Author Topic: Humanity: Good News, Bad News  (Read 112471 times)

Kyronea

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1913
    • View Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #135 on: April 19, 2007, 11:26:27 pm »
Perhaps it is a difference of opinion brought about by the difference in how our countries came to power, but I still feel that the decentralization via the states is worthwhile. I am confused as to what constiutional rights you speak of, however...if you'll forgive me, I've never read the Australian constitution.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #136 on: April 20, 2007, 12:05:32 am »
The problem of stuffed, slothful bureaucracy can go either way. From one perspective, a central state allows centralized decision making, planning, and information sharing. On the other hand, state governments are more prepared and positioned to govern regions than a far-off capital, and are staffed with local citizens with experience in the region. Each form has its issues. I personally like states because they offer such beautiful empirical testing and checks against the government. Programs, law, policy, etc. can all be tested or implemented on the state-level as a test of value, and really good ideas could emerge in some enterprising states that would not have a chance in a stuffed-up parliament representing the country at large.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #137 on: April 20, 2007, 02:54:25 am »
I should clarify on Zeppy's behalf that "Liberal" in most countries indicates a right-wing ideology, especially on economic issues. America is the only country I know of where the word refers to a left-wing ideology.

Burning Zeppelin

  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
    • View Profile
    • Delicate Cutters
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #138 on: April 20, 2007, 08:03:31 am »
The problem of stuffed, slothful bureaucracy can go either way. From one perspective, a central state allows centralized decision making, planning, and information sharing. On the other hand, state governments are more prepared and positioned to govern regions than a far-off capital, and are staffed with local citizens with experience in the region. Each form has its issues. I personally like states because they offer such beautiful empirical testing and checks against the government. Programs, law, policy, etc. can all be tested or implemented on the state-level as a test of value, and really good ideas could emerge in some enterprising states that would not have a chance in a stuffed-up parliament representing the country at large.
While I agree with you, but our states are frankly, well, shit. Ok, I can't speak on behalf of all states. Queensland is a political crisis. But New South Wales, oh boy. The thing is, no one really cares about the government. Why? Both parties are hated. Labor has screwed up far too long, and the Liberals ad campaign was so horrible, the only votes they got were sympathy votes. Greens didn't even try to become a 3rd party candidate, and the Australian Democrats, usually held as the 4th big party, didn't even get any seats! So what we got instead was a whole lot of Christian Democrats, and, er- The Shooters Party, with preferences from The Fishing Party & the Unity Party.
Perhaps it is a difference of opinion brought about by the difference in how our countries came to power, but I still feel that the decentralization via the states is worthwhile. I am confused as to what constiutional rights you speak of, however...if you'll forgive me, I've never read the Australian constitution.
You should. It was the New York Time's Read of the Month. States basically have complete power unless they are inconsistent with the Federal Government (but some things can not be changed by the Federal government). The clash between Federal and State go far deeper though, and I don't really feel like going in depth about it. For example, a certain dam was ready to be sold by the Federal Government, buyers were ready, contracts were being made. But at the last minute, the States pulled out, since they had a share of the dam. The funny thing is, that there is a real contradiction; every state is Labor, while the Federal government is Liberal.

Oh, and an unrelated tidbit about the Australian constitution: Unlike the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights and such, hardly any rights are protected in the constitution- most rights are determined by Common Law.
I should clarify on Zeppy's behalf that "Liberal" in most countries indicates a right-wing ideology, especially on economic issues.
Why thank you Lord J =)

Kyronea

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1913
    • View Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #139 on: April 20, 2007, 09:57:34 am »
I should clarify on Zeppy's behalf that "Liberal" in most countries indicates a right-wing ideology, especially on economic issues. America is the only country I know of where the word refers to a left-wing ideology.
Obviously....or at least it was obvious to me. But then, I spend lots of time on a political forum so I'm well versed in that kind of stuff.

Quote from: Burning Zeppelin
You should. It was the New York Time's Read of the Month. States basically have complete power unless they are inconsistent with the Federal Government (but some things can not be changed by the Federal government). The clash between Federal and State go far deeper though, and I don't really feel like going in depth about it. For example, a certain dam was ready to be sold by the Federal Government, buyers were ready, contracts were being made. But at the last minute, the States pulled out, since they had a share of the dam. The funny thing is, that there is a real contradiction; every state is Labor, while the Federal government is Liberal.
So, in essence, similiar to our own Constitution when it comes to our states, except we have more cooporation. Interesting.
Quote
Oh, and an unrelated tidbit about the Australian constitution: Unlike the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights and such, hardly any rights are protected in the constitution- most rights are determined by Common Law.
Common Law pisses me off because I tend to prefer something like rights set down in stone--or at least plaster--so we have them clearly defined.

I'll be sure to read the Australian Constitution when I get a chance...it'll be extremely dry, but I can read dry material quite readily. I used to read textbooks for fun.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #140 on: April 20, 2007, 12:10:56 pm »
The issue is that you get bloated law ledgers. It helps to have English common law filling in certain gaps. Treasure trove law is pretty interesting, for example.

