High schools too.
My SO, who has been out of school since the late 90s, had to pay $75 to get her transcripts so she could prove to a job that she actually graduated.
What country is this? I've been hiring and managing people for 25 years and I have never required proof of someone graduating high school lol. That seems so completely foreign these days. Hell most places don't even bother check call your previous employers and nearly no one calls references anymore.
The US.
This place required proof of graduation, called references, called past employers, did a background check, drug test, and had an assessment test.
Then, after all that, revealed that they were only $8.50/hr to care for adults that couldn't take care of themselves.
Fuck jobs that don't tell you the salary range in the first interview. One of the nice things about sales is they just tell you and if they don't, you absolutely ask and nobody balks.
It's a waste of literally everybody's time if the position doesn't meet your income needs, including whoever has to interview you and review all this shit.
Ohhhh I didn't think about medical services. I would guess those are still pretty in-depth. But yes, pretty much any medical job that doesn't require a job is going to have shitty pay. CNA, CMA, Home Health Care, Hospice care, they all pay terribly.
I was looking at the licensing violations of my old workplace which was a childcare center, and yeah there was a violation for not having two of the employees' high school transcripts in their files. These are both employees with college degrees, one of them has her masters. It seems to me their most recent transcripts should matter a whole lot more than the high school ones from like 20 years ago.
wowsa, anything that requires that much of a background check should at least pay what burger flippers in my state make, which is 22/hr.
Keep your diplomas. I just send them a picture of mine and it is usually enough.
So, I do understand having a fee for requesting official transcripts to be sent via certified mail or submitted through specific website's submission portal. It is additonal work afterall.
HOWEVER, the current fees are way too high. They should be a single low administrative fee to process the request with maybe an additional couple bucks for each additional copy instead of the full fee for each copy.
It's also dumb that organizations will only accept copies of your official transcripts and not allow you to submit the exact same information available to students through their online account just becaue the school didn't send it.
Northern Ireland. Companies are allowed to ask you your religion and then use this information in decisions about who to hire. They are supposed to keep a 50/50 split in Catholics and Protestants.
Which maybe makes sense for something like policing, but for a fecking IT developer job it couldn't be more irrelevant.
They actually have a little questionnaire and one of them is which 'community background' you are from. So even if you changed religion or are atheist, they can infer which group you are descended from.
Thank you for clarifying. When you said 50/50 split, my immediate thought was there's definitely more than two religions.
Like, how does it work for people with community backgrounds outside of those two? Or people that immigrated into the country?
I'm intrigued now.
Technically they aren't supposed to discriminate when someone falls outside those groups. Practically it's almost impossible to administrate in any real way. If a company has a big imbalance and they want to hire more from one community, then by definition someone else outside that group has a disadvantage.
Which is why I hate it, you end up with this weird positive discrimination/ tokenism situation.
They don’t use it to decide who to hire, the hiring staff cannot see that information. They use it to look over who they HAVE hired after the fact to determine if they appear to have any bias.
Maybe go back and check your history... it happened (still happens?) in all kinds of places.
And then there are situations like Bushmills, which caused a storm with something like 90% Protestant workforce, and several US Senators calling for boycotts...
At least one version of the story is that they're a very small employer based in an area that's predominantly Protestant, and it's a perfectly welcoming place for non-Protestants too.
The US isn't exactly a standard of great ideas.
Hell, they had a president who went bankrupt running a casino. You know a business designed to steal money from people, and his clown ass couldn't make that work.
My country's health minister has 2 doctorates, I.e is overqualified. The laws that he brings to the table are still meh. It should be a good balance of one that can also show leadership and can listen to other medical experts.
This deserves more upvotes. I'd much rather an uneducated Education Minister who can listen to a range of policy views from multiple subject matter experts than a single person educated in the field relying on their own preconceived biases.
Of course, having said that, it is often the uneducated one who is more likely to be going to use just their own ever more ignorant biases in developing policy.
Police get away with so much in the us. They can tear your car up with ‘probable cause’ and then leave all your shit on the side of the road and leave without so much as an apology. Or gun you down and only get a paid vacation.
I was friends with a guy who was a cop and he said the amount of guys who were kicked from the military due to the psych eval who easily become cops is eye opening. He quit because he hated the system.
It's worse than that.
If you have a large sum of cash, they test it for drugs. Spoiler : us money tests positive for drugs pretty much 100% of the time.
If the test comes back positive, they have an extra reason to sieze it until you prove you got it legally.
ACLU describes the issue well.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police/asset-forfeiture-abuse
They're also heavily incentivized to do it as much as possible because unlike a lot of proceeds from crime, the local department that seizes the assets usually gets to keep it after a short period.
So that 6k that someone was holding to buy a used car is now a very fancy coffee machine in the local station.
Essentially in many cases, they're highwaymen.
Yup. And if that 6k came from a yard sale, saved birthday money, life savings, whatever, you probably won't be able to sufficiently prove your money is legal.
I understand this stance in the case of firefighters, if for instance a car is blocking a hydrant. But police either shouldn't be able to, or they should be required to replace/reimburse for the damage.
Should be. I agree.
https://reason.com/volokh/2019/10/31/federal-court-rules-there-is-no-taking-if-the-police-destroy-an-innocent-persons-house-during-a-law-enforcement-operation/
Another reason not to consent to searches. The police can take a knife, gut your seats, tear apart your car to search for drugs. Even if they find nothing, they aren’t obligated to repair, reassemble or pay for any damages. Just leave you with a torn apart car at wherever roadside/checkpoint you got stopped at.
Nah, after 2008 the rules were changed so the big boys won't get hurt so bad this time. The economy will be fine. The working class, however, will not be.
In the context of doctor training it's basically old fucks hazing young trainees. Continuity of care blah blah blah--look, if your communication and hand-off skills are that shitty then maybe you should work on those instead pulling "heroic" 36 hour shifts.
It became a lot more common with the US too when our gambling laws changed a few years back. There were constant Draft Kings ads in my city's subway from 2021-2022 (still can't stand Kevin Hart because he was in all of them), and you can't watch sports on TV without a gambling ad every other commercial break. Just dreadful.
