I'm not as sensitive about it as it sounds like Burt is, I've just never to my knowledge had it happen to me.
To the extent I've personally interacted with attorneys who have CJ's anecdote is representative. I don't know what the official protocol is but I'm doubtful the commission in Maryland would even contact you about something like that, were it to be filed, but if someone raised enough ruckus who knows?
Which isn't to say no complaints are ever merited. However I'm pretty confident we've already spent more time on this than it's worth, maybe even more time than Letitia James will.
A lot of this comes down to whether or not one believes that womens' equality depends in some part on separate accommodations for situations where women are particularly vulnerable.
Always worth remembering that one of the (many) ways that a lot of Muslim countries enforce a second class status on women is simply by not having womens' accommodations in places where they aren't wanted or allowed. In light of this debate I've found it useful to occasionally ask myself 'would a woman really be allowed here if there weren't separate bathrooms'? Sometimes the answer is clearly yes but a lot of times it isn't so clear cut. Ponder this next time you're at a big sporting event or a bar or some other place with a lot of drunken or rowdy behavior.
I had a longer reply that I somehow lost. I'd say it's consistent with the standard for a complaint in the sense that there is no standard for comaints. Otherwise I'd just cosign on what Burt said. Can't ever totally rule anything out but my money is on a troll unlikely to go anywhere.
In Maryland they are very easy to file. You can download a form and put it in the mail.
They go to the grievance commission, which then decides whether to take any action. That could include a petition for disbarment or some other sanction.
The commission is made up of, you guessed it... lawyers! So there is kind of a self audit aspect, not dissimilar to a physician malpractice committee made up of doctors.
In my experience you have to have done something pretty bad for it to go anywhere, usually in a way that is harming the public (think misuse of client funds, criminal activity involving your practice, that kind of thing). No idea how this is done in NY but sounds more like a dumb stunt unlikely to result in anything.
I mostly agree, with the maybe quibble that people would get mad about losing certain pieces of legacy infrastructure, even where they harbor some pretty serious gripes about it.
To bring us full circle my whole point about tent widening was that the tent needs to be big enough to allow people to say things like what you just did without immediately being run off.
Yea I see a lot of positive (and some negative) press but I'm struggling to find anything that lays out a summary of how it works.
Also important context might be that this discussion starter as being about tent widening for the Democrats not the merits of a particular policy, childcare or otherwise.
Heh I mean my position currently is that we probably can't afford it under current constraints and even if we could the politics of the concept aren't so clear cut.
However I believe the point of comparison is Canada.
A few minutes of googling suggests that the federal government transfers money to the provinces who then spend it on both subsidies to existing centers and creation of new centers. No idea what strings are attached re: enforcement or other issues but the mission at least does seem to be focused on childcare, not jobs or other things ($10 per day is the mantra).
It's funny how times change. My parents did the old lady down the street method for me and my brothers (cousins got in on it too), with some assistance from grandparents. My wife and I of course paid an arm and a leg for a high end center for my oldest and currently pay slightly less for a center run by our parish for our little guy. Many of my friends with kids have done ad hoc arrangements involving grandparents and in homes, all college educated people, though pretty sure my wife and I are on the higher end of the earnings spectrum of our social circle.
Anyway, and to reiterate, my point isn't that this is inherently a bad idea. My point is that working class people are not necessarily as easy to buy off with benefits as those of us in a higher rung on the ladder might think. I suspect things like cost of goods or ability to get a car note on decent terms are much more front of mind than trying to emulate the European (or even Canadian) welfare state. If I was in charge my priority on this front, particularly in this economic environment, would be improving the systems we have, primarily by making them less of a patchwork.
I am not worried about whether the moms in question are the ones with 'in this house' signs or the ones who pose with Instagram face and a shotgun.
But otherwise this is closer to the mark. It's also not only about lifestyle choices but about trade offs. The high income family in the 90th percentile is going to pay $30k in taxes or a few grand less out of pocket to a private provider, no matter what. The 58th percentile family may take it or leave it even if the tax burden on them only ends up being $5k. That $5k in the pocket may be important enough to them they'd rather make do with ad hoc arrangements. Made up numbers but you see my point.
