AT&T was just okayed to merge with Time Warner Media, consolidating an already concentrated sector, because it was argued that there was no significant harm to the market and consumers. I believe that if mergers were only allowed when there was obligations of the corporations that were demonstrably pro-labor, pro-consumer and pro-competition, that only mergers that were absolutely necessary would proceed, instead of the bias towards allowing for mergers to make a smaller number of competitors more profitable.
Examples of such obligations that I would consider to be pro-consumer would be a price lock for 5 years and any new prices would need to approved by the court that rules on the merger, sort of like the DOJ pre-clearance of states and jurisdictions that had a history of voter discrimination (until SCOTUS gutted the Voting Rights Act.). This pre-clearance would be used to ensure that the merged companies wouldn't just offer comparable product or service for higher price as a work around. The argument of corporations need to maximize profits or maximize shareholder value has been called the dumbest idea in the history of world and I tend to agree with that way of thinking, which is why I want to discover if restricting mergers would be an effective way to go.
For the century of American history, corporations had a limited a time period to exist and needed to be reincorporated every 20 years or so by the state they operated in, and then demonstrate that they were providing a benefit to people, not simply generating profits. This was a superior practice for the general welfare of the people, and I believe the first steps to return to this would be to restrict corporate mergers.
The earliest I can get an initial appointment is three weeks from now, earliest I can get testing is a month from now, and the follow up appointment is for six weeks from now. (Very slow. Wonder why.)
However, I do believe there to be a "preponderance of evidence" standard towards my inclination to believe I do have it. (Most of my friends, when asked, say something along the lines of: "Yeah, I was thinking about that but thought it would be rude to bring it up," I seem to fit all of the criteria, including little quirks, and it would explain a GREAT many events in my childhood, teenagehood, and adulthood.)
You guys don't mind if I hang out here anyway, right, and use the pronoun "we" instead of "Aspergians and possibly myself" right?
Right now, I think it's kinda like M-theory before they discovered the Higgs Boson at CERN. Everyone kinda knew the theory made sense, because the mathematics were so elegant, but they didn't have the hard evidence until very recently.
But those supercolliders just take so long to warm up...
We have about ten perfumed candles in our house, but no normal candles
But I’m just grasping at straws here.
As we approach what may be the end of the Democrat primary, there is discussion of how Joe Biden should proceed with reaching out to progressive voters if he wins, with a common suggestion being that he needs to adopt some of Bernie Sanders' platform to garner their support.
The pickle/peanut butter problem refers to the idea of a divergent target audience or market which has one of two preferences. For pickles it is sweet vs sour, for peanut butter it is chunky vs smooth.
The concept being that while both markets have different preferences, there is agreement between them that both respond negatively to attempts to split the difference. Semi chunky peanut butter or semi sweet pickles are rejected by both groups. Trying to make sour pickles sweeter does not make sweet pickle fans enjoy them, and simultaneously drives away sour fans.
Is there documented evidence of how effective it is in politics to attempt to bridge the gap between political factions who are considered in opposition at a given time?
Both in terms of the hypothetical left shift Biden would consider to appeal to progressives, and the hypothetical right shift he would consider to appeal to general election moderates. Is there a difference in one being more or less effective than the other? Is either one shown to be particularly effective?
So, first off, I'm sure you're all aware of this system, as I would say it's absolutely integral to the experience of the game. It especially takes its toll on players like me, who already have 100+ hours in the game, but have yet to receive information on the inner mechanisms which drive this system.
Anyways, back to the point. I've been doing research on what we'll call RV (Rat Variance). I've been to a lot of different maps, testing triggers, cooldowns, and size of the rats. MOST rats trigger when you run into or past a specific point or area, and it seems like they are impossible to shoot (might need someone to verify, my aim is bad). The only exception I've found to this is that on certain maps rats will spawn as you exit the van/helicopter at the start of the mission.
Next, most rats have a cooldown on a life-by-life basis, meaning that as soon as you respawn you get to trigger the rats again. So far I've found two exceptions to this, which was on St. Petrograd in the warehouse area, and Hackney Yard in the back alley with the dumpsters and the wall you vault over. These rats seem to respawn every minute or so. This makes me wonder if the rats on those maps are superior, and have evolved to such a level that they believe themselves to be higher on the food chain than humans. I think this might be hinting at a mutant rat DLC, which I'm very excited for.
Now, onto the main point about RV. The rats actually seem to have varying sizes. I first noticed this when I played with my friend and saw a big rat, to which I exclaimed "holy shit that's a big rat." Now. Here's what I'm wondering. Just how big can the rats become? Is there a limit to the RV? I want to see a human sized rat, and after spending 3 or 4 hours studying them, some of them seem to actually get as high as the player model's calves. Has anyone seen a waist high rat yet? Please PM me if you have. It's EXTREMELY important to my work to find out how large the rats can get.
I also want to ask IW if they can verify the existence of white rats? Someone told me they saw a white rat, but I don't know if I can believe him, because he also tried to get me to join a pyramid scheme.
Thanks for reading this write-up. I know the lack of information has been frustrating dedicated players but if we just wait I know IW will come through for us. Have a good day, everyone.
