State's AG Google Investigations Like USA vs Microsoft?

Google is being investigated by 50 state attorney generals for monopolistic practices. Google is too popular and its success has reinforced its wealth and market position in searches. Google it is a synonym for internet search.

Microsoft was sued by the U.S. Government and found responsible in 2000. An appeals court overturned the verdict. Eventually a settlement was reached. The main problem was the packaging of windows with internet explorer and the difficulty computer producers had in detaching them and using other products.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Judgment

Google has been sued a lot by various governments and has paid out billions and billions. Fifty states A.G.s are investigating Google, perhaps with mixed motives in possibly filing suit, since Internet sales compete with local brick and mortar sales in states. States have started taxing Internet sales- even from out of state purchasers sending a gift to someone in a state.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/9/20857440/google-antitrust-investigation-attorneys-general-advertising-search

Alternative operating systems to windows are slowly spring up though windows continues to be the world number one in sales if not friendliness. Users tend to feel like renters rather than owners because of the way the software is written. Google isn't like that, though taking down Google plus killed the business sites of lots of people that had invested in building their site up, without providing an easy continuity migration on a downsized location without all of the empty space.

Google is a leftist leaning political entity concerning politics although it is not leftist financially. It is challenging to say what remedies might be made to bring Google into a more competitive position regarding advertising. Google maps have changed the way humanity views the world- literally. Maybe Google could spin off some of its search functions and ties to open source, commercial-free operating Linux systems in order to render search functions available through non-commercial portals. That would be quite a substantial change for-itself.

Automatic Peace Deal for Afghanistan

Afghanistan is fortunate enough to have an automatic, self-igniting peace deal built in that does not require anyone to sign. If the Taliban stops hostilities against its own people, the government and Americans in that country peace automatically breaks out. No one needs to sign anything.

The United States should be prepared to back up the lawful Government the remainder of this century if need be. It could be our new Germany with permanent garrisons established in country to defrappe general war, terror, werewolf return and so forth.

https://nypost.com/2019/09/08/taliban-more-americans-will-die-after-secret-camp-david-talks-cancelled/

The Taliban want to rule Afghanistan through terror on their own people. Not all Muslim Afghan citizens or others want a Taliban theocracy to decree what should be. The Taliban would need to accept Democracy as the lawful form of government and just go back to the plough, madrass and mosque to busy themselves while people choose for-themselves how to run their own life.

Of course the Taliban should be against censorship as authoritarian government like to impose as they declare opposition political speech to be 'hate speech'.  The Taliban party would be one party in Afghanistan yet Democracy would be firmly established and extremism of any sort that would destroy democracy would not be allowed. Neither theocratic or communist governments, royal or authoritarian would be permitted.

The United States should keep troops in secure forts for a century in order to prevent the area from simply becoming a vast, extremist theocracy that support terrorism on the west. Democracy isn't so bad until extremists take over and corrupt moral foundations and censor free speech. Rectification then need occur is a society is lucky enough to be free to work that.

Challenges and Responses During the Great Depression

F.D.R.’s response to the depression rescued millions of Americans from the worst extremes of poverty created by the Wall Street collapse of 1929–33. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933, yet was cut in half by 1935 to 12%. In some rural Oregon counties the unemployment rate reached 1933 levels during the Carter administration in the late 1970s. Banking runs were a problem

Economic Recovery in the Great Depression

One theory that is popular as an explanation for the great depression, it was not limited to the United States, was the tie of money to gold stocks in nations and the need to export gold to sell to help recovery. Nations with a surplus of gold did not spend it. National economies exporting gold contracted with money supply and those receiving it din’t expand money supply. A book Golden Fetters (1992), Barry Eichengreen explains the cycle leading to depression. It is briefly described in the url above from which I paraphrased/abbreviated some of the information in this paragraph.

