John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight' • Hacker News Board

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#281

Post by dogma1138 » Tue, Jun 07, 2016, 10:26 AM UTC

yardie wrote: post #108

dogma1138 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently pretty much anything including answering a phone call under some jurisdictions. Pretty much they can hook you in by calling you and saying "Good day Mr. Smith you have a debt for 50$ to Acme Medical do you want to hear about our debt relief plan with payments as low as 1$ a month". If at any point you seem to show any response to it they can use it to prove that you've acknowledged the debt at which point…

They can call and you can ask but if you say the debt is not yours or you don't recognise it that is not an acknowledgement.

Well yes, but most people won't be able to not to put their foot in their mouth. Oddly enough saying "the debt is past this statutory limit and cannot be forcibly collected" might actually be an acknowledgement of the debt by itself. All the laws regarding this are completely bonkers.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#282

Post by bayesian_horse » Tue, Jun 07, 2016, 1:13 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #257

bayesian_horse wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, let's hope Trump wouldn't nuke anybody for saying his hands are small. But his incredible thin skin and demonstrated vulnerable ego is hardly an asset in diplomatic or military matters...

Again. The US system is not that fragile. It's made to be able to deal with presidents smart or dumb. I see no evidence that Trump should be any more dangerous than Bush or Clinton. He might say more outrageous things than even Bush to the international community but his rhetorics isn's his politics and he can't just send nuclear bombs at whomever he wants.

I'm not aware of any such checks or balances which would prevent a president from launching a military attack when there is at least the faint notion of a threat. He certainly doesn't need any parliamentary approval for the first strike and he is commander in chief of the armed forces. The only hope is that the military would refuse stupid orders.

I also don't see why anyone would want a thin-skinned man child in charge of the only superpower in the world. Being in the center of at least one pretty strong fraud case doesn't help either. The argument "he just says stupid things all the time, but he will be presidential and wise when he is president" doesn't even begin to make sense to me.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#283

Post by Agustus » Tue, Jun 07, 2016, 1:19 PM UTC

pas wrote: post #280

Agustus wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His interpretation of the Venezuelan crisis. He pointed to the price of oil driving the issue. Nowhere did he mention the crazy socialist/populist programs that Chavez and his successor Maduro. The main problem in Venezuela is the erosion of property rights. Nowhere in the report was this mentioned.

I don't think his interpretation was total, complete or absolute. He basically refrained from commenting on it, and made very direct jokes on basic aspects of the situation, while introducing it via a proximate cause (oil price crashing led to instability - it's the lack of diversified economy that made them vulnerable, and it's usually caused by shortsighted natural resource expolitation, blablabla, but that's just…

The socialistic / communistic populist rhetoric used by Chavez is what allowed him into office.

The socialist / communist people who elected him created the monster that he became, so those who wanted the platform elected and in his mind instilled his beliefs as "the will of the people" that we hear so much from those who are marginally elected.

No one ever wants to elect a dictator, however, the requirements of a socialist / communist leader lends itself much more to developing one when one utters: "It is the will of the people" to supersede the property rights of others.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#284

Post by Agustus » Tue, Jun 07, 2016, 1:20 PM UTC

anentropic wrote: post #177

Agustus wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His interpretation of the Venezuelan crisis. He pointed to the price of oil driving the issue. Nowhere did he mention the crazy socialist/populist programs that Chavez and his successor Maduro. The main problem in Venezuela is the erosion of property rights. Nowhere in the report was this mentioned.

I thought the main problems were less abstract, like not being able to buy toilet paper etc

This is the short term approach that John Oliver puts forward. This is not a year's development, this has been the result of 16 years of Chavez / Maduro policies.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#285

Post by pc86 » Tue, Jun 07, 2016, 2:08 PM UTC

bmh_ca wrote: post #232

pc86 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please explain what you are trying to say with "neurostatic precepts?" This thread takes the first two spots on Google for that phrase...

I understand neurostatic means the opposite of neuroplasticity. Google is indeed unhelpful; I had never Googled "neurostatic", and it's possible I have the term wrong. That said, I seem to recall reading it somewhere. Interestingly, the lead-in for Neuroplasticity on Wikipedia[1] states: > [Neuroplastic] contrasts with the previous scientific consensus that the brain develops during a critical period in early childho…

TLDR: You made it up.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#286

Post by ThomPete » Tue, Jun 07, 2016, 11:55 PM UTC

bayesian_horse wrote: post #282

ThomPete wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again. The US system is not that fragile. It's made to be able to deal with presidents smart or dumb. I see no evidence that Trump should be any more dangerous than Bush or Clinton. He might say more outrageous things than even Bush to the international community but his rhetorics isn's his politics and he can't just send nuclear bombs at whomever he wants.

I'm not aware of any such checks or balances which would prevent a president from launching a military attack when there is at least the faint notion of a threat. He certainly doesn't need any parliamentary approval for the first strike and he is commander in chief of the armed forces. The only hope is that the military would refuse stupid orders. I also don't see why anyone would want a thin-skinned man child in cha…

Well then you should read a little up on it.

