> if you really know what to do
The so called "load-bearing gap" you pay experts for.
94 karma · joined December 27, 2022
The so called "load-bearing gap" you pay experts for.
To be ultra pedantic, you're paying American import tariffs to the American shipping carrier or American broker not CBP itself.
> refunds for it like Americans supposedly did
No one's getting those refunds, if they do get a portion back and not at the rate at which they increased prices on American consumers.
But more to your point, you can certainly pay American import tariffs on behalf of Americans, but your response is to raise prices on American consumers commensurate to the tariffs you're paying. Your margins are necessarily lower to sell to Americans, so you must raise prices for American consumers.
If your margins were high enough that you can absorb American import tariffs, then you're lucky the market hadn't provided a relevant market substitute.
And that's the problem. It doesn't get much more simple than "Canadians pay Canadian import taxes" and "Americans pay American import taxes". Can you at least recognize that reality? For any country, its own people pay its tariffs.
> required consumers to pay new duties.
Required American consumers to pay new American levied duties.
Canadian pharmacies pay Canadian tariffs. Americans pay American tariffs. American importers are no longer exempted from paying American tariffs applied by the US government for goods de minimis goods they import from Canada.
This post is about American importers no longer having exemption on tariffs they would have otherwise paid to the US government.
At no point has Canadian pharmacies ever paid American tariffs. This is fiction you invented.
Why would a firm invest in research improving Super-Rare-Disease therapies if I don't get exclusive rights to the monetary benefit?
And to the inevitable room temperature IQ DSA crowd, why would the ML government with state research firms ever direct public resources to improving Super-Rare-Disease? Something that affects 1-in-10000 people doesn't deserve public resources like common diseases.
s/ancap/marxist leninist/
"Headline" unemployment rate is U-3 unemployment. If they compared "TRU" to it's analogous match U-6 the graph would be less striking as it's a 1:1 match.
Yes, <bad code, fake pictures, security vulnerabilities, malicious actors> existed before LLMs. No one is saying otherwise.
You're asking a lot from extremely fancy auto complete...
True! Why did we bother with devcontainers anyway? Who asked for permissions on tool calls? Only those weird security people care about putting whats effectively a CNC rootkit inside a sandbox. Its not about seriously protecting the user against our AI slop inevitably typing `rm -rf work /` and deleting their entire drive.
Or actually you're right I should as an American citizen have to be versed in all the random arcane laws each individual state..no. Each individual COUNTY has instead of a common shared American values. God forbid someone play dominoes on Sunday in Alabama.
The problem is the fragmented states where they can hide their corruption.
Again, what's ONE (1) real world example of "SSN/PII" being illegally exposed that wasn't investigated or prosecuted.
And? Welcome to the big boy world. This isn't playground rules where you can complain "But Bobby was doing bad things too why isn't he in trouble?"
But you know this already. You're just pretending not to. Why?
They get more per Capita representation in the House, and electoral college.
Is this happening? GitHub status page is a Christmas tree for 3 quarters and comically had an incident 10 minutes after the "we're working hard on fixing stability!" blog post published.
The free market has responded by buying GitHub Enterprise to avoid the incidents. So we've effectively rewarded GitHub's lack of serious engineering with more money. Doesn't seem like they have any real pressure to improve.
From the individuals' perspective, overusing uncollateralized debt to be discharged is a good deal. That loss is offset by the creditor by issuing higher interest to unsecured credit lines because people can default on their debts. From the creditor's perspective, it's risk adjusted for people who default.
It just logically follows. I can't help you understand past this.
Article author completely ignores this for the obvious reasons.
What are you comparing to?
Shhh just let the marketing slop wash over you.
I'm going to tell you a secret it doesn't tell you on the ballot: You don't have to fill in all the bubbles like you're being graded in middle school. You can chose to only vote for things you are opinionated on.
Just kidding, every ballot already explains this. Next time just admit you're lazy to cast a ballot and lead with that. Its the same outcome, no reason for anyone to read the next 10 paragraphs.