#Policy and Charging Rules Function | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

danatron1 · 24 days ago

Text

Help trans people in the UK!

TERF island sucks, however thousands of innocent people are harmed by their tyranny. Have sympathy for brits like me who would rather be born anywhere else.

An unprecedented attack on trans rights took place last Wednesday, with the UK Supreme Court writing trans people out of the Equality Act by redefining "woman" to only mean assigned female at birth.

Protests erupted across the country, with thousands taking to the streets to fight for trans rights. With our current government, our suffering falls on deaf ears.

It won't be enough to just fight in the streets, but we need to fight in the courts. The UK Supreme Court is the highest court in the country, with no chance of appeal. However, there is hope.

The European Court of Human Rights can step in if we can get them to recognise this blatant violation of human rights. Leaving the EU doesn't get you out of it! This legal case will be time consuming and expensive, so please donate all that you can to help us win this fight. We're fighting JK Rowling money, but together we can make a difference!

If you can't donate, please share instead!

If you need to know how bad this situation really is, keep reading.

The Supreme Court's ruling, where 3 men decided what "woman" means, puts all women at risk. Male police officers in the UK now have the power to strip search any women they believe to be trans.

It is an offence to enter a single sex bathroom and changing room different from your birth sex, but also to enter one where your presence is "likely to cause offence". This leaves trans men and women with nowhere to go, as well as gender-non conforming cis people.

Non-binary people naturally have zero legal recognition whatsoever, the existence of trans men has been ignored again, and intersex people have been written out of existence.

Trans people are always sent to male prisons regardless of sex. If you don't know the horiffic ramifications of this, Google v-coding.

Gender Recognition Certificates, which were supposed to update your legal sex for all purposes, have been rendered functionally worthless. Trans people are being forced into their assigned sex at birth.

Trans women are banned from rape crisis shelters, domestic abuse protection, and discrimination claims such as equal pay. Trans women have also unsurprisingly been banned from Women's sports.

Trans women are banned from all lesbian groups and organisations, and not just that, cis women are too if they're dating a trans woman. The court ruled that "lesbian" means "AFAB attracted to AFAB", making cis women dating trans women legally straight. The definition also means bi women aren't a thing in UK law now - just a sidenote!

Trans people sent to hospital wards are now always housed according to their assigned sex at birth, regardless of their comfort.

If you're a trans minor, your life is even harder. Puberty blockers and HRT, despite being completely safe and legal for cis people, are banned nation wide for trans youth. The only "help" offered is conversion therapy, which the government calls "exploratory therapy".

And if you're thinking "well, people won't comply" or "My workplace is friendly," then I regret to inform you that this isn't allowed. The UK expects all organisations to update their policies to be trans exclusionary by this summer, and the so-called "Equality and Human Rights Commission" has announced they will persue any organisation which doesn't immediately comply.

By the way, earlier this year the EHRC made the trans panic defense legal. Even kissing someone without disclosing that you're trans is enough to get you convicted with sexual assault. Trans people must always out themselves before any relationship forms or be charged with a sex crime.

Any organisation with bathrooms, changing rooms, rape crisis centres, etc. will be for Ed to exclude trans people. If an organisation lets a trans woman (who in UK law is now legally a man) into a women-only space, they lose the right to operate the single sex space, and can be successfully sued for not letting cis men into it.

The EHRC's recommendation? Trans people use their "powers of advocacy" to request "third spaces" with regards to toilets. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

We CAN put a stop to this. We CAN defeat transphobia. Bigotry has fallen before and it can fall again. Be the side history remembers fondly.

We'll let you mock our accent if you stop innocent people from suffering first.

DONATE

#transgender #trans #trans rights #uk politics #trans pride #lgbt pride #lgbtq #lgbtqia

764 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 16 days ago

Text

What stage of authoritarianism is it when the government starts arresting judges? Because that’s the one we’re at.

Last Friday, Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested over allegations that she obstructed justice by helping an undocumented immigrant avoid arrest by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Dugan allegedly let Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who was in her courtroom on misdemeanor battery charges, evade ICE agents by leaving through a side door that led to a non-public part of the courthouse.

Her arrest was conducted with maximum fanfare and designed to terrorize not just Dugan, but anyone else who might not want to assist the administration in its lawless and vicious deportation efforts. Attorney General Pam Bondi made that evident when she went on Fox to call the judiciary “deranged” and to say that the arrest of Dugan was “sending a very strong message today” and that “we will come after you and we will prosecute you.”

Kash Patel, Trump’s tragicomically underqualified and authoritarian FBI director, made sure to post a photo of Dugan’s arrest on X. Not that rules matter any longer, but DOJ policy prohibits disclosing a photograph of a defendant unless it “serves a law enforcement function” or it is already part of the public record.

It’s not just that Dugan was arrested, but also how she was arrested. The whole point was to cause a scene. She was arrested Friday morning in the parking lot of the Milwaukee County Courthouse, complete with handcuffs. There’s no allegation she was a flight risk or was attempting to evade arrest, but the FBI still forced a sitting judge to do a perp walk at her place of work.

Additionally, Dugan was arrested pursuant to a criminal complaint signed by a federal magistrate judge. There’s nothing improper about that as such, but for felonies in federal court, prosecutors must convene a grand jury and present evidence. Only if the grand jury returns an indictment can someone be prosecuted.

Going before a grand jury isn’t a nicety or a minor procedural step. The Fifth Amendment requires it. Arresting Dugan before convening a grand jury was intended to get flashy headlines and whip the MAGA faithful into a frenzy. Even if a grand jury declines to indict Dugan, the administration has succeeded in creating a climate of fear and suspicion.

64 notes · View notes

agenericplaceholdername · 6 months ago

Text

saw a post a few days ago that said something along the lines of: "the First Spinjitzu Master and his family should be royalty and have the ability to interfere in Ninjago's government"

hard disagree with this however because basically every *political* decision this family makes is awful:

the First Spinjitzu Master negotiates a peace between humans and serpentine that exists around Aspheera's time. what is that peace? simple: humans and serpentine are forbidden to enter each other's lands. let's be clear - this is a creation of two ethnostates divided on the basis of species. yes humans and serpentine are different species, but as sentient beings they have fundamental equality. dividing them like this is absurd and as we see later, only leads to more conflict

Garmadon and Wu facilitate the end of the Serpentine War by locking every Serpentine underground presumably forever. what about the Serpentine children? civilians? also, even POWs (which is functionally what the Serpentine are once put under the control of the Sacred Flutes) should be released after the conclusion of the war (see Article 118, section II of the Geneva Conventions). the anacondrai minus Pythor starve to death as a result. why do they do this? listen to what Wu tells Lloyd as a mere child: "never trust a snake." should we accept this racism simply because Wu's dad used some magic weapons once?

more fundamentally, Ninjago as a society is a constitutional monarchy whose emperor is a figurehead (and also dead). functionally, Ninjago is governed by democratic institutions, and that's a good thing. yeah it sucks that the Ninja go to prison when they break the law, but you shouldn't get a pass because of something your ancestors did.

the reason we have democratic institutions is because they are supposed to be most responsive to the people the state is designed to benefit - their citizens. that's because citizens have a direct say in who they elect and therefore government policy. no citizen's right to vote should be overturned because some old guy asserts his birthright to be in charge.

and even just from a practical level, would Ninjago be better governed if Garmadon had returned from the Underworld and proclaimed that as the eldest heir to the FSM, he deserves to rule? Given all the secrets Wu keeps, would he be a better leader? and Lloyd -- cmon he is NOT a politician, let him teach his kids in peace.

