Hi,
I installed Linux a few days ago and already ran a Linux app. I downloaded another Linux app, copied it to the Linux folder, then looked at the Chromebook app launcher ( bottom left of the screen) and cannot see it. What could be the reason?

Hi,
What is going on with Project Fi and Google Messages? From the web version of Project fi, I cannot access to my messages anymore. Have you noticed that?

The Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025 (S.2321, proposed) is federal legislation designed to ban "grossly excessive" pricing during exceptional market shocks, such as pandemics or natural disasters. It empowers the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to punish corporations taking advantage of consumers and requires transparency in pricing, targeting companies boosting profits through unfair leverage during crises. 

Key Aspects of the Price Gouging Prevention Act

• Federal Ban: Makes it illegal to sell goods or services at unconscionably excessive prices during declared market shocks.
• Targeting Large Corporations: Focuses on companies exploiting inflationary environments or supply chain disruptions to increase profit margins.
• Enforcement: Expands FTC authority and allows state attorneys general to seek penalties, injunctions, and restitution for consumers.
• Transparency Requirements: Requires public companies to disclose costs and explain pricing strategies in quarterly SEC filings during emergencies.
• Rebuttable Presumption: Establishes a presumption of violation if companies with significant market share increase prices dramatically, forcing them to prove their costs actually rose.

 

Usage Examples & Context

• Gasoline: Preventing gas stations from drastically raising prices during a fuel shortage caused by a refinery incident, often referred to as the Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act.
• Supermarkets: Stopping grocery stores from using algorithms to increase prices on necessities (e.g., milk, bread) by the minute or based on individual consumer data during a supply crisis.
• Supply Chain Disruptions: Limiting price increases on goods that are not actually affected by new tariffs or supply issues but are raised for higher profits.

 

Unfortunately, not many:
.
USSR (1920s–60s): Took a semi-feudal empire, wiped out illiteracy, industrialized in a generation, crushed Nazi Germany, gave free healthcare/education, and put the first human in space.

Rapid industrialization and literacy gains occurred, but through brutal forced collectivization that caused the Holodomor and other famines killing millions (estimates for 1932–33 alone: 4–10+ million excess deaths from starvation and related causes). Agricultural productivity collapsed initially, livestock was slaughtered, and peasants faced mass deportations and terror. The "one generation" industrialization built heavy industry for military purposes but produced chronic shortages of consumer goods, low living standards, and later stagnation by the 1970s–80s. The economy was inefficient due to central planning's calculation problems and lack of incentives; it ultimately failed to deliver broad prosperity and collapsed in 1991. Victory over Nazi Germany came at ~27 million Soviet deaths (mostly under Stalin's pre-war and wartime policies). Space achievements and "free" services masked a repressive system with gulags holding millions. Net result: gains were real in narrow metrics but outweighed by avoidable mass death and long-term economic failure.

Cuba: Despite 60+ years of U.S. blockade, built universal healthcare and literacy, and sends doctors abroad to disaster zones.

Literacy rose and some health metrics (life expectancy, infant mortality) improved to levels better than many poor Latin American peers, aided by a strong primary care focus. However, the economy has been a chronic failure: low productivity, shortages, rationing, and dependence on external subsidies (first Soviet, then Venezuelan oil). Doctors are often exported for revenue under poor conditions, functioning as state labor export rather than pure altruism. The U.S. embargo exists, but internal policies—central planning, price controls, suppression of private enterprise, and one-party rule—bear primary responsibility for poverty and emigration waves. Recent data shows deteriorating health indicators amid ongoing crises (rising infant mortality in some periods, medicine shortages). Cuba remains far poorer than it could be with market freedoms; repression (political prisoners, restricted speech) and lack of broad prosperity undermine claims of success. Pre-revolution Cuba was not the poorest in the region.

Yugoslavia: Socialist self-management, high living standards, independent of both U.S. and USSR.

Worker self-management and market elements produced early growth and higher living standards than rigid Soviet-bloc countries in the 1950s–70s. However, the system suffered chronic inflation, unemployment, foreign debt ($20 billion by late period), regional inequalities, and inefficiency from soft budget constraints and party interference. It collapsed economically in the 1980s with hyperinflation and stagnation, contributing to the violent breakup and wars of the 1990s. "Independence" relied on Western loans and tourism; it was not a pure socialist success but a hybrid that failed to scale sustainably. Living standards were relative and eroded over time.

Kerala, India: Communist-governed state with literacy and life expectancy rivaling rich countries.

Kerala has strong human development indicators (high literacy, life expectancy) due to land reforms, education focus, remittances from Gulf migration, and a history of public investment. However, it is not a full socialist success: it operates within India's democratic federal capitalist system, with private enterprise, markets, and central government support playing major roles. Economic growth has lagged other Indian states; high unemployment, fiscal strains, out-migration for jobs, and dependence on remittances reveal weaknesses. Communist governments alternated with others; claims of "eliminating extreme poverty" are recent and contested amid broader Indian trends. Kerala's model excels in social spending but struggles with productive job creation and sustainability without capitalist elements elsewhere in India.

