USCE 2024: Macklemore Is The New Michael Moore

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2024: Macklemore Is The New Michael Moore

«‹›277 »

C. Everett Koop: Aug 18, 2008

Xiahou Dun posted:

Trump didn't have a dog, which is a very easy way to guarantee no bites.

Eric has been very well trained.

zoux posted:

The crowd consensus would agree
https://twitter.com/dhume/status/1784278152585281618

I would have lost my bet here as well, she was trending well to be VP before she started blasting.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 18:22

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 01:13

Butter Activities: May 4, 2018

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The research, development, and testing for the drugs was very time-consuming and expensive, but the actual production isn't very expensive.

It goes generic in 2031 and currently costs about $5 to produce a month's supply, so generics could be as cheap as $10 a month.

It is true that is where the cost lies, but pricing is not actually connected to the cost of a drug or why drugs are expensive. That�s a function of anti-competitive practices by manufacturers and permissive regulatory environment that allows for practices such as evergreening patents. When you look where pharma companies actually spend their money most years they spend more on marketing than R&D. Much of the huge research cost is also heavily subsidized and done via public private �partnerships� that allow for private companies to maintain IP while using labor and facilities paid for by public universities and public grants.

Otherwise the price of insulin minus the manufacturing cost insulin would be cheaper than any other drug since the IP was given for free before companies were able to evergreen their own �formulas.� The reason its expansive is because of cartel like control of markets and the fact that many people will die or suffer without it.

Butter Activities fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Apr 29, 2024

# ? Apr 29, 2024 18:23

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

You know that Pharma has too much money when they are advertising tons of drugs on TV that have to be prescribed by a doctor. That shouldn't be a thing.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 18:27

TheDeadlyShoe: Feb 14, 2014

Butter Activities posted:

It is true that is where the cost lies, but pricing is not actually connected to the cost of a drug or why drugs are expensive. That�s a function of anti-competitive practices by manufacturers and permissive regulatory environment that allows for practices such as evergreening patents. When you look where pharma companies actually spend their money most years they spend more on marketing than R&D. Much of the huge research cost is also heavily subsidized and done via public private �partnerships� that allow for private companies to maintain IP while using labor and facilities paid for by public universities and public grants.

Otherwise the price of insulin minus the manufacturing cost insulin would be cheaper than any other drug since the IP was given for free before companies were able to evergreen their own �formulas.� The reason its expansive is because of cartel like control of markets and the fact that many people will die or suffer without it.

to my understanding, its expensive because the improved versions of insulin medication we use these days in the US are indeed patented, with the semaglutides that have exploded in popularity being a case in point. Old insulin isn't recommended.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 18:49

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

Butter Activities posted:

Otherwise the price of insulin minus the manufacturing cost insulin would be cheaper than any other drug since the IP was given for free before companies were able to evergreen their own “formulas.” The reason its expansive is because of cartel like control of markets and the fact that many people will die or suffer without it.

Modern insulin is substantially different from the original freely licensed formulation in ways which are basically life-changing due to the variety of onsets and durations available to manage levels. The rest of your post is accurate but downplaying the development of modern insulins weakens your point significantly.

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

to my understanding, its expensive because the improved versions of insulin medication we use these days in the US are indeed patented, with the semaglutides that have exploded in popularity being a case in point. Old insulin isn't recommended.

Yeah most people use a combination of rapid onset and long acting insulins now.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 18:57

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Butter Activities posted:

It is true that is where the cost lies, but pricing is not actually connected to the cost of a drug or why drugs are expensive. That�s a function of anti-competitive practices by manufacturers and permissive regulatory environment that allows for practices such as evergreening patents. When you look where pharma companies actually spend their money most years they spend more on marketing than R&D. Much of the huge research cost is also heavily subsidized and done via public private �partnerships� that allow for private companies to maintain IP while using labor and facilities paid for by public universities and public grants.

Otherwise the price of insulin minus the manufacturing cost insulin would be cheaper than any other drug since the IP was given for free before companies were able to evergreen their own �formulas.� The reason its expansive is because of cartel like control of markets and the fact that many people will die or suffer without it.

