CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
Roger got banned!?!?
Never saw that coming.
Never saw that coming.
Stuff that doesn't really fit in either "Examples of" thread....
- Thread starter Roger A. Shrubber
- Start date
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
well at least they are still playing with it......
printer
Well-Known Member
Progressive rep: Two-year House terms ‘incredibly wasteful and counterproductive’
Progressive Rep. Summer Lee (D-Penn.) on Monday blasted two-year terms in the House of Representatives, arguing it shuts out many candidates and benefits the wealthy.
“I don’t know who needs to hear this, but 2-year terms are incredibly wasteful and counterproductive… but it benefits the wealthy and powerful, so it’ll probably never change,” Lee wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.
Lee said the high cost of running a campaign ends up shutting out working-class voters and candidates. She also argued that it pushes lawmakers to be full-time fundraisers, “focusing more on keeping their job than doing their job.”
“2yr terms mean a rep is running +raising $ every yr. Since citizens united, every cycle is exceeding records,” she wrote, referencing the 2010 Supreme Court decision.
“Congressional races can be multi millions, locking out not just working class candidates, but working class voters who can’t afford to compete w/dark money influence,” Lee added.
“It also means that legislators are permanent candidates, focusing more on keeping their job than doing their job. Very many reps do call time as a full-time job. 20-40 hours/week. They also have to weigh the interests of donors over constituents bc of the brevity of term.”
According to the FEC, the 345 Senate candidates in 2021-2022 reported receipts totaling $1.3 billion and disbursements of $1.1 billion. The 2,306 House candidates reported total receipts of $1.8 billion and disbursements of $1.5 billion.
Campaign donations have skyrocketed since the Supreme Court ruled that political spending is a form of free speech and that therefore corporations and unions can spend an unlimited amount of money in campaigns, though the money can’t go directly to candidates.
Campaign spending by corporations and outside groups reportedly increased by nearly 900 percent from 2008 to 2016.
A report also shows billionaires spent $1.2 billion on the 2020 election, which is about 70 times what billionaires spent on campaign donations in 2008, at $17 million.
thehill.com
By the time the Rep gets in it is time to start working on the next election. What a way to run a railroad.
Progressive Rep. Summer Lee (D-Penn.) on Monday blasted two-year terms in the House of Representatives, arguing it shuts out many candidates and benefits the wealthy.
“I don’t know who needs to hear this, but 2-year terms are incredibly wasteful and counterproductive… but it benefits the wealthy and powerful, so it’ll probably never change,” Lee wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.
Lee said the high cost of running a campaign ends up shutting out working-class voters and candidates. She also argued that it pushes lawmakers to be full-time fundraisers, “focusing more on keeping their job than doing their job.”
“2yr terms mean a rep is running +raising $ every yr. Since citizens united, every cycle is exceeding records,” she wrote, referencing the 2010 Supreme Court decision.
“Congressional races can be multi millions, locking out not just working class candidates, but working class voters who can’t afford to compete w/dark money influence,” Lee added.
“It also means that legislators are permanent candidates, focusing more on keeping their job than doing their job. Very many reps do call time as a full-time job. 20-40 hours/week. They also have to weigh the interests of donors over constituents bc of the brevity of term.”
According to the FEC, the 345 Senate candidates in 2021-2022 reported receipts totaling $1.3 billion and disbursements of $1.1 billion. The 2,306 House candidates reported total receipts of $1.8 billion and disbursements of $1.5 billion.
Campaign donations have skyrocketed since the Supreme Court ruled that political spending is a form of free speech and that therefore corporations and unions can spend an unlimited amount of money in campaigns, though the money can’t go directly to candidates.
Campaign spending by corporations and outside groups reportedly increased by nearly 900 percent from 2008 to 2016.
A report also shows billionaires spent $1.2 billion on the 2020 election, which is about 70 times what billionaires spent on campaign donations in 2008, at $17 million.
