"Freedom" thread or something

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: Pat, I mostly agree with you, but I must ask: Do you think he could get a fair trial? No I do not. However, I think that's frequently the case. It's an unfortunate consequence of a jury of peers. It's one of the reasons that I think an arrangement of professional jurors could be beneficial.

I think media is responsible for our inability for fair jurors.  (Mis)information and sensation gets passed about so quickly, a jury of peers is a joke.

Epignosis wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: Pat, I mostly agree with you, but I must ask: Do you think he could get a fair trial? No I do not. However, I think that's frequently the case. It's an unfortunate consequence of a jury of peers. It's one of the reasons that I think an arrangement of professional jurors could be beneficial. I think media is responsible for our inability for fair jurors.  (Mis)information and sensation gets passed about so quickly, a jury of peers is a joke.

Agreed. I also blame the individuals though. The current of sensationalism flows quickly, but you still have to jump in before it takes you. As with most problems in society, our troubles stem from a lack of serious thought on the individual level. Which comes as a predictable outcome of a culture which seeks to train its children like dogs rather than human beings.

There have been though cases when even with all the media onslaught and public opinion agreeing on a specific position, juries have been able to act with some kind of reason and justice. I can think of the Anthony case when everybody wanted the mother burned already and the jury didn't convict her. 

Epignosis wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: Pat, I mostly agree with you, but I must ask: Do you think he could get a fair trial? No I do not. However, I think that's frequently the case. It's an unfortunate consequence of a jury of peers. It's one of the reasons that I think an arrangement of professional jurors could be beneficial. I think media is responsible for our inability for fair jurors.  (Mis)information and sensation gets passed about so quickly, a jury of peers is a joke. Agreed. I also blame the individuals though. The current of sensationalism flows quickly, but you still have to jump in before it takes you. As with most problems in society, our troubles stem from a lack of serious thought on the individual level. Which comes as a predictable outcome of a culture which seeks to train its children like dogs rather than human beings. My students are all "Tayvon got killed!  He shunna been shot!" And I have to explain to them that there is more to the story than the media (and what they hear from the media) offers.  Wearing a hoodie doesn't make you cool, Bobby R. (D).  In fact, you look like an imbecile.  Too bad you are pandering to you black on black crime state of IL.

This is a reasonable article on this subject, written by a black man by the way

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: Pat, I mostly agree with you, but I must ask: Do you think he could get a fair trial?  It's an unfortunate consequence of a jury of peers. It's one of the reasons that I think an arrangement of professional jurors could be beneficial.

Totally agree and have thought this for years.  Not to mention the efficiencies to be gained.  No expensive selection process system costing tons of tax dollars.....once seated there is no "training" of jurors and wasting time telling them how to perform the duty because the "professional jurors" know the rules and system already. 

Finnforest wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: Pat, I mostly agree with you, but I must ask: Do you think he could get a fair trial?  It's an unfortunate consequence of a jury of peers. It's one of the reasons that I think an arrangement of professional jurors could be beneficial. Totally agree and have thought this for years.  Not to mention the efficiencies to be gained.  No expensive selection process system costing tons of tax dollars.....once seated there is no "training" of jurors and wasting time telling them how to perform the duty because the "professional jurors" know the rules and system already.

The only issue is the problem of alienation and corruptibility. Within a governmental system of law, I have some reservations about it. I think it may be better than the alternative though.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: KoS wrote: That's why the bank is insured( federally, but you know, the Libertarian boogeyman). And that;s how they make money. Yeah that's one meaning of the word insured. The banks are "insured" as a permanent bailout at the expense of the general population. It's moral hazard at its worst. Your contempt for banks acting as mere piggy banks is ahistorical. Banks long had kept the actions of storing funds and investing funds separate.

Indeed.

I do sincerely thank you Ric for giving so much info to mull over, guess I've just been lost to the dark side but the more I think about it just seems more and more like the Fed/banks are a self supporting system.

No Fed, Go Gold. It'll be my campaign slogan for 2014

JJLehto wrote: Indeed. I do sincerely thank you Ric for giving so much info to mull over, guess I've just been lost to the dark side but the more I think about it just seems more and more like the Fed/banks are a self supporting system. No Fed, Go Gold. It'll be my campaign slogan for 2014

As a bit advice since I find this to be the defining economic issue of our time, it's probably wise to read a serious treatise on the matter coming from the two major schools. I was (un)lucky enough to receive plenty of formal training in "real" economics since I minored in the subject and consider doing mathematical economics for a long time. The conflict between that and what I learned from the Austrians really gave way to my true opinion.

It's an issue important enough to almost try to convince yourself to take the opposite view continuously. Mises' Theory of Money and Credit should definitely be read. It's still the best book on the subject from an Austrian perspective. Had the nobel prize existed at the time, it surely would have netted him it. I can't think of an equally monumental and self-contained text that Bernanke would approve, but you could probably do well with a selection of journal articles since I assume you still have a nice subscription from Penn State's library.

True and good point.  I need to think more about the privatized justice system too, I know its been discussed here but I haven't had time to read much about it.  

Did you actually read that first Fed report that you posted?