I engaged the point Tom, no need to swoon, and I thought quite adequately considering how nakedly incorrect it was. I mean the dude didn't even include tort lawyers, abortion doctors or political activists in his list? How hard should I try to refute something that clearly had no effort put into it to make even remotely plausible.
Go ahead and link it. The premise sounds so nakedly risible, though, that I personally don't intend to dignify such hogwash with much more than a snort or perhaps your summary doesn't do it justice.
Well at some point it stops being insider trading and becomes ideology. If Dakota Dan is a huge personal supporter of frak drilling and invests in Frak drilling and pushes frak drilling while in congress that's not insider trading. The dude presumably got elected despite being a frak oil driller. (The same'd go for Nancy the Nevada Nuclear bug or Ted the Tort guy from Tucson).
Actually I wasn't thinking of anything so dramatic.
When you go into congress your financial assets go into a box. You can't do very much with them in the box and what little you can do is put up on a website after being vetter by some bored accountant. No more insider trading. This is somewhat constraining I suppose but it's not much to ask of people who want to lay their hands on the reins of power of the country.
Not at all. If your assets are in a trust with limited access/control and full transparency for you then you will have a very limited ability to insider trade. Insider trading is generally an issue only in a very limited time window; the markets process their information very quickly. If Jim or Jane Congresscritter can't access their assets but for, say, a trade or two a year and those trades must be fully publicized then they can't insider trade without quickly losing their jobs (because Bob or Barbara Congresscandidate will be watching those couple trades closely for dirt to campaign on).
Seems simple enough. People elected to Congress, the Senate or the Presidency should surrender their financial assets into some kind of trust fund system (perhaps with limited and carefully public access to a certain limited number of financial transactions) for the duration of their stint in office.
At some point, however, the underlying cause of your pain lays you out cold on a street or other public place whereupon people without your democratic consent will cart you off to a hospital where they will endevor to treat the underlying issue.
If I misread you I apologize. The only thing I can offer is that the homosexuals are all child predators canard is a hoary and common cliche on the right so I'm used to reacting firmly to it.
The link you've provided though (and it is from one of my countries) merely indicates that it's unlikely that pedophilia is some kind of easily treatable disorder; though for people who indulge I doubt you'd find many liberals who'd say a bullet wasn't an appropriate response.
Well there are several. The Greeks could vote to leave the monetary union (and suffer for it) or they could vote to enact heavy austerity and tax regimes that are not easily evaded (and suffer for that instead). Or, they could vote to keep the monetary union but refuse to accept the austerity and less evadable taxes required and thus empower technocrats by default. They appear to be embracing option C.
You could use pedophile as well to accurately eliminate the whole Greek aspect but then that'd then be including the massively more common practice of men predating on prepubescent little girls. Please note that I am not suggesting that such men are heterosexuals nor do I assert that the practice of raping little girls is a time honored tradition in religions (Christianity not the least among them) or that it is a behavior the right condones or winks at.
We do Tom, people can be a little over the top here from time to time so there's little sense getting excessively exercised.
Still, I'm surprised; you've taken to your fainting couch over considerably less than having an entire group of people being accused of being sexual predators of little children. Or the entirety of the left being in the process of legitamizing such.
Bob, the man who perpetrated this crime is not a homosexual, he is a pederast. For a man who puts as much weight as you do in the importance of words and especially The Word I would think you would be more hesitate to abuse them in this manner.
Ultimately this seems pretty moot. Romney seems an effortless shoe in for the nomination and he's clearly playing things safe in the debates (and who in his position wouldn't?).
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Patient BW, DOB 2/16/1971”
This was eminantly worthy of the front page. I cannot praise it enough.
On “What Should Occupy Wall Street Do Next?”
I engaged the point Tom, no need to swoon, and I thought quite adequately considering how nakedly incorrect it was. I mean the dude didn't even include tort lawyers, abortion doctors or political activists in his list? How hard should I try to refute something that clearly had no effort put into it to make even remotely plausible.
"
Go ahead and link it. The premise sounds so nakedly risible, though, that I personally don't intend to dignify such hogwash with much more than a snort or perhaps your summary doesn't do it justice.
On “Epidemiological Politics”
That may be but that's not insider trading. Now we're talking about influence peddling which is a different basket of fish entirely.
