No, really - part of a company's risk assessment and budget balancing is figuring out how much money to set aside to pay fines, because it's more profitable for them to just pay the fines than follow the goddamn law.
"The U.S. House of Representatives will weigh legislation next week to boost security for Supreme Court justices, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, one day after an armed man was arrested near Brett Kavanaugh's home and charged with attempted murder"
- Reuters is a news organization.
I get it. I do. Violence directed against a Supreme Court Justice is terribad, and the consequences would be enormous.
But it just shows in stark relief, if you're Washington elite and you're under threat, they'll move heaven and earth. If you're a child trying to learn under the continual threat of another school shooting, well, nothing can be done.
Why does SCOTUS get action, and children get thoughts and prayers?
As always Senate Republicans (and their enablers in the Democratic majority on the filibuster) are the problem. The House is also trying to solve the main problem.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
As always Senate Republicans (and their enablers in the Democratic majority on the filibuster) are the problem. The House is also trying to solve the main problem.
Tie the two bills together.
Make Republicans choose between protecting SCOTUS and some low level forms of gun control.
"I'm sorry that Senator Cruz values the ability of fucking assholes to shoot up schools is more important than protecting the Supreme Court."
If this goes through uncontested, I'm going to be pissed at Democrats. This is the opportunity to force SOMETHING through. Way too often Democratic agendas are tied to poison pills, while Republicans get clean bills for the shit they want. Not saying pushing something unrelated is necessary (re-up of the VRA, codifying Roe), but this is about violence.
Don't even have to reach for the moon. Get something. Anything. But a clean "Protect SCOTUS, and only SCOTUS" bill will piss me off.
EDIT - To be clear, I'm expecting to be pissed off.
As always Senate Republicans (and their enablers in the Democratic majority on the filibuster) are the problem. The House is also trying to solve the main problem.
Tie the two bills together.
Make Republicans choose between protecting SCOTUS and some low level forms of gun control.
"I'm sorry that Senator Cruz values the ability of fucking assholes to shoot up schools is more important than protecting the Supreme Court."
If this goes through uncontested, I'm going to be pissed at Democrats. This is the opportunity to force SOMETHING through. Way too often Democratic agendas are tied to poison pills, while Republicans get clean bills for the shit they want. Not saying pushing something unrelated is necessary (re-up of the VRA, codifying Roe), but this is about violence.
Don't even have to reach for the moon. Get something. Anything. But a clean "Protect SCOTUS, and only SCOTUS" bill will piss me off.
EDIT - To be clear, I'm expecting to be pissed off.
Fair. Of course they already passed the gun stuff stand alone yesterday and today (red flag law was separate for some reason).
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Why are they increasing the security when the current security deterred the gun man?
Because the nobles can't feel threatened by the peasants ever.
"Go down, kick ass, and set yourselves up as gods, that's our Prime Directive!"
Hail Hydra
+17
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
+8
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Why are they increasing the security when the current security deterred the gun man?
To send a message that the dirty commoners shall not even dare to come within a mile of their superiors with a firearm, despite that being an """absolute constitutional right""" they're okay with when its someone elses kids smearing blood on themselves to fool a shooter.
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
I guarantee a non-zero amount of people have thought it through and decided flipping that coin might be worth it if things get bad enough.
"Go down, kick ass, and set yourselves up as gods, that's our Prime Directive!"
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
I guarantee a non-zero amount of people have thought it through and decided flipping that coin might be worth it if things get bad enough.
Someone had plans to kill Sotomayor a while back but that didn't get much press even though that person actually killed a different judge.
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
And Kavanaugh wouldn't even actually flip the majority to Liberals.
Someone literally shot a congresswoman in the head in 2011 and someone shot at a congressional baseball game, wounding multiple people, in 2017. Congress didn't do anything. But protests outside SCOTUS houses and someone deciding "Naw, I don't think I'll do this" after seeing existing security both get emergency bills pushed through?
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
I guarantee a non-zero amount of people have thought it through and decided flipping that coin might be worth it if things get bad enough.
It’s hilarious that our side is worried about a Civil War breaking out if some extremist kills one Republican in power while Republicans just openly try to end democracy in this country and support decisions by said individual that will result in the countless deaths of innocent women
Wait, not hilarious, what’s the word I’m looking for…
(Seriously, Pelosi and fellow Democrats in Congress, get a spine, thanks)
+16
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
We've been living in a growing firearm epidemic for 20 years and I'm supposed to be more scared that 2/3 of the current Court is enabling their own demise from it?
