That doesn't sound legal -- at the least, he could sue the city/state for those wages
The city can defund the entire police force, but it will have to set up or allow an alternative which will end up the same as the current one if the incentives don't change. Resetting the entire system every time something goes wrong isn't really a viable strategy. It'll work every so often.
If someone takes a bunch of hostages then we need people who can de-escalate and rescue them, but that isn't what most cops spend their time doing every day.
Even knowing that US police are harsh and trigger-happy, I find it deeply amusing that first world citizens protected by the world's strongest military will talk about community policing.
Pass laws to reform the police. Abolishing them will just ensure that power hungry and petty tyrants fill the void. And these folks will happily beat and murder any and all who act against them, tax/toll all economic opportunities (roads/bridges/vendors, etc), keep the local politician and bureaucrats in their pocket, assault/abuse any woman on the streets - and no-one will dare to report anything.
The police aren't following the laws now. Why would you think that adding laws would make them follow the existing ones? Police reform isn't the only tool we have available, and it feels very silly to hear people continue pounding the reform drum in 2020.
Fwiw, I've been using arch as my daily driver continuously for 14 years and haven't ever really felt the strong need for an AUR helper.
Although there are a few pushing for recognition of good local work, those few tends to be attacked from both sides of the discussion.
Evergreen professor forced to resign for opposing day of white absence: https://blog.usejournal.com/the-controversy-of-bret-weinstei...
UCLA professor placed under investigation for reading MLK's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail": https://freebeacon.com/issues/university-to-investigate-lect...
Data scientist fired for retweeting study showing non-violent protests are more effective: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/case-for-liberalism-...
This is a blatant misrepresentation. The tweet talked about "race riots" and Democrat election results. Many people would argue that the point of direct action is not to sway electoral votes toward the Democratic party.
I don't think giving 1 day's wages to the world can be construed as "eliminating a category of poverty".
My guess is that it's closer to your estimate, about 1 day of wages, but it could be 2.7 years of wages at most.
For the purposes of this debate, "Americans" means citizens and those that can vote, the ones to whom the government answers.
Why can't we discuss the legitimacy of the government?
Generally I've seen people reach for "cancel culture" when:
1. Fear-mongering the left over perceived injustice.
2. Defending bad takes by tone-policing any disagreement.
Can you point to a comment by john_moscow where they've been 'cancelled'? Or maybe a comment by you?