Glassnoser
2d ago
The side that believes more strongly in its case will pay all the legal fees.
Glassnoser
8d ago
I didn't say he wasn't a hack because he's popular. I said him not liking Trump doesn't make him a hack.
You admittedly knew nothing about but called him a hack. If you want to know if he's a hack, you need to become familiar with him. You're currently in no place to be making the judgment, which shouldn't be based on your impression from a two second Google search.
He's not even an economist at the University of Chicago.
Glassnoser
8d ago
I think you're inflating congestion with all the other problems caused by there being too many cars. If the goal is to reduce traffic, then it shouldn't be called congestion pricing. Congestion pricing is for reducing congestion, which increases traffic because it unclogs the roads.
Reducing traffic beyond the point needed to eliminate congestion because you also want to reduce pollution and noise should be called something else.
Glassnoser
8d ago
You're obviously not familiar with Scott Sumner. He criticizes both sides. He plainly isn't partisan.
His being famous for writing about economics doesn't need explanation just because you find the subject boring. Many people don't find it boring.
Glassnoser
8d ago
What is CHA?
Glassnoser
14d ago
He has strong opinions about Trump. That doesn't make him partisan or a hack. He's also not a random person but one of the most famous economics bloggers.
Glassnoser
14d ago
The interesting thing about this is that, theoretically, if a computer has access to all the information you do, including, not just the videos and photos, but somehow your memories too, then it could recreate a simulation of your relative that you would not be able to distinguish from the real thing. For all practical purposes, they could bring the person back to life, as long as they incorporated all the information that anyone had of them so that no one would realize anything was off.
Glassnoser
14d ago
What is networking? People sometimes say they're going to some event to "network"? What does that mean?
Glassnoser
14d ago
Are you calling Scott Sumner a random partisan hack?
It's been three years. The emergency for which their rights were suspended is long over. Why can't they start giving these people trials to determine if they belong in prison? Why don't they have habeas corpus? Why do they need to experience such high levels of abuse while in prison?
the very few (ie probably less than 0.1%) innocently caught in the net via the policies are worth more than having a functioning society.
How could you possibly know what that number is?
Now Bukele over time may turn into a negative authoritarian and at that time if criticize him.
That time is now.
https://apnews.com/article/bukele-salvador-crackdown-price-gouging-7e99374c444a81a4009ec09d94857d25
Glassnoser
14d ago
~700, which is roughly the same number as US district judges.
That seems like an extremely low number to me. Why aren't there ten times that number? That's about one immigration judge for every 500,000 people. As you point out, it's not nearly enough to handle the number of cases in a timely manner.
Canada has more judges than this, and we have 1/8 the population of the US.
Glassnoser
15d ago
What happens when Garcia goes to the media and tells people about what the conditions are like in the prison?
Glassnoser
15d ago
You're the one employing the motte and bailey technique by literally changing what the argument is about when challenged. No one here is saying all deportation is inhumane. This is a distraction from the fact that the US government is sending people to foreign prisons without charge.
Glassnoser
15d ago
There have been cases of Venezuelans legally in the US being deported to El Salvador where hey we're imprisoned, with the US paying for it.
Glassnoser
15d ago
The government can hire more immigration judges. There are extremely few of them.
But you're missing the point. You can deport people without paying to have them imprisoned.
Glassnoser
15d ago
Presumably, the police would be expected to follow a court order and not prevent someone from being arrested.
Glassnoser
15d ago
Yes
Glassnoser
16d ago
All that's being asked is that you not send innocent people to prison in third world countries. I don't think it's reasonable to reject that. In some cases, foreigners are being invited to come to the US, and then being deported to El Salvador, a country they are not even citizens of. No one is asking for you to give up anything of value. You are being asked to not be inhumane.
Glassnoser
16d ago
It has the jurisdiction to punish people for committing murder.
Glassnoser
16d ago
Can't they arrest people for contempt of court?
Glassnoser
16d ago
Minimally, it should be able to tell the president to at least ask El Salvador to release him and to stop paying to have him imprisoned.
Glassnoser
16d ago
He was not even afforded this small amount of due process required to establish citizenship. He was not deported as the result of any hearing. The result of the hearings was that he won the right not to be deported. They deported him anyway, accidentally and illegally. If they accidentally deported a citizen, at what point would that citizen be able to prove his citizenship before leaving the country? The current system would not put that person in front of a judge before getting deported.
Glassnoser
16d ago
We have probable cause, habeas corpus, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a quick and fair trial, which all serve to prevent such mistakes and to minimize their harms. The US government has a set up a system where there is no due process nor recourse for the people it deports, citizens or not.
It's not inconsistent to condemn human rights abuses abroad while acknowledging that the scope of the US government and its legal system ought to be limited to its citizens only.
Legally - not just morally - the US government's legal system is not limited to its citizens. Non-US citizens have rights in the US and the US prosecutes people outside of its borders, US citizens and non-US citizens alike.
But, returning to earth, it seems that Bukele's policies are widely approved by the people of El Salvador. On what basis can the American government (or, still less, an American judge) deny them?
On the basis that they are cruel and immoral. Popularity is not a justification. Moreover, if something is popular in the US and unpopular in El Salvador, it's popular in the two places considered together, since the US has 50 times El Salvador's population. If that shouldn't imply that the US gets to decide what happens in El Salvador, neither should the popularity of any given policy in either country justify the mistreatment of any minority there that objects.
But more importantly, you are ignoring the fact that the US government is paying El Salvador to imprison people that it is unnecessarily sending to El Salvador. It can stop doing either of these things at any time, yet it refuses.
The fact that the US is not all powerful is not an excuse for neglecting all moral and legal responsibilities to anyone who isn't a US citizen. The US government is not even trying to undo its mistakes. It would be one thing if the US government were taking all reasonable steps to undo the harm it has done to the people it has sent to El Salvador. Instead, it is doing everything it can to achieve the opposite.
We have Trump and Bukele sitting in a room together, amicably, with Bukele telling the press he can't force Trump to take any his prisoners and Trump telling the press he can't force Bukele to release any of his prisoners. Obviously, between the two of them, there exists the power to bring the prisoners to the US. There is no bona fide attempt on either of their parts to solve the problem. Everything you have said are excuses for subjecting people to inhumane treatment, not actual justifications for it.
The culture has been pushing for later and later ages. Most people seem to assume it's already 18 and I sometimes see people arguing for 25.
More options
Context Copy link