Mother Dies in Jail

095-1Have You Ever Been in Jail?

Read the headline below.

Impoverished Mother Dies In Jail Cell Over Unpaid Fines For Her Kids Missing School

Have you ever been in jail? I have. No, I didn’t do anything. I’ve worked in criminal justice. I was an intern in a U.S. Probation office and I worked with juvenile delinquents. I’ve visited jails. I didn’t mind the little town jails. They seem almost friendly. But the city jails, especially the big cities. They were awful. I always wanted to leave as quickly as humanly possible.

The big city jails are crowded. The clientele varies from next to nothing in terms of offenses (not being able to pay a fine) to people who can’t make bail for major offenses like murder. There are always prostitutes. And they don’t look like the ones on television. They aren’t pretty and they don’t have hearts of gold. They look beat up and worn. They talk nasty and think it’s funny. The atmosphere is oppressive and the facilities limited.

People used to tell me about how they wish they could live the life of the jailed or the inmate of a prison – free medical care, free dental, three squares a day and you don’t have to work – paradise. It takes an incredible absence of knowledge and poor judgment to believe that about one of these places. In one big city jail I visited, the cells housed twenty four prisoners each. That’s 24 beds and two steel toilets out in the open. (The seasoned professional I was with told me to keep my eyes open. Sometimes the inmates throw excrement at you.) There’s a television posted out of reach at the end of the cell. If you’re not in the bed nearest it, it’s a little difficult to see and hear, and if you are at the far end, it’s about the size of a postage stamp. And that was a brand new model installation that was not overcrowded and run down.

They took a mother of seven away from her children and put her in one of these places for non-payment of a fine. She didn’t commit a crime and they put her in there. She owned money and they locked her up – debtor’s prison – you know, those things we abolished in the United States.

She was scared. She was stripped and cavity searched. It’s not in the article but that’s what happened. It’s standard procedure. It should only happen to people who committed crimes. It’s demeaning and humiliating.

They put her in there with real criminals. Being a mother of seven is probably not a good preparation for jail. She had high blood pressure. She was middle aged. She was a law abiding citizen trying hard to raise her children.

She had 55 truancys that she owed thousands of dollars for. That sounds like a lot. But it’s not. The offenses date from 1999. That’s fifteen years. For one child that is an average of three and one half offenses per year. For seven children, that’s an average of one-half a truancy a year. I’m not sensing Al Capone here.

She’s dead. End of story. A county in Pennsylvania has criminalized non-attendance in school and chosen to punish the parents with thousands of dollars of fines. And when they don’t pay, they go to jail.

But the story gets better. You see, if you read the article, it’s obvious the court knew she was on welfare and had no money. She didn’t bring her paperwork showing her lack of income. The court was punishing her for not having proof of what was obvious.

Obviously, that’s justice. Well, in Pennsylvania.

Where’s the business ethics?

This isn’t a business? The city uses the truancy law to impose thousands of dollars of fines which it extracts under fear of imprisonment. Isn’t that policing for profit? More and more cities and counties are using these kinds of fines to generate revenue. It’s deliberate policy. It’s a recent development historically and my understanding is that it is increasing in use across the nation.

If a city or a county uses fines for a revenue stream, justice is not a real consideration. Getting the money is. They’re using the jail to make money.

I appeal to your judgment – are fifty-five truancys over fifteen years worth thousands of dollars of fines? And isn’t it obvious that these fines and the penalties for non-payment are going to fall most heavily on the poor?

Jails and prisons are supposed to be for criminals. They are not supposed to be tools for cash strapped municipalities to balance the budge on the backs of the poor.

When the courts are no longer dealing justice but making money for the government, the central purpose of the criminal justice system is perverted and forgotten. The inmates are people being punished for committing crimes. They are living, breathing revenue streams who must be subject to fines and stacked penalties to squeeze out that last dime.

Justice is the goal we should aim at as a society, as a nation and as individuals. There are other ways to raise money. There have to be.

James Pilant

On the Same Subject.

http://antzinpantz.wordpress.com/2014/06/14/mom-dies-in-jail-for-not-paying-school-fines/

More than 1,600 people have been jailed in Berks County alone – two-thirds of them women – over truancy fines since 2000 …

http://mybraincage.wordpress.com/2014/06/13/mother-dies-in-jail-cell-where-she-was-serving-a-two-day-sentence-for-her-childrens-absence-from-school/

 

George Will Crosses the Line

George Will Crosses the Line of Decency

I had pondered for a number of days whether or not to discuss the Will column on campus rape and his claim that Progressivism had transformed rape into a “coveted status.” I was upset, but he has said many foolish things as have many other writers on the Washington Post. So, I was leaning toward skipping the topic and discussing the oligarchy of internet providers. But today, the Washington Post responded to criticism, and it was a remarkable response.

