Biker Killed by Mountain Lion

Edward Dolan wrote:

...
You make my point for me. Better to lose your money than to lose your
life. White collar crime will not normally take your life....

And neither will most other crime - especially “crimes” that occur
between consenting adults [1].

Of course, the worst white-collar crimes have been legal or only involve
civil penalties at the worst. This is what happens when accepting
campaign contributions from the rich is the only way most politicians
can get elected to office.

[1] It is of course; these “crimes” that make up the bulk of the current
US prison population.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

We are in a society that is ruled by lawyers. I do not know what % of the
general population is lawyers, but I don't think it is 59%......

-------------------------------------------------------------

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.overlawyered.com/cgi-local/mt/mt-tb.cgi/601

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Number of Senators who are
lawyers' from Overlawyered.
If You Wonder Why
Excerpt: "It currently stands at 59 of the 100, according to today's
editorial in Investor's Business Daily on legal reform ('Any...
Weblog: Rodent Regatta
Tracked: December 20, 2003 04:54 AM

-------------------------------------------------------------

Arne

=====================
"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
om...
"Arne" wrote in message
news:KfZ4c.2786$rQ.545@lakeread04...

"GeoB" wrote in message
om...

We allow the rich their behavior because the system is run by thieves
and crooks.

We do not allow the rich anything. They take it. They become lawyers, we
chose between 2 choices usually, they get elected and if they retain
their
morales, they accomplish nothing, else they lose them and accomplish a
lot,
usually to their collective benefit. I say lawyers as most politicians
have
a law background.

Way back in ancient history, the collective legislators were a
conglomeration of shop keepers, farmers, and other types. They did what
they
had to do in Washington (formerly Philadelphia) and went home to earn
their
keep. Then, the people decided the federal gov't should do more... and
more
and more.... and we gave up our rights and responsibilities to the feds
and
wound up where we are today.... a lot of the population said 'let the
feds
do it' and the feds got all the power...

That happens when you don't want to do things for yourself...

Arne

Yes, everyone hates lawyers. But they are the lubricant that makes our
kind of society possible. I have often thought that the best possible
society to live in is one ruled by lawyers. Only they know how to
checkmate one another, thereby insuring the maximum amount of freedom
for the rest of us.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

PS. Arne, please, always bottom post so that we know what particular
passage you are responding to at the outset of reading your posts.

Edward Dolan wrote:

...
There is absolutely no reason on earth why we can't accomplish this
most essential and basic of all tasks for any society - and that is to
provide good and adequate housing for everyone that does not cost an
arm and a leg....

There is a very good reason why it can not be accomplished. There is no
profit in it for the wealthy holders of capital that really run the US
and many other countries. They do not have to deal with the homeless
problem since they live in gated and guarded communities.

Homelessness is also a threat that can be used against workers that get
out of line. Removing the social safety net (policy of the Republican
Party and the DLC wing of the Democratic Party) allows employers to
obtain workers even when they offer substandard wages and working
conditions.

... The average American is not even aware that there are
other ways of doing things that accomplish the same purpose of
insuring a good and satisfying life for all its members. If others
have the courage to experiment with alternative life styles, then I am
all for it and I aways await with interest whether they have succeeded
or not.

The "average American" has been brainwashed into believing the national
religion - EVERYTHING IS BETTER IN THE US THAN ANYWHERE ELSE, AND NO
IMPROVEMENT IS POSSIBLE. This is supported by most politicians, media
outlets, and public school curricula. Campaigns of falsehood will be
used to discredit those who wish to change the system to benefit the
working classes. E.g., raising the minimum wage will result in massive
unemployment, reducing the tax burden on the rich will benefit everyone,
single-payer healthcare will result in rationing of essential services [1].

No, it will not matter how many times I read you. You are a
Romanticist about housing and about how free a society should be.
There are individual rights but there are also plenty of collective
rights as well. In the end, I come down on the side of the collective....

However, the political party you support does not support the rights of
individuals or the collective, but puts the rights of capital above all
else.

...
We humans require housing. We are not wild animals. All sound
societies provide housing for their members, no matter how poor or how
sick some of them may be.

By this definition, the US is not a sound society.

[1] Canada is offered as an example of this (which is false), and in
addition the fact that per capita health spending is half the rate in
Canada compared to the US is not mentioned.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

I would like to be ruled by either a benevolent dictator with a grip on
life, or a conglomeration of people who actually work for a living and have
a bit of a struggle to make ends meet. The first would probably not pass out
the pork and get rid of some of the stupid things that occur (ie, suing a
company that sells food because a person can't walk away from their plate)
and the second would have a grip on how money should be spent.

An example is our own town. It is one of the top 5 towns in my state for per
capita income. And when they build schools, they draw on their experiences
of how they live. Consequently, they think our schools should reflect their
life style. And our taxes have risen accordingly. And people of normal means
are leaving town to avoid our high taxes....

Then we have our folks in washington who have their own retirement plan.
They have their own health care system. What did they do after passing OSHA
and Equal Opportunity Emloyment Act? They put provisions in that excluded
themselves from having to follow the laws they just passed.... In short,
they continually put themselves above us.

The main reason the gov't first existed was to maintain an army/navy for the
defense of our country. There was no income tax...... and it has grown from
there to where we are now. We think they should take care of everybody and
everything.

Arne

=====================
"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
om...
"Arne" wrote in message
news:mE25c.3672$rQ.2995@lakeread04...

We are in a society that is ruled by lawyers. I do not know what % of
the
general population is lawyers, but I don't think it is 59%......

I grant you your point, but what I am saying is that is not such a bad
thing. Who would you rather be ruled by? Corporate executives. Labor
union leaders. Priests. Intellectuals. Wealthy landowners. I think
not.