The degree to which they are just flatly stating that they’re striving to be seen as Reagan-era Republicans is concerning but not the least bit surprising. It's been an undercurrent for awhile, and the only justification for their messaging strategies, but before now it's just always been kind of implied
Someone literally shot a congresswoman in the head in 2011 and someone shot at a congressional baseball game, wounding multiple people, in 2017. Congress didn't do anything. But protests outside SCOTUS houses and someone deciding "Naw, I don't think I'll do this" after seeing existing security both get emergency bills pushed through?
The difference here is pretty easy to see: did Republicans want to support the reaction to the incident? Cause if Republicans actually wanna do something, shit can happen. If Republicans don't wanna do something, mostly nothing is gonna happen.
As long as one of the two parties doesn't want something to happen, it's hard for it to happen. Even the recent Senate bill on the SCOTUS security just sat around going nowhere cause Pelosi didn't want to do it.
Republicans don't want to pass basically any kind of gun control regulation so even members of congress getting shot in the head don't lead to much of anything changing.
A gunman shot a congresswoman in the head over a decade ago and no one did shit.
No one will do shit if a sitting SCOTUS justice gets shot.
Except the Democrats, they'll probably pass some new dumb bullshit Patriot Act
A congresswoman isn't really comparable to a sitting Supreme Court Justice. It would be more like assassinating 49 House members or 11 Senators simultaneously on the same night.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I think everyone is terrified that the first one of the leadership/SCOTUS to actually get assassinated means that things go from a little light insurrection to Civil War.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
We've been living in a growing firearm epidemic for 20 years and I'm supposed to be more scared that 2/3 of the current Court is enabling their own demise from it?
I mean, I'm talking about the equivalent of the Troubles or so.
A gunman shot a congresswoman in the head over a decade ago and no one did shit.
No one will do shit if a sitting SCOTUS justice gets shot.
Except the Democrats, they'll probably pass some new dumb bullshit Patriot Act
A congresswoman isn't really comparable to a sitting Supreme Court Justice. It would be more like assassinating 49 House members or 11 Senators simultaneously on the same night.
Assuming, that this is the opposition party to whoever is in the WH.
Probably a bit higher in both really. Congress is probably a bit more likely slow down things, so that whoever is in power doesn't look like they are taking advantage of things, should that body count give them a majority or make it easier for them to pass their agenda because of less no votes. Then there is the whole, thing where in most cases they'll send someone from the same party in after the special election or appointment to fill the vacancy. SCOTUS probably doesn't delay things and whoever is in the WH likely gets to fill that seat with someone that will be there for decades.
I mean, even if Kavanaugh being replaced with someone that isn't a shitty federalist, wouldn't change the majority. It likely would have a profound effect on a number of cases. For one, Roberts gets to be the tie breaker again and do shit that papers over the real issues with the court right now.
A gunman shot a congresswoman in the head over a decade ago and no one did shit.
No one will do shit if a sitting SCOTUS justice gets shot.
Except the Democrats, they'll probably pass some new dumb bullshit Patriot Act
Oh no the Republicans will take this opportunity to just stop whatever minimal pretense they have left they aren't fascists and go full blown brownshirt in public.
The first major overhaul of regulations governing U.S. container trades since 1998 was easily approved by Congress on Monday and President Biden is expected to sign the bill into law shortly.
Among the bill’s provisions, it will:
-Prohibit ocean carriers from unreasonably declining shipping opportunities for U.S. exports, as determined by the FMC in new required rulemaking.
-Shift the burden of proof regarding the reasonableness of detention or demurrage charges from the invoiced party to the ocean carrier.
-Require ocean common carriers to report to the FMC each calendar quarter on total import/export tonnage and twenty-foot equivalent units (loaded/empty) per vessel that call ports in the United States.
-Establish new authority for the FMC to register shipping exchanges.
-Study intermodal chassis pool best practices to deal with chassis supply and positioning issues.
-The legislation boosts the FMC’s funding levels from $32.9 million in 2022 to $49.2 million in 2025 – a 50% increase over four years – to help the agency increase the staff needed for its expanded oversight of the container trades.
the stuff that business and capital wants, that gets done.
It's been ~5 years in the making from Congressional negotiations. They just finally managed to get the last bits finalized. Same as how the Music Modernization Act and Marakesh that got passed and implemented under Trump, but which he had no hand in.
Also, the businesses and capital behind ocean going freight carriers very much did not want this. They wanted to keep screwing people.
the stuff that business and capital wants, that gets done.
It's been ~5 years in the making from Congressional negotiations. They just finally managed to get the last bits finalized. Same as how the Music Modernization Act and Marakesh that got passed and implemented under Trump, but which he had no hand in.