Progressive rep: Two-year House terms ‘incredibly wasteful and counterproductive’
Progressive Rep. Summer Lee (D-Penn.) on Monday blasted two-year terms in the House of Representatives, arguing it shuts out many candidates and benefits the wealthy. “I don’t know who needs …
thehill.com
By the time the Rep gets in it is time to start working on the next election. What a way to run a railroad.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
The short, spectacular life of that viral room-temperature superconductivity claim
In just 2 weeks, unlikely “discovery” skyrockets to internet fame and then begins to fall back to Earth
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
One thing covid changed was people and talking heads getting interviewed from home now that that consumer cameras, computers and internet connections support HD video. I see from this picture they appear to be equipping some of the regular talking heads with a bit of a home studio from the equipment in the picture including the big screen TV as a background. Good money if you can get it, work from home for hundreds of thousands a year and not nearly as many treks into the studio.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
printer
Well-Known Member
Utah man killed in FBI raid linked to threats against Biden
A Utah man was shot and killed Wednesday morning during an FBI raid linked to threats against President Biden and other Democratic officials.
The FBI said the incident occurred after special agents attempted to serve arrest and search warrants at a residence in Provo, Utah.
Sandra Barker, spokesperson for the FBI’s Salt Lake City field office, said the shooting is under review by the FBI and declined to offer additional details, calling the incident an “ongoing matter.”
Secret Service spokesperson Alexi Worley said in a statement that it is aware of the FBI investigation involving an individual in Utah “who has exhibited threats to a Secret Service protectee.”
Craig Deleeuw Robertson of Provo was under investigation for making threats against Biden and facing a charge of that crime, according to a sealed criminal complaint obtained by The Hill.
“I hear Biden is coming to Utah. Digging out my old ghillie suit and cleaning the dust off the M24 sniper rifle. Welcome, buffoon-in-chief!” Robertson allegedly said on social media, according to the complaint.
Biden is expected to depart New Mexico later Wednesday bound for Utah, where tomorrow he is to deliver remarks and attend a campaign reception before returning to the White House.
Robertson was also facing charges of interstate threats for allegedly threatening New York County District Attorney Alvin Bragg — who is prosecuting the hush money case against former President Trump — and influencing, impeding or retaliating against federal law enforcement officers by threat.
Other threats were made against Vice President Kamala Harris, New York State Attorney General Letitia James and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, according to the sealed complaint.
thehill.com
A Utah man was shot and killed Wednesday morning during an FBI raid linked to threats against President Biden and other Democratic officials.
The FBI said the incident occurred after special agents attempted to serve arrest and search warrants at a residence in Provo, Utah.
Sandra Barker, spokesperson for the FBI’s Salt Lake City field office, said the shooting is under review by the FBI and declined to offer additional details, calling the incident an “ongoing matter.”
Secret Service spokesperson Alexi Worley said in a statement that it is aware of the FBI investigation involving an individual in Utah “who has exhibited threats to a Secret Service protectee.”
Craig Deleeuw Robertson of Provo was under investigation for making threats against Biden and facing a charge of that crime, according to a sealed criminal complaint obtained by The Hill.
“I hear Biden is coming to Utah. Digging out my old ghillie suit and cleaning the dust off the M24 sniper rifle. Welcome, buffoon-in-chief!” Robertson allegedly said on social media, according to the complaint.
Biden is expected to depart New Mexico later Wednesday bound for Utah, where tomorrow he is to deliver remarks and attend a campaign reception before returning to the White House.
Robertson was also facing charges of interstate threats for allegedly threatening New York County District Attorney Alvin Bragg — who is prosecuting the hush money case against former President Trump — and influencing, impeding or retaliating against federal law enforcement officers by threat.
Other threats were made against Vice President Kamala Harris, New York State Attorney General Letitia James and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, according to the sealed complaint.
Utah man killed in FBI raid linked to threats against Biden
A Utah man was shot and killed Wednesday morning during an FBI raid linked to threats against President Biden and other Democratic officials. The FBI said the incident occurred after special …
thehill.com
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Another he-ro of the right and martyr, maybe Trump and foxnews will make him a victim of the war on free speech.Utah man killed in FBI raid linked to threats against Biden
A Utah man was shot and killed Wednesday morning during an FBI raid linked to threats against President Biden and other Democratic officials.
The FBI said the incident occurred after special agents attempted to serve arrest and search warrants at a residence in Provo, Utah.
Sandra Barker, spokesperson for the FBI’s Salt Lake City field office, said the shooting is under review by the FBI and declined to offer additional details, calling the incident an “ongoing matter.”
