As it happens over half my employees are women, and I've happily provided paid maternity leave (and paternity leave). You really are a sad sad little bigot.
Nicely avoided all the questions and points made. Your statement displays a complete disconnect with any points made showing you don't quite comprehend the points. I said "if you lived in a jurisdiction with greater than 1 year maternity leave...". And hiring women just to make up a balanced workforce is as gender discriminating as it can possibly get. But I bet you don't get this point either. I give up.
Again, you should stick with what you know. Civil cases have a completely different standard that the trier of fact, whether a judge or jury, uses to weigh evidence than do criminal cases. Further, “Reckless” and other words that have legal significance mean one thing in a criminal case and possibly a different thing in a civil case. Next, there are different evidentiary rules applicable to criminal cases vs civil cases. It is not possible to combine the two as the issues will overlap. You have no idea about how “judges are trained”. There is zero chance a judge could be adept at the width and breadth of all our laws. Lawyers become specialized in one, possibly two, and I’ve even seen one have a specialty certificate in 3 areas of civil law. Yet, you expect judges to somehow be a specialist in EVERY area of law, both civil AND criminal law. Impossible. Regarding judges “fixing” the problems you perceive juries have, you are clueless. I’ve seen Republican waves take out Democratic judges en mass and more recently Democratic waves take out Republican judges en mass. (For example, take a look at the incoming new judges in Harris Country Texas where Houston is located). Risk changes at that point. It is better(from a fairness standpoint) to have a cross section of the community judging the facts as the political leaning of the judge will have already affect the litigation and what can be presented to the jury. Trust me, as you sound like a libertarian or Republican, you would much rather have a jury in Harris County if you were sued now. Your odds are much better that you can convince 3 jurors to vote for you if you are a business and getting sued in district ct than the new judges coming in. If 3 jurors out of 12 “vote” in your favor, the Plaintiff loses. Not so with a Democratic judge making the legal AND factual findings. Why continue to argueabout something you are clearly ignorant of? Do you just enjoy spewing inaccuracies? Just stop.
So this is a German dude who lives in Hong Kong and has to trade for a living (actually live off his wife's salary) because he's unable to play well enough with others to survive a normal work environment. Hell, at one point this guy was claiming that he spent 3 weeks in Hawaii, a place I lived for 3 years, therefore his assessment of the place was valid and I was wrong ('cause he said so). So belligerently pontificating on things he knows nothing about is pretty much all he does.
I am not arguing about the status quo, I am arguing about a radical change. I equally suggest radical changes in America's health care system, the argument that everyone who is not a professional should shut up, makes no logical sense. By that argument I should question what you as non career retail trader or non professional trader are doing on this website in the first place. Further, I question your understanding of impartial and the entire meaning of legal and law. Do you understand why justicia is blindfolded? What do you mean with republican and democratic judges. Political leaning of judges. Tell this to anyone outside the US and they will stare at you in disbelief and confusion. If you accept that as normal and un-change-worthy then the American legal system is doomed for sure.
You have not once provided a single logical counter argument (in fact to anyone who ever disagreed with you on any thread). Name calling the entire time.
Sig you got triggered, out on a lying binge again? My gpu compute server (pictured on this site) alone costs more than your entire IT setup. You could not even afford to rent in Hong Kong even if you wanted to be here. German is just your wild hunch. You have been trying most countries by now. My education is vastly superior to your fun MBA from UpPenn. Seems to come with the program, most every UPenn MBA I ever came across had very low moral values, integrity, and skills/knowledge, but they provide you guys with first class coaching in marketing and an unwarranted overdose of arrogance. The ROI I generate most likely runs circles around that of whatever you are doing. By the way what are you actually doing? Import/export? Consulting?
You are arguing for something that cannot work. Judges cannot be specialists in everything. ALMOST EVERY appellate case that overturned a trial court judgment does so on the basis of a JUDGE’S mistake of law after the law was usually brought to them by one side or the other. You thinking that judges don't have political leanings is almost funny considering I have watched this in action for 25 years. Wait till you find out there is no Santa Clause. This has and will go on as long as judges are appointed by a person that was elected (Trump appointing two conservative judges is an example recently) or if the judges have to run for election individually. It is great that you are advanced enough to propose a system that is revolutionary and not used now even though there are lots of smart people involved in the current system and there is no push to scrap it. i think it is also great that you can fix things even without having an understanding of how they currently work Perhaps you could cure cancer next or you could just stop showing your ignorance of this matter.
Well, it works in many other countries. Perhaps you should ask yourself whether the legal training is good enough. Or perhaps the entire precepts of precedence law is flawed perhaps? Nothing is perfect for sure, but judges applying law code rather than grasping at straws of a few precedent cases seems like a place to start. The American legal system is to a large degree based on interpretation and opinions rather than on applying well laid out statutes (statutory law). Then you should not be surprised that everything hinges on how a judge interprets precedent. And the entire punitive damage system apparently does not work all that well either. I don't see how it has much of an effect as deterrent at all. Listen, in the end, for example, software companies have to decide whether they want to patch and tweak an antiquated code base forever or perhaps at some point write an entirely new api that is based on modern principles and practices. I acknowledge your domain knowledge, and never claimed I know much about American law (neither does almost anyone else in this thread by the way) . As previously argued that should never disqualify someone from taking a position. Sometimes it helps to have outsiders critique the entire status quo because all others usually suffer from tunnel vision.