Well, when we have headlines from last week like this, I'm ready to give coal a hard deadline and fuck 'em if they can't meet it:

https://www.msn.com/en-sg/news/other/west-virginia-says-no-to-biden-s-solar-panel-push-state-s-billionaire-coal-magnate-governor-vetoes-renewable-energy-bill-claiming-it-would-ve-put-miners-out-of-work/ar-BB1kE1oo

There is currenlty enough solar and wind projects queued up to more than double the entire US grid capacity, they're just waiting on interconnections. The processes used in the US for grid upkeep and upgrading are antiquated, laborious, and not geared for growth.

Within the framework of the Constitution itself, Congress is king. They can override a veto by the Executive and remove them from office if they so choose. For the context we were speaking, tax and spend, Congress has effective unlimited authority if they so choose to use it.

Names of bills don't mean shit, they never have. Trying to tie anything to what politicians *name* a bill is pointless and childish. (Hello "Patriot Act").

Inflation hasn't gone down because people are still spending, raised prices or not. Talk is cheap, actions are what matter. People bitch up a storm that fast food prices (for example) are thru the roof (they are), but they're doing it while buying enough fast food the companies are making record profits.

And it isn't just essentials that are absolutely required, but everything. Prices will go back down when people start taking more action and stop spending.

It doesn't work that way. Everything works because people follow the basic rules -- the Constitution itself. Amending the Constitution itself isn't a simple vote of Congress, much less something signed by a President into law. There's an explicit process.

Your question is akin in seriousness to "what if EVERYONE just stopped paying taxes".

They didn't. They went up variable amounts, often higher, depending on what they were. And those prices went up YEARS before this legislation was passed, so the link you're implying is imaginary.

Unless SCOTUS officially rules "Unconstitutional", essentially. That's the check and balance we have.

You seem to have a problem understand the word "over". It isn't a lump sum at the end of the decade, it is accumulated over the 10-year period -- like like the spend.

Congress and their powers to tax and spend in general. That doesn't vary by specific technologies like solar vs oil, etc.

Not free, paid for by large corporations. The Inflation Reduction Act raises $300 billion over a decade by requiring large corporations to pay a 15 percent minimum tax on their profits and by enacting a 1 percent excise tax on stock buybacks and redemptions.

Criminals? That might have something to do with the fact the SEC isn't a law enforcement agency and has no arrest powers, they're a regulatory agency. Anything the SEC discovers that looks criminal is passed to the FBI.

Burner phones? Why bother? Read the article again. This is a ban from "work" phones, which are the ones issued to a limited number of personnel who don't like using something like Good on their personal phone. At best, work partition on their managed personal phone.

They can't touch employee's personal phones beyond an agreed-upon managed work partition. Everyone has a personal phone.

Tabs vs Spaces is right up there in geek hills-to-die-on with Vi vs Emacs. It has been around for decades.

If your parser is that shit and can't HANDLE tabs, it needs to be broken explicitly so you fix it and it doesn't break accidentally, in some weird and obscure way. Even just blindly converting tabs to spaces is better than breaking.

No, it doesn't say that. It says simply that it is difficult to get banks to invest in low income areas. You make the assumption that it is because they can't make a profit, but that isn't how things work. It is simply because they can make MORE of a profit elsewhere. This is just leveling out opportunity cost.

That market you're talking about taxes the everloving fuck out of petrol in the Netherlands, with a price being about $2.16 per litre according to the Internets. Whereas in the US we're looking at around $3.00 per US gallon, or about $0.80 per litre.

If petrol was $0.80 or less per litre how eager would they be switching over to EVs?

EVERY market is distorted, you just have different places it happens and different amounts.

They look cool. I've see a couple of articles lately where the younger crowds buy vinyl to use as a decorative "retro" music library. Many don't even have record players so what they sound like is irrelevant.