rkbabang

I am not expert in carbon prints of electric car vs gasoline cars. However, my point is regular gasoline cars have also improved. Prius 2017: 54 city / 50 highway Honda civic 2016: 31 city / 42 highway Honda civic 2011: 26 city / 34 highway For someone having mostly highway commute, the differential between regular and hybrid cars is going down. Yes in some places even highway driving can be stop & go, but my point is one won't actually put much mileage in stop & go scenario and vast majority is highway driving at decent speed. Thus, even though hybrids are vastly better in city driving, it is not relevant unless someone puts a lot of mileage in city driving which is difficult because they can only go so far in an hour in city traffic. When we talk about electrical/hybrid cars, we need to compare with improvements in regular cars which have considerably improved particularly in Highway mileage in recent years. For example in one of my previous jobs, I used to have 40 miles of highway driving and 4 miles of local driving. The Honda civic is competitive with that type of driving profile. The Civic is a very small compact car, I think the advantage of a hybrid is that you can get compact car like milage in a mid-sized car such as: 2016 Toyota Camry Hybrid: 43 city / 39 highway

Car companies have been doing research and introducing Electric cars for some time. Here is GM EV1 1996-1999 ==> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1 People have short term memory. In fact as we speak GM is ahead of Tesla in introducing a EV at less than $40k. Search for Chevy BOLT. One can order it and get it this fall. I'll never understand why all of the traditional car companies think that you need to make your electric vehicles look as strange and ugly as possible. I wouldn't drive that car if you gave it to me.

Depending on the drug, I agree. More psychedelics (mushrooms, mescaline, LSD, ayahuasca, etc), more weed, less pharmaceutical poisons. Especially psychedelics, there is a growing field of research into treatment for many disorders and even the benefits of micro-dosing for anyone. I don't see much use for heavy duty opioids except for infrequent short term pain relief. Cocain doesn't seem worth the risks to me, however if it were legal I'm sure there would be safer versions of it available, smaller-less concentrated doses (more like beer and less like moonshine) and such. I'm not saying anything at all should ever be banned, because no drug should, I'm just saying what I'd like to see people do more and less of.

I think the question is about the long term upward trend, not the short term ups and downs. In the short term those reasons you listed drive the market back and forth, but over the long term it has only gone up. My opinion is that the long term upward climb, has been due to population growth (people are the ultimate resource) as well as increases in productivity, wealth creation, technology, transportation, trade, etc. Population is not going to increase at the same rates as in the past (as has been mentioned by others above), but hopefully increases productivity, wealth creation, and technology of all types (weak AI, then strong AI, nanotech, etc) will partially or even completely compensate for the that lack of new people. Maybe, maybe not, I don't know. But even if 7-10% long term growth becomes 2-4% long term growth, I do think the market will continue to grow long term not shrink.

Why do you find that admirable? Certainly it isn't good to abuse these things, or to drive while intoxicated, but what is admirable about not enjoying life's pleasures on occasion?

Since we are doing recommendations. I tried this a few weeks ago: Nitro Coffee Stout I was a little sceptical, but it was surprisingly good, and refreshing on a hot day.

I just use it for cooking. I sometimes feel bad using wine received as a gift for marinating meat, so sometimes I save bottles I suspect are more expensive for guests. I usually buy the cheep gallon size jugs for cooking.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who hates wine. I could never stand it. A good whiskey is OK, but I don't go out of my way to drink it. The only alcohol I really enjoy is dark beers, and since I've been trying to keep my carbs on the low side I don't drink very often anymore. Here's an article for the wine snobs: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis

Neither in the last week, but I am not philosophically against either. I probably have about 6-12 beers/year and do recreational drugs far less than even that (it's been a few years). But as far as what others do ... smoke em if you've got em, I don't mind.

was he even born? Obviously he went back in time. He used the Tesla that comes with a flux capacitor. That is the model which has an incredible battery that can deliver 1.21 gigawatts to the flux capacitor for time travel. Manufactured in the gigafactory of course.

Why don't ya marry him - looks like he's available ;) Hopefully this thread doesn't go the way of the Elizabeth Holmes thread. Hopefully Musk doesn't go the way of Holmes. Although with Holmes there was nothing but secrecy, speculation, and hype. Where Musk has already achieved enough to be highly respected even if he fails at everything else in his life from this moment forward, so there really can't be a comparison between the two.

This morning my friend lucked out and was able to buy several cases of ammo. On the way home he stopped at the gas station where a drop-dead gorgeous blonde was filling up her car at the next pump. She looked at the ammo in the back of his pickup truck and said in a very sexy voice, “I’m a big believer in barter. Would you be interested in trading sex for ammo?” He thought a few seconds and asked, “What kinda ammo ya got?”

