Andrew Low House

Andrew Low House Museum Guidelines for Conducting Tours After Covid-19 Reopening June 1, 2020 • The Andrew Low House Museum will be opening on June 1st. For the first month we are planning on having self-guided tours scheduled on the hour and half hour. The Andrew Low House's important collection of paintings, furniture, silver, and glass, many of which belonged to the people associated with the house, provides a visual reference to the past. Together with the historic garden, Greek and Italianate Revival-style architecture, and fascinating stories about the generations of people related to ... The Andrew Low House preserves one of the finest collections of period furnishings relating to the history of Savannah and the Low family. Additionally our garden is one of three remaining original 19th-century garden plans in the city of Savannah and the only one available to be viewed by the public. 1850's historic house owned by Andrew's Low family. The house is well preserved with appointed rooms filled with a fine collection of furniture and artwork. Julliette Gordon Low, founder of the Girl S... Visiting the Haunted Andrew Low House. Are you planning to visit the historic Andrew Low House anytime soon? Well, if you do, be sure to stop by for a historical day time tour! The Andrew Low House is one of the most architecturally pleasing in all of the Savannah Historic District. Historic District House/Mansion/Villa Built on the site of the city jail, this residence was constructed in 1848 for Andrew Low, a native of Scotland and one of Savannah's merchant princes. Low and the girls moved into the house anyway, and five years later, Andrew Low remarried. Soon he had two more children, including his son William Mackey Low, who would grow up to marry Juliette Gordon, the founder of the Girl Scouts of America. In July 1847, Andrew Low II purchased the southwest Trustees’ Lot on Lafayette Square and hired John Norris, a New York architect then in the city, supervising building of the new Custom House, to design and build a fine house for his growing family. The neo-classic style house John Norris designed for Andrew Low II is today Savannah’s premier museum house. The Andrew Low House preserves one of the finest collections of period furnishings relating to the history of Savannah and the Low family. It includes examples of works by some of America’s most prestigious furniture makers including Duncan Phyfe, Joseph Barry, Joseph Meeks, Charles-Honore Lannuier, and Michael Allison. The Andrew Low House is open to the public Monday through Saturday from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. It opens two hours later on Sundays. The museum is closed on major holidays and during the first two weeks of January. Offered at the top and bottom of every hour, guided tours last approximately 40 minutes.

[OC] Comprehensive list of possible Chris Paul trades with every other team in the league

2020.09.22 10:30 mediuqrepmes [OC] Comprehensive list of possible Chris Paul trades with every other team in the league

Here’s my overview of the universe of possible CP3 trades. I’ve gone through each team’s cap sheet and identified how a Chris Paul trade could be constructed. Wherever possible I’ve proposed one or more specific trades.
To trade for Chris Paul’s $41M salary for 2020-21, most teams will need to send at least $33M in outgoing salary to make the trade legal under the CBA’s salary matching rules. The exceptions are the handful of teams that have significant cap space.
I focused on what works cap-wise. For the most part I omitted specific draft picks. The list is comprehensive, so there are teams here for the sake of completeness that make no sense as CP3 trade partners. For every trade, Chris Paul is the only player OKC is sending out; including additional OKC players in the trade configurations would have made this writeup too long. Some players are so obviously unavailable (e.g., Doncic, Steph Curry, LeBron) that I omitted them from potential trade constructions.
Atlanta:
Boston:
Brooklyn:
Chicago:
Charlotte:
Cleveland:
Dallas:
Denver:
Detroit:
Golden State:
Houston:
Indiana:
Los Angeles Clippers:
Los Angeles Lakers:
Memphis:
Miami:
Milwaukee:
Minnesota:
New Orleans:
New York Knicks:
Orlando Magic:
Philadelphia:
Phoenix:
Portland:
Sacramento:
San Antonio:
Toronto:
Utah:
Washington:
All numbers are courtesy of Spotrac and Bballref.
submitted by mediuqrepmes to Thunder [link] [comments]


2020.09.22 09:25 Zombatron_Reaper Player tries to use a DnD game as a single player game. And cracks it when others dont follow him

This is a long post, and my first time posting. Enjoy and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Earlier this year there was a post on my local game store facebook page looking for a player to join an online session. Since I lost my job due to the pandemic, I joined. First session comes around and it turns out I know the 3 other players, which was alright… at first.So, we have our DM playing as the DM, Me playing as an Aasimar Paladin, Georga playing a Ranger, Julie playing a Bard, and Andrew playing as a Warforged Cleric. (All names have been changed from IRL names) Andrew and Julie are married IRL
First couple of sessions are alright, Andrew likes to be the voice of the party and the rest of us just follow him, which was a bit boring, but as a paladin, I had a lot to do during combat. Also, our DM was actually really good at leading the story and running the game, so I didn’t want to leave.
I had to miss our 6th session due to personal reasons and another player joined, Carl playing a Half-Orc Fighter. When I returned, I noticed that Carl wasn’t just letting Andrew lead the party and was voicing his opinion and properly playing his character. Seeing this gave me the strength to start playing my character too (I have severe anxiety) and things were starting to become more interesting and fun. Georga also started talking more and joining in on role play. Things were looking up for the sessions.
For the next part of the story, we need to look at my paladin’s backstory;
“My Family came from poverty. My Parents "Musket Azure (Dad) and Azraelle Azure (Mum)", wanting the world for me, gave me to a rich noble named Jingo Bulwark. Under his guidance, I learned how to fight like the sword masters of old and how to survive.
He became like a father to me.
Years later, he told me that he had sworn to protect the world from demons and the like. However, as he grew older, he realised he couldn't do it alone.
He had no heirs to pass his legacy onto, so sought out a squire to pass on his knowledge.
Though I was nothing but an urchin, he saw the rough makings of a true Paladin. In his eyes, I am his one true heir.
I accepted his offer, and had to undergo a trial by combat. It was very difficult. I was sent to the gladiator pits to fight for my life. When I won, I was sent to train under the local priests, to learn respect and religion.
It was here where I learn of my bloodline, I was an Aasimar. I always knew I was different, the dreams I have had my whole life were not normal.
Years later, as Jingo lay on his death bed. He looked at me weakly and said "I have never wanted anymore in life than a son like you, please accept this gift and carry on my legacy. I will always be proud of you, my son" With his last ounce of strength, he gave me his signet ring. Which I have carried with me ever since.
I've been alone for many years, fighting the evil that plagues this world. It has been a hard journey, with harder times to come. Hopefully I can count on my new companions to help me rid the world of this filth. I will do whatever it takes, no matter the cost...”
Being sworn into the life so young and not really knowing his parents, my Paladin becomes conflicted with his path and becomes quite angry. Whenever a fight breaks out against an evil person, that person must now die.
The party was trying to uncover how stolen items were getting into a local city, we found a local gang hideout that was getting regular deliveries of said stolen items. Once dealing with the gang intown, we found a note that lead us to a meeting point outside the city. We followed the lead to find a group of Orcs waiting for someone. We used our half-orc to get a little closer and try and find out what they are doing here. Turns out they work for a group that is trying to take control of the town.They see through our ruse with some crappy rolls on the party’s part and a fight breaks out. I think “Perfect, a group of half-orcs that are terrorizing civilians and now they want to fight us” We kill all and there is a single half-orc left that lays down his weapons and tries to beg for his life. In my paladin’s eyes, he is evil and must die, so I keep attacking him. Julie and Andrew then start yelling at me saying that he is innocent? And we should help him. I am so confused at this point cause a minute ago he wanted us dead. Julie and Andrew hold me back enough for the half-orc to get away. I think “Well, that’s going to bite us on the ass later”
We continue to the keep where the leader of this gang is hold up. We fight and kill them. We get back to town and Julie and Andrew run into the half-orc and get him a job with the towns guard. They tell the rest of the party this has happened, but don’t tell my paladin because they don’t want me to find him and kill him.The next day guess who my paladin runs into? That’s right, the half-orc! And my paladin explodes, we know there is a plot from his gang to over throw the rulers of this town, and now he turns up as a guard. So, I attack him. The party runs to his rescue and stops the town guard from arresting me for attacking a guard, and stops them from knowing why I attacked him, because that would get the half-orc killed by the town.
We finish that campaign and kill the BBEG. While we are looting the BBEG we find a spell book, which my character grabs. Julie grabs a staff and Carl grabs an axe. Andrew asks me if I would like him to try and identify the book, I reluctantly agree. He takes the book and casts identify, which fails and instead of giving me back the book, gives it to Julie. Because she wants it… I’m mad but don’t want to start a fight so just let it go.
We move onto Curse of Strahd. Which seems really interesting, and I don’t see the situation with the half-orc coming into a campaign that is based around people being enthralled by a vampire.In the first town, we meet a guy who asks us to help his sister get out of town and away from Strahd. We agree. When we meet his sister, my paladin notices that she is acting shady. He also notices that she is trying to cover her neck with her clothes. Thinking this is odd, I convince the party to split (I know, should never do). Georga, Julie and Andrew are going to take the father of these two people to the church to be buried, while Carl and I stay back to “chat” about something. They leave and we search the place, finding a diary that said that she remembers his eyes, so enchanting.That’s it, she has met Strahd and could be trying to lead us to a trap. We sprint after the party and catch them; we fill them in on what we found and that she was trying to hide her neck. Andrew says “It’s nothing, we can trust her. She is innocent” I think, what? With all the information we just gave, you’re not even going to question her?
We get to the church and find out that the priest is hiding his son downstairs because his son has become a thrall of Strahd. We go down there and kill him. Now I know something isn’t right here. We get back to the house with the brother and sister, and they pull out some alcohol and start drinking, offering it to the party. I refuse, but the rest of the party just start drinking. I stand up and pull out the diary, yelling “We need to talk about this, you are hiding something and need to explain yourself. Now!” and then throw the diary onto the ground. Andrew stands up and casts heat metal onto my paladin that is wearing full plate armour. I’m like “What the fuck are you doing?!” Andrew says that I need to calm down and not attack her because she is innocent. We argue for a little in character all while he keeps concentrating on heat metal, I never once draw my axe, I never once cast a spell. He takes me down to 12 HP before the spell ends. Carl is backing me up in all this, Julie is backing Andrew and Georga is trying to calm everyone down and defuse the situation. Julie walks out and we take a 10-minute brake.
We all come back and it starts with Andrew talking really low and sad saying “I think we need to have a serious conversation about what just happened, and everyone is going to get a say. Julie wants to start”Julie pipes up and says “There are members in the party that just attack first ask questions later and aren’t putting the parties needs first. Also, people in this party aren’t listening to others and doing their own thing and its not right”
I stay silent through this whole thing
Julie says that she feels that no one listens to her. Which is complete bullshit because all we do is listen to her and Andrew besides the few occasions where we have had our own character-building moments.
Carl chimes up, basically saying that they aren’t listening to facts and only doing things they want to do. Which obviously Andrew and Julie disagree with. I say nothing, just absolutely shocked that they are saying these things.
We agree to undo what just happened and handle it differently. The sister says that Strahd visited her and had fed on her and that’s why she wants to get away. We do a few tests to make sure she isn’t a thrall and it turns out she isn’t. I apologise to her for going through her stuff, but I just had to be sure. All ends well this session… Sort of.
The next session we are in the next town over and trying to cross a lake on a boat. We start to pass a man that throws a sack over board. Carl notices that the sack was wriggling, he tells the rest of the party and we jump into the water and get the sack. Turns out this man had kidnapped a local “druid” child and was trying to sacrifice her so that he could get more fish to sell. We save the girl and Carl kills the man. Julie and Andrew yell at him for killing the man saying “He was innocent” and “We should have arrested him instead” but what’s done is done and they have to deal with it now.
We get back to the inn. Me being done with everything, childishly decides to try and ruin the game, so I try to poison the town by dropping a Vial of Fridged Woe (From our last campaign that my character held onto “Just in case”) into the well and then go to bed. My paladin has a vision from his god telling him to pick up his act and stop doing bad things and shows me that the vial didn’t break. I wake up and run down to the well and take the vial back inside. As I get to my room (which I’m sharing with Carl) he sits up crying from a nightmare. I put the vial down on the table and rush to his aid. He tells me that he had a dream from his childhood, about his village being burned and his family slaughtered. We go downstairs for a drink. Andrew comes and asks what happened to which I respond “He had a nightmare about his childhood, just give him some time and he will talk to you when he is ready”
Before I continue, I need to explain about the axe that Carl has. It is a sentient axe that talks to Carl. Out of character we know this, in character we don’t.
Andrew heads up stairs and goes to our room, he sees the vial of fridged woe on the table and pockets it. He then heads to the axe. Tries to identify, nothing (Not powerful enough).
He then, starts breaking the axe… The axe being sentient reaches out to Carl for help, Carl runs upstairs screaming in pain. The rest of us follow. Just as we all reach Andrew; he breaks the axe completely. Carl, stands frozen, not knowing how to react. I turn to Andrew and ask “What have you done”
Andrew responds “The axe was corrupting him, I had to do it to save my friend”
Carl responds “We are no longer friends” This was all said in character but Andrew screams out of character “WHHHHAAAAATTTTTT, we aren’t friends?” We all argue for a bit saying things like “Andrews character had no reason to break it, he had no idea that it was sentient”
We are all yelling at this point, our poor DM trying to hold it together. Carl says “I’m done, I quit” and leaves the call. We all do the same. Andrew asks me to come back to the call and tries to plead his case as to why he did it but I’m done too.
Our DM talks to Georga, Carl, and myself individually and he realises that we still want to play, just not with them. So, we start back up, continue the story. Georga’s IRL partner joins us. We have had a lot of fun since that day and have never had an in character (Or out of character) fight since.

Tl:dr - Player plays a group game of DnD but tries to be in every conversation and lead everything. When the rest of the players dont follow suit and do their own thing he blows up. He also disregards what other players say and thinks he knows best
submitted by Zombatron_Reaper to dndhorrorstories [link] [comments]


2020.09.21 12:00 C19NewsBot Coronavirus Australia News Updates (21 September)

This daily news summary was automatically generated using News API data from Australian news sources. If you have feedback, please send a modmail to /CoronavirusAustralia.
submitted by C19NewsBot to CoronavirusAustralia [link] [comments]


2020.09.20 16:49 expat2020123 A UK-Canada trade deal is now back on the table

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/09/14/uk-canada-trade-deal-back-table/
The progress of the “Global Britain” project will be the measure of whether the UK’s trading partners still regard the agreements it signs as worth the paper they are written on.
Former prime minister John Major warned last week that “if we lose our reputation for honouring the promises we make, we will have lost something beyond price”, after the Government’s Internal Market Bill proposed to override promises made to Brussels over Northern Ireland in the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement.
Tokyo appeared unfazed, however, as a UK-Japan trade deal “in principle” was struck on Friday, the first Britain has negotiated independently of the EU for 47 years.
The next challenge will be Canada. Liz Truss, the Trade Secretary, confirmed last week that talks were back on to protect the two countries’ £19.7bn trading relationship when the Brexit transition period ends at the end of the year.
It is understood that Ottawa envisages a “Phase One” agreement – like Beijing’s with Washington – so that businesses can continue to benefit from the provisions of the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (Ceta), before a free-trade agreement proper is targeted.
Canada will then support Britain’s accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which also includes Japan, Australia, Mexico and New Zealand.
The announcement of fresh talks ended a period of soured relations after the Department for International Trade (DIT) published a temporary regime that would have cut tariffs on nearly all UK imports, shielding British consumers from a no-deal Brexit but making a UK-Canada deal futile.
When Britain revised its global tariff strategy in May, publishing the rates that will apply to trading partners’ exports when the transition period concludes, the stage was set for discussions to resume.
But in reaching anything more than a skeleton agreement, as ministers will be keen to do to prove UK negotiators’ prowess when free from the EU, they will have their work cut out.
“Canadian trade negotiators, for the past 25 years, have negotiated some of the biggest deals on the planet so this is simply a question of leverage,” according to Eric Miller, a former Canadian trade negotiator and president of the Rideau Potomac Strategy Group, an advisory firm.
Those agreements include Ceta, the CPTPP and US-Mexico-Canada Agreement – a modernised version of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).
Behind those deals is a seasoned team of negotiators, spearheaded by Steve Verheul, who led on Ceta, so in Miller’s words, unlike his British counterparts, “he knows where all the bodies are buried.” Verheul, who cut his teeth in trade on agricultural negotiations, “has the absolute trust of the government”, Miller adds.
In addition, the minister who was responsible for trade when the Ceta negotiations were passed was Chrystia Freeland, now the deputy prime minister. She will have a strong influence over a final UK-Canada deal, alongside Mary Ng, Truss’s opposite number, Miller says.
The Canadians have so much experience on trade that DIT has hired them to train its own staff. For example, UK officials have taken part in negotiation simulations with Canadians based at Carleton University in Ottawa.
Andrew MacDougall, who was director of communications for Stephen Harper as the Canadian prime minister, notes such training is necessary because “Britain hasn’t had in-house trade negotiation capability for 40-plus years. You don’t just come off the bench cold and bend one into the top corner”.
As in most trade negotiations – including the Japan talks, which stalled over Stilton cheese – agriculture is likely to be a contested issue with Canada. Again, Britain may seek to expand access for its dairy products but this will be met with resistance by the Canadian farm lobby.
Armand de Mestral, professor of international trade law at McGill University, Montreal, explains: “Quebec and Ontario are key to getting the Liberals re-elected. They’re the places where milk is produced. If their dairy farmers are on the warpath about cheese, the Liberal minority government might think twice. Why rouse a sleeping dog?”
Indeed, after the USMCA, Justin Trudeau, the Canadian premier, promised no more compromises on dairy, having handed the US more market share for its dairy exports.
This contradicted Canada’s supply management framework, which controls the production and imports of dairy, poultry and eggs and is enforced by the Agriculture and Agri-Food Department. It states that imports should face high tariffs and shoppers pay high prices so that domestic farmers are guaranteed price stability.
This time, Jacques Lefebvre, chief executive of Dairy Farmers of Canada, is confident that “concessions to our domestic dairy sector are off the table”. Because of favoured-nation clauses in Ceta, any concessions to the UK will be automatically granted to the EU.
If Albertan beef farmers’ wish to sell more to the UK is granted, however, British food standards groups will be angry, just as they have been about the potential US trade deal.
Sue Davies, of Which?, says that in Canada “growth hormones are permitted for use in beef production although not dairy production. Chlorine washes are also permitted for chicken. The issues are therefore the same as the other deals – we need to make sure that we build on our standards – and in this case don’t go backwards from Ceta on food standards”.
The UK will also want to expand access to Canada’s financial services sector, so that British insurers can open offices in Canadian cities. Ottawa has resisted this too, and “any future free trade agreement between Canada and the UK will be influenced by the UK-EU trade relationship, as well as any unilateral UK approaches”, a spokesman for Ng says.
For now, attempting to conclude anything more than a transitional deal would be disastrous, according to Lorand Bartels, lecturer in international trade at Cambridge University. “When Canada negotiated Ceta, they were negotiating with the UK,” he adds. “What’s changed from the Canadian point of view is the UK is no longer a springboard into the rest of the EU so they’ve lost interest.”
For Harry Broadman, who led negotiations for the US with Canada on the foreign investment provisions of Nafta and is now managing director of Berkeley Research Group, even a skeleton agreement this year is “wishful thinking”.
Although the UK is Canada’s largest market in Europe and fifth-largest globally, a deal between the two countries “is as close to insignificant as you can get”, Steen Jakobsen, chief economist at Saxo Bank’s, reckons.
“The EU says from the EU-Canada deal it saves €590m a year in the reduction of duties,” he says. “The EU has 500m people. The UK has a tenth of that. So on the back of an envelope, you’d have to say the economic consequences are very limited.”
Broadman warns that this, added to Britain’s recent behaviour towards Brussels, will make a comprehensive trade deal with the UK a low priority for Canada. “There’s a world of difference between how trade negotiators think about the UK and its credibility and sincerity and a decade ago,” he says. “If you’re any trade negotiating side, you’re looking at the UK having depleted resources and you see that what they may agree to one day, they may not agree to the next day. It makes you nervous.”
submitted by expat2020123 to CANZUK [link] [comments]


2020.09.19 23:32 BigTravelGuy Giannis Antetokounmpo Narratives: A Discussion Reddit Needs to Have

The past few days, I've seen a lot of slander towards Giannis Antetokounmpo, especially in the wake of him winning the NBA's Most Valuable Player after his team was eliminated from the Second Round of the playoffs. A lot of it revolves around him not deserving MVP, him being a choker in the playoffs, and him needing to win a ring to validate his existence as one of the best players in the NBA. These narratives are disappointing to see, not only because they are incorrect, but also because they have the potential to become the reasons that Giannis leaves the Milwaukee Bucks to join up with other superstars - creating a similar super team that you all swore you hated when LeBron, KD, and others did it. So, in a rambling but hopefully somewhat coherent post, I want to dispel these narratives and hopefully change your opinion on what success in the NBA should mean. I'd love to have some discussion on this. Please chime in.
Narrative Number 1: Giannis did not deserve the MVP
I do think that the majority of people here believe that Giannis deserved the MVP, but I want to start with this one anyways as it is the freshest in our memories. This narrative is fueled by two camps: one that views LeBron as the 'always MVP' of the league, and another that just straight up thought LeBron deserved it.
Let's start with the stats. I can't find pre-bubble stats, but they're similar to the total.
LeBron: 25.3 PPG 7.8 RPG 10.2 APG 55.0% eFG 25.5 PER 0.5 BPG 1.2 SPG
Giannis: 29.5 PPG 13.6 RPG 5.6 APG 58.9% eFG 31.9 PER 1 BPG 1 SPG
Straight-up numbers are clearly in Giannis's favor. But considering LeBron also played on average 4 more minutes than Giannis did each game, the stats skew even more to the MVP. Here's the Per 36:
LeBron: 26.4 PPG 8.2 RPG 10.6 APG 0.6 BPG 1.2 SPG
Giannis: 34.9 PPG 16.1 RPG 6.6 APG 1.2 BPG 1.1 SPG
Maybe you think LeBron is the better player. That's fine. But the stats clearly indicate that he was not the Most Valuable Player in the league this year. 34.9 and 16.1 PER 36 is INSANE.
But valuable also deals with making your team better. The Bucks went 56-17 and the Lakers went 52-19. Close, but the Bucks won more and lost less. Furthermore, Giannis took a team that lost their 3rd best player (Brogdon) and STILL led his team to the 1 seed, whereas LeBron needed to add another top 5 NBA player just to avoid a repeat of MISSING the playoffs altogether last year. So please, stop with your BUT LEBRON IN THE PLAYOFFS narratives, learn and understand the concept of recency bias and know that Giannis was the MVP.
Narrative Number 2: Giannis Can't Win in the Playoffs and/or He Chokes
My all time least favorite take. The Bucks had Championship expectations this year, so obviously a Second Round exit was disappointing. Giannis should've played better that series, I will admit. But come on, a choker? Can't win? Let's not forget the Bucks were a bad overtime period away from going up 3-0 in the Conference Finals against the team that ended up winning it all last year. They replace their 3rd best player with Wes Matthews and you demand a Championship?
In fact, I consistently hear that Giannis has a good enough supporting cast to win it all. Let's examine that. Here are the supporting casts of the top 5 teams (regular season) in each conference.
  1. Khris Middleton, Brook Lopez, Eric Bledsoe, George Hill, Wes Matthews
  2. Anthony Davis, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Rajon Rondo, Danny Green, Kyle Kuzma
  3. Kyle Lowry, Fred Van Vleet, Marc Gasol, OG Annuoby, Serge Ibaka
  4. Paul George, Marcus Morris, Lou Williams, Montrez Harrell, Patrick Beverly
  5. Kemba Walker, Jaylen Brown, Gordon Hayward, Marcus Smart, Daniel Theis
  6. Jamal Murray, Gary Harris, Torrey Craig, Paul Millsap, Michael Porter Jr
  7. Malcolm Brogdon, Domantas Sabonis, Myles Turner, TJ Warren, Jeremy Lamb
  8. Russell Westbrook, Eric Gordon, PJ Tucker, Robert Covington, Danuel House
  9. Bam Adebayo, Goran Dragic, Tyler Herro, Jae Crowder, Duncan Robinson
  10. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Dennis Schroder, Danilo Gallinari, Steven Adams, Luguentz Dort
I firmly believe that the Bucks have the worst supporting cast out of these ten teams. They are a maximum of a 7 seed without Giannis. Meanwhile, a guy who a lot of people considered to be the best player in the league - Kawhi Leonard - left a team and they STILL got the 2nd seed while replacing him by bringing FVV off the bench. Come on. The Bucks closed playoff games this year with PAT CONNAUGHTON. This roster is not that good behind Giannis. It's full of inconsistent shooters (besides Midds) and a point guard who does not complement Giannis at all. But if that's not enough for you, if you still believe he should be winning Championships, let's look at the supporting casts of the last 10 champions:
  1. Pascal Siakam, Kyle Lowry, Marc Gasol, Fred Van Vleet
  2. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, Andre Iguodola
  3. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, Andre Iguodola
  4. Kyrie Irving, Kevin Love, Tristian Thompson, JR Smith
  5. Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, Andre Iguodola, Harrison Barnes
  6. Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobli, Tony Parker, Danny Green
  7. Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, Ray Allen, Mike Miller
  8. Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, Mario Chalmers, Mike Miller
  9. Jason Kidd, Tyson Chandler, Jason Terry, DeShawn Stevenson
  10. Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum, Lamar Odom, Derek Fisher
The Bucks supporting cast, once again is: Khris Middelton, Brook Lopez, Eric Bledsoe, George Hill. There is no comparison.
Narrative Number 3: Giannis Needs to Win Championships - and Soon
Why do we insist on judging individuals based on team awards? You all stan Dirk for staying with the Mavs for his whole career, but forget that he won his championship in the latter half of his run as an all-time great. If he had left early, wouldn't you feel slighted? You love Dame for constantly talking about how he wants to build a winner in Portland. Where is that love for Giannis staying?
In fact, when it comes to Giannis, all it seems like you want to do is talk about how he doesn't have any rings. You may be doing this out of a legit desire to compare him to other great players, but in reality all you are doing is driving him to team up with other superstars in another location and win rings so he can check off the box that said he won something. Is that really what you want the sport to be? Just people changing teams so we can complete made-up requirements? If so, why? Let's not forget that demanding something, and demanding something quickly usually causes that thing to come in lower quality. So stop celebrating championships as if they are the end-all, be-all. Remember, only 1 out of 30 teams gets to win one each year. Those are extremely low odds.
What you'll end up doing as a Championship fanatic is cause Giannis to look at his career as incomplete until he wins one. What that will lead to is him hopping around teams, and recruiting stars until he can guarantee one. Because he'll have to. Because of you. When he does, you'll roast him like you did LeBron, like you did KD, like you did Paul George - failing to realize that you are the reason he did it.
If you're a fan of a small market team, I especially don't understand it. You should be rooting for the Bucks to keep him no matter what. It's good for the league, for the balance of play. Do you all really want to watch California teams keep winning every year until you die? I just don't understand it. Judge players by their legacies they built, that they worked for - not by the cheap outs they took to check off your boxes.
That's it. It's long so I get it if you didn't read. But these takes are getting ridiculous so I said I might as well dedicate an hour of my Saturday to it. I even spell-checked. You might as well drop a comment explaining why you agree or disagree. Go Bucks. FTD.
submitted by BigTravelGuy to nba [link] [comments]


2020.09.19 17:29 tombstoneshadows28 Turner Classic Movies (U.S.) Schedule for October, 2020 (All times E.S.T.)