Additionally as you note you've got the means testing and other kinds of issues. I don't think a lot of the people who wonder why the US can't just be more like France understand that in France they'd pay at least 1.5 the taxes (or more) and depending on their circumstances might not actually get the daycare. The German version of this system took a hit a few years ago because it was overwhelmed and there was a daycare worker strike as a result. My brother's wife worked for the state system but ultimately went back to school because she was sick of the issues with it.
None of this is to say that some form of state supported childcare is a bad idea. It may well math out, trade offs may be worth it. All I'm saying is that the case for it in the eyes of a working or middle middle class person may not be so self evident and it's a mistake to assume it is.
As I said I don't have a problem with them doing their thing. Like North I actually have a fondness for AOC, Bernie too.
I'm also not saying I've done the math on daycare, I'm saying it needs to be ok to say it isn't worth it. Right now the tenuous position the Democrats have been trying to hold is no taxes on households making under ~400k. You can't maintain the welfare state we have on that much less expand it. When you look at countries that have things like that they fund it with taxes way down the income ladder, plus VATs. Pivoting might mean understanding that if you ask households in the median if they'd give an extra few thousand dollars for subsidized daycare (or whatever), with high earners covering the majority of the cost, a lot of them might still say no, or not really care one way or the other, and not just among the usual suspects either.
Eh I'm actually with Saul that I don't see any issue with AOC and Bernie doing their things. I doubt it's moving the needle in any significant way but someone has to be the furthest left person in the coalition and the electoral fortunes of the party aren't going to rise or fail around what that person does.
The important difference isn't the left flank, it's the right flank. If the Democrats want to win the Senate, much less have 60 votes again, they need to be open to having members in good standing that think certain ideas and attitudes within the party are kind of bullsh*t. And I stress that they actually need to believe it as opposed to just saying it sometimes when it's convenient.
Take something that seems like it shouldn't be controversial, like subsidized daycare (I bring it up because Saul mentioned it). There are a lot of people who you would think would favor it but you find they don't because in practice its upper middle class welfare, or it just doesn't rate as a priority that outweighs other more pressing needs. That perspective has to be allowed.
Yea I'm going to tell you there's no way you can operate with that mentality and anyone who has it needs to abandon it post haste. Further I'd say any Democratic leader that thinks that way should be run out of his or her office.
I know it's rude to say it but we're about 15 minutes away from most 'hispanic' people being white (enough anyway). The way assimilation works in this country there will not be a time this century where the plurality of the electorate is not 'white,' even if today's geriatrics would not necessarily see it as such. What you're effectively talking about is pre-emptively conceding every jurisdiction that does not touch an ocean, plus several that do. If that's where we are then we might as well wind down the party and start something new.
I think it's helpful that Trump's approval is catering. Hopefully it gets even worse and will embolden other politicians and institutions in taking stands against him where they can.
However Yglesias had some cold water this morning, appears to be unpaywalled.
To the extent Trump can be checked by thermostatic forces and repeated unforced errors I'll of course take it but there is still a huge strategic task of competing for Senate seats that no one seems to be preparing for.
I don't think the inclination to shake up an aging establishment is wrong. The party needs it. What I question is whether David Hogg has the political acumen to do it in a way that actually helps the party. It's easy to imagine a situation where he replaces a bunch of risk averse dinosaurs (good) with leaders so immersed in deep blue, alienating culture issues that the results is a net detriment to the brand nationally (bad).
Congrats on achieving final completion of another of the offspring.
Also you better start stocking up on fireworks. No backyard wedding is complete without them, and the small element of danger they add to the occasion.
That's hilarious about your coworker and I respect her resistance to the arbitrary demands of your corporate overlords.