> If you find gold, silver, bullion, or currency on someone's property, as long as you were not trespassing the treasure is yours.
> If you find anything else -- dinosaur bones, lost manuscripts -- it is the property of the owner unless you were specifically and legally agreed to be on his premises to hunt treasure.

Kyronea

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1913
    • View Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #141 on: April 20, 2007, 12:21:44 pm »
The issue is that you get bloated law ledgers. It helps to have English common law filling in certain gaps. Treasure trove law is pretty interesting, for example.

> If you find gold, silver, bullion, or currency on someone's property, as long as you were not trespassing the treasure is yours.
> If you find anything else -- dinosaur bones, lost manuscripts -- it is the property of the owner unless you were specifically and legally agreed to be on his premises to hunt treasure.
Well, I suppose you've got a point there. I was speaking specifically of basic civil rights, such as free speech, freedom from discrimination, lack of cruel and unusual punishment, that sort of thing. Certain gaps can be filled in by common law, certainly. Basic civil rights ought to be codified, though.

Burning Zeppelin

  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
    • View Profile
    • Delicate Cutters
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #142 on: April 20, 2007, 11:09:47 pm »
RPG Law is pretty cool too:
If you find anything anywhere, it is yours.
Quote
Oh, and an unrelated tidbit about the Australian constitution: Unlike the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights and such, hardly any rights are protected in the constitution- most rights are determined by Common Law.
Common Law pisses me off because I tend to prefer something like rights set down in stone--or at least plaster--so we have them clearly defined.
Well, I was watching a mock trial against the Constitution in Commerce, but we didn't get to finish it, so we didn't see the argument to and for having a Bill of Rights.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #143 on: April 25, 2007, 01:00:28 am »
Good News

Abortion legalized in Mexico, meaning no more guilt and dangerous self-abortions:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/04/24/mexico.abortion.ap/index.html

Bad News

Get your Masters degree in Creative Fiction today!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/24/tillman.hearing/index.html

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #144 on: April 29, 2007, 06:48:45 pm »
Good News: Fight to Save Internet Radio Gets Eleventh Hour Boost in Congress

The bad news within the good news is that, on March 2 of this year, the U.S. Copyright Royalty Judges made a determination to impose destructively high royalty rates on Internet radio providers. Worse, these royalties shall be retroactive all the way back to January 1, 2006. The new rates are scheduled to take effect on May 15 of this year.

In short, it spells the end of most independent Internet radio.

This disgrace was heavily lobbied for by the big record companies, such as Warner Music, and particularly by the big radio companies, such as Clear Channel. The effort by these influential conglomerates to impose destructively high royalties on independent webcasters is deliberate and very much intended to shut down new and emerging rivals and to defend the incumbent oligopolies from the consequences of free competition.

But independent webcasters must be allowed to thrive! Countless musicians who never get seen by the big labels have come to depend on Internet radio to get their music out to fans and build new audiences. Indeed, oftentimes it is the artists themselves who go on to become the webcasters, wanting to give a sturdier stage to independent music and pave an easier road for the artists who follow them.

I sincerely wish that artists were better compensated for the music they make, but it is not for artists’ sake that these destructively high royalties are soon to take effect. As you may know, the big radio companies have long negotiated nominal or zero artist royalty payments for themselves. Instead, they pay only the copyright holders—not the artists per se—and, invariably, the copyright holders are the big record companies, who then turn around and pay their artists only pennies on the dollar. The entire scheme is altogether ugly!

These corporate juggernauts are not interested in musical art. They aim only to stir up sensations and collect many profits. I do not disparage the many people who enjoy the music that results from that unhealthy environment, but I do not much prefer it myself. I listen to independent Internet radio—featuring the work of musicians for whom music is still an art.

I have a lot to lose if independent Internet radio is bankrupted and destroyed by oppressive royalties. Webcasters themselves stand to lose even more: their businesses. And as for the musicians…what will become of them?

Then along came Washington State Representative Jay Inslee (D, of course), sponsoring H.R. 2060, the Internet Radio Equality Act. It will prevent these destructive royalties from taking effect, effectively giving independent musicians and webcasters a five-year reprieve.


Bad News: Defiant Bush Administration Unlikely to Submit to Congressional Authority

There's lots of wicked shit going on out there, but to be honest I'm still pretty pissed at the Supreme Court's ban on abortion. However, moving on for the moment, we in the United States are heading toward a potential "Constitutional crisis." In a nutshell, here's what's happening:

Congress: We're doing an investigation into how fucked up your administration is. We want you to give us some documents and e-mails, and we want some of you to come to Congress and give testimony under oath about what's been happening at the White House.

Bush Administration: Nope.

Congress: Then we'll subpoena you. That means you have to show up.

Bush Administration: Nope.

Congress: Then we'll find you in contempt of Congress, and lock up anyone who refuses to participate in our Constitutionally mandated congressional oversight.

Bush Administration: Nope.

Congress: We will! We'll have a U.S. attorney prosecute our charges of contempt against any of you who refuse to cooperate with us.

