3 ms·

For your example you picked the highest paid officer in one of the richest areas in the state where police officers make the most money. It does seem that polic

by blix 5y ago

For your example you picked the highest paid officer in one of the richest areas in the state where police officers make the most money. It does seem that police in California make a ton of money, but it's really not representative of the entire country. Take a look at that Forbes link you posted. Despite reading your articles, I still don't think $100/hr is a reasonable approximation of an average cop's hourly rate, and thats before getting into the fact that the guy making half a million for watching Warriors games is probably not the guy pulling you over.

newbie789 5y ago
> Despite reading your articles, I still don't think $100/hr is a reasonable approximation of an average cop's hourly rate I’ve personally never said that police make more than $100 per hour, in fact I specifically said that despite not knowing what the hourly wage works out to, I don’t think that $100 would be a significant amount of money to most cops. If your premise is “you can bribe anyone as long as the dollar amount is higher than the wages from one hour of work,” then I suppose it’s impossible to discuss in good faith. My premise is “$100 isn’t usually enough to bribe people that make high five figures or more.” I’m not entirely sure why hourly wage is supposed to fit in here.
- blix 5y ago
  > I’m not entirely sure why hourly wage is supposed to fit in here. Please read the original post I responded to. It explicitly mentions hourly wage which is the only reason I mentioned it at all. I thought their estimate seemed a little high. Thank you for stating your premise, I didn't find it clear in your earlier posts. I don't have strong opinions about how much is enough to bribe someone who makes X as I am not aware of any good sources of data that deal with this question. Maybe a table of attempted bribes with metadata. I'll run some experiments and get back to you.
  - newbie789 5y ago
    I’d suggest a wonderful book called The End of Policing by Alex Vitale. I’ve read it cover to cover many times and it may include some insight that you’d enjoy.
    - blix 5y ago
      I appreciate the suggestion :) I will add it to my list. Based on a quick glance at some synopses, it seems the author accurate identifies the role of police in society but perhaps doesn't adequately account for how society would change if the police were removed but the driving force for their existence remained in place.
      - newbie789 5y ago
        I would suggest drawing your own conclusions from the book. It’s exhaustively researched and thoroughly cited, but it’s a topic that gets people worked up so I’m sure that interpretations abound. I’m kind of curious as to what you mean by this: > it seems the author accurate identifies the role of police in society but perhaps doesn't adequately account for how society would change if the police were removed but the driving force for their existence remained in place. You believe that the author has a factual understanding of the current state of police, and at the same time is factually wrong about a hypothetical scenario that has never occurred in American history? (As an aside, I’m not sure what the synopses have led you to believe Vitale is directly advocating for. It’s a very complex book with a lot of nuance. If one’s interpretation is “this is the same exact thing as a ‘defund the police’ or ‘black lives matter’ or ‘coexist’ bumper sticker” then there isn’t really much that can be done to change that opinion.) What authors do you think are correct about a hypothetical future in which something completely unprecedented happens to American society?
        blix 5y ago
        If the only possible opinions to have about hypothetical events are 'factually correct' and 'factually incorrect,' I don't think you will find many good opinions. I haven't the book and it will take me several months to get to it, so I'd appreciate if you didn't pull random concrete ideas out of my intentionally vague and non-committal statement. Why is it that the people quickest to accuse others of bad faith are the ones that do this?

by blix 5y ago

newbie789 5y ago

> Despite reading your articles, I still don't think $100/hr is a reasonable approximation of an average cop's hourly rate I’ve personally never said that police make more than $100 per hour, in fact I specifically said that despite not knowing what the hourly wage works out to, I don’t think that $100 would be a significant amount of money to most cops. If your premise is “you can bribe anyone as long as the dollar amount is higher than the wages from one hour of work,” then I suppose it’s impossible to discuss in good faith. My premise is “$100 isn’t usually enough to bribe people that make high five figures or more.” I’m not entirely sure why hourly wage is supposed to fit in here.

blix 5y ago
> I’m not entirely sure why hourly wage is supposed to fit in here. Please read the original post I responded to. It explicitly mentions hourly wage which is the only reason I mentioned it at all. I thought their estimate seemed a little high. Thank you for stating your premise, I didn't find it clear in your earlier posts. I don't have strong opinions about how much is enough to bribe someone who makes X as I am not aware of any good sources of data that deal with this question. Maybe a table of attempted bribes with metadata. I'll run some experiments and get back to you.
- newbie789 5y ago
  I’d suggest a wonderful book called The End of Policing by Alex Vitale. I’ve read it cover to cover many times and it may include some insight that you’d enjoy.
  - blix 5y ago
    I appreciate the suggestion :) I will add it to my list. Based on a quick glance at some synopses, it seems the author accurate identifies the role of police in society but perhaps doesn't adequately account for how society would change if the police were removed but the driving force for their existence remained in place.
    - newbie789 5y ago
      I would suggest drawing your own conclusions from the book. It’s exhaustively researched and thoroughly cited, but it’s a topic that gets people worked up so I’m sure that interpretations abound. I’m kind of curious as to what you mean by this: > it seems the author accurate identifies the role of police in society but perhaps doesn't adequately account for how society would change if the police were removed but the driving force for their existence remained in place. You believe that the author has a factual understanding of the current state of police, and at the same time is factually wrong about a hypothetical scenario that has never occurred in American history? (As an aside, I’m not sure what the synopses have led you to believe Vitale is directly advocating for. It’s a very complex book with a lot of nuance. If one’s interpretation is “this is the same exact thing as a ‘defund the police’ or ‘black lives matter’ or ‘coexist’ bumper sticker” then there isn’t really much that can be done to change that opinion.) What authors do you think are correct about a hypothetical future in which something completely unprecedented happens to American society?
      - blix 5y ago
        If the only possible opinions to have about hypothetical events are 'factually correct' and 'factually incorrect,' I don't think you will find many good opinions. I haven't the book and it will take me several months to get to it, so I'd appreciate if you didn't pull random concrete ideas out of my intentionally vague and non-committal statement. Why is it that the people quickest to accuse others of bad faith are the ones that do this?