betz24

He was re-elected because he won the war and was a good leader at the time, nothing really to do with socialism. He navigated a depression for the American people and they loved him for it

S&P 500? That's an interesting ask considering teachers pension/tenure funds and administrative 401ks are all probably in there.

I can understand that people hold their college as some part of their soul and want their universities actions to reflect their political beliefs. But, I don't think universities (as an entity) should be involved politically or have political opinions.

I still believe the university benefits from government funding since NSF, NIST, DoD etc are all agencies funding university research. I don't think it's possible to un-fund yourself completely from the government given that it spurs research everywhere.

Yes, anti-BDS laws. These were passed years ago (not reactionary to now). There are state and federal rules but in general, a university can't boycott or divest from Israeli (or many other nations) in political protest or it loses funding.

I think this is why we see most universities have their hands tied.

Aren't there laws that prevent Universities from doing so?

I thought the whole reason universities had their hands tied were the anti-BDS law. Maybe Brown is in a state (RI) where it won't lose state funding, but losing federal funding would be a blow to the research orgs.

You originally said that you find Portugal less 'burdened', I am just pointing out that that is not the case. Decriminalization takes significant amount of spending and burden for both Portugal and Portland and isn't showing improvements in the community. If a policy isn't making an impact it's not a working policy: this experiment has been alive in Portugal for over 20 years. Feel free to look at more sources, or provide proof that it does work, I'm all ears.

I have heavy drug users in my family. Giving them access to more supply and mobility to shoot up whenever they want isn't going to help them. They don't think that way.

Aside from being there many times and seeing the problem first-hand here are a few articles:

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-drug-decriminalization-a-failure-or-success-the-answer-isnt-so-simple/#:~:text=Overdose%20rates%20now%20stand%20at,just%20from%202021%20to%202022.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/25/it-beats-getting-stoned-on-the-street-how-portugal-decriminalised-drugs-as-seen-from-the-shoot-up-centre

The idea that decriminalization leads to less hard drug usage is seen to have an initial positive effect (which could be why you had previously thought it was better) but unfortunately has led to a larger unmaintainable drug problema:

• locations become drug trafficking epicenters
• rubber band effect from expiring and unmaintainable government funding
• number of users growing

The number of Portuguese adults who reported prior use of illicit adult drugs rose from 7.8% in 2001 to 12.8% in 2022 — still below European averages but a significant rise nonetheless. Overdose rates now stand at a 12-year high and have doubled in Lisbon since 2019.

Check Portland, OR. Not going so great now. The drugs nowadays are synthetic and designed to be addictive to most people. Decriminalizing them isn't going to get them off the streets and stop people from getting hooked.

Idk, look at Portugal. Full drug legalization is not doing too hot.

Does anyone live in an electric building? I'd be curious if they can deliver enough hot water to all the units in time