It seems absolutely insane to me that there is any level of support for this idea. What is even the allegation against the ICC? That it did something that undermined US geopolitical interests? It’s not an international court if it’s the puppet of a single country.
The US gov wants everyone to pretend that they are the true beacon of peace and democracy as they go around bullying other countries for their lunch money.
Look at the hague invasion act passed in 2002. They have always known that the court might hold them accountable for malicious acts in the region.
Imagine the US invading the Netherlands to protect war criminals. Absolutely no global credibility after that.
Damn that is a wild law but it came out of the bush administration and focuses on US citizens. This current bit is even more surprising to me, particularly because it’s being supported by democrats too. Democrats usually at least like to come up with a reasonable sounding excuse for their military aggression but I don’t even see that here.
It's just astounding to me how fragile our society is to disruption of something so short-term inconsequential.
Like, if the protests are so bad, the outcome is... canceled classes. Not even some critical function of our society in the here and now like... power production, or food production.
If this is the response to rejecting genocide, then these protests are sorely needed.
A nice idea, but then they’re also enforcing a defacto 7% minimum, too. I’m lucky, I guess, that my landlord basically forgot to put up rent the last few years.
Yep and your landlord, nor any other, will ever, ever, ever forget to do that (or decline to raise it) if this passes. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I’m sure there are some people in the world who when they get raises, they set aside the difference and save it up for an investment of some sort instead of just carrying on their life as normal and spending the extra money as if it was always there. Gumball machine trinkets, woo-hoo.
Is it legal in the US to store your guns in a nightstand or something? That’s insane.
Even so, that’s just irresponsible. It’s my duty to make sure nobody has access to my guns except if I personally give them access, after making sure they know how to handle them safely. Also, very illegal in my country, they check safe storage and if you don’t stick to it, you’ll lose your gun licence quickly.
@_MusicJunkie@admin
Sadly, the protection of the 2nd Amendment by the Republican Party is a result of fear and perceived loss of control because of a rapidly changing and diversifying America and of those that intimidate and scare others into their way of thinking.
One state has strict gun lock/storage laws (Mass), a few others have laws requiring you to keep them away from minors and prohibited persons, but the majority do not. I’m guilty of haphazardly tossing mine in the nightstand. But I’m also the only human allowed in the house, not too worried about the cats getting ahold of one.
“Is it legal in the US to store your guns in a nightstand or something? That’s insane.”
Don’t restrict my freedom
“Even so, that’s just irresponsible. It’s my duty to make sure nobody has access to my guns except if I personally give them access, after making sure they know how to handle them safely.”
This is the proper way everyone should be thinking. Just don’t force it upon people
How can they bust unions like that and just getting told to reopen? Let them pay the yearly income of these stores as a fine to the unions fund instead!
The NLRB General Counsel is seeking an order for offers of re-employment for affected employees and reimbursement for loss of pay, along with the stores reopening for business.
The goal is that they reopen with the same unionized employees, plus back pay. That would be a huge win for the union.
That is not a win in my view. That only means that they have to pay what they had to pay anyway the store were open. That’s like literally no fine. It was worth it for them to try to close the store. At worst they need to reopen the store and continue. What is the backpay of the baristas? 4 worker each 30k/year? That does not hurt them. And you know this because they just did it and will do it again. Where is the fine that hurts so much, that they do not dare to try to bust other locations again and again? The fact that they continue this behavior tells you everything you need to know.
Except they were generating zero revenue during the time they were closed. That is pretty close to a fine.
I do also think they should be fined for preventing a union from forming, but having them pay back wages would be more of a fine than most places would be fined because there are basically no penalties for this kind of behavior.
axios.com
Active