https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/25/business/economy/chips-commerce-department.html

Yes, this article explains it slightly better…

It’s not a fab. It’s a research location.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/25/business/economy/chips-commerce-department.html

“The phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution. However, the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a religion or interfering with the free exercise of religion.”

Jefferson letter:" I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

https://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall-html/

So they’re very closely related but don’t go around saying it’s in the Constitution because it isn’t.

You must not be a Harvard MBA in charge of Apple Marketing.

Kenny Kawaguchi on the mound.

Starting lineup.

1. Pete Wheeler
2. Dimitri Petrovich
3. Kiesha Phillips
4. Pablo Sanchez
5. Tony Delvecchio
6. Jocinda Smith
7. Stephanie Morgan
8. Ahmed Kahn
9. Kenny bb

Eh, but how do we rank if you are flush with disposable income?

West*

Life sucks. Then you die.

Wistoria violin track slaps.

Teamwork!

I loved how immediately taken in by it he was. Pure bewilderment.

We learned from the best.

I am curious how else we would describe the direction of circular motion

What if I want to know the time?

Hi American here. One of these men is the richest man in the world. To assume his behaviors aren’t globally reaching is wrong. The other, if elected, would control the most powerful military in the world. Of course well suffer here but the influence and reach of these two should not be understated.

Technically it’s the only kind of correct. Technically.

"Also remember, CPI only reflects those out-of-pocket expenses. "

“it doesn’t take into account goods and services that may have been provided to consumers by, for example, the nonprofit sector and the government.”

https://www.marketplace.org/2021/11/22/whats-included-in-the-consumer-price-index-and-what-isnt/

My point here is your raises should be CPI + buffer as real costs are higher.

A fun image of what’s in the CPI:

I love this comment because I learned something.

From the article, “Supporters of such programs argue that they stimulate the economy: “The level of impact and the amount of benefits the film tax credit brings to Massachusetts is immeasurable, creating local jobs and boosting overall economic activity in our cities and towns,” state House Speaker Ronald Mariano (D–Quincy) said in 2021 after the legislature voted to make the credits permanent.”

The fallacy:

"Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James Goodfellow, when his careless son has happened to break a pane of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation – “It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?”

Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.

Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier’s trade – that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs – I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.

But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, “Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen.”

It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.[1] "

The commentors point: This is a dumb excuse to spur the economy and if they want to do that there are better more direct and impactful ways to spend that money.

Clau Clau Claudius