guajalote
4d ago
I think they mean "Her fiancé gets a license to keep selling his soul to big corporations for money while they retain their virtue in their social circles." But personally I doubt this. Most top lawyers run in elite blue-tribe social circles where "selling one's soul" to corporations is not really frowned upon to begin with.
guajalote
9d ago
Yeah there are a bunch of jobs where hiring works the "normal" way. I work at an IP litigation firm. If someone emails me their resume I look at it to see if they meet the qualifications we're looking for. If they do I circulate it to the other partners and recommend an interview. Then we have an interview and if we like the person we hire them.
guajalote
16d ago
Public statements of support for organizations (including bad ones) are protected by the First Amendment. I can't see how this would survive a constitutional challenge unless he did something more substantial than "express support" for Hamas.
Regardless, I am not aware of a real-world situation where a federal judge has been consistently "wrong" while otherwise doing his job (i.e. showing up for hearings and issuing orders in a timely fashion). For example, a federal district judge ignoring a direct order from the circuit court would be shocking. Perhaps some examples of this exist, but I am not aware of any, and presumably it would be grounds for disciplinary proceedings.
guajalote
24d ago
The process is generally used for criminal/corrupt behavior or failing to do the job (like failing to show up to court, failing to issue opinions, failing to resign when no longer mentally competent for the job). The complete set of arcane procedures are here, I believe.
I don't know whether the process is ever invoked for judges who are "wrong as a matter of law frequently." Often this is the result of a political or philosophical disagreement rather than a failure to do one's job. For example, imagine a conservative district judge pre-Dobbs who consistently holds that Roe was wrongly decided and is not good law, and therefore keeps getting reversed. It may seem that this judge is constantly getting the law "wrong," but in fact he is getting the law "right" and will later be vindicated by Dobbs.
guajalote
24d ago
I don't know whether the data exists, but my understanding is the vast majority voluntarily resign, probably over 90%.
guajalote
24d ago
Judges are almost never impeached because the federal judiciary has an internal process where if a judge is found to have done something bad after an investigation, the judiciary will recommend that the judge voluntarily resign. The judge will almost always comply with the resignation "suggestion," because if he does not, the judiciary will recommend impeachment to congress. Such a recommendation carries a great deal of weight when your own colleagues in the judiciary think you deserve to be impeached. So the impeachment rate is low because there is an internal process that pushes judges who would otherwise get impeached to voluntarily step down.
guajalote
1mo ago
Banning all travel to and from places millions of Americans visit each year would be costly to the economy so while it might be cheaper for the government it would surely be more expensive for the country. Also, I want freedom to travel where I please. We shouldn't impose travel bans that aren't actually necessary.
guajalote
1mo ago
If you're going to invest in the stock market, put the money in an index fund as suggested. I've been making around 10% annual returns doing this. You're not going to beat the market making risky bets because you don't have better information than the market. Trying to pick stocks is just gambling.
If you are truly dead set on out-performing index funds, then you need to invest in something that you have more direct control over, like a business you own or a property you manage.
guajalote
1mo ago
In addition to the "no step on snek" crowd, many evangelicals consider a federal ID to be the biblically prophesied "mark of the beast." There has been a strong consensus among the republican voting base for a long time that a federal ID would be one of the worst things that could possibly happen, and I don't see that changing soon.
guajalote
2mo ago
Wokeness only appealed to a segment of the elites and was unappealing to most non-elites. So wokeness gained power quickly but ran out of steam because it lacked any grassroots support. On the other hand, Christianity started out as a religion of the proletariat and by the time it trickled up to the elite of Roman society it had massive grassroots support. I think that's a key difference.
guajalote
3mo ago
I am pro-choice, but it seems like pro-lifers have a number of easy retorts to this argument:
-
Most pro-life people do care about and help prisoners, immigrants, the sick, the poor, etc.
-
Why would it make sense to prioritize the wellbeing of "morally uncomplicated" unborn children lower than the wellbeing of "morally complicated" people (i.e. people who bear a non-zero amount of responsibility for their circumstances)? Shouldn't the former be a higher priority, or at least an equal priority?
-
He is making an apples-and-oranges comparison. It is already well-established and widely agreed that it is wrong to kill prisoners, immigrants, the sick, the poor, etc. Pro-lifers simply seek to extend these protections to unborn children. If the law permitted the killing of immigrants or poor people without due process, I am sure pro-lifers would be just as upset about this as abortion, if not more so.
guajalote
3mo ago
You can make this argument about anything. Many men would prefer an educated wife, therefore they would benefit from society shaming women who choose not to pursue an education. Does that mean women who do not pursue an education are "cheating the social contract?"
guajalote
3mo ago
Because if it were, you would have no problem with people becoming addicted to drugs and other substances.
