-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Even if such a bill passes the toxic political wasteland that is the House and Senate, what are the odds our climate change denying Cheeto in Chief would sign such legislation into law?
I trust Musk to offer a tweet that Punkin Head can use to show how he is not going to subsidize foreign manufacturers and make it more difficult for American companies. It's obvious, but that clown listens to some evil people and they send him off in crazy directions. Musk may find an opportunistic way to cajole POTUS to do the right thing. We can at least hope.
Don't need the president if you have enough of the congress. They can vote again with 2/3s, both house and make any bill law even if the President doesn't sign in.
But, now THAT would a stretch, but there is a constitutional path for it.
There are enough crazies like Jim Jordan in the House that would make getting a 2/3 majority in the House very difficult.
Only hope is that Cheeto would have tunnel vision and view such legislation as helping his "MAGA" campaign.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
I like to follow www.fivethirtyeight.com for many reasons, but one of them is the political polling tracking and related information, including information such as @neroden is referring to here. I find it quite valuable, and I suspect neroden already knows about the site.
If anybody has another site, especially one heavy on data and analytics they recommend, I'm eager to know about it.
ruralectric
Member
Hey everybody!
OT, but the market is closed for the day. Here's something I think everyone can agree on: There be d*kishness about
like = agree, disagree = disagree.
Enjoy this post before its deleted : )
OT, but the market is closed for the day. Here's something I think everyone can agree on: There be d*kishness about
like = agree, disagree = disagree.
Enjoy this post before its deleted : )
Last edited:
He might if it was pitched to him correctly. One article I read about it on one of the EV sites last night pointed out that 10 years is probably too long to keep the incentive. And that's from a strong EV advocate. They speculated that the bill was shooting for the moon and stars to allow some wiggle room to pare down to something more reasonable.
They could tweak it so only American based companies got the new incentive. That would probably please Trump, though it would include Tesla. They could also make it shorter.
The car companies are going to be in favor of this bill, especially GM because the wiser heads in these companies are beginning to realize Tesla is right on the cusp of changing the game. Tesla will have a car that with no incentive can come in close in price of ownership with comparable ICE cars that has a lot more to offer than ICE cars can and the general public is just about to figure it out. When public demand flips for EVs, Tesla will likely be the only company able to mass produce them and the incentive as it stands will have run out or be on the verge of running out when that sprint starts.
If the public suddenly wants EVs and the only options from GM have no incentive, then that puts them at a disadvantage compared to other companies with some runway left. Even at that if public demand starts sucking up EV supply, many other companies will be hitting the 200K before they are able to price compete in a fair fight with Tesla. Tesla is the furthest down the price per KWh curve which is a hard limit on everyone else.
He got a better offer from CNBC to be a talking head who opposes green energy companies.
Where are you seeing this? I don't find it on the usual news sites...
I think he's one of the few I despise more than Trump.
Update: just appeared on Huffpost. LOVE IT!!!
Update: Words of caution though - despicable morons queuing-up to take his place...
Andrew Wheeler, the EPA’s newly confirmed No. 2 and a likely contender to become the administrator, is a climate change-denying former coal lobbyist. His four years working at the EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton earned him a reputation as an actor capable of pursuing Trump’s agenda without hitting the legal snares that slowed down some of Pruitt’s decisions in court. He is expected to become the acting administrator as of Monday.
Another potential pick to replace Pruitt is William Wehrum, the powerful assistant administrator of the Office of Air and Radiation, who rejects climate science and fought to undermine clean air rules and weaken mercury standards as a lawyer for the fossil fuel industry.
A good day for the environment. One less toxic waste dump to clean up.
sundaymorning
Active Member
Scott Pruitt earns one-way ticket back to Oklahoma. He may want to travel coach.
He’s resigning. A good day for the environment.
He’s resigning. A good day for the environment.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Might be trading one snake for another more poisonous.
Out today. Fabulous 27 min video about Scott Pruitt with interviews with EPA scientists: As Scott Pruitt Resigns, Former EPA Officials Warn His Radical, Anti-Science Agenda Harmed Nation | Democracy Now!
Paracelsus
Active Member
Thanks for sharing, Gene. Amy Goodman is one of the very few reporters I still hold in high regards...........and Democracy Now is one of the very few media sources I still put great faith in. It was during the Democratic Primary that I finally threw the towel in on NPR.
