So, synthetic performers are a problem, but entirely synthetic products are... encouraged? Is that what I'm hearing? So, the product that you're actually trying to purchase can be completely fake, but at least you'll know that the *people* using it are... also fake! So helpful!

Wasn't this the entire premise of the movie Brazil? We are truly living in the worst timeline.

What you call "implementing a bunch of new services" could also be called "investing in the future when the money is there". For example, I'm a teacher, and we had an infusion of cash from this that led to us being able to upgrade equipment, buy some new things to offer more programs to our students, and fix a lot of broken stuff. I imagine a lot of this extra cash was spent in ways like this, that lead to long-term gains, not just temporary services that disappear, tho I imagine there's not zero of that, but not likely the majority. I don't know, and probably neither do you, unless you've done a deep dive into California Budgetary decisions for the last 10 years, but we seem to be doing pretty okay, and there can be some pretty smart people in government if you don't run them out by electing a narcissistic psychopathic orange man-child.

So, what is a "CVE"? It's used an awful lot in the summary for never explaining what is or what it stands for...

There's a provision in the Proclamation that allows trump (Well, the Sec of Homeland Security, but who are we kidding) to waived this extra fee if it is deemed to be "in the national interest" by which it means "If they bribe me".

So, I don't think this will fix anything, and is just designed to line trump's pockets.

Again, Trump's only interest is himself, not you, not industries, no one else.

The provision:
          (c) The restriction imposed pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall not apply to any individual alien, all aliens working for a company, or all aliens working in an industry, if the Secretary of Homeland Security determines, in the Secretary’s discretion, that the hiring of such aliens to be employed as H-1B specialty occupation workers is in the national interest and does not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States.

My wife and I just bought (well, leased) a 2025 Ioniq 5 SE (base model). This was an upgrade from a 2016 Spark EV we bought new 9 years ago that has been great to drive (tho too small for our family now).

The great part is, the Spark is still going fine. It's a tiny EV, only about 70 miles on a charge, but only has 40k miles on it, and definitely still usable by someone, so, we're looking to sell it.

The even *better* part is, where we live, there's a $4000 used EV subsidy (through the power company, not federally) so we're hoping someone would like a free car and we get our down payment back plus some, and hopefully let someone see how an EV can work for them.

I spoke with a bunch of sales reps during this process and they were selling the Ioniqs as fast as they got them. The finance guy said ours was the 16th they had done *that day*. Also, since it was such a great deal, he had got one for his wife to use as a backup to her Mercedes. After using it a while she now drives the EV exclusively and loves it.

VW's ID4, Chevy's Equinox, same deal (Ford's Mustang EV seemed to be sitting around though...) but they were all worried about what was going to happen once the tax credit runs out. Its a shame that EVs are starting to get traction here broadly, only now to be shot in the foot by this ludicrous administration. (Not to mention the Ioniq we bought was made in that Georgia plant... thats not gonna help).

We got the 3 year lease in hopes of riding out this administration into something more sane next round. We'll see where things are at by then I suppose.

I think this is the main cause. People who are poor have kids in the hopes for economic benefit: There is no where to go but up, so you have kids, and hope they'll be better off than you. The reward outweighs the risk. Thus poor countries and lower income people have more kids (and also: maybe less access to birth control/opportunities to distract themselves with other costly activities)

If you're *already* middle or upper-middle class tho, you might choose to have kids to maintain your wealth, or maybe build some, but there is the risk that the opposite happens (kids are expensive, they might end up doing drugs/fall in with the wrong crowd, "ruin the family" etc). And, if there's that risk, or a not likely chance that your kid's going to be better off than you, well, might as well just enjoy what you have. The risks outweigh the rewards (for many).

I don't know what you're talking about. Go to History->Show all History, find the website you don't want in your history by looking up the time or searching (very convenient!) and right click-> delete website.

For bookmarks it's identical.

Not sure what difficulties you're having.

Right there in TFS it says

I mean... so, if MORE time on phones leads to WORSE outcomes, then... less time on phones leads to better outcomes? Isn't that how it works?

Anyway, I don't give an [explative] what this study says, let me tell you about my experience in the ONE MONTH that our school has been implementing a cell phone ban (enforced with Yonder pouches). It's been incredible. I feel like a weight has lifted off my shoulders when EVERY DAY I would battle the students and their phones EVERY SINGLE CLASS. And now I can focus more on TEACHING and ENGAGEMENT like these yahoos want instead of policing some G.D. cellphone usage like a grandma trying to get you to sit up straight. It's fantastic. Do the kids still eff around and find out? Yes they do, they're kids (high school, still idiots) but when there is not anything else for them to use to check out of class they are GOING to engage more, and I have SEEN this every day myself. More work, more notes, more attention, more questions, more engagement, and this will 100% lead to better grades in my class, no question.

So, I don't know what this person who did this study was expecting, and as has been mentioned here discipline and phone usage and academics START AT HOME, so I can't solve that, but for my classroom? It's been the best, and I don't ever want to go back.

P.S. The Yonder pouch was a game changer. You can tell students to put their phones away all day long, but they will not, and then you will spend all day long telling students to put their phones away and NOT BE TEACHING. The pouches enforce this in a way their own little half-formed frontal lobes cannot. And when we catch them (And I have caught a few because they are dumb kids and it's entirely obvious what they are doing with their arms two feet deep into their backpacks staring into it like some cave spelunker) then its taken for the day, and if its a repeat offense they must get their PARENTS to come get the phone. So, hopefully that sends the message HOME a little bit more.