Re: We are all Slave now.
 

1. The Nordics are the Saudis of the North. Petro-states with small populations can run a long time before the resources are exhausted.

But to your point, all pure democracies will eventually collapse. People see someone with more of something and seek parity by whatever means they can. If this is a the ballot box, they'll attempt to vote themselves even with the closest Joneses. The Joneses will then pull away a bit, desiring to enhance their relative status, and the cycle will ratchet up in terms of cost. Eventually, it breaks the bank.

In the US, in a culture as crass and class ambitious as ours, the process is very much accelerated in comparison to the more mature Nordic societies.

2. That's part of it. No doubt. But nowhere near all of it.

Re: Religion on the P-Board
 

Have I mentioned lately how much I love the Pope?

Nothing like a throw-down against Pelagianism to start the week.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Yup. This is where we cue Eisenhower's farewell "Military/Industrial Complex" address.

It's worth watching every two or three years, just to recall, "Oh yeah... shit never really changes."

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Name a "pure democracy" that has ever "collapsed." I pointed to the Nordics because they should be closer to "collapse" than us, having voted themselves more benefits. To your way of thinking, they are "mature" and we are "crass and class ambitious" (? to all of the above) so somehow your theory is that mature pure democracies are slower to collapse than crass ones except that still if they are pure then the collapse is coming inevitably just like the Incas and the Hapsburgs, except those weren't pure democracies so uh, hey, look over there!

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Does the GOP want Trump to fire Mueller?

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I dont know. It would give them cover to impeach and get Pence, but most would have to admit that they were deceived, or weren't deceived but supported him anyway, by such an obvious charlatan, thief, asshole, buffoon, con artist, etc.

He took his bullshit to too high a level of scrutiny, and the law is coming for him.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/04/1...ohen-raid.html

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

All I can say is poor Paul Ryan has lost his chance if he can't get a couple impeachments going in the next eight months.

Query: outgoing speaker is raised to Presidency through succession this December, does he keep the job in the next Congress or does Speaker Nancy become President in January?

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

That was a great editorial, but particularly the end:

"Among the grotesqueries that faded into the background of Mr. Trump’s carnival of misgovernment during the past 24 hours was that Monday’s meeting was ostensibly called to discuss a matter of global significance: a reported chemical weapons attack on Syrian civilians. Mr. Trump instead made it about him, with his narcissistic and self-pitying claim that the investigation represented an attack on the country “in a true sense.”

No, Mr. Trump — a true attack on America is what happened on, say, Sept. 11, 2001. Remember that one? Thousands of people lost their lives. Your response was to point out that the fall of the twin towers meant your building was now the tallest in downtown Manhattan. Of course, that also wasn’t true."

Mic fucking drop.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I'd agree to a deal that let Ryan take the White House in exchange for impeachment of two ahead of him.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

The Speaker departs:
http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/dat...AgBACAEB//2Q==

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

That was supposed to be rats, sinking ship, etc. No computor skillz.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I would take that deal too. I don't even need impeachment - just resignations.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I'm hoping for a "health event" myself, but any way to get them out works for me.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

We found out that he’s a lying sack of shit fraud a long time ago when he lied about his marathon PR. Every runner I know knows his/her PR TO THE SECOND.

A stain on my alma mater.

From wiki:

“He often visited the office of libertarian professor Richard Hart to discuss the theories of these economists and of Ayn Rand.[23][33] Hart introduced Ryan to National Review,[23] and with Hart's recommendation Ryan began an internship in the D.C. office of Wisconsin U.S. Senator Bob Kasten where he worked with Kasten's foreign affairs adviser.”

I too took a few classes with Professor Hart, but ditched Ayn Rand and The Dave Mathews Band when I graduated.

That’s not true - I listened to DMB in law school.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Former 49er and Raider Aldon Smith did better - he was .40 when he showed up to be fitted for an alcohol monitor - https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/...d-12826511.php

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Name me a scenario in which the tragedy of the commons would not apply. Given enough time, any pure democracy will fail. It's like the sun coming up tomorrow.

The purest democracy would be one in which people vote for everything by referendum. How long could a country that did that survive? Maybe a century?

And "collapse" should include "morph into something else" or "require bailout" to survive.

Give them time. If the oil were to run dry, do you think the people would stop voting themselves more benefits? Not a chance.

The tragedy of the commons problem moves slower in European countries because they are not 70% consumer driven economies. Their "maturity" also includes less class friction and antagonism toward government.

