Ok, IANAL, hopefully someone with a bit more nous on these matters than me can comment.
Firstly, Johnson is on record as saying the NIP and WA did not imply repeal of Article IV of the Treaty of Union as amended in 1800. Now that a Belfast Court have ruled that the NIP and WA do in fact repeal Article IV, we can see again that Johnson has no clue what he's talking about - no big surprise there.
However, a couple of points.
-
does this implied repeal of Art IV now mean that subjects of NI origin no longer have the right of trade and navigation across the UK? Trade is clearly so, does this also extend to the movemebt of people?
-
which may be more interesting - this implied repeal was enacted from just one Parliament- that one based on the Thames. Without ratification by the Irish Parliament (a signatory to it), does that give Sturgeon yet more confidence that should referendum legislation come before the Supreme Court, the Westminster Parliament is in a weaker constitutuonal position?
Sorry if this is badly worded. Sitting in a field in Scotland with 2 screaming weans and a Mrs about to burst me.....
Hullo. It occurred to me the other day while reading the “Why the NFL isn’t rigged” thread that there is a dearth of content on this sub about how high-level sports betting actually works. This is not news to me, of course, but I was just reminded of how mysterious all of it still remains in the eyes of the average Joe. in the spirit of Thanksgiving, I want to share some insight about the business of sports betting, as I know it.
About me: I am a professional sports bettor in the Northeast. Please note carefully what this actually means. It means my primary (>70%) annual income derives from wagering on sports. It does not mean this is my only income. It does not mean I’m a God at picking teams, that I hit 69% of my picks (or that I even make any picks, more on this later), or that I’m an autistic mathematical savant. I’m just a dude who stumbled upon this and met the right people at the right time. Not unlike anything else in life.
Btw, being an “alum” of this sub and knowing the kind of BS that gets thrown around, I really don’t care whether you believe this is what I do for a living. I’m not here to shill or sell picks or tout packages, so if you think I’m full of shit, just move on, Karen.
Part I: Roles in Professional Sports Betting
Some context is necessary before we can discuss more. In most of the US, sports betting remains “illegal.” I use air quotes here bc betting on sports is rarely expressly illegal by statute. Prior to the 2018 repeal of PASPA, it’s more accurately described as “unregulated.” Local bookies using software they lease from pay-per-head websites (PPH) and Costa Rican offshores like Bovada/BetOnline dominated the action written for decades. Because we live in a backwards country where 400% short position taking and derivative options trading is legal but somehow sports betting is immoral, it was a sad state of affairs. Since most professional enterprises were formed when these were the only options around, the majority of action still takes place at these joints.
Here is a very rough sketch of the job descriptions involved in this racket:
- Originator: These are people who come up with picks, aka handicappers or tipsters in common parlance. They use whatever process they have to pick the wagers they like. Most originators are nerds and a robust understanding of statistics is almost always required to do this well. However, there exists significant variation even among originators. Everyone makes their own nu
I decided to reread this essay yesterday and have been pondering the Church’s approach to answering “why?”
It starts by talking about that it no longer excludes anyone and that it’s not like that anymore. The church is wonderfully integrated now.
The next section has me stumped. It talks about the early Church in American racial culture. The authors cite several laws forbidding interracial marriage, which is not at all the same thing as granting the priesthood and temple blessings to black members. Telling the reader how the SCOTUS ruled is unnecessary- Brigham Young had already told the members of the LDS church the awful ramifications of interracial marriage on an eternal scale (death on the spot). There was no danger of Mormons marrying blacks on a large scale.
So why include this section? Are they telling us this to show us how difficult it would have been for the church to allow black members to integrate fully? Other churches (set up by men) allowed it, so why not God’s one true church? What happened to doing what is right and letting the consequences follow?
Would the fledgling church have been wiped out in its infancy because of this unpopular counter-cultural move? If polygamy didn’t make this happen, nothing else would. Literally nothing, aside from perhaps cannibalism, could have turned their neighbors (and their former members) against them more than polygamy. Besides, the Lord said that the church would not be taken from the earth again and no unhallowed had could stop the work.
Is the essay’s discussion of American racial culture supposed to imply that the racist doctrine of the church were the result of the times in which the people lived in? That would mean that it was instituted by man. It would follow, then, that it could be rescinded by man. However, the essay points out that several prophets were told by God not to lift the ban. In fact, when it was lifted, the whole experience was apparently quite godly and spiritual. Why would there need to be a revelation from God after being asked several times to repeal false teachings of men? Why did these doctrines, clearly influenced by the racism of men, have any staying power at all when God has the final say?