The president will need permission to declare war.

Trump can in theory command the nukes to be fired without declaring war but this only works if there isn't any political opposition agains his case (i.e. it would be considered unpatriotic to disagree with his decision)

Given the general dislike for Trump there will be plenty of dissent if he decided to just send nuclear bombs left and right. The military would overthrow him pretty quickly.

So yes there are checks and balances and in the case of Trump they would make sure that he followed protocol.

You dislike him so your analysis of why he would be thin skinned has little value here too.

I have no personal interest in this as I can't vote, however I am not afraid of him more than Hillary (who is a known Hawk)

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#287

Post by bayesian_horse » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 5:06 AM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #286

bayesian_horse wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of any such checks or balances which would prevent a president from launching a military attack when there is at least the faint notion of a threat. He certainly doesn't need any parliamentary approval for the first strike and he is commander in chief of the armed forces. The only hope is that the military would refuse stupid orders. I also don't see why anyone would want a thin-skinned man child in cha…

Well then you should read a little up on it. The president will need permission to declare war. Trump can in theory command the nukes to be fired without declaring war but this only works if there isn't any political opposition agains his case (i.e. it would be considered unpatriotic to disagree with his decision) Given the general dislike for Trump there will be plenty of dissent if he decided to just send nuclear b…

I don't believe he would launch nukes against someone. I don't believe that his staff would necessarily stop him, either. As far as I know nobody would be legally allowed to stop him. Even more so in the case of small scale military actions, like drone strikes or the bin Laden raid. Declarations of war are overrated.

Trump's thin skin is a proven fact. He still isn't over the jokes over his small hands. He felt the need to defend his penis size in a presidential campaign. He attacks voters at his own events. He verbally insulted almost all minority groups. His default reaction to any criticism is to personally insult the critic.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#288

Post by aptwebapps » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 12:20 PM UTC

lujim wrote: post #258

marxidad wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's fair to compare John Oliver to a televangelist minister with private jets.

Well to be fair you're stripping away the context of the discussion I was having. An internet enthusiast believed that I was minimizing John Oliver's work by calling him a slacktivist. I felt like pandering to beliefs and emotions of your target demo without taking any real meaningful action other than talk and throwing around token amounts of money is insincere. Then he said John Oliver and HBO spend thousands of do…

If'd just conceded that 'slactivist' was a poor choice of words (because as it is commonly used it does not match the criticisms you are leveling at Oliver) you both could have saved a lot of typing.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#289

Post by awesomerobot » Wed, Jun 08, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

jdmichal wrote: post #239

k-mcgrady wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "At that point it's likely your credit is already ruined though... which is a whole different topic to broach." In the UK at least getting passed to a debt collector should have no impact on your credit score. It's when they decide to go further and recoup it through court that you start to get hurt. This is my experience at least. It makes sense as I know many people who have been passed to debt collectors for de…

It doesn't matter in the US either. What matters here is days late. Anything over 30 days gets noted under the credit line, and will stick around there for a couple years or so. Unsure what happens to the mark once the debt is settled.

After it's passed to collections you can't do much, it's too late. A "couple years" is 7 years. The US credit industry is absurd.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#290

Post by pas » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 12:44 PM UTC

Agustus wrote: post #283

pas wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think his interpretation was total, complete or absolute. He basically refrained from commenting on it, and made very direct jokes on basic aspects of the situation, while introducing it via a proximate cause (oil price crashing led to instability - it's the lack of diversified economy that made them vulnerable, and it's usually caused by shortsighted natural resource expolitation, blablabla, but that's just…

The socialistic / communistic populist rhetoric used by Chavez is what allowed him into office. The socialist / communist people who elected him created the monster that he became, so those who wanted the platform elected and in his mind instilled his beliefs as "the will of the people" that we hear so much from those who are marginally elected. No one ever wants to elect a dictator, however, the requirements of a so…

This is true of every ideology usurped so far by dictators. Kings usually just invoked divine rights, or the good old "my father was king and his father was king before him, so I shall be king after him too" as is tradition. Caesar was also a tribune of the people, yet he was ineligible, but he also used the "will of the people" as justification.

The problem is, when someone has so much power to do this, ideologies don't matter anymore, and there's no argument that can best the "will of the people", because if the will of the people is wrong, then the people are wrong too, and since they are the majority, you're screwed with your logic (and rationality).

I'm saying these, because it's important to note that communism as an abstract idea is not worse or better than any other form of government, such as feudalism, or fascism. Ideally all could work. Given an ample supply of good kings, incorruptible premier secretaries and supreme leaders, and so on.

Naturally, the problems are foreseeable, so individual power should be limited. What better way to do that than to remove even the power of wealth generation? Bam! Instant communism, again.

And this works with property rights too. Someone offers you a very good deal on a crate of gold, you buy it. It turns out it was stolen from a national bank. But reversing that transaction would violate your property rights. (How far you would have to go to make sure you're not buying contraband/bootlegged stuff? Anyone can make up an example where you have done enough yet a lot of people will suffer as a result of your gains.)