In Europe, where people have gone through millennia of wars, the ability to adapt is greater. Our history is much shorter, we've been trained to expect more (we are a spoiled culture), we've not been compelled to adapt to lower living standards very much, and distrust of authority and revolt at class stratification are defining traits of the national character. This leads me to believe that we'll vote ourselves into bankruptcy if allowed (both the rich through tax breaks and the poor through benefit demands) more quickly than a Nordic country.

Also, we're 30X, 40X the size of those countries? And we're a much more diverse population. We don't rally together and sacrifice as easily.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Okay, now re-run your analysis but instead of assuming that everyone is entirely motivated by financial self-interest, people actually have complex and varying systems of values.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Sebby: Rich people need to keep exploiting poor people, because every time a country tries to treat poor people equally, it inevitably results in societal collapse.

Me: Like when?

Sebby: Did I say inevitable? I meant hypothetical. Same thing, really. Stop paying attention to my words. The important thing is, poor people need to keep getting screwed, for their own good and everyone else's. Also, none of you people understand that ordinary people voted for Trump because the economy is so awful, and the current system is broken. We to tear it all down in an orgy of creative destruction. But not by letting poor people have an equal say in the government. That's much too dangerous.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I remember back when words didn't come in salads.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I have something of a history with former Senator David Vitter. He is vile, dishonest, and petty. Those are his good qualities. Imagine my surprise when I found out that his wife is more of a troll than he is.

She is up for a federal judgeship. She would not say whether the Supreme Court was right in 1954 to outlaw racially segregated public schools. She dodged the question when Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., asked during her Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday (April 11) whether she thinks Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kan., was correctly decided.

The exchange with the Senator:

"Senator, I don't mean to be coy, but I think I get into a difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions, which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with," said Vitter, who is married to former Sen. David Vitter, R-La. "That is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed, I would be bound by it and, of course I would uphold it."

He asked a second time: "Do you believe it was correctly decided?"

"And again, I will respectfully not comment on what could be my bosses' ruling, the Supreme Court. I would be bound by it, and if I start commenting on I agree with this case or don't agree with this case, I think we get into a slippery slope. ... If I'm honored to be confirmed, I would be bound by Supreme Court precedent and would follow it, and 5th Circuit [Court of Appeals] precedent."

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

He should have asked about another precedent, say Citizen's, that "conservatives" like, and see if her answer was different. I'm not saying she isn't a snake, but the quoted answer isn't improper.

I think Griswold was a great result, but I think the logic was for shit. I believe in a right of privacy, but it doesn't seem to be in the constitution, as least as Griswold was written. If I were nominated and asked the same question about Griswold, I'd probably answer how she did.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Bullshit. If that's her position, then she could avoid the whole hearing by submitting a statement that read, "No matter my opinion, I will apply the law and strictly adhere to stare decisis at every opportunity."
___________
Also:

Vitter, who was given a unanimous "unqualified" rating by the American Bar Association, was also grilled by lawmakers over her staunch anti-abortion views.

The 56-year-old nominee once accused Planned Parenthood of "killing over 150,000 females a year," seemingly without any proof to back it up.

"Do you stand by that statement?" Blumenthal asked her.

Vitter avoided the question, only saying that she will "set aside" her religious and personal views as a federal judge.

"You said Planned Parenthood kills 150,000 females. Do you stand by that statement? It's a yes or no question," Blumenthal pressed.

"My pro-life stance has been made very clear," Vitter responded.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.3929024
_____________

This psycho is dangerous as fuck. she should not be on any bench, including one in a park I might visit.

TM

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

A judge shouldn't express "feelings" about binding precedent. Most judges must have feelings about what came before that they must follow. They shouldn't allow that to impact decisions. The whole "how do you feel about X" grew out of Roe. I doubt it came up before the 80s.

