Hawai’i Business Magazine has done a report on what I assume are major problems and the changes we need to make to address those problems. I haven’t read the report yet, but I want to. This thread will be a place to take notes and discuss the report.
Thoughts on the trial.
In the recent Check This Out thread, we talked about the wealth tax. Here’s a really good, short video explaining the concept:
I’m interested in hearing the drawbacks to this proposals, because it sounds good to me.
I figured the report deserves a separate thread.
BREAKING: The House Judiciary Committee is told to expect notification by 5pm that the Mueller report has been delivered to Barr— Ellen Nakashima (@nakashimae) March 22, 2019
While we wait for more information, I think the following David Frum piece,
A Special Prosecutor is not the Answer, written in 2017, is worth reading. The gist is that a Special Prosecutor will focus illegal acts that can be prosecuted, and that a president can do a lot of bad things that aren’t crimes. The Trump campaign coordinating with Russia and its cutouts to harm Clinton may not be illegal, or the Special Prosecutor may decide there isn’t enough evidence to prosecute anyone. This does not mean that the coordination is acceptable. What it does mean is that the question is not something for the legal system to answer, but the political one. In my view, the Republicans has hindered the political system from properly functioning. If Clinton had become president and Clinton campaign behaved similarly with regard to Russia, we would be moving towards, if not completing, impeachment. If a future president behaves in a similar manner, impeachment and removal would be justified.
This is probably better:
As a refresher, here are our 4 principles for reading the Mueller report without knowing what’s in it. https://t.co/CvGJqoufQh— Susan Hennessey (@Susan_Hennessey) March 22, 2019
Continue reading “Mueller Report”
This twitter thread will demonstrate what I mean: Continue reading “One Quick Example of Why Better Critical Thinking Isn’t an Adequate Solution to Information Overload”
Democrats unveiled a major policy proposal, the Green New Deal. The title references FDR’s New Deal, and my understanding is that the plan is equally ambitious–addressing not only climate change, but also education, healthcare, among other things. In this thread, I want to analyze and discuss this proposal. Here’s a twitter thread that summarizes the deal:
Continue reading “Green New Deal”
Based on the first episode, I get the impression this season will be more informative (in a sociological way) rather than entertaining. The subject itself, the way the criminal justice system typically operates, is also not a very cheerful, especially since a realistic depiction is the goal. Based on the first episode, they’ve seem to have done that. Listening to it made me think of my experiences in courtrooms. What I heard was familiar and not really pleasant. Continue reading “Notes on the Serial Podcast, Season 3”
I believe I’ve talked about the following concept several times before, but I can’t find my posts or thread(s) on it, nor do I know if I even started a thread. Because of that, I’m starting a thread on this topic now. The basic concept is as follows:
- A group of people, preferably one that is preferably diverse in terms of their politics, ethnicity, gender, age, etc., meets periodically (maybe weekly, monthly, or quarterly), to receive, analyze, and discuss the most important information about current events and news.
- Preferably, a news agency (e.g., Start-Advertiser, Civil Beat, or even the Atlantic magazine) could oversee, lead, and facilitate these meetings, but a non-profit group (such as, the league of women’s voters, Common Cause, etc.) could also do so as well. The facilitators and leaders should represent different parts of the political spectrum, especially the left and right
Here’s another idea that I may not have mentioned before. Continue reading “News Meeting Groups”