|
mobby_6kl posted:Well they should fire her from that too. BTW several big-name politicians in Europe had been forced to resign because their academic work was found to have been plagiarized. Same logic applies imo, you wouldn't want someone dishonest to be in charge of the government either, even if it's not an academic position. I wouldn't WANT it, but it's the only option the US government system produces.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
ColdPie posted:Absolutely insane. Insulin used to be extremely cheap too. This is just bringing it back to where it was in the nineties. It’s been an obviously bullshit price for decades now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 23:39
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Well they should fire her from that too. BTW several big-name politicians in Europe had been forced to resign because their academic work was found to have been plagiarized. Same logic applies imo, you wouldn't want someone dishonest to be in charge of the government either, even if it's not an academic position. My expectations of the leadership of this country, and who would take their place if they were ousted, are so low that plagiarism does not even register to me as a concern.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 23:40
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:i think it's better than nothing, but the total expense ratios in california have been very disappointing for an institutional plan. currently there's an administrative fee of 30 bps which is pretty steep (my calpers 401k has much lower admin costs once you hit ~20k in assets), but up until june of last year the admin fees were a whopping 80 bps, which is just sheer highway robbery Are these just the expense ratios of the underlying funds? I'm assuming they're using pretty standard target year funds which a lot of major brokers offer and usually have ratios in the 20-50 bps area.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 23:57
|
|
|
koolkal posted:Are these just the expense ratios of the underlying funds? I'm assuming they're using pretty standard target year funds which a lot of major brokers offer and usually have ratios in the 20-50 bps area. no, those admin fees are in addition to fund specific fees, which range from .04 for a global equity index fund to .09 for target date to .19 for esg. the fund fees themselves are competitive, but that admin fee is steep in my experience, though less so since last year's change again, if someone were to opt-out of the calsaver program and enroll in a roth ira at vanguard, they could get a target date fund for .08 flat with no admin fee. the calsavers fund specifically counts towards an individual's roth ira contribution cap (and by extension their traditional ira cap), so any additional fees they have above vanguard or fidelity comes at the expense of less informed members of the public it's of benefit if they would have never invested at all, but that's no excuse to keep costs to the investor to the necessary minimum
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 00:18
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They have electronic tools for it now. OP's regdate is 2005, no need to be that harsh
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 00:18
|
|
|
I’m honestly not sure if retirement accounts are appropriate for most low-wage workers. Like, consider that the $12k a year mentioned above would have the purchasing power of $5500 today in 30 years, if we had similar inflation as the last 30. Meanwhile, you are forgoing almost $2000 a year in current income - and a lot of people would be a lot better putting that money into paying down any debt. Plus, y’know, you can always die. Then your face would be pretty red.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 00:42
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Well they should fire her from that too. BTW several big-name politicians in Europe had been forced to resign because their academic work was found to have been plagiarized. Same logic applies imo, you wouldn't want someone dishonest to be in charge of the government either, even if it's not an academic position. Oh god, can you imagine a politician who lies holding high office? I hope that never happens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 00:45
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:My expectations of the leadership of this country, and who would take their place if they were ousted, are so low that plagiarism does not even register to me as a concern. Even with higher expectations, plagiarism doesn't concern me for politicians like it does for academics in the same way that the use of performance enhancing drugs by musicians concerns me less than it does for athletes. My expectations for each are different. I don't really care if a stump speech or policy idea is original and unique, or worry about its quotes and attributions: I care if it is sincere and reflects what I can expect from the politician if they are put into power. And it's as easy to make original false promises as to lift them from someone else. I can't see myself turning down a politician who used phrasing they lifted from someone else, or who proposed a policy ignoring the "Original Tax Plan Do Not Steal" note, provided those are the results they're actually working to get.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 00:48
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:I’m honestly not sure if retirement accounts are appropriate for most low-wage workers. I've also got to assume the ulterior motive here is not to get low income workers retirement accounts that otherwise wouldn't have them, that's one of the results but the reason they are doing this is it's a nice chunk of change funneling into the stock market every year so number continues to go up. The rich benefit from this even more than the workers will.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 00:58
