I wonder why it is I even bother.
I wonder why it is I even bother.
I imagine that any association with the US Govt. could engender distrust in such matters these (post Snowden) days.
It might engender quantitatively more distrust than in pre-Snowden days, but probably not deeper distrust. The US government has been deeply distrusted by the rest of the world for a long time.
Price fixing happens for most monopolies, a free market wouldn't allow for many monopolies on high margin products. A truly free market wouldn't have licenses, FDA, copyright or patents. Price fixing protects the poor from abuse by government granted monopolies.
The problem is the decisions are disproportionately favored in the mother in contested cases. Actually go to family court once, as a father you have to prove that your ex is truly incompetent and incapable of taking care. It takes a very expensive 3-way psych eval in most cases meaning a full psych eval of all people involved for the plaintiff, defense and for the court; a single one costs $2000/pp on average and the cost is solely carried by the plaintiff (father). That is $12-20k simply to prove your ex has the condition she often has been prescribed medication for but never takes and then you still only have a 75% chance of success.
It doesn't matter who spends more time with the kids before, the mother has often kidnapped or been granted temporary full custody the children and is refusing to allow court ordered visitation and as a result she gets to claim she spent more time with the kids.
When the statistics surrounding temporary custody do not go 90% in the mothers favor (the court is supposed to be ignorant of any unfounded accusations until they hear the case), then fathers may see a chance.
As an informal study a million years ago, I tested a variety of CD-R media.
I put a bunch of them on the rear deck of my car, and left yhem there for a couple of Ohio years.
They worked fine.
What do you mean "slide".
We wallow in it.
Yoga bridesmaid pr0n? Here we come.
"the rules aren't subject to congressional approval" - a lot of "laws" have passed since Bush onwards that are no longer subject to congressional approval. They're just a source of comedic entertainment any other time, why do we even have congress or a judiciary for that matter? It didn't pass congress properly, let's just make it a presidential order.
If anything, you should vote for Trump because he's too stupid to realize he can pull legalistic shit like this, perhaps "the people" can restore some of the balance and take it away from the attorneys-in-charge. That or Gary Johnson/Jill Stein - may not be ideal but anything is better than an extension of these Bush-Obama policies.
Either way, I'm sure this won't be abused. Come to the US, get $500k in funds, you just have to promise us to create some jobs in the next 5 years even though our own startups fail 90% of the time this won't be a problem for you. If anything, give ANY startup in the US access to the same funds. I sure could use them, I'm an immigrant even.
The 'true' pay gap is 0.1-0.01% or something like that (a statistical error) in the western world and that may be due to (70-80% paid) maternity leave. The "problem" is the lifetime income gap, which has been closing but is somewhere on the order of -5 to 15% depending on the field. Educated women no longer stop work to take care of children and it's no longer odd that the father stops working these days as well.
Obviously employers would get an all-female workforce if it were legal for them to pay them even 1% less than equally qualified men.
This agreement is just White House endorsed commercial advertisement. It gets everybody in the news one last time.
Start a Equal Opportunity lawsuit, you should win.
Sorry, but you must be looking at different stats:
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17%
Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
The only articles I can find that say otherwise are ALL pointing to the same HuffPo article (not even a scholarly backed piece).
The "majority" of parents does indeed reach an agreement out of court, a little over 50% (Macooby & Mnookin) reaches a so-called uncontested agreement, that means at least 49% is contested. In SJW-world this would mean any contested cases should automatically go to the father right? Equality in numbers and all.
In a study of 705 cases, an uncontested request for maternal physical custody was made in 500 cases. The outcome matched the request for maternal custody in nearly 90% of such cases. In contrast, paternal physical custody was awarded in only 75% of the 47 cases in which there was an uncontested request for sole paternal physical custody. - So EVEN in uncontested cases (the mother agrees), the courts will 25% of the time override the parents' wishes and still grant the mother custody.
There are some 40,000 disputed custody cases every year which are decided by family court judges. These judges will listen to recommendations from court welfare officers who visit the family and write 35,000 reports every year. The welfare officers work in the probation service which deals with mostly male criminals, this makes it difficult to see fathers in a positive light. The result is that family courts award mothers sole custody in 71% of cases and fathers sole custody in 7% of all cases, joint custody is awarded in the remaining 21% of cases. Many fathers report giving up an expensive custody fight for their children after advice from lawyers who say they can't win. It is very common for mothers during custody battles to receive state funded legal aid. A custody battle is therefore a very unequal war of attrition. Many fathers report that efforts to have contact with their children are blocked by mothers, and the courts will not enforce the right of children to have contact with their fathers.
And how would they check that? Sure they can filter IPSEC traffic but there are many more VPN types, over HTTP, SOCKS, SSL and quite a few 'experimental' ones (encapsulated in DNS or ICMP).
Criminal investigations don't use 'undelete'. They use electron microscopes to read areas that were microscopically out of alignment the next time the drive passed it's head. It's very expensive to actually recover large amounts of data this way, but for 'spy agency' needs it's trivial.
That is not how FBI investigations work. You can't just turn over the data, there is a chain of evidence.
Wishing without work is like fishing without bait. -- Frank Tyger