Objectively intelligent.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

What about the electoral college inherently prevents that? Not something about your current understanding of the politics of sparsely-populated states, but something that comes directly from giving extra weight to the votes of people in those states? There's nothing. Because de Tocqueville was full of shit on this.

Sebby believes that the "common man" shouldn't be able to bankrupt the treasury, but that that privilege should go to consistent Republican voters.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

At my last Big Law you had to come in Saturday. There was one guy who I'd see come in, sit in his office for a minute, then pick up some news article of memo, walk all the way to the CEO's office. Talk to him for a minute, then he'd leave.

But my favorites were Randy and Mahesh. They had their own ways of letting people know how much they worked. Mahesh would tell you: "I worked to 9 last night." Randy was more subtle: "Yes, Mahesh did stay until 9. I saw when he left."

I told someone who stayed there after I left about Mahesh and Randy. About a year after I left he forwarded an email. Mahesh send an email firmwide one Monday: "I had a client meeting Sunday afternoon in the second floor big conference room. I left my pen. If anyone found a pen the room please let me know."

I was never so impressed.

I couldn't care how much I see anyone. I care about how quickly they respond to my email. Even if a just get a quick "I'm working on it", it's wayyy better than face time. But I'm sure Mahesh could figure out an equally insubstantial way to check that box.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

At my last Big Law you had to come in Saturday. There was one guy who I'd see come in, sit in his office for a minute, then pick up some news article of memo, walk all the way to the CEO's office. Talk to him for a minute, then he'd leave.

But my favorites were Randy and Mahesh. They had their own ways of letting people know how much they worked. Mahesh would tell you: "I worked to 9 last night." Randy was more subtle: "Yes, Mahesh did stay until 9. I saw when he left."

I told someone who stayed there after I left about Mahesh and Randy. About a year after I left he forwarded an email. Mahesh send an email firmwide one Monday: "I had a client meeting Sunday afternoon in the second floor big conference room. I left my pen. If anyone found a pen the room please let me know."

I was never so impressed.

We used to have Saturday morning meetings. Not working Saturday to meet a deadline, which I have done independently forever, because I can get more done in 4 hours without being interrupted by stupid questions than I can in a day, but just meetings to talk about our day, how our cases were going, blah blah.

We have one guy who is a kiss ass who does the same as Mahesh. "I am working on a case, a very big case. I have very big boxes on my very big desk" sent out on a Sunday at 9:00 PM.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Sebby believes that the "common man" shouldn't be able to bankrupt the treasury, but that that privilege should go to consistent Republican voters.

Republic Presidents increase the deficits, Democratic Presidents shrink them.


When Sebby sees these numbers, I'm sure he'll switch to opposing the Electoral College in the name of fiscal responsibility.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Republic Presidents increase the deficits, Democratic Presidents shrink them.


When Sebby sees these numbers, I'm sure he'll switch to opposing the Electoral College in the name of fiscal responsibility.

This is the biggest BS line. Obama got 1 budget he wanted, maybe 2. Then the Rs took the House and forced the budget down.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

This is the biggest BS line. Obama got 1 budget he wanted, maybe 2. Then the Rs took the House and forced the budget down.

That's a nice story, but I don't think it's what happened. Federal spending has been relatively consistent over time, in real terms and as a proportion of GDP. Republicans blow holes in the deficit by cutting taxes without cutting spending. The reason why the deficit exploded under W. and then again under Trump is that they presided over massive tax cuts that they didn't pay for.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

That's a nice story, but I don't think it's what happened. Federal spending has been relatively consistent over time, in real terms and as a proportion of GDP. Republicans blow holes in the deficit by cutting taxes without cutting spending. The reason why the deficit exploded under W. and then again under Trump is that they presided over massive tax cuts that they didn't pay for.

The R house didn't force Obama to cut his budgets? Seriously? I mean they did it to fuck with him, but they def did it.

edit: check the requested and final numbers. You are delusional. I mean I love you, but I worry.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

We used to have Saturday morning meetings. Not working Saturday to meet a deadline, which I have done independently forever, because I can get more done in 4 hours without being interrupted by stupid questions than I can in a day, but just meetings to talk about our day, how our cases were going, blah blah.

We have one guy who is a kiss ass who does the same as Mahesh. "I am working on a case, a very big case. I have very big boxes on my very big desk" sent out on a Sunday at 9:00 PM.

In Detroit real lawyers go to visit Canadian clients on US-only holidays, Memorial/Labor days, Thanksgiving. You cannot bill for family time. But NOW WE CAN'T GET INTO CANADA!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

The R house didn't force Obama to cut his budgets? Seriously? I mean they did it to fuck with him, but they def did it.

edit: check the requested and final numbers. You are delusional. I mean I love you, but I worry.

I checked the numbers before my last post. If you look at federal spending in 2009 and 2010 and assume that was what Obama wanted to do, and then look at it the following couple of years and assume that was Republicans reining him, that's a plausible story, but it ignores some key facts. One is that spending soared because of the recession that started late in W.'s administration. The hike in spending was the stimulus, which was never designed to go indefinitely. And Obama then called for austerity (which I thought then and continue to think was a mistake). He was a good neoliberal and internalized the Wall St. view (just as Clinton did before him) that bond markets will punish a President who runs big deficits. Recall that he insisted that his major domestic policy initiative, the ACA, had to be budget neutral.