There is a break in linear time of recovery for the depression of the 1930s- it was the Second World War. The war-time economic requirements for rationing and production of war goods manufacture from civilian plants that had produced consumer items changed things a lot. It was a jolt none should want to try to use in the future. An unintended yet necessary response to the facts of European and Asian wars of aggression by non-Democratic countries, it brought the U.S. economy to the far side of the rabbit hole in the late 1940s in a new political economy. Taxes on the rich were raised to 90% during the war, and Military spending was 42% of G.D.P. The tax rate only slowly tapered off over decades after the war permitting government science, technology and defense research as well as the Interstate Hwy System and numerous electrification projects.

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

There were new technologies, ways of production, changes in demographics, education and social arrangements that were great. Mass production for war might have been reflected in the knowledge of mass home construction in the 1950s. So many people became internationalized that globalism was stimulated for more than elites. Continuing military intervention and foreign intelligence gathering was required to address a very destabilized and rapidly decolonizing world; not to mention the fission and fusion bomb races.

The rise in unemployment did not halt or solve all of the preexisting social and political, health and conservation issues of the U.S.A. Work continued in the private sector to better life, to invent things and to be productive as government reaction to the high unemployment and banking problems worked from a different direction. The Dust Bowl, floods, cancer. lack of electrification and modern sanitation, meat inspection, organized crime, lack of telephone network saturation etc…those items effected challenges and response continuing for decades.

About Ancient Giants

I think people continue to manufacture new myth content, mostly with good intentions, regarding ancient giants.

https://gigantomachia.typepad.com/gigantomachia/ 

I think many ancient myths had a basis in fact. Before common literacy way back in the day of oral story transmission a lot of detail was lost. So if some smaller group of homo sapiens met and fought a larger group of humans; perhaps a head taller, they were fighting 'giants'. Pegasus might have had a similar origin; a Saudi Arabian or Iraqi white race horse that could 'fly' in comparison to the plodding though strong European horses. 

The contact and interaction of humans with pure bred neanderthals continued until 30-40,00 b.c. Some of them may have been larger boned, and some hybrids a little taller than smaller people. Partial hybrids that were more robust and taller than pure humans could be the giants referenced (they interbred) Modern Europeans still have 2 or 3 percent Neanderthal genes. It is easy to see in some political leaders.

Potential Vectors of Change in Political Economy

A political economy interfaces politics and economics. For the U.S.A., when government regulation quality and understanding is lacking the private sector and government investment goes to seed; the ecosystem declines, economics serve capital concentration entirely for its own sake rather than national citizenry well-being, national financial balances run tens of trillions of dollars of deficits, and wealth is concentrated to the point of creating a virtual aristocracy or plutonomy.

Remedies exist that are obvious, yet the corporatism phenomena of the private sector merging with the government that becomes a servo-unit for it following it about has negated the selection of quality political candidates and oversight.

Patents can be reformed such that exclusivity exists for just three years with 10% royalties to patent holders from anyone in the common domain era after three years, Regulations can be made to reward quality production that reduces mal-effects on the ecosystem. Capital acquisition by individuals can be capped at a percent of the national income that is low enough to prevent political power from being concentrated as well as economic, and ecological economics can become a guiding principle for the political economy, instead of being a vague outline in the shadows.

Conflict isn't inevitable with shared items. In primitive societies with few kinds of tools people will give an item admired by someone else to them, since it reduces jealousy or conflict, and is easily replaced. Scarcity of an item is an element in the function of covetousness and conflict over an item. Few are jealous about sharing air because their is a lot of it. Some are jealous about water where it is more rare, others have a lot of it and would toss a bucket of it on someone to cool them down. Exclusive use of an item or space may be necessary to produce a particular article. In a global economic system individuals and corporations rather than nations take profit from resources of other nations (unless one has a state socialist government then that government does harvest the resources of other nations).

