The problem is building a strong case is part of what the system wants to avoid doing. They want to make it expensive for the guilty to find out if the eventual evidence is going to be strong. So what is the ratio of X to Y? Unless that ratio is large it may always pays for a defendant to take their chances until at least late in the process.
The right against self incrimination is a protection against torture and coercion. It works against justice and due process because those are seen as greater evils.
I like (a) for both our civil and our criminal system.
(b) can be circumvented easily. I charge X with 20 counts of A carry a sentence of X and 1 count of B carrying a sentence of Y. Say X < 1% of Y. So that doesn't fix the problem.
c) I like as well a lot regardless of this other issue.
So say we cap it at a 50% reduction. How can you enforce that? Prosecutor changes X with crimes A carrying L years, B carrying M years and C carrying N years. With L M,N. He decides that X is not guilty of B and C and drops the charges. How is that prevented?
For a justice system to function guilty people need to have reason to confess their guilt and engage in a process of reconciliation with the community. You are talking about creating a strong incentive to lie. It is also much too expensive to administer.
You really don't want the reinstatement of Glass-Steigel. What you want is an updated version. The nice thing is Elizabeth Warren wrote it 21st Century Glass–Steagall Act (S.1282).
can they then bring you up on charges of perjury for lying in court and saying you committed a crime when you did not?
Yes. Not only that they can bring the prosecutor up for pressuring you to perjure yourself if your confession was clearly false to a reasonable person of his skill.
That systems exists in a lot of European courts. It is very bad because in that situation the defendant almost never has a reason to cooperate. At best they plead no contest. Since you never get a full confession you have no check on whether people did the crime.
The easiest way to combat prosecutorial abuse would be: Providing for compensation for charges being lost in court. Something like a 1/3rd rule, that is someone disproves 1/3rd of the charges against them the rest are dismissed by the judge. Create a penalty for overcharging.
Less drastic. Strengthening the grand jury system to make it more like an inquisitorial system trial ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I... ). Good quality analysis so that indictments represent the community and not just prosecutors gaming the system.
Even less drastic. Elect prosecutors who are moderates or liberals on crime. Many DAs are elected offices or answer to attorney generals that are elected. Those aren't elected often need to go through a confirmation process by elected officials.
J2EE became popular because it answered the question in a reasonable way of how to handle state for web application development. Rails became popular because it offered a way to do 80% of what J2EE allowed at 20% of the development time and complexity.
Except that the company reneges or loopholes you on the back end, like millions of people getting canned just before being able to retire.
Reneges is breach of contract. We have pretty good laws against that. Canned before being able to retire is a poor contract. We have systems to avoid that.
How about the company pays 3 months salary for the first two weeks of work as a contract and if you both like what you got you stick around.
That's like paying for training. I was suggesting the reverse where the employee takes the risk but the company sinks in money. Your system is not a compromise just better for employees completely. Which I'd be in favor of but that would require law.
As for smoking I disagree with you. Testing I don't know what you mean about so far it doesn't look good, major improvement. Why wouldn't Obama get credit for gulf oil compensation? Etc... I don't think you are scoring fairly here. My point being yes they do stuff for the middle class.
Tell me how a flat tax of 10% on *everyone's* income starting at the first dime is manipulation.
You are taxing income but not capital gains. Which means you are creating a massive incentive for people to create situations where they take short term loses but build capital in their investment thereby offset their income. So for example it becomes highly profitable to sell my house to a 3rd party before doing extensive home repairs then buy it back while he charges me huge rent fees (i.e. negative income). It becomes the norm for companies to not pay dividends but do stock buybacks. It distorts the market by favoring equity over debt: in investors directly leverage up rather than companies leveraging up.
The other thing is of course you are taxing income but not property. So you are encouraging property to stay underutilized. Japan has traditionally had this problem where very valuable real estate doesn't go to its rational (i.e. highest disposition).
The third thing is you are forcing more direct government intervention. The government right now is able to shift societal resources by offering tax incentives. By getting rid of those you force the government to directly buy things and pass them out which is likely to increase cronyism.
Fourth, the tax you propose isn't very progressive. 10% isn't going to cover the current size of government, it would likely have to be more in the 30-40% range. That's going to hit the lower middle -upper middle class very hard.
Allowed middle class children to stay on their parent's insurance (Obamacare) Student debt interest decreases via. kicking the banks out... Rescued the auto industry and thus saved about 1m middle class jobs Repealed don't ask don't tell (many was an issue for officers so I'm calling that middle class) Credit card reform Food safety (a major middle class concern) Kept up the pressure on smoking (both poor and middle class mainly benefit) Developed next generation school testing Gulf Oil spill compensation (many many small businesses) Huge expansion of broadband to rural America and I could easily keep going.
