Bison06

Great, numbers are rising. I ask again, why roll out a strategy that has proven to be a failure?

Why do you and others continue to talk lockdown? Haven’t we seen enough example of its failure as a policy?

I agree that we can learn some things from Canada, but comparing the United States to any country in the world is a fool errand. The diversity of culture and how each of those cultures consumes healthcare in the United States makes it unique. I find a few things we do to be odd. One, I’m sure there was good intentions in the beginning, but I don’t like that healthcare benefits are tied to a specific job. It creates too many problems when someone is fired or just switches jobs. Benefits vary wildly from plan to plan, leading to nothing but confusion for the consumer. Second, I believe strongly that basic healthcare and preventative healthcare should be a right in our country and not a privilege. Doctors in our system do not have the time to be who they should be, teachers. Educating our youth on how to take care of their body through preventative measures and then helping them grow into healthy adults. Being there in case something goes wrong and helping to correct it. Much more in line with how dentists fit into a family’s healthcare plan. Doctors know little to nothing about nutrition and exercise protocols, which is easily the most impactful category in determining long term health outcomes. Our system is bloated and intervention heavy, not enough accountability and prevention education.

Well, I prefer people get together for Thanksgiving so yeah, I don't care one bit. My family had to cancel it's second holiday get together of the year, so I'm slightly salty about not being able to see my family for the last 8 months.

Well, let's see if it actually happens before getting too worked up over it.

In that I have played a part in the creation and execution of more than a dozen research studies in the past two decades. Yeah I'd say I know more than the average person about how research is done and how science works. Less than a ton of people, but more than the general public.

Science is no better than quackery when it is applied incorrectly. In fact, its possibly worse as at least quackery can be dismissed on it's face, whereas "science" requires some investigative work to know whether or not the findings are significant. Which 99.9% of our population doesn't have the ability or knowledge to discern.

Do you find it interesting and convenient how that narrative shifted?

Also, hilariously, how could they know how long it lasts? Remember to “trust the science”, observation is a critical component of “science” and they’ve had this vaccine all of ten minutes and somehow know how long the immunity lasts? That should be sounding alarms bells in everyone’s head.

Even the most fervent vaccination advocates will tell you that vaccination is inferior to contracting the wild virus when it comes to long term immunity. There’s no chance that the vaccination antibody response will be stronger than the wild virus. Doesn’t it say something to you about the narrative surrounding immunity that in April, May, June it was all about “well we don’t know how long immunity lasts” and now when it’s a vaccine that isn’t even a talking point?

How. Long. Does. Immunity. Last. Following. Vaccination?

ok...how about addressing my question instead of obsessing about your favorite topic. I actually responded to something you posted.

And how long is a person's immunity following vaccination? Or isn't that a conversation anymore?

But it’s these same politicians whining that the ultra wealthy use tax shelters who wrote the tax code that allowed those shelters in the first place. Why is the government constantly trying to incentivize behaviors through the tax code. Simplify the tax code, get rid of nearly every tax incentive and let percentages take care of ultra wealthy people.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rudy-giuliani-sidney-powell-not-part-of-trumps-legal-team Fourth paragraph down. I should clarify my statement that it’s a non story. I believe it to be a non story in reference to people seeing this as further proof that it’s all unraveling. This was strategic. What for? I have no clue, but they clearly planned this together for some reason. I don’t have a Wall Street journal membership, so the best I can get is a reference to the Wall Street journal statement.

And the fact that Sidney Powell issued a statement that she agrees with Guiliani? They planned this together.

Again, read the statement for yourself, not the spin.

This seems like a non story. Read the statement.

The more I read about it, the more it seems like just a clarification that Sidney Powell has never been on Trumps personal team vs a change and her being removed.

It’s interesting, I just read the statement from the trump campaign and it’s ambiguous as to its meaning. Are they truly trying to distance themselves from her or are they simply trying to paint her as an independent “objective” lawyer who is seeking the truth. The way they worded it I could see it being either.

International Units(IU) seriously, I’d increase that to 5000 as an adult in the northern hemisphere in the winter. 2000 will prevent a deficiency, but 5000 is necessary for optimal levels

Vitamin D3 supplementation seems like a pretty easy solution.

Also making the mistake of thinking every corporation is a Fortune 500 company. Most small business are corporations with middle class owners. Raising the corporate tax rate raises taxes for these small businesses as well.

...as a general rule they are, hahaha.

Because politicians are masters of the English language. “We are not going to raise taxes on the middle class” is technically correct if your tax plan doesn’t call for an increase for that group, but instead doesn’t renew a previous administration’s cuts for that group. My favorite example of this is when a politician claims that “funding for (insert here)program has been slashed” when in reality what happened was a planned budgetary increase wasn’t approved. The budget could stay the same as it was before, but since the planned increase in budget didn’t take place, they call it a funding cut. This is why I hate politicians across the board as a general rule, they are liars and half-truth tellers. Remember when a sitting president had the audacity to utter the phrase “that depends on what your definition of the word is, is” ? Disgusting people who will say anything to get what they want. I’d trust a street hustler before I’d trust a politician.