What is the criteria? If you you get too specific with what qualifies and what doesn't you defeat the purpose of innovation (ie let creators create).
Battery tech is a worthy investment. Tesla still receives much, much less subsidies than the fossil fuel industry, and kills much less people in the process.
When using tax incentives to encourage consumer behavior the government must balance the cost of the incentives against the impact on consumer behavior and the selling price. Vendors aren't stupid, they know they can charge more when the government is subsidizing the purchase.
The luxury market is less driven by cost than by cachet. That's why automaker love high end vehicles, the margins are much higher. If the government wants to subsidize EV/Hybrid tech they can do it in the mid-range consumer market where the margins are lower due to much higher cost sensitivity.
But they don't need government assistance to buy a luxury vehicle.
The logic is that by subsidising a new industry, eventually the technology will become cheap enough for everyone else to benefit too. As much as it makes for great headlines, sometime subsidising the wealthy is actually a net gain for everyone (but only in some specific cases).
This isn't one of those cases. There are plenty of non-luxury EV and hybrid cars that cost much less.
I agree that the luxury cars aren't a necessity, however, plenty of "poor" people that get various housing and food subsidies already pay for brand new 4x4 pickup trucks and luxury SUV's that retail at $50k+.
I live in the inner city myself, the average income here is ~$35k but my entire neighborhood is dotted with recent year Jaguars, Escalades, Navigators, Crew Cabs. Not sure how they afford it, all I got is a $15k pre-owned VW and a used Jeep. Removing those subsidies would be hurting those poor people.
So you are living responsibly and within your means, but you are in favor of subsidizing people who don't? I don't agree with your thinking.
If they can afford a $50k+ car with a subsidy, they can afford a $37K+ car without one. And that's exactly what they should be doing, looking for a car they can afford.
BTW I can afford a new luxury car but I'm driving a 1999 with over 281,000 miles. When it fails I will look for another good value used car.
From the article: "The researchers analysed the total cost of ownership of cars over four years, including the purchase price and depreciation, fuel, insurance, taxation and maintenance. They were surprised to find that pure electric cars came out cheapest in all the markets they examined: UK, Japan, Texas and California."
But the "journal of applied energy" report they reference said "To address this gap, this research provides a more extensive Total Cost of Ownership assessment of conventional, Hybrid, Plug-in Hybrid and Battery Electric Vehicles in three industrialized countries – the UK, USA (using California and Texas as case studies) and Japan – for the time period 1997–2015."
So they had almost 20 years of data but reported on only the first 4 years of car ownership. Such a short period seems suspect to me.
Look around you. How many luxury SUV's don't you see in the inner city? Mercedes, Lincoln,... they cost about $65k and up. People don't seem to have any problem plunking down $50k+ for a car.
The difference is we are getting a supreme court staffed with people who are to the right on many social issues. (anti-poor, anti-homeless, anti-minority, anti-gay, anti-abortion, etc...) While there's some room for disagreement, ultimately this is pretty ridiculous once you know much about these issues.
All of the above are examples of political framing. The conservative party is pro-life, seeks to end poverty and homelessness by promoting prosperity, supports lawful and enforceable immigration policies, is pro traditional marriage.
Actually no. Antifa in the EU mainly target fascists. Therefore, they are not more than an annoyance and can usually be ignored. I do not know what you mean be SJW, but if you refer to people who fight for the protection of human rights, then we like human rights. That was once a thing in the US. If it is not, you will have less visitors. For the rest, I haven't heard of them that much in the media. However, we hear about mass shootings every other week, mental ill people locked up in prisons, hate crimes against people who do not look white or wear the "wrong" stuff.
In the US they ARE the fascists.
SJW snowflakes are liberal losers who are triggered by everything. It has nothing to do with human rights.
Haven't heard about mass shootings every other week, mentally ill people locked up in prisons, or hate crimes against people who do not look white or wear the "wrong" stuff. But if those things concern you, stay home. We wont miss you.
The craziness on campuses has been widely publicized. I would be turned off by that too.
* ANTIFA and SJW crazies * Trigger warnings * Classroom disruptions * 53 gender pronouns and counting * Crazy standards for what constitutes a sex crime
The former US President Ronald Reagan was a bit of an idiot . . . but he was smart enough to realize that he was an idiot, and got folks like James Baker and Casper Weinberger to do all the work for him.
Pretty standard "conservatives are idiots" line.
