source

Honestly he wasn't wealthy before

Stolen from here

The actual article

My husband’s family has a trust that owns rental properties. One of them is a commercial property with several tenants. One of the tenants is Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and they use it as a “short-term holding facility” (their description).

We receive income from the trust, which earns money from several other things as well; it’s all bundled together. Figuring out what portion of my rental income comes from the ICE client is not possible, as the family member who manages it declines to go to the trouble, which I understand is considerable.

I feel pretty horrible about getting money from an immigration prison, but I’m the only beneficiary of the trust who cares. I could resign from the trust, but my husband of 50 years would get my share — and anyway, our funds are completely mingled.

I’m not sure you can make me feel any better about this, but I’m curious about the ethics of receiving money from an entity you consider kind of evil. I went to a lot of Catholic schools, including a Jesuit university. I don’t know all the finer points, but it feels unethical. My husband and his family think this is ridiculous. What is your opinion? Is there a correct action? — Name Withheld

From the Ethicist:

It’s understandable that you’re troubled. Court rulings, investigative reporting and firsthand accounts have shown that ICE has acted in ways that not only harm noncitizens but also erode the rights of citizens.

Even so, the existence of an immigration-enforcement agency isn’t inherently the problem. Most people accept that states have a right to control their borders and that there’s a legitimate role for authorities charged with enforcing immigration policy, especially when it comes to those who have committed serious crimes. ICE also investigates trafficking, smuggling and other transnational offenses that clearly require federal oversight.

The core issue is less the agency’s mandate than its methods. Well-documented abuses — denials of due process, inhumane conditions and politically motivated enforcement — have undermined public trust and raised serious ethical concerns. The worry is not whether immigration law should be enforced but how, and at what human cost.

The holding facilities ICE uses are part of this system: They house people awaiting deportation, court appearances or further investigation. What’s in dispute isn’t the need for such spaces; it’s the treatment of detainees within those spaces. Many facilities have drawn criticism for degrading or dangerous conditions. Still, as a beneficiary of a trust that rents a property to ICE, your leverage is minuscule. You can’t unilaterally break the lease. Even if you could, ICE would simply relocate its facility. And while moral complicity is a serious concern, receiving income from a legal tenant, however problematic, isn’t generally considered an ethical transgression on its own.

We’re all entangled in systems we don’t control. As citizens, we’re already implicated in the actions of government agencies that act in our name and that we help fund. If those actions are shameful, they cast a shadow on all of us. But that shared entanglement also opens the door to shared responsibility — and response.

You mentioned your Jesuit university. You’ll probably remember, then, the emphasis placed on “discernment” — not just abstract moral reasoning but the habit of examining one’s own position in the world, with clarity and courage, and then acting on that understanding. So here’s one constructive path: If this money feels tainted, redirect it. Use it to support organizations that advocate for the rights you believe ICE has violated — groups like the A.C.L.U., the American Immigration Council or local legal-aid nonprofits that provide support for detainees. Back candidates pushing for humane immigration reform. It’s a way to turn your sense of passive complicity into a measure of active redress. You may not be able to change the trust’s lease, but you can choose what your share of the proceeds stands for.

A lot of details and times in this story have been obscured so I don't get doxxed.

It's sorta funny being a tall, middle aged white guy. I so rarely get shit for my idiosyncrasies. I can't remember the last time people gave me grief about masking, reading constantly, not drinking, or being vegan. People in my life seem to learn very quickly that if they start bullshit with me, I'm going to drop 10 peer reviewed studies on why they're wrong. I'm legit sorry for people who aren't born into that privilege. My partner gets a lot more crap from acquaintances than I do.

My managers at work seem to understand that I mask because 1) my partner's health isn't great and I have a legit reason to keep her safe, 2) I will drop 100 peer reviewed studies on you if you suggest otherwise, 3) it negatively affects nothing about how I do my job, and 4) fuck you I will take it to the union and labour tribunals if I have to, and you'll look like an absolute fuckface.

So guess how I felt when I got an email saying there was a big plan to get the one remaining masking student in the school to stop masking. I've never once asked this teen girl why she still masks, I just felt that it's none of my business. But now I see a bunch of middle aged white guy managers deciding to make health choices for this young non-white girl, and it makes my blood boil. Not even for the covid thing, but every page of theory I've read says how fucked up this situation is.

So I talked to the staff directly, said that long covid is the largest chronic disease affecting children. Said that there's an abundance of research on masking and education. Said there's no medical or educational body that suggests doing what you're doing, and that you've brought zero evidence for the claims you're making. Said that this girl's age is far old enough that the WHO and other research have shown that masking has no effect on her learning. Said that she's a human being that deserves to make her own choices, and that children aren't resilient to pressure from adults.

That was just the start of the issue. The anti-masking staff took it really personally. I was objectively not mean. I never raise my voice or use insults. But I was dragged into several meetings over my attitude. As far as I can tell, I was "too verbal" over the issue. People felt that I was calling them cruel or stupid, which other teaching staff in the room with us can attest that I wasn't. It's all incredibly over the top. For the first time since I was a student, I have quite a few people who won't say hello to me in the corridor. Some of these people I've known for over a decade, and we've been very cordial and productive together.

If I may bring up my experience being a vegan: people don't like being wrong on a subject. If someone is made to feel like an evil person, even if I explicitly never said anything close to that, their rage metre goes to 100%. I'm sure plenty of non-vegan leftists have similar reactions with other modes of oppression. I'm guessing people get pretty illogical when called a racist or misogynist?

