US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1868

On April 21 2015 14:23 Simberto wrote:
Aren't the terms of the lease mostly "We have bigger guns than you and we like this piece of land, so we are gonna keep it"?

Monday was another dark day for Kansans hoping to see better state services in the future.

Officials announced that state revenues would come in almost $90 million short of expectations over the next three months of the year — and almost $200 million less than once predicted in the next two budget years.

What’s that mean?

First, the income tax cuts approved by Gov. Sam Brownback and the Legislature in 2012 still aren’t bringing in nearly enough new tax revenue through additional jobs once bravely predicted by Republican lawmakers.

Second, Brownback and the Legislature will have to keep cutting services, borrowing money and/or raising other taxes just to balance the budget.

Funding of K-12 schools just got a little dicier. And will the state have to borrow more from the state’s already-tapped highway fund?

Budget director Shawn Sullivan said Monday that Brownback would have a plan to offer by Thursday of this week.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a likely 2016 GOP presidential candidate, is marching forward with his bold new pro-American worker immigration policy. He’s not afraid to push for a legal immigration system that doesn’t box out American workers with a massive influx of inexpensive foreign labor.

After first rolling out his new ideas on Glenn Beck’s radio program on Monday, Walker appeared on Fox News’ Megyn Kelly’s show to further elaborate on how he hopes to protect Americans economically from special interests pushing for a massive influx in cheap foreign labor from around the world.

“When it comes to immigration, as a governor I don’t have any direct role in that—but having talked to border state governors and having talked to other people, seeing how screwed up immigration has become under this president, it was clear to me talking to them and listening on this issue, traveling to the border actually going there with the governor of Texas Gov. Abbott, seeing the problems there, yeah from my standpoint going forward we need to secure the border, we need to enforce the laws that we currently have with an e-verify system,” Walker said.

On April 22 2015 09:53 Lord Tolkien wrote:
"Liberals stutter"?

As someone who's studied immigration policy extensively, these kind of policies are utterly retarded, with no realistic basis on the reality of immigration and its effects on economies. Jeb Bush and Rubio are at least recognizing that the classic Republican stance on immigration is both political suicide in any national election and, and harms the US economy as a whole.

ZZZZZ. I'll write a giant wall of text debunking all of this stupid shit that some Republican candidates are apparently saying.

After my DnD session with TLers.

On April 22 2015 07:29 Yoav wrote:


Does anyone have a decent reason this isn't the only thing Obama is talking about right now (along with a requirement to report all police homocide to the Justice Department)? It would be comparatively really easy to get past Congress, hard to object to, would satisfy things most conservatives agree to (keep honest cops out of trouble, catch the bad apples) and just generally be a good idea.

On April 22 2015 10:13 zlefin wrote:
What do people think about switching US fines to a day-fine system? That's one where fines are scaled by the person's income (with some minimum and possibly maximums); so a fine might be 1 day's pay. the intent is to ensure fines are not ruinous, but still hurtful to poor people, that fines actually hurt rich people, and to ensure fines adjust appropriately over time.

I looked into it some awhile ago and feel it represents an improvement over the existing system, and should in general be adopted (there are a variety of known specifics and issues that need to be worked out).

It also helps with a common complaint I have: fines and other values are often set by statute, and while 5 years in prison and/or a $5000 fine may make some sense a hundred years ago, they're very unequal now. Looking through law codes it's a common issue in the US that values were set at the time the statute was made, which is often many decades old

On April 22 2015 10:30 Millitron wrote:

I don't like the concept of fines period. They cause a conflict of interest for police. They end up being used primarily for a revenue source, not as a slap on the wrist for minor offenses. That's how places end up like Ferguson. The city has a few bad fiscal years in a row, and the bean counters start pressuring the police to write more tickets. It's kinda like the prison-industrial system.

Basically, having a monetary incentive for punishing people is a bad idea.

President Barack Obama criticized Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and others who are opposed to a new trade deal that he is negotiating on Tuesday, saying that his opponents are simply wrong on the facts of the deal.

Warren and other Democrats have raised concerns about the deal being negotiated with other 11 Pacific countries, called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, saying that it could worsen income inequality and allow private companies to challenge domestic financial regulations before an international tribunal. Those challenges, Warren and other critics argue, could undermine key financial, environmental and other regulations.

