archive.org link for those who try to avoid Google services

(courtesy of xylogx@lemmy.world who also posted this)

The funny thing is y’all in the US still have a better selection of vehicles available than we do in Europe, it’s just mostly not from American marques.

I recently got my hands on a USDM Subaru. It has more options than the EU spec one so I figured I’d look at the US Subaru website and yup, even for current model years, they have WAY more options available in terms of both models and trims. Y’all still get the WRX sedan, we only get the Impreza hatchback with a naturally aspirated engine. We don’t get the Ascent either.

You guys also get things like the Toyota 4-runner, Volkswagen Atlas, etc in terms of SUVs that are pretty big, but not gigantic.

Mercedes, Audi and BMW?

I’m sure they’re right around the corner, pretty close to the top 10.

Oh, you meant Ford, GM and Chryslerdaimlerfiatstellantis?

Yeah nah, as true patriots, they produce in other countries so Americans would pay for the cars, but not be paid to build them.

Yeah. Case in point: Ghost riders in Motorcycle racing.

Motorcycles also tend to fall down when stationary, yet stay upright without the rider at speed.

Also makes me wonder if just the bike crossing the finish line would be enough to win if you fell off in first place just before the line.

If you read my other comment, basically I’ve heard from other commenters online that some collective bargaining agreements restrict individual bargaining. That would suck. If the union only sets floors instead of absolutes or ranges, that is another thing entirely and something that I’m very much in favor of.

It’s ridiculous.

Numbers are funny, anyway. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang’s net worth is closer to yours and mine than it is to Elon Musk (Forbes list currently placing them at ~100 bill and ~250 bill respectively). But that’s only in absolute terms. In reality, Jensen’s got like 8 or 9 orders of magnitude more wealth than I do depending on how far into the month we are, and on the same order of magnitude as Musk.

Either one losing 99% of their wealth would still be above a billion.

Oh I agree that even 2 billion is too much, but my reasoning is that proponents of capitalism often make the claim that capitalism drives innovation (you try to fill some market niche in order to get rich) so if they are right, then 2 billion should be enough that this still works.

I had yachts depreciating to zero in my example because it’s estimated that you have to spend about 10% of its’ purchase price annually anyway, so anyone keeping a 20 year old yacht around is going to be spending a lot of money on it that will fuel other parts of the economy.

Any billionaire can lose 90% of their wealth and have above 100 million left.

Many can lose 99% and have above 100 million left.

Some can lose 99% and still be billionaires.

The 100 millionaire will still have a million or more left after losing 99%, but that’s not “live like hogs in the fat house forever” money at least. It’s just “I don’t have to worry if I lose my job” money.

A hundredbillionaire can lose 99% of their money and not make any perceptible changes in their lifestyle.

I propose the following:

Gap individual wealth at 50000x the national median annual income. Max wealth anyone in the US could have is, at present, under 2 billion. Other countries will vary, but generally it’s plenty enough to motivate people to innovate, but nobody gets to be Bezos or Musk wealthy. Yachts should count towards this wealth gap, at a depreciation rate of 5% a year off the build cost. Primary residence doesn’t count unless it’s also used for generating income. You get to have one car, regardless of price, that doesn’t get counted towards it, and the other ones count at market value. So you can have your classic car that appreciates in price, and a daily driver - without having to worry about the classic car’s effect on your wealth limit.

Side effect is that now suddenly rich people near the gap will be a lot more interested in paying better wages to the working class. Why? Because then they’d get to keep more of their money. And to raise the median efficiently, you need to be raising wages for the poorest among us first and foremost.

There’s a caveat:

Don’t unions really restrict your salary growth in fields where there’s actual potential for it?

I’m in software engineering and I reckon a whole bunch of people would be unhappy if their salary was in a direct relationship with their years of experience.

Though if the gravy train ever ends, I’ll be the first to advocate for an union.

SpaceX and American allies’ Internet access could be considered to be of national importance

I’m not gonna answer that question. I don’t have the perfect answer ready for you.

Instead I will tell you what happens when you vote third party in FPTP. Okay, you have a .nl TLD so I guess ssyou’re either in a much better electoral situation or just picked it because it’s cool, but I will use the example of the upcoming US presidential election.

Now, let’s say the race is really even and it’s over. Flipping just one of several key battleground states would’ve placed Harris in the lead, but unfortunately, Trump won. You look at the votes in your state: Trump won by under 600 votes. Nearly 100,000 people voted for a third party candidate that’s actually to the left of Harris. They would’ve preferred Harris, but because they voted third party, they elected Trump.

If this sounds familiar, that’s what happened in 2000. Al Gore could’ve won. Should’ve won. But 3rd party candidate Ralph Nader was further left of him and received a bunch of votes that needed to go to Gore. In Florida, he had nearly 100k votes, and the difference between Bush and Gore was literally triple digits. And it wasn’t even the only state where Gore lost because of the Spoiler Effect

It’s an inherent flaw of the FPTP system and yes, it sucks. It means a vote for a third party is a wasted vote.

And yet (at least from an outsider perspective) libertarians are closer to democrats than republicans

I’m an outsider too, but here’s my take on this

For the most part (certain exceptions exist, like guns), democrats seem to be about individual freedom from government, but they want government to regulate corporations.

Republicans are more about corporate freedom from government, but they want government to regulate people they don’t like (women, LGBT, immigrants).

Libertarians ideally want corporate AND personal freedom from government, but a lot of people only want personal freedom from government if it applies to “their kind”. So they’re really republicans.

I also failed to look at the year, I went by the fact that I’d seen it long ago lol

Eh wasn’t this one like over a year ago?

That’s just your opinion. To me, clothes are tools and there’s no reason to personalize - just wear black everything, that’s what I do. Other people don’t seem to share my opinion and that’s fine too.

It’s Japan. If anything is promoting drug abuse, it’s the work culture.

What’s trump got to do with toilet paper? I don’t like the fucker, but I live halfway across the world and we had the exact same issue here, people bought up all the toilet paper readily available in stores.

Eh, we’ve also started expecting continuous updates of our games and apps. That’s why SaaS is such a popular model.

You used to be able to buy Photoshop and own that version forever. Now it’s a SaaS. Personally I prefer the old model too, but a lot of people prefer to get updates apparently.

I checked, fully expecting it to be a joke lol

Google is allowing the app developers to choose (for now?). With Apple, developers never had the option to allow other stores or sideloading.