Isabella Soprano 2010

The right and externalities.

Hello! Best

saving me the classic rant about how I've been slow to upgrade and that it what a shame, and that this is no longer what it was and where we'll end up and this and that. I know that long ago should have updated, but hey, opposite is what is (besides being a great excuse for almost everything). Having said that, without further ado, we go with today's topic: the relationship (or rather, one of the many relationships) between economics and law.

The fact is that the other day we talked about when to eat (we like that), and I wanted to write something about the positive and negative externalities and their internalization by law. Take that. "But we've gone mad?", You say. Yes, to deny. But then I think a very useful for understanding from taxes on snuff and alcohol to climate change solutions. And I am also the topics of economics. In short, I do not just law that I have to get up in the mess of the economy. With a pair.

First things first, as forever. externalities are those effects resulting from an activity X that initially fall outside the cost-benefit calculation made by the agent in question when carrying out such activity (this is where economists come and destroy me by have no idea). Quick example: a smoker does not think of how much it can cost in medical smoking, but look how much it costs only package. Externalities can be both positive and negative : well, when you install a factory in a village has a positive effect (open shops and restaurants that new workers can buy and eat, so you create wealth) and turn can have negative effects (pollution, saturation of the people, etc ...). At first, the master of the factory as well as give some other, because neither will go to pay for open restaurants or you will be charged for pollution. These effects are, therefore, external to the analysis made by the employer at the time of opening the plant in question.

Well, what looks right in all this? Well, right comes into play as the primary mechanism for internalizing the externalities , which is nothing more than add to the cost (usually) or benefits (rarely) to the decisions of economic agents. Let's see how this is done with two examples.

1. The snuff: Smoking has some benefits (pleasure for smokers, say) and two types of costs: it costs you the package and what it costs doctors you need to ensure your health after years of service. The first thing you pay each one, but what the latest? In most cases we pay to all by way of public health, funded by our taxes. The mechanism used by the government to pass some of these costs to the smoker in question is, as you have already correct, put a milk tax on the one hand reduce the number of smokers and otherwise help pay medical costs in expected to be incurred to complete our friend smoking. Thus, altering the price, internalize the negative externality in the decision making of those who freely choose to smoke.

2. CO2 emissions: Air pollution is another prime example of negative externalities. When I put a factory (well, no longer today, but imagine that we are in 1920 or something) do not think about what or how I will deliver gases to the atmosphere, but calculates how much it costs the local raw materials labor, etc ... What happens long term? Because all the guys who put factories feel the same and - Alehop! - We have a change of face. What governments do here, seeing that sea level rise, extreme temperatures rise and desertification falling and a blizzard of the host in Barcelona? They could close the factories directly, but that does not say many votes. The alternatives now are two: an emissions market (who wants to know how to put it in a comment to explain step here) or a tax on CO2 emissions. In Europe we have opted for the market, but in the U.S. are still arguing over which is better. China, meanwhile ... Well, imagine that we are in 1920.

Is that clear? Two months waiting for a post for this, seems to lie. Ah! For the record, I have nothing against smokers, eh? That was just one example.

I leave because I complain about the issues that I have abandoned.

See you in April. Maybe.

Walk In Clinic In Toronto 24

CARE JOURNALISTS WITH ART. 139 THE NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

La verdad que como abogado litigante. Como periodista afiliado a la Asociación Nacional de Periodistas, la gloriosa ANP. Me preocupa el comentario del Dr. Enrique Ghersi, en el Diario el Correo , edición del 14 del actual mes, y a quien llegué a conocer hace varios años cuando me desempeñaba como Auxiliar Jurisdiccional en el 39 Juzgado Penal de Lima. Digo que me preocupa, por dos razones: por ser abogado y periodista.

Lo que manifiesta el destacado Letrado, que los Jueces están censurando a la prensa. Es cierto, y como lo puntualiza cuando entre en vigencia el Código Procesal Penal del 2004 aqui en Lima, una Espada de Damocles va a pender sobre la cabeza de los hombres de prensa. Why? Because

paragraph 1) of section 139 of that statute that is found here in Lima Vacation says: " is prohibited publication of the procedural steps taken when developing the Research School or the intermediate stage ia . A pessimism, is banned from publication, even partial, of the actions of the trial when they occur in cases deprivacaidad of the hearing.

words friends, in our view this is becoming almost standard a gag press men that are the subject of complaints by complaint, because they can not play the song while is developing the first and second stages of the unique process that regulates this new standard adjective. Ie with this new code disappear from the scene Summary Criminal Legal Process. The ordinary criminal process and the common complaint and the particular complaint (by the press) regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure and Law No.22633.