The advent of the small town lawyer in America who works in all areas
of the law is one of our finest creations. It may very well be that
this lawyer class has more to do with our freedoms than any other
class of citizens. They value the law above all else and see to its
enforcement. I give you old Abe Lincoln as a fine example of what I am
talking about. If it weren't for lawyers, we may very well have lost
our democracy long ago along with most of our freedoms.

But lawyers do not so much rule us as represent us. But the beauty of
it is that lawyers know how to check one another without coming to
blows or committing murder. This creates balance and it is very
difficult for any one person or clique to ever dominate anything. It
mostly creates a lot of grid lock, but that is not such a bad thing
either.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote in message ...


Edward Dolan wrote:


...
There is absolutely no reason on earth why we can't accomplish this
most essential and basic of all tasks for any society - and that is to
provide good and adequate housing for everyone that does not cost an
arm and a leg....

There is a very good reason why it can not be accomplished. There is no
profit in it for the wealthy holders of capital that really run the US
and many other countries. They do not have to deal with the homeless
problem since they live in gated and guarded communities.


I do not see why there can not be profit in it for someone to provide
low cost housing for folks of modest means. However, I do think it
takes more brains to accomplish this. If the free market were
operating properly it would be done. I do not recall folks having such
serious problems getting affordable housing when I was a kid some 50
years ago.

The rich are not immune from the problem of the homeless. They
encounter them on the streets where they work each and every day. If
they are not careful, their gated communities will end up becoming
fortresses and they will have to have bodyguards accompanying them
when they venture out. That is the way it is in many third world
countries.

And the economic elite’s in those third world countries appear to be
content with the status quo, as they generally oppose any reform efforts
that would lead to a more equal distribution of wealth. (Ironically,
since they are less affluent than the wealthy in the more socially equal
countries of western/northern Europe and Japan).

Homelessness is also a threat that can be used against workers that get
out of line. Removing the social safety net (policy of the Republican
Party and the DLC wing of the Democratic Party) allows employers to
obtain workers even when they offer substandard wages and working
conditions.


I don't confuse the problem of the lack of inexpensive housing with
low wages. They are two separate and distinct problems. Employers
aren't interested in threatening their workers. That is way too
conspiratorial for me....

It happens all the time - ask anyone who has worked in a low wage
factory. If management hears a rumor of union organizing, they call a
meeting where it is made clear that they will shut the plant down if the
workers unionize. There are plenty of desperate workers to exploit in
third world countries.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

On 14 Mar 2004 21:57:06 -0800, (Edward Dolan) wrote:

The rich already pay most of the taxes in this country, even with the
recent reduction in their taxes by the Republican congress. Kerry can
only threaten to raise taxes on the rich. If he even mentions raising
middle class taxes he will go down to massive defeat like Mondale did.
This should tell you that most Americans think they are paying more
than enough taxes

al quaeda (may their carcasses be buried with the excrement of pigs)
just installed a socialist government in Spain and they will do the
same in America in November.

not true.. a dictator is simply a one person government. that does not
exclude fairness.

What we have now could be much better than it is. It is human nature that
has ruined it.... even fair application of the laws we have now to hold
those jackasses accountable for their actions would be nice. Most times,
when they get caught, they get a slap on the wrist.... where we would wind
up in jail.

Anyway, this discussion is getting boring, so I'm done.

Arne

=====================
"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
om...

There is no such thing as a benevolent dictator. It is an oxymoron.

The second group you mention would be ideal and harkens back to the
Jeffersonian ideal of democracy, the sturdy yeoman of the countryside.
Alas, those days are long gone.

What we presently have is not as bad as you imagine it to be. It could
be infinitely worse.

On 16 Mar 2004 13:48:39 -0800, (Edward Dolan) wrote:


Only if Kerry wins.

NOT "if", ed. "When".

Look at the electoral votes and do the math.

The next several months will be entertaining, but the outcome's pretty
much a lock.

The bad thing is that kerry's apparently made some back-channel
arrangements with foreign powers, probably including terrorist
sponsors (c.f. his remarks about foreign leaders secretly supporting
him).

Spain's the first domino.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:12:43 -0600, Zippy the Pinhead
wrote:

The bad thing is that kerry's apparently made some back-channel
arrangements with foreign powers, probably including terrorist
sponsors (c.f. his remarks about foreign leaders secretly supporting
him).

Well, since his own logs don't support that these meetings took place
and he evidently can't even get one leader that wants to go on record,
this appears to be vapor air meetings. He needs a handler and soon -
one that keeps him on point and able to not contradict himself in the
same paragraph, or he won't be close in the election.

Not happy with either and think I'll give Nader a vote, more to
support the message that the two party system is essentially
unresponsive than that I really support Nader. The height of arrogance
is that Democrats think that Nader owes them stepping aside. When is
the last time the Democrats did anything for Nader to be owed
anything?

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

On 17 Mar 2004 13:37:12 -0800, (Edward Dolan) wrote:

If others
like Curtis decide to vote for Nader it will be an even closer and
more interesting election. Nader has gotten a bit too liberal for me
although I did like him in years past.

Depends on the state. In Maryland, the electoral college votes will be
for Kerry. Its only the states up for grabs that it makes a
difference. That ain't Maryland. OTOH, in those states a vote for a
third party will be a noticeable increment - there simply won't be
many.

The bigger problem with Nader is that he isn't running as a particular
party. So it will be wasted in the since that it isn't making it
easier to run in the next Presidential race. Still, since the vote
will be wasted in a sense anyway, voting for other than the two major
parties is more satisfying and that's what I'm going to do (if he gets
on the ballot).

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...