He was so stupid that among other things he was head of Screen Actor's Guild, Governor of California, and President of the USA for two terms.
Many if not most H1-B's I've worked with are not "highly specialized experts". I'm not putting them down, they are nice people who want to make a living. But it's nonsense to suggest a local could not be found to do what they are doing.
I found the pilot episode barely watchable. Nothing I heard or saw made me want to see episode 2.
From the comments here it appears I didn't miss anything
It's hard to tell from the article and their accompanying documents what exactly it means for a city to join this alliance. It could just be some bureaucrat in an obscure agency nobody heard of signing up for some nice conferences overseas. I doubt it has any significance beyond virtue signaling.
The article says the replacement will be ready in 2022 and the existing satellites will be operational until 2023. So whatâ(TM)s the problem?
Also, the satellite cost cost 58 million to build but they stored it since the 1990s at a cost of 500 million. That makes no sense at all.
It also makes no sense that the Air Force is in the weather satellite business at all. We have NASA and we have NOAA in charge of this space. This is just waste and mismanagement.
Did the southern states have the right to secede from the union?
Right to secede? Not by any law, treaty, or constitutional provision. At most, you could say they had the right to petition for it. The first amendment is very open-ended on that regard. They could write letters to Congress all day!
Unfortunately for them, their actions went beyond petition straight to insurrection.
The federal government does have the authority to suppress insurrections, and unlawfully seizing its property, interfering with its agents, and so forth, yep, that's pretty squarely under the aegis of insurrection.
I believe they did, and if so, this was a war of northern aggression.
You also believe in unicorns, don't you? Russian Unicorns that fuck you up the butt.
And this is why they kicked you off the debate team. You try to hide ignorance behind personal attacks.
The southern states in the Civil War are often referred to as "the states in rebellion" - kinda sounds like they the South started it, since the Northern army was fighting to PRESERVE the union, they are fighting to SECEED from the union.
Did the southern states have the right to secede from the union?
I believe they did, and if so, this was a war of northern aggression.
But you got one important point wrong - the money collected WAS spent when collected. There's no giant piggy bank holding all those people's money collected as FICA over the years. Just IOUs from Uncle Sam.
This is utterly and completely false. It can not possibly be more wrong without invoking the Earth being flat or anti-vaxx theology.
The Social Security Trust fund is a giant piggy bank. Like all sensible savings plans, it invests the money. The money was invested in US government bonds. Those bonds are not "IOUs". They are savings instruments just like bonds issued by companies or states or cities or banks. They have a maturity date, at which time the government has to pay the money back, along with interest
What is a US government bond and why does the US government issue them? Bonds are issued by the US government to borrow money. The money that was borrowed is being spent to fund current expenses, including the deficit and debt service. These bonds must be repaid with interest. To repay them the government will need to get money either from tax revenue or more borrowing. So it is 100% true that your social security payments have been spent as part of the current general revenue and replaced by an IOU in the form of a US bond that must be repaid in the future by future taxpayers.
It would be different if the money was instead invested in something other than US bonds.
On the other hand, men I've worked with seem convinced that they should get paid far more for doing minimal work of questionable quality. When they aren't promoted for this work they cause a big stink, complaining about how they are not treated like they deserve.
The women I've worked with are usually quietly competent. For the most part they weren't brilliant but they weren't idiots either. If I want to point out the biggest idiots around my workplace it is usually a man.
And this is why men get promoted and paid more. They demand it.
I've mentored many women in tech and told them the squeaky wheel gets greased. They can either meekly accept not getting compensated at what they feel they are worth or they can demand more and change jobs aggressively.
Nobody handled me large paychecks. I changed jobs frequently and always demanded a big increase. If they wont compensate you during the romance period they damn sure wont after the marriage.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't one of those cases.
What is the criteria? If you you get too specific with what qualifies and what doesn't you defeat the purpose of innovation (ie let creators create). Battery tech is a worthy investment. Tesla still receives much, much less subsidies than the fossil fuel industry, and kills much less people in the process.
When using tax incentives to encourage consumer behavior the government must balance the cost of the incentives against the impact on consumer behavior and the selling price. Vendors aren't stupid, they know they can charge more when the government is subsidizing the purchase.
The luxury market is less driven by cost than by cachet. That's why automaker love high end vehicles, the margins are much higher. If the government wants to subsidize EV/Hybrid tech they can do it in the mid-range consumer market where the margins are lower due to much higher cost sensitivity.
