Same technology, different health outcomes

There have been no deaths and few if any cases of lung illness directly attributed to vaping in the U.K. A recent study has concluded that vaping is now helping up to 70,000 people stop smoking every year by reaching those who failed to quit smoking by other means.
...
In the U.S., by contrast, vaping has killed at least 33 people, injured about 1,500 and earned the wrath of both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and President Trump.
...
Why the different experience? The CDC says that most cases of illness are linked to vaping products laced with THC oil, an ingredient of cannabis, “particularly those obtained off the street or from other informal sources (e.g., friends, family members, illicit dealers).” In addition, many American nicotine e-cigs are much stronger than those allowed in Britain, where there is a 2% limit on nicotine concentrations under the EU’s Tobacco Products Directive. A typical Juul is nearly three times as strong.

In Britain, a manufacturer or importer of e-cigarettes must submit a notification to the authorities six months in advance of a product launch and is subject to strict product-safety regulations, including toxicological testing of the ingredients and emissions, as well as rules ensuring tamper-proof and leakproof packaging. Stimulants, colorings and vitamin additives are tightly regulated.

Few such regulations exist in the U.S. For many observers, this explains the higher injury rate.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the-u-k-isnt-having-problems-with-vaping-11571928833

Quote within Quote

Alexander Hamilton peered through the ages and commented on the current Republican failure to abandon Donald Trump:

The prosecution of [impeachments], for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influences, and interests on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of the parties than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.

Nailed it.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/collapse-presidents-defense

Second order effects of negative interest rates

- If interest rates for small savers ever were to go negative, it would give rise to the juxtaposition of income penalties for households with benefits for “the elites” through their ability to profit from rising equity prices. Economic impact aside, the boost to populist politics would likely be dramatic.

- Negative rates on U.S. Treasurys would, for example, harm the Social Security Fund (which can only invest in Treasurys), hastening the day when it runs out of money.

- Financial models and algorithms – which essentially are a matter of looking for and profiting from deviations from historic relationships – may not work as well as they did in the past, since history (all of which has been based on positive interest rates) may be out the window.

https://www.oaktreecapital.com/docs/default-source/memos/mysterious.pdf

somewhat related https://www.coindesk.com/3-ways-staking-will-upend-the-economics-of-ethereum