It functions like this:

US American importers pay the tariffs to the US American state.

The effect on EU entities is secondary in nature: The US American importers will either buy less from the EU entities and substitute the rest from other countries or they will try to buy the same more cheaply because they can’t keep up their previous value chain when the tariffs are included. Thereby demand for products from the EU will fall, hurting EU based exporters and more indirectly everyone up the chain from there.

It will also hurt the US American importers and more indirectly everyone down the chain from there.

Trump ignores the latter effect, and thinks the money raised for the US American state is more significant than it is. He also lies about the first step, but I think he knows how it really is, sometimes he lets it slip that he actually knows how tariffs work.

Parts, sure, but they also still have separate foreign policy apart from trade. As seen in the American War on Afghanistan for example.

What a load of cringe.

And that second to last sentence is just the cherry on top of the pile of shit. Everybody is already severely disappointed.

By the way: Does anyoen know if it’s even appropriate to call Von der Leyen “Her Excellency”? It sounds pretty weird to me.

He’s gonna abuse his Malaysian maid isn’t he?

No not really. I have the bedtime mode set up the way I want it with the necessary exceptions. Airplane mode would mess that up.

The funniest thing about this is that Prime day is a “holiday” of their own making. It’s not like it’s the Christmas push caused by consumers.

Just recently there was a guy on the NANOG List ranting about Anubis being the wrong approach and people should just cache properly then their servers would handle thousands of users and the bots wouldn’t matter. Anyone who puts git online has no-one to blame but themselves, e-commerce should just be made cacheable etc. Seemed a bit idealistic, a bit detached from the current reality.

Ah found it, here

Wow that’s fucked. In my country the kids going to school is the parents legal responsibility, they can actually get fined if the child is delinquent. But never would the child be arrested.

I’m very sorry that happened to you, both the sexual assault and the police treatment.

The questionnaire respondents are requested to leave those out. See my other comment. I dug up some detail.

Clinton signed his crime bill

I wasn’t familiar, thanks for the pointer. This rhetoric “though on crime” has been going on from before my birth it seems.

We cannot take our country back until we take our neighborhoods back. Four years ago this crime issue was used to divide America. I want to use it to unite America. I want to be tough on crime and good for civil rights. You can’t have civil justice without order and safety.

I’m unfamiliar with the term field arrest. If I get this right, this is what happens when you get arrested for a misdemeanour on site, cited and then immediately let go? Possibly with a requirement of turning up to a police station for booking, or to a court date?

I read a bit of the paper, and it seems they are simply using the data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997.

The relevant NLS topical guide says the following:

NLSY97 youth respondents are asked whether they have ever been arrested by the police or taken into custody for an illegal or delinquent offense (not including arrests for minor traffic violations) and the total number of times this has happened.

And looking up the phrasing in the questionnaire is also exactly the same

Have you ever been arrested by the police or taken into custody for an illegal or delinquent offense (do not include arrests for minor traffic violations)?

So I guess it would depend on whether respondents consider a field arrest an arrest and report it.

All of those sound insanely high. If you take a group of 10 random adult men from the US, roughly four of them have been arrested?

Is a lot of it for underage drinking because that law is so far from lived reality?

I think that makes sense too. Sure a drunk cyclist is less of a problem than a drunk motor vehicle operator.

But as the third party you still don’t want 100 kg (200 pounds) of dude and aluminium frame running into you at 20 km/h (12.4 mph), especially if you are a pedestrian, a second cyclist, or a biker.

Yikes. Did he make through?

Yes it’s very common, which is why everyone of even mild intelligence knows to check the results of a plain full text search.

The argument is utterly stupid.

Ignoring that it is building on a fantasy reality for the moment. Even if you had free healthcare, and if only the financial costs of survival motivated people to get jobs, then the other costs of living, like for food and shelter, would still provide that motivation.

Whoever came up with that stupid word filter and decided to follow through on it without proper human review that the filter matched what they meant to find, is pretty trans-intelligent.

What is TG?

That Economic Times article cites a Kyiv Insider article, but doesn’t link it, which I consider terrible journalism.

Here’s the link: https://kyivinsider.com/orbans-hungary-is-now-officially-the-poorest-nation-in-the-eu/

He’s just stirring shit to get his name out there isn’t he?