Having lived and worked in China for most of the last 10 years (including 6 years full-time living in Shanghai), it's the 50-80 km range that's real. That's been the experience I've seen whilst riding in, and talking with friends who own such electric vehicles. A big reason for this is the fact that you cannot install high-power chargers in 99% of all apartment complexes, so you're limited to an extension cord from the 220VAC run, which means maybe 2 kW/hr recharge rates. So a battery bigger than 15-20 kWh simply cannot recharge over night. You're limited to small batteries, and you get the corresponding small range (especially when the AC is cranked, which is pretty required for 5-6 months of the year when it's 40+ deg C and 90% humidity out).
The most VALUABLE company in the world: Berkshire Hathaway. After all, their stock price is a huge $290,975 per share! They have to be the most highest valued company according to your logic, right?
US Federal Government annual spending on healthcare would make it the 14th largest country by GDP alone (over $1.2 trillion). This does not include spending by the States, counties, and cities. The US Federal Government's number one expenditure is healthcare, followed closely by retirement benefits. We spend a massive amount, Federally, on healthcare for just 20% of our citizens. The other 80% are covered by the ~$1.2 trillion in private insurance/spending. If anything, the Federal Government is the perfect example of waste, fraud, and inefficiency - it spends more to cover just 25% of the people as the private sector (Federal spending is approximately 5X that, per person covered, as the UK).
So then your solution is to nationalize all health care providers. Because if your doctor (and most of them do) takes Medicare, then your doctor is effectively nationalized, for you. What is it you're proposing?
Apparently, the current anthropogenic sea rise is indistinguishable from noise. That would mean it would be normal occurrence, regardless of what we believe...
No, just that when folks talk about sea level rise killing the reef, it's best to put the current change in perspective. When the authors talk about:
Rising sea levels—like those we see today—killed off the coral twice between 13,000 and 17,000 years ago
and then you look at the historical record, a scientist (someone skeptical of a claim without data) should go "huh?" We've seen massive sea level changes in the past, compared to what is happening now, and the reef survived.
The team that gets the most hits doesn't win; the team with the most runs wins. That's the way the game is played, those are the rules. Trump won 306 to 232 - that's the final number that matters.
Great questions! And the fact the change came so quick (about a week) means it really was a significant engineering FUBAR, or they really are pandering to the press and putting lives at risk. Either way, the optics are NOT good...
Yes, it is. We socialize 20% right now, and that equals about what is spent by the rest on the other 80%. We spend 5X as much as the UK for every socialized medicine recipient. How do we cut the costs by a factor of 5 AND increase coverage? Because that's what it would take to reach what the UK or others spend. Where are you getting this $4.8 trillion in savings?
OK, let's discuss ALL costs. Do we also include the costs of backup generation/capacity for renewables and assign to them the "externalized" costs that are bandied about as to cost $5 trillion? Because suddenly you'd have about 80% of the externalities assigned to older power generation also being applied to renewables.
It's already been shown above that we pay the same per capita as the U.K. for federal health care costs.
But that is for just 20% coverage. In other words, we pay $3400 per person per year, but only 20% of those people get coverage. Or, to put it another way the Federal Government pays $17,000 per person that it covers, way above what private insurance covers. Our Government pays 5X that of the UK Government, right now - independent of private insurance.
Right now, the UK spends $3300 per person per year. The US Federal Government pays $3400 per person - and that's for just 20%. If we covered everyone like the UK does, but at the rate the Federal Government spends right now, Federal spending would go to nearly $6 trillion per year on healthcare alone.
So what's your solution? Do you realize we already spend more on healthcare at a Federal level per man, woman, and child than the UK? Federal spending on healthcare in the US is $1.2 trillion already, which is about 10% more than the UK pays per person - and they cover everyone, not the 20% that is covered by the Federal levels (meaning we spend 5X at the Government level per person actually covered, than the UK - and that is before private insurance costs are factored in). How much more do we need to spend?
Yes, health insurance is NOT health care! Yet I had to legally buy the former no matter my desire for it. And I am over 50 and my total costs are well under $1000 per year (sans insurance)... Would love to go back to catastrophic, as my experience is fine FOR ME. But the move to ACA forced us much closer to "once size forced on all" kind of approaches...
Go ahead, justify the fact it's a poor performer. We know you already live-and-breathe Apple. Go ahead, walk into a stereo shop and ask why their products don't sound as good as a HomePod. Go ahead and cheer-lead your locked in product once again, and stay on that Apple reserve!
if you want to look at real subsidies (and not some pie-in-the-sky "let's pin anything we don't like on evil oil and ignore all the good it does!"), solar and wind vastly outstrip fossil fuels in absolute dollars. And when you scale by actual generation, it's skewed orders of magnitude in favor of solar and wind.
Slashdot Mirror
Having lived and worked in China for most of the last 10 years (including 6 years full-time living in Shanghai), it's the 50-80 km range that's real. That's been the experience I've seen whilst riding in, and talking with friends who own such electric vehicles. A big reason for this is the fact that you cannot install high-power chargers in 99% of all apartment complexes, so you're limited to an extension cord from the 220VAC run, which means maybe 2 kW/hr recharge rates. So a battery bigger than 15-20 kWh simply cannot recharge over night. You're limited to small batteries, and you get the corresponding small range (especially when the AC is cranked, which is pretty required for 5-6 months of the year when it's 40+ deg C and 90% humidity out).
