politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Not... quiet. These are punitive damages - above and beyond the assessed monetary damages inflicted by Jones.
As a comparison, let's say you own a car. Your neighbor, in a fit of piqued, drops a cartoon anvil on the hood and totals it. The car costs you $30k to replace. And there's a second order cost on you for not having your own car that you can calculate out to be another $30k.
But the jury doesn't believe a $60k award is sufficient to justify the harm your neighbor caused. So they want to assess "punitive" addition costs in excess of the discrete monetary damage. They cannot assign a number bigger than $750k for this claim.
If your neighbor can come up with a way to make $750k + 30k + 30k of demolishing your car, then they have an economic incentive to do it.
But if the neighbor burns down your $800k house? Or drives a Killdozer through your $1.5M front office? Or puts a 757 through one of your twin towers? Then there's a much higher liability.
Kalshi has entered the chat
Yeah, I suppose I'm going with the actual losses being an assumed cost too. I guess a simple way might be steal $1B, make $1M off it before being brought to court, pay back the $1B and $750K punitive amount, walk off with $250K profit.
Unless they allow someone to collect for potential gains missed due to the theft and provide a suitable deterrent in punitive amounts it basically comes down to paying back the raw losses and up to $750K
The courts generally recognize the time-value of money. If you steal $1 and make $.10 on it, then you've deprived the person you stole from of the same ROI. In fact, you've demonstrated the deprived returns by investing it.
So, back to the car example. If you deprive someone of a car and that costs them their job, you're liable for the wages they lost when they lost their job.
This is a great example where th punitive damages are the inportant part. I’m sure they argued there were no direct monetary damage and how do upsi quantify such a thing anyway.
The analogy is what if someone vandalized your car and came back every night to keep vandalizing it, and accosted you as a liar in public, and attacked your employer to get you fired, and told everyone they could that you were the problem? Now imagine it wasn’t a car but your child that you lost
There are conditions where the cap is waived and this doesn't meet them