Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

This is how much control Big Pharma has in America Louisiana Reps UNANIMOUSLY voted against a bill that would allow Pharmacy Benefits Managers to raise drug costs for their residents Again, they UNANIMOUSLY voted against it It passed anyway “$2 billion was spent in Louisiana over the last two...

WallStreetApes's profile picture

Wall Street Apes

1,373,307 subscribers

79,650 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & PolitikGesundheit & Wellness
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

11 Kommentare

Profilbild von Seek & Expose
Seek & Exposevor 1 Jahr

Elected reps: “We unanimously reject this deal.” Big Pharma: “That’s cute. Here’s the bill anyway.”

Profilbild von DeFi-G
DeFi-Gvor 1 Jahr

Common sense isn’t common

Profilbild von Deplorable Ms B
Deplorable Ms Bvor 1 Jahr

WHAT THE VIRTUAL F?!

Profilbild von American Stranger 🇺🇸 ❤️
American Stranger 🇺🇸 ❤️vor 1 Jahr

Big Pharma is out of control. They want us all sick so they can continue to make bank off of us. Disgusting.

Profilbild von Gypsy
Gypsyvor 1 Jahr

This happened with alcohol in small clubs back in 2009. The costs went to high for them to stay in business.

Profilbild von STAT
STATvor 1 Jahr

Here’s a rundown of Trump’s health policy stances and his potential top priorities in a second administration.

Profilbild von Sherry Morris
Sherry Morrisvor 1 Jahr

Corruption.

Profilbild von 🔨Robert The Builder 🇺🇸
🔨Robert The Builder 🇺🇸vor 1 Jahr

Are we paying attention

Profilbild von JaneDoeCitizen
JaneDoeCitizenvor 1 Jahr

Their full rot, in display.😪🙏🇺🇸

Profilbild von I Love America News
I Love America Newsvor 1 Jahr

This is the way.

Profilbild von GFORD
GFORDvor 1 Jahr

This needs to stop🤬

Ähnliche Videos

Mockler on Cost of Iran War: So in New York, they did free school lunches for $300 million a year, put that against the $50 billion, which is a conservative estimate for this war. We could have funded this across the country. How about in Connecticut? They have paid family leave. It was $450 million a year. And it is $5 million to start up. Put that against the $50 billion. It is a no brainer. What about one more in New Mexico. It costs $1.5 billion for free college. We could do that 20 times over with the $50 billion that we've spent.
1:41

Mockler on Cost of Iran War: So in New York, they did free school lunches for $300 million a year, put that against the $50 billion, which is a conservative estimate for this war. We could have funded this across the country. How about in Connecticut? They have paid family leave. It was $450 million a year. And it is $5 million to start up. Put that against the $50 billion. It is a no brainer. What about one more in New Mexico. It costs $1.5 billion for free college. We could do that 20 times over with the $50 billion that we've spent.

Acyn

529,396 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I spoke with two state lawmakers today, one who voted in favor of the Climate Leadership and Protection Act (CLCPA) and one who voted against it. Now that NYSERDA has some realistic projections of how much it will cost to implement it, where do they stand? Take a listen:
3:00

I spoke with two state lawmakers today, one who voted in favor of the Climate Leadership and Protection Act (CLCPA) and one who voted against it. Now that NYSERDA has some realistic projections of how much it will cost to implement it, where do they stand? Take a listen:

Jennifer Lewke

12,707 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

The 1500 page spending bill that Congress tried to jam in yesterday just got hacked down to 116 pages. It was a big win for Donald J. Trump and Department of Government Efficiency. When Democrats found out they wouldn’t be getting a raise, they started chanting “hell no” inside of their little meeting room. Now, the bill is dead. Only 2 Democrats voted for it and 38 Republicans voted against. The Republicans didn’t like that it raised the debt ceiling, without enough spending to make up for it. They’ve had all month to hash this out, but instead left it until the last minute. As for Democrats, they’re all for shutting down the government unless they get a raise. They voted against disaster relief, aid for farmers, pay for the military and to keep the government open— all because the bill didn’t have their pork.
9:11

The 1500 page spending bill that Congress tried to jam in yesterday just got hacked down to 116 pages. It was a big win for Donald J. Trump and Department of Government Efficiency. When Democrats found out they wouldn’t be getting a raise, they started chanting “hell no” inside of their little meeting room. Now, the bill is dead. Only 2 Democrats voted for it and 38 Republicans voted against. The Republicans didn’t like that it raised the debt ceiling, without enough spending to make up for it. They’ve had all month to hash this out, but instead left it until the last minute. As for Democrats, they’re all for shutting down the government unless they get a raise. They voted against disaster relief, aid for farmers, pay for the military and to keep the government open— all because the bill didn’t have their pork.