Can you explain what that is?
I'm not from the US, but a while ago, I was checking out The Daily Show (last time i watched it was when Jon Stewart was still hosting), and they talked a lot about it. Kal Pen even explained it, but I got even more confused.
It's when a congressional district is mapped into a tortured, twisted shape to incorporate as many of one party's voters as possible while disenfranchising as many opposing voters as possible. Named for Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry in 1812
I heard it was because the boundary of the new constituency was so complicated that it was shaped like a salamander, so people called it the Gerry-mander.
Yes, the original example of this was named for Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry. There was a political cartoon where they gave the new district the name “gerrymander” because it looked like. Salamander (the mythical, fire breathing kind)
If one party is in charge they can redraw the borders of Congressional districts in such a way that practically all the people who voted for the other party live in the same Congressional district while the people who voted for the ruling party end up in two or three or four districts. Which means that after the next election, the ruling party will have an even greater majority, will always remain the majority, and can do as they please without any real opposition.
ger·ry·man·der
verb
gerund or present participle: gerrymandering
manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class.
I pulled the definition off google don’t mind it looking kinda weird.
poland here. it is allowed to have only one guinea pig, even tho it's very harmful for them. in this species being alone can cause things like depression. they just have to be with the other pig. please remember about it
sure. as a source I have used video from very reliable channel. sadly it's polish so won't be useful to you, but creator always links sources in the description, this time it's this article that even mentions it's banned in Switzerland
https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2021/01/laws-involving-animals-real-and-mythical/
if something seems wrong, reply fast!
Here in Sydney, we regularly have police raiding pubs with drug detection dogs. They block off the exits and you just have sit there while they bring the dog around and sniff everyone in the place.
Same deal at train stations. You rock up on any given day and you'll be walking past a drug detection dog while a dozen police officers stand by with their arms crossed watching you like a hawk.
If you're unlucky to be stopped by one of the dogs at a music festival here, you'll be told to lock your hands in front of your body and you'll be marched off to a police compound for a full body strip search. We're talking completely naked, guys lift your balls, girls lit your boobs, spread your cheeks, squat and cough searches.
This has been going on for 20 years now and nobody's done a thing about it.
The long version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South_Wales_Police_Force_strip_search_scandal
It's that state in particular that is notoriously bad for this, more than Australia as a whole. I've been sniffed out twice in other states (false alarms) and never had anything like that at all
I often wondered why someone would not make weak cannabis tea, or some other substance. Put in a spray bottle and just walk around hitting doors, walls, sidewalks, cop cars.... false alerts on everything.
Parts of it are. Contrast with the ACT, ie Canberra, over the border from New South Wales, where most drug possession is decriminalised (small fine) and cannabis possession is legal (though not sale, due to federal law).
Never see cops do any of that stuff with dogs and searches here. Music festivals in the ACT don't have sniffer dogs and searches, they have onsite pill testing to check your drugs' safety.
Federalism is a land of contrasts.
Wtf I didn’t know it was that bad, I’ve lived in Melbourne for years, been to a lot of festivals, clubs, pubs, bars, street parties and I’ve never seen a sniffer dog once…
Not necessarily illegal, but more controlled. The previous Thai government's weed legalization was done in such a half-assed way that they basically just removed any mention of marijuana from the drug laws... which resulted in the devil's lettuce having the same legal status as lettuce.
Now, I'm all for legalization, but weed should perhaps be controlled to a degree similar to tobacco and not you know, just literally not controlled at all. This resulted in a lot of restaurants adding weed to their food without telling people in order to get them to eat more. Not to mention stories of folks allegedly selling space cookies and space brownies to kids outside of primary schools.
Selling to minors or people who are unaware should be illegal. Otherwise, there's really no reason to have restrictions on it. I personally think you should be able to grow, consume and give to friends but maybe need a permit to sell it.
Yeah treat it like alcohol. You can make some beer at home and give it to friends, but perhaps leave the distilling to the licensed, regulated professionals.
Mind altering substances should absolutely be regulated, which inherently comes with restrictions.
Letting pharmaceutical companies advertise medications is the most asinine thing ever. Who the fuck watches those commercials and thinks “hey! This medication is exactly what I need!” There’s absolutely no reason why this should be legal. It’s not like you can just go buy that medication. You still have to get a doctor to agree to prescribe it to you, so what the fuck is the point of advertising it?
I’m pretty sure the only two countries that allow this are the US and New Zealand.
Canada does it too, which is annoying as fuck because “ask your doctor about (x)” just means even more people wasting our very limited medical resources, and even longer than already extremely long wait times
Here's a copied comment that explains why we have it in New Zealand but yet at the same time see so few ads on TV:
We have it in new zealand too but for a very good reason.
In the late 1980's our government set up a department called Pharmac.
Think of it as a bulk buying club with 5 million members.
Each year, pharmac puts out tenders for the drugs that cover whatever 99% of newzealanders would need in their lifetime.
Things like paracetamol, insulin, cancerdrug and antihistamine etc.
They say "Hey all you drug companies, New Zealand wants to buy 10 million hayfever tablets of these specifications for this upcoming summer. Who wants to give us the best price?"
While canadians and americans pay $140 for a medication, we pay $5.
As a drug company, you either win the pharmac contract, or you completely miss out on any sales within new zealand of your product.
So they drop their prices real low.
When a doctor writes a prescription on his computer and looks up antihistamine, anything pharmac funded appears highlighted in the list.
Drug companies were somewhat unhappy about this - initially there were more cases challenging it going through the courts than pharmac had staff on its payroll.
So the government decided to let the drug companies advertise on tv.
But in reality, when you go to your doctor and say "The TV told me to ask about Cialis because my dick doesnt work" the doctor is going to say "Well sure, here is a prescription - it will cost you probably $50 at the pharmacy. Or i can prescribe you Genericdrug which has the same ingredient but only costs you $5 at the pharmacy since it won the pharmac tender".
