throwaway_Bees

>A reasonable person absolutely would have made that decision based on information that was already public.

The stock was sold immediately after a coronavirus briefing, not just some stock, his entire net worth.

Maybe it is reasonable to have sold your entire net worth based solely on the available public news, but then why not well before or well after the briefing and instead right after the briefing? Why tip of your wealth constituents at a $10,000/plate fundraiser while simultaneously maintaining a different political position publicly?

No, but you could purchase a $10,000 plate at his next fundraiser and he may just tell you, like he told the donors at the last fundraiser before the crash.

>what information did they have access to that wasn't publicly available already?

Both classified and top secret information.

For example, changes to China's production, mobilization, expenditure (sale of stocks, debts, etc...), changes to net imports/decreases in net exports, satellite imagery, State Dept/CIA field officers analysis/reports, etc...

Certainly it goes without saying the head of the Senate intelligence committee has access to classified and top secret information.

He sold nearly 100% of his net worth in stocks and his public political position is inconsistent with the sale of the stock which he has at least admitted was influenced by public news reporting. It leaves one to wonder why the public news would guide his financial decisions, when as a Senator he had a different political position. Not to mention its is established he dropped the market crash tip at a $10,000/plate campaign fundraiser dinner.

Clearly not the brains of those certain congressmen and women that sold off before the crash...not to mention their constituents they likely gave the tip to while maintaining a different political posture publicly. Curious what kinds of bucket loads of cash they made and continue to make shorting with continued access to inside info including classified intelligence.

>I'm not a fan of the banks, they were encouraged to loan to risky borrowers, people who bought as much as they could with little more than a pulse.

There is so much to unpack in this sentence, this alone could be a book about the financial/housing collapse.

Yes, in Clinton's years the banks lobbied and successfully had regulations rolled back so they could underwrite loans on stated income from broker applications. For purposes of culpability/intent, look no further than these lobbying efforts (I am skipping the other deregulations they successfully lobbied for: 103% financing/nothing down/adjustable rate mortgages).

With these new rules its fair to say banks encouraged brokers to in turn encourage borrowers to make up numbers because now they would not be verified.

When it all blew up, the banks blamed the borrowers for lying on mortgage applications, making themselves out to be the victims.

Billions will be poured into the SBA, so they can claim billions went to small businesses, but that money will all be given to businesses with political connections.

And they will never mention those thousands of small businesses you reference that will go under, just like politicians never once spoke of American's who lost their homes and became homeless, instead mentioning only the banks problems.

Don't forget about the corporate welfare. 2008 resulting in 2 bailouts totaling nearly $2T for the banks.

At a time when American's are staying home and not being paid, Trump is continuing to focus on the stock market. He will soon pass a nearly $1T bailout for businesses...American workers will be lucky to see a single check in the next 2-4 weeks.

>If you have something interesting to offer to the scenario of collapsing American restaurants, go ahead.

You didn't quite offer anything interesting, just stated the industry is collapsing and workers should get other jobs...that isn't interesting or helpful.

Curious how many people you employ and if your business is immune from the economic impact of this pandemic, maybe some of these workers would like you to hire them.

A lot, that is why it is backed by the Country with the largest economy in the World...mean while Bitcoin isn't backed by anything except false marketing, it certainly isn't a P2P electronic system of cash.

Wow less than 24 hour notice to get your things and get out, with Spring Break starting Friday some students may not even be around and will return to a closed campus.

>None of the local Verizon stores had any phones (11 Pro Max) in stock (they explicitly said it was due to China supply chain)

That may be true...but it may be just as likely they are minimizing their own inventory to keep their own costs down/cash on hand, which is not something they would freely tell their own employees or customers.

Monk fruit may be promising, there has been studies in Mice where Monk Fruit even lowered blood sugar levels. However, I agree more studies must be completed.

Another study including Aspartame, monk fruit, stevia and sucrose was kind of interesting which showed sucrose (as expected) had the biggest insulin spike, but interestingly the participants made up for the sucrose calories in their next meal and actually had higher insulin spikes in the subsequent meal compared to the sucrose group. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27956737

Probably best to avoid all sweeteners.

I sold honey for a time, at significantly higher prices than the market price, retail price was $1.99/.25 ounce (our wholesale price was a little less than 50% of the retail). To put it in perspective a typical 12oz honey bear retails for $3.50-$4.

The secret to our success was coloring it red, and giving it a "vampire theme" at the height of the Vampire show/movie craze and selling it through Hot Topic (a Fortune 500 retailer with our target demographic and we were selling through 800 stores nationwide).