Let's be clear. Systemd's logs have way way more information. They will not be as easy to use by just reading the stream. 100x as much data will obscure what you are looking for. Your way of working has to change.
Also remember systemd does export to text, you want text you can have text. That's an option. The option isn't being taken away from you.
As for the murphy and... stuff goes wrong with software. This is heavily used software. I'm not going to defend against silly hypotheticals that are just FUD like weird bugs that appear for no reason.
Virtual machines do figure because most of what you want is inside the VM's systemd not on the hardware's systemd. So hardware failure isn't going to be a problem you boot the image on new hardware.
It isn't just me that's furious. I, at least can appreciate the more useful parts of systemd. I'm not rejecting for the sake of rejection. But take away functions I use every day and replace them with a second-rate black-box substitute and I'll definitely howl.
Lots of functions you use everyday are going to be replaced with stuff that is more full featured but quite different. This is the first of many you'll notice. I'll disagree with you on worse but not o this is a change.
The journalctl mess is essentially an Apple approach. You'll take what we give you and you'll LIKE it. And that's not what people are expecting in Linux.
People have taken the disadvantages of text logs for decades. The other side had to live with it.
As for there not being choice there is choice. There are distributions that use systemd there are ones that don't. That is the difference between Linux and Apple. It stil exists. Systemd is just too low level for it to be easy right now for their to be distributions which are and are not effectually systemd.
The Democrats have done quite a lot for the middle classes. You can look at things like wage growth under Democratic administrations vs. Republican. Honestly the Republicans aren't even that good for the rich anymore. The.01% are having to pull from the top 5% now and the Republicans are helping that. It is basically
Republicans = pro-plutocracy Democrats = pro-middle class society
I'm horrified by what's happening to our code over time. The lack of institutional knowledge at all levels in American companies is simply breathtaking. One of the reasons the shadow IT movement grew was that IT systems couldn't be expanded because no one knows how they work. The problem is of course that our investors are now funds trading equities not long term stakeholders who plan to hold the stock for decades.
I don't know what to do because our finance system does work well, but at dreadful cost.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is building a strong case is part of what the system wants to avoid doing. They want to make it expensive for the guilty to find out if the eventual evidence is going to be strong. So what is the ratio of X to Y? Unless that ratio is large it may always pays for a defendant to take their chances until at least late in the process.
The right against self incrimination is a protection against torture and coercion. It works against justice and due process because those are seen as greater evils.
I like (a) for both our civil and our criminal system.
(b) can be circumvented easily. I charge X with 20 counts of A carry a sentence of X and 1 count of B carrying a sentence of Y. Say X < 1% of Y. So that doesn't fix the problem.
c) I like as well a lot regardless of this other issue.
Well Germans do like the rules. :) There are ways of corrupting any system, nothing is full proof. We hope for better not perfect.
That should be L < M,N. Didn't realize I had to use HTML there. Sorry.
That's a good solution potentially.
So say we cap it at a 50% reduction. How can you enforce that?
Prosecutor changes X with crimes A carrying L years, B carrying M years and C carrying N years. With L M,N. He decides that X is not guilty of B and C and drops the charges. How is that prevented?
For a justice system to function guilty people need to have reason to confess their guilt and engage in a process of reconciliation with the community. You are talking about creating a strong incentive to lie. It is also much too expensive to administer.
I'd agree. Good point. Perhaps the best thing would be the American system plus a lengthy detailed confession requirement.
Small guy can't pay $10m and goes bankrupt. That seems fair. He has to gamble.
You really don't want the reinstatement of Glass-Steigel. What you want is an updated version. The nice thing is Elizabeth Warren wrote it 21st Century Glass–Steagall Act (S.1282).
Yes. Not only that they can bring the prosecutor up for pressuring you to perjure yourself if your confession was clearly false to a reasonable person of his skill.
That systems exists in a lot of European courts. It is very bad because in that situation the defendant almost never has a reason to cooperate. At best they plead no contest. Since you never get a full confession you have no check on whether people did the crime.
The easiest way to combat prosecutorial abuse would be:
Providing for compensation for charges being lost in court. Something like a 1/3rd rule, that is someone disproves 1/3rd of the charges against them the rest are dismissed by the judge. Create a penalty for overcharging.
Less drastic. Strengthening the grand jury system to make it more like an inquisitorial system trial ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I... ). Good quality analysis so that indictments represent the community and not just prosecutors gaming the system.
