All_Pro_Bills

More importantly, not having the ability to get away with it without suffering legal and other consequences unlike the democrat's cult of chaos which gets away with all sorts of riots and plunder. Mostly peaceful protests! Remember that whopper of a lie?

Can you post a link or source of that survey?

Could be a number of potential groups. On thing is certain. As long as the people rioting have the backing of the Democrats running the government and law enforcement where the riots are happening they will face no consequences.

Do you profit from death?

Fixed.

To add to your view. I beleive most of these political, and business, bigwigs are sociopaths thst have no real feelings like sympathy or empathy, or any genuine concern for others. They simply have just learned to imitate those feelings and behaviors (like feigning sorrow over some loss) by observing others that do. As Sociopaths they naturally have high self-esteem and are threatened by anyone smarter or "better". Narcissism is one characteristic of their psyche. Along with concern only for themselves which they've learned to hide in public.

This post should close the topic as that's ultimately the end of the story.

Was there? Because if there wasn't there's likely no law requiring a private citizen to maintain "security" recordings of their personal residence.

Was there a violation of a court order to preserve evidence in effect?

You think supporting this senseless war that's resulted in the deaths of 100's of thousands of Ukrainians makes you a hero?

It doesn't matter if you know you're innocent. You still might have something to worry about. Because what you think doesn't matter. What matters is what the cops and investigators think. That's why engaging legal counsel is a good idea. And why making statements or answering questions beyond providing some basic information and being cooperative above level is discouraged.

Really? Is that what you think? I don't know how mutual funds work? Like actively or passively managed, load or no load, sector or general or index funds. Growth vs. value vs. income funds. Investment decisions and considerations for ETFs vs. funds vs. stocks. Stuff like that? Thanks for setting me straight. FYI. Those stats are directly from industry reported updates as of 6.30.23. And I'm not going to social media to get that info. And sure its client money but who votes those shares at corporate meetings and events? Not the mutual fund shareholders. its the fund manager or fund company management.

Yep, Disney for example, number 1 and 2.

Vanguard and Blackrock ranked #1 and #2 institutional holders for: APPL - 8.34% and 6.65% MSFT 8.79% and 7.22% AMZN 7.04% and 5.92% NVDA 8.15% and 7.37% GOOG (class A) 8.19% and 7.06% Surprisingly even XOM 9.70% and 6.79% (what happened to ESG?)

All the big funds.

The initial number gets the headlines and the revisions are footnotes generally ignored. More or less, these jobs reports are fiction. They always have been. Who believes the government knows how many new jobs were created in August on September 1st? These numbers are generated by a model. Models can be programmed to produce whatever result you desire. If you assume the economy is still growing then the model will output higher job growth statistics. If you assume small business birth/death model is in expansion then new businesses are hiring lots of people and the BIS reports big gains. Are new businesses really forming at any positive level? Subjectively, I see a lot of vacant store fronts and closed businesses locally. I don't even see the Amazon, UPS, and FedEx delivery trucks that used to frequent the neighborhood as much. Whether that translates nationally I can't say. What all this means is planners, investors, and others making judgments and decisions on the future of the economy and business in general based on "bad" data input which implies bad decisions. That's why when the economy and the markets crash everyone is going to be completely surprised and asking how the Hell did this happen? Currently, 7 to 10 mega-cap stocks are propping up the markets and hiding the broad weakness of the rest of the market.

This study was recently published in the Lancet. Its rather tedious reading but a couple takeaways are viral transmission was associated with viral load from the nasal passages rather than the throat and also transmission was associated with visible symptoms. Meaning if somebody isn't visibly sick, they most likely cannot infect others. And the concept of asymptomatic transmission requires more study. My other take, mixed reviews on the benefits of masking. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(23)00101-5/fulltext

Which kind of proves the Fed's claims of independence are an illusion because under those conditions he could have just said no. IMO, rather than supporting a dual mandate of employment and price stability, the Fed's primary mission at this point is to guarantee there's a pliable market for US government securities needed to fund ever increasing deficits and national debt. My personal business plan is based on the expectation they'll continue on this interest rate hike and credit contraction cycle until something breaks such as a major shock to the economy and the markets. I don't see that event very far off into the future. Lots of indicators are flashing red. I also see the soft landing scenario as consistently repeated delusion. Which will be responded to by lowering rates and increasing liquidity to markets and the economy. The dilemma will be doing this in the face of stubbornly high inflation that just won't go away.

Goldman is known to be a very accurate contrary indicator.

A major oversight here is how the author fails to implicate the Republican leadership which still doesn't have the stones to play hardball with these characters. They''re still under the false impression the Democrats will self-regulate themselves and stay constrained by rules or law. For starters, McConnell is one of several walking dead member of the Senate and McCarthy is timid and afraid.

What's fun is using various unpopular topics, such as "COVID vaccines not effective" for a search against various search engines like Google or Bing and then compare how the results are ranked and displayed. You can gather some insights into how specific positive or negative source and stories are displayed and ranked or omitted by the algorithms. I expect if you had some AI powered programs you could perform enough searches to produce enough data and intelligence to more or less reverse engineer the algorithm, identify what sources, authors, and opinions are approved and which are not approved.

Maybe the US government can get some pointers from Cuba on how to uncover human trafficking networks operating along the US/Mexico border?

I'd suggest you approach sounds more than reasonable but I'd also argue its mostly theoretical. My major objection is a conclusion that the people running "the algorithms" are not driven by a desire to protect the truth. They're driven by self-interest. And when both those factors align it works as you might suggest. But when they don't align, it doesn't. And it doesn't many times.

Who gets to decide what constitutes disinformation and what right do they have to decide for me what is right or wrong? What can't I just decide for myself what to believe and what not to believe?

I hear Lichtenstein is a nice place. Why don't these 5 million+ people apply for asylum there?