Thursday, October 01, 2020
(12:00 AM) (drama) Up The Down Staircase (1967/124 m/Robert Mulligan)
(2:15 AM) (comedy) Our Miss Brooks (1956/85 m/Al Lewis)
(4:00 AM) (drama)The Corn Is Green (1945/114 m/Irving Rapper)
(6:00 AM) (comedy) Girl He Left Behind (1956/103 m/David Butler)
(8:00 AM) (war) Lafayette Escadrille (1958/93 m/William A. Wellman)
(9:45 AM) (comedy) Dondi (1961/100 m/Albert Zugsmith) '
(11:30 AM) (epic) The Shoes of the Fisherman (1968/162 m/Michael Anderson)
(2:15 PM) (crime) Ring of Fire (1961/91 m/Andrew L. Stone)
(4:00 PM) (suspense) Twenty Plus Two (1961/103 m/Joseph M. Newman)
(5:45 PM) (horror) Marooned (1969/129 m/John Sturges)
(8:00 PM) (drama) La Strada (1954/108 m/Federico Fellini)
(10:00 PM) (romance) Two for the Road (1967/111 m/Stanley Donen)
Friday, October 02, 2020
(12:00 AM) (romance) Dodsworth (1936/101 m/William Wyler)
(2:00 AM) (documentary) The Memphis Belle: A Story of a Flying Fortress (1944/40 m/Lt. Col. William Wyler)
(3:00 AM) (drama) Black Girl (1966/60 m/Ousmane Sembene)
(4:15 AM) (drama) The Music Room (1958/99 m/Satyajit Ray)
(6:00 AM) (comedy) Go West (1940/80 m/Edward Buzzell)
(7:45 AM) (comedy) The Big Store (1941/83 m/Charles Riesner)
(9:30 AM) (comedy) Double Dynamite (1951/81 m/Irving Cummings)
(11:00 AM) (comedy) Girl In Every Port (1952/86 m/Chester Erskine)
(12:30 PM) (comedy) A Day at the Races (1937/109 m/Sam Wood)
(2:30 PM) (comedy) At the Circus (1939/87 m/Edward Buzzell)
(4:15 PM) (comedy) A Night at the Opera (1935/91 m/Sam Wood)
(6:00 PM) (epic) The Story of Mankind (1957/100 m/Irwin Allen)
(8:00 PM) (horror) Dracula (1931/74m/Tod Browning)
(9:30 PM) (suspense) Cat People (1942/73 m/Jacques Tourneur)
(11:00 PM) (horror) House on Haunted Hill (1958/75 m/William Castle)
Saturday, October 03, 2020
(12:30 AM) (horror) The Haunting (1963/112 m/Robert Wise)
(3:45 AM) (premiere) Wigstock: The Movie (1995/85 m/Barry Shils)
(5:15 AM) (short) The Relaxed Wife (1957/13 m/?)
(5:15 AM) (short) Time Out for Trouble (1961/19m/David S. Glidden)
(6:00 AM) (comedy) Million Dollar Baby (1941/101 m/Curtis Bernhardt)
(8:00 AM) (premiere) MGM CARTOONS: The Peachy Cobbler (1950/7 m/Fred (Tex) Avery)
(8:08 AM) (short) Phonies Beware! (1956/8 m/Larry O'Reilly)
(8:17 AM) (short) Night Life in Chicago (1948/9 m/?)
(8:27 AM) (premiere) Arctic Fury (1949/61 m/Norman Dawn)
(9:30 AM) (premiere) THE WILD WEST DAYS: Redskins’ Revenge (1937/?/?)
(10:00 AM) (premiere) POPEYE: Baby Wants a Bottleship (1942/7 m/Dave Fleischer)
(10:08 AM) (adventure) Safari Drums (1953/71 m/Ford Beebe)
(11:30 AM) (documentary) Alaska Lifeboat (1956/21 m/Herbert Morgan)
(12:00 PM) (drama) The Prince and the Pauper (1937/118 m/William Keighley)
(2:15 PM) (crime) Key Largo (1948/100 m/John Huston)
(4:15 PM) The Defiant Ones (1958/96 m/Stanley Kramer)
(6:00 PM) (romance) The Thomas Crown Affair (1968/102 m/Norman Jewison)
(8:00 PM) (epic) Lawrence of Arabia (1962/227 m/David Lean)
Sunday, October 04, 2020
(12:00 AM) (crime) Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950/95 m/Otto Preminger)
(2:00 AM) (western) Across the Wide Missouri (1951/78 m/William Wellman)
(3:30 AM) (musical) On An Island With You (1948/108 m/Richard Thorpe)
(5:30 AM) (short) Inflation (1942/17 m/Cy Endfield)
(6:00 AM) (romance) The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (1937/98 m/Richard Boleslawski)
(7:45 AM) (romance) Humoresque (1946/124 m/Jean Negulesco)
(10:00 AM) (crime) Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950/95 m/Otto Preminger)
(12:00 PM) (comedy) Mr. Belvedere Goes to College (1949/83 m/Elliott Nugent)
(1:30 PM) (comedy) The Women (1939/133 m/George Cukor)
(4:00 PM) (musical) Bye Bye Birdie (1963/112 m/George Sidney)
(6:00 PM) (documentary) The Great Buster: A Celebration (2018/101 m/Peter Bogdanovich)
(8:00 PM) (silent) Sherlock Jr. (1924/46 m/Buster Keaton)
(9:00 PM) (silent) The General (1927/79 m/Buster Keaton)
(10:30 PM) (silent) Steamboat Bill Jr. (1928/71 m/Charles F. Reisner)
Monday, October 05, 2020
(12:00 AM) (silent) Seven Chances (1925/57 m/Buster Keaton)
(2:00 AM) (drama) Viridiana (1961/91 m/Luis Buñuel)
(3:45 AM) (drama) The Exterminating Angel (1962/92 m/Luis Buñuel)
(5:30 AM) (documentary) MGM Parade Show #5 (1955/26 m/?)
(6:00 AM) (musical) Roberta (1935/106 m/William A. Seiter)
(8:00 AM) (musical) Fashions of 1934 (1934/78 m/William Dieterle)
(9:30 AM) (drama) Stolen Holiday (1937/80 m/Michael Curtiz)
(11:00 AM) (comedy) Designing Woman (1957/118 m/Vincente Minnelli)
(1:00 PM) (comedy) Made in Paris (1966/103 m/Boris Sagal)
(2:45 PM) (romance) A Place for Lovers (1969/88 m/Vittorio De Sica)
(4:30 PM) (horror) Blood and Black Lace (1964/88 m/Mario Bava)
(6:00 PM) (suspense) Lured (1947/103 m/Douglas Sirk)
(8:00 PM) (crime) Cash on Demand (1961/80 min/Quentin Lawrence)
(9:30 PM) (romance) The End of the Affair (1955/106 m/Edward Dmytryk)
(11:30 PM) (crime) Time Without Pity (1957/85 m/Joseph Losey)
Tuesday, October 06, 2020
(1:15 AM) (adventure) John Paul Jones (1959/126 m/John Farrow)
(3:30 AM) (drama) Hamlet (1948/154 m/Laurence Olivier)
(6:15 AM) (comedy) A Chump at Oxford (1940/63 m/Alfred Goulding)
(7:30 AM) (drama) Vigil in the Night (1940/102 m/George Stevens)
(9:15 AM) (comedy) The Gay Bride (1934/80 m/Jack Conway)
(10:45 AM) (musical) Swing High, Swing Low (1937/83 m/Mitchell Leisen)
(12:15 PM) (comedy) Love Before Breakfast (1936/70 m/Walter Lang)
(1:30 PM) (comedy) Nothing Sacred (1937/74 m/William A. Wellman)
(3:00 PM) (comedy) Mr. and Mrs. Smith (1941/95 m/Alfred Hitchcock)
(4:45 PM) (comedy) To Be or Not to Be (1942/99 m/Ernst Lubitsch)
(6:30 PM) (documentary) The Golden Age of Comedy (1957/79 m/various)
(8:00 PM) (premiere) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 6) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
(9:15 PM) (drama) The Ascent (1977/109 m/Larisa Sheptiko)
(11:15 PM) (documentary) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 6) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
Wednesday, October 07, 2020
(12:30 AM) Meek's Cutoff (2010/104 m/Kelly Reichardt)
(2:30 AM) (premiere) Cameraperson (2016/103 m/Kirsten Johnson)
(4:30 AM) (comedy) Daisies (1966/76 m/Vera Chytilová)
(9:15 AM) (drama) The Journey (1959/126 m/Anatole Litvak)
(11:30 AM) (drama) The Squall (1929/102 mAlexander Korda)
(1:30 PM) (short) Beautiful Budapest (1938/9 m/?)
(1:45 PM) (short) Rural Hungary (1939/9 m/James A. FitzPatrick)
(2:00 PM) (drama) Fight For Your Lady (1938/66 m/Ben Stoloff)
(3:15 PM) (drama) Storm at Daybreak (1933/79 m/Richard Boleslavsky)
(4:45 PM) (romance) The Shop Around the Corner (1940/99 m/Ernst Lubitsch)
(6:30 PM) (musical) One Heavenly Night (1930/80 m/Geo. Fitzmaurice)
(8:00 PM) (comedy) No Time For Sergeants (1958/119 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(10:15 PM) (drama) A Face in the Crowd (1957/126 m/Elia Kazan)
Thursday, October 08, 2020
(12:30 AM) (western) Hearts of the West (1975/102 m/Howard Zieff)
(2:30 AM) (comedy) Onionhead (1958/110 m/Norman Taurog)
(4:30 AM) (comedy) Thunder Afloat (1939/95 m/George B. Seitz)
(6:15 AM) (crime) The Public Enemy (1931/84 m/William A. Wellman)
(8:15 AM) (romance) Red-Headed Woman (1932/79 m/Jack Conway)
(9:45 AM) (comedy) Dinner at Eight (1933/111 m/George Cukor)
(11:45 AM) (comedy) Saratoga (1937/92 m/Jack Conway)
(1:30 PM) (romance) Hold Your Man (1933/87 m/Sam Wood)
(3:15 PM) (romance) Red Dust (1932/83 m/Victor Fleming)
(4:45 PM) (comedy) Personal Property (1937/84 m/W. S. Van Dyke II)
(6:15 PM) (comedy) Bombshell (1933/96 m/Victor Fleming)
(8:00 PM) (comedy) The Front Page (1931/101 m/Lewis Milestone)
(10:00 PM) (suspense) Detour (1945/68 m/Edgar G. Ulmer)
(11:30 PM) (drama) The Man with the Golden Arm (1956/119m/Otto Preminger)
Friday, October 09, 2020
(1:45 AM) (romance) Love Affair (1939/88 m/Leo McCarey)
(3:30 AM) (crime) A Brighter Summer Day (1991/237 m/Edward Yang)
(7:00 AM) (short) Alice in Movieland (1940/22 m/Jean Negulesco)
(7:45 AM) (drama) Nora Prentiss (1947/111 m/Vincent Sherman)
(9:45 AM) (crime) Born to Kill (1947/92 m/Robert Wise)
(11:30 AM) (drama) Dark Passage (1947/106 m/Delmer Daves)
(1:30 PM) (suspense) Out of the Past (1947/97 m/Jacques Tourneur)
(3:15 PM) (crime) Race Street (1948/79 m/Edwin L. Marin)
(4:45 PM) (suspense) Impact (1949/111 m/Arthur Lubin)
(6:45 PM) (suspense) The Woman On Pier 13 (1950/73 m/Robert Stevenson)
8:00 PM) (horror) The Ghoul (1933/81 m/T. Hayes Hunter)
(9:30 PM) (horror) The Black Sleep (1956/82 m/Reginald LeBorg)
(11:00 PM) (horror) Mark of the Vampire (1935/60 m/Tod Browning)
Saturday, October 10, 2020
(12:15 AM) (horror) Night of the Living Dead (1968/96 m/George A. Romero)
(2:00 AM) (adventure) White Lightning (1973/101 m/Joseph Sargent)
(3:45 AM) (drama) Gator (1976/116 m/Burt Reynolds)
(5:45 AM) (short) The Corvair in Action! (1960/6 m/?)
(6:00 AM) (musical) The Opposite Sex (1956/116 m/David Miller)
(8:00 AM) (premiere) MGM Cartoons: Red Hot Riding Hood (1943/7 m/Fred (Tex) Avery)
(8:09 AM) (short) Fortune Seekers (1956/8 m/Larry O'Reilly)
(8:18 AM) (documentary) Historic Maryland (1941/8 m/?)
(8:27 AM) (drama) Men of the North (1930/61 m/Hal Roach)
(9:30 AM) (premiere) THE WILD WEST DAYS: Brink of Doom (1937/?/?)
(10:00 AM) (premiere) POPEYE: Alona the Sarong Seas (1942/7 m/Dave Fleischer)
(10:08 AM) (premiere) The Golden Idol (1954/71 m/Ford Beebe)\
(11:30 AM) (comedy) King Of The Islands (1935/17 m/Ralph Staub)
. (12:00 PM) (adventure) Tarzan The Ape Man (1932/100 m/W. S. Van Dyke II)
(2:00 PM) (musical) Lili (1953/81 m/Charles Walters)
(3:30 PM) (comedy) Casino Royale (1967/131 m/John Huston, et. al.)
(6:00 PM) (musical) Top Hat (1935/100 m/Mark Sandrich)
(8:00 PM) (adventure) Gunga Din (1939/117 m/George Stevens)
(10:15 PM) (adventure) The Three Musketeers (1948/126 m/George Sidney)
Sunday, October 11, 2020
(12:30 AM) (crime) The Racket (1951/89 m/John Cromwell)
(2:30 AM) (comedy) Bananas (1971/82 m/Woody Allen)
(4:00 AM) (comedy) Hannah and Her Sisters (1986/107 m/Woody Allen)
(6:00 AM) (comedy) A Midsummer Night's Dream (1935/143 m/Max Reinhardt)
(8:30 AM) (drama) Journey For Margaret (1942/81 m/Major W. S. Van Dyke II)
(10:00 AM) (crime) The Racket (1951/89 m/John Cromwell)
(12:00 PM) (drama) Sounder (1972/105 m/Martin Ritt)
(2:00 PM) (drama) The Secret Garden (1949/92 m/Fred M. Wilcox)
(3:45 PM) (drama) The Catered Affair (1956/94 m/Richard Brooks)
(5:30 PM) (musical) Flower Drum Song (1961/131 m/Henry Koster)
(8:00 PM) (comedy) The Front Page (1974/105 m/Billy Wilder)
(10:00 PM) (comedy) The Fortune Cookie (1966/126 m/Billy Wilder)
Monday, October 12, 2020
(12:15 AM) (comedy) Sidewalk Stories (1989/99 m/Charles Lane)
(2:15 AM) (comedy) The Firemen's Ball (1967/73 m/Milos Forman)
(3:45 AM) (premiere) All My Good Countrymen (1968/126 m/Vojtěch Jasný)
(6:00 AM) (horror) The Reptile (1966/90 m/John Gilling)
(7:45 AM) (horror) The Killer Shrews (1959/68 m/Ray Kellogg)
(9:00 AM) (horror) King Kong (1933/104 m/Merian C. Cooper)
(11:00 AM) (horror) The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms (1953/80 m/Eugene Lourié)
(12:30 PM) (horror) Gojira (1954/96 m/Ishiro Honda)
(2:00 PM) (horror) Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954/79 m/Jack Arnold)
(3:30 PM) (horror) Creature from the Haunted Sea (1961/59 m/Roger Corman)
(4:45 PM) (horror) The Green Slime (1969/90 m/Kinji Fukasaku)
(6:30 PM) (horror) Night of the Lepus (1972/88 m/William F. Claxton)
(8:00 PM) (adventure) Sword of Sherwood Forest (1960/80 m/Terence Fisher)
(11:00 PM) (horror) Daleks - Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. (1966/81 m/Gordon Flemyng)
Tuesday, October 13, 2020
(12:30 AM) (adventure) She (1965/106 m/Robert Day)
(2:30 AM) (crime) Violent Playground (1958/106 m/Basil Dearden)
(4:30 AM) (premiere) In Saigon: Some May Live (1967/89 m/Vernon Sewell)
(6:00 AM) (drama) Devotion (1931/81 m/Robert Milton)
(7:30 AM) (comedy) The Runaway Bus (1954/74 m/Val Guest)
(9:00 AM) (crime) The Solitaire Man (1933/67 m/Jack Conway)
(10:30 AM) (suspense) Blind Adventure (1933/63 m/Ernest B. Schoedsack)
(11:45 AM) (musical) Double Trouble (1967/92 m/Norman Taurog)
(1:30 PM) (romance) A Warm December (1972/101 m/Sidney Poitier)
(3:30 PM) (drama) The V.I.P.S (1963/119 m/Anthony Asquith)
(5:45 PM) (comedy) The Prince and the Showgirl (1957/117 m/Laurence Olivier)
(8:00 PM) (premiere) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 7) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
(11:00 PM) (documentary) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 7) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
Wednesday, October 14, 2020
(2:00 AM) (documentary) The House Is Black (1963/22 m/?)
(2:30 AM) (romance) First Love (1977/91 m/Joan Darling)
(4:15 AM) (drama) The Night Porter (1974/118 m/Liliana Cavani)
(6:30 AM) (drama) Le Bonheur (1965/80 m/Agnes Varda)
(10:15 AM) (silent) The Unholy Three (1925/86 m/Tod Browning)
(12:00 PM) (silent) The Unknown (1927/49 m/Tod Browning)
(1:00 PM) (silent) The Blackbird (1926/86 m/Tod Browning)
(2:30 PM) (horror) The Thirteenth Chair (1929/73 m/Tod Browning)
(4:00 PM) (horror) Freaks (1932/62 m/Tod Browning)
(5:15 PM) (horror) Mark of the Vampire (1935/60 m/Tod Browning)
(6:30 PM) (horror) The Devil-Doll (1936/78 m/Tod Browning)
(8:00 PM) (drama) Abe Lincoln in Illinois (1940/110 m/John Cromwell)
(10:00 PM) (drama) Sunrise at Campobello (1960/144 m/Vincent J. Donehue)
Thursday, October 15, 2020
(12:45 AM) (drama) Wilson (1944/154 m/Henry King)
(3:30 AM) (war) PT 109 (1963/140 m/Leslie H. Martinson) .
(6:00 AM) (comedy) Three Men on a Horse (1936/86 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(7:30 AM) (crime) Unholy Partners (1941/94 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(9:15 AM) (musical) Sweet Adeline (1935/88 m/Mervyn Le Roy)
(11:00 AM) (comedy) Happiness Ahead (1934/86 m/Mervyn Le Roy)
(12:30 PM) (drama) Big City Blues (1932/63 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(1:45 PM) (suspense) The Bad Seed (1956/129 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(4:00 PM) (drama) They Won't Forget (1937/95 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(5:45 PM) (romance) Random Harvest (1942/126 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(8:00 PM) (war) Tunes of Glory (1960/107 m/Ronald Neame)
(10:00 PM) (war) The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943/164 m/Michael Powell)
Friday, October 16, 2020
(1:00 AM) (war) The Seventh Cross (1944/112 m/Fred Zinnemann)
(3:00 AM) (drama) The Diary of Anne Frank (1959/180 m/George Stevens)
(6:15 AM) (documentary) Trances (1981/89 m/Ahmed El Maanouni)
(8:00 AM) (comedy) Little Shop of Horrors (1960/72 m/Roger Corman)
(9:15 AM) (horror) Village of the Damned (1960/77 m/Wolf Rilla)
(10:45 AM) (horror) The Brain That Wouldn't Die (1962/82 m/Joseph Green)
(12:15 PM) (horror) Carnival of Souls (1962/78 m/Herk Harvey)
(1:45 PM) (horror) Dementia 13 (1963/75 m/Francis Ford Coppola)
(3:15 PM) (horror) The Raven (1963/86 m/Roger Corman)
(4:45 PM) (horror) Spider Baby (1964/84 m/Jack Hill)
(6:15 PM) (horror) The Nanny (1965/93 m/Seth Holt)
(8:00 PM) (horror) Dead of Night (1945/103 m/Alberto Cavalcanti, Basil Dearden, Robert Hamer, Charles Crichton)
(10:00 PM) (horror) Twice-Told Tales (1963/120 m/Sidney Salkow)
Saturday, October 17, 2020
(12:15 AM) (horror) Black Sabbath (1963/96 m/Mario Bava)
(2:00 AM) (premiere) Enter the Ninja (1981/99 m/Menahem Golan)
(3:45 AM) (premiere) Revenge of the Ninja (1983/?/Sam Firstenberg)
(5:30 AM) (short) Shake Hands With Danger (1970/23 m/?)
(6:00 AM) (war) The Password Is Courage (1962/115 m/Andrew L. Stone)
(8:00 AM) MGM CARTOONS: Sheep Wrecked (1958/6 m/Michael Lah)
(8:08 AM) (documentary) Cave Explorers (1957/8 m/Heinz Scheiderbauer)
(8:17 AM) (short) The Capital City Washington, D.C. (1940/9 m/?)
(8:27 AM) (drama) She Loved A Fireman (1937/58 m/John Farrow)
(9:30 AM) (premiere) The WILD WEST DAYS: Indians Are Coming (1937/?/?)
(10:00 AM) (premiere) POPEYE: A Hull of a Mess (1942/6 m/Dave Fleischer)
(10:08 AM) (adventure) Lord of the Jungle (1955/69 m/Ford Beebe)
(11:30 AM) (short) Kissing Time (1933/22 m/Roy Mack)
(12:00 PM) (western) Angel And The Badman (1947/100 m/James Edward Grant)
(1:45 PM) (adventure) Captain Horatio Hornblower (1951/117 m/Raoul Walsh)
(4:00 PM) (comedy) Support Your Local Sheriff! (1969/93 m/Burt Kennedy)
(5:45 PM) (horror) Rollerball (1975/125 m/Norman Jewison)
(8:00 PM) (musical) Singin' in the Rain (1952/103 m/Gene Kelly)
(10:00 PM) (musical) Summer Stock (1950/109 m/Charles Walters)
Sunday, October 18, 2020
(12:00 AM) (crime) Destination Murder (1950/73 m/Edward L. Cahn)
(1:45 AM) (comedy) The Fearless Vampire Killers or Pardon Me, But Your Teeth Are in My Neck (1966/107 m/Roman Polanski)
(3:45 AM) (horror) House of Dark Shadows (1970/97 m/Dan Curtis)
(5:30 AM) (short) Return to Glennascaul (1953/24 m/Hilton Edwards)
(6:00 AM) (drama) The Life of Emile Zola (1937/116 m/William Dieterle)
(8:15 AM) (comedy) His Girl Friday (1940/92 m/Howard Hawks)
(10:00 AM) (crime) Destination Murder (1950/73 m/Edward L. Cahn)
(11:45 AM) (epic) The Good Earth (1937/138 m/Sidney Franklin)
(2:15 PM) (drama) Written on the Wind (1957/99 m/Douglas Sirk)
(4:00 PM) (romance) Dear Heart (1964/114 m/Delbert Mann)
(6:00 PM) (comedy) Peggy Sue Got Married (1986/105 m/Francis Ford Coppola)
(10:00 PM) (comedy) Losing Ground (1982/86 m/Kathleen Collins)
Monday, October 19, 2020
(12:00 AM) (silent) Exit Smiling (1926/77 m/Sam Taylor)
(2:00 AM) (premiere) I Am Waiting (1957/91 m/Koreyoshi Kurahara)
(3:45 AM) (premiere) A Colt Is My Passport (1967/84 m/Takashi Nomura) .
(5:30 AM) (documentary) MGM Parade Show #5 (1955/26 m/?)
(6:00 AM) (comedy) I Married a Witch (1942/77 m/René Clair)
(7:30 AM) (comedy) Mr. and Mrs. Smith (1941/95 m/Alfred Hitchcock)
(9:15 AM) (crime) Touch of Evil (1958/111 m/Orson Welles)
(11:30 AM) (adventure) Mogambo (1953/116 m/John Ford)
(1:45 PM) (suspense) North by Northwest (1959/136 m/Alfred Hitchcock)
(4:15 PM) (drama) In A Lonely Place (1950/93 m/Nicholas Ray)
(6:00 PM) (war) Any Number Can Play (1949/103 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(8:00 PM) (suspense) The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959/87 m/Terence Fisher)
(9:30 PM) (horror) Horror of Dracula (1958/81 m/Terence Fisher)
(11:15 PM) (horror) The Mummy (1959/88 m/Terence Fisher)
(1:00 AM) (horror) The Curse of Frankenstein (1957/83 min/Terence Fisher)
(2:45 AM) (horror) Frankenstein Created Woman (1967/92 min/Terence Fisher)
(4:30 AM) (horror) Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed! (1970/101 m/Terence Fisher)
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
(6:15 AM) (comedy) Front Page Woman (1935/82 m/Michael Curtiz)
(7:45 AM) (romance) Wife Vs. Secretary (1936/88 m/Clarence Brown)
(9:30 AM) (suspense) Mr. And Mrs. North (1941/67 m/Robert B. Sinclair)
(10:45 AM) (comedy) Theodora Goes Wild (1936/94 m/Richard Boleslawski)
(12:30 PM) (comedy) Breakfast for Two (1937/68 m/Alfred Santell)
(1:45 PM) (comedy) Four's A Crowd (1938/92 m/Michael Curtiz)
(3:30 PM) (comedy) It's A Wonderful World (1939/86 m/W. S. Van Dyke II)
(5:00 PM) (comedy) Fools For Scandal (1938/80 m/Mervyn Le Roy)
(6:30 PM) (romance) Love on the Run (1936/80 m/W. S. Van Dyke)
(8:00 PM) (premiere) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 8) (2019/60 min/Mark Cousins)
(10:45 PM) (documentary) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 8) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
Wednesday, October 21, 2020
(2:00 AM) (premiere) The Third Miracle (1999/119 m/Agnieszka Holland)
(7:45 AM) (short) The Birth, the Life and the Death of Christ (1906/34 m/Alice Guy-Blache)
(8:30 AM) (documentary) Araya (1959/83 m/Margot Benacerraf)
(10:00 AM) (drama) Children of a Lesser God (1986/119 m/Randa Haines)
(12:15 PM) (drama) Young Dr. Kildare (1938/82 m/Harold S. Bucquet)
(1:45 PM) (drama) Calling Dr. Kildare (1939/86 m/Harold S. Bucquet)
(3:30 PM) (drama) The Secret of Dr. Kildare (1939/84 m/Harold S. Bucquet)
(5:00 PM) (drama) Dr. Kildare Goes Home (1940/79 m/Harold S. Bucquet)
(6:30 PM) (drama) Dr. Kildare's Crisis (1940/75 m/Harold S. Bucquet)
(8:00 PM) (comedy) Hard To Handle (1933/78 m/Mervyn Le Roy)
(9:30 PM) (crime) The Beast of the City (1932/86 m/Charles Brabin)
(11:15 PM) (drama) One Way Passage (1932/67 m/Tay Garnett)
Thursday, October 22, 2020
(12:45 AM) (crime) They Live By Night (1948/95 m/Nicolas Ray)
(2:30 AM) (adventure) The Prisoner of Zenda (1952/100 m/Richard Thorpe)
(4:15 AM) (adventure) Green Fire (1955/100 m/Andrew Marton)
(6:00 AM) (adventure) Three Faces East (1930/71 m/Roy Del Ruth)
(7:30 AM) (drama) Born to Love (1932/81 m/Paul L. Stein)
(9:00 AM) (drama) The Common Law (1932/74 m/Paul L. Stein)
(10:30 AM) (drama) Rockabye (1932/68 m/George Cukor)
(11:45 AM) (drama) Bed of Roses (1933/ 67 /Gregory LaCava)
(1:00 PM) (drama) Our Betters (1933/83 m/George Cukor)
(2:30 PM) (comedy) Topper (1937/97 m/Norman Z. McLeod)
(4:15 PM) (comedy) Topper Takes a Trip (1939/80 m/Norman Z. McLeod)
(5:45 PM) (comedy) Merrily We Live (1938/95 m/Norman Z. McLeod)
(7:30 PM) (documentary) MGM Parade Show #5 (1955/26 m/?)
(8:00 PM) (crime) The Killers (1964/93 m/Donald Siegel)
(9:45 PM) (drama) The Breaking Point (1950/97 m/Michael Curtiz)
(11:30 PM) (horror) The Mystery Of The Wax Museum (1933/77 m/Michael Curtiz)
Friday, October 23, 2020
(1:00 AM) (horror) Night of the Living Dead (1968/96 m/George A. Romero)
(3:00 AM) (premiere) A River Called Titas (1973/158 m/Ritwik Ghatak)
(6:00 AM) (drama) Inside Straight (1951/87 m/Gerald Mayer)
(7:30 AM) (crime) Absolute Quiet (1936/70 m/George B. Seitz)
(8:45 AM) (drama) Chain Lightning (1950/95 m/Stuart Heisler)
(10:30 AM) (adventure) Tycoon (1947/129 m/Richard Wallace)
(12:45 PM) (drama) No Marriage Ties (1933/72 m/J. Walter Ruben)
(2:00 PM) (drama) Death of a Scoundrel (1956/120 m/Charles Martin)
(4:15 PM) (crime) Assignment To Kill (1968/99 m/Sheldon Reynolds)
(6:00 PM) (suspense) The Drowning Pool (1975/108 m/Stuart Rosenberg)
(8:00 PM) (horror) Pit and the Pendulum (1961/80 m/Roger Corman)
(9:45 PM) (horror) Spirits of the Dead (1968/121 m/Federico Fellini, Louis Malle, Roger Vadim)
Saturday, October 24, 2020
(12:00 AM) (horror) Murders In The Rue Morgue (1971/98 m/Gordon Hessler)
(2:00 AM) (premiere) Ninja III: The Domination (1984/95 m/Sam Firstenberg)
(3:45 AM) (drama) Heavenly Bodies (1985/89 m/Lawrence Dane)
(5:30 AM) (short) Keep Off The Grass (1969/21 m/?)
(6:00 AM) (comedy) Please Don't Eat the Daisies (1960/111 m/Charles Walters)
(8:00 AM) (premiere) MGM CARTOONS: One Cab's Family (1938/8 m/Fred (Tex) Avery)
(8:09 AM) (documentary) Black Cats and Broomsticks (1955/8 m/Larry O'Reilly)
(8:18 AM) (short) Wandering Here and There (1944/9 m/James A. FitzPatrick)
(8:28 AM) (romance) King Of The Lumberjacks (1940/59 m/William Clemens)
(9:30 AM) (premiere) THE WILD WEST DAYS: Leap For Life (1937/?/?)
(10:00 AM) (premiere) POPEYE: Cartoons Ain’t Human (1943/7 m/Dave Fleischer)
(10:09 AM) (adventure) Tarzan And The Amazons (1945/76 m/Kurt Neumann)
(11:30 AM) (short) The Flame Song (1934/22 m/Joseph Henabery)
(12:00 PM) (suspense) Harper (1966/121 m/Jack Smight)
(2:15 PM) (horror) Brainstorm (1983/106 m/Douglas Trumbull)
(4:15 PM) (war) Men Of The Fighting Lady (1954/80 m/Andrew Marton)
(5:45 PM) (drama) Citizen Kane (1941/119 m/Orson Welles)
(8:00 PM) (drama) Ace in the Hole (1951/111m/Billy Wilder)
(10:15 PM) (premiere) Flesh and Fury (1952/83 m/Joseph Pevney)
Sunday, October 25, 2020
(12:00 AM) (adventure) Macao (1952/81 m/Josef von Sternberg)
(1:45 AM) (horror) The Werewolf (1956/80 m/Fred F. Sears)
(3:15 AM) (premiere) The Howling (1981/91 m/Joe Dante)
(5:00 AM) (horror) The Mummy (1932/73 m/Karl Freund)
(6:15 AM) (suspense) Murder on the Blackboard (1934/72 m/George Archainbaud)
(7:30 AM) (romance) All This, and Heaven Too (1940/143 m/Anatole Litvak)
(10:00 AM) (adventure) Macao (1952/81 m/Josef von Sternberg)
(12:00 PM) (romance) The White Cliffs Of Dover (1944/126 m/Clarence Brown)
(2:15 PM) (epic) Around the World in 80 Days (1956/182 m/Michael Anderson)
(5:30 PM) (horror) What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962/134 m/Robert Aldrich)
(8:00 PM) (western) 3:10 to Yuma (1957/92 m/Delmer Daves)
(10:00 PM) (western) Gunman's Walk (1958/95 m/Phil Karlson)
Monday, October 26, 2020
(12:00 AM) (silent) Haxan: Witchcraft Through the Ages (1922/107 m/Benjamin Christensen)
(2:00 AM) (suspense) Diabolique (1955/117 m/Henri-Georges Clouzot)
(4:15 AM) (horror) Eyes Without a Face (1959/90 m/Georges Franju)
(6:00 AM) (suspense) The Beast with Five Fingers (1946/88 m/Robert Florey)
(7:45 AM) (adventure) Mara Maru (1952/98 m/Gordon Douglas)
(9:30 AM) (drama) They Won't Believe Me (1947/80 m/Irving Pichel)
(11:15 AM) (suspense) Where Danger Lives (1950/80 m/John Farrow)
(1:00 PM) (suspense) Fingers at the Window (1942/81 m/Charles Lederer)
(2:30 PM) (suspense) Footsteps in the Dark (1941/96 m/Lloyd Bacon)
(4:15 PM) (suspense) Kill or Cure (1962/88 m/George Pollock)
(6:00 PM) (comedy) The Gazebo (1960/102m/George Marshall)
(8:00 PM) (horror) Nothing But the Night (1972/91 m/Peter Sasdy)
(9:45 PM) (horror) Madhouse (1974/91 m/James Clark)
(11:30 PM) (horror) From Beyond the Grave (1973/98 m/Kevin Connor)
Tuesday, October 27, 2020
(1:30 AM) (horror) Scream and Scream Again (1970/95 m/Gordon Hessler)
(3:15 AM) (premiere) The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973/88 m/Alan Gibson)
(4:45 AM) (horror) Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972/96 m/Alan Gibson)
(6:30 AM) (western) Somewhere In Sonora (1933/58 m/Mack V. Wright)
(7:45 AM) (western) Along the Rio Grande (1941/64 m/Edward Killy)
(9:00 AM) (western) Valley of the Sun (1942/78 m/George Marshall)
(10:30 AM) (western) Sagebrush Trail (1933/53 m/Armand Schaefer)
(11:30 AM) (western) Devil's Canyon (1953/92 m/Alfred Werker)
(1:15 PM) (western) The Hired Gun (1957/64 m/Ray Nazarro)
(2:30 PM) (premiere) Black Patch (1957/82 m/Allen H. Miner)
(4:00 PM) (western) Virginia City (1940/121 m/Michael Curtiz)
(6:15 PM) (western) Escape From Fort Bravo (1953/98 m/John Sturges)
(8:00 PM) (premiere) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 9) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
(11:00 PM) (documentary) Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (episode 9) (2019/60 m/Mark Cousins)
Wednesday, October 28, 2020
(12:15 AM) (comedy) Girlfriends (1978/88 m/Claudia Weill)
(2:00 AM) (drama) The Connection (1962/103 m/Shirley Clarke)
(4:00 AM) (comedy) Lost In Yonkers (1993/114 m/Martha Coolidge)
(10:00 AM) (drama) Winter Meeting (1948/104 m/Bretaigne Windust)
(12:00 PM) (romance) I Know Where I'm Going (1945/92 m/Michael Powell)
(1:45 PM) (romance) The Enchanted Cottage (1945/92 m/John Cromwell)
(3:30 PM) (romance) Random Harvest (1942/126 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(6:00 PM) (romance) Desire Me (1947/91 m/George Cukor)
(8:00 PM) (drama) The Best Man (1964/102 m/Franklin J. Schaffner)
(10:00 PM) (drama) State of the Union (1948/123 m/Frank Capra)
Thursday, October 29, 2020
(12:15 AM) (comedy) The Great McGinty (1940/82 m/Preston Sturges)
(2:00 AM) (drama) The Candidate (1972/110 m/Michael Ritchie)
(4:00 AM) (drama) All the King's Men (1949/110 m/Robert Rossen)
(6:00 AM) (western) Haunted Gold (1932/58 m/Mack V. Wright)
(7:00 AM) (horror) The Devil-Doll (1936/78 m/Tod Browning)
(8:30 AM) (suspense) Before Dawn (1933/61 m/Irving Pichel)
(9:45 AM) (comedy) Man Alive (1946/70 m/Ray Enright)
(11:00 AM) (horror) Tormented (1960/75 m/Bert I. Gordon)
(12:30 PM) (adventure) Angel on My Shoulder (1946/101 m/Archie Mayo)
(2:15 PM) (horror) Night Of Dark Shadows (1971/94 m/Dan Curtis)
(4:00 PM) (horror) Indestructible Man (1956/71 m/Jack Pollexfen)
(5:15 PM) (horror) From Hell It Came (1957/71 m/Johnny Greenwald)
(6:30 PM) (horror) Death Curse of Tartu (1966/88 m/William Grefé)
(8:00 PM) (western) Winchester '73 (1950/92 m/Anthony Mann)
(10:00 PM) (western) She Wore a Yellow Ribbon (1949/104 m/John Ford)
Friday, October 30, 2020
(12:00 AM) (documentary) Primary (1960/53 m/Robert Drew)
(1:15 AM) (documentary) Crisis (1963/53 m/Robert Drew)
(2:15 AM) (premiere) Dos Monjes (1934//Juan Bustillo Oro)
(4:00 AM) (drama) Of Mice and Men (1939/107m/Lewis Milestone)
(6:00 AM) (documentary) MGM Parade Show #5 (1955/26 m/?)
(6:30 AM) (horror) Doctor X (1932/76 m/Michael Curtiz)
(8:00 AM) (horror) The Mask Of Fu Manchu (1932/68 m/Charles Brabin)
(9:30 AM) (horror) The Most Dangerous Game (1932/63 m/Ernest B. Schoedsack)
(10:45 AM) (horror) Island of Lost Souls (1932/70 m/Erle C. Kenton)
(12:00 PM) (horror) White Zombie (1932/67 m/Victor Halperin)
(1:30 PM) (horror) The Vampire Bat (1933/63 m/Frank Strayer)
(2:45 PM) (horror) The Mystery Of The Wax Museum (1933/77 m/Michael Curtiz)
(4:15 PM) (horror) Mad Love (1935/68 m/Karl Freund)
(5:30 PM) (horror) The Walking Dead (1936/65 m/Michael Curtiz)
(6:45 PM) (horror) The Return of Doctor X (1939/62 m/Vincent Sherman)
(8:00 PM) (horror) Burn, Witch, Burn! (1962/89 m/Sidney Hayers)
(9:45 PM) (horror) The Four Skulls of Jonathan Drake (1959/70 m/Edward L. Cahn)
(11:00 PM) (horror) The Devil's Bride (1968/96 m/Terence Fisher)
Saturday, October 31, 2020
(12:45 AM) (horror) The Conqueror Worm (1968/87 m/Michael Reeves)
(5:15 AM) (short) The Distant Drummer: Flowers of Darkness (1972/22 m/William Templeton)
(5:15 AM) (short) Movie Trailer (1950/16 m/?)
(6:00 AM) (horror) Freaks (1932/62 m/Tod Browning)
(7:15 AM) (horror) Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1932/96 m/Rouben Mamoulian)
(9:00 AM) (horror) House of Wax (1953/88 m/Andre DeToth)
(10:45 AM) (horror) Children of the Damned (1964/90 m/Anton M. Leader)
(12:30 PM) (suspense) The Bad Seed (1956/129 m/Mervyn LeRoy)
(2:45 PM) (drama) The Picture of Dorian Gray (1945/110 m/Albert Lewin)
(4:45 PM) (horror) The Wolf Man (1941/70 m/George Waggner)
(6:00 PM) (horror) The Haunting (1963/112 m/Robert Wise)
(8:00 PM) (comedy) Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964/95 m/Stanley Kubrick) .
(10:00 PM) (horror) Them! (1954/92 m/Gordon Douglas)
(12:00 AM) (horror) The Seventh Victim (1943/71 m/Mark Robson)
(1:30 AM) (horror) I Walked With A Zombie (1943/69 m/Jacques Tourneur)
(3:00 AM) (horror) The Body Snatcher (1945/78 m/Robert Wise)
(4:30 AM) (suspense) The Leopard Man (1943/66 m/Jacques Tourneur)
submitted by tombstoneshadows28 to movies [link] [comments]


