The original poster provides information from the CNN article that shows deaths. It does not report that (1) the patient population is old, thus prone to death, and (2) that two follow-on studies found no difference in death rate between the drug and placebo. FDA is monitoring the reports of deaths, but unless someone does the science to find out whether the deaths of these old people are unusual you risk denying the patient population that benefits from the drug the relief from their disease.
It is good that the medical community is being made aware of the adverse event reports. Doctors and patients (or their guardians) should know this information in making a personal decision.This is not a drug category with good options as shown by the breakthrough drug designation.
CNN reporting a half truth / incomplete story for sensationalist purposes? Unbelievable. If they keep that up someday they will be known as fake news. Did they link Trump to it yet?
For certain degrees it could be true that you're more likely to cash out on a lucky bet than the degree itself. [Aggrieved group] Studies type degrees probably aren't too marketable.
I agree that both sides will lose something, but you completely ignored my comment about forced technology transfers, ownership limits, government sponsored industrial espionage, required bribes and such. China is a bad actor and that shouldn't be tolerated. Something had to be done and ignoring it, as we've done since the 90s, isn't working.
Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this.
Productivity and wages have become decoupled.
Living standards are not entirely built on wages. If you're spending 18 hours/day farming enough food to keep yourself alive, high wages are not going to increase your standard of living. So you need a productivity boost to get that 18 hours down and have high enough wages to use your newfound free time.
First off most people in the 1970's weren't on farms. Second, free trade is a huge part of why although the pie has grown by leaps and bounds actual wages have not grown nearly so much and for many not at all. Want a better US? Greatly limit free trade and greatly limit immigration. We've tried the free trade route for decades and only seen living conditions deteriorate. Time for a new approach.
Then they will just buy $60 billion worth of airplanes from Airbus. We just pissed off Europe not long ago. And they will import chicken feet and other farm products from somewhere else.
At the end of the day we can impose even more - they sell us more than we sell them. How about we also make them only be able to own 50% of a US company and a bunch of other restrictions that they put on us. Fair is fair after all. I'm fine with the US focusing on ourselves for a change. It's not like the world will ever thank us for helping them.
This is not good for anyone, as the slew of economists and economic reporters have been putting out there for the last few weeks.
Let me guess, the same economists who preach this also preach that productivity must go up for living standards to go up. Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this. These are also the same economists that tell us that free trade is the best while also looking at a declining standard of living even as we've signed ever more free trade deals. The same economists that presided over the economic meltdown and failure of a recovery for the middle class. Economists are either utterly useless or deliberately undermining the 99%.
I'll believe that they are interested in promoting truth when they start flagging people who conflate all immigrants, both legal and illegal, with illegal immigrants. Those liars really need a proper flogging.
And yet Obama said his administration was scandal free....and the media reported it that way verbatim without commentary.
So apparently he was lying, and the media was covering it up.
Obama was the most protected president *ever* by the media. Even more than JFK which I would have thought hard to imagine. His many flaws are slowly starting to leak out, like his association with Farrakhan, his lifting sanctions on Myanmar as they kill their own civilians, Assad getting away with genocide, slavery increasing on his watch, etc. He competes with Bush II for worst foreign policy in recent memory.
How will it choose if it has to decide between killing 4 people or 1?
Roughly 3000 people in the US are killed each month from cars, or 36000 a year. Many times that are injured. Less than 10% of these accidents are due to mechanical failure, so in a perfect world we could save 32,400. While I doubt that we'll achieve a perfect world, anything lower than 32,400 is an improvement. Thus delaying an improvement over the status quo due to hypothetical and unlikely events may kill people by delaying progress. Stop killing people:-)
Um... not only are immigrants a relatively small part of the population, but they are overwhelmingly working age, which means they contribute in taxes more than they take away in services. They make UBI more attainable, not less.
First off you use the phrase immigrants, which ignores the vast distinction between legal and illegal immigration. This is very disingenuous. It is well known that legal immigrants are more likely to be skilled labor while illegal immigrants are almost always unskilled labor. Skilled labor can be a win for the US while unskilled labor is always a loss. The loss on illegal immigration is to the tune of $116 billion annually. Every year. The crime rate is higher than average for illegal immigrants, especially for drunk driving deaths. For those who think that all illegal immigrants just want a better life, tell that to these US citizens who were killed by illegals:
http://www.ojjpac.org/memorial...
You can have mass immigration or you can have nice things. Notice that the people who are pushing mass immigration, such as Koch bros, already have nice things and benefit more from cheaper labor than better public schools and such. UBI is another example of this. If the US had less immigration, both legal and illegal, as well as no anchor babies then UBI would be much more attainable. Also wages would be better, traffic would be less, and housing would be more affordable. UBI is interesting but unless immigration is *greatly* reduced don't expect it regardless of how much AI and robotics reduce jobs.
