Except Mastercard is lying, FinCEN has specifically issued guidance for national finance institutions (banks, credit cards, etc.) to be able to accept cannabis transactions in states that have legalized. Most of these finance institutions are just unwilling to accept the additional cost of complying with the regulations. There’s a reason why Valley National Bank is so popular with cannabis companies - it’s a national bank that follows FinCEN guidelines. It comes at a higher cost, but a lot of companies feel it’s worth it.
And this FinCEN guidance wasn’t just issued - it was issued in 2014. The only reason the cannabis industry doesn’t have widespread access to traditional finance, and why banks keep lobbying for the SAFE Banking Act, is because the banks don’t want to have to do the extra work to comply with the FinCEN guidance.
Note - I agree it’s stupid that cannabis is federally illegal and think it should be legalized (or at the very least deschedule it and let states decide if they’ll allow it). But Mastercard could choose to follow FinCEN guidance if they wanted to.
Because the paragraphs of the summary are indented, they appear as monospaced text with a horizontal scrollbar in the Lemmy web interface. This makes the summary unreadable to web users.
Suggestion: Do not indent paragraphs in Markdown input.
Summary is reprinted below without indentation:
WASHINGTON (AP) — A measure of consumer prices that is closely monitored by the Federal Reserve fell last month to its lowest level since March 2021, the latest sign that inflation in the United States is steadily cooling from its once-painful highs.
The inflation report that the Commerce Department issued Friday also showed that Americans’ willingness to keep spending, despite two years of high inflation and 11 Fed rate hikes over 17 months, remains a powerful driver of the economy.
Consumer spending rose 0.5% from May to June, up from 0.2% the previous month.
This can occur as persistent consumer demand enables more companies to raise prices, thereby keeping inflation above the Fed’s target and potentially causing the central bank to raise rates even higher.
Powell declined to offer any signal of the central bank’s likely next moves.
The Fed’s policymakers consider core prices a better measure of where inflation might be headed.
Overall prices will increase slightly and at a slower ratewhich is fine. We do not want prices to decrease overall. That causes a whole host of issues. What we want is low, consistent inflation so that you know roughly what prices will be next year.
Some things will decrease in price, of course, but overall prices went up very slightly. One other thing to note is that this specific indicator does not take food and energy prices into account. There is another indicator for that.
It looks like the inflation rate for food is coming down but it is still higher than typical. The war in Ukraine and bad crop yields in China because of heat waves are likely responsible for that. Energy prices look like they have dropped pretty significantly though.
Shortly after the video was posted, Gibson said he learned online that Petty had been fired from her job as a massage therapist at Sea Glass Therapy, an emotional wellness center. The business’s owner, Jennifer Yaeger, declined to comment to NBC News on the matter. The wellness center announced that Petty had been fired on a since-deleted social media post.
I saw a video of another community member coming by after this happened (while he was fishing of course) and basically begging him to contact her work and explain it’s a misunderstanding. He declined lol
After his confrontation with Petty went viral, Gibson said Thomas Drolet, president of Springwater Plantation’s board of directors, asked him to release another video saying the encounter had been a “misunderstanding.” The reason cited by Drolet, Gibson said, was that Petty needed her job back to pay her “big mortgage.”
“We live in the same neighborhood,” Gibson said. “I’m not going to help her get her job back. She still hasn’t apologized to me. I haven’t seen her since.”
You go, dude. Fuck that lady. And fuck the guy asking him to mischaracterize the interaction.
I think it would be nice to have a rule that reminds people to post for a global audience. This community tends toward news that is only relevant to people in the United States. I believe that having active moderation effort to encourage more non-US-centric content would be good for the community.
I agree that this sub can be very US-centric at times, but I feel like that is a product of people’s interests. Wouldn’t it be a little bit misplaced to put a “rule” to restrict the amount of US content / encourage non-US-centric content? I’m not sure, so I’ll need some further input on that (:
Agreed. I mean, since lemmy.world/c/world already restricts itself to non-US news, /c/news seems to be the next largest logical community where both US and non-US news can be posted together. For a similar comparison, I appreciate r/news’ description: “The place for news articles about current events in the United States and the rest of the world.”