81 notes · View notes

misfitwashere · 29 days ago

Text

State Terror

A brief guide for Americans

TIMOTHY SNYDER

APR 15

READ IN APP

Yesterday the president defied a Supreme Court ruling to return a man who was mistakenly sent to a gulag in another country, celebrated the suffering of this innocent person, and spoke of sending Americans to foreign concentration camps.

This is the beginning of an American policy of state terror, and it has to be identified as such to be stopped.

So let’s begin with language, because language is very important. When the state carries out criminal terror against its own people, it calls them the “criminals” or the the “terrorists.” During the 1930s, this was the normal practice. Looking back, we refer to Stalin’s “Great Terror,” but at the time it was the Stalinists who controlled the language. Today in Berlin stands an important museum called "Topography of Terror"; during the era it documents, it was the Jews and the chosen enemies of the regime who were called "terrorists." Yesterday in the White House, the Salvadoran president showed the way, referring to Kilmar Abrego Garcia as a "terrorist" without any basis whatsoever. The Americans treated him as a criminal, even though he was charged with no crime.

The first part of controlling the language is inverting the meaning: whatever the government does is good, because by definition the its victims are the "criminals" and the "terrorists." The second part is deterring the press, or anyone else, from challenging the perversion by associating anyone who objects with crime and terror. This was the role Stephen Miller played when he said yesterday in the White House that reporters "want foreign terrorists in the country who kidnap women and children."

The control of language is necessary to undermine a legal or constitutional order. Our rule of law begins with notions such as the people and their rights. If politicians shift the framework to "criminals" and "terrorism," then they are shifting the purpose of the state.

In the United States, we are governed by a Constitution. Basic to the Constitution is habeas corpus, the notion that the government cannot seize your body without a legal justification for doing so. If that does not hold, then nothing else does. If we have the law, then violence may not be committed by one person against another on the basis of namecalling or strong feelings. This applies to everyone, above all to the president, whose constitutional function is to enforce the laws.

Trump spoke of asking Attorney General Pam Bondi to find legal ways to abduct Americans and leave them in foreign concentration camps. But by "legal" what is meant are ways of escaping law, not applying it.

It is that anti-constitutional escapism that enables abuse. State terror involves not just the malignant development of state organs of oppression, such as masked men in black vans, but also the withdrawal of the state from its role as a guardian of law. What aspiring tyrants present as "strength," the ability to terrorize innocent people, rests on what might be seen as a more fundamental weakness, which is the withdrawal of the state from the principle of the rule of law. When we have law, we are all stronger; when we lack law, everyone is weaker except for the very few who can direct the coercive power of the state against the rest of us.

In the history of state terror, the escape from law into coercion takes three forms, all of which were on display, incipiently, in the White House yesterday: the leader principle; the state of exception; and the zone of statelessness.

The leader principle, or in German Führerprinzip, is the idea that a single individual directly represents the people, and that therefore all of his actions are by definition legal and proper. In discussions in the White House and thereafter, we see this notion being advanced. Trump's advisors claim that what he is doing is popular. The claim (as in legal filings) that the president is acting from a personal "mandate" from the people has the same problem. Asked on Fox News about the abduction of Americans and their transfer to foreign gulags, Attorney General Pam Bondi said that “these are Americans he is saying who have committed the most heinous crimes in our country.” If it comes down to what “he is saying,” then he is a dictator and the U.S. is a dictatorship. Trump spoke of the need to deport people who "hate our country" or who are "stupid."

The second escape from law is the state of exception. In principle, the Soviet Union was governed by law. Before its greatest exercises of terror, however, the Soviet authorities declared for themselves states of exception. This meant that, on the territory of the Soviet Union itself, it was "legal" (in Bondi's and in Trump's sense) to abduct people and send them to concentration camps: authorities claimed that there was some sort of threat, and so protections could be withdrawn and procedures set aside. People could be abducted in black vans and executed or sent to a camp, "legally," in the sense that the law had been set aside. The notion of the state of exception, important to Soviet practice, was at the center of Nazi theory. As the leading Nazi thinker Carl Schmitt argued, the sovereign is the person who can make an exception. If we are living in normal times, then we think we should be governed by law. But if politicians can use words to make us think that these are exceptional times, then we might accept their lawlessness.

A simple way to escape from law is to move people bodily into a physical zone of exception in which the law (it is claimed) does not apply. Other methods take more time. It is possible to pass laws that deprive people of their rights in their own country. It is possible to carve out spaces on one's own territory where the law does not function. These spaces are concentration camps. In the end, authorities can choose, as in Nazi Germany, to physically remove their citizens into zones beyond their own countries in which they can simply declare that the law does not matter.

This exploitation of purported stateless zones was the main line of the history of the Holocaust. Under Hitler, the Germans did have concentration camps on their own territory, and they did reduce Jews to second-class citizenship, and they did live under a permanent state of exception. But, in the main, the mass murder of German Jews was achieved by their abduction and forced rendition to sites beyond prewar German territory where, German authorities claimed, there was no law.

A probing of this statelessness approach was on display yesterday, as Trump and his advisors claimed that Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legal resident of the United States whom US authorities abducted by mistake and sent to a concentration camp in El Salvador, was now beyond the reach of American law. This is state terror: the state is presented as "strong" in its oppression of a person, but as weak in its ability to respect or enforce law. The idea that the United States can send you to places from which it cannot bring you back is the theoretical basis for a doctrine of statelessness. Call it the Rubio Doctrine: in the words of the secretary of state, "the foreign policy of the United States is conducted by the President of the United States, not by a court." But what that implies is that people forcibly transported beyond the boundaries of the United States can be incarcerated or killed for no reason. That would be "foreign policy."

Will citizenship save people? Obviously it is better to be a citizen than not. Citizenship provides some protection, at least by comparison with its absence, or with statelessness. The problem, though, is that citizens can find themselves borne along with the rationales applied to non-citizens. If we accept that Trump exercises power because of the Führerprinzip, then what is to stop him from saying that the people want to see the forcible rendition of “homegrowns,” of "really bad people, every bit as bad as the ones coming in." If citizens accept that we are living in a state of exception, then they are also accepting that they too can be treated exceptionally. Perhaps worst of all, if citizens accept the notion of stateless zones, of law that only functions as the servant of power, they are inviting their own deportation to places from which we will never return.

