Joe Mac
Well-Known Member
I just remember my mum and granny having a prayer to St. Anthony that they used to say if they had lost anything
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
I just remember my mum and granny having a prayer to St. Anthony that they used to say if they had lost anything
Oh, me too. Me too.I just remember my mum and granny having a prayer to St. Anthony that they used to say if they had lost anything
The White House submitted their own stimulus plan yesterday. It includes no unemployment benefits and is strong on litigation shields.
Mitch McConnell is also indicating that he would be willing to forgo litigation shields for now if democrats are willing to make major concessions.
We are already on a skinny bill. Just what would those major concessions be? I'm sure it includes unemployment benefits, but what else would the republicans want to cut?
The litigation shields are the most contested issues of the stimulus package. And democrats my very well be willing to make concessions to eliminate hold off the litigation shields.
Republicans are insisting that waves of lawsuits are coming. And that businesses will not be able to survive all the lawsuits if they don't act. However, that simply is not true. Very few covid-19 related lawsuits have been filed to date and they only make up a very small percentage of work place litigation this year.
And those lawsuits that do exist are totally warranted.
For example, on the Apple News+ Today podcast this morning, they talked about one such lawsuit. I guy asked his boss if he could wear a face covering at work. He was considered high risk with a underlaying condition. His boss said no and was unwilling to budge on his stance. Either don't ware a mask or don't show up to work. So, needed his job he continued to show up to work where he contracted COVID-19 and later died. His family has filed a lawsuit against his employer.
Mitch McConnell is also indicating that he would be willing to forgo litigation shields for now if democrats are willing to make major concessions.
We are already on a skinny bill. Just what would those major concessions be? I'm sure it includes unemployment benefits, but what else would the republicans want to cut?
The litigation shields are the most contested issues of the stimulus package. And democrats my very well be willing to make concessions to eliminate hold off the litigation shields.
Republicans are insisting that waves of lawsuits are coming. And that businesses will not be able to survive all the lawsuits if they don't act. However, that simply is not true. Very few covid-19 related lawsuits have been filed to date and they only make up a very small percentage of work place litigation this year.
And those lawsuits that do exist are totally warranted.
For example, on the Apple News+ Today podcast this morning, they talked about one such lawsuit. I guy asked his boss if he could wear a face covering at work. He was considered high risk with a underlaying condition. His boss said no and was unwilling to budge on his stance. Either don't ware a mask or don't show up to work. So, needed his job he continued to show up to work where he contracted COVID-19 and later died. His family has filed a lawsuit against his employer.
AnthonyI
Well-Known Member
As long as business' have a COVID "Plan" to help protect their employees litigation isn't a problem............it's those business' that are ignoring all of this that are open too it, and just as you said, is then warranted.
Dems are always making concessions because they want to "play nice", Republicans are well aware of this and know how to play the game, while I loath the republicans, now more then ever, the Dems need to grow a spine or move over for some progressives to take care of things.
Yet it is off the table for both Republicans and Institutional Democrats.
Only progressives would support it, and it's an impossible uphill battle to pass unless we have new faces in the house and senate.
AnthonyI
Well-Known Member
Sorely needed.
Credit scores have been used for decades to assess consumer creditworthiness, but their scope is far greater now that they are powered by algorithms: not only do they consider vastly more data, in both volume and type, but they increasingly affect whether you can buy a car, rent an apartment, or get a full-time job. Their comprehensive influence means that if your score is ruined, it can be nearly impossible to recover. Worse, the algorithms are owned by private companies that don’t divulge how they come to their decisions. Victims can be sent in a downward spiral that sometimes ends in homelessness or a return to their abuser.
Credit-scoring algorithms are not the only ones that affect people’s economic well-being and access to basic services. Algorithms now decide which children enter foster care, which patients receive medical care, which families get access to stable housing. Those of us with means can pass our lives unaware of any of this. But for low-income individuals, the rapid growth and adoption of automated decision-making systems has created a hidden web of interlocking traps.
Fortunately, a growing group of civil lawyers are beginning to organize around this issue. Borrowing a playbook from the criminal defense world’s pushback against risk-assessment algorithms, they’re seeking to educate themselves on these systems, build a community, and develop litigation strategies. “Basically every civil lawyer is starting to deal with this stuff, because all of our clients are in some way or another being touched by these systems,” says Michele Gilman, a clinical law professor at the University of Baltimore. “We need to wake up, get training. If we want to be really good holistic lawyers, we need to be aware of that.”
www.technologyreview.com
Credit-scoring algorithms are not the only ones that affect people’s economic well-being and access to basic services. Algorithms now decide which children enter foster care, which patients receive medical care, which families get access to stable housing. Those of us with means can pass our lives unaware of any of this. But for low-income individuals, the rapid growth and adoption of automated decision-making systems has created a hidden web of interlocking traps.
Fortunately, a growing group of civil lawyers are beginning to organize around this issue. Borrowing a playbook from the criminal defense world’s pushback against risk-assessment algorithms, they’re seeking to educate themselves on these systems, build a community, and develop litigation strategies. “Basically every civil lawyer is starting to deal with this stuff, because all of our clients are in some way or another being touched by these systems,” says Michele Gilman, a clinical law professor at the University of Baltimore. “We need to wake up, get training. If we want to be really good holistic lawyers, we need to be aware of that.”
The coming war on the hidden algorithms that trap people in poverty
A growing group of lawyers are uncovering, navigating, and fighting the automated systems that deny the poor from housing, jobs, and basic services.
www.technologyreview.com
LeSamourai
Well-Known Member
Credit scores have been used for decades to assess consumer creditworthiness, but their scope is far greater now that they are powered by algorithms: not only do they consider vastly more data, in both volume and type, but they increasingly affect whether you can buy a car, rent an apartment, or get a full-time job. Their comprehensive influence means that if your score is ruined, it can be nearly impossible to recover. Worse, the algorithms are owned by private companies that don’t divulge how they come to their decisions. Victims can be sent in a downward spiral that sometimes ends in homelessness or a return to their abuser.
