It's important to note that this isn't some new blanket forgiveness. These are people who have been paying on their loans for 10 years. People who should've already been eligible for loan forgiveness under existing policies and who have already paid more than they took out in many cases.
Absolutely, but Musk specifically said weather wouldn't be a problem like regular satellites, which was just not true from my experience.
Overall though, I just think people should be aware that it's not a good replacement for if you already have access to other Internet services. I've seen people discuss how they want to ditch Comcast for it. It's a lot more expensive and definitely not as consistent. Again, it totally has an audience and purpose, pros and cons.
In my state, it's $10 for a non-driver state issued ID card. However, the offices you need to visit in person have limited days and hours that they are open, meaning some people can't afford to take the time off of work to do so.
If for some reason they don't already have supporting identifying documents like a social security card, it could take multiple steps and visits.
"The cancellations have come through existing federal student loan forgiveness programs, which are limited to specific categories of borrowers, such as public-sector workers, people defrauded by for-profit colleges and borrowers who have paid for at least 20 years. " -CNN
These are not rich people.
These forgiveness programs weren't even created by Biden.
I'd love to discuss this more if you'd be interested. I teach mass communications and visual literacy courses at a university and have over a decade of experience. I'm always interested in discussing these things further, as media literacy is extremely important and we can only educate others and make improvements with our literacy skills through discussion, learning, and practice.
Could you tell me more about the authors you mention and where you got the information from?
One thing I like about Media Bias Fact Check is that their methodology is transparent and clear. Yes, there is a certain level of subjectivity, as there is with any analysis like this. They utilize fact checking best practices and have ethical funding. Even their competitors rate them to be accurate and credible.
They are considered reliable not because people use them, but because of their methodologies, transparency, and factuality. Nothing is 100%, but it's a good resource in my opinion.
When I watched it live, I believe the count said 2 Democrats didn't vote for the quorum that came before the vote, so yeah I'm guessing they just weren't there today.
It's certainly very complex. I definitely agree he didn't get a fair treatment or trial and for that reason alone shouldn't be incarcerated
I also think that the Netflix documentary really skewed the view and understanding of the evidence, though. And, as you note, there can be confusion over what level of certainty a jury needs to reach. Beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond any doubt.
All this being said, it bothers me to some degree that people will go to great lengths to fight for Avery's innocence, largely due to that documentary, when there are others whose cases are much more questionable and deserve attention too, such as Temujin Kensu.
I just hope that people, upon seeing documentaries (or really any information that drives them to a certain decision or thought, particularly based on an emotional response), would do further research.
Me and your cat have no idea what you're talking about...