To say that the Dodd-Frank law does not go far enough in protecting the public suggests that it goes SOMEWHERE in protecting the public. Since the purpose of the law was to protect the political class and their cronies, anything it does which protects the public is by accident. I believe the public would be better off without the Dodd-Frank law (although this case does not make that argument one way or the other).
I suspect that there was something in the arguments presented which led the Supreme Court Justices to feel that it required a definitive ruling which only they could provide.
Considering that the Dodd-Frank bill is named for Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, it is hard for me to believe it does anything useful for anyone other than the banks. Those two men were the staunchest opponents of doing anything to fix the problems in the financial markets before the 2008 meltdown. Both profited handsomely from that opposition.
The summary says there is reason to doubt what the Venezuelan government has said about the 'petro". Well, of course there is. There is reason to doubt anything said by the Venezuelan government.
The quality system I was talking about had nothing to do with consistency either (and it was for a product which was supposed to stand up to just about everything that could be thrown at it and still survive). The Quality Manger was perfectly happy sending out units which would fail before the warranty expired, as long as they passed the inspections as described in the quality procedures. Change the procedures to make sure the products actually last through warranty? Why would we do that? Those procedures would make it harder to get our quality certifications.
Actually, based on some of my experiences with Quality Managers, the purpose of the Diversity Officer is to find a way to cover up the ways in which you discriminate against certain groups. I have recently discovered that the purpose of a Quality Manager is NOT to ensure the quality of your production. Rather their purpose is to put into place systems and procedures designed to disguise the fact that you don't give a crap about quality. I saw a situation where the Quality Manger did not CARE that the products going out the door were terrible as long as all of the boxes on the proper forms were checked and the right people had signed them. The fact that following those procedures failed to catch the quality defects was irrelevant. It was the Sales and Marketing guys who insisted that people change what they were doing in order to make sure that the stuff going out the door would perform as the customer expected. The Quality Manager fought them on those changes because they would make it harder to pass the Quality Standards audits.
If my reading of the summary is correct, it was a different person who asked a reporter to turn off their phone from the guy who was told to shut his laptop.
Of course it is about content. More precisely it is about protecting the incumbents from outside challengers. For example, that half day you spent in that class in order to run for office provides just the first barrier to entry. In order to understand that the point of campaign finance laws is to protect incumbents all you have to do is look at the rate at which incumbents win re-election...every time a new campaign finance law is passed, the chance that the incumbent will lose the election goes down. The "best" part about campaign finance laws is that those who do defeat an incumbent are now almost always deeply indebted to the political machine which supplied the money for them to even campaign.
Actually, I am reading an abuse of power from the information which has come out over the last couple of months, not just from the memo. We have people who recommended against prosecution for lying to the FBI under oath by people associated with Hillary about actual crimes, while recommending prosecution for lying to the FBI under oath by people associated with Trump about something which was not actually a crime as one example.
Well, of course they knew about it...the wife of the FBI agent in question worked for Fusion GPS and had consulted with Mr. Steele as he worked on compiling this dossier.
Under the U.S. Constitution, neither the FBI nor the DoJ are independent of the President. So, if Trump needs to remove their independence, we ALREADY have fascism and he is undoing it.
Or to put this another way, it sure looks like there are a whole bunch of people in the DoJ and the FBI who put their opinion of who should be President above the results of the election and are seeking to undo the last election by whatever means necessary.
Which is exactly contrary to my experience. Perhaps it is WHERE you live now vs where you grew up.
When I was growing up fireflies were common in the summer, but not in swarms. When we captured fireflies it was one at a time as we moved around the yard. Then I moved into less rural areas and did not notice them much. A couple years ago I visited a friend of mine who lived on a property similar to the one I grew up on. There were so many fireflies that I could have filled up a jar without moving much at all.
Well, head impacts ARE just as common in soccer, if not more so. Unlike soccer, in football it is now against the rules to intentionally have a head impact (either. In soccer, head impact (heading the ball) is actually one of the strategies which is practiced
Minor quibble, the NYT is shilling for the tobacco companies in order to prop up the tax stream of the governmental bodies. I find it highly incongruous that an organization that once demonized Big Tobacco now finds itself campaigning to increase its revenue.
It reminds me of when Mayor Bloomberg passed a large tax increase on cigarettes in order to "reduce smoking" and a ban on smoking just about every where, then was shocked that people actually smoked so much less that the tax generated massively less than projected.
various levels of government entered into an agreement with the tobacco companies for those companies to pay them a certain percentage of their revenue each year.
Many of those governments issued bonds with a repayment schedule based on what those payments were projected to be.
Partly as a result of vaping, the tobacco company revenues are not as large as projected
As a result of lower than projected tobacco company revenues, payments to those government bodies is less than projected.
This set of facts leaves those governmental bodies with insufficient revenue to pay the bonds they issued without dipping into tax revenues. Therefore, the NYT is shilling for the tobacco companies to prop up their revenue.
OK, because Twitter is turning to blatantly partisan groups. The founder of Common Sense Media is Jim Steyer, the brother of Tom Steyer...Tom Steyer is to the Democratic Party what people think the Koch brothers are to the Republican Party. The National Association of Media Literacy is composed of administrators from various universities and environmentalist groups (which leads me to believe that they are people who believe that Republican=Nazi).