Rename “blacklist” to “blocklist” in the spirit of inclusivity
Focus on reliability and accuracy rather than political bias
My guess is the purpose of rule #2 is to prevent opinion pieces and misinformation from being published as “news”. If the goal is to limit opinion articles presented as “news”, then perhaps the rule should instead clarify A) whether opinion pieces are allowed (and how that is defined) and B) if they are allowed whether they should be marked as such.
If the goal of rule #2 is to achieve some sort of “political neutrality”, I would challenge whether that should be a goal. This community has an inherent political bias that manifests in which articles people share and how they upvote or downvote. I don’t think that removing sources on the basis of political affiliation per se minimizes harm, and I strongly prefer a focus on removing posts that contain verifiable inaccuracies. Of course, it will ultimately be up to the moderation team to decide what actually constitutes misinformation (and there is bias there too), but I hope that shifting the focus toward that goal explicitly will mean that they will more carefully consider their own biases when exercising the moderation power.
Good idea, I’m not a linguistic expert or an expert on racism, but I feel like it’s not a big problem to change it, and if it makes anyone feel better, it’s worth it.
As main rule we focus on “reliability” and “Unbiasedness”. We then further explain that obvious biased posts, which are the most often “Bad thing” we see in this community, will be deleted. We don’t expect perfect articles, because they don’t exist, but we just want to make sure that posts which are only there to support a particular political movement, do not overtake this community.
Rule 5 states that opinion pieces are not allowed. We will have to judge posts that get reported because of rule 5 on a case-by-case basis, and we will make sure to communicate if there’s ever a post which is ambiguous.
Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns (:
No one should be shocked to know that both the state senator and representative for Newnan are Republicans, the Federal Congressman is Republican, and Coweta Country went 67% for Trump in 2020.
“I’m not afraid of anybody,” Gibson said. “But do I want to get out of this house and go fishing and do any of that stuff around here anymore? Hell to the no.”
No Offence but this is how racism wins, this end result was entirely what the racist wanted and they got it. They don’t have to lynch you to kick you out of a neighborhood, just mildy harrass you to the point where a person self segregates and then what? I mean the end goal is the same for the racist at the end of the day. Don’t give them the satisfaction
You're asking someone being harassed and threatened to keep fighting and deal with it. It's not on the victim to beat their abusers. It's on society to stop the abusers. That town should be arresting the racists for harassment but since the cops are likely supporting the racists, an ACLU lawyer should be stepping in pro-bono to sue the shit out of these people/department. Unfortunately it's rarely that easy to affect systemic change.
They’re not asking the victim anything, they just made a statement of fact that when we bow to the bully, they get their way.
You’re right that the town should be stepping up. But, the reality is that most of them are republicans and would not piss on him if he was on fire, let alone step up to support him. So all that remains as options are to fight back (I think his current tack is the best one), move away, or isolate. Feels like you shot the messenger (OP) here.
You’re right about he fighting part, not about the “deal with it” part. I’m not sure how you equate one with the other. If we don’t fight back against racism, then that is “dealing with it”. Fighting back is what I just said to do.
In general, yes. If you’re getting harassed and threatened and you want that to change, you should fight and deal with it. Nobody ever won anything by simply rolling over for anyone who was mean to them. Worse than that, society probably won’t support you if you do, even if they should.
It’s up to the individual how strongly they want to fight for it, of course, but I certainly wouldn’t discourage them from doing so.
This is literally victim blaming. What if he “stood up for himself” and was shot by a cop. What a win for him! What if he was best by a mob?
If someone pulls a gun on you should you fight them? A knife? A bat? A brick? A dirty needle? I’m mentioning this because people seem to understand immediate bodily harm and how it’s perfectly acceptable to keep yourself safe. However somehow when you have to make the active decision to expose yourself to bodily harm then suddenly if you don’t you’re coward and part of the problem.
