Should The Wealthy Be Above The Law?

Originally posted by dadudemon
And do just as well with out skipping any beats? Highly unlikely especially if he was heavily involved with directly managing them.

Sorry, but it still doesn't excuse killing someone

Wrong - he'd be even more proficient at managing the accounts he had.

And you arrived at this conclusion how exactly? If anything I'd think his incentive would be to manipulate accounts to his benifit for when he gets out. Happens all the time now with financial managers anyway who are not in prison. Having someone oversee him would negate the need for him to be involved anyway

And, there are literally thousands of doctors that work for free.

I'm well aware of that, but they aren't forced to. They volunteer in fields or on cases where they want to help, not where some court has ordered them to

The premise of the thread assumes criminals should be punished, not reformed. The system should be setup to REFORM people, not punish them. This is where you and Darth Jello are approaching the topic completely wrong.

People should be equally "treated" and "reformed".

We both know the American prison system does not "reform" people. It would take a major change in the way we approach criminal justice, not to mention probably hundreds of billions of dollars, which we no longer have, to do that.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Sorry, but it still doesn't excuse killing someone

Sorry if you think serving time while managing the accounts, and forcing the profits to go to the family destroyed by the death, is somehow "excusing" killing someone.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
And you arrived at this conclusion how exactly? If anything I'd think his incentive would be to manipulate accounts to his benifit for when he gets out. Happens all the time now with financial managers anyway who are not in prison. Having someone oversee him would negate the need for him to be involved anyway

You'd be amazed at the ridiculous things the human mind can accomplish with no free time: immaculate record keeping is very high on the list.

When you can do nothing "extra" except manage your accounts, you'll probably do better than ever. 🙂

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I'm well aware of that, but they aren't forced to. They volunteer in fields or on cases where they want to help, not where some court has ordered them to

Sure beats serving time in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison where they can't practice their medicine, though.

And why does this escapes you?

Side note - the doctor/nurse in question would be allowed to keep just enough money to live, of course.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
We both know the American prison system does not "reform" people. It would take a major change in the way we approach criminal justice, not to mention probably hundreds of billions of dollars, which we no longer have, to do that.

Rather tangential of you because this thread is not about how the system is run but what we think should be happening in the justice system.

I just don't think the wealthy (or anyone else for that matter) should get any breaks, regardless of what they might accomplish otherwise, it sends the wrong message (that the rich are above the law). I believe there should be an attempt to rehabilitate some criminals but it depends on their crime.....I think violent criminals should be removed from society and yes, punished...and I think killing someone makes one a violent criminal.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I just don't think the wealthy (or anyone else for that matter) should get any breaks, regardless of what they might accomplish otherwise, it sends the wrong message (that the rich are above the law). I believe there should be an attempt to rehabilitate some criminals but it depends on their crime.....I think violent criminals should be removed from society and yes, punished...and I think killing someone makes one a violent criminal.

Of course but don't you understand that in this time of Republican domination and Democratic apathy, laziness, and pathological obsession with being liked, every loony right wing idea must be reexamined and possibly considered legitimate?

Why should any rich people go to prison?
What's wrong with equal protection under the law?
Is phrenology, physiognomy, and eugenics really wrong?
Why should rich people pay taxes at all?
Did we fight on the right side of world war II?

Bleh.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Why should any rich people go to prison?

Depends on how the prison system is setup, if they are guilty, and some other things.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
What's wrong with equal protection under the law?

Equal protection and equal punishment under the law are two different things.

Equal protection would be a cop who enforces the law without regard to any demographic.

Equal punishment means that for the same exact crime, everyone gets the same exact time. Yes, it's meant to rhyme.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Is phrenology, physiognomy, and eugenics really wrong?

Phrenology is considered the building blocks of modern psychology and neuroscience but is quite obviously pseudo-science so, yeah, it's wrong. It's been proven, quite clearly, wrong. But so has a gigantic portion of Freud's work.

Physiognomy, in the modern uses, is not quite "quack" science as you imply. There is some truth in what we can tell about a person based on their face. In fact, sexology overlaps into physiognomy in that we really can tell which people may be more aggressive because the face screams to those around us about our hormones and pubescent development. So, no, this particular example does not work very well to make your point. It's not as quack as you think it is.

Eugenics is only used by those trying to fear-monger. There's actually nothing wrong with consensual genetic engineering. There's nothing wrong with wanting to create a better genetic future for our progeny, either. It's the way you go about doing that could be considered wrong. You know what would be awesome? Forced eugenics in the form of gene therapy. What do I mean? I mean doing something similar to crop dusting: immunizing everyone through gene therapy with a fly by. 🙂 It's fully possible and we can ALMOST do something like that now. Imagine curing HIV and reversing AIDS for everyone affected in Africa? What about curing the entire world of it? 🙂 How is that bad? It's eugenics, though. Of course, I'm using a more liberal definition of eugenics and not the Nazi version you are trying to use. Maybe it's because I think improving the human genome is the farthest thing away from "evil" that you can do. It's the way you go about improving it that makes it "bad" or "good."