Secret Service spokesperson Alexi Worley said in a statement that it is aware of the FBI investigation involving an individual in Utah “who has exhibited threats to a Secret Service protectee.”
Craig Deleeuw Robertson of Provo was under investigation for making threats against Biden and facing a charge of that crime, according to a sealed criminal complaint obtained by The Hill.
“I hear Biden is coming to Utah. Digging out my old ghillie suit and cleaning the dust off the M24 sniper rifle. Welcome, buffoon-in-chief!” Robertson allegedly said on social media, according to the complaint.
Biden is expected to depart New Mexico later Wednesday bound for Utah, where tomorrow he is to deliver remarks and attend a campaign reception before returning to the White House.
Robertson was also facing charges of interstate threats for allegedly threatening New York County District Attorney Alvin Bragg — who is prosecuting the hush money case against former President Trump — and influencing, impeding or retaliating against federal law enforcement officers by threat.
Other threats were made against Vice President Kamala Harris, New York State Attorney General Letitia James and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, according to the sealed complaint.
Utah man killed in FBI raid linked to threats against Biden
A Utah man was shot and killed Wednesday morning during an FBI raid linked to threats against President Biden and other Democratic officials. The FBI said the incident occurred after special …
printer
Well-Known Member
US, Saudi Arabia Agree to Broad Terms for Israel Normalization
Saudi Arabia has agreed to recognize Israel in exchange for concessions to the Palestinians in the outline of a deal with the Biden administration, U.S. officials told The Wall Street Journal.
Challenges remain before an agreement can be finalized, ideally during the next nine to 12 months, U.S. officials told the Journal.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has told aides he's not prepared to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel, according to Saudi officials.
Mohammed has told advisers he's in no rush to reach a deal with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hard-line coalition government, which opposes the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
News that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia had agreed on the broad outline of a deal came after Mohammed met with Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, in Jeddah two weeks ago.
Among Saudi Arabia's requests is that the U.S. help develop a civilian nuclear program and offer ironclad security guarantees, and concessions from Israel that would help promote the creation of a Palestinian state, the Journal reported.
The U.S. wants Saudi Arabia to distance itself economically and militarily from China.
"There’s a work plan to explore the elements of what this would be and test the boundaries of what’s possible," a senior U.S. official told the Journal.
U.S. officials say Biden believes the U.S. must remain a key player in the Middle East to contain Iran, isolate Russia for its war in Ukraine, and stymie China’s efforts in the region.
The U.S. could seek assurances that Saudi Arabia won't allow China to build military bases in the kingdom — something that has been a point of contention between the Biden administration and United Arab Emirates.
The Biden administration also could seek assurances that the Saudis will use U.S. dollars, not Chinese currency, to price oil sales, officials told the Journal.
"It's such a dangerous landscape," Brian Katulis, vice president of policy at the Middle East Institute, told the Journal.
Katulis then compared the U.S.–Saudi Arabia situation to mountain climbers trying to scale several Mount Everests in succession.
"There are four or five things they need to do to make sure they don’t go into thin air and go off the mountain. To me, it seems highly improbable in the short run, but who knows?"
Would Trump not get peeved if Brandon get a Nobel Peace Prize?
Saudi Arabia has agreed to recognize Israel in exchange for concessions to the Palestinians in the outline of a deal with the Biden administration, U.S. officials told The Wall Street Journal.
Challenges remain before an agreement can be finalized, ideally during the next nine to 12 months, U.S. officials told the Journal.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has told aides he's not prepared to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel, according to Saudi officials.
Mohammed has told advisers he's in no rush to reach a deal with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hard-line coalition government, which opposes the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
News that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia had agreed on the broad outline of a deal came after Mohammed met with Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, in Jeddah two weeks ago.
Among Saudi Arabia's requests is that the U.S. help develop a civilian nuclear program and offer ironclad security guarantees, and concessions from Israel that would help promote the creation of a Palestinian state, the Journal reported.
The U.S. wants Saudi Arabia to distance itself economically and militarily from China.
"There’s a work plan to explore the elements of what this would be and test the boundaries of what’s possible," a senior U.S. official told the Journal.
U.S. officials say Biden believes the U.S. must remain a key player in the Middle East to contain Iran, isolate Russia for its war in Ukraine, and stymie China’s efforts in the region.
