Fuck trump and all but he literally did not say he would stop all electric car sales. He said he would stop all sales of Chinese brand cars manufactured in Mexico.
Source: The speech linked by the NYT article that Gizmodo/jalopnik references
That Gizmodo article is HORRIBLY written up and there never actually mention the quote outside of the blurb beneath the headline so the lack of context had me questioning them. Pretty shitty reporting.
Which is funny since Biden has the exact same position, which is why he expanded on Trump’s trade war with China by upping tariffs on EVs to 100%. I highly doubt Biden would let China do the Mexico workaround either, if he can help it.
I recently read an article that he is allowing to install China’s face tracking cameras in Hungary. I first thought that he was installing it for his own benefit and just got the technology from China, but this actually will be used by China.
While I might grasp his unexplained love for putin, this looks like just selling your country to foreign autocracies.
Well, a lot of boomers think office work isn’t real work, a deadweight on the economy, and will turn kids gay thus not making (great-)grandchildren due to not getting dirty and having an air conditioner. The previous system somehow reproduced the toxic Calvinist work morals of capitalist countries, and not only the politically illiterate calls this kind of behavior “communism”, but there’s a very big number of the pensioners, whose votes can be bought by promising more underpaid manual labor to their (grand)children.
The camera thing might be him getting more and more afraid. He’s losing popularity, and even if he crushes popular movements (often by “doomerism”), there are more and more popping up. If the AI bubble burst (which will cause a financial recession) or some of his allies will fall, he can also fall too. He’s a paranoid maniac that goes everywhere in a bullet vest. He just loves his fellow autocrats, especially as he can work together with them.
100% tariff on cars imported from China makes them unsellable. However there’s a free trade agreement with Mexico so GM and Ford can use the cheap labor.
Many people have pointed that out as a loophole and BYD has announced a factory on Mexico. If we wanted to block importing Chinese cars from Mexico, while still allowing GMs and Fords, we’d have to take additional action. This just means both candidates have vowed they would
As you said, this would require an additional action.
And to me it looks like it can’t be done by EO and would have to be a legislation. And during trump very few legislations got passed even when they had a majority.
The restrictions on sale through Mexico can be implemented when it actually is a problem.
I found an article where they announced a factory in Mexico, but it first have to be built. The news also appears to be before the sanctions were announced. So if that factory was meant for US market this could change their plans, as adding 100% sanctions signals determination to plugin other loopholes.
“That vehicle was completely unmarked. In my mind, this was not good, right?" Dr. Sean Hollonbeck told WEAR News.
I can’t say I’ve seen an unmarked Uber or Lyft car, generally they’re very good about displaying one or both signs, so doubting this statement from the jump.
“I served 31 years, I was an Army doctor, I trained as a Navy flight surgeon, I served with the 7th Special Forces Group, I served with the 160th," Hollonbeck said. "I served six tours.”
Massive disclaimer before this whole paragraph that this person’s actions are abhorrent and totally unjustified. Just want to provide some perspective on a single relatively minor point.
Regarding the unmarked uber it’s actually more common than you’d think. In some cities uber will send you a little decal you’re meant to put in the windshield of your car, but it could easily be missed and some drivers who maybe only drive a couple times a month may choose to not have that on display everywhere they go. Uber actually states that you’re only supposed to have it installed while you’re active in the app, but I don’t think it would last very long if you peeled it off and stored it in your car or on a shelf every time you needed to go to the grocery store let alone if you drive for personal reasons on a daily basis. Personally when I was driving uber with that decal provided I chose to just keep it on my windshield, but there’s no enforcement of that policy unless people scanned all your windows before getting in and decided that your license plate matching the app wasn’t enough evidence to get in your car.
In the previous city I drove uber (albeit it was only around 80k population) they didn’t provide any sort of markings. Plenty of uber drivers had signs, but those light up signs in particular are actually sold by third parties and as a result you need to pay out of pocket to get one. While I did choose to invest in a phone mount which is about the same price, I refused on principle to use my own money to buy signage.
So in short I can assure you that there are plenty of uber drivers in unmarked cars, either due to signage which doesn’t meet drivers’ needs or a lack of any signage provided by uber.
I believe it refers to a “Certificate of Deposit,” a type of savings account that pays a fixed interest rate on money held for an agreed upon period of time.
