I use bad grammar too! it's just when I hear someone say "*people of his ilk*" in praise of someone, it's like fingernails scraping over a chalkboard. I've heard alot of people using it lately

I confess though that I did have someone in mind for the slimy shifty eyed thief lol (unrelated to this story!)

Lol...Frozen

Based on which study. I hope theyve hurricane proofed everything. Hurricanes are the main cause of Freeports demise, even the weak hurricanes

Sorry this is totally unrelated (and not targeted at you) but its one of my pet peeves.

I've heard a number of people use the phrase "*men of their ilk*" with clear intent to portray something positive about a person. The word "*Ilk*", is almost always used to relay shared **negative** characteristics. You'd for example talk about a known slimy shifty eyed thief and men of his *ilk*. When speaking positively about group traits it's better to use "*men of his character*".. maybe even add an adjective, good character, exceptional character or upstanding character etc... words with positive connotations

"*persons frequently offered and/or made under-the-table payments to officials to expedite permits and approvals that were being held-up without explanation or for no obvious, valid reason.*"

This statement from the association president makes this corruption almost sound innocent, suggesting that contractors are only payinGB for expediency to move rightfully awarded contracts.

The word on the street is it's the reverse, those in control of contract awards demand payment or else you een getting this contract, something more akin to extortion, or award to people who already know "*how the game is played*" regardless of whether the contract is awarded to a competent contractor.

This isnt "just" the word on the street, check the US State Dept report with US contractors claiming theyve been asked to pay bribes in order to be awarded a contract

As to your statement of only dumb people being allowed into the police force. I highly doubt its true **especially** in first world nations. Because they need intelligent people to work in labs, forensics and as detectives. Is it a fact that less educated people opt for the beat patrol, yes because that's a game of numbers, they need a job and people with PHds aren't running to compete for those jobs *yet*.

Haiti is in the problem it's in not because of external forces but first because of geography. It's not anything anybody caused. Geography put it in the path of multiple hurricanes and geography subjected it to devastating earthquakes. Hurricanes and earthquakes are both a challenge to infrastructural development, especially for a dev ed loping nation

The second problem Haiti has is corruption. All homemade.
Corruption soaks up all investment dollars for the people at the top and leaves the poor wondering when is the help coming?

Its convenient for them and others to point fingers all around (the latest thing I heard was the UN brought cholera to Haiti. I'm assuming they means the slums of Haiti with poor sanitation and limited access to clean water, made exponentislly worse after an earthquake.. ok) but their major problems are a result of those two factors and this current crisis stems directly from corruption, all the money soaked up, prices rise in the vacuum and corrupt forces kill a president.

I do agree with you on one thing. We do need to use our brains more and I mean that, we are on the slippery slope to Haiti

So this week or maybe last, Oprah revealed that she's using a weight loss drug and she spoke of all the harassment and bullying she endured because of her weight. Then she said something puzzling, that obesity is a disease. I disagree, that's my opinion. If you put an obese person on a desert island their obesity will quickly fade, they no longer have access to the addictive substance. You cannot do the same with a person with cancer, they would die, because cancer is a disease, it exists even when you change the external environment. Sure the argument could continue that addiction is a mental disease. OK.

But I feel the same way about the obesity is a disease argument as I do about the if they didnt produce guns we wouldnt kill people. Guns certainly make it easier to kill people. But without guns we'd still have drug dealers, we'd still have turf wars, we'd still have cars and road rage, we'd still have illegal immigration stretching our resources, we'd still have corruption in high places siphoning the limited resources we do have and leaving a population in misery, a population on the edge and closer to anarchy. Guns aren't the problem.Cuba for example has access to the same gun market

The problem is **in** us.

Secondly society is society because a body of people get together under some rules. It doesnt matter what the rules are there will be someone who feels I could make so much money if this rule didn't exist and someone bold enough to buck the rule. It's up to designated people in society to stop those people. We could argue about the methods used to prevent illegal activity, but illegal activity should always be stopped because it's illegal (and of course I'm not referring to the slave running away illegal laws)

Doctors arent forced to give patients opioids. Opioids serve a medicine purpose. Theyre more potent than marijuana and they give patients with severe pain some ease when no other drugs are found to. They are pain relief drugs of **last** resort.

Nobody argues whether marijuana or its by products have some medical value. So does fentanyl and the other opioids. But what happened in the US when noone was paying attention? first hundreds of thousands developed an addiction then drug dealers capitalized on the addictive qualities and hundreds of thousands destroyed their lives and many of them died. It wasnt the drug that was the problem it was the monitoring and its too late to roll it back.

My concern about this marijuana thing is we fool ourselves if we believe we have any systems in place to control the potential gang activity around farms and assault on farms, the illegal distribution, the quality or the fallout in the inner city. But Its clear that they will do what they want as Chester Cooper said since they in charge, let noone say who could have seen this.

When the home based unregistered school comes to take the exam, inspect the premises, do the investigation of the program offered, charge a fine and allow the child to take the exam. I dont see any real issue there for legitimate programs. It's probably worse to have children who have been educated walking around with no certificates.

The only alternative is having the resources to act proactively in the detection of schools, how to do that well you'd have to know every living child in the country and complete some analysis on who is or isnt enrolled at a registered school, they're either not going to school or going to an unregistered school. Possible if you have the right tools and system integrations, but we dont.

I cant determine what registration really does, is there an effort to weed out people just taking money and not educating children or having children in unsafe environments or is it just, here's the list of our schools.

I made the **very** clear distinction that the story pointed to **internal** hospital staff who are not likely to be hackers. They were detected fairly quickly, not likely to be sophisticated hackers. Theres no need to add drama to the story.