I don't think you can reduce it all to the economy either. — Count Timothy von Icarus

I was only referring to poverty. Now crime is different and complex. Starting from having effective institutions like the justice system and a working and among the people an accepted police force. Huge income inequality and lack of social cohesion helps crime. I've always said to Finns that Finland would be like Mexico, if no criminals would be jailed and they could do whatever they want. Mexico is a perfect example when organized crime just can go rampant and integrates into the legal system and security forces. Basically if something happens to you in Mexico, stay away from the police.

Basically it just takes a few criminals and everybody loses the notion of safety. In Mexico over 90% of the homicides go unsolved. In Finland they make books and television series of the unsolved murder cases. Which there are in a hundred years like 10 or so. There has been a huge scandal here when a drug police chief had been too friendly with the local criminals.

The US has far more guns than nearly any other country, per capita. The gun manufacturing industry, with their propaganda and lobbying, is behind it. Which only means, as usual, the valuing of profits over people is at the core of this rot.

Same with tobacco, same with sugar, same with fossil fuels, same with opioids, same with hundreds of other examples. When you live in a socioeconomic system that chooses to value money and property over everything else, these issues are mere symptoms.

Well, there are a lot more of us than there are of them, and we all have guns. — Ciceronianus

God Damn It, I love how true this is. They come try and get some, if they wish.

the valuing of profits over people is at the core of this rot. — Xtrix

Profits are what benefits people, specifically people willing to produce for their own benefit. Meaning, there is no distinction between people, and the pursuit of profits in function, and also nothing wrong with profit. The lobbying you mention would not be possible if law makers, who are representatives of the monopoly on force that is actually the core "of this rot," wern't there to be bought from rich people seeking to avoid competition through government protections against said competition.

When you live in a socioeconomic system that chooses to value money and property over everything else, these issues are mere symptoms. — Xtrix

Money and property is the recognition of individual value. They are the representation of respect for the Human Consciousness to pursue its own homeostasis, and being successful in doing so. If I open a bar, and people come to my bar, get wasted, attempt to drive home, and are killed in a car crash, that is clearly their fault, as I was simply providing a service for profit and had no involvement in such irresponsible actions. If, however, I can simply purchase representatives of the state to avoid any accountability for problems that I did, in fact, cause, then there's an issue with profit seeking, you see? In which case, who exactly is doing the most consequential amount of valuing profit over people? This type of phenomena, in all of its varied permutations, is actually what the problem is. Kind of like with slavery. It wasn't the fact that ignorant dipshits thought it was justified for so long, reason could have covered that, it was the fact that it was instantiated and protected by the state. Nothing has changed about the nature of things. You're about to get a front row seat to an example of what I mean in Ukraine here soon, so you'll see what I'm getting at.

It's a combination of both way too liberal gun laws and problematic socioeconomic politics, it's not one of the other. You increase crime through problems of poverty and lesser quality of life, as well as bad educational systems, no real working welfare, bad medical care and so on, while too liberal gun laws increase the severity of crime.

Profits are what benefits people — Garrett Travers

A small minority of people, yes. The environment and the rest of the population -- not so much.

Meaning, there is no distinction between people, and the pursuit of profits in function, and also nothing wrong with profit. — Garrett Travers

There is a very clear distinction between people and the concept of profits. I don't know what the above sentence is supposed to mean.

There is something wrong with profit when profit gets prioritized over human well being, yes. As we see over and over again, with the examples I mentioned.

The lobbying you mention would not be possible if law makers, who are representatives of the monopoly on force that is actually the core "of this rot," wern't there to be bought from rich people seeking to avoid competition through government protections against said competition. — Garrett Travers

That's one part of the story, yes. We can blame the weak-willed bride-takers. We can also blame those who bribe. You seem much more reluctant to do the latter.

Blaming the government in every instance is, as I've talked with you about before, too simplistic. It's an incomplete analysis. But one with an important function: to divert attention from the decisions of private power.

There is also no evidence whatsoever that market "competition" will solve any issue, let alone all issues (as is often claimed). Market efficiency, in my view, is a myth -- much like free markets.

When you live in a socioeconomic system that chooses to value money and property over everything else, these issues are mere symptoms.
— Xtrix

Money and property is the recognition of individual value. — Garrett Travers

Money and property have nothing to do with a human being's value.

But even if it were true, the ranking of money and property over everything else, as mentioned above, is leading, and will continue to lead, to massive destruction.

There's a social world outside of the self.

A small minority of people, yes. The environment and the rest of the population -- not so much. — Xtrix

No, all people who have things are benefitted by profit. There are no exceptions.

