Did you mean 65% of people in the USA own a home, or that 65% of people in the USA have a big mortgage and own a very small fraction of their houses?
I myself am in year 11 of a 15 year mortgage (anything beyond 15 years is just giving banks money for nothing, but that’s another issue), and still owe about 40% of the principal(*).
The typical house owning model in the USA is buying the largest, most mortgaged house you qualify for, and trade up, to a larger, most mortgaged house in five years or so. In this model, most homeowners own very little of their houses.
The median net worth of US families is about $100,000, most of which, as pointed out above, being the equity in their houses. For families with a head of household in the 35-45 age range, it’s 60,000 dollars. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/14/the-net-worth-of-the-average-american-family.html
Tl/dr. No, they don’t (we don’t) own their houses. Banks do
(*) Though because of house prices rising, I would have about 85% of the value of the house if I sold it today.
Im sure Ms Maxwell won’t kill herself while the cameras are off, but I’ve never seen anybody so susceptible to a violent and fatal case of COVID-19 as her.
She will be so sick so shortly they might as well start writing a medical paper now
Pre-symptomatic transmission is a very common phenomenon in other diseases. It makes sense that it happens here.
A case was reported in Germany (I think) of an "asymptomatic" woman that transmitted Covid-19, and was later proven to be a pre-symptomatic/mild symptomatic case.
I think the challenge is trying to identify and trace truly asymptomatic infected patients, since, almost by definition, we can only catch them later via antibodies tests, when trace and contact is almost impossible. In the German case mentioned above, the woman had recently returned from China, and that is how several cases were traced back to business meetings with her.
I also don't think we understand how asymptomatic infection works in Covid-19. Is it like the immune system is able to detect and kill the virus immediately after infection, because of some residual immunity from a previous flu of flu vaccine, before the virus multiplies enough to be transmittable, or is it more that the body does not react to the virus presence "at all" while letting the virus multiply, until, eventually, the immune system clears it out in a couple of weeks? In the first case, the carrier would likely not transmit the virus, in the latter, it would.
Joke aside, this is one of the most interesting problems in physics.
My first exposure to the existence of antimatter was in a Superman comic, and since I was a wee nerd before becoming a full grown one, I checked it in the encyclopedia and was surprised antiparticles did exist and did destruct each other in a burst of energy.
For a long time I was under the impression that antimatter was a byproduct of nuclear reactions. I was only in my college days that I understood there should have been 50-50 matter/antimatter at the Big Bang, too.
Somewhere, symmetry breaks down, and the hypothesis that gravity might be the clue (since we don't know of antigravitons (though we actually probably don't know that there gravitons either )) makes at least intuitive sense. Of course, in real life (sic), super-asymmetry is built upon string theory, so there's that, too.
In any case, I am really curious about the explanation. I hope they get something soon enough
ThTh5 I don't understand. This must be an old article.
I am quite sure Sheldon Cooper and Amy Farrah Fowler-Cooper were awarded the 2019 Physics Nobel Prize for their discovery of Super-Asymmetry, which, among other things, explains the discrepancy in symmetry between matter and antimatter.
I'm trying to understand what is the message the author is trying to convey with this series of posts on Mike Pence, and I confess I am drawing a blank.
I could imagine these same stories with the protagonist being, for instance, Will Ferrell (an everyman that we've seen in a myriad of different and weird situations), or Will Smith (a borderline superhero). And I would enjoy those stories, because Will F., or Will S., have warm personas who exude good will.
But Mike Pence is not like that. Mike Pence is not a very nice person, or he has decided to project the image of a not very nice person, which, for this discussion, is the same. There's not enough suspension of disbelief that would allow me to imagine Mike Pence acting this way, Doctor Who, like, at the same time incredibly superior to all. a bit goofy, and warm and caring towards the little people.
So I have to assume that these posts are satire of some sort, that either try to tell us something about today's society or politics, o try to tell us something about Mike Pence himself. And I don't get it at all.
