This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Ironically, you didn't respond to my argument with any details, you just repeated your own belief.
It's not really "my idea" as it's used in dozens of countries. If you think it's completely unusable then the burden of proof is on you.
Here's one example. This is the only time I'm going to do this, because otherwise this comment chain could just grow until we've recreated all of the law system of a developed country.
The use of shell companies is, as another commenter pointed out, already common everywhere. This does cause problems sometimes, but is not something that makes the whole system unusable. In this case of "make a shell company just to file a lawsuit" one option is to require someone filing a lawsuit to have assets or insurance. You dismissed this option above then poor people couldn't sue, but A) insurance could still be very cheap for a lawsuit that is likely to succeed; B) filing a lawsuit already has costs; and C) we already have lawyers who work on contingency, who would probably have little issue also fronting the cost of insurance for legitimate suits.
There are other options as well. A country could require a more substantial entity located in their borders to file a lawsuit, such as an actual person who owns the company or can attest to its legitimacy, and is willing to take responsibility for the costs of losing a lawsuit. As above, this entity would need to have assets or insurance. Courts already deal with location-based jurisdiction questions, companies and individuals trying to hide assets, etc; while I'm sure there are questions that would need be resolved by legislatures and/or courts, they don't prevent the system from working at all.
To summarize
“It’s used in a lot of other countries” therefore I do NOT need to give detailed reasoning for changing the entire legal system of the richest country earth has ever known.
And to repeat I can’t give you a response if you don’t give me specific detailed solutions to think about. I can’t debate something with myself.
Wow, you're obnoxious. I gave you a solution, did you just not bother to read 80% of my comment?
Did you edit? To add insurance? Yes that’s possible. Would add a substantial costs for poor people. Since well small cases would need to pay underwriters to evaluate or charge significant premiums for cases and try to hope it’s filter for selection bias. Insurance is basically the same thing as bails bondsmen which the US is already removing due to negative effects on the poor.
For insurance your basically just privatizing initially court date to see if their is probably cause. We could just reform that step in the existing system .
I didn't edit it. If I did, you could see "Edited ago". What is with these easily disproved lies? You've already shown you don't bother to read comments or links before making aggressive comments, so I'm not sure who you think you're fooling.
Anyway, yeah, all systems have costs and downsides. Right now we have one where the downside is "you can ruin anyone's life at any time by filing frivolous lawsuits and bankrupting them." To me this seems pretty clearly much worse than "poor people continue to have worse access; may need help with legal issues, like they already do (as well as for everything else); obvious solutions like contingencies already exist but might not be perfect."
The bail bondsman reference doesn't make any sense at all.
The "Edited ... ago" indication only shows if you edit a comment after few minutes have passed. If you edit within the first few minutes, nothing shows.
I'm not party to your conversation or anything, but I thought it'd be worth clarifying this for you and @sliders1234
More options
Context Copy link
Bail and insurance to file are literally the exact same product. One for criminal and one for lawsuit but both are essentially insurance for performance.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link