This is all true, but the assumption is that the drugs will go generic in 2031 as planned. Obviously, if there was some sort of extension on the patent, then the situation would change. But, the production costs for GLP-1 type drugs like WeGovy and Ozempic are fairly low and when they go generic they should be a fraction of the cost they are now.

Ozempic and WeGovy are expensive now because there is a huge production shortage and Novo Nordisk is the only one who is allowed to manufacturer or sell those specific formulations right now due to their patent exclusivity.

Insanely, Novo Nordisk is actually missing out on an incredible amount of money because their production capacity is very limited since they, for some reason, did not expect the drug to be as popular as it ended up being and can't meet demand.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Apr 29, 2024

# ? Apr 29, 2024 18:59

PharmerBoy: Jul 21, 2008

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

to my understanding, its expensive because the improved versions of insulin medication we use these days in the US are indeed patented, with the semaglutides that have exploded in popularity being a case in point. Old insulin isn't recommended.

While it doesn't really detract from your main point, the pharmacy pedant in me needs to distinguish that semaglutide is a different category of drug than insulin, with a different development than insulin's rather unusual history. Both insulin and semaglutide can be used to illustrate issues regarding drug pricing, but it'll definitely confuse issues to substitute one for the other in discussion of drug economics.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 19:06

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

The first new nuclear power plant project in the U.S. in decades was fully completed and went online today.

The new reactors are located in Georgia and were the culmination of a long-delayed project that started in 2006.

The first reactor of the project was finished in late 2023 and the second reactor was just finished.

The projects were finally pushed across the finish line after the federal government guaranteed $12 billion in loans to finish construction.

Despite being carbon-free and the first new nuclear project in the U.S., the major problems that have traditionally hurt nuclear power plants have plagued this new project as well.

- Costs overran much higher than expected with delays.

The initial estimate was a total cost of $16 billion. It ended up costing $31 billion, including $12 billion in loan guarantees from the federal government.

The project was also originally projected to be finished in 2017, but was put on hold due to unexpected costs and construction delays.

- The power generated from it will never be cheaper than coal, natural gas, or solar and it will take nearly 80 years to break even.

The feds are putting more money behind nuclear through loan guarantees and new federal funds spent to keep existing nuclear power plants running. Additionally, there is a movement to restart construction on two nuclear powerplants in South Carolina that were abandoned halfway through construction due to cost overrun.

The rate increases they need to charge to pay for nuclear power are a strong disincentive for private industry and also a political problem for government funding. However, this new reactor is the first step forward for American nuclear power in decades and may be the start of a trend if they can overcome the issues with costs and delays associated with nuclear power in the future.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1785001107162370203

quote:

ATLANTA (AP) � The second of two new nuclear reactors in Georgia has entered commercial operation, capping a project that cost billions more and took years longer than originally projected.

Georgia Power Co. and fellow owners announced the milestone Monday for Plant Vogtle�s Unit 4, which joins an earlier new reactor southeast of Augusta in splitting atoms to make carbon-free electricity.

Unit 3 began commercial operation last summer, joining two older reactors that have stood on the site for decades. They�re the first two nuclear reactors built in the United States in decades.

The new Vogtle reactors are currently projected to cost Georgia Power and three other owners $31 billion, according to calculations by The Associated Press. Add in $3.7 billion that original contractor Westinghouse paid Vogtle owners to walk away from construction, and the total nears $35 billion.

Electric customers in Georgia already have paid billions for what may be the most expensive power plant ever. The reactors were originally projected to cost $14 billion and be completed by 2017.

Utilities and their political supporters on Monday hailed the plant�s completion. Georgia Gov Brian Kemp proclaimed he was �thankful for this historic achievement by Georgia Power and its partners.� Chris Womack, CEO of Atlanta-based Southern Co., which owns Georgia Power, argues Vogtle will make the state�s electrical grid more reliable and resilient and help the utility meet its goal of zeroing out carbon emissions by 2050.

�These new Vogtle units not only will support the economy within our communities now and in the future, they demonstrate our global nuclear leadership,� Womack said in a statement.

Each of the two new reactors can power 500,000 homes and businesses without releasing any carbon.

