More of a diplomatic crisis between Israel and the entire rest of world, really.

That would be awfully hypocritical, given that Mangione’s crime in the first place was (allegedly) killing a mass murderer.

Going by standard algebraical operations, the “ia” would be implied to be 9.2

You were confused? In this story about democratically electing parliaments and presidents, you needed it clarified whether they were talking about North Korea or South Korea?

OK, but we have to make it absolutely crystal clear who is doing this, who it’s hurting, and who is benefiting. That’s why reporting like this is important.

Trump just won an election by blaming democrats for Trump’s own terrible economy.

I think a good start would be to stop allowing Republicans to raid Social Security for quick cash, like they’ve been constantly doing since the Reagan administration.

Yes, it’s a payroll tax. Your paycheck may show how much you are paying into Social Security. This is money meant to help you and others after retirement. Musk wants to take that money and instead use it to fill unrelated gaps in the federal budget, gaps caused by Trump’s tax cuts for the very wealthy.

Friendly reminder that Social Security is a separate government program that funds itself.

What Musk is talking about is stealing from Social Security in order to cut taxes elsewhere (namely cutting taxes for people like Musk).

TL;DR this is related to Tesla’s Autopilot (the rule “requires automakers to report crashes if advanced driver-assistance or autonomous-driving technologies were engaged within 30 seconds of impact”). Musk wants to not be held accountable for damages and casualties caused by his shitty software.

You’re right, and that one isn’t even hyperbole. They earnestly want to turn the parks into oil fields and cut down the forests.

This has to have been some kind of clerical error, there’s no political motivation whatsoever for Biden to have done this.

That being the case, keep publicizing the story, and maybe it will get to the administrations radar. Have the clemencies already been actuated, or is there still time to correct the mistake?

The postal service doesn’t lose money, it costs money.

By this logic, the interstate highway system and the military both lose billions! Is Trump going to privatize them too?

“Unpopular Opinion: [popular opinion]!”

Don’t call it an oops.

This was either a massive lapse of bureaucracy, or it was a massive lapse in judgement. Either way, in my opinion it is one of Biden’s biggest mistakes in his entire four years of governance.

Well that’s a fucking oops by Biden. Most of the clemencies on today’s list were ~1500 nonviolent drug offenders who deserved leniency. How the fuck did Conahan manage to slip in with them?

Behind the Bastards did a series on this guy. TL;DR the guy deserves a hell of a lot worse than life in prison.

Here’s a more general report that delves into your question: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/global-study-on-homicide.html

By far the biggest reason is that ~70% of those homicides are crime or gang related, and almost all of those are men, which neatly accounts for the disparity.

That of course raises the question, why are men so much more likely to get tangled up in gangs or crime? I’m sure that the sociologists have a more nuanced take, but I’ll venture out on a limb and say it’s because men are full of dumbassifying hormones. Being immersed in societal peer pressure probably doesn’t help, depending on what environment they’re in.

Yep. A 10% tariff will mean that every other country has 10% more purchasing power compared to the US. It’s basically shooting your own economy’s competitiveness in the foot.

Thank you.

To be fair to the Guardian, their headline is substantive, compared to the other article that just gave a number without context. The report does clearly support the assertion that on average home is the most dangerous place for women to be attacked.

Sir, my entire thesis was about how important it is to present clear data to substantiate your claims. Not only are you refuting the findings with zero data or sources, you are injecting a racially charged dimension into the mix.

For all we know your arguments could be entirely correct, but you yourself are undermining them by not attempting constructive discourse.

It’s a shame that this data is being presented this poorly, because this is a really important issue that deserves attention. None of the figures presented in the linked article have the proper context to understand them. Even the UN report itself does not present their findings well.

So, for instance, 140 women per day is of course more than the ideal number of zero, but there are billions of people on this planet. To actually quantify the gender imbalance of this number, we need to compare it to the number of men who are victims in the same way. From the report:

Globally, approximately 51,100 women and girls were killed by their intimate partners or other family members […out of…] 85,000 women and girls killed intentionally during the year […] In other words, an average of 140 women and girls worldwide lost their lives every day at the hands of their partner or a close relative.

The report does not offer corresponding numbers for male (or non-binary) victims. It does, however, say that 11.8% of male victims and 60.2% of female victims are killed by partners or other family members. It also acknowledges that 80% of all homicide victims are men and 20% women, which is beside the point as this is about domestic violence, but it will allow us to do some math to arrive at numbers to compare against.

• 85,000 * 80/20 = 340,000 men killed total
• 340,000 * 11.8% = 40,120 men killed by partners or family
• so we are comparing 40,120 men with 51,100 women
• women are 27.4% more likely than men to be killed by partners or family.

…which should have been the headline. 27% more is massive! Domestic violence is a huge issue, and women are more likely to suffer from it!

There is no need to obfuscate the numbers to be less honest. The honest numbers themselves are shocking enough, and scientifically literate readers won’t dismiss your credibility along with your cause. I look forward to future UN reports communicating these horrifying statistics a bit more clearly.