How is ICE enforcing US laws on immigration in a country where those laws and officers have no jurisdiction?
This is a call to kick out a problematic enforcement agency from a country that it has no right being in. There are already collaborative agreements with the RCMP and US law enforcement, including CBP agents stationed in Canada for the purposes of border control. ICE has no reason to be here that is not already handled by CBP or Canadian law enforcement.
The motivation is that we are seeing, with our own eyes, that ICE is shooting people in the streets, and being used beyond their mandate for political purposes. Operating within Canada is a privilege, and the people of Canada are calling for that privilege to be revoked.
You should also read closer. The CBC is not calling for anything. They are reporting on others doing that.
> This is a call to kick out a problematic enforcement agency from a country that it has no right being in. There are already collaborative agreements with the RCMP and US law enforcement, including CBP agents stationed in Canada for the purposes of border control. ICE has no reason to be here that is not already handled by CBP or Canadian law enforcement.
> ICE's two primary and distinct law enforcement components are:
> Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)
> Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO)
> HSI is focused on the disruption of transnational crime, whereas ERO is responsible for the apprehension, detention, deportation and removal of undocumented immigrants.
Everybody is focusing on the "ERO" part right now, but these offices look like they're with the "HSI" part.
The people eligible for passports are not the same group of people eligible for voter id since there are a few jurisdictions where non-citizens can vote in certain elections. Voting is also a responsibility of the states (even at the federal level), so there isn't really such thing as a federal voter id since each state has different eligibility requirements for voters that don't necessarily align with passport eligibility. Additionally, passport cards aren't interchangeable with passports in most countries.
Also, every four years? Elections happen more or less constantly in this country at some level or another. Federal elections are every two years, BTW, and that's if we ignore special elections for federal candidates. You should learn more about the system you live in.
The current round of stop-and-search would be enabled by making passport cards or some form of universal id. The current legal reality is that you do not need to prove your citizenship on demand if you are already in the US as a citizen. The burden of proof - rightly in my opinion - lies with the government to prove that you are not a citizen. Frankly, I'm quite uncomfortable with "paper's please" entering the US law enforcement repertoire. The fourth amendment was pretty clear about this.
With the CBP using mere presence validated by facial id only at legally protected protests as reason to withdraw Global Entry enrollment, it seems more and more clear that we do not need to be giving more power to the people who do not understand the 4th and first amendments. Removing people from Global Entry for protected first speech is, afaict, directly in violation of the first amendment even if Global Entry is a "privilege"
FWIW, REAL-ID is not about U.S. citizenship: A passport issued by any country is considered "compliant" with the REAL-ID Act for air travel or any other purpose, regardless of the person's U.S. immigration status. Some politicians seem to have deluded themselves to think that requiring REAL-ID will stop "illegal aliens" from flying. But it won't. Many foreigners in the U.S. (regardless of U.S. immigration status) have an easier time getting REAL-ID (a passport from their country of citizenship) than some U.S. citizens.
Shouldn't we celebrate her for changing and growing instead of trolling the web for 12 year old edgelord tweets that she has already apologized for? Since then, she has become a strong and rational voice on the national scene, and there is nothing to indicate that her change in beliefs and apology was insincere.
I don't think I was a "bad person" at that age, but I certainly know that I said some cringy, stupid stuff that I certainly don't stand by anymore.
Quite frankly, I think it is far more concerning if a person can't identify anything that they have changed their mind on. We should celebrate when people change for the better instead of attacking them for having been bad in the past.
I severely doubt your thesis around iPhones being Veblen goods.
You are claiming that if the price of the iPhone went down, apple would sell fewer phones?
Correspondingly, you are arguing that if they increased prices they could increase sales?
You are claiming that 100s of millions of people have all made the decision that the price of an iPhone is more than it is worth to them as a device, but is made up for by being seen with one in your hand?
Not all goods that signify status are Veblen goods.
>Correspondingly, you are arguing that if they increased prices they could increase sales?
