Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
US Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has proposed a federal privacy law that would preempt tougher privacy rules issued by states.
Rubio's announcement Wednesday said that his American Data Dissemination (ADD) Act "provides overdue transparency and accountability from the tech industry while ensuring that small businesses and startups are still able to innovate and compete in the digital marketplace."
But Rubio's bill establishes a process for creating rules instead of issuing specific rules right away, and it allows up to 27 months for Congress or the Federal Trade Commission to write the actual rules.
In addition, the bill text says it "shall supersede" any provision of a state law that pertains to the same consumer data governed by Rubio's proposed federal law. That includes names, Social Security numbers, other government ID numbers, financial transactions, medical histories, criminal histories, employment histories, user-generated content, "unique biometric data, such as fingerprint, voice print, retina or iris image, or other unique physical representation," and other personal data collected by companies.
[...] Rubio's bill wouldn't do much to protect Americans' data privacy, consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge said. The Rubio bill uses the Privacy Act of 1974 as its framework; the 1974 law applies to federal agencies, but Rubio's bill would apply similar rules to the private sector.
[...] The Act "can generally be characterized as an omnibus 'code of fair information practices' that attempts to regulate the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of personal information by federal executive branch agencies," the DOJ says in an overview last updated in 2015. "However, the Act's imprecise language, limited legislative history, and somewhat outdated regulatory guidelines have rendered it a difficult statute to decipher and apply."
Despite the DOJ saying the law is confusing, Rubio argued in an op-ed for The Hill that the Privacy Act of 1974 is "widely considered one of the seminal pieces of privacy law in effect today."
[...] Congressional Democrats recently proposed a much stricter privacy law, which could issue steep fines to companies and send their top executives to prison for up to 20 years if they violate Americans' privacy.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @12:38AM
Fascism1
(Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday January 20 2019, @12:45AM (21 children)
Rubio is a deep-state homosexual like Anderson Cooper. They should be tried at Guantanamo and sentenced to have sex with women as punishment for their crimes towards the United States of America.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:13AM (9 children)
Sounds good. Can I be a deep state homosexual too?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:16AM
Is there any other kind?
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:18AM
Deep basement homosexuals don't count, even if they deep throat deep state homosexuals.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday January 20 2019, @02:45AM (6 children)
American women like those in the CIA or who were otherwise trained in the art of interrogation at Fort Machaca, Arizona, can easily sniff-out phonies like you. But those vixens are extremely adept in interrogating Muslims, they'll capture a motherfucker from ISIS or something, ship him to Gitmo, then in the interrogation room they will rub their tits on a Koran in plain sight of them, while playing American heavy-metal music. If that doesn't cause the suspect to confess, then they will break out the leather and ball-gags. The interrogators are of those of the most serious degree, as they have been known to slip random pages from Heavy Metal Magazine [heavymetal.com] into the pages of the Korans of Guantanamo prisoners, and in their torture play nonstop Guns 'n' Roses and Metallica whilst "interviewing" their suspects.
They will break down one's Islamic beliefs until the suspects are left as living husks of men, and those women of the CIA and military intelligence are sexually gratified.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @02:50PM (1 child)
We'll finally know he was too close to the truth.
Honestly this is one of the MOST believable things to come out of Ethanol-Fueled's mind that I have heard so far.
You never use interrogation to get someone to actually get information out of someone, but if you soften them up with it first, especially if they are already sexually frustrated, you will have no trouble unravelling it from them later when all that pent up stress needs to be released and you slowly build them to a satisfying climax after which they will answer, do or say whatever you ask.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Phoenix666 on Sunday January 20 2019, @06:07PM
Ahem. You and EF should get a room.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday January 20 2019, @04:39PM
I had no idea you were 1) a Muslim and 2) this kinky.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @08:41PM (1 child)
You have been reported to the Department of Homoland Security.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 22 2019, @04:25AM
Thankyou.
(Score: 2) by Webweasel on Monday January 21 2019, @11:17AM
They actually played NiN and Skinny Puppy.
Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:18AM (6 children)
I had the experience of lunch and a talk from Rubio during his 100 points of light campaign before he entered State level government.
He was (and I'm sure still is) 100% lizard people. He didn't like our group, believe in our group, nor ever help our group, and you could read that in his body language before he stood up and his face during the moments while he was psyching himself up to put on his public face, tell the crowd what they wanted to hear - which he barely got right, didn't really understand our issues but did manage to spout most of the right buzz words mostly in correct context, smile charmingly, and make heartfelt sounding "I will help you" platitudes come out of his mouth.
