Doesn't Tesla lose several thousand dollars on every car it sells?

And though their cars look very cool, they are likely to depreciate even faster than most luxury models. So where will the company be in two or three years?

He did not violate the Hatch Act, because "'My counsel advises me that there is no controlling legal authority."

Nevertheless, Gore admitted making fundraising phone calls from his White House office, and that he was "proud of what I did",

With airline travel, the infrastructure already exists: the airfields, the traffic control, the hotels and car rentals and expressways. Yes, the public paid for them, but they are built and there is no annual appropriation to keep planes in the air. Ticket prices pay for landing slots and terminal rents.

Planes are more energy efficient than ever before -- airlines are scrapping perfectly good planes so they can replace them with newer more-efficient ones.

I am not opposed to investigating the Hyperloop idea; I am opposed to building the HSR (high-speed rail).

I have traveled from LA to SF many times -- actually, San Diego to the Bay Area, not San Francisco specifically. I always drove my own vehicle, so I'd have it available while there and not need to rent one. But I also stayed for a week at a time; if I was returning the same day or in a day or two, I probably would have flown. I would have traveled by train only if it was cheaper and reasonably quick. Likewise, I would travel by Hyperloop if it was cheaper than flying.

We already have a fast and efficient way to transport people from LA to SF -- it's called air travel. There may be more efficient ways to travel, but they're slower. And there are cheaper ways, but they're also slower. High-speed rail may be fast, but it will always require taxpayer subsidies to keep it running; so it's not an efficient use of limited public funds.

The US has a particularly bad corporate income tax system, which discourages companies from repatriating foreign earnings. The companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize after-tax income by; they can't do this if they pay taxes in the foreign company where income is earned, then pay again by bringing that income back to the US.

There is no moral or legal obligation for companies (or individuals) to pay more than necessary. There is an obligation on the part of the Congress and the president to fix the tax system, but that won't happen during the remainder of this president's administration.

There is a difference between destroying something that already exists, and blocking something that is still in the planning stages. The headline is wrong -- Rupert Murdoch is not destroying or seeking to destroy anything.

Additionally, there is a difference between competing private networks and a single government monopoly. We have recently seen that an imperial government can coerce private media companies, to obtain information about users and subscribers. How much easier it would be if there is a single broadband network run by the very government that seeks to gather the information.

There seem to be very good reasons why a government should not be given a monopoly over broadband networks for the entire country. I think China has such a system, and maybe it works for them, but quite a few of the Chinese do not seem content to let their government filter their access to the internet. Murdoch has had decades of experience dealing with China, so maybe he knows something about closed media systems.

Post Citizens United, corporations are still not permitted to donate directly to campaigns.

You might want to do some research, too.

"Corporations can now contribute with no caps..."

That is incorrect. Corporations may not contribute to a campaign for office. They may form political action committees, and a PAC can make a contribution; but there are strict caps on how much they can give.

Pardon me, but I drive a Volkswagen and I am a snob. I disdain nearly all of you who drive lesser vehicles. When I am cruising at 80 or above in my Golf TDI, alongside a Bentley Continental GT or Audi R8, I feel a kinship with other superior beings.

The US has more czars than any other country.

The TSA has an excessively large budget that it must spend each year, in order to justify an even bigger appropriation next year.

So, the solution to that agency's outrageous behaviors is to slash its budget, sharply. Or, kill it completely.

Really? Look at the Peace Prize awardees over the last several decades; maybe two or three of them were really deserving.

Incidentally, Rush Limbaugh was nominated a few years ago. I guess he didn't win.

Mitsui O.S.K. Lines is a division of Mitsui, a firm that's been in business since the mid-1600s. I imagine the company intends to remain in business for at least a little while longer.

The theory of a 6000-year-old Earth was made by Archbishop Ussher in the 1640s, not in the Middle Ages which ended 400-500 years earlier.

It was a valid theory at the time, based on the best available evidence, but wrong. Even today there are many theories which are commonly accepted as scientifically valid, but which are most likely wrong in part or entirely. Our descendants will laughingly mock anyone who still believes them, just as some of us dare to mock today.

The average car on the road is something like 11 years old, maybe older. Just because some people trade for a new car every 3 years does not mean their old one is scrapped -- they are driven into the ground, usually, unless totaled in a crash. And the typical used car ends up with 200-300 thousand miles before it goes to the crusher.

EVs really aren't designed to last that long. So whatever fixed environmental costs there are to manufactured the vehicle and later on to scrap it must be distributed over a smaller number of miles.