I pay most of my bills with my end of the month paycheck and the middle of the month paycheck is for necessities/savings/fun stuff. Mostly necessities/savings though.

I wouldn’t imagine even a privately owned business would qualify for privacy. I don’t expect any privacy when I’m walking around in Walmart.

Trump cult will just claim it’s all the more likely the jury was rigged.

It’s because that’s the level the average American can understand.

Not the original you replied to. And I had a typo when trying to spell typo 😂 just adding to the conversation. Wasn’t disputing you, just meant the may have meant refresh rate instead of resolution. Easy mistake. It’s still quite disputed how well eyes can tell the difference in refresh rates.

I imagine it was a typo*, but this article in Nature reports that in specifics circumstances the median maximum that people can perceive a difference may be around 500hz, with the maximum in their test possibly being as high as 800hz.

Normally though it seems closer to 50-90hz, but I’m on the road and haven’t delved too deeply into it

Edit: Type to Typo

Unfortunately it doesn’t look like it. I misremembered a few details, he “died” from natural causes in prison, not execution. The court ruled “Schreiber is either alive, in which case he must remain in prison, or he is dead, in which case this appeal is moot.”

His name was Benjamin Schreiber.

I think there was a case somewhere that the prisoner was sentenced to death, and was executed ina fashion that didn’t quite work.

But technically he did die for a minute or two before his heart restarted, and he sued to be released from prison because he technically served his sentence.

I mean, HR is being paid. They should be going through the resume and compiling the data themselves.

Instead they require the applicants to do it for free, despite the fact the applicants are probably having to do it dozens of times trying to apply for multiple jobs.

Do cars really need to have it though? They seem to be the only thing “targeted” to be forced into include something that can receive emergency broadcasts. Why not force homes to be outfitted with an AM radio? Everyone lives somewhere (mostly, unfortunately) but not everyone owns a car. If they really want people to have access to AM radio emergency broadcasts maybe they should supply people with portable AM radios rather than forcing car companies to include it in their cars and increasing the price of vehicles since they will require larger antennae and more wiring than just FM radio or no radio at all.

Yes

I quite liked it, don’t usually like musical shows but the tunes are catchy and somewhat funny sometimes

I’m curious how they came up with 3.48 hours. Does rounding it up to 3.5 really make that much of a difference?

A lot of times that’s where people cross the street. Want people to stop before the spot people might step out into.

But… Do you really?

How much does a fridge filter actually filter? I am perfectly fine with drinking out of the tap, and the fridge is just filtering the tap water…

To me it just seems like a cash grab.

Please try to develop some reading comprehension.

In the context of

So would you agree there should be rules about protestors blocking access to planned parenthood? Or is it perfectly fine the way the system is right now, just allowing them to threaten and harass everyone going inside for unhindered rights or assembly?

It was in direct reply to your comment about planned parenting protestors.

In none of my comments am I bashing the bridge protestors other than saying they should not be allowed to block traffic, and the right of assembly should have rules and regulations to determine “proper” and “improper” forms of protest.

I don’t even know what you are arguing about.

Literally no one said that. I fully support anyone wishing to protest against Israel’s treatment of Palestine and the hypocritical enabling of the democrats. The issue being discussed is whether or not certain rights and freedoms should have rules attached to it.

Blocking a bridge, people say there should not be rules against it because they need to be a disruption to be heard properly. Some people say certain rules preventing the right of assembly should be allowed in certain cases, like blocking hospital access or creating buffer zones around schools and abortion clinics.

Some people say there shouldn’t be any rules at all preventing any rights from being expressed.

I’m of the opinion that blocking traffic shouldn’t be allowed for protesting peacefully. Line the edges and walkways of the bridge and be as visible as you want with large vibrant signs and megaphones, but don’t stand in the street preventing people from getting to work.

Others disagree and simply say that it’s a right to do it, but then they are fine with attaching certain rules to other rights like preventing hate speech. It’s simply a matter of trying to find where the line should be drawn.

So would you agree there should be rules about protestors blocking access to planned parenthood? Or is it perfectly fine the way the system is right now, just allowing them to threaten and harass everyone going inside for unhindered rights or assembly?

And not just liquid wealth.

Own stocks? Pay a tax on their value at time of purchase, updating every year from that day.

Wouldn’t people still own the same percentage, but the company itself just own less?

I don’t believe they can just create shares out of thin air. The company would typically own a certain amount of shares the entire time and then sell the ones they own.

So if you had 1% before and the company owned 50%, they might decide to sell half of their shares so they now only own 25% but you still own your 1%. You don’t just magically have 0.5% now.

The reason the shares drop in price when this happens is because it’s a sign that the company is either in financial trouble and seeking for a quick influx of cash or it’s a sign that the company doesn’t have much hope for its future success and wants to sell now before the price naturally starts to go down anyways.