Though I confess I can very easily imagine Mike Pence shooting a Bald Eagle, since I doubt he particularly cares about endangered species, and likely subscribes to the belief that God gave man unrestricted dominion over all other creatures.
I do a lot of “hot dogs” (scare quote intended) at home. I grew up with hot dog carts, including one that would stand near my high school gate, where we would buy them on our way home, but I’ve never been able to get anywhere closer to the cart taste and texture at home. Not just the firmness of the sausage (I think mine boil too much too quickly, as opposed to being hours in hot water), but, more important, the moistness of the buns.
So my version of “hot dog” uses freshly baked French baguette bread, and thick (one inch or so) European style sausages. I vary the sausages, from mild to spicy, German, British, Italian, or Spanish style, cooked on the oven. I’ve tried andouille or similar Louisiana style sausages, but they are too soft and tend to crumble. Toppings are chopped onions and the traditional three sauces: ketchup, mayo (or alioli), and yes, Grey Poupon. Beer, hoppy, is the proper drink for it, but I wouldn’t kick anyone out if they ask for a dry white wine instead.
It doesn’t sound very American Sandwich, but it’s quite good for a grownup summer evening meal.
Susan Collins has been, for quite some time now, one of the key members of the axis of serious concern. Something would happen that would give her "serious concern" and after serious reflection she would conclude that eh correct course of action was to do nothing about it. Other members have included, on and off, Ben Sasse, Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowski, Mitch Romney, and others, but Susan Collins, probably because of her previous independent streak, has become the epitome of a group of pathetic hand wringers.
It is significant that all of Collins' great examples occurred before Dec 31, 2017. After her, yes, decisive, vote against the ACA repeal, there has been no further shows of independence from her beyond mouthing platitudes about her concern with things.
If i were a betting man, I would guess she was told, by Mitch McConnell, in no uncertain terms, that unless she behaved as a loyal member of the team from there on, come November 2020 she would not be the Maine Republican candidate to the Senate. Only Romney, independently wealthy, and high enough in the Mormon church hierarchy, has a position that is safe enough from being de-platformed by the MAGA right. Susan Collins knows that Trump would not allow her to be the candidate unless she showed her loyalty to him, in all ways that matter,.
It is actually surprising that she is allowed to still say that she is concerned. I guess it's Mitch's concession to electoral realities. He knows it's unlikely she wins, having thrown her voting record away. ,But he knows she will not win if she's forced to become another Dear Leader sycophant. At some point though, she might be forced to not only eat the sacrificed meat, but also to drop the pinch of incense. Dear Leader does not suffer serious concerns gladly
As someone who didn’t go to college in the USA, or the Anglosphere, can I say that there’s nothing that requires you to go out of town to go to college, and even. to meet @Dark Matter’s five point list.
I made invaluable friendships in college, several of which continue after 40 years (I spent Christmas with my college’s best friend and his family, for instance). Friendships that also helped me professionally as my career was taking off. And yes, there was sex going on, we were adults.
And I lived 15 miles away from home. I went back to my parents every evening. We all did.
The concept of going away for college at the other end of the country is very weird for me, for Southern Europeans and Latin Americans generally. The few people at my university that came from out of town had a very miserable existence away from their families. Several gave up and transferred out to a less elite institution, but located in their town.
In the second week of March I developed a light fever. It lasted about ten days. I had no other symptoms. Just a light fever (in the 99s compared to my normal low 97s). That was after about a week of self quarantine
I applied for a test then. It was denied because I hadn't been to China, wasn't over 65, had no co morbidities, and my fever was below 104 (that was the bar a fever on its own had to clear in those days).
The fever cleared out. Whether I had or hadn't a light case of COVID is up for grabs, but, as @DensityDuck points out, if I had it, at would have been classified as asymptomatic.