Veblen goods aren't like this. If they were, everything would be priced at infinity. Veblen goods have to take into account the amount of spending money their target customers have, and how much they're willing to spend. Apple products are priced this way. They're not targeted just at people who can afford Rolls-Royce Silver Shadows, they're targeted at regular people who are willing to spend too much money on a phone when they can get an equivalent Android phone for half the price. Those people have limited money, but they're willing to overpay, but only so much.
>You are claiming that if the price of the iPhone went down, apple would sell fewer phones?
Quite likely, yes. If they adopted razor-thin profit margins on iPhones, their phones would be seen as "cheap" and wouldn't have the cachet they have now. More people would start looking at alternatives, and start buying Samsung Galaxies and other flagship Android phones.
Increasing demand with increasing prices is the very definition of a Veblen good. I never said anything like pricing them at infinity (an exceptionally stupid way of saying that something is not for sale).
I simply pointed out that there isn’t really any reason to believe that a mass produced easily available phone that holds a massive percentage of the entire global cell phone market would see increased demand from increased prices. It is an extraordinary claim with nothing resembling evidence. The most damning evidence is that the most expensive iPhone, the Pro Max, is outsold 2:1 by the base model for the last three generations, despite being visually distinguishable. (The 17 saw initial sales of Pro Maxes higher than base, but that appears to have corrected. Easily understandable that early adopters are more willing to pay for the best version of new tech)
There is an argument to be made that the Pro Max flirts with Veblen for small parts of the market, or that certain submarkets in poorer countries treat the iPhone that way, but that all looks more like conspicuous consumption. I still don’t believe that Pro Max sales increase if the price increases. A few individuals or submarket will not have the ability to invert a demand curve for an Apple device.
Again, I think that you are confusing conspicuous consumption with a Veblen good. This sentence is the giveaway:
> Those people have limited money, but they're willing to overpay, but only so much.
What you are describing is a normal demand curve. As price rises fewer people are willing to pay. People being unable to pay for something they still want does not make something a Veblen good (that would make insulin a Veblen good). You are describing a steep demand curve, not a reversed one.
Just because you perceive that an equivalent android can be purchased for half the price does not mean that everyone uses your criteria. I tried switching to a lower priced android made by google. In no way was it equivalent for my purposes. and I still wouldn’t want it. I am happy to pay the price, not because I care about being seen with an iPhone, but because it is the tool that I have determined to best suit my purposes. Many people refuse to believe this, but many people like the Apple ecosystem.
iPhones in the US have an estimate ~55% market share depending on source. Owning an Android wasn't unusual in the least when I lived there, and appears to be pretty popular.
I don't think its unusual that a country with high median income and higher average income will tend to gravitate towards more expensive phones. Given that Apple doesn't make a cheap phone, it kind of follows that wealthier countries will buy more iPhones.
Of course the opposite is true as well, In a country where an iPhone is measured in months of salary, they won't sell well, but I'd be willing to bet that Androids in that price tier sell like shit in those countries too.
Is it a status symbol? arguably. But it also correlates pretty strongly with median income.
> What's to be gained... by offloading inference to someone else?
Access to models that local hardware can't run. The kind of model that an iphone struggles to run is blown out of the water by most low end hosted models. Its the same reason that most devs opt for claude code, cursor, copilot, etc. instead of using hosted models for coding assistance.
Claude code produces stuff orders of magnitude more complicated than classifying expenses.
If the task can be run locally on hardware you own anyway, it should.
This is a call to kick out a problematic enforcement agency from a country that it has no right being in. There are already collaborative agreements with the RCMP and US law enforcement, including CBP agents stationed in Canada for the purposes of border control. ICE has no reason to be here that is not already handled by CBP or Canadian law enforcement.
The motivation is that we are seeing, with our own eyes, that ICE is shooting people in the streets, and being used beyond their mandate for political purposes. Operating within Canada is a privilege, and the people of Canada are calling for that privilege to be revoked.
You should also read closer. The CBC is not calling for anything. They are reporting on others doing that.