LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=875)

Sidd Finch 04-06-2016 01:33 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick (Post 500203)
Just to clarify, Gary Johnson, former governor of NM is a traditional libertarian. In the debate he said that he thinks Jewish bakers should have to bake a Nazi wedding cake, and he's pro choice.


So, your point is that there are people even crazier than Trump or Cruz in the race? And you actually listen to these people, like voluntarily?

Seriously, how does a fuckhead like that not get booed off the stage? Assuming the stage is not in Berlin and it is after 1944.

Not Bob 04-06-2016 01:49 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 500213)
So, your point is that there are people even crazier than Trump or Cruz in the race? And you actually listen to these people, like voluntarily?

Seriously, how does a fuckhead like that not get booed off the stage? Assuming the stage is not in Berlin and it is after 1944.

I took it more like the ACLU filing suit to allow the American Nazi Party to march in Skokie. And it's an extreme example designed to offend liberals and those who remember the Holocaust, but I'm sure that many bakers or florists who are fundamentalist Christians or conservative Catholics aren't thrilled with being "forced" to sell cakes or corsages for same sex marriage. Or the white owners of diners and cafeterias in (mostly) the South who weren't thrilled with having to sell tuna salad on rye to blacks.

We can't pick and choose when it's ok for businesses* to discriminate based on the owner's political, religious, or racial/ethnic biases. So the Nazis get to buy their cake from the Jewish bakery regardless of the baker's (justified) anger about it.

*As opposed a church, for example. And yes there are all sorts of wrinkles regarding when a church or church-affiliated entity can refuse to hire or fire someone on religious grounds.

Sidd Finch 04-06-2016 01:59 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 500214)
I took it more like the ACLU filing suit to allow the American Nazi Party to march in Skokie. And it's an extreme example designed to offend liberals and those who remember the Holocaust, but I'm sure that many bakers or florists who are fundamentalist Christians or conservative Catholics aren't thrilled with being "forced" to sell cakes or corsages for same sex marriage. Or the white owners of diners and cafeterias in (mostly) the South who weren't thrilled with having to sell tuna salad on rye to blacks.

We can't pick and choose when it's ok for businesses* to discriminate based on the owner's political, religious, or racial/ethnic biases. So the Nazis get to buy their cake from the Jewish bakery regardless of the baker's (justified) anger about it.

*As opposed a church, for example. And yes there are all sorts of wrinkles regarding when a church or church-affiliated entity can refuse to hire or fire someone on religious grounds.

I'm embarrassed to admit this, but -- maybe because of the other discussions going on -- I actually read it as "Jewish baNkers should be forced to bake cakes for Nazi weddings."

This is an Emily Latella moment. Never mind.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 04-06-2016 02:02 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 500210)
Oh, c'mon. If you were a bank looking to get an easy deal on criminal conduct, wouldn't you plan to pay the current Secretary of State a large speaking fee a few years from now, after that person retires, in order to secure that deal?

Makes total sense. Let's talk about Vince Foster!

Still finding great irony in Bernie Sander's campaign turning into a never-ending looped showing of the Citizen's United movie when he gets desperate.

Not Bob 04-06-2016 02:08 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 500215)
I'm embarrassed to admit this, but -- maybe because of the other discussions going on -- I actually read it as "Jewish baNkers should be forced to bake cakes for Nazi weddings."

This is an Emily Latella moment. Never mind.

Lloyd Blankfein strikes me as a guy who could whip up a nice red velvet from scratch on short notice. By contrast, that dumb Mick running BoA (Brian Moynihan) would probably burn the Duncan Hines brownies. And trash the kitchen in the process.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 04-06-2016 02:18 PM

#ASSLaw
 
Hank, they're renaming your law school after you.

Sidd Finch 04-06-2016 02:28 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 500217)
Lloyd Blankfein strikes me as a guy who could whip up a nice red velvet from scratch on short notice. By contrast, that dumb Mick running BoA (Brian Moynihan) would probably burn the Duncan Hines brownies. And trash the kitchen in the process.

As time goes on, these senior-moment mental lapses will provide more and more entertainment for us all.

ThurgreedMarshall 04-06-2016 02:40 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 500210)
Oh, c'mon. If you were a bank looking to get an easy deal on criminal conduct, wouldn't you plan to pay the current Secretary of State a large speaking fee a few years from now, after that person retires, in order to secure that deal?

