Jump to content

Dahobbs

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    17794
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dahobbs

  1. A sovereign wealth fund could actually be useful if our economy collapses and we stop being the de facto world reserve currency. Absent that, I'm not sure it serves much of a legitimate purpose for the United States.
  2. I mean, you can also just download it and run it locally. There is no practical way to block it.
  3. AKA as giving Trump something he can use to say he has completely solved the problem (which is what he will say) regardless of whether anything changes. I also bet Mexico doesn't do anything. Claudia has correctly concluded she is dealing with a toddler.
  4. Batteries requires mining certain resources that can have negative local environmental consequences, but those can be minimized. Hydrogen fuel cells also require mining of resources. And they require consuming several times the amount of energy they store. They are horribly inefficient in comparison to batteries. They are worse than batteries in pretty much every single way.
  5. Fuel cells are pointless. They are inefficient and expensive. They require extensive infrastructure to utilize. And there is no particular need to go 600 miles on a single fill-up. Something like 90% of trips are 30 miles or less. But even if you needed that you already have EVs that can go 400 and fill up 80% in 15 minutes. It isn't going to be that long before technology gets to your completely pointless requirement.
  6. There is no way this works out anyway but bad. Our economy is going to be in shambles.
  7. No. Fuel cells are pointless, at least for cars.
  8. Just like @Bevo said, right?
  9. She had 20 lbs on him at least.
  10. DE can shine early if you don't care about them playing the run. We play sound defense, so we care.
  11. Finish home remodel somewhat in budget (fucking tariffs may fuck me) Reduce expenses, particularly discretionary spending and food. We used to have a very strict budget. Money isn't a huge concern anymore, so the spending has gotten a bit out of control. Also, turns out, 3 kids over 4 is significantly more expensive than 1.
  12. Holy shit. I was being sarcastic, but @Thetexashammer actually believes this shit. Talk about dumb.
  13. I can see why you used to be a CPA. Dementia is a bitch.
  14. Accurate title is accurate.
  15. It was a serious question. You told other people it would work. I was hoping you'd realize through this comparison why that doesn't make sense. I actually don't hate tariffs as a rule. Tariffs can help us create certain domestic industries that we have lost or are losing (chip manufacturing, solar panel manufacturing, ship building, etc). But these tariffs on goods like lumber from Canada are just going to raise prices. There is no real economic windfall or development to be gained. Supply chains went through hell during Covid. Expect more of the same if these go into effect.
  16. Have you considered just not believing in tariffs? Maybe that way they will not do anything and you don't have to worry about it.
  17. What, we're going to make more trees? Tariffs related to specialized, critical industries that we need to develop domestically make a bit of sense (e.g., semi-conductor manufacturing). Tariffs on fucking lumber are fucking stupid.
  18. Bullshit. No one is negotiating shit. Either they go into effect and we all suffer or they don't go into effect because someone is convinced this is an idiotic, self-destructive idea. Pretending otherwise is fucking stupid.
  19. It is good to suck for everyone. Nothing good will come of it.
  20. No. Adler is very much the opposite of that guy. https://www.transparencyusa.org/tx/contributor/jim-s-adler
  21. Obviously the solution to that is to cause another recession as soon as possible! But also, like, we were just in a recession not too long ago? Why didn't the dollar collapse then? Anyway, it will be really funny when your parade of horribles come true because of the person and policies you voted for. Such self-ownage is truly impressive.
  22. 1. I'd argue that the difference between 1 week and the perhaps 12 days is completely irrelevant. The rhetorical points stands: there was very little time given to consider this offer (or whatever you want to call it). 2. The tweet literally used quotes around the term buyout. The whole point of that is to suggest that it isn't really a buyout. Trying to argue that makes the tweet wrong is fucking asinine. 3. What part of the tweet is wrong about the impact on the ATC staffing at the time of the crash? I don't see any specific reference in the tweet. More critically, I don't think you have any knowledge of what affect it had on staffing, so I'm unclear why you believe you're in a position to judge. Here is her statement again for reference: "I represent LaGuardia Airport as well as workers for JFK. Trump gutted the Aviation Safety committee last week. Air traffic controllers - already understaffed - got Trump’s “buyout” this week with a 1 week ultimatum to decide. It’s not DEI - it’s him. And Elon too." In short, I think you're talking out your ass.
  23. The general trend for PI firms has been to increase the contingent fee. We previously had 3 tier contracts with 1 rate for pre-trial, 1 rate for trial, and 1 rate if it goes on appeal. But, the reality is that it was often confusing for the client, and frankly a poor indicator of how much work had to go into the case. We've moved to a single rate for our cases. That said it is possible some of the firms that focus on volume car crash work still have lower rates. But I don't know of anyone going under 1/3rd contingency on a normal basis. I have had cases that resolve relatively quickly and recommended reducing the fee after the fact, but that is a voluntary reduction based upon the actual work and not guaranteed upfront.
×
×
  • Create New...