Ranvier

joined 2 years ago
[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is why we so desperately need the voting rights act back. It used to be that changes like this required pre clearance before taking effect, and any challenges be worked out before hand.

Another terrible supreme court decision courtesy conservatives/Republicans who don't respect the right to vote.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

So the model image you posted above there says it's more likely that Trump wins the election than it is flipping two heads in a row while flipping a coin. This is saying it's less likely for Trump to win than Hillary to win, but something that could fairly easily happen still. These aren't poll numbers, where 70-30 would be a massive blow out. This is a 30% chance of winning for Trump, closer to a coin flip than a sure thing.

A lot of other models were saying something ridiculous like Clinton had 95% chance to win or something. Nate Silver's model seems better than others based on this, if anything.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 50 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately the interest rate is specifically set by law and tied to 10 year treasury bill rates. This cannot be altered with an executive action, would need congress to change the law.

https://studentaid.gov/understand-aid/types/loans/interest-rates#who-sets

That's why the executive orders are focused on things like minimum payments, how long it takes to get forgiveness, who qualifies, etc, because the laws give the department of education more latitude to adjust those things (or are supposed to at least, weird rulings from republican judges notwithstanding).

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It wasn't the same thing, all three of them were different plans using different justifications based on different laws. One was a blanket forgiveness based on laws allowing for adjustments of student loans in emergencies. One is need based or other circumstance based forgiveness based on a much earlier law giving the department of education wide latitude to make adjustments. And one was adjustments to the income based repayment plans based on the laws establishing those (this has happened many times in the past, such as the establishment of the PAYE and REPAYE plans).

It's especially egregious that judges are blocking the SAVE plan, as many similar adjustments have been made to income based repayment plans previously with no one taking any issue.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-issues-new-batch-of-sanctions-targeting-west-bank-settlers-amid-rampant-violence/

You can say it's not enough if you want, but you can't say it's nothing. Certainly gets Netanyahu upset at least.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The "pro family" party everyone. Don't forget their other greatest hits like, kidnapping children of immigrants and not keeping records of who they were kidnapping them from, making reuniting them with their families ever again difficult to impossible.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Absolutely despicable. How do these people sleep at night?

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 22 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Would love an electric hatch back. Wish they'd bring more of them to the US.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 41 points 1 year ago

It also includes restoration of the child tax credit, just like we had during the pandemic when monthly checks were sent out to all parents and the child poverty rate was cut in half overnight. This is just an even bigger payment for the year they are a newborn.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

This is also misleading because he has pension funds. Those pensions certainly have the money invested. They're acting like the guy has no retirement plan.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 33 points 1 year ago

We've noticed

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That gas line goes right into Ukraine, they could have blown it up anytime they wanted safely in their own territory. So I'm not sure that makes much sense. They have not done this previously to avoid angering EU allies funding them, as some still rely on it.

I think more likely explanations are it helps make it easier to strike and and shut down a very important rail route for Russian re supply, it brings the war to the Russian people in a way they can't ignore, makes Putin look weak, draws Russian troops away from other fronts, and if the land is held gives Ukraine a bargaining chip in any future negotiations with Russia.

view more: ‹ prev next ›