According to Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt he welcomed the column and it “was well within the bounds of legitimate debate.” Really, that’s what he said.

What are the facts?

George Will downplayed the seriousness of campus rape, suggested that women claimed rape when it was not an appropriate charge and out of political correctness. I am familiar with the studies done on campus rape.  Here is one from the National Institute of Justice, an arm of the United States Justice Department. It indicates that on a campus of 10,000 female students, there will be an average of 350 rapes a year. The report indicates that five percent of the women in college are likely to experience rape in any given year (page 11). I can go on and tell you more findings, but does it appear to you that campus rape is a made up crisis? or that it was brought about by Progressivism run amok?

The Business Ethics of the Situation

The Washington Post is a newspaper, a business. It is supposed to provide news and commentary. Many things are debatable and a good newspaper provides a platform for vigorous debate over the great issues of the day.

But some things are facts. And trivializing facts about the nature of rape and suggesting that women are willing to decide later that it wasn’t consensual and that being raped is a positive status would seem in my mind to be in a real way a defense of the rapist, the poor misunderstood male who interpreted a woman’s “No” as part of a twisted game, who may have felt that if a woman dresses suggestively, drinks or invites him into her living quarter, she’s just asking for it.

It was to be hoped that these few men, for the statistics are clear – only a small proportion of the male population rape, could be deterred by more vigorous administrative action or at the very least they could be subject to more vigorous punishment. But this is now rendered more unlikely by George Will and defenders of a status quo which celebrates past custom and male aggression. For the poor, much put upon males, it was in his mind one indignity too much.

This issue brought forward by the commentary page of the newspaper is about crime. I firmly believe that if Will had trivialized armed robbery or shoplifting, he would have been fired yesterday. A great newspaper does not ignore facts or imply that a crime is okay because it has been the custom in the past – so was slavery and wife beating. Times have changed and George Will likes the old way.

But crime is crime, and the newspapers twisted ideas on what constitutes fair comment distorts a horrible act into a matter of dispute. That’s not responsible commentary.

James Pilant

On the same subject:

https://fishershannon.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/a-letter-to-george-will-in-response-to-his-june-6-2014-opinion-piece/

http://tpfleming.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/george-will-lashes-out-at-rape-victims/

http://barrystuartlevy.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/george-will-being-a-victim-of-sexual-assault-is-a-coveted-status-that-confers-privileges/

Obama Lied About Net Neutrality

Obama Lied About Net Neutrality

Net neutrality is a business ethics issue. Are a handful of cable companies able by skillful lobbying and enormous campaign contributions going to be able to end the open internet? The question is one of basic fairness. Will the government allow the regulations to be changed so that small players on the internet (like me) can be placed on the slow track to oblivion while large companies like Netflix have priority for internet use? If the regulations are changed as planned, my tiny voice and millions of others will probably disappear because who wants to wait around while our content loads?

This problem was not supposed to happen. In fact this situation is supposed to be impossible because the President of the United States said it wouldn’t happen.

Many people in the United States, literally millions of them, believed that they elected as President, a man committed to net neutrality. For he did not imply that he was in favor of an open internet, he loudly proclaimed his support and said he would not appoint an FCC commissioner opposed to net neutrality. You can hear that direct statement in one of the You Tube video’s below.

If Obama had been defeated in 2008 or 2012, I would have expected a challenge to net neutrality. It is appalling that after all his honeyed words, his dramatic phrases, net neutrality is on the chopping block.

James Pilant

 

Watch Obama Lie About Net Neutrality Three Times Below

(I can get you more – do you really need them?)

In the one below he says he is a big believer in net neutrality.

In this one, in 2007, the President says he will take a back seat to no one when it come to net neutrality.

In this one, an interview on MTV, he is asked if he will support net neutrality and pledge not to appoint someone to the FCC who will oppose it.

Public Funding and Science

Public Funding and Science

Today, the good author at “Why We Are Screwed,” commented on my post https://southwerk.com/2014/05/27/do-the-american-people-need-to-become-re-introduced-to-science/

Here is his comment in full. I totally approve.

James Pilant

 

Yes! I am sure I sound like a broken record – but once again, public funding for science needs to be increased, prospective science/engineering PhD students need to be told that they are unlikely to land assistant professor positions upon study completion, and working conditions for PhDs also need to improve drastically. Universities need to cut the administrative fat, cease functioning like corporation and put the focus on the purpose of university; getting research and teaching done.

I will also argue that the United States should improve its immigration policies and procedures to make it easier to attract and retain talented foreign scientists. Many are unhappy with the American immigration and education system, which does not make it easy for PhDs/post-docs to balance their professional and personal lives.

Canada, which is a resource rich country, needs to spend a larger percentage of its GDP on more scientific research and development, to align itself with the spending of other wealthy countries. The current and recent governments have had dismal records in this regard.

Finally, in Canada/US there are too many PhD scientists working on either post-doctoral salaries — or not in their fields at all.

If we continue down this path there will be fewer and fewer good scientists to learn from – and we will continue to carry out research which is only in the interest of corporations and not the public good.

The web site, Why We Are Screwed is here. Please go and visit. Sign up as a follower and get e-mail updates!

Burglary and Banking

Burglary and Banking

What if we punished burglars the way we punish banks for crimes?

Let us assume the burglar steals one hundred high definition televisions from one hundred different homes and sells them for one hundred dollars each. He now has ten thousand dollars. If caught and convicted of all these offenses, his sentence could run into hundreds of years and he would be forced to restore any stolen property and profits derived from the sale of such property.

Now, let us use banking penalties – The same burglar steals the same number of sets and makes the same profit, 10,000 dollars. We catch him and after some negotiation he is willing to accept a fine but will not admit committing a crime. The fine is usually around ten percent of his ill-gotten gain, thus he owes the government, 1,000 dollars.

Obviously, he will not commit this same offense because of the stigma that now hangs over him from being caught committing a crime, and since his reputation has been damaged, no further punishment is necessary as a deterrent. And since, he is an upstanding and valued member of the community because many can buy inexpensive televisions due to his financial innovations, and a number of people who sell his “finds” rely on him for their jobs – for this man is indeed a job creator.

Now a cynic might point out that the burglar can replace all his losses from the fine by stealing just ten more televisions. And that if he is only caught ten percent of the time and has to pay ten percent of his gains each time, his penalty would only come to one percent of his criminal profits.

That is the situation the banks are in. To reiterate, if you pay a ten percent fine on your thefts and you are only caught ten percent of the time, you are out 1% of your profits.

Now, you are reasonable human being, if you were the burglar in this example and subject to these kinds of penalties would the pressure on you reform you or inspire you to even greater crimes?

James Pilant

On The Same Subject.

http://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/04/21/banking-fraud-under-attack/

Doug McMillon, Just Another Associate?

Just Another Associate?
Just Another Associate?

Doug McMillon, Just Another Associate?

McMillon, Wal-Mart’s CEO was at a conference last week and gave the audience an opportunity to ask questions. They asked what he planned to do for his workers, in Wal-Mart speak, associates. Whereupon, he told the assembled multitude that he too was an associate – Ich bin ein Berliner. 

Corporate executives spouting PR points as if they were a revered truth have long been a part of the American scene. Generally, they aren’t actually lying, they are exaggerating, emphasizing certain aspects of a situation, trying to persuade the public that their actions are legal or righteous in some sense. But this one tests the limits of credulity.

McMillon did at one point work for Wal-Mart in their warehouse. He could have said with perfect truth that he had once been an associate, a telling point in an argument, that he is speaking from direct experience. But no, his PR staff undoubtedly explained to him that It would be far more convincing if he could persuade an audience that his company was one big family struggling together against a cruel world of which he was but one insignificant player among many.

But he’s not an associate and only his PR flacks and he find it credible to claim otherwise.

What’s the business ethics of claiming to be just another employee? What’s the business ethics of being a multimillionaire and claiming the mantle of those a bare step above a minimum wage? This is both an organizational and a personal business ethics problem. There can be little doubt that McMillan did not construct the “millionaire CEO as regular worker” ploy. It has too much PR built into it, it feels like an ad campaign. But while both McMillan and an associate are both Wal-Mart employees, there is just too much distance in status and renumeration to make this a viable claim. On the personal ethics level, that McMillon said this knowing that most people would consider it a lie does not speak well of his judgement either.

It seems to me that when your resort to this kind of hollow argument, that you must be flailing around looking for something that might work because what worked in the past, doesn’t sell anymore.

James Pilant
McMillan, Walmart’s CEO Says He’s Just Another Associate—Except He Makes $9.56 Million a Year

Walmart’s CEO made about $10 million last year, but he’s just another “associate,” he says.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/06/05/doug_mcmillon_walmart_s_ceo_insists_he_s_no_different_from_associates_making.html

From Around the Web.

http://walmart1percent.org/boardofdirectors/doug-mcmillon/

McMillon is said to be close to the Walton family and reportedly was their choice for Duke’s successor.