2020.09.17 20:41 SweetyFresh [Pennsylvania] The Unemployment Organizing Committee and Philadelphia Unemployment Project call for the immediate resignation of PA Labor Secretary Jerry Oleksiak

Out of work Pennsylvanians call for resignation of PA Labor Secretary Jerry Oleksiak, citing late and missing benefit payments, jammed phone lines, and ignored pleas for help.
A group of working Pennsylvanians who have lost their jobs as a direct result of the COVID19 crisis have called for the resignation of Gerard Oleksiak, secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry. The Unemployment Organizing Committee formed in the aftermath of the mass layoffs resulting from the coronavirus pandemic and created a network for unemployed workers to share information and jointly demand fixes for the failures of the Unemployment Compensation office in the state.
https://philaup.org/web/the-unemployment-organizing-committee-and-philadelphia-unemployment-project-call-for-the-immediate-resignation-of-pa-labor-secretary-jerry-oleksiak/
Florence Corcoran, a physical therapist who lost her job on March 20th, is a UOC member who has not received any payments from the UC office. She called the communications she received from the Department of Labor “effectively indiscernible.” “We need people to answer the phones, hire more people, answer emails, do anything to get people their unemployment compensation. It’s a little ridiculous that I’ve been waiting 17 weeks.”
Another out of work Philadelphian, Andrew W., said, “I’m just about out of savings to get me through May and now June. I’m literally on the food lines but my bills are late.” He was laid off in early April. “I apologize for being frustrated but I am. And I’m worried.”
A letter drafted by the UOC notes that “over 1.7 million individuals in Pennsylvania are unemployed as a direct result of the pandemic. To date, approximately 280,000 citizens of the Commonwealth have not received any unemployment benefits. These claims date back to mid-March. Your failure to address the systemic problems that the department continues to allow going unresolved is unacceptable.”
The Unemployment Organizing Committee works alongside the Philadelphia Unemployment Project, a non-profit organization that since 1975 has advocated for unemployed and low income Pennsylvanians, fair wages, and just housing policies.
The letter calling for Sec. Oleksiak’s resignation below.
submitted by SweetyFresh to Unemployment [link] [comments]


2020.09.15 02:31 iambrian81 The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the U.S. Less Secure