Even some opponents of Vogtle have said the United States can�t achieve carbon-free electricity without nuclear power. But Georgia Power, like other utilities, plans to build more fossil fuel generation in coming years, saying demand is rising sharply. That demand, driven by computer data centers, is being felt by multiple utilities across the country.

Calculations show Vogtle�s electricity will never be cheaper than other sources the owners could have chosen, even after the federal government reduced borrowing costs by guaranteeing repayment of $12 billion in loans.

�Hopefully, despite being seven years late and billions over budget, the two new units at Plant Vogtle will finally perform well for at least the next 80 years to justify the excessive cost,� said Liz Coyle, executive director of Georgia Watch, a consumer group that fought to limit rate increases.

In Georgia, almost every electric customer will pay for Vogtle. Georgia Power owns 45.7% of the reactors. Smaller shares are owned by Oglethorpe Power Corp., which provides electricity to member-owned cooperatives, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia and the city of Dalton. Utilities in Jacksonville, Florida, as well as in the Florida Panhandle and parts of Alabama also have contracted to buy Vogtle�s power.

Regulators in December approved an additional 6% rate increase on Georgia Power�s 2.7 million customers to pay for $7.56 billion in remaining costs at Vogtle, with the company absorbing $2.6 billion in costs. That�s expected to cost the typical residential customer an additional $8.97 a month in May, on top of the $5.42 increase that took effect when Unit 3 began operating.

Even as government officials and some utilities are looking to nuclear power to alleviate climate change, the cost of Vogtle could discourage utilities from pursuing nuclear power. American utilities have heeded Vogtle�s missteps, shelving plans for 24 other reactors proposed between 2007 and 2009. Two half-built reactors in South Carolina were abandoned. But Westinghouse is marketing the reactor design abroad. China has said it will build more reactors using the design, while Bulgaria, Poland and Ukraine also say they intend to build nuclear power stations using the Westinghouse reactor.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Apr 29, 2024

# ? Apr 29, 2024 19:21

Shooting Blanks: Jun 6, 2007; Real bullets mess up how cool this thing looks.

-Blade

FlamingLiberal posted:

You know that Pharma has too much money when they are advertising tons of drugs on TV that have to be prescribed by a doctor. That shouldn't be a thing.

I'm fairly sure advertising drugs on TV (and maybe in general) is illegal in quite a few places. I think it's an EU-wide rule, not sure about elsewhere.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:00

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

The Feds are trying to launch an all-out assault on America by airdropping in grizzly bears and wolves into the backyards of innocent Colorado and Washington residents.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1785017493846663658

quote:

Federal Agencies to Restore Grizzly Bears in Washington State

Grizzly bears haven�t been seen in the North Cascades range, where they were once a vital part of the ecosystem, in nearly 30 years.

The federal government plans to restore grizzly bears to the North Cascades range in northwestern Washington state, where they once roamed and were an essential part of the region�s ecosystem, officials said.

The National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced plans this month to release three to seven bears a year over five to 10 years. This will establish an initial population of 25 bears in the North Cascades, where grizzlies have not been seen in nearly three decades.

The goal is to restore the grizzly population to 200, which could take 60 to 100 years, the agencies said, noting that the bears would be rarely seen by people during the first 10 to 20 years of the effort.

The agencies said they would move grizzlies to the North Cascades from other ecosystems, such as the Rocky Mountains or interior British Columbia. The Park Service did not say when the plan would begin.

The U.S. portion of the North Cascades is about 9,800 square miles, or about the size of Vermont, and features scenic and intact wilderness, the agencies said. About 85 percent of the mountainous region is under federal management.

�We are going to once again see grizzly bears on the landscape, restoring an important thread in the fabric of the North Cascades,� Don Striker, superintendent of the North Cascades National Park Service Complex, said in a statement.

The grizzly bears that are relocated to the North Cascades will be fitted with radio collars that will provide wildlife officials with updates on their movements.
For thousands of years, grizzly bears were integral to the ecosystem of the North Cascades, where they distributed native plant seeds and kept other wildlife populations in balance, the Park Service said.

In the 1800s, there were about 50,000 grizzly bears in North America, spread across a wide swath of the western half of the continent from Canada to Mexico, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.

