If it's the principle that's driving the decisions, not the affluence of the beneficiaries, across a sufficiently-large set of cases we'd expect to find no correlation between the political leanings of the justices and their votes benefiting wealthy vs poor people. Which is what the article said happened for many decades.

Unless, of course, the principle being applied is "Who benefits?"

It's worth pointing out that although gtall framed it as the Republicans siding with the wealthy, it's equally true that the Democrats are siding with the poor. Both sides are inordinately focused on who benefits.

His advisors told him that he wouldn't be able to get a cut. Not even a measly 5%.

I used HP/UX as a development platform in the mid-90s, cross-compiling to m68k boards running pSOS and VxWorks. It was a little weird, but rock solid, utterly reliable, as were the HP workstations it ran on.

The data shows that college improves your options and your income now. Who cares what effect it had 50 years ago?

But... shouldn't they? I graduated from college in 2002. Today I run software development teams that build cloud hosted machine learning models pretty much none of which was a thing in 2002. Even if we want to imagine that college is essentially a trade school but with ivy and columns, the fact remains that your average college graduate's degree far outlives the value of most of what they're taught unless they're majoring in history.

We certainly want people to exit college with the skills they need to either enter the workforce or grad school, but those skills could be aquired for a whole heck of a lot less time and money than a four-year-degree. The college degree is about critical thinking skills; managing complexity; proving a capability for self education and improvement; etc. Or it should be, anyway.

That's funny. My EV is the vehicle of choice for long trips. Fuel costs are much lower than my ICEV, and long-distance travel makes that more important, not less.

Nah.

All that's required is that EVs be cheap. A 300-mile range is sufficient. When the purchase price of a car with a 300-mile range is at or only slightly above the purchase price of a comparable ICEV, EVs sales will explode because they're cheaper to operate and maintain. All of the range anxiety and concerns about fires (which are silly, since gasoline vehicles are a lot more prone to burning) will inhibit a few people, for a little while, but pretty soon they'll all have friends and relatives who are driving EVs and happy about it, and they'll start making the switch, too.

It's all about the benjamins.

Batteries are certainly part of it. I think China has pushed its industries to innovate and compete whereas the US has sat on its ass due to complacency and bad policy and now its fucked.

Yeah sure it is. As soon as these devices get sent out it will become instantly obvious they are OEM trash phones made in China, Taiwan or somewhere. If they were "made" in the USA, then the effort will be about as substantial as somebody replacing the original covers with hideous gold ones. God knows what firmware they run but expect that to be as shoddy and insecure as the hardware itself. I'm sure researchers will have a field day exposing all the vulnerabilities and questionable software these garbage devices have installed on them.

Volvo is owned by Geely which is Chinese. They also own Polestar, Smart & Lotus. I have no idea where they build/assemble Volvo vehicles but just because the parent is Chinese doesn't mean they don't have a plant somewhere closer to the intended market for tariff / logistical / PR reasons.