Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mongrel]

By the way, is there a link that actualy works for the evil canuckistani among us?

'Cause I'd like to, you know, actually watch it before commenting further.

[SCD]

http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca

They usually archive the daily show there to about a week back.  Ditto colbert.

[Brentai]

I can sort of see how they can be worried about some sort of catastrophic economic chain reaction, i.e. Halliburton loses its magical immunity-to-the-sixth-amendment, collapses pretty much overnight under the weight of all its incredibly blatant crimes, blows a huge hole in an already strained economy and sends us spiraling into a real depression.

The counter-argument is of course that if this country's economy really is dependent on making sure its megacorporations can never be held liable for gang-rape, then it's probably time to just let the damned thing collapse.

[Royal☭]

The counter-argument is of course that if this country's economy really is dependent on making sure its megacorporations can never be held liable for gang-rape, then it's probably time to just let the damned thing collapse.

Well, Goldman Sachs is still an operating company, so I think we understand where the government stands on this.

[Pacobird]

I suspect it has way more to do with Al Franken having spent the past 25 years literally calling these guys cocksuckers than the actual merits of the bill.

Petty?  Maybe.

[Royal☭]

How is "We're willing to support gang-rape because Al Franken insulted us." better than "We just support gang-rape"?

[Pacobird]

It's almost as if the Senate's veneer of civility conceals a deep cynicism about the political process it controls!

[Mongrel]

'Cynicism' may be close, but it's not quite the word you're looking for.

[Catloaf]

if this country's economy really is dependent on making sure its megacorporations can never be held liable for gang-rape, then it's probably time to just let the damned thing collapse.

This.

I also think that if our economy revolves around things that produce nothing, and provide no service other than making or just hoping to make money exchange hands, (translation:  FUCK YOU, MARKETING DEPARTMENT) then we deserve a poor economy until it moves back to a system that for the most part actually enriches the lives of the members of society.

[McDohl]

The life of a defense contract employee is a tightrope walk, and on either end, you've got people kicking the anchor points where the rope is on both sides of the political spectrum.  For the most part, if there's something in paper, it might as well be set in stone.  On the one end, the guys who want to cut down on military spending are setting fire to the rope.  The other are the guys who are kicking the rope, telling you that you're not getting across fast enough.

It's a headache of a life, really.  I'm kinda glad that I'm putting it behind me.

[Royal☭]

You'll forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for an industry built, maintained and reliant on killing people.  I understand the need for defense, but not everything that's put under "Defense Spending" counts as such.

[McDohl]

And that's your choice.  However, it's what put food on the table until this summer for me, so forgive my judgment being colored.

It's sort of like my dad, who works in the oil and natural gas industry.  When the new administration took over, a lot of the work he was expecting to have went away, and my family went through some rough times.

[Brentai]

I understand the need to keep money circulating through the industrial military complex, but there has to be a compromise somewhere between "Spend $3,000 on Hammers" and "Deny Employees Their Right to Trial by Jury as a Cost-Cutting Measure".

[SCD]

Yes there is, but I believe that it lies in major reforms of the justice system, access to justice, and lawyers. 

Right now, lawyers on retainer are seen as a cost-cutting measure, and good ones cost due to current market conditions.  This is one industry I sympathize less, than the military contractors. 

While our litigation society is something that allows us to learn from our mistakes in principle, the lessons come now at an overwhelmingly high rate where restrict what can and cannot be done through contract to the point where law degrees become increasingly needed to understand them.  This leads us to the rape deal, as well as a major source in the loss of our dynamic ways that once made north america,  (well, mostly you guys) the chief innovator. 

In the meantime, I'd rather see equity of law - allowing all contractors civil rights while working as opposed to just one subset within an industry that rightly provides the means to allow nasty people to kill as required, near and far in so many delicious delicious ways..(grin).   

China gets over this with the use of fascist-style force and the middle finger from party level, although at a decreasing level. 

But there's got to be a better way around this whole thing...

[patito]

I thought the US was supposed to be the good guys, you know. The whole "We'll allows gang-rape as long as it creates jobs and gives us money" doesn't seem like a particularly noble value. I'm sorry is this would have meant that Dohl could have been out of a job, but there's gotta be another way.

[Miss Cat Ears]

Pregnant woman denied cheese at grocery.

Aren't pregnant women able to buy alcohol and even worse things than cheese?

[Pacobird]

stuff

I don't know if this is specifically what you're getting at, but mandatory ADR is a good thing for the U.S. justice system because it keeps many, many disputes that do not need the particular resources of a court to be resolved out of the court system, lowering costs and easing access for the disputes that do. 

I would agree, however, that gang-rape is a pretty awful place to draw a line in the sand.  I can't be bothered to find the actual text of this woman's employment contract; does anyone have it?

[TA]

In large corporations, mandatory, binding arbitration is done through arbitration firms are paid by the corporation, and whose continued employment depends on them siding in the corporation's favor, and if the plaintiff finds themselves with $50 and a gag order then they're barred from taking it to a civil suit.  ADR can be a good thing in some cases, but these serve to close off access to the court system for people with grievances, and that is in no possible way a good thing.

[Mongrel]

I can't believe that we're even having this debate. Wait, yes I can.

[Pacobird]

Yes, those with money and power use it to manipulate the system for their own gain.  This isn't dramatically different from the courts, where straight-up legal costs prevent you from maintaining litigation against a major corporation through discovery, let alone through a trial and subsequent appeals process.

This is, again, with the point that ADR is much better suited to a contract dispute than a tort.