Thanks for the link, I take it back I am familiar with this one. Territories are a bit of an anachronism, similar to Indian reservations, where they might have made sense in a different age but are a mess now. I'd wager that most in the US would be in favor of having the territories either get "full independence" or join on as states. The problem is that some of these, like Puerto Rico, don't speak English and thus wouldn't assimilate well.
I largely agree with you. Unfortunately support for government becomes mixed when it dabbles in multiple realms and conflates the two. For example I love the idea of government supported basic research and allowing US companies to license that under preferential terms. This is a win for the US in general. However knowing that the priorities of many in government is not getting things done but having their preferred person getting things done I don't trust the government to be a good steward anymore. They want a new antibiotic sure but they also want a certain number of discoveries to happen from aggrieved group X/Y/Z. If push comes to shove which is more important, good discoveries or who discovers them? If I had confidence that they were only interested in good discoveries regardless of who discovers them then I'd wholeheartedly support basic research. However by consistently demonizing me, a (gasp) white male who works in technology, I have no confidence in their willingness to fund winning research based on merit.
You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. Somewhere banksters and the CEO were able to extract 23 million per radio station. I'm sure a shell company in a tax haven is doing quite well. Perhaps even Clinton was able to monetize this move since he kicked it off.
Citation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I'm guessing you're the kind of person that thinks the crusades were "building things and improving the world". Go christians!
I'm guessing that you're the kind of person who didn't know that the Crusades were a response to the Muslims pillaging and raping. You do know that Christianity is older than Islam and that what we think of Muslim lands were taken over, enslaved really, by the Muslims. In terms of building things and improving the world, the western world has given the most progress of any and certainly more than the Muslim world.
I think their official kill list includes males in general (unless gay)
This is incorrect. Male homosexuality is extreme misogyny and emblematic of toxic masculinity.
You may be correct, and certainly it carries health implications as well like higher rates of AIDs and suicide, but nevertheless they are a protected class from from everything I've seen.
Slashdot Mirror
The original poster provides information from the CNN article that shows deaths. It does not report that (1) the patient population is old, thus prone to death, and (2) that two follow-on studies found no difference in death rate between the drug and placebo. FDA is monitoring the reports of deaths, but unless someone does the science to find out whether the deaths of these old people are unusual you risk denying the patient population that benefits from the drug the relief from their disease.
It is good that the medical community is being made aware of the adverse event reports. Doctors and patients (or their guardians) should know this information in making a personal decision.This is not a drug category with good options as shown by the breakthrough drug designation.
CNN reporting a half truth / incomplete story for sensationalist purposes? Unbelievable. If they keep that up someday they will be known as fake news. Did they link Trump to it yet?
My ultra liberal brother voted for Trump as a joke in the primary, thinking he was fucking over the republican nomination.
Living in the best time line.
It's OK, the media did the same thing for the same reason. Glad it back fired on them both.
When a person makes a mistake they learn. When a mistake like this happens all autonomous cars learn. This needs to press forward.
For certain degrees it could be true that you're more likely to cash out on a lucky bet than the degree itself. [Aggrieved group] Studies type degrees probably aren't too marketable.
I agree that both sides will lose something, but you completely ignored my comment about forced technology transfers, ownership limits, government sponsored industrial espionage, required bribes and such. China is a bad actor and that shouldn't be tolerated. Something had to be done and ignoring it, as we've done since the 90s, isn't working.
Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this.
Productivity and wages have become decoupled.
Living standards are not entirely built on wages. If you're spending 18 hours/day farming enough food to keep yourself alive, high wages are not going to increase your standard of living. So you need a productivity boost to get that 18 hours down and have high enough wages to use your newfound free time.
First off most people in the 1970's weren't on farms. Second, free trade is a huge part of why although the pie has grown by leaps and bounds actual wages have not grown nearly so much and for many not at all. Want a better US? Greatly limit free trade and greatly limit immigration. We've tried the free trade route for decades and only seen living conditions deteriorate. Time for a new approach.
Globalists are always pro free trade, the easier to sell out their fellow countryman. Not hard really.
Then they will just buy $60 billion worth of airplanes from Airbus. We just pissed off Europe not long ago. And they will import chicken feet and other farm products from somewhere else.
At the end of the day we can impose even more - they sell us more than we sell them. How about we also make them only be able to own 50% of a US company and a bunch of other restrictions that they put on us. Fair is fair after all. I'm fine with the US focusing on ourselves for a change. It's not like the world will ever thank us for helping them.
This is not good for anyone, as the slew of economists and economic reporters have been putting out there for the last few weeks.
Let me guess, the same economists who preach this also preach that productivity must go up for living standards to go up. Which sounds reasonable until you realize that productivity and living standards have been decoupled since the 70s yet they continue to preach this. These are also the same economists that tell us that free trade is the best while also looking at a declining standard of living even as we've signed ever more free trade deals. The same economists that presided over the economic meltdown and failure of a recovery for the middle class. Economists are either utterly useless or deliberately undermining the 99%.
Trade barriers are a bonehead move. Always were, always will be.
-jcr
Said every globalist ever
Anything hailed by both law enforcement and big data means privacy just got the shaft
More importantly, they outsourced their military to barbarians and then stopped paying them.
Live by outsourcing, die by outsourcing. This applies to many companies today sadly.
I'll believe that they are interested in promoting truth when they start flagging people who conflate all immigrants, both legal and illegal, with illegal immigrants. Those liars really need a proper flogging.
And yet Obama said his administration was scandal free....and the media reported it that way verbatim without commentary.
So apparently he was lying, and the media was covering it up.
Obama was the most protected president *ever* by the media. Even more than JFK which I would have thought hard to imagine. His many flaws are slowly starting to leak out, like his association with Farrakhan, his lifting sanctions on Myanmar as they kill their own civilians, Assad getting away with genocide, slavery increasing on his watch, etc. He competes with Bush II for worst foreign policy in recent memory.
How will it choose if it has to decide between killing 4 people or 1?
Roughly 3000 people in the US are killed each month from cars, or 36000 a year. Many times that are injured. Less than 10% of these accidents are due to mechanical failure, so in a perfect world we could save 32,400. While I doubt that we'll achieve a perfect world, anything lower than 32,400 is an improvement. Thus delaying an improvement over the status quo due to hypothetical and unlikely events may kill people by delaying progress. Stop killing people :-)
Um... not only are immigrants a relatively small part of the population, but they are overwhelmingly working age, which means they contribute in taxes more than they take away in services. They make UBI more attainable, not less.
First off you use the phrase immigrants, which ignores the vast distinction between legal and illegal immigration. This is very disingenuous. It is well known that legal immigrants are more likely to be skilled labor while illegal immigrants are almost always unskilled labor. Skilled labor can be a win for the US while unskilled labor is always a loss. The loss on illegal immigration is to the tune of $116 billion annually. Every year. The crime rate is higher than average for illegal immigrants, especially for drunk driving deaths. For those who think that all illegal immigrants just want a better life, tell that to these US citizens who were killed by illegals: http://www.ojjpac.org/memorial...
You can have mass immigration or you can have nice things. Notice that the people who are pushing mass immigration, such as Koch bros, already have nice things and benefit more from cheaper labor than better public schools and such. UBI is another example of this. If the US had less immigration, both legal and illegal, as well as no anchor babies then UBI would be much more attainable. Also wages would be better, traffic would be less, and housing would be more affordable. UBI is interesting but unless immigration is *greatly* reduced don't expect it regardless of how much AI and robotics reduce jobs.
Thanks for the link, I take it back I am familiar with this one. Territories are a bit of an anachronism, similar to Indian reservations, where they might have made sense in a different age but are a mess now. I'd wager that most in the US would be in favor of having the territories either get "full independence" or join on as states. The problem is that some of these, like Puerto Rico, don't speak English and thus wouldn't assimilate well.
I largely agree with you. Unfortunately support for government becomes mixed when it dabbles in multiple realms and conflates the two. For example I love the idea of government supported basic research and allowing US companies to license that under preferential terms. This is a win for the US in general. However knowing that the priorities of many in government is not getting things done but having their preferred person getting things done I don't trust the government to be a good steward anymore. They want a new antibiotic sure but they also want a certain number of discoveries to happen from aggrieved group X/Y/Z. If push comes to shove which is more important, good discoveries or who discovers them? If I had confidence that they were only interested in good discoveries regardless of who discovers them then I'd wholeheartedly support basic research. However by consistently demonizing me, a (gasp) white male who works in technology, I have no confidence in their willingness to fund winning research based on merit.
The US has citizens, that did nothing wrong, barred from voting.
And, contrary to you, I can back all that with links.
I live in the US and I'm not familiar with this one. Can you provide the link you mentioned? Thanks
Toys r us had that debt as a result of a leveraged buyout from Bain and friends.
Banksters strike again.
You're looking at this from the wrong perspective. Somewhere banksters and the CEO were able to extract 23 million per radio station. I'm sure a shell company in a tax haven is doing quite well. Perhaps even Clinton was able to monetize this move since he kicked it off. Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If there's one thing both Republicans and Democrats can agree on it's that the government needs more access and citizen's concerns are not important. Citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I'm guessing you're the kind of person that thinks the crusades were "building things and improving the world". Go christians!
I'm guessing that you're the kind of person who didn't know that the Crusades were a response to the Muslims pillaging and raping. You do know that Christianity is older than Islam and that what we think of Muslim lands were taken over, enslaved really, by the Muslims. In terms of building things and improving the world, the western world has given the most progress of any and certainly more than the Muslim world.
This is incorrect. Male homosexuality is extreme misogyny and emblematic of toxic masculinity.
You may be correct, and certainly it carries health implications as well like higher rates of AIDs and suicide, but nevertheless they are a protected class from from everything I've seen.