Jesse Watters

503,671 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Pharmacy Benefits Managers are SKYROCKETING the price of prescriptions to Medicare because taxpayers are paying for it. This is a racket - Medication Chlorpromazine cost to Medicare is $344 per prescription - Normal price ONLY $17 - Medicare PAYS 20x THE PRICE - Medicare paid for this prescription 500,000 times and spent $170 million in 2022 - Of the $170 million that Medicare spent 165 million of that was wasted overpaying “The companies they hire to manage their pharmacy costs are so terrible at their job that 95% of the money they spent is wasted. If you're wondering how they could mismanage it this badly, it's because they get paid more. If the drugs cost more and worse, they own the pharmacies that most of these are filled at. That means that the ridiculous 95% waste goes straight into the pockets of the company tasked with lowering the costs.” This is a racket
1:34

Pharmacy Benefits Managers are SKYROCKETING the price of prescriptions to Medicare because taxpayers are paying for it. This is a racket - Medication Chlorpromazine cost to Medicare is $344 per prescription - Normal price ONLY $17 - Medicare PAYS 20x THE PRICE - Medicare paid for this prescription 500,000 times and spent $170 million in 2022 - Of the $170 million that Medicare spent 165 million of that was wasted overpaying “The companies they hire to manage their pharmacy costs are so terrible at their job that 95% of the money they spent is wasted. If you're wondering how they could mismanage it this badly, it's because they get paid more. If the drugs cost more and worse, they own the pharmacies that most of these are filled at. That means that the ridiculous 95% waste goes straight into the pockets of the company tasked with lowering the costs.” This is a racket

Wall Street Apes

84,879 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨 To Elon Musk and the DOGE team looking at Medicare: Pharmacist says - Cancer Medicine Imatinib costs them $7 to buy. They add $10, so you're out the door for $17 - When Medicare pays for this drug, IT COSTS THEM $2,400 - This drug was filled 250,000 times in 1 year costing Medicare $600 million “If every one of those scripts was filled at our pharmacy instead of through Medicare, it would've cost $4 million. That means that we are $596 million cheaper than the insurance. That's crazy.” “So why are they paying this much for that medication? Well, insurance companies pay a middleman, the pharmacy benefits manager, and that person decides how much that medication's gonna cost” - 3 Pharmacy Benefits Managers control over 90% of all prescription pricing in America - Pharmaceutical companies bought all 3 Pharmacy Benefits Managers They set their own pricing, Medicare pays ASTRONOMICAL prices and taxpayers pick up the bill. This is a racket.
1:25

🚨 To Elon Musk and the DOGE team looking at Medicare: Pharmacist says - Cancer Medicine Imatinib costs them $7 to buy. They add $10, so you're out the door for $17 - When Medicare pays for this drug, IT COSTS THEM $2,400 - This drug was filled 250,000 times in 1 year costing Medicare $600 million “If every one of those scripts was filled at our pharmacy instead of through Medicare, it would've cost $4 million. That means that we are $596 million cheaper than the insurance. That's crazy.” “So why are they paying this much for that medication? Well, insurance companies pay a middleman, the pharmacy benefits manager, and that person decides how much that medication's gonna cost” - 3 Pharmacy Benefits Managers control over 90% of all prescription pricing in America - Pharmaceutical companies bought all 3 Pharmacy Benefits Managers They set their own pricing, Medicare pays ASTRONOMICAL prices and taxpayers pick up the bill. This is a racket.