Obama disputed that was true during a town hall hosted by MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Tuesday.

"I love Elizabeth. We're allies on a whole host of issues, but she's wrong on this," Obama said. "When you hear folks make a lot of suggestions about how bad this trade deal is, when you dig into the facts, they are wrong."

While Obama criticized Warren for being wrong on the facts of the deal, it's difficult to know exactly what the deal contains because his administration has deemed the negotiations to be classified.

On April 22 2015 10:13 zlefin wrote:
What do people think about switching US fines to a day-fine system? That's one where fines are scaled by the person's income (with some minimum and possibly maximums); so a fine might be 1 day's pay. the intent is to ensure fines are not ruinous, but still hurtful to poor people, that fines actually hurt rich people, and to ensure fines adjust appropriately over time.

I looked into it some awhile ago and feel it represents an improvement over the existing system, and should in general be adopted (there are a variety of known specifics and issues that need to be worked out).

It also helps with a common complaint I have: fines and other values are often set by statute, and while 5 years in prison and/or a $5000 fine may make some sense a hundred years ago, they're very unequal now. Looking through law codes it's a common issue in the US that values were set at the time the statute was made, which is often many decades old

WASHINGTON -- The head of the Environmental Protection Agency says the final rules for reducing U.S. power plant emissions will be done by mid-summer, and she's not particularly worried about legal and political attempts to block them.

The draft rule, released in June 2014, calls for a 30 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants by 2030. The EPA received more than 2 million comments on the proposed rules from citizens, states and private companies.

"We’re really comfortable that we can get this rule done in mid-summer and do justice to a full evaluation of all those comments, so that we can make sure that it gets over the finish line really solid," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told The Huffington Post. "It's going to be solid legally, and it's going to get some tremendous progress moving forward to address carbon pollution that’s fueling climate change."

Though the rule has not yet been finalized, there are already legal challenges underway. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard a case against the rules for existing power plants.

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has been personally appealing to state governors to challenge the validity of the EPA's carbon-reduction blueprint, urging them not submit compliance plans.

McCarthy said she's not worried about McConnell's campaign.

"I don’t see this call for inaction gaining momentum. In fact, just the opposite. The states are recognizing that EPA has never really crafted a rule that was so respectful of the role of states, where the federal government just says the standard and allows the states to develop their plans," said McCarthy. "They know we’re serious about this. They know climate change is serious business and concern. They know they're best positioned to design a plan that's going to work for them."

McCarthy also said the agency is taking extra time to consider the comments it's received -- a process that has pushed back the timeline on delivery of the final rules. Some states have expressed concern that the required emissions reductions for 2020 may force certain states to switch from coal power to natural gas, rather than investing in solar or wind, which might take longer to deploy.

On April 22 2015 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:


And there you go. If I was the second person recording I would of been like "Seriously!?? Did you not just see what they did to your shit? Then you're gunna holler across the street 'did you record that!?'... Are you out ya' mind bitch?!"

What would you have done if it was your camera/phone he was smashing sheep? Presumably you wouldn't of 'let him' like she did?

On April 22 2015 10:56 GreenHorizons wrote:


I like the idea, of course updating fines is one of those things that's just doing the very basics of their jobs (like actually flipping a burger as a burger flipper) and shouldn't take specific motivation from the people. Apparently several countries in Europe already do it.


Just to put some numbers to the disparity...

Maximum fine for first speeding ticket in Georgia: ~$1000

Minimum wage hours (makes $15,080 annually) required to pay $1000 ticket : ~138 hours or, ~3 1/2 weeks of full-time work

(makes ~$52,000): ~40 hours to pay ticket or, ~1 work week
(makes ~$100,000)~20 hours to pay ticket or, ~1/2 of a work week
(makes ~$250,000)~8.33 hours to pay ticket or, ~1 work day
.....

You get the pattern. For someone like Donald Trump, it's more expensive to get pulled over than it is to get the ticket. I say base it off net worth (though I suppose income would be easier to crunch out quickly and without much dispute).

As for milli how do you suggest we deal with traffic infractions?