Why do the authors say that the Church disavows all theories ever presented and then proceed to present some of them?
Why do they only quote part of Brigham Young’s statement that the Blacks will indeed receive the priesthood - *but only after every other of God’s children rece
... keep reading on reddit ➡I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.
Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.
A Japanese artists rendition of the First Battle of Hawaii, the largest of the Pacific War.
The primary event of President Houston’s term was the Pacific War, which one may find in four parts:
Aaron Burr Houston, 21st President of the United States.
Administration:
Vice President: William M.O. Dawson
Secretary of State: Shelby M. Cullom
Secretary of the Treasury: Seth Low
Secretary of War: Galusha Grow
Attorney General: Louis Brandeis (1897-1899 (resigned)), Henry Teller (1899-1901)
Secretary of the Navy: Henry S. Boutell
Secretary of the Interior: Joseph M. Carey
Postmaster General: Charles J. Bonaparte
Secretary of Agriculture: Mary Elizabeth Lease
Secretary of Labor: Terence V. Powderly
Houston's cabinet largely carried over from his first term and remained remarkably consistent, yet he brought in two leading members of the Farmer-Labor Party to form what was dubbed his "coalition cabinet" as the Pacific War raged: 1892 Farmer-Labor presidential nominee Mary Elizabeth Lease and former General Trades Union President Terence V. Powderly, with Farmer-Laborite Henry Teller replacing Louis Brandeis as Attorney General following the former's resignation.
[Praised as the most influential Secretary of State in American history, Shelby M. Cullom has presided over the Pacific War, annexation of Hawaii, and what some have labelled \"America taking its place among the Great Powers.\"](https://preview.redd.it/6q8qjs4tp2x71.png?width=1339&forma
... keep reading on reddit ➡The Green party got 160 thousand votes in 2008 and 1.4 MILLION votes in 2016. That growth was larger than Trump's margins in WI, PA, and MI. We all saw Bernie's wife tweeting for Stein, Bernie himself dog whistling it, and how all his Stein touting surrogates in 2016 became his senior campaign staff in 2020.
We all saw the Mueller Report talking about Russia amplifying Bernie's narcissistic lies and messaging - specifically:
- Amplify the lie that Bernie won the popular vote in the primary. He lost by double digits and 4 million votes.
- Amplify the lie that the Supers "stole" the election for Hillary. In reality it was Bernie who tried to get the supers to overturn the popular vote and coronate him the nominee over the will of the people. (https://www.npr.org/2016/04/09/473398688/sanders-supporter-creates-superdelegate-hit-list-superdelegates-not-amused)
- Amplify the lie that Hillary Clinton is on the take/corrupt. As we have seen Bernie calls all his opponents corrupt, has his entire lie, and never provides evidence. After 2020 I trust that even his former fans realize this is something he says about anyone who stands in his way. Even former friends like Warren.
- Amplify the messaging implied by Bernie and directly stated by his wife and surrogates that voting Green is a way to signal to that mean old DNC that you know what they did and you are pissed. It's totes safe! Clinton can't lose! Don't be silenced! Vote Stein!
- Amplify Bernie's bigoted dog whistles, "Vagina Voter", "You can't just say I'm a woman vote for me!", and "Identity Politics" being "distractions" from the "real, economic, issues". As if education, marriage, employment, and reproduction aren't economic issues.
- Amplify Bernies' constant cowardly insinuations of corruption with no evidence. The one two punch paired with his erasure of her accomplishments and insistence that he totes has accomplishments that he's just to busy to show you right now but they absolutely exist ..
And it isn't just the lies Bernie told. It's the truths he silenced. If Bernie put progress ahead of his own ambition and vanity he could have done so much to get his fans on board with voting for Clinton. But he painted himself into a corner with the nasty lies he told about her. He couldn't support her without admitting he'd been slandering her. **Here are just a few of t
... keep reading on reddit ➡Do your worst!
I'm surprised it hasn't decade.
For context I'm a Refuse Driver (Garbage man) & today I was on food waste. After I'd tipped I was checking the wagon for any defects when I spotted a lone pea balanced on the lifts.
I said "hey look, an escaPEA"
No one near me but it didn't half make me laugh for a good hour or so!
Edit: I can't believe how much this has blown up. Thank you everyone I've had a blast reading through the replies 😂
It really does, I swear!
Because she wanted to see the task manager.
Heard they've been doing some shady business.
They’re on standbi
Following the Adams administration former security of the treasury Henry Clay won the presidency. Making 3 successful National-Republican victory’s.
