That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
The weak U.S. dollar policy as advocated this week by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin would stop the economic boom in its tracks, noted banking analyst Dick Bove said.
Since Mnuchin made comments Wednesday indicating that the White House prefers a softer greenback, the currency has plunged. Efforts Mnuchin made Thursday to backtrack failed, with the dollar off another 0.5 percent or so against its global competitors in morning trade.
That comes along with a 14 percent or so decline since President Donald Trump took office in early 2017. Trump himself is on record as preferring the weakness as it gives exporters an edge on the global trading stage.
Though the stock market has enjoyed the declining dollar, Bove said the policy over the long term is misguided.
"Foreigners will not fund U.S. debt if the policy of the United States is to degrade the stability of the dollar," Bove, of the Vertical Group, said in a report. "The United States depends on the dollar being regarded as the world's reserve currency."
...
Continuing to degrade the currency would put the reserve status at risk, Bove said. Should that happen, foreign governments would demand higher yields to hold U.S. debt, which in turn would boost borrowing rates and throttle the administration's hopes for a continued economic recovery and at least 3 percent growth.
...
Mnuchin spent Thursday seeking to clarify his remarks the day before that "a weaker dollar is good for us as it relates to trade and opportunities." The comment was made at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, as reported by Bloomberg.
He also said, "Longer term, the strength of the dollar is a reflection of the strength of the U.S. economy and the fact that it is and will continue to be the primary currency in terms of the reserve currency," and it was that portion of his remarks he chose to focus on Thursday
During a CNBC-moderated panel in Davos, Mnuchin said that dollar weakness in the short term was "not a concern of mine," before adding, "In the longer term, we fundamentally believe in the strength of the dollar." He later added, during an interview with Fox Business News, that his comments were misrepresented by the media.
I'm not well-versed in this topic, but do any of the studies consider the benefit of less traffic congestion? Assuming there is actually a less traffic congestion.LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2018 5:12 pmI haven't seen data for the last two years but before that it was a financial disaster. The wife was working on an article and I was helping with the database for the FOIA date.ImLawBoy wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:46 pmI was surprised to learn that Oak Park even had one. They don't seem to have the population density to support it. Divvy bikes are all over Chicago (and even seem to get used quite a bit during the winter), but I don't know how profitable they are.Jeff V wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:07 pmThere was a story on the news this morning that the city of Oak Park (suburban Chicago) is jettisoning their bike sharing program.gilraen wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2018 10:47 amNo, it's not. It's true that several bike-sharing companies in China ended up a 'bubble" of sorts, some went bankrupt, others are still trying to carve out a better business model. But they'll figure it out, they always do. But people mostly love it, so they'll keep using it. As long as there's demand for the product, the industry has a promising future. There are other challenges in markets such as the U.S. (not the least of which being that too many assholes vandalize the bikes). But again, there will continue to be a demand for such service, since "last mile" commuting is the biggest problem with even the best transit systems.
It's not self sustaining and gets a ton of subsidies from taxpayers.
I'd actually be interested in doing the last 2 years.
The White House has outlined an immigration plan that would allow 1.8 million people to become US citizens in exchange for funding for a border wall.
The framework was described by a senior Trump aide in a conference call to Republicans ahead of legislative negotiations with Democrats.
The proposed bill, to be unveiled on Monday, requests $25bn (£17.6bn) in funds for a wall on the Mexican border.
Democratic leader Chuck Schumer this week vowed to oppose funding the wall.
Under the White House proposal, US residents would only be able to sponsor the visas of spouses and children, rather than extended family members.
And the diversity visa lottery, under which 50,000 people win Green Cards annually, would be scrapped entirely. Mr Trump has frequently criticised that programme.
The details emerged in a conference call on Thursday between White House policy chief Stephen Miller and Republican congressional aides and journalists, report US media.
Mr Miller is quoted as saying the 1.8 million figure includes some 700,000 people who illegally entered the US as children.
These people were protected from deportation under the the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca).
Mr Miller reportedly said the rest would be immigrants who did not apply for Daca but otherwise met its requirements.
Sounds fair, what is that about the price of health insurance for a year? You could easily find more people than that willing to pony up more than twice that much for citizenship.Zaxxon wrote: Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:29 pm Alternate summary of 'Give us $13,888.88 for each person you want to stay' didn't poll as well.
Except it's not just the money is it? The deal also includes an anti-immigrant racist's laundry list of ways to close or restrict US borders to future immigration.Rip wrote: Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:16 pmSounds fair, what is that about the price of health insurance for a year? You could easily find more people than that willing to pony up more than twice that much for citizenship.Zaxxon wrote: Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:29 pm Alternate summary of 'Give us $13,888.88 for each person you want to stay' didn't poll as well.
So now guarding against illegal immigration is racist? Got it. I guess we will have to stick to letting them stay for awhile and then tossing them out on their asses. Good thing we have you warning us against screwing people.raydude wrote: Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:44 pmExcept it's not just the money is it? The deal also includes an anti-immigrant racist's laundry list of ways to close or restrict US borders to future immigration.Rip wrote: Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:16 pmSounds fair, what is that about the price of health insurance for a year? You could easily find more people than that willing to pony up more than twice that much for citizenship.Zaxxon wrote: Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:29 pm Alternate summary of 'Give us $13,888.88 for each person you want to stay' didn't poll as well.
It figures that the mindset of the people offering it "You'll get to say 'I got mine, screw the future generations'" renders them incapable of wondering why someone would turn down being able to screw others out of a future?
Ivanka Trump has sought to bring an aura of female empowerment to her lifestyle brand and spoken out for women's rights from her post at the White House. But her legacy has been less than empowering for at least one woman in China.