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Why should rich people pay taxes at all?

No one should pay income taxes, imo. So, no, rich people should not have to pay income taxes.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Did we fight on the right side of world war II?

First, you mention eugenics with the rhetorical goal of illustrating how bad it was as it specifically applied to Nazism and now you ask a rhetorical question about which was the correct side in WWII?

Sure, there were evils from all sides. 🙂

yes, but only if they are also a famous athlete and/or entertainer

keep warm, burn the rich.

teehee.

Not to get off the subject but the Amish don't pay any taxes and they are not rich folks but I wonder how they are getting away with it?

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Not to get off the subject but the Amish don't pay any taxes and they are not rich folks but I wonder how they are getting away with it?

They do pay taxes, just not Social Security after they forced the IRS to back down on religious grounds.

Well, the semiannual Koch Brothers orgy for rich fascist plutocrats a few hundred miles away ended yesterday so those ridiculous rhetorical questions no longer need to be considered legit, at least not locally.

As for income tax, many of the loopholes and write-offs should be eliminated but the brackets should be kept as is other than raising the $250,000 bracket to 40%, adding a 70% bracket at $1 million, and a 140% bracket at $10 million. Also, capital gains should be legally considered income.

they have orgies for that now?

the rich keep getting cooler

Originally posted by Robtard
Yeah, but they're mostly killing other Chinese, so it's ok.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Phrenology is considered the building blocks of modern psychology and neuroscience

Originally posted by Robtard
Should? No.

Are they? Yes.

Bingo. Money buys you anything .

Originally posted by King Kandy
lol, considered that by whom?

http://psychology.about.com/od/historyofpsychology/f/phrenology.htm

http://thehistoryofpsychology.blogspot.com/2011/04/history-of-phrenology.html

http://books.google.com/books?id=iZwXnfYAo3oC&pg=PA247&lpg=PA247&dq=phrenology+started+psychology&source=bl&ots=cAcSohgKMm&sig=ApctnAwh2prmkryA-XxMkORqzpg&hl=en&ei=ENEOTpCkNMLVgQfly7DODQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=phrenology%20started%20psychology&f=false

http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/historyofpsych.html

http://thehistoryofpsychology.blogspot.com/2010/11/phrenology-beginners-guide-part-2.html

lol, so like...I just linked you to the first page results. I should have used that "let me google that for you". 313

None of those sources say it was the building blocks, that would imply, in some way, that the concepts of psychology are based on phrenology. Not at all. The most those sources can say for it are that they both involve studying the brain. The actual discipline of phrenology made zero valid additions to psychology, let alone the kind of fundamental ideas that "building blocks" would be.

WE the people should put bars on the court houses

Originally posted by King Kandy
None of those sources say it was the building blocks, that would imply, in some way, that the concepts of psychology are based on phrenology. Not at all.

Dude.

WTF?

Are you trolling?

Could you use a bigger strawman?

Originally posted by King Kandy
The most those sources can say for it are that they both involve studying the brain. The actual discipline of phrenology made zero valid additions to psychology, let alone the kind of fundamental ideas that "building blocks" would be.

Phrenology didn't make additions to modern psychology, it was the precursor to modern psychology.

Phrenology is to psychology as alchemy is to chemistry. Phrenology is also the precursor to neuroscience.

Seriously, dude...this is like psychology 101. It's the things you cover in the first chapter: "The history of psychology."

Do you even know what it is?

Originally posted by inimalist
they have orgies for that now?

the rich keep getting cooler

Never heard of Bohemian Grove? Even Nixon called them "F@GGY"

Originally posted by dadudemon
Dude.

WTF?

Are you trolling?

Could you use a bigger strawman?

Phrenology didn't make additions to modern psychology, it was the precursor to modern psychology.

Phrenology is to psychology as alchemy is to chemistry. Phrenology is also the precursor to neuroscience.

Seriously, dude...this is like psychology 101. It's the things you cover in the first chapter: "The history of psychology."

Do you even know what it is?

building block
n.
1. A block used as a building material, especially a cinder block.
2. A small wooden or plastic cube used as a building toy.
3. A basic element or part of something: Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins.

Phrenology is not a "basic element" of psychology; in fact, phrenology techniques are 100% useless to psychology. If you asked any psychologist how often they use phrenology, the answer would be zero. That's the furthest thing from a building block.