Politics always brings out the best in people.

I've tried to stay out of this as much as possible. But I think you're spot on Mark. I think of the last 8 years as difficult for everyone as it was the aftermath of the Great Depression. Right now we are about 8 years off the crash in 1929, that makes this the equivalent of 1937. The world was engulfed in war in political turmoil leading to WW2 with officially began in 1939 which doesn't officially end until 1945. The next 4-8 years will be crucial a perhaps the most difficult. I fear you both may be correct. I know that history never repeats, but even if it rhymes with the late 1930's/early 1940's I don't want either of these two in the Whitehouse. <sigh>

+1. Trump himself might be just a middling racist and xenophobe on the par of water-cooler brogrammers and jocks who just don't think it racist or misogynist to call someone n word or ho, bitch, etc. The problem is that he's running a campaign based on raising and supporting that hatred. I don't know if the fact that this strategy is working says a lot about our society or if it just shows how bad his competition is, both in the primary and now in the general election? Whatever it means it isn't good.

With a few words snipped that is a excellent summary of this election. The dangerous, corrupt, bloodthirsty, war hawk politician vs. the dangerous populist xenophobic demagogue that, well, who knows what he will do. I find it fascinating that "war hawk" would be a pejorative for Hillary Clinton from the standpoint of the Trump supporter given that a consistent rhetorical position of Trump is that the military has been underfunded (good luck proving that based on military budget allocation through the Obama administration from actual data). Further, a major talking point of Trump is something like knocking the hell out of ISIS (whatever that means - he apparently knows more about ISIS than the Generals) and encouraging increasingly brutal "enhanced interrogation." How is increasing military spending, increasing military actions against ISIS, and encouraging more intense "enhanced interrogation" (plus, encouraging war crimes by "kill[ing] their families") not the actions of a bona fide war hawk? Trump has said some hawkish things and also some very anti-war things as well. Like I said "Who knows what he will do?" He's a complete unknown, I don't think he knows what he will do if elected. Also did you just call me a Trump supporter? How many Trump supporters describe him as a "dangerous populist xenophobic demagogue"?

With a few words snipped that is a excellent summary of this election. The dangerous, corrupt, bloodthirsty, war hawk politician vs. the dangerous populist xenophobic demagogue that, well, who knows what he will do.

Who was damned because they didn't? That hasn't been tried in generations. I'll answer this, but I'll try to not get drawn into the discussion further. Do you really believe that if some party withdrew US bases from Middle East and suspended support for Israel, they would not be damned? What about Iran? What is the "you don't" with Iran? Maintaining sanctions? Removing sanctions and doing nothing? Look how well that worked for Democrats. I don't have an opinion about the Iran deal and I don't know if you consider it "you don't", but it's not a bad example IMO for being damned if you don't. What about Iraq's Kuwait invasion in 1990? You really think that USA would have not been damned if they didn't? Edit: Also in something like Arab spring, there is no "you don't" option. You implicitly support either status quo or the rebels and different groups will definitely damn you for either stance. If your idea of "damned" is being criticized by someone, then of course you will be criticized no matter what you do. If your idea of "damned" is filling the world with violence, death, destruction, chaos, and terrorism, and plunging the US into massive amount of debt as $trillions are spent on wars, then yes, the US should have stayed out of the Middle East even after Iraq invaded Kuwait. And because it is better to be late than never, the US should pull up stakes and come home even now.

Who was damned because they didn't? That hasn't been tried in generations.

What a circus this election is. How can anyone take any of these people seriously. I love it. ABC News thinks Trump might drop out. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senior-gop-officials-exploring-options-trump-drops/story?id=41089609

The issue is sane vs. insane. I'd put it more as evil vs. insane.

I support Trump? LOL good God no. I wouldn't support that xenophobic moron ever. Not in this lifetime. Sorry. Also I admitted that I was wrong. I'll apologize if it will make you feel better. I'm sorry for being wrong.

His son died in 2004. How did the Democratic Party send his son to die? I missed that, I thought it was more recent. OK, so not his son, but they are the party who has most recently sent other people's sons to die. And Hillary is more of a hawk than Trump, so his support of one over the other makes little sense.

He is angry that Trump said mean words, so he supports the party that sent his son to die.

I've never seen the HBO series, but I've been listening to the audiobooks. I'm on book 5 "A Dance With Dragons" now. They are excellent, well written, highly detailed (as you said), and the audiobooks are well produced. I highly recommend them.