My weekend, as usual this time of year, is going to be wall to wall children's sports. Hopefully I don't die of allergies. Everything around here is covered in a yellowish green and I need Zyrtec just to keep my eyes open.
However I did do something weekend-y last night and saw the Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii currently being screened at various imax theaters across the country. I have to say it was awesome and totally worth the price of admission. Sound quality was just incredible. It is the way Pink Floyd is meant to be listened to so any fans should check it out. Also depending on legal status in your state a little extra tap from your local dispensary will make it even cooler, not that I personally would know anything about that.
With many of these things you could come up with a rational explanation and hypothetical approach to consolidation of government functions that would make sense. However I think it is fair to notice that is not what's been happening. Instead it's a haphazard shutting off of functions and firing people (sans Congressional mandate, naturally) without thinking through ramifications, right up until they're trying to re-hire people they canned a few weeks prior.
Heh I think this one has more of a 'News of the Weird' or morning radio '.. and in other news!' flavor to it, not something that's going to influence voting.
As bad as the disease riddled children are I see it as an overall slower moving, easier to correct catastrophe than a strategic compromise of national security that might not be repairable. I also have to think that once parents start getting a taste of what letting these diseases back into the population looks like they will start to correct. Right? Right?? Ugh.
But look its terrible company to be in and if someone wants to give RFK Jr. the edge far be it from me to argue about it.
I was just about to post about this. Dude is a disaster. He may take the prize for worst Trump appointment, which is quite the achievement given that the list also includes RFK Jr.
On “Open Mic for the Week of 4/28/2025”
I'm not as sensitive about it as it sounds like Burt is, I've just never to my knowledge had it happen to me.
To the extent I've personally interacted with attorneys who have CJ's anecdote is representative. I don't know what the official protocol is but I'm doubtful the commission in Maryland would even contact you about something like that, were it to be filed, but if someone raised enough ruckus who knows?
Which isn't to say no complaints are ever merited. However I'm pretty confident we've already spent more time on this than it's worth, maybe even more time than Letitia James will.
On “Cats Are The Best: An Annotated List”
I prefer dogs, not least because you can eventually train them not to poop in your house.
On “Gender Critical: Legally Defining Sex”
A lot of this comes down to whether or not one believes that womens' equality depends in some part on separate accommodations for situations where women are particularly vulnerable.
Always worth remembering that one of the (many) ways that a lot of Muslim countries enforce a second class status on women is simply by not having womens' accommodations in places where they aren't wanted or allowed. In light of this debate I've found it useful to occasionally ask myself 'would a woman really be allowed here if there weren't separate bathrooms'? Sometimes the answer is clearly yes but a lot of times it isn't so clear cut. Ponder this next time you're at a big sporting event or a bar or some other place with a lot of drunken or rowdy behavior.
On “Open Mic for the Week of 4/28/2025”
I had a longer reply that I somehow lost. I'd say it's consistent with the standard for a complaint in the sense that there is no standard for comaints. Otherwise I'd just cosign on what Burt said. Can't ever totally rule anything out but my money is on a troll unlikely to go anywhere.
"
In Maryland they are very easy to file. You can download a form and put it in the mail.
They go to the grievance commission, which then decides whether to take any action. That could include a petition for disbarment or some other sanction.
The commission is made up of, you guessed it... lawyers! So there is kind of a self audit aspect, not dissimilar to a physician malpractice committee made up of doctors.
In my experience you have to have done something pretty bad for it to go anywhere, usually in a way that is harming the public (think misuse of client funds, criminal activity involving your practice, that kind of thing). No idea how this is done in NY but sounds more like a dumb stunt unlikely to result in anything.
"
I mostly agree, with the maybe quibble that people would get mad about losing certain pieces of legacy infrastructure, even where they harbor some pretty serious gripes about it.
To bring us full circle my whole point about tent widening was that the tent needs to be big enough to allow people to say things like what you just did without immediately being run off.
"
Yea I see a lot of positive (and some negative) press but I'm struggling to find anything that lays out a summary of how it works.
