Author | Lightnews

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 5h

What if, what if. Not impossible, but highly unlikely. FAR more likely is they're stealing when they don't really have to.

In any case, it serves general prosperity if we have no tolerance for thieves. We invite more of them when we're too soft-hearted to prosecute any because "Maybe they need to"

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 5h

That explanation is even more implausible: it requires backwards causation. He wrote first in this thread; my "uncharitable" interpretation came afterwards.

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 5h

Malnutrition (broader than starvation) accounts for 0.27% of all deaths.

The odds that that particular guy in front of you is (a) actually at risk of starving, and (b) cannot avert this risk by ANY OTHER MEANS than by stealing, is tiny.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...

Disparities in Place of Death Among Malnourished Individuals in the United States

Background: Deficiencies or imbalances in a person's intake of nutrients are referred to as malnutrition. Malnutrition remains a significant public health concern in the United States, with potential consequences ranging from chronic disease to ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 5h

Well, not literally no one, of course. But assuming none of us are in Sudan or somewhere like that, and assuming we're talking of someone roaming the aisles of a first-world supermarket, it's a PRETTY SAFE BET that that person isn't in any real risk of starvation.

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 5h

The chap I'm replying to also gives the even weaker that he's not prepared to even "give a shit" unless he's paid to, or it's part of his job title.

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 5h

The explanation you give is charitable, but not plausible. In the context of this thread this is about not INTERVENING with an act of shoplifting (sure, the thief might get violent with you), but merely REPORTING it to someone else.

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 14h

What's the charitable interpretation?

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 14h

But:

(a) In the modern world, with no one under any real risk of starvation, "Oh I'm having such a hard time" is usually a very weak excuse

(b) Even if (improbably) this IS an excuse for the thief, it doesn't follow that it's a reason for US to let them get away with it.

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 14h

I'm talking about theft in general. Rich people stealing from poor, poor from rich, or rich or poor from each other: I'm opposed to it all.

I recognise some thieves are "desperate people trying to get by" (indeed, often they're such losers BECAUSE they're thieves)...

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 14h

Well, yes: they are. If a man thinks he's a woman, he's delusional. Similarly for a woman who thinks she's a man. Really hard to dispute this!

But even if you're inclined to dispute it, how is this in any way relevant to what you're responding to?

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 1d

I wonder how far your apathy extends. If one customer stabs another, would you shrug and look the other way because "I'm not paid to investigate crime"?

You should report, and do what you can to thwart, thieves not because you're paid to, do it but because IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 1d

Jesus Christ. "Stop crime by rewarding people attempting to commit it"... yeah, that will work out well.

I haven't seen any attempted theft, I must admit. Would I have the strength of character to unhesitatingly report the thief, at once? Perhaps not. But I hope I would

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 1d

Let's call this "cringe" by its proper name: rap. Miranda's problem is that he rights real songs, but then puts rap in them.

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 2d

Sorry, I am of the Cricket faith. Baseball is an ersatz, cheap version of the same idea followed by would-be cricket supporters who by virtue of having been born in the USA or Japan or some such, don't know any better

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 2d

Incidentally: I'm not using the fact your motives are shady, as evidence that you're wrong in your primary claims. I wouldn't need that evidence even if it were good evidence (which it isn't)

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 2d

Inasmuch as that article answers my question at all, it turns out the answer is: Sales have fallen because of boycotts and other similar factors (in other words, acts of malicious sabotage which Trump can't reasonably be blamed for, however much we may dislike him)

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 2d

Having the latter motivation AT ALL is a discredit to you.

But yes, I'm sure that in addition to being primarily driven by malice, you also rationalise your position as "doing good" in some mysterious and unspecified way. (I mean: who doesn't do that?)

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

For once I believe you without reservation.

I fully believe that the main reason you want a gender ideologue to win the Democratic primary is not for any good it might do anyone, but because it would annoy people you dislike.

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

Sure, I get the idea of those correlations, but my point is that this graph is showing a proxy of a proxy, and one that (if we interpret its claims literally) is close to impossible to measure anyway.

Why not directly chart the thing you want to show?

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

Does this chart actually mean anything?

What might make sense would be "employment rate under each president".

But "jobs created by" is either fanciful theorising; or, if it only includes directly commissioned employment, irrelevant to any legitimate real-world concern

3 4

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

Well, I'm sure you tried your best.

Drop me a postcard if you ever hit upon an argument showing how or why I'm wrong.

1

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

You're the one who thinks men can turn into women (or women into men) by clicking their ruby slippers together and wishing really, really hard. One does not need to be fed propaganda to be sceptical of this idea. One DOES need to be fed propaganda, however, in order to believe it.

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

That's exactly what I think of you.

But I'm more likely to be right. That's because my opinions are far more likely to be ones that will occur to normal people naturally, without intervention of any propaganda, than yours are. You don't NEED invoke "propaganda" to explain my beliefs.

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

Okey-dokey. Indulge in that thought all you will: believe I'm a real wrong 'un, a nasty chap; convince yourself I kick puppies and burn down orphanages, if it suits you.

But then, try setting your assessment of my character aside, and ask the heretical question: am I, nonetheless, CORRECT?

2

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 3d

“Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short...at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes...not grasping analogies...misunderstanding the simplest arguments...and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction”
―Orwell, 1984