"
Like many of the virus’s hardest hit victims, the United States went into the COVID-19 pandemic wracked by preexisting conditions. A fraying public health infrastructure, inadequate medical supplies, an employer-based health insurance system perversely unsuited to the moment—these and other afflictions are surely contributing to the death toll. But in addressing the causes and consequences of this pandemic—and its cruelly uneven impact—the elephant in the room is extreme income inequality.
How big is this elephant? A staggering $50 trillion. That is how much the upward redistribution of income has cost American workers over the past several decades.
This is not some back-of-the-napkin approximation. According to a groundbreaking new working paper by Carter C. Price and Kathryn Edwards of the RAND Corporation, had the more equitable income distributions of the three decades following World War II (1945 through 1974) merely held steady, the aggregate annual income of Americans earning below the 90th percentile would have been $2.5 trillion higher in the year 2018 alone. That is an amount equal to nearly 12 percent of GDP—enough to more than double median income—enough to pay every single working American in the bottom nine deciles an additional $1,144 a month. Every month. Every single year.
Price and Edwards calculate that the cumulative tab for our four-decade-long experiment in radical inequality had grown to over $47 trillion from 1975 through 2018. At a recent pace of about $2.5 trillion a year, that number we estimate crossed the $50 trillion mark by early 2020. That’s $50 trillion that would have gone into the paychecks of working Americans had inequality held constant—$50 trillion that would have built a far larger and more prosperous economy—$50 trillion that would have enabled the vast majority of Americans to enter this pandemic far more healthy, resilient, and financially secure.
As the RAND report [whose research was funded by the Fair Work Center which co-author David Rolf is a board member of] demonstrates, a rising tide most definitely did not lift all boats. It didn’t even lift most of them, as nearly all of the benefits of growth these past 45 years were captured by those at the very top. And as the American economy grows radically unequal it is holding back economic growth itself.
📷People participate in a "March on Billionaires" event on July 17 in New York City. The march called on Governor Andrew Cuomo to pass a tax on billionaires and to fund workers excluded from unemployment and federal aid programs Spencer Platt—Getty Images
Even inequality is meted out unequally. Low-wage workers and their families, disproportionately people of color, suffer from far higher rates of asthma, hypertension, diabetes, and other COVID-19 comorbidities; yet they are also far less likely to have health insurance, and far more likely to work in “essential” industries with the highest rates of coronavirus exposure and transmission. It is no surprise then, according to the CDC, that COVID-19 inflicts “a disproportionate burden of illness and death among racial and ethnic minority groups.” But imagine how much safer, healthier, and empowered all American workers might be if that $50 trillion had been paid out in wages instead of being funneled into corporate profits and the offshore accounts of the super-rich. Imagine how much richer and more resilient the American people would be. Imagine how many more lives would have been saved had our people been more resilient.
It is easy to see how such a deadly virus, and the draconian measures required to contain it, might spark an economic depression. But look straight into the eyes of the elephant in the room, and it is impossible to deny the many ways in which our extreme inequality—an exceptionally American affliction—has made the virus more deadly and its economic consequences more dire than in any other advanced nation. Why is our death toll so high and our unemployment rate so staggeringly off the charts? Why was our nation so unprepared, and our economy so fragile? Why have we lacked the stamina and the will to contain the virus like most other advanced nations? The reason is staring us in the face: a stampede of rising inequality that has been trampling the lives and livelihoods of the vast majority of Americans, year after year after year.
Of course, America’s chronic case of extreme inequality is old news. Many other studies have documented this trend, chronicled its impact, and analyzed its causes. But where others have painted the picture in terms of aggregate shares of GDP, productivity growth, or other cold, hard statistics, the RAND report brings the inequality price tag directly home by denominating it in dollars—not just the aggregate $50 trillion figure, but in granular demographic detail. For example, are you a typical Black man earning $35,000 a year? You are being paid at least $26,000 a year less than you would have had income distributions held constant. Are you a college-educated, prime-aged, full-time worker earning $72,000? Depending on the inflation index used (PCE or CPI, respectively), rising inequality is costing you between $48,000 and $63,000 a year. But whatever your race, gender, educational attainment, urbanicity, or income, the data show, if you earn below the 90th percentile, the relentlessly upward redistribution of income since 1975 is coming out of your pocket.
📷People line up outside Kentucky Career Center to find assistance with their unemployment claims in Frankfort, Kentucky, U.S. June 18 Bryan Woolston—REUTERS
As Price and Edwards explain, from 1947 through 1974, real incomes grew close to the rate of per capita economic growth across all income levels. That means that for three decades, those at the bottom and middle of the distribution saw their incomes grow at about the same rate as those at the top. This was the era in which America built the world’s largest and most prosperous middle class, an era in which inequality between income groups steadily shrank (even as shocking inequalities between the sexes and races largely remained). But around 1975, this extraordinary era of broadly shared prosperity came to an end. Since then, the wealthiest Americans, particularly those in the top 1 percent and 0.1 percent, have managed to capture an ever-larger share of our nation’s economic growth—in fact, almost all of it—their real incomes skyrocketing as the vast majority of Americans saw little if any gains.
What if American prosperity had continued to be broadly shared—how much more would a typical worker be earning today? Once the data are compiled, answering these questions is fairly straightforward. Price and Edwards look at real taxable income from 1975 to 2018. They then compare actual income distributions in 2018 to a counterfactual that assumes incomes had continued to keep pace with growth in per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP)—a 118% increase over the 1975 income numbers. Whether measuring inflation using the more conservative Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (PCE) or the more commonly cited Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U-RS), the results are striking.
📷Data Source: RAND; Graphics: Mary Traverse for Civic Ventures
At every income level up to the 90th percentile, wage earners are now being paid a fraction of what they would have had inequality held constant. For example, at the median individual income of $36,000, workers are being shortchanged by $21,000 a year—$28,000 when using the CPI—an amount equivalent to an additional $10.10 to $13.50 an hour. But according to Price and Edwards, this actually understates the impact of rising inequality on low- and middle-income workers, because much of the gains at the bottom of the distribution were largely “driven by an increase in hours not an increase in wages.” To adjust for this, along with changing patterns of workforce participation, the researchers repeat their analysis for full-year, full-time, prime-aged workers (age 25 to 54). These results are even more stark: “Unlike the growth patterns in the 1950s and 60s,” write Price and Edwards, “the majority of full-time workers did not share in the economic growth of the last forty years.”
📷Data Source: RAND; Graphics: Mary Traverse for Civic Ventures
On average, extreme inequality is costing the median income full-time worker about $42,000 a year. Adjusted for inflation using the CPI, the numbers are even worse: half of all full-time workers (those at or below the median income of $50,000 a year) now earn less than half what they would have had incomes across the distribution continued to keep pace with economic growth. And that’s per worker, not per household. At both the 25th and 50th percentiles, households comprised of a married couple with one full-time worker earned thousands of dollars less in 2018 dollars than a comparable household in 1975—and $50,000 and $66,000 less respectively than if inequality had held constant—a predicament compounded by the rising costs of maintaining a dignified middle-class life. According to Oren Cass, executive director of the conservative think tank American Compass, the median male worker needed 30 weeks of income in 1985 to pay for housing, healthcare, transportation, and education for his family. By 2018, that “Cost of Thriving Index” had increased to 53 weeks (more weeks than in an actual year). But the counterfactual reveals an even starker picture: In 2018, the combined income of married households with two full-time workers was barely more than what the income of a single-earner household would have earned had inequality held constant. Two-income families are now working twice the hours to maintain a shrinking share of the pie, while struggling to pay housing, healthcare, education, childcare, and transportations costs that have grown at two to three times the rate of inflation.
This dramatic redistribution of income from the majority of workers to those at the very top is so complete that even at the 95th percentile, most workers are still earning less than they would have had inequality held constant. It is only at the 99th percentile that we see incomes growing faster than economic growth: at 171 percent of the rate of per capita GDP. But even this understates the disparity. “The average income growth for the top one percent was substantially higher,” write Price and Edwards, “at more than 300 percent of the real per capita GDP rate.” The higher your income, the larger your percentage gains. As a result, the top 1 percent’s share of total taxable income has more than doubled, from 9 percent in 1975, to 22 percent in 2018, while the bottom 90 percent have seen their income share fall, from 67 percent to 50 percent. This represents a direct transfer of income—and over time, wealth—from the vast majority of working Americans to a handful at the very top.
📷Data Source: RAND; Graphics: Mary Traverse for Civic Ventures
But given the changing demographic composition of the U.S. workforce, these topline numbers can only tell part of the story. The U.S. workforce is now better educated and more urban than it was in 1975. It is also far less white and male—with white men falling from over 60 percent of the prime-aged workforce in 1974 to less than 45 percent by 2018. These changes are important, because while there was far more equality between the income distributions in 1975, there was also more inequality within them—notably in regard to gender and race.
For example, in 1975, the median income of white women was only 31 percent of that of white men; by 2018 white women were earning 68 percent as much. Likewise, the median income of Black men as a share of their white counterparts’ earnings rose from 74 percent in 1975, to 80 percent in 2018. Clearly, income disparities between races, and especially between men and women, have narrowed since 1975, and that is a good thing. But unfortunately, much of the narrowing we see is more an artifact of four decades of flat or declining wages for low- and middle-income white men than it is of substantial gains for women and nonwhites.
📷Data Source: RAND; Graphics: Mary Traverse for Civic Ventures
Much has been made about white male grievance in the age of Trump, and given their falling or stagnant real incomes, one can understand why some white men might feel aggrieved. White, non-urban, non-college educated men have the slowest wage growth in every demographic category. But to blame their woes on competition from women or minorities would be to completely miss the target. In fact, white men still earn more than white women at all income distributions, and substantially more than most non-white men and women. Only Asian-American men earn higher. Yet there is no moral or practical justification for the persistence of any income disparity based on race or gender.
The counterfactuals in the table above appear vastly unequal because they extrapolate from the indefensible 1975-levels of race and gender inequality; they assume that inequality remained constant both between income distributions and within them—that women and nonwhites had not narrowed the income gap with white men. But surely, this cannot be our goal. In an economy freed from race and gender bias, and that shares the fruits of growth broadly across all income distributions, the most appropriate counterfactual for all the groups in this table would be the aggregate counterfactual for “All Groups”: a median income of $57,000 a year for all adults with positive earnings ($92,000 for full-time prime-age workers). That would be the income for all workers at the 50th percentile, regardless of race or gender, had race and gender inequality within distributions been eliminated, and inequality between distributions not grown. By this measure we can see that in real dollars, women and nonwhites have actually lost more income to rising inequality than white men, because starting from their disadvantaged positions in 1975, they had far more to potentially gain. Per capita GDP grew by 118 percent over the following four decades, so there was plenty of new income to spread around. That the majority of white men have benefited from almost none of this growth isn’t because they have lost income to women or minorities; it’s because they’ve lost it to their largely white male counterparts in the top 1 percent who have captured nearly all of the income growth for themselves. According to economist Thomas Piketty, men accounted for 85 percent of the top income centile in the mid-2010s—and while he doesn’t specify, these men are overwhelmingly white.
Thus, by far the single largest driver of rising inequality these past forty years has been the dramatic rise in inequality between white men.
📷People participate in a "March on Billionaires" event on July 17 in New York City Spencer Platt—Getty Images.
The data on income distribution by educational attainment is equally revealing, in that it calls the lie on the notion of a “skills gap”—a dominant narrative that has argued that rising inequality is largely a consequence of a majority of American workers failing to acquire the higher skills necessary to compete in our modern global economy. If workers were better educated, this narrative argues, they would earn more money. Problem solved.
Indeed, at every income distribution, the education premium has increased since 1975, with the income of college graduates rising faster than their less educated counterparts. But this growing gap is more a consequence of falling incomes for workers without a college degree than it is of rising real incomes for most workers with one—for not only have workers without a degree secured none of the gains from four decades of economic growth, below the 50th percentile they’ve actually seen their real incomes decline. College educated workers are doing better. The median real income for full-time workers with a four-year degree has grown from $55,000 a year in 1975 to $72,000 in 2018. But that still falls far short of the $120,000 they’d be earning had incomes grown with per capita GDP. Even at the 90th percentile, a college educated full-time worker making $191,000 a year is earning less than 78 percent what they would have had inequality held constant.
The reality is that American workers have never been more highly educated. In 1975, only 67 percent of the adult US workforce had a high school education or better, while just 15 percent had earned a four-year college degree. By 2018, 91 percent of adult workers had completed high school, while the percentage of college graduates in the workforce had more than doubled to 34 percent. In raw numbers, the population of adult workers with a high school education or less has fallen since 1975, while the number of workers with a four-year degree has more than quadrupled.
📷Data Source: RAND; Graphics: Mary Traverse for Civic Ventures
It is impossible to argue that a “skills gap” is responsible for rising income inequality when the rate of educational attainment is rising faster than the rate of growth in productivity or per capita GDP. Yes, workers with college degrees are doing better than those without; the economy we’ve built over the past 45 years has been more unequal to some than to others. But below the 90th percentile, even college graduates are falling victim to a decades-long trend of radical inequality that is robbing them of most of the benefits of economic growth.
The iron rule of market economies is that we all do better when we all do better: when workers have more money, businesses have more customers, and hire more workers. Seventy percent of our economy is dependent on consumer spending; the faster and broader real incomes grow, the stronger the demand for the products and services American businesses produce. This is the virtuous cycle through which workers and businesses prospered together in the decades immediately following World War II. But as wages stagnated after 1975, so too did consumer demand; and as demand slowed, so did the economy. A 2014 report from the OECD estimated that rising income inequality knocked as much 9 points off U.S. GDP growth over the previous two decades—a deficit that has surely grown over the past six years as inequality continued to climb. That’s about $2 trillion worth of GDP that’s being frittered away, year after year, through policy choices that intentionally constrain the earning power of American workers.
COVID-19 may have triggered our current crisis, but it wasn’t its only cause. For even had our political leaders done everything right in the moment, our response to the pandemic would still have been mired in the footprint of extreme inequality: a $50 trillion upward redistribution of wealth and income—$297,000 per household—that has left our families, our economy, and our democracy far less capable of fighting this virus than in other advanced nations. This is the America that stumbled into the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic catastrophe it unleashed: An America with an economy $2 trillion smaller and a workforce $2.5 trillion a year poorer than they otherwise would be had inequality held constant since 1975. This is an America in which 47 percent of renters are cost burdened, in which 40 percent of households can’t cover a $400 emergency expense, in which half of Americans over age 55 have no retirement savings at all. This is an America in which 28 million have no health insurance, and in which 44 million underinsured Americans can’t afford the deductibles or copays to use the insurance they have. This is an America that recklessly rushed to reopen its economy in the midst of a deadly pandemic because businesses were too fragile to survive an extended closure and workers too powerless and impoverished to defy the call back to work.
📷Rectangles designed to help prevent the spread of the coronavirus by encouraging social distancing line a city-sanctioned homeless encampment at San Francisco's Civic Center on May 21 Noah Berger—AP
There are some who blame the current plight of working Americans on structural changes in the underlying economy—on automation, and especially on globalization. According to this popular narrative, the lower wages of the past 40 years were the unfortunate but necessary price of keeping American businesses competitive in an increasingly cutthroat global market. But in fact, the $50 trillion transfer of wealth the RAND report documents has occurred entirely within the American economy, not between it and its trading partners. No, this upward redistribution of income, wealth, and power wasn’t inevitable; it was a choice—a direct result of the trickle-down policies we chose to implement since 1975.
We chose to cut taxes on billionaires and to deregulate the financial industry. We chose to allow CEOs to manipulate share prices through stock buybacks, and to lavishly reward themselves with the proceeds. We chose to permit giant corporations, through mergers and acquisitions, to accumulate the vast monopoly power necessary to dictate both prices charged and wages paid. We chose to erode the minimum wage and the overtime threshold and the bargaining power of labor. For four decades, we chose to elect political leaders who put the material interests of the rich and powerful above those of the American people.
Other nations are suffering less from COVID-19 because they made better choices, and the good news is that America can, too. Economics is a choice. We could choose to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 or $20 an hour and peg it to productivity growth like in the decades before 1975. We could choose to revalue work so that the majority of Americans once again earn time-and-a-half pay for every hour worked over 40 hours a week. We could choose to provide affordable high-quality healthcare, childcare, and education to all Americans, while modernizing our social insurance and retirement systems so that contract and gig workers aren’t left out and left behind. We could choose to make it easier for workers to organize, and to defend the rights and interests of those who can’t. We could choose to build a more equitable, resilient, and prosperous America—an America that grows its economy by intentionally including every American in it. But given our nation’s radical redistribution of wealth and power these past 40 years, it won’t be easy.
📷People wait on a long line to receive a food bank donation at the Barclays Center on May 15 in Brooklyn. The sports arena saw lines wrap around the block as New Yorkers struggle with unemployment and other financial stresses brought on by the COVID-19 outbreak Stephanie Keith—Getty Images.
What American workers need are multiple simultaneous experiments in rebuilding worker power, from tweaking existing labor laws to sectoral bargaining to the creation of whole new trade associations and broad-based not-for-profit organizations. For example, imagine an AARP for all working Americans, relentlessly dedicated to both raising wages and reducing the cost of thriving—a mass membership organization so large and so powerful that our political leaders won’t dare to look the other way. Only then, by matching power with power, can we clear a path to enacting the laws and policies necessary to ensure that that trickle-down economics never threatens our health, safety, and welfare again.
There is little evidence that the current administration has any interest in dealing with this crisis. Our hope is that a Biden administration would be historically bold. But make no mistake that both our political and economic systems will collapse absent solutions that scale to the enormous size of the problem. The central goal our nation’s economic policy must be nothing less than the doubling of median income. We must dramatically narrow inequality between distributions while eliminating racial and gender inequalities within them. This is the standard to which we should hold leaders from both parties. To advocate for anything less would be cowardly or dishonest or both."

https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/
submitted by iambrian81 to WayOfTheBern [link] [comments]


2020.09.14 21:39 monophobe Houston Rockets Offseason: Solving the Eric Gordon and Danuel House Jr. Problem

It's no secret that Houston needs to continue to make changes to their roster after another second round exit this season. The two big questions however, are 1) who can they move in order to upgrade their roster and 2) how can they do so with so little draft capital? Last night in a stoned stupor, I sat down to try and figure out these issues for them. So, there's no question that the two must move pieces for the rockets this summer are Eric Gordon and Danuel House Jr. For seemingly opposite reasons I might add, as Eric Gordon is one of the few names left on a Rockets jersey despite lots of overhaul each season, but whose declining play and poor fit leaves the Rockets needing more. House however, was on the rise as a solid role player for Houston and their de facto sixth man, but off the court issues make it hard to imagine him on the payroll for much longer. So without further ado, let's get into the meat of it.
Danuel House Jr. to the Washington Wizards for Mortiz Wagner
Why: Houston fully implemented Micro Ball this season (for better or for worse), and while it did lead to success in the short run, their players simply cannot keep up with the physical toll that Micro Ball demands in the long term. They need someone to soak up minutes at the 5 spot, and Moritz Wagner is one of those solutions. A stretch big, he provides Houston with the spacing they need on the offensive side of the floor. His defense remains a question mark, but it's likely to Rockets just go small in crunch time anyways (ala Warriors' Death Lineup). Washington has routinely had a hole at their 3 spot for years, and House supplements that need for 3&D at a low cost. They'll be able to sign a backup big in free agency, so losing Wagner isn't a huge loss given what they gain.
Danuel House Jr. to the Chicago Bulls for Ryan Arcidiacano
Why: This is more a "get rid of House" no matter what move, but the Rockets still come out with a cheap, decent rotational player. Chicago gets a defensive wing to slide next to Lavine and clears up their cluttered backcourt.
Danuel House Jr. to the New Orleans Pelicans for Nicoli Melli
This is one idea I'm not too sure about, as I admittedly don't know too much about Melli outside of him being an older rookie on a short, cheap contract. He'd be able to soak up minutes at the 4/5 and provide spacing for Houston, but could prove to be a defensive liability. The Pelicans in my opinion aren't losing too much as they get House to spot up and play defense next to Ingram and Williamson. That will conclude this portion of the Danuel House trades, but I will be adding in one big trade at the end that he plays a part in.
Eric Gordon and 2021 2nd to the New York Knicks for Taj Gibson and Kevin Knox
Why: Knicks continue to be in free fall and would gladly eat a contract in exchange for some sort of draft capital. Taj and Knox are each expendable for different reasons, with the former aging and the latter lacking as a prospect. Houston takes a huge gamble on Knox, as his shooting and defense are a concern, but are also able to net Taj to slot in at their 5 spot.
Eric Gordon, 2021 2nd, and a 2024 2nd to the Orlando Magic for Aaron Gordon
Why: The old Gordon switcheroo, would take some serious convincing from Morey to go through. Orlando are in basketball limbo, nibbling at the 8 seed in consecutive seasons with no real direction. They should commit to a full rebuild soon with young players like Fultz, Bamba, and Isaac (upon his return from injury). Aaron Gordon looks to need a change of scenery, as he's put up similar numbers with no real progression made in the past couple seasons. He would serve as a huge addition to Houston as their permanent 4 with solid defense, decent shooting, and a great pick and roll partner for Westbrook/Harden. Eric and some second rounders aren't the best return for a solid starter, but he would serve as a good veteran for the Magic and fit their new timeline.
Eric Gordon and a 2021 2nd to the Cleveland Cavaliers for Larry Nance Jr. and Dante Exum
Why: With Cleveland fully committed to tanking, they wouldn't scoff at losing expendable pieces in exchange for for a shooter and a pick. Exum has been riddled with injuries most of his career and could end up as dead weight on the Houston payroll, but Nance Jr. slides in as a fairly inexpensive center. Now, onto a only partially related bigger trade scenario that should, in theory, benefit all parties.
Golden State Warriors send Andrew Wiggins, Alan Smailagic, the 2nd pick of the 2020 Draft, and a 2022 Unprotected 1st to the Orlando Magic for Nikola Vucevic
Why: As mentioned earlier, Orlando needs to bite the bullet and shed what they have for assets. Vucevic is stranded on an island, in the prime years of his career and the Magic barely scraping at the 8th seed at best as his reward. The Warriors offer here in my opinion is probably one of the better returns they'd get for their All Star Center, and could even be sweetened further with the addition of Jordan Poole or other first/second round picks. Both teams come out with brighter futures, as the Warriors get another All-Star that fits their timeline, and Orlando comes out with a lion share of draft picks, prospect(s), and a low risk high reward player in Wiggins. In conjunction with that trade, the Warriors should look to make the following move.
Kevon Looney and Minnesota's 2021 2nd round pick to the Houston Rockets for Danuel House Jr.
Why: No idea if this trade goes through given these teams are direct competitors in the West, but both gain for the better if it goes through. Golden State fills out their starting lineup and Houston gets a good, low cost big man to add to their starting lineup.
So that concludes my long list of trade ideas. Please let me know what you guys think, what works and what doesn't, or how to improve upon anything. I also apologize in advance for any potential formatting issues.
submitted by monophobe to nbadiscussion [link] [comments]


2020.09.14 18:43 damazz10 Bravo Ratings 9/6/20-9/10/20

Sunday 9/6/20

Competing shows during the night (for comparison)

Monday 9/7/20

Competing shows during the night (for comparison)

Tuesday 9/8/20

Competing shows during the night (for comparison)

Wednesday 9/9/20

Competing shows during the night (for comparison)

Thursday 9/10/20

Competing shows during the night (for comparison)

submitted by damazz10 to BravoRealHousewives [link] [comments]


2020.09.13 03:06 AuthorJoJo My friend started streaming again after two years, his room looks a lot different now.

About two years ago my friend started streaming. He would just sit around and play whatever video game he was trying to complete at the time. It wasn't uncommon that he wouldn't have any viewers and knowing how rough his home life was, I started feeling bad. So I subscribed to his channel and would chill with him whenever he was on.
I thought if I was there he would have someone to talk to and keep his mind off the things that were bothering him. Not to mention if someone happened to check the stream out they would see he was talking and engaging with a viewer which always helps convince people to stick around. It went like this for a while and now and then he would get new subscribers and even some fans of his content.
People would always ask why he was muting his mic all the time. I can't say for certain but I think it was because his parents would start fighting and he was embarrassed. Over time people began to notice that his room was getting messier and eventually that it was pretty common for him to wear the same clothing for days in a row.
I tried my best to encourage him and be a good friend, telling him that he should just focus on streaming because he was starting to get an audience. It wasn't too long after that topic that his streams suddenly stopped. Waiting there for his scheduled streaming session to start, watching the chat complain that it hadn't yet. Felt lonely in a weird way, I wondered if maybe I was using his stream as a means to escape too. Or something I could pat myself on the back about. “You're doing a nice thing.” I know that sounds selfish.
The stream hadn't come back up, I check every day he would typically stream for a month and he never showed up. We weren't super close, like, the hang out at each other's houses type of friends but it still stung that he never said goodbye or let me help him any further. He never really said anything to me after that last stream. Which sucked but, I had to move on with life. I couldn't sit there staring at a blank screen all day waiting for something to happen.
You know how it is to lose track of days. How friends can come and go sometimes and before you know it, it's years later and things feel completely different. I still check in on people streaming now and then. Mostly as background noise while I work on projects or whatever. I have a few people I subscribed to, content creators that I knew wouldn't distract me.
So imagine my surprise last week. I sat down to work on my term paper, the silence made it hard to concentrate so I went on the old go-to. Then as I load up the people I subscribed to, I feel a nostalgic shiver wrestle with my spine when I read “AndrewinVain: Now live.” I'll be honest I had kind of forgotten about him. Maybe not forgotten but he hadn't been at the forefront of my thought for quite some time.
Seeing his channel live gave me a somber ping in my throat, a lump of repressed memory that was hard to swallow. I could see the view counter was zero and a low-res image of someone sitting in front of a camera. I stared at the red dot indicating the stream was live wondering if it was some fluke or some sick joke. Thought about just ignoring it for a while, but then I remembered all those nights I hung out in the stream with him. It couldn't hurt just to click it I thought.
Listening to the soft click of plastic my mouse gave off I watched the screen load up into Andrews stream. I couldn't believe it, there he was just sitting in his room, I think it was his room anyways. I could only make out his face illuminated by the computer screen and a vague collection of shapes in the background. I sat there stunned for a good while. Too anxious and afraid to engage, but the way he looked into the camera felt like he already knew I was there.
The look in his eye was almost a physical representation of that ping I felt in my throat upon seeing him online. His camera was pretty low quality but not so bad that I couldn't make him out, it was almost like someone was trying to sensor him but didn't put the filter up high enough. I kept sitting there waiting for him to say something. His mouth would sometime move like he was going to speak but then he would close it. Still, I saw him moving his hand to the cord of the headset and his finger clicking a small button to mute his mic. I don't know if that was a comforting familiarity and a painful realization. He had never got away.
Just as I was working up the courage to type something I could see a sliver of light appearing in the background to his right as if someone had opened his bedroom door. He reached forward and the stream went off-line. My computer screen was sent into darkness as I leaned back in my chair letting out the breath I had been holding in. The situation was surreal enough to completely take me out of my element.
I looked at the screen of my phone, also black from inactivity. I didn't even know if I still had Andrew's number saved. The desire to call his house was a fleeting one anyways. Instead, I decided to call it a night, I had been working too late and likely just needed sleep. The next day would be a better one.
Then the next day came, the sun went down, and once again I found myself sitting at the desk readying myself to get my project done. I looked at my paper for a good while without anything coming to mind. For whatever reason, I found the thought of using my crutch of background noise to be foreboding. I decided to just face it head-on and loaded up the site. Going directly to Andrew's channel this time I was relieved to see that he wasn't live.
Laughing at myself I moved the mouse to click off the page when I noticed. In the thumbnail of his stream from two years ago, his very last stream. The door to his room was over his left shoulder, not his right. Then I remembered he was always a little late to start streaming one Wednesday because he had to take some trash out and sure enough, his stream went active before I could leave the page.
Of course, I clicked it. I was already in it how could I just avoid it. I had to know. Where was he now? It wasn't his room from two years ago. So I found myself staring him in the eyes again as his gaunt features peered into the camera. Right away I bit the bullet and type a simple “Hey” into the chat and sat back, almost like I expected him to jump through the screen at me.
His head moved slowly to the portion of the screen where the chat would come up, his lips curled as he read the message. A tiresome grin, half-hearted. “You here.” He replied in the chat. I thought it was odd that he type it instead of speaking but thought maybe his mic was just muted. “Check this out.” He typed before I could get a response in.
A hand lifted into the frame and brought thin fingers to his cheek. His pointer finger and his ring finger both looked ragged and dark. Like they were made of completely different skin that was being rejected by his body. The craggy fingernail of his pointer finger pressed into his cheek and as he dragged his hand down, in abject horror, I watched his skin part. It was like he was pulling down a zipper destroying his skin, yet there was no blood.
His finger should have been painted red but instead, I only saw darkness where his skin had been peeled away. I didn't know if the low quality of the stream made it hard to make out details or if there were no details to make out. He lowered his hand and offered the same half-hearted smile, but I wasn't looking at his lips. I was too focussed on how the smiled contorted the gash he had just given himself. How the skin rippled around the dark pit manipulated by his smile.
I couldn't stop being pulled in, watching the hole he had made in his face slowly closing up until the darkness was gone. His head swayed left and right as if he was listening to some slow classical music yet I head nothing. In fact the whole time there wasn't the faintest hint of noise, his mic was muted the whole time.
The same crack of light started to appear. I expected him to end the stream but he just turned his head to look at it. Light from the computer illuminated the back of his head, how his hair had been missing in patches. Where there was no hair I could see deep yellow bumps with faint purple dotting around the affected area.
And the light. The light that appeared behind him wasn't some hallway light slipping in. It was yellow but a darker hue, closer to mustard than anything else. The light got wider, there was no door opening but the light got wider still. Allowing for a fraction of the room to become visible. The mustard light landed on what looked like black plastic but more, organic. Something that was writhing around and reacting to the light.
Andrew turned back towards the camera, his eyes almost portraying a sense of content or, I don't know, pride? He smiled, also a prideful expression. Then the stream turned off. The room was dark and my body retched back, standing to my feet and throwing my chair to the floor. I listened to my chair smacking against hardwood.
Getting up like that was something I was trying to do the whole stream. Practically begging my neurons to fire off and let me react. I think it's easy to say what you would do in certain situations but when you are faced with something so unusual it's like your brain shuts you out. Like a turtle pulling into its shell for self-defense or animals who lie still to pretend they're already dead. I didn't think I was in danger but something in my head begged to differ.
I paced around the room for a while, just listening to my footsteps, half expecting to hear something else make noise in the house. Several times I convinced myself to ring Andrew's house, each time it would ring once and I would end the call. I worked myself into a panic and at some point, I think I just fell asleep.
Like I said I hadn't been getting much sleep so when I woke up the next day to find it was already getting dark, it felt sensible. Still, with the approaching darkness, I could feel a chorus of ambiguity washing over me. Despite the tizzy I had worked myself into, I had never thought to close the page. “AndrewinVain” was still running on my computer screen and he was live.
Just sitting there while I slept, I could swear as I rose up from my bed his eyes were following my movements. Slowly I stepped across the bedroom. I swear I could feel his pupils dilating as he stared into the camera. Dark pupils reflecting the contents of his body that hid underneath bloated and scared skin. Pupils that could swallow me whole.
“Sit down.” I saw had been written in chat. Next to that, I could see the length of the stream, he had been sitting there for 5 hours. His head was swaying like it was last time and as I sat down I could see the line of light ignite to life behind him.
“Why is this happening?” I typed into the chat. I could see his body jumble around like he was laughing but his face didn't change to match. Instead, he lifted his hand again, and within his hand was the cord to his microphone. Specifically, the section of wire that contained the button that would mute him.
“Would you like to hear me?” He typed into the chat. I felt my insides churning as I read the question. Despite my rational protest, I knew I was going to say yes. I knew before they did that my fingers were going to dance over the keyboard affirming my desire. As each fingertip made contact with the cold plastic keys I watched the light grow brighter than ever before.
“Yes, I want to hear.” The message I typed read, though I hadn't put any thought into how to word the response. It almost felt like my fingers moved, tugged by strings. He smiled, a dubious smile as his finger pressed down. There was a soft click and then, I could feel my body slump over and my sensibilities become completely hopeless.
From AndrewinVain's stream, I hear a chorus, an overwhelming and all-encompassing cacophony of wails. A torrid and perpetual berating of screams emitted from my computer speaks. It sounded like I was playing every grisly murder scene in every horror movie I had ever seen. I watched unable to physically respond as that yellow light flared up like a wildfire illuminating the entirety of the room.
The entire floor of that room, the walls of that room were all the same black and leathery texture, every inch of it squirming desperately. I could make out vague shapes of fingers reaching up and faces pressed against the fabric. The membrane of the room Andrew sat in. Unable to move I just had to accept the bile filling my mouth and dripping out from my slightly agape lips.
Andrew just smiled at the camera, lifting his fingers to his mouth he spread them out to cover grasp the corner of his mouth and eyes. Fingers dug in like before and he pulled his arms to the side stretching the skin more and more. I had to watch, listening to the soundtrack of shrill and unrelenting cries for help and Andrew impossibly pulled his skin away from his face.
It would have been almost cartoonish, watching A portion of his face remaining in front of the camera as darkness undulated around it. His eyes drifting into the darkness like it was a black whole stealing his features. His hands returned placing the rest of his head back where it belonged so he could give me one last look. “Guess where I am.” He said. I heard his voice, deep and gruff stuttering of words that barely registered to me. Words that felt like I shouldn't have been able to decipher. And then, the stream ended.
I don't know. I don't remember what I did after that. I don't remember even knowing what to do and so a day went by and then another. He didn't come back online again, I remember that. I sat for a while watching his final stream before vanishing for two years. I played it over and over letting those memories wash over me.
Remembering what it felt like when my Mother called me downstairs and explained to me Andrew's mother had called in solace to let me know that Andrew had passed away. Remembered watching the news and hearing that they weren't ruling out foul play but suicide was the most likely answer.
I watched that stream so many times now. Watching him looking at the camera for the last time when he was alive. His last words I think were directed towards me, they were always his last words as a sort of sign off. But in that particular stream, the way he looks at the camera, even now on rewatch feels like he's looking right at me.
And as he says those words I can see, on the wall to his right, a small sliver of light reflected on the wall. I used to think it was from a passing car or the sun just bouncing off of something. But when you know something exists, when you know something CAN exist. You start to see it everywhere. You can't forget you've seen it.
I don't think I'll see AndrewinVain's channel active anymore. But I have no doubt I will be seeing him again. As he always said before he turned his stream off.
“Thanks for joining me today and I'll see you

in hell.”
submitted by AuthorJoJo to nosleep [link] [comments]