Also important context might be that this discussion starter as being about tent widening for the Democrats not the merits of a particular policy, childcare or otherwise.
"
Heh I mean my position currently is that we probably can't afford it under current constraints and even if we could the politics of the concept aren't so clear cut.
However I believe the point of comparison is Canada.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_care_in_Canada
A few minutes of googling suggests that the federal government transfers money to the provinces who then spend it on both subsidies to existing centers and creation of new centers. No idea what strings are attached re: enforcement or other issues but the mission at least does seem to be focused on childcare, not jobs or other things ($10 per day is the mantra).
"
It's funny how times change. My parents did the old lady down the street method for me and my brothers (cousins got in on it too), with some assistance from grandparents. My wife and I of course paid an arm and a leg for a high end center for my oldest and currently pay slightly less for a center run by our parish for our little guy. Many of my friends with kids have done ad hoc arrangements involving grandparents and in homes, all college educated people, though pretty sure my wife and I are on the higher end of the earnings spectrum of our social circle.
Anyway, and to reiterate, my point isn't that this is inherently a bad idea. My point is that working class people are not necessarily as easy to buy off with benefits as those of us in a higher rung on the ladder might think. I suspect things like cost of goods or ability to get a car note on decent terms are much more front of mind than trying to emulate the European (or even Canadian) welfare state. If I was in charge my priority on this front, particularly in this economic environment, would be improving the systems we have, primarily by making them less of a patchwork.
"
I am not worried about whether the moms in question are the ones with 'in this house' signs or the ones who pose with Instagram face and a shotgun.
But otherwise this is closer to the mark. It's also not only about lifestyle choices but about trade offs. The high income family in the 90th percentile is going to pay $30k in taxes or a few grand less out of pocket to a private provider, no matter what. The 58th percentile family may take it or leave it even if the tax burden on them only ends up being $5k. That $5k in the pocket may be important enough to them they'd rather make do with ad hoc arrangements. Made up numbers but you see my point.
Additionally as you note you've got the means testing and other kinds of issues. I don't think a lot of the people who wonder why the US can't just be more like France understand that in France they'd pay at least 1.5 the taxes (or more) and depending on their circumstances might not actually get the daycare. The German version of this system took a hit a few years ago because it was overwhelmed and there was a daycare worker strike as a result. My brother's wife worked for the state system but ultimately went back to school because she was sick of the issues with it.
None of this is to say that some form of state supported childcare is a bad idea. It may well math out, trade offs may be worth it. All I'm saying is that the case for it in the eyes of a working or middle middle class person may not be so self evident and it's a mistake to assume it is.
"
As I said I don't have a problem with them doing their thing. Like North I actually have a fondness for AOC, Bernie too.
I'm also not saying I've done the math on daycare, I'm saying it needs to be ok to say it isn't worth it. Right now the tenuous position the Democrats have been trying to hold is no taxes on households making under ~400k. You can't maintain the welfare state we have on that much less expand it. When you look at countries that have things like that they fund it with taxes way down the income ladder, plus VATs. Pivoting might mean understanding that if you ask households in the median if they'd give an extra few thousand dollars for subsidized daycare (or whatever), with high earners covering the majority of the cost, a lot of them might still say no, or not really care one way or the other, and not just among the usual suspects either.
"
Eh I'm actually with Saul that I don't see any issue with AOC and Bernie doing their things. I doubt it's moving the needle in any significant way but someone has to be the furthest left person in the coalition and the electoral fortunes of the party aren't going to rise or fail around what that person does.
The important difference isn't the left flank, it's the right flank. If the Democrats want to win the Senate, much less have 60 votes again, they need to be open to having members in good standing that think certain ideas and attitudes within the party are kind of bullsh*t. And I stress that they actually need to believe it as opposed to just saying it sometimes when it's convenient.
Take something that seems like it shouldn't be controversial, like subsidized daycare (I bring it up because Saul mentioned it). There are a lot of people who you would think would favor it but you find they don't because in practice its upper middle class welfare, or it just doesn't rate as a priority that outweighs other more pressing needs. That perspective has to be allowed.
