Ah, good old 2007 when corporations didn't control every facet of life and Citizens United hadn't passed yet with a reasonably fair Supreme Court. Don't think we'll have it any better for quite some time.
U.S. Charges 4 Chinese Firms With Selling Chemicals to Make Fentanyl The indictments are part of a strategy attacking every stage of the supply chain for the opioid, which kills thousands each year. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/23/nyregion/china-fentanyl-companies-charged.html June 23, 2023 Four chemical companies based in China and eight Chinese nationals have been charged with trafficking chemicals used by Mexican drug cartels to manufacture vast quantities of fentanyl later sold in the United States, federal officials said on Friday. The officials said that two of the defendants, the principal executive of one Chinese firm and its marketing manager, had been arrested overseas and taken to Hawaii for a court appearance, and that they would be brought to Manhattan to face prosecution. The indictments announced Friday in New York are part of a strategy by the Drug Enforcement Administration to attack the scourge of fentanyl at every stage of the supply chain. The buyers of the chemicals were largely organizations like the Sinaloa cartel, formerly run by the Mexican drug lord known as El Chapo, which the Justice Department says is largely responsible for the influx of fentanyl into the United States. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in a news conference that the firms advertised the so-called precursor chemicals online, and an indictment said they were packaged to resemble dog food, nuts or motor oil. Wuhan-based Hubei Amarvel Biotech Co., Mr. Garland added, “went as far as to guarantee ‘100 percent stealth shipping,’ and they provided proof of their success on their websites, including a screenshot of a shipping confirmation to Culiacán, Mexico, the Sinaloa cartel’s base of operations.” … The charges revealed Friday came two months after Mr. Garland announced sweeping indictments in Manhattan, Chicago and Washington, D.C., against more than two dozen people in what he described as a global fentanyl manufacturing and distribution operation run by the Sinaloa cartel. … The trade was also a major topic this week during a visit to Beijing by Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken. The United States and China have been at loggerheads over military and technological policies, the Russia-Ukraine war and human rights, but Mr. Blinken said that he raised fentanyl control as an area of potential cooperation. Mr. Blinken said that the countries would explore setting up a working group to “shut off the flow” of precursor chemicals.
I sincerely wonder if this is a good idea or not. Giving broadband internet to every corner of rural America sounds good in theory but will it radicalize alot more people into qnon? Will more people turn into @Os Trigonum ? Wish democrats were more greedy at times. Helping rural Republicans won't help in the general.
The point of having good leadership is to get good policy. What would be the point of getting Democrats elected if they're just going to make bad policy for partisan gain?
related "The Neglected Value of Effective Government," by Prof. Rick Pildes (NYU) "How law and policy have undermined the ability of government to deliver both large-scale policies and a range of public goods." https://reason.com/volokh/2023/06/2...effective-government-by-prof-rick-pildes-nyu/
You don't think it's a issue that rural America will have access to full blown qnon conspiracies 24/7. Sigh
What would be the point of getting ______ elected if they're just going to make bad policy for partisan gain If only!
on the Biden broadband plan, they estimate 8 million U.S. households don't have reliable internet. WaPo and the NYT are also both reporting that mobile systems such as Starlink are not being considered for funding. But seems to me a quicker, cheaper, and more cost-effective alternative to the 42 billion dollar let's-spend-money-so-it-looks-like-we're-doing-something panderfest would simply be to distribute $1000 Starlink dishes to each one of those 8 million households and turn people loose to decide which plan they want: Of course a cynic might speculate that the reason why the U.S. government isn't considering subsidizing rural internet with Starlink satellite dishes is because Elon Musk is now an official enemy of the state . . . ? we use Starlink at our camp in the Adirondacks and it works great. Plus the RV version of the dish is only $600 Spoiler https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-rejects-ltd-broadband-starlink-bids-broadband-subsidies
I would think ignoring the struggles Rural America faces would only exacerbate the issues they face further. The GOP isn't really out to help them. They may not receive the messaging that it's a Dem president that's enacting policy that benefits them, but it should still be done regardless. I personally tend to think a philosophy of a bottom up approach where attention is focused on your worst affected communities in the United States and investing in people that live in those communities and not only the land that people live on, would as a positive side effect reduce issues like crime, poverty, lack of healthcare facilities and specialists in rural areas and improve education. No doubt having gigabit internet running would benefit educators with limited resources available locally and I think that would outweigh the spread of propaganda shared through the internet. Having high speed internet in rural areas would be a positive for small business owners in those areas that can now sell their merchandise across the globe with greater ease and reliability because of fiber optics in their area. Part of the reason rural America supported Trump in the first place is the idea they were left behind for decades from both major parties. Before Eisenhower set up freeway infrastructure, people used to actually have to drive through FM and RM roads to connect to major cities. Some of those drivers would have to stop at local gas stations and small owned stores in those towns benefiting their local economy. When freeways got built, less people had to actually commute through those ranch roads and farmer market roads which no doubt affected the economies of those small towns in negative ways. Freeway construction is still a valuable idea that's benefited more Americans than it's hurt, but that's just one example of how major policy has left rural areas behind. Leaving behind rural America is also what gets their jimmies rustled when it's perceived that an undocumented worker has more opportunity and status than them even though that's often times not the case at all. Genuinely helping communities that are struggling is the correct way to help mend a lot of the division and issues residents in America face today.
The same elon musk who threatened to turn off starlink in Ukraine in the middle of a conflict if he hadn't gotten more money? I wonder why the us government wouldn't wanna work with someone who threatens to use his assets as a negotiating tool? You forget that the Biden folks are giving grants to states and counties to implement their version of the expansion. Again I think this is ****ing stupid and I hate how dems play nice. Giving money to republican states gets you ZERO PR cuz they don't acknowledge it. The feds are trusting the states on conditional grants which I think is effin dumb. Quit playing nice with folks who hate you
Those speeds aren’t future-proof. They are too slow relative to even today’s wired and cellular services. I don’t know if the plans are only considering those 8 million households. Whatever the case, investing in this infrastructure means you are also enabling growth in those areas. If you build them, people will come. The future holds much more population movement with the remote work trend and technology enabling work, play, and education from anywhere. I would love to see the US population spreading out instead of being so concentrated. But that’s just me—I have always liked large land and nature over tall artificial buildings.
I wouldn't support Starlink because Fiber Optics is faster and once set up is likely to last longer than Startlink which constantly needs to fire rockets to send more of those satellites into low Earth orbit that just end up crashing down in a short of amount of time and are affected by natural phenomena like coronal mass ejections. Starlink isn't really sustainable and is honestly a bad business model dependent on government subsidies just to exist. Not to mention those satellites are a bane for astronomical observation.
