Vorticity

Vorticity, 14 hours ago

How does he not just topple over? Does the shit in his diaper act as a counter balance?

Vorticity, 16 hours ago

Don’t forget threatening to sanction the ICC over the Netanyahu arrest warrant.

Vorticity, 1 day ago (edited 1 day ago)

I don’t agree with these religious nuts but, in this case, I don’t think they’re completely off base regarding “God given rights”. The Declaration of Independence (not the Constitution) says:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I wish the Declaration didn’t include “by their Creator” but it does.

Vorticity, 3 days ago

I wonder how this compares the the number of businesses that existed in 2013 that no longer exist. I wonder for two reasons:

• Is 38% similar to the typical rate of failure for businesses and other ventures?
• How much of the 38% can be explained by closure of high-risk businesses like restaurants?

Something else that could explain a lot of it is webpages that were always intended to be ephemeral. Political campaign websites for instance.

Vorticity, 3 days ago

I think there is more nuance to it than this. Certain government officials who are in sensitive positions should be barred from holding stocks except through a blind trust, an index fund, a mutual fund, or some other vehicle that they can’t directly control or influence. Those “certain government officials” should include members of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches who tend to be privy to information that would, if acted upon, constitute insider trading. This would include policy-makers as well as those around the policy-makers whose knowledge would create a conflict of interest.

That is all to say, I don’t think that someone working in government IT, doing wildlife research, or doing HR work for a government agency should be required to divest from their stock portfolios. That should be limited to people whose jobs create an inherent conflict of interest.

Vorticity, 3 days ago

allowing them to profit through “normal/legal” channels prevents them from taking bribes or seeking other forms of income.

This doesn’t seem to have worked. Thomas and Alito are the glaring examples, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that they all take bribes of one form or another, whether intentionally or unintentionally because their actions bear no personal consequences other than enrichment.

Vorticity, 3 days ago

Thanks for the context. I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted by some people. Given the timing, I don’t see that this either constitutes insider trading or implies prejudice (even if he is prejudiced). I do wonder, though, if something happened in the news cycle around August 14th that might have prompted his sale at that point. I don’t trust Alito to do anything in good faith around the subject of trans rights.