|
|
|
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/senior-education-official-cites-bidens-blind-eye-atrocities-gaza-reaso-rcna132107 Senior education official cites Biden's 'blind eye to the atrocities' in Gaza as reason for resignation quote:WASHINGTON — A senior Biden education official announced his resignation Wednesday, citing the administration’s failure to protect Palestinian civilians in Gaza from Israel’s offensive in its deadly war with Hamas. This is someone who campaigned for Biden in 2020 and actually shaped some policy on education. I hope more follow or, more importantly, Biden changes course
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 01:06
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:I’m honestly not sure if retirement accounts are appropriate for most low-wage workers. Are you assuming the money put into the retirement account does not appreciate in value at all? Also the tax advantage of this type of savings has not been mentioned. Of course if you are low income with very low tax burden it may or may not be worth it. Zwabu fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 01:18
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Are you assuming the money put into the retirement account does not appreciate in value at all? It's also baby bond lite in a weird way but its a way to help low-income workers build wealth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 01:46
|
|
|
EDIT: I quoted the wrong post when responding at first.Hieronymous Alloy posted:They have electronic tools for it now. To think it was unintentional I would have to conclude either a very accomplished academic has a very poor grasp of academic honor codes or else she copy pasted something and accidentally forgot to note at the time it was from another source, came back to it, and thought it was her own thing then edited to reword slightly. I just don’t think it’s reasonable to conclude that happened over and over again. The near-word for word long sentences look to be more than merely accidental. In fact, changing a few words slightly while keeping long strings the same are even more incriminating because they make it look like an intentional effort to steal as much of the original work as possible while doing as little work as possible without attribution. Direct quote with citation is fine. Paraphrase of another source in your own words plus a proper citation is also fine. It’s not really that complicated for an author with an advanced degree. The Plagiarism Today guy lays it out in this video in a different context (reacting to hbomberguy): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-148vb8rzJ0 He has also written on Claudine Gay and basically seems his opinion is this is something that would likely lead to some corrective action against a typical faculty member (including suspension), but wouldn’t normally be treated too severely unless there’s more that we’re not yet aware of, and he says Harvard should have done a full review of all her scholarship when a problem first came to their attention. He also notes that a student pulling this who got caught would have a harsher penalty and that Harvard was first aware of the plagiarism allegation in October (before the hearings) and has sleepwalked into this. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 02:15
|
|
|
It's possible that both a Gay level of plagiarism is too much to credibly sustain her position in Harvard and for the right to be utterly disingenuous in their attacks on her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 02:38
|
|
|
ColdPie posted:This is pretty bonkers. I'm T1D and last I checked some years ago, my insulin costs were like $1000 for a month supply, which my insurance would then lower to like a $100 copay. Quoting from the article:
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 02:45
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/senior-education-official-cites-bidens-blind-eye-atrocities-gaza-reaso-rcna132107 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/03/biden-campaign-anonymous-letter-israel-hamas-00133705 There was actually another letter also sent recently from a bunch of campaign staffers urging him to shift and saying that it's affecting his campaign efforts, such as causing volunteers to quit. I would not be surprised if his stance on this issue causes him to lose the election because his extreme stance is causing him to lose his biggest supporters, people who volunteer to campaign for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 03:21
|
|
|
koolkal posted:https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/03/biden-campaign-anonymous-letter-israel-hamas-00133705
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 06:09
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:He can’t afford to lose Michigan. This war is just going to continue to alienate his base there of Muslim Americans who generally vote for Democrats. But I don’t get the impression that the campaign or the WH is especially concerned about any of this when they are continuing to provide weapons to Israel so that they can kill more civilians. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 06:43
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:I agree with everything you're saying. But the implication is that they'd vote for Republicans instead... which would, to put it mildly, not be an improvement over this situation. This is a very dangerous way to look at voting in America. These voters are not being forced to choose between voting for Biden or Trump - they could easily stay home, which could cost Biden the election. There will be a lot of people who don't vote for Biden due to his active enabling of genocide in Palestine. Americans don't have to vote, and they don't certainly don't have to choose between these two men. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 06:52
