I think some stock ticker said there was a 16% bump with the announcement. Not negligible, and perhaps enough to take profits while you can.
But I will look at their stock history soonest.
Printable View
They are not that good at this. The Senate does not threaten them. It would not be plausible to push it that far. Etc.
You're from Budapest. If you are driving down the road in Vienna in a truck with your kids in the front and a load of stolen furniture in the back, and the cops stop you for running a red light, ask for your passport, you don't have one, they see the furniture, ask you where it came from, you can't tell them, they get a report of stolen furniture, it matches your load, and they arrest you for theft/burglary/smuggling/human trafficking/etc., what do you suppose happens to your kids? You really don't know anything about this other than what CNN tells you through your local media, so just stop typing. I'm done reading your stupid shit.Quote:
But I can and would still oppose a policy of separating families to dissuade immigration. A wall is more effective.
Why can't this one aspect be criticized as less humane than his predecessors?
Looked. That CEO has impeccable timing. Pfizer is down by about, oh, 25% over the past two years. With some significant swings in there (large amplitude, low frequency, ~ zero mean). He picked a point just above the 1-year high. There’s a very clear signal in the stock price series corresponding to the vaccine’s announcement.
Like genetics, not sure what to make of it.
Probably. That's why I said "in his opinion". He still has liabilities and assets that must be maintained. Maybe $5 million is a buffer from his usual $10 million in liquidity that just went down to $7 million due to expenses. I'm not here to speculate on his liabilities and use of money.
Here's the thing people misunderstand about rich people - they're not qualitatively different from you or me. They have the same worries, perspectives, and fears. The difference is that their income and liabilities scale with a few more zeros on the ends than ours do.
The USA government and business interests spent the last 50 years welcoming illegal labor with open arms, and sending mixed messages to illegals to come on over. Basically the USA wants illegals to 'steal those TVs' because it's cheaper than paying the disposal fee. But they don't want to admit it, so they arrest a few here and there and act all upset. I certainly understand why people think we should just leave kids out of this stupid game.
Do Employers Face Consequences for Hiring Unauthorized Workers?
"Department of Justice data analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse show that criminal prosecutions against employer representatives for hiring undocumented workers have never exceeded 20 per year, except during 2005 under George W. Bush and in 2009 under Barack Obama.
The numbers have held steady under President Donald Trump, even as almost every other enforcement measure has surged. From April 2018 through March 2019, 11 individuals representing employers were prosecuted for hiring workers without proper documentation. Of those, only three were sentenced to prison time."
Its amazing. There's ~20 million illegals in the USA, and THREE people went to jail for hiring them in 2018-2019. I wonder how many people Sessions sent to jail for smoking pot that year??
Pretty much no. I would say never, but that's a bad word. It probably happened once to some guy my cousin knew.
As I recall, mRNA is actively transported out of the nucleus. Transporting it back in would be kind of counterproductive and a waste of energy, so therefore unlikely. Wasteful, counterproductive, expensive behavior is characteristic of complex multicellular organisms like people, not of cellular organelles. Do you know of counterexamples?