You main argument around stifling innovation and efficiency makes great logical sense, however it is actually bunk for the vast majority of international trade. If you’re referring to cutting edge manufactured goods (say laptops or cars) each product is unique and competition is more on capability than cost (in the sense any company so large has done all the normal MBA things to minimize costs - they want a better product). Mom and pop shops that needs efficiency and innovation rarely trade internationally. Finally, a massive amount of trade is in basic materials and components. There’s little efficiency or innovation to be gained from ones domestic aluminum industriesthe countries that import it for cheaper usually do so by paying lower wages and having no environmental controls.

Ceasing operations would imply anyone who was working for the company who could do such visits was immediately fired at the same time.

Oh hey up there - thou on your high horse. I’m white collar and own a half ton. I used it to commute, shop, and go skiing and camping maybe 8-10 times a year. Your argument is that I should buy a vehicle that doesn’t fit all my use cases, for one that’s more efficient in the majority of use cases and “either stop doing that stuff or rent a vehicle when you need it”. That’s idiotic. A full size truck is easily affordable here.

lol, so you think a company has the ability to simply choose what they was to sell based on what they get the most margin from? Good god, they sell what people want to buy. There are still plenty of options for passenger cars out there, if people literally didn’t show up with dollars in hand and demand to buy their trucks and SUVs they would go out of business. Insanity how you think the world works.

You ask a good questionif their availability and affordability were actually available world wide, you’re confident in the fact they’d be rejected? I can tell that comes from a lack of experience driving larger vehicles. If you can afford it (very much more so in NA) and have the skill to drive it, it’s better in every way.

No. The profit motive is what drives (no pun intended) a business such as this, in the sense they sell a product directly to consumers based on what they want and will pay for. If this is the wrong decision, they will fail and others who offer the right market product will step in. If it is a good decision, both their shareholders and customers will benefit greatly from offering what people choose to pay for from their wallets. If you didn’t even have an idea about fixed costs and management accounting, why do you feel you are a judge of what a good or bad long term decision this is? Compared to the large teams of professionals educated and laid the make such forecasts? Jeebus when you don’t know anything, recognize that and sit back and let the pros play things out.

No, this is the beauty of a capitalist system. Private companies get to make these calls and they will thrive or fail based on that. You seek to believe business choices should be dictated to the masses and wellfor fucks sakes go read a book.

No this is just rational capitulation to what their customer still want (F150s) versus a whole lot of media, management, government, and even slashdot posters trying and hoping to change their behaviour for ideological reasons.

EVs are great, and make sense in a lot of situations. The sad fact thought is the places adopting them have no exposure to a luxury item like a half ton truck. Americans aren’t different human beings than others, they’ve simply been able to explore more paths that other countries and cultures (largely due to wealth and “teh freedom”).

I own and drive a half ton. I am convinced if the larger world knew of the experience, wider use cases, and had the same affordability as one in North America, the F150 would be the world top seller and no one would choose those range limited small EVs, save for a second vehicle, which I would as well. Well, no doubt a lot would turn their noses up because of parking or driving difficulties, but that’s a fault of their own driving ability. It does take time to learn how to drive a truck safely. But as sales and capabilities show, I don’t see how you can make a rational argument they’re not better vehicles.

I know your goal is simply to defend some side of a massive internet flame war you are incapable of escaping, but this is one of your dumbest takes ever. I’ve seen you generalize entire groups of people as “lost causes” who simply can’t be reasoned with, so try to follow along with the rational crowd here eh?

I’m no fan is musk and have no investment in Tesla. But this package simply indentures very high growth goals and offers ownership of the company in return. What that is actually worth is up to the market and what someone will pay. How is this the wrong way to go about doing things? Musk has basically grown that business from nothing to a major enterprise- if you suggest not setting further performance goals for someone who has performed, you clearly don’t know how to run a popsicle stand.

Let me put it this way - I can go file articles of incorporation for a new business tomorrow, and name myself chief executive. Now, this business has no assets and no income. I will also write myself an agreement stating that if the company hits $5 trillion in market cap in 5 years, I will be given 20% of ownership shares. Now would you call me a trillionaire simply because of such an agreement? But further to the point of highlighting your idiotic opinion - let’s say I actually do grow the company to $5T in 5 years. You’re basically arguing such amazing performance can’t possible be worth a 20% ownership of said company. Pure abject stupidity. But I get it - you’re invested in a flame war and “oMg teh mUsK and billionaires bad”. Grow up, read a book or two.

Yes yes, because you standing there at the door either with a receipt to exit or a refusal to take two seconds to request to exit is clearly a kidnapping in progress. The massive police response that arrives will surely immediately agree with you and arrest everyone who works at the store, and thank you for your tireless efforts in combating crime.

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you? Have you ever been a part of normal society?

Nobody sane would complain about a locked exterior door in a commercial building. If you know that poster’s past, clearly they looked for the first reason to become enraged and argue against this, because people who steal are oppressed and do not deserve punishment to the far left.

Should be “policy for policing and prosecutions”. Still gobsmacked such a thing would be modded up. Changes to laws have absolutely made theft a major problem in SF and other North American jurisdictions because it simply isn’t worth the time to pursue, investigate, and prosecute. But this poster and apparently a handful of idiot mods would rather stick their heads in the sand and call anyone pointing out the obvious problem a nazi.

Why is this modded up and believed by people? Ok they had the number wrong is was anything under $950 was classified as a misdemeanour which has a very serious impact on property for policing and prosecutions. Took 5 seconds to verify this but you just pulled out a Nazi reference? Jesus slashdot. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/12...

From what i understand, the places the National Guard are being deployed have worse problems that shoplifting (gang violence and high murder rates). Not American so correct me if wrong. Perhaps if shoplifting is the worst crime areas of Texas experiences they should that their lucky stars.

There are many areas of Canada with shoplifting problems too (Toronto, Vancouver) and it’s well known by now the cause is a combination of people knowing the non-intervention policies of staff combined with lack of police response to theft calls. Thankfully a change in the latter is slowing the rates of clothing thefts in Vancouver and jewellery small and grabs in Toronto. Are you implying that should be handed to the National Guard versus just made a priority for police?

Also white collar crime is notoriously difficult to prosecute due to the knowledge, track covering, and difficulty in proving intent versus something like catching someone red handed with unpaid merchandise.

Thinking of the most prominent American billionaires - Musk, Bezos, Gates, Ellison, maybe Zuckerberg - they are all self made aren’t they? Sure they were upper middle class before, and I get it’s not de rigeur to defend America, but isn’t that a good thing? Would you rather have it billionaires are generational and that can’t possibly change? Even note in all those US examples billionaire is defined by their ownership of something that has become super valuable and not cash hoarding.