hvb2

> Sure, but EVs also often have cooling loops that need service,

If you're talking about ac, sure. The rest, no? I've been driving an electric car for over a decade and have been replacing tires, and nothing else.

Sure it is anecdata with n of 1 but in over a decade I've probably spent ~4k on maintenance while driving 120k miles electrically? The bulk of that on tires and fixing that ac I mentioned.

> Yes, but it appears that the banks are not over levered like they were during the housing crisis

Banks weren't over levered back then either because all the mortgages went straight into CDOs held by other people/institutions.

The problem was that nobody trusted each other because Lehman could just fail. So they stopped lending to each other (like the daily loans they give each other). Trust evaporated and the whole system stopped dead in its tracks.

Leverage is not the only thing that matters...

> what kind of regulations would serve this particular scenario?

Separation of duties so more than one person is needed to create and then approve such transactions?

It's not just repairs, maintenance too

Oil changes, timing belts, spark plugs etc. It really helps if you have no metal touching metal

Because the general public does not, journalism and checking politicians isn't something you can do while breaking even. The result of that is that you need to have someone with a lot of money to back your losses.

And here we are.

> my default assumption for any new country is that overstaying your visa will be treated seriously, resulting in something like immediate detention (in a very lousy environment), probably a fine, and near-immediate deportation (at your expense), and probably some sort of quite serious ban (probably greater than merely months).

Overstaying a visa in the us isn't necessarily illegal. It can mean that the next time you leave, you'll have to get a new one before being allowed to re-enter which can take months even if it's the same one.

I'm not saying this is universally true for all visas. But if the underlying reason you're eligible for the visa is still there then overstaying it is not a problem.

So I get your assumption, and being pessimistic on that front is probably a good idea. However, immigration isn't straightforward and things that sound bad could be completely legal.

> Our problem is that the press isn’t doing their job

The general public isn't willing to pay for this, so it's very hard to do this. Especially given that most of this isn't exactly going to generate tons of views.

Let's be honest, in general, the public is very upset about all the injustice they perceive. But the public also lost all interest in the process, some can't even be bothered to vote once every other year....

It's too easy to blame others for your own inaction

> But that still doesn’t allow the bureaucracy invoking HR rules to protect itself against the actions of the elected branches.

It's not hr writing the rules here. It's them enforcing what they were given.

Also, they're not saying he cannot do what they want to do. It's that the law prescribes that certain things need to happen first.

Those rules were given to them by elected people in Congress.

Edit:

To add

> But the President doesn’t need a court ruling giving permission before he exercises his powers.

The system was created with the assumption that the president would act cautiously and judiciously. This administration doesn't care about whether something is lawful. When you act fast enough the damage will be done before your called out on it.

South Korea saw a president declare martial law and the other branches held him accountable very quickly. I am not convinced the US in the current state would.

> But if he does have the power, then it would be perverse if he couldn’t exercise the power due to HR rules.

It's not even established that he has the power. The fact that they do something doesn't mean they have that power.

And given that, it doesn't mean that you get to ignore all other rules.

> You cannot put HR in the way of the duly elected President exercising his powers.

When you're firing thousands of people, some due diligence is in order, no?

> Our elected congress blocked it. That is their role.

So in a Republic, the President has the right to issue decrees. That's what makes it the executive branch. Congress can make laws that block specific things but they would need to pass legislation? And assuming this power is granted on the constitution, they can't change this (easily).

> That is exactly what they do.

They rule if the president can issue that decree, no? They don't have the ability to change any of that?

But nvidia can sell to anyone, right?

They'll take a heavy hit stock wise, and might be an LLM company through all their shady financial constructions to keep the music going by propping up demand. But in the end, nvidia as a company has a place even when the frontier labs go bankrupt. Some other company will take their place. Worst case it'll be like the cable companies in the end 90s who found themselves out of work because they overbuilt for dotcom

> Here's an example from the last four years: Lula implemented a tax on financial operations, our elected congress blocked it, then he went to the supreme court and they rammed it down our throats. Yes, the supreme court raised taxes. Not a single person voted for those judges, by the way. This is the Venezuela governance model.

Do you have a source to read up on this?

Surely they're ruling on whether the executive branch has the power to do XYZ, right? So they don't directly endorse a policy, they decide who can do what?

You see the same in the US, with the decisions largely going the other way.

This works well when the answer to the question is a number or something else definitive. When the answer is fuzzy, how do you compare 3 different responses? They'll all be different

> But I think the hardest thing to replace is Active Directory, Outlook, all the integration with Windows, all the admins certified on Microsoft technology

Nah, it's the users. Those are resistant to change even more. When they miss deadlines that they can now blame, sometimes rightfully, on the software change