I don't disagree she probably believes whites and blacks shouldn't be in school together, but without the "how do you feel about Citizen's" question the answer appears okay. If one of Pony's associates came back with this as a dep transcript, he'd fire the guy. Ask the money question, not just the one that causes your base to post quotes of your question on social media.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I don't get how one has a meaningful hearing without discussing a judge's views on legal precedent and process. I just don't see what the purpose is without that.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

By the way, a quick google came up with this page, featuring hearings from S.Ct. nominees going back to 1971. A quick look at the oldest one, for Powell, showed a rather interesting discussion of the Miranda case between Powell, a lawyer who had not practiced criminal law and professed to not have strongly developed views, but who had still spoken out against the case, and a Senator who seemed to know much more about the applicable caselaw than Powell. The discussion was frank, open, and had an odd tone of humility.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

He should have asked the question about Citizen's.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I don't really want to continue this. I don't disagree with you when it comes to judges who are qualified for the positions they are being nominated for. However, the ABA graded her as unqualified. If she is unqualified, there is only one reason why she is being nominated to the bench and that's her ideology. If she refuses to answer questions about even basic positions she's taken publicly (and I think the headline should have been more about her positions on abortion) and declines to answer questions about where she stands on settled law, then she should be deemed a danger to our system of justice and not allowed anywhere near a bench.

TM

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

It's not improper, it's just disqualifying. All she had to say is "of course."

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

I agree with everything you wrote. To me anyone that outspoken on abortion should be DOA for nomination. But that she was even nominated shows how far the senate has likely slipped.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

So when you go on the tv and say "I did a crime for the guy, he didn't even know about it" and then the guy goes on the tv and says "I didn't even know about it" it turns out that makes it hard to claim that anything about it is really privileged, ya know?

Just an fyi for y'all to keep in mind.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

You are presupposing that it was a crime. See, e.g. John Edwards' acquittal - https://nypost.com/2018/04/10/trump-...itions-expert/.

Weird story number 90
 

There’s an older woman at the gym who scrubs every bike she gets on like she’s prepping for surgery. When I get off my bike (which I wipe like a normal person) she gets right on.

Is she hitting on me?

Re: Weird story number 90
 

Yes.

Please let us know as things develop.

Re: Weird story number 90
 

They won't.

Re: Weird story number 90
 

Maybe she's commenting on your workout intensity?

Re: Weird story number 90
 

The lack thereof yup.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

That's not at all what I said. I said when a democracy allows the rich, or the poor, or the middle class, to liberally vote themselves transfers, it's on the road to bankruptcy.

The .0001% is voting itself, via bought and paid for representatives, significant wealth transfers. What would normally be taxed is not. The rich get much richer much faster than in the past. Hand in hand with that, the poor and middle class demand more in the way of transfers, wealth being relative.

Now, of course, we could tax the top 5% at 100% and probably not dent the promises our govt makes to the poor and middle classes. But we make those promises nonetheless. ...Govt debt doesn't matter, so who cares, right? (Larry Summers and Dick Cheney both agree.)

I can't give you an example of a pure democracy that fell. But I didn't offer one, either. I said any pure democracy will spend itself into the shitter. You demanded an example. I gave no example, but instead explained how the process is inevitable (and I think I have Plato, or maybe Aristotle, and a bunch of other important dead people on my side in the "democracy is not the optimal state" argument).

I am not able to provide you with the example you want. That doesn't mean my point doesn't hold, however. That probably means no pure democracy has ever existed because:

(a) It's pretty clear to those establishing states that such a system is built to fail; or,
(b) Every state that started out as one was later converted to a form of govt that could actually survive.

How are inevitable and hypothetical mutually exclusive here? (Or ever?)

Me: X

Ty: Repackaged X.

Me: That's not what I said.

Ty: I'll tell you what you said. And now here's why you're wrong in saying what I've said you said. And further -- when you say something, understand that I will select the criteria on which to judge whether what you've said holds water, not you. So when you say something like, "as a general proposition, pure democracy will cannibalize itself," I'll demand an example. If you don't give me one, I'll then frame the issue as one where we debated whether there are historical examples of pure democracies failing. (Knowing full well that one has never existed, for pretty obvious reasons.)

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

There are several aspects of his story that could be criminal, including that its doubtful he told his mortgage lender that it was for a hush money payment (not that I believe him about the source of funds, but that's his story).

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Why aren't persons of the progressive persuasion screaming about how long the IRS is taking to audit the Trump tax return?

What is the holdup? If it is a completely correct return, the IRS should be finished. If it is shot through with sketchy numbers (What are the odds?) why doesn't the IRS know that by now? Are the IRS and the taxpayer negotiating?

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

He borrowed against his home to pay Stormy Daniels? This guy's been Trump's head goon for 15 years and he couldn't pull $130k out of a brokerage account somewhere? Did he perhaps think borrowing the money somehow washed the transaction? I'm confused.