The U.S. could seek assurances that Saudi Arabia won't allow China to build military bases in the kingdom — something that has been a point of contention between the Biden administration and United Arab Emirates.
The Biden administration also could seek assurances that the Saudis will use U.S. dollars, not Chinese currency, to price oil sales, officials told the Journal.
"It's such a dangerous landscape," Brian Katulis, vice president of policy at the Middle East Institute, told the Journal.
Katulis then compared the U.S.–Saudi Arabia situation to mountain climbers trying to scale several Mount Everests in succession.
"There are four or five things they need to do to make sure they don’t go into thin air and go off the mountain. To me, it seems highly improbable in the short run, but who knows?"
Would Trump not get peeved if Brandon get a Nobel Peace Prize?
printer
Well-Known Member
One for Hunter.
Appeals court rules for man who challenged ban on illegal drug users possessing firearms
A federal appeals court ruled a ban on gun possession for users of illegal drugs is unconstitutional as applied to a man who used marijuana.
The three-judge panel ruled on Wednesday that Patrick Darnell Daniels Jr.’s Second Amendment rights were violated in being convicted of the charge.
Law enforcement had pulled over Daniels for driving a vehicle without a license plate in April of last year.
The officers found two loaded firearms and several marijuana cigarette butts in the car. Although Daniels was not alleged to have been smoking at the time, he admitted being a regular marijuana user to law enforcement and was subsequently charged with the gun crime, court records indicate.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel on Wednesday reversed Daniels’s conviction, finding the government did not pass the new test for gun restrictions outlined by the Supreme Court last summer: a law must be consistent with the nation’s historical regulation of firearms.
“In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage,” Circuit Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the panel.
“Nor do more generalized traditions of disarming dangerous persons support this restriction on nonviolent drug users,” he continued. “As applied to Daniels, then, § 922(g)(3) violates the Second Amendment.”
Hunter Biden, the president’s son, has agreed to a pretrial diversion program on the same charge in his criminal case in Delaware. The 5th Circuit’s ruling does not immediately impact Biden’s case, but the decision adds to the increasing constitutional scrutiny on the provision in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision.
The court’s conservative majority in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen ruled individuals have a right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, upending the standard courts had previously used to assess potential Second Amendment violations.
The decision has led to a flurry of cases in the lower courts attempting to apply the new historical test to various federal gun laws.
In Daniels’s case, the panel considered potential historical analogies about laws that governed firearm use for those consuming alcohol and those deemed dangerous, but the judges ultimately found the arguments unavailing.
“Although a few states after the Civil War prohibited carrying weapons while under the influence, none barred gun possession by regular drinkers,” Smith wrote in the ruling.
Circuit Judge Stephen Higginson, an Obama appointee, wrote separately to argue “that courts, operating in good faith, are struggling at every stage of the Bruen inquiry” as he noted the various provisions already struck down by courts nationwide.
“Although our decision is limited in scope, it is hard for me to avoid the conclusion that most, if not all, applications of § 922(g)(3) will likewise be deficient,” Higginson wrote. “It is also important to acknowledge that other gun safety laws, especially longstanding status-based prohibitions previously understood to be constitutionally unassailable, have been recently struck down by courts across the country as they attempt to faithfully implement Bruen.”
The Supreme Court next term is set to hear a case about the constitutionality of a neighboring provision to the one at issue in Daniels’s case.
The justices will decide whether a federal ban on gun possession for people under domestic violence restraining orders is constitutional. The court agreed to take up the case after the 5th Circuit similarly struck down that provision.
thehill.com
Appeals court rules for man who challenged ban on illegal drug users possessing firearms
A federal appeals court ruled a ban on gun possession for users of illegal drugs is unconstitutional as applied to a man who used marijuana.
The three-judge panel ruled on Wednesday that Patrick Darnell Daniels Jr.’s Second Amendment rights were violated in being convicted of the charge.
Law enforcement had pulled over Daniels for driving a vehicle without a license plate in April of last year.
The officers found two loaded firearms and several marijuana cigarette butts in the car. Although Daniels was not alleged to have been smoking at the time, he admitted being a regular marijuana user to law enforcement and was subsequently charged with the gun crime, court records indicate.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel on Wednesday reversed Daniels’s conviction, finding the government did not pass the new test for gun restrictions outlined by the Supreme Court last summer: a law must be consistent with the nation’s historical regulation of firearms.
“In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage,” Circuit Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the panel.
“Nor do more generalized traditions of disarming dangerous persons support this restriction on nonviolent drug users,” he continued. “As applied to Daniels, then, § 922(g)(3) violates the Second Amendment.”
Hunter Biden, the president’s son, has agreed to a pretrial diversion program on the same charge in his criminal case in Delaware. The 5th Circuit’s ruling does not immediately impact Biden’s case, but the decision adds to the increasing constitutional scrutiny on the provision in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision.
The court’s conservative majority in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen ruled individuals have a right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, upending the standard courts had previously used to assess potential Second Amendment violations.
The decision has led to a flurry of cases in the lower courts attempting to apply the new historical test to various federal gun laws.
In Daniels’s case, the panel considered potential historical analogies about laws that governed firearm use for those consuming alcohol and those deemed dangerous, but the judges ultimately found the arguments unavailing.
“Although a few states after the Civil War prohibited carrying weapons while under the influence, none barred gun possession by regular drinkers,” Smith wrote in the ruling.
Circuit Judge Stephen Higginson, an Obama appointee, wrote separately to argue “that courts, operating in good faith, are struggling at every stage of the Bruen inquiry” as he noted the various provisions already struck down by courts nationwide.
“Although our decision is limited in scope, it is hard for me to avoid the conclusion that most, if not all, applications of § 922(g)(3) will likewise be deficient,” Higginson wrote. “It is also important to acknowledge that other gun safety laws, especially longstanding status-based prohibitions previously understood to be constitutionally unassailable, have been recently struck down by courts across the country as they attempt to faithfully implement Bruen.”
The Supreme Court next term is set to hear a case about the constitutionality of a neighboring provision to the one at issue in Daniels’s case.
The justices will decide whether a federal ban on gun possession for people under domestic violence restraining orders is constitutional. The court agreed to take up the case after the 5th Circuit similarly struck down that provision.
Appeals court rules for man who challenged ban on illegal drug users possessing firearms
A federal appeals court ruled a ban on gun possession for users of illegal drugs is unconstitutional, as applied to a man who used marijuana. The three-judge panel ruled Wednesday that that Patrick…
thehill.com
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Bail! This nutcase murdered someone in front of an eyewitness, fuck bail, the weight of evidence should count for something when detaining someone.
printer
Well-Known Member
"But, but.... ...Free Speech."
YouTube announces new policies to target medical misinformation
YouTube on Tuesday announced it is creating a new framework to crack down on medical misinformation on the platform.
“In the years since we began our efforts to make YouTube a destination for high-quality health content, we’ve learned critical lessons about developing Community Guidelines in line with local and global health authority guidance on topics that pose serious real-world risks, such as misinformation on COVID-19, vaccines, reproductive health, harmful substances, and more,” a blog post from the video-sharing site read. “We’re taking what we’ve learned so far about the most effective ways to tackle medical misinformation to simplify our approach for creators, viewers, and partners.”
The platform has faced controversy in recent years for its algorithm and the way it can direct viewers to misleading and extremist content. In 2021, YouTube said it removed more than 1 million videos related to “dangerous coronavirus information” since the beginning of the outbreak in the U.S.
YouTube said it will use three categories, “Prevention, Treatment and Denial” to sort the kinds of medical misinformation on the platform.
It will remove content that contradicts guidance from health authorities on the prevention and transmission of certain conditions, including vaccines. It will also take down content that contradicts guidance on treatments, including videos that tout unproven remedies in place of seeking care, and content that denies the existence of specific conditions, including COVID-19, according to YouTube.
The platform said its new policies “will apply to specific health conditions, treatments, and substances where content contradicts local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO).”
“To determine if a condition, treatment or substance is in scope of our medical misinformation policies, we’ll evaluate whether it’s associated with a high public health risk, publicly available guidance from health authorities around the world, and whether it’s generally prone to misinformation,” the post read.
The post also highlighted new policies targeting cancer treatment misinformation. The company said it will begin to remove “content that promotes cancer treatments proven to be harmful or ineffective, or content that discourages viewers from seeking professional medical treatment.”
