I found https://daily.jstor.org/the-invention-of-incarceration/ by using https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ftsa&q=punishment+before+prison&ia=web

My assumption before even reading that was: I expect it’s because people wanted a punishment that wasn’t a monetary fine, corporal punishment, enslavement, death, or “death but we’ll pretend to not see you running away, and we might pardon you in 10 years, but if we see you before then we’ll kill you” (exile). I knew those were the only punishments in ancient Rome (and people weren’t held for long before facing a trial), and it seems that not much had changed until the idea of long term incarceration was conceived: https://romanempiretimes.com/crime-and-punishment-in-ancient-rome-justice-and-inequality/ https://factsanddetails.com/world/cat56/sub408/entry-6360.html

There is more discussion that might be useful here: https://ponder.cat/post/1453581

It seems the specific problem was that military planes were being used instead of civilian planes:

That is why I returned the U.S. military planes that were carrying Colombian migrants… In civilian planes, without being treated like criminals, we will receive our fellow citizens.

That does make sense to me, since I’d feel less comfortable if a military plane was flying into my country, whereas I’d be more comfortable if a regular civilian flight was used instead. From the perspective of a Colombian, I would be concerned about how national security would be affected by giving permission for military planes to operate when they wouldn’t otherwise have permission.

Something that might be useful is a general strike (see https://sh.itjust.works/post/9745322 and https://sh.itjust.works/post/31602246 also). It would be nice for more people to be unionized in preparation for that. I suspect that it would be better to start unionizing for jobs that more people have (like Personal Care Aides or people working in a retail store or fast food restaurant), since after having a union contract is more normalized it’d probably be easier for people like medical doctors or pilots or lawyers to have a union contract.

I’m personally interested in electoral reform (see !rcv@ponder.cat and !fairvote@lemmy.ca also), such that I wouldn’t have to worry as much about coordinating with other people before I vote. However, it’s guaranteed that someone will always be dissatisfied with the results of an election that isn’t unanimous, so that might not be a complete solution. A more general solution might be to handle more things locally with voluntary organizations. Another option could be to generally devolve power to local institutions (like to a state government or municipality) or to create more independent institutions that are directly accountable to the government of the United States but can act autonomously (like the Federal Reserve System) so that less is dependent on the Congress or the President, and then to reduce the authority of more powerful institutions. If some states withdrew or were expelled from the United States of America that might help (since the power of an expelled state and a post-expulsion United States of America would naturally be more local, and the power of each would also affect less territory).

I didn’t know this was the origin of the “I’m baby” meme: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/im-baby

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/miracles-fucking-magnets-how-do-they-work

I suspect it’s legal because it was a prevalent practice before laws were made, and nobody wanted to change that so they just made sure the law allowed for what they were already doing. For example, Kansas was part of a “territory” before it was a state, so only the USA as a whole had authority, and I doubt there were many laws about the subject we’re discussing, so there was probably literally no local law enforcement in most of Kansas at some point. Additionally, in the USA people settled / farm(ed) by having one family live far away from everyone else (as opposed to in Europe where it was supposedly more common to have a central place where a lot of people lived and then they would walk to their sector of farmland that surrounds the town). This means that people with 8 kids probably assigned any 14 or 16 or 12 year olds to watch the younger kids, while the adults and older children were out farming or preparing food (which took a lot more time in the past), since there was no other adult that was physically close by (and any that were would probably have to attend to their own farm/business rather than help with raising someone else’s kids).

This seems to be the actual reporting: https://abc7.com/montclair-teen-saves-niece-home-invasion-quick-thinking-home-invasion/1781013/

Note that there are irrecoverable costs to owning your housing too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9Golcxjpi8

See also https://lemmy.world/post/23582960

An interesting perspective I heard about is “affordability”. To describe that with my own words: if your income is stable or will grow compared to your housing costs, and housing costs are not burdensome to you, housing is affordable to you. Owning a house rather than having a lease should make your housing costs vary less, so if housing costs will go up in the future it might be useful to buy a house (but if housing costs will go down in the future it might not be useful to buy a house). I found some graphs for “Affordability”: https://dqydj.com/historical-home-affordability/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FIXHAI

I have also heard that it’s hard to find people to do repair work in some places, and that people there charge a lot of money for their services. If you have trouble finding someone who you can pay just to produce a quote for a roof repair, the actual cost of housing will probably be higher than in other places.

I had a thought after looking at this post: I expect that it’s better to own land in places that are more likely for people to want to move to or work near.

I thought this was obvious: avocado seeds are large because they were eaten by giant sloths. It would surely be much more difficult for an avocado tree to reproduce without the involvement of an animal, and giant sloths are not around anymore, so at some point humans must have taken over from the giant sloths, so there was probably some place where humans and giant sloths lived at the same time.

Technical problems and political problems can be related, and discussing one in the context of the other can be useful.

https://jakeukalane.github.io/archiving.html

Brussels sprouts used to taste different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_sprout#Contemporary_Brussels_sprouts

It doesn’t matter if anything is behind you or not: any other road users would also be obligated to give up their right of way (by stopping) if you chose to stop, if doing so would help prevent collisions.

It’s probably best if a driver yields to a flying saucer.

Give up your right-of-way when it will help prevent collisions.

When entering traffic, you must proceed with caution and yield to the traffic already occupying the lanes.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/california-driver-handbook/laws-and-rules-of-the-road/

The discussion is probably about https://lemmy.world/u/FlyingSquid

I see “50.7K Comments” and “Joined 1 year ago” at https://sh.itjust.works/u/FlyingSquid@lemmy.world and 50.7*1000/(8760 hours) = 5.78767 posts per hour