4 ms·

> Suspending a driver's license because of debt is an absolutely bone-headed idea. There are people who have money, yet won't pay debts, unless you force the

> Suspending a driver's license because of debt is an absolutely bone-headed idea. There are people who have money, yet won't pay debts, unless you force them to. This system ostensibly was designed to solve this problem while at the same time ignoring the impact on low income people. > If someone owes a debt to the government, garnish wages. You've never had your wages garnished, have you? If you think suspension of a drivers license, which is just a temporary paperwork condition, is somehow preferable to actual taking of up to 25% of your income from your check, I'm incredibly surprised. > designed to kick them while they're down and punish them for being poor. Finally.. you shouldn't assume that all poor people are victims of some external circumstance. It's not a uniform "class" of people you can think of this way.

bryanrasmussen 3y ago
>Finally.. you shouldn't assume that all poor people are victims of some external circumstance. sure, some are victims of some internal circumstance, but I can't really think of someone who is willingly poor, more like incapable of getting over their internal problem.
- akira2501 3y ago
  > but I can't really think of someone who is willingly poor It's not an isolated choice. Their choice to be poor is usually a consequence of them deciding that some other activity is easier and better than attempting to build wealth for themselves. I've lived this way for large portions of my life. America is not fun to live in while facing this proposition, and the current climate seems to require a certain tolerance or willingness towards corruption that I personally cannot abide even though I am poorer for it. It wasn't a judgement. It's just an anecdote about how solving the problem may look quite a bit different than the frothy suggestions posted here.
  - pierat 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - akira2501 3y ago
      > But it's usually choices your parents did, and the community you live in. What is your source for this assertion? > "individual choices cause bad" So, your expectation is, if you fund the schools and fix the "resources," everything is suddenly going to be better because everyone will make the best choices naturally? What experiences or data are you drawing from here?
      - skulk 3y ago
        > What is your source for this assertion? Having eyes and keeping them open. You should look up the term "sealioning". Then stop doing it.
  - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
    >Their choice to be poor is usually a consequence of them deciding that some other activity is easier and better than attempting to build wealth for themselves. I would say your choice to be middle class or not wealthy is a direct and easily understood consequence of deciding that some other activity is easier and or better - for example I'm going to be a Public Defender and help people! Also I guess I want to learn about Ancient Sumerian instead of pursuing an MBA! But those are not choices guaranteed for poverty, they are choices not to pursue wealth. choices for poverty are generally not willingly chosen or are at least not direct and clear consequences but sure I bet you can with diligent searching turn up some examples.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - akira2501 3y ago
      > But those are not choices guaranteed for poverty Your encoded is assumption is that not only did they make these choices but that they were successful in choosing them. You're also missing the most obvious way people make this choice: Having a child. Which, is not always a _predictable_ addition to life. Everyone is acting like I've got some "anti welfare queen" bias here, when in reality I have an "anti bleeding heart" bias here. We should solve the problems. To do so, we should first be /honest/ about what those problems actually are.
Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
> at the same time ignoring the impact on low income people. That's a HUGE problem. > If you think suspension of a drivers license, which is just a temporary paperwork condition "temporary paperwork condition"? Are you advocating driving on a suspended license? Because someone who can no longer drive to work either loses their job or it's suddenly very expensive to drive. > you shouldn't assume that all poor people are victims of some external circumstance. It's not a uniform "class" of people you can think of this way. Well no, of course not. Some people are poor because of shitty choices. But poverty is extremely difficult to escape, whether or not it's because of shitty choices. I think it's fair to try to improve the lives of people that are poor because of external circumstance, even if it means we end up helping people who you feel don't deserve help because poor choices led them to be poor.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- akira2501 3y ago
  > That's a HUGE problem. It may be large, but do you have any information that can put the size of this problem in context with the others? > Are you advocating driving on a suspended license? I'm merely recognizing that doing so is possible without bringing further harm to yourself, while having your paycheck garnished is entirely unavoidable. Further if you're driving for an actually good reason, I doubt most police officers would make an issue of the paperwork condition. Finally there are many states where simply driving with a suspended or revoked license is not an arrestable or towable offense. > But poverty is extremely difficult to escape If you are unwilling to change anything else about their lives, then yes, it's hard to make the same actions have a different result. In particular, even if you try, you're probably just moving consequences and risk around the system in a careless fashion. > even if it means we end up helping people who you feel don't deserve help So far I've failed to witness "throw money at the problem" or "let them off the hook" actually _improve_ anything other than the conscience of the people who advocate for it.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    > Further if you're driving for an actually good reason, I doubt most police officers would make an issue of the paperwork condition That's a pretty ballsy assertion. > Finally there are many states where simply driving with a suspended or revoked license is not an arrestable or towable offense. Even in those, they'll just keep fining you. Great solution.