Hume- Is, Ought and What Not of Moral Norms

"All prescriptive theory" is quite a large field that isn't even finished. Formal logic and the square of opposition has the A proposition being 'All are". One learns to be very careful with that. All are x or None are x can allow zero exceptions to be true. Hume wanted to disprove cause and effect relationships, so he necessarily would have pointed out the looseness of 'is' propositions to 'ought' or should propositions, quite reasonably. 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/

Prescriptive theories can be applied in fields beside moral philosophy, and in some case the formal logical tests would be applied equally and in others the tests fall outside of simple formal logic and within larger structures for analysis that might best be compared to dead reckon'd sailing judgments. Rather than being logically rigorous propositions formally the use was analytical. One could say for instance that 1 + 3 equals 4 and the answer they provided is 5, and they ought to have written '4'. That kind of statement is reasonable.

 Moral propositions though, unlike Kant's categorical imperative that has some logical validity in a dead reckoning sort of way, are descriptive of actually existing human behavior and suggestions to improve that in some cases. In others it could be a simple observational use of the word 'ought' for a moral circumstance where variant behavior did not comply with the prevailing idea of the normal correct behavior. 

An example for that might be that a baby is crawling across a street amidst heavy traffic, the mother is laying on the sidewalk knocked out from a falling brick, and a passerby walks past the scene and allows the baby to be squished by a truck when he could have easily rescued the tyke from the rode. While not legally responsible to rescue the infant, a police officer that saw the scene from a distance says to his partner the "the rogue ought to have saved that baby".   

https://www.livescience.com/solution-to-worst-prediction-in-physics.html

Experience of exigent circumstances are rather subjective and conditional, yet descriptive and normative (prescriptive) ethics describe situations in space-time, Situations that are recurrent can be emergent though not unique. Consider the Nurmagomedov vs Porier UFC 242 fight- It was like a martial arts match where each knew various katas or forms. None were unique or original, and there are lots of prescriptive analysis about what ought to have been done to get outcome A, B. or C. Prescriptive ethics about what people think they should do probably never would be over regarding humans. Hume's Fork (good point) about empiricism and rationalism going separate paths, disregarded by Kant, might be a subject of more modern philosophical research in the developments of 20th century empiricism and Ayer's book 'Language, Truth and Logic' wherein only empirically based statements-more scientific ones, had validity and the remainder were psychological and subjective. W.V.O. Quine broke that paradigm in 'The Two Dogmas of Empiricism'. Epistemologically speaking the separability of the world and statements about it was renormalized or returned to something closer to a Kantian rather than Humean position. I think a lot of moderns like Dewey's paradigm of everything being subjective, and so they like Hume's ideas. He seemed to want to dismiss common ideas about the relation between words and objects-fair enough, yet he went too far in several ways, from a much later point of view in regard to subsequent developments.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_ethics Normative ethics are also known as prescriptive ethics, They are usual contrasted to descriptive ethics. Hume created an epistemological battle taken up by Kant. The resolution of the epistemological war was settled by logic and logical analysis of the relation between words and objects. Ethics falls into valleys between the hilltops of epistemology and logic. Subjectivists like Hume later tended to justify moral paradigms with epistemology that broke the ties between rationality and the world itself experienced by individuals. Prescriptive theory is an ethics about what people think they should do in a particular circumstance, descriptive theory is about what people actually do.

Jehovah and Allah

The Bible has several references to names of God. Jehovah in particular is an evolution or product of a medieval Latin translation of JHVH- YHVH- Yahweh-consonants that were used to refer to the unspoken name of God, or Adonai, back in the day when it was thought wrong to actually say aloud the name of God. The medieval Latin word for JHVH was "Iehouah".  English had a great vowel shift, yet that probably isn't relevant, one discerns the upgrade to Jehovah. 

If you remember the Northern Kingdom had the term Elohim for God. The suffix 'him' is a plural term. That was just the way those people referred to God when a single God amongst a pagan society with many gods was novel. The Encyclopedia Britannica relates that the Arabic word Allah probably originated with the Hebrew term for God el. Allah probably is from the Arabic al-Ilāh meaning 'the god' in the singular from the Hebrew word for God el. So the answer would be for the question of does Allah and Jehovah refer to the same God is perhaps best said that God is not an object, though the intention is the same. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Yahweh