But they don't need government assistance to buy a luxury vehicle.
The logic is that by subsidising a new industry, eventually the technology will become cheap enough for everyone else to benefit too. As much as it makes for great headlines, sometime subsidising the wealthy is actually a net gain for everyone (but only in some specific cases).
This isn't one of those cases. There are plenty of non-luxury EV and hybrid cars that cost much less.
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-t...
I agree that the luxury cars aren't a necessity, however, plenty of "poor" people that get various housing and food subsidies already pay for brand new 4x4 pickup trucks and luxury SUV's that retail at $50k+.
I live in the inner city myself, the average income here is ~$35k but my entire neighborhood is dotted with recent year Jaguars, Escalades, Navigators, Crew Cabs. Not sure how they afford it, all I got is a $15k pre-owned VW and a used Jeep. Removing those subsidies would be hurting those poor people.
So you are living responsibly and within your means, but you are in favor of subsidizing people who don't? I don't agree with your thinking. If they can afford a $50k+ car with a subsidy, they can afford a $37K+ car without one. And that's exactly what they should be doing, looking for a car they can afford.
BTW I can afford a new luxury car but I'm driving a 1999 with over 281,000 miles. When it fails I will look for another good value used car.
But the "journal of applied energy" report they reference said "To address this gap, this research provides a more extensive Total Cost of Ownership assessment of conventional, Hybrid, Plug-in Hybrid and Battery Electric Vehicles in three industrialized countries – the UK, USA (using California and Texas as case studies) and Japan – for the time period 1997–2015."
So they had almost 20 years of data but reported on only the first 4 years of car ownership. Such a short period seems suspect to me.
I'll let Musk and GM know that electric vehicles will never work because people like you need to drive 1000km once a year.
100+ mile trips happen quite frequently. I used to do 120/day. I wouldn't even consider a vehicle with a 106 mile range. Hybrid would be o.k. though.
Look around you. How many luxury SUV's don't you see in the inner city? Mercedes, Lincoln, ... they cost about $65k and up. People don't seem to have any problem plunking down $50k+ for a car.
I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or not.
According to Kelly Blue Book the average new car price in 2017 is $34,600 https://mediaroom.kbb.com/2017...
The only cars over $65K shown in the price breakdown are high-end luxury or performance.
By definition a luxury is not a necessity. The government subsidizing a luxury is nuts.
Note I am in no way against the wealthy. I wish them every success.
But they don't need government assistance to buy a luxury vehicle.
CNN does a pretty good job scaring people.
There's a reason they used the voice of Darth Vader to say "This is CNN".
https://youtu.be/BuHfSo5YI_M
I gave up on pointing out the article doesn't say what they think it does. They really don't care.
The difference is we are getting a supreme court staffed with people who are to the right on many social issues. (anti-poor, anti-homeless, anti-minority, anti-gay, anti-abortion, etc...) While there's some room for disagreement, ultimately this is pretty ridiculous once you know much about these issues.
All of the above are examples of political framing. The conservative party is pro-life, seeks to end poverty and homelessness by promoting prosperity, supports lawful and enforceable immigration policies, is pro traditional marriage.
Actually no. Antifa in the EU mainly target fascists. Therefore, they are not more than an annoyance and can usually be ignored. I do not know what you mean be SJW, but if you refer to people who fight for the protection of human rights, then we like human rights. That was once a thing in the US. If it is not, you will have less visitors. For the rest, I haven't heard of them that much in the media. However, we hear about mass shootings every other week, mental ill people locked up in prisons, hate crimes against people who do not look white or wear the "wrong" stuff.
In the US they ARE the fascists.
SJW snowflakes are liberal losers who are triggered by everything. It has nothing to do with human rights.
Haven't heard about mass shootings every other week, mentally ill people locked up in prisons, or hate crimes against people who do not look white or wear the "wrong" stuff. But if those things concern you, stay home. We wont miss you.
The craziness on campuses has been widely publicized. I would be turned off by that too.
* ANTIFA and SJW crazies
* Trigger warnings
* Classroom disruptions
* 53 gender pronouns and counting
* Crazy standards for what constitutes a sex crime
Better to go elsewhere where sanity might prevail
Sure, I'm on an older Iphone 6. But it was fine before, and now it's dreadful. Is there some hidden "ps" command to show what the hell it's doing?