Even less drastic. Elect prosecutors who are moderates or liberals on crime. Many DAs are elected offices or answer to attorney generals that are elected. Those aren't elected often need to go through a confirmation process by elected officials.
J2EE became popular because it answered the question in a reasonable way of how to handle state for web application development. Rails became popular because it offered a way to do 80% of what J2EE allowed at 20% of the development time and complexity.
Basically the above is: http://www.randomhacks.net/200...
Reneges is breach of contract. We have pretty good laws against that. Canned before being able to retire is a poor contract. We have systems to avoid that.
That's like paying for training. I was suggesting the reverse where the employee takes the risk but the company sinks in money. Your system is not a compromise just better for employees completely. Which I'd be in favor of but that would require law.
How does reducing interest rates on debt increase college costs?
As for food safety: http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITI...
As for smoking I disagree with you. Testing I don't know what you mean about so far it doesn't look good, major improvement. Why wouldn't Obama get credit for gulf oil compensation? Etc... I don't think you are scoring fairly here. My point being yes they do stuff for the middle class.
You are taxing income but not capital gains. Which means you are creating a massive incentive for people to create situations where they take short term loses but build capital in their investment thereby offset their income. So for example it becomes highly profitable to sell my house to a 3rd party before doing extensive home repairs then buy it back while he charges me huge rent fees (i.e. negative income). It becomes the norm for companies to not pay dividends but do stock buybacks. It distorts the market by favoring equity over debt: in investors directly leverage up rather than companies leveraging up.
The other thing is of course you are taxing income but not property. So you are encouraging property to stay underutilized. Japan has traditionally had this problem where very valuable real estate doesn't go to its rational (i.e. highest disposition).
The third thing is you are forcing more direct government intervention. The government right now is able to shift societal resources by offering tax incentives. By getting rid of those you force the government to directly buy things and pass them out which is likely to increase cronyism.
Fourth, the tax you propose isn't very progressive. 10% isn't going to cover the current size of government, it would likely have to be more in the 30-40% range. That's going to hit the lower middle -upper middle class very hard.
Just in the last 6:
Allowed middle class children to stay on their parent's insurance (Obamacare)
Student debt interest decreases via. kicking the banks out...
Rescued the auto industry and thus saved about 1m middle class jobs
Repealed don't ask don't tell (many was an issue for officers so I'm calling that middle class)
Credit card reform
Food safety (a major middle class concern)
Kept up the pressure on smoking (both poor and middle class mainly benefit)
Developed next generation school testing
Gulf Oil spill compensation (many many small businesses)
Huge expansion of broadband to rural America
and I could easily keep going.
Let's be clear. Systemd's logs have way way more information. They will not be as easy to use by just reading the stream. 100x as much data will obscure what you are looking for. Your way of working has to change.
Also remember systemd does export to text, you want text you can have text. That's an option. The option isn't being taken away from you.
As for the murphy and ... stuff goes wrong with software. This is heavily used software. I'm not going to defend against silly hypotheticals that are just FUD like weird bugs that appear for no reason.
Virtual machines do figure because most of what you want is inside the VM's systemd not on the hardware's systemd. So hardware failure isn't going to be a problem you boot the image on new hardware.
Lots of functions you use everyday are going to be replaced with stuff that is more full featured but quite different. This is the first of many you'll notice. I'll disagree with you on worse but not o this is a change.
People have taken the disadvantages of text logs for decades. The other side had to live with it.
As for there not being choice there is choice. There are distributions that use systemd there are ones that don't. That is the difference between Linux and Apple. It stil exists. Systemd is just too low level for it to be easy right now for their to be distributions which are and are not effectually systemd.
The Democrats have done quite a lot for the middle classes. You can look at things like wage growth under Democratic administrations vs. Republican. Honestly the Republicans aren't even that good for the rich anymore. The .01% are having to pull from the top 5% now and the Republicans are helping that. It is basically
Republicans = pro-plutocracy
Democrats = pro-middle class society
Any given tax system is a manipulation. That's a non argument. The question is only which manipulation.
You can combine the two. Raise taxes in other areas and still advantage domestic labor.
You do something like this.
Get rid of corporate tax.
VAT tax is 25% on all goods.
Domestic labor costs are 125% deductible from VAT duties.
I'm horrified by what's happening to our code over time. The lack of institutional knowledge at all levels in American companies is simply breathtaking. One of the reasons the shadow IT movement grew was that IT systems couldn't be expanded because no one knows how they work. The problem is of course that our investors are now funds trading equities not long term stakeholders who plan to hold the stock for decades.
I don't know what to do because our finance system does work well, but at dreadful cost.