The real test for Rubio was his actions performance on his 100 points of light tour, he accomplished absolutely nothing on his promises, maybe 25% of the 100 points got done, but they were in-progress to get done before he adopted them as a cause, and the other 75%, like ours, got ignored.
Rubio's vote has been for sale since he entered office, and I'm sure it still is. If you want his vote, just make sure to lobby him with a bigger carrot than the other side is bringing.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:20AM (5 children)
Lizard. It's what's for lunch!
(Score: 2) by SpockLogic on Sunday January 20 2019, @03:19AM (4 children)
Rubio is a festering slimy dick. Along with the truly reptilian Red Tide Rick, Florida has the two worst senators in the US.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 2, Informative) by fustakrakich on Sunday January 20 2019, @05:24AM (2 children)
Well, it is a state full of people who always leave their turn signals on. Funny that's almost always the left one. And they occupy the left lane like those kids on Wall Street.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @07:49PM (1 child)
No problem, just ban all vehicles except for GM products. It is extremely rare to see a GM car or truck use a turn signal, especially the left one.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday January 21 2019, @12:45AM
Hmm, didn't know the vehicle had a choice... What does the driver do? Adjust the climate control?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Sunday January 20 2019, @12:37PM
Such other interests to include the Care Spot chain of doc-in-a-box operations which he threw governmental favors to while he was governor of Florida.
Scott came to give a speech at a startup company I worked for one morning, he looks more like a fully committed wannabe lizard person - clearly he's somebody's bitch, seemed like he hadn't slept for days and wasn't doing any thinking for himself, just standing behind the mic with big black bags under his eyes while spewing the party line, somewhat halting and groggy.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:19AM
If that happened, there'd be 100 more little Rubio's running around the lollipop tree.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @04:50AM (1 child)
You keep posting about homos. Whats up with that?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Sunday January 20 2019, @07:14PM
Usually it's a sign somebody is deep in the closet.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @02:13PM
Are you offering up your elderly mother for that duty, eth?
That's a big sacrifice, as unless you go to Gitmo, you'll never get laid again.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:18AM
You either have to pay for privacy, or go off the grid.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @01:43AM
13 pages. 13 pages to say what can be perfectly summed up in seven words:
ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US
s/base/data/ as needed...
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @02:04AM (7 children)
"That includes names, Social Security numbers"
The federal government created the whole social security number privacy nightmare and not only do they not want to fix it but they also want to prevent states from doing anything to fix it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erp8IAUouus [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Sunday January 20 2019, @02:31AM (6 children)
Fix?
It looks like the US Government us doing its best to make sure Social Security numbers are the least protected piece of data.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Sunday January 20 2019, @02:44AM (5 children)
The social security number concept is coming up on its 84th birthday, when it was rolled out the Enigma was state of the art encryption and we all saw the movie with the machine Turing built in Bletchley Park to break Enigma messages...
Yeah, it's only better than your given name in that it is mostly unique, but no more private.
Anyone who acts as if SSN is a security layer probably also thinks that big-sheet 1/8" soda glass keeps their home secure from break-ins.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Sunday January 20 2019, @11:49AM (1 child)
Lenders act like it is, and that it's your responsibility when that inevitably fails. Credit agencies back them up in holding you responsible for their choices.
That's the problem with SSNs.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday January 20 2019, @12:30PM
Knock on wood, I haven't had a problem with SSN fraud yet. I do get my 16 digit CCN stolen about once every 2 years, but the banks are pretty cool about that. They seem to stop the fraudulent charges before they happen when they're over about $1000, and I think they probably just write off the little $40 and $60 frauds when they slip through the system - I do have to get a new number whenever it happens, which is a pain, but they can't be too concerned, last couple of times they changed my number they only changed the last 5 digits (and the 3 digit security code and expiration date...)
Thing that really gets me is them using crap like mother's maiden name as security, as if I haven't given that out hundreds of times by now...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @03:24PM (1 child)
"when it was rolled out the Enigma was state of the art encryption"
While you are obviously being sarcastic the fact of the matter is that social security numbers were never meant to be used for identification. If you watch the video social security cards used to even have printing on them that said not to be used for identification. Of course no one listened to it and eventually the government removed the print.
Perhaps everyone should have like a USB stick with all of the information on an ID card on it signed by the federal government's private key. Everyone knows their public key. They can put the USB stick in a computer and get a high resolution photo of me along with my name, birth date, etc... on the screen and all the information will be signed by the federal government to prove my identity. If someone wants to identify me they need the USB drive with the picture so that they can see it looks like me.