If citizens endorse the idea that people named by authorities as "criminals" or "terrorists" have no right to due process, then they are accepting that they themselves have no right to due process. It is due process, and due process alone, that allows you to demonstrate that you are a citizen. Without it, the masked men in the black vans can simply claim that you are a foreign terrorist and disappear you.

Horrible though all of this is, it is still state terror in outline, a test of how Americans will react. We can react by seeing all of this for what it is, and naming it by name: incipient state terror. We can react by associating ourselves with others are repressed before we are. Only in solidarity do we affirm law. We can remind the other branches of government that their functions are being taken over by the executive. Citizens cannot do this alone; they have to remind the rest of the government of its constitutional functions.

The president is claiming core congressional responsibilities when he asserts personal control of immigration policy, criminal law, and the funding of forcible renditions. Congress could very easily pass laws, if a few Republicans found the courage. The president is claiming core judicial functions when he defines himself as judge, jury, and, in the case for forcible renditions to El Salvador, de facto executioner. The phrase "contempt of court" took on vivid life in the White House yesterday.

Even these most basic institutions, the ones defined by our Constitution, do not act on their own. To a very sad degree, Supreme Court justices and members of Congress are already complicit in this experiment in state terror. They might find their way back to an America in which their offices have meaning, but only with the help of we the people.

#timothy snyder #thinking about...

29 notes · View notes

dertaglichedan · 26 days ago

Text

White House Relaunches ‘COVID.gov’ Site to Expose Fauci, the Lab Leak, and China.

IN FULL:

The Trump White House has drastically repurposed the COVID.gov website into a public-facing indictment of the pandemic establishment, accusing Anthony Fauci, federal agencies, and international bodies of suppressing the truth about COVID-19’s origins. The news comes as Trump tightens the screws on the Chinese Communist Party. The National Pulse understands the COVID.gov website does massive amounts of organic web traffic.

The revamped site now leads with the claim that the virus likely leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and that Fauci helped orchestrate the now-infamous “Proximal Origin” paper to shut down the lab leak theory, both stories that were first broken here on The National Pulse.

Supporting the charge: evidence of gain-of-function research funded by U.S. taxpayers through EcoHealth Alliance–another entity first exposed by The National Pulse–as well as the early illness of Wuhan lab workers, and internal NIH communications that suggest efforts to avoid transparency laws. Dr. David Morens, Fauci’s top advisor, is accused of deleting federal records, lying to Congress, and sharing nonpublic info with EcoHealth’s Peter Daszak.

EcoHealth is under federal investigation, NIH’s oversight process is labeled a “national security threat,” and HHS is accused of dragging its feet to protect high-ranking officials. Even the World Health Organization is slammed for pushing China’s interests, with the site warning that the WHO’s “Pandemic Treaty” could further compromise U.S. sovereignty.

The site also torches domestic policies: calling lockdowns medically reckless, mask mandates unscientific, and social distancing arbitrary. In closed-door testimony, Fauci reportedly admitted the six-foot rule “sort of just appeared.” Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s nursing home order is branded “medical malpractice,” with claims his administration redacted and withheld damning documents to dodge accountability.

The message on the new site is blunt: the American public wasn’t just misled—it was manipulated, censored, and endangered by a bureaucracy desperate to protect itself and its partners in Beijing. The website is available here.

7 notes · View notes

spewagepipe · 3 months ago

Text

The Evolution of RPGs: The Landlord's Game

The Landlord's Game was invented in 1902 by Georgist activist Elizabeth "Lizzie" Magie, in an effort to educate the public about how the seemingly-obtuse Georgist land-tax would cure the problems of capitalism. Magie, despite having no noteworthy background in gaming, turned out to be a game design prodigy. She single-handedly innovated multiple long-standing design elements and created the single most influential commercial board game of all time.

The Landlord’s Game appears, at first, to be structured like a simple race game in the vein of Pachisi or Goose, but one of Magie's most influential innovations was the idea of a looping circuit: Upon reaching the end of the track, players simply start a new lap. Victory is decided on the basis of the play-money that is lost and gained as the players land on the various spaces. The original rules prescribe five laps, but the game can be shortened or lengthened to taste.

Race games are already tedious, so repeatedly looping the track might have been downright Sisyphean – except that Magie's board is highly dynamic. Another influential element of her design was a space where players draw a random event card from a deck, such that the space’s effect is always unique. But almost all of the track spaces in The Landlord's Game are subject to some change: players can buy a "title deed" for most spaces that then forces any subsequent players who land there to pay "rent" to the owner.

Players earn a modest "wage" for each lap they complete – but not enough to keep pace with the escalating taxes, fees, and rents. When you can't pay, you start losing turns locked in the "Poor House", which can see you functionally eliminated from the game. To win, you must charge more rent than your opponents, so that they end up in poverty instead. As the rulebook notes, this system (modelled after real-life capitalism) will eventually drive all but one player to ruin.

But players can vote at any time to adopt the Georgist "Single Tax" policy, which means that rents are paid to a new “Public Treasury” instead of to the owners of title deeds. At the same time, all of the spaces that charge taxes or fees become free of charge (either immediately or gradually as the public treasury grows). Portions of the public treasury are used to increase the players’ wages, and whenever a player would otherwise be sent to the “Poor House”, they instead move to the nearest public sector workplace (where they earn additional wages).

The overall effect of the Single Tax mode is that poverty is eliminated, and it is no longer possible to brutally extort one’s opponents. The game shifts into a much friendlier – and tighter – race to see who can make the most wealth, rather than who can cause the most harm. Unfortunately, the Single Tax mode has not survived into the modern era: as if to prove the inherent cruelty of real-life capitalism, the Parker Brothers company first refused to publish The Landlord's Game, and then later stole the design. They stripped Magie of her inventor's credit, erased all traces of Georgism from the game, and published it under the now much-more-widely known brand Monopoly.

Click here for the index of my Evolution of RPGs posts.

#evolution of rpgs #part 19 #tabletop #game design #history #the landlord's game #monopoly #elizabeth magie #lizzie magie #to be honest the landlord's game is not especially relevant to rpgs so I wanted to try to keep this one short #but I found it basically impossible to talk about it at all unless I talked about it a lot because it was a huge deal historically #also hooray the chronology is back on track again #people keep saying that the landlord's game was anti-capitalist but it isn't #the landlord's game is Georgist – which is just capitalism-with-tax-reforms

11 notes · View notes

the-real-zhora-salome · 29 days ago

Text

State Terror

A brief guide for Americans

Timothy Snyder

Apr 15

This is the beginning of an American policy of state terror, and it has to be identified as such to be stopped.