And if I had it, either I caught it from having had lunch, a week earlier, with a friend who did catch COVID, or, since he fell sick later than when my fever developed, he might have caught it from me. But, in any case, neither had any symptoms that day
And while I think that that’s great, I can’t help but notice that I remain dependent upon an army of Essential Workers who allow me to work remotely.
The Amazon guy, the Instacart guy, and the guys who make the stuff that the Amazon guy and the Instacart guy bring to me are all guys who need to show up to work.
If I were one of the security guards, or a straggler in receiving who had to be there every day, I would be very happy that the place is almost empty, and there's significantly less people around me potentially shedding viruses.
I never took probability and statistics in college, but I'm sure plenty here know the answer:
If the virus is distributed uniformly so that [take a guess] 10% of the people are infected at any time, and I see/interact with/cross paths in an elevator with only 20% of the people I used to before, how much my chances of being infected have been reduced?
So how many people in your company can work remotely on a mostly permanent basis (an approximation is good enough). @Jaybird? And how many, lie you, can work it out with going in only once or twice a week?
If half the people work remotely, and another 25% go only once a week, the personnel at the site on any day has gone from 100% to 30%.
That's a big reduction in the chances of people in your company catching COVID-19 in the office and transferring to your family and the rest of the people you interact with. If every large company did that, even without a vaccine, we would be significantly better than "going back to normal like if it was the flu"
My company, for instance, is seriously evaluating going remote permanently (we are about ten people in the Houston office), and just renting some space in Regus to have a physical address for deliveries, and access to conference rooms for the rare in-person meeting
Since I am a supporter of either we do federalism all the way down to each community, or we drop the concept altogether, my sympathies are with the tribes.
Big state government out of touch elites in far away Pierre should not be telling local communities how they should or should not respond to a pandemic. Subsidiarity and all that.
Every scientist (no scare quotes) does know how the scientific method works. As does every good engineer, and every good MD, and even every nutritionist, I've ever met professionally or socially .
I cannot vouch for how people (or quacks) present themselves, particularly if they are selling something to "laymen"(scare quotes intended)
I would push very hard about calling people who who use shortcuts and shorthand and rely on dubious data to just basically quickly get people to do what they say, painting themselves as all-knowing experts since it is a heck of a lot easier and quicker than actually explaining “here is what we think, but we don’t KNOW it as a fact”. "science minded"
By definition, every science minded person understands how science and the scientific method work. And they know that "certainty", like "Truth", are Platonic ideals that cannot be reached, just approximated to. Painting yourself as an all-knowing expert and using dubious data, well, that's more what stable geniuses do
We went trough this technical debate in real time here in OT - This is exactly what happened. Flint used to buy water from Detroit, the EM decided that was too expensive, and they could use water from the river. The change caused the pipes to leach (which I think it had been predicted by the engineers, but I might be wrong). Once the protective oxide layer was removed from the pipes, even returning to Detroit water would not stop the leaching.
Savings was the only driver on the decision, which was made by the EM
L1: I don't know if there's a perfect (or a more better :-) )solution to the issue, but I think Ginsburg's way is fairly reasonable.
Mrs. Capato decided, about 11 months after Mr. Capato's death, to conceive for the second time. At what point does it become equivalent to her having conceived with a surrogate donor?
Mr. Capato himself did not explicitly consent to this conception (he had envisioned a fertilization with him alive, but infertile) -absent a will or other document we do not know if he had wanted for her widow to conceive his child. To conceive almost a year later makes the conception, in my mind too removed from Mr. Capato to alter the provisions of his state
A) We don't have a TPP. The USA pulled out of it. If we had a TPP we could perhaps be getting gloves and masks from Malaysia, for instance.
B) China was never a part of the TPP. The idea was to create a block that would counterbalance China and create/strengthen alternative supply chains, so we would have more trade options.