But their population declined, primarily because of settlers who overhunted and trapped them. The last confirmed sighting of a grizzly bear in the U.S. portion of the North Cascades region was in 1996, the Park Service said.

Today there are more than 1,900 grizzly bears in the lower 48 states, where they are managed as a federally protected species, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Under the restoration plans, grizzly bears in the North Cascades will be designated as a �nonessential experimental population� under a section of the Endangered Species Act that �will provide a variety of flexibilities for land managers and communities to manage a restored population of grizzly bears,� the park service said.

That means that rules under the act could be eased to allow for the relocation of bears �if a conflict appears imminent,� or to allow people to harm or kill bears if they attack livestock or working dogs.

Collette Adkins, a carnivore conservation program director at the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit wildlife advocacy group, said in a statement on Monday that she was �thrilled that grizzly bears will be back in the North Cascades.�

�Grizzly bears once called the North Cascades home,� she said, �and bringing them back is a solid step toward recovery for this majestic species.�

https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1785000612100215134

Shooting Blanks posted:

I'm fairly sure advertising drugs on TV (and maybe in general) is illegal in quite a few places. I think it's an EU-wide rule, not sure about elsewhere.

The U.S. and New Zealand are the only countries in the world where it is legal.

Some places allow limited ads that are "Hey, we sell X drug here!" style ads, but only New Zealand and the U.S. allow completely general direct to consumer ads.

Edit: For prescription drugs specifically. I'm pretty sure direct to consumer ads for non-prescription drugs are allowed in most places, but don't know all the specifics. I'm sure it varies in every place for non-prescription drugs.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Apr 29, 2024

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:01

zoux: Apr 28, 2006

I think the government should not train bearatroopers

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:09

Killer robot: Sep 6, 2010; I was having the most wonderful dream. I think you were in it!; Pillbug

zoux posted:

I think the government should not train bearatroopers

They never told us BBB stood for Build Better Bears.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:13

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

zoux posted:

I think the government should not train bearatroopers

It's in the goddam constitution!!!!!

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:15

Barrel Cactaur: Oct 6, 2021

It's necessary to control the regions overpopulation of libertarians.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:21

Raenir Salazar: Nov 5, 2010; College Slice

The government should probably tax industry its carbon cost, because right now the reason why coal and whatever is cheaper is because its costs are externalized to the third world getting affected by climate change while nuclear is mandated by law to internalize its costs and safety concerns. Plus the more nuclear power plants that are built the cheaper it will get as the US builds back that knowledge.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:30

Shageletic: Jul 25, 2007

Kale posted:

Curious to see if Margie plans on looking stupid tonight by triggering the motion to vacate and the Dems probably giving enough hall passes to save him as a bone for getting the bill passed across party lines. Like this time the speaker isnt going anywhere clearly.

If the Dem was a really opposition party they would use this to pass policies aimed at increasing the chances of getting reelected. But...

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:31

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Texas joins Florida in saying they will not comply with the Biden administration's new Title IX regulations for transgender students and sexual assault.

This puts Texas' federal education funding under jeopardy as well.

Texas gets a much smaller share of its education money from the feds than Florida (only 6% and part of that is money for school lunches or other "education" programs that can't be withheld), but it would still be a potential loss between $500 million and $1.5 billion for Texas.

Louisiana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Wyoming have also protested the new Title IX rules and vowed to do something about it, but haven't actually said they would require schools to not enforce them. Instead, those states have called the rules "deeply troubling" and say they will "encourage local schools and universities to ignore them."

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1785029048650862744

quote:

Texas governor says state will ignore �illegal� Biden Title IX revisions

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) said on Monday his state will not abide by the Biden administration�s sweeping new changes to Title IX, the federal civil rights law prohibiting sex-based discrimination at government-funded schools.

In a letter to President Biden, Abbott railed against the revised rules � which provide new protections for transgender students � saying they�re �illegal� and the result of a �ham-handed effort to impose a leftist belief onto Title IX,� which, Abbott said �exceeds your authority as President.�

�You have rewritten Title IX to force schools to treat boys as if they are girls and to accept every student�s self-declared gender identity,� Abbott wrote in his letter, arguing that step exceeds Biden�s authority.