“This includes content that promotes unproven treatments in place of approved care or as a guaranteed cure, and treatments that have been specifically deemed harmful by health authorities,” the post continued. “For instance, a video that claims ‘garlic cures cancer,’ or ‘take vitamin C instead of radiation therapy’ would be removed.”
thehill.com
"Another Democrat plot."
YouTube announces new policies to target medical misinformation
YouTube on Tuesday announced it is creating a new framework to crack down on medical misinformation on the platform.
“In the years since we began our efforts to make YouTube a destination for high-quality health content, we’ve learned critical lessons about developing Community Guidelines in line with local and global health authority guidance on topics that pose serious real-world risks, such as misinformation on COVID-19, vaccines, reproductive health, harmful substances, and more,” a blog post from the video-sharing site read. “We’re taking what we’ve learned so far about the most effective ways to tackle medical misinformation to simplify our approach for creators, viewers, and partners.”
The platform has faced controversy in recent years for its algorithm and the way it can direct viewers to misleading and extremist content. In 2021, YouTube said it removed more than 1 million videos related to “dangerous coronavirus information” since the beginning of the outbreak in the U.S.
YouTube said it will use three categories, “Prevention, Treatment and Denial” to sort the kinds of medical misinformation on the platform.
It will remove content that contradicts guidance from health authorities on the prevention and transmission of certain conditions, including vaccines. It will also take down content that contradicts guidance on treatments, including videos that tout unproven remedies in place of seeking care, and content that denies the existence of specific conditions, including COVID-19, according to YouTube.
The platform said its new policies “will apply to specific health conditions, treatments, and substances where content contradicts local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO).”
“To determine if a condition, treatment or substance is in scope of our medical misinformation policies, we’ll evaluate whether it’s associated with a high public health risk, publicly available guidance from health authorities around the world, and whether it’s generally prone to misinformation,” the post read.
The post also highlighted new policies targeting cancer treatment misinformation. The company said it will begin to remove “content that promotes cancer treatments proven to be harmful or ineffective, or content that discourages viewers from seeking professional medical treatment.”
“This includes content that promotes unproven treatments in place of approved care or as a guaranteed cure, and treatments that have been specifically deemed harmful by health authorities,” the post continued. “For instance, a video that claims ‘garlic cures cancer,’ or ‘take vitamin C instead of radiation therapy’ would be removed.”
YouTube announces new policies to target medical misinformation
YouTube on Tuesday announced it is creating a new framework to crack down on medical misinformation on the platform. “In the years since we began our efforts to make YouTube a destination for high-…
thehill.com
"Another Democrat plot."
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
This is gonna be interesting, time to get out the solar box
knew i should have save up for the solar lense
knew i should have save up for the solar lense
printer
Well-Known Member
Ohio effort to legalize recreational marijuana gets enough signatures for November ballot
Marijuana legalization will be on the ballot in Ohio in November, the secretary of state’s office confirmed Wednesday.
Petitioners submitted 127,772 signatures from all over Ohio to qualify for November a referendum to legalize the growing and sale of marijuana to people 21 and over. They needed about 124,000 signatures — 3.5 percent of the votes in the last gubernatorial election. The signatures also had to cover at least 1.5 percent of voters from half of Ohio’s 88 counties.
“We are grateful to the thousands of Ohioans who helped us get to this point and are excited to bring our proposal to regulate marijuana like alcohol before Ohio voters this coming election day,” Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol leader Tom Haren said in a statement Wednesday.
If Ohio passes the marijuana law, it will be the 24th state plus D.C. to fully legalize the drug. The state legalized medical marijuana in 2016, but dispensaries took three years to open due to regulation challenges.
The proposed law would allow any person over 21 to grow up to six plants at home and impose a 10 percent tax on marijuana sales.
A study from Ohio State University found that the plan could generate about $275 million to $450 million in tax revenue after five years.
The move is popular among Ohioans, according to opinion polling. About 58 percent of Ohioans support legalizing marijuana, according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll from late July. That includes over three-quarters of Democrats, 60 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans.
However, even if the measure passes, it could face opposition from the state legislature. Because it is an initiated statute, it could be modified or repealed by Ohio lawmakers. Gov. Mike DeWine (R) has previously stated that he does not support legalized marijuana.
Marijuana will be joining abortion rights on the ballot, as Ohio is also scheduled to consider a constitutional amendment which would provide “a fundamental right to reproductive freedom” with “reasonable limits.”