"
He voted to confirm all D judicial nominees and ultimately was a yes on the big pieces of legislation. Not sure what else we're supposed to ask.
"
Yea I'm going to tell you there's no way you can operate with that mentality and anyone who has it needs to abandon it post haste. Further I'd say any Democratic leader that thinks that way should be run out of his or her office.
I know it's rude to say it but we're about 15 minutes away from most 'hispanic' people being white (enough anyway). The way assimilation works in this country there will not be a time this century where the plurality of the electorate is not 'white,' even if today's geriatrics would not necessarily see it as such. What you're effectively talking about is pre-emptively conceding every jurisdiction that does not touch an ocean, plus several that do. If that's where we are then we might as well wind down the party and start something new.
"
Yea hard to imagine anywhere in the deep south being put into play any time soon but they have to find a way with some of the others.
"
I think it's helpful that Trump's approval is catering. Hopefully it gets even worse and will embolden other politicians and institutions in taking stands against him where they can.
However Yglesias had some cold water this morning, appears to be unpaywalled.
https://www.slowboring.com/p/whats-the-plan-to-win-the-senate
To the extent Trump can be checked by thermostatic forces and repeated unforced errors I'll of course take it but there is still a huge strategic task of competing for Senate seats that no one seems to be preparing for.
On “Open Mic for the Week of 4/21/2025”
I don't think the inclination to shake up an aging establishment is wrong. The party needs it. What I question is whether David Hogg has the political acumen to do it in a way that actually helps the party. It's easy to imagine a situation where he replaces a bunch of risk averse dinosaurs (good) with leaders so immersed in deep blue, alienating culture issues that the results is a net detriment to the brand nationally (bad).
On “Weekend Plans Post: Caffeine Rituals”
Congrats on achieving final completion of another of the offspring.
Also you better start stocking up on fireworks. No backyard wedding is complete without them, and the small element of danger they add to the occasion.
"
That's hilarious about your coworker and I respect her resistance to the arbitrary demands of your corporate overlords.
My weekend, as usual this time of year, is going to be wall to wall children's sports. Hopefully I don't die of allergies. Everything around here is covered in a yellowish green and I need Zyrtec just to keep my eyes open.
However I did do something weekend-y last night and saw the Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii currently being screened at various imax theaters across the country. I have to say it was awesome and totally worth the price of admission. Sound quality was just incredible. It is the way Pink Floyd is meant to be listened to so any fans should check it out. Also depending on legal status in your state a little extra tap from your local dispensary will make it even cooler, not that I personally would know anything about that.
On “US Department of Education Announces that it is Restarting Loan Collection”
With many of these things you could come up with a rational explanation and hypothetical approach to consolidation of government functions that would make sense. However I think it is fair to notice that is not what's been happening. Instead it's a haphazard shutting off of functions and firing people (sans Congressional mandate, naturally) without thinking through ramifications, right up until they're trying to re-hire people they canned a few weeks prior.
"
I wouldn't say I'm surprised exactly but the failure and/or inability to think things through at a basic level is impressive.
On “Open Mic for the Week of 4/21/2025”
Heh I think this one has more of a 'News of the Weird' or morning radio '.. and in other news!' flavor to it, not something that's going to influence voting.
"
As bad as the disease riddled children are I see it as an overall slower moving, easier to correct catastrophe than a strategic compromise of national security that might not be repairable. I also have to think that once parents start getting a taste of what letting these diseases back into the population looks like they will start to correct. Right? Right?? Ugh.
But look its terrible company to be in and if someone wants to give RFK Jr. the edge far be it from me to argue about it.
"
I was just about to post about this. Dude is a disaster. He may take the prize for worst Trump appointment, which is quite the achievement given that the list also includes RFK Jr.
On “Open Mic for the Week of 4/14/2025”
Because orderliness and rule of law inherently favors liberals over fascists.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.