Abbott�s criticism comes as a growing number of Republican-led states have pledged to reject the Title IX rules finalized this month by the Education Department.

Top education officials in Florida, Louisiana, Wyoming, South Carolina and Oklahoma have publicly rebuked the Biden administration�s new Title IX, arguing the new policies roll back the rights of women and girls by expanding the landmark civil rights law�s definition of sex discrimination to include gender identity.

Abbott said in his letter he will instruct his state government not to adhere to the new policies, citing concerns that they conflict with Texas state law.

�I am instructing the Texas Education Agency to ignore your illegal dictate,� Abbott continued. �Your rewrite of Title IX not only exceeds your constitutional authority, it also tramples laws that I signed to protect the integrity of women�s sports by prohibiting men from competing against female athletes. Texas will fight to protect those laws and to deny your abuse of authority.�

Laws passed in more than a dozen Republican-led states prevent transgender students from using school restrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identity or allow teachers and students to disregard a trans person�s name and pronouns. Adhering to such laws may violate the new Title IX regulations, a senior administration official told The Hill, if doing so creates a hostile environment.

In Texas, Abbott signed two laws aimed at prohibiting transgender women from playing on sports teams that match their gender identity, in public schools and in universities. The Education Department unveiled a proposal last April governing athletics eligibility that would prohibit schools from adopting policies like the ones in Texas, but the Biden administration has yet to finalize the rule.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:39

mdemone: Mar 14, 2001

What's the mechanism by which Texas loses that budgeted money? Who is responsible for directing that the allocations not be sent to the states?

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:40

Nissin Cup Nudist: Sep 3, 2011; Sleep with one eye open

We're off to Gritty Gritty land

I still have no idea how Texas banning DEI programs is legal under Title IX

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:42

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

mdemone posted:

What's the mechanism by which Texas loses that budgeted money? Who is responsible for directing that the allocations not be sent to the states?

Title IX of the amendments to the 1972 Education Act requires that the DOJ and DOE either require any organization that receives any federal money not discriminate on the basis of sex in education or they must withhold all grants and "federal financial assistance" from the institutions that do not comply.

Note that this is on a per institution basis, so if an individual school complies, then it doesn't matter what the state says. However, it depends on whether state law allows the Governor or Board of Education to require local schools or public universities to follow or reject those requirements. It also binds private universities that receive federal financial assistance.

There are definitely going to be a bunch of lawsuits at the state level and at least one at the federal level that goes to the Supreme Court if the states force some schools to reject it and still demand the money.

https://www.justice.gov/crt/title-ix#A.%C2%A0%20Federal%20Financial%20Assistance

quote:

Title IX prohibits, with certain exceptions, any entity that receives "federal financial assistance" from discriminating against individuals on the basis of sex in education programs or activities.11 The clearest example of federal financial assistance is the award or grant of money. However, federal financial assistance may also be in nonmonetary form. See United States Dep’t of Transp. v. Paralyzed Veterans, 477 U.S. 597, 607 n.11 (1986). As discussed below, federal financial assistance may include the use or rent of federal land or property at below market value, federal training, a loan of federal personnel, subsidies, and other arrangements with the intention of providing assistance.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:48

Queering Wheel: Jun 18, 2011

They're probably correctly guessing that Biden's not going to do poo poo about their defiance. Just like he hasn't done poo poo about half of America's trans kids losing healthcare

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:48

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Nissin Cup Nudist posted:

I still have no idea how Texas banning DEI programs is legal under Title IX

It depends what specific programs you are talking about. DEI programs generally don't ban or unban women from accessing public school or university facilities or programs.

They are usually essentially diversity training or affirmative action programs that aren't covered under Title IX.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:53

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Queering Wheel posted:

They're probably correctly guessing that Biden's not going to do poo poo about their defiance. Just like he hasn't done poo poo about half of America's trans kids losing healthcare

The DOE already said that they are required by law to deny the federal money to schools that don't comply.

quote:

In an emailed statement, an Education Department spokesperson said public schools across the country are required by law to update their policies to comply with the new regulations, regardless of whether officials in their state agree with them. Doing otherwise may jeopardize federal education funding.

�As a condition of receiving federal funds, all federally-funded schools are obligated to comply with these final regulations,� they said.

