Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Recent Posts
81
DnD Central / Re: The Awesomesauce of the American 2024 Presidential Elections
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
Americans with their stupid non-system where the president has the freedom to be a treasonous nepotist election-denying incompetent buffoon and run again without any repercussions to himself while all his law[y]ers and more eager supporters are being jailed left and right.
Can't even manage to put your frothing-at-the-mouth anger into sentence form! :) But look on the bright side: Michelle Obama might be "drafted" to run...
82
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
The following are notes for myself. You are completely unqualified for this discussion, Oakdale.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL
First, the U.S. is not subject to the so-called World Court. So, your "serious charge" amounts to nothing more than impotent moralizing.
Second, immigrant status is not conferred by mere aspiration.
This is exactly my point, knowing that "conservatives" and "literalists" in USA do not acknowledge the concept of human rights, even though Declaration of Independence of USA takes it "to be self-evident that all men and women are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights." It's an enlightenment concept, not a World Court concept.

A country that is in denial of this concept is not an enlightened country. It is in plain evidence now that what Declaration of Independence proclaims does not obtain in the legal and moral sense of the inhabitants of the country at all.
Human rights? Another symptom of your self-righteousness: You believe everyone in the world has the right to residence and citizenship anywhere they choose... Why? It's certainly not enlightenment. It's Soros-style agitprop.
How do you determine that residence and citizenship are inalienable? Hand-waving?
No. You just want to keep the argument going, and this red herring is just a means to that end. It doesn't matter that it's nonsensical!
83
DnD Central / Re: Maps-Maps-Maps! ?
Last post by ersi -
A test question @jax

61% in Germany. 62% in Estonia. What explains the fact that the numbers are so low and so close to each other, compared to 83% in Lithuania and 90% in Finland?
84
DnD Central / Re: The Awesomesauce of the American 2024 Presidential Elections
Last post by ersi -
(It's too soon, because several keys are undecided yet, but) Biden is the more likely winner, according to Alan Lichtman who has correctly predicted every presidential election result since 1984 https://politicalpulse.net/us-politics/alan-lichtmans-prediction-for-2024/

Americans with their stupid non-system where the president has the freedom to be a treasonous nepotist election-denying incompetent buffoon and run again without any repercussions to himself while all his lawers and more eager supporters are being jailed left and right. And that this idiotic campaigning takes years in enormous cost of time, money and nerves. Oh Lord have mercy.

Good that this is over and done with now. Except if one of the main party candidates dies and the not the other....
86
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
The following are notes for myself. You are completely unqualified for this discussion, Oakdale.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
First, the U.S. is not subject to the so-called World Court. So, your "serious charge" amounts to nothing more than impotent moralizing.
Second, immigrant status is not conferred by mere aspiration.
This is exactly my point, knowing that "conservatives" and "literalists" in USA do not acknowledge the concept of human rights, even though Declaration of Independence of USA takes it "to be self-evident that all men and women are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights." It's an enlightenment concept, not a World Court concept.

A country that is in denial of this concept is not an enlightened country. It is in plain evidence now that what Declaration of Independence proclaims does not obtain in the legal and moral sense of the inhabitants of the country at all. The bussing of immigrants is a clear example that the moral turpitude is not limited to Oakdale rednecks in the country, but it is a general state of mind among the country's officials and jurists. As follows:

Quote from: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/us/migrants-marthas-vineyard-desantis-texas.html
The flights last month, carrying 48 migrants, attracted international attention and drew condemnation from Democrats as well as several legal challenges. Mr. DeSantis immediately claimed credit for what appeared to be a political maneuver — dumping dozens of asylum seekers on the doorstep of Northeastern Democrats who have resisted calls to clamp down on immigration.
The fact that DeSantis is using the budget of his own state to bus immigrants of another state (since his own state does not have such readily abusable immigrants) to a third state should be an inter-state/federal legal challenge in multiple ways, but this is not the most pertinent point. The most pertinent point is that "legal challenges" in this article refer to lawyers trying to figure out whether there is something legally challengeable in this activity.[1]

If lawyers are puzzled about human trafficking on the level of governors of states, then clearly USA is a sad third-world dump when it comes to the legal framework concerning human trafficking.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Third, if you're in the country legally (i.e., have been processed by Border Patrol and have a scheduled court hearing) and I offer you a bus or plane ticket to -say- New York, that is not "trafficking". That is largesse.
To reduce the concept of human trafficking as far as possible, its minimum key feature is the consent of the trafficked. Now, many people *want*, even desperately so, to get to a country that has been presented to them as a better country. They are lured by alleged opportunities. So people's want is not the kind of consent relevant to the concept. Trafficking comes in with a trafficker/smuggler who does the allegations of the work/living opportunities and then the opportunities don't obtain at the destination.