|
|
|
It's a dangerous way to look at voting in America because it's accurate. There is zero chance that the winner of the 2024 Presidential election is neither Democrat nor Republican. Unless you pull a Brewster's Millions and spend a fortune to get "None of the Above" receiving the most votes nationwide, the choice really is binary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 07:10
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:This is a very dangerous way to look at voting in America. These voters are not being forced to choose between voting for Biden or Trump - they could easily stay home, which could cost Biden the election. There will be a lot of people who don't vote for Biden due to his active enabling of genocide in Palestine. Americans don't have to vote, and they don't certainly don't have to choose between these two men.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 07:14
|
|
|
Characterizing the decision of Palestinian and Arab Americans to not vote for Biden because their friends and families are being murdered by the country he vociferously supports as voting for Republicans is counterproductive. It shifts the focus onto them when it's really Biden's fault. The focus and blame should be on him and his actions, not the people who supported him and now feel betrayed. They've stated what he can do to get their vote back and he's choosing not to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 07:31
|
|
|
Sounds like Joe Biden wants Trump to win the election. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 07:39
|
|
|
Why would Biden care about the issue unless he thought he was going to lose more votes by not supporting Palestinians? If those voters care about that issue, what is more impactful that they could do than convince Biden he'd have to change his behavior to win their votes? Why would they say "hey, we care a lot about this issue, but we'll vote for you no matter what you do"? That doesn't make any sense (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 07:39
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:It's possible that both a Gay level of plagiarism is too much to credibly sustain her position in Harvard and for the right to be utterly disingenuous in their attacks on her. A gay level of plagiarism? I don't think we use gay like that in 2024
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 07:43
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:I don't think ever seen "not voting" have the effect you're getting at here. "Not voting" IS choosing one of them; in fact, in a state like Michigan, not voting is basically a vote for the Republican. Yes but they don’t see it that way. They just think “gently caress this” and don’t vote. You can explain the ramifications to them and it may sway some people, but not all. And on top of that, if they feel let down even if they are going to vote for Biden there might be fewer canvassers and the like in Deerborn this time around. And the margins are close enough that that could matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 08:08
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:A gay level of plagiarism? I don't think we use gay like that in 2024 The joyous news of the year is that we can indeed do so! E; It's entirely possible that Biden's team have determined that opposing Israel costs him more votes than supporting it does. They may even be right. But it's also possible that Biden is taking a principled stand and drat what it costs him; he just has the principles of a zionist. Either way changing the administration's course on this doesn't seem like something anyone can convince him to do. I had hoped that the prisoner exchange pause showed that behind the scenes he really had been trying to get Israel to drink a big bottle of calm the gently caress down juice but it's pretty clear that was a forlorn hope. Ms Adequate fucked around with this message at 08:22 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 08:15
|
|
|
For all of you who think Biden will lose more votes, and possibly the election, because of his current stance with Israel/Palestine: do you honestly think he would have more votes if he was constantly being painted as anti-Semitic by AIPAC? Especially if AIPAC pulled their money from Biden and shoveled it to Trump (or whoever the R nominee is)? I think Biden should be more supportive of Palestine because it’s the right thing, of course. But I can’t imagine how much more of an electoral backlash there would be once AIPAC would decide he’s too “anti-Israel”, along with a large chunk of our population being extremely pro-Zionist. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 12:34
|
|
|
Kalit posted:For all of you who think Biden will lose more votes, and possibly the election, because of his current stance with Israel/Palestine: do you honestly think he would have more votes if he was constantly being painted as anti-Semitic by AIPAC? Especially if AIPAC pulled their money from Biden and shoveled it to Trump (or whoever the R nominee is)? I'm not so sure that a large chunk of our population really is actively pro-Zionist. The pro-Israel position has been the default for both parties for twice as long as most of us have been alive. I suspect it's just a thoughtless default position for a lot of people who don't pay that much attention. Given the tribal nature of our politics and society, if Biden changed his position I imagine 99% of democrats would instantly support him & 99% of republicans would be even more vocally pro-genocide, or something. Tbh, we've never seen a president do anything but tow the AIPAC line. Are they really that much of a *political* powerhouse? Can they really motivate a bunch of voters? Everything I know about them indicates that the main source of their influence is the relations they've built with other politicians. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems likely that politicians listen to AIPAC because they want the money (and are worried about it going to their opponent). Which probably matters in a house or senate race, but the total amount of money AIPAC can mobilize is probably a rounding error in the presidential contest. It would also be super risky for AIPAC to declare war on a major party's candidate. How do you think most democrats would react if AIPAC helped push Trump over the line? It'd make support for Israel a 100% partisan issue, which is probably more dangerous to Israel over the long term than Biden giving them slightly fewer weapons or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 12:47
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:I'm not so sure that a large chunk of our population really is actively pro-Zionist. The pro-Israel position has been the default for both parties for twice as long as most of us have been alive. I suspect it's just a thoughtless default position for a lot of people who don't pay that much attention. Given the tribal nature of our politics and society, if Biden changed his position I imagine 99% of democrats would instantly support him & 99% of republicans would be even more vocally pro-genocide, or something. A large chunk of the population doesn't know what the word Zionist means. Try talking to the average person about all this they mostly think Israel is sitting there doing nothing being picked on by the mean terrorists and they are just trying to survive. It takes a lot of convincing to even get them to look at the basic facts of the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 12:55
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:I'm not so sure that a large chunk of our population really is actively pro-Zionist. The pro-Israel position has been the default for both parties for twice as long as most of us have been alive. I suspect it's just a thoughtless default position for a lot of people who don't pay that much attention. Given the tribal nature of our politics and society, if Biden changed his position I imagine 99% of democrats would instantly support him & 99% of republicans would be even more vocally pro-genocide, or something. Trying to claim that ~99% of Democrats will be supportive of Biden no matter his Israel stance is impossible to know. If that’s the case and are insinuating it wouldn’t impact the election, then you can claim it in the opposite. Also, there’s a tiny chunk of non-Democrats that voted for him/against Trump too, so it’s not just Democrats. Which is definitely important in the swing states As far as for my pro-Zionist statement, I made it based on historical polling. Hell, even if we look at a current poll, 60% of the respondents say our involvement is the right amount or too much. There’s lots more polling to support my pro-Zionist claim, I can link some if you want, but I figure it’s well known and not a controversial claim. As far as AIPAC, why would they care about what politicians think of them? They’re the ones buying influence with lots of money. They’re the ones who want to promote pro-Zionism within the US populace. They’ll just keep throwing up more and more extreme ads and enough of the US populace will gobble it up, giving more support to politicians who remain pro-Zionist. E: And if you’re talking about AIPAC’s image strictly among Democratic voters, I’d be shocked if even a quarter of them know who AIPAC is and what their mission is. They would just hear things such as Biden not wanting the Jewish population to be able to defend their homeland and increasing in rhetoric from there Kalit fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 13:02
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:E; It's entirely possible that Biden's team have determined that opposing Israel costs him more votes than supporting it does. Kalit posted:I think Biden should be more supportive of Palestine because it’s the right thing, of course. But I can’t imagine how much more of an electoral backlash there would be once AIPAC would decide he’s too “anti-Israel”, along with a large chunk of our population being extremely pro-Zionist. There is a huge deck stacked against Biden taking the right position. There are 1 - more Jews than Arabs and 2 - a higher percentage of them are citizens and 3 - they vote at a higher rate and 4 - they have a gigantic lobbying arm that will gently caress up your poo poo. poo poo sucks. Ultimately it's public opinion that matters, but the public would need to understand what is happening much, much better to be able to withstand the propaganda shitstorm that would bring down on the entire party. Gnumonic posted:I'm not so sure that a large chunk of our population really is actively pro-Zionist. Kalit posted:cians who remain pro-Zionist. e: We need a second Jewish state that's cool, so we can have good relations with them to prove we're down with Jews, and then really crack down on those fuckers in Israel. Kind of a "Goofus and Gallant" model of Jewish statehood. Misunderstood fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:05
