Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

1. Yes.

So you are basically OK with any conduct that harms a large number of people? We don't need campaign finance laws, money laundering laws, antitrust laws, securities laws -- all of that has no immediate victim, so fuck 'em?

Reread.

I reread. I confess that it's hard to figure out what your point is.

[Hank Chinaski]

So the USS John McCain was hidden from the Prez seeing it, and he denies he knew about the act. I choose to accept his denial. I believe/hope that was an attempt by the Prez’s staff to avoid another super stupid tweet about McCain being a shit. The numbskull would never say I don’t want to see the boat, why would he? He has zero problem with talking about things that bother him.

[Hank Chinaski]

So the USS John McCain was hidden from the Prez seeing it, and he denies he knew about the act. I choose to accept his denial. I believe/hope that was an attempt by the Prez’s staff to avoid another super stupid tweet about McCain being a shit. The numbskull would never say I don’t want to see the boat, why would he? He has zero problem with talking about things that bother him.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So the USS John McCain was hidden from the Prez seeing it, and he denies he knew about the act. I choose to accept his denial. I believe/hope that was an attempt by the Prez’s staff to avoid another super stupid tweet about McCain being a shit. The numbskull would never say I don’t want to see the boat, why would he? He has zero problem with talking about things that bother him.

I accept his denial too. I imagine someone else didn't want him to see the ship and do something like order it renamed.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I accept his denial too. I imagine someone else didn't want him to see the ship and do something like order it renamed.

Ha! Never thought of it being renamed. “Today I have ordered the USS John McCain be renamed the Ivanka. There are brave men serving on the ship and I think we all know in wartime the McCain would end up on the ocean floor. Plus what red blooded sailor wouldn’t love to be on the Ivanka! Really great decision, the Navy is getting better and better.”

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So the USS John McCain was hidden from the Prez seeing it, and he denies he knew about the act. I choose to accept his denial. I believe/hope that was an attempt by the Prez’s staff to avoid another super stupid tweet about McCain being a shit. The numbskull would never say I don’t want to see the boat, why would he? He has zero problem with talking about things that bother him.

While I suspect you're right about the staff, I have given up trying to predict what stupid shit the numbskull might do. All I know is, however stupid it is, Sebby will defend it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So the USS John McCain was hidden from the Prez seeing it, and he denies he knew about the act. I choose to accept his denial. I believe/hope that was an attempt by the Prez’s staff to avoid another super stupid tweet about McCain being a shit. The numbskull would never say I don’t want to see the boat, why would he? He has zero problem with talking about things that bother him.

As bizarre as it sounds on the surface, I find this assessment credible.

Recall, his staff is the only thing that saved him from obstruction, by refusing to do what he asked.

And he of course repays them by regularly firing them.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Ha! Never thought of it being renamed. “Today I have ordered the USS John McCain be renamed the Ivanka. There are brave men serving on the ship and I think we all know in wartime the McCain would end up on the ocean floor. Plus what red blooded sailor wouldn’t love to be on the Ivanka! Really great decision, the Navy is getting better and better.”

I hate how accurate this is.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

So you are basically OK with any conduct that harms a large number of people? We don't need campaign finance laws, money laundering laws, antitrust laws, securities laws -- all of that has no immediate victim, so fuck 'em?



I reread. I confess that it's hard to figure out what your point is.

In order:

Campaign finance law: I don't care so much about prosecuting people for violating this in terms of donations. Dinesh D'Souza's case comes to mind as a recent, silly prosecution. I do care about violations where the money is stolen, such as Duncan Hunter's case.

Money laundering laws: Depends on the purpose of the laundering. Drug money I find hard to be offended about, given banks can legally accept and loan money to pushers like the Sackler family. Seems arbitrary to have a fit about holding El Chapo's money while countenancing banking for any opioid maker. And money laundering laws are also too broadly written. Structuring a transaction to keep it off uncle Sam's radar should be legal. The govt has no right to full disclosure of everything. It's a catch-all charge too often abused.

