Posts by FletcherB
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Heres the thing... given the circumstances, what IS disproportionate?
When my son misbehaves in the same way again and again, the punishments get worse... (with advance warning).
Now, I know all the stuff about people not expecting to get caught, so longer sentences arent a deterrent... But anyone in the position of "strike 2" already knows that sometimes they DO get caught.... has already served two five year sentences (at least) and maybe it might just act as a deterrent to them personally.... and if it doesnt, and they do get caught..... is it disproportionate to give them a longer sentence than the same crime would have received, had it been their first or second, especially considering they had been "warned" about what happens after strike 2?
Now, I know that 25/life under some US 3-strikes laws gets handed for fairly low-level crimes that are indeed disproportionate...
But I'm less convinced that it is under the circumstances required to trigger this proposed law (as described by Mr Edgeler)
-
Re: court suppression...
If it's not name suppression, but something else that's suppressed.... say current abode of the accused, (to give a recent well publicized example) and I've even heard the media report "something is suppressed but we cant tell you what it is and so are the reasons for it's suppression so we cant even tell you why we cant tell you..."
What's to stop the public rumour-mongering in ignorance?
Can you be breaking a suppression order if you dont know you are?
How do you find out that you're breaking it? Anyone who tells you your guesses or rumours are suppressed is confirming them and breaking suppression themselves no? -
Using Safari on Leopard here.... I see Russell's black square.
Didnt need to empty the cache or anything.... -
Definitely. And Daniel Craig for sure if we didn't share a last name which I think I would find slightly off-putting.
Lots of married people find it off-putting too. :)
-
You know, I've been thinking about it for days. Because, the way I see it, it means that people used to behave a lot more petulantly before either Ms. Ciccone or the Virgin Mary came on the scene and put a stop to that.
Well, It certainly applies to Sean Penn, then, doesnt it?
-
Doh! Giovanni beat me!
-
the Bonanza theme song! who knew there were words?
Of course there were words...... but I always thought it was "dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum Bonanza! dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum"
Not having heard it for 20 or more years, I see I wasn't that far off :)
-
Yeah, look.... this whole mass is energy thing is obviously a scam....
Otherwise, we'd be able to take any old unwanted stuff..... like a dead fly, a dog turd, or some rotten framing from a leaky home, and turn it into electricity and stuff.
Energy crisis? What energy crisis? According to Einstein you should be able to drive your car for a year on a teaspoon of dirt, or use one dump-truck of rubbish to power all of Auckland for a year!
P.S. at first, upon reading the headline, I thought maybe we were finally going to get another installment on the history of energy series? Humour is great, but I like to learn stuff too :) -
Also, I read in the DomPost today that banks won't lend to single people without a big deposit. Is this legal - marital status is a prohibited ground of discrimination, isn't it?
If they really are using it to discriminate... then yeah thats bad and probably illegal (IANAL).
But I would expect, with similar saving history (ie. deposit built up over time rather than majically appearing out of nowhere- demonstrating ability to budget and make regular payments), that a single person with a $100k salary would probably find themselves with the same ability to borrow as a $50k + $50k couple would be.
What I mean is, I think ability to pay is probably far more importatnt to the bank than whether you are single, couple, whatever...
I bought my first house, while single, with a deposit that was a) 25% of total price, and b) more than my annual salary.... because I'd saved it over time..... way back in 1995. It was hard, but it's really payed off in the long term.....
Unfortunately, wage growth hasnt kept up, and I know it would be even more difficult starting out today... but I dont think it's impossible.
-
I'm feeling pretty pleased with my own reading of the entrails...
My 2-year fixed is up for expiry in two months... It rose about 1.5 % since I fixed in at 8.5%, and I was starting to think I didnt fix for long enough then all of a sudden- slow turnaround becomes crash! and I'm looking like a genius.
And if that sounds like gloating..... I'll just balance that by admitting to being floating for the last ten years or so and always paying too much when in hindsight I would have been way better off sequentially fixing...
more fool me...