For many intents and purposes, Norway uses the same laws and regulations the EU does. In this particular case, it’s just about setting an example
For many intents and purposes, Norway uses the same laws and regulations the EU does. In this particular case, it’s just about setting an example
100k is a lot when you consider how small Norway’s population is. If you extend that same ratio per capita to the rest of the EU, FB would go broke.
Even without doubling, fines on a regular basis can hurt. Norway imposed $100k fine on FB on a daily basis, and FB is scrambling to do something about it, especially before other countries in the EU follow suit
The tinfoil, not the laser
I thought you were riffing off r/pyongyang, but holy shit
Some people like asking hypothetical questions, others just take every random question as a personal affront.
https://dune.fandom.com/wiki/Orange_Catholic_Bible
Then you just have to become the Kwisatz Haderach
That’s just a bad implementation, then. Tax brackets are progressive for a reason, having a cliff like that should be an obvious no no.
Not to say you don’t have a point, because you do, but the govt could fix that particular issue very easily.
While I have my own issues with OP, would you explain how he is breaking the rules with his posts?
I’m a bit baffled by why anyone would give them money though, since even if you were guilty of a crime in China, the UK doesn’t extradite people to China
Childhood indoctrination to obey the authorities, plus awareness that if China wants you back, they probably won’t use the official extradition process. See the recent examples:
The game is released, for a certain amount of money. If people don’t like what they get for their money, they simply should not buy it.
The problem does not lie with gamers. It lies with ‘AAA’ developers who publish unplayable cashgrabs that need years of bugfixing before reaching a playable state, thus leading to expectations of ongoing development. Not that Early Access has helped in that regard.
It’s never been on sale, but the price HAS gone up multiple times since it was first launched in alpha.
There isn’t even any risk, considering the amount of detail they’ve covered in the dev blogs.
They can, but it costs so much that salvaging it is cheaper
Additional sentencing was added
How is that additional sentencing? In essence, they proved themselves to be unfit parents (because, you know, the whole grooming for crime thing), and had their kids removed due to that. It’s like if you lost your job because you were convicted of a crime. That’s not additional sentencing, that’s just a consequence of your actions
Trusting the government to do the right thing is a poor idea. Politicians will only do the “right” thing if it helps them out.
Without any information, this is just idle conspiracy theorising. It’s not even about politicians, since from the sound of it this came from regular govt officials, not elected politicians.
Due process means the law was fairly applied and their rights were respected. I agree and understand that a govt program does not mean this is the case. In the absence of any countervailing evidence however, that would be the default assumption.
The interviews published were hand selected, the articles are very biased. I’ll sumerize a different way, only 3 of the 100 kids taken from their parents did not speak poorly about their experience.
I agree with you there. The kids are not under a gag order though. Is there any other article or source that indicates a different situation from the one described here?
There was no due process to kidnap the kids. Part of the parents sentence was not loss of custody.
Source? It’s an official govt program being run by a judge. Not even those opposing the program are claiming it’s against the law, they’re just saying it’s a bad idea.
If you look at history the state has been a much more terrible guardian.
Worse than grooming the kids to be crime lords? It’s a closely scrutinised program, and nobody’s calling shenanigans on the implementation, not even the kids being interviewed. It might not work out, that’s true, but I am not seeing a reason that it would be a definite failure.
It astounding that you can’t think of why government kidnapping is a bad thing. They have no right to take kids from homes because they want to “tame the savages”.
Did you miss my big, big disclaimer? “excepting the potential for abuse of this precedent”.
In the case under discussion, the parents are convicted major criminals, there’s a big difference from targeting a certain race. I do agree it’s a potential slippery slope.
It’s not morality to teach kids about all the options they can choose to earn a living.
You can teach the kids their options, but the home environment obviously exerts a greater influence, especially if they are brought up to glorify it.
I have a serious, non-rhetorical question that I’m honestly interested in an answer to. Given that the parents and family have proven themselves to be bad influences and unfit guardians, why would we WANT to continue exposing the kids to their influence? This question is specific to this situation, not about the potential for abuse of the law in other situations. I don’t have a dog in this fight, I appreciate hypothetical discussions.
Upgraded. That one counts under the T-91 stats