Bush Administration: You mean the same U.S. attorneys who are so absolutely loyal to us because we fired all the ones who had even an ounce of professional credibility?

Congress: D'oh! Then we'll take you to court.

Bush Administration: And by the time the courts decide, it'll be 2008 and none of this will even matter. You phail.

Congress: So, you're not going to cooperate with us?

Bush Administration: Nope.

Congress: But then what's left for us? Aren't we a co-equivalent branch of the government?

Bush Administration: Nope. War on Terror 'n all. Unitary Executive. President calls the shots.

Congress: Damn. Does that mean we're just a useless bunch of blubbering sissies?

Bush Administration: Yup.


Of course, the good news within the bad news is that Congress actually does have a few other options at its disposal, provided that it can muster the political willpower to exercise those options. Congressional Democrats, conciliatory by nature and long whipped by twelve years in exile, have been astonishingly reluctant to push the progressive agenda that voters demanded back in the November elections. Even though the American people are squarely with the Democrats right now, the Democratic leadership is still afraid of alienating itself from them. Darn. I wish they'd be more strong-willed.

Not just because they're the Dems--my team--but because we are headed toward a confrontation with the Bush administration that truly is a Constitutional crisis. This president and his people have done so much in six short years to pevert the American model of government--and at such ruinous costs to the American people and America itself--that there has to be some accountability, some oversight. There must be, or else this presidency will take root in precedent, and the future of American politics will be shaped permanently. If Congress caves to the White House, you can bet your lucky dime that future presidents will take for granted some of the same abuses of power. Likewise, if Congress caves to the White House, then much of the disastrous policy introduced under the Bush administration will become entrenched and permanent.

These are troubling times!


WTF News: Fireball Destroys San Francisco Freeway Interchange Overpass

A fuel tanker was going too fast on a freeway ramp and crashed. The thing caught aflame and shortly exploded, sending a fireball hundreds of feet into the air. Oh, and straight through a three-lane overpass, which promptly melted.

Impressive...

The concrete from the collapsed overpass is folded like a piece of cloth and you can see where the metal railings and steel girders melted. The San Francisco Chronicle reports. This looks like the worst freeway disaster in California since the Northridge Earthquake of 1994 (in which I participated). Luckily, nobody was killed.

A Caltrans engineer held up his forefinger an inch from his thumb and said the remains of the fuel truck are now "this big."

Commuters beware. Actually, scratch that. With two freeways closed at the Bay Bridge, commuters be screwed. Take the train. At least San Francisco has a train. (*grumbles at Seattle politicians*)



"I say, is this what we call hard-hitting news?"

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #145 on: April 29, 2007, 07:43:10 pm »
Jay Inslee just made my awesome list. My really awesome list. Club977 might LIVE! 80s music for ALL!

~

Concerning the bad news, this little gem stuck out from South Dakota's senator in the Iraq withdrawal bill debate (SD is also known as abortion capitol of the US):

Well, okay, don't remember the exact quote, but it went like: "We can't let Congress intercede in the military chain of command!"

Ah. So the executive branch answers to no one.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #146 on: April 29, 2007, 08:22:11 pm »
It's a thorny issue, but one with a fairly straightforward resolution: The executive branch controls the the military, but the legislative branch funds it. That funding, or "power of the purse," is not a formality. Congress has the right to fund or not fund almost anything. For instance, it could choose to de-fund most of our specific operations in Iraq. Should it choose to do so, Congress would concurrently assure the military a fully funded departure from Iraq.

What Congress does not have the right to do is attempt to control the military directly. Nor are the Dems in Congress trying to do that, even though the right-wing noise machine would have us believe otherwise, because it would be not only highly illegal, but unenforceable as well.

Congressional intervention to end wars is not a new phenomenon. Even in the most recent pages of our history, Congress has used its purse power, against executive wishes, to decisively end two wars: Vietnam and Somalia. The bottom line is that presidents can only conduct wars for as long as the Congress is willing to foot the bill.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #147 on: May 01, 2007, 09:49:03 pm »
Good News

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6609205.stm

Gene therapy +1! I hope that gene therapy used to totally eliminate cancer in...what was it, around 17 people out of 20 or 25? I hope it's still working and improving as well.

Bad News

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6610333.stm

Chavez: L'État, c'est moi!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6613141.stm

This is where it gets interesting.

Cool News

Fishing for intelligence in primates? Why not set up automated games and other mental tests, and let them do all the hard work?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18064686/

Burning Zeppelin

  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
    • View Profile
    • Delicate Cutters
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #148 on: May 02, 2007, 05:14:30 am »
So basically, the Congress is allowed to let the troops starve into conceding defeat? :P

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Humanity: Good News, Bad News
« Reply #149 on: May 02, 2007, 01:28:45 pm »
Congress Edition

Good News

Genetic discrimination is preempted through legislation:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/01/genetic-discrimination-ban-edges-closer-to-reality/

Bad News

Bush submits an ambitious bill to allow even more eavesdropping:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/opinion/02wed1.html?ex=1335758400&en=3f401cc1e04c6609&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss