throwaway_USD

And now others are insisting that Apple should not have that control (even when they themselves are doing the same thing).

Exactly Apple organized developers, giving the developers a collective power to rival Apple's unilateral dictatorship...sure Apple could call their bluff like they always do with any one single developer, except if these developers collectively withdraw from the Apple ecosystem in mass, Apple would lose developers/market share/market cap.

Now if only consumers would collectively organize against big tech in the same fashion, big tech wouldn't seem so big, and consumer could begin to dictate how these platforms collect use their data.

How does one use honey as a treatment? Just eat some? How much? How often? Etc.

Depends on the use case, for wounds you can apply it to dressings, but generally yes just eat it.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3758027/

Whether it gets repaid or not has no bearing on the fact that taxpayers were robbed and their future taxes were used in large part to prop up an historically overvalued stock market completely detached from traditional P/E ratios.

Plus the working class will be made to suffer as their measly incomes, taxed at significantly higher rates than capital gains, will be worth even less due to devaluation of the dollar and inflation.

But people who don’t earn much money aren’t going to be responsible for that bill because they pay no (or almost no) income tax.

Maybe, but the devaluation of the dollar as a result of this additional and significant debt is only going to effect the daily lives of people "who don't earn much money."

You mean to pay for teachers

This is going to be a very interesting and telling litmus test for the future of the Country in the next few months.

If public schools go the route of remote teaching, which I think they will...then I don't see much choice but for State, County and local governments to go to war against the Teachers Unions and lay waste to upwards of 75% of the teacher workforce. Lets ballpark about 3M teachers losing their jobs and the entire educational system reformed where there is very limited public school in person attendance. As bad as losing 3M jobs would be to the economy, there will be untold negative impacts on children and parents that will have to leave their children unsupervised during the day.

Easy Congress put on bandannas and robbed the tax payers of about $18,000 each.

Congress then turned around and gave taxpayers $1,200 each, of their own money, that total amount can be doubled that to account for the temporary unemployment benefits increase. The rest of the taxpayer money went to the FED so they will guarantee the prices of shit stock...the market can't lower because as many rich CEOs and investors cash out their shit stock the FED is there to buy at these artificial prices.

Its not healthy obviously, its just another in a long line of scams on taxpayers who paid for the golden parachutes and will be left holding the bag. There is about $4.2T the FED has to buy stock at artificial prices so it will be sometime before this bubble pops.

My understanding of the evolution of Earth flora is that prior to plants being green, the dominant plant life was red (think of red algae blooms) and that the current dominant green plant life likely evolved to use different photons along the EM spectrum where there was less competition.

Funny enough as I understand visible light and the EMR spectrum there is no "green" (color/wave length/energy) rather the color green is a construct originating not in the light spectrum but in the mind of the observer.

54% of Americans own stocks, either directly or indirectly.

But its negligible ownership stake, during the pandemic we have seen the multiple single day market swings that more than erase the collective holdings of 80% of investors. Moreover, 1% of investors own more than 33% of the market and the top 10% own >80% of the US stock market, that type of top heavy system is always bound to topple.

A stock market crash wouldn’t improve the economic situation... Many Americans have retirement and pensions tied to stocks.

Sounds like a free market isn't good for the Free Market. A crashed stock market would create opportunity for new investors to invest during this historic downturn...instead during this historic downturn the market is being artificially supported (at record high prices nonetheless) so no new investors will enter.

Free market economics asides, I could imagine the bourgeois and bourgeoise running around during the French Revolution telling the plebs how revolutions and guillotines aren't good for the economy.

Probably something to do with shallow breathing so you inhale and exhale more often the one should without maximizing oxygen intake per breathe nor efficiently regulating oxygen/co2.

Why, at the government level, do we not look at best practices worldwide?

Because there is a ruling class and for the rulers it is not about best practices or happiness, it is about maximizing wealth and maintaining power.

Education and healthcare (which should be considered human rights not industries) are very helpful in seeing some of the tools the ruling class uses to maintain power. Both education and healthcare are standardized enough they are rated by Country and while the US spends more on both than any other country the US is not even close to being rated number 1 in either category.

Yet, to your point, when one points to other countries as evidence how well other systems work (with less funding) that person will be demonized as Anti-American. Even in the current pandemic where the numbers speak for themselves, we are subjected to having to hear the ruling class get on TV and tell us how we are #1 and doing better than every other Country and even worse in many cases this ruling class refers to the pandemic in the past tense and proclaim how they defeated it. It is Machiavellianism incarnate.

Coincidentally neuroscientist Andrew D. Huberman was on the JRE podcast yesterday and among the many topics/studies he discussed was one where electrodes were hooked up to brains and the subjects were given complete control over the areas they stimulated.

