gbear

As a member of a medical household, I can assure you decisions like this do play a part in where doctors chose to work/live. For what it is worth, abortion is not the only decision made by non-medical people that impacts where they chose to work. Other examples of decisions include euthanasia laws and how licensing works for the state. I know my sister-in-law was at first very hesitant about Washington State's passing a law allowing euthanasia. I know when I was a patient advocate on the American Board of Internal Medicine, they took states using their certification as a requirement as both a good (sign of agreement for the need) and negative (they knew it would increase blow back on their requirements for certification). Some doctors have no desire to put in the continuing education needed for certification much less certification in multiple specialties which they may desire to practice. I don't doubt the laws banning abortion play a role in where some OBGYN chose to practice. This is made much much worse when there is ambiguity in the law and how it may be enforced. As the one doctor in the article this morning mentioned, how long do I have to let my patient risk medical harm before I perform an abortion? From talking to doctors, they worry about laws like this because they also don't know who is going to make the final decision on when it was "bad enough" to have done the procedures. If they do it based on a medical need, is some right to life group going to push to have them tried? Ambiguity of laws written by lay people, especially in a hasty manner with little or no medical review are a nightmare for the profession being regulated. All of that has little to do with their feelings about "abortion" itself. Yes, I put it in quotes because there are procedures some would view as abortion and others would not. For example, is removing a dead fetus an abortion? In many abortion laws, the procedure itself is what is outlawed, especially those attempting to ban third trimester abortions.

Renegade, I used nurses and doctors out of laziness. Sorry. I could just as easily use truck drivers, waiters, child care, translators or any one of hundreds of other jobs we currently understaff as an economy. In general, I agree on the need for more specific fixes. The problem is we are plugging holes by taking stones from elsewhere in the wall. At some point, we need more stones. From an unemployment stance, this means more people capable of working and desiring to do so. That means immigration and education along with a recognition there is no instant fix. We can only hope to set up future generations to have easier/more choices. Even the poor immigrant who doesn't speak English will have kids and grandkids who will.

Yes, they can hire already employed people, but this means the other company is now short staffed. The point remains. The economy needs more workers than it currently has. Renegade, I am not saying unemployment doesn't suck for those mired in it. I am saying a healthy economy needs some to allow for growth. When I was in college, many many moons ago, they preached 5-6 % unemployment was about optimal. This allows for frictional unemployment as employees move from one job to another. With that rate, businesses can generally find workers, but still have to compete for the ones with the most marketable skillsets. When I speak of 3.6% unemployment causing problems, I am talking about from a system wide perspective. We have nursing homes and doctors' offices without staff. We have schools that can not hire enough teachers. We have sectors of the our economy not growing as they should because the workers aren't there to do the work. Some of this may be a pay issue of just needing to pay more, but a lot of it is not having enough potential employees.

I find it interesting how many people seem to think a jobs report showing 3.6% unemployment is a good thing. When the rates get that low, there are fewer and fewer people to hire when a new business wants to expand. As the numbers get too low, the good ideas get stymied by lack of available labor. Yes, that may push wages up because businesses have to bid against other businesses. This wage increase will increase the costs businesses have to pay which will be passed along to the consumers in the form of higher prices (inflation). So the Fed raises rates, it's only arrow to fight inflation. In theory, this should slow business growth which will the lower the demand for employees which will keep wages and inflation in check. However, we are also fighting a demographics situation where there will be fewer and fewer workers in the U.S, barring a change in our immigration policies (that I have advocated in favor of for more than a decade). Fewer workers for more jobs needed for an expanding economy will mean higher wages and inflation. The sad part is that presumes a best case scenario. In a less favorable scenario, the economy tanks. Then there are less people and companies paying into our social safety net programs.

Ferriera has an amazing ability to get a shot off quickly. The U.S. might finally have a goal scorer. It is easy to say he had hat tricks against weaker competition, but he is still the only U.S. player to do it in consecutive games, and it's not like previous players didn't play against this level of competition. I would also point out Cade Cowell seems to have speed to burn. I look forward to seeing him and Ferriera together putting pressure on opposition defenses. I thought our midfield in general looked pretty solid with good quick touches to move the ball and create space. Now I don't know if that was the result of weak competition, but again one can only play against the team on the other side of the ball. They did what they were supposed to do. The back looked to be lulled to sleep a little when they got a significant lead which could be concerning. Still, I think the U.S, controlled the game for the most part from whistle to whistle.

for fun: Which dog is different in this picture? Is it the only solid color dog or the three legged one or the one with the mushed nose? I think about this and all the infinite ways we divide ourselves into "us" and "them." There are legit differences in our experiences, and they change us and how to deal with us. However, for the dogs they are all "us" in their play. I'm jealous. Sorry, that is my random thought for today as I looked at a picture I took last night.