2020.09.12 15:32 treatmedaddy Andrew Giuliani considering run for NYC mayor in 2021

https://nypost.com/2020/09/12/andrew-giuliani-considering-run-for-nyc-mayor-in-2021/amp/
By Jon Levine September 12, 2020 9:09am
Mayor Giuliani? Yes it could happen again.
While the 76-year-old former occupant of Gracie Mansion won’t be returning to his old job, his 34-year-old son Andrew is taking a hard look at running for mayor in 2021.
“I am certainly thinking about it. It’s something that a bunch of people that I trust have approached me with,” the younger Giuliani told The Post. “It’s been terrible to see over the last few years how the city has spiraled. I am afraid if the right candidate doesn’t win in 2021, four more years of de Blasio’s policies will remind us of the 80s.”
“Mayor de Blasio’s administration has failed New York as he does not value the New York Police Department and he does not value what they have done for the city,” Giuliani continued, singling out recent budget cuts and the disbanding of the NYPD’s undercover anti-crime unit.
Andrew Giuliani has spent more than three years working in the White House as a public liaison assistant to President Trump and — like his father — has developed a close working relationship with the billionaire. They sometimes meet four times a week when things get busy. His portfolio involves interfacing between the White House and a variety of business, nonprofit and other groups.
“We deal with everyone from Tim Cook to Kim Kardashian and everybody in between,” he said.
Giuliani, who once aspired to be a professional golfer, also occasionally hits the links with Trump.
“I am a couple of strokes better,” he laughed, adding that he preferred being on the president’s team. “You always want to be careful about beating your boss.”
Giuliani stressed that his energies right now are focused on reelecting the president before attending to his personal ambitions.
“I am trying to make sure the president gets over the finish line on November 3rd and then right after that my focus is going to be on how we can save New York City again,” he said.
Giuliani said he’s been mulling running for the city’s top job with his father for the past six weeks. Rudy Giuliani served as mayor from 1994 to 2001 and is widely credited with curbing out-of-control crime and leading New York through the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
If he did seek the Republican nomination, Andrew Giuliani would potentially face stiff resistance from supermarket billionaire John Catsimatidis, who is also considering a run — and has pledged to spend $100 million of his own money to win. The Giuliani and Catsimatidis families are personally tight and the elder Giuliani has spoken enthusiastically about John Catsimatidis potential run.
If he doesn’t ultimately pull the trigger, Andrew Giuliani said he could only support a candidate who followed what he called the “Giuliani playbook” of governing the city.
“It’s broken-windows policing, it’s empowering the NYPD to do their job, it’s bringing the private sector in and making them more accountable for creating economic opportunity, it’s reintroducing the free market to some of these low income communities in New York City that have been stuck on the cycle of government dependency for so long,” he said. “The nucleus of all of it is public safety. It’s making sure that New Yorkers feel safe and that tourists feel safe coming here.”
Andrew Giuliani, whose mom is former TV newswoman Donna Hanover, Rudy’s second wife, has kept a low profile over the last two decades and may need an image makeover if he’s going to make a splash in the Big Apple. If New Yorkers remember him at all, it is likely for less than glorious moments — like when he sued Duke University for kicking him off the golf team in 2008 over acts of misbehavior (the case was later dismissed).
There was also his famously comical antics at his father’s first inauguration as mayor in 1994. As Rudy took the oath, then 7-year-old Andrew mouthed along with him, and blew kisses to the crowd from the podium. The moment was memorably lampooned by Saturday Night Live in a sketch by the late comedian Chris Farley.
“I never really tried to get past it. I just tried to live my life. But I do wish I could have had a chance to meet Chris Farley,” Andrew Giuliani said, remembering the moment.
Since 2017, he’s been married to real estate executive Zivile Rezgyte, who — much to dad’s delight — he met at Yankee Stadium. So far there are no children, but Andrew says he hopes they’ll be on the way soon.
A mayoral run would also likely revive interest in the messy divorce between Rudy Giuliani and Hanover. Mayor Giuliani famously announced the couple’s split during a Bryant Park news conference in May 2000 — without previously informing Hanover. She took $6.8 million in an out of court settlement two years later.
“I have a relationship with both of them that I treasure,” Andrew Giuliani, a dead ringer for his mom, said. “Like any family we have our disagreements and my dad and I are two stubborn Italians — so those disagreements can get heated – but I am very blessed to have a relationship with both of them.”
submitted by treatmedaddy to nyc [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 22:40 CK120 A perfect son, a model family - so what made him run away? (Article from The Times 2007)

The Times article written in 2007 about Andrew's disappearance. It includes testimonials from McAuley's assistant principal and one of Andrew teachers. With statements from Detective Inspector Martin O'Neill.
Currently the article is paid, so not everyone can see it. Fortunately someoneon a Tapatalk forum in 2008 quoted it completely. So it is possible to read it in its entirety.
His parents are haunted by the stark, still-frame closed-circuit television footage of their son leaving King’s Cross. In three consecutive shots, Andrew Gosden walks from the concourse towards the railway station exit and emerges on to the pavement.
Small for his age and slim, he is 14 but looks younger, perhaps 12. He is wearing a black T-shirt and jeans and has a black canvas satchel slung over his shoulder.
He has left behind a secure home, a loving family and a glittering array of school prizes. Ahead is London, that great, sprawling, teeming, terrifying city with all its allure and danger. He looks so young, so vulnerable.
“If we never see him again, that’s going to be the last photograph of my son. That’s what really gets you in the guts,” says Andrew’s father, Kevin.
Related Links Above all, parents need to stay calm Every year, an estimated 100,000 under-16s are reported missing. The vast majority return safe and well within 72 hours, according to the charity Missing People.
Some are fleeing abuse, bullying or family conflict. Others seek to escape some “low-grade issue they don’t feel they can talk to their families about”. Sometimes, the children are simply seeking an adventure.
Andrew’s case is unusual not merely for the length of time he has been missing, but also because there seems to be not the slightest clue explaining his decision to leave home.
The bare facts are these. At 8am on Friday, September 14, eight days into a school term, Andrew left home — a neat Victorian terrace in Doncaster, South Yorkshire — in school uniform for his short walk to the bus stop. His sister Charlotte, 16, had already set off.
The night before had been a standard evening at home. The family ate together and Andrew played a jigsaw game with his father on their computer before watching some of his favourite television comedies with his mother, Glenys.
On that Friday morning, however, he had no intention of going to school, where he had a 100 per cent attendance record. Instead, he walked to a park and waited until 8.30am, when he knew that his parents — both speech and language therapists — would have left for work.
Andrew then returned home, let himself in with his key and changed out of his uniform, leaving his blazer neatly hanging from the back of a bedroom chair and placing his shirt and trousers in the washing machine.
In T-shirt, jeans and trainers, he walked to a local garage, withdrew £200 from his savings account at a cash machine and headed for the station, where he bought a one-way ticket to London. The woman who sold him the ticket remembers thinking that he looked quite young. She asked him whether he was sure he wanted a single. Andrew was adamant. A passenger on the 9.35am Doncaster-London train recalled sitting opposite a boy matching Andrew’s description exactly. He sat quietly, playing on his portable PlayStation.
When staff at the McAuley Catholic High School, in Doncaster, realised that he had not arrived they phoned the family at once. Critically, the contact list was misread and the numbers phoned were those of a different pupil.
Mr and Mrs Gosden, therefore, did not realise that anything was amiss until late afternoon, when Andrew — known to the family as Roo — did not come home from school.
His uniform was soon found. Andrew is the sort of boy, his father says, “who leaves you a note if he goes to the shop on the corner”. After a few quick phone calls drew a blank, Mr Gosden contacted the police.
Detective Inspector Martin O’Neill heads a team of officers from the South Yorkshire force who are working on the case and have paid several visits to London in search of Andrew.
They did an immediate risk assessment and put Andrew in the highest category because of his age, his perceived vulnerability and his vanishing act being “totally out of character”.
It took only three days to establish that Andrew had arrived in London at 11.20am on the Friday. It would take another 24 days before the CCTV footage of him leaving King’s Cross was discovered. The police have paid several visits to the school. They have spoken at length with his family and friends. They have no theories that would explain his disappearance.
For five of the past six weeks one or both parents has tramped the streets of London in search of their son. They have put up posters, toured Andrew’s favourite haunts — such as the Science Museum and the Natural History Museum — and questioned many strangers.
Mr and Mrs Gosden have also tried to drum up media interest. They have had some success, but there are a lot of missing children. There have been reported sightings of him in London — at a Pizza Hut in Oxford Street, in a park in Streatham, leaving a local train at Waterloo — and farther afield, from South Wales to Birkenhead. None has been confirmed.
“We’re doing everything we can to find him, but it’s very concerning. Andrew is a very intelligent boy, very gifted academically, but he may not be very streetwise,” Mr O’Neill said.
At McAuley, Paul Gray, the deputy head, said that “a visible cloud” was hanging over everyone who knew Andrew. “He’s a very likeable, self-effacing boy. No one’s got a bad word to say about him. This is not the sort of school where you can get lost in the system. If there had been any bullying going on, we’d know about it.”
Andrew was in the top set of his year group for every subject but his greatest gift is as “a natural mathematician”, winning a host of gold awards in national and European competitions.
Martin Taylor, one of his teachers, said that Andrew would comfortably achieve a first-class honours degree in the subject at Oxford or Cambridge.
“He’s quite a shy lad, but he has a fantastic smile and I’ve never seen him down or sullen,” Mr Taylor said. “Andrew is deep and mature beyond his years. He’s quite self-contained and happy in his own company, but he’s not a loner. He always had a little posse of friends with him.”
Yet something prompted him to head for the bright lights.
Kevin Gosden, 41, and his wife, who is 43, are committed Christians. They have sacrificed a lot for their two children and they would probably admit, in private, that they thought they had done a pretty good job as parents.
Now a family history is being deconstructed. Has there not been enough love, or too much? Have the children been given too little independence, or too much? What have the parents done wrong? They thought that Andrew would talk to them about anything. They were wrong. In their tired eyes is fear for a missing child, but also bewilderment, hurt, a little anger and a shattering sense of rejection.
“You can’t grow up in this house and think that nobody gives a darn about you. He knows how much we love him, so of course it’s hurtful,” Mr Gosden said. “You wonder, what is so wrong with us? What was so wrong with growing up in a supportive family, going to a good school and having a bright future ahead of you? But then you think about Andrew, this boy who has always been so cheerful, who didn’t seem to have any problems and who is the gentlest soul. It just doesn’t make any sense.”
This is a boy to whom everything came easily. Andrew’s sister Charlotte has 11 GCSEs, nine of them graded A\, but said: “I can get the grades, but I have to work hard. He doesn’t have to try. Nothing seemed to bother him.”*
Looking in vain for an explanation, the family wonder why Andrew twice chose to break his normal routine, walking home from school instead of making the four-mile journey by bus.
Was he preparing for a future of wandering the streets? And if so, why?
His parents thought initially that he wanted to prove something to himself, or to them, to show that he could stand on his own two feet.
Andrew seemed unusually content to stay at home in the evenings. He never went to a friend’s house or had anyone round, still less hung around on street corners. He was given a mobile phone for his 12th birthday, but rarely used it and did not want to replace it when he lost it.
Could it be that beneath a surface contentment at spending most of his free time at home, Andrew felt stifled and nursed a desire to rebel?
Although the Gosdens are Christian, they encourage their children to make their own choices. Andrew had not been to church for 18 months. His interest in goth clothing and music was not a source of friction.
Mr and Mrs Gosden had suggested that Andrew travel alone to London during the summer holidays to stay with his grandmother. He did not want to go. Had his trip been planned as an awfully big adventure, then surely it would have lasted for a few days at most. If the worst has not happened and he has not fallen in harm’s way, then what sent him to London in the first place may also be keeping him from making contact with home.
Mr and Mrs Gosden are keen to send their son a message: “We love you and we care about you. You have left a huge gap in our lives. We want you back with us but we also want to know that you’re OK. Even if you don’t want to come back, please let us know that you’re OK.”
submitted by CK120 to AndrewGosden [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 22:33 coRvid_ice_elation More Evidence Masks Don’t Work to Prevent COVID-19 [FACT CHECKED]

More Evidence Masks Don’t Work to Prevent COVID-19 [FACT CHECKED]

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • According to British deputy chief medical officer Dr. Jenny Harries, the evidence for face masks is “not very strong in either direction.” Sweden’s coronavirus pandemic response leader, Dr. Anders Tegnell, dismisses the scientific evidence for mask-wearing, calling it “astonishingly weak”
  • White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx is urging Americans to wear their mask whenever they’re around others, including other household members, while admitting that “when people start to realize that 99% of us are going to be fine,” compliance becomes “more and more difficult”
  • A 2015 study found health care workers wearing cloth masks had a 72% higher rate of laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections, when compared to those wearing medical masks or controls (who used standard practices that included occasional medical mask wearing)
  • A working paper by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) suggests draconian lockdown measures implemented in many countries, including the U.S., have achieved little in terms of stemming the death toll; regardless of policy, deaths per day stop increasing within 20 to 30 days of passing a threshold of 25 deaths
  • According to the NBER, lockdowns, closures, travel restrictions, stay-home orders, event bans, quarantines, curfews and mask mandates do not seem to affect virus transmission rates overall, and governments have likely acted in error
According to an August 28, 2020, article1,2 in The Telegraph, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson now “insists he does not want to see face coverings in schools.” During a question and answer session posted on Facebook, Johnson said:3,4
“There's no need for it. Indeed, there's a need not to have it because obviously it's very, very difficult to teach or to learn with a face mask on.”
British deputy chief medical officer Dr. Jenny Harries stated the evidence for face masks is “not very strong in either direction,” but that advice may change in the future should scientific evidence emerge. For now, head teachers will be allowed to make their own decisions about mask adherence in school hallways and communal areas.
“Dr. Harries said that the wearing of masks in hallways and communal areas ‘can be very reassuring in those enclosed environments’ despite the lack of definitive science,” The Telegraph reports, adding:5,6
“She also urged people to be ‘very kind’ to those with disabilities who were ‘struggling’ with coronavirus measures such as the wearing of face coverings. ‘Many of the actions that we have quite rightly taken to control the pandemic can be quite difficult for people with all sorts of sensory disabilities,’ she admitted.”

Sweden’s Pandemic Response to Masking

Sweden is one of the few countries where draconian pandemic responses have not been widely implemented. Throughout the pandemic, most of the country’s businesses have remained open, and people have to a large degree been allowed to go about their lives as usual, albeit with the general recommendation to social distance whenever possible.
According to an August 10, 2020, article7,8 in The Times, the epidemiologist in charge of Sweden’s coronavirus pandemic response, Dr. Anders Tegnell, “has dismissed the scientific evidence for mask-wearing as ‘astonishingly weak’ and suggested that making face coverings mandatory could backfire.”
Tegnell insists the only viable solution in the long run is to trust people and give them the responsibility to make sensible decisions for themselves.
“It is a Swedish tradition that we give a lot of responsibility to individuals and influence them. So, we never saw any reason to take more drastic measures … I’m surprised that we don’t have more or better studies showing what effect masks actually have.
Countries such as Spain and Belgium have made their populations wear masks but their infection numbers have still risen. The belief that masks can solve our problem is in any case very dangerous,” Tegnell said in a recent interview with a German newspaper.9,10
Interestingly, despite the country’s lack of lockdowns and mandatory mask requirements, infections have now “dwindled away to a negligible level” on their own.
According to The Times, as of August 10, 2020, Sweden’s total death toll for COVID-19 stood at 5,763. At the peak of the pandemic in mid-April, just under 100 daily COVID-19 related deaths were recorded. By early August, the average death toll was down to one or two per day. Positive test results are also trending downward.
📷

Birx Ridiculously Urges Mask Wearing at Home

Meanwhile, in the U.S., the fact that the curve has been flattened and the total COVID-19 death rate has been dramatically reduced11 doesn’t seem to make a difference. At the end of August, White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx urged Americans to stay vigilant, and to wear their mask whenever they’re around others, including other household members. According to CNN:12
“Birx urged Americans to take personal responsibility, especially if they want to help keep economies open. ‘Right now, we gain freedom through wearing our masks and socially distancing,’ she said.”
Ironically, in mid-August, during a visit to Little Rock, Arkansas, Birx gave the following statements, reported by Eldorado News-Times:13
“‘I’ve been so struck by the number of Americans across the country that have just had it,’ she said. ‘Mortality decreases’ have also complicated matters … ‘When people start to realize that 99 percent of us are going to be fine, it becomes more and more difficult’ to get people to comply, she said.”

What Is the Real Risk of COVID-19 at This Point?

Indeed, it now appears the mortality rate of COVID-19 may be right around or lower than that of influenza. During an August 16, 2020, lecture at The Doctors for Disaster Preparedness14 convention, Dr. Lee Merritt15 pointed out that, based on deaths per capita — which is the only way to get a true sense of the lethality of this disease — the death rate for COVID-19 is around 0.009%.
That number is based on a global total death toll of 709,000, and a global population of 7.8 billion. This also means the average person’s chance of surviving an encounter with SARS-CoV-2 is 99.991%. The U.S. area with the highest death rate, New York, has a death per capita rate of 0.17%. Merritt’s lecture with this information is featured in “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible.”
So, while mainstream media still claims a mortality rate below 1% is a complete hoax, Birx verified — whether on purpose or by accident — that at least 99% of the population has nothing to fear from this virus.
And remember, the total death toll is enormously falsely inflated with those that died WITH, rather than FROM, SARS-CoV-2. The reason the U.S. Centers for Disease Control hasn’t ended COVID-19’s epidemic status also appears to be because they include deaths from pneumonia and influenza in the statistics. Combined, pneumonia, influenza and COVID-19 deaths were still above the epidemic threshold, based on data through August 22.16
Meanwhile, deaths in which COVID-19 is listed on the death certificate as the sole cause of death are only 6% of the total COVID-19 death toll, according to CDC data released August 26.17 On that day, the total death toll listed was 161,392, 6% of which would be 9,683.
The remaining 94% had an average of 2.6 “additional conditions or causes” contributing to those deaths. That even includes 5,133 deaths from intentional or unintentional injuries (according to the data listed on August 26; exact numbers may have changed since then).

Evidence Shows Masks Do Not Protect Against Viral Infection

I’ve already written several articles detailing studies showing that masks cannot protect against viral infections. The reason is simple. SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 0.06 to 0.14 microns.18 Medical N95 masks — which are considered the most effective — can filter particles as small as 0.3 microns.19 Surgical masks, homemade masks, T-shirts and bandanas are even more porous.
Strangely, mask mandates continue to flourish despite health agencies own research showing it’s a futile measure that only provides a false sense of security:
  • The World Health Organization’s June 5, 2020, guidance memo20 on face mask use states “there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID- 19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.”
  • According to a policy review paper21 published in the CDC’s own journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases, in May 2020: “Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
  • The National Academies of Sciences in its Rapid Expert Consultation on the Effectiveness of Fabric Masks for the COVID-19 Pandemic report,22 published April 8, 2020, concluded “The evidence from … laboratory filtration studies suggest that … fabric masks may reduce the transmission of larger respiratory droplets,” but that “There is little evidence regarding the transmission of small aerosolized particulates of the size potentially exhaled by asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals with COVID-19.”

Researchers Warn Against Cloth Masks

A study published in 2015 recently received additional commentary from the authors in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The original study23 was titled “A Cluster Randomized Trial of Cloth Masks Compared with Medical Masks in Healthcare Workers.”
They found that health care workers wearing cloth masks had the highest rates of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections, when compared to those wearing medical masks or controls (who used standard practices that included occasional medical mask wearing). Compared to controls and the medical mask group, those wearing cloth masks had a 72% higher rate of lab-confirmed viral infections. According to the authors:
“Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety.
Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs [health care workers], particularly in high-risk situations …”
In a follow-up commentary dated March 30, 2020, the authors of this study address questions received during the pandemic from health care workers concerned about instructions to use cloth masks if or when medical-grade masks are unavailable. Their comment reads, in part:24
“The study found that cloth mask wearers had higher rates of infection than even the standard practice control group of health workers, and the filtration provided by cloth masks was poor compared to surgical masks …
Health workers are asking us if they should wear no mask at all if cloth masks are the only option. Our research does not condone health workers working unprotected. We recommend that health workers should not work during the COVID-19 pandemic without respiratory protection as a matter of work health and safety …
There have been a number of laboratory studies looking at the effectiveness of different types of cloth materials, single versus multiple layers and about the role that filters can play. However, none have been tested in a clinical trial for efficacy.
If health workers choose to work using cloth masks, we suggest that they have at least two and cycle them, so that each one can be washed and dried after daily use. Sanitizer spray or UV disinfection boxes can be used to clean them during breaks in a single day. These are pragmatic, rather than evidence-based suggestions, given the situation.
Finally for COVID-19, wearing a mask is not enough to protect healthcare workers — use of gloves and goggles are also required as a minimum, as SARS-CoV-2 may infect not only through the respiratory route, but also through contact with contaminated surfaces and self-contamination.”

Pandemic Policies Have Achieved Little

Last but not least, a working paper25 by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), written by Andrew Atkeson, Karen Kopecky and Tao Zha, suggests the draconian lockdown measures implemented in many countries, including the U.S., have achieved little in terms of stemming the death toll.
If we are concerned about the evidence on this global experiment, we must concede that most government authorities have likely acted in error. ~ National Bureau of Economic Research
In an August 26, 2020, article, the American Institute for Economic Research presented the following four “stylized facts” from the paper:26
1.“Once a region reaches 25 total COVID deaths, within a month the growth rate in deaths per day falls to approximately zero. In other words, no matter the country or state and its policies, deaths per day stop increasing within 20-30 days of passing a threshold of 25 deaths.
2.Once that happens, deaths per day either begin to fall or the trend remains flat.
3.The variability in death trends across regions has fallen sharply since the beginning of the epidemic and remains low. All states studied, all countries studied, have become more similar in their trends and have remained so.
4.Observations 1-3 suggest that the effective reproduction number, R, has hovered around one worldwide after the first 30 days of the epidemic.
The paper’s conclusion is that the data trends observed above likely indicate that non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) — such as lockdowns, closures, travel restrictions, stay-home orders, event bans, quarantines, curfews, and mask mandates — do not seem to affect virus transmission rates overall.
Why? Because those policies have varied in their timing and implementation across countries and states, but the trends in outcomes do not.”

Estimation across locations

Lockdown Measures Should End Now

Put plainly, the measures we’ve endured these past six months were largely unnecessary. One key reason for why lockdown and social distancing measures had no impact, according to the researchers, is because “human interaction does not conform to simple epidemiological models.”
In a nutshell, human social networks overlap, allowing a virus to rapidly spread for a time. Then, the virus quickly loses momentum, as people have already been exposed via other social networks and are no longer susceptible. The end result is that a form of herd immunity develops, but at a lower rate of infection than typically assumed would be necessary.
What’s more, the authors argue that even if nonpharmaceutical interventions were at one point having some positive effect, that effect no longer applies. Therefore, it would be a mistake to include estimates of NPI effectiveness when trying to forecast the potential outcomes of relaxed measures. As reported by the American Institute for Economic Research:27
“This study provides strong statistical support for what so many have been observing for six months. The epidemic has a natural tendency to spread quickly at first and slow down, seemingly on its own, a point made not only here but as early as April 14 by Isaac Ben-Israel.28
Meanwhile governors imagine that very specific rules for opening bars and restaurants are the key to containment. Governments have conducted an unprecedented social, economic, and political experiment in controlling whole populations’ behavior, with high economic and human cost.
The authors ask the right question: has this experiment in government-managed virus control and suppression made a difference? The startling answer they found, after examining data from around the country and the world, is that the evidence simply is not there. If we are concerned about the evidence on this global experiment, we must concede that most government authorities have likely acted in error.”

Why Are They so Persistent With Mask Recommendations?

Considering the strong scientific evidence against it, why are governments so persistent in their recommendation of mask wearing? Clearly, for many, wearing a bandana or cloth mask provides a form of psychological defense, a way to feel less fearful because it feels like you’re doing something to protect yourself and others. But it’s a false sense of security.
Masks will not prevent you from exhaling or inhaling the aerosolized virus. Cloth masks are clearly also the least preferable option if you want to reduce the spread of infection, as their ability to block larger respiratory droplets is also limited.
In particular, N95 masks with airflow valves on the front should be avoided, as the valve lets out unfiltered air, thus negating the small benefit — the reduction in respiratory droplet emissions — you might get from a mask.29
But with mortality rates as low as they are, why would governments be pushing for a false sense of security? It seems completely unnecessary at this point. Remember back in March 2020 when they said we just need to slow down the rate of infection to avoid overcrowding hospitals?
How did we go from that to now having to wear masks everywhere until every trace of the virus has been eliminated, even though a vast majority remain asymptomatic and don’t even know they have the virus unless they get tested?
Overall, it’s starting to look as though mask mandates are being used as a psychological manipulation tool to encourage compliance with vaccination once a vaccine becomes available. At that point, I predict a tradeoff will be offered: Mask mandates will be dropped provided everyone gets vaccinated.
By then, many may be willing to take just about anything as long as they don’t have to wear a mask anymore.
submitted by coRvid_ice_elation to u/coRvid_ice_elation [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 21:36 GuvnzNZ Relevant to New Zealand’s situation, if originally directed towards Australia

Not my words, this from Wade Gravy, of Barcelona.
“If you think this might be directed at you, it probably is.
Melbourne can, and has, learnt the lessons the rest of us had to experience first hand. As a result you've locked down hard and for a long time, and viral transmission has been limited, while the healthcare services haven't been over extended.
You've gone from over 700 cases a day to consistently well under a 100.
This is because businesses have been closed, people have been forced to spend more time at home and less time mingling with strangers and because masks are mandatory.
That's a fucking success story you absolute numpties.
Anybody protesting about that is rallying in favour of death. Everybody complaining about this online is spreading propaganda in favour of a deadly virus.
Here in Spain we didn't have the same lessons on hand. Italy was just beginning to unfold, China was both secretive and living under a different political system altogether, and the rest of the world was about to feel the effects of the virus.
But shall I remind you of what happened in Spain?
This is an illustration of what transpires when you implement and state of alarm, shut down businesses and enforce social distancing too late:
Two weeks before lockdown we were experiencing around 700 new cases a day.
Once they decided to lockdown on March 14th that number was nearer to 8000.
One week after lockdown that number was 11,000.
Two weeks after that peak we were counting almost 1000 deaths a day.
And that lasted a while. A thousand people a day who could have lived for days, months, years and decades longer, not to mention the countless more who will suffer chronic illness for the rest of their shortened lives due to being infected with the virus.
It wasn’t until the end of April that the daily new infections number was back down to 1,500.
By the end of May, when we were allowed out of the house for an hour to exercise per day the number was around 400.
That last milestone is important, because once we got there we were allowed outside for an hour at sunrise or sunset. From March 14th until May 25th we weren’t allowed outside to exercise.
For 72 days we weren’t allowed outside at all, unless to go to the supermarket or to take a dog outside to do its business, and people were getting fines for going to the supermarket too often/to supermarkets that weren’t the closest to them, or for walking the dog further than 100m from their front door.
It would be another month after that before we were allowed out of Barcelona's city limits.
Now I know that some of you might be saying, but why are Melbourne’s lockdowns so extreme when the cases are so low compared to Spain’s? And for that I have two answers. Melbourne’s lockdown measures aren’t that extreme. That’s not to say that it hasn’t been too long, nor that it’s easy for you, but it’s not extreme, not compared to what other cities and countries have been and are going through. You can leave your house to exercise and you can travel up to 5kms from your home (and I know that many Melbournians don’t leave their neighbourhoods during healthy times – I kid, I kid).
Also, and this is the most important to understand, but Melbourne and Victoria and Australia’s cases are so low because the lockdowns happened quickly. They appear disproportionately harsh because they’ve been so successful. This success story is due to the fact that Dan Andrews listened to his expert advisors and his expert advisors learned lessons that the rest of the world had to fight through. When someone sees this kind of success it’s absolute lunacy to then go and doubt them, second guess them, call for their resignation or openly defy them.
Do you want to know what Dan Andrews and his advisors saw in Spain that they don’t want repeated in Victoria?
We’ve now recorded over 500,000 infections.
So far 30,000 people have died.
Too many of the 470,000+ survivors will suffer long term health problems and complications from the virus.
At the peak the city of Madrid converted the municipal ice skating rink into a morgue.
The army had to go through nursing homes to clear out corpses after residents had been left first to die, then to rot.
Spain is again recording new daily infections in the 1000s. We didn’t get the virus out of the community, so once we opened up again it just came back.
Australia has had 26,000 cases.
Less than 800 people have died.
And if lockdowns endure long enough there’s a good chance Victoria can be like West Australia and New Zealand with very few cases in the community and a good chance for life to be back to normal while a vaccine is developed, produced and distributed.
So please, tell us again why you’re complaining about having to live with one of the most successful virus prevention regimes in the world.
Are you coming from a short sighted, selfish, pro virus or pro death perspective? It kinda has to be one of them.
submitted by GuvnzNZ to ConservativeKiwi [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 20:17 cammelspit RSV-L4500 Hard Drive rails

So, I moved and I downsized from a 1600Sq foot house to an 1100 Sqfoot apartment. In the move, somehow I ended up losing the little cardboard box with my last three pairs of those little purple drive rails that the case comes with. (Almost every slot is populated) After doing some digging, I ended up finding one of the only places that sell them a la carte is THIS PLACE and it seems everyone else I could find with the same issue mentioned the same place.
My problem is $10 shipping on $4 worth of purchase is frankly a little silly for me, I mean I would do it and all if I had to but I would grumble a little about it. Right before I decided to make the purchase and all I decided as a last-ditch effort to give Rosewill a call and just ask them if they would sell me a few pairs. I spoke to this really nice dude on the phone named Andrew, and even though they don't just sell them, he said he would just send me the three sets I lost for free, no strings attached just because.
Since there are SO FEW options out there to get proper replacements, and I can't find even one person who has used a different kind of rail and confirmed they work I can't in all good conscience recommend you just randomly buy something else hoping it will work. Remember, not one other place I could find with evidence any other rail would work.
Anyways, just give them a call and ask to buy some, seems they will just give you some for free!
Now andrew did say they have hundreds of them just laying around and I don't see the case available anywhere anymore so maybe they won't have them forever or maybe the virus stuff has made it hard to make new cases right now and supplies will be low temporarily but if you lost your rails, give them a call it worked for me!
I would have replied to a previous thread here but it was archived and I had SUCH a hard time finding replacements that I figured it worth mentioning how much easier it was to just call and ask and how cool they were over the phone.

Anyways, that's all I wanted to share! Mainly so that the next person to google it will read this and have less trouble. 😁
submitted by cammelspit to DataHoarder [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 13:55 Ctoea Kaiserreich:Cold War. Ep. 2 .Long united must divide (American States)

(Intro) 19th of October 1937
A family in Texas under loyallist occupation listen to a radio and hear about the news. They go on with their everyday lives. The mom makes the lunch. The dad is reading a new book he just bought. And the kids are playing with their dog and cat. But then. BAM. An atillery shell. The father stand up and orders everyone to go to the basement. Every person and animal goes down and wait. 10 hours later and the sounds stop. The dad tries to take a look and he sees their house destroyed. And he sees something else. A unionist flag. It was clear what happened. The rebels are coming. (Intro over)
Its been years since the civil war began. Almost no american remember what was the cause of it. Those that do remember are the leaders and their generals.
When election day came, there was already enough tension between supporters of 5 different ideologies (republicans,democrats,progressives,unionists and socialists). When it was time to see who would be the new president, it happened. On december 1936, general Douglas Mccarthur staged a coup and seized the congress. It was a blodless success and he was appointed as the "American Ceasar". Despite gaining a nice title ,the coup proved to be the last straw of what was left of stability. In the 18th of december, the louisiana governor and unionist canditate? Huey Long have spoken on the radio an infamous speech.
"People of Louisiana, I went to D.C with hopes of making things right. But after what happened ,my eyes were finally open. I saw how sick is truly America. I realise that i cannot save it. For that its not worth, what i must say, a Dead Nation. There is only one solution left. By burning this state and make a new one. Where every man is alive. Where every man is free from dictators. Where every MAN. IS. KING. RISE UP KINGS. RISE.
After this speech, the people rose up in defiance and declared the America Union State with Huey Long as its new leader or "Kingfish". In response to this the syndicalists, who were based around the Great Lakes have also rebelled. On Christmas Eve, the people of Chicago have rose up and destroyed the police station and raided everyone who was non socialist. The city was up in flames because what Alfred once said, "some men just want to watch the world burn". This was an event known as the "Chicago Sun" and it created the Combined Syndicates of America. And the Syndie Candidate John "Jack" Reed became the new chairman. As a response to this, In D.C, martial law was declared and mobilises troops from the loyalist states in the Midwest to crush the rebels. This action only leads the eastern states from the pacific coast to rebel. They are claiming that Mccarthur has destroyed the democracy that USA once had. They are known as The Pcific States and the democrat and progressive party fled there. In North west, canadian states occupied the terrtory as peacekeeping forces. The people there declared themselves as New England in january 1937, and declared themselves neutral. Also Hawaii also declares indepedence as a constitutional monarchy (ill put in a future poll) . The Second american civil war had begun.
Ten years later and it still occurs. The AUS has taken most of Texas and is marching towards D.C while CSA has tahen the Dakotas in 1939. After the states declared war against the reichs as a retalliation to the air bombings of japan, they united in an "american front" and The Ceasar Mccarthur , Chairman Reed, Kingfish Huey Long and President Wallce as a triumvirate. But only until the Weltkrieg ended, the fighting restarted. By then the USA militia has exhausted itself and is wide open to the rebels and thats what they did.
In 13th of May, the CS forces marched to the Montana state but they were stopped by the PS forces with whom they clashed at the town of Livingston. Meanwhille, AU forces took the "Federal Strait" and on the 4th of july (america day) they finally took the Loyalist capital after a 2 month siege. Long declared this moment as "a victory against the Wall Street serfdom". Not LONG after this, the federal forces surrendered and the unionists had a border with both PSA and CSA. Mccarthur and a number of federalists went into exile in Canada . Mccarthur would die in 1964 in Petrograd at the age of 84. Realising how much momentum he had gained, Long decides to invade PSA on 28th of February 1949. But the Kingfish had made a mistake. Ever since 1936, many americans, sick of war migrated to PSA because they wanted a moderate and calm life again. Because of this, many joined the army to reunite America again, making PSA the largest army in the civil war. They also have more capable generals who also migrated or switched sides. Among them were Dwight David Eisenhower and William Hood Simpson who had proven themselves competent leaders during WK II . And so after capturing Pueblo, two days later the PS forces beat back the unionists and were in full retreat while local militias in the countryside harassed the invaders. But the troops did not follow them as they saw them as not worth the invasion. Meanwhille the CSA( which recently took Kansas and Nebraska) had prepared for a clear momnt to invade AUS and after the majority of the silver shirts had been killed or deserted, they invaded on june. Thanks to the fact the CSA had most of the factories in north they made new tanks,aircraft and guns, they made big gains. They took D.C , Atlanta, Richmond and were close to New Orleans in just 4 months.
Also , in New Orleans something had been discovered. It was descovered that Long planed to make an alliance with the Kaiserreich in 1945 to invade the other states in exchange for weapons and men. This is nothing more than betrayal. The "Betratyer's letter" shocked everyone even his hardcore supportes. Long's opponents were quick to denounce it as selling the will of america in exchange for power. That he was a dictator. Many people began abandon the not-so-Kingfish and openned their gates to the syndicalists. In New Orleans, long decided to make one last attack. In the Missisipi Offensive, Huey had amassed 140.000 men but they were inexperienced and the offensive was too litle too late. At first, they did made some progress but the CS reserves came and strike back on 31st of October. By the 2nd of November, most of the AUS ministers fled but Long decided to stay because in his words "i want to show to my people that the kingfish would not leave them in this crisis". As the CS forces advanced into New Orleans, the soldiers clashed in streets and buildings. As the 1st brigade with Reed himself in charge, entered the city hall and when they opened the doors by force . They saw it.
Huey Long laying dead on the floor with a gun in his hand while the anthem of AUS playing in a record. Huey long commited suicide when the CS troops entered the city to escape capture. He died on november 4th 1949. Unloved and alone. A joke to his people. In the aftermath Reed ordered his body to be carried and raised himsekf the flag of CSA on the the city hall. The fighting had stopped and AUS ceased to exist after 13 years of existence.
Long's body had been buried in the new orleans graveyard. His tomb remains unmarked. In the 15th of december, Csa tried to invade Psa, but in the states of Colorado and new mexico they reached stalemate and in february, finally both sides sued for peace. In the peace of Denver, Chairman Reed and President Taylor divided the Anerican States on the Montana-Tucson line. And so after 14 years of war , there was no clear winner and what was the US its now a divided nation on a political line and 3 nations.
And they joined alegiances. CSA joined the internationale and became the leading nation with new capital at D.C. While PSA joined the AntiSoc Pact. The two nations had become to rebuilt infrastracture. In PSA they tried to rebuild destroyed bimuildings . In CSA the cities were built this concrete grey blocs with different heights but they looked the same (like the blocs in the soviet bloc in otl).
Reed quickly establishes a cult of personality where he is seen as a hero and a legend . And Russia in 1950 declared conflict with Csa making the Savinkov Doctrine in which he declared the policy of containig socialism around the world. The Cold War had begun
Reed was pretty concerned with having a democratic neighbour and so ordered a huge line of barbed wire to be buil to prevent defections. But also got more bumpy towards canada. In one incident three canadian soldiers were killed by a CS soldier and it led to border raids until the CS and canadian commanders wrote a letter of apologise.
Also Reed continued a policy of continuing the Revolution towards other parts of the globe.
In India they send troops to help the Baharatiya forces but were crushed by the russian-indian troops. In latin america the new csa secret police, the Socialist inteligence agency (SIA) manged to stage a coup against the cuban goverment and the new syndicallist goverment was established in 1956. Most of the latin america would be full of syndicallist or communist goverments safe for Paraguay, Brazil , Panama and Dominican island (DR and Haiti) .
Reed suffered a lot from headstrokes because many assasination atempts had been made but also Reed became more paranoid and in the 50s he had launched a great purge against any who he BELIEVED were traitors. After his death in 1953, there was a power vacuum and a guy and the real author of the Jungle, Upton Sinclair came up on top. Tough he was a totalist he held a speech where he criticized Reed as a demagog who cared only for himself. He created a new campaign called the Sinclairism. He began creating new job programs. He changed the anthem with the song "this land is your land". And he sacked many "corrupt" ofcials like Frank Johns, Elizabeth Flynn, Marshal Smedley Butler and John Lewis (largely because they were his opponents). And would allow greater freedom in the socialist bloc (northern and western europe).
And how did that went down ? A demonstration in Belgium was crushed. A rebellion in Italy was supressed. And protests in Denmark brought some mildly reformed but still, crushed.
Back in the americas, PSA had also troubles. The new republican goverment under the Richard Nixon administration had been executing a witch hunt against any suspected socialist sympathizer. And the FBI director, Joseph Mcarthy, had been aresting 20000 citizens most of them without trial. One of the many critics of this abuse of power was Russell Long, Kingfish's son. He had built a career by becoming the senator of the state of Oregon (where many former unionists reside). Many were more than welcome to vote for him in 1954 and he turned out to be an excelent senator. In 1956 he was elected as governor and he climbed the ladder. he denoounced the socialists as "heartless people" but he also denounced the republicans of abusing power. in that he became very popular with the middle class citizens. in 1960, Long wanted to run for president but unlike his father, the democrats elected him as candidate. The reason was that his policies were equal to that of democrats but also for being seen as a brave fighter against injustices of GOP. And he won the seat. Russell had made what his father couldn't.
Meanwille In Csa, Sinclair had made several reforms of keeping the country united such as leting cultural expression in music and art but he began to censor them because he believed most of them are anti socialist. But make no mistake he still allowed freedom of expression through artistic means.
But who wants to hear about reforms. So lets talk abbout foreign relation. CSA was in a big tension with PSA. Both of them have nuclear arsenals and both claim that their each succesor of all the the former US . But CSA had gained victories in space. They launched the first satelite and man into space and they had the bigger nuclear arsenal. Sinclair was so confident in 1958 that he even allowed an PS exhibition in washington D.C , which was atended by a certain Secretary of state, Lyndon B. Johnson.
The tension that is at the heighest is in New England. Tough NE had proclaimed that they want to be left alone, the CSA had argued that its a puppet state of Canada and that they would face war if they do not give it back. Tough the war stuff was a bluff , Canada had some anxietes over a real war and that it cannot stand the giant army of syndicalists. The NE also had made a friendship alliance with PSA in 1955, which adds more fuel to the fire. as alkies they an simply invade the country on 2 sides. the CS leaders knew that something had to be done. First in 1961, Sinclair reached for an offer with Long. If he surrenders New england, he would give Psa all of Texas. But Long refused saying that its a sovereign nation and thats it. But it was not PSA who had control over NE, but Canada. And after much pressure, The queen surrendered New England to CSA on July 14th 1961. Many PSA people were shocked by this event. a democratic neighbour giving an ally to a totalitarian regime. The relations between PSA and Canada would not become same again after the latter called this action "a betrayal of the freedmen".
The New England President , John F. Kennedy, tried to plead with Sinclair but it was futile. he had made his decision. Every NE leader shall be executed. But Kennedy manage to escape with the help of a canadian spy. he and his family fled to PSA while watching his nation being gobbled up by corrupt socialists. in California, he declared:
"For as traitorous as it is , the freed men cannot be free by standing near a totalist".
And he began to not trust canada by saying his famous words: "If we listen to them, none of us will be allive to tell them they were wrong".
The syndies may have expected that the new english may submit to the occupation but no. many rose up as partisan groups through 1961 to 1972 when they would be killed by the revolutionary army. but for now the so-called green boys would assasinate many oficials and in each crime scene would be a slogan "live free or die".
in 1962, there was an event called "the Indochinese Missile Crisis" but we will not get to it. what you must know is that eventually csa agreed with russia and PSA to remove the missiles from indochina in exchange for the removal of those in Poland and Greece. And the world was safe again.
Long tought this maybe the biggest crisis in his presidency. Unfortunatelly for him, his presidency would end with one. He and Kennedy were assasinated in 1963 in a visit in California. Both died from an anarchist sniper.
Also in 1964, Sinclair, whose health was deteorating, resigned from his post. in his place came the politician Elizabeth Nord who is known for not being kind to her opponents.
As the 70s came, both nations began to suffer its issues from this cold war. CSA's coffers were still spending money for the military and more CS citizens' lives began to be worse than in the West. And what did they have to show for it. They already lost the Space Race, with PS astronauts being the first in the Moon in 1970.
In the 70s elizabeth the russian PM andrew romanov had made several diplomacies of a diplomacy known as detente. Romanov became the first russian politician to visit CSA and France in 1973 and a year later, the leaders of both nations returned the gesture by visiting Moscow.
The realtions with psa were improving. In 27yh of April 1970 , in Tucson, the Nuclear De-Militarization Treaty (NDMT) was signed between Elizabeth and progressive President Jimmy Carter. PSA also remade relations with Canada over the "gymnastics diplomacy" when canadian gymasts visited the capital of L.A . However, at the time, americans were still pushing anti-brittish propaganda, so the greeting speech let to some mixed messages.Carter even made a visit in Ottawa in 1972.
But dont think that the tensions were low because there weren't. In 1973, the Csa made new recconisance flights over Eastern Europe and saw that new weapons were delivered. Several missiles were put in european nation in yet another missile crisis. Russia also put new national populists goverments (napolist govnts) and in 1979, CSA tried to invade Paraguay to prevent a nationalist insurgent group taking power. And in response to this crises, Olympic Games were boycotted.
Some conservatives in PSA, believed that L.A became to soft on socialism. And in 1980, the people wanted a new president who would be tough on socialism, so they elected Ronald Reagan. Due to many human rights violations, he called CSA an "evil titan" and decided to keep the arms race by using new technology computers . He also introduced obligatory military service as a means to be prepared for war.
While this happens, Nord is trying to block the reforms of Sinclair cause it was , in Nord's perspective, tearing the nation apart. Speaking of which, Nord managed to crackdown on NE partisans through blackmail, torture and sexy tanks.
But by the end of the 70s the economy reaches a stagnate point , largely because of huge military spending and ,of course, corruption. there were huge protests but ,as an amrican Thatcher, Nord crackdowned on these protesters using SIA snipers. But in 1978, Nord died and was succeded by a reedist John Bernard whom made new totalist policies but he died in 1983 and was succeded by John Conyers
Coming into office as chairman in 1983, he was the real changer. He was more democratic minded who believed that CSA economy was bad was because many people saw no happiness in work because freedom of speech was prohibited. He decided to change it . He allowed new policies such as "Freedom" and "Distribution" (think of them as The Glasnost and Perestroika in OTL). And it did the expected thing. many americans began to criticize the goverment, many younglings began to enjoy western pop culture, the CStv media began to interview the Tsarevna Maria Vladimirovna . Even better, they began to enjoy KFC and McDonalds. ALL HAIL CONYERS.
He also came to the conclusion that he must end the arms' race to save the nation's economy and a new relation with PSA and Russia must be made. And so in 1986, he, Reagan and the russian PM Gorbachev signed the INF treaty which prohibited the usage and creating missiles. Reagan's tone towards CSA began to soften and finnaly peace was on the horrison. But what do these reforms mean for The Socialist bloc. For 40 years their reforms have been brutally opressed by the SIA but when the italian president Achille Occhetto visited D.C. in 1987, Conyers' response was that he would not care if reforms are made. he was ready for Western Europe to choose its own future.
And the Autumn of Nations came , a year period of revolutions and protests that led to western europe being free from syndicallist authority.
Americas president , George W Bush decided that PSA would not interfere and allow the change to happen. "We will not stop what is the decision of God" bush said on the radio
As protests came in D.C. wanting an end to one-party rule, Conyers gave in. in 1988, elections came for the first time and non socialist candidates were allowed to run. And one democratic movement politician and a rival of Conyers, Bogdan Denitch, became the new governor of Illinois District (a place of importance in CSA history as its capital is Chicago). Conyers switched his position of chairman to president of CSA. Maximists were unhappy with what Conyers allowed. And so they briefly put him under house arrest and the maximists tried to make a new totalist goverment but Denitch and his supporters came to the White House and they forced them to concede. Which they did and released Conyers. The last atempt of saving CSA had failed spectacularily.
And also Denitch had made a deal with the other governors in giving them autonomy from the goverment and ,basically, ending CSA. in december 1989, Connyers and his goverment resign and in the New Year's Eve, the CSA flag which flew for 50 years, came down.
CSA had collapsed not with a bang, not with a blaze, but with a paper and betrayal. in January 1990, George W. Bush, his family and party, alongside the democrat and progressive parties entered in D.C in a triumph as great that of the days of the Roman Empire.
In November, Bush became the new president with Denitch as vice president. and democrats, republicans, progresives, unionists and even moderate socialists became members of a new goverment. One without rivalry, one without differences, one who should have been in 1936.
The United States of America was reborn and became the new superpower of the globe. but this time its a new America cleansed by its original sins. For the best or for the worst, l this new America is the new simbol forgiveness . This America is finally stretched from SEA TO SHINING SEA
submitted by Ctoea to Kaiserreich [link] [comments]


2020.09.10 22:30 teksmith Return to Campus

Paxson just sent out an email announcing they are moving forward with the next phase and invited students to return to campus. First day of in-person classes planned for 5OCT.
Heres the letter:

Dear Members of the Brown Community,
We are writing to update you on our plans for the remainder of the fall semester at Brown. As you know, in August we announced that, in light of the public health situation involving COVID-19, the University would take a phased approach to bringing undergraduate students back to campus. We are writing to share that we have decided to move to the next phase of inviting remaining undergraduates (sophomores, juniors and seniors) to campus and beginning in-person undergraduate courses on Oct. 5. In this letter, we provide the basis for this decision, as well as relevant information for students and employees as we transition to increased on-campus operations.
Over the last several weeks, we have continued to consult with public health experts, closely monitor the public health data at campus and statewide levels, and engage in extensive analysis of several other important factors impacting our ability to keep the Brown community and the greater Providence community safe. You have heard us say many times from Day One of this pandemic that the health and safety of our community has been our top priority. We also believe that the wellbeing of our students will benefit from engaging with a thriving college environment.
We and other leaders in higher education well understand that nowhere in this country will the public health conditions be anything approximating “normal” for a long time, considering the trajectory of the pandemic and the projected timeline for the widespread distribution of an eventual vaccine. Yet for our own campus, what Brown and Rhode Island are currently experiencing is a set of conditions that may be among the most conducive to bringing more students back to campus that we’re likely to experience for up to a year.
We have seen an improved public health situation in Rhode Island over the past several weeks. As participation in testing has increased statewide, the number of new cases continues to trend downward, along with the state’s test positivity rate.
We have also had a good experience with our routine asymptomatic COVID-19 testing program at Brown, which has been mandatory since Aug. 24 for all of our employees authorized to be on campus and students who live in residence halls or in the Providence area. Undergraduate students are required to be tested twice a week. To date, the fraction of tests for students that are positive is very low — about 1 in 1,000, or a test positivity rate of 0.10%. Test positivity for employees is 0.05%. In addition, test results in most cases are returned within a day.
The current low utilization of isolation and quarantine rooms is also a major consideration. We know that we must be prepared for the strong possibility of clusters of positive COVID-19 cases, just as we see in the general population. But the University is currently utilizing only a small fraction of its quarantine and isolation capacity and, so far, we have seen very few violations of our COVID-19 Campus Safety Policy. Graduate and medical students have been on campus over the summer, and while most undergraduate students have been on campus for just a few weeks, we are encouraged that they have overwhelmingly demonstrated a desire to keep the University community and the greater Providence community safe.
Given these circumstances, we have determined that we will move ahead with the second phase of welcoming students to campus and in-person instruction. Graduate courses will begin in person Sept. 16, and sophomores, juniors and seniors who wish to return to Providence will be allowed to do so beginning Sept. 18, at which time they will be subject to the mandatory Quiet Period. In-person instruction of small undergraduate classes will begin the week of Oct. 5, which is after the 14-day quarantine ends. All undergraduate students enrolled for the fall semester under this year’s three-term model have the choice to return to Providence or study remotely, and all courses for undergraduate and graduate students will accommodate remote learning.
Extensive information about how this phase of reopening will affect students, faculty and staff follows this letter. Please be sure to read this letter and the addendum in its entirety for details on telecommuting, academics, residential life, COVID-19 testing, and various campus services, policies and protocols.
It is important to note that a data-based and public health-based approach has driven and continues to form the foundation of every decision about operations since the onset of the pandemic — reflected in the move to this phased approach to welcoming students back to campus and in-person instruction, which created the time for health indicators and testing and prevention resources to improve. Throughout the semester we will carefully monitor the public health situation on campus and in Rhode Island, and remain prepared to make adjustments to the activities that are possible on campus.
To guide this decision-making, Brown has launched a COVID-19 Campus Activity Level Review Team, which will allow us to move quickly from one level of campus activity to another as the public health situation demands. We have also created a public COVID-19 dashboard that provides daily updates on asymptomatic test positivity in the Brown community among other factors.
As I’m sure you know, to date, colleges and universities across the country have had mixed success with returning to in-person instruction. We are heartened to see that a number of our peer institutions that have testing and public health plans similar to Brown’s are faring well, and demonstrating that it is possible to learn to live with a virus that, unfortunately, may be with us for some time.
To a large degree, how the semester will unfold is up to us. Brown has prepared extensively to support the health of the community with its comprehensive testing and contact tracing programs and added cleaning and safety protocols. But, these measures alone will not stop the spread of the virus. It remains essential that all members of the Brown community embrace personal responsibility in following public health guidance, including mask-wearing, social distancing and increased cleaning. We must care about each other and all the people whose lives will be affected by our actions. We all must stand ready to make sacrifices in our social lives to protect Brown and the greater community, and to have a successful semester.
Whether you choose to study at Brown or remotely, we look forward to a semester that is intellectually engaging and socially supportive.
Sincerely,
Christina H. Paxson, PresidentRichard M. Locke, ProvostBarbara Chernow, Executive Vice President for Finance and Administration
UPDATES FOR NEXT PHASE OF ON-CAMPUS OPERATIONS AND COMMENCING IN-PERSON INSTRUCTION
Please review this section for the following categories of operational updates from across the University as Brown moves to the next phase of increased on-campus operations, including offering in-person instruction:
TELECOMMUTING AND “RETURN TO CAMPUS” PLANS
Even with the move toward in-person instruction, the University expects individuals who can work remotely to continue to do so; this is central to promoting a healthy University environment. Telecommuting for all regular employees who are able to complete their work remotely continues through the end of the fall term, Dec. 23, 2020.
Nevertheless, moving to increased on-campus operations with the arrival of more students may affect planning being done across offices and departments to determine which employees are able to work remotely to fulfill their responsibilities, and those who may need to work at a Brown location regularly or occasionally. Academic and administrative units should assess their operations to determine if the shift to more on-campus operations requires a re-assessment of the designations of employees and/or a resubmission of Return to Campus Plans.
Units that have not yet submitted a work plan that includes on-campus and remote staffing needs should review the Return to Campus Plans and Guidelines webpage. If plans require an update, please submit an addendum with any necessary adjustment to the relevant committee listed on the page. Department leaders should continue to follow guidelines in managing schedules with their employees based on the nature of their job assignments.
Student Employment:
Opportunities for student employment for the fall term will be largely offered on a remote basis. Limited in-person opportunities will also be available. Students who are interested in work can search for student job opportunities in Workday. Questions regarding student employment can be submitted directly to [Student_[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]).
ACADEMICS
The University’s phased approach to beginning in-person instruction does not impact Brown’s plans for a three-term academic calendar. The 2020-21 Academic Calendar is online, and Fall 2020 Academic Policies for remote and hybrid instruction for undergraduate and graduate students are now posted on the Healthy Brown website.
For Undergraduate Students:
As announced previously, all undergraduate classes will be taught remotely until the week of Oct. 5. Classes began remotely on Wednesday, Sept. 9, and will continue remotely throughout the next phase of student move-in from Sept. 18 to Sept. 20 and the Quiet Period for newly arriving students. The 14-day Quiet Period is a requirement for all arriving undergraduates living on campus, no matter when you arrive during the phased resumption of on-campus operations. Hybrid undergraduate classes may begin meeting in person the week of Oct. 5.
Students returning to campus in September may reach out to academic advising deans for support for navigating classes during move-in and the Quiet Period.
For Graduate Students:
For graduate students enrolled in courses numbered below 2000, if these courses are listed as hybrid, they will meet remotely until Oct. 5 and will then continue according to their original, hybrid format. Fully graduate courses, those numbered 2000 and above, will proceed in either a hybrid or online format, depending on their designation in [email protected], after the conclusion of the Quiet Period for graduate students on Sept. 15.
Graduate students teaching in the fall will continue to teach fully online until the week of Oct. 5. Following that date, undergraduate courses will resume in their currently planned delivery mode (hybrid or online). If you are serving as a teaching assistant, fellow or independent instructor, you may elect to continue to teach remotely for the full semester.
A substantial number of graduate students have already been approved to be on campus. These include graduate students who have been approved for on-campus research in labs, graduate students who have indicated that their location status is “on campus” (this includes students in labs, students who are taking hybrid courses or who are teaching hybrid courses and have not elected to do so remotely), and graduate students who have been approved for access to departmental spaces through an approved departmental Return to Campus Plan.
For Medical Students:
First- and second-year students at the Warren Alpert Medical School have been successfully attending a mix of online and required in-person components of the curriculum since early August. One hundred percent of actively enrolled pre-clerkship students are participating in the campus-wide COVID-19 testing and symptom tracking program.
For Faculty, Instructors and Staff (including postdocs):
Remote/Hybrid/In-person Instruction: As we welcome students to begin in-person instruction the week of Oct. 5, we anticipate offering some hybrid courses with in-person sessions of fewer than 20 students. As a reminder, all class and section meetings of 20 or more students must be online.
Faculty and instructors planning to teach in person or to offer hybrid instruction with some in-person components may visit the assigned classroom in advance of teaching by contacting the Digital Learning and Design team at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). Faculty may choose to teach their course exclusively online, and may also opt to do so at any point in the term. In addition, since many students are studying remotely, all courses must be designed to accommodate online instruction for remote learners. Online classes may be offered either asynchronously or synchronously.
Lab and Performance Courses: As part of planning for the fall, the Office of the Provost has requested that all lab, studio and performance classes that involve an in-person component develop plans for safe instruction. Please review the following memos from Provost Richard M. Locke for details about the processes for laboratory courses and performance/studio courses: Safe Instruction: Performance/Studio Courses and Safe Instruction: Laboratory Courses.
Support for Teaching and Learning: Substantial resources are available to support online teaching and learning from the Digital Learning & Design team. Designed for faculty who are planning to teach in the spring and summer terms, the Fall Term Anchor Program will be offered over five weeks from Oct. 19 to Nov. 20, 2020. For more information and to apply, please see the Sheridan Center website. For instructors seeking additional support for online courses, please contact [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) and/or [Sheridan_[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) for information.
Research: Research activity remains at Stage 2 of Resuming Research. Principal Investigators interested in updating their Stage 2 plans to reflect any personnel changes should follow the Resuming Work in Research Facilities Principles and Procedures: Stage 2 guidelines, which include important information about ensuring health and safety in research labs, as well as parameters for undergraduate involvement in labs.
STUDENT RESIDENTIAL LIFE
For All Undergraduates:
All students who will be living in the Providence area, whether you live on or off campus, will be required to read and sign the Student Commitment to COVID-19 Community Health and Safety Requirements (Student Commitment); complete an online educational module; and follow a set of pre-arrival requirements and recommendations.
You will also be subject to Brown’s COVID-19 Campus Safety Policy and must participate in the COVID-19 testing program while you are in the Providence area, including a required test upon arrival in Providence. These are necessary safeguards for student health and well-being and that of the broader Brown and Providence communities.
Failure to comply with the health and safety requirements contained in the Student Commitment (including but not limited to wearing masks, social distancing, testing, contact tracing, and limiting the size of social gatherings for attendees and especially hosts — all whether on or off campus) will be a violation of the Code of Student Conduct. Violations will be addressed through the COVID-19 Student Conduct Procedures with sanctions up to and including removal from campus and academic suspension.
Students who change plans and prefer to live and study remotely outside of the Providence area must send an email from their Brown address to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) to request a change in your location of study. The final deadline for this request is 5 p.m. EDT on Monday, Sept. 14. We particularly encourage this option for students with health conditions that may place them in a high-risk category. You will receive a confirmation email when your location of study has been updated. Students who choose a remote location of study and live in the Providence area will be violating the University’s rules and potentially endangering the health and safety of themselves and others. Dishonesty about location of study will be referred to the student conduct process, and possible sanctions could include academic suspension.
For Undergraduates Returning to Live On Campus:
To gather information needed to make housing assignments, the Office of Residential Life previously contacted students who will be living in a residence hall on campus. This information was due on Sept. 7. Move-in will occur between Friday, Sept. 18, and Sunday, Sept. 20. You will be able to choose one of these three days when you receive your housing assignment (no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, Sept. 15). Detailed arrival information will be provided with this communication. All students will be required to observe the 14-day Quiet Period, which will include a period of time when you will be required to remain in your residence hall except to get a COVID-19 test, receive care from Health Services by appointment, or to pick up dining hall meals. All students returning to campus will observe the Quiet Period regardless of pre-arrival test status (including antibody testing) and geographical point of departure.For Undergraduates Returning to Live Off Campus:
Students living off campus will be scheduled for their first COVID-19 test with Brown shortly after arrival in Providence. If you have not already provided your arrival date, you will soon be asked to do so to become enrolled in COVID-19 testing with Brown.
Off-campus students must follow state-mandated 14-day quarantine requirements in place for people entering Rhode Island from outside the United States and from certain states within the country. You are responsible for keeping apprised of the state directives specific to your situation and for planning your arrival and quarantine accordingly. This may include completion of a certificate of compliance with out-of-state travel quarantine and testing requirements upon arriving in Rhode Island, as well as completion of an out-of-state travel screening form.
Between Sept. 18 and Oct. 4, most students on campus will be observing the Quiet Period. During this time, students who reside off campus are not permitted on campus. Off-campus students are not permitted in the residence halls at any time.
COVID-19 TESTING FOR STUDENTS AND EMPLOYEES
With the increase in community members on campus, a routine testing program — which tests individuals regardless of symptoms — will continue to be essential for identifying and preventing community spread of novel coronavirus at the earliest possible stage. Students, faculty and staff who are approved to return to campus to live, study or work are required to undergo COVID-19 testing at times and dates established by the University.
All community members who are subject to mandatory testing will receive an initial baseline test upon arrival to campus. After the baseline test, these individuals will be tested either once or twice per week, depending on the amount of regular contact they are likely to have with others. Information on testing frequency for students and employees is available on the student and employee testing pages on the Healthy Brown website. If you are required to enroll in the routine testing program, you will receive an email before your arrival to campus with instructions on how to enroll, schedule your first test and track any symptoms daily.
In addition to the routine testing program, Brown has guidance in place for anyone who experiences COVID-19 symptoms. Anyone with symptoms should immediately self-isolate, limit contact with other individuals and stay away from campus, including for any scheduled routine tests. To arrange for a symptomatic test or coordinate for care, students should contact Health Services at 401-863-1330 or [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). Employees should contact their primary health care provider and inform University Human Resources at 401-368-4828 or [leave_[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]).
TRAVEL POLICIES AND QUARANTINE
Any student, faculty or staff member who arrives from a location beyond Rhode Island (or who leaves Brown and returns) must follow state requirements, which may require a 14-day quarantine before conducting activities outside of an individual’s place of residence. For Brown community members who complete quarantine or are not required to do so, Brown’s guidelines on travel beyond campus will be shaped by the Campus Activity Status level in place at any given time, along with Brown’s policy on High-Risk and Restricted Travel, which remains in place.
Brown has suspended all international and domestic travel organized, sponsored or supported by the University through Jan. 3, 2021. This applies to all undergraduates and (unless an exception is approved) to graduate students, medical students, faculty and staff. This includes not only air travel, but local travel for field trips organized by faculty, staff or students for academic or other purposes. We urge all community members to avoid non-essential personal travel and to minimize movement off campus to the greatest extent possible.
Travel for Undergraduate Students:
Out-of-state travel is permitted for undergraduates only in emergencies and with approval, unless a student will remain away from campus for the duration of the fall semester. Travel within Providence for undergraduates will be guided by the prevailing Campus Activity Status level for such functions as visiting medical providers, commercial establishments and other local purposes. Additional details are available on the Campus Activity Status and Travel Policy pages of the Healthy Brown website.
CAMPUS SERVICES
Dining and Meals:
Undergraduates Who have Finished their Quiet Period: Beginning Sept. 16, students on meal plans who are already on campus and have completed the required Quiet Period will be able to go into two eateries to pick up their grab-and-go meals: Verney-Woolley and Andrews Commons. For Andrews, ordering will be required through the Get Food App.
Newly Arriving Undergraduate Students: For newly arriving students beginning their Quiet Period, Dining Services will have several meal delivery/pick-up locations to collect grab-and-go meals. These pick-up locations will be assigned based on residence hall proximity. Students will receive this information with their room assignment from Residential Life.
Graduate Students and Employees: As the fall semester begins, faculty, staff and graduate students may access meals on a grab-and-go basis at the Blue Room in the Stephen Robert ’62 Campus Center. The Brown Faculty Club will continue to offer the Brown to Table curbside pickup program to Faculty Club members. Safety guidelines must be followed when visiting dining locations.
Library Services:
The Library will be opening spaces for de-densified individual student work on a reservation basis. Graduate and medical students will have access beginning Sept. 16, and undergraduates will have access as of Oct. 5 In addition, the Library continues to support faculty and students in the following ways:
Brown Bookstore:
The Brown Bookstore is scheduled to be open beginning Sept. 16. Students who finished their Quiet Period will be able to access the store in person, while complying with all health and safety protocols. Newly arriving students will not be able to use the bookstore in person until Oct. 5, at the conclusion of the Quiet Period. The bookstore is developing plans to process online orders for course materials and deliver them to students’ designated meal pick-up locations.
Mail Services:
Mail Services will be open for business beginning Sept. 16 for University employees approved to be on campus, and for students who have completed the relevant quarantine or Quiet Period. The University is developing options to support in-person customers in compliance with health protocols, as well as newly arriving students who will be adhering to Quiet Period and unable to access Mail Services in person. These students will have course materials and critical packages delivered to their designated meal pick-up locations.
Shuttles:
Passengers who use shuttle bus services must abide by health protocols to ride safely. All Brown University Shuttle routes are fully operational at this time, and the University may expand shuttle service depending on the location of students in residence. If more students move into the Jewelry District, the daytime Connector route will be modified to accommodate Chestnut Street. In addition, Brown may add an express weekend and evening fixed route for those living in that area. Additional information can be accessed on the Transportation and Parking Services website.
Parking:
Currently, any Brown employee who comes to campus can park in any University surface parking lot, with the exception of the leased street parking spaces that are enforced by the City of Providence. As more employees return to campus and lots start to become congested, we will return to our normal system of parking permits.
VISITORS, PROGRAMMING AND EVENTS
Visitors:
The University recently updated restrictions for Fall 2020 regarding the hosting of non-degree visiting and exchange students, visiting faculty and researchers, and general visitors for the coming year. Learn more by visiting the Visiting Campus page in the Life on Campus section of the Healthy Brown website.
Programming and Events:
The expectation remains that most events and programming will be offered virtually in the fall semester. Any small gatherings planned on-site must follow University safety protocols and Rhode Island Department of Health guidelines in terms of numbers of individuals permitted, social distancing, use of face coverings etc. Also consult the Campus Activity Status levels on the Healthy Brown website for guidance on permissible activities. For students, guidelines for extracurricular activities are being reviewed on an ongoing basis by the Student Activities Office.



submitted by teksmith to BrownU [link] [comments]


2020.09.10 21:43 GuvnzNZ Written for the Australian audience, but unfortunately, relevant for NZ TOO (not my words, from Wade Gravy of Barcelona)

If you think this might be directed at you, it probably is.
Melbourne can, and has, learnt the lessons the rest of us had to experience first hand. As a result you've locked down hard and for a long time, and viral transmission has been limited, while the healthcare services haven't been over extended.
You've gone from over 700 cases a day to consistently well under a 100.
This is because businesses have been closed, people have been forced to spend more time at home and less time mingling with strangers and because masks are mandatory.
That's a fucking success story you absolute numpties.
Anybody protesting about that is rallying in favour of death. Everybody complaining about this online is spreading propaganda in favour of a deadly virus.
Here in Spain we didn't have the same lessons on hand. Italy was just beginning to unfold, China was both secretive and living under a different political system altogether, and the rest of the world was about to feel the effects of the virus.
But shall I remind you of what happened in Spain?
This is an illustration of what transpires when you implement and state of alarm, shut down businesses and enforce social distancing too late:
Two weeks before lockdown we were experiencing around 700 new cases a day.
Once they decided to lockdown on March 14th that number was nearer to 8000.
One week after lockdown that number was 11,000.
Two weeks after that peak we were counting almost 1000 deaths a day.
And that lasted a while. A thousand people a day who could have lived for days, months, years and decades longer, not to mention the countless more who will suffer chronic illness for the rest of their shortened lives due to being infected with the virus.
It wasn’t until the end of April that the daily new infections number was back down to 1,500.
By the end of May, when we were allowed out of the house for an hour to exercise per day the number was around 400.
That last milestone is important, because once we got there we were allowed outside for an hour at sunrise or sunset. From March 14th until May 25th we weren’t allowed outside to exercise.
For 72 days we weren’t allowed outside at all, unless to go to the supermarket or to take a dog outside to do its business, and people were getting fines for going to the supermarket too often/to supermarkets that weren’t the closest to them, or for walking the dog further than 100m from their front door.
It would be another month after that before we were allowed out of Barcelona's city limits.
Now I know that some of you might be saying, but why are Melbourne’s lockdowns so extreme when the cases are so low compared to Spain’s? And for that I have two answers. Melbourne’s lockdown measures aren’t that extreme. That’s not to say that it hasn’t been too long, nor that it’s easy for you, but it’s not extreme, not compared to what other cities and countries have been and are going through. You can leave your house to exercise and you can travel up to 5kms from your home (and I know that many Melbournians don’t leave their neighbourhoods during healthy times – I kid, I kid). Also, and this is the most important to understand, but Melbourne and Victoria and Australia’s cases are so low because the lockdowns happened quickly. They appear disproportionately harsh because they’ve been so successful. This success story is due to the fact that Dan Andrews listened to his expert advisors and his expert advisors learned lessons that the rest of the world had to fight through. When someone sees this kind of success it’s absolute lunacy to then go and doubt them, second guess them, call for their resignation or openly defy them.
Do you want to know what Dan Andrews and his advisors saw in Spain that they don’t want repeated in Victoria?
We’ve now recorded over 500,000 infections.
So far 30,000 people have died.
Too many of the 470,000+ survivors will suffer long term health problems and complications from the virus.
At the peak the city of Madrid converted the municipal ice skating rink into a morgue.
The army had to go through nursing homes to clear out corpses after residents had been left first to die, then to rot.
Spain is again recording new daily infections in the 1000s. We didn’t get the virus out of the community, so once we opened up again it just came back.
Australia has had 26,000 cases.
Less than 800 people have died.
And if lockdowns endure long enough there’s a good chance Victoria can be like West Australia and New Zealand with very few cases in the community and a good chance for life to be back to normal while a vaccine is developed, produced and distributed.
So please, tell us again why you’re complaining about having to live with one of the most successful virus prevention regimes in the world.
Are you coming from a short sighted, selfish, pro virus or pro death perspective? It kinda has to be one of them.
submitted by GuvnzNZ to newzealand [link] [comments]


2020.09.10 18:07 ZandrickEllison Offseason Blueprint: The Cleveland Cavaliers need to find their way back from the abyss

The playoffs continue to rage on, but there are 23 teams sitting at home with nothing to do but twiddle their thumbs, tweet Danuel House jokes, and wait for next season to start.
For their sake, we wanted to look ahead with the next edition of the OFFSEASON BLUEPRINT series. In each, we'll preview some big decisions and make some recommendations for plans of attack along the way. Today, we're looking at the Cleveland Cavs.
step one: sit down, because this may take a while
In the aftermath of LeBron James' exit, the Cleveland Cavaliers needed to rebuild from the ground up. Understanding that, they hired a veteran college coach in John Beilein to effectively build an entire program from scratch. Alas, it did not work as planned. Instead of a long-term partnership that may have lasted 5+ years, the pairing combusted before the 60 game mark. Clearly, Beilein (age 67) had a hard time connecting with NBA players, and vice versa. At the end of the day, it's fine. It's better to realize that a marriage won't work and divorce with a clean break before it gets too ugly and you end up smashing up the walls.
After the relationship ended, the team rebounded with J.B. Bickerstaff. And this is hardly Bickerstaff's first rebound rodeo. Bickerstaff is only 41 years old, but this is already his third interim takeover. He stepped in after Kevin McHale got fired in Houston, and stepped in after David Fizdale got fired in Memphis. The jokes write themselves; hiring J.B. Bickerstaff as your assistant coach is like having sex with a black widow or marrying an axe murderer.
While Bickerstaff's resume so far may be stained, he's not a bad fit for this franchise. As mentioned, he's young. He's an NBA lifer, literally born and raised into the league (as the son of a coach.) He should be in this for the long haul. And more than anything, that's what the Cleveland Cavs need right now. Some familiarity. Some continuity. Some slow, gradual steps to improvement.
It's going to be a long, long road back. This season, the Cavs finished 19-46 -- second worst in the NBA. They were also second worst in point differential, SRS, expected win total, total defensive efficiency, etc. Amazingly, their advanced stats this season were actually better than last year, which is how they should track success for the next few years. You're not going to be good for a while, but you want to keep moving forward. As long as Bickerstaff can do that, he can stay in charge of the ship.
step two: out with the old...
The Cleveland Cavaliers don't have many free agents, although two familiar faces will be off the books: Tristan Thompson and Matthew Dellavedova. Thompson actually had his best season in a while, scoring 12.0 points and grabbing 10.1 rebounds per game. 4.0 of those were offensive rebounds, which ranked second in the entire NBA (behind new teammate Andre Drummond.) The "old man" (only 29, in reality) looked like he had some life in his legs, and may have bought himself a few more years as a starting big.
That starting job is unlikely to come here in Cleveland. Drummond will opt in to his $28M player option, which soaks up the center spot. The Cavs also have Kevin Love under contract (for now), as well as Larry Nance Jr. It simply doesn't make sense to invest more in the frontcourt. The Cavs should wish Thompson well as he heads off to his next adventure.
Taking it a step further, the Cavs need to field trade offers for Kevin Love as well. Love has been a good soldier for the franchise -- both during their championship past and now in their post-apocalyptic present. It'd be in the team's best interest, and his best interest, to find a deal that would bring him to a playoff contender. Now 32, Love shouldn't spend his late prime wasting away for a bottom dweller.
The return for Love may be modest. He's under contract for three more years at $31M + $31M + $29M -- an overpay but not a complete albatross of a deal. He's still a good player, as illustrated by his averages of 17.6 points, 9.8 rebounds, and 3.2 assists this year. His defense and his rim protection are still an issue, but he can at least toggle between PF and C depending on the matchup. The Cavs have been playing him 90% of the time at PF over the last two seasons, but another team will likely try him as a stretch center.
Some veteran teams may be inclined to take a chance on Love, although his big salary will make "matching" difficult. The most fitting, from a karmic perspective, would be a sequel of the Kevin Love for Andrew Wiggins trade. The Cavs need wings and youth, while the Warriors will still be in "win now" mode. I actually don't mind the idea of Love + Draymond Green defensively, figuring Green could take the tougher matchup in the frontcourt. That said, if Golden State is still wary of the James Hardens and Houstons of the world, then an old Kevin Love may not be their ideal solution. I'd presume the Warriors would prefer Wiggins at this point, but it may depend on their plans for the # 3 pick.
Overall, the Cavs aren't going to get a huge haul for Love, or perhaps any real positive returns at all. Given that, they can treat Love more as a human being than an "asset," and work with him to find a good situation. Maybe that's Golden State, maybe that's Portland, maybe that's Brooklyn (any good team that can try to cobble together matching salaries, really.) But if possible, it'd be great to see Love find his footing and his relevance again.
step three: in with the new.
There's usually a silver lining to a bad year: a nice, high draft pick!
Unfortunately, the Cavs' lottery luck has run out lately. They stumbled from the # 2 slot down to # 5.
That could be an especially challenging fall given the context here. This isn't a particularly strong draft to begin with; in fact, it's one of the weaker drafts of the decade. Moreover, the strengths of the draft don't line up with the Cavs' needs. There are several lead guards at the top of the class (LaMelo Ball, Killian Hayes), but the Cavs have selected scoring guards like Collin Sexton and Darius Garland in back to back years. There are a couple of big men who could be top 5 picks (James Wiseman, Onyeka Okongwu), but the Cavs just traded for Andre Drummond. This is a team that's starved for wings, but they find themselves in a draft that's run out of wings in the kitchen.
There are two top 5 talents that would be great fits for the Cavs, but both may taken before # 5. SG Anthony Edwards (Georgia) may be the top talent overall, which means that he's not lasting to # 5 barring some injury or ethics scandal. More realistically, the team should root for Deni Avdija (Israel) to fall to them. He has the size at 6'9" to play either SF or PF, two areas of need. He's a smart player and a ball mover, two aspects which should mold well into this current core.
So what should the Cavs do in a "worst case scenario" if Edwards and Avdija are off the board? They could consider taking one of the big men, knowing that Drummond's contract will only run 1 more year anyway. Alternatively, they could debate reaching on the next level of prospect.
Among those, there are a few I'd caution against. PF Obi Toppin (Dayton) had been productive in school and flashes some scoring chops, but he plays tall and stiff and may have some real trouble hanging on defense in the NBA. SF Isaac Okoro (Auburn) is getting some love from scouts based on his strength and athleticism, but he lacks pro-ready skills to me. I wouldn't bet my life on them being long-term starters, which is a scary thought for a # 5 pick.
Two "reaches" that I actually like are Devin Vassell (Florida State) and Aaron Nesmith (Vanderbilt.) Vassell is the prototypical 3+D wing, with length, defensive instincts, and a solid shot (41.5% from three.) Nesmith is an even better shooter, perhaps the best in this class. He's not a great athlete or defender, but he has enough length ( 6'10") to hang at the 2 or 3. Perhaps Vassell and Nesmith lack the upside of an Obi Toppin, but I'd consider them safer bets for long and productive NBA careers. They have the skill sets that the league is looking for right now. Taking them would represent a step in the right direction.
step four: don't be afraid to take your lumps
The Cavaliers made a curious move when they traded for Andre Drummond. Even if we presume they'll find a taker for Kevin Love, Drummond still may not match the timeline of this team. He's already 27, and may be past his prime in 2-3 years. The Cavs may not be ready to contend for a playoff spot in 2-3 years.
Adding Drummond shouldn't put pressure on the front office to "win now." They need to keep the long term, long road approach. If it turns out that the team goes 20-62 next year, then that's okay. Maybe that's a sign that they should let Drummond walk, and push their window and timeline down a few more years. They have the luxury of patience, and they need to exercise that.
That should also apply to the rotations for next year as well. J.B. Bickerstaff is going to have to put on his white coat and goggles, because he needs to start some experimentation. The team needs to figure out whether Darius Garland and Collin Sexton can play together heavy minutes (or whether the defensive issues would be too severe.) If it doesn't work, they need to figure out if one is more effective coming off the bench. They need to figure out if there's any remaining spark in Dante Exum (acquired from Utah.) They need to figure out if SG Kevin Porter Jr. can turn into a high-level scorer and potential building block. Bickerstaff is going to have to try a lot of different combinations here to see what works, and what doesn't. If the team can end 2020-21 with some of these questions answered, it'll be in their best interest in the long term, even if it results in a few extra losses.
If the team can get on the same page and follow through, then there may be gold at the end of the rainbow. Next year's class appears (at the moment, anyway) to be a strong group, highlighted by... WINGS! WINGS! WINGS! Point forward Cade Cunningham (heading to Oklahoma State) and scoring swingman Jalen Green (heading to the G-League) headline the class right now, while PF Jalen Johnson (Duke), and SF Ziaire Williams (Stanford) have the potential to join the # 1 pick conversation in time. And while those flattened odds make it difficult to ensure the # 1 pick, grabbing the # 1 spot means that you can only drop as low as # 5. If the Cavs end up in that top 5 again, it may be a major boost of NOS to their long journey.
previous offseason blueprints
CHA, CHI, IND, MIN, NYK, POR, SA, SAC, UTA
submitted by ZandrickEllison to nba [link] [comments]


