Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Gatefan1976]

Oh dear sad.

Hey lets label all women liars, hell POTUS just did that on twitter. So much winning MAGA.

On another topic I just want some opinions so everyone chime in

What are your thoughts on Privitization, as in the selling off of government assets and infrastructure.

IMHO to me these three things are essential services, gas, electricity, and water supply. I think all 3 are and should be treated as essential services.

So why do governments think privitizing these things is a good idea? It's short term gain for long term pain.

And the lie they trot out to the pubic always is that doing this will lower prices and yeah that worked out so well in many countries didn't it?

Welcome to the greatest screw up of Australian politics.

[Coco Pops]

Welcome to the greatest screw up of Australian politics.

But it was good for the nation. Hey blame the Liberal party for it.

[Annoyed]

You know what proceeds a trial?
It begins with an I, and is a word in one of your Federal Bureau's of...……… something...…..

If they wanted their accusations investigated, they should have brought their charges, they should have made their accusations in a timely fashion in order to allow one before the confirmation hearings, not delayed them till the last minute. After all, the offenses supposedly occurred more than 30 years ago. And we know Feinstein had Ford's accusation 2 months ago. But no, they chose to delay to the last minute for political gain.

[Annoyed]

Oh dear sad.

Hey lets label all women liars, hell POTUS just did that on twitter. So much winning MAGA.

On another topic I just want some opinions so everyone chime in

What are your thoughts on Privitization, as in the selling off of government assets and infrastructure.

IMHO to me these three things are essential services, gas, electricity, and water supply. I think all 3 are and should be treated as essential services.

So why do governments think privitizing these things is a good idea? It's short term gain for long term pain.

And the lie they trot out to the pubic always is that doing this will lower prices and yeah that worked out so well in many countries didn't it?

Trump did not say all women are liars.

But as to privatization, we were sold that line of bull under the name of deregulation a few decades ago, and it hasn't worked out well for the consumers. Bigger businesses, on the other hand, have done well.

Of course, the difference is that big business and the wealthy can buy politicians, the average guy can't afford them.

[Chaka-Z0]

Oh dear sad.

Hey lets label all women liars, hell POTUS just did that on twitter. So much winning MAGA.

On another topic I just want some opinions so everyone chime in

What are your thoughts on Privitization, as in the selling off of government assets and infrastructure.

IMHO to me these three things are essential services, gas, electricity, and water supply. I think all 3 are and should be treated as essential services.

So why do governments think privitizing these things is a good idea? It's short term gain for long term pain.

And the lie they trot out to the pubic always is that doing this will lower prices and yeah that worked out so well in many countries didn't it?

Privatization is not necessarily a bad thing, but many people mistakenly believe they will save money if they go for it. Here's a concrete example in Canada. Hydro-electricity is privatized in Ontario and in Quebec it's run by a crown corporation. I live in a town that is right on the border of the two provinces and can see the difference for myself.

Fact: Ontarians have much higher electricity bills than Quebecers

So no, privatizing is not an absolute money saver. The way I see it, when you privatize there will be a price war, companies are going to fight to have the lowest prices. Eventually, some companies gets assimilated or go bankrupt or whatever other reason and you end up having a handful of companies sharing the market, therefore they can manage the prices as they see fit; oligopoly, which is bad for everybody, except Putin maybe. Essential services, imo, should NEVER be privatized. Companies simply do not have the moral obligations of a Government.

On the other hand, privatizing certain sectors such as small services offered to the population or non-essential services can be a good thing since the Government can spend the tax dollars elsewhere and save money on operating costs. To prevent abuse and save as much tax dollars as possible, the usual condition of the call of bid is the lowest price, which more and more politicians denounce and want it to be Lowest Price adjusted instead. Its easy to get cheap services, but you need quality too, not to mention we had major construction corruption scandals in and around Montreal city because entrepreneurs would consort between themselves and fix the bids, abusing the lowest price condition.

[Chaka-Z0]

Well, as I understand it, Cosby's accuser has proven her case in court, and Weinstein has a criminal case being prosecuted against him as well.
A bit of a difference there.

Not entirely true, main reason was public pressure. One needs not to forget that the court of laws will sometimes cave to the population's will: the most important aspect of the law is that people have faith in it. Cosby was already guilty in the public's eyes so he got the axe. Weinstein will be jailed I'm telling you, 100% sure. Especially since the recent audio recordings have come to light.

The Law is made so innocents don't get jailed, but at the same time it makes it really hard for cases such as sexual assaults to be fully prosecuted. How can you find proof, Annoyed, of something that happened 30+ years ago? There's no DNA left, no proof really, what do you do? You bring circumstancial proof, testimonies, witnesses and hope there's enough to convince the Judge / jury.

Are you saying that sexual assault victims should stay quiet since its difficult to prove it? As for the timing of the accusations, it could (as many have mentioned already) simply be a desire of vengeance, when your aggressor is about to become a life-time pillar of your country, I could buy that.

[Annoyed]

Not entirely true, main reason was public pressure. One needs not to forget that the court of laws will sometimes cave to the population's will: the most important aspect of the law is that people have faith in it. Cosby was already guilty in the public's eyes so he got the axe. Weinstein will be jailed I'm telling you, 100% sure. Especially since the recent audio recordings have come to light.

A court of law should be immune from public pressure, it should have no influence at all. The case should be decided on the facts of the matter, not the public's opinion.
The most important aspect of the law is not what the public thinks, it's that it be fair and accurate as possible.

The Law is made so innocents don't get jailed, but at the same time it makes it really hard for cases such as sexual assaults to be fully prosecuted. How can you find proof, Annoyed, of something that happened 30+ years ago? There's no DNA left, no proof really, what do you do? You bring circumstancial proof, testimonies, witnesses and hope there's enough to convince the Judge / jury.

You can't prove something that happened 30+ years ago. That's one of the reasons for a statute of limitations. In Ford's case, there is nothing but the accusers's word, and that is highly flawed.

So in this case, it's not possible to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the standard for conviction.

She should have spoke up at the time.

[Gatefan1976]

A court of law should be immune from public pressure, it should have no influence at all. The case should be decided on the facts of the matter, not the public's opinion.
The most important aspect of the law is not what the public thinks, it's that it be fair and accurate as possible.

Did you say that with a straight face?

You can't prove something that happened 30+ years ago. That's one of the reasons for a statute of limitations. In Ford's case, there is nothing but the accusers's word, and that is highly flawed.

So in this case, it's not possible to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the standard for conviction.

You DO realise that a senate inquiry is NOT a court of law right?
The senate inquiry is over Kavanaugh's character fitness to be given a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land, not to see if he goes to prison for something.
Additionally, if he get's Borked, it's not like there is not a list of pro republican choices that people like the heritage foundation can replace him with (same as what happened to Bork), you won't loose the chance to nominate another judge. Perhaps you would be better asking why is trump so gung ho about getting -this- particular choice.

She should have spoke up at the time.

You should learn something about rape victims.

[Annoyed]

You DO realise that a senate inquiry is NOT a court of law right?
The senate inquiry is over Kavanaugh's character fitness to be given a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land, not to see if he goes to prison for something.
Additionally, if he get's Borked, it's not like there is not a list of pro republican choices that people like the heritage foundation can replace him with (same as what happened to Bork), you won't loose the chance to nominate another judge. Perhaps you would be better asking why is trump so gung ho about getting -this- particular choice.

Yes, if they have to, they can put up Bennett or another person and do a hurry up confirmation.
Does it matter? Whoever Trump or any Republican nominates will get the same treatment.

[Gatefan1976]

Yes, if they have to, they can put up Bennett or another person and do a hurry up confirmation.

Why do they have to hurry?

Does it matter? Whoever Trump or any Republican nominates will get the same treatment.

Only if:
A: They have skeletons in their closet.
B: You expect the Dems to act like the Repubs.

[jelgate]

Why do they have to hurry?

Only if:
A: They have skeletons in their closet.
B: You expect the Dems to act like the Repubs.

C. If you buy Annoyed's conspiracy theory

[Gatefan1976]

C. If you buy Annoyed's conspiracy theory

But it's not a conspiracy theory, it's projection which is covered by B.
"If it were up to us, we would say screw character, get that seat with the person we want no matter what"
If the repubs are willing to do it, it only makes sense that everyone else would.

[Chaka-Z0]

A court of law should be immune from public pressure, it should have no influence at all. The case should be decided on the facts of the matter, not the public's opinion.
The most important aspect of the law is not what the public thinks, it's that it be fair and accurate as possible.

Theoretically yes, practically? No. Public pressure has HUGE influence over these types of cases. I recall a case here where a man stabbed and killed both his children. The man was found psychologically unstable and not ''criminally responsible'' for his actions.

Public went nuts over this, was the headline in the media for a long period of time, and a new trial was ordered. The court of law is supposed to be immune from public pressure but if people don't get their justice it needs to be adjusted. Some killers and criminals get away with their crimes using technicalities or loopholes or what I like to call lawyer games, which is something that should not stand.

Also quite funny you say that considering that the US justice system is the most partisan I've ever seen.

[Chaka-Z0]

C. If you buy Annoyed's conspiracy theory

D: You are a class-A A-hole that has the small tendency so sexually abuse women

[Gatefan1976]

Theoretically yes, practically? No. Public pressure has HUGE influence over these types of cases. I recall a case here where a man stabbed and killed both his children. The man was found psychologically unstable and not ''criminally responsible'' for his actions.

Public went nuts over this, was the headline in the media for a long period of time, and a new trial was ordered. The court of law is supposed to be immune from public pressure but if people don't get their justice it needs to be adjusted. Some killers and criminals get away with their crimes using technicalities or loopholes or what I like to call lawyer games, which is something that should not stand.

Also quite funny you say that considering that the US justice system is the most partisan I've ever seen.

No, the REALLY funny bit is he is pushing for a "properly aligned SCOTUS"