Both measures on the same off-year ballot could drive more voters to the polls. A special election earlier this month to consider a constitutional amendment drew record turnout for August votes.
That vote was to consider an amendment to change how amendments are passed. It would have required more signatures to get a proposal on the ballot and a 60 percent vote to enact an amendment instead of 50 percent. It failed, with 57 percent of voters against.
thehill.com
Marijuana legalization will be on the ballot in Ohio in November, the secretary of state’s office confirmed Wednesday.
Petitioners submitted 127,772 signatures from all over Ohio to qualify for November a referendum to legalize the growing and sale of marijuana to people 21 and over. They needed about 124,000 signatures — 3.5 percent of the votes in the last gubernatorial election. The signatures also had to cover at least 1.5 percent of voters from half of Ohio’s 88 counties.
“We are grateful to the thousands of Ohioans who helped us get to this point and are excited to bring our proposal to regulate marijuana like alcohol before Ohio voters this coming election day,” Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol leader Tom Haren said in a statement Wednesday.
If Ohio passes the marijuana law, it will be the 24th state plus D.C. to fully legalize the drug. The state legalized medical marijuana in 2016, but dispensaries took three years to open due to regulation challenges.
The proposed law would allow any person over 21 to grow up to six plants at home and impose a 10 percent tax on marijuana sales.
A study from Ohio State University found that the plan could generate about $275 million to $450 million in tax revenue after five years.
The move is popular among Ohioans, according to opinion polling. About 58 percent of Ohioans support legalizing marijuana, according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll from late July. That includes over three-quarters of Democrats, 60 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans.
However, even if the measure passes, it could face opposition from the state legislature. Because it is an initiated statute, it could be modified or repealed by Ohio lawmakers. Gov. Mike DeWine (R) has previously stated that he does not support legalized marijuana.
Marijuana will be joining abortion rights on the ballot, as Ohio is also scheduled to consider a constitutional amendment which would provide “a fundamental right to reproductive freedom” with “reasonable limits.”
Both measures on the same off-year ballot could drive more voters to the polls. A special election earlier this month to consider a constitutional amendment drew record turnout for August votes.
That vote was to consider an amendment to change how amendments are passed. It would have required more signatures to get a proposal on the ballot and a 60 percent vote to enact an amendment instead of 50 percent. It failed, with 57 percent of voters against.
Ohio effort to legalize recreational marijuana gets enough signatures for November ballot
Marijuana legalization will be on the ballot in Ohio in November, the secretary of state’s office confirmed Wednesday. Petitioners submitted 127,772 signatures from all over Ohio to qualify …
thehill.com
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
looks like something heading for SoCal....just a heads up
printer
Well-Known Member
Exclusive-China's state banks seen selling dollars for yuan in London and New York hours
China's major state-owned banks were seen busy selling U.S. dollars to buy yuan in both onshore and offshore spot foreign exchange markets this week, people with direct knowledge of the matter said, in an attempt to slow the yuan's depreciation.
Though they also trade on their own behalf or to execute clients' orders, state banks often act at the behest of the central bank when the yuan is under pressure, as it is now.
"State bank dollar selling has become a new normal to slow the pace of yuan depreciation," said one Shanghai-based trader.
Offshore branches of the state banks were also seen selling dollars during London and New York trading hours this week, two sources with direct knowledge of the matter said on Thursday.
Such dollar selling could limit falls in the offshore yuan and prevent it from diverging too far from its onshore counterpart.
The yuan has lost about 2.4% against the dollar since this month, and 6% since the start of the year. The onshore yuan traded at 7.3145 per dollar as of 0442 GMT, while the offshore yuan last fetched 7.3400.
The recent steepening in the yuan's decline is a result of China's widening yield differential with the U.S., and investors' mounting concerns over China's weak economic growth and rising default risks in its property and shadow banking sectors. [CNY/]
The government's slow delivery of stimulus measures to bolster growth has disappointed investors. Meantime, the People's Bank of China (PBOC) has eased monetary policy to support the economy, though the price paid for lowering interest rates is more pressure on the yuan.
This week, yield differentials between China and the U.S. widened to their highest in 16 years, as investors speculated that the PBOC would ease policy further after a surprise rate cut this week, even if it puts the yuan under more pressure.
