Lizzo makes another huge announcement. Now that that is finished, maybe she can sink back into obscurity again.
The “stealing of property” is not just limited to our wallets and cars.
And Japanese have a study out that has every man on edge.
Oh, Thank God!
You might all be relieved to find out That Lizzo, the gravitationally challenged pop singer, has decided to walk back her early retirement. She released a statement yesterday on Instagram:
“When I say ‘I quit,’ I mean I quit giving any negative energy attention.
“What I’m not going to quit is the joy of my life, which is making music and connecting to people. And I know I’m not alone. In no way shape or form am I the only person experiencing that negative voice that’s louder than the positive.
“If I can just give one person the inspiration or motivation to stand up for themselves and say they quit letting negative people, negative comments win then I’ve done even more than could’ve hoped for. I’m going to keep moving forward and keep being me.”
Nope, that’s not what she said. She said she got tired of being called fat and being accused of harassment and she quit. But, like I said, money is money and those entourages that will tell Lizzo how great he is cost a lot of money.
So, rest easy people. It will all be OK.
This Is Getting Ridiculous
According to the New York Post:
A pair of alleged squatters accused of unlawfully moving into a Queens duplex are suing its rightful owners after refusing to vacate the $930,000 home.
It’s the latest logic-defying chapter in the ongoing squatter saga in the borough, which in recent weeks has seen multiple homes occupied by unwelcome invaders who claim rights to the properties under New York City’s permissive laws.
“It’s absolutely absurd,” said the owner of the latest targeted home, Juliya Fulman — who so far has racked up more than $4,000 in legal bills fighting the suit — to The Post on Sunday.
“These people literally broke into my house. It’s not fair to us as homeowners that we are not protected by the city,” said the Jamaica property owner.
Within the five boroughs, squatters need only occupy a property for 30 days before a wide range of legal protections kick in that make it difficult for the owner to evict them.
But that isn’t the only asinine squatter story. In this story, developers are now squatting to claim land. According to Fox News:
A Hawaii property owner is getting sued after finding out a half-million dollar house was accidentally built on her land.
The legal quagmire has attracted squatters to the house, according to a neighbor who spoke to local news.
“You already make a mistake, and then you build on my land without my permission. And then now you’re suing me for it,” Reynolds told the New York Post. “I was so mad. I was so mad that day … that’s a really big mistake to make.”
In 2018, Annaleine Reynolds, known as Anne, purchased a vacant, one-acre lot in Hawaiian Paradise Park on the Big Island for around $22,500 at a county tax auction, according to court documents. Reynolds, who lives in California and works as a relationship coach, planned to eventually move and host meditative healing women’s retreats on the lot, but was shocked to find out from a real estate broker last year that a $500,000 three-bedroom house was built and sold on her property by accident, Hawaii News Now reported.
Keaau Development Partnership, LLC hired PJ’s Construction to build around a dozen homes on properties the developer bought in a subdivision of the Big Island’s Puna district, the Associated Press reported. The developer is now suing Reynolds and PJ’s Construction, among others involved in the home’s development.
“It would set a dangerous precedent, if you could go on to someone else’s land, build anything you want, and then sue that individual for the value of it,” said James DiPasquale, an attorney for Reynolds.
Reynolds rejected an offer from the developer for a neighboring property to resolve the dispute. She told Hawaii News Now she bought the lot for its “sacredness.”
This type of story is very common in communist Leftist cities where property rights are demonized. This is opening the the industry of “squatter vigilantes.
In Florida, Ron DeSatis, they Republican governor that is way too effective has signed an anti-squatter law. Now, squatters who do not belong are immediately arrested. It makes you wonder why all states aren’t passing these laws.
I’m thinking if someone is illegally in your house, you should be able to shoot them. But that’s just me.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/squatters-occupy-500k-home-mistakenly-built-wrong-lot-developer-suing-lands-true-owner
https://nypost.com/2024/03/31/us-news/nyc-couple-sued-by-squatters-who-allegedly-took-over-their-930k-investment-home/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nypost
I’m Interested in This Study
According to the New York Post:
She’s sizing up some seriously big myths.
A surgeon specializing in sexual health says you cannot tell the size of a man’s penis simply by looking at his hands and feet.
Dr. Rena Malik made the declaration on the Diary of a CEO podcast on Monday, squashing the stereotype that blokes with bigger shoes are better endowed.
However, the surgeon — who practices in both Beverly Hills and Irvine, Calif. — said there is one body part that could accurately indicate the size of a man’s member.
“There’s one study — it’s a Japanese study where they looked at only Japanese men so there are some limitations — but they measured all these body parts and penile length and they found was that nose length was correlated with penile length, not hand length or foot,” Malik declared.
https://nypost.com/2024/04/02/lifestyle/surgeon-reveals-the-one-body-part-that-indicates-penis-size-and-its-not-hands-or-feet/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nypost
We Didn’t Need a Study for This
According to the Post Millennial:
A new study looking at the patterns of lyrics and music over the last 50 years have concluded that songs have gotten more simple and repetitive over time. Emotions in the songs have also become more negative and angry.
The study, published in Scientific Reports found the English-language songs have become simpler and repetitive over the last five decades in the categories of rap, country, pop, R&B, and rock songs.
Lead author of the study Eva Zangerle and others wrote in the paper’s conclusion, “We find that lyrics have become simpler over time regarding multiple aspects of lyrics: vocabulary richness, readability, complexity, and the number of repeated lines.”
