I think the reason people are fixated on the $2000 checks is because that's immediate in a way the other stuff in the bill isn't.
That's not nothing! But it's not a RIGHT NOW check for $2000.
- We desperately need a minimum wage increase.
- But a minimum wage increase is not a substitute for *covid relief* when so many of us lost our jobs or had our hours reduced because of the deadly pandemic.
My assumption is that Biden will cave on most of the Bill as soon as some R asks nicely in the name of "Unity". It's a lot harder to take back checks once they're mailed so I'm focused on "2000 not 1400" because that's something that they can do RIGHT NOW.
— Michael Orr (@Morr_1980) January 15, 2021
More from Finance
The Dutch regulator and DNB as financial supervisor are a tough cookie to deal with. In essence they hyperregulate EU-rules into goldplated Dutch rules which go beyond what is prescribed in Europe.
All NL-customers at British banks may thus be kicked out on brexit.
Thread
/1
If we start with the capital requirements directive, it says attracting deposits is forbidden. In article 9.
https://t.co/RYl7SXligC
Now the translation of that rule into Dutch law is slightly expanded to not only prohibit attracting deposits, but to also prohibit, having those deposits under custody ('ter beschikking hebben').
That's not in EU law, but it is in our Dutch law.
https://t.co/PsbWfNY3PA
So if you wonder how this would work out for UK banks and Payment institutions servicing Dutch customers. Have a read at the technical explanation of DNB, the financial supervisor and their summarising table.
https://t.co/LL0fAnYkRJ
Passive servicing of Dutch is not allowed!
Any bank or PSP in the UK that continues to serve Dutch customers (as in retail customers, professional players are excepted) can thus be subject to fines and policing under Dutch law.
Meaning we not only have Accidental American issues in payments, but also Accidental Dutchies
All NL-customers at British banks may thus be kicked out on brexit.
Thread
/1
If we start with the capital requirements directive, it says attracting deposits is forbidden. In article 9.
https://t.co/RYl7SXligC
Now the translation of that rule into Dutch law is slightly expanded to not only prohibit attracting deposits, but to also prohibit, having those deposits under custody ('ter beschikking hebben').
That's not in EU law, but it is in our Dutch law.
https://t.co/PsbWfNY3PA
So if you wonder how this would work out for UK banks and Payment institutions servicing Dutch customers. Have a read at the technical explanation of DNB, the financial supervisor and their summarising table.
https://t.co/LL0fAnYkRJ
Passive servicing of Dutch is not allowed!
Any bank or PSP in the UK that continues to serve Dutch customers (as in retail customers, professional players are excepted) can thus be subject to fines and policing under Dutch law.
Meaning we not only have Accidental American issues in payments, but also Accidental Dutchies
You May Also Like
The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.
View the resolutions and voting results here:
The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.
Israel and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr
The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.
Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab
The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF
The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW
View the resolutions and voting results here:
The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.
Israel and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr
The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.
Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab
The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF
The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.
Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW