Stop trying to sanewash this lunatic. Agreed it would have been much worse with a gun, but let's not pretend he had a change of heart and wanted to help.
Officials say Soliman planned the attack for a year, wanted to “kill all Zionist people” and told investigators he would do it again.
The IRA is getting gutted and Trump is trying to force coal plants to stay open. Even if Kamala did absolutely nothing, that would still be much better for the climate. 1.3% is not a big number.
Vance represents the tech bro "libertatian" wing with Thiel and those ghouls. Musk fits right in.
Maybe the study was more robust that this article suggests, but this doesn't tell me anything. Humans are amazing at regulating our remperature via sweat, so I have zero doubt that normal healthy people will have the same internal and even skin temps wearing different color clothing in different conditions. If the group wearing e.g. dark codlors just sweat X% more to compensate, we can't draw any conclusions at all. Clothing is complicated, since airflow and moisture retention matter significantly, but we know for a fact that lighter colors reflect more energy than darker colors.
This is not the whole story because not every heating day is equally cold. I have a high end cold climate heat pump in Colorado (which works great btw). I use about 1/3 of my total annual heating energy in January, despite heating for >6 months of the year. I'll use 10% of my annual energy budget for a long weekend if its -10F, and that's all heat pump (I don't even have backup strip heat). It would be 20% if i was using electric resistnace for those 4 days. Electric resistance is really not great, so folks really should get the best heat pumps they can that cover the coldest normal days. It's fine to install strips as a true backup but you're going to have some very high bills and high carbon if you're using it 20-30 days/year. If its hydro/nuclear power you'll still come ahead on carbon but that's not the case everywhere.
This is a bit dramatic. There are plenty of sanely sized cars available, and its not like everyone yearns for them but is forced into a suburban. Last time I checked you could still buy a corolla, an H-RV, a leaf, crosstrek, civic, Prius, several minis, a Mazda 3, BMW 1, etc. If people literally just bought rav4s instead of giant SUVs the average vehicle size would be significantly smaller, even though the rest of world thinks those are huge too.
It's something. I'd like to see something more comprehensive, like also public transit for the islands and dramatically higher gas/car costs. Maui has like two roads, it can't be that hard to add a train and kill all the tourist parking. Blows my mind that this isn't a thing already.
Suing oil companies is great too but why not actually eliminate oil from the state entirely and make tourists pay for it? Hell I'd price out carbon for their flights and find a way to charge for that too, and spend the money on decarbonizing the entire state and climate adaptation.
That all being said, this is a start so let's build from here and force the wealthiest tourists to be carbon neutral and take care of these places.
People that finance literally will pay less each month for the car. I don't understand the semantics game here to avoid calling this a "discount". If you pay less each month it's ok to call it a discount. I'd argue neither scenario justifies a news story, but the Tesla demand cliff is trendy (justifiably so of course, fuck Nazis) so here we are.
You're just playing semantics. Lots of customers finance cars. Before the "discount" they had to pay $X/month, now they pay $(X-discount)/month. They literally pay less each month because of the discounted, subsidized rates. It's a discount for folks that finance through Tesla. I'm not sure why you think you're the only person that understands the simple concept of interest here. You've just decided that the definition of discount only applies to MSRP arbitrarily. Is a point of sale tax credit not a discount either?
Maybe. Tire rubber compounds continue to improve, along with construction and tread design. So newer tires might be just as grippy and more efficient. Or way less grippy and way more efficient. Or way grippier and just as efficient. It just depends on the tradeoffs the manufacturer decided to make.
What does this have to do with any economist? Are they supposed to be able to predict a cheeto imposing absurd global tarriffs? "Once in a lifetime" is just an expression the media likes to use.
Not sure where you're from, but in the US "training" is optional, the tests are worthless (I passed by driving around a parking lot with one stop sign and parallel parking in a space that could fit a bus), and the points barely matter. Humans kill >40,000 other a humans a year on US roads. "We" are absolutely ok with massive amounts of traffic violence, unfortunately.