During recent weeks, market watchers say the Chinese authorities have sought to slow the yuan's decline, with the PBOC persistently setting a stronger-than-expected fixing, and state banks repeatedly selling dollars.
Similar tactic were seen in September 2022, when the PBOC also asked major state-owned banks to be prepared to sell dollars for yuan in offshore markets as it tried to stem the yuan's fall.
In July, the central bank adjusted a parameter to allow companies to borrow more overseas, so that they could bring in foreign currency to be converted onshore, thereby supporting the yuan. But the higher interest rates charged on overseas loans remain a deterrent to borrowing abroad, undermining the impact of that policy tweak.
One tactic that does appear to have worked is state banks offering to lend less yuan in the offshore Hong Kong market, as liquidity tightness there helped to limit the yuan's decline this week, traders said.
Hong Kong's overnight yuan borrowing costs jumped to the highest level since April 2022 on Wednesday, with the CNH Hong Kong Interbank Offered Rate benchmark (CNH HIBOR) rising across the board.
The liquidity squeeze was not very drastic as aggressively mopping up yuan liquidity from that market could adversely affect bond market sentiment, one banker noted.
news.yahoo.com
China's major state-owned banks were seen busy selling U.S. dollars to buy yuan in both onshore and offshore spot foreign exchange markets this week, people with direct knowledge of the matter said, in an attempt to slow the yuan's depreciation.
Though they also trade on their own behalf or to execute clients' orders, state banks often act at the behest of the central bank when the yuan is under pressure, as it is now.
"State bank dollar selling has become a new normal to slow the pace of yuan depreciation," said one Shanghai-based trader.
Offshore branches of the state banks were also seen selling dollars during London and New York trading hours this week, two sources with direct knowledge of the matter said on Thursday.
Such dollar selling could limit falls in the offshore yuan and prevent it from diverging too far from its onshore counterpart.
The yuan has lost about 2.4% against the dollar since this month, and 6% since the start of the year. The onshore yuan traded at 7.3145 per dollar as of 0442 GMT, while the offshore yuan last fetched 7.3400.
The recent steepening in the yuan's decline is a result of China's widening yield differential with the U.S., and investors' mounting concerns over China's weak economic growth and rising default risks in its property and shadow banking sectors. [CNY/]
The government's slow delivery of stimulus measures to bolster growth has disappointed investors. Meantime, the People's Bank of China (PBOC) has eased monetary policy to support the economy, though the price paid for lowering interest rates is more pressure on the yuan.
This week, yield differentials between China and the U.S. widened to their highest in 16 years, as investors speculated that the PBOC would ease policy further after a surprise rate cut this week, even if it puts the yuan under more pressure.
During recent weeks, market watchers say the Chinese authorities have sought to slow the yuan's decline, with the PBOC persistently setting a stronger-than-expected fixing, and state banks repeatedly selling dollars.
Similar tactic were seen in September 2022, when the PBOC also asked major state-owned banks to be prepared to sell dollars for yuan in offshore markets as it tried to stem the yuan's fall.
In July, the central bank adjusted a parameter to allow companies to borrow more overseas, so that they could bring in foreign currency to be converted onshore, thereby supporting the yuan. But the higher interest rates charged on overseas loans remain a deterrent to borrowing abroad, undermining the impact of that policy tweak.
One tactic that does appear to have worked is state banks offering to lend less yuan in the offshore Hong Kong market, as liquidity tightness there helped to limit the yuan's decline this week, traders said.
Hong Kong's overnight yuan borrowing costs jumped to the highest level since April 2022 on Wednesday, with the CNH Hong Kong Interbank Offered Rate benchmark (CNH HIBOR) rising across the board.
The liquidity squeeze was not very drastic as aggressively mopping up yuan liquidity from that market could adversely affect bond market sentiment, one banker noted.
Exclusive-China's state banks seen selling dollars for yuan in London and New York hours
SHANGHAI (Reuters) -China's major state-owned banks were seen busy selling U.S. dollars to buy yuan in both onshore and offshore spot foreign exchange markets this week, people with direct knowledge of the matter said, in an attempt to slow the yuan's depreciation. Though they also trade on...
Last edited:
big bud man 413
Well-Known Member
Nice pussy! Lol!