Contrary to what one might think (or at least the scientists) that the subjects would stimulate areas of sexual response or pleasure, it turns out they elected to stimulate areas of anger and frustration.

Without knowing exactly what "news" you found yourself reading, I think its a fair guess the majority of news now-a-days (or maybe always) triggers this area of the brain and so you are probably just elected to trigger anger and frustration over stimulating your brain with the natural beauty of the world around you (so don't feel bad apparently this is the norm).

As others note you don't need to be a monopoly to violate anti-trust laws. However, as it relates to being defined as a monopoly this ability to leverage your market position to stifle competition is the exact type of behavior that would support a finding of monopoly...most non-monopolies can't leverage their market position to unfairly compete

It definitely feels scummy, but it didn't sound like GP had access to evidence of a crime.

Violating Anti-trust statues isn't criminal...but it is still illegal. Anti-trust violations also aren't the only potential laws this would violate. It sounds like it would violate unfair trade practices as well (most states has statues/laws/codes on point).

Ever hear of Trump University? Granted he isn't a "mega billionaire"...and turns out it wasn't a University at all, in fact it was shut down and resulted in lawsuits Trump settled for $25M.

I was saying that the fact that you personally haven't seen it happen doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Yes, when bail hearings aren't seen, its good proof they aren't happening because its contrary to legal procedure. Are you claiming all people snatched off the streets have had bail hearings in secret and for some reason the court orders aren't being made public? You do realize news would show up to these bail hearings if they were happening and otherwise the Court orders would be public record right?

You have the President bragging about these actions:

"We’ve done a great job in Portland," Trump said. "I guess, we have many people right now in jail, and we very much quelled it. And if it starts again, we’ll quell it again very easily. It’s not hard to do if you know what you’re doing." https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/07/17/report...

The fact people would be in still be in jail as opposed to being brought before a judge for a bail hearing shifts the burden, sure some could have been denied bail (on the merits), but either way the Judge/Court order would exist, the fact there are no court orders is prima facie evidence they are not happening, there are ongoing violations of constitutional rights.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also condemned the reported actions of the agents.

"Usually when we see people in unmarked cars forcibly grab someone off the street, we call it kidnapping," the organisation wrote on Twitter. "These actions are flat-out unconstitutional and will not go unanswered." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53453077

Anyway its clear this won't go anywhere, because unless I see that which does not exist, in your opinion the same can not be excluded from existence...which is obviously an impossible burden. Should unmarked militarized federal officers occupy your city and snatch you off the streets, I wish you the best.

The fact that you haven’t seen anyone bonded out is meaningless.

If you believe Constitutional rights are meaningless.

It may also be partly about proactively anticipating civil lawsuits for false imprisonment and other violations of civil rights. If there is no record of these arrests it will frustrate future civil claims, where the Feds will just deny ever arresting claimants and for the most part unless on video there will be no evidence of the claim.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807

Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254 requires the President to first publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse. So if this is your precedent and there is no Presidential proclamation, then you would agree Trump has engaged in illegal acts?

2. Attempting to burn down the federal courthouse would probably violate federal law, one would think.

There have been multiple "arrests" on video, and in the video the individuals were not attempting to burn anything down, much less a federal courthouse, in fact they weren't even near a federal courthouse and had no materials in their hands to suggest they could burn anything down.

3. You’re just speculating. There’s no reason to think the arrestees aren’t being mirandized and given access to counsel.

There is video of some of these "arrests" including the prior to the interactions, the initial interactions, the detention, the "arrest" and placement into unmarked vans...in these videos there was no Miranda given. Since when is verifiable video evidence speculation?

But yes, my point is even if a court ruled the Federal Government has this power, there would still be many other Constitutional protections that apply, and based on what we have seen there seems to be those kinds of violations based on verifiable video evidence. I have also yet to see anyone who was arrested be bonded out nor make a public statement through any attorney...where are these arrestees held? Have they been afforded the right to an attorney? Have they appeared before a Judge for bail?

Yeah but you don't know if the posters aren't just trolling, and even if legit gun advocates you can't really expect them to come out and say this is what I always feared and never realized I was just talking shit about what I would do if this happened and surprised to learn I am just a coward that is scared of the government.

We have seen federal agents acting as police and detaining and arresting individuals on the streets over objections from the Governor and Mayor.

If you are going to support these acts:

1. Cite any legal precedent where Federal government has policed and made arrests over state/local government objections?

2. Identify the Federal Criminal Statute any of the suspects violated authorizing these "arrests"? (presumably even if you believe the Federal government has the power to police over State/local objections, you hopefully agree they don't have the power to make arrests without probably cause a crime was committed, so what is are the federal criminal statutes?)