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:I'm not so sure that a large chunk of our population really is actively pro-Zionist. The pro-Israel position has been the default for both parties for twice as long as most of us have been alive. I suspect it's just a thoughtless default position for a lot of people who don't pay that much attention. Given the tribal nature of our politics and society, if Biden changed his position I imagine 99% of democrats would instantly support him & 99% of republicans would be even more vocally pro-genocide, or something. AIPAC can absolutely motivate voters. For starters, there's more than twice as many Jewish-Americans as there are Arab-Americans, and many more of them are in positions of political or media influence. Of course, not all Jewish-Americans support Israel, but not all Arab-Americans support Palestine either. I have no idea how to count the Christian sects that believe in supporting Israel for religious reasons, but I wouldn't be shocked if they outnumber Arab-Americans too. What about the general American populace with no particular ethnic or religious connection to the conflict? Well, Americans generally have some cultural favorability toward the Jewish people, a widespread disapproval of anti-Semitism, and some cultural memory of the Holocaust. Additionally, for cultural, institutional, and historical reasons, the American people generally tend to be hostile to insurgents engaging in asymmetrical guerilla warfare against civilian populations, and they generally tend to sympathize with imperial powers using organized professional militaries to assault the insurgency with overwhelming force while a bunch of lawyers spend all day going on Western news outlets and assuring everyone that all civilian casualties are merely unfortunate collateral damage that are probably the insurgents' fault for using human shields. That's especially true when the insurgents are Muslim Arabs and the imperial power is Western-influenced, Western-aligned, and has plenty of white civilians to parade in front of the cameras to cry about their plight at the hands of insurgents. (Israel isn't quite majority-white, but I'll bet a lot of Americans don't actually realize that). Whether the American populace is "pro-Zionist" is tough to answer because Zionism is more of a spectrum. I'd guess that the American populace supports an Israeli "right to exist" in its current form as an explicitly Jewish-dominated country on formerly-Palestinian territory, but that they aren't particularly interested in further Israeli territorial expansion into the remaining Palestinian territories. But the question isn't really whether they're Zionist or not. The question is who they're going to support in this conflict. One side is Muslim Arab terrorists who killed a bunch of defenseless white people, and the other side is a Western-influenced country whose Western-influenced military is using both military and media tactics taken straight from the War on Terror playbook. American sympathies are naturally going to lean toward the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:16
|
|
|
Israel has proven that the existence of any kind of ethnostate is inevitably going to lead to repression of some kind. It’s inherently making an unequal situation that will eventually boil over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:16
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:A large chunk of the population doesn't know what the word Zionist means. Try talking to the average person about all this they mostly think Israel is sitting there doing nothing being picked on by the mean terrorists and they are just trying to survive. It takes a lot of convincing to even get them to look at the basic facts of the situation. Finally someone gets it. The terminally online folks you see in forums pontificating about geopolitics couldn't be any more removed from the general populations view on it. Like you said I'm sure most people don't even know what Zionism means. So I think the calculation the Biden administration made (if they made it) that they would lose way more votes if they refused to support Israels war (ethnic cleansing campaign) is correct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:22
|
|
|
For one possible scenario of how things could have gone for alternative universe Biden who chose to support Palestine over Israel, consider Jeremy Corbyn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:29
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Finally someone gets it. The terminally online folks you see in forums pontificating about geopolitics couldn't be any more removed from the general populations view on it. here's an NYT op ed about it from the eve of the 2020 election. (I'm now having a stoner moment where I'm not sure if the reason I thought of this article is because somebody linked it in this thread recently - if so, oops! Shoulda listened to the DARE officer.) Yanna Krupnikov and John Barry Ryan in NYT posted:The Real Divide in America Is Between Political Junkies and Everyone Else It seems like the Israel war did briefly transcend this because it became so huge on social media, but that effect is fading fast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:30
|
|
|
If Biden is in a situation where he would lose votes and the election no matter which side he chooses, then he should choose the side that results in not supporting a genocide
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis had CNN townhalls last night. They were both mostly uninteresting, but someone again asked Haley about the civil war and she managed to step on a rake again. She said "it's not a leader's place" to decide which side in the civil war was right or wrong because it is too divisive to talk about. She also said that she can't be racist because she had black friends growing up. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1743113111576404103 Someone also asked her what we should do about school shootings and she replied that we need to focus on mental health and secure our schools the same way we secure our airports and courthouses. Then, someone mentioned that they ban guns at courthouses and airports and she just said, "Not like that."
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:37
|
|