#timothy snyder #authoritarianism #America is fucked

3 notes · View notes

momentokori · 4 months ago

Note

oh yeah lemme tell you the different departments so you can place the koolkidz in them also note they’re more likely to see their own departments but there will be crossover every now and then (like they’ll see other departments every other week or something while their own is every day)

anyways I’ll give you their game descriptions lol

be prepared for lore

The Control Team monitors the employees and Abnormalities and plans the best course of action. They give immediate orders to other employees while watching the CCTV feeds. They tend to be quite bossy and assertive, making them unpopular with other teams.

The Information Team analyzes the Abnormalities, profiles them, and devises solutions to issues the Abnormalities may cause based on the data. They are in charge of collecting, analyzing, and archiving observation data and interview logs provided by the Welfare Team. The vast library of data is the basis for finding “solutions” to various problems encountered in the energy harvesting process; they often conduct experiments to determine the consistency and safety of the solution. All of the invaluable information could be gathered thanks to long-term observations and numerous sacrifices made by the team, not armchair theorizing as some suspect… is what they asked us to write here.

The Safety Team gives safety training to new employees and develops action plans for all kinds of potential emergencies that can occur in the company. They establish strategies for situations such as escaping Abnormalities, panicking employees and security breaches, as well as setting up safety guidelines for others to follow. They are notably meticulous and punctual

The Training team is in charge of composing and regulating company policies and various management procedures. They also run general-purpose training programs to help employees adapt well to their new departments.

The Central Command Team represents the Middle Layer of the facility. The upper and lower halves of Central Command take the role of the foundation for the facility, which allows expansion upwards and downwards. The department also functions as a bridge between the Upper and Lower Layers, making it a valuable strategic location

The disciplinary department's top tough team creates and punishes a variety of reasons, such as when an employee violates material rules, does not fulfill its obligations, neglects the job, damages the company enormously, and so on. This department has the best ability to control and sanction the situation. Whether it's a Abnormality or an employee

With the goal of preventing epidemics and secondary infection caused by Abnormalities, the Welfare Team puts preventative measures into action and works on programs that benefit the physical fitness and mental health of employees. In-house welfare is one of the highest values Lobotomy Corporation pursues; for the protection of our valuable resources… ah, no, I mean the lives of our employees

The record team department in which everything that occurs in the company is recorded. There are endless pages to be filled, but the last is always empty. The contracting and promotion of employees is decided by their records and assessments, so the employees always try to get on the good side of those who work in the Record Team; no one knows when [Record Deletion] will take place

The extraction department handles all physical material needed to maintain the company. They play a big role in the upkeep of everything by restoring collapsed facilities and extracting E.G.O. The arrangement, restoration, and extraction of Abnormalities are some of the duties that lie with this department as well. As such, its employees are always facing something from the Well, and moreover have an empty borehole within their hearts

hope this wasn’t too much of a lore dump have fun struggling I suppose ;-;

Nono it's okay, I think I got most of them

I just don't understand stuff well unless I'm really fixated on it and I'm really focused on Spooky Month and KoolKidz

You're good man👍

#PBG Sandwich :)

3 notes · View notes

finsurancebiz · 1 month ago

Text

How Insurance Companies Make a Profit: Understanding the Business Model

Insurance performs a crucial function in shielding individuals, families, corporations, and corporations from potential monetary losses due to unforeseen occasions like accidents, theft, health issues, and herbal disasters. By supplying quite a few plans with exceptional premiums, coverage businesses provide clients with options to shield their property and well-being. However, many human beings might also marvel how can an insurance company make a profit by taking in premiums and making payouts?. In this article, we will discover how coverage companies generate sales through premiums, payouts, and diverse business strategies.

How Insurance Companies Make a Profit from Premiums and Payouts

Insurance agencies function by using pooling risk and collecting top rate bills from policyholders in exchange for coverage against positive risks. The enterprise version of an insurance company revolves round key standards inclusive of risk management, top class collection, funding of rates, and claims management. These elements decide how insurance groups make a profit, notwithstanding the want to pay out claims.

Here are the primary approaches insurance businesses generate income after gathering charges from their customers:

Underwriting: Risk Assessment and Pricing Underwriting is the process via which insurance businesses verify and rate the risks related to insuring individuals or businesses. Insurers determine whether or not to provide insurance and at what fee primarily based on different factors, inclusive of the applicant’s records, fitness, life-style, and other threat elements.

Insurance businesses make a take advantage of underwriting when the quantity of premiums accumulated exceeds the claims paid out and operational fees. In simpler phrases, underwriting income takes place when the organization collects extra in premiums than it spends on claims and going for walks its business.

To maximize profitability, insurers use facts evaluation and algorithms to discover excessive-hazard individuals. If the threat is simply too high, the insurer would possibly both refuse to provide coverage or growth the top class to ensure the enterprise remains profitable. This cautious selection technique helps generate higher sales for the insurer.

Investment Income: Growing Premiums Through Investments Insurance organizations don’t simply collect charges; in addition they invest them. After amassing charges from policyholders, insurers make investments these price range in lots of low-chance assets, including government bonds, corporate bonds, actual property, and stocks. The aim is to earn a return on those investments through hobby, dividends, and capital gains.

The income generated from those investments can make a contribution considerably to an insurer’s profitability. For instance, if an coverage employer’s funding income exceeds the prices of claims and operating expenses, the enterprise can generate income. This strategy allows insurers to advantage from each top rate income and returns on invested finances.

3. Coverage Lapses: Profit from Unpaid Premiums When policyholders fail to pay their premiums on time, it is able to result in a insurance lapse. In such cases, the coverage business enterprise may also terminate the policy and keep the rates which have already been paid. Since the policyholder now not has coverage, the insurer doesn’t need to pay any claims.

While coverage lapses aren't the primary sales source for insurers, they are able to make a contribution to usual profitability. If a policy lapses, the insurer can maintain the rates with none further legal responsibility.

4. Cash Value Cancellation: Profit from Surrendered Policies For certain varieties of life coverage rules, which include entire life or normal lifestyles insurance, policyholders may gather a cash cost over the years. If the policyholder decides to surrender their coverage before it matures, the insurer keeps the premiums and any collected coins fee.

In this situation, the insurer blessings by means of retaining the rates paid via the policyholder, in conjunction with the hobby earned from investments. The insurer can maintain to control these price range for income, without having to fulfill the policyholder's coverage needs.

5. Administrative Fees: Additional Revenue Streams In addition to rates, insurance corporations regularly charge administrative prices to cowl the price of dealing with policies and processing claims. These prices, although small consistent with policy, can upload up to large sales when implemented to a big purchaser base.

Administrative expenses assist coverage companies offset their operational charges and make contributions to their bottom line. By charging those prices throughout severa rules, insurers can generate great revenue without increasing premiums.

Add-On Riders: Extra Revenue from Customization Many insurers offer upload-on riders to their basic insurance policies. These riders permit policyholders to customize their insurance with extra safety for things like crucial contamination, unintentional demise, or different particular desires. Insurers rate greater fees for these riders, which generates additional revenue past the bottom top rate.