It would not surprise me if Apple gave them a list of serial numbers of phones which were stolen from the store which included all of the iphones which were supposed to be at that store...AND that Apple also told the police that "this one is registered to this person at this address", with no one at Apple ever cross referencing their database to notice that the owner had actually bought it from the store.
Then why do I only see this racism among progressives?
It is especially hard to buy your explanation when you look into the history of progressivism. This article discusses how progressives thought it pointless to give African-Americans academic training: https://www.edweek.org/ew/arti...
Most of the key thinkers who laid the foundation for modern, progressive thought on education are listed as supporting this effort.
Did you notice that Planned Parenthood has more clinics in minority neighborhoods than anywhere else? You know, the organization which was founded by a woman who spoke at KKK rallies performs a disproportionate number of its abortions on black women and I am supposed to think that is not because of race?
Perhaps you have not heard about Senator Byrd? The KKK Senator?
Perhaps you are unaware that it was Senator Ted Kennedy who sponsored the Immigration Act of 1965 which set up an immigration system which suppresses wages for African-Americans?
Or, just look at Portland, one of the most leftwing and most racist cities in the United States.
Or look at the results of Democratic policies in many of urban centers.
That explanation would make sense except the examples of racism she gave were from the left wing political establishment of the city...you know those supposedly "more liberal and accepting" people who implement the policies so beloved by the left.
My sister explicitly stated that her experience is that the majority in Portland are racist.
It should come as no surprise that progressives are racist. They always have been. The KKK was founded as the militant arm of the Democratic Party. The founder of Planned Parenthood was a eugenicist who spoke at KKK rallies and Planned Parenthood today has more clinics in minority neighborhoods than not. Woodrow Wilson resegregated the U.S. government and screened the movie "The Birth of a Nation" (the 1915 one) in the White House.
In my experience, the people you meet in most red states are wildly more affable, warm, friendly, and polite than most you'll meet in the increasingly effete, shrill, divisive, identity-politics-obsessed wastelands of political-correctness-paralyzed lands of blue.
...as long as your skin is the same color as theirs.
It is interesting that you think that. My sister is very left wing. A few years ago she moved to Portland, Oregon, at least partly because it is such a left wing city. She was shocked to learn how racist the city is. I had to bite my tongue when she made that comment over a family dinner when she came home to visit, because anyone who studies the history of the progressive movement knows how racist it has always been.
Slashdot Mirror
To say that the Dodd-Frank law does not go far enough in protecting the public suggests that it goes SOMEWHERE in protecting the public. Since the purpose of the law was to protect the political class and their cronies, anything it does which protects the public is by accident. I believe the public would be better off without the Dodd-Frank law (although this case does not make that argument one way or the other).
I suspect that there was something in the arguments presented which led the Supreme Court Justices to feel that it required a definitive ruling which only they could provide.
Considering that the Dodd-Frank bill is named for Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, it is hard for me to believe it does anything useful for anyone other than the banks.
Those two men were the staunchest opponents of doing anything to fix the problems in the financial markets before the 2008 meltdown. Both profited handsomely from that opposition.
government.
The summary says there is reason to doubt what the Venezuelan government has said about the 'petro". Well, of course there is. There is reason to doubt anything said by the Venezuelan government.
The quality system I was talking about had nothing to do with consistency either (and it was for a product which was supposed to stand up to just about everything that could be thrown at it and still survive). The Quality Manger was perfectly happy sending out units which would fail before the warranty expired, as long as they passed the inspections as described in the quality procedures. Change the procedures to make sure the products actually last through warranty? Why would we do that? Those procedures would make it harder to get our quality certifications.
Actually, based on some of my experiences with Quality Managers, the purpose of the Diversity Officer is to find a way to cover up the ways in which you discriminate against certain groups. I have recently discovered that the purpose of a Quality Manager is NOT to ensure the quality of your production. Rather their purpose is to put into place systems and procedures designed to disguise the fact that you don't give a crap about quality. I saw a situation where the Quality Manger did not CARE that the products going out the door were terrible as long as all of the boxes on the proper forms were checked and the right people had signed them. The fact that following those procedures failed to catch the quality defects was irrelevant. It was the Sales and Marketing guys who insisted that people change what they were doing in order to make sure that the stuff going out the door would perform as the customer expected. The Quality Manager fought them on those changes because they would make it harder to pass the Quality Standards audits.
If my reading of the summary is correct, it was a different person who asked a reporter to turn off their phone from the guy who was told to shut his laptop.
Of course it is about content. More precisely it is about protecting the incumbents from outside challengers. For example, that half day you spent in that class in order to run for office provides just the first barrier to entry. In order to understand that the point of campaign finance laws is to protect incumbents all you have to do is look at the rate at which incumbents win re-election...every time a new campaign finance law is passed, the chance that the incumbent will lose the election goes down. The "best" part about campaign finance laws is that those who do defeat an incumbent are now almost always deeply indebted to the political machine which supplied the money for them to even campaign.