C) The math proved, in the XVIII century, that Free Trade makes both societies that engage in Free Trade richer -in the aggregate. That doesn't mean that every single person of both societies will come out ahead, just that the net sum of winners and losers will will be net winners in both societies.How the winners and losers are distributed internally in each society is a different issue
I thought conservatives and libertarians were perfectly fine with letting inefficient players fail, creative destruction, the invisible hand, etc. But there's nothing to stop them from joining liberals in fighting for a welfare safety net. And I'd be happy to consider joining them in considering safety limits on trade.
Instead, they seem to be asking to make us all -in the aggregate- poorer.
until the housing market goes down and now the money is gone
This is so completely wrong in so many ways
The money is not gone. It is now in the pocket of the next buyer of the house, who will purchase it for less money, and keep the difference in value.
Plus, the original owner's loss in value is only loss of money if and when he sells the house. A drop in valuation is not a loss of actual money. He was living in the house when it was worth 1,000,000, and he is still living in it now when it is worth 500,000. He still has the same house. He has a potential future loss, but as long as he stays put, he hasn't loss anything.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “From National Low Income Housing Coalition: Minimum wage workers cannot afford rent in any U.S. state”
Did you mean 65% of people in the USA own a home, or that 65% of people in the USA have a big mortgage and own a very small fraction of their houses?
I myself am in year 11 of a 15 year mortgage (anything beyond 15 years is just giving banks money for nothing, but that’s another issue), and still owe about 40% of the principal(*).
The typical house owning model in the USA is buying the largest, most mortgaged house you qualify for, and trade up, to a larger, most mortgaged house in five years or so. In this model, most homeowners own very little of their houses.
The median net worth of US families is about $100,000, most of which, as pointed out above, being the equity in their houses. For families with a head of household in the 35-45 age range, it’s 60,000 dollars. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/14/the-net-worth-of-the-average-american-family.html
Tl/dr. No, they don’t (we don’t) own their houses. Banks do
(*) Though because of house prices rising, I would have about 85% of the value of the house if I sold it today.
On “There Are No Bad People”
How should we treat this case:
https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article244189047.html
Do people that wave guns in BBQ places as their personal face mask wearing exception deserve the benefit of the doubt?
On “From NBC New York: Jeffrey Epstein Confidante Ghislaine Maxwell Arrested, Sources Say”
Im sure Ms Maxwell won’t kill herself while the cameras are off, but I’ve never seen anybody so susceptible to a violent and fatal case of COVID-19 as her.
She will be so sick so shortly they might as well start writing a medical paper now
On “SCOTUS Rules in Favor of LGBT Rights in Workplace Discrimination Case”
Roberts did something similar in Obergefell, but I agree that Kavanaugh’s comments are more gracious
On “Thursday Throughput: Caldera Edition”
Pre-symptomatic transmission is a very common phenomenon in other diseases. It makes sense that it happens here.
A case was reported in Germany (I think) of an "asymptomatic" woman that transmitted Covid-19, and was later proven to be a pre-symptomatic/mild symptomatic case.
I think the challenge is trying to identify and trace truly asymptomatic infected patients, since, almost by definition, we can only catch them later via antibodies tests, when trace and contact is almost impossible. In the German case mentioned above, the woman had recently returned from China, and that is how several cases were traced back to business meetings with her.
I also don't think we understand how asymptomatic infection works in Covid-19. Is it like the immune system is able to detect and kill the virus immediately after infection, because of some residual immunity from a previous flu of flu vaccine, before the virus multiplies enough to be transmittable, or is it more that the body does not react to the virus presence "at all" while letting the virus multiply, until, eventually, the immune system clears it out in a couple of weeks? In the first case, the carrier would likely not transmit the virus, in the latter, it would.
"
Joke aside, this is one of the most interesting problems in physics.
My first exposure to the existence of antimatter was in a Superman comic, and since I was a wee nerd before becoming a full grown one, I checked it in the encyclopedia and was surprised antiparticles did exist and did destruct each other in a burst of energy.