Anyhow, it just sucks here. Meetings are being held with parents. Calls are being made to health authorities and educational offices. It's tense in a way that I'm absolutely not used to.

Fuck white liberals

Note from me: this article is a plain text summary of a this peer reviewed study.

Article text below

The prevalence of long COVID symptoms among adult patients was found to be relatively high 2 years following index COVID-19 infection, with female sex, obesity, and severity of initial infection identified as predictors for the emergence of common symptom clusters. These study findings were published in the Journal of Infection.

Researchers conducted a follow-up survey of patients who participated in a population-based, longitudinal, observational study of Long COVID symptom prevalence that was conducted in southwestern Germany in 2021. The researchers aimed to describe the symptom burden and associated impairment of long COVID 2 years after index SARS-CoV-2 infection. All patients who completed the survey initially tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 6 and 12 months prior to study enrollment. The follow-up survey included questions about COVID-19 reinfection, vaccination history, general health and working capacity, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). A Poisson regression model was employed for statistical analysis.

A total of 6635 patients completed the follow-up survey, of whom the mean [SD] age was 45.8 [13.4] years, and 60.9% were women. The median time between index SARS-CoV-2 infection and the first survey was 8.7 months, and the median time to the follow-up survey was 23.9 months. In regard to index infections, 76.3% of patients reported mild disease severity, 3.7% required hospital admission, and 0.9% required intensive care unit admission. Nearly half (47.5%) of the population experienced at least 1 secondary COVID-19 infection, and 86.8% had received multiple COVID-19 vaccine doses. [A] considerable portion of symptoms newly emerged, of which only few could be attributed to reported SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.

Overall, 29.9% of patients met criteria for long COVID at the time of the first survey, which increased to 31.2% at the follow-up survey. Of patients who reported long COVID symptoms on the first survey, 8.8% recovered by the follow-up survey, but 10.2% reported emerging long COVID symptoms.

Predictors of emerging long COVID included female sex, lower education level, index infection severity, smoking, obesity, and underlying comorbidities. The researchers noted no association between COVID-19 reinfection and emerging long COVID.

At the individual symptom level, only 9 of 30 symptoms assessed for the study showed a net decrease in reported frequency between the first survey and follow-up survey:

Altered taste (from 17.9% to 12.2%);
Altered smell (from 23.2% to 15.8%);
Shortness of breath (from 32.1% to 29.6%);
Chronic fatigue (from 28.1% to 26.3%); and,
Rapid physical exhaustion (from 37.7% to 35.1%).

In contrast, there was a net increase in the reported frequency of cough (from 13.3% to 24.0%) and sore throat (from 8.6% to 19.7%) over the same period.

The researchers noted that the frequency of some common symptom clusters, including fatigue, neurocognitive impairment, and chest symptoms, remained relatively stable from the first survey to the follow-up survey.

Positive predictors for the emergence of any long COVID symptom cluster were female sex (relative risk [RR] range, 1.25-1.62) and treatment required (proxy for disease severity) for the acute index infection (RR range,1.47-1.83). Positive and negative predictors for the emergence of most symptom clusters included obesity and higher education level, respectively. The only significant positive predictor for the emergence of chest symptoms was secondary COVID-19 infection.

Further analysis indicated smell and taste disorders had the highest probability (59%) of resolution within the 2 years following the index infection. In patients affected by multiple symptom clusters, the resolution of 1 symptom cluster increased the likelihood of further resolution. Patients who reported sleep disorders or symptoms of anxiety or depression exhibited the highest risk for the emergence of any symptom cluster, whereas those who reported smell and taste disorders exhibited the lowest risk.

Limitations of this study include the lack of data on infections other than COVID-19, the relatively low completion rate for the follow-up survey (61.4%), and the lack of generalizability to older and younger populations due to the focus on working-aged adults.

According to the researchers, “[A] considerable portion of symptoms newly emerged, of which only few could be attributed to reported SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.”

Me in the 2020s: woke is ruining everything! cancel culture! what's with all the pronouns!?! masks are the the number one threat to freedom!

Also my wife is 20.

My good friend is really cool. He's basically a super nerd scientist guy. Despite having a ton of knowledge, he's humble af, I've known him for years before I knew how high his educational qualifications go.

My friend just married someone with a nice job and a bougie family. I'm happy for my friend, I couldn't give a fuck if all her convos revolve around past holidays, resorts, and pricey drinks. My friend is happy and and he feels secure with this woman, and I'm glad that things are going well for him.

My friend and his wife keep trying to organise double dates. I guess it feels natural, to bring us into the wider family. But what happens is that the men and women separate and have their own conversations. My gf finds this woman boring af, bragging about all the countries she's traveled and nice places she's been isn't really interesting. I wonder if posh people are so used to talking to service workers and underlings who are required by their job to please them, that they have no idea how fucking boring they are.

link

I'm as progressive a drumpf hater as they come. I feel for all those be oppressed by the new presidency. But I was talking to someone from .ml today. Just because I rent out several properties, they called me a land-leach and hoped that a Maoist revolution would sweep my income away. This is intolerable.

Fellow no kings brethren, what is to be done about the auth left????

They don't, btw.

The war in Afghanistan was a good thing. My business got so many orders that it allowed me to retire early.