Offering add-on riders offers insurers with a manner to increase their earnings at the same time as offering policyholders with greater alternatives to tailor their coverage to their unique desires.

How Insurance Companies Manage Risks Insurance corporations face sizable risks, in particular throughout huge-scale natural screw ups or occasions that cause a surge in claims. To control those risks and ensure long-time period profitability, insurers implement several strategies:

Reinsurance: Spreading the Risk Reinsurance is a practice where coverage organizations share a number of their dangers with different insurers. By buying reinsurance, an insurer can unfold the economic burden of big claims, together with the ones arising from catastrophic occasions like hurricanes or earthquakes. This guarantees that no unmarried organisation bears the whole price of a big declare.

Risk Pooling: Spreading the Risk Across Policyholders Insurance businesses pool rates from a large variety of policyholders to spread the risk across many individuals or corporations. This method helps insurers decrease the impact of high claims, as the general danger is diluted by using the rates amassed from the broader pool of policyholders.

Mathematical and Statistical Analysis: Predicting Risk Insurance organizations use superior statistical fashions to expect the probability of claims and alter their rates consequently. These models assist insurers examine the capacity fee of claims and set premium ranges that balance the chance even as nonetheless generating a income. By cautiously calculating and adjusting charges, insurers can better manipulate dangers.

Strict Claims Management: Preventing Fraud and Reducing Losses To shield their profitability, insurers put into effect stringent claims control approaches. This includes verifying the legitimacy of claims to keep away from fraud and ensuring that best valid claims are paid. By handling claims correctly, insurers can reduce the likelihood of overpaying for claims, which allows preserve their earnings.

Conclusion: Making Informed Insurance Decisions Insurance companies generate income thru numerous way, which include underwriting, funding profits, insurance lapses, administrative expenses, and upload-on riders. By carefully coping with risks and implementing green strategies, insurers can continue to be profitable at the same time as offering important coverage to policyholders.

Read more: finsurancebiz

#business #insurance #healthcare #financial #money

2 notes · View notes

dailyanarchistposts · 3 months ago

Text

An anarchist case for social transformation and answers to questions about anarchism

“The State is a condition, a certain relationship between human beings, a mode of human behavior; we destroy it by contracting other relationships, by behaving differently.” Gustav Landauer

Anarchism is the belief that people can voluntarily cooperate to meet everyone’s needs, without bosses or rulers, and without sacrificing individual liberties. A common misunderstanding is that anarchism is the total absence of order; that it is chaos, or nihilism. There are even people who call themselves “anarchists” who have this misperception. Anarchists are opposed to order arbitrarily imposed and maintained through armed force or other forms of coercion. They struggle for the order that results from the consensual interaction of individuals, from voluntary association. If there is a need, anarchists believe that people are capable of organizing themselves to see that it is met.

J. A. Andrews used the example of a group of friends going on a camping trip. They plan their trip, and each person brings useful skills and tools to share. They work together to set up tents, fish, cook, clean up, with no one in a position of authority over anyone else. The group organizes itself, chores are done, and everyone passes the time as they please, alone or in groups with others. People discuss their concerns and possible solutions are proposed. No one is bound to go along with the group, but choosing to spend time together implies a willingness to at least try to work out constructive solutions to the problems and frictions that will inevitably arise. If no resolution is possible, the dissenting individuals can form another grouping or leave without fear of persecution by the rest of the group.

Compare this to the way most organizations function. A few individuals make the important decisions, with or without the approval or input of the rest of the group. Rules and bylaws are passed in the hope of preventing undesirable activities on the part of members. The leadership starts out by addressing legitimate concerns, but is soon corrupted by power. It begins doing what it thinks is best, for itself and the organization, even if it involves concealing its activities from the other members or using deception. The elite attempts to entrench itself by making it difficult for the members to oust it, and constantly works to increase its power. The elite may ban criticism of its leadership and policies, or it may attribute superhuman qualities to itself, far surpassing those of “mere” members. Eventually the elite is no longer under the control of the members, and cannot be challenged. It can run amok with all of the power and resources of the organization, punishing those who dare to defy it. Membership is no longer voluntary, but is imposed on whoever falls within whatever the organization decides is its jurisdiction. Laws and authority which were originally aimed at preventing harm are turned into tools for inflicting harm on whoever is targeted by the elite.

Another problem with laws and rules is that if you do not have voluntary compliance, the unlawful behavior will still take place, whether or not there is a law against it. The outlawed activity will be driven underground or will be protected by the imprecise wording of the laws. Having failed to win people’s voluntary cooperation, through education or persuasion, the government passes volumes and volumes of laws, in a hopeless attempt to address and control every possible situation. Sometimes the law is observed as if it were carved in stone, even when the results are clearly ridiculous. An example is the case of the female motorist who was stopped for speeding, and lectured by a police officer at length as she sat there suffering labor pains. The officer thought she was faking the pain of childbirth to escape a traffic ticket! Sometimes the police fabricate charges against people they wish to punish, or they simply beat people as an “attitude adjustment” (if you are not sufficiently terrorized by the police, they consider it an attitude problem). It is also not uncommon for the laws to be overly vague, or to be misapplied. In my town, in obvious violation of their own laws, the police set up roadblocks to stop all motorists, check their sobriety, and search their vehicles for contraband if there is suspicion of any illegal activity after questioning them. This is done under the guise of checking for valid driver’s licenses, which is clearly a ruse since there is no indication of any wrongdoing when the people are stopped. But if anyone would refuse to submit to such a search, they would likely be charged with interfering with the duties of a police officer, disorderly conduct, and resisting arrest, plus whatever other charges the district attorney could dream up. If you were to challenge the roadblocks in court, the judge would probably say that the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, does not really mean what it obviously says when it forbids unreasonable searches and seizures, but that it has been interpreted to mean something entirely different. It now means that the government has the power to decide what is or is not reasonable, entirely voiding the purpose of the law. The law means whatever those in power say it means. The courts have ruled, for example, that conscription is not involuntary servitude, and that the government can force you to choose between a military uniform and a prison uniform. And the laws gradually become more and more restrictive, so that people gradually become accustomed to having less and less freedom. Children are assigned identification numbers at birth. Photos on driver’s licenses are stored electronically in computers, where they can be accessed at will by law enforcement personnel. Employees must present specified forms of identification to be eligible for employment. Residents of public housing can have their apartments searched without a search warrant. What seems outrageously intrusive today is tomorrow’s legislation.