“Our results also confirm previous research that found that lyrics have become more negative on the one hand, and more personal on the other,” it added.
Additionally, the authors stated, “Our analysis shows that lyrics have become angrier across all genres, with rap showing the most profound increase in anger.” Country music had the lowest increase in anger and negative emotion across time.
The authors stated that the information gathered on the pattern in lyrics of songs could be “used to further study and monitor cultural artifacts and shifts in society.”
Further, it added that these insights could signal “changing sentiment in societies and shifts in the use of emotionally loaded words and the sentiment expressed in the lyrics consumed by the different audiences (age, gender, country/state/region, educational background, economical status, etc.).”
Alongside this discovery, US reading scores have dropped to the lowest levels in decades among students. Fewer and fewer people read books in comparison to the late 1900s. Both are an indicator similar to the declining complexity of song lyrics in that reading and complex literary understanding seems to be on the decline.
The authors speculated in the study that the simplicity could be a result of more and more Americans simply music as background noise.
https://thepostmillennial.com/pop-music-keeps-getting-worse-over-last-50-years-study?utm_campaign=64466
Pure Incompetence
According to the Free Beacon:
California’s $20 minimum wage for fast food workers became law Monday and quickly caused chaos, with pizza chains preparing to cut hundreds of employees, ice cream and pretzel shop franchisees struggling to learn if the law applies to them, and industry leaders eyeing price hikes in the state.
California governor Gavin Newsom (D.) last week signed more carve-outs for the law, which already exempted bakeries and chains inside grocery stores, adding increased confusion over which franchisees must comply with the mandate.
The chaos over the law could deal a political blow to Newsom, who became the face of negotiating the $20 fast food wage as a “compromise” between unions and business interests. Newsom, whose approval ratings have tumbled in recent months, signed the legislation last September after a rushed and secretive process, but critics say the fallout is only beginning.
It’s still unclear whom the law applies to. The owner of an ice cream franchise, for example, has tried for months to learn from Newsom and other state officials whether she has to pay her mostly part-time, high school and college student workers $20 an hour, KCRA reported last week. The Democratic state assemblyman who wrote the law directed her to the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), one of the state’s most powerful labor groups and the driving force behind the legislation, which ultimately told her to find a legislator to pass a new bill exempting her.
“I think there’s going to be a big backlash,” the state assembly’s Republican leader James Gallagher said. “The whole thing is just making it more expensive to live in California.”
Newsom’s office declined to comment, but a spokesman has told other outlets that who’s subject to the law will ultimately be decided by the state labor commissioner’s office, a fast food council made up of political appointees, and “potentially the courts.” The legislation’s author, Democratic assemblyman Chris Holden, did not respond to a request for comment. The SEIU did not respond to a request for comment.
Starting Monday, franchises are supposed to start paying $20 hourly to their workers and if they don’t, can be taken to the state labor agency responsible for its enforcement. Yet many of these franchises do not know if the law applies to them. It’s not clear, for example, if Panera Bread is exempt from the mandate even after allegations that Governor Newsom negotiated a carve-out for chain bakeries to benefit a billionaire donor and former schoolmate who owns Panera franchises. Newsom denied the report after days of bad press and insisted that Panera didn’t qualify as an exempted bakery after all—a claim disputed by others in the industry that will likely need to be litigated in court.
Chain ice cream parlors, pretzel counters, and doughnut shops are in the same boat.
The state’s department of industrial relations, which is tasked with answering the hard questions about the law, has issued a fact sheet saying that chain ice cream shops, pretzel and doughnut bakeries, and even boba tea joints may have to comply—even though the federal government explicitly exempts such places from its definition of fast food restaurants.
Keith Miller, a California Subway franchisee and consultant to other fast food franchises, said ultimately, even if owners find technical exemptions, “I don’t think it’s a good feeling with your employees to say, ‘I don’t have to pay you $20.’”
Widespread layoffs in the industry are already underway because of the law, and fast food prices are set to rise—as fast food corporations warned investors months ago would happen. Starting this month, pizza chains will permanently fire hundreds of workers, state records show. Jobs in California’s fast food sector fell by 1.3 percent from last September—when the law passed—to January of this year, the Wall Street Journal reported, compared to an overall 0.2 percent decline in private employment. This comes as California clocks the nation’s highest unemployment rate at 5.3 percent, according to the latest federal figures, and has seen stagnating job growth compared to the rest of the country.
The legislation “will prove that the law of unintended consequences will always run amok—and get ready for amok,” said Michael Lotito, a California attorney and co-chair of the Workplace Policy Institute.
Lotito noted that the legislation was passed under SEIU pressure without any evaluation of how an unprecedented 25 percent minimum wage increase would affect food prices, labor costs, worker hours, hiring, business closures, and inflation.
“I think that when you’re in the fifth or sixth largest economy in the world … that is probably not the right thing to do,” he said.
Miller said the legislation will test whether the small franchise model is sustainable and that the state likely won’t see the full picture of who can stay in businesses until leases end. He noted that California’s past minimum wage hikes have forced owners to keep staff as lean as possible, and it’s unclear how they will manage the higher costs, now that additional price hikes may not be sustainable given already-high prices. The revenue-share model of franchises means that the fast food corporations will benefit most from higher food prices, without the pain of higher labor costs.
“You’re enriching the corporation and driving out your local business owner,” Miller said.
.https://freebeacon.com/california/californias-20-minimum-wage-law-takes-effect-causing-confusion-layoffs-and-price-hikes/?utm_source=GeorgiaLogCabin
