• Announcements

    • Kelly

      AVENues Holiday Special Edition is now live   08/17/17

      The new edition of AVENues is done!   See:        
    • Lady Girl

      Ace Community Census   11/06/17

      It’s time for the 2017 Ace Community Census!   see:   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/162675-announcing-the-2017-ace-community-census/  
    • Heart

      Help fund AVEN's servers!   11/06/17

      AVEN is doing its annual fundraiser to raise donations for server costs! See http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/163251-aven-server-fundraiser/ for more details.  
ConorOberst

Trump is amazing!

Recommended Posts

Raven Luni

Well theres something I didnt know.  Interesting - thankyou.

p.s. That was genuine and not sarcasm :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
1 hour ago, CaptainYesterday said:

I'm referring to the Obama's Dear Colleague letter that lowered the standard of proof colleges need for sexual assault investigations to a preponderance of evidence ("at least a 50% chance of being true") rather than a reasonable doubt (which is what our court system uses). 

 

You don't understand much about law.  The standards for investigations do not need to be a "preponderance of evidence".  Investigations don't need any evidence to proceed -- they are INVESTIGATIONS, not trials.  And when the investigation leads to a criminal charge, the prosecution has the duty to prove guilt; the defense need not  prove anything.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday
9 minutes ago, Sally said:

You don't understand much about law.  The standards for investigations do not need to be a "preponderance of evidence".  Investigations don't need any evidence to proceed -- they are INVESTIGATIONS, not trials.  And when the investigation leads to a criminal charge, the prosecution has the duty to prove guilt; the defense need not  prove anything.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/us/devos-colleges-sex-assault.html

 

The most controversial portion of the Obama-era guidelines had demanded colleges use the lowest standard of proof, “preponderance of the evidence,” in deciding whether a student is responsible for sexual assault, a verdict that can lead to discipline and even expulsion. On Friday, the Education Department said colleges were free to abandon that standard and raise it to a higher standard known as “clear and convincing evidence.”

 

This wasn't a court of law, this was the college itself handling a fake trial.  Sometimes the same person representing the school would be the prosecution, the judge, and the jury.  It was a complete joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yato
3 hours ago, Raven Luni said:

If youre going to make a statement like that, at least provide examples of these 'good points', otherwise it seems like youre taking the centre ground for the sake of it.

I was speaking in general terms, with undefined sides. It can apply to everything. 

 

Here is some general belief ideas. Whether it actually happens, is another question that both sides fail to meet expectations of. 

 

Republicans thinks its good to not raise taxes. This is a fair deal, no one likes taxes. 

Democrats want more funding for social programs like welfare and social security. I can see why people would like this, if they are reliant on it etc. 

 

Both things are inherently good. The problem lies in how.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb
14 hours ago, Chihiro said:

ROFL. I first read it as "I'll be black" :lol:

I won't be surprised if he markets himself as black just to stay in power :P

 

That made me think of jokes I think someone had made before - something about "Orange is the New Black". :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chihiro
12 hours ago, Yato said:

Republicans thinks its good to not raise taxes. This is a fair deal, no one likes taxes. 

Democrats want more funding for social programs like welfare and social security. I can see why people would like this, if they are reliant on it etc. 

 

Both things are inherently good. The problem lies in how.

 

I think people are very much dependent on social programs especially in western society. And in a consumerist nation like US, the concept of "saving for future" is unpopular- I have seen people living paycheck to paycheck or spending on credit, despite having good well paying job. Asking people to 'manage your own healthcare and future, in return for tax cuts' is not easy, you will have to ask them to change their lifestyle and mindset. IMO, this is a lot more difficult than making Americans learn the metric system LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A mere monkey
20 hours ago, Chihiro said:

I think people are very much dependent on social programs especially in western society. And in a consumerist nation like US, the concept of "saving for future" is unpopular- I have seen people living paycheck to paycheck or spending on credit, despite having good well paying job. Asking people to 'manage your own healthcare and future, in return for tax cuts' is not easy, you will have to ask them to change their lifestyle and mindset. IMO, this is a lot more difficult than making Americans learn the metric system LOL

Well, I mean, they are adults. I don't see why that's a problem. If you suck at managing your money then of course you are going to have a hard time. You won't have to ask them to change, they will know when they realize they have been wasting and mismanaging their money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chihiro
48 minutes ago, A mere monkey said:

Well, I mean, they are adults. I don't see why that's a problem. If you suck at managing your money then of course you are going to have a hard time. You won't have to ask them to change, they will know when they realize they have been wasting and mismanaging their money.

Unfortunately, I don't think so. Just because you are an adult doesn't mean you can change your mindset and lifestyle easily. Otherwise old people would have become pro in current technologies. Religious people wouldn't be so conservative. In fact, its easy for children to change but not adults.

 

Let me present you an opposite scenario. For example, right now I am visiting India, where social security is a joke. But then the income tax rate is pretty low, only less than 1% of population pays income tax. So people manage their finances on their own, by spending only on the necessities and what they can afford and put the rest towards future emergencies and retirement. The 'saving' mindset is pretty much ingrained in the culture. Now what happens if they have social security and excess money?  Will they spend more on something unnecessary but fun or luxurious? In most cases, no. They are like 'Have more money than you need? Give it to children. Have even more? Reserve it for grand children. And then great grand children' LOL. Now you can't tell them they suck at spending money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A mere monkey
31 minutes ago, Chihiro said:

Unfortunately, I don't think so. Just because you are an adult doesn't mean you can change your mindset and lifestyle easily. Otherwise old people would have become pro in current technologies. Religious people wouldn't be so conservative. In fact, its easy for children to change but not adults.

 

Let me present you an opposite scenario. For example, right now I am visiting India, where social security is a joke. But then the income tax rate is pretty low, only less than 1% of population pays income tax. So people manage their finances on their own, by spending only on the necessities and what they can afford and put the rest towards future emergencies and retirement. The 'saving' mindset is pretty much ingrained in the culture. Now what happens if they have social security and excess money?  Will they spend more on something unnecessary but fun or luxurious? In most cases, no. They are like 'Have more money than you need? Give it to children. Have even more? Reserve it for grand children. And then great grand children' LOL. Now you can't tell them they suck at spending money.

I can't tell they suck at spending money because it exemplifies exactly the opposite of what you said on the previous post. They are not the ones living paycheck to paycheck if they save most of it. Anyway, I never said that adults change easily. I said they were adults because they should be old enough to know the value of their own work, and that if they spend more than they earn they will find themselves at trouble. They shouldn't be asked to "change their lifestyle" because their current lifestyle is not sustainable. That way, when they realize they are spending more than they earn, they will change that or go broke. If they do run out of money, they are the only ones to blame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
On 11/23/2017 at 10:52 AM, Chihiro said:

I think people are very much dependent on social programs especially in western society. And in a consumerist nation like US, the concept of "saving for future" is unpopular- I have seen people living paycheck to paycheck or spending on credit, despite having good well paying job. Asking people to 'manage your own healthcare and future, in return for tax cuts' is not easy, you will have to ask them to change their lifestyle and mindset. IMO, this is a lot more difficult than making Americans learn the metric system LOL

There's no way someone can manage their own healthcare.   Leukemia can't be treated by changing your "lifestyle and mindset".   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now