Also, the businesses and capital behind ocean going freight carriers very much did not want this. They wanted to keep screwing people.
Right, but people have been murdering children with AR-15 rifles for decades
+1
Options
MonwynApathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime.A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered Userregular
Considering the steamship lines that are being regulated by this and who very much do not want it "not capital" is so bizarre that it transcends funny and wraps around to disconcerting
Does that bill fix that stupid fucking Puerto Rico issue? Or has that already been resolved? I haven't checked since the last time a fix was suggested and failed (I think it was a JOliver segment?).
I'm referring to the requirement that foreign ships cannot dock at Puerto Rico, that all cargo had to go to a mainland port, be offloaded, and put on a different ship (and vise versa for PR goods outbound). Significantly increasing the costs of importing or exporting.
This is what I heard from the guys I know in the industry:
I think it's all about the price gouging going on in the industry. There's 8 or 9 mega companies that run containerized shipping and they've been gouging on freight rates for years. Meanwhile our US fleet gets smaller and smaller. I don't know how much they can actually do about controlling those rates, but the bill looks like it's in the right place and supports the Jones Act, we can and should use any leverage on other companies to keep it fair and not give them.
MonwynApathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime.A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered Userregular
Like for context Maersk did $66b USD in revenue last year and just got told that they have to justify pricing container rental (which is basically what demurrage is) at $1k+/day to the federal government or they can fuck off with that charge
Considering the steamship lines that are being regulated by this and who very much do not want it "not capital" is so bizarre that it transcends funny and wraps around to disconcerting
If your conception is that Republicans and democrats are a conspiracy of capital against the people then it follows naturally that anything they succeed at doing must be because “capital” wants it.
Rather than like, shipping regulation just not being a culture war issue.
the stuff that business and capital wants, that gets done.
It's been ~5 years in the making from Congressional negotiations. They just finally managed to get the last bits finalized. Same as how the Music Modernization Act and Marakesh that got passed and implemented under Trump, but which he had no hand in.
Also, the businesses and capital behind ocean going freight carriers very much did not want this. They wanted to keep screwing people.
Right, but people have been murdering children with AR-15 rifles for decades
You know legislatures can go through multiple bills at once right?
And that this passage does not prevent other bills from passing?
And there isn't a magic number of bills that can be passed?
Oh and the reason gun control can't be passed is 50 senators with Rs next to their names.
the stuff that business and capital wants, that gets done.
It's been ~5 years in the making from Congressional negotiations. They just finally managed to get the last bits finalized. Same as how the Music Modernization Act and Marakesh that got passed and implemented under Trump, but which he had no hand in.
Also, the businesses and capital behind ocean going freight carriers very much did not want this. They wanted to keep screwing people.
Right, but people have been murdering children with AR-15 rifles for decades
You know legislatures can go through multiple bills at once right?
And that this passage does not prevent other bills from passing?
And there isn't a magic number of bills that can be passed?
Oh and the reason gun control can't be passed is 50 senators with Rs next to their names.
Yes, I know all of those things, I'm not a four year old
the stuff that business and capital wants, that gets done.
It's been ~5 years in the making from Congressional negotiations. They just finally managed to get the last bits finalized. Same as how the Music Modernization Act and Marakesh that got passed and implemented under Trump, but which he had no hand in.
Also, the businesses and capital behind ocean going freight carriers very much did not want this. They wanted to keep screwing people.
Right, but people have been murdering children with AR-15 rifles for decades
This is whataboutism, which is also super rude and patronizing.
Posts
We should arrest the entire company.
And by vulnerable, I mean SCOTUS.
"The U.S. House of Representatives will weigh legislation next week to boost security for Supreme Court justices, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, one day after an armed man was arrested near Brett Kavanaugh's home and charged with attempted murder"
- Reuters is a news organization.
I get it. I do. Violence directed against a Supreme Court Justice is terribad, and the consequences would be enormous.
But it just shows in stark relief, if you're Washington elite and you're under threat, they'll move heaven and earth. If you're a child trying to learn under the continual threat of another school shooting, well, nothing can be done.
Why does SCOTUS get action, and children get thoughts and prayers?
We know why. And it's fucking sickening.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Tie the two bills together.
Make Republicans choose between protecting SCOTUS and some low level forms of gun control.
"I'm sorry that Senator Cruz values the ability of fucking assholes to shoot up schools is more important than protecting the Supreme Court."
If this goes through uncontested, I'm going to be pissed at Democrats. This is the opportunity to force SOMETHING through. Way too often Democratic agendas are tied to poison pills, while Republicans get clean bills for the shit they want. Not saying pushing something unrelated is necessary (re-up of the VRA, codifying Roe), but this is about violence.
