|
FizFashizzle posted:I’m curious what biden thinks the legacy of his admin is going to be. Uh, the IIJA and the BBBA? Seems obvious that those two historic bills would be considered legacy.
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 22:59 |
|
ex post facho posted:https://twitter.com/Forbes/status/1...ingawful.com%2F This is entirely based on a press conference from two days ago and includes no new information. I strongly encourage reevaluating random forbes columnists as sources.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:06
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:What does "good decision, legally speaking" mean here. "Good decision legally speaking" is probably referring to how the Court had to twist itself into a judicial logic pretzel justifying patient privacy and the right to get an abortion under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which was always a pretty shaky ruling because it allows the Court to use its power of judicial review to determine constitutionality of laws. It's been used to strike down laws before, and ruling as protected under the 14th Amendment allows the Court to use judicial review to reverse that decision later...which is what seems to be happening now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:08
|
|
|
Boomer discourse is 100% reification. It's poisonous because it assumes as a given that our kayfabe democracy is actually controlled by its voters and that the actions it has taken were the result of collective electoral decisions. "Ahh well you see boomers collectively approve of punitive policy XYZ" well okay fine but even if that's true it's orthogonal, they're still in the passenger's seat with you and me. Liking the destination isn't the same thing as steeringDiscendo Vox posted:This is entirely based on a press conference from two days ago and includes no new information. I strongly encourage reevaluating random forbes columnists as sources. Does this mean you think he is going to extend student loan deferments? TheIncredulousHulk fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Dec 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:09
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:with the odd Gen X-er thrown in (Beto, Kamala) Kamala was born in 1964 - she is technically a boomer. Beto was '72.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:12
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This is entirely based on a press conference from two days ago and includes no new information. I strongly encourage reevaluating random forbes columnists as sources. Is there anything wrong with it that merits harshing on Bestselling Author, The Lemonade Life, who writes and speaks about leadership and greatness? Let people do their jobs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:"Good decision legally speaking" is probably referring to how the Court had to twist itself into a judicial logic pretzel justifying patient privacy and the right to get an abortion under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which was always a pretty shaky ruling because it allows the Court to use its power of judicial review to determine constitutionality of laws. It's been used to strike down laws before, and ruling as protected under the 14th Amendment allows the Court to use judicial review to reverse that decision later...which is what seems to be happening now. I guess I don't see what's wrong with that reasoning Shouldn't we have protection from arbitrary violations of our life and liberty from the government? The government has to prove I committed a capital crime to execute me for it, but if they want to execute me they can just make it a crime to wear a condom or jerk off at night and that's due process? If I'm always looking over my shoulder for morality police watching to make sure I'm not getting a blowjob do I really live in a free country? I agree with you it's weak practicality speaking because Republican judges can just overturn it at will, so a law or an amendment would be more protection (maybe, as you say there's no oversight on the power of judicial review that the court asserted for itself and they've ignored amendments before) but legally I don't see why it's a bad decision or anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:Boomer discourse is 100% reification. It's poisonous because it assumes as a given that our kayfabe democracy is actually controlled by its voters and that the actions it has taken were the result of collective electoral decisions. "Ahh well you see boomers collectively approve of punitive policy XYZ" well okay fine but even if that's true it's orthogonal, they're still in the passenger's seat with you and me. Liking the destination isn't the same thing as steering I like this point and wish I had made it. VitalSigns posted:Shouldn't we have protection from arbitrary violations of our life and liberty from the government? The government has to prove I committed a capital crime to execute me for it, but if they want to execute me they can just make it a crime to wear a condom or jerk off at night and that's due process? If I'm always looking over my shoulder for morality police watching to make sure I'm not getting a blowjob do I really live in a free country? I think that TB agrees with you that we should have those things, they're just saying that PeterCat meant the consequences of most of our rights being borne out of a very shaky legal precedent is definitely part of why america is the hellscape it is. I don't really know what the alternative is, though. If we didn't have those shaky legal grounds for the right to privacy giving us most of everything from Griswold through to Obergefell, then we probably wouldn't have those rights at all, and your blowjobs would be serious public business, instead of just fascinating.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:26
