Categories For later read
Safe? Doesnt exist? No evidence? Decide for yourself I have things to show you...
Dont say I didnt try to tell you...
Over 1600 post & counting...
Parts 1-14 attached...
Part 1 🤔🧐⬇️ 🚨Active Thread🚨
\U0001f914\U0001f9d0\u2b07\ufe0f
— TXgrlWatching \U0001f4bb\U0001f6e1\u2694 (@VeritasTXgem) November 5, 2020
\U0001f6a8Active Thread\U0001f6a8 if you have more please add to the comments but give me a minute this is long.... if you see something say something...
1. Woman arrested in Vanderburgh county for pre checking boxes on 400+ ballotshttps://t.co/TyeyRT72cw
When did gau hatya become such a universal taboo among H? I recall to my shock it being mentioned in the agnicayana documentary as an offering.
— rahula (@pashyaka) January 3, 2021
the pre-IE Indian peoples like the Harappans and the neolithic Ash Mound culture of southern India (i.e. the bUti-palli/halli-s; early Dravidians?). What is clear is that these pre-IE & circum-IE entry peoples of India consumed the flesh of cattle. However, it is like the female
animal (henceforth cow) was also valued for milk->curds/cheese(?) among both the Harappan and Ash Mound peoples. The former probably also used them as draught animals. The situation was similar with the IEans on the steppe with their version of Bos cattle playing a major role in
food (both diary and flesh) and as draught animals. Given their value for the IEans, the idea of the protection of cattle was central to their culture (independently of them consuming their flesh). Thus, the cattle raids& countering such were very central to their imagination.
Hence, we may infer that the concept of cattle-protection, emerged entirely independently of their consumption among the steppe IEans. For a IEan king whose wealth was animal herds such protection was a central role. Hence, the ideal of go-pAlana emerged long before beef-taboo.
I\u2019m not clear what you are arguing about the rate of interest\u2014you only mention it in passing here?
— Jo Michell (@JoMicheII) December 3, 2020
Making G contingent on a ultra low government rate of interest (ULGROI) seems household budget thinking: lower expenditure on interest payments is being portrayed as permitting the higher expenditure on G. (2/13)
All fine that this is permitting those who think in a household budget way (OBR, IFS etc) to support spending (or rather not prescribe austerity) but it is not the macro of the situation. (3/13)
As an aside I'd rather call out the household budget mob for prescribing austerity last time, not least in the week that the OECD publicly acknowledged austerity was overdone. Parotting their present argument seems to let them off the hook. (4/13)
As you know the low rate of interest - in advanced economies on government debt - is not a matter of chance but a consequence of a decade of reliance on QE and a wider global retreat from risk. (5/13)
And I'm more pissed now than when I woke up this morning. The traitors Cruz and Hawley must resign. Every means necessary against Trump and family. Stefanik and Malliotakis disgrace New York. No "unity," - no "healing" - we need justice. https://t.co/XG3RfbPqmV
— Tom Watson (@tomwatson) January 10, 2021
Now they’ve come out as fascists and smeared the capitol with feces and bashed a cop’s head in and tried to overturn the election and now those fuckers are calling for “unity”?!
Make no mistake: a call for unity with people who incited and took part in an insurrection against American democracy is not a call for unity, but for surrender.
Unity with fascists makes us fascist.
We don’t unite with fascists. We defeat them.
Unity keeps them in power. Unity concedes they were right. Unity suggests they had good reason for what they did.
They participated in an insurrection and an ongoing coup. They need to be removed, disqualified from ever holding office, & jailed where they have committed crimes.
They smeared our Capitol with shit, threaten to lynch members of our government - including the Vice President, a member of their own party - and you’re telling me to unite with them?
Fuck unity. Fuck the fascists. And fuck anyone who makes this argument.
So I have a theory on this. And if I'm right, there's bad news about that acceleration in the overall case trend, and possibly good news about vaccines in the over-80s. WARNING: This is going to be another long, maths-y thread (involving cubic coefficients this time!) https://t.co/EiszSAIL9t
— James Ward (@JamesWard73) January 29, 2021
This is one of those university / job interview 'order of magnitude' estimation problems. So feel free to disagree with any or all steps on my logic chain, and please explain why - it will help improve / refine (or falsify) the analysis.
So let's focus on the primary-school-age kids as that's where the effect is strongest. We have 3.5m 5-9 year-olds in England. I don't know how many were in school on 4th Jan - we know some regions (London / Kent etc.) didn't go back, and a lot of schools had INSET days etc
So I'm going to make a wild guess and say 40% were in school on that day. Better ideas (particularly if backed by data) very welcome. So that's about 1.4m children in school
Now ONS tells us that about 1.5% of that age group would test positive for coronavirus in early January. So that's about 20,000 kids with the virus heading into school.