10% was state only. The Federal gov will take another progressive rate that will make my all-in around 33%.
Oregon and WA are exceptions in the US. Most states have both sales and income tax. WA has sales only, and OR has income only. Both have real estate taxes too.
In the lead up to the financial crisis, sub-prime MBS deals always had series names like MLST-2006 11 or some such, based on the issuer (typically the initials of the special purpose vehicle), but I always believed the ones with pronounceable series like SALT or CBASS (especially clever) traded better.
A stable coin prounounced “busty” would definitely be at an advantage with crypto bros.
> the overwhelming majority have reached a consensus in favor of vaccination doing more good than harm (for good reason)
Do you believe they have all the data needed to make that a final conclusion?
Or are most of those medical professionals simply following certain leaders and descission makers? Would that even count as (useful) consensus then?
> Do you believe they have all the data needed to make that a final conclusion?
There is no "final conclusion". There will always be more data. So far the data have rather strongly indicated greater benefit than harm, even among the reports asserting correlations between vaccines and adverse reactions, so it doesn't seem very surprising to see consensus on that among medical experts.
The consensus ain't always right, to be clear. Maybe the small minority of experts asserting more harm than good are onto something. The body of data supporting such assertions is far more lacking, so I wouldn't bet on it.
> Or are most of those medical professionals simply following certain leaders and descission makers?
It's usually the other way around: the "certain leaders and decisionmakers" in the pro-vaccination camp largely lead/decide based on how experts are informing them - and there's certainly no shortage of said experts.
It's a fair bit more varied in the anti-vaccination camp; some such leaders/decisionmakers do defer to experts (and it's simply a case of their pool of experts being in the anti-vaccination camp), but it seems like most instead assume they know better than the experts; they tend to be the sorts of folks who already reject scientific methodology for various reasons, and thus are not inclined to defer to experts informed by said methodology.
I appreciate the response. I agree with most of what you say.
I still think it's important to point out that in this situation, with
a) a lack of primary data
and especially
b) considering the political and societal implications for publicly disagreeing with the "accepted opinion"
consensus might just not be a great measure in this case.
Building and flying custom FPV quadcopters. I think this would be a great way to teach young kids all kinds of interesting topics AND get them to go outside.
I imagine this to be a real-life thing.
In Germany, we have things called "Volkshochschule" (think: community college without any commitment, just booked by the course.
It would be perfect for this kind of model, or just offering a few weeks crash course during the summer break.
I heard that very often from my old college friends. And it made me laugh considering during 2020s harsh covid, media said half the people that get it don't even have any symptoms... And then when the vaccine came around, I was apparently going to die if I got it without the vaccine.
Apparently the nuance between some people can't even tell they got it, some people have a mild cold, and some people die got lost on some people.
Even bill Maher showed that democrats were over estimating death odds by almost 20x, while republicans it was about 3-4x I think.
Why does your account read like every comment was written by an AI? They are all so gerneric, most of them seem to directly relate to the title but nothing else. You've also never gone into any discussion after leaving your initial comment.
That's within the realm of possibility I guess. The three parties in the current government are struggling quite hard to find a common strategy to manage this crisis, so it's not entirely certain that they'll make it to the next regular elections, and the far left and right have largely positioned themselves in favor of taking both Nord Streams online and appeasing Russia, and that view is apparently also held by part of the conservative electorate, who might drift rightward if the crisis deepens. If there were elections in late winter, who knows how that would turn out, especially for the AFD party on the right.
So what's the alternative, don't support Ukraine and let Russia finish their invasion? Arming the defender against an illegal aggression is not aggression itself.
Intelligence agencies will say anything. Everyone crafting pet conspiracy theories today belies either underlying motive or incompetence. (I tend to assume the latter.) It’s in the same category as same-day armchair crash investigation. Fact-driven analysis not yet possible, the discussion gets dominated by those fitting data to their worldviews.
> you make the assertion "What it is not is a successful covert operation by a competent intelligence agency."
Yup. Because obvious, minor disablement not in anyone’s interest. Russia, U.S. or Europe. It might be latent capabilities firing early (fuckup), rogue elements (fuckup), et cetera. But anyone arguing this news benefits America or Moscow is already outside reality.
This post is specifically about the US' own psyop operations -
> The Pentagon has ordered a sweeping audit of how it conducts clandestine information warfare, after major social media companies identified and took offline fake accounts suspected of being run by the U.S. military — tactics used by countries such as Russia and Iran in violation of the platforms’ rules