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:How is this determined by generational cohort, rather than by age? So you're ignoring the argument in front of you and making things up to support your case. Very impressive. Saying "I'm pretty sure" while implying it's true with no evidence at all is a garbage tactic. Try harder. Speaking of evidence, I already posted evidence that boomers have been the most influential voting block for over thirty years. That is, the time period you are pondering about instead of finding evidence for. The Sean fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Dec 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:
The legal reasoning seems fine, there has to be some limit to how much the government can gently caress with you, right. The protections against arbitrary imprisonment etc don't do much good if the government can just go "uhhh ok then we'll just jail you for playing with your titties, yep new rule you play with your titties you go to jail". E: and yes I'm aware that they both think we should have it, and that you can think we should have a right and also think the reasoning behind a particular decision is bad, I was just wondering what's wrong with the reasoning in their view VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Dec 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:How is this determined by generational cohort, rather than by age? Have you not seen a graph like this one before?  Millennial wealth wealth and power has absolutely been suppressed relative to what Boomers experienced. This is what we would expect, seeing as how building wealth, especially when you’re starting out with nothing, has grown increasingly difficult since 1970. Like, boomers bought into a market where houses were affordable, and now own the same houses, which are now unaffordable, to their financial benefit. They went to college for almost nothing and began their careers in a time when a single worker could still support a family. I mean... the graph speaks for itself. (The Great Inheritance is going to be a weird time.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:42
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:Does this mean you think he is going to extend student loan deferments? No, and this is a deliberate misrepresentation of my post. The problem is it's misrepresenting the source subject as if it's breaking news. mawarannahr posted:Is there anything wrong with it that merits harshing on Bestselling Author, The Lemonade Life, who writes and speaks about leadership and greatness? Let people do their jobs. "Their job" in this case is misleading clickbait, which is an ongoing issue with Forbes, as has come up in this thread many times before.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:No, and this is a deliberate misrepresentation of my post. The problem is it's misrepresenting the source subject as if it's breaking news. Isn't your just just to straight up Manufacture Consent?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:(The Great Inheritance is going to be a weird time.) Hahaha you think all the generational wealth isn't going to be sucked into healthcare/hospice/end-of-life sinks?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/coribush/status/1470499797010423812?s=21 A good statement but we all know that they will blame progressives for any losses
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
The Sean posted:Boomers have been a dominant voting block for most of their lives. Biden not being a boomer doesn't refute this; it just means he relied on pandering to boomers (usually white ones) to get elected (as did trump, obama, clinton, bush I & II, reagan and carter). Did you vote for any of those people
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:No, and this is a deliberate misrepresentation of my post. The problem is it's misrepresenting the source subject as if it's breaking news. Why would you blame the columnist for that and not the completely different person running the Twitter account? The author links to this tweet, dated December 11, about said press conference in citation, even, making it clear when and from where they got their information. Your issue is with the person running the Forbes social media account, over which this random columnist has no control — try sending @Forbes an @, they’re sure to be responsive to your request to be more mindful as to their tagging practices. It is so unnecessary to impugn the good character of hardworking journalists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:54
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Did you vote for any of those people Do questions end with a question mark? (Not for you I guess but what the hell is this supposed to mean? Get the gently caress out of here with that facebook discourse.