Wall Street Apes

3,763,653 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Elon Musk: There's a total misunderstanding that my companies are being subsidized and supported by the government. “We've got to be one of the biggest government contractors. We do essential work for the government. We do useful essential work that we compete for and win contracts on because our product is much better and costs less. If you take, for example, the NASA contract to transport astronauts to and from the space station, NASA awarded two contracts at the start, one to Boeing and one to SpaceX. Boeing was awarded twice as much as SpaceX. SpaceX has done all the astronaut transport from the space station and Boeing has only done one transport of two astronauts to the space station. And we have to bring them back. Boeing got twice as much as SpaceX. There's this total misunderstanding that my companies have been subsidized and supported by the government. Do you really think that a Biden administration is going to subsidize me? Probably not. Are you kidding? No. In fact, they take away every contract they possibly can. So, for example, there was the FCC $42 billion contract for providing rural broadband. We actually first said, look, we think there shouldn't be any subsidies, so we recommend that this program just not exist. But since you're insisting that it exist, we will compete and we have better products. So we won, I don't know about a quarter of it, which would have included the devastated areas like North Carolina and stuff. And the FCC took it away illegally. They just voted three out of five commissioners voted away and said, even though you won it, we're rescinding it. On what grounds? And do you know how many people they've connected? Zero. So you think that was political? Well, the three Democrats voted against it. And the two Republicans voted for it.” Source: Interview with Tucker Carlson, October 7, 2024
1:31

Elon Musk: There's a total misunderstanding that my companies are being subsidized and supported by the government. “We've got to be one of the biggest government contractors. We do essential work for the government. We do useful essential work that we compete for and win contracts on because our product is much better and costs less. If you take, for example, the NASA contract to transport astronauts to and from the space station, NASA awarded two contracts at the start, one to Boeing and one to SpaceX. Boeing was awarded twice as much as SpaceX. SpaceX has done all the astronaut transport from the space station and Boeing has only done one transport of two astronauts to the space station. And we have to bring them back. Boeing got twice as much as SpaceX. There's this total misunderstanding that my companies have been subsidized and supported by the government. Do you really think that a Biden administration is going to subsidize me? Probably not. Are you kidding? No. In fact, they take away every contract they possibly can. So, for example, there was the FCC $42 billion contract for providing rural broadband. We actually first said, look, we think there shouldn't be any subsidies, so we recommend that this program just not exist. But since you're insisting that it exist, we will compete and we have better products. So we won, I don't know about a quarter of it, which would have included the devastated areas like North Carolina and stuff. And the FCC took it away illegally. They just voted three out of five commissioners voted away and said, even though you won it, we're rescinding it. On what grounds? And do you know how many people they've connected? Zero. So you think that was political? Well, the three Democrats voted against it. And the two Republicans voted for it.” Source: Interview with Tucker Carlson, October 7, 2024

ELON CLIPS

17,280 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Sinn Féin's #GE24 manifesto calls the Irish hate speech bill "a form of censorship" and says they voted against it. Ben Scallan puts it to Mary Lou McDonald that her party voted for it unanimously and tried to expand it to make illegal immigrants a protected class in Irish law:
2:04

Sinn Féin's #GE24 manifesto calls the Irish hate speech bill "a form of censorship" and says they voted against it. Ben Scallan puts it to Mary Lou McDonald that her party voted for it unanimously and tried to expand it to make illegal immigrants a protected class in Irish law:

gript

76,254 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

This Dog Voted in 2 California Elections and Got Away With It “The dog voted in two elections, and the only reason he got caught was because the owner reported herself. You then had Democrats out defending the dog like, well, it didn’t count. No, it counted—it voted in that first election and that vote counted. If your vote doesn’t matter, what does matter? All you have to do is say you’re that person and then sign the signature.” Nick shirley
8:39

This Dog Voted in 2 California Elections and Got Away With It “The dog voted in two elections, and the only reason he got caught was because the owner reported herself. You then had Democrats out defending the dog like, well, it didn’t count. No, it counted—it voted in that first election and that vote counted. If your vote doesn’t matter, what does matter? All you have to do is say you’re that person and then sign the signature.” Nick shirley

