Readit Newshttps://public.com/bonds/screener?issuerSymbol=PDFHV
The yield on ~20 year Harvard bonds seems to be about one percentage point higher than the yield on 20 year treasuries.
No, I think it's to get the cost of an electric truck down. I've never heard anyone from Tesla say it looks that way because it'll sell better. It doesn't look like the other Teslas, which all look really nice, but are more expensive.
No, they're not. The price of a Cybertruck is in line with the price for a Model S or Model X, and significantly higher than a Model 3.
The US hasn't declared a war since WWII since executive privilege allows the President to pursue war without Congress declaring war. Does that mean that every time we take military action (which the US is doing daily, right now) we're pursuing what the founders of the country would (rightfully?) classify as an illegal war?
(I didn't take any political science, and I'm not really informed on constitutional law so I could have this partially wrong)
That's not correct. Congress no longer passes declarations of war, it passes authorizations of the use of military force (AUMF). The change was made starting in Vietnam because a declaration of war can only target a recognized sovereign nation, while an AUMF can target any state or non-state actor. The President is still heavily restricted from employing the US military without an AUMF.
I think the confusion about this stems from Congress having passed several, a couple of which are pretty broad, and never repealing them. This has allowed various Presidents to use one of the active AUMFs to justify actions, but for those who don't know or pay attention to the details it seems like the President is going around Congress.
The system more or less worked until the Spanish American War, when the government realized that the militias need some sort of standard in order to integrate properly with the regular army when called up. This led to the creation of the National Guard in 1903. It was tightly integrated into the Army structure in 1933.
What arguably made the Amendment obsolete was the advance of technology. By the early 20th century conventional warfighting took too much firepower, support, and coordination for a loose citizen militia to conduct. At best they could form the core of an insurgent force, but the goal is always to not get to that point.
In theory, that insurgent force could work against a tyrannical federal government. In practice, even if most of the people with the civilian firepower weren't supporting the tyranny I'm not sure it would work out. Conducting an insurgency against a foreign occupier is a lot different than conducting one against a domestic oppressor.
Although in the days since “O Brother Where Art Thou?”, when they added dust-yellow color to the entire movie in post, maybe there are other ways now, if you didn’t want to go entirely to CGI.
Like the terrible model work in In Harm's Way.
Greenland has been a Danish territory for 300+ years. This is longer than the United States of America has existed.
I have also noticed that e.g. Lockheed Martin (maker of the F35) is not doing very well on the stock market.
There's no "e.g." here. It's only Lockmart, and it's because they recently lost the Next Generation Air Defense contract to Boeing. The rest of the US defense sector is fine (for now).
These statements from the US are more about keeping Europe dependent on the US (and thus the US keeping some geopolitical leverage) than about bolstering the US defense sector.