Also, I am not delusional that W. and Trump presided over massive tax cuts that made the deficits bigger, something Obama did not do.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I checked the numbers before my last post. If you look at federal spending in 2009 and 2010 and assume that was what Obama wanted to do, and then look at it the following couple of years and assume that was Republicans reining him, that's a plausible story, but it ignores some key facts. One is that spending soared because of the recession that started late in W.'s administration. The hike in spending was the stimulus, which was never designed to go indefinitely. And Obama then called for austerity (which I thought then and continue to think was a mistake). He was a good neoliberal and internalized the Wall St. view (just as Clinton did before him) that bond markets will punish a President who runs big deficits. Recall that he insisted that his major domestic policy initiative, the ACA, had to be budget neutral.

Also, I am not delusional that W. and Trump presided over massive tax cuts that made the deficits bigger, something Obama did not do.

I know you don't study math, but his proposed and final numbers are different, very different. Do you ever acknowledge anything contrary to your internal narratives?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I couldn't care how much I see anyone. I care about how quickly they respond to my email. Even if a just get a quick "I'm working on it", it's wayyy better than face time. But I'm sure Mahesh could figure out an equally insubstantial way to check that box.

Because you've dealt with something life threatening. Your view is forever altered, in a good way. I don't agree with a lot of your views on politics, but I surmise we'd agree considerably on the value of time versus all else, and this accrues from a recognition that life is short which one acquires from dealing with mortality. Your recognition being much more concrete than mine could be... at this time (the invoice for my decades of behaviors, despite being a physical fitness nut and careful eater, largely out of vanity, is coming).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

We used to have Saturday morning meetings. Not working Saturday to meet a deadline, which I have done independently forever, because I can get more done in 4 hours without being interrupted by stupid questions than I can in a day, but just meetings to talk about our day, how our cases were going, blah blah.

We have one guy who is a kiss ass who does the same as Mahesh. "I am working on a case, a very big case. I have very big boxes on my very big desk" sent out on a Sunday at 9:00 PM.

I had a boss years ago who had one rule: "Don't lose." He was a great guy. He treated me quite well. One year he told me why I couldn't get a bonus. He was honest about cash being tight, but he gave me a crazy office and partnership if I wanted it, but quick money couldn't be had.

I left. I went to work for a massive dick, for more money. I hated him and I left him rather than wait for a sizable bonus. He sucked that badly. He'll suck to his death, a barrel of garbage genes.

Regret's a stupid waste of one's time. Repentance a Catholic pile of shite. But I do think I owe that managing partner who treated me well an apology, or at least an explanation.

1800s hr a year, nothing more. And of course I lost a few, and he let it slide a bit. But not many.

It's strange the people you feel you owe a debt to in scary times. But I feel a strange obligation to the few decent laywers in existence? Kind of like the need to coddle a near-extinct animal?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Oliver_Wendell_Ramone

My tiny little beach house is under level 3 evacuation orders (LEAVE NOW!!). Don't know if it will last the day. Thankfully nobody using it at the moment.

Shit... I'm terribly sorry.

Of all the states to become a hotbed of cray news stories. I've a buddy in Bend I'm eager to Zoom with over weekend, just to ask, "WTF's up?"

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I had a boss years ago who had one rule: "Don't lose." He was a great guy. He treated me quite well.

Big tits?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Nope. I'm an elitist prick, but I'm not that much of an elitist prick.

I'm not elitist. I'm pragmatic. I can tell you why the average voter is suspect in one word: Population.

Watch the first ten minutes of Idiocracy.

Or wait for a morning hearing on some injunction while the judge disposes of his or her "family court" issues (the ones that enrage him or her to the point of turning bright red).

The "common" person includes a ton of wonderful, smart, thoughtful people. But far more, it includes idiots. Clueless, hopeless idiots who wander through life unaware of any of its complexities or obligations. (And we must state that, without apology. And this includes historically disenfranchised Americans. An idiot's an idiot regardless of the reason, or the idiot's race, or socioeconomic background, and an idiot should be ignored. There is no "underdog handicap" because one is from a disadvantaged background, whatever that may be.)

BUT

Idiots. Have. Kids.

This skill they master. (Rewatch Idiocracy here.) They have issue, loads of it, and most of that issue is headed nowhere. I see them meander through the hall of the courthouse, and they're largely hopeless as they’ll never acquire the soft skills to ascend.

Americans are considerably like American cheese. It's got some great taste points, but the shit makes you sick. And the complaints, from all of them, Trumpworld to CHAZ, are largely diversions, deflections.

We need more immigration, yesterday. And we need a bit more nasty and direct pragmatism as well. No more of this trash-think from soft-headed professors and apologists for the right or left. If you've not had metrics applied to you (and few academics have), your ideas should be considered, as abstract ideas always are, but you should not be allowed at the Big Kids' policy meetings. Nor should the views of any Wall Street-funded think tank assholes.