There's a lot wrapped up in this statement. For a small business, business owners usually do *not* take home income when their businesses lose money. Contrast this with modern-day CEOs, who continue to take home millions of dollars per year EVEN WHEN their business loses money. In good years, a small business owner will often take home more money (sometimes much more) than the workers for whom he/she has paid. That's one of the main perks of owning one's business (besides hopefully building equity in the business itself). Most workers do not have the same opportunity to gain by a business doing well, nor are they usually rewarded through equity, which is why 'wages' are a business expense. A salary or hourly wage is what is necessary to keep people working for a company. Different levels of risk. How many multiples more than the average wage a CEO should get for heading a large company vs a small one is something people can argue, but what is obviously clear is that our economic inequality is becoming not dissimilar to many other less developed countries. The top 1% in this country now own more than the entire middle class. As recently as 1990, the middle class owned *twice as much* wealth as the top 1%. In the past thirty years, that has been completely erased and is now rapidly reversing. And it is now becoming increasingly common for private & public equity (including a recent fund being started by Jeff Bezos) to buy up housing. This is Monopoly (does no one remember how it ends?) for future generations. My point is that you can pick at the hyperbole in a small statement about CEO compensation, but if you're not applying that same focus to the overall system that is - yes - deliberately & systematically removing financial stability and well-being from tens of millions of people (all to further enrich the already rich), you're missing the point.

Very true. Yet no amount of cutting back on "wants" will change the fact that the increasing cost of the BASICS - housing, automobile, health care, child care, any form of higher education or training (necessary to attain almost any decent job) - has far outpaced wages for so very many Americans. And a lot of young people now are doing the minimalist lifestyle, including not having children (for which, of course, they face a lot of judgment).

You & me both. I've really never been one to push the vaccine even tho I got vaxxed as soon as I could & have some boosters. If people don't want a vaccine, fine (too bad they could never be quiet about that). But I've always been astonished at the # of people who are spittle-flecked in their insistence that the Covid vaccine is so very, very dangerous while also completely ignoring (& completely dismissing) the fact that the Covid virus itself is *completely unknown* in terms of it's long term impacts. Side note: much more is known now of it's intermidiate risks, and, golly gee, C19 isn't very benign at all to a large # of people. And who knows what will be discovered over the coming years?

After my rant above, I wanted to say that I do support AirBnBs run by small farmers (who increasingly seem to offer them). I'll also seek out listings in more rural areas, if I can find one that has hosts on site, such as a family renting out part of their own house or property. I also know, tho, that those are increasingly hard to find. I looked this fall for listings to stay on Cape Cod this coming summer. I found *one* that looked to be an individual house with an individual owner (meaning not an individual with a chain of properties). All else was a chain of some sort. Said "screw it" & booked a hotel. With more flexible cancellation (& other) policies & slightly less in cost.

Anyone else remember how AirBnB started? It was about all regular joes (& janes) standing up to the big hotel chains. Fellow Americans opening extra rooms in their homes and charging truly affordable rates for travelers while earning a little extra income, with the sidekick of unique & interesting experiences & introductions. Fast forward x number of years later....now it's largely a huge *&^%ing joke. It's contributing to the housing shortage, esp in desirable areas, (double esp in desirable vacation areas). Hotel chains, businesses, & rich individuals now own up to dozens of properties each. Rentals often cost more than a hotel (by the time you add in all the extra fees), plus you're expected to clean the whole damn place, take out the garbage, run (& empty) the dishwasher, & strip all the beds. And your personal experience is about as charming and interesting as 2-day-old french fry from MacDonalds. I'll occasionally still check AirBnB listings, but if I'm gonna be depersonalized by a corporate overlord, at least I won't have to pretend otherwise if I stay at a hotel. Or clean my room.

I agree, *especially* given the condition a not-insignificant percentage of houses are in (or will be in in a certain # of years) in many/most places of the US. Dh & I just spent ungodly amounts of money basically rebuilding (not that we planned on that) our 100-yo farmhouse. Many houses in my area are old(er) and need that kind of input at this point. OTOH, when we were renting near Columbus, OH not that long ago (during a 2-yr stay for DH's job), we lived in a lovely-looking suburban home that was built in the mid-90s. It was a tract home. While it looked nice, it was cheaply built and it would not be a house I would want to own, particularly if I had to pay a steep(er) price for it and was planning to stay in it. It will also need major financial input to keep it truly livable over the long haul. Dh & I have talked many times about what a financial mess a young couple could be in if they had purchased either house, or the many, many, many others like them. (side note: not that renting is that great...I totally get the desire to have some financial security. Unfortunately, the older generations have pushed seemingly an unfair amount onto the younger ones in terms of financial upkeep on houses, systems, etc).

She didn't mention Fauci, and she doesn't live in the US, so why are you bringing him up? And other countries didn't follow Fauci (Covid-19 was a *worldwide* pandemic, other countries have their own public health systems and leaders, and the rest of the world is not as obsessed with the US as much as the US likes to think they are), so, yes, by definition, he had limited power & influence. Re: the Twitter Files....that would be your opinion. There was a lot of nuance and context in those Files that were conveniently overlooked by those eager for confirmation bias.

And many, many people are able to look at certain pictures and not have it progress from there. What's ridiculous is expecting everyone else to adapt to a certain few's inability to control themselves. (ETA: the # of people claiming to have developed a problem with pornography after viewing the book in question is an exact set of "1", so clearly the problem is HER.)

Yes, public money with zero accountability is never a good idea.

So for those who don't believe that any additional government oversight is necessary (& I'm not saying it is)...what are the potential solutions to these situations (which do routinely crop up)? Or do we just do nothing?

Hmmmm, the HCWs pictured are in full-on hazmat gear. I'm sure (or hoping) that's because there are unknowns with the appearance of this new virus (& it's infectiousness), but given China's history of being less-than-forthcoming with information in general, as well as the previous pandemic, it's a little unsettling to be told "it appears like pneumonia" while all HCWs are running around in hazmats.

TingTang, I went through your posts and have pasted below a series of things you've said which really stood out to me. I think it might be worthwhile for you to see in black & white what your own experience with your own husband is: "My husband has a tendency to side with his family and to disregard the value of my feelings over theirs…. "I have been going on this trip since 2010. Almost every year, it has resulted in some kind of fight before or during the trip. He points out all the reasons why it's a great trip for our family and how much the kids love it, basically discrediting my reasons for not wanting to go….. "I'd probably go on that after Christmas trip with just my own family, but my only excuse for not going with all of them is I do not want to be around them so much, and that is not good enough for them... "We are not aligned or bonded these days when it comes to how we spend our free time or what the kids do. 😞 He is not into kid extracurriculars at all, even with the boys.... "He always says how much he wants me to go, but I feel like I do a lot of sitting around and waiting for him while he is out fishing, then I feel obligated to socialise with them for 10 days straight. We tow a boat, and he is very opposed to bringing two vehicles, so I just always feel kinda trapped... "It’s just my entire social life seems to be around them. Multiple weekends, weekdays, and vacations. I don’t even feel like my husband uses my labor for the MN trip; it’s just more time we’re not really interacting with each other and are around the in-laws if we are together.... "I just know few other women would do this, yet he paints me as the bad guy..... "The fact is, I am going to be the "bad guy" for not wanting to spend more time with his family away, with his mother being sick.... "I didn't plan this trip. I am just always expected to go along with things.... "I am rarely asked. I am just told....." ************************************************************ You & your dh have some *serious* marital issues going on. (Sorry if that's harsh, but your own words tell the story.) If he won't attend counseling with you (which I kinda doubt he will, but perhaps....), you will have to accept that you are at a crossroads. You will need to: put & shut up (which is what you've been doing, and is what he wants you to do) and quietly live a miserable life, or you can choose to start educating yourself for how to advocate for your own needs (& the needs of the children); this might include seeking counseling just for yourself (highly advised), but you could also go the self-help route with books and videos. The downside of Choice #2 is that it *will* increase conflict in the relationship(s), and you'll need to be prepared for how to navigate that while calmly holding your ground and w/o becoming Bitch Mama (which will play into the narrative that you're being Unreasonable). It's not fun, but this relationship is at a crossroads, too. It either needs to grow, or it will continue to die. (A relationship where one party continually ignores and denigrates the needs & wants of the other party *is* a dying relationship.) Again, sorry if this is harsh, but I don't see that pretense is helpful here.

This is where I am as well. We have chosen to build a fair amount of resilience at our 'homestead' and I have 4 mos of dried food stored. I'm also really into wilderness skills (I love dropping into nature) and can be fairly self-sufficient for a few days with nothing other than a knife. Great stuff for short-term emergencies, aka 3 mos or less. I'd advise prepping like this for everyone. You'd think having/knowing all that would make me confident about a potential WWIII and collapse. It doesn't. In fact, it's the exact opposite. There's nothing like *actually* having experience living like it's a full-on Apocalypse to make one realize what an utter delusion that is. Even for people who could magically find enough to eat in the nearly-completely-denuded forests / rivers / ecosystems, you're constantly one infection, illness or accident away from being unable to care for yourself. Other individuals don't/won't have the bandwidth to care for you & ensure food & fuel for themselves. There's not enough dry wood to burn for the needs of non-stop heat / fuel / boiling water, and the biting insects completely take over in warmer months. No one I've met (or studied) has ever provided anywhere close to their *caloric* needs through gardening, and that's been with relatively stable weather. Seriously, the beans-and-guns thing is just prepper porn, a fantasy held by people whose driving motivation is revenge on a society they hate.

Thank you. There is so, so much suffering, especially for children & the vulnerable. They are always the ones to bear the brunt of brutal wars & their consequences. Off to donate now....

My understanding is that grants are tied to research. With something like cancer, I would think there would be grants fairly available due to the research is going on. I am curious (& doubtful) if there are any grants for people trying to access primary care, or standard surgeries, or other non-research oriented care. I agree that the system in the US for things like cancer research is cutting edge. Like everything else in this country, the system is widely diverging. For specific people, the health care system works very, very well. For others, it doesn't work very well at all. I agree. Which is why I won't be silent about those who don't have a hard time getting care for their child or family member, or who face certain financial devastation if they do.

Sigh. The *lack* of good insurance - for tens of millions of people in this country (including millions of children) - is THE issue. The *lack* of *affordable* health care for tens of millions more (including millions of children) is an even larger issue. YOUR ability to access vast resources of consumer-driven care not available in other countries is a direct result of our profit-driven, insurance-controlled system being able to limit or deny care to other US citizens. The closest we can come to your second paragraph would be to have universal coverage (not that we'll ever do that) with private options for those who can pay for it. But, again, who is the *we* you refer to? Obviously, the haves. Because tens of millions of have-nots do not have care or "choices". ******* As for the topic at hand, I'm in the "new family gets to set the rules of engagement". There's a whole slew of people who are tiring to have around, even if they mean well and even (sometimes) if they are good people. Parents with new babies don't need to accommodate other people's expectations during this stressful (however wonderful it may be) time.

True, and what this moron didn't realize is that a seeing-eye dog does not begin training until it's at least a year old. The American Veterinary Medical Assocation now considers the first year of a medium-sized dog's life to be the equivalent of the first 15 years of a human life. Without even considering the differences between expectations for a dog - with genetics bred in over thousands of years to be obedient to rank - with a human being, his comparison would only be valid if expectations for said child would *start* at age 15. I am so, so done with Stupid.

Another fan of California Olive Ranch here as well..... I'm careful of the EVOO I buy, due to all the adulteration that happens with "EVOO", but I know there are other good brands as well.

I always find articles like this rather irritating, because they leave a lot out in order to sensationalize the headlines. I actually did a little more digging: -High Point U touts the "Steak House" as a learning lab for students to practice professional and social etiquette in a business-professional environment, with restaurant staff providing instruction and guidance to students on proper table customs, esp with featured international foods. Students are expected to make reservations, dress appropriately, practice conversation on current topics, and cell phones are not allowed. While one can still see this venture as 'unnecessary' it's a little different than the headline of "luxury steakhouse on campus". I'm also sure 'High Point U' needs help in drawing students. - Other things included in the article are things like Ohio University offering "a personalized birthday cake for students"....but the cake has to be ordered and privately paid for by parents or friends of the student (I'm sure it's a money-making service); the University of MN offering "underground walking tunnels"....in Minneapolis, where winter wind chills can hit -60F; the Western Washington University having "outdoor adventures (like hiking)"...not sure how either of those could be considered unnecessary / luxurious. And that lazy river at the University of Missouri? It's part of the Rec Center, and the current fee to access the entire Rec Center is $176 per semester/student....a drop in the bucket as far as college costs go. The Rec Center is also on track to pay for itself in the next 5-7 years. I've toured dozens of colleges (sigh) with my kids over the last few years and, while I may quibble with certain services, overall I've been struck by how much it much cost to keep it all running. Building maintenance and upkeep alone must cost a fortune. I really haven't seen that much that has struck me as wildly luxurious. I certainly no longer would want to live on campus in any kind of dormitory.

And I have an extended family member, a 30-yr-old formerly-uber-athlete w/ no health issues, who now has chronic adult-onset severe asthma (life-altering), which started immediately after the second bout of Covid last February. So far it is not improving with time, but we hold out hope. It's these stories that make me so frustrated / disgusted with the "it's totally minor for the majority of people" crowd. And, no, that doesn't mean we need to live with lockdowns. There's a lot of potential stops on the continuum between lockdowns and everyone living as a selfish a$$hat.

You have no clue what my spirit is going to nudge me about. Or anyone else's. Believing that you do is the biggest lie of all, and the height of arrogance. Maybe you need to pay more attention to what inner voice *you're* listening to.

I'm *not* trying to derail this thread, but, while I'm not sure which 'they' you are referring to (perhaps the Cochrane study?), if you're interested, this summary / overview of mask research by Katelyn Jetalina is excellent and clarifying. And, to address the OP's post, I really hope no more lockdowns happen. If we have another pandemic that necessitates that (it won't be Covid), I hope administrations would just the college down rather than try to keep them going. My oldest, just entering college now, does NOT learn well online. At. All. So, we would probably just withdraw him until things opened up again. So, OP, I feel your pain.

Yes, that was my point as well. It's not a point you made when you poised the original question, nor was it clear that you were attempting to grapple with a field of knowledge or how to know what is true. But such is the nature of internet communication(s). They are incomplete at best.

You asked the question using that as your criteria / standard. Sorry, didn't realize you were just pot-stirring.

By the same token: - what evidence do you personally have that they didn’t? -what evidence do you (or anyone) personally have that *anything* in recorded history has actually happened? - ditto for much of the truths / beliefs we hold about anything in medicine, including knowledge of germs, nutrition, treatments, etc. How much of any of that can any of us personally verify is true? And forget religion. No one has any personal evidence that Jesus or Mohammed or any other historical religious leader ever existed. So I’m not sure what your point is. Perhaps the nature of knowing what and whom to trust? But if you limit your world to only things you can personally verify, it’s a very tiny world and you will need to give up many/most of what you currently believe and the ways you operate if you are going to be consistent with your standard.