bryanrasmussen 3y ago

>Finally.. you shouldn't assume that all poor people are victims of some external circumstance. sure, some are victims of some internal circumstance, but I can't really think of someone who is willingly poor, more like incapable of getting over their internal problem.

akira2501 3y ago
> but I can't really think of someone who is willingly poor It's not an isolated choice. Their choice to be poor is usually a consequence of them deciding that some other activity is easier and better than attempting to build wealth for themselves. I've lived this way for large portions of my life. America is not fun to live in while facing this proposition, and the current climate seems to require a certain tolerance or willingness towards corruption that I personally cannot abide even though I am poorer for it. It wasn't a judgement. It's just an anecdote about how solving the problem may look quite a bit different than the frothy suggestions posted here.
- pierat 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - akira2501 3y ago
    > But it's usually choices your parents did, and the community you live in. What is your source for this assertion? > "individual choices cause bad" So, your expectation is, if you fund the schools and fix the "resources," everything is suddenly going to be better because everyone will make the best choices naturally? What experiences or data are you drawing from here?
    - skulk 3y ago
      > What is your source for this assertion? Having eyes and keeping them open. You should look up the term "sealioning". Then stop doing it.
- bryanrasmussen 3y ago
  >Their choice to be poor is usually a consequence of them deciding that some other activity is easier and better than attempting to build wealth for themselves. I would say your choice to be middle class or not wealthy is a direct and easily understood consequence of deciding that some other activity is easier and or better - for example I'm going to be a Public Defender and help people! Also I guess I want to learn about Ancient Sumerian instead of pursuing an MBA! But those are not choices guaranteed for poverty, they are choices not to pursue wealth. choices for poverty are generally not willingly chosen or are at least not direct and clear consequences but sure I bet you can with diligent searching turn up some examples.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - akira2501 3y ago
    > But those are not choices guaranteed for poverty Your encoded is assumption is that not only did they make these choices but that they were successful in choosing them. You're also missing the most obvious way people make this choice: Having a child. Which, is not always a _predictable_ addition to life. Everyone is acting like I've got some "anti welfare queen" bias here, when in reality I have an "anti bleeding heart" bias here. We should solve the problems. To do so, we should first be /honest/ about what those problems actually are.

Sohcahtoa82 3y ago

> at the same time ignoring the impact on low income people. That's a HUGE problem. > If you think suspension of a drivers license, which is just a temporary paperwork condition "temporary paperwork condition"? Are you advocating driving on a suspended license? Because someone who can no longer drive to work either loses their job or it's suddenly very expensive to drive. > you shouldn't assume that all poor people are victims of some external circumstance. It's not a uniform "class" of people you can think of this way. Well no, of course not. Some people are poor because of shitty choices. But poverty is extremely difficult to escape, whether or not it's because of shitty choices. I think it's fair to try to improve the lives of people that are poor because of external circumstance, even if it means we end up helping people who you feel don't deserve help because poor choices led them to be poor.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
akira2501 3y ago
> That's a HUGE problem. It may be large, but do you have any information that can put the size of this problem in context with the others? > Are you advocating driving on a suspended license? I'm merely recognizing that doing so is possible without bringing further harm to yourself, while having your paycheck garnished is entirely unavoidable. Further if you're driving for an actually good reason, I doubt most police officers would make an issue of the paperwork condition. Finally there are many states where simply driving with a suspended or revoked license is not an arrestable or towable offense. > But poverty is extremely difficult to escape If you are unwilling to change anything else about their lives, then yes, it's hard to make the same actions have a different result. In particular, even if you try, you're probably just moving consequences and risk around the system in a careless fashion. > even if it means we end up helping people who you feel don't deserve help So far I've failed to witness "throw money at the problem" or "let them off the hook" actually _improve_ anything other than the conscience of the people who advocate for it.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  > Further if you're driving for an actually good reason, I doubt most police officers would make an issue of the paperwork condition That's a pretty ballsy assertion. > Finally there are many states where simply driving with a suspended or revoked license is not an arrestable or towable offense. Even in those, they'll just keep fining you. Great solution.