I just went to Vegas and probably took 30 ubers while there. Almost none had signs. One had a police license plate though lol
I think there’s a lot more to this guy’s relationship with his daughter. She had other friends at the house and hadn’t told him she’d left. She also went inside and left during this confrontation. Sounds like a very strained relationship for many reasons - eg I wonder how many times he’s threatened her with a gun etc
A man was shot and killed while exchanging gunfire with Harris County Sheriff’s Office deputies following a traffic stop in north Houston Sunday.
He wasn’t shot because he was a Sovcit idiot, he was shot because he was shooting at police. Why even mention he was a Sovcit idiot? It doesn’t change the story at all.
The site might as well have: “Man with blue pants shot, killed during exchange with Harris County deputies”
the man refused to exit his vehicle and identified himself as a sovereign citizen. Deputies engaged the man in conversation for over an hour in an attempt to remove him from the vehicle.
It’s obviously relevant context. This situation wouldn’t exist if he wasn’t a sovidiot.
Meth? Personal grudge? Former cop whistleblower fighting for his life? Just hates cops and shoots at people all the time? Suicidal? It’s part of the Who What Where Why When formula.
It’s a valid question, and valid to include in the story and, yes, in the headline.
Deputies conducted a traffic stop on the vehicle with expired tags and a broken taillight on FM 1960. Sheriff Ed Gonzalez said the man refused to exit his vehicle and identified himself as a sovereign citizen.
Deputies engaged the man in conversation for over an hour in an attempt to remove him from the vehicle, Gonzalez said.
Refusing to comply with their demands, he drove away from the scene and engaged in a brief pursuit with deputies before his vehicle was brought to a stop on the corner of FM 1960 and Ella Boulevard.
After stepping out of his vehicle, the man, armed with a pistol, began shooting at deputies. They exchanged gunfire and the man was shot dead. No deputies were injured during the exchange, Gonzalez said.
Ahem…
He wasn’t shot because he was a Sovcit idiot…
Oh, yes he was.
…he was shot because he was shooting at police.
His “ideology” dictated a pathology that led to a predictable outcome. The article is a clear and concise description of the standard sovcit idiot playbook, however cops are usually successful in arresting the dopes before it gets shooty. Not always.
An hour of talking to the man. Must been white because a black man would not get this treatment if asked to exit vehicle. Matter of fact they probably wouldn’t have asked.
Either way, refusing to get out of your car when a cop tells you to is never going to end well for the driver, regardless of race. Especially in Texas, and doubly so when you try to take off on them. Cops don’t tend to like people flouting their authority.
IDK some power-tripping assholes will take any excuse to open fire. I can respect people who don’t move at all for their own safety. They’ll be enraged and power-tripping, so likelihood of being dragged out of the car and unconstitutionally beaten is high. But they have fewer excuses to pretend they fear for their lives.
I say we indulge them and take that to its logical conclusion.
Sovereign citizen? Ok so not a citizen of the United States. Do they have a Visa to be in the country? No? Then they’re here illegally and should be deported. Process them like any other illegal immigrant.
In the meantime, we all know they’re actually US citizens, but if they keep claiming they aren’t a citizen then they obviously must have stolen that citizen’s identity. Process it that way.
They’ll very quickly admit they are actually a US citizen, and thus must comply with US laws, when they’re looking at being deported to a country they know nothing about and losing everything they have here for fraud and identity theft.
You know what amazes me, is that there are black sovcits. I saw video one of them shot lately, and honestly I appreciated the cops being as boundedly patient with him as I've seen them be with white sovcits, but holy shit I do not get how black people are willing to play that particular game given all of the times the cops have, in very genteel language, failed to uphold professional standards when interacting with someone with more than a minimal amount of melanin.
The real lesson we should get out of all of this is that we’re not that much different.
White people should absolutely care about Black Lives Matter, even just for selfish reasons. Because as soon as a cop decides, he will treat you or your kids in the exact same way. They have a predilection to treat black people as inferior, but as soon as you do anything they don’t like you’re in the exact same bucket.
We should all be on the same side, and it’s for some kind of real police accountability.
Lots of Sovcit idiots are pulled over and NOT shot.
If a Sovcit is pull over and not shot, and a Sovcit is pulled over and shot, the status of the idiot being Sovcit or not doesn’t make them be shot. Its when the idiot starts shooting at police he’s shot, just like when non-Sovcit idiots shoot at police, they’re shot.
So no, the idiot being sovcit didn’t change the outcome.
