Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
... Austerity measure?
Okay, this is going to need to be explained to me. The US is still going to spend ~$20 Billion more this year, than it did last year(assuming the budget is ever approved). And that's including the cuts involved with the sequestration...
Yes agencies are shelving things they were planning to do, and cutting expendetures... But that's because they were planning on getting the increase in spending the sequestration took away and are now having to backpedal because they didn't expect something passed two years ago to take effect....
If sequestration can be considered Austerity, then by the same logic not getting a pay raise any given year is, essentially, a pay-cut.
... So that shit's going to need to be explained before I buy the whole "austerity measure" bit.
If wages had kept up with inflation over the last several decades, minimum wage would be over $20/hr. The fact that it's not but costs of living have skyrocketed to demand such in nearly any large city is, yes, for all practical purposes a pay cut.
That's not even counting how many companies slash hours (and thus how much employees can get paid in a day) to dodge healthcare requirements.
edited 4th Mar '13 8:44:41 PM by Pykrete
Populations have increased. Aging populations have increased. Health care costs have increased. Energy costs have increased. Consumer populations around the world (people who can spend money on stuff) have increased, and thus overall business transactions have increased. Yes, there is more stuff to spend money on.
If you've a problem with that, well, us crazy hippies in the sustainability movement have been suggesting alternatives to our economic model for decades now.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Look at it this way. You're working to feed a number of people. You have a budget of 100 dollars food costs 5 dollars a person and you have 20 people to feed. The first year, you're fine. The next year, you have a budget of 110 dollars, but 23 people to feed and that same food is 6 dollars. You would need 138 dollars to feed them all. Even to feed the original 20 you would need 120. Even though you have a bigger budget, you're going to have to cut services.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickAppeals Court Rules Arizona Day Labor Solicitation Law Is Unconstitutional
An odd thought just occurred to me:
Currently in the United States, a few states recognize gay marriage, while most states and the federal government do not. However, as far as I'm aware, polygamy is universally illegal in the U.S. So what happens if, in a state that allows gay marriage, Bob marries Alan, then later, in a state that doesn't recognize gay marriage, Bob marries Alice without divorcing Alan first?
Would that count as polygamy? While Bob's married to two people, the state he got the second marriage in doesn't acknoweledge his first marriage as being a real marriage. So would he be safe from polygamy charges as long as he doesn't go back to a state that recognizes gay marriage, or could he be extradited over something like that?
This is where my mind goes at one in the morning.
edited 4th Mar '13 11:31:19 PM by RavenWilder
Not recognizing the marriage just means that you don't get all the tax breaks and so on. You'd still have to sign divorce papers, and for legal purposes the husband could sue the bigamist. The fact that they got legally married in a place where that's legal would most likely take precedence as far as the law goes. I think that's how it would go, anyway.
edited 4th Mar '13 11:22:41 PM by AceofSpades
@Raven: I think (IANAL of course) he'd be safe under the state's bigamy laws, but polygamy laws may apply depending on the exact wording of the state's polygamy statute.
Legally speaking, bigamy (normally a misdemeanor) is having multiple spouses, while polygamy (felony) is having multiple spouses "in purported exercise of a plural marriage." Essentially, the latter means that you're not only in a polygamous relationship, but that you're "righteously flaunting it."
edited 5th Mar '13 12:52:35 AM by Ramidel
Meaning, the spouses of the bigamist do not know their partner is married to someone else. Polygamy occurs when the spouses know, and approve or accept, that their partner is married to others.
Actually, the difference is more like bigamy is marrying after one has broken up with one's spouse, but before divorcing, and polygamy is marrying without breaking up with one's spouse.
Both of which I object to being illegal, as long as it is consensual with all involved.
edited 5th Mar '13 3:31:43 AM by deathpigeon
Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) blasts GOP proposals to raise Medicare age
STFU Conservatives
also linked it.
EDIT UPDATE: FUCK. That black gay mayoral candidate? He was beaten, set on fire, and dumped near a river.
edited 5th Mar '13 2:22:20 PM by RadicalTaoist
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Edit: And we already have a thread for this, so I guess this post is kind of redundant. Sorry about that.
edited 5th Mar '13 2:40:10 PM by Ekuran

Only investment in town? Why can't they invest internationally?!