You’re wrong that it didn’t impact the outcome. MI flipped to Trump directly because of the uncommitted movement. Slotkin won the senate race, but Trump won by a narrow margin. Independent votes and low turn out siphoned off enough to make that happen. Low turn out also directly impacted the results. PA is a different story, but low turn out was true there, too
The word you’re looking for is etcetera. And unless you plan to return to community banks where you have to get to know the local banker to get a mortgage, you need this system.
I’m not sure how tying this to capitalism makes sense…lending is a risk, they are betting that you’ll remain employed and will continue to pay them - there is a chance you won’t and you pay a premium to get money now. Communist countries also have this system, but it is more centrally controlled by the State.
No, it’s more like 3-400. The key point here is not the range, but the charging time
Clearly you’ve never worked with the homeless…it’s not the “look of poverty” as you alluded, it’s really more about active drug use or untreated mental health disorders.
Some people certainly fall on hard times, but many have serious mental health disorders that for a variety of reasons they are not managing. We often require an address and lots of paperwork to provide government benefits in the US, so it isn’t hard for people to fall out of the system.
Once that happens, it’s really hard to find your way back. There are certainly not enough programs to help people reintegrate with society. At the same time, a homeless encampment in a neighborhood is not a reasonable solution either.
I volunteered nearly every week feeding the food and housing insecure in Philly for nearly 3 years pre-covid (I moved shortly before Covid). It was a great experience and I got to know many people that I might have otherwise walked past, and it really underscored the value of social services and lack of help available.
It also taught me that people need to be in a place to accept help. The ones that were not in that place are the ones you worry about - they have nothing to lose. Most that came to the church to be served lunch (usually 100-200) were to an extent willing to receive help. Some had bad days or would relapse into drug use, but they were generally trying to do better.
But there were other, much darker, places in the city that people unwilling or unable to accept help went. Places like Kensington in North Philly. That was a huge problem for years…it was a huge open air drug market that basically occupied that area. Finally, I think just this year, police cleared the encampments there.
It’s not a great solution, but it also wasn’t tenable. My point is that you should understand that not all housing insecure populations are just good people that bad things happened to. Those not in a place to get help or actively using drugs can be dangerous. I certainly would not let my son near that group, nor would I gleefully accept an encampment near my house
This is not comparable.
The fuel is spent and sold. Gas stations usually only have a few days supply of inventory.
This is like holding engines in inventory to swap without notice on the spot. But in this case the engines cost $10k+.
The fee to swap is about $12…so you have to swap each battery about 800 times to break even. See how you’re wrong yet?
The answer is massive government support. The cost of those stations has to be insane…imagine the inventory holding cost of those batteries
I used to work at a movie theater and someone died once in the bathroom. So that is probably why
You’ve missed the mark on two counts:
I used to volunteer weekly with homeless and housing insecure people in Philadelphia and untreated mental health or substance abuse was an issue for many. There are also barriers to receiving government aid that would assist them because many programs require an address or the process is unnecessarily complicated.
Housing is just one step. They would also require a great deal of counseling, job training, and medical attention to reintegration into society. Anyway, my point was simply to illustrate what a magnificent waste of resources it was to buy Twitter.
To put this in perspective, they lost an average of $2B per month in value. According to HUD, there were about 582,000 homeless people in the US last year. $2B per month is enough to house all of them nearly 4 times over if you assume $1k per month in housing expenses.
What a monumental waste of resources that could have made a difference. Musk just sucks
It’s funny because OP leads with stating they don’t identify as Latino, and then proceeds to ask a question that has absolutely nothing to do with identity.