All the while, no one is talking about how people with nothing to lose to stand up to the abusers aka the person judging the victim for keep themselves safe. If they really thought it was a great idea they’d do it themselves. They’d confront the harassers and give them the proper shunning and verbal redress they deserve, but that never happens. All that happens is people with no skin in the game talk about how others should risk their personal safety and livelihoods for some principle the victim doesn’t want to stand for.
It’s up to him to judge his own situation and make his own decisions. There are many different ways besides physical to fight and struggle against something. Basically the only thing that does nothing is giving up entirely.
Call it victim blaming if you like. It would be lovely if society at large sprung to assist those who are wronged. But that’s not what happens in reality, as I see it.
Unlike the moon being made of cheese I gave actual real situations. I agree that everyone has to judge if they want to fight or not, but it’s not up to people who will never be impacted by a situation to have that opinion.
I say this as a black person who has been punched by a cop as a teen. As a black person who had my house raided for no reason. As a black person who has watched my family carried away for no reason. Whose grandmother was put in federal prison for helping fund the civil rights movement and was nearly denied a security clearance because most of my family is considered domestic terrorists because of the Civil rights movement. I have a lot more to add to the stack.
I’ve spent my whole ass life advancing safety for my people, but no I would not go purposefully to an area where I would be harmed. That’s why I take offense for judging that man for making that decision. It’s doubtful you’ve ever had to make such a decision and if you could have helped you wouldn’t have because as you said outsiders don’t help. Stop judging people for not taking steps you never would.
Perhaps you should take a moment to reflect on if your words are callus towards the people who are affected. You can think that I’m talking at you or taking meaning that isn’t there, but you’re on the side of people who arr advocating for risking their safety. It doesn’t matter of you didn’t say it, it matters that you contradicting me and another person who say that person was wrong.
Context matters, especially ok a platform that doesn’t put focus on users, but words. Your words will add to the context and not be just your words. That is what I’m arguing against. You addition to te context because you are saying that victims should risk themselves based on nothing but where you chose to interject yourself.
BTW, I didn’t vote one way or another on your posts. Those downvotes came organically.
BTW, I didn’t vote one way or another on your posts. Those downvotes came organically.
I don’t care if you do or not. We’re not having a popularity contest here.
You can think that I’m…taking meaning that isn’t there
I sure do, because you are. Just because I’m saying that it’s important to stand up and fight for your rights does not mean that I’m advocating for this particular guy to put himself in a situation where he might get beaten up or killed, or judging him for not doing so. There’s an enormous range of actions between actively putting yourself in harm’s way and doing nothing at all. And in fact, the only person judging people here…is you.
for some principle the victim doesn’t want to stand for
So we should all just let racism flourish then and not stand against it? The victim here isn’t being threatened with violence, and they have friends too, so why then run away? Running away from problems never solves anything
If the racism is institutionalized, the racists will always win in the end. I work with people with disabilities and the list of places I can’t take people with dark skin keeps growing. There was a park we used to enjoy until someone started stalking us, as if that wasn’t bad enough the cops were called on us every time by the stalker. They knew they only needed to get the racist cop once for it to work, and us knowing that too means we can’t go back. They got what they wanted.
This helps no one and accomplishes nothing, just saying we should “deal with racism” is racism in itself.
Institutional racism will always exist as long as that’s peoples attitude towards it. Civil Rights never would’ve gotten anywhere if black people were just complacent ALL the time, if black people didn’t make noise they never would’ve been heard by white people and forced to think about these issues.
This is a lived expirence that actually happened. Don’t treat it like an arguement to do nothing because i never suggested people should do nothing. What it should do is inform how one approaches dealing with racism because asking a Disabled Black young man to risk bodily harm to get the same rights other people already have is not going to work. You can’t put the burden of changing a predatory system on the people the system preys upon. Thats the message.
At no point did I make any argument that the entire burden should rest on your shoulders and your shoulders alone, nor would I ever. This is a shared burden amongst all of us. Letting racism take control of our lives is an admission of defeat and I will not tolerate that in my country.
He told one co-worker the trip was for a family emergency and used “shushing” emojis, the court documents allege.
This reads like that Eli Manning SNL sketch where his murder alibi is that he was at home sending horny texts. So funny to read out emojis in a court document.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.