There are already zero private companies that have to follow the constitution, since it never applied to them, ever.
As another person mentioned, radio crosses international boundaries, but it is regulated by regulating ground equipment and people and organizations on the ground. You'll see some countries on https://starlink.com/map that are greyed out because of regulatory issues... for example, some countries such as India heavily control the use of satellite comms
> However don't cloud up the space and confuse people by saying you owe tax for property you don't own because someone feels that you are evading tax.
Legally, single member LLCs often simply pass-through tax obligations. In this situation, the law literally disregards their existence for tax purposes.
> Now do you need to take ownership of things you use in a state just so you can hypothetically pay a tax for an evasion accusation that you don't apply to, I would be incredibly surprised to see if any state actually is saying this - I don't think its constitutionally or legally sound in any way.
No nobody is arbitrarily forcing anyone to trade ownership of anything -- a Montana LLC could register their car locally in CA. But that defeats the point of the "Montana car registration scheme" -- which is tax evasion.
If there is an actual real company in Montana that is giving their employees a car to drive around in California, they need to register it in California and pay tax there.
When it comes to paying tax, ownership/use/residency is up for examination by tax authorities. They will make a determination based on their evidence and if you don't like it you can take it to tax court and you all can show a judge your evidence.
I agree that you want a provider to be humble. But, not knowing what freekin' meclizine is isn't a healthy level of self-doubt. It's a pretty fundamental drug.
Most side effects don't happen to people taking a drug. The warning isn't because of the likelihood of drowsiness, but the magnitude of risk caused by someone who may become drowsy when doing some other dangerous activity.
Either way, what you describe doesn't sound like a good experience. When I had some issue that necessitated meclizine, the PA wrote a prescription, explained what it was, warned me to be aware of drowsiness until I knew how it affected me, and I picked it up for $1-2 after insurance.
If I had a provider who was anything less than 100% confident and knowledgable about what they wanted me to take, I would be seeing someone else.
I haven't had that experience. I use generic names with all of my doctors and family who work in healthcare; they follow suit.
Also meclizine causes drowsiness and you should have been warned that this is a common side effect, I was warned when I was prescribed this (it's also on the drug information sheet that comes from the pharmacy). So it might just be that your doctor isn't that good.
Eh, from what I gather from the healthcare professionals I know, I think that is mostly doctors adapting to the language accessible to their clientele. I don’t think it’s about being “easy” as much as it is “doable”. I’ve heard that it’s often hard to even get an accurate list of current medications out of a person, brand name or not.
Now I suppose ibuprofen/acetaminophen is common enough that people may be familiar with it, but I could see how in a clinical setting defaulting to brand names is the only reasonable default for accessibility.
I’ve had multiple doctors remark specifically about my use of generic drug name in discussion. “So I presume you’re a little bit familiar already”, etc.
We don't have to prevent people from being stupid, but we do want to mitigate it, because medicine is supposed to be accessible to everyone, and part of the safety profile of a medication plainly is the ability for it to be administered safely.
> safe when taken as instructed
Part of that means that instructions and ingredients should be clear.
I am educated and knowledgeable and a trip to the pharmacy is more complicated than it needs to be. You damn near have to pick up every damn box to see what is actually in things, if your pharmacy doesn't have things locked up, and half of the time I ask a pharmacist for pseudoephedrine even they give me combination drugs instead.
I don't think we should take anything off the shelf (except oral phenylephrine). If anything, I think we should make more drugs available OTC.
Many states have laws that require a vehicle to be registered in-state if they have established residence, or similar.
Even if you are able to register a vehicle legally in another state, that does not necessarily exempt you from obligations in your own state... even if it would for non-residents passing through.
OTC drugs should be both available and regulated to be sold in such a way to minimize harm to people who use it.
Honestly, combination drugs are out of fucking control. Some people don't know Advil is ibuprofin. Some people think all Advil is ibuprofin. Both are wrong!
It used to be true that doctors could tell people that it was okay to take [X] brand drug with [Y] brand drug but anymore, there are a half dozen formulations of each in varying combinations on the shelf and half of them have some of the same ingredients. Basically every brand has a "fuck it lets just mix everything together, flu" version on the shelf now.
> When I want to get irrationally angry about something in a department store, I'll walk over to the shampoos, which for some reason always have a whole entire aisle dedicated to a single product, when they all do literally the same exact thing, just with different scents and advertising budgets baked into the sticker price.
Somewhere on a shampoo forum people are complaining that all computers do the same damn thing. I guess they probably just don't know what they're talking about.
I think there's one thing most people agree on: drugs should be safe and effective.
DXM is fine but oral phenylephrine should be banned. The only reason it's in any of these drugs is because they don't want to lose sales when the real version that works is locked behind the pharmacy counter after hours. It's a scam to keep sales up.
A concern with OTC drugs is specifically that they won't be taken at normal doses. People confuse brand names and drug names, and don't realize they are taking more than the reccomended amount. This is especially problematic with combination drugs.
They're at the bottom of a portrait screen (and IIRC there's a bit of a bezel to rest your hand on), which makes it a little better.
Floating screens make this harder, especially as they get larger and further from the driver
Tesla has also been guilty of some particularly awful designs on later models, like requiring the driver to navigate to a submenu to turn on the wipers (which I know they changed in an update, but still should have never done to begin with)
> In contrast, touchscreens are, quite literally, free. All US cars have screens, since rear-view cameras have been mandatory here since 2018, and most of those will be touchscreens
Not quite true because automakers can satisfy the rear-view camera requirement with very cheap screens, e.g. integrated into the rear view mirror.
