wiv was not documenting them. Hospitals were documenting flu like cases increasing at exponential rages. And there are hospitals everywhere

Coordinating medical information is notoriously hard, particularly when the government doesn't want to acknowledge something. Let's take Florida as an example.

There was a point at the beginning of the covid pandemic where the governor was declaring that the state only hand a few cases, and there was not great need for concern. The pneumonia death rates for the previous months showed a different story. For the previous two months the death rates were 10x higher that normal. Nobody seemed to have noticed that at the state level.

Most outbreaks follow a pattern where the disease shows up in small pockets for many years before it becomes an epidemic. HIV is an example. The first HIV death in the USA happened in 1969. The oldest confirmed case in Africa is in '59. The oldest suspected death in the US is '52.

Crossover tends to happen multiple times, and there is no reason to expect otherwise with covid-19. The problem with finding these cases is that it happened in an area governed by an authoritarian ruler. Authoritarians don't want to admit that there are things out of their control, and by inclination they conceal bad news, or news that makes them look like they're less than omnipotent. They shift blame rather than dealing with problem.

The love of the lab theory in the US seems to be driven by the same desire to push the blame on someone else. It takes the focus away from the incompetent response.

The pandemic was discovered by ordinary doctors in Wuhan who noticed the unusually high volume of sick and dying patients. Only then were specialists engaged to identify the cause, and the viral genome was first published by Zhang Yong-Zhen in Shanghai. The WIV isn't known to have played any role in this.

Perhaps the WIV secretly discovered the new virus by more sophisticated means before those doctors did. There's no evidence for this, but maybe. There is no possibility that a Wuhan-level outbreak occurred in a different city first, though. China keeps tight control of their mass media, but mortality on that level is impossible to conceal. Do you not remember 2020? The coffin shortages? So your implication that the WIV's presence somehow caused the first cases in a natural pandemic to get ascertained in Wuhan just doesn't make sense.

This topic is unfortunately politicized, and you're not helping. I think it would be helpful to spend more timing studying the scientific evidence, and less time speculating over the motivations of one's perceived ideological opponents.

As someone else has said, this isn't legal. I hope you don't publicize the actions you took.

USA is not a real democracy either in your definition.

Correct.

I like how these people think the checkmate move is assume the person they’re talking to is a blind supporter of the USA for some reason, and have zero response when they realize that rationally applying the same rules to everybody really does mean Israel doesn’t pass the bar for a democracy.

Jersey City has the broker problem too

If only I could be in so much debt and the govt gives me a loan with such generous terms.

The government undoubtedly provided its backing to the banks. That "profit" is not commensurate to the risk that the govt took on.

Last I checked, loans with generous terms given to people were called to be cancelled because they were "exploitative." For ordinary people, it makes much more sense for aid to come from a more direct means.

> That "profit" is not commensurate to the risk that the govt took on.

That's because the bailouts was intended to stabilize the economy rather than to turn a profit.

>Last I checked, loans with generous terms given to people were called to be cancelled because they were "exploitative."

What do you mean by this exactly? I don't know what this is in reference to.

Never mind the case, the biggest problem with TARP isn't the money per se, its the lack of substantially increased regulation and teeth to enforce it. Executives and boardrooms should have been bankrupted as the government should have clawed back pay, personal assets, and bonuses to pay for the damage that was done. In another words, boardrooms and c-suites should have been humiliated and fired en masse, with prison time for those culpable.

That would have been a good start. TARP funds were handed out with no teeth. The senate hearings largely ended up being for show, and only a few executives were held feet to the fire and even so, it was brief.

Not to mention, how the heck are these people still allowed to work in finance at all.

that is not a bad idea. Imagine qualified homeowners or car owners being able to refinance at the 30 year treasury bond rate?

> only I could be in so much debt and the govt gives me a loan with such generous terms

This was the CARES Act.

> By this metric, we can see that the states where it’s easiest to find housing include Utah (2.83 units per capita), California (2.75), Hawaii (2.57), and Texas (2.57). Overall, in the United States, there are approximately 2.35 housing units available per capita.

I just read the article. I think the article makes a grave error. It is not 2.37 houses per person, which would be absurd. Instead it is 2.37 persons per available house. So instead of being 2nd easiest to find housing, California is 2nd most difficult. This is also borne out by the new construction rates in California, which has faced huge population growth but below national average house construction.

> Programs like Head Start in the US have measurable positive impact:

Something can have an unjustified basis, but have a measurable positive impact. Just because the unjustified basis of race was correlated with income. But using the justified basis of income and wealth will not only lead to even more measurable positive impact, it will also be fair.

> It USED to be a very valid disadvantage across the board to have a minority race or skin color

I completely agree that this used to be the case. I might even argue that it is still true to an extent. I will also agree that we should still address it. My problem is when addressing it involves discriminating against asian Americans like me. The people who want to discriminate against asian Americans are just using "historical disadvantage" as an excuse, their actions are political/ideological.

The thing that made the least sense about Harvard's case was that Asians had a harder time getting in than white students. I could see the argument for other minorities being given a leg up over Asian students, but white students? That made no sense.

And the people who want to discriminate against Black Americans are just using "discriminating against Asian Americans" as an excuse, their actions are also political and ideological.

Umm, NYC is 30% white (so, 70% non-white). If among those who left were 64% non-white (or 36% white), if anything, whites are disproportionately being pushed out.

Although I would not say there was any group who is a majority in NYC.