Does this make up for all the IT people that the Trump administration fired because firing people makes the government more fficient? Including the US Cyber command, the NSA chief, and the people maintaining the IRS computer systems?
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffederalnewsnetwork.com...

ByteDance will retain 19.9% of the business, ... another 30.1% will be held by affiliates of existing ByteDance investors

So, exactly 50% will be held by ByteDance or existing ByteDance investors. That number can't be a coincidence.

If even one person of the rest of the investors sides with ByteDance and its Investors, ByteDance still has full control.

Uh, I take it you don't actually know how refrigerators work? Or is this intended as ironic?

That applies to Donald Trump in spades. His entire qualifications are "he's a rich white dude."

How about a black woman who was a successful prosecutor, won a seat in the Senate, and was attorney General of California before being elected vice president? one running against a reality-show actor whose tag line was "you're fired!", was born rich, started businesses which went bankrupt... six times over, and had no experience in government at all (but... was a white man).

ah, too bad,

I was thinking that if we could turn meetings into electricity, corporate America would have our problems solved!

Your argument basically says that EV incentives have had only a small effect to date. But the intent of incentives was to stimulate the market, with the idea that once the market became established, EV manufacturing would become mainstream, and that "small effect" would become significant.

We'll see.

People have problems conceptualizing large numbers. Let's run through them. Oil companies make about six trillion dollars in revenue per year. That's too much to easily conceptualize. Using your numbers, suppose 3.7% of cars on the road become electric, and oil consumption drops by 2.5 percent (2/3 of oil consumption is for vehicles). How much revenue do the oil companies lose? 150 billion dollars.

But, really, the oil companies are worried about the future. They're worried, what happens to our profit when electric vehicles rise to ten percent of the total. What if (gasp) they rise to 50 percent?

You know what actually is a drop in the bucket? Dropping a few hundred million here and there to finance campaigns to slow or stop adoption of electric vehicles. If you make even a one percent change in adoption rate, you make that investment back a hundred times over.

Do not ever EVER trust a chatbot for factual information.

Chatbots are designed to give output that looks like it answers the question.

"Someone" told you wrong.

Ah, you nailed the key point: a trillion dollar industry has a vested interest in selling as much oil as possible, and is doing whatever they can toward killing electric cars.

Google "learning curve". Technology prices always start high and drop low.

If you actually read more than the first sentence of the summary, it would have shown you that fully electric vehicles increased in sales even more than plug-in hybrids.

Here's another article with the same conclusion: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.strategyand.pwc.co...

Yes, that's the way Senators are elected. Senates represent the entire state, and are voted on by the entire state's voters; Representatives represent their districts, and are voted on by their district's voters.

This is what makes gerrymandering possible, since by carefully selecting which voters are assigned to which districts, you can alter the party representation.

Impeachments are meaningless theatre unless you have the voted in the Senate to convict.

The goddamn Democrats probably will do things like that, because they love theatre, but I would much much rather that they did something useful.

I read your comment. You made assertions and presented no data to support them.

You are now making a point that China is "weaponising" the trade surplus "and turning it into the economic equivalent of an aircraft carrier by buying government bonds (e.g. the national debt) of countries that they may have a problem with in the future." I don't necessarily disagree with that, but that wasn't the point of the article we're discussing.

So, the revised version of your comment summarizes to "I don't believe it."

OK.