Say a pimp promising a different job to someone at a destination while the actual job ends up being prostitution — this is sex trafficking even when the pimp pays all the costs to the destination and provides accommodation at the destination.  This should be easy peasy to understand for a ten-year-old, if not a five-year-old. For an Oakdale pimping is a largesse because he cannot afford it, but legally pimping is sex trafficking. In case of the bussing of immigrants, the perpetrators provide nothing at the destination.

DeSantis and Abbott qualify as human traffickers. Human trafficking is a serious crime when regular people do it, but lawyers in USA are puzzled about it when governors do it, so once again so much for being a law-and-order country where people allegedly have rights. Immigrants deserve more adequate information about their destination country: USA is a below-average third world dump where non-citizens have zero constitutional rights and there is no recourse against state officials. African smugglers advertise the EU as the place where everyone who crosses the border receives an Adidas jumpsuit, iPhone and a fully equipped apartment. Sorry, dear immigrants, the traffickers are lying to you.
1 There's a class action lawsuit that has amounted to nothing much thus far.↵
87
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
If immigrants had no nominal rights, then USA would be under serious charge due to lack of legal framework for human rights at home. But if immigrants have nominal rights, then bussing them *is* human trafficking and against the law. Which way is it?
First, the U.S. is not subject to the so-called World Court. So, your "serious charge" amounts to nothing more than impotent moralizing.
Second, immigrant status is not conferred by mere aspiration.
Third, if you're in the country legally (i.e., have been processed by Border Patrol and have a scheduled court hearing) and I offer you a bus or plane ticket to -say- New York, that is not "trafficking". That is largesse.
And since you only want to consider Florida's governor (and not Abbott of Texas... :) ), I'd ask how -do you think- the "migrants" got to Florida in the first place? :)

Of course, your quoted comment poses a false dilemma — and you know it. Is all your legal analysis predicated on self-righteous indignation? So it seems to me... If only you were Czar, eh? :)
88
Hobbies & Entertainment / Re: Films and Books
Last post by ersi -
Sergei Guriev recommended Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro in his latest (or perhaps penultimate) livestream. The little book club of my colleagues at work took it on.

I'm halfway through now and I guess I can recommend it too, even though I don't know what the final turn will be. The only other work I know from Kazuo Ishiguro is The Remains of the Day (the movie, not the book) and judging from that, no sharp turns are expected.

Klara and the Sun qualifies as science fiction. The first-person narrator Klara is an "artificial friend," preoccupied and constantly concerned with serving its human. In this sense the novel is similar with the main theme of The Remains of the Day. Also similar is the class society and the focus on mannerisms and etiquette.

But I'm expecting a science-fictiony turn in Klara and the Sun. Perhaps artificial intelligence sinking into abuse mode while failing to sense anything out of the ordinary?

As said, I'm only halfway through. Hope I did not spoil anything for anyone. Really lovely piece of literature it is.
89
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by ersi -
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
FYI: Resident Aliens are both subject to U.S. jurisdiction and protected by most constitutional provisions — one obvious exception being the right to vote in federal elections. :)
Your dilemma is as follows: If immigrants had no nominal rights, then USA would be under serious charge due to lack of legal framework for human rights at home. But if immigrants have nominal rights, then bussing them *is* human trafficking and against the law. Which way is it?

Either way I know both the legal situation and concrete facts better than you. You are not in a position to FYI anything. All your years on this forum you have provided very little factual information, but none that was not known already. Otherwise you have only provided so-called alternative facts, which are sometimes fascinating to observe for psychoanalytical purposes.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
What? I'm now required to agree with anyone you call "conservative" or "literalist"?
An entrenched Trumpite who did not see the insurrection happening and thinks Hillary is somehow crooked while Trump is not obviously lacks sufficient epistemological acumen to agree or disagree with anything. 

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
(But I did note your failure to cite an example or culprit! :) Typical "ersi".)
The name and example is DeSantis. Come on, it's directly in the post you were responding to, inside the embedded quotes. Typical Oakdale dropping off half of the content when parsing sentences both when reading and writing. Since you are clearly overburdened with incoming information already, I won't bother you with any further details.
90
DnD Central / Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?
Last post by OakdaleFTL -
Quote from: ersi on
The facts are as follows:

The immigrants are taken to where they do not want to go. They are not going by themselves. They are taken to where nobody expects them, i.e. they are literally dumped at the destination. The name of the crime is human trafficking.

And you are completely clueless of the fact that the American constitution has been argued (by "conservatives" and "literalists") to guarantee literally nothing to non-citizens. You really have no grasp on law. Same as on facts.
Sigh... Your set of "facts" supporting the human trafficking charge happens to be another of your delusions.

FYI: Resident Aliens are both subject to U.S. jurisdiction and protected by most constitutional provisions — one obvious exception being the right to vote in federal elections. :)
What? I'm now required to agree with anyone you call "conservative" or "literalist"? No thanks: I'm not a follower! And -even if I were- your pervasive and constant bad faith would preclude me from accepting your recommendations at face value...
(But I did note your failure to cite an example or culprit! :) Typical "ersi".)