Chile under Allende: Peaceful road to socialism with land reform and nationalized resources, overthrown by a U.S.-backed coup.

Allende's policies (nationalizations, wage hikes, price controls, deficits) caused economic chaos: GDP growth turned negative, inflation exploded (hundreds of percent, reaching hyper levels), shortages, black markets, falling real wages, and declining production. Fiscal deficits ballooned, money supply surged, and output losses from seizures/strikes mounted. By 1973, the economy was in crisis with scarcity and unrest, eroding support even before the coup. U.S. involvement existed amid Cold War tensions, but domestic policy failures (misguided expansionary socialism ignoring incentives and calculation) were the core driver of collapse. The "peaceful road" led to ungovernability, not sustained improvement.

Grenada under Maurice Bishop (1979–83): Free health care, mass literacy campaigns, new infrastructure; crushed by U.S. invasion.

Short-lived regime (4 years) saw some social spending, literacy pushes, and infrastructure on a tiny island with Cuban aid. It pursued a mixed economy with state dominance but banned rival parties, suspended the constitution, and ruled by decree without elections—hardly a democratic model. Economic gains were modest and untested long-term; internal factionalism led to Bishop's execution by hardliners. The U.S. invasion followed that chaos and regional security concerns (airport as potential threat). No evidence of transformative, sustainable success; it was a brief authoritarian experiment ended amid its own instability.

Tanzania under Nyerere (1960s–70s): Attempted African socialism (“Ujamaa”), focused on literacy, health, rural development, life expectancy nearly doubled.

Literacy and some health gains occurred via villagization and social programs. However, forced resettlement of millions into collective villages disrupted farming, destroyed homes, and caused agricultural collapse: food production fell sharply (from exporter to importer), per capita output dropped, and the economy stagnated. Ujamaa led to inefficiency, coercion, and reliance on foreign aid; by the 1980s, Tanzania was one of Africa's poorest despite "self-reliance" rhetoric. Economic failure forced policy reversals. Gains in life expectancy were modest and not unique; costs included lost productivity and human suffering from top-down planning ignoring local knowledge.

Bolivia under Evo Morales (2006–2019): Nationalized gas/lithium, slashed poverty, expanded indigenous rights; toppled in a U.S.-backed coup, now back in power.

Poverty fell and growth averaged ~4.5–5% early on, aided by a global commodities boom (high gas/mineral prices) and redistribution from nationalizations. Indigenous inclusion advanced symbolically. However, this was resource nationalism during a boom, not pure socialism; growth slowed later with falling revenues, high fiscal deficits, debt accumulation, reserve depletion, energy subsidies causing distortions, and corruption scandals. Democratic institutions eroded (judiciary politicization, media pressure, term-limit maneuvers). The 2019 events involved disputed elections and protests, not a simple "U.S.-backed coup." Sustainability was questionable; reliance on extractives without diversification mirrored other populist failures. Poverty reduction was real but vulnerable to price cycles.

Vietnam: Defeated French and then U.S. occupation, rebuilt under socialism, today one of the fastest-growing economies with strong public services.

Military victories were costly (millions dead). Post-1975 socialist planning brought stagnation, shortages, and poverty. Rapid growth and poverty reduction since the 1980s came from reforms: market liberalization, private enterprise, FDI attraction, price decontrols, and integration into global trade—explicitly moving away from central planning toward a "socialist-oriented market economy." Success stems from capitalist tools (property incentives, competition), not socialism. Public services improved with growth, but core socialist experiments failed beforehand. Vietnam's model confirms that ditching rigid socialism enables progress.

Capitalism hasn’t exactly upheld your Enlightenment ideals either, see Jim Crow, COINTELPRO, CIA coups against elected governments, or mass poverty in the Global South. So yes, socialism has worked. The real question is: why does capitalism go to such lengths to strangle it whenever it does?

Flaws and crimes exist under capitalist or mixed systems (racism, intelligence abuses, interventions). However, these are not inherent to market principles or Enlightenment values (individual rights, rule of law, free inquiry); they often contradicted them and were corrected through liberal mechanisms (civil rights movements, reforms). Mass poverty in the Global South has declined dramatically since ~1990 via globalization, trade, and market reforms (hundreds of millions lifted out, per World Bank data)—China and India being prime examples after partial liberalization. Socialist regimes produced far higher body counts via democide, engineered famines, and repression (estimates 20–100+ million across USSR, China, Cambodia, etc.). No systematic "strangling" explains socialist failures; internal incentive problems, knowledge/coordination failures (central planning can't match dispersed market information), and authoritarianism do. Countries that liberalized markets (South Korea, Taiwan, post-Doi Moi Vietnam, post-1970s China, Chile post-Allende) surged; pure or heavy socialist experiments consistently stagnated or collapsed. The pattern favors markets with rule of law over state-directed economies.

Do you believe that freezing the rent of rent-stabilized apartments in New York will enhance the rental market and increase the availability of apartments for rent?The authorized rent increase for rent-stabilized apartments in 2026 is set at 3%, while the projected cost of living increase is 2.8%. If rents are frozen, property owners may struggle to maintain their buildings properly, and the tenants may suffer the consequences.