They do a mark to market sure but the ops point is that all of it is a debt bubble and if the debt is called back it collapses. So there is an implicit agreement between all the "developed" countries to keep the sham going as long as possible. When it hits... your house will be worth billions.
I remember people saying this back when I was a student in the 80s. Sure we've had booms and busts, and over leveraging is a thing, but I see "the 95% collapse is already happening" videos on youtube occasionally and, yeah, no, it's been already happening for like 10 years now.
The mistake this sort of analysis makes is assuming nobody will do anything to stop things getting worse, and underestimating the extent to which other things in the economy and society are going well. The same is true in booms, most analysts under value the risks building up in the system. It's the old extrapolating the down trend to infinity in a bust, and extrapolating the upswing to infinity in a boom.
This is why Ukraine didn't collapse under bombing, Russia didn't collapse under sanctions, the Chinese property market is now rallying. It's why the Fed made a profit out of TARP. When things go to crap, the people who can do something don't throw their hands in the air and give up. They get to work.
There are decades where nothing happens and there are weeks where decades happen.
That's the idea. When bad happens, it is uncontrolled. Eventually, bad will happen and no attempt to control it will succeed. But sure, until then, you are right. And there is nothing anyone can really do to prepare except have a "go bag" and have assets and residence in multiple countries.
If a book only featuring white people isn't racist, then a book only featuring black people isn't racist. If a book ending with a prince living happily ever after with a princess isn't about sex, then a book ending with two princes living happily ever after isn't about sex. However, these are not the standards that Florida is applying.
The rule says books that are pornographic. This became an issue because teachers began putting books like "Genderqueer" in school libraries and classrooms, featuring explicit illustrations of apparently children engaging in things like fellatio on a dildo, anal sex with a strap-on, etc.
This isn't about Romeo and Juliet. Do you have a better way to describe those kinds of books? Or do you support having "Genderqueer" in elementary school libraries?
First, this is the most extreme example on that list. Lots of other literature is on there, do you support banning all of it, and jailing teachers that don't prevent a kid from reading it, because that is the real question.
Second, you say apparently, so it sounds like you haven't read it. Perhaps you don't want to, but have you talked to someone who actually has?
I've not read it, but I'm going to buy it. I went to the web page and saw the intention, which is to teach young adults (late teenagers) healthy sexual habits. If this book isn't provided to them, those kids are going to get it from alternative sources on the Internet. I mean porn. I don't mean to be "binary" (I'm happy with that pun) but it really is a choice between those two things.
By the way, that book isn't directed towards children as you assert. It's on the web site and clearly intended for young adults. Big difference.
When I read the book, interested in hearing my review?
I'm genuinely interested in the answer to this. It is definitely found in an elementary school? I can see that it is on the banned list, but are you sure this book was actually found in an elementary school? Someone in a position of authority then needed to specifically order it, and that would be a dereliction of their duties if they did so, and that would prove the "grooming" assertion.
Is there documented proof that this was in an elementary school?
This feels like an important question. If it isn't found in elementary schools, then there simply is not a teacher or librarian out there attempting to put books in front of elementary kids. And, then this whole argument seems like virtue signaling for political gain.
If it's not for children, why is it in school libraries? The problem is not that it exists. The problem is that it is being put in school libraries. If you read it you will likely see why. It literally has graphical depictions of children engaging in what would be considered hardcore pornography in any other context.
I can self-describe liquor as a "natural sleep aid for young adults", that doesn't change the fact that it is liquor and has no place in a high school vending machine.
I lived in Japan. They had vending machines that sell liquor and they trust kids not to buy it. It's not a perfect solution.
If a six year old kid walked up to check out that book, wouldn't the librarian stop them? I think the answer to that question speaks to whether you believe in "grooming" or not.
You really feel like this is hardcore pornography? The images I saw didn't suggest that at all. There are people that engage in sex like that, I'm sure you know. Do you feel like it is morally wrong to have sex like that which is described and is that why you are saying it is hardcore pornography?
I'll need reserving judgement on whether these are pictures of children engaging in sex. I would be very surprised if that's what is depicted. You are sure of that?
I'm sure that the specifics and edge cases will get parties quite riled up. Still, I believe the general guideline of "don't expose young children to the themes of sex or racism" is reasonable.
But in high school, some of the books we read were Nineteen-Eighty-Four (liberating power of sexuality is a theme), To Kill a Mockingbird (rape trial in the Jim Crow south), Huckleberry Finn (often considered racist in contemporary American society due to its frequent use of the n-word) and the Handmaid's Tale (rape and gender relations and racism).
I can't really imagine how literature, or society and history for that matter, can be taught without sex and racism coming up, and frequently.
And no "Watchmen", "Dune"… not even X-Men comics. Certainly not "Maus". No "Native Son", no "Farewell to Manzanar". No "The Good Earth". No "The Grapes of Wrath". No "Of Mice and Men". No "Invisible Man". No "Autobiography of Malcolm X". Absolutely none of Martin Luther King's speeches aside from "I Have a Dream".
Certainly not 99% of poetry.
Also would mean "Othello", "The Merchant of Venice", and all of the cross-dressing comedies like "Twelfth Night" are right out.
I completely agree with you that if this is allowed to stand, it would gut education irreparably. Critical thinking is already under fire; this would drop a nuke on it.
They're on such shaky ground they had to form a coalition with the NDP, and rely on their support to remain functionally in power. They don't have to be popular when the Conservatives are worse.
I've been stalked by women it's not a good feeling. They even enlist the help of friends to do it to the point where I kept a baseball bat by the door.
Nah, it's more like if your idea can't be distilled down to a few sentences, it's probably not well thought out. A lot of people here write a lot of garbage.
There are a lot of cases long explanation is necessary. There are many greats comments that are way in depth and breath here than paid articles, and I never seen that in other chat based communities like discord, or slack( a lot worse).
There may be garbage but this is public forum anyways, still garbage here is a lot better than top gold post of reddit.