DeSantis is also sort of walking back his threat to require all schools to not comply and instead is just generally saying they will "fight back" and not making any specific promises.

quote:

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) said the state plans to �fight back� against the new regulations, which he said undermine the right of parents to control their children�s education. Florida�s Parental Rights in Education Act, signed by DeSantis in 2021 and expanded late last year, prevents teachers from addressing sexuality and gender identity in the classroom.

DeSantis on Thursday did not specify how the state intends to resist the federal government�s directive to implement the changes to Title IX by Aug. 1. His office declined to comment on any specific actions the governor may take.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:58

Raenir Salazar: Nov 5, 2010; College Slice

Queering Wheel posted:

They're probably correctly guessing that Biden's not going to do poo poo about their defiance. Just like he hasn't done poo poo about half of America's trans kids losing healthcare

Do you have evidence for the former or an argument that there's a relevant link between these two statements and third evidence that he has in fact not done anything about the latter claim or that its in his power to do so?

# ? Apr 29, 2024 20:59

Queering Wheel: Jun 18, 2011

Raenir Salazar posted:

Do you have evidence for the former or an argument that there's a relevant link between these two statements and third evidence that he has in fact not done anything about the latter claim or that its in his power to do so?

And now you want to loving argue. Why is it that red state governors/GOP leadership can increasingly do whatever they want, but when Biden does jack poo poo in response y'all are like BuT hE cAn'T bEcAuSe LaWs

The GOP just keeps taking more and more poo poo from trans people with barely a peep from the Biden admin and y'all are like HeS jUsT a SmOl BeAn

He won't even stand up to Florida when they invalidate trans people's driver's licenses and call them fraudsters, even though he could easily do something since they're not complying with the federal REAL ID requirements. That's an easy one to fight! If he won't even do that then idk why you think he'll fight the more serious poo poo

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Apr 29, 2024 21:48

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

Queering Wheel posted:

And now you want to loving argue. Why is it that red state governors/GOP leadership can increasingly do whatever they want, but when Biden does jack poo poo in response y'all are like BuT hE cAn'T bEcAuSe LaWs

The GOP just keeps taking more and more poo poo from trans people with barely a peep from the Biden admin and y'all are like HeS jUsT a SmOl BeAn

He won't even stand up to Florida when they invalidate trans people's driver's licenses and call them fraudsters, even though he could've easily do something since they're not complying with the federal REAL ID requirements. That's an easy one to fight! If he won't even do that then idk why you think he'll fight the more serious poo poo

The Real ID act—thankfully, given it was passed in 2005—doesn't have anything to say about how the states make a determination of someone's gender nor does it give the power to dictate it to the executive branch. It simply requires that one's gender is listed.

What, specifically, would you have him do about what the red states are doing? I'm legitimately interested to hear it.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:06

Fork of Unknown Origins: Oct 21, 2005; Gotta Herd On?

Queering Wheel posted:

And now you want to loving argue. Why is it that red state governors/GOP leadership can increasingly do whatever they want, but when Biden does jack poo poo in response y'all are like BuT hE cAn'T bEcAuSe LaWs

The GOP just keeps taking more and more poo poo from trans people with barely a peep from the Biden admin and y'all are like HeS jUsT a SmOl BeAn

He won't even stand up to Florida when they invalidate trans people's driver's licenses and call them fraudsters, even though he could easily do something since they're not complying with the federal REAL ID requirements. That's an easy one to fight! If he won't even do that then idk why you think he'll fight the more serious poo poo

There are a lot of things state governments currently have the rights to do that the federal government doesn�t have the right to stop. Thats why you see this playing out through things like Title IX; federal funding is one of the only real tools the federal government has, especially when one and a half branches of the government is controlled by Republicans.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:28

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Kagrenak posted:

The Real ID act—thankfully, given it was passed in 2005—doesn't have anything to say about how the states make a determination of someone's gender nor does it give the power to dictate it to the executive branch. It simply requires that one's gender is listed.

What, specifically, would you have him do about what the red states are doing? I'm legitimately interested to hear it.