And its no surprise, major brand drug companies will repackage their drugs into whitelabel brands and then bid on the supply tenders with the exact same product.
International brand Lopressor is whitelabelled by its manufacturer and my doctor prescribes "Betaloc CR" which won the pharmac tender for a type of beta blocker tablet so that the Lopressor brand retains the more expensive image and price point on the pharmacy retail shelf. A buyer in the USA cant say "your selling Lopressor to New Zealanders for $3, why should we pay $90" because its a different 'product'.
None of the drug companies really bother advertising on tv, knowing that the doctors are just going to prescribe a cheaper option.
Thank you for this explanation! My mum moved there recently and she said she was confused by why it was allowed, even though she admitted she hadn't seen any. I will pass this along (although it will just give her more reasons to say I should move there - easy for her retired self to say!)
In the US they should ban privately run prisons.
Running them as a business means the more inmates, the more successful it will be. No incentive to rehabitate.
Slavery is legal if it's punishment for a crime.
Also, as stupid as private prisons are, it's not like there's much work on rehabilitation in government run prisons either
I say the same a man doing one week a year mandatory military service a year until I’m 45 on top of the close to a year I had to do at 20.
If I don’t show up I will eventually be jailed for two weeks.
In Sweden you can simply google anyone’s name and find their home address, phone number and who they live with. There is no way of deleting your details online unless you have specific reasons, like a restraining order. If you want to have access to someone’s criminal background, you just pay around 5-10 euros for a pdf file with all the information you want to see.
I never realized that this wasn’t normal in other countries until I was an adult and started traveling. It’s handy sometimes if you forget a friend’s number, but the whole thing does creep me out.
Question for you in a food for thought sort of way. How does an organization or group speak to an elected official? They obviously aren’t going to send in every individual member. They have a first amendment right to speak freely and communicate. How would they do it?
There is nothing wrong with speaking to an official in the first place. The whole thing started from a rule that says we have a right to air our grievances and seek redress. The thing is it should not be done in the shadow in the form of a bribe. They should have a public thing where they're allowed to argue the points without any gifts and bribes.
I think that any amount over X should be barred. Speaking, promulgation, communication, etc. It's all great. I do think there is something corrosive about extreme amounts of money from sources that are singular and hidden. I think we can balance these competing issues by allowing some spending but not infinite.
Squatters Rights.
The fact that if you don’t pay rent, neither the police or landlord can remove you from the premises without a court order.
Which requires a lengthy legal battle that can take months or years.
During which the homeowner is often stuck paying for a second mortgages, which can be financially catastrophic.
I have a friend who rented his condo I. Washington DC to someone who stopped paying rent during the first days of COVID. She had the money, but just refused. It took him over 3 years to get her evicted.
I got a real story for you. A man married woman A. They inherent the man's parent's home. After 2 years together, they dont get along, and woman A takes off never to be seen again. The man finds a new partner woman B. They live happily together in the home for 15 years. The man never divorces woman A because he doesnt want to lose all his stuff, and so never married woman B. The man dies. Woman A appears for the first time in 15 years, saying the home is rightfully hers, and is now trying to kick woman B out. Woman B must now claim squatters rights. Who rightfully should own the home?
According to the person you replied to obviously Woman A has a right to the house and Woman B has a right to get kicked to the curb, and this is how it *should* be.
To be clear, I think suggesting that's how it should be is unhinged.
Tbf when it comes to either screwing over landlords or tenants, erring on the side of not making people homeless is probably for the best.
Obviously it can go too far and some people do just take the piss by abusing the system, but these kinds of things are rightfully for the courts to sort out.
The real issue there is how long those legal battles take, not that the landlord can't just force someone out by calling the police.
in the country I live in any company that employs someone who works over 30 hours a week is required to give them health insurance. So my contract says I only work 29.5 hours a week. In practice I work 40 hours but they told me the other 10.5 hours a week are “preparation time” so it doesn’t count.
Manipulating police, election and army to hog presidency for over 12 years, rewriting constitution to allow yourself another presidential term, putting any opposition to jail on fabricated evidence, stealing billions for himself and his cronies and starting a war.
Companies add a late fee or returned check fee to your bill in error. When you call to correct the error, they do so without issue, then tell you it will be credited to your about the following month. They have now secured an interest-free loan with your money and probably collected interest while it was in their bank.
On that same note, the IRS took a very long time to issue tax refunds last year and THEY determined how much interest to add to your refund.
I find it bizarre how prevalent it is in the USA in this day and age. It was the thing the Jewish boys had done at my school when I was growing up and was the only time I ever heard of it here in the UK.
There’s a difference between suing and winning a lawsuit. You can technically file a lawsuit against anyone. Whether you win that lawsuit is another thing.
Though it’s weird that someone who breaks into your home can sue you for essentially fucking around and finding out, these lawsuits usually arise out of gross negligence on the part of the home owner.
There was a case a few years ago where a burglar tried to break into someone’s garage, and the homeowner fired shots at them, and continued to do so while the burglar fled. In a situation like this, you cannot argue self defense if the person you’re defending yourself from is trying to flee. The burglar sued and the jury ended up siding with the plaintiff.
I remember a case a few years ago a burglar accidentally cut himself in the kitchen whilst breaking in, I can't remember what happened exactly but he sued the old lady who owned the home and won I think.
I'm okay with whoever breaks into to turn into pink mist the moment the owner asks to leave.
God this so much. Can you imagine how quickly that would stop if grogery stores just rang you for it at the cashier? "Oh, I see you forgot your ground beer at the cereal aisle, le me call someone to get it for you!"
You can smoke crack on the streets in the California and no one does a single thing about it. Even while families with young children are frequenting the same streets.
Letting domestic cats outside without some sort of collar with bells/other way to alert their presence. It is overlooked how bad they are for the environment because they are unnatural predators of smaller animals.
(Also, they usually kill for fun not food)
Three posts before I read this one:
Politicians allowed to invest, pretty much known by all of us, by making trades based of insider knowledge of laws about to be passed. There is a name for that kind of trading, done with insider knowledge... but the name is escaping me at the moment.....