Shawn Ryan

99,587 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

WOAH 🚨 Pay attention to this American pharmacist exposing that some cheap, very effective drugs, HAVE BEEN BANNED form being prescribed because they’re too cheap So instead of the cheap option, drugs that cost $1,000+ are allowed for certain treatments (INSANE) “The most insane examples of why drugs cost so much is a drug called Brenzavvy. You almost certainly haven't heard of it, but you've probably heard of similar drugs like Jardiance or Farxiga. The reason you haven't heard of Brenzavvy, though, is because no insurance companies will cover it. Most doctors won't prescribe it, and most wholesalers won't even carry it. When I tell you why our entire healthcare industry is turning its back on this proven drug in one of the most critical classes in existence, you are going to be furious. They are shunning Brenzavvy because it's too cheap. I'm not being hyperbolic or sensational. I mean it literally. At my pharmacy, Brenzavvy costs $60 bucks. When they took that price to the pharmacy benefits managers, or PBMs, that's the people in charge of deciding what's covered on your insurance, they all said no, because Brenzavvy can't do a rebate at a price that low. Farxiga and Jardiance, the other Drugs in the SLGT 2 class with Brenzavvy, cost insurance payers $1000 bucks each prescription up front. Then they get a big, probably like 40% rebate later. So that's a $400 rebate, and that is a huge selling point for the PBMs to prove how important they are. The PBMs get a piece of that rebate, and they get a percentage of the final price. An HHS report from last year said that the PBMs get 23% on average for for brand meds. After the rebate, Farxiga and Jardiance still cost $600. 23% of that is $138 for the middleman. Those drugs get dispensed 8 million times a year, which means the total they make in a year off of those two drugs is $1.1 billion. They don't make the drug, they don't prescribe it, they don't dispense it, they don't sell it. They only have to do one thing to make that money. Keep Brenzavvy off their list. If they let in a drug that costs 1/10 of the price and doesn't pay rebate, they literally lose a billion dollars a year. To me, that's the clearest example of why we will never get affordable health care in America. As long as we have PBMs involved, they can't afford to save you money.“ So while this might not be an outright ban, meaning illegal to create, for all purposes it is a ban. Because if the insurance companies won’t cover it, their doctors won’t prescribe it and nearly all wholesalers won’t carry it, that means the insurances companies and PBMs are effectively banning medication in America so they can make maximum profits. Billions a year on a single Medicine, when there are much cheaper options available for the customer This is organized crime. This is racketeering
2:27

WOAH 🚨 Pay attention to this American pharmacist exposing that some cheap, very effective drugs, HAVE BEEN BANNED form being prescribed because they’re too cheap So instead of the cheap option, drugs that cost $1,000+ are allowed for certain treatments (INSANE) “The most insane examples of why drugs cost so much is a drug called Brenzavvy. You almost certainly haven't heard of it, but you've probably heard of similar drugs like Jardiance or Farxiga. The reason you haven't heard of Brenzavvy, though, is because no insurance companies will cover it. Most doctors won't prescribe it, and most wholesalers won't even carry it. When I tell you why our entire healthcare industry is turning its back on this proven drug in one of the most critical classes in existence, you are going to be furious. They are shunning Brenzavvy because it's too cheap. I'm not being hyperbolic or sensational. I mean it literally. At my pharmacy, Brenzavvy costs $60 bucks. When they took that price to the pharmacy benefits managers, or PBMs, that's the people in charge of deciding what's covered on your insurance, they all said no, because Brenzavvy can't do a rebate at a price that low. Farxiga and Jardiance, the other Drugs in the SLGT 2 class with Brenzavvy, cost insurance payers $1000 bucks each prescription up front. Then they get a big, probably like 40% rebate later. So that's a $400 rebate, and that is a huge selling point for the PBMs to prove how important they are. The PBMs get a piece of that rebate, and they get a percentage of the final price. An HHS report from last year said that the PBMs get 23% on average for for brand meds. After the rebate, Farxiga and Jardiance still cost $600. 23% of that is $138 for the middleman. Those drugs get dispensed 8 million times a year, which means the total they make in a year off of those two drugs is $1.1 billion. They don't make the drug, they don't prescribe it, they don't dispense it, they don't sell it. They only have to do one thing to make that money. Keep Brenzavvy off their list. If they let in a drug that costs 1/10 of the price and doesn't pay rebate, they literally lose a billion dollars a year. To me, that's the clearest example of why we will never get affordable health care in America. As long as we have PBMs involved, they can't afford to save you money.“ So while this might not be an outright ban, meaning illegal to create, for all purposes it is a ban. Because if the insurance companies won’t cover it, their doctors won’t prescribe it and nearly all wholesalers won’t carry it, that means the insurances companies and PBMs are effectively banning medication in America so they can make maximum profits. Billions a year on a single Medicine, when there are much cheaper options available for the customer This is organized crime. This is racketeering

