My partner is T1D. When I see stories like this pop up, I am hopeful, but I generally don’t share them with her because these revolutionary discoveries are always “x years away.” This sounds amazing and if it works as well as it sounds here, it would absolutely change lives.
For me the “coming out of dark ages” happened when freestyle libres came out and you didn’t have to stab your fingers all time. Oh what a glorious time that was. Hope to live long enough to maybe see fruits of this labours too.
I love that we need ironclad proof to decide whether or not it’s okay for people to be able to afford sustenance or not. If there’s no proof then, oh well! The poors will just have to make do.
I’m aware that’s how they work but when the system “works” and the result is starving families then maybe it’s time we rethink whether we should keep following this system, no?
The problem is but just one system, but a set of interlocking bad systems. For instance, there would have been no Trump administration without the Electoral College and plurality voting. I didn’t think any system can be made to work right when we allow bad people to be put in charge.
Would you prefer the FTC just forces them to cut prices, and then give both the corporations reason to sue them, as well as more right-wing talking points about “big government stealing money from Ma and Pa grocer”? The unfortunate reality is that if the FTC don’t do this investigation and come back with hard proof, no matter how blatantly obvious what the large grocers are doing actually is, they will play the victim and make it even harder to take any hard action against them.
The other reality is that, even if it’s not actually the case, if it turned out that it was just “inflation” and all those companies did have to raise prices to stay afloat (again, not saying this is the case at all, just simply playing devil’s advocate), the FTC would face an absolute shitstorm if they took action and it did actually do serious harm to grocers/the broader food supply chain. Again, not a “Oh no, profits were only up 20% YoY instead of 35% because of the FTC action” but a “We will literally be selling all our products at a severe loss and will be bankrupt in weeks”. They have to understand exactly how much they’re fucking people over to take action, because historically there have been plenty of times where a well-intentioned “Stop fucking people over” rule, has caused much greater consequences down the line.
It sucks and is disgusting that in such a wealthy nation that we have people going hungry at all, but at least they’re attempting to finally do something about this specific issue, and hopefully will at least discourage shit like this in the future.
We’re at an inflection point where Federal government arms actually have to show the citizens they sometimes work. Something may actually happen here. Many government agencies like them, the FCC, DOE, DOT, and FTC are actually being run by people that are trying to make a difference. Did a 4000 mile road trip across the US over the holidays and was impressed to see so many bridges actually being fixed, rebuilt, or replaced. First time I’ve ever seen that level of progress. (Or at least, level of undoing technical debt.)
Not to fill you with false optimism though. I’ve not seen our federal government do anything useful my entire life, only take away rights with things like the Patriot Act and making women not be people anymore, so I have a hard time myself believing they will actually do something for the People.
Opposite corollary: They antitrusted Google over search while Google is currently being run by morons and failing at everything, meanwhile ignoring that Apple is becoming an actual monopoly in the US and segregating the population based on the color of a text bubble; owning media production, distribution, and sales; and other bad behavior.
Your worry about posters here “unfairly” blaming Israel - whose government can’t stop genociding men, women and children of another ethnicity at the same time as claiming they represent all Jews and call those that criticize that government and that genocide anti-semites - for the increase of acts of anti-semitism justified by said genocide, is purelly the result of you being a pure, loving soul that can’t but empathise with the suffering of the poor Genocidal ethno-Fascists.
I mean, what pure soul out there wouldn’t feel pain when people are “unfairly” blaming genocidal ethno-Fascists who claim to represent an entire ethnicity and accuse those critical of them of being against that ethnicity, for an increase in actions against that ethnicity justified by the genocide being commited by those ethno-Fascists: there is clearly no relation at all between ethno-Fascists doing horrible deeds claiming it’s for an entire ethnicity and there being people who believe that ethnicity is responsible for those crimes.
And don’t get me started on how your choice of “whatabout” targets just happen to be Islamic nations and Islam, THE favorite choice of pro-Zionism racists, and not even being an equivalent “whatabout” since none of those nation went around committing genocide whilst claiming to represent Islam and accusing critics of being Islamophobic.
Clearly you’re just one big misunderstood impeccably fair softy and all the coincidences in the kind, form, quality and target of that argument of yours with the style used by pro-Zionist racists is just an amazing coincidence.
There are two reasons for something being said by multiple people:
It’s just people following people, and repeating what others said, which indeed is a trend.
It’s multiple people independently deriving the same conclusions from the facts on the ground.
