refurb

25 ms·

601.
by refurb 1y ago
I mean you could definitely argue that from the other side as well. “We should note that in 2025 we need an app to help people breaking the law avoid law enforcement”
602.
by refurb 1y ago
That doesn’t make a lot of sense when you apply it. If a legal immigrant in the US starts recruiting for ISIS (entirely legal behavior), don’t you want the ability to remove them? Generally countries don’t want immigrants who support peopl
603.
by refurb 1y ago
> As an non-American, this situation seems really crazy and is quite hard to understand for me. Why would anyone want to prevent deportation of someone, who is in the country illegaly? As someone not born in America, I find the politics
604.
by refurb 1y ago
> If you don't already know that keeping the name & badge number visible is the most important part of proper policing But clearly there are exceptions. You can even read about them on European police websites. https:/&#x
605.
by refurb 1y ago
You're not really arguing in good faith when your response is "Fuck. No." > The EU is stricter with immigration than the US. But it does not use secret police and concentration camps. You don't think the police in Eur
606.
by refurb 1y ago
This is a very disingenuous question for a number of reasons. - Whether unlawful presence is a civil or criminal law, countries should control who enters the country. - Masked police seem like a reasonable response to doxxing of police offi
607.
by refurb 1y ago
Europe doesn't make a lot of the arms it would need to go it alone.
608.
by refurb 1y ago
Productivity measures are calculated pre-tax.
609.
by refurb 1y ago
“We’re not going to hold our own corporations to the minimum. What are you going to do about it?”
610.
by refurb 1y ago
It’s an interesting system looking from the outside in. A party with a majority in power has little to stop any legislation the party decides to pass. The senate is mostly a rubber stamp. The courts are independent but won’t nullify legisl
611.
by refurb 1y ago
True, US politics has no sense of fair play (but I haven’t seen much better in other countries I’ve lived). I would fully expect Rs to complain about it if it used against them. And it may be overturned, but judicial decisions are based on
612.
by refurb 1y ago
> any of 700 district judges could unilaterally block the president from exceeding his authority Not at all. Whether or not the president is exceeding their authority, a judge could block it nationally. It's not like lower court r
613.
by refurb 1y ago
Why would a D president reverse it? It gives a D president more power, not less.
614.
by refurb 1y ago
True. The US system has power more fragmented than most. In Europe, the Senate often doesn't wield any power (it rubber stamps anything the legislature approves). The executive is a part of the legislative. In parliamentary system, i
615.
by refurb 1y ago
That study is...not that rigorous, but I give them points for being clear about it. "The downward step change was not apparent when the intervention point was moved back to the beginning of 1998." "Despite the apparent ben
616.
by refurb 1y ago
Ibuprofen and other NSAID result in a ton of hospitalizations each year due to gastric bleeding.
617.
by refurb 1y ago
The LD50 is 10x the standard dose (5 g vs 0.5 g) And the people that have serious toxicity at 5 g are likely already sensitive due to alcohol intake, malnutrition, etc. For a healthy, well fed human who isn’t consuming alcohol the dose that
618.
by refurb 1y ago
Based on what? The US went with the educational route - any product containing acetaminophen has “CONTAIN ACETAMINOPHEN - DO NOT COMBINE WITH OTHER PRODUCTS CONTAINING ACETAMINOPHEN” Overdoses went down despite the fact I can buy $1,000 tab
619.
by refurb 1y ago
Do people remember during Covid how it was a “remote work revolution” and how it was going to cause sweeping changes to how people worked and how the economy functioned? Pepperidge Farms remembers… Not to toot my own horn or even make a pre
620.
by refurb 1y ago
It helps when you read your sources. It literally says “GRAS must meet the same standards as new additives”. The only reason GRAS exists is that FDA regulations have changed over time. Unless you wanted all food additives immediately banned
621.
by refurb 1y ago
As a scientist there are a few things to drive my opinion it’s overblown: - you can’t prove a negative (“this dye isn’t harmful”), all you can do is run a panel of tests and interpret the data - food additives are tested in animal models at
622.
by refurb 1y ago
> Right now the system is sort of set up as default-allow. This is not true. Food additives need to go through an approval process. It’s right on the FDA website. https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-and-gras-in
623.
by refurb 1y ago
That fails the scientific method in several places. Science doesn’t ban things with questionable data from poorly designed studies when other studies say the opposite. Science doesn’t ban things because of some other problem where a causal
624.
by refurb 1y ago
Rolled back a banning of artificial dyes? Gonna need a source for that.
625.
by refurb 1y ago
If you have a source of water, providing purified drinking water is stupid cheap. It’s the initial infrastructure that requires investment but after that, purification costs fractions of a penny per liter.
626.
by refurb 1y ago
As a scientist I don’t think this change is really science based. Banning artificial colors because “chemicals are bad” isn’t logical. Banning artificial dyes because one random paper maybe found a cancer link isn’t rational (generally if
627.
by refurb 1y ago
The federal government has exclusive and full power over immigration laws. The states don’t have any sovereignty to make their own decisions about immigration.
628.
by refurb 1y ago
I get the point but that’s not true at all. There are plenty of guns in LA, and any ICE agent or cop would be dumb to assume those they are arresting are unarmed because “it’s against the law”. The red cities don’t have sanctuary city rules
629.
by refurb 1y ago
Let’s be honest - like most international law, it’s just a coat of paint over the stronger demand the weaker do what they say. If it wasn’t the US as the world’s leading power, but rather China, the list of countries forced to give up nucle
630.
by refurb 1y ago
Or, Obama knows it’s all politics and mudslinging, where the truth is irrelevant? And in reality he’s happy to have Trump as a friend and isn’t really worried about a dictatorship?

More ›