Wall Street Apes

107,917 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨🇨🇦Budget 2025 It's important to understand that the CPC doesn't want an election, no one does, and was prepared to abstain more votes for in case the NDP all voted against it. Andrew Scheer and MP Reid voted AFTER the vote count was known claiming they had technical difficulties even though they are in person. This is politics, ladies and gentlemen.
0:27

🚨🇨🇦Budget 2025 It's important to understand that the CPC doesn't want an election, no one does, and was prepared to abstain more votes for in case the NDP all voted against it. Andrew Scheer and MP Reid voted AFTER the vote count was known claiming they had technical difficulties even though they are in person. This is politics, ladies and gentlemen.

Kirk Lubimov

111,632 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Today I offered an amendment in the Appropriations Committee to stop the Trump Administration from canceling federal grants based on how a state voted in the 2024 election. A federal judge has already ruled that this is exactly what the Administration is doing. Not canceling grants based on need. Not based on merit. Based on the electoral map. The court found it violates the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. My amendment was one sentence. It blocked federal funds from being used to cancel or pause grants based on the political leanings of a state. Every single Republican on the committee voted no. Let that sink in. Every Republican in the room looked at a federal court ruling that the Administration is violating the Constitution, and voted to let it keep happening. They chose loyalty to a president over loyalty to their oath. They chose party over the Constitution they swore to defend. That means they’re fine as the Administration keeps pulling grants from states that didn’t vote for Trump. Research funding, public safety dollars, infrastructure money, disaster aid. All of it stays on the table. All of it can be yanked based on nothing more than how a state voted. The Constitution gives the power of the purse to Congress, not to the White House. Today, every Republican in that room handed it over anyway, as they have been doing for the last year.
2:32

Today I offered an amendment in the Appropriations Committee to stop the Trump Administration from canceling federal grants based on how a state voted in the 2024 election. A federal judge has already ruled that this is exactly what the Administration is doing. Not canceling grants based on need. Not based on merit. Based on the electoral map. The court found it violates the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. My amendment was one sentence. It blocked federal funds from being used to cancel or pause grants based on the political leanings of a state. Every single Republican on the committee voted no. Let that sink in. Every Republican in the room looked at a federal court ruling that the Administration is violating the Constitution, and voted to let it keep happening. They chose loyalty to a president over loyalty to their oath. They chose party over the Constitution they swore to defend. That means they’re fine as the Administration keeps pulling grants from states that didn’t vote for Trump. Research funding, public safety dollars, infrastructure money, disaster aid. All of it stays on the table. All of it can be yanked based on nothing more than how a state voted. The Constitution gives the power of the purse to Congress, not to the White House. Today, every Republican in that room handed it over anyway, as they have been doing for the last year.

Rep. Mike Levin

20,081 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

RFK Jr: "In 1989... all these autoimmune diseases suddenly appeared." "The CDC thought it may be the vaccine schedule... so they looked at one vaccine, which is the hepatitis B vaccine. They looked at kids who had gotten it in the first 30 days, and then they looked at... kids who got it later or didn't get it at all, and they compared these two groups." "Among the kids who got it in the first 30 days, there was... a relative risk of 11.35 [for a subsequent autism diagnosis]. If you have a relative risk of two, causation is presumed... The link between smoking a pack of cigarettes a day for 20 years and getting lung cancer is a relative risk of 10. This was 11.35." "So they knew what it was, and then they had an emergency meeting that they called... and they had all of the big panjandrums from the vaccine industry, from the pharmaceutical industry... from NIH, CDC, FDA, the WHO, the European Medicines Agency, and they all got together for two days to talk about this study." "Somebody made a transcript of it, and that transcript was given to me... The second day they spent talking about how to hide it from the American public, and I published these things... I took a lot of heat at that point."
3:25

