SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Friday that he has directed his federal prosecutors to pursue the most severe penalties possible, including mandatory minimum sentences, in his first step toward a return to the war on drugs of the 1980s and 1990s that resulted in long sentences for many minority defendants and packed U.S. prisons.
[...] In the later years of the Obama administration, a bipartisan consensus emerged on Capitol Hill for sentencing reform legislation, which Sessions opposed and successfully worked to derail.
In a two-page memo to federal prosecutors across the country, Sessions overturned former attorney general Eric H. Holder's sweeping criminal charging policy that instructed his prosecutors to avoid charging certain defendants with offenses that would trigger long mandatory minimum sentences. In its place, Sessions told his more than 5,000 assistant U.S. attorneys to charge defendants with the most serious crimes, carrying the toughest penalties.
More at Washington Post, Fox News, Huffington Post, The Hill
Memorandum on Department Charging and Sentencing Policy - US Department of Justice PDF
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday May 18 2017, @12:23PM
Ah, OK. They want it more. As for doing the things very rich people have done to get rich, do you mean using my buddies to hand me a sweetheart, no-bid contract? No, of course not. You imply they have better instincts and business savvy than everyone else.
Well, looking at those ten people on the richest list that I mentioned yesterday, not a one got that way through sweetheart deals.
You imply they have better instincts and business savvy than everyone else.
No, if I had implied that, I would have implied that. However, if you don't do anything that would develop those instincts, then why do you think you would have better instincts?
One question, khallow, do you really know any rich people?
How does "knowing" rich people help you figure out how to get rich? Is that working for you?
As for the rest, you have an oddly insousciant view of how things are going in the world, and moreover, how everyone else thinks things are going in the world.
The current developed world troubles are temporary. There isn't an infinite supply of cheap developing world labor. My view is that the developed world is currently under an economic stress that can't be fixed with politics, but only by elevating most of the rest of the world to developed world status. Further, we're well on our way to getting that done. I believe 2050 will see a very different developed world than the present.
I think it's safe to say that the consensus is that the status quo is broken. Great Britain voted for Brexit because they think the status quo is broken. People voted for Trump because they think the status quo is broken. Marine Le Pen, who couldn't get the time of day in France for decades, was the runner-up candidate in France this time.
So what? Those activities are all completely democratic and legal, and are examples of voting populations attempting to fix perceived problems in their countries. Sure, good intentions don't magically result in good outcomes, but you do want voters to try to fix the things they see as wrong, right?
It's like you live in a parallel universe. Do you not see any of these things, or is it that you're paid not to? I don't get it.
The problem is your provincial perception. Look at all that verbiage you wrote. What continents did the various activities you mention fall on? North America and Europe. At best, that's roughly a billion people, a seventh of the world's population. You ignore what happens to a much greater portion of the world's population. China and India are each elevating more than a billion people into the developed world, for example.