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If that's what they mean then I agree that relying on getting the right judges is a poor way to secure our civil rights but that's why I asked because saying that Roe v Wade is not a good decision legally speaking kinda sounds like they're saying the legal reasoning itself is bad, and if that's what they mean I'm curious what they think is wrong with it aside from it only lasting as long as people with other opinions don't get on the bench. I don't agree with what I'm about to argue because I think ultimately the supreme court as it currently exists should necessarily invent new rights in order to prevent people from getting hosed with for increasingly invasive and extraneous things that the states might invent, but I think the argument for the "bad legal reasoning" is: the 14th amendment's due process clause doesn't really specify what crimes states are allowed to place on the books, it just says that whatever the law is, there must be a fair way to enact it. It says that one can't be subjected to arbitrary action, not that the states can't impose things that would be unfair. According to the constitution itself, there are enshrined peoples who are explicitly less important or worthy of protection as other peoples, so it naturally follows that states can write laws that disproportionately impact people who can become pregnant. The right to privacy is fundamentally invented by the courts based off of Meyer v. Nebraska allowing people to teach their children foreign languages despite the supposed vested interest of the state - in this case German during/after the world war, but expanded to lots of forms of parenting, and it applies to abortion through being combined with Griswold, but neither of those things really work from a textual understanding of the constitution as written. Based on what's actually in the constitution, and the 14th in particular, the idiots complaining about being forced to get vaccinated or wear masks are more correct than people who argue that abortions should be free and available to anyone who needs them or wants them for any reason. The infringement of life, and a nebulous concept of "liberty," is easily argued because there's no provision for it being supplanted for things like "the greater good" or "the morally correct thing." The actual solution to this problem is a new constitution, but, well, y'know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:00
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Why would you blame the columnist for that and not the completely different person running the Twitter account? The author links to this tweet, dated December 11, about said press conference in citation, even, making it clear when and from where they got their information. No, my complaint is with ex post facho, who originally posted the tweet with zero context and a reaction, and the twitter account, which presented the content as breaking, and the columnist, who published the column which has no value unless it can be remediated as if it were new for outrage, which is, hey presto, what happened. This is not a new issue with Forbes. We don't have to pretend it is.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Hahaha you think all the generational wealth isn't going to be sucked into healthcare/hospice/end-of-life sinks? My grandmother was recently moved into hospice due to dementia and the costs of the memory care home and medical assistance (24/7 nurses when she still lived in her house) were so high that my mom liquidated all of my grandmother's assets to pay for it and from what she has said, the last 4-5 years have cleared out hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings, bonds, and retirement on top of having to sell the house and the 65 acres of land it sits on, and she's not even dead yet. My grandmother is def a silent (born in 1937), but the inheritance aspect? That's a preview of what it's going to be like when the boomers start really dying off. There's not gonna be poo poo left for younger generations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:05
|
|
|
The Sean posted:Do questions end with a question mark? Oh. Sorry mb. The Sean posted:Boomers have been a dominant voting block for most of their lives. Biden not being a boomer doesn't refute this; it just means he relied on pandering to boomers (usually white ones) to get elected (as did trump, obama, clinton, bush I & II, reagan and carter). ¿Did you vote for any of those people?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1470440318424256518 I find this poo poo so annoying. Just do the unpopular stuff you're going to do and take whatever minimal flak you take from your base on it. Looking like a wimp whose hands are tied is no better. They did the same thing with the remain in Mexico stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:11
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:My grandmother was recently moved into hospice due to dementia and the costs of the memory care home and medical assistance (24/7 nurses when she still lived in her house) were so high that my mom liquidated all of my grandmother's assets to pay for it and from what she has said, the last 4-5 years have cleared out hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings, bonds, and retirement on top of having to sell the house and the 65 acres of land it sits on, and she's not even dead yet. It's why we are planning to move ourfolks in and take care of them ourselves to the best of our ability, and they don't want to be strung out barely alive for years. They want to leave us the little they have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:11
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:No, my complaint is with ex post facho, who originally posted the tweet with zero context and a reaction, and the twitter account, which presented the content as breaking, and the columnist, who published the column which has no value unless it can be remediated as if it were new for outrage, which is, hey presto, what happened. It sounds like Forbes had caused no end of problems to you and this thread. I hope you win what you’re fighting for. Do you have complaints about what the Biden administration is or isn’t doing or are you only offended by the timing of the post not matching the definition of “breaking?”