Who promotes this Standard before glossed? unquestionably going to favor the so-called white collar criminals. That is the corrupt. Those who have the protection of political power. Because these so that they are not publicly denounce. In order that the people are not aware of their illicit escapades, simply claiming a complaint for crimes against honor, and can isofacto sent to jail to fulfill its mission reporter informs the public criminal acts perpetrated against the Peruvian State. This rule is arbitrary and contrary to press freedom. Should therefore be reviewed and amended to be at that we are in a state of law and democracy as indicated by the current government.

face of this danger that hangs over the men of the press, and for the good of society is necessary for the ANP, The Federation of Journalists of Peru, and the College of Journalists, join forces and engage in a struggle to prevent Political Power and Corruption are shielded and so avoid being investigated and inspected by the public. Accurate as the opinion of the lawyer Enrique Ghersi in its assessment of the New C ODE Criminal Procedure, which makes no distinction whatsoever as to its handling of the complaint against the honor, committed through the press, as did the art. Procedimteos 314 of the Criminal Code of 1940, as amended by Law No.22633.

Ahi is the detail on the procedure of crimes against honor under the new Code of Criminal Procedure, which according to their mentors here in Lima will take effect in 2011. We share the analysis made by the Dr.Ghersi, and will also say that this new standard adjective is not the panacea Peruvian Penal Process, because it is true or not being met in the places where it is in force, as expressly stated in the standard.

is provided for prosecutors and judges loe committed serious injustices that undermine the right to defense and due process. On another note we will discuss

Funny Vegeta And Bulma Comics

Diplomacy (II): Diplomatic immunity statute

Nothing like a cat to begin in 2010, and the way to draw your attention.

Hello!

Do you you thought you had already done, right? What starts this year you were going to get rid of the sermons legal doctrine, eh? Ahhhhh, Alert! It is going to be no, even seen what it has cost me start writing in January, it will not take this as often as he planned to give at first. You know the usual excuses: that if a lot of trouble, if laziness, if you please with this, that if you study that ... And finally, as always, this remains drier than Mohamed and begrudge me a sense of duty and a desire to report that I have me, I say, being of family of teachers. Not by fear, for any, Hayle, and now that I have returned to study law and I'm up all day convention, discussed below.

Finally, let us and let stories and what we, namely the so-called "diplomatic immunity" which will ring you more or less have heard or seen a chapter of CSI Miami. Well then, to explain a little about the subject that I will divide the post into two parts: the first when I say this as the issue more or less a day, and a second in which, practically, is as was the subject of old, so you can see how far we've come. Skip directly to the video is cheating.

As always, best to start at the beginning. diplomatic mission (ie, the local and the staff of the same) is the organ of the sending State which will, inter alia, to represent him in the receiving State . Or what is the same, the French embassy in Brazil represents France against Brazil and Spain in Ecuador to Spain to Ecuador. Does that represent what it means? Well, the embassy can make legally binding acts on behalf of the State (more on soon mandate, which serves civil even for that matter), or what would be the same, the ambassador or chief of the embassy to sign a treaty with the State in which it is the embassy ( ved the 1969 Vienna Convention Law of Treaties). Today these diplomatic missions are usually permanent , but this is only so since the XVI century or so, until then what was done was to send a State representative to the neighboring king to address what had to be treated and then re-house (what we now call "special missions"). All matters relating to the topic at hand is regulated in 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations . No, there were no more places to make treaties. This latest agreement

collects certain privileges and immunities to) local mission Al b) The diplomatic staff of it. The most important , in my opinion, is that the police receiver can not enter the premises of the embassy without permission from the ambassador and diplomatic staff can not arrest (in leguleyo "personal inviolability"). These two immunities should be added, among others, privacy in mail and communications (emails can not open the letters from the embassy or they can click the phone), tax exemption and the famous diplomatic bag, which means say that customs can not open up the bag (those dog sausages!) And to realize how much privilege, you might be wondering? The long answer is to process the representative of another state equivalent to prosecute the State, which does not fit too well in an international system governed by the sovereign equality of States (2.1 CNU). The short answer is that it has done all my life.

But this is not the same as giving them carte blanche to commit crimes to diplomats? Well perhaps, but there are several considerations involved: 1) Although a diplomat will leave frog throughout history these immunities and privileges have been very helpful and, after all, are respected by almost every state in the world , 2) In principle, the diplomats are responsible people who want to keep your job after x years of opposition, 3) Although you can not judge the person, the receiving State may declare person non grata and throw the country. Dead dogs, dead of rabies, which they say.

Well, after similar rant comes all been waiting for. So things worked in ancient Sparta, which, incidentally, still went to special envoys.

Here the whole scene. And with two last thoughts I leave you, that these are not hours.

1) You are not bottomless pits like they used to.

2) Someday I'll have these immunities, if all goes well. Muahahah!

Soon more! Or not.

any questions you have you put in the comments, that's what they are.