• 1 Post
  • 16 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle


  • You’re deliberately missing the point. Whether you watch it or not, that it is televised brings the issue of execution to the public’s attention:

    1. If a country is going to execute people, it should have the honesty to show the public what that actually means
    2. if the public can’t handle public executions, they should perhaps revisit why they want something they are unable to bring themselves to watch.
    3. Regardless of intent, making executions public is increasing public dialogue about executions. We can see that correlation in other countries above. Improved communication modes correlated with abolition.
    4. If that increased public dialogue focuses on the fact that the executions are public and not that they are happening at all, that shows a basic dishonesty about what the problem actually is.

  • Pre radio and tv, and interestingly the human rights revolution in western nations aligns well with increased public discourse allowed by radio and tv.

    Key Abolition Timeline in the Western World

    • 19th Century:

      • San Marino: 1865 (last execution in 1468)
      • Costa Rica & Venezuela: 1859 / 1863 [1, 2]
    • Post-World War II (1940s–1960s):

      • West Germany: 1949 (following World War II)
      • Italy: 1948 (civil crimes; total abolition in 1994) [1, 2]
    • Late 20th Century Wave (1970s–1990s):

      • Portugal: 1976
      • Denmark: 1978
      • Norway: 1979
      • France: 1981 (under President François Mitterrand)
      • Australia: 1985 (completed across all states/territories)
      • New Zealand: 1989
      • Canada: 1998 (abolished for ordinary crimes in 1976 and completely for all military/remaining offenses in 1998)
      • United Kingdom: 1998 (de facto ended in 1965, formally abolished for all remaining offenses like treason in 1998)








  • NSAbot@lemmy.catoCanada@lemmy.ca•David Eby's gambit folks
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    I was interested in this comparison so I did a small amount of research on total cost of living in Vancouver vs Stockholm Sweden for a high earner like a doctor, lawyer @$330k CAD with a modest 3 bedroom home (townhouse) along with the proposed NDP tax increases. This is the conclusion. High earners under the proposed system in Vancouver get the high taxes of Sweden with the high cost of living of right wing capitalism:

    • You save more cash in Stockholm:Despite losing an extra $1,717 CAD every single month to Swedish income taxes, the structural sanity of the Swedish housing market saves you $3,091 CAD a month in raw mortgage math. This leaves you with roughly $1,380 CAD more surplus cash per month in Stockholm.
    • The Equity Difference: In Vancouver, you are building equity on a larger asset ($1.27M vs $912k), but you are heavily exposed to interest rate volatility. If rates jump 1% at renewal in Canada, your budget breaks. In Sweden, your exposure is mitigated by the interest tax write-off.