knz

The bias I was referring to was not so much one of pro Russia but more one related to the particular focus that Greenwald/The Intercept seems to have on American policy. If you read their "About Us" page (https://theintercept.com/about/) it mentions that their mission is to "expose corruption and injustice __wherever__ they find it and hold the powerful accountable.". Personally I find it very interesting that they rarely seem to find examples of this in other contexts - the reporting is predominantly about American/western issues. I don't think I'm stretching to suggest that Greenwald/The Intercept wear their disdain for western foreign policy/hegemony openly.

This doesn't negate their reporting or perspective but it does make me question what impact this has on the conclusions they draw about the Russia issue, particularly when the public record shows questions about the role of Russia in relation to organizations such as Wikileaks. As you said - "There is a reason for the Russian fear mongering and not Chinese fear mongering, Saudi Arabian fear mongering". Personally I believe being skeptical also includes being open to the idea that extraordinary events can occur and the growing body of public evidence seems to suggest that the Russian influence was far greater than previous efforts.

In the context of the increasing evidence of Russian involvement in our elections and reports about their support of our enemies (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/17/evidence-russian-mil... or https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/04/24...) I'm not sure it's baseless fear mongering.

Greenwald isn't exactly an impartial source when it comes to Russia either - he has his own overt biases. It's healthy to be skeptical but naive to assume Russia is a benevolent actor on the world stage (even more so in the context of events like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17).

Even beyond the domestic political implications of Russian involvement in our election, Russia is actively supporting groups that are likely shooting at Americans and our allies today (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/17/evidence-russian-mil... or https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/04/24...).

Is it hysterical to care about these issues?

In 2014 the US was spending ~ 6.5% of household expenditure on food, on the lower end compared to the listed European nations (Germany, France, Italy, and Greece in particular).

There are many other links with a similar premise.

My own travels have taken me to Spain, Denmark, France, Germany, England, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, and Canada - other than Vietnam I've always found prices to be comparable or greater than in the US. Obviously the cost is influenced by what you are buying, what is in season, and where you are a shopping. YMMV though!

A ten percent increase across an entire grocery bill might be more noticeable though. Likewise with the cost of eating at a restaurant if all workers are paid more (i.e. the $15/hour movement).

Personally I am not opposed to paying the actual costs instead using immigration and government subsidies of crops like soybeans and corn to lower the costs for some farmers.

Respectfully, I have to disagree. I watched this documentary for the first time last night and came away feeling that the jarring tone was deliberate (the whole point was that our unease about the chaos of the world is being exploited for political means).

I'm curious if you were familiar with many of the events depicted in the documentary? I suspect it would have been harder to follow without some knowledge of these events.

My experience has always been that customers with email addresses at older services (Hotmail, Yahoo, Earthlink, AOL etc) are usually boomers that are using an account set up for them by their millennial aged grandchildren back in the 90's or early 2000's...

The movie Contagion was partially set where I live in Minnesota - it contained depictions of people assembling for food, vaccines, treatment, and mass burial. Seeing local landmarks in the movie made it feel very real and made me think more about emergency preparedness.

I've also talked people out of supporting outrageous statements or made them question their own beliefs (rural relatives in South Dakota who loved talking about their lack of income tax now openly question why SD gets so much more government tax money than neighbouring MN etc).

That said, the point isn't to be "win", it's to have a dialogue, share ideas, and break out of the "us vs them" mentality.

So speak up. Educate your fellow citizens as to why these issues are important. Break through their media bubble/snowglobe and have multiple meaningful conversations that go deeper than the talking points spewed out by media personalities. Much of the country is purple not red and blue - if you can have a respectful conversation with someone you can find common ground on these issues.

And show up on election day.

The First Amendment exists for a reason - "we get the government we deserve" applies to those of us who chose to stay informed as well if we don't respond to the challenges of the day.

Of course you're paying $35+/month instead of the usual $0-10/month for most of their consumer products.

Part of the "game" is pretending that you're not involved in espionage despite all players knowing that it occurs. Morals don't really come into it, since there is no reward for having the most "fair" intelligence agencies.

The "Misty" satellites came up on HN last week related to the SpaceX launch and failure.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misty_(satellite)

http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/the-real-mystery-satellites...