I want to thank ggr, hacer, Familial Rhino, and others for explaining in clear language why my supposition the moon and Earth are bound to collide, is factually incorrect. Nonetheless the explanations for their divergence also posit increase in entropy so the second law is still involved, though not directly included in GR as noted above. I've had time to look at the two links above and also a refresher on Aristotle's categories of causal meaning, and a superficial glance at Prigogine's Nobel address since I vaguely remembered he posits an "entropy operator" at the microscopic level.
https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1977/prigogine-lecture.pdf
Particularly interesting to a novice like me were a few paragraphs from his conclusion.
"[snip] One of the most important aspects of Einstein’s theory of relativity is that we cannot discuss the problems of space and time independently of the problem of the velocity of light which limits the speed of propagation of signals. Similarly the elimination of 'unobservable' has played an important role in the basic approach to quantum theory initiated by Heisenberg.
"The analogy between relativity and thermodynamics has been often emphasized by Einstein and Bohr. We cannot propagate signals with arbitrary speed, we cannot construct a perpetuum mobile forbidden by the second law.
"From the microscopic point of view this last interdiction means that quantities which are well defined from the point of view of mechanics cannot be observables if the system satisfies the second law of thermodynamics.
"For example the trajectory of the system as a whole cannot be an observable. If it would, we could at every moment distinguish two trajectories and the concept of thermal equilibrium would lose its meaning. Dynamics and thermodynamics limit each other. [snip]"
I can barely understand this but I think it calls into question the validity of the critique of entropic gravity. I'm totally lost in Prigogine's math, however, but you guys, welcome!
What does this have to do with markets? We often see in both the General and Market roundtable laments about how irrational the market pricing of Tesla is. Also, there is abundant discussion of manipulation of perceptions which affect investing. The dialogue is often differences between short and long term perspectives. Thus understanding time and irreversible processes would seem to be appropriate.
Putting on my social science hat with a twinge of quantum understanding we cannot separate ourselves from what we are trying to understand. We are part of the apparatus. As early as 1960 I worried in my master's thesis that social scientists need an uncertainty principle to measure the static created by the self-fulfilling and destroying prophecies. In our book I spend some time arguing we have to understand the physiological equipment we observers have which limits what we can "see" in the world. All perceptions are local to the perceiver so how can we adjudicate among them to ascertain "truth" about what we loosely call the "external world?" It seems to me now that what we call science is the best approach—a consensus of observers replicated in experiment. As is well known, it is a social function as C.S. Pierce noted in Popular Mechanics in the 19th century. We need to understand the relation of mind to matter. There's perhaps a second law of thinking separating out the entropy of delusion (shorts) from a clear consensus on what the future portends. An equilibrium of consensus which we can call truth, bearing in mind the fact the universe at base is statistical and hence there is always some uncertainty even black swans.
I want to elaborate further in a subsequent post or, ggr, can it stay here?
Edit: Some punctuation; bolded added.
Last edited:
The upcoming election has great import for the markets, both long term—pace of climate change—and short—fate of trade war. That has implications for Tesla SP. There are many other implications related to China. (I think TSLA is a good hedge in any case, but....)
Elsewhere I have warned about shenanigans by some state secretaries of elections who might skew things as some California county officials did in the 2016 primaries. According to the Los Angeles Times they suppressed the Sanders vote.
Now there is a long essay detailing concerns about Russian hacking from Five Thirty-Eight. I've only skimmed it, but the layout of a long hypothetical has boxes summarizing some really scary excrement, including in some cases where some states have done nothing proactive.
The Moscow Midterms
Also, and related, it looks like Mueller is being very helpful to the counter narrative of the White House by timing notice of charges against Russian hackers just before Trump's visit with Putin and after the shellacking of Strzok.
12 Russian Agents Indicted in Mueller Investigation
I am cross posting this on the macro thread.
Edit: Bolded added.
Elsewhere I have warned about shenanigans by some state secretaries of elections who might skew things as some California county officials did in the 2016 primaries. According to the Los Angeles Times they suppressed the Sanders vote.
Now there is a long essay detailing concerns about Russian hacking from Five Thirty-Eight. I've only skimmed it, but the layout of a long hypothetical has boxes summarizing some really scary excrement, including in some cases where some states have done nothing proactive.
The Moscow Midterms
Also, and related, it looks like Mueller is being very helpful to the counter narrative of the White House by timing notice of charges against Russian hackers just before Trump's visit with Putin and after the shellacking of Strzok.
12 Russian Agents Indicted in Mueller Investigation
I am cross posting this on the macro thread.
Edit: Bolded added.
Last edited:
bhtooefr
Active Member
This is a bit... surprising, to be honest: Elon Musk revealed as one of the largest donors for a House Republi...
- Status
Similar threads
