The energy companies seem to be raking in the profits, such as Constellation, which is up by more than 300% since 2023, and over 750% in a 5-year time span (https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/CEG/). I don't know all what they do (energy generation and delivery are listed, but I suspect they do other things too, such as trade and speculate on energy like Enron did), but as an essential service that everyone needs it seems outrageous they are socking the public (particularly a public that doesn't get to choose where to get their electricity) with costs that have produced such insane profits for shareholders.

Apple TV has a huge catalog of movies and TV shows for rent (digitally). I believe Amazon does rentals, too (there's probably a ton of others, like YouTube?). Most of them are a similar price to what I used to remember paying for a DVD rental or even a VHS rental ($3-$5 USD). And nothing to rewind and nothing to return!

Samsung will just put a cellular chip in it and it will connect all on its own. It will know its location so it can even call its own repair team and they can show up at your house for "repairs" and "service."

Just another point of evidence to suggest the recession is already here. Wages are not keeping up with costs, driving up loan usage as consumers can't keep up.

But I fear the Trump administration will never admit it because he'll just keep firing anyone who reports bad news about the economy.

There's actually tons of science about gas ranges and health effects. You can read some here: https://scholar.google.com/sch... TLDR, it's not good for your indoor air quality to have a gas range, no matter how much "venting" you do.

Because electric ranges are in homes that are less expensive, and therefore more likely to be made of flammable materials and less likely to have working smoke detectors and other fire suppression devices (such as fire extinguishers)? I don't know if this is the reason, but there are often a broad range of factors associated with a fire and the extent of damage caused by a fire.

I totally agree, although it's not a totally end-sum game as a huge proportion of that $250 million went to salaries and jobs (not just the actors and writers, but also bus drivers, painters, security guards, etc.) many of whom pay taxes and contribute to the public good in other ways, too.
Unfortunately for investors, schools and cancer research usually take too long to produce a profit to be interesting investments :)!

We don't know enough details to say what the alleged shooter's political beliefs were, or if they were the primary factor in their decision to shoot. We DO know the alleged shooter appears to be a video game fan, and a gun enthusiast - why are video games and guns not getting any blame here? Isn't there the same amount of evidence that video games and gun enthusiasm caused the shooting as there is evidence that political motivations drove the shooting? (Which is to say, no evidence at all?)

I don't think the *reason* why the shooter killed Kirk matters at all. Because efforts to find the *reason* will likely increase the chance of future killings, because future killers will believe that their killing someone will get their *message* amplified as people seek out the *reason.*

Instead of trying to score red / blue political points, we need to recognize there are three types of people: 1) people who will engage in violence for political purposes, 2) people who will encourage people to engage in violence for political purposes, and 3) people who condemn all forms of political violence. And our goal should be to get as many people into category 3 as possible. Unfortunately, we have many elected Republican leaders who are in category #2 right now (and feel free to point out, with evidence, any elected Democratic leaders who are in category #2, but I'm not aware of any), and that is extremely dangerous as those in category #1 will be more likely to follow-through on that violence.

The other thing we need to do is address our serious gun problem in the U.S.

With the sheer amount of content created, even if I watched 8-hours a day, every day, I could barely keep up with all the new TV content created this year, let alone even scratch the surface of all of the content created over the last 7 decades. Add in movies, and there's easily way more good entertainment & content than any human being could consume in a lifetime.

So if the pace of new content creation starts to slow down...who cares? There's more to life than watching TV anyway.

I also don't get how it could cost $200 million + for 8 episodes of Severance. They must be paying salaries up front rather than waiting for royalties or a cut of profits down the road (like was common in the olden days), and counting every studio cost they can think of.

People who are experiencing suicidal thoughts are often very good at hiding it from those closest to them. At a minimum, bots of this nature should require parental permission to access and should alert a responsible adult when the child begins sharing any thoughts of self-harm.

I honestly am not convinced that AI has effectively replaced any meaningful job at any organization. I think AI is a cover and lots of places are not hiring because the economy is in a recession (we just don't see the full numbers yet).

Hey, I'm glad people go into the trades, and I'm glad people are willing to do important but sometimes dirty jobs like plumbing and garbage collection.

But claims about "high salaries!" and "get rich being a plumber!" and "six figure starting salary right out of the gate in the trades!" are greatly exaggerated and are offered commonly across social media and various other places without any evidence or connection with reality.

In general, broad level data show a direct stair step down in salaries, with Doctorate / professional degrees at the top, then Master's, then bachelor's, then trades / associates, then high school, then no high school (https://collegefinance.com/plan/trade-school-vs-college-degree-salaries-who-makes-more). Now, obviously, these are distributions and not all high school drop-outs earn less than people with professional degrees, but, on average, financially you are better off the more education you can get.

And going to college will open more doors and give you more opportunities for success, even if you are interested in the trades. Want to go into firefighting? Great! We need firefighters. If you go to college first and study fire protection services and management, you'll be primed to move up the career ladder (ha) more quickly than your peers who will max out earlier.

If you are considering the trades, look carefully at your local trade school. They will provide reports that show expected first-year earnings and average earnings in the trade. And then go and do it for two or three weeks with someone who does it for a living and see if you and your body can hack it.

There are plenty of poor people in remote, low-income areas that get (or stay) quite cold. Huge parts of rural Alaska, northern Russia, and Canada are quite remote and can have a high proportion of low-income people with low access to government support and infrastructure. But you are right, they aren't buying EVs.

It's warm enough to grow apples, but too cold for your EV? Something isn't adding up here.

60% seems overly dramatic in charge lost. I live in a place where it gets pretty cold in the winter (routinely below 0 C), and there is some loss in mileage for the EV, but it is nowhere near 60%. Use of the passenger compartment heater seems to burn through the battery more than the loss due to colder temperatures. It would probably be most useful to consumers if manufacturers were required to disclose range based on average summer and winter temperatures...but, unfortunately, it seems we are unlikely to get things "beneficial to consumers" during the current U.S. administration.

Why do you care what pronouns someone uses? And why is someone's DNA any of your business?