jlj

Agree, but my point is that when the gas pumps are gone or hard to find it will make owning an ICE vehicle more inconvenient and encourage use of electrics.

Increased gas taxes would drive behavior change towards electrics. Similar to tobacco and alcohol taxes to discourage their use.

I don't see diesel going away so soon though because of industrial, agriculture, and military use. It will probably be taxed differently according to it's use. In fact it already is taxed differently in the US for home heating, vehicle, and aviation use.

In the US there was a "cash for clunkers" program about 10-15 years ago that tried to clear out ineficient older model cars. It was fairly successful and stimulated purchases of newer cars. The downside was that some perfectly fine cars were scrapped.

I suspect that gas stations will start swapping pumps for chargers, and that will motivate people to switch too.

By the time this all happens though we will have more car sharing programs and maybe autonomous vehicles, so the ownership paradigm will be different in 2030 compared to now. Why buy a car that sits idle for 90% of the day?

Gas taxes set a floor for how low prices can go. They'll probably increase as gas motor cars are phased out before the process ever sink too low.

In Washington, US, they increased the registration fee for electrics to make up for the shortfall in gas taxes that pay for road wear, congestion, etc. So that's already happening.

How much of the ad spend is coming from PAC's with unrestrained fundraising abilities, and dark money sources? Cut off that money supply with election reform and a lot of these ad network problems coupled to political polarization become a lot smaller.

Agree, and will add that this should be backed by LEO's tracking online posts inciting violence to people's doors, arresting them, and letting courts decide if it's a free speech issue.

It is common for software development expenses to be capitalized and expensed over time (depreciated).

A lot of what shows up as intangibles is from M&A activity. If the acquirer paid more than book value for a company, then all of the remainder goes into intangibles (goodwill).

The write-up argues that non-physical assets (software) show up as intangables (balance sheet) then argues that they are expenses (income statement). It doesn't make sense.

I don't follow what the article is arguing, and it seems to draw big and likely incorrect conclusions from loosely related accounting terms and data points.

I meant something slightly different (and I did not write it very well at all), but to give an example I spent the first 15+ years of my career chasing success, upskilling, focusing on self improvement. And my identity became tightly coupled to my work and each little win felt good for a day or two, then felt empty pretty quickly after that. When I let all that go and found a stronger sense of self worth, I found much more career success than I ever had before without really trying so hard for it. It came more naturally. Therapy helped me with this journey.

> How do you end up with a network of the good ones?

> I have wanted to escape the dreaded cycle of dealing with these terrible recruiters

Focus on yourself. When you are in a good place yourself you will find non-terrible recruiters. And when recruiters reach out, have a copy/paste response to say thanks for reaching out. +1 bonus points if you have a friend looking for a job and you can share their LinkedIn profile in your copy/paste response.

And don't run away (escape), run towards something.

Seems like very low hanging fruit compared to anti-trust. A nice perk of being government funded through in-q-tel.

They will settle and write a small check while admitting no wrongdoing.