General Politics Thread

[amadeus]

I am sure there are loads that go unreported, but going by the news companies are failing every week leaving the creditors out of pocket while the rich owners keep all the money they have taken from the business. I have always thought limited companies was an intensional mechanism to encourage risky behaviour, as the economy works better on aggregate when people take risks (in theory, according to some theories).

A liquidation bankruptcy is something I think most creditors would want to avoid; since the business is already in a position where its liabilities so great, a selloff of assets is only going to net creditors a fraction of what they’re owed.

As far as a company in bankruptcy proceedings, executive salaries can be limited by bankruptcy judges. It depends on the case—there was outrage a few years ago when a new Toys ‘R’ Us exec was getting a big salary despite the company’s fortunes; the salary was okay’d because they thought they’d get the too talent to turn the business around. Sometimes works, sometimes fails, I guess.

You’re right about the limited liability, and I don’t think a libertarian legal framework would do away with it since, as you say, the theory is that in aggregate it’s better to encourage a little risk than to make liabilities unlimited.

Anyway, how did I get on the subject of corporate liabilities? I’m saying vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate. Anyone who doesn’t want one, show ‘em the door. Good luck in the search of finding a country freer than America.

 

[Samson]

Anyway, how did I get on the subject of corporate liabilities?

My argument was with this statement:

the system as-is subsidizes, via the state, risk-takers and punishes the risk-averse—when the reality should resemble the opposite in a libertarian society
​

It seems most libertarian talking points are about subsidizing the risk-takers. For example, changing from the EPA rules of "you are not allowed to do this risky thing" to the libertarian idea of "if you do this risky thing, and the dangerous thing happens, then people can sue you" is very much to the benefit of those who want to take a risk.

 

[amadeus]

For example, changing from the EPA rules of "you are not allowed to do this risky thing" to the libertarian idea of "if you do this risky thing, and the dangerous thing happens, then people can sue you" is very much to the benefit of those who want to take a risk.

That may or may not be the case depending on the penalties metered out, and it isn’t exclusively a problem of libertarianism because even an EPA fine could be less expensive than not pursuing the risk at all.

I’d say again that it all depends. Suppose you have a oil well that leaks, should the company pay 100% of damages? The “fair” answer says yes, but on the other hand, what if that puts the company out of business and gas goes up to $10/gallon? Unfortunately, the most just settlement may not be the most optimal one in terms of the general interest, and I suppose that could apply to some bankruptcies too where creditors don’t get the full amounts to which they are entitled.

 

[Samson]

That may or may not be the case depending on the penalties metered out, and it isn’t exclusively a problem of libertarianism because even an EPA fine could be less expensive than not pursuing the risk at all.

I’d say again that it all depends. Suppose you have a oil well that leaks, should the company pay 100% of damages? The “fair” answer says yes, but on the other hand, what if that puts the company out of business and gas goes up to $10/gallon? Unfortunately, the most just settlement may not be the most optimal one in terms of the general interest, and I suppose that could apply to some bankruptcies too where creditors don’t get the full amounts to which they are entitled.

We have a lot of examples of oil wells that leak. Does it really look to you like sometimes this is better handled by civil law rather than criminal? It certainly does not like seem like what we have is working better in places that have less regulation that places that have more. We still have oil leaks, cheap oil, and very little money going to those who are impacted by the leaks, and those leaks tend to be in places that have less regulation. It very much seems like we need more a priori regulation rather than more reliance on posteriori civil law, and that comes down to less subsidies to risk taking in resource extraction. Libertarian talking points at least seem exactly the opposite of this.

 

[Lexicus]

I’d say again that it all depends. Suppose you have a oil well that leaks, should the company pay 100% of damages? The “fair” answer says yes, but on the other hand, what if that puts the company out of business and gas goes up to $10/gallon? Unfortunately, the most just settlement may not be the most optimal one in terms of the general interest, and I suppose that could apply to some bankruptcies too where creditors don’t get the full amounts to which they are entitled.

Companies that poison people to death should not be paying damages, responsible officers should be getting manslaughter or murder charges with long minimum sentences depending on the precise facts of the case.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Companies that poison people to death should not be paying damages, responsible officers should be getting manslaughter or murder charges with long minimum sentences depending on the precise facts of the case.

It needn't be mutually exclusive.

