LilB0kChoy

Yeah, there’s this too:

However, a small but growing number of U.S. states, cities and counties have adopted legislation that impose maximum indoor temperature standards on rental housing. In the last five years, six U.S. localities, including New Orleans and Clark County, Nevada, have adopted such cooling laws, compared with just seven in the previous two decades, according to Reuters' review of property codes and interviews with more than a dozen policymakers and housing officials.

But it shouldn’t have to be done at that minute of a level. State or federally it could (I argue should) be guaranteed as a basic necessity, just like water, power, sewer.

“Women mature faster”

They have to, it’s a survival necessity. They have to work twice as hard to even get some of the recognition their male peers do, plus having to be constantly alert for creeps, weirdos, manipulators etc.

A Reuters survey of housing regulations in all 50 U.S. states found that, while nearly half of them require landlords to maintain existing air conditioning units, none require that air-conditioning be provided. Nor do rental housing regulations describe air-conditioning as an essential service like plumbing, heat and electricity.

AC not mandated in Texas

AC not mandated in LA, though that might change

In general, it’s a safe bet to just assume it’s not mandated and if it is or going to be there’s probably a landlord who opposes it.

Generally speaking you and @Lucky_777@lemmy.world are both right.

There are people who have issues tied to excessive porn consumption but there is not consensus about it being an addiction. Some experts argue that it’s a compulsion rather than an addiction.

I said “very likely” because he is not a reliable source/witness.

There’s a Wikipedia page about all the false or misleading things he says.

I believe he did but I tend to follow the journalistic two-source rule for definitive statements.

I feel similar to you. I’d really question any attempts to ban by this administration.

Article title:

Von der Leyen and Trump strike EU-US trade deal with 15% tariff for the bloc

But this raises the important question whether in a functioning democracy it is ever okay for the police to investigate who marked a specific ballot.

Does Germany have a post-war law that makes this a crime? I thought the had a lot of anti-Nazi laws on the books.

Edit: Turns out it is. Under Section 86a of the German Criminal Code (StGB), it “prohibits the distribution and public use of symbols of unconstitutional organizations and those similar to them. This includes symbols of parties or organizations banned in Germany, especially those associated with National Socialism, as well as their propaganda materials. Violations can lead to imprisonment or fines.”

Many of us are in the habit of mentally calculating it wherever we live though.

For example, my state sales tax is 6.88%, my county has a .25% tax on top of that, and then there’s a metro area tax of 1% on top of that, my city does not impose a separate tax of their own, so total sales tax in my city is 8.13%.

When shopping we’ll do the mental math (roughly) and factor that in so it might say $39.99 + tax but I know that it’ll be a little under $44 with tax.

It’s inconvenient but, like most things, we get used to it and adapt. Also, while tax varies a lot by state, most of us don’t venture too far out of our home area so tax is roughly the same all the places we regularly go.

It would be nice to have the price listed as the price you pay but it doesn’t work as well with our current system.

I must be ugly as sin. My wife and I have been married almost five years and I have yet to be in a situation where a woman is pursuing me and I can shout, “I don’t know you! You’re not my wife!” and run away.

There's loads (almost all ?) of public institutions which have become tools for the authoritarian regime.

Yep, there sure are. Anything to support that the OCE (a non-partisan independent board) or House Ethics Committee (a bi-partisan committee made up of 5 members of each party) is one of them?

This institution is not "working as intended" if it asks a democrat to repay an event ticket

OCE referred it to the HEC, they reviewed it and found that while AOC made full effort to abide by the gift policy there were a few things missed. They asked her to rectify it and she agreed. She also acknowledged their findings (“She accepts the ruling and will remedy the remaining amounts, as she’s done at each step in this process“). What’s not working there?

but gives a republican a free pass on insider trading.

“the committee said that it reviewed allegations referred by the Office of Congressional Conduct and “did not find evidence that he knowingly or intentionally caused his spouse to trade based on insider information.”

Any actual tangible proof or evidence they’re lying? Or maybe you have a view like the MAGAs and want to suspend due process for those you don’t like?

One person received a benefit of a few hundred dollars and the other received a benefit of possibly a few million dollars.

Do you notice how you worded this?

“One person received a benefit of a few hundred dollars”

“other received a benefit of possibly a few million dollars”. Possibly.

The committee said that it reviewed allegations referred by the Office of Congressional Conduct and “did not find evidence that he knowingly or intentionally caused his spouse to trade based on insider information.”

But the report said that the panel “did not receive full cooperation from Mrs. Kelly and was therefore unable to determine whether her stock purchase was improper.”

I think it’s very likely they engaged in insider trading, but if they have nothing to actually prove it, what are you expecting from the process?

I'll remind you that insider trading is theft.

It sure is. Who handles financial crimes? The DoJ and the SEC, yet no investigation was opened. Probably because those organizations have been hamstrung and stacked with loyalists at positions of power? Although the case for Rep. Kelly was referred to House Ethics in 2021…

On July 23, 2021, the Office of Congressional Ethics transmitted a referral to the Committee on Ethics of the United States House of Representatives regarding Rep. Mike Kelly.