84 witnesses seems like a lot. Are some of them held in reserve to counter a potential defense strategy/show the lies? I tend to think of each of them as potential walls held in reserve should Trump break out of corridor the prosecution is constructing for him. They can be used to steer the trial path back towards the goal of conviction. However, if the trial proceeds without break away attempts, the rest of the 84 witnesses will not have to be called. Am I wrong in that assumption about the high number of witnesses?

With the first round swaps in future years, do you swap regardless of who starts w higher pick?

That's a new take on the "Your momma is so fat..." jokes from the 1980's.

The original argument as I understand it is if Medicare "negotiates," then it isn't a negotiation because of the market share of Medicare. For them when Medicare says we will pay x, the drug companies can't easily say they need 2x in payment. However, the current result is the rest of the market pays 2x and medicare pays 4x. Personally, I am all for medicare driving down prescription costs. The argument that paying less will stifle innovation ignores the rest of the world getting the results of our innovation without paying the prices we do...and they still innovate, even in countries not paying what we do for the drugs.

I love how the dog goes from concerned to "great he's dead. Let's do the humpty dumpty!"

I will say, it made running a challenge. I took it like my training to run in Yellowstone. I ran making sure to never lose my breath.

As a parent of a trans 8 year old, I can assure you many kids know their penis or vagina does not match their gender. My daughter wanted to cut her penis off at 3 years old because it doesn't belong there. Gender dysphoria is very real, and it can start pretty much as soon as a child starts to develop a sense of self. As a trans-racial adoptive parent, believe me this is about the last thing I would wish her to be. That is not because of any sense of embarrassment. It is because I would wish for her to miss a few of the correlations to suicide. One of the main causes for suicide in the trans population is thought to be a lack of feeling acceptance. This is already a challenge for her. Thus, as with all our kids, we do what we can to support who she is and wants to be. We are lucky enough to be in a supportive school system, but I know she still takes some flack as all "different" kids do. Many on here seem to think gender has no reason to be taught to little kids. I would argue the need to teach acceptance of all requires us to teach it. If it is a point of hatred or disgust being taught at home by those who are ignorant, then we have a duty to teach kids that they may better learn acceptance as a social norm. Do you think racists are born that way or do you think they learn it by what they are exposed to growing up? What age should a child be taught not to say the n word? We learn our social rules early, and if we don't, we should.

I saw the Super Mario Brothers movie. It was better than I thought it would be with a lot of references to the original game that I liked. I won't say it was a great movie, but it was a solid B, and I don't regret spending the time to watch it with my youngest kid.

I have to say, there were times the language was a bit hard to exactly get the first time around, but I had a harder time getting used to the swearing. There were times I would go back just to hear the string again. It made a lie of my usual rule on swearing being a lazy and often forgettable approach to making a point.

A fence was the hardest decision he made all year? I would think one of their many difficult cases would win this honor.

I watched Peter Pan and Wendy with my kids. It was well done, and I liked the different emphasis from the original. This one was much more about Wendy growing up and out growing the need for Never Land. The acting was good and the writing was imaginative. If you liked the original years ago, you are likely to like this. My kids enjoyed it for the story of magic, fairies and little kids able to take on adults. I'd give it a 7 or an 8.

I want to know how Texas teachers will explain the 7th commandment to grade school kids without mentioning sex. "Excuse me teacher...What is the word in the 7th one, 'A D U L T E R Y'? "

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-health-maryland-medicaid-0b18cbd6f11e1f0d96bcfc47f40224cc MD approves Medicaid paying for more gender affirming treatments.

I wish I didn't find the last sentence to be the most likely outcome. Rooting for the Wizards makes me understand why there are still people who root for the Jets and other teams that have sucked for a generation but have some glimmer of a vaguely remembered history. We all want to be like Packers fans who had a long drought but eventually regained some luster of success for a time.

You're right. Good catch.

I really enjoyed Leigh Bardugo's book, The Ninth House, and i am now reading the second book in the series. They are a great modern fantasy story complete with secret societies and magic.

For a silly show, check out Schmigadoon. It is a story of a couple who are having marital strife getting stuck in a land where everything is a musical.

I like the Fox banner line above, "Bidens used companies to enrich themselves." I like to think that is why most companies exist. I don't believe most of us use them to declare bankruptcy multiple times.

I am just happy George Michael got in. I think Crow gets in for being one of the early artists with songs playing on both country and rock stations. Her appeal was broad.