In this post, I will be addressing the article 5 Insane Laws Written Specifically to Harass Poor People that I found on Cracked.com. The Author of this article is J. F. Sargent. Much like my last blog post, I will review the article piece by piece, and then present my questions and thoughts for everyone to give thumbs up, thumbs down, ask questions, make comments, and most importantly air grievances.
#5. Unpaid Rent Can Get You Thrown in Prison in Arkansas
Sargent opens with the statement that if you are a normal person, you have most likely been late on your rent at least once. The law that Sargent is referring to is the failure-to-vacate law. This law states that if you're late on your rent, you have 10 days to get out. There is no investigation of this process so the landlord can basically say anything he or she wants and the tenant is at fault. Thinking about pleading not guilty? Seems reasonable, right? Well think again sane citizen, because pleading not guilty actually has worse consequences than pleading guilty. You still have to leave your home while you wait for a trial, and then pay all the court fees. Ahh, justice. Sweet corrupt justice. The system is so corrupt that actual homeowners have been charged with being late on their rent. Below is an example of what I envision that conversation to look like:
Judge: I can see how this is confusing to you, Mr. & Mrs. Homeowner. Allow me to explain: purple unicorns popcorn fluffy rug.
Mr. & Mrs. Homeowner: Well when you put it that way, I guess common sense and logic are completely disregarded in this situation. Thanks for the clarity.
Silver onion pickle powder. Yes, dishwasher candles, that's what I said the first time. Duh.
So, let's talk a little about this law. First off, wow Arkansas, you have really outdone yourself when it comes to making life tough for poor people and really exercising your right to make sure that no jail cells stay vacant. (I know, you're just looking out for the jail cells. Such lonely dwellings that whine and whine on hours end unless you find them some unjust company to play with. Alas.) Anyway - while I'm making fun of Arkansas, let's talk about state statistics and state mottos. According to Wikipedia, Arkansas is ranked #29 in size, #32 in population size, and #50 in lawmaker brain size. (ok, I might have made that last one up, but it's not my fault that Wikipedia lets anyone edit anything...) Their state motto is 'regnat populous' which roughly translates to 'the people rule'. Seriously? Which people? The rich ones? Maybe that's actually what it translates to. My Latin is about as good as the logic behind this law.
I'll open up some concluding thoughts about this law. Why is this still a law? If it is known that it is corrupt and generally speaking, stupid, then why hasn't anyone nixed it or edited it to make sense? What would happen if this were true in every state? Say you were late on your rent. So, now you need to spend money on storage space while you sit in jail waiting for trial. You obviously can't work while you're sitting in a jail cell, so how are you going to come up with the money for your back due rent, storage space, first month's rent and security deposit for a new place (assuming that you will eventually get out of jail) AND court fees? Sheesh! That's a lot of money for being put in jail for not having money in the first place. Oh, irony, you are a cruel mistress.
#4: Wisconsin Wants to Freeze the Bank Accounts of Unemployed People
Ok. Yeah. Let that one sink in for a second. So, don't jump out of your seat just yet to find the nearest map of the US and stick your middle finger right in Wisconsin's face. Not YET. When they want to freeze bank accounts of unemployed people, they mean people collecting unemployment. But when they see an error in your unemployment payments (wait, how is that my fault?), they want to reserve the right to freeze your bank account. The whole thing, not just the one unemployment payment that they screwed up. Apparently the method to the madness on this bright idea is that they will recoup money for the unemployment fund. Hmm... still wondering how this is your fault and now the state has frozen all of your funds on account of their screw up? You and me both, buddy.
At least I have work tomorrow and a paycheck on the way... Oh, wait.
Let's look at the logistics of this. I want to note that this isn't an actual law. It is what some legislators are pushing for. Even so, this is something that could very well be a reality. Let's hope that it doesn't come to that. I want to look at a scenario where this does happen to someone and let's see how successful this someone is. So, Suzie Someone loses her job. She is given unemployment benefits. Woo-hoo! Now she only gets 70-80% of what she was making. Boo-hoo, right? Only 70-80%? That's nothing. Well, perhaps not. If your salary is relatively low and you were struggling when you were barely making ends meet when you were receiving 100% of your salary.. that 20-30% cutback could lead to some serious problems. So now that Suzie Someone has received her first unemployment check that is not enough to pay her rent and bills on, she also is spending time looking for new jobs. Everything is going exactly as shitty as it sounds, when wait! What's this? Your bank account is frozen? But... what? Why? Oh... she was paid an extra $30 on one of her unemployment checks. Now she has to wait for the state to fix it, and who knows how long that could take. So, in the meantime she has no money, and no food. Oh, now it's the first of the month. She also don't have rent money.
