yes_this_time
Don't they often take crypto currency though?
How else are they going to ban prediction markets if people can pretend they aren't in Minnesota?
Very true, we are all flawed humans.
It would do us good to examine why democratically elected positions don't often attract the right people, I suspect some mix the right people are often too busy, don't want to deal with the harassment, can't afford it. And that last point is critical, greed as a character flaw skews to the wealthy.
Then there is marketing/charisma angle, even if you objectively have the best person in hand... they still need to be elected, which is tougher to solve
"Using workers from poorer countries as their workforce" Yikes. Doesn't sound too great.
I should clarify, im not trying to let China off the hook.
But production based CO2 per capita is not the only metric. Europe (for example) has outsourced dirty production to China, so they look clean, but it's people in Europe consuming the products China is producing, so it should be on their ledger.
If you look at CO2 from a consumption basis China falls down the list below Europe.
Now... I suppose consumption based metrics better align with peoples behaviors (ie Europeans are more damaging to the environment than Chinese on average).
On the other hand, production metrics point to European countries having stricter environmental policies than China. which to be fair is what you are highlighting. I'm trying to say, yes, but China is manufacturing way more for other countries.
Stricter policies is part of what pushed manufacturing out (and labour costs). Easier to do when you are a service economy.
China manufactures the most goods though... by a lot, and that's going to be pollution intensive. They are a pretty populated country as well.
US, oil producing countries, Europe are generally a lot worse than China on a per capita consumption basis.
Eh gas tax basically just covers Healthcare externalities from all the pollution. If you are in a country with private health care its even worse - drivers aren't even covering the lung disease they are giving you!
Ha weird. I've never even heard of song, but their first album.. i love the whole thing. They are fairly eclectic though so I could see how a any one song could give the wrong idea.
Why couldn't this apply any to a non profit or public service? What makes it inheritingly capitalist?
Or are you presuming the model is owned by a for profit corporation?
I thought I was careful not to claim any stats. The only thing we know is that EV fires are less frequent but more intense.
Probably not much data out there because it's so infrequent. You are much more likely to die from collisions I imagine.
I think Teslas cast a dark halo in this area as well. Newer vehicles, but it wouldn't surprise me of their drivers carelessness mirrored their largest shareholder.
Its worth knowing and researching to reduce fire incidence, but combustion engines have bigger problems.
I think Teslas shouldn't speak for all EVs.
the company has demonstrated a very high tolerance for risk. In execution, but also they don't seem to care about reputational risk. Other manufacturers with a larger business at stake, I would expect to handle recalls, safety in a different manner (one of the reasons they are lagging in the EV space)
So.. EVs have significantly less fires than combustion engines
But EVs fires are more severe
Tesla is a mess.
EV chemistry is getting better and safer over time.
Combustion engines are largely at their limit.