Don't even have to reach for the moon. Get something. Anything. But a clean "Protect SCOTUS, and only SCOTUS" bill will piss me off.
EDIT - To be clear, I'm expecting to be pissed off.
Fair. Of course they already passed the gun stuff stand alone yesterday and today (red flag law was separate for some reason).
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
Because the nobles can't feel threatened by the peasants ever.
To send a message that the dirty commoners shall not even dare to come within a mile of their superiors with a firearm, despite that being an """absolute constitutional right""" they're okay with when its someone elses kids smearing blood on themselves to fool a shooter.
Yeah I dunno if people have really thought through what happens if a Justice is assassinated. Especially of the party opposite the president. It would be REALLY REALLY bad.
I guarantee a non-zero amount of people have thought it through and decided flipping that coin might be worth it if things get bad enough.
Someone had plans to kill Sotomayor a while back but that didn't get much press even though that person actually killed a different judge.
And Kavanaugh wouldn't even actually flip the majority to Liberals.
It’s hilarious that our side is worried about a Civil War breaking out if some extremist kills one Republican in power while Republicans just openly try to end democracy in this country and support decisions by said individual that will result in the countless deaths of innocent women
Wait, not hilarious, what’s the word I’m looking for…
(Seriously, Pelosi and fellow Democrats in Congress, get a spine, thanks)
We've been living in a growing firearm epidemic for 20 years and I'm supposed to be more scared that 2/3 of the current Court is enabling their own demise from it?
No one will do shit if a sitting SCOTUS justice gets shot.
Except the Democrats, they'll probably pass some new dumb bullshit Patriot Act
The difference here is pretty easy to see: did Republicans want to support the reaction to the incident? Cause if Republicans actually wanna do something, shit can happen. If Republicans don't wanna do something, mostly nothing is gonna happen.
As long as one of the two parties doesn't want something to happen, it's hard for it to happen. Even the recent Senate bill on the SCOTUS security just sat around going nowhere cause Pelosi didn't want to do it.
Republicans don't want to pass basically any kind of gun control regulation so even members of congress getting shot in the head don't lead to much of anything changing.
A congresswoman isn't really comparable to a sitting Supreme Court Justice. It would be more like assassinating 49 House members or 11 Senators simultaneously on the same night.
I mean, I'm talking about the equivalent of the Troubles or so.
Assuming, that this is the opposition party to whoever is in the WH.
Probably a bit higher in both really. Congress is probably a bit more likely slow down things, so that whoever is in power doesn't look like they are taking advantage of things, should that body count give them a majority or make it easier for them to pass their agenda because of less no votes. Then there is the whole, thing where in most cases they'll send someone from the same party in after the special election or appointment to fill the vacancy. SCOTUS probably doesn't delay things and whoever is in the WH likely gets to fill that seat with someone that will be there for decades.
I mean, even if Kavanaugh being replaced with someone that isn't a shitty federalist, wouldn't change the majority. It likely would have a profound effect on a number of cases. For one, Roberts gets to be the tie breaker again and do shit that papers over the real issues with the court right now.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Oh no the Republicans will take this opportunity to just stop whatever minimal pretense they have left they aren't fascists and go full blown brownshirt in public.
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/congress-passes-ocean-shipping-reform-biden-plans-to-sign-soon
It's been ~5 years in the making from Congressional negotiations. They just finally managed to get the last bits finalized. Same as how the Music Modernization Act and Marakesh that got passed and implemented under Trump, but which he had no hand in.
Also, the businesses and capital behind ocean going freight carriers very much did not want this. They wanted to keep screwing people.
Right, but people have been murdering children with AR-15 rifles for decades
I'm referring to the requirement that foreign ships cannot dock at Puerto Rico, that all cargo had to go to a mainland port, be offloaded, and put on a different ship (and vise versa for PR goods outbound). Significantly increasing the costs of importing or exporting.
It was such a stupid thing.
If your conception is that Republicans and democrats are a conspiracy of capital against the people then it follows naturally that anything they succeed at doing must be because “capital” wants it.
Rather than like, shipping regulation just not being a culture war issue.
You know legislatures can go through multiple bills at once right?
And that this passage does not prevent other bills from passing?
And there isn't a magic number of bills that can be passed?
Oh and the reason gun control can't be passed is 50 senators with Rs next to their names.
Yes, I know all of those things, I'm not a four year old
This is super rude and patronizing.
This is whataboutism, which is also super rude and patronizing.
I was expressing frustration with the apparent priorities of Congress representatives and I guess the voting public