The Economy: he economy has held up well trough Clays first term and has seen small growth with no downturn. Clay in 1833 passed a lower tax act which lowered taxis further and gave him a early popularity boost. Clay also kickstarted internal improvements projects and with many states having petitioned the government for improvements Clay has built much. Especially in the west like Illinois and in places like Florida and Louisiana. Clay has oversaw the begging of the American railroad industry with new rails being opened in Ohio Maryland Pennsylvania and other places. Clay has supported the new industry and given national founds to build new ones. Clay unlike Adams is anti foreign trade and has cut back trade with Mexico so to safeguard American industry having repealed the treaty in 1834. Clay has also given bank appointments piers to local authorities and has disagreed with Adams federal appointments. Clay however allowed the national bank to begin minting more and more money. Clay also passed the coinage act of 1834 which made us currency less valuable and lead to small amounts of inflation of the currency. However Clay argues this is simply him regulating the economy for stability.
Foreign affairs: Clays first term like Adams second term it has been uneventful in foreign affairs. Clay did cancel a Mexican American trade treaty and has also recalled the missions system deeming missions as expensive. However Clay has adopted a anti imperialism stance on European intervention and has made a policy of defending Latin American sovereignty. While Clay is a trade isolationist on foreign policy wanting a independent market free form other nations. Clay believes American is a regional power and should act like one. Imports have increased under Clay while exports have continued to fall. Clay has tried to smooth over Anglo American relations and has been largely successful having sent his security of state to Canada on a personal visit and has claimed tension over western border disputes.
State of the union: many accuse Clay of being a third term to Adams while Clay has denied any accusations of being a hand picked successor arguing his economy policy’s are different and that he is his own man and should be separate from Adams. In congress a collision of Democratic-Republicans Independence Party members and som
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Pilot on me!!
Nothing, he was gladiator.
> Here’s a useful @JosephPolitano piece attacking my argument on inflation and concentration. (Ht @GeorgeSelgin)📷
**Are Rising Corporate Profit Margins Causing Inflation?**A Response to People Calling for Antitrust Actions and Price Controls to Combat Inflationhttps://apricitas.substack.com/p/are-rising-corporate-profit-margins
>
>I think my response to @JosephPolitano is that his analysis is divorced from the underlying reality of commerce. Like most macro-economists, he assumes that individual markets are generally competitive, and that concentration is not the norm.
>
>Take this argument on how meatpacking monopolists don't really matter because meat is a small portion of the CPI. This only makes sense if you assume that meatpacking is an outlier. But is it? No.📷
>
>75% of U.S. industries have gotten more concentrated over the last 25 years, with higher profit margins, larger firm size, and fewer new entrants. This is probably a *secular* shift in our markets. It's not just meat. econpapers.repec.org/article/ouprev…
>
>This lack of curiosity about the economy shows in his solutions. He argues, for instance, that the Department of Commerce should not increase tariffs on Canadian lumber. They aren't tariffs, they are duties, and they are set by anti-dumping law. They aren't discretionary.
>
>He also does a rhetorical dance, where he implies solutions that attack individual markets by taking on corporate power won't work to reduce inflation, but then suggests a number of his own solutions that facilitate corporate power in individual markets will work.
>
>He argues for repealing the Jones Act, which would let foreign ships traffic from U.S. port to U.S. port. This might help Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Alaska a bit, but almost no one else. The jam-up at the Port of LA/Long Beach has zero to do with domestic maritime trade.
>
>A far better solution on the table is the Ocean Shipping Reform Act to re-regulate shipping. But of course that, plus other eminently reasonable choices like re-regulating railroads, is not noticed by macro-econ
Dad jokes are supposed to be jokes you can tell a kid and they will understand it and find it funny.
This sub is mostly just NSFW puns now.
If it needs a NSFW tag it's not a dad joke. There should just be a NSFW puns subreddit for that.
Edit* I'm not replying any longer and turning off notifications but to all those that say "no one cares", there sure are a lot of you arguing about it. Maybe I'm wrong but you people don't need to be rude about it. If you really don't care, don't comment.
Or would that be too forward thinking?
When I got home, they were still there.
I won't be doing that today!
Where ever you left it 🤷♀️🤭
This morning, my 4 year old daughter.
Daughter: I'm hungry
Me: nerves building, smile widening
Me: Hi hungry, I'm dad.
She had no idea what was going on but I finally did it.
Thank you all for listening.
[Removed]
There hasn't been a post all year!
It was about a weak back.
You take away their little brooms
What did 0 say to 8 ?
" Nice Belt "
So What did 3 say to 8 ?
" Hey, you two stop making out "
