As a minimum make the fucker pay back the store the $35,000 it lost.Charge them with attempted murder and let's see if the frequency drops.
Upvote
0
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
As a minimum make the fucker pay back the store the $35,000 it lost.Charge them with attempted murder and let's see if the frequency drops.
So the UPenn hospital is starting to pick up...
If I read Jake's link above correctly, an individual in Fungo's clients' situation may end up quite unhappy April 15, 2021
Same. I really don’t need or want it to show up. The last tax table change totally whacked my return and I don’t need it messing up my taxes for next year.I am extremely fortunate to not need the stimulus money but if/when my check comes it will be put to use buying gift cards/food/other items from small business in the area and if possible large tips for the workers were possible
Taos has some serious competition now for the title of site Chicken Little...And afterwards, there'd be not only millions dead, but maybe 15% of people who live and have scarred lungs for the rest of their live.
Like or dislike, the solution (poverty/unemployment) will destroy more lives than the problem (CV-19). I'm not sure how anyone could argue differently with a record 3.3 million jobless claims last week. Well, other than the wealthy government officials who ordered the solution without any personal economic impact whatsoever.
So, they aren't going to clawback the check you get, even if your 2020 income would otherwise preclude you.
So I've got a guy who made $135,000 in 2018 and $210,000 in 2019 now sitting on filing his tax returns so he'll get the check, knowing that he doesn't qualify. For fucks' sake -- you made $200,000 last year, how the fuck are you this desperate for $3,000?!?!
I'm not sitting on my returns for this but my accountant was slow before all this bullshit so they are just sitting.
I'll just donate it to the local foodbank or something. Simplest solution I can think of.
I'm usually a fan of middle road solutions, but in this instance, I suspect that we're going to get the worst of both worlds unless we get lucky and warming weather really takes care of the issue for us. We've imposed enough restrictions to exacerbate economic distress, but, given a significant portion of our populace that is bound and determined to act like idiots and the pressure to ease the restrictions up early, not enough to really shut this things down. So, there's a decent chance that we'll end up with all of the lost jobs in the short-term and most of the deaths, permanent lung impairments, and long-term health and economic consequences too. Either (1) early and truly truly draconian measures, with massive short-term government relief to those most affected economically or (2) begging people who can work from home to do so but otherwise imposing no restrictions and letting this thing kill who it wants to kill might well have ended up being better choices than what we're doing.Steve, I read a Chicago Tribune article that said a 43-year-old Jo'burg man attended a party in Connecticut on March 5th, and fell ill on his plane ride home a couple of days later. So it may not have been just the folks on the tour of Italy that brought the virus to South Africa.
I wish that the US had enacted the measures you described on a nationwide basis 10-to-14 days ago. I believe that stricter measures will be much more effective overall, the piecemeal approach here can end up being a losing game of whack-a-mole.
I'll donate mine to the heisman fund.
Taos has some serious competition now for the title of site Chicken Little...
12 days in none in my county.I mean...I don't know what else to tell you. If you let a virus that kills 1.5-3% of people to run rampant in a country of 330 million an astronomical amount will die. And there will be a depression and chaos as that occurs. And yes, it's shown to scar people's lungs in severe cases even if they recover.
All I know is that if this was a bio-terrorist attack instead, the general population (not saying you in particular) would be doing everything gov asked and more with no questions attached. This doesn't happen as quickly though, so it's hard for people to take seriously until they see 10,000 dead overnight.
That 1.5-3% rate is dropping as the virus spreads to better-prepared countries and as more testing is done. And you assume that every single one of the 330M will get it.I mean...I don't know what else to tell you. If you let a virus that kills 1.5-3% of people to run rampant in a country of 330 million an astronomical amount will die. And there will be a depression and chaos as that occurs. And yes, it's shown to scar people's lungs in severe cases even if they recover.
I'm usually a fan of middle road solutions, but in this instance, I suspect that we're going to get the worst of both worlds unless we get lucky and warming weather really takes care of the issue for us. We've imposed enough restrictions to exacerbate economic distress, but, given a significant portion of our populace that is bound and determined to act like idiots and the pressure to ease the restrictions up early, not enough to really shut this things down. So, there's a decent chance that we'll end up with all of the lost jobs in the short-term and most of the deaths, permanent lung impairments, and long-term health and economic consequences too. Either (1) early and truly truly draconian measures, with massive short-term government relief to those most affected economically or (2) begging people who can work from home to do so but otherwise imposing no restrictions and letting this thing kill who it wants to kill might well have ended up being better choices than what we're doing.
That 1.5-3% rate is dropping as the virus spreads to better-prepared countries and as more testing is done. And you assume that every single one of the 330M will get it.