homura1650 @ homura1650 @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

206

Joined

2 yr. ago

Generally, mortgages for your primary residence offer more favorable terms then ones for investment properties. The issue in the above story is likely related to the friend. If they had tried the same thing, their offer would likely have been even worse than what they got for a primary residence with a cosigner. Assuming they got an offer at all.

"They" is a minority of House Republicans. The majority of House Republicans are also frustrated with them. However, since the Republican majority is so razor thin, they are in a 'most intolerant wins' situation; where the most obstroctionist minority dictates what happens. If they can get a deal with even a few democrats, they can break the dynamic. Even the credible threat of doing so might be enough to pull everyone in line.

Having said that, the more plausible path is a deal where a more moderate Republican gets Democrat support (likely in exchange for rules changes giving the minority party more power)

Operation Prosperity Guardian is already underway. Unfourtuantly, modern drone technology tilts the scales in favor of the attacker in this sort of situation relative to where it was a decade ago; and commercial shipping companies are not in the bussiness of shipping through active combat zones.

Agree on going with safty razors, but once you are there, you don't want to cheep out. The one option my local grocery store carries is a $20 that is complete junk. I invested $70 in a Henson safty razor and never looked back. They also have a $250 offering for people who want the benefits of a safty razor without the cost savings.

For blades, I actually splurge and buy the $0.20/piece offering from Feather instead of the $0.10/piece ones that Henson sells. Still cheeper than the $0.80 safty blades the grocery store sells, or the checks app $4.50/piece cartridge blades the store sells?!?

Moral of the story: go cheap, but don't be afraid of spending a little money to do so.

What Judicial body? Every currently standing ruling regarding the merits of Trump's eligibility to be president under the 14th amendment have found that he is not eligible (although all are still in limbo pending the inevitable SCOTUS appeal). There is a colorable technical argument to be made that he is not excluded, but most of the legal community is not convinced by them.

The legal arguments about his eligibility to appear on the primary ballot are more nuanced, but seem kind of silly if he ultimately is inneligable to hold the office.

The states that have ruled that Trump can remain on the primary ballot all did so on some sort of procedural ground. Typically of the form "state law does not require a candidate to be elligable to hold office to appear on a primary ballot". In fairness to those states' lawmakers, what sort of braindead political party would try nominating someone who was inneligable to hold office?

The giver is responsible for reporting gifts and paying taxes on them, so Thomas is clear on that front. Currently, the yearly exemption is $17,000 (per donor/donee pair). Beyond that the giver must report gifts, but still doesn't owe unless they (the donor) have reached their lifetime exemption of $13 million.

I'm not aware of any research on plan B specifically; but most medicines retain there effectiveness for decades past their stated expiration date.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7040264/

This is about the primary election ballots. There is no stall indefinitely. The only options available to SCOTUS are to take it up on a highly expediated basis or dismiss it as moot.

Translating into Linux terms, Steam has dropped support for:

• Ubuntu 8.04 LTS Hardy Heron
• Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Precise Pangolian