You know what else makes the stated findings worthless? They didn’t state where the money they saved by using the card was spent on. Somebody buying basics now was probably buying those same basics before. Just using “their own” money to do so.

It’s meaningless. Only tracking the expenditures from card and not total household expenditures almost certainly means that for every $1 spent on those basics via the card, they had $1 from existing income to spend on something else... like alcohol and tobacco. Since, basics being basics, they were likely buying those…

So far, participant spending of that extra money has been relatively austere. On average, people spend almost 40% of their $500 UBI on food. They spend 24% on merchandise, including items from stores like Walmart and dollar stores that sell groceries and home essentials. About 11% went to utility bills, and 9% went to…

I’m kind of sort of curious what makes Trump think that, if China actually had access to dirt on Biden, they would hand it over to Trump instead of hoping that Biden gets elected and then use it as leverage on the POTUS? 

Sort of like “Federal Republic of Germany”? Or “Dominion of Canada”?

Why?  Until it comes time to actually splitting the vote in a way that matters, 2 people getting the message out on stage is better than 1 for a variety of reasons.

Yes, but it’s better to fix those issue while getting paid than while not getting paid.

Servers aren’t free.

No such thing as bad publicity?

Didn’t realize everybody over 30 had tried to be an influencer.

Eh, I don’t see any dissonance with being against killing the innocent while being for killing those obviously guilty of committing horrible crimes.

1. Depends on what the analysts are actually doing.

It is scientifically studied data.

So many studies have shown that people misidentify other races, scientists have given the phenomenon a name: The cross-race effect.

I believe that situation falls squarely under “Ergo unless the point of the prison sentence is because the person is likely to pose a continued threat to society”

Not usually. No idea about the U.K. But I think it’s illegal where I live (California) to say why you let an employee go. That said, most companies won’t as a general policy because it opens them up to slander/libel lawsuits. Typically, you can let somebody go because you strongly *suspect* they are doing shady thing…

Yep. And numerous studies have shown that the deterrent effect of a longer prison sentence pretty much ends at 10 years*. Ergo unless the point of the prison sentence is because the person is likely to pose a continued threat to society, prison sentences longer than ~10 years are about vengeance, not about…

Eh, I would have argued ~15 years for manslaughter, not 10 for murder.

I think good news is far more likely to spread around the echo chamber that is social media than bad news.

(The 40% figure included people who didn’t know about the call in the first place, so...)