Are Students Idiots?

!!@@#dddddd444lotr_18thAre Students Idiots?

There is a new article in Slate written by Rebecca Schuman.

She discusses (the article is linked below) a famous college professor named Slavoj Zizek who is important in his field, loved by his students but considers those same students to be idiots. Zisek also hates office hours and gets upset whenever a student shares a personal story or wants to be friends.

Let’s be clear, I do not regard my students as idiots. I like my students and want them to succeed. Mr. Zizek’s opinion of his students is offensive to me.

However is this a business ethics problem?

On the surface, there would seem to be no problem at all. He is popular with his students and important in his field. We can safely conclude that he is teaching his classes successfully, so where’s the problem? I want to find a problem because I don’t like his attitude but he fulfills the requirements of his position and his students find him lovable. I would like to think I can probe beneath his success at his job and find some moral lack but by the rules of business ethics, I don’t see one.

I view teaching as a calling, more an art than a science. So when someone finds his students in a sense, unworthy, my personal values seemed to be attacked. I would rather every professor cared about their students as much as I do. I would rather that every professor would willingly do his office hours. And I would rather that professors feel honored that a student would confide in them.

I don’t know if you remember Wesley’s line from the movie, The Princess Bride, when he says to Montoya, “Learn to live with disappointment.” Apparently, I have to learn that too.

James Pilant

Slavoj Zizek calls students stupid and boring. Stop worshiping this man! (VIDEO.)

He is also a grade-A, number-one, world-class jerk, who brings to life the worst caricature of the humanities eminence: someone who loves subjecting other people to his talks, but who loathes contact with students—who, being “like other people,” are mostly “boring idiots.”

via Slavoj Zizek calls students stupid and boring. Stop worshiping this man! (VIDEO.).

Is Google Evil?

 

Is Google Evil?
Is Google Evil?

Is Google Evil?

I’m Getting Discouraged

Writing is a pleasure for me and a need. I have to write to get some things out. There are things I want to say that I believe are important.  I’ve been doing blogging on regular basis for about five years, more on some sites than others.

It is now pretty obvious that Google has penalized me repeatedly and thoroughly. With the changes Google made in 2012 and 2013, I have been reduced from more than a hundred hits a day to my current average (and falling) of 34 hits a day.

So, I’ve been looking at Google and “Search Engine Optimization.” To say the rules are Byzantine would be a dramatic understatement. What’s more Google changes the rules whenever it feels like and in anyway it feels like.

I want to write. I don’t want to spend hours doing SEO. I like to think I have a life, and the implication of having a life is that you are experiencing it and don’t have time for nonsense. I envision the great authors of history trying to navigate through Google and spending hours on SEO. It was only funny the first time.

What’s getting me in trouble? One thing is my lengthy quotes. I like to talk up my friends’ Blogs, Dan Bodine, Steven Mintz and my colleague, Chris MacDonald and many others. I love telling people about new blogs. I write a paragraph introduction, include two or three paragraphs of one of their articles followed by a direct link (usually I link to both the individual post and their full web site). Google considers this duplicate material and penalizes me heavily for it. So, I’m going through my posts, 2,210 of them, trying to get the quotes reduced to “snippets,” which I’m not sure exactly what is, but am assuming it is a sentence or two with a “…” at the end. I’m told a snippet will not draw unfavorable attention.

There appears to be a bunch of other things I do that were okay in 2012, that are Google penalized now. I am trying to learn the rules. I’m pretty upset. After all, you might think that my 2,210 posts would get me some kind of credit in the first place but no, sometimes I don’t stay on topic, my “brand.” When I talk about a favorite movie or mention something that happened or talk about criminal justice (which I teach), their diabolical rating system says “NOT BUSINESS ETHICS.” And I get penalized. So, I’ve been killing posts that aren’t directly on subject.

I can’t help but believe that I want to write about the important issues of the day and instead I’m playing a maniacal time-eating,role-playing game in which the rules make little sense and change while you are trying to play the game.

Is Google Evil?

I hope not. Maybe all this horrible, horrible things they have done is just an aberration and once I work through it, I will get some search results for all my work. I don’t expect to be treated fairly because Google isn’t going to do that, but a little, tiny bit of fairness is not too much to hope for.

James Pilant

From Around the Web.

From Evil Google to WordPress

Google recently revealed the pitch-black nature of its evil heart …

http://vanshardware.com/2010/02/from-evil-google-to-wordpress/

What’s the Business Ethics? Should the Employees in Video Stores be Movie Buffs?

029What’s the Business Ethics? Should the Employees in Video Stores be Movie Buffs?