Yeah, but this guy wasn’t “lots of other sovcits”. He was this guy who took it way too far and suffered the consequences of his batshit ideology in a very predictable way. He did not commit his actions in a vacuum— he followed a very specific script of escalation in accordance with sovereign citizen ideology, and that is what is to blame, for it’s that influence which is undoubtedly what led him to this very predictable end.
The article (which I quoted) spells that out very clearly and unambiguously.
he followed a very specific script of escalation in accordance with sovereign citizen ideology, and that is what is to blame, for it’s that influence which is undoubtedly what led him to this very predictable end.
If your statement is true, why don’t all Sovcit idiots engage in gunfire with police, if its prescribed that way in their batshit insane ideology?
This isn’t a conversation about ALL sovcits, just this one and what they did. Besides, since when do adherents to any beliefs system always follow every tenet, or even universally agree on what they even are?
Their cowards? Many people talk a great game about their ideology but fail to follow through.
Many(most?) religious texts require stoning people to death for violating certain rules. Just because most don’t, doesn’t mean it isn’t relevant if one person does because of that text…
Being a sovcit led to the altercation which led to the shooting which led to the death.
Just because not every sovcit gets shot doesn’t mean his being sovcit isn’t relevant. Not everyone who pulls a sword on police gets shot, but pulling a sword on police would be relevant if the person pulling the sword out got shot.
Because they had a conversation for an hour and a half talking to the guy before he drove off on them. That’s an hour and a half of sovcit circle talk bullshit.
“After stepping out of his vehicle, the man, armed with a pistol, began shooting at deputies. They exchanged gunfire and the man was shot dead. No deputies were injured during the exchange, Gonzalez said.”
“My daddy fucked the shit out of mah sister momma, just like his daddy cousin did to his momma! And ba GAWD I’m gonna fuck my cousin!!” - Jim Bob Smith Senator.
To prevent abuse, and to limit the chances of children being born with serious medical problems they will have to suffer with for the rest of their life.
If those states allow first cousin marrying then yeah, that’s cousin fucker states.
Most of the world doesn’t live in the states man, did you think naming other states was going to offend people? You guys and all your weird hillbilly sex stuff need to get your shit together man. It’s embarrassing to see.
It’s legal in most of the world, including most of Europe. I don’t think legality is necessarily the greatest guide for how often it actually happens or social attitudes towards it.
There’s a map in there too of prevalence though and United States isn’t anywhere close to the most prevelant, it’s extremely rare. What’s going on down in Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium though?
Ya know, there’s definitely some towns where I’m from that have shallow gene pools, not gonna lie. But I live in Alberta, we’re sometimes the Texas of Canada, and sometimes the Alabama.
Yeah. Pretty much everything south of Calgary and north of Edmonton is Alabama. I’ve lived in every city in the province, and worked in a lot of the towns. It’s pretty crazy in some of the towns here man.
That chart technically includes second degree cousins and any closer relations. So if you don’t count second degree cousins it might be less. But yeah there’s a tradition of parellel cousin marriage especially in parts of the middle east, north Africa, and south Asia.
Dunno about Belgium but Italy, Spain and Portugal have quite communal family structures, at least by European standards. Not necessarily in the living together sense but in the you’ll definitely see the whole extended shebang every other holiday sense.
It’s not just England. Marrying cousins was considered common practice among royalty and nobles in the past, not “normal” for everyday people.
They would inbreed to try to keep blood “pure”, or to keep the family in power, or to sell off their family for power. People knew a long time ago this was bad and caused health problems, but the rich kept doing it because theyre egoistical maniacs.
We don’t have monarchs and royalty anymore, we can do away with inbreeding completely. The fact some conservatives still defend it is ridiculous.
When you work for Apple, Apple gets to tell you what to do. Same goes for any corporate owned media outlet.
Jon Stewart has more than enough money to just quit, which he did. Most normal folks do not have this luxury so they tow the line.
Welcome to the reality that the US economic system.
No real free speech, no real agency in our economy, captive regulators that like to masquerade as populist heros but rarely actually do any real damage to sociopathic corporations.
