I’m not sure how it works in every state, but in mine rabies testing is covered by the state but kind of requires a doctor visit, (and the animal to be tested) to get the ball rolling. I think you could also go straight to the sheriff. All of that to say i went to the ER for a minor bat bite, and to make my PSA statement that if there is even a sliver of possibility that rabies is possible, don’t ever assume that a minor animal bite is no big deal.
I agree, i was trying to also bring to light that he can have that much influence with an amount of money that could almost be a rounding error to him.
Still extra sickening how much billions are. Even if he actually did 45 million it would have roughly the same percentage impact to his net worth as me spending $100
Let’s say he donated the highest amount of 6 figure (i didn’t read the article), 999,999. His net worth is at 260 billion, would be the same as me donating $2.50 in regards to my net worth, and i consider myself technically pretty okay money wise. It’s absurd how much billions are…
I feel like Europe would offer way better finds than the US. I’ve only ever used one to locate electric lines, but i definitely can’t imagine discovering any of your impressive finds in the USA especially where I’m at in the Midwest
Haha underage, I’ll fix it
This is a completely random story but the post made me remember and i wanted to share.
In college about 12 years ago i got cited for underage alcohol consumption and got an email saying i had to meet with an advisor to discuss the situation. I slept through the meeting and basically said exactly that in an email to the advisor who replied like wtf okay we’ll reschedule, and then i never heard anything about it ever again.
I’ve posted this elsewhere but I hate this so: A “donation” up front says I’ll see what I can do, money after the fact says I’ll fight for you. Sounds like bribery to me. Not that the current system isn’t but backend feels so much worse
A “donation” up front says I’ll see what I can do, money after the fact says I’ll fight for you. Sounds like bribery to me. Not that the current system isn’t but backend feels so much worse
If you lived somewhere where the GOP candidate is going to get 65 percent of the vote basically no matter what, and in the GOP primary you had an incumbent, somewhat average, right wing conservative that you’ve seen work across the aisle in the state legislator ruining against a hard core maga nut job, anti vaccine, anti public schools, openly racist etc. Do you think registering as a Republican to vote for the incumbent in that primary sounds like an okay idea? You can still vote for the Democrat and make your voice heard there at the general election even though it’s essentially guaranteed he loses.
Or is the argument against this that if the crazy maga guy wins the primary there’s a slightly better chance the Democrat can win? I’d call it unlikely where I’m at, but could see tighter districts working that way.
I would be voting for the better GOP candidate in the primary hoping they win, and likely the Dem come general election, but since I’m in a red area I’d expect the Dem to lose but maybe help pick the lesser of two evils for the GOP?
I’ve been considering changing my registration to Republican specifically for primaries. I’m in SD, and the Republican almost always wins so I feel I’d have more impact trying to push the right left and can still vote however I want in the general.
Pumping blood to your organs even though you are fat!
Isn’t it dumb that if I Google “Amazon” the top result is their ad and the next is the same link without the ad? Would make way more sense for the Amazon’s ad to be the top result if I googled “Wal-Mart”
Like a random intrusive ad? No, but when I Google something simply to go to their website and their ad is the top result I often decide if I like them more or less than Google before deciding to click the ad link vs the regular search link (I assume they pay Google a little extra for ad clicks). Amazon gets the ad click most others do not.
I can’t remember the specifics well enough to state anything as fact, I’m pretty sure we had something on campaign finance that disappeared after voter approval, and I know we had a ballot initiative on minimum wage that they reworked after the fact into something better than many places, but not quite what was voted on. Marijuana felt like they straight manipulated rules and it disappeared with their reasoning being that it technically was more than one rule at once.
Even if my poor explanations aren’t great, I can state as a fact that our voter pool seems to not care at all that their elected officials don’t give two shits about their interests. I know plenty actually do, but our averages voter just looks for the R
And minimum wage laws, and campaign finance laws, we show up to for the ballot measures, but not for the people in office.
Edit: or we’re perfectly happy voting for people that go against our voting interests. It’s horrible either way
One of the dumber parts of this is that, prior to Roe vs Wade being overturned, SD had an abortion ban on the ballot twice since (guessing here) 2006 and voters voted it down both times. Roe v Wade gets overturned and our elected officials immediately enact they’re own rules and now we have to fight for our rights back. I hate that our state still votes for Kristi and others like her, but hopefully we can get a little win bank this year.
I may have missed it in another comment, but I believe part of it is the cost of lives. During the space race someone dying would’ve just been part of the risk. Now we are using more automation and a human fatality might risk a company’s ability to continue its pursuit.
It is rare, but not something to completely ignore as a possibility