If the last 12 months are any indicator, MS and AAPL will reach $1T at about the same time...
The most VALUABLE company in the world: Berkshire Hathaway. After all, their stock price is a huge $290,975 per share! They have to be the most highest valued company according to your logic, right?
US Federal Government annual spending on healthcare would make it the 14th largest country by GDP alone (over $1.2 trillion). This does not include spending by the States, counties, and cities. The US Federal Government's number one expenditure is healthcare, followed closely by retirement benefits. We spend a massive amount, Federally, on healthcare for just 20% of our citizens. The other 80% are covered by the ~$1.2 trillion in private insurance/spending. If anything, the Federal Government is the perfect example of waste, fraud, and inefficiency - it spends more to cover just 25% of the people as the private sector (Federal spending is approximately 5X that, per person covered, as the UK).
So then your solution is to nationalize all health care providers. Because if your doctor (and most of them do) takes Medicare, then your doctor is effectively nationalized, for you. What is it you're proposing?
Apparently, the current anthropogenic sea rise is indistinguishable from noise. That would mean it would be normal occurrence, regardless of what we believe...
No, just that when folks talk about sea level rise killing the reef, it's best to put the current change in perspective. When the authors talk about:
Rising sea levels—like those we see today—killed off the coral twice between 13,000 and 17,000 years ago
and then you look at the historical record, a scientist (someone skeptical of a claim without data) should go "huh?" We've seen massive sea level changes in the past, compared to what is happening now, and the reef survived.
When you look at what has actually happened in the past, it's kind of humbling that for all our faults, we result in nothing different than noise in the system.
Does Medicare/Medicaid socialize care or insurance?
The team that gets the most hits doesn't win; the team with the most runs wins. That's the way the game is played, those are the rules. Trump won 306 to 232 - that's the final number that matters.
Great questions! And the fact the change came so quick (about a week) means it really was a significant engineering FUBAR, or they really are pandering to the press and putting lives at risk. Either way, the optics are NOT good...
Yes, it is. We socialize 20% right now, and that equals about what is spent by the rest on the other 80%. We spend 5X as much as the UK for every socialized medicine recipient. How do we cut the costs by a factor of 5 AND increase coverage? Because that's what it would take to reach what the UK or others spend. Where are you getting this $4.8 trillion in savings?
OK, let's discuss ALL costs. Do we also include the costs of backup generation/capacity for renewables and assign to them the "externalized" costs that are bandied about as to cost $5 trillion? Because suddenly you'd have about 80% of the externalities assigned to older power generation also being applied to renewables.
So we spend $6 trillion per year on Federal health insurance spending? The Federal budget is just a hair over $4 trillion as-is...
Tesla is making a change to fix the brakes. CR was right - Tesla was wrong. Otherwise, why does Tesla need to change anything?
They said CR was wrong but now apparently they say CR was right...
It's already been shown above that we pay the same per capita as the U.K. for federal health care costs.
But that is for just 20% coverage. In other words, we pay $3400 per person per year, but only 20% of those people get coverage. Or, to put it another way the Federal Government pays $17,000 per person that it covers, way above what private insurance covers. Our Government pays 5X that of the UK Government, right now - independent of private insurance.
Right now, the UK spends $3300 per person per year. The US Federal Government pays $3400 per person - and that's for just 20%. If we covered everyone like the UK does, but at the rate the Federal Government spends right now, Federal spending would go to nearly $6 trillion per year on healthcare alone.
So what's your solution? Do you realize we already spend more on healthcare at a Federal level per man, woman, and child than the UK? Federal spending on healthcare in the US is $1.2 trillion already, which is about 10% more than the UK pays per person - and they cover everyone, not the 20% that is covered by the Federal levels (meaning we spend 5X at the Government level per person actually covered, than the UK - and that is before private insurance costs are factored in). How much more do we need to spend?
Yes, health insurance is NOT health care! Yet I had to legally buy the former no matter my desire for it. And I am over 50 and my total costs are well under $1000 per year (sans insurance)... Would love to go back to catastrophic, as my experience is fine FOR ME. But the move to ACA forced us much closer to "once size forced on all" kind of approaches...
Funny, I got that from the Tesla forums. Lots of people reporting such drops, and others saying "don't worry about it". Which is it?
SONOS One the winner. Sorry!
Go ahead, justify the fact it's a poor performer. We know you already live-and-breathe Apple. Go ahead, walk into a stereo shop and ask why their products don't sound as good as a HomePod. Go ahead and cheer-lead your locked in product once again, and stay on that Apple reserve!
No, no - he has to hate facts, because otherwise he'd have no reason to hate at all!
I wish we had decent electricity prices in Southern California. We pay $0.25/kWh, and $4.00/gallon for gas...
if you want to look at real subsidies (and not some pie-in-the-sky "let's pin anything we don't like on evil oil and ignore all the good it does!"), solar and wind vastly outstrip fossil fuels in absolute dollars. And when you scale by actual generation, it's skewed orders of magnitude in favor of solar and wind.