For a long time I was under the impression that antimatter was a byproduct of nuclear reactions. I was only in my college days that I understood there should have been 50-50 matter/antimatter at the Big Bang, too.
Somewhere, symmetry breaks down, and the hypothesis that gravity might be the clue (since we don't know of antigravitons (though we actually probably don't know that there gravitons either )) makes at least intuitive sense. Of course, in real life (sic), super-asymmetry is built upon string theory, so there's that, too.
In any case, I am really curious about the explanation. I hope they get something soon enough
"
ThTh5 I don't understand. This must be an old article.
I am quite sure Sheldon Cooper and Amy Farrah Fowler-Cooper were awarded the 2019 Physics Nobel Prize for their discovery of Super-Asymmetry, which, among other things, explains the discrepancy in symmetry between matter and antimatter.
On “The Time Mike Took Me To The Gathering Of The Juggalos”
I'm trying to understand what is the message the author is trying to convey with this series of posts on Mike Pence, and I confess I am drawing a blank.
I could imagine these same stories with the protagonist being, for instance, Will Ferrell (an everyman that we've seen in a myriad of different and weird situations), or Will Smith (a borderline superhero). And I would enjoy those stories, because Will F., or Will S., have warm personas who exude good will.
But Mike Pence is not like that. Mike Pence is not a very nice person, or he has decided to project the image of a not very nice person, which, for this discussion, is the same. There's not enough suspension of disbelief that would allow me to imagine Mike Pence acting this way, Doctor Who, like, at the same time incredibly superior to all. a bit goofy, and warm and caring towards the little people.
So I have to assume that these posts are satire of some sort, that either try to tell us something about today's society or politics, o try to tell us something about Mike Pence himself. And I don't get it at all.
Though I confess I can very easily imagine Mike Pence shooting a Bald Eagle, since I doubt he particularly cares about endangered species, and likely subscribes to the belief that God gave man unrestricted dominion over all other creatures.
On “American Sandwich Project: Hot Dogs, Coney Dogs, and Carlos SpicyWeener”
Let's make it clear it's just a matter of common courtesy and politeness
https://www.art.com/products/p15063264188-sa-i6844560/bruce-eric-kaplan-i-only-sniffed-his-ass-to-be-polite-new-yorker-cartoon.htm
"
Reason # 9,360 Houston rocks
We've had coneys since 1923. They are an institution, and going strong. Eat dust, Colorado!!
http://www.jamesconeyisland.com/
"
I do a lot of “hot dogs” (scare quote intended) at home. I grew up with hot dog carts, including one that would stand near my high school gate, where we would buy them on our way home, but I’ve never been able to get anywhere closer to the cart taste and texture at home. Not just the firmness of the sausage (I think mine boil too much too quickly, as opposed to being hours in hot water), but, more important, the moistness of the buns.
So my version of “hot dog” uses freshly baked French baguette bread, and thick (one inch or so) European style sausages. I vary the sausages, from mild to spicy, German, British, Italian, or Spanish style, cooked on the oven. I’ve tried andouille or similar Louisiana style sausages, but they are too soft and tend to crumble. Toppings are chopped onions and the traditional three sauces: ketchup, mayo (or alioli), and yes, Grey Poupon. Beer, hoppy, is the proper drink for it, but I wouldn’t kick anyone out if they ask for a dry white wine instead.
It doesn’t sound very American Sandwich, but it’s quite good for a grownup summer evening meal.
On “Remembering Susan Collins”
Susan Collins has been, for quite some time now, one of the key members of the axis of serious concern. Something would happen that would give her "serious concern" and after serious reflection she would conclude that eh correct course of action was to do nothing about it. Other members have included, on and off, Ben Sasse, Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowski, Mitch Romney, and others, but Susan Collins, probably because of her previous independent streak, has become the epitome of a group of pathetic hand wringers.
It is significant that all of Collins' great examples occurred before Dec 31, 2017. After her, yes, decisive, vote against the ACA repeal, there has been no further shows of independence from her beyond mouthing platitudes about her concern with things.
If i were a betting man, I would guess she was told, by Mitch McConnell, in no uncertain terms, that unless she behaved as a loyal member of the team from there on, come November 2020 she would not be the Maine Republican candidate to the Senate. Only Romney, independently wealthy, and high enough in the Mormon church hierarchy, has a position that is safe enough from being de-platformed by the MAGA right. Susan Collins knows that Trump would not allow her to be the candidate unless she showed her loyalty to him, in all ways that matter,.
It is actually surprising that she is allowed to still say that she is concerned. I guess it's Mitch's concession to electoral realities. He knows it's unlikely she wins, having thrown her voting record away. ,But he knows she will not win if she's forced to become another Dear Leader sycophant. At some point though, she might be forced to not only eat the sacrificed meat, but also to drop the pinch of incense. Dear Leader does not suffer serious concerns gladly
On “College and Covid”
As someone who didn’t go to college in the USA, or the Anglosphere, can I say that there’s nothing that requires you to go out of town to go to college, and even. to meet @Dark Matter’s five point list.
I made invaluable friendships in college, several of which continue after 40 years (I spent Christmas with my college’s best friend and his family, for instance). Friendships that also helped me professionally as my career was taking off. And yes, there was sex going on, we were adults.
And I lived 15 miles away from home. I went back to my parents every evening. We all did.
The concept of going away for college at the other end of the country is very weird for me, for Southern Europeans and Latin Americans generally. The few people at my university that came from out of town had a very miserable existence away from their families. Several gave up and transferred out to a less elite institution, but located in their town.
On “Some Potentially Very Good News”
In the second week of March I developed a light fever. It lasted about ten days. I had no other symptoms. Just a light fever (in the 99s compared to my normal low 97s). That was after about a week of self quarantine
I applied for a test then. It was denied because I hadn't been to China, wasn't over 65, had no co morbidities, and my fever was below 104 (that was the bar a fever on its own had to clear in those days).
The fever cleared out. Whether I had or hadn't a light case of COVID is up for grabs, but, as @DensityDuck points out, if I had it, at would have been classified as asymptomatic.
And if I had it, either I caught it from having had lunch, a week earlier, with a friend who did catch COVID, or, since he fell sick later than when my fever developed, he might have caught it from me. But, in any case, neither had any symptoms that day
On “Coronavirus: Now Cometh The Lawsuits”
And while I think that that’s great, I can’t help but notice that I remain dependent upon an army of Essential Workers who allow me to work remotely.
The Amazon guy, the Instacart guy, and the guys who make the stuff that the Amazon guy and the Instacart guy bring to me are all guys who need to show up to work.
If I were one of the security guards, or a straggler in receiving who had to be there every day, I would be very happy that the place is almost empty, and there's significantly less people around me potentially shedding viruses.
I never took probability and statistics in college, but I'm sure plenty here know the answer:
If the virus is distributed uniformly so that [take a guess] 10% of the people are infected at any time, and I see/interact with/cross paths in an elevator with only 20% of the people I used to before, how much my chances of being infected have been reduced?
"
So how many people in your company can work remotely on a mostly permanent basis (an approximation is good enough). @Jaybird? And how many, lie you, can work it out with going in only once or twice a week?
If half the people work remotely, and another 25% go only once a week, the personnel at the site on any day has gone from 100% to 30%.
That's a big reduction in the chances of people in your company catching COVID-19 in the office and transferring to your family and the rest of the people you interact with. If every large company did that, even without a vaccine, we would be significantly better than "going back to normal like if it was the flu"
My company, for instance, is seriously evaluating going remote permanently (we are about ten people in the Houston office), and just renting some space in Regus to have a physical address for deliveries, and access to conference rooms for the rare in-person meeting
On “South Dakota vs the Sioux Over Coronavirus “Checkpoints””
You mean you do not believe in federalism and subsidiarity, and letting communities manage their own affairs, and laboratories of democracy.