Anarchists do not wish to see traffic fatalities, rapes, or murders. Quite the contrary. They feel the current combination of tyranny and social chaos are responsible for much of the suffering in the world. What anarchists fear is the corrupting influence of power and the inevitable abuse of power. An individual can only do so much damage, but the same person in a position of authority, or worse yet, an organized, systematic application of corrupted power, can wreak horrible damage. Governments have sent millions upon millions of people to their deaths, through wars and persecutions, and have taken away the freedoms of billions of others. And note that the police only prevent crimes in rare situations, such as when a police officer just happens to be at the scene of a crime in progress. The police almost always show up after the crime has been committed. Most crimes go unsolved. Attempting to punish offenders after they have committed their crimes is not a very effective way to protect people. This false “cure” is just an attack on the symptoms without treating the underlying problem — a society that is losing its social consciousness. In other words, the individuals who make up the society have stopped thinking of themselves as being members of a society. If your neighbors are all strangers, and you feel powerless to improve anything, you are not likely to feel that you have a relationship with those around you. The police are not very effective against criminals, but they are extremely effective at controlling the general public. A lone individual has little hope of resisting the depredations of these heavily armed paramilitary organizations. Even if a benign and uncorrupted government was possible, many of us would prefer our freedom, with all of its responsibilities, to being forced to live according to volumes of well intentioned dictates written by others. Care to wear a crash helmet when you drive your car? How about banning bare feet on beaches so no one steps on a sharp rock? And absolutely no walking in remote areas or doing work outside of your profession.

Fred Woodworth has pointed out that the claims of legitimacy made by governments, the justifications used by those in power as to why they have the right to order us about, would be laughable if the results were not so tragic. Any claims to power made by a monarchy, constitutional democracy, theocracy, nationalist fatherland or people’s republic are totally bogus since they govern without the consent of the governed. Any constitution, contract or agreement that claims to bind everyone living in the same geographic area, unborn generations, or anyone other that the actual parties to it, are despicable falsehoods. Some governments rule through fear and brute force, while others, as a result of intense pressure from their subjects, have become dependent on winning the support of large sectors of the public in elections in order to stay in power. Bourgeois democracy, democracy controlled by the elite, is preferable to dictatorship, but these republics also rely on coercion to achieve their goals. The political party which wins, with the help of big money, restrictive ballot access, and winner-take-all election laws, does not have the right to inflict its will on those who do not support it. The state machinery uses coercion to compel obedience from its subjects, regardless of which party is at the controls. Democracy is often equated with tolerance, but Hitler was a product of democracy, and slavery and apartheid existed in the U.S. under democracy. Even in an ideal democracy, unwarped by elite control, the majority may actually support the persecution of people with unorthodox ideas.

The public is constantly bombarded with propaganda justifying the existence of the government and explaining the necessity of the current social system, in the schools, the media, and in its own propaganda. But less than half of the eligible voters participate in elections in the U.S. The government loudly proclaims its mandate anyway.

Most of the objections people have to anarchism as a social system are based on the assumption that people are unreasonable and irresponsible. If this were the case, no amount of police, judges and jails could conjure order out of chaos. People would be routinely killing and robbing one another, and taking advantage of any perceived weakness on the part of others. We would all be certain we were much too clever to be caught. But truly anti-social behavior on the part of individuals is the exception, rather than the rule. Most of us are very well behaved. Much of the destructive behavior we suffer from is committed by individuals who have been raised in the most dire conditions, and who face very limited personal choices due to the material and cultural poverty they were raised in. This occurs across all ethnic groups and in all countries, but some societies are wise enough to attack the conditions that foster destructive behavior instead of merely punishing offenders after the acts have been committed. This is a social problem which needs to be dealt with, not a given fact of human nature. Human beings, and even animals, which are raised in an environment of love, respect and security tend to be good natured and well adjusted. But any creature raised in an environment of fear, cruelty or deprivation will tend to exhibit anti-social behavior. Each society spawns its own predatory individuals. In general, the more atomized and alienated individuals are from their society, the more likely they are to engage in destructive behavior, against others and against themselves. And people cannot be blamed for not identifying with an unsympathetic, and even predatory, society. Some anarchists argue that it is precisely because people have become so maladjusted that no one can be trusted with power over others.

A distinction must be made between socially destructive behavior and behavior which is not coercive, but which is banned by the government for other reasons. Besides the obvious examples of tax and draft evasion, governments, by passing laws, create entire classes of criminals by outlawing certain victimless or vice crimes. Certain activities may be distasteful to some of us, but if they are not predatory or coercive in nature then they are only crimes because the government says they are. But once an activity is outlawed, professional criminals become involved because these activities become highly profitable. This is why criminals were active in the alcohol and gambling trades when they were outlawed, and why they are still active in drugs, prostitution and immigration today. If guns are outlawed, organized crime will have another lucrative trade to pursue. The taxation of alcohol, cigarettes and gasoline has spawned entire bootleg industries.

The for-profit nature of capitalism encourages other forms of anti-social behavior, such as taking advantage of the disorganization of workers by hiring them for as little as possible, working them as hard as possible (sometimes until they break, physically or mentally), and making them pay as much as possible for what they consume. Another example is “externalization of costs”, which means getting society to pay the costs while private businesses get the profits, such as the education of workers at public expense; mining, fishing, grazing and lumbering on public land for token payments; government bailouts; strike breaking; and toxic waste clean up. This officially protected form of destructive behavior, known as corporate capitalism, creates a competitive, dog-eat-dog mentality that is extremely disruptive to human solidarity. Some anarchists believe capitalism is malignant by its very nature. Others argue that it is government interference which has made capitalism malignant, by favoring larger, established businesses and creating barriers for small businesses and self-employed people.

Anarchists believe that people should be free to organize themselves as they see fit, but are divided as to which methods are the most just or desirable. Some anarchists claim that everyone has a right to an equal share of the wealth, since it has been produced primarily by generations of wage slaves living under the threat of dire poverty. They see the functioning of society as a team effort. How could a small fraction of the population have honestly gained such disproportion-al control of the existing assets while the majority has become so totally dependent? They simply couldn’t have. As the saying goes, “it takes money to make money,” and most of our families did not start us off with large sums of money. What business owners had was money to invest, and/or a willingness to go deeply into debt, while most of us make our living selling our labor power. Employees are treated like just another input into the production process: their labor is “bought” when needed, at the market price, and no longer “purchased” when the need has passed. But since employees need to provide for themselves and their families, regardless of the condition of the labor market or the treatment they receive at the hands of their employers, they live in constant insecurity. This insecurity is why employees form labor unions, or turn to laws and government for protection. So most socialist anarchists argue that the most just way to organize an economy is to treat it like one huge cooperative, shared and operated by all, in the interests of all. Anarchists favor a confederal form of organization, so that each locality or industry would be autonomous, but would be closely coordinated with the other units which make up a society. They believe that each unit will act responsibly in relation to the other units, because cooperation and good faith are in everyone’s interest.

