Wooster

I question how much of this is a logistics issue, vs how much of this is because half the population is convinced that basic medical care causes Down syndrome .

Mm… again not a lawyer, but I think that question goes beyond the scope of the document.

It basically gives the government permission to hold renters accountable for using software to artificially raise prices. What form that accountability takes is not addressed. Either that’s covered under existing collusion laws or is up to the courts.

So, it’s an essential ingredient to the cake that you’re describing… but unless prosecution (or whatever the term actually is) brings that up (I assume?), it won’t happen.

The joint legal brief clarifies that it is indeed collusion. And continues to explain how this is a technological evolution of the handshake.

I just read the joint legal brief, and, I have to say up front that I am not remotely a lawyer… but the document specifies how and where to identify price fixing, and that motions to dismiss those charges are to be dismissed.

So it doesn't dictate the penalties for price fixing (I assume that's on a trial by trial basis—but again, not a lawyer), but it makes it impossible(?) to ignore, and suggests that (to me), users of 'RENTMaximizer' will be in the crosshairs… while not actually stating that.

An exceptional shortfall in hydropower due to extreme droughts in the US, China, and several other economies resulted in over 40% of the rise in emissions in 2023 as countries turned largely to fossil fuels to plug the gap.

I’m honestly surprised Hydro (or rather lack thereof) accounted for that much of the difference.

The range of both vehicles is comparable, so I’d argue it boils down to which dealer is more convenient to visit for the odd maintenance.

(That aside, I’m personally dubious of opting for a lease, especially if money is tight long term. But I’m the sort of person who’d opt to get every damned mile out of a vehicle I could before begrudgingly admitting it’s time for a replacement.)

Semi-off topic… but I’m surprised they aren’t making/marketing a Lightning Bug.

"I think the biggest concerns are that people elsewhere forget about us and they think, 'Oh they're just the conservative state, and they're all country bumpkins. Don't worry it will never happen here.'

"And the next thing you know, it is happening in other states that are ultra-conservative."

On paper, that’s a great idea.

In practice though, you can expect the dealers to markup the difference, so the consumer pays exactly the same.

At least with the tax credit, dealers still have to account for sticker shock.

Edit: Looks like you’ve edited the message since my reply. So continuing:

They do offer subsidies on home chargers, both installation and the device itself, also through tax credits. Though you have to be careful, if your tax credits on the car exceed your taxes for that year, the credit for the charger is worthless.

I may be smart to make your EV purchase towards the end of one tax year, and the charger at the beginning of the next.

But why not just reverse the polarity of the primary power coupling?

I appreciate this level-headed take from someone knowledgeable on the topic. It's very easy to get riled up over the issue in Gaza, and it's important to discern where certain actions are sanctioned or not.

That said, I suspect there were better ways to deescalate the issue on Girl Scouts' end. Threatening litigation over a contentious humanitarian issue is begging for bad publicity. But, I'm not privy to the exchanges that brought it to that level.

IMO, it’s more a consequence of a black & white morality. Nuance isn’t even a blip on the radar. I guarantee they aren’t considering the ramifications, and wouldn’t understand them if explained.