Unfortunately, I think at least a *part* of it has indeed been the unintended consequences of Obama-era legislation.

From the 70's through the 90's, we had station wagons. They were the family car, along with the minivan. They got 20-30 MPG, and could fit between five and eight passengers, depending on model. In the 2000s, minivans and SUVs became a bit more popular, but the station wagon still existed.

Then, the MPG mandates came. Cars had to get a certain amount of MPG, irrespective of other factors (e.g. not MPG/passenger). A car that fit seven passengers simply couldn't physically make that possible. So, the station wagon died...and instead of getting 30MPG in a car, people got 15-20MPG in an SUV, because they were classed as 'trucks', which weren't required to meet those criteria.

So, anyone who would have *wanted* a smaller, car-like way of transporting larger amounts of people or things, were stuck getting an SUV or a minivan. The squeeze continued, because the sedans that *did* exist had ever-more-stringent MPG requirements placed on them, which tended to involve design changes that reduced cargo space in many cases.

Also, with more and more higher vehicles, driving a regular car means getting blinded at night with floodlights from cars at mirror-level right behind (I *always* have to turn my side mirrors down to the point of uselessness in order to avoid getting blinded by SUVs behind me), and the feeling (irrespective of accuracy) that an accident between a sedan and an SUV involves the SUV walking away with a fender replacement, and the sedan driver ending up in the morgue.

I remember a few years ago, going to California for the first time and taking note of what was driving with me on Interstate 5. California - tree-hugging, forest-fire-having, $7/gallon-gasoline California...3/4 of the vehicles within visible distance were SUVs. Really? *ALL* of them wanted an SUV purely as status symbols, and wouldn't have preferred a station wagon, or something like it, if they were both available and common enough that they felt safe in them? Don't get me wrong, I love getting 51MPG in my Elantra...but you can't tell me that the laws intended to push automakers to make that possible didn't end up putting at least *some* pressure on consumers.

Yea, TFA was not clear on what happened earlier as to source of money

An earlier report claimed that the director had actually turned a $4 million investment in Dogecoin into $27 million, but had then proceeded to spend much of his profits on luxury goods.

He should have just put 11$mill back and enjoyed the rest; I doubt anyone would b ethe wiser and he could have gone on and made the series. If it was a dud the studio would just have charge dthe loss to oteh rprojects.He thought he was too smart to lose and got greedy...

There are plenty of legal ways to take 11 million form a studio and pocket it without resorting to theft; Hollywood has perfected the game of taking money from one pocket and sliding it into another.

The good news is if it fails, lawyers get nothing. What damages has the class suffered? Fewer bad movies and shows? Higher costs? IF Netflix get more expensive, cancel it. It's not like you need Netflix or HBO or whatever. I get creatives' concerns, especially if Netflix moves away from theatrical releases, which can change how they get paid at the back end. Should teh class get certified, opt out. If enough people do, the action becomes worthless for the lawyers and costly since they don't get paid.

Mighty nice place you have here. Be a shame if anything happened to it, I suggest insurance from here...

Quite true, but you are limited to the quality of the stream; and if a service decides to remove the video and your file gets corrupted/lost you can't redo it. Then again, DVD media is not eternal either. Both options have their pluses and minuses.

It'd make my year if he went back to that. Ever since Hasbro bought them, they've looked like these useless contraptions made by Dr. Seuss; we need to get back to the CPS2000 and the other turn-of-the-century models that were actually effective at their intended purpose.

It's ca;;ed the real world, and is coming at them with a clue by four. A HS near me no longer fails students, because well, it's easier to pass them and push them on than deal with parents who blame the school and teachers for their kid's performance.

And you can rip them for portablity or to put on a server. Best of both worlds.

Rather, itâ(TM)s about money. If Netflix goes streaming, all that money made in distribution, percentages of gross, etc. goes away. WB doesnâ(TM)t care because, except for payments such as percentages of gross, much of it rolls back to them eventually. All the creatives, OTOH, may lose out on a lot of money.

Or the jerk in glasses decided to shoot you when being assaulted.

I doubt any bus driver would want to cross to the other side, it would be a challenge, even if cars cooperated. You'd have a line of blocked cars that would need to be let by, while holding up traffic behind you. If the driver doesn't have on red flashers when they start to move, a car could potentially legally pass them and the bus pull out into them. Then if the stop is near a corner, the driver may not see an oncoming car, setting up your scenario; or I've seen stops on a street with a 45 MPH limit, trying to cross that and then face oncoming traffic would be crazy.

Some cars do not have integrated gsrage door openers. I have one that uses bluetooth and works great, no network needed.

In general, bus stops are designed for the students to exit on the non-street side. The issue is kids who have to cross the street to get home since a stop serves multiple homes on both sides of a street. Retracing the route would double the bus transit time for some kids, who likely just get off the bus at the first stop and not theirs if the bus retraced the route so they could get off on their side of the street.