This story ends in a tragic homeless, hungry, pissed off Suzie. As I predicted, not an ideal scenario. You may resume flipping the bird to the state of Wisconsin should you choose to do so.
#3: One Third of American States Have Debtors' Prisons
When I first read this I thought to myself 'what the hell is a debtors prison?' A quick google search confirmed my suspicion that it is exactly what it sounds like. Jail for people who can't pay their debts. Sargent talks about Charles Dickens and how he so eloquently expressed how much it sucks to be poor. He makes the incredibly valid and sane point that you can't earn the money to pay off said debt while sitting in jail.
Like, whoa, bro. Whoa. That's some deep shit right there.
Ok. Here's a fun fact about debtors' prisons. They were deemed illegal in the US in the 1830s. Yup. So, how do a third of states still have them? They get around calling it a debtors prison by holding people in contempt of court during a creditor lawsuit and then sending them to jail. Not paying your debt = contempt. How much do you have to owe? Apparently in Ohio there are some people doing time for as little as $300. I tried to find an accurate statistic about how many Americans are in debt, but everyone says something different and breaks it down according to this or that. My conclusion was that all of these sources gave roughly the same number- A LOT. A lot of people are in debt. I'm wondering how much money we as taxpayers are spending to house these people in jail whose only crime is being in debt along with the majority of other Americans. So, we're spending money to provide these people with shelter, food, medical care, and denying them a chance to work and earn money to pay off their debt. This makes perfect sense on opposite day. Personally, I should probably get an alias, a few wigs, and load some cash into a getaway bag. If they find out about my student loan debts... I'm toast.
#2: Tons of States Punish You for Being Homeless
Sargent lists different cities that target the homeless for crimes. For example, you can be arrested for scrounging for discarded food, panhandling, and falling asleep in public. The police have actually targeted the homeless and setting up essentially a sting operation to arrest these unfortunate folks. Surely, they have something better to do...
Excuse me Mr. Unfortunate Looking Person, but I'm going to need a receipt for those scraps.
Personally, I can't help but thinking that the homeless guy is making out in this situation. No one wants to be in jail, but hey a roof over your head, a shower, and three square meals a day don't sound so bad comparing to sitting on the street digging through trash cans waiting to be arrested. And no, before you get all crazy about my overly optimistic views on being in jail, I'm referring to a probably non-existent best case scenario where this guy spends a night or two and then goes back to his homeless. Either way, it doesn't look like a glamorous life. It seems like a complete and total waste of time for police to be targeting these people. If I'm ever in serious trouble and no one can come help me because they are setting up undercover operations to put the homeless in jail... then I don't know. That's stupid and crazy and I am speechless trying to define exactly how that would make sense in any variation of the universe.
#1: Tennessee Tries to Make Welfare Dependent on Kids' Grades
In his closing rant about laws that target the poor, Sargent notes that Senator Stacey Campfield has proposed a law that would make poor families' welfare benefits dependent on their child's grades. You might think this is a joke, but the good senator has actually revised this bill multiple times to try to get it passed. If this law did pass, poor families could lose up to 30% of their benefits if their children did not make 'satisfactory progress' in school. Sargent makes the point that there is a clear connection between poverty and education. But hey, that's his opinion. It's not like there's any research to support that.
Pictured above: actual research supporting the correlation between poverty and education.
So, here's a shocker! This correlation that I'm talking about is a negative one. When poverty increases, grades decrease. I know. Crazy. How could this be? Why aren't these poor kids excelling at the rate of all the rich kids? Well, a lot of them are coming from families that are undereducated. It's hard to teach your child what you don't know. Both parents could be working, leaving little to no time for helping their kids with school work. If there isn't enough money for food, then a child's growth (including brain development) could be stunted. Poor students often live in poor neighborhoods with poor schools, overcrowded classrooms, and an extreme lack of resources. But, Campfield knows how to fix this! Make them even poorer. That'll learn 'em.
I'm not a fan of even the slightest notion of this law, even as a joke. As I discussed in my first blog, when you cut benefits, it is often the children of the household that suffer. So, how are we supposed to help these children help themselves if they have no control over the household, and are likely facing this poverty and education barrier due to the fact that oh, I don't know, they're living in poverty? Nah. Couldn't be. It makes all too much sense to nurture these children who are doing poorly in school and try to make resources available to them. We should just punish them instead.
Thanks for reading!
#5. Unpaid Rent Can Get You Thrown in Prison in Arkansas
Sargent opens with the statement that if you are a normal person, you have most likely been late on your rent at least once. The law that Sargent is referring to is the failure-to-vacate law. This law states that if you're late on your rent, you have 10 days to get out. There is no investigation of this process so the landlord can basically say anything he or she wants and the tenant is at fault. Thinking about pleading not guilty? Seems reasonable, right? Well think again sane citizen, because pleading not guilty actually has worse consequences than pleading guilty. You still have to leave your home while you wait for a trial, and then pay all the court fees. Ahh, justice. Sweet corrupt justice. The system is so corrupt that actual homeowners have been charged with being late on their rent. Below is an example of what I envision that conversation to look like:
Judge: I can see how this is confusing to you, Mr. & Mrs. Homeowner. Allow me to explain: purple unicorns popcorn fluffy rug.
Mr. & Mrs. Homeowner: Well when you put it that way, I guess common sense and logic are completely disregarded in this situation. Thanks for the clarity.
So, let's talk a little about this law. First off, wow Arkansas, you have really outdone yourself when it comes to making life tough for poor people and really exercising your right to make sure that no jail cells stay vacant. (I know, you're just looking out for the jail cells. Such lonely dwellings that whine and whine on hours end unless you find them some unjust company to play with. Alas.) Anyway - while I'm making fun of Arkansas, let's talk about state statistics and state mottos. According to Wikipedia, Arkansas is ranked #29 in size, #32 in population size, and #50 in lawmaker brain size. (ok, I might have made that last one up, but it's not my fault that Wikipedia lets anyone edit anything...) Their state motto is 'regnat populous' which roughly translates to 'the people rule'. Seriously? Which people? The rich ones? Maybe that's actually what it translates to. My Latin is about as good as the logic behind this law.
I'll open up some concluding thoughts about this law. Why is this still a law? If it is known that it is corrupt and generally speaking, stupid, then why hasn't anyone nixed it or edited it to make sense? What would happen if this were true in every state? Say you were late on your rent. So, now you need to spend money on storage space while you sit in jail waiting for trial. You obviously can't work while you're sitting in a jail cell, so how are you going to come up with the money for your back due rent, storage space, first month's rent and security deposit for a new place (assuming that you will eventually get out of jail) AND court fees? Sheesh! That's a lot of money for being put in jail for not having money in the first place. Oh, irony, you are a cruel mistress.
#4: Wisconsin Wants to Freeze the Bank Accounts of Unemployed People
Ok. Yeah. Let that one sink in for a second. So, don't jump out of your seat just yet to find the nearest map of the US and stick your middle finger right in Wisconsin's face. Not YET. When they want to freeze bank accounts of unemployed people, they mean people collecting unemployment. But when they see an error in your unemployment payments (wait, how is that my fault?), they want to reserve the right to freeze your bank account. The whole thing, not just the one unemployment payment that they screwed up. Apparently the method to the madness on this bright idea is that they will recoup money for the unemployment fund. Hmm... still wondering how this is your fault and now the state has frozen all of your funds on account of their screw up? You and me both, buddy.
Let's look at the logistics of this. I want to note that this isn't an actual law. It is what some legislators are pushing for. Even so, this is something that could very well be a reality. Let's hope that it doesn't come to that. I want to look at a scenario where this does happen to someone and let's see how successful this someone is. So, Suzie Someone loses her job. She is given unemployment benefits. Woo-hoo! Now she only gets 70-80% of what she was making. Boo-hoo, right? Only 70-80%? That's nothing. Well, perhaps not. If your salary is relatively low and you were struggling when you were barely making ends meet when you were receiving 100% of your salary.. that 20-30% cutback could lead to some serious problems. So now that Suzie Someone has received her first unemployment check that is not enough to pay her rent and bills on, she also is spending time looking for new jobs. Everything is going exactly as shitty as it sounds, when wait! What's this? Your bank account is frozen? But... what? Why? Oh... she was paid an extra $30 on one of her unemployment checks. Now she has to wait for the state to fix it, and who knows how long that could take. So, in the meantime she has no money, and no food. Oh, now it's the first of the month. She also don't have rent money.