2020.09.07 15:39 rusticgorilla Lost in the Sauce: DHS hides intelligence that reveals Trump using Russia's playbook, again

Welcome to Lost in the Sauce, keeping you caught up on political and legal news that often gets buried in distractions and theater… or a global health crisis.
Housekeeping:

Trump’s playbook is Russia’s playbook

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in July withheld an intelligence bulletin warning of a Russian plot to spread misinformation regarding Joe Biden's mental health. The bulletin, titled “Russia Likely to Denigrate Health of U.S. Candidates to Influence 2020 Election,” was blocked by the office of acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf on July 9.
  • The bulletin states that analysts had “high confidence” in their conclusion. However, a DHS spokesperson tried to defend the “delay” in issuing the document by saying it did not meet the agency’s standards. This is curious because just a week later, on July 16, DHS circulated a bulletin on anarchists in Portland that officers admitted they had “low confidence” in. Why was the Russia memo held back but the Portland one released?
  • Trump has been pushing the same line of attack against Biden for months - yet another instance of Russia and Trump operating from the same playbook. For instance, in March Trump said there was “something going on” with Biden; in June Trump ran selectively edited ads asserting that Biden is “unfit to serve as Commander in Chief”; last month Trump ran a digital ad portraying Biden as perpetually confused and mentally unstable. Most recently, Trump said questions about his own health are only in the news because “they want to try and get me to be on Biden's physical level."
DHS is just the latest agency in the Trump administration to erode election security, following actions by the Justice Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) last month. DNI John Ratcliffe announced he was ending in-person congressional briefings on election security ahead of November and AG Bill Barr removed a leading career official at the Justice Department’s national security division, replacing him with an inexperienced political appointee.
The ODNI’s decision to halt congressional election briefs may have been influenced by top White House officials. National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien and Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, among others, have repeatedly discussed in meetings with staff and with Trump “how to restrict and control the flow of information on such sensitive topics to Capitol Hill.”
One White House official told The Daily Beast that Meadows has for months been wary of the type of briefings on Capitol Hill that Democratic sources can potentially use to try to make Trump look bad through surreptitious leaks to media outlets.
Meanwhile, interim Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee Marco Rubio (R-FL) said last week that his committee will be granted an exception to the ODNI’s new policy and continue to receive in-person briefings from top U.S. intelligence officials about election-security issues. This essentially means that only Democrat-led committees have been cut out of the process ensuring election security.
House Democrats wrote to Ratcliffe insinuating if his office does not provide the previously scheduled briefings this month they will issue subpoenas and/or defund the ODNI in the appropriations bill due by the end of the month. Read the letter here.
In addition to attacks on Biden’s health, DHS has determined that Russia is seeking to “amplify” concerns over the integrity of U.S. elections by promoting allegations that mail-in voting will lead to widespread fraud. Intelligence analysts say this strategy has been underway since at least March, coinciding with Trump’s own assaults on mail-in voting.
  • For instance, in March Trump said if he agreed to funding vote-by-mail expansions in the first coronavirus stimulus bill, the U.S. would see “levels of voting that, if you ever agreed to it, you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again” (clip). Fact check: Neither party has historically benefited. On April 7, at the White House press briefing, Trump claimed: "Mail ballots are a very dangerous thing for this country, because they're cheaters… They're fraudulent in many cases" (clip). Fact check: There is no evidence that mail ballots are dangerous or fraudulent.
At a White House press briefing on Friday, Trump denied there is any proof that Russia poisoned opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Instead of backing the German government's analysis of Nalvany's illness, Trump then redirected the criticism from Russia to China (clip).
"I don't know exactly what happened. I think it's tragic. It's terrible; it shouldn't happen. We haven't had any proof yet, but I will take a look. It is interesting that everybody is always mentioning Russia - and I don't mind you mentioning Russia - but I think probably China, at this point, is a nation that you should be talking about much more so than Russia. Because the things that China's doing are far worse.”
Trump then went on to say he’s “taken stronger action against Russia than any other country in the world,” but added “I do get along with President Putin” (clip).
  • RELATED: Leaked notes obtained by the Telegraph say that when Theresa May asked for Trump to take a strong stand after Russia poisoned Sergei Skripal, Trump replied “I’d rather follow than lead.” He pushed May to “put together a coalition” first.
The Trump administration plans to deport a Russian national living in America, a move experts say is in response to a politically motivated request by Russia. Gregory Duralev was persecuted by the Russian state for exposing corruption. He fled to America and applied for asylum in 2015. While waiting for a decision on his application, he was arrested by ICE and jailed for nearly 18 months. His case is now in court.
“DHS has acted no better than the Russian authorities,” Duralev said. “They simply fabricated charges against me for violations I never committed — and if DHS can trump up charges against immigrants with impunity, nobody can guarantee they won’t start doing it” to regular Americans. “So that’s the main message I now hope to send.”

Michael Cohen & Peter Strzok

Former FBI agent Peter Strzok has a book coming out called “Compromised.” In it, he alleges that FBI investigators came to believe it was “conceivable, if unlikely” that Russia was secretly controlling President Trump after he took office:
“We certainly had evidence that this was the case: that Trump, while gleefully wreaking havoc on America’s political institutions and norms, was pulling his punches when it came to our historic adversary, Russia,” Strzok writes. “Given what we knew or had cause to suspect about Trump’s compromising behavior in the weeks, months, and years leading up to the election, moreover, it also seemed conceivable, if unlikely, that Moscow had indeed pulled off the most stunning intelligence achievement in human history: secretly controlling the president of the United States — a Manchurian candidate elected.”
He now says he doesn’t believe that Trump is literally a Russian spy: “I don’t think that Trump, when he meets with Putin, receives a task list for the next quarter,” Strzok said, referencing the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. “But I do think the president is compromised, that he is unable to put the interests of our nation first, that he acts from hidden motives, because there is leverage over him, held specifically by the Russians but potentially others as well.”
In an interview with Politico, Strzok confirms that he and then-deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, opened a counterintelligence case on the president, but that it likely was never pursued. Two weeks ago, NYT reported that Rosenstein secretly closed it.
As if there weren’t enough political books coming out this summefall, Michael Cohen is releasing his, called “Disloyal: A Memoir.” The following a couple of quick takeaways:
Cohen says that he, Trump, Aras Agalarov, Emin Agalarov, and others, watched a strip show in Las Vegas where one performer simulated peeing on another performer, who pretended to drink it. Trump reportedly reacted with “delight.” Aras Agalarov, a Russian real estate mogul, is a trusted associate of Putin and reportedly served as a liaison between Trump and the Russian president during Trump’s trip to Moscow.
WaPo:
On Russia, Cohen writes that the cause behind Trump’s admiration of Russian President Vladimir Putin is simpler than many of his critics assume. Above all, he writes, Trump loves money — and he wrongly identified Putin as “the richest man in the world by a multiple.” Trump loved Putin, Cohen wrote, because the Russian leader had the ability “to take over an entire nation and run it like it was his personal company — like the Trump Organization, in fact.”
...According to Cohen, Trump’s sycophantic praise of the Russian leader during the 2016 campaign began as a way to suck up and ensure access to the oligarch’s money after he lost the election. But he claims Trump came to understand that Putin’s hatred of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, dating to her support for the 2011 protest movement in Russia, could also help Trump amass more power in the United States.

USPS & mail voting

According to a Washington Post report yesterday, Postmaster Louis DeJoy engaged in campaign money laundering, also called a straw-donor scheme, at his former logistics business. Five of his former employees told WaPo that they were “urged” to donate to politicians in North Carolina and would be paid back through bonuses from DeJoy. Such a plan would allow DeJoy to illegally circumvent campaign donation limits.
“Louis was a national fundraiser for the Republican Party. He asked employees for money. We gave him the money, and then he reciprocated by giving us big bonuses,” said David Young, DeJoy’s longtime director of human resources, who had access to payroll records at New Breed from the late 1990s to 2013 and is now retired.
“He would ask employees to make contributions at the same time that he would say, ‘I’ll get it back to you down the road,’ ” said [another] former employee.
...A Washington Post analysis of federal and state campaign finance records found a pattern of extensive donations by New Breed employees to Republican candidates, with the same amount often given by multiple people on the same day. Between 2000 and 2014, 124 individuals who worked for the company together gave more than $1 million to federal and state GOP candidates. Many had not previously made political donations, and have not made any since leaving the company, public records show.
More than one million mail-in ballots were sent late to voters during the 2020 primary elections, an audit by the USPS IG’s office determined. Most of the ballots were late, the USPS says, because local election boards sent the ballots to voters at the last minute. Official press release.
[The audit] found the problems during primaries had been most pronounced in Kentucky and New York, where a combined 628,000 ballots were sent out late. In 17 states, the audit found, more than 589,000 ballots were sent from election boards to voters after the state’s ballot mailing deadline. In 11 states, more than 44,000 ballots were sent from election boards to voters the day of or the day before the state’s primary election.
One particularly troubling situation, auditors found, unfolded in Pennsylvania, where 500 ballots were sent to voters the day after the election.
Furthermore, only 13% of the ballots were mailed with the recommended bar code tracking technology.
Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D) was blocked from attending two scheduled tours of USPS facilities last week. Local Postal Service officials informed her and union leaders waiting to accompany her into the building that national USPS leadership had directed them to bar the group from the building. A Postal Service spokeswoman said they simply needed more notice for a tour.
Many states, including important battleground states, are not legally permitted to process mail-in/absentee ballots until Election Day, leading to concern that results will be delayed by days or weeks. For instance, in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan election officials cannot even begin processing ballots until Election Day. Processing involves opening envelopes, flattening ballots to run through the scanning machine, and prepping for the scanning.
"When voters have to wait so long for results, it erodes trust in the process and leaves room for partisan bad actors to dispute the will of the people," said Amber McReynolds, CEO of the National Vote at Home Institute, a nonprofit organization.
AG Bill Barr made three stunning false claims about mail voting during an interview with Wolf Blitzer last week. First, Barr wouldn’t even acknowledge that voting twice is a crime - because just hours earlier, Trump encouraged his North Carolina supporters to vote twice to “test” the state’s mail-in voting system (clip).
BLITZER: It sounds like he’s encouraging people to break the law and try to vote twice.
BARR: It seems to me what he’s saying is, he’s trying to make the point that the ability to monitor this system is not good. And it was so good, if you tried to vote a second time you would be caught if you voted in person.
BLITZER: That would be illegal if they did that. If somebody mailed in a ballot and then actually showed up to vote in person, that would be illegal.
BARR: "I don't know what the law in the particular state says.”
BLITZER: You can’t vote twice.
BARR: "I don't know what the law in the particular state says.”
Then, Barr tried to assert that foreign countries could fake ballots, but when challenged he admitted he had no evidence (clip).
BLITZER: You’ve said you were worried that a foreign country could send thousands of fake ballots, thousands of fake ballots to people that it might be impossible to detect. What are you basing that on?
BARR: I’m basing — as I’ve said repeatedly, I’m basing that on logic.
BLITZER: Pardon?
BARR: Logic.
Finally, Barr cited a supposed incident of mail-in voting fraud in Texas. Too bad it doesn’t exist.

The payroll

Charles Rettig, the Trump-appointed IRS Commissioner who has refused to release President Trump’s tax returns, has made hundreds of thousands of dollars renting out Trump properties while in office. Rettig makes $100,000 - $200,000 a year from two units at Trump International Waikiki. When first nominated, Rettig failed to disclose his financial ties to Trump Waikiki. When questioned by Congress, he did not directly answer concerns about the properties.
CREW: With Trump’s name removed from some buildings as it began to hurt property values, we can only imagine how toxic it would become if a bombshell in his tax returns were released. Which means the IRS Commissioner has a vested interest in the success of the Trump brand—and of preventing anything that could damage it.
Voice of America staffers say Trump appointee Michael Pack is threatening to wash away legal protections intended to insulate their news reports from political meddling. Since arriving, Pack has fired the network's leaders, pushed out agency executives, refused to approve allotted budgets, and refused to renew visas for foreign employees.
  • Further reading: “Deleted Biden video sets off a crisis at Voice of America,” Politico.
Pack suggested the staff he fired and foreign journalists he essentially kicked out may have been foreign spies, without offering any evidence to support his claim. A group of 14 senior VOA journalists are openly disputing his explanation:
“Mr. Pack has made a thin excuse that his actions are meant to protect national security, but just as was the case with the McCarthy ‘Red Scare,’ which targeted VOA and other government organizations in the mid-1950s, there has not been a single demonstrable case of any individual working for VOA — as the USAGM CEO puts it — ‘posing as a spy,’ ” they wrote.
The White House is searching for a replacement for Federal Trade Commission Chair Joe Simons, a Republican who has publicly resisted President Donald Trump’s efforts to crack down on social media companies. Simons, a veteran antitrust lawyer, cannot legally be removed by the president except in cases of gross negligence. But the White House has already interviewed at least one candidate for the post.
  • RELATED: The Justice Department plans to bring an antitrust case against Google as soon as this month, after Attorney General William P. Barr overruled career lawyers who said they needed more time to build a strong case.
Richard Grenell, formerly the highest-ranking out gay official in the Trump administration, has joined a law firm founded by Pat Robertson that has a history of opposing LGBTQ+ rights. Grenell also recently joined the Republican National Committee to do outreach to LGBTQ+ voters.
The Trump administration has quietly named a new acting State Department inspector general. Matthew Klimow, the U.S. ambassador to Turkmenistan since mid-2019, is the third acting IG since Trump and Pompeo ousted Senate-confirmed IG Steve Linick in May.
Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s current special envoy to Northern Ireland, former Chief of Staff, and former acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, is starting a hedge fund focused on financial services regulation. Ethics experts say Mulvaney explicitly using his knowledge of CFPB to place bets for and against companies gives him an unfair and perhaps illegal advantage.

Court and DOJ matters

Court cases
The Trump administration must, for now, stop winding down in-person counting efforts for the 2020 census, a federal judge in California ordered.
The three-judge panel hearing a challenge to Trump’s new anti-immigrant census policy seemed hostile to the government’s arguments in a hearing last week.
A federal judge has stopped the Trump administration from enforcing a rule change that would let health care providers deny medical services to LGBTQ patients on the grounds of religion.
Justice Department
Federal prosecutors are preparing to charge longtime GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy in connection with efforts to influence the U.S. government on behalf of foreign interests. Broidy helped raise millions for Donald Trump’s election and the Republican Party.
Barr ordered another round of changes to FISA rules, tightening the use of government surveillance on political candidates or their staffers — a move conservatives will likely cheer, as they have long criticized how the FBI investigated the Trump campaign in 2016.
Before conducting physical searches or wiretaps of a federal election official, members of the official's staff, candidates for federal office, or their staff or advisers, the FBI must now consider giving them a "defensive briefing," to tell them that they could be the target of foreign influence.
submitted by rusticgorilla to Keep_Track [link] [comments]


2020.09.07 03:26 HugeCanoe Matt Comyn on Afterpay: 'It looks like credit to me'

Commonwealth Bank chief executive Matt Comyn says the hefty fees Afterpay charges merchants will come under pressure from the Reserve Bank, and Australian Securities and Investments Commission regulation should become more intense if the buy now, pay later sector continues to grow.
Mr Comyn told a parliamentary committee the pay-in-four instalment model pioneered by Afterpay would trigger more competition, after US giant PayPal entered the market last week, sinking share prices across the high-flying ASX sector.
Commonwealth Bank chief Matt Comyn: "I see certainly the potential for [Afterpay's] offering to be competed away." Louie Douvis
Yet he also revealed his respect for Afterpay, saying its customers' attraction to the product had triggered a competitive response from the country's biggest bank. It has invested $US300 million ($411.9 million) in Swedish-based competitor Klarna, and Mr Comyn said payments was one of the most important focus areas for banks.
"I see the potential for [instalment] offerings to be competed away, or to evolve," he said.
The hearing of the House of Representatives economics committee on Friday showed growing concern on both sides of the political fence about the power of buy now, pay later players. Mr Comyn was asked whether they should be subjected to responsible lending regulations or if the impact on vulnerable customers should be more closely monitored.
Queensland Liberal MP Julian Simmonds said the product was popular in his household but "it does scare the bejesus out of me, in terms of the unsecured nature of the credit and how much people are looking at capacity to repay".
Liberal MP Julian Simmonds has questions about whether buy now, pay later providers considered their customers' broader circumstances.
He wanted to know from Mr Comyn about safeguards CBA and Klarna had in place to "consider the entirety of [the customer's] capacity to pay, as opposed to just accepting their buy now, pay later application on its face value".
Consumer groups raised similar concerns after Afterpay's full-year result briefing last month. Klarna examines customer credit files in responsible-lending style customer checks, but Afterpay does not. ASIC is preparing a report on the sector, to be released at the end of the year; it has criticised commitments to assess customers in a draft industry code as being "vague". But a Senate committee report last week backed self-regulation of the industry.
Mr Comyn said: "Even though it is not referred to as credit, it certainly looks a lot like credit to me."
He said it was appropriate for ASIC to support emerging innovation and that it was important competition was allowed to emerge. But he added that "generally what happens, as industries or products become much larger and popular and usage expands, is there will be more scrutiny on the consequences and vulnerabilities customers may have".
Businesses are effectively funding the buy now, pay later opportunity for customers.
— Matt Comyn, CBA chief executive
"I will leave it to the regulators ultimately to make those decisions. But I have no doubt that given the size of the industry now, it must be being reviewed quite closely."
Labor committee member Andrew Leigh also questioned the rapid growth of the sector. He asked Mr Comyn whether he thought the large merchant fees – which can be about 5 per cent of the cost of goods sold – were "going to be sustainable in the medium term".
Labor MP Andrew Leigh does not believe the large merchant fees are sustainable. Alex Ellinghausen
"No, I don't," the CBA boss replied. He pointed to the RBA's efforts to push credit card payment costs lower to help businesses accepting them. The RBA is reviewing whether Afterpay should continue to be able to prevent merchants from passing the cost of its products to customers.
"When you think about credit cards, understandably the central bank and government have been very focused on making sure payments are low cost," Mr Comyn said.
"What the buy now, pay later sector has done well and successfully is convince [merchant] customers ... they are getting more than just the payment, that they are providing an acquisition channel for new customers, they are helping to increase basket size ... Businesses are effectively funding the buy now, pay later opportunity for customers."
Mr Leigh asked why CBA had invested so much in Klarna to compete in buy now, pay later. "To an economist like me, the model seems fragile," he said. "It seems premised on the fact Amazon is a pretty hopeless shopping experience if you don't know what you are looking for; and Google shopping tends to be pretty badly organised if you want to know the final cost.
"These buy now, pay later operators seem to be exploiting an information asymmetry in the market that surely has to be temporary. I am surprised you are piling big into Klarna and you see this as enduring rather than ephemeral."
Mr Comyn said CBA had seen "a strategic gap, or opportunity" as Afterpay grew to 10 million customers in just a few years and felt compelled to compete.
As China fintech giant Ant Financial prepares a mega-IPO, Mr Comyn said "payments innovation is going to be one of the most important areas of financial services globally" and "we see our investment in Klarna as being about more than buy now, pay later; we see it as working ... to develop innovative payment experiences to benefit our customers".
https://www.afr.com/companies/financial-services/matt-comyn-raps-on-afterpay-it-looks-like-credit-to-me-20200905-p55sqz
submitted by HugeCanoe to ASX_Bets [link] [comments]


Beware the Lady in Black: Savannah Hauntings at the Sorrel ... Haunted House in Savannah, Ga Haunted Juliette Gordon Low House Juliette Gordon Low House, Savannah, Georgia - YouTube Inside Juliette Gordon Low House in Savannah, Georgia Andrew Camarata - YouTube Low Cost House Design In Nepal (see description) - YouTube Andrew Low House, Savannah, GA - YouTube Savannah Ghost Ob Caught On Camera

Complete Guide To Visiting The Andrew Low House Savannah

  1. Beware the Lady in Black: Savannah Hauntings at the Sorrel ...
  2. Haunted House in Savannah, Ga
  3. Haunted Juliette Gordon Low House
  4. Juliette Gordon Low House, Savannah, Georgia - YouTube
  5. Inside Juliette Gordon Low House in Savannah, Georgia
  6. Andrew Camarata - YouTube
  7. Low Cost House Design In Nepal (see description) - YouTube
  8. Andrew Low House, Savannah, GA - YouTube
  9. Savannah Ghost Ob Caught On Camera
  10. Haunted Sorrel Weed House

Pictures of the Juliette Gordon Low House in Savannah, Georgia. Juliette is the founder of the USA Girl Scouts. The house is said to be haunted. But what isn't in Savannah! Went to Savannah last week, I am a huge paranormal buff, and had the chance to take a haunted tour of the famous Sorrel Weed House. I was able to catch a few shadows and an orb, kinda interesting ... On Madison Square there sits a house of impressive ghostly repute, A house that is home to tragedy, and the spirits that follow suit. According to Savannah l... Andrew Low House Savannah, Georgia Ghosts & Gravestones Tour They say that ghosts are caught on camera in the form of energy orbs. What does this like to you? Website: https://escapearoundtheworld ... The district includes the Wayne-Gordon House at 10 Oglethorpe Avenue, East, which is also known as Juliette Gordon Low Birthplace, the First Girl Scout Headquarters (Andrew Low Carriage House) at ... SUBSCRIBE https://www.youtube.com/c/SIMPLELIFEHACK?sub_confirmation=1 http://design.daddygif.com/house-design-worth-1-million-philippines/ - House Design Wor... Touring Andrew and Juliette Lowe House in Savannah, Ga. Listen for child like voice at 11:42! PS, no children were on the tour! Where else can you find hand-tied tassels on the fringe of velvet curtains, as if fringe is not enough, gorgeous works of art by a woman who changed history,... Videos from my property maintenance business. Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.