Jump to content


Dirt Lot 0'
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That quote is quite misleading. It even links to this article: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-lockdown-is-on-course-to-reduce-total-death-rate-3gn7hfjzk?fbclid=IwAR1BQTPXoBN2IQdlr_BEgmBKBjOHpg4pFjk0r13-5x_90_V8vKCH5u9FpRc which states the following: “They emphasised that this did not imply that the fears of mass deaths were alarmist, but that the government strategy was working. “Our work shows that social distancing is working against Covid-19 as an effective parachute across multiple countries,” Tom Pike, of Imperial College, said. “That’s no reason for us to cut away our parachutes when we’re still way above the ground.”“ The AIER opinion piece uses the times piece to imply that the experts were originally wrong and thus are reducing death rates. The article they quote says something quite different in which the death rates are reducing because of what we are doing. It’s an extremely garbage article. Edit: the article AEIR links to is titled Coronavirus: Lockdown ‘is on course to reduce total death rate’ quite clear in my opinion that the original estimates of a worst case scenario aren’t coming true because we did something....
  2. Yes this is true. However, this logical statement can’t really be turned around to say that because Sanders supporters don’t support Trump (which is what the above graphic shows) that they also don’t support other democratic candidates (no evidence in the graphic of this and is significantly a different question).
  3. @Enginerd already pointed that out and I accepted the argument and responded above.
  4. They were working in between the retail space and the hotel/Parker’s entrance and I didn’t look too long so I can’t exactly say what they were doing.
  5. Thank you for the information I apologize for being up misinformed points. In the case of the CT lawsuit, is there a requirement about bringing down T levels before competing? If they did have that requirement I’m not sure what the correct solution is because it would be hard to define the limit for T levels based of a “change in athletic performance” which is incredibly hard to define. And then even if you could measure that and you set the percentage change too high that’s not fair to transgender athletes because you would force them to have a disadvantage but if you set the percentage too low it’s not fair to non transgender athletes. Regardless if there is no requirement in CT for hormone therapy before competition, that becomes closer to the classic argument I would think.
  6. Saw some work being done framing? On the corner of the schofield this morning not quite sure what they were doing or if someone is moving in.
  7. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe even if one goes through transition fully and hormone therapy, you don’t lose your body frame or muscle mass (with the exception that if you stop training, then muscle mass may decrease). I’ve read up on bodybuilding a bit and testosterone is used heavily to increase mass, but once you stop using it in excess it doesn’t mean you lose the muscle just that you stop building it as fast. Genetically speaking if an athlete transitioned from M to F she would still be retain her abilities that she had before. This becomes an issue when you start talking about winning competitive events. It was said earlier that NBA pros are 3 standard deviations above mean height besides the fact that they have exceptional body control and “game intelligence” (unless you’re JR Smith who might be lacking game intelligence). The best female athletes would arguably be just as good as the best male athletes relative to normal athletes in their respective gender. Since both the best male and female athletes are the best in the world you may question if the females could compete with the males. There have been cases where this has happened. Anika Sorensen and Michelle Wie both competed on the PGA Tour (which is generally only comprised of males opposed to the LPGA). Neither of them made the cut to continue playing the tournament. Another case I know of is a male tennis player ranked 200+ in the world was challenged to a match against Serena Williams. It was informal so maybe not the best example but he played a round of golf before the match and was still able to beat Serena 6-1 in one match. Immediately after that match he also played Venus and beat her 6-2. There are other examples if you compare the times of track runners who do nothing but train and the women are significantly slower than the men, (not for a lack of effort). Essentially there are genetic differences between XX humans and XY humans that separate them in sporting ability. When one transitions from M to F it doesn’t remove her inherent advantage at sports although it may slightly lessen it. I believe sports should not label them Male or Female but rather XX and XY to focus on the genetic differences.
  8. RDB

    Health Care

    I don’t think they think putting $30k aside for healthcare is reasonable. It’s much more simple than that. HSAs can be used as retirement accounts similar to IRAs or 401(k)s. Once you hit 59.5 or 69.5 ( I can’t remember the exact age) you can withdraw penalty free. If you have enough income/cash flow then you can use an HSA to shelter another ~$30k a year tax deferred. Especially helpful if you currently have a healthcare plan that isn’t a HDHP and can put away an extra $30k a year. Edit: although I do think some of the other provisions would be helpful to everyone, such as paying premiums out of an HSA or if you’re a government employee in some places the ability to set one up for non HDHPs.
  • Create New...