I sympathize with the cynicism in your last paragraph, but I push a little optimism back on a couple points. 1: our capability for speech may be limited by the corporations who have grabbed control over our media platforms, but insofar as freedom of speech refers to our ability to speak freely without retaliation from the government, we do still have real free speech. It's a juvenile point, but given events in the last few years it's not a right I take for granted as I did previously. That being said, I did just watch a video of FBI agents interrogating a woman in front of her house for posting non-violent content on Facebook relating to Gaza that you can add to a pile of evidence that the government is frequently toeing the line on free speech, so... that's not good.
2: Regulatory authority has become almost laughably meek, granted, but you're commenting on a video of one of the most aggressive regulators to hold the position in as long as I'm aware. This is a powerful sign that regulatory capture is not inevitable if we care enough to vote for candidates who will appoint strong regulators -- even if it hurts our pride to do so (<<conscientious vote objectors).
the government is frequently toeing the line on free speech
We need to have a lemmy-wide class on the phrase “toe the line” because this is the 2nd time it’s been used incorrectly in this thread.
I think what you mean to say is “pushing the envelope”. To “toe the line” means to support and parrot what an authority body says, even if you personally have different ideas, like Sanders endorsing Biden. What the government is doing is infringing on free speech.
“He who pays the piper, calls the tune” is an old saying and not any less true today. If your livelihood and that of your family depends on someone, very, very few people will antagonize this someone.
State owned news media sounds like a bad idea from communistic countries, but nevertheless, plenty of European countries have just that, and it’s noteworthy how it’s much less biased than the commercial outlets. The people pay the piper.
It actually works in democratic countries where the government is representative of the people, so that any single party can’t push their agenda to the media by laws. On the contrary it happens more often that the media is told to keep a straight line if they go too far in any direction.
It’s no wonder it doesn’t work in dictatorships, and I don’t think it would work in two party politics, but in European countries the state media is very likely the less biased one.
I knew I was forgetting one. But yes, a state ownd independent media would be nice. I’d be grateful just for reinstating the fairness doctrine at this point
In Dutch we say: “wiens brood men eet, diens woord men spreekt” which convolutedly translates to: “who’s bread one eats, thine word one speaks”… which shows this is present in many cultures.
Jon Stewart has more than enough money to just quit, which he did.
Celebrity is often its own reward. And Stewart wasn’t getting much coverage when he didn’t have a show, despite some very sincere and fervent lobbying efforts during his retirement period.
No real free speech, no real agency in our economy, captive regulators that like to masquerade as populist heros but rarely actually do any real damage to sociopathic corporations.
One of the more infuriating bits about liberal agitprop shows is how fucking devoid of agitprop they actually are. Yeah, guys like Stewart and Colbert and Oliver can go on rhetorical tirades about the Big Evil Business Thing. But when push comes to shove, what do they actually advocate? Noncompliance? Organized revolt? A general strike? Confrontations with abusive and cartelized law enforcement? Any kind of material self-defense or defense of one’s friends and neighbors? Anything that might violate the latest round of right-wing prohibitions on health care or gender or speech?
Or do they just put on a “Rally to Restore Sanity” that tells people activism begins and ends with voting, in an election system that’s increasingly threadbare?
The fact that Jon Stewart worked for Apple for a podcast and is now again on television working for some TV station shows that he has very little to offer in the way of anything meaningful. He had more than enough notoriety to start a podcast in his basement where he could say anything he wanted and get compelling guests. He has more than enough money to hire a crew and create a self-produced show online and get real viewership. People should really ask themselves why he is sticking with the big companies. It’s because he likes the money and is an expert at getting the narrative out there. The Daily Show has always been lowest common denominator “subversion” that takes itself seriously enough to shame non-approved worldviews but not enough to be held accountable in any meaningful way. It’s like if a teenager was a show.
Love or hate Tucker Carlson he is doing what Jon Stewart should have done years ago.
Tucker and Stewart are both just the dead end of modern entertainment journalism. Guys who haven’t been relevant in nearly a decade showing back up on mediums with declining user bases to appeal to an audience that’s getting older and grumpier and more out-of-touch than their Boomer-era peers from the early '00s.
“Tricking him” by paying for him to say stuff over Cameo, something he agreed to.
In fact, the only way he didn’t know what he was being tricked into was that he didn’t read what he said before he said it since you can say no to any request. It was fucking obvious he was being trolled. Here’s one of the things he was paid to, and did, say and it wasn’t even the most ridiculous:
Holy fuck. Reading that, how was it not obviously a troll/joke? Are our politicians that out of touch? Seriously. Are they actually that. Badly. Out. Of. Touch?