If somebody is shot on the street in front of a crowd and dies, and 10 passerbys who saw it are interviewed and all say that “a person was murdered”, it’s not a trend, it’s them deriving the same conclusion from having observed what happenned.
Similary the people here having read again and again, from the government of Israel and Western “leaders” such as Sholz and Biden calling Israel “the Jewish Nation” and even accusing those critical of Israel and its actions of being anti-semite (i.e. of being “against Jews”, not of being against Israel) and then seeing news of somebody attacking a Jew whilst loudly criticising Israel, multiple people are all concluding from that base data that all those claims of Israel representing Jews are why some people really do believe Israel represents Jews, is simple logic: cause and consequence rather than a social mechanism like a “trend”.
It’s so simple logic, that confusing it with a meme is strange.
Beyond that, the tendency for people to actually go to the trouble of sharing with others that conclusion here now is probably driven by their outrage at the actions of Israel in recent times - very few people were pointing out the logic conclusion that “Israel claiming to represent Jews will lead others to actually believe it and hence blame Jews for any bad actions of Israel” back when the Israeli Genocide was slow burning and they weren’t murdering thousands of chidren a month.
I just don’t believe the story. Nobody in the world would be stunned if Trump treated them like crap, because he’s done it to so many people that supported him over the years.
Oh but surely those people had said something to get such an aggressive response or they weren’t actual supporters in the first place, some were probably leftist moles, not me though, I support him, he will fix the US! /s
Once in a while, I see a short video clip of “Why I’m not voting for Trump this time”. They give some good reasons - narcissism, brash rudeness, looking out for himself, etc. Of course, I salute people for having their moment of introspection. But what annoys me is, none of their reasons were less true in 2016 - and few of them ever really say they themselves changed in the intervening span.
Goalpost one is to stop supporting the guy. I’m glad for people that hit that. Goalpost two is to realize a reasonable person never should’ve supported him. Perhaps that’s a lot for some people.
BBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for BBC News:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Guardian:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
Why the Fuck is ‘Robert Telles’ buried 3 paragraphs in instead of put in the first GD sentence? I hate how this article is written. Oh, and if anyone cares, Telles was a Democrat.
I have no problem with the information being given - it’s not pertinent, but it’s a reasonable detail. I do think it’s telling that you felt the need to call attention to it, however.
Yes, because its absence suggested either laziness or bias. Why wasn’t it mentioned unless the writer was concerned that simple 1 letter D would be used as ammunition or did insufficient research? My issue was how shoddily the article was written. Concealing information that people would find a reasonable detail was one of the gripes.
It’s weird you act so judgmentally with little thought on how it demeans the word ‘weird’.
Same agency and yet this time the article lists the suspect’s political affiliation (R - mentioned last paragraphs). I didn’t even need to look this up, someone posted the article on Lemmy right after I closed the first edit.
… What. What are you talking about. Their job is to present pertinent information. They also didn’t present the year he first started campaigning or the name of his opponent, both of which are also irrelevant. They’re fine to include, but they don’t need to be, and it’s certainly not concealing them to not include them.
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Guardian:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Forgive my cynicism, but even if they get caught for egregiousness, I can’t imagine they won’t just get a “cost of doing business” slap on the wrist. I can only hope I’m wrong.
I agree the fines that are issued for these companies is way to low. But on the bright side the FTC is actually doing their job and if it is making C-suite executives even the slightest bit nervous I’m for it. Yep I know that is a low bar but it’s something
It’s absolutely something and a direct result of Democrats being in power.
Could you ever image a republican even asking about price fixing?? They’d probably be passing tax cuts for the offending corporations instead of fighting for the consumer.
It’s amazing to see how Walz is outshining Harris as far as the media attention goes. He’s so good at making the case for his positions and striking back at the right in a way that anyone can understand and embrace. Hope the campaign takes a note from Walz’ policy accomplishments, because that’s honestly the only thing lacking still. If they just copy paste from Walz’ Minnesota populist accomplishments, you’ll see them winning in a landslide.
Harris taking up the candidacy was great. It felt good to be listened to but the hype wore off quickly as you realized that the party itself had not changed, only the face. She’s also been quietly changing her stances on some issues, shifting around center right. The Biden-Harris administration does have its own achievements but it tends to feel like the rest of the Democrat party where you’re voting more so for ideals which may or may not be implemented. Walz is more than talk though and it’s not like he hasn’t faced some of the same hurdles that other Democrats have either.
Walz is entirely what keeps me from feeling like I’m just voting to keep Trump out right now.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.