The other general category includes anarchists who feel that people should be able to be independent of any organization if they so choose, including economic organizations. They fear socialization of the economy for the same reason they fear the government, because it puts the individual at the mercy of others. They also feel that some individuals are willing to work harder to achieve a higher standard of living than others might be willing to work, and that the more industrious should not be dragged down to the same level as those who choose to work less intensively and live at a more basic standard of living. They feel that the use to which one puts one’s earnings is not the business of the rest of society, as long as it does not cause obvious harm to others, and that they should be free to pass their wealth on to others if they so choose. Individuals should be free to be self-employed, or to employ or be employed by others, as long as the arrangement is voluntarily. These anarcho-capitalists argue that the best way to organize the economy is through voluntary economic transactions of whatever type that people choose to make, with everyone taking responsibility for their own well-being. They claim that in a truly free market system, consumers would be able to control the socially destructive activities of business owners by boycotting their products and by buying from more socially conscious competitors.

As different as these views are, it is possible to have an economy that includes both options, plus others not mentioned or even thought of, and to leave people free to choose whichever type of organization they prefer. The economy would function through the voluntary interaction of a multitude of differently organized groupings, each working out for itself the best methods of organization. The socialistically inclined groups could produce goods for their own consumption, and avoid market relationships to whatever extent they feel necessary. Gustav Landauer wrote, “We can establish a great number of crafts and industries to produce goods for our own consumption. We can go much further in this than the cooperatives have gone until now, for they still cannot get rid of the idea of competing with capitalist managed enterprise.”[1] What is important is that people have a choice, which most of us currently do not have. The various groupings could interact whenever they chose to do so. One serious barrier to cooperation among anarchists is the issue of property rights. At one extreme are those with an almost feudalistic attachment to private, for-profit ownership of the necessities of life, while at the other extreme even the ownership of personal property is seen to be anti-social and elitist. There is quite a bit of room to maneuver between these two extremes, but the question of expropriation of the workplace is the major issue dividing the movement. A communitarian approach would sidestep this issue entirely. These intentional, self-organized communities could not replace the existing system overnight, but eventually they could greatly reduce our dependence on it. Many of the goods currently produced are either unnecessary or are produced in excessive quantities. The use of automobiles, for example, could be greatly reduced through the use of mass transit, bike paths and better urban planning (and this would be a partial solution to the problem of traffic fatalities). And what would anarcho-socialists do with an expropriated cash register factory or mink ranch anyway? If we can’t get people to choose to meet their needs cooperatively, buy buying or using cooperatively produced goods, they are probably not sufficiently interested in radical social change.

What about those who argue “abolish work”? Like a perpetual motion machine, or cold fusion, there is no scheme currently known that can provide everyone with what they need which does not require anyone to perform tasks which they find unpleasant. If everyone does only what they enjoy, we would have a huge oversupply of performing artists and athletes, and a serious shortage of dental hygienists and plumbers. Through job sharing and the elimination of unproductive activities, the amount of unpleasant work can be fairly shared and reduced to a minimum. Those who wish to abstain from the consumption of work enhanced products could not reasonably be expected to work. But it seems just as reasonable for those who do a share of the work to deny access to those who voluntarily choose not to work, in the absence of barriers to productive activity such as unemployment, or harsh or dangerous working conditions.

At the present time, since there is not widespread agreement that anarchism is the best form of social organization, it is up to us to spread these ideas and to implement them as best we can among ourselves. It would be impossible to compel people to participate in an anarchist project, since anarchism relies on voluntary cooperation and self discipline to make it work. Once large numbers of people agree that this is the way things should be organized, not even a tyrant can stop them from reorganizing themselves. As Elisee Reclus wrote, “When the miserable and disinherited of the earth shall unite in their own interest, trade with trade, nation with nation, race with race; when they shall fully awake to their sufferings and their purpose... powerful as may be the Master of those days, he will be weak before the starving masses leagued against him.”[2]

3 notes · View notes

bhavanameti · 1 year ago

Text

#Virtualized Evolved Packet Core Market #VEPC Market #Mobility Management Entity #Home Subscriber Server #Packet Data Network Gateway #Policy and Charging Rules Function #Mobile Private Network & Mobile Virtual Network Operator (MPN & MVNO)#Long-term Evolution & Voice over Long-term Evolution (LTE & VoLTE)#Telecom Operators #Internet of Things & Machine to Machine

0 notes

rauthschild · 6 months ago

Text

Finally, the pendulum has swung on "Lawfare" being practiced by the DOJ. The so-called "January Sixthers" are being released following a Supreme Court finding that they were improperly charged from the start.

The DC Gulag has been breached and 84 year-old Nancy Pelosi is being asked by her own constituents to leave. Gracefully, if possible.

Numerous lower level Federal District and Circuit Court Judges are facing recall and loss of public confidence because of their slave-like willingness to do the will of political and agency officials instead of honoring their own plainly stated obligations under both The Constitution of the United States and The Constitution of the United States of America.

These fawning characters didn't just trounce one part of The Bill of Rights or one Constitutional Amendment protection or one part of the Public Law; oh, no, they went for broke. They violated at least ten (10) actual laws and/or contractual obligations in order to honor a private corporation's "policy" toward the victims of these heinous scumbags.

How is that even possible?

A normal American living in the factual world is bound to wonder.

It's because the courts have been corrupted ever since the so-called Civil War and Americans have been misrepresented as British Territorial U.S. Citizens and as Municipal "citizens of the United States" since 1937 --- without their knowledge or agreement.

This misrepresentation of our political status and identity set up a constructive fraud that has allowed foreign courts to "assume" jurisdiction over Americans based on False and Unconscionable Registrations ---- and has allowed judges to use their own private "discretion" instead of following the Public Law and the Law of the Land.

This is the actual basis of the Lawfare that has been used by foreign British Territorial "Carpetbagger Courts" ever since the so-called American Civil War --- which was instead a Mercenary Conflict.

These courts were originally set up in May of 1865 for the purpose of collecting war reparations from the Southern States. New "military districts" were set up in these states to expedite this illegal and disguised confiscation activity and the equally illegal mercenary occupation of our country.

By the 1930's everyone had forgotten that these were military district courts and gotten used to calling them "District Courts" instead. To finish glossing over what these courts actually are, Territorial "Judicial Districts" were used to overlay the original military districts, and this system of venal foreign law was extended to cover the entire country.

It's a crime, plain and simple. It has always been an international crime and it is long overdue to be addressed, along with the unlawful, illegal, and immoral mercenary occupation of our country by the British Government(s) and Roman Curia.

This is the underlying reason that these judges could function with such horrible impunity to inflict obvious, gross injustice on the January Sixth protestors.

They have done the same and worse to countless innocent Americans who trusted them and did not recognize the nature of these "courts" and the constructive fraud being exercised against them.

These courts began as undisclosed private bill collection agencies and that is what they still are. They are not owed any respect and don't actually practice law. They are all private bank administrators enforcing court rules, collecting so-called private taxes, and imposing corporate administrative codes, instead.

Contempt of court and perjury are two of their favorite laws to enforce, and these happen to be the same fundamental laws they routinely break themselves.

It is contempt of court to reduce justice to a mockery and artifice used to disguise illegal and unlawful confiscation, racketeering, and coercion.