If so, I’ll be pouring one out for America. I know they are generally old, but come on!
TBF he got kicked out of congress for his shenanigans, is literally a national laughing stock for his idiocy, and also needed the money badly so likely would have said anything. A lot of moving pieces with this guy.
Well, yeah. You’d have to be an absolute fucking idiot to say otherwise. The dude tried an insurrection. He routinely violated American democracy. It’s almost like if you elect a wanna be dictator he’s gonna, you know, become a dictator
Dealing with Republicans is like talking to the dumb computer scientist in a Star Trek plot, “I know the last fifteen of these we tried betrayed us and killed millions, but we should totally give control of all our ships and weapons to my new AI program… Hm? Oh, yes, it is a new uniform, thank you for noticing. Yeah, my tailor said it matched the color of my blood.”
I always saw the Vulcans as Republicans, in all honesty.
They are aggressively xenophobic and use ‘logic’ as an excuse to berate, bash, ignore, and forget anything that they don’t like. They claim to be bowing to ideals set by their predecessors but their predecessor would likely be rolling in their grave at what they’ve been doing. They don’t make any real advancement or go further, they’re happy to stay exactly where they’re at with the status quo. They abhor anything that’s different and see giving any sort of space to that difference as a gracious gift to be given and one that the different thing better be grateful for. They lord themselves high and mighty above everyone else but routinely miss the big picture and end up putting themselves into positions of failure due to it. They put far too much into what are mostly superstitious and religious beliefs and those beliefs often impact everyone. When they have a child with someone who isn’t part of their group, they try to raise the child in such a way that the child is permanently torn and confused. When teenagers are confused, frightened and upset instead of allowing them to embrace these feelings and figure out how to control them, they instead root out all compassion and hints of emotion to further what they think is the best.
Ha, this created an unexpected mixture of emotions for me. I never would have thought of this because a lot of my favorite characters are Vulcan crew members who tell non-Vulcans to stop being so emotional and trying to blast their way out of problems or whatever, but yeah, come to think of it pretty much all of those characters had to fight against Vulcan society a ton, so you’ve kinda got a point…
… Which is really annoying, because I’m in the middle of hate-watching Enterprise for the first time and I can’t stop seeing Archer as Rick Berman’s fantasy version of a George W Bush and the Vulcans as stand ins for Europeans and The Democratic party and anyone else who thought we couldn’t solve the problem of international terrorism by just " standing up to bad guys " (which back in our reality translated into conducting drone strikes on civilians and stuff)
Yeah… Enterprise is hard for me to watch because it often feels like Team America Space Police. Not as bad as fucking Stargate mind you. That shit is intolerable…
It comes up a lot, off the top of my head I definitely remember episodes in lower decks and Discovery and the original series that dealt with this, but I honestly think I’m forgetting a few
Where differences occurred, they were especially large on three broad types of questions: Items that asked the respondent to assess the quality of their family and social life produced differences of 18 and 14 percentage points, respectively, with those interviewed on the phone reporting higher levels of satisfaction than those who completed the survey on the Web.
Questions about societal discrimination against several different groups also produced large differences, with telephone respondents more apt than Web respondents to say that gays and lesbians, Hispanics and blacks face a lot of discrimination. However, there was no significant mode difference in responses to the question of whether women face a lot of discrimination.
Web respondents were far more likely than those interviewed on the phone to give various political figures a “very unfavorable” rating, a tendency that was concentrated among members of the opposite party of each figure rated.
Statistically significant mode effects also were observed on several other questions. Telephone respondents were more likely than those interviewed on the Web to say they often talked with their neighbors, to rate their communities as an “excellent” place to live and to rate their own health as “excellent.” Web respondents were more likely than phone respondents to report being unable to afford food or needed medical care at some point in the past twelve months.
ultimately, the legitimacy of the poll would depend on where they solicited their subjects in the poll. You’re likely to get a far different answer with advertisements on Truth Social than you would with advertisements on, lets say, a palistinian-american subreddit. but that wasn’t addressed in the report, so. we’ll never really know.
Opt-in polling is so bad. It means you only get answers from people with strong opinions. They are polls where the results are shaped like a U instead of a bell curve so it rarely represents the actual 95 percentile.
I don’t think it’s opt-in in that way though. They have a pre-existing list of millions of pre-screened people and they’re selecting a representative sample from that list. Fivethirtyeight ranks them fairly highly among other polls – certainly high enough for this opinion poll to be considered accurate.
It’s still selecting from a list of people who have something to say, though.
As far as how accurately they represent broad swaths of america… well, that’s a different matter. I would expect your average american to be far more luke warm to any given subject than respondents to a poll.
That’s probably just a problem with polls though – people who won’t answer aren’t included. But they’re saying that 26-32% of Americans are “unsure,” and that sounds pretty lukewarm. Their methodology does sound odd to me too but if it was flawed it would show in the election data, right? Elections are a brutal testing ground. Hundreds of surveys have been predictive and high quality on average.
I would have guessed 1/3 are “wtf! stop it”, a 1/3 are “bomb them harder!” And then there’s everyone else just doing their thing, going to work. Going to school.
Fivethirtyeight only grades them on their ability to predict american election results. I don’t think that’s the same as advocating for their efficacy in producing leading public opinion polls.
It’s a serious issue when there’s a clear political bias in the founders. They put more effort into steering the narrative than objectively reporting it.
If you haven’t seen any clear bias then you probably have a close enough outlook to them to not notice. And that’s fine, I don’t require everyone to have the same opinion as me for their comments to have value.
My impression of bias is probably born out of the leading polls that rightwing media and thinktanks in the UK commission them to do. You can fairly argue that these polls are externally commissioned so their tenor is a product of their issuer not yougov. But the overall impression I got was that they could be readily depended on to produce misleading propaganda against labour when it wasn’t being run by corporate technocrats.
For sure! I could write a novel about “everything else catastrophic about it” (and probably have by now, if you concatenate my previous Lemmy and Reddit comments on the subject), but that would distract from my point that the headline “Americans can no longer afford their cars” applies in more ways than one.
Though, it makes me wonder how much better cities fair, as I’m not so sure they’re doing much better being able to afford covering the costs of all their crumbling infrastructure.
That’s going to depend on density. Higher densities means more people paying for the same amount of infrastructure, leading to better affordability.
It’s also going to depend on the type of infrastructure - car infrastructure scales hilariously poorly, while transit generally becomes better when you add more riders.
while transit generally becomes better when you add more riders.
I’m generally pro-transit, but it seems like there’s some serious congestion problems (that is, upper limits to how these systems scale) to deal with here too - looking at relatively rich but crowded cities like New York and Tokyo and how people are frequently packed in like sardines.
Terrible examples. New York and Tokyo made the bulk of their investments in transport decades ago.
Look at China for an example of it working. Things are not congested at all there, and they just keep expanding the network if it gets near any bottlenecks. Like adding hundreds of miles of metro, light rail, high speed trains etc. per year.
It’s actually the opposite - suburbs and car centric design are strangling cities. If you look at history before car centric design and suburbs, the best quality of life was generally found in cities.
But, the way we build cities has changed since the 50s, and they don’t get the density that they used to. It used to be the case that a city generally grew by increasing the density of older parts of the city. Single family homes would become multifamily townhouses, which would give way to multi-storey apartment buildings. As the density increased, so would the tax revenue per square foot, allowing a city to invest more on improvements like infrastructure. But since the 50s, cities generally don’t increase density like that. Instead, they build more suburbs filled with single family homes that are a net drain on city revenue. And then you add in the infrastructure needed for cars commuting into the city every day, and that revenue per square foot gets even worse. The suburbs are basically subsidized by the densest (and often poorest) sections of a city.
The example I always think of is the old main street style businesses vs. the modern convenience store. On the same piece of land that today houses a convenience store in the middle of a parking lot, you used to be able to fit 3 or 4 businesses and possibly apartments above them.
The taxes from dense cities cover maintenance for suburbs. They are subsidizing them. There are neat 3D tax maps that demonstrate this (that I can’t seem to find).
The part where the parent refused medication that can prevent infection is awful too. Can you imagine being so against medicine that you both risk your child’s life and risk leaving your child without a parent?
Yeah I don't understand why they would go to the hospital and then not accept the treatment. For a diagnosis? How can they trust the diagnosis if they don't trust the treatment?
Not according to the article: "The outbreak began after a child who’d recently spent time in another country was admitted to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) with an infection, which was subsequently identified as measles. "
The disease then spread to three other people at CHOP, two of whom were already hospitalized there for other reasons.
