Being forced anywhere starts to sound like jail, except it would be a free for all in there. How would the policy force anyone into a camp without guards? Why would this work great?
US imports from China is ~2% of US GDP and largely in electronics [0], which are actively being targeted for sanctions. It will be painful but not catastrophic for the US to "de-risk".
China has to import both energy and food to sustain it's economy and population[1, 2]. There is very little domestic consumption to absorb their own production capacity and western countries are actively blocking their markets, like the EV situation in Europe or electronics with the US.
They have a very bleak demographic picture with a massively aging population along with some of the lowest fertility rates in the world[3]. It is odd to think of China as running out of people[4], but there will be two elder dependents for every working age person very soon.
There is an expectation of a full on collapse coming and local governments there are already $100TN+ in debt collectively[5]. If there was a pivot possible, would anyone provide that capital with what is happening with the Evergrande liquidation where foreign capital is the first to get wiped out?
Any company that hasn't pivoted to India or some other SEA country for manufacturing will simply be left behind.
I think we could agree generally that "the hostile work environment at Boeing ... led to his death." It is appalling that they could apply this kind of pressure to one of their own .
I'm not familiar with the process here, but does anyone know if the officer makes the determination that this is a "self-inflicted gunshot wound"? I thought that kind of assessment was for the coroner to determine over the course of the investigation.
I take it you did this yourself but that is definitely not the cost of paying someone to do it for you. There is no way you can purchase the fiber and pay someone to trench and lay it for you for under $1.50/ft.
I would have preferred a program where in rural counties the up front cost of acquiring the $599 kit can be claimed as a tax credit.
In the FCC press release above,
> Collectively, these companies are committing to deploy broadband service of at least 100/20 Mbps service to over 700,000 locations and to maintain or improve existing 100/20 Mbps service to approximately 2 million locations in 44 states across the United States.
That is Starlink bandwidth and that 18B would pay for 30M install kits instead of just 2.7M homes.
Why does it matter if they are getting government funding when the article is discussing government subsidy to the tune of $18B?
It might be more cost effective to service rural customers using Starlink. I know of many people working remotely using it. Some of which have fiber at the road in front of them, running it up to their rural home from the road would still cost tens of thousands out of pocket and opted for Starlink.
If we are all helping pay to deliver internet access to every part of this country, which I wholeheartedly agree with, could we do so in a way that maybe also helps R&D space travel instead of whatever Comcast or Verizon is doing?
What evidence has been provided to meet this preponderance of evidence standard you are putting forward for moral evaluation?
You have one party making an allegation claiming they have documents to back it up and the other party denying innocence with claims of their own exculpatory evidence. Nothing has been shared to the public by either party for me evaluate who has the preponderance of evidence.
I do believe YouTube (or any other private platform) can and should be able to set it's own rules for participation so I see no issue with what they did here. If it's a right for someone to be on that platform then we should not be relying on a private party to guarantee that and make the necessary legislative changes.
I would just love to understand why I should be outraged at this individual before anything has been presented before me so that I can evaluate for myself.
> If people find these allegations credible—and most should
Why should most people find these allegations credible? I do not believe there is a police report, arrest, and let alone a trial. These are currently just allegations, their credibility has not been adjudicated.