What bank do you have that charges $35 for a transfer?
I transfer between b of a and chase bank, both known for having decently high fees, without any of those fees.
The $35 amount I’ve only seen with overdrafting. Do you overdraft every single transfer?
Same with us. I don’t know what these other folks are talking about. I transfer seemlessly between my accounts at different banks.
Wasn’t there a huge civil suit against J&J that they avoided paying?
Just another big pharma company that is getting charged fines, but that’s just their cost of doing business. These suits against J&J, Pfizer & more should put the company permanently out of business.
The whole reason we’re in this problem in the first place is that the legislative branch has basically ceded its power.
Agreed.
People in Congress don’t want to be responsible for changing laws so they just have the Supreme Court do it for them.
Disagree. That’s not at all what’s happening. Congress ceded their power to the president with the executive orders, and a mistake by the supreme court case resulting in the Chevron Deference, which should be ruled against next year.
so they just legislated from the bench and had the Supreme Court take away women’s rights.
Incorrect. They determined the previous ruling, which was actually so terrible RBG actively spoke against it and told the Dem’s they needed to codify RVW, was incorrect. And they were right. There’s absolutely no way judges, outside of activist judges, could have ruled RVW implementing term limitations for abortions. Their ruling should be based on the constitution, and nowhere can you ever extrapolate the constitution to determine at X weeks a baby is X way so they can be aborted, or past X weeks is too far for an abortion.
It should have always been a states issue.
It just so happens that many (most) private schools have a barrier that prevents people without resources from attending, so private schools appear to do better because they have better outcomes, but it’s by design.
I have addressed one way to get around that off the top of my head above. I’m sure there are plenty of other ways.
Terrible take in this context. It’s one thing for Manchin to vote a more conservative line being that he’s likely the only Democrat that will be elected in his state.
It’s only terrible if the only purpose you see for the democratic and republican parties is to fully allign their votes with their party and against the others.
She should have been recalled for that stunt,
If her voters wanted to recall her, they could have.
it’s certainly not the performance her constituents put her in there for.
If you have a problem bring it up with the voters.
People with money are and are likely going to be “more successful” regardless of where/if they go to school. They’re also likely to have more free time and resources to use after-school test improvement courses. It’s like saying “the children of billionaires are more likely to become at least be millionaires when they are adults.”
Interesting, so people that have the ability to send their kids to different schools, like having a school choice, is having more input and the kids are provided better materials and resources than they are in public schools!
There’s also a huge issue of private schools being for profit businesses, so looking good is important.
first off, not all private schools are for profit. Secondly, that’s the point, they need to do well, or they don’t make money. That’s like saying 'dammit, apple only makes money because they provide a service that billions of people pay for and enjoy!! grrrr, I wish we just had one standard government phone for everyone!"
They will pass students who don’t deserve it.
Really? You’re saying the private schools are the issue with this? Public schools it’s literally illegal to hold someone back.
There was at least one charter school that had almost no attendance but an almost 100% pass rate, because it was more profitable to pass them regardless and not enforce attendance.
And baltimore public schools produce illiterate kids. You think using one example to base your opinion off of all charter schools is okay? I’ll do the same but can name hundreds of public schools.
Profit should not be the measure of success for a school, so why would we ever want to make that the case?
I didn’t. I made test scores and success in life a metric for it. Right now, schools are more segregated since they were literally segregated.
Your policy of forcing every kid to go to public school and requiring that parents will need to pay 40k to a private school to get a better education only hurts people. There are plenty of benchmarks we can require to ensure private schools take in students from different demographics. Right now a poor inner city kid is sent to a shitty inner city school, without an option to actually go to a good school. Give parents the option to do that.
but look at how little money teachers make. Things need to change for sure, but that isn’t turning them into institutions for turning out money rather than good students.
How public schools are run aren’t making good students. I want to switch it up by offering the choice for schools.
Please explain how this is a “left” thing.
The general views have been that republicans are for parents being able to use their school funding for alternatives. The left is against that. That’s how it is a ‘left’ thing.
, the left is the only advanced-thinking society we have.
I feel like your bias. You can recognize and criticize your own party. I promise, you don’t have to just agree with everything they do.
If we left it to the right, we’d all be kneeling in a f*-k*g church somewhere.
In this situation, no, some would just be at different schools. Whether it’s charter schools, private or home schooling.
I responded with several sources and points, showing that we’ve been spending more and more money, getting worse results and that private and homeschooling have shown to provide better equipped individuals to society. What do you think of these arguments?
It’s almost like the supreme court leaves legislation to the legislative branch.
If people want something changes in our laws, regulations and constitution, it’s the legislative branch they need to go through. Which has separate powers than the supreme court.
When we see school districts closing AP and other honor programs because of equity, do you not see how, as a parent, you’d want more of a choice of sending your kids to better schools?
Basically, the argument from the left is that they want to control what the kids are learning, and can’t control private/homeschooling education, and it might teach the kids something they don’t want them to learn. Whether that’s because they think the private schools are all religious cult institutions, or because they think every parent wants to homeschool their kids to be racist.
But regardless, the studies show that private schools and homeschooling is better for success of the individuals. Having ways that parents can have more of an option of a specialized school would be good for most families.
It sucks, because I love when representatives deviate from their party and vote on the other side.
That’s what bipartisanship is - to look at issues and what the bills are instead of just uniformly voting on legislation.
It sucks because people hate the two party system, but if there’s anyone on their side that votes on the other, they’re just jackasses screwing their party over. That shouldn’t be our perspective.
"Republicans on the subcommittee said in a messaging document, because some COVID relief funding provided to schools ”remains unspent and further investments will not be provided until these funds are used responsibly.”
Not saying I agree with them, or think they have the best plans for our school system, but I can see asking for some fiscal responsibility when given these funds.
Strategy and empire building! Total war is by far my favorite series.
Mount and blade/Bannerlord is up there too.
I don’t think it’s a trap.
I was only 9 when we invaded Iraq, I wasn’t in much of a position to protest.
But seeing for the majority of my life, how that played out, along with studying American history and our involvement in other countries the last ~70ish years has made me a borderline military pacifist. We spent some 10-20 trillion on an endless war that got us absolutely nothing, and killed millions of people across the world. What Americans life was positively impacted from that?
I’m almost always going to say to stay out of foreign conflicts going onward.
I absolutely agree, I’m conservative and am fine with cutting 80% of our foreign military activity.
Using that money to help folk here including veterans.
If your neighbour, having been born in an extremelly wealthy family, hired 100 hunters and hunted all deers in a 100 mile radius and offered to sell you venison, and you subsequently went hunting, got 0 and had to buy the venison from him, that would absolutelly be his fault.
His fault of what? Hunting more? I don’t own the deer, nor the land the deer are on. In fact, it’d probably work better for me, he doesn’t have use for all the deer, and I can buy it pretty cheap from him without getting my hands dirty. Isn’t that what you do? All your stuff, do you make it? Or buy it from someone who provides it?
As it so happens my version of the metaphor is very much how it works nowadays at that level of wealth compared to the normal individual.
Not really. You didn’t explain why it’s my neighbors responsibility to give me food.
It’s funny that in your mind they work just like you, even down to doing it hands on: that’s not even close to how it happens with the vast majority of them and even the ones who do “work” used their wealth as a force multiplier to make way more happen than you could ever possibly do and thus get way more benefits than you could possible get (normallly make way more money which they can use as an even bigger force muliplier in the next round).
Yeah. Once you have your needs met and have expendable income you can use that how you see fit. Some use it for luxuries, some use it to make more money.
I’m not gonna be mad at how someone uses their property. That doesn’t do anybody any good.
Nobody would have any problem with the rich if their taking wasn’t so vast that it stops everybody else from getting even a little bit.
Yes, you and many other young left wing folks would. It stems from jealousy, not necessity. The world is a much much much better place due to capitalism, which has brought insane amounts of people out of poverty, into positions they don’t have to worry about starving everyday.
You’re just mad because your wealth hasn’t increased as much as theirs. Your life is easier than 90% of people throughout world history, your on your little Mac or Iphone, in your air conditioned home because it’s a little too hot this july, drinking your starbucks coffee, stewing in hatred about how rich people are awful, but anybody in human history will look at your life of luxury and be appalled how someone with so much comfort and wealth is complaining.
I suppose until then you won’t understand why this is just embarrassing for Musk.
I think Musk is fine if some lemmy migrants from reddit think that he’s embarrassing for tweeting at big streamers about twitters video platform.
Competition is not always good.
So you think video streaming services should be in a monopoly?
You think that will be the best for the consumer and content creators?
I disagree.
haha new to lemmy, thanks!
Which part? The fees?