4 ms·

Class differences are understated or poopooed in American politics. But class divides are very real and they marr everything you see, including the Sacklers get

by all2 5y ago

Class differences are understated or poopooed in American politics. But class divides are very real and they marr everything you see, including the Sacklers getting a pass. > feels like it was designed to protect families That's because it is designed to protect them. When a good enough team of lawyers can free you from consequences, it equates to being able to buy off justice. When the majority of financial instrument controls are designed to limit the financial activity of the layman, who does it benefit? Just yesterday I was fighting with my bank about how much I could spend on a single purchase. It was a startlingly low number. The amount I can actually withdraw from an ATM at any point in time is lower. And what divides the classes most is the law. The law benefits those who can navigate it effectively. This boils down to people wealthy enough to buy, barrow, and steal professionals to navigate it for them. If the law were simple, everyone would benefit because everyone could navigate it easily. All that to say, you aren't the only one.

samizdis 5y ago
There's a Bloomberg opinion piece from earlier today [1] that focuses on shopping around for "friendly" jurisdictions for bankruptcy hearings. It focuses on the judge in this case (Robert Drain). Excerpt: Bankruptcy lawyers can shop for venues they think will be favorable to their case, and a lot of them bring their corporate clients to Drain’s court. And though Drain told the Wall Street Journal last year that any notion of legal friendliness was “an offensive fantasy,” the bitterly fought settlement in the Purdue Pharma case he announced from the bench on Wednesday would seem to provide ammunition for his critics. A worthwhile read, in my opinion. [1] https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/purdue-pharma-oxycontin-ruling-lets-sacklers-off-the-hook https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/purdue-pharma-oxyconti...
pessimizer 5y ago
> Class differences are understated or poopooed in American politics. Class differences are understated or poopooed in American media, and by the Republican and Democratic party leadership. In real life, people talk about class all of the time. The people who own media companies and donate to political parties don't.
- marcellus23 5y ago
  > In real life, people talk about class all of the time. I generally agree with you but I'm not sure about this. IME, the media/government complex has done a very good job of convincing people that the primary cause they should be fighting about and talking about is identity politics, not class.
lotsofpulp 5y ago
> When the majority of financial instrument controls are designed to limit the financial activity of the layman, who does it benefit? Just yesterday I was fighting with my bank about how much I could spend on a single purchase. It was a startlingly low number. The amount I can actually withdraw from an ATM at any point in time is lower. I have no experience like this, other than a bank contacting me if I am trying to use a card outside of my usual locations or outside of my usual amounts and I did not already alert them. Which sounds like a pretty reasonable anti fraud measure, and it only takes a couple minutes to solve. And you can alert them prior to traveling or spending large amounts, and even do it online, so you are not inconvenienced at the time of purchase. I also think it is easier than ever for the layman to buy whatever they want than ever. Everything is electronic and mostly instant. People can gamble on options sitting on their couch watching a game. You can buy equities for free. You can buy and sell in foreign currencies and Bitcoin with the clicks of a few buttons. All seems far more accessible than when I was a kid.
- all2 5y ago
  Try paying cash for something costing more than 10k USD. Things get hairy pretty quickly. [edit]And if your bank has no issues with that, then I'd love to know what bank it is. Mine was pretty sketchy about moving more than 3k at once per day.[/edit]
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    I mainly use BoA, but while I have not had to withdraw or deposit $10k in paper cash in some time, as far as I know, the law requires you to fill out a form. But I wire much larger amounts of cash all the time online for real estate transactions, and I generally do not even have to talk to someone at the bank. I can do it all online. Edit: I have not needed to send $3k via Zelle yet, but according to BoA’s website, $3,500 in 24 hour time period should not be a problem: https://www.bankofamerica.com/online-banking/zelle-transfer-limits/ https://www.bankofamerica.com/online-banking/zelle-transfer-...
  - salawat 5y ago
    Technically, it just means extra paperwork. Tell their compliance department to hop to it. Just because it's uncommon, doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. In fact, the justification for these types of controls is normal people don't do those type of transactions. Think about that carefully, and you'll start to smell the rat decaying under the floor. In a way, the system is architecting itself to keep the fiscal freedom of the populace low to catch outliers that may just be criminals. I've just never been able to convince myself that there isn't some economic reality shaping going on there that people don't feel comfortable either talking about or admitting. If I can't easily do a transaction, but that transaction would be an example of good business that everyone wins from; I'd possibly be dissuaded from even trying. That seems counter to incentivizing good business to facilitate economic mobility.
droptablemain 5y ago
Marx and Lenin's conception of the state was as machinery designed to aid the oppression of one class at the behest of another. Notions within our legal and justice system in the U.S. make much more sense viewed through this lens -- that the U.S. and most so-called liberal democracies are "dictatorships of the bourgeoisie."
- all2 5y ago
  They can be "dictatorships of the bourgeoisie", but once upon a time in the US it wasn't so much that way. And maybe I'm romanticizing things. I do know that our tomes of tax law didn't exist 200 years ago, and financial controls and centralized currency also didn't exist 200 years ago. Tools arise when the inventive require them. Those same tools become weapons of oppression when the right (wrong?) people start to use them for their own advantage.
  - mrguyorama 5y ago
    The united states was literally born to be a useful thing for rich white dudes. That's why "by the people, for the people" doesn't mean women or black people or people without enough land. The founders didn't want normal people to have power, and everything they wrote was so the people in power could keep that power. The constitutional convention was literally a room full of powerful people agreeing on what compromises would keep them happy
  - 8note 5y ago
    200 years ago, only the bourgeoisie could vote.
matmann2001 5y ago
Not too long ago, I had a lawyer tell me unironically, "Justice is for those who can afford it."
- all2 5y ago
  This is upsetting to me on so many levels, I'm not even sure how to properly express it.

by all2 5y ago

samizdis 5y ago

There's a Bloomberg opinion piece from earlier today [1] that focuses on shopping around for "friendly" jurisdictions for bankruptcy hearings. It focuses on the judge in this case (Robert Drain). Excerpt: Bankruptcy lawyers can shop for venues they think will be favorable to their case, and a lot of them bring their corporate clients to Drain’s court. And though Drain told the Wall Street Journal last year that any notion of legal friendliness was “an offensive fantasy,” the bitterly fought settlement in the Purdue Pharma case he announced from the bench on Wednesday would seem to provide ammunition for his critics. A worthwhile read, in my opinion. [1] https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/purdue-pharma-oxycontin-ruling-lets-sacklers-off-the-hook https://www.bloombergquint.com/gadfly/purdue-pharma-oxyconti...

pessimizer 5y ago

> Class differences are understated or poopooed in American politics. Class differences are understated or poopooed in American media, and by the Republican and Democratic party leadership. In real life, people talk about class all of the time. The people who own media companies and donate to political parties don't.

marcellus23 5y ago
> In real life, people talk about class all of the time. I generally agree with you but I'm not sure about this. IME, the media/government complex has done a very good job of convincing people that the primary cause they should be fighting about and talking about is identity politics, not class.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

> When the majority of financial instrument controls are designed to limit the financial activity of the layman, who does it benefit? Just yesterday I was fighting with my bank about how much I could spend on a single purchase. It was a startlingly low number. The amount I can actually withdraw from an ATM at any point in time is lower. I have no experience like this, other than a bank contacting me if I am trying to use a card outside of my usual locations or outside of my usual amounts and I did not already alert them. Which sounds like a pretty reasonable anti fraud measure, and it only takes a couple minutes to solve. And you can alert them prior to traveling or spending large amounts, and even do it online, so you are not inconvenienced at the time of purchase. I also think it is easier than ever for the layman to buy whatever they want than ever. Everything is electronic and mostly instant. People can gamble on options sitting on their couch watching a game. You can buy equities for free. You can buy and sell in foreign currencies and Bitcoin with the clicks of a few buttons. All seems far more accessible than when I was a kid.

all2 5y ago
Try paying cash for something costing more than 10k USD. Things get hairy pretty quickly. [edit]And if your bank has no issues with that, then I'd love to know what bank it is. Mine was pretty sketchy about moving more than 3k at once per day.[/edit]
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  I mainly use BoA, but while I have not had to withdraw or deposit $10k in paper cash in some time, as far as I know, the law requires you to fill out a form. But I wire much larger amounts of cash all the time online for real estate transactions, and I generally do not even have to talk to someone at the bank. I can do it all online. Edit: I have not needed to send $3k via Zelle yet, but according to BoA’s website, $3,500 in 24 hour time period should not be a problem: https://www.bankofamerica.com/online-banking/zelle-transfer-limits/ https://www.bankofamerica.com/online-banking/zelle-transfer-...
- salawat 5y ago
  Technically, it just means extra paperwork. Tell their compliance department to hop to it. Just because it's uncommon, doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. In fact, the justification for these types of controls is normal people don't do those type of transactions. Think about that carefully, and you'll start to smell the rat decaying under the floor. In a way, the system is architecting itself to keep the fiscal freedom of the populace low to catch outliers that may just be criminals. I've just never been able to convince myself that there isn't some economic reality shaping going on there that people don't feel comfortable either talking about or admitting. If I can't easily do a transaction, but that transaction would be an example of good business that everyone wins from; I'd possibly be dissuaded from even trying. That seems counter to incentivizing good business to facilitate economic mobility.

droptablemain 5y ago

Marx and Lenin's conception of the state was as machinery designed to aid the oppression of one class at the behest of another. Notions within our legal and justice system in the U.S. make much more sense viewed through this lens -- that the U.S. and most so-called liberal democracies are "dictatorships of the bourgeoisie."

all2 5y ago
They can be "dictatorships of the bourgeoisie", but once upon a time in the US it wasn't so much that way. And maybe I'm romanticizing things. I do know that our tomes of tax law didn't exist 200 years ago, and financial controls and centralized currency also didn't exist 200 years ago. Tools arise when the inventive require them. Those same tools become weapons of oppression when the right (wrong?) people start to use them for their own advantage.
- mrguyorama 5y ago
  The united states was literally born to be a useful thing for rich white dudes. That's why "by the people, for the people" doesn't mean women or black people or people without enough land. The founders didn't want normal people to have power, and everything they wrote was so the people in power could keep that power. The constitutional convention was literally a room full of powerful people agreeing on what compromises would keep them happy
- 8note 5y ago
  200 years ago, only the bourgeoisie could vote.

matmann2001 5y ago

Not too long ago, I had a lawyer tell me unironically, "Justice is for those who can afford it."

all2 5y ago
This is upsetting to me on so many levels, I'm not even sure how to properly express it.