RFK Jr: "In 1989... all these autoimmune diseases suddenly appeared." "The CDC thought it may be the vaccine schedule... so they looked at one vaccine, which is the hepatitis B vaccine. They looked at kids who had gotten it in the first 30 days, and then they looked at... kids who got it later or didn't get it at all, and they compared these two groups." "Among the kids who got it in the first 30 days, there was... a relative risk of 11.35 [for a subsequent autism diagnosis]. If you have a relative risk of two, causation is presumed... The link between smoking a pack of cigarettes a day for 20 years and getting lung cancer is a relative risk of 10. This was 11.35." "So they knew what it was, and then they had an emergency meeting that they called... and they had all of the big panjandrums from the vaccine industry, from the pharmaceutical industry... from NIH, CDC, FDA, the WHO, the European Medicines Agency, and they all got together for two days to talk about this study." "Somebody made a transcript of it, and that transcript was given to me... The second day they spent talking about how to hide it from the American public, and I published these things... I took a lot of heat at that point."

Wide Awake Media

755,907 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

They passed it in the middle of the night…and most of them didn’t even read it. Rep. Randy Fine RIPS THE MASK OFF the Senate bill after being asked why he opposes it. FINE: “Well, I don’t know how hard they did they work.” “They passed it at 3 o’clock in the morning, when there were 5 Senators there.” “We’ve been told many of the Senators didn’t even know about it because they started writing it after midnight.” “So I don’t know how hard it was.” “Now it’s clear that they wanted to get on vacation. I think that was the focus.” “But it didn’t do what you claim, that bill does not end the shutdown. The shutdown was going to continue for thousands and thousands of federal employees who work at ICE and Border Protection, including those who investigate child trafficking of little girls.” “So it wasn’t going to end. It was just going to be less.” “And we said, no, we either take care of the country or we keep on fighting.”
0:43

They passed it in the middle of the night…and most of them didn’t even read it. Rep. Randy Fine RIPS THE MASK OFF the Senate bill after being asked why he opposes it. FINE: “Well, I don’t know how hard they did they work.” “They passed it at 3 o’clock in the morning, when there were 5 Senators there.” “We’ve been told many of the Senators didn’t even know about it because they started writing it after midnight.” “So I don’t know how hard it was.” “Now it’s clear that they wanted to get on vacation. I think that was the focus.” “But it didn’t do what you claim, that bill does not end the shutdown. The shutdown was going to continue for thousands and thousands of federal employees who work at ICE and Border Protection, including those who investigate child trafficking of little girls.” “So it wasn’t going to end. It was just going to be less.” “And we said, no, we either take care of the country or we keep on fighting.”

Overton

41,874 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

This World Cup has shown how Argentinian players are just built different, and it was interesting because, in the press conferences, both managers addressed this. First, Tuchel talks about the Argentinian value of the ball and how they protect the ball at all costs, how they manage those small spaces, and how they learn this from a young age. He references culture, and this is exactly it. A child playing in a certain environment leads to that. Not every Argentinian child is on the national team, but it raises the ceiling. It creates a certain type of style and a certain type of player. Then Scaloni also references his culture. He sees them play without fear of losing. It comes from playing in an environment where you are constantly faced with the potential of losing and being able to play with that pressure, right? They don’t fight against it. They play with it. They use it. And I think this is where youth football coaches should really take note. This does not mean we should copy and paste Argentinian culture into every training environment, because culture cannot just be copied. But the values within that culture can be inculcated in every training environment. The value of the ball. The courage to receive it in small spaces. The ability to protect it under pressure. The confidence to keep playing after a mistake. The willingness to play with the possibility of losing rather than constantly trying to avoid it. Those values can become part of the environment we create every day. They can be present in the games we design, in what we praise, in what we allow players to struggle with, and in how we respond when they lose the ball. If every mistake leads to the coach stopping the session, giving the answer, or taking the pressure away, then players never learn to play with that pressure. They learn to wait for the coach. It was cool to see how two managers, at such a big stage, reference culture and the environments that kids play in when they’re young. Because the players we see on the biggest stage were not only created by tactics or coaching information. They were created by environments that taught them what to value, how to relate to the ball, and how to play when there was something to lose.
1:47

