throwaway_USD

15 ms·

91.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
I never once said the Executive.
92.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
Well that is how the law reads, but its not how it is applied. Put it this way the federal government uses the commerce clause to regulate everything from farmers growing marijuana; farmer feeding their live stock excess crops they grew; re
93.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
Whether it is for the opening or closing of the States the federal government would have the constitutional powers to make those orders. States have the primary authority but essentially at anytime the Federal government could invoke the C
94.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
> The government of the United States is set up so states have supremacy over the Federal Government in many/most areas of domestic policy. I don't think you are familiar with the commerce clause [1]. It gives the federal gover
95.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
>The federal government never put it there, Maybe you could debate when the federal government put it there, but they did. I think we would both agree that at all phases of a quarantine the Federal Government has supremacy over the Stat
96.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
>This is the cost of a profound lack of leadership. From the second the federal government put the "opening up" in the hands of each State it seemed like a massive effort from the top down to distance themselves from any bad ou
97.
Ask HN: Did you get rejected for a PPP loan for foreign ownership?
1 points by throwaway_USD 6y ago|0 comments
98.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
Going further it would be interesting to see a galactic model with potential distributions of the previously unknown and hiding blackholes that would explain galaxy rotation we observe. I would assume there must be an unusual distribution
99.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
>In this case it sounds easy enough since they consulted with the artist beforehand, but what if they ripped off his style without ever talking to him, how do you prove it's a copyright infringement? As they say when the facts are n
100.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
It is actually an extremely complex analysis that is dependent on the facts and the jurisdiction (applicable law). It simply isn't applicable to my communications with a 3rd party recruiter from LinkedIn which was not regarding legal
101.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
In 2015 I had an unusual solicitation from a recruiter on LinkedIn - as a lawyer this in my experience is a rarity unlike tech where I understand it to be common place - with interest in offering me a General Counsel position with Romero Br
102.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
You are copying and pasting the same responses throughout this entire thread challenging everyone... You are just accepting that what Chinese Authorities told the WHO was true, yet you can't cite any actual written report or data suppo
103.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
>"No clear evidence" uncovered in a "preliminary investigation" was a completely true statement. Something tells me you haven't seen this alleged "preliminary investigation" report, but assuming you had
104.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
It depends...like I said in my comment you replied to: >maybe acting on the best info at the time or acting as puppet for China The WHO is supposed to be an independent international organization, so again the question is what kind of in
105.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
>This is one of those completely false things that people only believe is true by repetition. Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. You say it is "completely false" that people only believe is
106.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
Pick any politician and you will likely find some egregiously false statements about Covid-19...but I have to say the WHO, maybe acting on the best info at the time or acting as puppet for China, had put out some seriously dangerous false s
107.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
Funny, that was their strategy pre-IPO
108.
by throwaway_USD 6y ago
I had some puts on UCO. Last night there was a 25:1 reverse split...I just sold for >500% return (very small position).
109.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>Usually by the time you see commodities activity hitting the front page of HN the bets are in... My bet was already in...however, I do think once we start seeing the news like this proliferate we will see an odd swing by Wednesday or Fr
110.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>Irony factor: it'll come from the same congress members who are now pushing the "allow people to sue China" agenda. I think it will work something like this, the cruise ships are insured, the insurers will settle these ca
111.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>Well first off, dividends are a normal method for business owners to make an income... they take all the risk... Except if they did actually take all the risk, they would presumably be going bust right now...but they aren't going b
112.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
Usually by the time you see commodities activity hitting the front page of HN the bets are in and the market is about to take a wild swing in the other direction. It is very easy to side with the news on oil right now that there is a histor
113.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>Call me skeptic but it's likely that banks prioritized applications of companies that have significant debt with the bank. They certainly did, on April 3 the day the program started of the 4 big banks only Bank of America began acc
114.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
You are down voted, but it is true. The same thing happened with the 2008 housing and financial crisis, millions lost jobs, lost their houses, almost any major city can tell you about the explosion of homelessness during that time and has n
115.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>We already have lots of data that says this is not true... Longer term follow-up found ~25% of infections were asymptomatic. Based on other available data the severity of the Covid symptoms are dependent on both the length of exposure a
116.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>The First Amendment applies to restrictions to speech from the government, but provides no rights or privileges when it comes to repercussions from private entities. This is generally true but there are exceptions, which funny enough yo
117.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
You don't seem to understand 1st Amendment Law and protections; contract law; nor employment law. >This is an employment arrangement which can unilaterally be ended at any time by either party, and Amazon has chosen to do so. Yes, a
118.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>There are no constitutionally protected rights to disparage, or even just talk negatively about, anyone you want. Yes, you certainly do have that right so long as what you say is true. But lets assume your misunderstanding of the law we
119.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
>but in US most of the employment is at will. In practical terms, they can fire you for any or no reason at all. Yes, employment at-will allows both the employer and employee to terminate employment at anytime without cause. However, it
120.
by throwaway_USD 7y ago
Federal Law Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countr

More ›