Credit-scoring algorithms are not the only ones that affect people’s economic well-being and access to basic services. Algorithms now decide which children enter foster care, which patients receive medical care, which families get access to stable housing. Those of us with means can pass our lives unaware of any of this. But for low-income individuals, the rapid growth and adoption of automated decision-making systems has created a hidden web of interlocking traps.
Fortunately, a growing group of civil lawyers are beginning to organize around this issue. Borrowing a playbook from the criminal defense world’s pushback against risk-assessment algorithms, they’re seeking to educate themselves on these systems, build a community, and develop litigation strategies. “Basically every civil lawyer is starting to deal with this stuff, because all of our clients are in some way or another being touched by these systems,” says Michele Gilman, a clinical law professor at the University of Baltimore. “We need to wake up, get training. If we want to be really good holistic lawyers, we need to be aware of that.”
The coming war on the hidden algorithms that trap people in poverty
A growing group of lawyers are uncovering, navigating, and fighting the automated systems that deny the poor from housing, jobs, and basic services.
A good book on the topic of black box algorithms and how they can put a veneer of objectivity over the same old prejudices- Weapons of Math Destruction
Or a talk of hers on the topic:
What I find really worrisome is that evictions can have a huge in pact on your credit scores. And that eviction can haunt you for life. The waves of people that will soon be evicted will likely end up with a permanent dock on their reports that makes it much harder to find a new place to rent. Their options will be limited to who does not require credit / background checks. And for those who do require the checks, they likely wont pass and be approved to rent. Much of corporate America involved in property management as an investment will not rent to those who have prior evictions. The apartment complex I'm in now requires a minimum credit score of 700 to be approved to lease a unit. I was able to pass that before my student loans defaulted, but I wouldn't be able to pass that now.
All 17 AG's are Republicans as well. Surprise surprise.
It's funny that they keep trying the same shenanigans that keep failing over and over because there is nothing there. Just different groups keep file lawsuits. It's not going to go anywhere. I'm wondering if their game to keep the appearance of a disputed election through January.
grumble grumble grumble...
[T]he Partnership for America’s Health Care Future (PAHCF) issued a statement saying they “look forward to working with the Department of Health and Human Services under the new administration to build on and improve what’s working, where private coverage, Medicare and Medicaid work together to expand access to coverage and care, and fix what’s broken.”
PAHCF’s members include top lobbying groups representing health insurers, drugmakers, and for-profit hospital conglomerates. Under the existing system that the group is defending, up to twelve million Americans have lost their medical coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic, as health insurance industry profits have skyrocketed because people have avoided elective medical procedures.
Now, new financial disclosures reviewed by the Daily Poster shed light on just how much money PAHCF has been able to amass in its crusade to block significant health care reforms. In 2019, the group raised more than $55 million and spent roughly $20 million, ending the year with $36 million in assets, according to its tax return filed with the IRS last month.
jacobinmag.com
[T]he Partnership for America’s Health Care Future (PAHCF) issued a statement saying they “look forward to working with the Department of Health and Human Services under the new administration to build on and improve what’s working, where private coverage, Medicare and Medicaid work together to expand access to coverage and care, and fix what’s broken.”
PAHCF’s members include top lobbying groups representing health insurers, drugmakers, and for-profit hospital conglomerates. Under the existing system that the group is defending, up to twelve million Americans have lost their medical coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic, as health insurance industry profits have skyrocketed because people have avoided elective medical procedures.
Now, new financial disclosures reviewed by the Daily Poster shed light on just how much money PAHCF has been able to amass in its crusade to block significant health care reforms. In 2019, the group raised more than $55 million and spent roughly $20 million, ending the year with $36 million in assets, according to its tax return filed with the IRS last month.
The Establishment Is Gearing Up Against Even a Public Option
Tax records we've reviewed show a health care industry front group run by a former Hillary Clinton aide has already amassed millions to block a public health insurance option. Even small reform isn't possible without confronting powerful interests.
jacobinmag.com
AnthonyI
Well-Known Member
Oh, it's definitely about the "Legal Defense Fund", Trump's making way too much money on that scam and he'll ride it out to the bitter end The said part is the millions sitting there saying "Look how hard he's fighting for us", so again.............
And just for fun:
This observational study, which analyzed publicly available data on campaign contributions and lobbying in the US from 1999 to 2018, found that the pharmaceutical and health product industry spent $4.7 billion, an average of $233 million per year, on lobbying the US federal government; $414 million on contributions to presidential and congressional electoral candidates, national party committees, and outside spending groups; and $877 million on contributions to state candidates and committees. Contributions were targeted at senior legislators in Congress involved in drafting health care laws and state committees that opposed or supported key referenda on drug pricing and regulation.
This observational study, which analyzed publicly available data on campaign contributions and lobbying in the US from 1999 to 2018, found that the pharmaceutical and health product industry spent $4.7 billion, an average of $233 million per year, on lobbying the US federal government; $414 million on contributions to presidential and congressional electoral candidates, national party committees, and outside spending groups; and $877 million on contributions to state candidates and committees. Contributions were targeted at senior legislators in Congress involved in drafting health care laws and state committees that opposed or supported key referenda on drug pricing and regulation.
Oh wow, I was not expecting the story to show he hit a police officer with his car.
Had he been black that car would have been full of bullets.
Had he been black that car would have been full of bullets.
Twentytwo
Pre-order Goodness
Yep. Wasn't even charged. This country is an absolute joke.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Blue lives....matter?