It is perjury to take a private oath and pass it off as a public oath of office, instead --- but this is what these courts and their officers have been doing for well-over a century and a half.

That's how the DC District and Circuit Court Judges could so cavalierly mistreat the January 6th Protestors; in their minds at least, it was a matter left to their personal discretion, and they chose to violate the Constitutional Guarantees owed to these Americans and to pander to the DC Democrats instead.

Let justice begin.

The Department of Justice has an equally clouded and disturbing history.

When the Scottish Interloper, a Scottish-based commercial corporation merely calling itself "The United States of America, Incorporated" stole the identity of our Federation of States and fraudulently accessed our credit in 1868, they also set up the "Department of Justice" a few years later, as an in-house corporate law firm dedicated to defending this foreign corporation -- at our expense.

So the "Department of Justice" is not, as most people would assume, a part of our legitimate Government. Today, it's a private incorporated entity, still serving as a Flak Jacket for dishonest foreign corporations in the business of providing governmental services.

And still sending their bills for all these "services" to their victims.

They are either the most shameless criminals around, or the dumbest excuses for lawyers on the planet. They have been operating under color of law lacking full disclosure for well over a century, pretending to be a legitimate part of our government the whole time, guilty of Gross Breach of Trust and constructive fraud the entire time.

They aren't part of any government of ours, American or Federal.

Like all the other so-called Federal Agencies the "Department of Justice, Incorporated" is a private, for-hire subcontractor of a Subcontractor of a Subcontractor.

Three layers down in the cesspit, DOJ officials don't know who actually pays their paychecks, but Elon Musk will figure it out.

He will be looking up at the sky and shaking his head and he will know what to do with employees who waste our time and money, and who prosecute us under False Pretenses, and who use bogus politically-motivated charges to do so.

He will fire them. Not for political reasons. For practical reasons.

There should never have been a "Department of Justice" in the first place. The best solution would be to fire the Department of Justice, Incorporated, for cause. Fine it into oblivion. Fire all the "United States" Attorneys working for it. And be done with it.

Imagine their faces when they realize that they were "misdirected" and that the people that they railroaded and persecuted and left in freezing cold prison cells --- are their actual employers, the ones who pay the bills, and carry the water?

Big mistake. Big. Really big.

There should never be a "Department of Justice" whose job is to defend incorporated governmental services vendors at public expense. The service vendors need to pay their own legal defense costs and do so without the pretense of being "the government".

The cost of their crimes and negligence should be coming out of their own profit margins, not out of our pockets.

This is a small sample of the abuses this country has suffered at the hands of these British Bunko Artists and Roman Charlatans, but a highly instructive one, because the same scheme has been followed like a playbook to foist off other "departments" and "agencies" which are not part of any legitimate American or Federal Government, to imbue them with authority they don't actually have, and pass the cost of all this padding on to the victims.

This practice of operating under color of law is not only a crime in and of itself, it's an open invitation to embezzlement and racketeering and other forms of crime on our shores ---- all made possible by people who take their paychecks out of our pockets and who are supposed to be providing us with "good faith service".

#blacklivesmatter #blackvotersmatters #donald trump #joe biden #naacp #blackmediamatters #blackvotersmatter #news #ados #youtube

2 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 29 days ago

Text

This is the beginning of an American policy of state terror, and it has to be identified as such to be stopped.

20 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 2 years ago

Text

ATLANTA (AP) — Georgia’s Republican Senate Caucus is suspending a GOP state senator who attacked them for opposing his plan to impeach Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for indicting former President Donald Trump.

The caucus announced Thursday that it was indefinitely suspending state Sen. Colton Moore of Trenton, who represents a district in Georgia’s northwest corner.

“Sen. Moore has a right to his opinion,” the caucus said in a statement. “However, during his advocacy for his ill-conceived proposal, Sen. Moore has knowingly misled people across Georgia and our nation, causing unnecessary tension and hostility, while putting his caucus colleagues and their families at risk of personal harm,” said the group, which has 32 of the Georgia Senate’s 56 members.

Moore attacked his colleagues as “Republicans in name only,” or RINOs.

“The Georgia RINOs responded to my call to fight back against the Trump witch hunts by acting like children and throwing me out of the caucus,” Moore wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “But I’m not going anywhere.”

It’s the latest display of a divide between Gov. Brian Kemp and many elected Republicans, on the one hand, and grassroots Trump backers who have captured control of Georgia’s Republican Party organization.

Kemp refused to endorse Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election and help him try to overturn his narrow loss in the state. Willis has charged Trump and 18 others, including the former state Republican Party chair, with crimes related to the effort. All have pleaded not guilty.

Moore will still be a member of the Senate and will still be a Republican, but may find it hard to pass legislation without support of the majority caucus. But he already often functioned like a party of one in the body, voting against measures that all other Republicans or all other senators supported.

Moore was the most prominent backer of a special session to impeach and remove Willis or defund her office, winning Trump’s endorsement. Kemp denounced the call as “some grifter scam” to raise campaign contributions for Moore, in a news conference that was unusually impassioned for the buttoned-up Kemp.

Kemp called the push “political theater that only inflames the emotions of the moment,” saying a special session “would ignore current Georgia law and directly interfere with the proceedings of a separate but equal branch of government.” Kemp said he didn’t think Willis had done anything to merit removal.

Moore launched a petition for lawmakers to call themselves into special session, requiring signatures by three-fifths of both houses. That would require some Democratic support because Republicans have a less than 60% majority in each chamber. And the Senate would have required a two-thirds vote to remove Willis after the House impeached her. Moore never got close to persuading fellow Republicans, much less Democrats, winning the signatures of one Republican House member and one other Republican senator.

However, Moore attacked some other state senators. After Republican state Sens. Bo Hatchett and Shelly Echols issued a joint statement criticizing Moore’s call, they said Moore targeted them for retaliation and they received threats.

The caucus claimed Moore violated internal rules and was suspended by Republican leaders after refusing to follow those rules. The caucus claimed Moore was not being retaliated against for “his wrongheaded policy position.”

Some other Georgia Republicans have freely attacked Willis, including U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.

“Fani Willis should be ashamed of herself and she’s going to lose her job. We’ll make sure of that,” Greene told reporters outside the Fulton County Jail, shortly before Trump arrived by motorcade to submit to booking and a mug shot.

Despite Moore getting the boot, some Republican state senators are backing a plan to seek Willis’ removal by a new state prosecutorial oversight commission. The Prosecuting Attorneys Qualifications Commission is supposed to begin work sometime after Oct. 1, when the state Supreme Court approves its rules. The body was created with the aim of disciplining or removing wayward prosecutors.

Some district attorneys, not including Willis, are already suing to overturn the law, saying it improperly infringes on their authority.

Kemp, while criticizing the timing of the Trump indictment, has said he hasn’t seen any evidence that the commission should discipline or remove Willis.

#nunyas news

7 notes · View notes