This World Cup has shown how Argentinian players are just built different, and it was interesting because, in the press conferences, both managers addressed this. First, Tuchel talks about the Argentinian value of the ball and how they protect the ball at all costs, how they manage those small spaces, and how they learn this from a young age. He references culture, and this is exactly it. A child playing in a certain environment leads to that. Not every Argentinian child is on the national team, but it raises the ceiling. It creates a certain type of style and a certain type of player. Then Scaloni also references his culture. He sees them play without fear of losing. It comes from playing in an environment where you are constantly faced with the potential of losing and being able to play with that pressure, right? They don’t fight against it. They play with it. They use it. And I think this is where youth football coaches should really take note. This does not mean we should copy and paste Argentinian culture into every training environment, because culture cannot just be copied. But the values within that culture can be inculcated in every training environment. The value of the ball. The courage to receive it in small spaces. The ability to protect it under pressure. The confidence to keep playing after a mistake. The willingness to play with the possibility of losing rather than constantly trying to avoid it. Those values can become part of the environment we create every day. They can be present in the games we design, in what we praise, in what we allow players to struggle with, and in how we respond when they lose the ball. If every mistake leads to the coach stopping the session, giving the answer, or taking the pressure away, then players never learn to play with that pressure. They learn to wait for the coach. It was cool to see how two managers, at such a big stage, reference culture and the environments that kids play in when they’re young. Because the players we see on the biggest stage were not only created by tactics or coaching information. They were created by environments that taught them what to value, how to relate to the ball, and how to play when there was something to lose.

David Garcia

170,319 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

The honourable members opposite are in no condition to talk about money. They waste it time and time again. They do not know how to conduct the finances of the nation. In one year it got so bad that they borrowed today's equivalent of £50 billion. Of course, they do not mind handing power to other people. They handed it over to the IMF. They had to, because they could not run it themselves.
0:27

The honourable members opposite are in no condition to talk about money. They waste it time and time again. They do not know how to conduct the finances of the nation. In one year it got so bad that they borrowed today's equivalent of £50 billion. Of course, they do not mind handing power to other people. They handed it over to the IMF. They had to, because they could not run it themselves.

Margaret Thatcher

31,521 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

One of the most astonishing attempts at projecting grandiose delusions I’ve ever seen—“so [Obama] tried to bribe them to make a deal… 1.7 billion in cash was put on a Boeing…” Trump bribed Iran with $324 billion. And got nothing for it. “And the main thing is that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. They fully agreed to that with strong policing powers, and they won't have nuclear weapons, which is what I was all about, because they probably would have used it if they had it. So we had two big moments when they terminated the JCPOA, that was the Obama deal, the Barrack Hussein Obama deal, and when I terminated that, it was very important because it was a road to a nuclear weapon. It was a horrible deal for the United States. It was a deal where billions of dollars was given to Iran. It was a deal where 1.7 billion in cash was put on a Boeing 7, well, not a 7, 7, 57, I guess, right? But it was put on a big, beautiful Boeing 757. They needed a Boeing 747 to be honest with you, because it was a lot of cash. 1.7 billion was taken out of the banks and given to Iran, and on top of that, tens of billions of dollars was made. So they tried to bribe them to make a deal that didn't work. It never works. And that we lived on a great job, and hopefully it's going to be a good relationship, and we're going to get along. And if we don't, we go back to where we started, but I don't know if it's going to be necessary. The Iran deal that we made is going to bring a lot of success to the world, because the oil was really plugged up there for a while. They would call me on occasion, "See, come on, please. Let's go." The oil prices. But the oil is coming way down.”
1:39