The former US President Ronald Reagan was a bit of an idiot . . . but he was smart enough to realize that he was an idiot, and got folks like James Baker and Casper Weinberger to do all the work for him.
Pretty standard "conservatives are idiots" line.
He was so stupid that among other things he was head of Screen Actor's Guild, Governor of California, and President of the USA for two terms.
What's on your CV?
If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. You can always work someplace with less pressure.
Many if not most H1-B's I've worked with are not "highly specialized experts". I'm not putting them down, they are nice people who want to make a living. But it's nonsense to suggest a local could not be found to do what they are doing.
I found the pilot episode barely watchable. Nothing I heard or saw made me want to see episode 2. From the comments here it appears I didn't miss anything
It's hard to tell from the article and their accompanying documents what exactly it means for a city to join this alliance. It could just be some bureaucrat in an obscure agency nobody heard of signing up for some nice conferences overseas. I doubt it has any significance beyond virtue signaling.
The article says the replacement will be ready in 2022 and the existing satellites will be operational until 2023. So whatâ(TM)s the problem? Also, the satellite cost cost 58 million to build but they stored it since the 1990s at a cost of 500 million. That makes no sense at all. It also makes no sense that the Air Force is in the weather satellite business at all. We have NASA and we have NOAA in charge of this space. This is just waste and mismanagement.
Did the southern states have the right to secede from the union?
Right to secede? Not by any law, treaty, or constitutional provision. At most, you could say they had the right to petition for it. The first amendment is very open-ended on that regard. They could write letters to Congress all day!
Unfortunately for them, their actions went beyond petition straight to insurrection.
The federal government does have the authority to suppress insurrections, and unlawfully seizing its property, interfering with its agents, and so forth, yep, that's pretty squarely under the aegis of insurrection.
I believe they did, and if so, this was a war of northern aggression.
You also believe in unicorns, don't you? Russian Unicorns that fuck you up the butt.
And this is why they kicked you off the debate team. You try to hide ignorance behind personal attacks.
Start your education here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Trump pardoned Arpaio. If you still support trump then you hate America and hate the constitution.
I support Trump and love America and the Constitution.
Obama pardoned a lot of criminals, including Oscar Lopez Rivera, convicted terrorist and cop killer. Elections have consequences. Deal with it.
The southern states in the Civil War are often referred to as "the states in rebellion" - kinda sounds like they the South started it, since the Northern army was fighting to PRESERVE the union, they are fighting to SECEED from the union.
Did the southern states have the right to secede from the union? I believe they did, and if so, this was a war of northern aggression.
that only applies to the west, you should know better than that.
The east destroys "offensive" statues too
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
But you got one important point wrong - the money collected WAS spent when collected. There's no giant piggy bank holding all those people's money collected as FICA over the years. Just IOUs from Uncle Sam.
This is utterly and completely false. It can not possibly be more wrong without invoking the Earth being flat or anti-vaxx theology.
The Social Security Trust fund is a giant piggy bank. Like all sensible savings plans, it invests the money. The money was invested in US government bonds. Those bonds are not "IOUs". They are savings instruments just like bonds issued by companies or states or cities or banks. They have a maturity date, at which time the government has to pay the money back, along with interest
What is a US government bond and why does the US government issue them? Bonds are issued by the US government to borrow money. The money that was borrowed is being spent to fund current expenses, including the deficit and debt service. These bonds must be repaid with interest. To repay them the government will need to get money either from tax revenue or more borrowing. So it is 100% true that your social security payments have been spent as part of the current general revenue and replaced by an IOU in the form of a US bond that must be repaid in the future by future taxpayers.
It would be different if the money was instead invested in something other than US bonds.
On the other hand, men I've worked with seem convinced that they should get paid far more for doing minimal work of questionable quality. When they aren't promoted for this work they cause a big stink, complaining about how they are not treated like they deserve.
The women I've worked with are usually quietly competent. For the most part they weren't brilliant but they weren't idiots either. If I want to point out the biggest idiots around my workplace it is usually a man.
And this is why men get promoted and paid more. They demand it.
I've mentored many women in tech and told them the squeaky wheel gets greased. They can either meekly accept not getting compensated at what they feel they are worth or they can demand more and change jobs aggressively.
Nobody handled me large paychecks. I changed jobs frequently and always demanded a big increase. If they wont compensate you during the romance period they damn sure wont after the marriage.