It’s good that we have cleared that out.
"
Since I am a supporter of either we do federalism all the way down to each community, or we drop the concept altogether, my sympathies are with the tribes.
Big state government out of touch elites in far away Pierre should not be telling local communities how they should or should not respond to a pandemic. Subsidiarity and all that.
On “Torture Numbers and They’ll Confess to Anything”
Every scientist (no scare quotes) does know how the scientific method works. As does every good engineer, and every good MD, and even every nutritionist, I've ever met professionally or socially .
I cannot vouch for how people (or quacks) present themselves, particularly if they are selling something to "laymen"(scare quotes intended)
"
I would push very hard about calling people who who use shortcuts and shorthand and rely on dubious data to just basically quickly get people to do what they say, painting themselves as all-knowing experts since it is a heck of a lot easier and quicker than actually explaining “here is what we think, but we don’t KNOW it as a fact”. "science minded"
By definition, every science minded person understands how science and the scientific method work. And they know that "certainty", like "Truth", are Platonic ideals that cannot be reached, just approximated to. Painting yourself as an all-knowing expert and using dubious data, well, that's more what stable geniuses do
On “100 Favorite Films To Recommend Part 5: The 1960s”
I was in shock when I saw 2001 was not in the list
On “Once Again, Media Figures Can’t Handle Big Numbers”
We went trough this technical debate in real time here in OT - This is exactly what happened. Flint used to buy water from Detroit, the EM decided that was too expensive, and they could use water from the river. The change caused the pipes to leach (which I think it had been predicted by the engineers, but I might be wrong). Once the protective oxide layer was removed from the pipes, even returning to Detroit water would not stop the leaching.
Savings was the only driver on the decision, which was made by the EM
On “Wednesday Writs: In Utero Edition”
L1: I don't know if there's a perfect (or a more better :-) )solution to the issue, but I think Ginsburg's way is fairly reasonable.
Mrs. Capato decided, about 11 months after Mr. Capato's death, to conceive for the second time. At what point does it become equivalent to her having conceived with a surrogate donor?
Mr. Capato himself did not explicitly consent to this conception (he had envisioned a fertilization with him alive, but infertile) -absent a will or other document we do not know if he had wanted for her widow to conceive his child. To conceive almost a year later makes the conception, in my mind too removed from Mr. Capato to alter the provisions of his state
On “On Libertarianism & China: Two Perspectives”
A) We don't have a TPP. The USA pulled out of it. If we had a TPP we could perhaps be getting gloves and masks from Malaysia, for instance.
B) China was never a part of the TPP. The idea was to create a block that would counterbalance China and create/strengthen alternative supply chains, so we would have more trade options.
C) The math proved, in the XVIII century, that Free Trade makes both societies that engage in Free Trade richer -in the aggregate. That doesn't mean that every single person of both societies will come out ahead, just that the net sum of winners and losers will will be net winners in both societies.How the winners and losers are distributed internally in each society is a different issue
I thought conservatives and libertarians were perfectly fine with letting inefficient players fail, creative destruction, the invisible hand, etc. But there's nothing to stop them from joining liberals in fighting for a welfare safety net. And I'd be happy to consider joining them in considering safety limits on trade.
Instead, they seem to be asking to make us all -in the aggregate- poorer.
"
until the housing market goes down and now the money is gone
This is so completely wrong in so many ways
The money is not gone. It is now in the pocket of the next buyer of the house, who will purchase it for less money, and keep the difference in value.
Plus, the original owner's loss in value is only loss of money if and when he sells the house. A drop in valuation is not a loss of actual money. He was living in the house when it was worth 1,000,000, and he is still living in it now when it is worth 500,000. He still has the same house. He has a potential future loss, but as long as he stays put, he hasn't loss anything.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.