HN user

sbenitoj

229 karma
Posts11
Comments237
View on HN

Get this book — Toxic: Heal Your Body from Mold Toxicity, Lyme Disease, Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, and Chronic Environmental Illness

I didn’t have Lyme but I had mold toxicity, and pretty much every doctor and test came back saying, “everything’s fine” when I clearly knew it was not. If his treatment recommendations for Lyme are half as good as his recommendations for mold, this book is worth 1,000x the price.

Toxic: Heal Your Body from Mold Toxicity, Lyme Disease, Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, and Chronic Environmental Illness https://www.amazon.com/dp/1628603119/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_Sv...

Yup! Somehow everyone is content to have 1 in 68 Americans on the Autism spectrum, without any genuine, serious discussion of what causes it.

Amazing how many people delude themselves that they’re “thinking different” while actually engaging in mass groupthink.

Plenty of other topics are similarly taboo, but I won’t list them here — I’ll probably get plenty of downvotes just for this post!!

You’re a rare breed in these parts!

I’m not trying to argue semantics, I don’t think most people on this forum realize that the redistribution of wealth IS socialism. I’m aware that “socialist” does not carry the bad connotation I believe it deserves on this forum.

Capitalist companies are first and foremost concerned with growing the pie; socialist govts are concerned with getting a bigger slice of the current pie and don’t care very much about growing it.

Yes, and they moved specific means of production to Jersey in order to sell their services from there.

Now there are complaints that Apple actually owes more taxes to USG (and other govts).

So which one is it — does Apple own the means of production (and thus what they did is totally legal) or do they not own the means of production (and thus this is socialism)?

Because strong companies don’t worry much about short sellers. You’ll never see Apple complain about them (and if they do you know Apple is having cash flow problems).

Companies complain about short sellers when they’re having cash flow problems and are dependent on the public markets to raise $ (by issuing new shares or in a bond offering), dto fund their operations. Short sellers can increase the cost of the company to raise money (eg if the company has a bond offering they may have to pay a higher interest rate if tons of shorts effectively lower the share price of the company).

1) does that mean they’re entitled to them? Why can’t these needs be met by those people, their families, or simply remain unmet?

2) socialism = redistribution of wealth; govt services are redistribution of wealth

3) didn’t say everyone can take care of themselves, many people can’t take care of themselves now even WITH govt assistance, it’s completely beside the point

4) true

“In Beijing alone, roughly 10,000 bunkers were promptly constructed...Now when night falls, more than a million people—mostly migrant workers and students from rural areas—vanish from Beijing’s bustling streets into the underground universe, little known to the world above...Local laws require a minimal living space of 4 square meters (43 square feet) per tenant, which, in many cases, go ignored.”

Something about this story doesn’t add up — many bunkers are less than 43 sq ft per tenant, but somehow the average number of people living in a bunker is ~100 (1,000,000 people / 10,000 bunkers)??