341–350 of 728 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Please don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. We were much better off the last 4 years than it looks like we will be for the next, but it was far from ideal/perfect.
Predicting the future is hard.
Having said that, certainty does make planning easier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that keeping Musk wealthy is contrary to the interests of most Americans.
I disagree. I agree that the system shouldn't be creating so many billionaires. It's a flaw in the system. But Musk is among the best of them IMO and his contrarian position makes him essential, even if you disagree with him and his politics. There needs to be opposing forces among the elite or else we're sure to walk down the path of totalitarianism. I generally agree with Musk's politics but I wouldn't want all bil…
I generally agree with Musk's politics
And what is your definition of consensus? If everyone strikes a compromise, is that evil ? If majority strike a consensus, is that not consensus; that is, does it have to be total in order to be called consensus?
Is majority a consensus? Of course people agitate for getting full victory
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Corruption is nothing new in Washington. This is not business as usual, no matter how much this administration tries to pretend it is. Regardless, that wouldn’t make it okay. It’s weird to claim that it’s normal. > The real question is… No, that’s a separate question. Not the “real” question. The current tariff drama is widely regarded to be temporary because it’s so economically damaging that Trump’s successor (of…
> This is not business as usual, no matter how much this administration tries to pretend it is. Rules that favor a politically connected company over others is absolutely business as usual. It's the foundation of the multi-billion dollar lobbying industry.
Yes, 'well connected' counted in the past. Now it's "buy my crypto thing directly" or "talk with me about exceptions to the tariffs".
If there was a faint whiff of something untoward in the past, this is the Augean Stables.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's different when I like the rules.
Washington state is going in the other direction: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/wa-legisl... I'm sure the targeted aspect of that one is applauded by the same side that is unhappy about this tariff. At least in the tariff case, it's an objective numerical target and probably even achievable by other manufacturers. Ford is only 5% away from the target for some of its models.
Did his competitors do something similar in Washington?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, it's an inherently fuzzy concept, but that hasn't mattered much until now.
I actually see this as an example of why the fuzziness should always matter. We may occasionally find good reason to take the risk, but we have a ton of this kind of fuzziness written into our countless laws and we have no real way to stop those in charge from deciding to misuse it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that keeping Musk wealthy is contrary to the interests of most Americans.
I disagree. I agree that the system shouldn't be creating so many billionaires. It's a flaw in the system. But Musk is among the best of them IMO and his contrarian position makes him essential, even if you disagree with him and his politics. There needs to be opposing forces among the elite or else we're sure to walk down the path of totalitarianism. I generally agree with Musk's politics but I wouldn't want all bil…
The guy paves the way towards totalitarianism, but please, tell me about we should have people like him because it prevents totalitarianism.
The CEO of Ford is very critical of Trump. But Ford can probably get the USA content for gas-powered Mustangs up from 80% to 85%. The electric version is made in Mexico, but once Ford's Blue Oval City plant in Tennessee comes up in 2027, that will move to the US. Of course, who knows where Trump will be by then.
How long do you think that 5% will take them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that keeping Musk wealthy is contrary to the interests of most Americans.
I disagree. I agree that the system shouldn't be creating so many billionaires. It's a flaw in the system. But Musk is among the best of them IMO and his contrarian position makes him essential, even if you disagree with him and his politics. There needs to be opposing forces among the elite or else we're sure to walk down the path of totalitarianism. I generally agree with Musk's politics but I wouldn't want all bil…
Children are dying in Africa as a direct result of his actions right now.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2025/04/14/g-s1-...
I wonder how much their lack of union plays into this. The auto factories fled Flint/Detroit due to the UAW basically an attempt to limit the scope of strikes and violence from the UAW. Tesla doesn't have to worry about unions (at least yet), and so they have very centralized factories where an enormous amount of work is done. Probably makes it easier to do everything in the US if you can do it all in one building
> The auto factories fled Flint/Detroit due to the UAW basically an attempt to limit the scope of strikes and violence from the UAW. That is the story the auto companies like to tell, to make unions look damaging to workers and communities. From what I've read, the migration had a lot to do with race. But regardless, do either of us have any evidence to share? (not me right now)
Similar things happened in most major industries. The other one I'm familiar with is GE Locomotive, who moved their engine facility to Grove City (which still never unionized), and now has a major facility in Fort Worth as well.
So how does this encourage a shift to domestic manufacturing? It's basically a reward for those who have already done what you want rather than incentivizing those who's behavior you'd like to change. It's a carrot for sure, but the carrot is out of reach since now you're putting financial stress on those you're hoping to bear the cost of moving onshore by giving an advantage to their competitors. It's similar to giv…
That was yesterday's narrative, keep up! Now tariffs were a plan to pressure our allies to renegotiate their trade deals with us in our favor, and that worked great! (According to the white house (Also forget that not a single deal was made)). Oops! Scratch that, now that China won't back down on their retaliatory tariffs, they were always a tool to make China "fall back in line" or something. Yeah, destroying our ow…