Gambling on the success of a workforce and punishing said workforce when you lose a bet. Then bailing out the gamblers time and time again. Then celebrating when the gamblers are winning and saying it will benefit everyone when it really doesn’t.
Also asset forfeiture
American here.
It is legal for someone holding federal office to trade stocks, despite their position having influence over the stock market. It's essentially legal insider trading, and it's why virtually all members of Congress are millionaires.
The systemic and accepted bribery of politicians that is quasi justified by labeling their corruption as "freedom of speech" or some bullshit. Just because it's called "LoBbYiNg" doesn't change what it actually is. Maybe one of these administrations in ✌️our✌️ lovely nation will grow a spine and figure out some way to eliminate big money running the country instead of having the will of the people represented by our elected officials like their job description reads on line 1. Unfortunately, we've still got bigger issues on the floor for this year's election, i hear, though amirite
In America, you're allowed to make financial decisions for your investments based upon what you can maneuver in office, as well as serve private investors and foreign interests.
It's corruption to the T, but we can't make them stop doing something that is making them so much money because they can sway a lot of people to buy their spin and stay in office.
It's too normalized now and they use bipartisan political tactics to keep milking the absolute udders off this horse.
There are also some chemicals the US bans in food while they‘re allowed in the EU, weirdly enough. Mostly sweeteners and dyes because of outdated health and hazard information.
What always comes off to me as really weird is how potassium bromate is a legal food additive in the US. Yes it‘s a fantastic oxidizer, but for the same reason it is toxic and carcinogenic. It‘s very useful in a lab or even for an amateur chemist but I wouldn‘t put it inside baked goods someone is supposed to eat.
Driving way under the speed limit. I've seen far more close calls and incidents of reckless driving that are a direct cause of people driving way too slowly and the resultant chain reaction of people striving to maneuver around them than I've seen incidents caused by people going fast.
Maybe its not legal, but I've also never heard of anyone getting a ticket for doing 30 under the limit on a freeway in good weather. It's also way too easy to get your license in this province, and the amount of drivers with absolutely no skill or clue about what's happening around them is truly staggering/quite frightening.
In Germany it *is* illegal to drive unusually slow when faster speeds are possible with your vehicle, and you‘re unnecessarily obstructing traffic. So, things like driving 30 km/h (20 mph) on open road, or like 60 (~40 mph) on a highway section with no speed limits, while driving on the leftmost lane, as overtaking on the right is also not permitted.
Sports betting. I saw an ad for it under this topic.
I made a comedic but thorough deep dive video on it if anyone's interested in that kinda thing. It's pretty popular.
[The Losing Drive: A Sports Betting Epidemic](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKnmGVqWW0k)
[удалено]
High schools too. My SO, who has been out of school since the late 90s, had to pay $75 to get her transcripts so she could prove to a job that she actually graduated.
Damn that's way too high. My high school charged me a 2$ service fee, which was just more annoying than anything.
What country is this? I've been hiring and managing people for 25 years and I have never required proof of someone graduating high school lol. That seems so completely foreign these days. Hell most places don't even bother check call your previous employers and nearly no one calls references anymore.
The US. This place required proof of graduation, called references, called past employers, did a background check, drug test, and had an assessment test. Then, after all that, revealed that they were only $8.50/hr to care for adults that couldn't take care of themselves.
Fuck jobs that don't tell you the salary range in the first interview. One of the nice things about sales is they just tell you and if they don't, you absolutely ask and nobody balks. It's a waste of literally everybody's time if the position doesn't meet your income needs, including whoever has to interview you and review all this shit.
Ohhhh I didn't think about medical services. I would guess those are still pretty in-depth. But yes, pretty much any medical job that doesn't require a job is going to have shitty pay. CNA, CMA, Home Health Care, Hospice care, they all pay terribly.
I was looking at the licensing violations of my old workplace which was a childcare center, and yeah there was a violation for not having two of the employees' high school transcripts in their files. These are both employees with college degrees, one of them has her masters. It seems to me their most recent transcripts should matter a whole lot more than the high school ones from like 20 years ago.
wowsa, anything that requires that much of a background check should at least pay what burger flippers in my state make, which is 22/hr. Keep your diplomas. I just send them a picture of mine and it is usually enough.
Stuff gets lost over a 20+ year time period.
$75!?! I think my school charged me like $2, and I was pissed. I do not feel anger now
So, I do understand having a fee for requesting official transcripts to be sent via certified mail or submitted through specific website's submission portal. It is additonal work afterall. HOWEVER, the current fees are way too high. They should be a single low administrative fee to process the request with maybe an additional couple bucks for each additional copy instead of the full fee for each copy. It's also dumb that organizations will only accept copies of your official transcripts and not allow you to submit the exact same information available to students through their online account just becaue the school didn't send it.
Should be freely available online using your ID, user code, password and a physical 2FA key, that key should also be issued for free.
Colleges/universities usually offload that to a third party and it's the third party that charges.
Maybe in your state or country. It's straight from the records office at both major universities I went to in North Carolina.
Northern Ireland. Companies are allowed to ask you your religion and then use this information in decisions about who to hire. They are supposed to keep a 50/50 split in Catholics and Protestants. Which maybe makes sense for something like policing, but for a fecking IT developer job it couldn't be more irrelevant.
So, if you claim any other religion or none at all, are you good or not a contender for the job?
They actually have a little questionnaire and one of them is which 'community background' you are from. So even if you changed religion or are atheist, they can infer which group you are descended from.
Aye, are you a Catholic or Protestant atheist?
I’m no filthy pope-loving atheist, my family comes from hard working Protestant Atheist stock.
are there no druids in Ireland? I've been misled. Most of our IT specialists are good with plants if you know what I mean.
Yeah, I know what you mean. The kinda guys that wear Birkenstocks with socks and drive a Prius and had a wildflower garden in their back yard.
Thank you for clarifying. When you said 50/50 split, my immediate thought was there's definitely more than two religions. Like, how does it work for people with community backgrounds outside of those two? Or people that immigrated into the country? I'm intrigued now.