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:18
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:I don't agree with what I'm about to argue because I think ultimately the supreme court as it currently exists should necessarily invent new rights in order to prevent people from getting hosed with for increasingly invasive and extraneous things that the states might invent, but I think the argument for the "bad legal reasoning" is: You can even wipe out the rights that are named that way (it never explicitly says that judges can't just rubberstamp any warrant regardless of how thin the suspicion is, but if you allowed that would the right to be secure from search even exist) As for vaccines and masks those don't have anything to do with the cases you cited. Teaching your kids German doesn't hurt anyone else, if parents were teaching their kids to pronounce Power Word Kill there might be a public health argument for putting a stop to that. E: I mean whatevs, thanks for explaining the argument, I think it's a weak one but that's not your fault VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Dec 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:23
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Oh. Sorry mb. ¡get the gently caress out with your drunk uncle Facebook boomer poo poo! Can you make any rhetorical statements or is your brain frozen in 1986?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
I’m a boomer and this is my anthem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXMrDu7374Y Edit: for the embed. Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Dec 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:31
|
|
|
IK Hat I'm not going to name names, but more than a few of you are getting too heated and need to tone down the aggro posting before it devolves any further into personal slapfights.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:No, and this is a deliberate misrepresentation of my post. The problem is it's misrepresenting the source subject as if it's breaking news. It's not a deliberate misrepresentation, I was just trying to figure out what point you were trying to make and couldn't intuit that your actual quibble wasn't with the relevant information(that Joe Biden is restarting student loan payments purely out of discretion), but with a twitter post framing it as breaking news, because I personally thought the latter was irrelevant garnish and charitably assumed you'd be taking issue with something of more substance
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:It's not a deliberate misrepresentation, I was just trying to figure out what point you were trying to make and couldn't intuit that your actual quibble wasn't with the relevant information(that Joe Biden is restarting student loan payments purely out of discretion), but with a twitter post framing it as breaking news, because I personally thought the latter was irrelevant garnish and charitably assumed you'd be taking issue with something of more substance The amount of frustration without pushback I’ve seen on Twitter about this issue seems to indicate that liberals on there are just tired of hearing about it. They know it sucks, and very few of them can summon up the vim to actually defend the almost entirely indefensible, so there are a lot of pot shots at people who bring it up about Why Hasn’t Bernie Fixed This If He’s So Great from people with THEE in their handle, which is a Khive shibboleth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:49
|
|
|
Baronash posted:Cute how you’re ignoring the first half of the sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The people who wrote the Constitution owned people but you seem to think that they didn't believe that people had a right to own guns. These were the same people who wrote in a provision that allowed the Congress to license people who owned ships and cannon to act as pirates on behalf of the country. These people thought nothing of the wealth raising and equipping their own troops. They were very big on personal rights. You are really hung up on the narrative about the NRA as some kind of boogeyman and it doesn't follow through with the history of firearms ownership in the country. There were states that had extremely restrictive laws on who could own firearms. Those states were the former Confederacy and those laws applied to black people. To the point that black Soldiers in WW1 were barred from being drafted into the infantry and were barred from receiving training with rifles. But apparently you are OK with this because you don't believe that people have the right to arm themselves for their own defense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This is entirely based on a press conference from two days ago and includes no new information. I strongly encourage reevaluating random forbes columnists as sources. You’re right and earlier something similar happened with the oil leases article in the guardian. It’s being done intentionally ( not the posters here but in the news) That said they aren’t fighting the fight. It’s really obvious perceptions are being manipulated in this way. They should know silence will be filled with the worst possible interpretation that can construed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:01
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Part 2, wherein the question of how to reform and/or defund the police is addressed. Not that there's any drat shortage of ideas in this regard, all of which can apparently be easily dismissed with a " I just want to say thank you for these articles. They are very beneficial.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:02
|
|
defund the police is a terrible slogan and also it already failed".
