Jump to content

SiliconSorcerer

Members
  • Posts

    5,510
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Glen Ellyn

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

SiliconSorcerer's Achievements

Member

Member (24/24)

  1. This is actually good (IMHO) About chevron deference Among the many rulings the Supreme Court handed down this term, a decision on so-called Chevron deference could prove especially consequential. The question at issue was whether the courts or government agencies should determine the meaning of ambiguous laws. The new ruling unsettles a 40-year-old understanding by shifting some of the power over these choices away from the executive branch. Many regulatory actions may now face a torrent of litigation. Chevron deference matters more than it should because Congress insists on passing so many ambiguous statutes. Lawmakers do this partly by accident, failing to think through how new regulations will work in practice, and partly by design, settling on muddled directives as a way to build coalitions and satisfy rival constituencies. In either case, their failure leaves the other branches of government to work out what the laws in question actually mean. Under the now-discarded Chevron doctrine, courts usually deferred to the wisdom of regulatory agencies — and, on the face of it, with good reason. Officials at the Environmental Protection Agency, for example, know a lot more about how to regulate pollution than do lawyers and judges. The problem is that the relevant statutes give the agencies such wide leeway that they can sometimes act as de facto lawmakers. … It’s worth remembering that the politics of this decision can cut both ways. When Chevron deference was first established in 1984, conservatives applauded and liberals were dismayed. Under President Ronald Reagan, the EPA aimed to lighten regulation of power plants. Liberals wanted the agency’s discretion to do this reined in and objected when the Supreme Court said, in effect, the regulators know best. … The fact is, there’s no good remedy for Congress’ tendency to write ambiguous laws. If lawmakers cannot bring themselves to enact clearer statutes, agencies and the courts will frequently be at odds over what the law demands. … The fault, and the only good solution, lies with Congress. Bloomberg Opinion Editorial Board
  2. That's not the problem. When SS was created you were expected to start collecting at life expectancy and take care of yourself until then. If they world have made it life expectancy the rates would have never skyrocketed and people wouldn't (somewhar fairly now) considered it retirement income. There are reasonable plans to fix it and it would take about 80 years without anyone getting screwed but its the third rail. This starts with new employees (young) contributing their half (forced) into a 401k, employer still pays the government and if your alive at life expectancy you will collect. Until then you have a generous 401k to live on. Eventually your on SS only when you should be dead and the SS deficit gets repaid. That is if they don't steal it for something else.
  3. I was going to work on my reply to Chicago Tribune, sometimes I wonder if the $1 a year for digital access is even worth it but have a question... Has anyone in Chicago been even been killed with a AR this year or even shot?
  4. I don't know that's 900 round a minute bump stock has machine guns beat all to heck. (Tribune comments today, went from 400-600 to 900)
  5. That's just a pimp on the deaths due to Obesity, of course that hasn't risen significantly like overdoses with the Biden open border policy.
  6. It would hard to list all of them. Taxes up on gax, real estate, LGBT protests, abortion protests, Pro-Hamas protests, DNC, Chicago and Illinois by all definitions bankrupts, and lets take the right for people to protect themselves and crime has risen dramatically, lets not forget the Slushy Felony while two woman kill an uber driver and another DUI kills a woman and all got misdemeanors.
  7. We really need the people of Illinois step up. We are not far from a perfect storm and (unfortunately) that's a good thing.
  8. They should get them back, put them up as auctions on gunbroker.com with proceeds to Illinois Carry 😮 They might pull some hefty bids, some radically stupid other things have.
  9. I agree with he didn't say it was constitutional and no way in heck will they pass anything in THIS climate BUT... Why the f... did he say anything. I think that opens the door to more BS laws we will have to fight again.
  10. I still think Alito ... it up "Alito's concurrence pointed out it's still legislatively possible to ban bump stocks." If you can ban certain kinds of stocks you can ban certain certain types other firearm parts.
×
×
  • Create New...