"A week after launch, reports were released from the Soviets that six bits of debris had been detected suggesting an explosion had occurred. The Pentagon announced that any debris would decay after six weeks. The amateur astronomers and observers that were tracking this object only catalogued five out of the six pieces. Six months later an unidentified satellite was discovered in orbit on a similar trajectory to that of the classified payload was released, leading the satellite spotters to suspect it was the missing piece, nick-named Misty. However a couple of noticeable manoeuvres later, Misty disappeared again. Perhaps the ‘explosion’ was a decoy to put Misty into place unbeknownst to the Russians."

If I received one about a nuclear missile I'd assume it's legitimate and at least take some minor precautions while trying to verify the alert. It's foolish to assume every unlikely alert is a false alarm.

That said, a single nuclear missile seems incredibly unlikely to me. I'd expect multiple missiles and an associated cyber attack if another nation state was willing to start a nuclear exchange. A single missile is just inviting the wrath of the US and rest of the world for little benefit.

I've also experienced being caught in the middle of a tornado outbreak (30 in 90 minutes, a couple were over mile wide) while driving across southern Minnesota. We sheltered at a Walmart and were quite alarmed that no locals seemed to take it seriously, even when the roof partially lifted off and cars started getting tossed around in the parking lot.

IIRC the State recently switched to more localized warnings (not county wide) due to people ignoring the sirens.

I'm also pretty sure that "you can see tornadoes coming" is poor advice, especially since they often come at night or with significant rainfall.

They are primarily for tornadoes rather than nuclear weapons though.

"For the record, Trump's administration supports full reauthorization. In fact, the White House issued a statement on Wednesday evening — hours before Trump's tweet — restating its call for members of Congress to vote for its continued use."

To be fair, Trump is hardly the the first President to seek renewal of such laws.

> useful in cracking down on citizens and opponents who criticize him.

There were multiple reports about "Dark Side" yesterday - https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/dark-side-federal-unit-...

What could possibly go wrong.....

More information/speculation for anyone interested:

"The first of these satellites is known as the USA-53 or Misty satellite. This stealth satellite’s design means that it is incredibly difficult to detect or locate. This satellite is thought to have been developed to keep an eye on the Soviets and their concealment of weaponry. If this satellite is still really in place it remains classified information. Allegedly launched in 1990 (on board Space Shuttle Atlantis, STS-36), was a payload which remains top secret but openly known is that the mission was dedicated to the Department of Defense. Aviation Week magazine announced the satellite on-board was an imaging reconnaissance satellite. Amateur astronomers tracked the Shuttle and its payload and measured the satellite’s magnitude at -1, which was quite bright compared to normal imaging satellites.

A week after launch, reports were released from the Soviets that six bits of debris had been detected suggesting an explosion had occurred. The Pentagon announced that any debris would decay after six weeks. The amateur astronomers and observers that were tracking this object only catalogued five out of the six pieces. Six months later an unidentified satellite was discovered in orbit on a similar trajectory to that of the classified payload was released, leading the satellite spotters to suspect it was the missing piece, nick-named Misty. However a couple of noticeable manoeuvres later, Misty disappeared again. Perhaps the ‘explosion’ was a decoy to put Misty into place unbeknownst to the Russians."

That said, I have heard of remote sensing being used to monitor livestock and crops. The commercialization of UAV's is contributing to that.

"How many pints are in a 5-gallon pail? How many cups are in a 5-gallon pail?"

Of course the clinic knows I have insurance so only offers the "insured rate".

It's insane.

I'm currently on holiday in New Zealand and had to take my infant daughter to the urgent care. The total cost was $21 USD (including the prescription).

Back in the US it's $330 for a 15 minute appointment with her GP.

There is no way it costs $1,300/hour to run a GP clinic. Between my employer and I, the cost of family insurance is > $20,000/year and we pay the first $6,000 in expenses. That's similar to the TOTAL income tax of a median household in New Zealand - how are they providing all of the functions of government plus universal health care for the cost of just health insurance?!?

It really makes me wonder about the ROI on taxes in America.

Of course not. As you say, it's clearly not a significant issue for most Republican voters.

However, I think a lot of voters assume that the party reflects the values of the voters though - clearly that is not always true.