There is a very clear distinction between people and the concept of profits. I don't know what the above sentence is supposed to mean. — Xtrix

No, there isn't. You and all other humans are almost exclusively dominated by a desire for homeostasis, you are a functionally profit-seeking being. What is evil about profit, the only thing at all, is profit at the expense of other people, not profit before. The only institution in history to ever allow such a thing long-term is the state.

That's one part of the story, yes. We can blame the weak-willed bride-takers. We can also blame those who bribe. You seem much more reluctant to do the latter. — Xtrix

Those who take the bribe are the state, the people I was specifically criticising. They're the one's with all of the power, and it is the power that institutionalizes this behavior, and perpetuates it. Not the people tempted to offer the bribe because of some perception of fear. It is the responsibility of the person withthe most influence over everybody, the law maker, to not institutionalize evil, which has never happened in the history of mankind.

Blaming the government in every instance is, as I've talked with you about before, too simplistic. It's an incomplete analysis. But one with an important function: to divert attention from the decisions of private power. — Xtrix

There is no private power, there is only state institutionalized power. However, I would like to highlight that I hate evil of all kind, including private owners enlisting the aid of such evil. They are in fact both involved, one simply has more of a responsibility than another. Moral societies are completely stateless and no such thing occurs in them. But, those have long since been murdered out of history by the Roman Catholic church.

There is also no evidence whatsoever that market "competition" will solve any issue, let alone all issues (as is often claimed). Market efficiency, in my view, is a myth -- much like free markets. — Xtrix

It depends on the issue. If it is a market contained issue, yes, it most certainly will solve itself in the form of reorientation toward customer service, and employee happiness. But, that's in markets that don't exist. Nothing can or will save this evil that has poisoned capitalism now.

Money and property have nothing to do with a human being's value. — Xtrix

Yes they do. It is specifically the human's individual values that are pursued to obtain securities from other people. You show me your money, I can show you what you value. If you value only money, I can see that too, and such is not ethical, I think we can agree there. That kind of life will lead to no value, as value in security beyond what is necessary is not fulfilling if it is not paired with a productive value one loves, such as philosophy.

But even if it were true, the ranking of money and property over everything else, as mentioned above, is leading, and will continue to lead, to massive destruction. — Xtrix

You've got this disjointed. The money in my bank account in no way relates to anyone else. It relates to me. I value what I do to achieve it, and what it does for my life, and the values it allows me to pursue, other people are not even a part of the equation in any other way than staying out of their way to allow them to do the same. Valuing money is not what is leading to destruction, valuing destruction is, and using money as a means to do so. You'll see in time. Keep your eyes focused on the East, the beast is coming.

You and all other humans are almost exclusively dominated by a desire for homeostasis, you are a functionally profit-seeking being. — Garrett Travers

Homeostasis, a desire for food, etc., has nothing to do with profit. Nothing. If you want to define profit in some other way, you're welcome to.

all people who have things are benefitted by profit. — Garrett Travers

A small minority benefit from profit. The rest get scraps.

Not the people tempted to offer the bribe because of some perception of fear. — Garrett Travers

I don't let those who bribe others off the hook. Again, you're welcome to.

Blaming the government in every instance is, as I've talked with you about before, too simplistic. It's an incomplete analysis. But one with an important function: to divert attention from the decisions of private power.
— Xtrix

There is no private power, there is only state institutionalized power. — Garrett Travers

There is private power, and it's unaccountable. State power is accountable to the people, in principle. In corporations, there isn't a vote for CEO among the employees. They're private tyrannies. We can find a way to blame the state for the decisions of private power, but again -- simplistic, incomplete analysis.

The money in my bank account in no way relates to anyone else. — Garrett Travers

It does.

Because there's a world outside the self.

Valuing money is not what is leading to destruction, valuing destruction is — Garrett Travers

I doubt very much that the CEOs of Chavron or Exxon "value destruction." They're helping to destroy he environment, yes -- but that's not because they value destroying it. Their destroying it is a consequence of short-term thinking, spurred on by a system that demands greater share prices each quarter.

Homeostasis, a desire for food, etc., has nothing to do with profit. Nothing. If you want to define profit in some other way, you're welcome to. — Xtrix

That's not homeostasis.

A small minority benefit from profit. The rest get scraps. — Xtrix

Scraps are profit. And perhaps they should try harder and live more virtuously.

I don't let those who bribe others off the hook. Again, you're welcome to. — Xtrix

No, just their masters.

State power is accountable to the people, in principle — Xtrix

But in actuality is the greatest murder of the human in history.

It does.

Because there's a world outside the self. — Xtrix

It doesn't, and I don't care about the world outside in terms of other people.