It seems like a good idea – knowing the product – being able to understand questions – give good recommendations. But they are not always move buffs. Sometimes, they know very little about films at all.

For me personally, this isn’t much of a problem, I am a film buff, myself and know what I want to rent or buy. Of course, sometimes they think they’re film buffs. I’m sorry, one recommendation, Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry, is never going to be a classic.

But let us return to the question: Should the employees in video stores be movie buffs? I think they should at least have some rudimentary knowledge because of something that happened to me.

Now, I live in the Bible belt and here among many there is a certain pride in not being cultured, knowledgeable or educated. One day I wander into a video rental place and have a look around. There’s a couple of John Wayne films that I had seen when I was in my teens that I wanted to watch again as an adult. So, I’m back there in the shelves looking for Rio Bravo and El Dorado, when I come across the film, Even Cowgirls Get the Blues.

I had seen Even Cowgirls Get the Blues. I don’t remember where. It may have been on cable or a friend rented it. I think it’s a pretty good film but generally I don’t watch lesbian films. Now I have seen a lot of films involving lesbians but this isn’t quite the same thing. The film is not a lesbian film so much as it is a LESBIAN film. It shouts and screams and at the top of its lungs proclaims that it is a lesbian film. Okay? LESBIAN!!! And as for rating, it’s a hard R. How hard? Think of steel or diamonds.

I immediately see a vision in my mind of a Bible belt family just home from church about to watch what they believe is the usual redemptive tale of a white hatted cowboy slaughtering bad guys or Native Americans and winding up with the appropriately virginal school teacher who cannot restrain her ardor for a man who kills so casually. And instead the family gets to learn about female sexuality in a new and controversial way.

So, I, a good citizen and business ethics teacher (which means I can’t so much as eat a grape in the supermarket – a student might see me) carry the film up to the front and ask the clerk to move it from Westerns.

The conversation goes like this.

“You say this film isn’t a Western?”

“That’s right.” I reply.

“Does it take place in the West?”

“Well, yes it does.” I admit.

“Are there actual cowgirls in it?”

“Well, they do wear chaps.” I was not willing to disclose the absence of other clothing.

“Then why should we move it?”

“Look, just watch it, okay?” I give up, not willing to explain the significance of Uma Thurman’s outsized thumbs.

He gives me that look which means “I will go through the motions of appearing to take your concerns seriously but as soon as you leave this is going back in the Westerns.”

And it was back there the next time I came in.

As business ethics go, this is a small problem, no matter how traumatized the formerly happy middle class family that sees it, may become.

And of course, I did my ethical duty, so I can feel good about myself. But maybe, just maybe it would be a better world if the sales clerks in video rental places knew more about films.

James Pilant

Poor Youngsters as Happy as More Affluent Peers (via Thriven’s Blog)

Poor Youngsters as Happy as More Affluent Peers (via Thriven’s Blog)

!!@@#dddddd444plate16-thIs happiness determined by the size of your wallet? I’ve never thought so. But I do believe that debt pressure can make a good life into a living hell. I worry that millions of Americans saddled with debt they can never pay are never going to have a chance at the happiness that the last generation had.

Americans owe 2.4 trillion dollars in consumer debt. Than doesn’t count real estate. The big pieces of that are student loan debts coming in at about 730 billion dollars, credit card debt at 962 billion dollars. That leaves 708 billion for things like auto loans.

In good times, that wouldn’t be that big of a problem. If you have good jobs and a thriving economy, those kinds of debts are manageable.

These aren’t good times.

These debts translate into hardcore misery: lost homes, spousal abuse, alcohol and drug use, crime as well as mental illness.

When the debts are larger than your income, you lay awake at night. It sits in the back of your mind like a dull pain that never goes away. You feel it when you talk, when you read, even when you take a step.

You can’t buy a can of pop on the way to work. You can’t buy coffee when you’re cold.

You put gasoline in the car and pray hard that it works okay, even though you have been due for an oil change for three months and the tires are getting bald.

Your life moves away from logic and you rely on luck. Will the car keep running? Will one of us get sick? Can we get some part time work or maybe sell something? That’s what life is when it’s just a matter of luck. Things just happen.

There are millions of Americans out there feeling that kind of pain.

Read the article. It’s well thought out from a good web site.

James Pilant

  An important article in today’s Guardian. For many of us who grew up poor or who have close contact with young people and families in the low income category, we would hardly be surprised that life can be as good without much in the way of money. Indeed, in many cases it is better. The genuine positive closeness of people – family, partners and friends – is almost certainly the key factor to feeling secure and happy. There’s nothing like l … Read More

via Thriven’s Blog