Also... Gavin Newsom appears to be winning the recall election decisively... so there's that. Its the little things sometimes.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Also... Gavin Newsom appears to be winning the recall election decisively... so there's that. Its the little things sometimes.

Massif Cheeting!

 

[amadeus]

We have a lot of examples of oil wells that leak. Does it really look to you like sometimes this is better handled by civil law rather than criminal?

No; it wasn’t my intent to say that all cases of x should be handled exclusively by civil law, I was just trying to answer the question of risk/subsidization within the confines of which you asked.

Criminal law also ought to be applied to cases where there’s been a crime committed.

 

[AmtrakQuebec]

Fencing is going up atm around the US Capitol.

 

[amadeus]

I don’t have any setup for this but I’m going to inaugurate the first google hit for “Twitch Plays Washington D.C. Riot Control Water Cannon”

 

[Kaitzilla]

Most countries have more trade with China than the USA in 2021, a reversed situation from 2000.

How much attention should we pay to the impending bankruptcy of Evergrande in China right now?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-evergrande-scenario-is-an-uncontrolled-crash

Here's some synchronized implosions that aren't seen very often.
Like something out of Sim City.

 

[FriendlyFire]

How much attention should we pay to the impending bankruptcy of Evergrande in China right now?

For Asia, a lot since this will probably be the Chinese property market bubble bursting
With the results of such financial problems will ripple across all of Asia

 

[Drakle]

Cops mentally scar a hearing-impaired infant who lost his hearing aids in the 'scuffle', bashed a lady, wrecked her car and cost the city of Philadelphia 2 Million Dollars, for a stupid photo op right before the election. And of course, just an excuse to engage in wreckless thuggery.

This is what the cops posted



Here is reality



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1279134

Likely the only reason she won, is because someone happened to be filming.

Wild.

 

[really]

https://www.irishnews.com/news/repu...dup-over-ni-centenary-service-invite-2451533/
The DUP have seriously annoyed our normally quiet president.
He was invited (quite late it seems, he was already hosting some statisticians that day) to a religious ceremony to mark the creation of Northern Ireland (and by extension the partition of this country).
Given that the only side really marking this are the unionists, it seems it was becoming politicised.
Anyways he declined and the DUP wrote asking him to reconsider. (Not sure why the DUP were involved in organising a religious ceremony) but the used an incorrect and deliberate title to address him.

A couple of quotes:
'What (had started out as) an invitation to a religious service had in fact become a political statement,” he said. “I was also referred to as the President of the Republic of Ireland. I am the President of Ireland.”'

'President Higgins challenged the DUP criticism.

“It’s a bit much, to be frank with you. I have gone up to Northern Ireland to take part in events,” he said.

“There often has not been a great deal of traffic down from the DUP people who are criticising me now.” '

DUP got what it wanted anyway, stirring up their base.

 

[Arakhor]

They've got nothing left, I imagine. They can't even threaten to collapse power-sharing again without it obviously being their fault.

 

[AmtrakQuebec]

Most countries have more trade with China than the USA in 2021, a reversed situation from 2000.

Huh?
China Exports | 1981-2021 Data | 2022-2023 Forecast | Calendar | Historical | Chart (tradingeconomics.com)

 

[Kaitzilla]

Huh?
China Exports | 1981-2021 Data | 2022-2023 Forecast | Calendar | Historical | Chart (tradingeconomics.com)

Right.
China is ahead only by a little bit, but they are still the world's #1 exporter right now.

They are also the world's 2nd largest economy.
My main point was that their property bubble bursting might be worth paying attention to worldwide and not just regionally.

 

[AmtrakQuebec]

So, in the bizarro world, Putin's government has managed to have Google and Apple remove an App designed by Navalny's supporters to help them strategically vote. The reason the Putinites used was, get this, because it was ELECTION INTERFERENCE!!!

 

[Lexicus]

So, in the bizarro world, Putin's government has managed to have Google and Apple remove an App designed by Navalny's supporters to help them strategically vote. The reason the Putinites used was, get this, because it was ELECTION INTERFERENCE!!!

Google and Apple, such bastions of freedom

 

[red_elk]

So, in the bizarro world, Putin's government has managed to have Google and Apple remove an App designed by Navalny's supporters to help them strategically vote. The reason the Putinites used was, get this, because it was ELECTION INTERFERENCE!!!

May be Google and Apple want to protect Navalny supporters from being traced by Putinites!?