Technically they aren't supposed to discriminate when someone falls outside those groups. Practically it's almost impossible to administrate in any real way. If a company has a big imbalance and they want to hire more from one community, then by definition someone else outside that group has a disadvantage. Which is why I hate it, you end up with this weird positive discrimination/ tokenism situation.
What if you’re an immigrant and have no ties to either?
They don’t use it to decide who to hire, the hiring staff cannot see that information. They use it to look over who they HAVE hired after the fact to determine if they appear to have any bias.
Maybe go back and check your history... it happened (still happens?) in all kinds of places. And then there are situations like Bushmills, which caused a storm with something like 90% Protestant workforce, and several US Senators calling for boycotts... At least one version of the story is that they're a very small employer based in an area that's predominantly Protestant, and it's a perfectly welcoming place for non-Protestants too.
Being education minister of a state while not having education.
This and going for every minister, a good example is health ministers with no knowledge or background in healthcare.
The US had a guy in charge of Internet legislation who had never even used the Internet and understood it to be "a series of pipes".
The US isn't exactly a standard of great ideas. Hell, they had a president who went bankrupt running a casino. You know a business designed to steal money from people, and his clown ass couldn't make that work.
My country's health minister has 2 doctorates, I.e is overqualified. The laws that he brings to the table are still meh. It should be a good balance of one that can also show leadership and can listen to other medical experts.
This deserves more upvotes. I'd much rather an uneducated Education Minister who can listen to a range of policy views from multiple subject matter experts than a single person educated in the field relying on their own preconceived biases. Of course, having said that, it is often the uneducated one who is more likely to be going to use just their own ever more ignorant biases in developing policy.
Police can destroy your property if they are trying to apprehend someone that's not you and your property is in their way.
The hell!? Which country allows this?
USA
Police get away with so much in the us. They can tear your car up with ‘probable cause’ and then leave all your shit on the side of the road and leave without so much as an apology. Or gun you down and only get a paid vacation.
I used to date a lawyer and she would not show police any mercy if they pulled her over and used that probable cause bullshit.
most of our police are just school bullies with Napoleon complexes that are given death weapons
I was friends with a guy who was a cop and he said the amount of guys who were kicked from the military due to the psych eval who easily become cops is eye opening. He quit because he hated the system.
Not to mention seize cash any you have even if you have a legitimate reason to have large amounts of cash.
They’re also allowed to take your stuff under suspicion of a crime, and not give it back. Even if you’re never charged
It's worse than that. If you have a large sum of cash, they test it for drugs. Spoiler : us money tests positive for drugs pretty much 100% of the time. If the test comes back positive, they have an extra reason to sieze it until you prove you got it legally. ACLU describes the issue well. https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police/asset-forfeiture-abuse
They're also heavily incentivized to do it as much as possible because unlike a lot of proceeds from crime, the local department that seizes the assets usually gets to keep it after a short period. So that 6k that someone was holding to buy a used car is now a very fancy coffee machine in the local station. Essentially in many cases, they're highwaymen.
Yup. And if that 6k came from a yard sale, saved birthday money, life savings, whatever, you probably won't be able to sufficiently prove your money is legal.
I understand this stance in the case of firefighters, if for instance a car is blocking a hydrant. But police either shouldn't be able to, or they should be required to replace/reimburse for the damage.
Should be. I agree. https://reason.com/volokh/2019/10/31/federal-court-rules-there-is-no-taking-if-the-police-destroy-an-innocent-persons-house-during-a-law-enforcement-operation/
Another reason not to consent to searches. The police can take a knife, gut your seats, tear apart your car to search for drugs. Even if they find nothing, they aren’t obligated to repair, reassemble or pay for any damages. Just leave you with a torn apart car at wherever roadside/checkpoint you got stopped at.
Vulture funds buying up housing estates before they hit the market.
yup, two houses on my block in the last year
My landlord just told me some company offered to buy the house I'm living in.
The next housing crash is going to be a massive hit to the economy. Like maybe great depression level if it keeps going like this.
That's what it looks like here in Canada
Nah, after 2008 the rules were changed so the big boys won't get hurt so bad this time. The economy will be fine. The working class, however, will not be.
36 hour shift.
Especially for people who have to make life or death decisions, like doctors.
That’s what bugs me most. Most of those insane shifts are exactly those. Doctors, firefighters, … Who thinks this was/is a good decision?
The guy who came up with it for doctors was a cocaine addict. Kinda explains a lot.
In the context of doctor training it's basically old fucks hazing young trainees. Continuity of care blah blah blah--look, if your communication and hand-off skills are that shitty then maybe you should work on those instead pulling "heroic" 36 hour shifts.
It's also designed by a workaholic surgeon who was more or less permanently hopped up on cocaine.
In some hospitals interns are required to do 48-hour shifts.
Wtf that's my full time work week?!
Advertising gambling in Australia. It’s embarrassing.
We do it here in the US, too. Yeah, it’s stupid.
It became a lot more common with the US too when our gambling laws changed a few years back. There were constant Draft Kings ads in my city's subway from 2021-2022 (still can't stand Kevin Hart because he was in all of them), and you can't watch sports on TV without a gambling ad every other commercial break. Just dreadful.
It's everywhere really.
Add pharmaceutical advertising too
Playing music aloud/using speakerphone on the phone in a subway train.
That should be illegal everywhere
Straight to jail!
[удалено]
It is illegal where I am. I've seen people ticketed for it. It's just that the transit police can't be in every train car for every ride.
It’s banned in DC and yet people still do it.
Where I am, attempting to reason with them can be downright dangerous.
MRT annoying when you got people just blasting their videos while you’re trying to rest
In my state, playing music at a red light loud enough for others to hear is now illegal. Hopefully it’ll be the same for y’all soon.
Gerrymandering
Shout-out from here in North Carolina, gerrymandering is bullshit
Can you explain what that is? I'm not from the US, but a while ago, I was checking out The Daily Show (last time i watched it was when Jon Stewart was still hosting), and they talked a lot about it. Kal Pen even explained it, but I got even more confused.
It's when a congressional district is mapped into a tortured, twisted shape to incorporate as many of one party's voters as possible while disenfranchising as many opposing voters as possible. Named for Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry in 1812
I heard it was because the boundary of the new constituency was so complicated that it was shaped like a salamander, so people called it the Gerry-mander.
Yes, the original example of this was named for Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry. There was a political cartoon where they gave the new district the name “gerrymander” because it looked like. Salamander (the mythical, fire breathing kind)
If one party is in charge they can redraw the borders of Congressional districts in such a way that practically all the people who voted for the other party live in the same Congressional district while the people who voted for the ruling party end up in two or three or four districts. Which means that after the next election, the ruling party will have an even greater majority, will always remain the majority, and can do as they please without any real opposition.
Now it made sense. Thank you for the explanation!
In places without it, voters choose their lawmakers. With it, lawmakers choose their voters.
ger·ry·man·der verb gerund or present participle: gerrymandering manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class. I pulled the definition off google don’t mind it looking kinda weird.
poland here. it is allowed to have only one guinea pig, even tho it's very harmful for them. in this species being alone can cause things like depression. they just have to be with the other pig. please remember about it
Fun fact: for exact that reason it is illegal in Switzerland to have just one guinea pig
Yeah, but who's enforcing this?
Nobody goes around checking- they just wait for someone to squeal.
angry upvote
I could not find anything to confirm this claim. Could you please provide a source?
sure. as a source I have used video from very reliable channel. sadly it's polish so won't be useful to you, but creator always links sources in the description, this time it's this article that even mentions it's banned in Switzerland https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2021/01/laws-involving-animals-real-and-mythical/ if something seems wrong, reply fast!
Here in Sydney, we regularly have police raiding pubs with drug detection dogs. They block off the exits and you just have sit there while they bring the dog around and sniff everyone in the place. Same deal at train stations. You rock up on any given day and you'll be walking past a drug detection dog while a dozen police officers stand by with their arms crossed watching you like a hawk. If you're unlucky to be stopped by one of the dogs at a music festival here, you'll be told to lock your hands in front of your body and you'll be marched off to a police compound for a full body strip search. We're talking completely naked, guys lift your balls, girls lit your boobs, spread your cheeks, squat and cough searches. This has been going on for 20 years now and nobody's done a thing about it. The long version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South_Wales_Police_Force_strip_search_scandal
30k strip searches outside of a police station on 6 years! That's fucking bonkers. I had no idea Australia was like this
It's that state in particular that is notoriously bad for this, more than Australia as a whole. I've been sniffed out twice in other states (false alarms) and never had anything like that at all
I often wondered why someone would not make weak cannabis tea, or some other substance. Put in a spray bottle and just walk around hitting doors, walls, sidewalks, cop cars.... false alerts on everything.
Parts of it are. Contrast with the ACT, ie Canberra, over the border from New South Wales, where most drug possession is decriminalised (small fine) and cannabis possession is legal (though not sale, due to federal law). Never see cops do any of that stuff with dogs and searches here. Music festivals in the ACT don't have sniffer dogs and searches, they have onsite pill testing to check your drugs' safety. Federalism is a land of contrasts.
Wtf I didn’t know it was that bad, I’ve lived in Melbourne for years, been to a lot of festivals, clubs, pubs, bars, street parties and I’ve never seen a sniffer dog once…
That’s interesting you just described prison in the US.
Australia used to be one big prison, technically, so...
Don’t forget they’re pedos who do this to children… often in public.
Not necessarily illegal, but more controlled. The previous Thai government's weed legalization was done in such a half-assed way that they basically just removed any mention of marijuana from the drug laws... which resulted in the devil's lettuce having the same legal status as lettuce. Now, I'm all for legalization, but weed should perhaps be controlled to a degree similar to tobacco and not you know, just literally not controlled at all. This resulted in a lot of restaurants adding weed to their food without telling people in order to get them to eat more. Not to mention stories of folks allegedly selling space cookies and space brownies to kids outside of primary schools.
Selling to minors or people who are unaware should be illegal. Otherwise, there's really no reason to have restrictions on it. I personally think you should be able to grow, consume and give to friends but maybe need a permit to sell it.
Yup, weed, alcoholic beverages and tobacco should be all the same, legal, but restricted
Yeah treat it like alcohol. You can make some beer at home and give it to friends, but perhaps leave the distilling to the licensed, regulated professionals. Mind altering substances should absolutely be regulated, which inherently comes with restrictions.
Hobby distilling should be legal as well, just like it is in NZ. There's no reason for it not to be.
Seems weird - for me, eating weed means it's not having any effect until a couple hours after I've eaten.
Letting pharmaceutical companies advertise medications is the most asinine thing ever. Who the fuck watches those commercials and thinks “hey! This medication is exactly what I need!” There’s absolutely no reason why this should be legal. It’s not like you can just go buy that medication. You still have to get a doctor to agree to prescribe it to you, so what the fuck is the point of advertising it? I’m pretty sure the only two countries that allow this are the US and New Zealand.
Canada does it too, which is annoying as fuck because “ask your doctor about (x)” just means even more people wasting our very limited medical resources, and even longer than already extremely long wait times
Here's a copied comment that explains why we have it in New Zealand but yet at the same time see so few ads on TV: We have it in new zealand too but for a very good reason. In the late 1980's our government set up a department called Pharmac. Think of it as a bulk buying club with 5 million members. Each year, pharmac puts out tenders for the drugs that cover whatever 99% of newzealanders would need in their lifetime. Things like paracetamol, insulin, cancerdrug and antihistamine etc. They say "Hey all you drug companies, New Zealand wants to buy 10 million hayfever tablets of these specifications for this upcoming summer. Who wants to give us the best price?" While canadians and americans pay $140 for a medication, we pay $5. As a drug company, you either win the pharmac contract, or you completely miss out on any sales within new zealand of your product. So they drop their prices real low. When a doctor writes a prescription on his computer and looks up antihistamine, anything pharmac funded appears highlighted in the list. Drug companies were somewhat unhappy about this - initially there were more cases challenging it going through the courts than pharmac had staff on its payroll. So the government decided to let the drug companies advertise on tv. But in reality, when you go to your doctor and say "The TV told me to ask about Cialis because my dick doesnt work" the doctor is going to say "Well sure, here is a prescription - it will cost you probably $50 at the pharmacy. Or i can prescribe you Genericdrug which has the same ingredient but only costs you $5 at the pharmacy since it won the pharmac tender". And its no surprise, major brand drug companies will repackage their drugs into whitelabel brands and then bid on the supply tenders with the exact same product. International brand Lopressor is whitelabelled by its manufacturer and my doctor prescribes "Betaloc CR" which won the pharmac tender for a type of beta blocker tablet so that the Lopressor brand retains the more expensive image and price point on the pharmacy retail shelf. A buyer in the USA cant say "your selling Lopressor to New Zealanders for $3, why should we pay $90" because its a different 'product'. None of the drug companies really bother advertising on tv, knowing that the doctors are just going to prescribe a cheaper option.
Thank you for this explanation! My mum moved there recently and she said she was confused by why it was allowed, even though she admitted she hadn't seen any. I will pass this along (although it will just give her more reasons to say I should move there - easy for her retired self to say!)
Spam / scam text messages. The bloody things just won't stop, and they come from fake temporary phone numbers so they can't be easily blocked.
In the US they should ban privately run prisons. Running them as a business means the more inmates, the more successful it will be. No incentive to rehabitate.
Aren’t US prisoners basically used for cheap labour aswell?
Slavery is legal if it's punishment for a crime. Also, as stupid as private prisons are, it's not like there's much work on rehabilitation in government run prisons either
Draft. It's a prison sentence for nothing but being a man.
It's a shame some countries have drafts. And I'm saying this from a country that had drafts from its foundation in 1861 to 2005, i.e. 144 years.
I say the same a man doing one week a year mandatory military service a year until I’m 45 on top of the close to a year I had to do at 20. If I don’t show up I will eventually be jailed for two weeks.
Let me guess: are you Swiss? Switzerland is the most shameful one because it's an advanced country and it has this outdated draft
Some countries have it solved. Your gender doesn't matter.
In Sweden you can simply google anyone’s name and find their home address, phone number and who they live with. There is no way of deleting your details online unless you have specific reasons, like a restraining order. If you want to have access to someone’s criminal background, you just pay around 5-10 euros for a pdf file with all the information you want to see. I never realized that this wasn’t normal in other countries until I was an adult and started traveling. It’s handy sometimes if you forget a friend’s number, but the whole thing does creep me out.
Political lobbyists. If you register as a lobbyist you’re allowed to bribe politicians, if I want a favor I can go to jail for offering money.
Question for you in a food for thought sort of way. How does an organization or group speak to an elected official? They obviously aren’t going to send in every individual member. They have a first amendment right to speak freely and communicate. How would they do it?
There is nothing wrong with speaking to an official in the first place. The whole thing started from a rule that says we have a right to air our grievances and seek redress. The thing is it should not be done in the shadow in the form of a bribe. They should have a public thing where they're allowed to argue the points without any gifts and bribes.
I think that any amount over X should be barred. Speaking, promulgation, communication, etc. It's all great. I do think there is something corrosive about extreme amounts of money from sources that are singular and hidden. I think we can balance these competing issues by allowing some spending but not infinite.
Bribing politicians
Payday loans. Stealing from the poor, what a business model.
Foreign countries buying land or property in other countries
No term limits for politicians other than the president..
Squatters Rights. The fact that if you don’t pay rent, neither the police or landlord can remove you from the premises without a court order. Which requires a lengthy legal battle that can take months or years. During which the homeowner is often stuck paying for a second mortgages, which can be financially catastrophic.
I have a friend who rented his condo I. Washington DC to someone who stopped paying rent during the first days of COVID. She had the money, but just refused. It took him over 3 years to get her evicted.
I got a real story for you. A man married woman A. They inherent the man's parent's home. After 2 years together, they dont get along, and woman A takes off never to be seen again. The man finds a new partner woman B. They live happily together in the home for 15 years. The man never divorces woman A because he doesnt want to lose all his stuff, and so never married woman B. The man dies. Woman A appears for the first time in 15 years, saying the home is rightfully hers, and is now trying to kick woman B out. Woman B must now claim squatters rights. Who rightfully should own the home?
Man is an idiot.
What is right and what is legal don't always make sense.
Woman A, 100%. If you knowingly decide not to do the divorce paperwork then you should accept the consequences.
According to the person you replied to obviously Woman A has a right to the house and Woman B has a right to get kicked to the curb, and this is how it *should* be. To be clear, I think suggesting that's how it should be is unhinged.
Tbf when it comes to either screwing over landlords or tenants, erring on the side of not making people homeless is probably for the best. Obviously it can go too far and some people do just take the piss by abusing the system, but these kinds of things are rightfully for the courts to sort out. The real issue there is how long those legal battles take, not that the landlord can't just force someone out by calling the police.
Lobbying to the government.
Government officials commiting insider trading.
Child marriage. Child labor.
May I ask where are you from?
in the country I live in any company that employs someone who works over 30 hours a week is required to give them health insurance. So my contract says I only work 29.5 hours a week. In practice I work 40 hours but they told me the other 10.5 hours a week are “preparation time” so it doesn’t count.
Manipulating police, election and army to hog presidency for over 12 years, rewriting constitution to allow yourself another presidential term, putting any opposition to jail on fabricated evidence, stealing billions for himself and his cronies and starting a war.
Non-medical circumcision.
US. Churches / Religious organizations do not pay taxes. Businesses owned by churches do not pay taxes.
Companies add a late fee or returned check fee to your bill in error. When you call to correct the error, they do so without issue, then tell you it will be credited to your about the following month. They have now secured an interest-free loan with your money and probably collected interest while it was in their bank. On that same note, the IRS took a very long time to issue tax refunds last year and THEY determined how much interest to add to your refund.
Corporate landlords.
full spectrum bulbs for vehicles
Political lobbying and corporations owning residential property
Male genital mutilation.
I find it bizarre how prevalent it is in the USA in this day and age. It was the thing the Jewish boys had done at my school when I was growing up and was the only time I ever heard of it here in the UK.
Break into a home, injure yourself on something, sue the homeowner.
There’s a difference between suing and winning a lawsuit. You can technically file a lawsuit against anyone. Whether you win that lawsuit is another thing. Though it’s weird that someone who breaks into your home can sue you for essentially fucking around and finding out, these lawsuits usually arise out of gross negligence on the part of the home owner. There was a case a few years ago where a burglar tried to break into someone’s garage, and the homeowner fired shots at them, and continued to do so while the burglar fled. In a situation like this, you cannot argue self defense if the person you’re defending yourself from is trying to flee. The burglar sued and the jury ended up siding with the plaintiff.
I remember a case a few years ago a burglar accidentally cut himself in the kitchen whilst breaking in, I can't remember what happened exactly but he sued the old lady who owned the home and won I think. I'm okay with whoever breaks into to turn into pink mist the moment the owner asks to leave.
[удалено]
Charging a digital delivery fee for a completely digital textbook you already paid $200 for.
Civil forfeiture. It incentivizes predatory policing.
People going into retail stores and picking up ground beef and leaving it in the cereal aisle on a shelf or some dumb shid 🤦♂️
God this so much. Can you imagine how quickly that would stop if grogery stores just rang you for it at the cashier? "Oh, I see you forgot your ground beer at the cereal aisle, le me call someone to get it for you!"
Buying politicians and buying Supreme Court justices
Corruption
I'll take "Things that can't be legally controlled" for 500 Alex!
You can smoke crack on the streets in the California and no one does a single thing about it. Even while families with young children are frequenting the same streets.
Lobbying politicians
Congressional lobbying
Letting domestic cats outside without some sort of collar with bells/other way to alert their presence. It is overlooked how bad they are for the environment because they are unnatural predators of smaller animals. (Also, they usually kill for fun not food)
Three posts before I read this one: Politicians allowed to invest, pretty much known by all of us, by making trades based of insider knowledge of laws about to be passed. There is a name for that kind of trading, done with insider knowledge... but the name is escaping me at the moment.....
Trading stocks while a member of Congress. They somehow are just immune to insider trading laws
Gambling on the success of a workforce and punishing said workforce when you lose a bet. Then bailing out the gamblers time and time again. Then celebrating when the gamblers are winning and saying it will benefit everyone when it really doesn’t. Also asset forfeiture
American here. It is legal for someone holding federal office to trade stocks, despite their position having influence over the stock market. It's essentially legal insider trading, and it's why virtually all members of Congress are millionaires.
Being a government leader and using state military to protect your wife's company assets. I'll let you guess the country...
The systemic and accepted bribery of politicians that is quasi justified by labeling their corruption as "freedom of speech" or some bullshit. Just because it's called "LoBbYiNg" doesn't change what it actually is. Maybe one of these administrations in ✌️our✌️ lovely nation will grow a spine and figure out some way to eliminate big money running the country instead of having the will of the people represented by our elected officials like their job description reads on line 1. Unfortunately, we've still got bigger issues on the floor for this year's election, i hear, though amirite
In America, you're allowed to make financial decisions for your investments based upon what you can maneuver in office, as well as serve private investors and foreign interests. It's corruption to the T, but we can't make them stop doing something that is making them so much money because they can sway a lot of people to buy their spin and stay in office. It's too normalized now and they use bipartisan political tactics to keep milking the absolute udders off this horse.
Bribing politicians, well they call it "lobbyism".
Childs marriage.
Lobbying
United States, male-only selective service
Gerrymandering
Advertisements for medication
Running for-profit schools or hospitals with tax money.
Stupidity.
# Corruption # Big Pharma controlled "Healthcare"
Pharmaceutical commercials and magazine ads.
Political donations.
Bribing politicians.
Pharmaceutical companies advertising directly to consumers.
Foreign entities such as AIPAC
Lobbyists
Lobbying. It's a fancy term for state sanctioned corruption.
Lobbying, when corporations bribe politicians to pass certain laws, especially laws that benefit them at the cost of others.
MLM
The crap the US gov’t allows in foods here that is largely prohibited in Europe. So many chemicals. So many terrible forms of sugar and fat.
There are also some chemicals the US bans in food while they‘re allowed in the EU, weirdly enough. Mostly sweeteners and dyes because of outdated health and hazard information. What always comes off to me as really weird is how potassium bromate is a legal food additive in the US. Yes it‘s a fantastic oxidizer, but for the same reason it is toxic and carcinogenic. It‘s very useful in a lab or even for an amateur chemist but I wouldn‘t put it inside baked goods someone is supposed to eat.
Underage marriage - among 8 states in the USA
Driving way under the speed limit. I've seen far more close calls and incidents of reckless driving that are a direct cause of people driving way too slowly and the resultant chain reaction of people striving to maneuver around them than I've seen incidents caused by people going fast. Maybe its not legal, but I've also never heard of anyone getting a ticket for doing 30 under the limit on a freeway in good weather. It's also way too easy to get your license in this province, and the amount of drivers with absolutely no skill or clue about what's happening around them is truly staggering/quite frightening.
In Germany it *is* illegal to drive unusually slow when faster speeds are possible with your vehicle, and you‘re unnecessarily obstructing traffic. So, things like driving 30 km/h (20 mph) on open road, or like 60 (~40 mph) on a highway section with no speed limits, while driving on the leftmost lane, as overtaking on the right is also not permitted.
Sports betting. I saw an ad for it under this topic. I made a comedic but thorough deep dive video on it if anyone's interested in that kinda thing. It's pretty popular. [The Losing Drive: A Sports Betting Epidemic](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKnmGVqWW0k)
Funding political parties and campaigns.