3. Now even supposing the Court did side with the Federal Government, finding that they have police powers they may unilaterally deploy over objections from local governments and that the arrests here were lawful, you would still tons of other Constitutional issues. For example: in all the arrests I have seen, I have not seen any miranda warnings, post arrest I have yet to find any confirmation the arrestees were afforded their constitutional rights to an attorney...seeing as the Federal agents to date have not had these traditional police powers I think it is fair to assume they haven't received this basic training, and for that reason alone even if the Fed had these powers they are still likely violating numerous constitutional rights in each arrest.

Maybe its not just so much about "allowing" these acts because they are happening to "the other side", but just like most people who talk a big game when push came to shove they found themselves shitting their pants and realizing their worst fears about the government came true and their worst fears about themselves that they are all talk and it was easy to scream give me freedom or give me death until the armed government came for their freedom.

The States should prevail, because under the Constitution the Federal Government does not have police powers and under the 10th Amendment police powers are reserved for the states.

Now the limit on the Federal government police powers has eroded slowly (like all limitations on the federal governments power under the constitution), so you could point to the FBI, secret service, ICE/CBP...but if the Federal Government prevails it would be a giant leap in erosion of State rights and limitations on Federal powers. Basically it would be negating the 10th Amendment and authorizing the Federal Government to establish their own police and unilaterally deploy them nationwide.

In short the States should prevail based on police power and 10th amendment arguments, but I wouldn't foreclose this being the spark the Federal Government is looking for to gain the police powers they have always wanted. If the Federal Government prevails over the States here, you can anticipate a "commerce clause" argument where the Federal Government will use mental gymnastics to claim State failures to police their States effect interstate commerce, so the Federal Government must have the right to step in with their own police powers and regulate.

I know it's slightly off topic, but just be happy if you don't feel your heart beating...

When I was a kid I used to complain of episodic pains I would get in my heart, and as a child I described it as feeling like lightning shocking my heart. After some testing I was pretty quickly diagnosed with supraventricular tachycardia.

I feel pretty grateful as I never had to have a heart monitor, take meds, and as far as I can recall the last episode was sometime in high school (maybe 20 years ago), I hadn't really thought about it in a long time, but you made me realize now how bizarre it was to "feel my heart".

That is really interesting and on its face something that should definitely be done at random...however, its sad to say I wouldn't be at all surprised if such a system of solicitations could easily be used to manipulate the date for political purposes.

In other words if you jurisdiction has a high positive test rate, you may want to bring that % down for optics and the way to do that would be to use contact tracing (tracking tools) to solicit people who have properly been isolating and their exposure would have been minimized.

That's why there are zoning laws and regulated properties called hotels. I mean would you want you neighbor to convert their residence to a auto body shop for example? No, and that is a major part of why commercial zoning laws exist.

Nobody is entitled to their property remaining a certain value.

That is not necessarily true. Sure if property values go down as a natural result of supply/demand there is no remedy at law for that, but people are legally entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of their property, which would include enforcement of laws prohibiting short term vacation rentals interfering with your rights and resulting in damages (loss of property value). And under the law violating one's quiet enjoyment to their property results in compensatory damages.

How much did AirBnB have to pay for this PR piece?

it built a reputation as the polar opposite of its sharing economy peers such as Uber, which prized ruthless competition, and WeWork, which collapsed under a partying culture and its founder’s self-dealing.

instead, Airbnb stood for earnest idealism.

As I recall, just like Uber, Airbnb created a platform that facilitated breaking laws and regulations in many jurisdictions...and ultimately caused damages to many owners whose property values went down as a result of their neighbors running illegal short term rentals.

Its funny you cite the novel whereas the author, psychedelic guru Ken Kesey, based the book off his real life experience working as a nurses aid in a psychiatric ward while simultaneously being part of a CIA program testing hallucinogens.

For those unfamiliar with the back story of the novel, Kesey conceived the plot and characters while tripping on peyote while at work in the ward...his revelation being the patients were the sane ones and the workers enforcing the rules where insane, which was a metaphor for the modern dystopia he lived in. Times Magazine described it as: "a roar of protest against middlebrow society's Rules and the invisible Rulers who enforce them."

This is the most sane thing anyone can say.

At some point there is going to be a critical mass of people not paying their mortgage, not paying rent, not paying loans, not paying credit cards...and simply no money and unemployment.

I think this week we will begin to see some acknowledgement of the realities because July 15 is the new tax return date, and I think there will be millions and millions of American's who just say F it, I am not filing/paying taxes.

Then again it also wouldn't surprise me if 10s of millions end up homeless before the end of the year while politicians keep parading around unemployment numbers and the stock market record highs, while these people get swept under the rug and never actually acknowledged.