You act like the secret Goldman Sachs handshake promise wasn't made based on the promise of Hillary exerting her widely publicized and often acknowledged and significant influence over Obama and his administration on all matters. Try to keep up with world affairs. Sheesh.

TM

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 04-06-2016 02:53 PM

Re: does Bernie have Cuban bank accounts?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 500220)
You act like the secret Goldman Sachs handshake promise wasn't made based on the promise of Hillary exerting her widely publicized and often acknowledged and significant influence over Obama and his administration on all matters. Try to keep up with world affairs. Sheesh.

TM


I want to know which gun companies paid Bernie how much for getting that bill through barring suits against gun companies.

But as long as Bernie keeps refusing to release his tax return, we'll never know.

ThurgreedMarshall 04-06-2016 02:54 PM

Re: Arise, ye workers from your slumber.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 500211)
So Bernie's central policy plan is reduced to "I'm going to have the Fed require larger reserves"?

No, you're not paying attention. Certain banks will be required to have larger reserves based on some subjective reading of which banks can hold the country hostage. It surely won't be all banks that make the current too-big-to-fail list because that would mean that lending would freeze instantly, businesses would start failing, and tons of jobs would be lost overnight--all at rates we saw in 2008--and the economy would destabilize in an immediate and sharp reversal.

I'm not against breaking up the banks in principle. I don't know how the fuck it gets accomplished, though (even if our legislature could accomplish researching, drafting, and passing such a bipartisan bill*). Since we're not talking about a monopoly like AT&T's when they agreed to break up, I don't think there is a legislative hammer that exists to make it happen. If the argument is that the hammer is the ability to raise reserve requirements, if I'm one of the big banks, I'd be happy to call that bluff. "You want to crash the economy by lowering the hammer because we don't want to break up our bank? Do your worst."

TM

*
http://pipedreamleds.com/images/logo_pipedream.png

ThurgreedMarshall 04-06-2016 02:56 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 500214)
sell tuna salad on rye to blacks.

Do you know any black people?

TM

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 04-06-2016 03:07 PM

Re: Arise, ye workers from your slumber.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 500222)
No, you're not paying attention. Certain banks will be required to have larger reserves based on some subjective reading of which banks can hold the country hostage. It surely won't be all banks that make the current too-big-to-fail list because that would mean that lending would freeze instantly, businesses would start failing, and tons of jobs would be lost overnight--all at rates we saw in 2008--and the economy would destabilize in an immediate and sharp reversal.

I'm not against breaking up the banks in principle. I don't know how the fuck it gets accomplished, though (even if our legislature could accomplish researching, drafting, and passing such a bipartisan bill*). Since we're not talking about a monopoly like AT&T's when they agreed to break up, I don't think there is a legislative hammer that exists to make it happen. If the argument is that the hammer is the ability to raise reserve requirements, if I'm one of the big banks, I'd be happy to call that bluff. "You want to crash the economy by lowering the hammer because we don't want to break up our bank? Do your worst."

TM

*
http://pipedreamleds.com/images/logo_pipedream.png

Of course, right now, thanks to various exemptions, the big banks generally have lower reserves than community banks. http://www.bankregdata.com/allHMmet.asp?met=ONE

Sidd Finch 04-06-2016 03:12 PM

Re: Arise, ye workers from your slumber.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 500222)
No, you're not paying attention. Certain banks will be required to have larger reserves based on some subjective reading of which banks can hold the country hostage. It surely won't be all banks that make the current too-big-to-fail list because that would mean that lending would freeze instantly, businesses would start failing, and tons of jobs would be lost overnight--all at rates we saw in 2008--and the economy would destabilize in an immediate and sharp reversal.


Now you're talking like this stuff is actually hard, and like sweeping policy pronouncements can actually have unexpected and undesired consequences.

You incrementalist, you.

Hank Chinaski 04-06-2016 03:19 PM

Re: Hilary had nothing to do with UBS
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 500214)
I took it more like the ACLU filing suit to allow the American Nazi Party to march in Skokie. And it's an extreme example designed to offend liberals and those who remember the Holocaust, but I'm sure that many bakers or florists who are fundamentalist Christians or conservative Catholics aren't thrilled with being "forced" to sell cakes or corsages for same sex marriage. Or the white owners of diners and cafeterias in (mostly) the South who weren't thrilled with having to sell tuna salad on rye to blacks.

didn't she have a "not forced" in her original post?

Hank Chinaski 04-06-2016 03:21 PM

Re: #ASSLaw
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 500218)

actually almost was my LS, got into GW the last day off wait list.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:50 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com