Bar Ran Dun posted:You’re right and earlier something similar happened with the oil leases article in the guardian. It’s being done intentionally ( not the posters here but in the news) We should not have to internalize or tolerate a misleading framing of something that's been known for months as if it were new. I's being done intentionally by forbes, and it's being defended intentionally by posters. Neither should be conflated with a meaningful interest in discussing the subject matter.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:"Good decision legally speaking" is probably referring to how the Court had to twist itself into a judicial logic pretzel justifying patient privacy and the right to get an abortion under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which was always a pretty shaky ruling because it allows the Court to use its power of judicial review to determine constitutionality of laws. It's been used to strike down laws before, and ruling as protected under the 14th Amendment allows the Court to use judicial review to reverse that decision later...which is what seems to be happening now. Well said. This all goes back to Gavin Newsom's proposal and why the SC will treat it differently than the Texas Abortion law. Arms are specifically mentioned in the Constitution. The right to arms is mentioned in the Constitution. Abortion isn't and it took a pretty long and nebulous collection of rulings to arrive at a weirdly specific judgement in 73. Of course if the Democrats thought that it the important right they state it is in their fundraising letters, they might do something like make an exception to the filibuster to pass a law protecting abortion. The fact that they aren't is telling and will come back to bite them come election time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:06
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:The people who wrote the Constitution owned people but you seem to think that they didn't believe that people had a right to own guns. These were the same people who wrote in a provision that allowed the Congress to license people who owned ships and cannon to act as pirates on behalf of the country. These people thought nothing of the wealth raising and equipping their own troops. They were very big on personal rights. Literally don't care about any of this because the people who wrote the constitution would have been mad that anyone who wasn't a white male wealthy landowner was allowed to vote. What matters is that right now the interpretation of the 2nd by conservatives judges is "everybody has the right to own dozens of guns of any type and it should barely be restricted" is fairly recent jurisprudence, even if you factor in that much of previous gun control was about keeping guns out of the hands of brown people. Even in states with almost non-existent gun control, It's still pretty clear that those rights are for whites only. Gatts posted:I just want to say thank you for these articles. They are very beneficial. Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
Victar posted:I can speculate about your logic behind "if you're for reform, you should be for defunding the police" - it reminds me of the "Starve the Beast" anti-government mantra - but without further explanation I really don't understand it. I was reading the Police thread in this forum, when the thread was active, and still don't understand it. Post after post in that thread didn't have functional answers to the fundamental question of "what would a replacement for police look like, and how would it deal with violent crime, drug gangs, or organized crime?" Plenty of posts in that thread answer that question specifically, but we do have several posters who show up regularly to claim that, no matter how many pages are spent talking to them. It's a derailment tactic. Why don't you try asking some basic questions over in that thread and see what happens, instead of expounding your thoughts in the general thread where people have less specialized knowledge to address your concerns? quote:I do understand that police have huge budgets, that have not been defunded one bit, in nearly all parts of the US. But if you pay police terrible wages, then you get terrible policemen (who are also more likely to supplement their low wages with bribes or other misconduct). Cutting funding can also result in fewer officers doing the job, which is not what the US needs at a time when violent crime is on the rise. If you pay police extremely good wages, you also get terrible police, because the police problem isn't wages it's institutional. Police are often some of the highest paid city employees, especially with various overtime grifts. There's no real correlation that's ever been shown that links violent crime in any relationship with police employment levels. You're assuming how police work based on propaganda and popular fiction. quote:I've also read about Minneapolis, where they actually tried something along the lines of defunding/replacing the police. What I heard is that violent crime soared and black residents suffered the most. I believe the experiment has since been rejected in a ranked-choice vote. They didn't defund police. You have been misinformed. It was proposed and never actually went through, just like many other places. "They defunded the police and now crime is skryocketing" has no basis in fact and is a straight up rightwing talking point. quote:Obviously mental illness is not the primary driver of violent crime! Most mentally ill people are not violent criminals, but cases of mental illness so severe as to cause murder are real. A more recent, horrifying example is the mentally ill 15-year-old who murdered four students in a Michigan school shooting. Shortly before the shooting, he drew a picture of gun violence with the words "The thoughts won't stop, help me". It's not a significant aspect of violent crime focusing on it is attempting to place blame on people who already face challenges. Addressing mental health is a component of addressing homelessness, however. Police regularly respond to mental health crises and use violence on the mentally unwell but I don't see you talking about that. quote:I really hope the COVID pandemic and its repercussions turn out to be a statistical blip, but I don't think we can count on that, especially with the emergence of the Omicron variant. Again, you don't know enough about this to come close to making that call. We have violent crimes on a downward trend for decades and then a sharp spike when a pandemic interrupted a lot of things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:39
|
|
|
The Sean posted:¡get the gently caress out with your drunk uncle Facebook boomer poo poo! lol. I will take this defensive rage as a yes. So given your theory that everything Biden (or those other presidents) does is still Boomers' responsibility because they are part of a voting bloc that voted for him: you are part of a bloc that voted for Joseph Robinette Biden Jr, does that make you responsible for his policies? VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 01:51 on Dec 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
^^^ IK said the discussion was over. I welcome you to come at me in PMs. I'm not responding here.Eric Cantonese posted:I’m a boomer and this is my anthem. This is awesome. Thanks! Edit: It didn't imbed but is a good watch. The Sean fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Dec 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 01:40
|
|