The Real ID act isn't enforceable until May 2025, but there have been people suggesting that in 2025 (assuming Biden is reelected) the Department of Homeland Security declare Florida IDs out of compliance with Real ID because they won't allow residents to change their gender. Florida uses biological sex as the basis for the gender slot and some people argue that the definition could conflict with the federal government's definition and the DHS could use that to declare Florida's driver's licenses as invalid Real ID.

If Florida is out of compliance, then people from Florida won't be able to use their driver's license as ID for planes and it would be such a huge hassle that Florida would change the law.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:30

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The Real ID act isn't enforceable until May 2025, but there have been people suggesting that in 2025 (assuming Biden is reelected) the Department of Homeland Security declare Florida IDs out of compliance with Real ID because they won't allow residents to change their gender. Florida uses biological sex as the basis for the gender slot and some people argue that the definition could conflict with the federal government's definition and the DHS could use that to declare Florida's driver's licenses as invalid Real ID.

If Florida is out of compliance, then people from Florida won't be able to use their driver's license as ID for planes and it would be such a huge hassle that Florida would change the law.

Ah interesting, thanks for this. My read of it was that it doesn't provide for this type of nitpicking. Do you know if the enforcement date is a rules thing or legislation passed to delay implementation?

Kagrenak fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Apr 29, 2024

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:37

TheDeadlyShoe: Feb 14, 2014

The enforcement date has force of law. You can even go to the DHS website and they have a giant countdown timer til it takes effect.

Some states still refuse Real ID requirements for drivers licenses because they're designed to gently caress over brown people, which is gonna make it take passports to fly planes instead of drivers licenses. Lol. It remains to be seen how that's going to shake out, and whether states or Congress will blink first.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:48

Freakazoid_: Jul 5, 2013; Buglord

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The Feds are trying to launch an all-out assault on America by airdropping in grizzly bears and wolves into the backyards of innocent Colorado and Washington residents.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1785017493846663658

https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1785000612100215134

The U.S. and New Zealand are the only countries in the world where it is legal.

Some places allow limited ads that are "Hey, we sell X drug here!" style ads, but only New Zealand and the U.S. allow completely general direct to consumer ads.

Edit: For prescription drugs specifically. I'm pretty sure direct to consumer ads for non-prescription drugs are allowed in most places, but don't know all the specifics. I'm sure it varies in every place for non-prescription drugs.

I think this will work out well for the wolves but probably not so well for grizzly bears. We have a lot of deer that need culling and wolves are good at that. Grizzlies can hunt deer but not to the same extent wolves do. Also our salmon populations still need a lot of work, they probably won't be a reliable source of food for them for a long time.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:51

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

The enforcement date has force of law. You can even go to the DHS website and they have a giant countdown timer til it takes effect.

Some states still refuse Real ID requirements for drivers licenses because they're designed to gently caress over brown people, which is gonna make it take passports to fly planes instead of drivers licenses. Lol. It remains to be seen how that's going to shake out, and whether states or Congress will blink first.

DHS certified that every state is Real ID compliant back in 2020.

quote:

Q: Are all states issuing REAL ID compliant cards?

Yes. All states, the District of Columbia, and the 5 territories are REAL ID compliant and issuing REAL ID compliant driver�s licenses and IDs.

https://www.dhs.gov/real-id/real-id-faqs

# ? Apr 29, 2024 22:57

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Freakazoid_ posted:

I think this will work out well for the wolves but probably not so well for grizzly bears. We have a lot of deer that need culling and wolves are good at that. Grizzlies can hunt deer but not to the same extent wolves do. Also our salmon populations still need a lot of work, they probably won't be a reliable source of food for them for a long time.

Apparently, a Grizzly Bear's diet mostly consists of plants. I had no idea.

quote:

What Does It Eat? In their historic range: Grizzly bears are omnivorous and 75% of the food they eat is plant-based such as fruits, roots, grasses and nuts.

They also apparently eat just about anything:

quote:

Grizzly bears mainly get their food from eating insects, grass, broad-leaved herbs, tubers, sedges, berries, and roots. Apart from these foods, a grizzly bear will often get its daily nourishment from salmon, deer, moose, ground squirrels, mice, bison, and marmots. Due to their scavenging behavior, it is not rare to find them eating rotting animal carcasses.

