notch656c

Test strips are just as or almost as illegal as the drug themselves in many state. Except without the huge profit margins to incentivize dealers to carry them.

My point was that if voters had to eat their own medicine they wouldn't encumber new entrants to rules they themselves are immune to. I didn't seriously think they would vote to raze their own (previously immune) houses.

Well America needs an underclass. Now that blacks (on paper) have equal rights we have to make somebody the cheap exploited underlings.

And yet if I built a new house against code they would still make me go back and fix it, even though I could make the exact argument you made about the old house not penciling out to go back and make them fix it.

In the county next to me you can self certify and pretty promise you did all that "knowledge worker" shit. No one will ever check, the self certification just promises you did the stuff and the government promises they won't investigate. Somehow not everyone is dying in city-wide house fires.

Sounds like southern california done fucked themselves with over-regulating that stuff.

My logic is the entitled fucks that vote for this policy should be made to eat their own medicine. Either it's OK to have a house without the safety criteria in the code, or it isn't.

Forcing them to eat their own medicine would allow the youth to also have the chance to build a house, even if it's not perfectly safe, closer to the cost their parents had to spend. Rather than changing the game and screwing over new entrants while old entrants enjoy immunity to the same rules.

Valid point. I looked up average materials cost for a 2000 sq ft house and it was estimated at $120k. Materials costs vary much less across the country than land and labor.

For 580k I could hire 2 skilled men and 3 undocumented immigrants for a year.

Something isn't right.

Upping the codes to require new construction to have those things, while not razing your parents' house, shows it's all about the pyramid scheme and not about actual safety. If it were about actual safety and such things are considered unsafe then unsafe houses like your parents home should be bulldozed for the good of the people.

How does that happen? For 700k I could hire 2 skilled persons and 5 undocumented immigrants to work an entire year.

How long does it take to raise a house?

anti-union is anti-libertarian imo. But I can't gatekeep libertarianism, it's just my personal opinion.

Pure unbridled free market will crush unions anyway, both the kinds formed by corporations (collusion) and those formed by employees (union). There is no need to legislate such action as market forces influence actors towards the more economical choice.

Lol, one day I was riding my bicycle home, and had to pass through a very poor part of town in which I am a racial minority. My bike got a flat just that moment. Someone took notice of my weakness that I had to stop and fix the flat and that I was obviously not from the neighborhood. They put a gun to my head.

That disabused me of any notion I am never a target.

Because then you would realize the whole charade about the social contract and consent to be governed under the law all falls apart and there is nothing left but whether you decide to defend against the violence of enforcement.

I think it is because their state's congressman they think is acting in their interest, while the other states' congressman are not. And they're not wrong...

Personally I also find it bizarre system where the majority vote of the other 49 states tells your state what to do, under federal law, particularly in wholly intrastate matters.

Are they completely non-curated? Kids just put whatever book they want there? If so I'd say the teacher isn't liable for what happens. If the teachers put the books or manages which books are there they are curated and that activity can be managed by the people paying the teacher, ie the taxpayers/representatives.

If the government doesn't have the assent of the people is it not illegitimate? I thought the whole presumption under our system was the representatives have the assent of the majority.

If the books in the school library just appear there with no influence by the school staff in charge of the libraries then I guess we can just fire the library staff. Then there's no one there to risk a felony. I didn't realize it was completely non-curated and unmanaged in Florida.

If a law is passed the presumption under democracy is it has the assent of the majority.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of democracy, but you're looking at it.

It's to make sure you can't be re-licensed in a profession, like teaching. Anywhere.

I am very much against this law but I think "present in school" is much different than "curated."

I couldn't give a shit if kids were bringing Anarchist Cookbook and images of the tortures at Abu Dhabi prison to school. What the kid and his family obtain on their own through private means and choose to read in a public venue like a school IMO is none of my business.

If the teachers are curating books that disproportionately pushes certain non-academic agendas, though, then maybe the parents ought to have the right to guide the employment of that teacher to make sure it follows the desires of the voters. Criminal charges are insane though.

There were some books that some segment of voters didn't approve of that certain school libraries were providing. This seems like a backdoor way to stop that while bypassing having to go through controversial school board meetings and/or 1A constitutionality issues to block those books.

Not to say this isn't insane, just explaining how I think it happened.

Isn't weev hiding in Transnistria after he got released on a technicality that allows them to go back after him in another district court or something?

I was thinking the courts ruled he got tried in the wrong jurisdiction so prison had to release him. He basically GTFO'd before they had a chance to refile and is hiding in an unrecognized territory inside Moldova.

Federal law still enforced against the ~44% of the population who have constructive possession of a firearm by virtue of owning one themselves or having access to one via living with someone else with one and it either being unlocked or locked in a way other adults in the house may be able to get to it.

If you toss in those under the UCMJ and other people on federal property, etc, I'd say weed laws are federally enforced against the majority or a hair under it.

For such persons there is still actively enforced 10 year jail sentence for being a pot user.

Not to mention all sorts of weird state exceptions. In my state they have legal weed but also a law that says ANY metabolites in your body is a DUI. Inactive metabolites stay in the body a long long time and surviving here on the abysmal public transport without driving would be quite unpleasant. So basically just as illegal as it ever was.

I'm always baffled by people that think the way that laws are written must be the way things operate. Taxes in BA are above 100% of profits. On paper it's illegal to make money. Yet businesses exist. Some peoples' minds may explode.

Which is why even though I don't believe in the bible I would be happy to own a pallet of fancy ones to hawk.

I don't believe in crypto. But I know plenty of religious zealots to sell it to. So I'm happy to own it. My bet is it isn't a dying religion.

Yes complicity with theft makes one untrustworthy.

Describing it as mere tax evasion interests is a bit of a simplification. During Corralito accounts were frozen to the point they could often barely be drawn on. Whether you want to blame that on the bank or not, the end result is people end up not trusting the banks...

Crypto as a competitor to SWIFT is kind of interesting though. SWIFT is basically a fast international transfer. Crypto is actually pretty great for that because you can do a fast transfer against domestic crypt/fiat pairs and after the int'l crypto transfer dump back into fiat so the currency risk is relatively low. Using SWIFT / int'l fiat transfer to buy crypto makes no sense.

In short cutting off SWIFT from crypto exchanges is a nothing burger because domestic crypto/fiat pairs are available and int'l transfer of crypto bypasses SWIFT.

Ted was never meaningfully on the run. The place they found him was the same place with his name on it in the county assessor's office.

Kaczynski wasn't on the run and he had clear title to his property as I understand it. You could look up where he was in the property records.

He didn't get not captured because no one knew where Ted was. It's because they didn't know Ted was the guy doing the bad stuff.

There are a lot of unrecognized territories in the world. Wa State, Western Sahara, Rojava, Palestine, Transnistria (remember hacker weev?), Ambazonia, Artsakh, wide swaths of factions in central Africa. It's impractical to extradite people from these regions, although perhaps if they're badly enough wanted the CIA can toss them in a bag and just straight up drive them out or bribe others to do same.

It's thought for instance intelligence may know wanted British terrorist Samantha Lewthwaite is in Kenya or Somalia, but impractical to extract due to being controlled by Al-Shebab. Nobody is gonna send the troops/3 letter goons into some no-mans contested land over some non-violent holmes like character.

FTX guy literally owned by proxy rights to a yacht. I seriously don't get why he didn't flee the island as soon as he knew the jig was up.