Also perhaps I can have my own public/private key pair, the federal government signs my public key with its private key along with my other attributes to prove that my public key belongs to me. No one but me knows my private key and if I want to sign up for something I have to sign it with my private key. Perhaps the USB dongle can have my public/private key pair and it can sign information given to it. It can keep a record of everything it signed that I can later look at.
Credit card companies should really have something of this nature. They can issue a USB drive that has a public/private key pair. When I make a purchase I stick the USB drive into a machine and accept the charge. The USB drive will then sign the purchase information with my private key and store a copy of it. Information on the signature should be something like
Date : Time : Store location : Product Purchased : Price
The drive stores a copy of it for myself and gives the merchant a signed copy of this information. Fraud can only happen during the purchase, never after. Perhaps purchase information can also be confirmed via a text on my phone before the purchase actually goes through, I can click yes or no (they have this already). I guess credit cards now have the chip which provides something similar?
I should also be able to use it to purchase things online. I stick the drive in my computer and when I make a purchase the information goes through my USB drive, gets signed, gets sent to the seller, and a copy gets stored on my drive.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 21 2019, @12:36AM
Yeah, that would stay secret for, like, 2 weeks.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by bussdriver on Sunday January 20 2019, @08:28PM
SSN was simply a UID because many people have the same name. By law, it was forbidden to use anywhere else except for the SS Admin. It's use expanded but it was still not allowed for non-government services. It's used anyway and the PRIVATE industry has used it without hardly any authentication which is why it is such a huge problem. If you could only use it for government services as intended, the lack of good authentication would not matter that much - not that the government didn't already do pretty well the whole time... SS checks are mailed to your address; changing that requires authentication (ID) and so on, they didn't have many problems or many attempts to fool things.
It's PRIVATE industry that wasn't regulated that let you do credit, banking, jobs, etc. which made things so bad.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @03:15AM (35 children)
So what's the bit of the constitution that might allow the federal government to do this? Interstate commerce is a huge stretch given that not all websites are engaged in commerce at all.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Sunday January 20 2019, @03:17AM (14 children)
Exactly what I was thinking.
These people are openly ignoring the chain of command: The People -> States -> Federal.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @03:23AM (13 children)
The constitution doesn't specify that unaddressed authority be reserved for the people over the states. It leaves the question open to each state to decide. By all rights, the states should have way more power than the federal government. Unfortunately SCOTUS doesn't like the taste of that idea and the feds have more armed forces than any individual state.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Sunday January 20 2019, @05:31AM (9 children)
By all rights, the states should have way more power than the federal government. Unfortunately SCOTUS doesn't like the taste of that idea...
Yeah, well, you know, Jim Crow and all. And I wouldn't want to be under Sheriff Buford T Justice's thumb either. When the state goes crazy (stuff like dumping pig shit into the water), sometimes you have to call in the cavalry. Just wish people were more interested in keeping things honest.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @05:48AM (8 children)
Needs to be done legally or not done at all though. Giving the feds your approval to violate the constitution for any reason whatsoever is about the worst possible political position anyone could take.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday January 20 2019, @06:42AM (7 children)
But we have that power, by voting and active petitioning, call it abuse if you want, but one way or another we will (*sigh* if we only would) protect ourselves, through our reps and their big guns (just like Eisenhower sending in regular army to protect peoples' rights). We just have to be rational about it, with great oversight, and of course, that part is not happening now.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @07:48AM (6 children)
That was in fact legal. The constitution was amended to that effect, it just took a long time for enforcement to catch up.
No, being reasonable about when it's okay for the government to ignore the legal limits we have placed upon it is not in fact ever reasonable. Changing those limits is fine but you are either ruled by laws or ruled by tyrants. Because that's exactly what you call someone who can just do whatever they like without regard to any law. I prefer laws.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday January 20 2019, @07:57AM (5 children)
I prefer laws.
I would too, but, rational or not, the majority rules. The inmates run the asylum. That's what we are stuck with. It's on us.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Sunday January 20 2019, @11:53AM (1 child)
> > I prefer laws.
> I would too, but, rational or not, the majority rules. The inmates run the asylum. That's what we are stuck with. It's on us.
The majority may rule now, but if you can convince individual members of a majority that they may in future become members of a minority, then they are more likely to support minority rights.