I doubt very much that the CEOs of Chavron or Exxon "value destruction." They're helping to destroy he environment, yes -- but that's not because they value destroying it. Their destroying it is a consequence of short-term thinking, spurred on by a system that demands greater share prices each quarter. — Xtrix

I can't hear your words over their actions.

That's not homeostasis. — Garrett Travers

I didn't once offer a definition, so this statement is meaningless.

Scraps are profit. And perhaps they should try harder and live more virtuously. — Garrett Travers

:lol:

I don't let those who bribe others off the hook. Again, you're welcome to.
— Xtrix

No, just their masters. — Garrett Travers

The people being bribed are the "masters"?

You're derailing.

But in actuality is the greatest murder of the human in history. — Garrett Travers

According to a simplistic dogma that blames any and all problems on governments.

It doesn't, and I don't care about the world outside in terms of other people. — Garrett Travers

It does, and we're all well aware that you don't care about other people -- but thank you for clarifying.

I didn't once offer a definition, so this statement is meaningless. — Xtrix

Yes, you used words to describe something that wasn't homeostasis.

The people being bribed are the "masters"? — Xtrix

Yes, that's why their crawling to them to purchase services only they can provide. Like puppies chasing after their master that will feed them.

According to a simplistic dogma that blames any and all problems on governments. — Xtrix

Name one government in history that sits outside this paradigm, and you still won't even be close to how dogmatic it is to defend such an organization of killers.

It does, and we're all well aware that you don't care about other people -- but thank you for clarifying. — Xtrix

Again, people who defend the world's premier murderers do not care about people, they care about power and dominating people. I care about the non-violation of the Human Consciousness, and therefore respect their own responsibility to themselves and their happiness to be achieved by them and without my interference. Meaning, I care more about people than anyone you know, including yourself.

:lol: — Xtrix

Are you under the impression that scraps are not profits?

Yes, you used words to describe something that wasn't homeostasis. — Garrett Travers

I didn't once describe homeostasis, so the above is meaningless.

The people being bribed are the "masters"?
— Xtrix

Yes — Garrett Travers

:lol: OK!

Meaning, I care more about people than anyone you know, including yourself. — Garrett Travers

Good for you! Well done.

Homeostasis, a desire for food, etc. — Xtrix

Your words exactly.

OK! — Xtrix

Notice you didn't have an argument against my assertion?

Good for you! Well done. — Xtrix

Okay.

Homeostasis, a desire for food, etc.
— Xtrix

Your words exactly. — Garrett Travers

"X, y, etc.," does not imply y=x.

X, y, etc.," does not imply y=x. — Xtrix

Thanks for clearing that up, you had confused the hell out of me. It looks to me like you are starting with the word, placing a comma, and then describing what its functions etc.

Nonetheless, yes, homeostasis requires profit to achieve, or maximize.

homeostasis requires profit to achieve — Garrett Travers

Homeostasis has nothing to do with profit. You wish to invoke "profits" in the definition, that's your prerogative.

The reason for high murder rates is a feeling of entitlement, the Randian Me! philosophy, and the culture of arrogance.

Homeostasis has nothing to do with profit. You wish to invoke "profits" in the definition, that's your prerogative. — Xtrix

Profit is disntinguished by any form of benefit one can accrue that contributes to homeostasis. You can keep disregarding that, but, nothing changes facts.

The reason for high murder rates is a feeling of entitlement, the Randian Me! philosophy, and the culture of arrogance. — god must be atheist

Demonstrate that such is true, considering the fact that aggression is specifically linked to one feeling entitled him/herself to something they don't have? It's a competitive neural network. There is more reason to think that high murder rates are due to the greedy entitlement of the poor, not of people who value themselves rationally. Find me a Randian whose killed someone, and I'll show you 10 mindless miscreants who did it in comparison for petty gain. Also, most people are Christian in this country, and in the West broadly, or lean left. Randian philosophy constitutes like 1% of the population, so you're angry at your own people, not Rand. Randian philosophy would save most people from the irrationality, and immature lack of control of one's emotions that distinguish aggression and the vast majority of the population constantly bitching about what they don't have. Which is why the Randian philosophy is one of the few in the history of the world that has never been shown to lead to murder, or aggression. Because it's superior to just about all of them, and it's not even close. Some science for you on the subject, food for thought:

https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article/85/1/11/5299239
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7661405/

Profit is disntinguished by any form of benefit one can accrue that contributes to homeostasis. — Garrett Travers

Meaningless.

Homeostasis has a meaning, and generally a physiological one. Profits is basically an accounting term. It’s what is left after you subject cost from final price. One has nothing to do with the other, except perhaps in a some constructed semantic fantasy. If that’s where you choose to live, you’re welcome to. But don’t involve me.

