I think the real exhortation is to develop a multi-pronged strategy for managing depression. I didn't feel like my depressed life got durably better until I had both exercise and therapy, and there are still times where things aren't going well with no clear discernible reason. I suspect that adding a low dose of medication on top would help.
Every additional coping mechanism you add, that works well for you, provides defense in depth.
If so, that is a risk that is very dependent on local laws. I would be much more cautious about seeking mental health care in Florida, where the Baker Act makes it very easy, than in Connecticut [0]. The risk of being involuntarily committed also, of course, has to be balanced against the risk of forgoing mental health care when you need it and then injuring or killing yourself.
That seems like a minor concern. Therapeutic malpractice is a thing, misdiagnosis, iatrogenic treatments and so forth; not uncommon. Was a time when gay was in the dsm, the pendulum has swung back and forth on transgender children.
I am such a fan of minimal, text-forward, straight to the point website designs like this. I feel like it makes it easier to quickly determine whether the text content is worth reading.
Sub-3% inflation [0] and 3% annualized GDP growth [1] sure doesn’t seem like stagflation to me. Not everything is sunshine and flowers but we shouldn’t throw around terms when they don’t apply.
> Not everything is sunshine and flowers but we shouldn’t throw around terms when they don’t apply.
It seems to apply, despite your dismissal. Inflation is an ongoing and pressing concern, as stated by the Federal Reserve. The tightening of monetary policy has contributed to unemployment. GDP is irrelevant, as stagflation is a paradox, not a goalpost.
> In economic theory, there are two main explanations for stagflation: supply shocks, such as a sharp increase in oil prices, and misguided government policies that hinder industrial output while expanding the money supply too rapidly.
1) The US was rebuilt after WW2 to be highly car-centric, with disastrous results for pedestrian safety. It is actually more dangerous for children to move in public because of this automobile centricity in >95% of US spaces, which drives cultural shifts
2) US media is highly sensationalist; Fox News is popular and generally serves to make viewers frightened of the world
3) The US has 340M people to Ireland’s 5.6M people, so from a base rate, we’d expect ~60x more lurid headlines to come out of the US
Because renting a room in SF costs more than $700.
I understand asking $700 for this feels icky, but the only reason they can do it is because of the insane scarcity of housing in SF. If we want this to not be a competitive option, the way forward is just to build more housing - like these people are doing.
A girl I went to school with in the American South is now a reporter in the Midwest. She was supposed to go home for a brief visit to see her family, but Delta canceled her flight due to the CrowdStrike outage. A few days later her father was murdered by a disgruntled customer while working at his jewelry store in their hometown.
What an awful coincidence. I can’t even imagine how it must feel to have a freak technical accident deprive you of seeing your father for the last time.
This would happen with literally anything. Bus is late and you miss the flight. Weather is bad, flight gets delayed. You eat out and get food poisoning, can't get the flight.
Anything could have caused that really. Still very unfortunate but c'est la vie sometimes.
I agree. My desired tone for my comment was less “CrowdStrike is evil” and more “the universe, through its indifference to you, can be very cruel and absurd”
It could have happened with anything, but instead, it happened because a company run by a guy with a multi-billion-dollar net worth couldn't be bothered to check if the software they were shipping actually worked.
Exactly. A preventable action by a company resulted in this. It wasn't a tornado, a hurricane, an asteroid, or aliens from another planet. Crowdstrike played stupid games and now they're going to win a lot of stupid prizes. They're responsible for the harm they inflicted on the world - the amount of handwringing apologia on their behalf is staggering. Companies and the people who run them absolutely need to be held accountable concomitant with the level of harm they inflict.
The Economist has published several critiques of ESG investing:
- ESG is overbroad and contradictory, and funds that select investments solely based on emissions criteria would serve investors better [0]
- ESG is ineffective because it is rife with greenwashing [1]
- ESG is fundamentally unable to accomplish meaningful progress on social goals because profit-seeking will always take precedence in corporations [2]
I don’t think every ESG-related piece they publish needs to include a lengthy disclaimer that the publication itself doesn’t love ESG, just as their critiques of ESG don’t need to include disclaimers about the downsides of boycotting firms that offer ESG products, as mentioned in the article:
> Taking a stand can be expensive. Researchers at the Federal Reserve and the University of Pennsylvania have found that anti-ESG boycotts raised the cost of borrowing for Texan municipalities by $300m-500m as banks with ESG policies withdrew from underwriting bond sales.