It is only the short-term thinkers who believe that majorities are permanent. Some try to ensure that a particular in-group will remain as a permanent majority, but history shows this is remarkably hard to do.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday January 20 2019, @06:22PM
I never said anything about a particular majority being permanent. On the contrary they are quite fickle and fluid. That's part of the problem. Yes, long term thinking goes out the window. However, the majority still decides where to point the gun.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @11:34PM (2 children)
No, the majority has no say at all in the matter. SCOTUS is the arbiter of that and they are unaccountable to anyone.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday January 21 2019, @12:26AM (1 child)
they are unaccountable to anyone.
Vee haf vays...
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Touché) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 21 2019, @12:50AM
Vell, ve had better make use of zose vays soon, before ze court ends up 7-2 hardline Neocon und ve end up back in zer nineteenth century viz ze "Vhites Only" signs all over zer place again.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Sunday January 20 2019, @08:11PM (1 child)
Thanks, good clarification. Also yes, very much an instance of the people with the guns get to decide the actual hierarchy of power. A pretty good indication of why submitting to "gun control" is a bad plan for the people.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @11:36PM
You'd think that would be obvious what with not once in the history of the world has disarming a people been a precursor to their increased liberty. It's been the opposite every single time, usually with quite bloody results.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 21 2019, @01:44AM
"'specify that unaddressed authority be reserved for the people over the states"
The preamble defines both the origin of authority and the scope of the document when it says "We the people".
The 10th amendment says:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Since origin of authority is defined in the preamble, the delegation specified by the 10th amendment is redundant. In this case by saying "respectively" the 10th conflicts with the preamble. If the authority was originally derived from the people, then those rights were already with the people and require no articulation of order of precedence. So what you have hear is typical self conflicting circle jerk rhetoric dating all the way back to 1776.
This is doubly important when we consider that SCOTUS regards the dictionary act to have greater precedence than the preamble of the Constitution. I imagine they would interpret the preamble to be referring to people, but the 10th would be referring to corporations. Probably took em' a while to work that out in a bathroom stall, but we'll never know since they wiped their asses with the constitution so many times that no piece of paper in the building should be regarded as safe.
They don't respect their oaths. The only thing that obliges us to respect their titles is physical force. The problem is no longer rhetorical, political or even legislative. It really doesn't matter what Rubio does, since we aren't a nation of laws anymore. And that is on SCOTUS. It was their job, and they fucked it up.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Sunday January 20 2019, @04:08AM
Census. They're just getting a head start on the details.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @04:18AM (1 child)
Pull the other one Buzzie. If the commerce power was a condom it'd be stretched from Anchorage to Honolulu already.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @05:49AM
I was asking about legitimate authority, not what they'd claim gave them authority.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Sunday January 20 2019, @05:44AM (15 children)
My suspicion is that the driver is the political attacks by some states on unpopular businesses. For example, New York has a ridiculous amount of power because so many businesses are headquartered or publicly traded in the state (so anything material that affects your business anywhere in the world is a potential grounds for a New York lawsuit for the above companies). And when Exxon Mobil revealed that at one time they had done some climate change research, they were sued [wikipedia.org] by several states and a US territory (New York, California, Massachusetts, and the Virgin Islands), all for the same thing.
I think there's a case here that some potentially illegal activities shouldn't instantly result in potentially dozens of different court cases all for the same crime. But on the other hand, the federal government is notorious for passing regulations and then failing to police them. This would be a convenient way to void a lot of state law on privacy and data protection arbitrarily (possibly to be expanded in the future to a much wider scope). So while I see some bit of benefit to the proposed ideas, the implementation is a complete disaster and probably would eventually break the separation of power between state and federal government.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @05:53AM (14 children)
Could be but there needs to be an amendment if so. The commerce clause was written to keep say Virginia from slapping a tariff on Carolina tobacco or the like. It was never intended as a shoehorn the government could use for absolutely anything they wanted and that toy needs to be taken away from them badly.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20 2019, @03:03PM (13 children)
An Amendment to the constittution that makes America an opt-in entity, whose membership is only allowed when both the state and federal budgets are passed on time and the each branch of government has signed renewal paperwork. If either state or federal government has not handled their business, the breaching party (whether state or federal government) may secede or throw out the other.
