3 ms·

I think there's a big difference between something being a law and there being anyone around to implement that law, and indeed, there being a government departm

I think there's a big difference between something being a law and there being anyone around to implement that law, and indeed, there being a government department or regulator checking the law is being followed. There won't be anyone doing any of that.

foota 2y ago
I believe the government would be sued if not in compliance with e.g., the ADA
- lazide 2y ago
  How can you show the gov’t is not in compliance with the ADA if there is no one able to check for compliance with the ADA? Near as I can tell, that is also why the cyber intrusion investigation folks are being targeted to. If we never test, and there is no one to complain to, then clearly it is not a problem and not happening eh?
  - foota 2y ago
    That's what the courts are for.
    - OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - lazide 2y ago
        IMO, the thing to remember about the current administration, is that chaos is a useful tool. And for the last several admins (at least), actually solving problems isn’t really that interesting. It is just as useful for them that court challenges do work (at least against many of the smaller players) - as it gives them a chance to blame the courts, and push for more power. They aren’t there to actually solve problems (well, most problems anyway). They are there to get more personal power and wealth. If they can do that by pretending to do what someone needs, while actually not really solving that need and instead sowing the seeds of a bigger mess only they can solve? Awesome. If some of their supporters get thrown into the meat grinder for that to happen? Meh. As long as they can plausibly blame them for it, anyway. This, IMO applies to all the major ‘split’ issues - abortion, gun control, immigration, you name it. One ‘advantage’ too for those in power for those playing this game, is anyone someone ‘on the edge’ of doing legal stuff has to support them and give them even more power to undermine the legal system, since a reversion to the mean will definitely put them in jail.
        spacemadness 2y ago
        You just proved their point. The chaos overwhelms the system, the executive gets political backing to weaken those checks and balances.
        lazide 2y ago
        The chaos only exists when folks like the courts don’t just give in. If the courts just say ‘yeah, whatever Trump says’, then it’s not chaotic at all.
        OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
        Well then, we are in for a very deterministic, not-at-all-chaotic future. "Ve vill haff order!"
        OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
        Yes, that's my point. The objective is to overwhelm the society and its institutions - a disease that stresses the host's immune response until it breaks. The lower courts will stand by since the ultimate court is in the bag for this guy.
- viraptor 2y ago
  It definitely will. But we don't know if that will succeed or if ADA will get effectively rolled back instead.

foota 2y ago

I believe the government would be sued if not in compliance with e.g., the ADA

lazide 2y ago
How can you show the gov’t is not in compliance with the ADA if there is no one able to check for compliance with the ADA? Near as I can tell, that is also why the cyber intrusion investigation folks are being targeted to. If we never test, and there is no one to complain to, then clearly it is not a problem and not happening eh?
- foota 2y ago
  That's what the courts are for.
  - OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - lazide 2y ago
      IMO, the thing to remember about the current administration, is that chaos is a useful tool. And for the last several admins (at least), actually solving problems isn’t really that interesting. It is just as useful for them that court challenges do work (at least against many of the smaller players) - as it gives them a chance to blame the courts, and push for more power. They aren’t there to actually solve problems (well, most problems anyway). They are there to get more personal power and wealth. If they can do that by pretending to do what someone needs, while actually not really solving that need and instead sowing the seeds of a bigger mess only they can solve? Awesome. If some of their supporters get thrown into the meat grinder for that to happen? Meh. As long as they can plausibly blame them for it, anyway. This, IMO applies to all the major ‘split’ issues - abortion, gun control, immigration, you name it. One ‘advantage’ too for those in power for those playing this game, is anyone someone ‘on the edge’ of doing legal stuff has to support them and give them even more power to undermine the legal system, since a reversion to the mean will definitely put them in jail.
      - spacemadness 2y ago
        You just proved their point. The chaos overwhelms the system, the executive gets political backing to weaken those checks and balances.
        lazide 2y ago
        The chaos only exists when folks like the courts don’t just give in. If the courts just say ‘yeah, whatever Trump says’, then it’s not chaotic at all.
        OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
        Well then, we are in for a very deterministic, not-at-all-chaotic future. "Ve vill haff order!"
      - OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
        Yes, that's my point. The objective is to overwhelm the society and its institutions - a disease that stresses the host's immune response until it breaks. The lower courts will stand by since the ultimate court is in the bag for this guy.
viraptor 2y ago
It definitely will. But we don't know if that will succeed or if ADA will get effectively rolled back instead.