Antitrust: I have no problem at all with antitrust laws. I don't know why you included this here.

Securities laws: To this day, no one has clearly defined insider trading. How can that charge hold any credibility? Generally, I think securities laws are too numerous and byzantine. I don't even know where to start as so many of them should be repealed. But I can make one finite point about many of them: They more often act as barriers to entry, preventing changes in the securities industry, than they do as preventative or protective devices.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

In order:

Campaign finance law: I don't care so much about prosecuting people for violating this in terms of donations. Dinesh D'Souza's case comes to mind as a recent, silly prosecution. I do care about violations where the money is stolen, such as Duncan Hunter's case.

Money laundering laws: Depends on the purpose of the laundering. Drug money I find hard to be offended about, given banks can legally accept and loan money to pushers like the Sackler family. Seems arbitrary to have a fit about holding El Chapo's money while countenancing banking for any opioid maker. And money laundering laws are also too broadly written. Structuring a transaction to keep it off uncle Sam's radar should be legal. The govt has no right to full disclosure of everything. It's a catch-all charge too often abused.

Antitrust: I have no problem at all with antitrust laws. I don't know why you included this here.

Securities laws: To this day, no one has clearly defined insider trading. How can that charge hold any credibility? Generally, I think securities laws are too numerous and byzantine. I don't even know where to start as so many of them should be repealed. But I can make one finite point about many of them: They more often act as barriers to entry, preventing changes in the securities industry, than they do as preventative or protective devices.

We put way too many people in prison, I think that is something that you and I can agree on. But the problem really isn't with the number of bankers laundering money, securities dealers conning clients, or fat cats violating campagin finance laws. That's not the problem at all.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

We put way too many people in prison, I think that is something that you and I can agree on. But the problem really isn't with the number of bankers laundering money, securities dealers conning clients, or fat cats violating campagin finance laws. That's not the problem at all.

I agree 100%. I'm just replying to the categories he offered.

I'd eliminate almost all vice crimes and make them summary fines. I'd eliminate all of the criminal penalties for non-payment of fines as well. Those trap the poor in debtors' prisons.

Three strikes laws? Gone. All of them.

Laws that criminalize negligent behavior, like the law used to prosecute that ex-felon for voting in TX (in violation of some bizarre statute) should be eliminated.

The list could go on forever, but yes -- I believe we're very much on the same page here.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

In order:

Campaign finance law: I don't care so much about prosecuting people for violating this in terms of donations. Dinesh D'Souza's case comes to mind as a recent, silly prosecution. I do care about violations where the money is stolen, such as Duncan Hunter's case.

Money laundering laws: Depends on the purpose of the laundering. Drug money I find hard to be offended about, given banks can legally accept and loan money to pushers like the Sackler family. Seems arbitrary to have a fit about holding El Chapo's money while countenancing banking for any opioid maker. And money laundering laws are also too broadly written. Structuring a transaction to keep it off uncle Sam's radar should be legal. The govt has no right to full disclosure of everything. It's a catch-all charge too often abused.

Antitrust: I have no problem at all with antitrust laws. I don't know why you included this here.

Securities laws: To this day, no one has clearly defined insider trading. How can that charge hold any credibility? Generally, I think securities laws are too numerous and byzantine. I don't even know where to start as so many of them should be repealed. But I can make one finite point about many of them: They more often act as barriers to entry, preventing changes in the securities industry, than they do as preventative or protective devices.

All of the crimes I listed affect large numbers of people without being particularly grave for any one of them. You don't seem to care to try to prevent that sort of conduct.

[kafka_esquire]

Just checking in to see if I still remembered by password...

My profile shows that my last visit was 12-09-2015. What did I miss?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by kafka_esquire

Just checking in to see if I still remembered by password...

My profile shows that my last visit was 12-09-2015. What did I miss?

Sebby got Trump elected.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Sebby got Trump elected.

Also Ty got power mad. Read this quick cuz it’ll be deleted.