|
Insurance companies have their own insurance too so it gets really esoteric
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:52 |
|
|
And independent agents that sell insurance have insurance to cover them when they gently caress up providing the correct insurance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
Insurance to me seems to be mostly a premium collection business with the actual claims stuff shunted off to the Wall Street make believe world
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
buying insurance is gambling against someone better informed than you
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 19:28
|
|
|
owlhawk911 posted:buying insurance is gambling against someone better informed than you If I can afford to lose a small amount of money every day but a catastrophic loss will ruin my life then it's better to lose the money even if it'll cost more in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
Who needs pods anyway? Mass. parents knew kid had coronavirus, sent him to 1st day of school anyway, officials say At what point does "knowingly transmitting a disease" in a pandemic rise to a chargeable offense? I believe there is something akin to precedent, from the case of Nushawn Williams. Who would be culpable? The parents for sending him to school? The student for going anyway? Both?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
toplitzin posted:Who needs pods anyway? This current government probably isn't going to be willing to charge anyone so it'll all be down to civil suits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
e: wrong thread
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
pentyne posted:This current government probably isn't going to be willing to charge anyone so it'll all be down to civil suits. Would "the president said this was fine" be a viable defense in a civil suit? Assume the defendant can provide plentiful documentation of the president clearly signaling that the rona is no big deal etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
pentyne posted:This current government probably isn't going to be willing to charge anyone so it'll all be down to civil suits. At least in the US, charging people with crimes doesn't work that way. There are over 2000 different entities that make charging decisions in the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
owlhawk911 posted:buying insurance is gambling against someone better informed than you Insurance is mathematically beneficial for both parties under fairly standard conditions involving their loss functions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 22:07
|
|
|
Yeah insurance is hedging not gambling. NOT buying insurance is gambling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:25
|
|
|
owlhawk911 posted:buying insurance is gambling against someone better informed than you Nah. It is possible for both parties to benefit from trade due to having different risk aversions and risk pools. Product warranties though are often not worth it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:39
|
|
|
Senate can confirm a nomination after the election but before january 20th, right? So in theory, Trump could lose the election, and then nominate himself for the supreme court?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Senate can confirm a nomination after the election but before january 20th, right? So in theory, Trump could lose the election, and then nominate himself for the supreme court? Yeah
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 02:42
|
|
|
Could he win the election, and also appoint himself, and serve in both offices simultaneously also can he nominate mitch mcconnel, and if he does, could mitch then vote for himself, and also could mcconnel simultaneously be a senator and a justice (I've figured out that we live in the worst possible timeline and whatever the most stupidly hosed thing possible is, that's what's going to happen)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 02:52
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Could he win the election, and also appoint himself, and serve in both offices simultaneously That’s the one where Mitch McConnell is on the Supreme Court as a justice deciding whether to grant a writ of certiorari for a lawsuit against him being a justice and a senator.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
toplitzin posted:Mass. parents knew kid had coronavirus, sent him to 1st day of school anyway, officials say It’s a boy...? E: Taft served on the Supreme Court... but not while president GlobglogGroAbgalab fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Sep 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Could he win the election, and also appoint himself, and serve in both offices simultaneously No explicit constitutional bar, though it would violate the spirit of separation of powers. quote:also can he nominate mitch mcconnel, quote:and if he does, could mitch then vote for himself, quote:and also could mcconnel simultaneously be a senator and a justice Explicitly no, barred by the Ineligibility Clause in Article I.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 05:58
|
|
|
I’m swedish and not super big on american constitutional law etc., is there any stopping the republicans putting another judge on the supreme court before the next presidential term or whatever?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 10:44
|
|
|
Syncopated posted:I’m swedish and not super big on american constitutional law etc., is there any stopping the republicans putting another judge on the supreme court before the next presidential term or whatever? They have the raw numbers and made the senatorial rules this term to disallow fillibusters on judicial appointments. The question is, do they have the votes, which looks like maybe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 11:48
|
|
|
Syncopated posted:I’m swedish and not super big on american constitutional law etc., is there any stopping the republicans putting another judge on the supreme court before the next presidential term or whatever? We'll find out in the next few days. It basically depends on the moods of Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney and a few other "moderate" Republican senators. The most likely result is probably a vote to confirm a new candidate in the lame-duck session after the election, either way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 12:05
|
|
|
I see, thanks
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 14:08
|
|
|
Kalman posted:No explicit constitutional bar, though it would violate the spirit of separation of powers. Lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
Trump can technically nominate himself to serve concurrently on the supreme court. He can technically nominate himself nine times.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
Can’t wait for the seminal 7-2 pardon power decision U.S. v. Trump, delivered by TRUMP, C.J. (TRUMP, J., dissenting, in which TRUMP, J. joins)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
Is there any way for anyone to remove a SC judge that doesn't require a SC decision or violence? As in, assuming Dems win landslide victories over the next few years and every state goes blue, are the SC judges basically lifetime no take backs?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 00:43
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Is there any way for anyone to remove a SC judge that doesn't require a SC decision or violence? You can impeach them. Guess who is likely to be in control of the senate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:You can impeach them. Guess who is likely to be in control of the senate? I have some concerns regarding democracy's viability.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 01:00
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Is there any way for anyone to remove a SC judge that doesn't require a SC decision or violence? Impeachment and, depending on your tolerance for seriously loving up democratic norms, eliminating associate justice positions. (People are going to say poo poo about life tenure and I’m going to say go read about what happened to the Midnight Judges when Congress eliminated the circuit courts.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
There's always court packing if you want to take a less direct route.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
DaveSauce posted:There's always court packing if you want to take a less direct route. I think you mean court balancing. Court packing sounds bad, whereas court balancing sounds good, and since they are the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 04:01
|
|
|
I dunno packing seems potentially sexual so it sounds better to me
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 05:09
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:How many Twitter followers before you're a public figure? I asked about libelous rumors awhile ago. They've made there way here and a poster is spreading "convicted sex offender who did time" in D&D. Which is interesting legally. Does the fact that random goons quote her twitter opinion on these forums make her a public figure? I've never been clear on the bar. Should mods care about hosting libel? Not that they don't, I don't think it's come up. I doubt she's gonna sue jeffery this is just highpotthetical. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Sep 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 20:37
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:I asked about libelous rumors awhile ago. They've made there way here and a poster is spreading "convicted sex offender who did time" in D&D. Which is interesting. Links?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
therobit posted:Links? Hmm. I'm trying to keep this away from named names and shared legal documents of other people and imported drama. I have no idea of there's any kind of lawsuit and I'm unconnected to the parties I just think it's super lovely and report everyone spreading I can find. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Sep 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
If you're wondering if someone is a public figure but won't readily identify them it sounds like they're not a public figure
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Hoshi posted:If you're wondering if someone is a public figure but won't readily identify them it sounds like they're not a public figure This is fair. How many people independently recognize them may be a relevant metric. If only we could start a poll... Anyway. I'll let it go like the song Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Sep 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Would "the president said this was fine" be a viable defense in a civil suit? Assume the defendant can provide plentiful documentation of the president clearly signaling that the rona is no big deal etc. I'm pretty sure somebody tried this wrt firing a shotgun in the air to intimidate a trespasser, which was A) advice given on national television by Joe Biden B) illegal much everywhere I have no idea how that turned out, if I'm even remembering the events correctly, but it was similarly stupid
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 21:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:52 |
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Would "the president said this was fine" be a viable defense in a civil suit? Assume the defendant can provide plentiful documentation of the president clearly signaling that the rona is no big deal etc. No
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2020 21:44
|
|