MY VLOGS: http://bit.ly/EvanVlogs
BEHIND THE SCENES - http://bit.ly/29T4hBA
In this special Pranks episode of How To Magic, Evan Era from EvanEraTV shows 10 How To Magic Swimming Pool Pranks for Summer! These magic tricks and summer pool pranks are funny, easy to do, and perfect for kids, beginners, and adults as well! Have some fun in the sun with these magic pranks today and prank your friends and family at the pool or the beach! Thanks for all the love and support #eraSQUAD you are seriously amazing - [email protected] my friends! :)
SEND MAIL TO:
PO BOX 943
Crestwood KY 40014
EMAIL: [email protected]
Magic Pool Pranks Revealed in this Video:
1.) Magic Floating iPhone in the Pool Prank - 0:45
2.) Dry Ice in Swimming Pool Magic Prank - 1:27
3.) Hula Hoop Dive Challenge Pool Prank - 3:12
4.) Magic Bubbles Pool Trick Polymer Balls - 3:41
5.) Funny Scary Spider Beach Umbrella Prank - 5:12
6.) Cool Magic Bath Bomb Pool Pee Prank - 5:42
7.) Underwater Breath Hold Challenge Prank - 6:22
8.) Classic Mayo Sunscreen Switch Prank - 7:11
9.) Swimming Pool Noodle Toy Water Prank - 9:10
10.) Beach Shampoo Shower Magic Prank - 9:34
GOOD LUCK in the FREE Snapchat Beach Towel giveaway!
More Magic Pranks Here: http://bit.ly/29O3h1D
Special Thanks to Sasha Caufield, Zach Craig, Eric Williams, Brent Baker, and Travis Tuell for helping with this video :)
#EvanEraTV #HowToMagic #eraSQUAD #LaughAtLife [email protected]
This channel provides awesome content in the form of magic, pranks, and other cool videos - SUBSCRIBE for weekly uploads!! :)
More Videos Here: http://www.youtube.com/EvanEraTV
please follow Spooks one on Snapchat and if you follow him just good to talk to me you can give it by the way your videos are so magical I want to learn when your videos one day I'm going to be just like you.
People thinking I'm 2 I be like Ok ok the game is over they be like what game little Einstein I be like ohhhhh shut up he be like when we're u so aggressive little one I'm just like~~~~ok I'm going to sleep
Can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find a new man who can who can find find a man who can find find a new one ☝️ a new man who man is the one man who is a man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man who can find find a new man 🤥🤢🤔😨😭😨🤔😰😓😓😰😨😓😲🤤🤔😷😰😭🙌🏻🤔🙀🙌🏻👿😼👿😿🤧🤥😪👎🏻🤥😽😓😽😓😼😓😓😽😓😓😓😓😓😓👩🏭👩🏭👦🏿👩🏭👴🏻👦🏿👩🏿✈️👰🏽😤😐😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😨😰😰😤😨😤😢☹️😒😲😔🤡🤠
Knock knock who's there bat bat who boo who bat who but but do bat I'm stupid person or am I nerd because I have glasses or am I dumb because I just made that joke or my smart because I know what 10 times 10 is in its a hundred
To isolate the mobilization-induced labor supply shift, the authors exploit the fact that the fraction of males serving in the war was not uniform across states. For example, in Massachusetts, Oregon, and Utah, almost 55 percent of males between the ages of 18 and 44 left civilian work to serve in the war. In Georgia, the Dakotas, and the Carolinas, this number ranged between 40 and 45 percent. The state differences in war mobilization actually reflect a variety of factors. The Selective Services guidelines for deferments were based on marital status, fatherhood, essential skills for civilian war production, and temporary medical disabilities, but left considerable discretion to the local boards. Because of the importance of maintaining a strong food supply to support the war, an important consideration for deferment was farm employment.
States with a high percentage of farmers had substantially lower mobilization rates, and this explains a considerable share of the state variation in mobilization rates.
The authors show that in states with greater war mobilization of men, women worked more after the war and in 1950, but not in 1940. This differential does not appear to be explained by other cross-state differences or possible demand factors, and is not present in the 1940 data nor does a similar trend recur in the decade of the 1950s. The authors interpret these differentials as labor supply shifts induced by the War. Acemoglu, Autor, and Lyle believe these cross-state changes in female employment were caused by greater participation of women during the war years, with some of those women staying on. War changed womens preferences, opportunities, and information about available work.