Two of those infected at the hospital were a parent and child. The child had not been vaccinated and the parent was offered medication usually given to unvaccinated people that can prevent infection after exposure to measles, but refused it, the Philadelphia Inquirer first reported.
In the case of COVID at least, they went because they were literally drowning in their own mucus and didn’t have a choice. They only started refusing things when they woke up enough to be delusional again.
Others got real scared and “repented” and cried and said it was awful and the worst thing they’d ever encountered and they hoped no one else would ever get it and they were fucking dying and sadness.
Then some died.
Some got better. Of the ones that got better, some genuinely learned something. Others, like Trump, continued to spew hateful, stupid shit despite realizing it sucked. Others learned absolutely nothing. I’m not sure which is worse.
At the very least CPS better be involved. I would definitely hope they take your child away if you’d risk your health, the child’s health, and the health of other children like that.
Can’t the jan 6th committee release the unblurred videos? I think Johnson opened that can of worms, we, the people, might as well see what they’ve got.
His office later noted that DOJ already has the raw footage.
and later in the article:
Johnson’s spokesman suggested that the speaker was trying to keep the raw footage away from online sleuths who have helped identify hundreds of Capitol rioters and aided in the FBI’s investigation.
Eh, witch hunts are a big risk in the immediate aftermath when crowd tension is the highest. It has been three years, at this point I expect the sleuth work on suspect identification would be all upside.
The bigger security concern is sleuths figuring out all the camera locations and, by deduction, the blind spots. Johnson is setting up the next Congress to be much more vulnerable to violent attack.
The bigger security concern is sleuths figuring out all the camera locations and, by deduction, the blind spots. Johnson is setting up the next Congress to be much more vulnerable to violent attack.
If there's anyone with a lick of sense in the Congressional security team, they've added or moved cameras specifically for this reason. If I was on that team, January 7th I'd be pushing to add more cameras/defenses, given how close it was as is.
Didn’t Republicans say these rioters were Black Lives Matter people or government actors? Which pile of bullshit does little johnson want us to consume?
I can’t tell if this is just a joke about their electricity, or a joke about their electricity which happens to include a pun about the Camp Fire fires that started due to faulty electric transmission wires… if the latter, I salute you.
We’re already forced to burn oil to power air conditioners so our elders don’t die in heatwave. Just imagine the inside of a giant Vegas casino without electricity.
You said we will still use oil because it’s profitable. I said that we can’t stop using oil, because our earth is too hot, because we are too much burning oil. How am I off topic?
My point is, it’s not economically viable for an elderly Texan to spend 500 bucks on inflated energy prices during a heatwave, but it’s not like there is a choice. We’re gonna burn it all up because we don’t know how to stop.
While googling this, it seems like there is an international cap on marine fuels for 0.5% sulphur. cruisemapper.com/…/752-cruise-ship-engine-propuls…
A lot of ports and shipping areas require 0.1% sulphur content.
Here’s a thing about MDO and MGO. maritimepage.com/what-are-mgo-and-mdo-fuels-marin…
MGO is 0.1% sulphur content.
MDO is 2% sulphur content.
For comparison, car diesel sulphur content is like 0.001%.
Best source I can find for bunker fuel is 3.5%. So, MDO/MGO are better than bunker fuel, I guess. Feels like a rebrand with minor improvements, so everyone can say “yeh, it’s just diesel. Not bunker fuel”.
But 2% MDO is still a 40% improvement over 3.5% bunker fuel.
Seems like there is a lot of changing and outdated information on this.
And it being related to international trading, laws and standards… There doesn’t seem to be a reliable definitive source on it.
My takeaway is “yeh, it’s not bunker fuel. It’s diesel. But it’s not diesel as we know it from driving cars, trucks, tractors and other plant”
But when people talk about ship pollution, they’re usually talking about non-carbon pollution.
For example, ships often burn heavy fuel oil, which produces tons of sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain, and NOX, which depletes the ozone and causes smog and asthma.
Cruise ships are bad for the environment, but there’s honestly bigger fish to fry. Gas power plants are way, way worse for the planet.
From the comparisons I’ve made in the past, they’re also relatively cheap compared to land based vacations. For some reason, it’s cheaper to make your hotel float.
Then there’s places where ships are more inherent to the experience, like transiting the Panama canal, or coastal regions of Alaska or Norway. Places that are too remote to get to by most other means.
But fuck Caribbean cruises. That’s a boat taking you from one tourist outdoor shopping mall to another.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.