One of the most astonishing attempts at projecting grandiose delusions I’ve ever seen—“so [Obama] tried to bribe them to make a deal… 1.7 billion in cash was put on a Boeing…” Trump bribed Iran with $324 billion. And got nothing for it. “And the main thing is that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. They fully agreed to that with strong policing powers, and they won't have nuclear weapons, which is what I was all about, because they probably would have used it if they had it. So we had two big moments when they terminated the JCPOA, that was the Obama deal, the Barrack Hussein Obama deal, and when I terminated that, it was very important because it was a road to a nuclear weapon. It was a horrible deal for the United States. It was a deal where billions of dollars was given to Iran. It was a deal where 1.7 billion in cash was put on a Boeing 7, well, not a 7, 7, 57, I guess, right? But it was put on a big, beautiful Boeing 757. They needed a Boeing 747 to be honest with you, because it was a lot of cash. 1.7 billion was taken out of the banks and given to Iran, and on top of that, tens of billions of dollars was made. So they tried to bribe them to make a deal that didn't work. It never works. And that we lived on a great job, and hopefully it's going to be a good relationship, and we're going to get along. And if we don't, we go back to where we started, but I don't know if it's going to be necessary. The Iran deal that we made is going to bring a lot of success to the world, because the oil was really plugged up there for a while. They would call me on occasion, "See, come on, please. Let's go." The oil prices. But the oil is coming way down.”

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

31,475 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

"There was a beautiful study done by the Nordic countries. They probably have the best capture of medical data from how they run their health care systems and their electronic medical record. And so, they published this in JAMA Cardiology, and it was 23 million people. And they looked at their vaccination status by age, sex, which vaccine they got, how many did they get, did they get one of one and one of the other. …What they found was that the unvaccinated have the lowest amount of myocarditis. If you had one Pfizer, you had more than if you were unvaccinated. If you had two Pfizer, you had even more. If you had one Moderna, it was more. If you had two Moderna, it was even more. And if you mixed them, it seemed even higher. All of these were above what we saw with the unvaccinated. So, that sort of answers the question: which is worse, to be unvaccinated or vaccinated? For myocarditis, it was worse to be vaccinated." Kirk Milhoan Independent Medical Alliance
7:34

"There was a beautiful study done by the Nordic countries. They probably have the best capture of medical data from how they run their health care systems and their electronic medical record. And so, they published this in JAMA Cardiology, and it was 23 million people. And they looked at their vaccination status by age, sex, which vaccine they got, how many did they get, did they get one of one and one of the other. …What they found was that the unvaccinated have the lowest amount of myocarditis. If you had one Pfizer, you had more than if you were unvaccinated. If you had two Pfizer, you had even more. If you had one Moderna, it was more. If you had two Moderna, it was even more. And if you mixed them, it seemed even higher. All of these were above what we saw with the unvaccinated. So, that sort of answers the question: which is worse, to be unvaccinated or vaccinated? For myocarditis, it was worse to be vaccinated." Kirk Milhoan Independent Medical Alliance

Jan Jekielek

75,498 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Ohhh my god. Look at the ‘Like Count’ on this video On mainstream media CBS, over 620,000 Likes in 24 hours on Elon Musk telling reporters: This time, the American People are going to get what they voted for Support is MASSIVE for Elon Musk and DOGE “They say that you're orchestrating a hostile takeover of government and doing it in a non-transparent way. What's your response to that criticism?” Elon Musk “Well, first of all, you couldn't ask for a stronger mandate from from the public. The public voted, you know, we have a majority of the public vote voting for President Trump won the house and won the Senate. The people voted for major government reform. There should be no doubt about that. That was on the campaign. The president spoke about that at every rally the people voted for, for major government reform and that's what people are gonna get. They're gonna get what they voted for. And, and a lot of times that, you know, people that don't get what they voted for, but in this presidency, they are gonna get what they voted for, and that's what democracy is all about.”
0:58

Ohhh my god. Look at the ‘Like Count’ on this video On mainstream media CBS, over 620,000 Likes in 24 hours on Elon Musk telling reporters: This time, the American People are going to get what they voted for Support is MASSIVE for Elon Musk and DOGE “They say that you're orchestrating a hostile takeover of government and doing it in a non-transparent way. What's your response to that criticism?” Elon Musk “Well, first of all, you couldn't ask for a stronger mandate from from the public. The public voted, you know, we have a majority of the public vote voting for President Trump won the house and won the Senate. The people voted for major government reform. There should be no doubt about that. That was on the campaign. The president spoke about that at every rally the people voted for, for major government reform and that's what people are gonna get. They're gonna get what they voted for. And, and a lot of times that, you know, people that don't get what they voted for, but in this presidency, they are gonna get what they voted for, and that's what democracy is all about.”

Wall Street Apes

10,469,739 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr