COAUTiger
| Favorite team: | Auburn  |
| Location: | Lil town called Nunyogotdambidness |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 365 |
| Registered on: | 6/15/2012 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
So no loans for history, political science, psychology, criminology, economics, business, finance, marketing, accounting and teaching to name a few?
1
re: Vice President Vance White House Press Briefing: Confirming Media Lies
Posted by COAUTiger on 6/18/26 at 12:25 pm to JimEverett
Isn't this a similar policy we had with China , Pakistan & Afghanistan? The US heavily invested in China and yet they are our biggest threat now. Not saying Iran will be in the same boat but this strategy doesn't always work.
I would be surprised if other middle eastern countries invest in a country controlled by fanaticals of Shia Islam.
But as BBonds requested, I'll wait for the details to come. But so far, it looks like a horrible deal.
I would be surprised if other middle eastern countries invest in a country controlled by fanaticals of Shia Islam.
But as BBonds requested, I'll wait for the details to come. But so far, it looks like a horrible deal.
Now look who is assuming? Why not mention them as well as the US and other countries to be added later?
Also, let's not forget their nuclear program is status quo.
Also, let's not forget their nuclear program is status quo.
Don't forget the ballroom!
So some have already agreed?? Or we just assumed they would?
quote:
The neighboring states sure seem willing to make these loans in exchange for an Iran with no nuclear weapon program. Why wouldn’t we want to help negotiate that?
Which ones are those? To be named later?
Everyone is missing the whole reason for the war. We get Iran to pinky swear (again) to not develop nuclear weapons
The "deal" states maintain the status quo on their nuclear program which we said they already have enriched uranium.
The "deal" states maintain the status quo on their nuclear program which we said they already have enriched uranium.
re: Maine dem senate nominee sent sexually explicit texts to as many as 12 women while married
Posted by COAUTiger on 5/31/26 at 7:07 pm to RohanGonzales
"Unreal that dems are circling the wagon for this piece of trash"
Just pointing out hypocrisy is not just a Dem problem.
Just pointing out hypocrisy is not just a Dem problem.
re: Maine dem senate nominee sent sexually explicit texts to as many as 12 women while married
Posted by COAUTiger on 5/31/26 at 2:14 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Ever heard of Scott DesJarlais LINK
Six affairs (2 with patients) and at least 2 abortions.
Six affairs (2 with patients) and at least 2 abortions.
re: Colorado Legislature Passes Bill Forcing Taxpayers to Fund Abortions Up to Birth
Posted by COAUTiger on 4/7/25 at 6:45 pm to UncleFestersLegs
I found it. Anytime is correct.
I misunderstood the info (I thought it was 22 weeks based on a later sentence) but AFTER 22 weeks happens to include up to birth.
I misunderstood the info (I thought it was 22 weeks based on a later sentence) but AFTER 22 weeks happens to include up to birth.
re: Colorado Legislature Passes Bill Forcing Taxpayers to Fund Abortions Up to Birth
Posted by COAUTiger on 4/7/25 at 6:36 pm to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
but it's perfectly illegal in Colorado to do so
Would you mind linking that?
Just another one for accuracy
This bill should remove the Federal funding
"Because the bill requires all abortion services to be state-funded, it will shift costs to the General Fund and decrease the use of cash and federal funds. "
"Because the bill requires all abortion services to be state-funded, it will shift costs to the General Fund and decrease the use of cash and federal funds."
For FY 2025-26, the bill requires the following appropriations to the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing:
* an increase of $1,476,896 from the General Fund;
* a decrease of $41,650 from the Healthcare Affordability and Sustainability Fee Cash Fund; and
* a decrease of $1,721,497 from federal funds.
This bill should remove the Federal funding
"Because the bill requires all abortion services to be state-funded, it will shift costs to the General Fund and decrease the use of cash and federal funds. "
"Because the bill requires all abortion services to be state-funded, it will shift costs to the General Fund and decrease the use of cash and federal funds."
For FY 2025-26, the bill requires the following appropriations to the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing:
* an increase of $1,476,896 from the General Fund;
* a decrease of $41,650 from the Healthcare Affordability and Sustainability Fee Cash Fund; and
* a decrease of $1,721,497 from federal funds.
re: Colorado Legislature Passes Bill Forcing Taxpayers to Fund Abortions Up to Birth
Posted by COAUTiger on 4/7/25 at 6:27 pm to UncleFestersLegs
My information below is incorrect. Please disregard.
Downvoted myself
It reads that is 22 weeks.
Colorado is one of the few states where a late-term abortion (termination after 22 weeks) can be obtained. Most providers will recommend getting an abortion well before the 20th week, as abortions can become more complicated and more painful the further along the patient is in their pregnancy.
CO Abortion Facts
BTW - I am not for it by any means, just adding for possible accuracy.
Downvoted myself
quote:
In Colorado, abortion is legal at all stages of pregnancy. There are no gestational age restrictions on when an abortion can be performed. This means that women in Colorado can access abortion services up to the point of giving birth.
It reads that is 22 weeks.
Colorado is one of the few states where a late-term abortion (termination after 22 weeks) can be obtained. Most providers will recommend getting an abortion well before the 20th week, as abortions can become more complicated and more painful the further along the patient is in their pregnancy.
CO Abortion Facts
BTW - I am not for it by any means, just adding for possible accuracy.
Loogaroo, were are we disconnecting here?
US puts sanctions on Russian oil. This is to keep it off the international market. But there are other countries (China being one) that ignore the sanctions and buys it on the black market. Because Russian oil cannot be openly traded, it's traded at a lower than market value. No way would China pay open market price much less higher than market value for Russian oil. this means China has less demand on the open market. They are getting a lot of their oil cheap in the black market because Russia is desperate for the money (Russian government relies heavily on the oil revenue and not just for military).
Do you think it works different than this?
US puts sanctions on Russian oil. This is to keep it off the international market. But there are other countries (China being one) that ignore the sanctions and buys it on the black market. Because Russian oil cannot be openly traded, it's traded at a lower than market value. No way would China pay open market price much less higher than market value for Russian oil. this means China has less demand on the open market. They are getting a lot of their oil cheap in the black market because Russia is desperate for the money (Russian government relies heavily on the oil revenue and not just for military).
Do you think it works different than this?
re: New unidentified high altitude balloon flying over Western United States
Posted by COAUTiger on 2/23/24 at 5:44 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
If it's got cameras, then it's going to get some beautiful shots. Not a cloud in the sky today.
re: (Memo) Trump and GOP to come out against Alabama court ruling regarding IVF
Posted by COAUTiger on 2/23/24 at 3:56 pm to imjustafatkid
I agree. I'm just concerned it can take a turn like that. I am not aware of anything that would prevent it from going to this extreme. But I am by no means a law person.
It is a civil case but when you find the embryo to be human and was killed by negligence, it's now a criminal case (as far as I am aware).
Again, thank you for your responses. I don't think we are thinking the same way, but I appreciate your interactions.
It is a civil case but when you find the embryo to be human and was killed by negligence, it's now a criminal case (as far as I am aware).
Again, thank you for your responses. I don't think we are thinking the same way, but I appreciate your interactions.
re: (Memo) Trump and GOP to come out against Alabama court ruling regarding IVF
Posted by COAUTiger on 2/23/24 at 3:51 pm to imjustafatkid
Sorry IJAFK, I said I would leave it at my previous post but I just want to add this.
Yes, people are taking this farther than what this case is really about. But it sets precedence for other cases. Embryos are children. A vial gets destroyed accidentally aka 1-2 children are dead. Wouldn't the state have to press manslaughter charges because of the deaths? That's how I am concerned about this ruling. Maybe I am wrong but some laws have a much bigger reach than what was intended.
Yes, people are taking this farther than what this case is really about. But it sets precedence for other cases. Embryos are children. A vial gets destroyed accidentally aka 1-2 children are dead. Wouldn't the state have to press manslaughter charges because of the deaths? That's how I am concerned about this ruling. Maybe I am wrong but some laws have a much bigger reach than what was intended.
re: (Memo) Trump and GOP to come out against Alabama court ruling regarding IVF
Posted by COAUTiger on 2/23/24 at 3:31 pm to imjustafatkid
No, it's not a stupid question at all. I really don't see how you think it is. This law creates a precedence for other cases where embryos are involved.
But from your response, I gather you do not think an individual's actions can be held responsible. Thank you for your response.
But from your response, I gather you do not think an individual's actions can be held responsible. Thank you for your response.
re: (Memo) Trump and GOP to come out against Alabama court ruling regarding IVF
Posted by COAUTiger on 2/23/24 at 3:24 pm to imjustafatkid
How is that a stupid question?? If that California case happened in AL, the technician killed several kids by AL law. How is that a stupid question?
Heck, you are the one that posted the case yesterday .... You sure seemed to think it was related then.
And I was not trying to argue with you. I was curious how you think that should be handled. I was (and will) leave it at that if you answer and be polite about it.
Heck, you are the one that posted the case yesterday .... You sure seemed to think it was related then.
And I was not trying to argue with you. I was curious how you think that should be handled. I was (and will) leave it at that if you answer and be polite about it.
re: (Memo) Trump and GOP to come out against Alabama court ruling regarding IVF
Posted by COAUTiger on 2/23/24 at 3:16 pm to imjustafatkid
In the California case you posted yesterday, you would be for the technician that dropped the vials of embryos to be charged with multiple counts of manslaughter?
Please ignore one of your upvotes. I meant that for cwill.
Did you know that the price of oil is based on supply and demand on the international market? US oil price is based on the price of the international market, not the cost of business. Oil has been sold at a cost of business lost in the past. That goes into profit margins, not price of oil.
Oh wow, I just re-read your post. You called other idiots about not understanding basic economics and then write this -
"If the US cow population doubled, that has no bearing on what the price of milk should be.
It depends on what it COSTS the company to produce and deliver the product."
WOW!! Even basic economics is not that basic. Just wow... Not even a mention of supply and demand?? And I'm an idiot??
And let's read my comment again, but slowly this time. My production numbers had nothing to do with the cost of oil. I just thought the production numbers were interesting. The later comment of price of oil v gas was simply stating that the margin trend between the two has significantly increased. I guess you didn't check out the link prior to spouting off. But that is typical so I guess I should have expected this.
Did you know that the price of oil is based on supply and demand on the international market? US oil price is based on the price of the international market, not the cost of business. Oil has been sold at a cost of business lost in the past. That goes into profit margins, not price of oil.
Oh wow, I just re-read your post. You called other idiots about not understanding basic economics and then write this -
"If the US cow population doubled, that has no bearing on what the price of milk should be.
It depends on what it COSTS the company to produce and deliver the product."
WOW!! Even basic economics is not that basic. Just wow... Not even a mention of supply and demand?? And I'm an idiot??
And let's read my comment again, but slowly this time. My production numbers had nothing to do with the cost of oil. I just thought the production numbers were interesting. The later comment of price of oil v gas was simply stating that the margin trend between the two has significantly increased. I guess you didn't check out the link prior to spouting off. But that is typical so I guess I should have expected this.
Popular
18