Homeostasis has a meaning, and generally a physiological one. — Xtrix

That's correct. A term that implies the accrual of resources to maintain as a matter of physiological imperative, my friend. Very meaningful.

Profits is basically an accounting term. It’s what is left after you subject cost from final price. — Xtrix

No, that's just one aspect of the word. Profit encompasses all forms of benefit accrual. Be it monetary, subjective desire, water and food, sleep, everything that could be beneficial to human life.

One has nothing to do with the other, except perhaps in a some constructed semantic fantasy. If that’s where you choose to live, you’re welcome to. But don’t involve me. — Xtrix

No, in biological fact and lingustic accuracy. You're playing a reduction game, bud.

Again, you’re welcome to your invented semantics. I’m not interested.

Again, you’re welcome to your invented semantics. I’m not interested. — Xtrix

Homeostasis:

the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes.

Profit:

a valuable return : GAIN
2: the excess of returns over expenditure in a transaction or series of transactions
especially : the excess of the selling price of goods over their cost
3: net income usually for a given period of time
4: the ratio of profit for a given year to the amount of capital invested or to the value of sales
5: the compensation accruing to entrepreneurs for the assumption of risk in business enterprise as distinguished from wages or rent
profit verb
profited; profiting; profits
Definition of profit (Entry 2 of 2)
intransitive verb

Definitions aren't semantics dude. Their definitions. Homeostasis is the abeyance of stressors, and the accrual of resources. Profit is the natural motivating factor for all biological systems, including you.

Demonstrate that such is true, considering the fact that aggression is specifically linked to one feeling entitled him/herself to some etc. etc. — Garrett Travers

Garrett, I don't read your posts, and you promised to not read mine, but apparently you forgot.

No problem, just a gentle reminder that I ignore everything you say for I believe you are not worthy to be present on this board, but that you should not take it as an insult, because it is my opinion, and only that. If you feel like you can reciprocate this sentiment, and I believe you have in the past, then of course please do. This post is also a refresher for that opinion-exchange.

Happy philosophizing. :-)

Garrett, I don't read your posts, and you promised to not read mine, but apparently you forgot.

No problem, just a gentle reminder that I ignore everything you say for I believe you are not worthy to be present on this board, but that you should not take it as an insult, because it is my opinion, and only that. If you feel like you can reciprocate this sentiment, and I believe you have in the past, then of course please do. This post is also a refresher for that opinion-exchange.

Happy philosophizing. — god must be atheist

And to you as well, kind sir. I just like to provide irrational assertions with no basis for being posited a chance to demonstrate themselves as irrational. Thank you for continuing that trend. Take care!

Definitions aren't semantics dude. Their definitions. — Garrett Travers

Semantics deals with meanings. Definitions are meanings of words.

Why you continue on like this is baffling.

Homeostasis:

the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes. — Garrett Travers

Exactly right.

Profit:

a financial gain, especially the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something.

Totally different concepts. One deals with physiology -- equilibrium of temperature, for example -- and the other is (apart from whatever semantic fantasy one can construct) about financial gain.

Again, if you want to use the words differently, that's fine. I myself have no interest in it. Likewise if you want to argue that financial gain is "the natural motivating factor" in biological systems. It's just utter confusion to form the argument in this way, but that's not my business.

just a gentle reminder that I ignore everything you say for I believe you are not worthy to be present on this board — god must be atheist

I'm only beginning to understand this.

I'm only beginning to understand this. — Xtrix

You are understanding only that which you seek to understand, and ignorarntly negating anything you don't like because you must find some way to be correct about that which you are clearly wrong. You literally are just choosing to ignore the fact that homeostasis requires profit. Nothing else is happening. It isn't about "concepts" and it isn't about "semantics," which is precisely what people say when they have absoultely no place left to run to in an argument.

You literally are just choosing to ignore the fact that homeostasis requires profit. — Garrett Travers

No, it isn't. Because, as I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, homeostasis, a physiological concept of mainlining equilibrium in the body, has nothing to do with profit, which is financial gain.

"Selling at $10 when the cost was $5 gives me a profit of $5 -- and has really helped maintain my temperature of 98.6."

I think it's because the U.S. has too many guns. Way too many. The more guns available, the more you have issues. In other countries, less guns means less shootings. Seems kind of obvious.

The US has far more guns than nearly any other country, per capita. The gun manufacturing industry, with their propaganda and lobbying, is behind it. Which only means, as usual, the valuing of profits over people is at the core of this rot. — Xtrix

:100: I agree. There are endless examples. Even after Sandyhook, the gun manufacturers still lobbied strongly against regulations that over 90% of Americans were in favor of. It comes down to valuing money and livelihood over human life. Really sad.