4 ms·
I wasn't criticizing additional means to achieve compliance -- I don't know what you think you were addressing there. >Would you view a $100,000 non-dischargea
by SilasX 4y ago
I wasn't criticizing additional means to achieve compliance -- I don't know what you think you were addressing there.
>Would you view a $100,000 non-dischargeable, non-expiring debt to the federal government when you have $100,000 in current assets as equivalent to $10 million non-dischargeable, non-expiring debt to the federal government when you have $100,000 in current assets?
Would you view the $10 million as anything other than a number that attempts to sound big but will not have any meaningful impact?
I can see $100k vs $200k as being a meaningful distinction, but not $100k vs $10 million (re-read the farce-ratio part).
>What’s weird from a system outside of money bail world is...money bail.
Did you miss this part?
>>Like, even accepting the validity/logic of the cash bail system,
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Did you miss this part? Well, I addressed: (1) What was weird within the history of money-involved bail, and (2) What was weird outside that context, and (3) Why the federal system was not #1, and (4) What context the federal system was weird in. So…no? Did you miss…my entire post?
- SilasX 4y agoI missed what it was responding to beyond “look I can show off my knowledge and my proud opposition to cash bail”. If you want to dispute the “not weird” label, you should reply to the person originally making it. As it stands, you’re responding to something I didn’t say while implying you’re correcting something about it and getting in your virtuous anti-cash bail jabs (to say nothing of the word salad in your paragraphs 1 and 4 — try quotes or something to make it easier to parse).