They got tired of losing elections to immoral anti-American Democrats who wallowed in corruption.
Actually, I am reading an abuse of power from the information which has come out over the last couple of months, not just from the memo. We have people who recommended against prosecution for lying to the FBI under oath by people associated with Hillary about actual crimes, while recommending prosecution for lying to the FBI under oath by people associated with Trump about something which was not actually a crime as one example.
Well, of course they knew about it...the wife of the FBI agent in question worked for Fusion GPS and had consulted with Mr. Steele as he worked on compiling this dossier.
Under the U.S. Constitution, neither the FBI nor the DoJ are independent of the President. So, if Trump needs to remove their independence, we ALREADY have fascism and he is undoing it.
Or to put this another way, it sure looks like there are a whole bunch of people in the DoJ and the FBI who put their opinion of who should be President above the results of the election and are seeking to undo the last election by whatever means necessary.
Fusion in 2015 began investigating Trump under a contract with the Washington Free Beacon,
Which is why, when Hillary hired them to find dirt on Trump, they knew there wasn't anything useful in the standard channels and hired Steele.
Although there is some question as to whether Fusion GPS hired Steel on their own, or were directed to him by government agents.
Which is exactly contrary to my experience. Perhaps it is WHERE you live now vs where you grew up.
When I was growing up fireflies were common in the summer, but not in swarms. When we captured fireflies it was one at a time as we moved around the yard. Then I moved into less rural areas and did not notice them much. A couple years ago I visited a friend of mine who lived on a property similar to the one I grew up on. There were so many fireflies that I could have filled up a jar without moving much at all.
Well, head impacts ARE just as common in soccer, if not more so. Unlike soccer, in football it is now against the rules to intentionally have a head impact (either. In soccer, head impact (heading the ball) is actually one of the strategies which is practiced
Minor quibble, the NYT is shilling for the tobacco companies in order to prop up the tax stream of the governmental bodies. I find it highly incongruous that an organization that once demonized Big Tobacco now finds itself campaigning to increase its revenue.
It reminds me of when Mayor Bloomberg passed a large tax increase on cigarettes in order to "reduce smoking" and a ban on smoking just about every where, then was shocked that people actually smoked so much less that the tax generated massively less than projected.
You might want to look at history. Almost all of the jobs that were performed 500 years ago have been automated.
OK, because Twitter is turning to blatantly partisan groups. The founder of Common Sense Media is Jim Steyer, the brother of Tom Steyer...Tom Steyer is to the Democratic Party what people think the Koch brothers are to the Republican Party. The National Association of Media Literacy is composed of administrators from various universities and environmentalist groups (which leads me to believe that they are people who believe that Republican=Nazi).
Well, yes, but the police could not know that because Apple told them it was stolen.
It would not surprise me if Apple gave them a list of serial numbers of phones which were stolen from the store which included all of the iphones which were supposed to be at that store...AND that Apple also told the police that "this one is registered to this person at this address", with no one at Apple ever cross referencing their database to notice that the owner had actually bought it from the store.
Then why do I only see this racism among progressives?
It is especially hard to buy your explanation when you look into the history of progressivism. This article discusses how progressives thought it pointless to give African-Americans academic training: https://www.edweek.org/ew/arti... Most of the key thinkers who laid the foundation for modern, progressive thought on education are listed as supporting this effort.
Did you notice that Planned Parenthood has more clinics in minority neighborhoods than anywhere else? You know, the organization which was founded by a woman who spoke at KKK rallies performs a disproportionate number of its abortions on black women and I am supposed to think that is not because of race?
Perhaps you have not heard about Senator Byrd? The KKK Senator?
Perhaps you are unaware that it was Senator Ted Kennedy who sponsored the Immigration Act of 1965 which set up an immigration system which suppresses wages for African-Americans?
Or, just look at Portland, one of the most leftwing and most racist cities in the United States.
Or look at the results of Democratic policies in many of urban centers.
That explanation would make sense except the examples of racism she gave were from the left wing political establishment of the city...you know those supposedly "more liberal and accepting" people who implement the policies so beloved by the left.
My sister explicitly stated that her experience is that the majority in Portland are racist.
It should come as no surprise that progressives are racist. They always have been. The KKK was founded as the militant arm of the Democratic Party. The founder of Planned Parenthood was a eugenicist who spoke at KKK rallies and Planned Parenthood today has more clinics in minority neighborhoods than not. Woodrow Wilson resegregated the U.S. government and screened the movie "The Birth of a Nation" (the 1915 one) in the White House.
In my experience, the people you meet in most red states are wildly more affable, warm, friendly, and polite than most you'll meet in the increasingly effete, shrill, divisive, identity-politics-obsessed wastelands of political-correctness-paralyzed lands of blue.
...as long as your skin is the same color as theirs.
It is interesting that you think that. My sister is very left wing. A few years ago she moved to Portland, Oregon, at least partly because it is such a left wing city. She was shocked to learn how racist the city is. I had to bite my tongue when she made that comment over a family dinner when she came home to visit, because anyone who studies the history of the progressive movement knows how racist it has always been.