We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
If someone does have a backup copy, can they please share a link or upload it somewhere, we'll try to find a more robust / temporary hosting solution for this file
(looks are important but also overrated and not as important as you might think)
Point is, if the NSA didn't manage to stop Ed Snowden, how will a law firm?
Wikipedia isn't perfect and the majority of editors may very well lean on the socially liberal side of the spectrum (though economically both sides are probably represented), but Wikipedia is by design always a work in progress which aims for articles to eventually state a correct position, through dialogue, and nearly everyone will agree, no matter their political affiliation, that somehow all those volunteers have aggregated probably one of the most useful accumulations of free knowledge in the world.
In this case, they seem to have gotten there somewhat, as this is currently the second paragraph of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession
[quote] Although the definition of a recession varies between different countries and scholars, two consecutive quarters of decline in a country's real gross domestic product (real GDP) is commonly used as a practical definition of a recession.[3][4][5] In the United States, a recession is defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the market, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales".[6] In the United Kingdom and most other countries, it is defined as negative economic growth for two consecutive quarters.[7][8] [/quote]
In the US section, they also explain and link to seemingly new policy of NBER:
[quote]In July 2022, the NBER released a statement regarding declaring a recession following a second consecutive quarter of shrinking GDP, "There is no fixed rule about what measures contribute information to the process or how they are weighted in our decisions".[95][/quote]
Are you expecting them to condemn or start a 'controversy' section about the definition? Or just to pretend the NBER has said nothing?
Sometimes it could just be bullshit criticism though to make a senior feel better about themselves...
Quote: Because it was of greater advantage to her client's case and winning in appeal to make the media continue to spin their narrative?