8 years of investigations, two special prosecutor, two impeachments 3-4 non federal investigations all for different crimes... its almost comical to list all of that out and still have people think this isnt purely political.
So your opinion seems to be that investigations can never be political? Keep in mind that Trump is being indicted for a misdemeanor that they are contorting into a felony to avoid statute of limitations issue. I think everyone has to make up their own mind when an investigation is political and imho this one is comically so. So much so that i really struggle to see how any one can in good faith claim otherwise
But also bank failures are disinflationary so is the bailout negating the rate hikes or just negating the new regime of tighter lending standards by banks? I dont think anyone has a solid answer to that question
I think the repeating pattern is the banks end up over leveraging based on value of things like MBS or this one is maybe interest rates because money has been free to them for so long (holding lots of worthless bonds I think). In the end, none of it is their money they are playing with so they have a high risk tolerance and a history of getting bailed out, bought out and at a minimum getting bonuses paid out. And then they lobby for deregulation or self-policing.
I think having a shot at solving problems involves less lobbying and more criminal prosecution and loss of operating licenses.
If China is engaged in a behavior that lead to a global pandemic, we have to know everything about what they were doing so that we can stop this from ever happening again. Who gives a crap about thawed relations after the extraordinary amount of damage this pandemic has done to the world
The genie is more or less out of the bottle on that one. If it is a lab leak there is no stopping it from happening again and China is not doing anything special. There are hundreds of these labs all over the world, they have containment breaches all the time [1], and given the way of international politics it is effectively impossible to shut them all down. Probably undesirable as well given that labs like those are the reason we had the medical knowledge to create a vaccine.
I strongly disagree that they are not doing anything special. They are literally going out into remote bat caves and harvesting coronaviruses and bringing them into large population centers to study.
What they were doing was downplaying the severity of the problem until it was sufficiently widespread that it was not just a China problem. I'm not saying that was the plan from the start, but it definitely morphed into that.
If USA is engaged in a behavior that lead to a global pandemic, we have to know everything about what they were doing so that we can stop this from ever happening again. Who gives a crap about thawed relations after the extraordinary amount of damage this pandemic has done to the world
The money for WIV risky reasearch mostly came from the USA.
I actually completely agree. We SHOULD know the true origin and causes; I just have zero faith anyone in the US will put pressure on China or accuse them publicly. That was more the gist of what I was getting at.
The pressure is there if someone on your team works nights and weekends, especially if they are senior to you. They may not even realize they are pressuring you! But it is impossible to avoid.
Something to remember, especially if you have anyone working under you - your work level will be seen as the minimum for your team members, not the exception.
I agree with the overarching sentiment, which is to lead by example (even if you're not explicitly in a leadership position).
At the same time I can accept some nuance here, e.g. working nights and weekends because you're taking some time back during the day in the week.
Similarly with remote working, if there's a wide enough timezone difference you might shift your routine to maximise overlap with the team.
I'm strongly in favour of maintaining harmony between work and life such that you're able to comfortably do both, but would not insist on a hard and fast rule.
If someone even further up the ladder says X does nights and weekends, so should the rest of the team, then the buck stops with that person, and they are contributing negatively to the culture.
It seems unreasonable to dictate the way your colleagues work because it doesn't match your own value system. If the culture of the company/team is fast paced or long hours, maybe it isn't the right fit for you.
Generally speaking though, companies should value output and results over hours. Easier said than done. Additionally, value should be placed on what one commits to do and delivers on. So if somebody is constantly having to pull late nights to complete work, they may be overcommitting. It's also possible a manager will consistently push people to overcommit: this is a problem because that can indicate poor boundaries, bad planning, poor resourcing, and so on.
> If the culture of the company/team is fast paced or long hours, maybe it isn't the right fit for you.
Sure. And if the culture of the company/team is working 40 hours a week max and calling people out when they work more than that, then maybe it isn't the right fit for you.
In Germany that is required by law (if your employer sees you working when ill, working too long, working too much - they have to force you to stop).
If not by law, then because almost noone is happy working 60-70h and it puts pressure on others who feel like they also need to work similar hours. Additionally the efficiency gets worse as the weekly hours increase.
If some % of people are doing it then everyone will eventually be pressured to do it, otherwise they'll be at the bottom of the performance list. (Unless they are very good)
Everyone is talking about this from the perspective of cushy tech jobs and forgetting that this applies to _all_ job postings. The vast majority of the population isn't bargaining from nearly the same position.
These benefits that we're experiencing by being able to just walk away from an onslaught of recruiters begging anyone with +5yoe don't apply to other job sectors or even entry-level positions in tech!
Can you bring it up early? Yeah. Should it be in the job listing? Absolutely. I've yet to see a convincing argument otherwise.
Im not jewish and visited Israel recently for several weeks. Despite thinking I had a pretty good knowledge base of the situation beforehand, actually being there, and talking to people with actual stake in the region it became obvious that the opinions of people who have never been to Israel and dont have any skin in the game (95% of this thread) are completely off base, un-nuanced and literally worthless.
Visiting the country for only a few weeks isn't going to give you much more insight on the place than random commenters, especially if by your own admission you were already prone to overestimating your understanding.
I dont like giving an opinion for the same reasons I was complaining about. I dont have stake in the region and there is so much nuance in the history im still missing. Things that I found striking though were that there are huge populations of arabs that live peacefully in Israel so this apartheid narrative is complete nonsense. The power dynamics are pretty set in stone, Israel will never have to give up an ounce of land that they dont want to. Anyone that talks about who has what right to what pieces of land are completely out of touch with that. It is irrelevant at this point. And Israel is making massive investments in the country. Palestinians could easily partake in that economic expansion but instead devote a significant portion of their economic activity to the conflict with Israel which has 0% chance of changing anything ever. Pretty sad imho
> there are huge populations of arabs that live peacefully in Israel so this apartheid narrative is complete nonsense.
For many, the narrative has superseded reality. And that’s the crux of the issue. If only more people had your level of willingness to explore the facts on the ground with their own eyes. Thank you so much for sharing your perspective.
That makes complete sense for something like panic attacks. I guess I’m thinking more of GAD - I don’t know if they’re formally first line treatments but I know it’s definitely possible to get started with a long-acting benzo
Was your use monitored by a doctor? It doesn't sound like it. Klonopin was very helpful for me to pull me out of an episode of severe anxiety and constant extreme panic attacks. It was a bridge med until the SSRIs kicked in. My dose was never that high and I wound off them slowly after two months. Stopping abruptly after 3 weeks sounds like a bad idea. Im very grateful for that drug.