In May, Deng's husband, Hua Haifeng, and two of his colleagues were accused of illegally using secret recording devices and thrown in jail while investigating factories that made shoes for Ivanka Trump's brand. The group they were working for, a New York non-profit called China Labor Watch, obtained evidence of forced overtime and pay as low as $1 an hour, as well as a video of a manager berating a worker for apparently arranging shoes in the wrong order.
Well it's not like she hasn't tried running for office before.Smoove_B wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:08 am Stormy Daniels will be on Jimmy Kimmel next week to discuss Trump's State of the Union address, the same night he delivers it (1/30). I hope she also takes the time to announce her candidacy for some local or state office, because that's where I think this is all heading.
And that price isn't much different from what someone breaking the law in most other countries would 'suffer':Moliere wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:54 pm Chinese mother pays price for labor activist husband's probe into Ivanka's lifetsyle brand
Ivanka Trump has sought to bring an aura of female empowerment to her lifestyle brand and spoken out for women's rights from her post at the White House. But her legacy has been less than empowering for at least one woman in China.
In May, Deng's husband, Hua Haifeng, and two of his colleagues were accused of illegally using secret recording devices and thrown in jail while investigating factories that made shoes for Ivanka Trump's brand. The group they were working for, a New York non-profit called China Labor Watch, obtained evidence of forced overtime and pay as low as $1 an hour, as well as a video of a manager berating a worker for apparently arranging shoes in the wrong order.
Where is the support of China Labor Watch for an individual that suffered arrest and loss of earning for following their orders?With two young children, Deng Guilian hadn't planned on going back to work. That changed after her husband was arrested while investigating labor abuses at Chinese suppliers for Ivanka Trump's brand.
Now the 36-year-old mom works the overnight shift at a karaoke parlor and stays in a dorm nearby. She gets just three days off a month to see her kids.
...
The investigators were released after 30 days, but the bail conditions - restrictions on travel, regular meetings with the police - have made it hard for Hua to find work.
How easy do you suppose it is for an American group to support/reward the family of "criminals" in China?Isgrimnur wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:36 pm
Where is the support of China Labor Watch for an individual that suffered arrest and loss of earning for following their orders?
White supremacists in the United States killed more than twice as many people in 2017 as they did the year before, and were responsible for far more murders than domestic Islamic extremists, helping make 2017 the fifth deadliest year on record for extremist violence in America, a new report states.
Because it's NBC?Zarathud wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:51 pm With Kimmel unreservedly bashing Trump and the Republicans, that really leaves only Fallon on the Tonight Show handling them with kid gloves.
Pretty damn telling.
Seth Meyers follows Fallon on NBC, and he's one of Trump's most vocal critics. SNL has also said a bad thing or two about him.
Yeah, it's more that Fallon's schtick is "playful goofball", and I'm not sure he knows much about politics anyway. The Trump era just doesn't mesh with him super well.ImLawBoy wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:48 pmSeth Meyers follows Fallon on NBC, and he's one of Trump's most vocal critics. SNL has also said a bad thing or two about him.
I watched him on that Jerry Seinfeld thing with cars and coffee, and came to the conclusion he's not really funny himself, but is good at making others funny, or at least laughing at their jokes.El Guapo wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:51 pmYeah, it's more that Fallon's schtick is "playful goofball", and I'm not sure he knows much about politics anyway. The Trump era just doesn't mesh with him super well.ImLawBoy wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:48 pmSeth Meyers follows Fallon on NBC, and he's one of Trump's most vocal critics. SNL has also said a bad thing or two about him.
Kimmel's not super political either in general, but he's clearly smarter and more politically plugged in than Fallon, and he's wound up getting drawn in because of his baby's health problems and how that intersected with the attempted ACA repeal.
Do you get the same feeling when you're watching your copy of his hit film, Taxi?ImLawBoy wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:05 pm And if I can take a side track on Jimmy Fallon for a moment, Almost Famous has been getting a lot of play again for some reason lately, and I like to tune in just for the shock of seeing Jimmy Fallon as the label's super manager. It's weird no matter how many times I've seen it, and I always get a kick out of that.
I always find percentages a bit misleading without the count data. There were 34 people killed by what that study labels as extremists.Defiant wrote: Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:45 pm Remember how after the election, there was anecdotal evidence of hate crimes rising? More evidence:
Murders By U.S. White Supremacists More Than Doubled In 2017, New Report Shows
White supremacists in the United States killed more than twice as many people in 2017 as they did the year before, and were responsible for far more murders than domestic Islamic extremists, helping make 2017 the fifth deadliest year on record for extremist violence in America, a new report states.
Holman wrote: Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:59 pm He probably could have escaped attention for money laundering and passed along his empire intact if he hadn't gone into politics.
Hopefully the price of his arrogance will be everything he has.
FCC Chair Throws Water on Crazy Plan for Feds to Seize Control of Our 5G WiFimalchior wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:06 am Trump administration considering nationalizing 5G networks.
It sounds like pure operational planning; it very well might not be a serious effort yet but this should be a strong hell no.
I oppose any proposal for the federal government to build and operate a nationwide 5G network. The main lesson to draw from the wireless sector's development over the past three decades—including American leadership in 4G—is that the market, not government, is best positioned to drive innovation and investment. What government can and should do is to push spectrum into the commercial marketplace and set rules that encourage the private sector to develop and deploy next-generation infrastructure. Any federal effort to construct a nationalized 5G network would be a costly and counterproductive distraction from the policies we need to help the United States win the 5G future.
I'm pretty sure that was the whole point. Painfully rehashed bad jokes are a better choice than Trump.Moliere wrote: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:23 pm That was painfully unfunny, rehashing the same jokes about W.