"
Well at some point it stops being insider trading and becomes ideology. If Dakota Dan is a huge personal supporter of frak drilling and invests in Frak drilling and pushes frak drilling while in congress that's not insider trading. The dude presumably got elected despite being a frak oil driller. (The same'd go for Nancy the Nevada Nuclear bug or Ted the Tort guy from Tucson).
"
Even with a small government there'd be plenty of opportunities for a congresscritter to inside trade.
"
Actually I wasn't thinking of anything so dramatic.
When you go into congress your financial assets go into a box. You can't do very much with them in the box and what little you can do is put up on a website after being vetter by some bored accountant. No more insider trading. This is somewhat constraining I suppose but it's not much to ask of people who want to lay their hands on the reins of power of the country.
"
Not at all. If your assets are in a trust with limited access/control and full transparency for you then you will have a very limited ability to insider trade. Insider trading is generally an issue only in a very limited time window; the markets process their information very quickly. If Jim or Jane Congresscritter can't access their assets but for, say, a trade or two a year and those trades must be fully publicized then they can't insider trade without quickly losing their jobs (because Bob or Barbara Congresscandidate will be watching those couple trades closely for dirt to campaign on).
"
Seems simple enough. People elected to Congress, the Senate or the Presidency should surrender their financial assets into some kind of trust fund system (perhaps with limited and carefully public access to a certain limited number of financial transactions) for the duration of their stint in office.
On “Democracy, technocrats, and the EU”
Not all of them mind. Even most libertarians (except anarchists) endorse state involvement in things like externalities, the commons, force and fraud.
"
Reason is the province of technocrats. Voters don't have to worry about such things.
"
My point was that voters are generally incoherent, eagerly willing to dismiss options A or B and thus, by default, causing option C to occur.
"
At some point, however, the underlying cause of your pain lays you out cold on a street or other public place whereupon people without your democratic consent will cart you off to a hospital where they will endevor to treat the underlying issue.
On “A Legacy Tarnished”
You're welcome.
"
If I misread you I apologize. The only thing I can offer is that the homosexuals are all child predators canard is a hoary and common cliche on the right so I'm used to reacting firmly to it.
The link you've provided though (and it is from one of my countries) merely indicates that it's unlikely that pedophilia is some kind of easily treatable disorder; though for people who indulge I doubt you'd find many liberals who'd say a bullet wasn't an appropriate response.
On “Democracy, technocrats, and the EU”
Well there are several. The Greeks could vote to leave the monetary union (and suffer for it) or they could vote to enact heavy austerity and tax regimes that are not easily evaded (and suffer for that instead). Or, they could vote to keep the monetary union but refuse to accept the austerity and less evadable taxes required and thus empower technocrats by default. They appear to be embracing option C.
On “The League, Here and There and Back Again”
Ah memories, good times.
On “Is Mitt Romney the luckiest guy in the country?”
*Claps*
On “A Legacy Tarnished”
You could use pedophile as well to accurately eliminate the whole Greek aspect but then that'd then be including the massively more common practice of men predating on prepubescent little girls. Please note that I am not suggesting that such men are heterosexuals nor do I assert that the practice of raping little girls is a time honored tradition in religions (Christianity not the least among them) or that it is a behavior the right condones or winks at.
"
I suppose it was inevitable that NAMBLA would be brought up sooner or later on this subject.
"
We do Tom, people can be a little over the top here from time to time so there's little sense getting excessively exercised.
Still, I'm surprised; you've taken to your fainting couch over considerably less than having an entire group of people being accused of being sexual predators of little children. Or the entirety of the left being in the process of legitamizing such.
"
Well it is NARTH after all.
"
I'm afraid I'll have to ask for some citations on that last part Bob. Where are there progressives trying to justify this monstrosity.
"
Bob, the man who perpetrated this crime is not a homosexual, he is a pederast. For a man who puts as much weight as you do in the importance of words and especially The Word I would think you would be more hesitate to abuse them in this manner.
On “Six Quick Post-Debate Observations”
Ultimately this seems pretty moot. Romney seems an effortless shoe in for the nomination and he's clearly playing things safe in the debates (and who in his position wouldn't?).
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.