This story ends in a tragic homeless, hungry, pissed off Suzie. As I predicted, not an ideal scenario. You may resume flipping the bird to the state of Wisconsin should you choose to do so.
#3: One Third of American States Have Debtors' Prisons
When I first read this I thought to myself 'what the hell is a debtors prison?' A quick google search confirmed my suspicion that it is exactly what it sounds like. Jail for people who can't pay their debts. Sargent talks about Charles Dickens and how he so eloquently expressed how much it sucks to be poor. He makes the incredibly valid and sane point that you can't earn the money to pay off said debt while sitting in jail.
Ok. Here's a fun fact about debtors' prisons. They were deemed illegal in the US in the 1830s. Yup. So, how do a third of states still have them? They get around calling it a debtors prison by holding people in contempt of court during a creditor lawsuit and then sending them to jail. Not paying your debt = contempt. How much do you have to owe? Apparently in Ohio there are some people doing time for as little as $300. I tried to find an accurate statistic about how many Americans are in debt, but everyone says something different and breaks it down according to this or that. My conclusion was that all of these sources gave roughly the same number- A LOT. A lot of people are in debt. I'm wondering how much money we as taxpayers are spending to house these people in jail whose only crime is being in debt along with the majority of other Americans. So, we're spending money to provide these people with shelter, food, medical care, and denying them a chance to work and earn money to pay off their debt. This makes perfect sense on opposite day. Personally, I should probably get an alias, a few wigs, and load some cash into a getaway bag. If they find out about my student loan debts... I'm toast.
#2: Tons of States Punish You for Being Homeless
Sargent lists different cities that target the homeless for crimes. For example, you can be arrested for scrounging for discarded food, panhandling, and falling asleep in public. The police have actually targeted the homeless and setting up essentially a sting operation to arrest these unfortunate folks. Surely, they have something better to do...
Personally, I can't help but thinking that the homeless guy is making out in this situation. No one wants to be in jail, but hey a roof over your head, a shower, and three square meals a day don't sound so bad comparing to sitting on the street digging through trash cans waiting to be arrested. And no, before you get all crazy about my overly optimistic views on being in jail, I'm referring to a probably non-existent best case scenario where this guy spends a night or two and then goes back to his homeless. Either way, it doesn't look like a glamorous life. It seems like a complete and total waste of time for police to be targeting these people. If I'm ever in serious trouble and no one can come help me because they are setting up undercover operations to put the homeless in jail... then I don't know. That's stupid and crazy and I am speechless trying to define exactly how that would make sense in any variation of the universe.
#1: Tennessee Tries to Make Welfare Dependent on Kids' Grades
In his closing rant about laws that target the poor, Sargent notes that Senator Stacey Campfield has proposed a law that would make poor families' welfare benefits dependent on their child's grades. You might think this is a joke, but the good senator has actually revised this bill multiple times to try to get it passed. If this law did pass, poor families could lose up to 30% of their benefits if their children did not make 'satisfactory progress' in school. Sargent makes the point that there is a clear connection between poverty and education. But hey, that's his opinion. It's not like there's any research to support that.
So, here's a shocker! This correlation that I'm talking about is a negative one. When poverty increases, grades decrease. I know. Crazy. How could this be? Why aren't these poor kids excelling at the rate of all the rich kids? Well, a lot of them are coming from families that are undereducated. It's hard to teach your child what you don't know. Both parents could be working, leaving little to no time for helping their kids with school work. If there isn't enough money for food, then a child's growth (including brain development) could be stunted. Poor students often live in poor neighborhoods with poor schools, overcrowded classrooms, and an extreme lack of resources. But, Campfield knows how to fix this! Make them even poorer. That'll learn 'em.
I'm not a fan of even the slightest notion of this law, even as a joke. As I discussed in my first blog, when you cut benefits, it is often the children of the household that suffer. So, how are we supposed to help these children help themselves if they have no control over the household, and are likely facing this poverty and education barrier due to the fact that oh, I don't know, they're living in poverty? Nah. Couldn't be. It makes all too much sense to nurture these children who are doing poorly in school and try to make resources available to them. We should just punish them instead.
Thanks for reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment