On the one hand, Carlson being against it makes me assume that it's probably a good thing, but on the other I'm usually pretty against the use of landmines because they have a strong tendency to sit around for a long time and maim random civilians.

But if he said the sky was blue I'd have to go check for myself.

I believe the argument being used is roughly analogous to lending something to someone.

If you borrow a lawnmower, it doesn't get auctioned off when you go bankrupt. You get to use it however you like and if you commit a crime with it you're responsible. It's still ultimately owned by the person who leant it to you.

They werent allowed to disclose location and times

That makes it wholly unsuitable for a dragnet surveillance system.

Further, a business can aquire data that a police agency can't gather without a warrant.

I disagree on this specific one. It's not an incredibly esoteric concept and is part of every legal dispute involving ownership of anything. It's legalese for "they don't own it, I own it".

Notable advantage in a lot of beginner and intermediate level sports. By the time you get beyond that everyone knows how to compensate for left handedness.

Easier for you to assault a castle with spiral staircases while using a sword.

They look like they're in about the same position or lower than the sticks in the steam deck.
I'm guessing it's a little lower since there's no screen in the middle so your hands are angled together a little more.

I entirely agree with your main point.

Aside from that, the concept of "superior ownership" isn't something made up any time recently. It's the notion that there are different types of ownership and some of them take priority over others.
For example, if I have a watch, A steals the watch from me and sells it to you, and then B steals the watch from you, you, me and B all have a claim to it.
B possesses the watch so you need to prove they stole it to show you have a superior claim to ownership. You can show that you bought the watch fair and square from A, which means it looks like your claim is valid, but because it was stolen from me in the first place I have the best claim.

It's not a rich person making up a new legal principle, it's a rich person trying to use their money and lawyers to buy an outcome because they don't like one of the parties.

Accessing that location data isn't trivial. The data is typically held by various private companies who put up at least token legal resistance to cover themselves from lawsuits.
Intelligence agencies have their own avenue for getting the data, and on paper they're not allowed to share it with police agencies.
Police agencies typically need to specify the individual in question, or the specific location and time to get a warrant. This is because they're not supposed to be able to blanket surveil an otherwise private piece of information without having a good reason.
The classic example is not being able to listen to every call on a payphone they know drug dealers use because they'll listen to people who have not done anything illegal.
Intelligence agencies are an entirely different thing with weird special rules and minimal and strange oversight.

This is all relevant because the government doesn't actually know who's allowed to be here or not.
Most people in the country without proper documentation entered legally and then just stayed outside the terms of their entry. The terms can be difficult to verify remotely, which is why you're not actually here illegally until you go in front of a judge, they deport you, and then you return again.

Finally, there are significant chunks of the country where location tracking via cell tower is imprecise enough to get the country wrong, and a lot of people live there. So any dragnet surveillance setup is going to have to exclude some pretty large population centers to avoid constantly investigating people in Windsor sometimes quickly teleporting into Detroit.

Right? And the onion didn't even ask to take control of it because the sale isn't final.

Jones is just throwing a hissy fit about things that aren't happening yet, and then when they don't happen yet using that to publicly declare victory. When things actually do happen he'll call it foul play by ... Someone.

It's less that the social construct is failing, and more that we're finally letting it flourish.

Tying the way you present to the world to one of two options often linked to your gonads is extremely limiting. What you describe isn't the failure of gender, it's an explosion of genders.

When you say the workers don't want it to end, what they really don't want to end surely is their ability to work and earn money in the country, not their status of illegality and their lack of enforceable rights.

100% what I wanted to make clear I was saying in my initial comment that I worried was not clear. The "arrangement" I referred to was "consensual farm work", not "tacitly sanctioned ignoring of labor laws and worker exploitation".

Purely for the discussion: I do think the comparison to child labor is off in this case, even though I agree about the point of needing a true viable alternative.
I would draw the comparison more to a worker in a criminal enterprise than to child mine workers.
The work they chose is their best choice, but they could have realistically chosen differently.
Within reason people can choose risky or dangerous things, as long as best doesn't mean only.

That doesn't sound like he conceded to Jones though, since he rejected his request.

The auction not immediately changing anything is just how it goes, it's not a concession to Jones. The onion won the auction, but the sale hasn't completed. The judge letting them keep operating is both decent to the employees, and routine to not damage an asset while the sale is being handled.

Imagine it's a grocery store rather that a shitty news outlet. You buy it for $1 million, but the judge made the previous owners lock the doors and keep workers from showing up. You now have a damaged asset filled with rotten fruit and melted ice cream that you wouldn't have paid that much for.

I really don't think you could reasonably argue that the slaves in the US were compensated and okay with their conditions. For one, there were slave rebellions, and none of them asked to take part in the system or were given the option to leave.

I do get what you're saying though, and we do seem to be in ultimate agreement.

We have a legal framework for it in the US as well, it's just slow and inefficient with weird quotas that make people want to abandon the system. It undermines itself.
We do also have at least one prominent union for farm workers, including undocumented farm workers.
https://ufw.org/ The existence of a labor union with a history of real impact, as well as the workers seeking the work, is part of why I think the slavery comparison is misguided.

Equating immigrant farm labor to slavery creates the notion that we should abolish it entirely, which hurts both us and them, when the problem isn't "immigrants doing farm work", it's the massive exploitation hazard which leads to too many opportunities for farm labor to have said terrible working conditions.

I would say there's big difference between child labor, where the child can't consent to work and we've societally decided that no child should be working at all, and an adult choosing to work and someone exploiting their need to deny them the worker protections they deserve.

To be clear, I'm not saying to continue allowing farms to hire undocumented workers and eschew worker protections and proper payments.
I'm saying that there's clearly a need for farm workers that isn't being met domestically. We should increase our efforts to ensure that the workers filling those roles are protected and not exploited, and are given the opportunity to become permanent citizens, since they clearly play an important role in our society.

So, I do think what they're doing is shitty, and the way our government handles undocumented farm workers is shitty and immoral, but I also think it's not quite right to call the arrangement "slave-like".

The workers are getting paid, and they're getting paid enough to make them willing to violate immigration law, and in the case of undocumented migrant workers enough for them to enter the country and travel around it, often returning to the same places to work again.

It is very much exploitative and taking advantage of the worse economic situation elsewhere and their willingness to eschew what we consider basic worker protections.

Equating the arrangement to slavery creates the impression that it might be worth it to crack down hard to alleviate the moral injustice of the entire arrangement, despite the impact it will have on everyone involved.
A better tactic that relieves the gross injustice without hurting the people being wronged or ourselves is to make it easier for farm workers to enter the country in a safe way that allows them to benefit from the protections we believe workers should get, as well as the services we provide, like WIC. Amnesty, a path to legal residency or the citizenship process, and a harsher crackdown on businesses that look to bypass those protections.

Even the workers don't want the arrangement to end, which tells me we need to bolster the protections they're missing, not end the system entirely.

The sushi I see sold in the stores near me is usually restocked a few times during the day since they keep smaller quantities on hand, usually early morning, late morning and late afternoon, to get people for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
I also think it's a pretty high margin food. You usually just need a little veggies and some rice, and optionally a pretty small amount of fish for the price you pay.
One person can then prepare two or three rolls at once in a couple of minutes.

It's not great sushi usually, but it's at least better than the majority of grab and go foods.

Smurf yeah we can.

U.S. Representative John Duarte, a Republican and fourth-generation farmer in California's Central Valley, said farms in the area depend on immigrants in the U.S. illegally and that small towns would collapse if those workers were deported. Duarte's congressional seat is one of a handful of close races where a winner has yet to be declared. Duarte said the Trump administration should pledge that immigrant workers in the country for five years or longer with no criminal record will not be targeted and look at avenues to permanent legal status.

Wow, it's almost like when faced with the consequences of your profoundly cruel and destructive rhetoric, suddenly some form of tempered, compassionate approach seems like a good idea. 🙄

Assholes.

In the case of the food cleaning sprays, I didn't use "generally regarded as safe" in the sense they use it for food additives, I meant it in the plain English sense. The list of acceptable sprays is codified by the FDA and both the US and EU food safety organizations acknowledge that the risk of public health because of them is negligibly low. That's why the EU also uses the same sprays, just not for poultry specifically. Our standards are otherwise completely compatible .

I'm not saying there aren't gross things in our food system, or things we allow that others don't. I'm saying the poultry thing isn't one of them, and the reputation our food system has as a disgusting free for all is unwarranted.

That "worst factory farm process" is cleaning chicken with cleaning agents generally regarded as safe.

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R40199.pdf

The EU food safety agencies have issued opinions that it's fine, and the EU would resume importing US poultry if it weren't for that. The same agents are allowed to be used on other imported and domestically produced foods.
The conditions in our typical poultry facility are perfectly in line with theirs, we just allow an additional rinse that they don't.

Our food supply is nowhere near as gross as people seem convinced.
The biggest threat to the cleanliness of our food supply is actually people like RFK who view the food safety apparatus as the enemy.

I really don't see the incoming administration blocking washing poultry with vinegar or a dilute bleach solution and compensating with increased staffing for food inspection agents. More likely they approve requests by the meat industry to be able to do their own inspection and reduce independent verification in the name of "efficiency".