Grizzly bears also feed on domestic livestock, which is an excessive loss to farmers who keep livestock for economic purposes. Examples of their favorite livestock are sheep and cows.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 23:04

TheDeadlyShoe: Feb 14, 2014

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

DHS certified that every state is Real ID compliant back in 2020.

https://www.dhs.gov/real-id/real-id-faqs

Oh, i'm heavily out of date. It seems many states now have two-tiered licenses now so you can get either a non-compliant or compliant IDs.

# ? Apr 29, 2024 23:05

Blue Footed Booby: Oct 4, 2006; got those happy feet

Queering Wheel posted:

And now you want to loving argue...

Can this be the title of D&D?

But seriously, it's super cool how these states care more about hurting queer people than getting free money for schools. I have to assume it's a sneaky way to cut funding to liberal indoctrination centers, but are there really people who'd object to the cuts who wouldn't see through this tactic?

Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Apr 29, 2024

# ? Apr 29, 2024 23:51

After The War: Apr 12, 2005; to all of my Architects
let me be traitor

Reminder that people are dying every day because of states refusing the Medicare extensions in the ACA, leading to hospital closure. They have no problems loving over their own citizens.

# ? Apr 30, 2024 00:01

Queering Wheel: Jun 18, 2011

Kagrenak posted:

What, specifically, would you have him do about what the red states are doing? I'm legitimately interested to hear it.

I don't know, I'm not the loving president! I'm not the most powerful person in the world with practically unlimited resources who's currently sitting on his hands while like half the states in the union are marching toward making it illegal for me to exist. I'm just a loving dumb nerd who wants to enjoy the treats of life without having to worry about being directly targeted by my state government (and soon to be federal if Trump wins, jesus christ I'll probably be loving dead in a year or two if that happens lol)

The only things currently helping the situation are state/local organizations fighting this poo poo, and court decisions that go in our favor. But state/local organizing can only do so much, and not all the court battles will be won because some courts are packed with MAGA judges, including SCOTUS. All of this poo poo should already be federally illegal because the PPACA says you can't discriminate based on sex, among other things, but I guess that doesn't count for trans people because ~reasons~

edit: also, gently caress you! I mean seriously, gently caress you. Quit loving sealioning with stupid questions like this, I see what you're doing.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Queering Wheel fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Apr 30, 2024

# ? Apr 30, 2024 00:03

Fart Amplifier: Apr 12, 2003

Queering Wheel posted:

I don't know, I'm not the loving president! I'm not the most powerful person in the world with practically unlimited resources who's currently sitting on his hands while like half the states in the union are marching toward making it illegal for me to exist. I'm just a loving dumb nerd who wants to enjoy the treats of life without having to worry about being directly targeted by my state government (and soon to be federal if Trump wins, jesus christ I'll probably be loving dead in a year or two if that happens lol)

The only things currently helping the situation are state/local organizations fighting this poo poo, and court decisions that go in our favor. But state/local organizing can only do so much, and not all the court battles will be won because some courts are packed with MAGA judges, including SCOTUS. All of this poo poo should already be federally illegal because the PPACA says you can't discriminate based on sex, among other things, but I guess that doesn't count for trans people because ~reasons~

edit: also, gently caress you! I mean seriously, gently caress you. Quit loving sealioning with stupid questions like this, I see what you're doing.

So he should do something, but you don't know what it is, and you're going to yell and scream at anyone who asks you what you think he should do.

# ? Apr 30, 2024 00:27

Queering Wheel: Jun 18, 2011

Fart Amplifier posted:

So he should do something, but you don't know what it is, and you're going to yell and scream at anyone who asks you what you think he should do.

Uh, yeah?

# ? Apr 30, 2024 00:32

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 01:13

Kalli: Jun 2, 2001

In a very funny update to that excellent news about automatic refunds from airlines last week comes a bipartisan attempt to immediately get rid of that:
Link to the summary and bill https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2024/4/bipartisan-bicameral-faa-reauthorization-act-heads-to-senate-floor

https://twitter.com/senwarren/status/1785049761256452142

# ? Apr 30, 2024 00:34

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2024: Macklemore Is The New Michael Moore

«‹›277 »