I have no problem with people becoming addicted to drugs and other substances. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but I have no problem with it because it's none of my business how they choose to live their lives.
guajalote
3mo ago
I am not sure whether they are more social and more into strategic networking, but certainly the benefits of socializing and networking are greater because elites have more resources and power at their disposal.
Thanks for linking this article, I hadn't seen it before and its strikes me as pretty accurate. My family has been G2/G3 for several generations and I'm now in the E3/E4 range as a partner at an elite law firm.
Your question is pretty open ended but I guess my advice would be to network with other elites as much as possible. Send out Christmas cards, host parties and invite them over, go golfing with them, do whatever you can to nurture those connections. Learn elite class hobbies and conversation topics like tennis, skiing, golf, wine collecting, international travel, etc. People at this tier have real money and power, and friendships with them have the potential to truly change your life in ways that aren't possible at the lower tiers.
guajalote
4mo ago
The Number Needed To Treat for statins is about 138.
I believe her LDL is around 135.
I would suspect that given standard monetary values of QALY and DALY in the West, it would be a net positive given how damn cheap drugs are.
Assuming they actually prolong life. My understanding is that "statin clinical trials have shown marginally significant benefits on mortality" at best over 5 years, and there's no good evidence they reduce long-term morality. That's why I came here to ask the question, I'm curious if there's newer or better evidence to support their effectiveness. If they don't work, then we're just risking side-effects for no gain.
As for eggs, I have more or less given up on attempting to understand nutritional science, there's hardly a more cursed and confounded field on the planet.
I get that nutrition is hard to study, but do you really have no opinions about this topic as a doctor? Shouldn't lifestyle changes be the first line of treatment for this sort of thing? If you had to recommend the optimal diet to a patient with high cholesterol, what would it be?
I ask this because my mother is something of a health nut and will follow credible diet and lifestyle advice religiously. When her doctor told her to cut out red meat, butter, and eggs, she completely eliminated these things from her diet. If a doctor told her eating nothing but unseasoned boiled potatoes was the key to lower cholesterol, she'd eat nothing but unseasoned boiled potatoes. On the other hand, her doctor has not told her to avoid things like processed sugars or margarine, so she still eats plenty of that stuff.
So I'm interested in trying to set her up with the best evidence-based diet and lifestyle interventions possible. Since she is going to religiously follow some sort of diet program regardless, it may as well be the best possible program.
Finances willing, I'd put very many people on GLP-1 agonists, so if granny could do with losing weight and not just cholesterol, that's my recommendation.
She is not at all overweight, goes on long hikes/jogs daily, skis, bikes, and is otherwise very physically active for a 70 year old.
guajalote
4mo ago
List it as free on craigslist or nextdoor or a similar site and someone will come take it.
guajalote
4mo ago
What's the latest thinking on addressing high cholesterol? My mom has high cholesterol (70 years old, active, not overweight, otherwise in excellent health). She and her doctor are working off what I understand to be outdated thinking on the subject. For example she is avoiding healthy foods like eggs with high cholesterol content, but my understanding is the latest studies suggest no clear link between eggs and high cholesterol. It seems like the latest consensus is to avoid red meats, sugar, and processed foods. Her doctor has also suggested statins, but my understanding is that there isn't much if any evidence to support their effectiveness. What do the doctors of the motte suggest for an otherwise healthy person with high cholesterol?
guajalote
4mo ago
The squirrel only bit the guy after they entered the house and tried to take the squirrel, which should have never happened to begin with.
I agree with what you're saying but I also agree with cjet79's central point that "if someone is going to make a claim contradicting [most people's common sense about medicine] they need to have a lot of evidence and some damn good explanations."
I think this is true in general, not just in medicine. If you're going to make claims that contradict peoples' common sense, then you need to be prepared to carry a heavy burden of persuasion, and you should empathize with (rather than attack or belittle) those people who are unpersuaded and trust their (perhaps incorrect) common sense. This is where the medical establishment really messed up. Even on issues where I think the establishment is correct (e.g., the covid vaccines are effective, adults should be allowed to medically transition) I still think the establishment has done a horrible job of messaging, and has blamed its failures on the people it failed to convince.
More options
Context Copy link