Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[McTraveller]

Why would there even be an expectation the rules be different for government employees than any other employee who gets furloughed / laid off / fired?

To change it, you'd just need a large enough group of property owners to have a large enough pool of income that they agree to not evict/foreclose the portion of their tenants that get laid off or whatever and can't pay their rent/mortgages.  Go for it!

[Frumple]

Hell, there kinda' is stuff like that in the US...

... it's just conditional on government support/funding for the property owners to agree to it :V

[Max™]

Well, at least congress isn't getting paid after causing this fuck up.

*staffer hustles over and leans in to whisper something to me*

...WHAT? Seriously?

FUCK!

[Baffler]

It's unlikely that there are legal protections, but even if there aren't it's also unlikely that most people would be evicted if the person who they're paying is aware of the situation. It's not like they got fired and have no prospects of getting a new job, and it's not like they have no way of verifying that their paycheck is just coming late and they're not lying to avoid paying either. If they were just waiting for an excuse to get rid of them in the first place it may happen, but unless they're trashing the house/apartment it's usually better to keep a tenant on since there's no guarantee that you'll be able to put someone else into that spot anytime soon. And that's from just from the standpoint of Homo economicus, and makes no assumption that they'll keep them in out of common decency or a sense of duty/solidarity.

[Frumple]

Oh wow. Just noticed the tweet mitch made on the 19th. With that thing existent I think the GOP is going to have trouble framing this as the dems taking hostages. Even if it was the only thing to be found.

Though I'unno about that last bit, baff (well, the pre-edit last bit). Depends a lot on the area, sometimes the time of year. Plenty of places have less than zero difficulty replacing a tenant, and it's not the most rare thing a landlord has some degree of difficulty letting the payment slide for too long even if they know money's coming later (never mind issues with other things). Particularly if they do have replacement tenants actually able to immediately pay lined up.

[SalmonGod]

Plus... so much of corporate American culture is hardline "sorry but rules", regardless of how little sense the rules make in context.

[Reelya]

Can Trump get any more North Korea?

Trump just tweeted that the Women's March this year is celebrating the one year reign of Glorious Leader, Donald Trump.

[martinuzz]

He could start doing illegal nuclear tests somewhere underground (preferably not Yellowstone), then he'd be even more like NK

[Frumple]

I'unno, has rodman or whoever it was died yet? If not, get 'em to shack up in the oval office for a few days or something. Could probably lob some ballistic tests towards cuba or somewhere appropriate, too. Plenty of room left to sink.

End of the day, there's probably Kim wozzname cosplay suits floating around. Between that and the makeup artists the POTUS should be able to hire if they really want to, trump could probably do a pretty accurate rendition. Dunno if he's the right height, but if not there's always stilts or hacksaws.

[Reelya]

He could start doing illegal nuclear tests somewhere underground (preferably not Yellowstone), then he'd be even more like NK

NK Nuclear tests aren't illegal. They never signed any agreement to not do so, and even if they did, nations such as the USA repeatedly assert their right to break treaties if they feel like it. Right or wrong, "international law" only exists to the extent nations want to bully each other over things, they have no actual legal standing, since NK isn't a subject of the states that are upset. The USA for example has been found guilty by the International Court of Justice for mistreating other nations (e.g. CIA covert terrorist attacks againt Nicaragua) and ordered to pay reparations, which the US government promptly ignored, claiming that they're not subject to the International Court of Justice. "International Law" doesn't exist. What exists is "International punch you in the fucking face because I'm bigger than you".

[Frumple]

... if you're going by that description of things, law period doesn't exist. No law exists beyond the point something enforces it. Scale is pretty irrelevant.

Which would roughly mean legal and illegal are nonsense words with no meaning, and you can use them to describe adherence to international treaty as much as you please. You could also use them to refer to loofahs, I guess. Most people are pretty comfortable using 'em to describe treaty violating actions rather than bathing accessories, though, since the only particular difference between international treaty violations and your neighborhood ones is who's involved.

[Reelya]

Well you're right that no law exists beyond the ability to enforce it.

However, there are a couple of differences. North Korea hasn't actually broken any law, they've just upset people. It's like someone is being a dick, so now you want them to get some punishment. "Being a dick" isn't against any law. Also, when people think "legal" they think a codified set of rules that is enforced by proper due process. There's no "don't test nukes law" in existence, there's only a "I won't test nukes" treaty. And treaties are only enforceable by ad-hoc retaliation, not any sort of formal disciplinary process.

It's also a jurisdictional issue. By what law does USA, or anyone else, have jurisdiction over North Korea?

[smjjames]

Yeah, that'd be the main thing, jurdicision and sovereignity. Same reason the ICC in The Hague can't just airdrop into Syria and arrest Assad, there is literally no police force with that kind of jurdicision. The world powers (especially the permanent members of the UN Security Council) wouldn't allow something with powers like that to be formed. Heck, most countries would probably be against it because sovereignity alone.

It's the main reason why the UN is as weak and toothless as it is, the world powers wanted it that way.

[Karnewarrior]

"Being a dick" isn't against any law.

I bet it is in North Korea! ;V

[Folly]

Gods I'm sick of listening to turtle-man whine about the government shutdown. This is like the fifth long boring speech placing all the blame on dem's that he's given since this mess started.