This would result in a few years to decades of shakeup which might be better or worse for the US than the situation is right now, but at the same time it would rein in the budgetary abuses going on each year by partisans pushing an agenda, offer a clear road to secession for any state entity or the federal government to remove a party who is breaching their obligations to state or country, and would provide the foundation necessary to clear the way for constitutional congresses at both the state and federal levels, something that is fervently needed in order to clear up ambiguities, obsolete rules or interpretations, and help update legal foundations to match a number of unexpected realities of the modern world ranging from identity/voter fraud to clarified and enumerated privacy protections for all Americans at the local, state, and federal levels.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday January 20 2019, @10:46PM (12 children)
I can't help feeling that your suggestion would wind up with Americans killing each other in quite large numbers again.
I imagine the Deep South would be among the first to secede, and when their wobbly economies collapsed without their current source of subsidies, then their corrupt leaders would be forced to manufacture some sort of casus belli to keep power.
Just a shower thought.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @11:44PM (11 children)
What do you mean "again"? You're far more likely to be murdered today than you were in the actual wild west. Doesn't say much for the usefulness of having all these police around constantly invading our privacy and infringing on our liberties, does it?
It's kind of odd that you'd think the states that control the food and water of the rich states would be in the disadvantageous position. Even if it were so, all the open borders people would suddenly find themselves flooded with tens of millions of people who were formerly sucking up federal assistance. You don't think it'd happen? How do you think the blues moved from the Mississippi delta to Detroit and Chicago?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 21 2019, @12:07AM (7 children)
If you just calmed down for a second, you might have realized I meant the Civil War you guys had not so long ago when I put "again".
The states you claim control the food and water of the rich states only do so because of the massive subsidies they are paid to do that farming.
The rich states would spend the billions they save on importing food from other countries.
You know, like everyone else in the world does.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 21 2019, @12:59AM (5 children)
Those subsidies are there to keep food from commanding market value and starving those in cities who have no means to produce their own. No other reason.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 21 2019, @01:26AM (4 children)
That is the exact opposite of what farming subsidies are for.
They're actually to give the farmers a margin on the cost of production.
Have you never wondered why farmers protest when anyone ever talks about taking their "incentives" away?
If the farmers could make more money without the subsidies, don't you think they'd be blocking the main street of the capital city with their tractors to demand their removal?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 21 2019, @12:55PM (3 children)
I see that you don't understand even the most basic supply and demand dynamics. I'd explain it but I get the impression you're not inclined to learn them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 21 2019, @07:22PM (2 children)
You're delusional if you think farmers are anything other than price takers. Any search will explain it to you.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday January 23 2019, @12:03AM (1 child)
And you're mistaken if you think economics are that simple and lack any feedbacks.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday January 23 2019, @01:33AM
Farm subsidies have nothing to do with economics, despite what your farming neighbours tell you, they're political.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 22 2019, @05:13PM
today I learned 2 centuries ago is "not so long"
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday January 21 2019, @12:40AM (2 children)
The 'blues' from Mississippi are nothing like the 'blues' from Hollywood. And thought they won't admit it, the reds suck more money from the feds than the blues. That's a big part of the national paradox. What color is the biggest welfare state?
And open borders are a two way street. It's always about the money. I still don't know why a caribou, or even chimney smoke has more freedom of movement than a human.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 21 2019, @01:09AM
I've heard that argument before and it doesn't float any better now than it ever has. They keep voting to turn off the Open Wallet policy and the blues keep telling them no. I see no fault in trying to get a bit of your tax dollars that you had to pay for programs you don't want back through those very programs.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 21 2019, @01:12AM
Oh, I was talking about the musical style rather than state colors, by the way. People got tired of staying where they couldn't make ends meet and headed upriver, which is how we got the all that fine electric blues coming out of Chicago and Detroit.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Tuesday January 22 2019, @05:09PM
Couldn't this basically be the motto of Congress the last 100 years? But they do it anyway.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by stretch611 on Sunday January 20 2019, @06:41AM (1 child)
This is right up there with network neutrality... Allowing big business to do whatever it wants with your data and also sell it to whoever can pay.
It goes up against various laws that some blue states have passed and is trying to dismantle them.
However, with it obviously trying to circumvent some of these state laws, it is doubtful that a democratic house will ever let it see the light of day, let alone pass.
In addition a law like this will allow Google, Apple, and Facebook to run roughshod over your few remaining privacy rights. What right wing congress critter is going to want to give Google more power after they allegedly put a leftist spin on everything? (Well not without a lot more lobbyist money anyway.)
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday January 20 2019, @07:51AM
Don't fret, I'm pretty sure Tech companies can afford a senator or two between them. Okay, so they can afford a hundred of them if they really want to.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.