The Federal tax on gasoline funds the highway trust fund. It's not surprising that they want to collect from vehicles that don't used gasoline.
But given the current Federal gasoline tax is 18.5 cents/gallon it takes 1,081 gallons to reach $200 in Federal tax.
I think that's way higher than average. So $100 is more appropriate
The "low population states" are still states, and the minimum number of representatives is 1. Their population has a right to be represented too.
And the residents of Washington DC? There are more of those than in some states.
Even though Washington DC is not a state it still gets 3 electoral votes in the presidential election, which is consistent with what it would have if it were a state of their population size. I doubt DC will ever become a state or be absorbed back into Maryland. Absent being a state or joining a state they are not granted voting rights in the congress by the constitution.
So say these satellites last 20 years. So in 20 years they'll have to stick another 2000 of them up there. And again 20 years after that. And then each competitor will have to do the same. In 40 years you'll have 10,000s of them. What could possibly go wrong?
These are low-earth orbit satellite constellations. They deorbit and burn up when they reach EOL
Yes, that is pretty impressive considering how over priced BEVs are in the USA compared with the reset of the world. Once the USA also gets access to reasonably price BEVs those impressive growth figures will get even more impressive. The date of the cross over point for BEVs out selling ICEVs in the USA is still going to be later than most countries but it is clear that it is coming.
I think that date is many years away, for many reasons. I live in an affluent neighborhood where there are lots of Teslas and other EV's and homes have multi-car garages they can recharge in and even there it's a very small percentage. For people living with no dedicated parking for overnight charging it becomes a lot less attractive. If EV prices drop to the point where a car becomes like a consumer appliance, cheap to buy, throw out, and replace, maybe people will flock to them. The advent of "disposable cars" will be a net negative for the environment though.
Many of these EV sales are driven by government incentives, and Norway's big incentives to buy EV's have had many unintended consequences. https://www.vox.com/future-per...
> new vehicle sales in the quarter finished at around 3.91 million units, up 4.8% from last year
"Meanwhile, first-quarter electric vehicle sales rose 19.2%..."
Thanks for confirming that EV sales are growing steadily by double digit percentages every quarter, handily outpacing growth for non-EV sales.
=Smidge=
Yes, they have grown strongly to reach 300k out of 3.91 million.
From the linked article: 294,000 new EV Sales in Q1 2025
As per Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/busine...
"Overall, U.S. new vehicle sales in the quarter finished at around 3.91 million units, up 4.8% from last year, according to data released by Wards Intelligence on Tuesday"
Sales drivers: People are rushing to buy what they want before tariffs and reduction in incentives cause the price to go up. There are new EV's at lower price points to choose from.
Republicans know what a woman is. No citation needed
From the report, California dominates the list of most polluted places. Is this due to wildfires?
Did they provide a cure for it then? Because if so I would really like to know what it is.
They more or less said we have been medicating people to alleviate boredom. The same people are just fine when doing something that doesn't bore them. So the cure is do something you find interesting.
Ok, I'll just stop saying that I have ADHD and all my problems will just go away. Didn't realize it was so simple. Thanks!
The New York Times just ran an article saying that ADHD is bullshit
RTO started back in 2023. Govt workers started because they had employees who didnt check in for weeks and were getting paid. Crazy amount of abuse in Washington. It was time to drain the swamp
My kid in community college had an English teacher who quit because "She was ordered to return to the office or be fired". I looked her up, she's a Veteran's Administration employee but apparently while "working remote" she was teaching at the community college.
Electricity is fungible. If you add to the supply, you drive down prices everywhere. It doesn't matter what one specific producer is allowed to charge.
It doesn't matter if the prices go down everywhere, they get paid regardless. Offshore wind is expensive and the financing depends on revenue guarantees. The rate had gone up twice since the plan was initially proposed.
As per: https://www.equinor.com/news/2... "In June 2024, Equinor announced the execution of the Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority for Empire Wind 1 power for 25 years at a strike price of USD $155.00
Governor Hochul is lying when she says "Every single day, I'm working to make energy more affordable, reliable and abundant in New York". This wind farm had a deal that would allow them to charge twice the national average for energy.
Which completely glosses-over that the House isn't truly proportional anymore since 435 artificially skews power to low-population states.
The "low population states" are still states, and the minimum number of representatives is 1. Their population has a right to be represented too.
I'd argue that the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act was defacto gerrymandering because it set the number of representatives hard-capped at 435, which in turn directly influences the total number of EVs.
This quantity was defined to avoid having to build yet another building for the House of Representatives.
The problem with this is that if the number of representatives was truly proportional then the high-population states would have much greater numbers of representatives, both in the House and in EVs. That's why it's effectively gerrymandering, agrarian states in the upper midwest and upper Rocky Mountains have disproportionately more representation in the electoral college than their populations would naturally call for.
While the original 30,000:1 ratio for representatives might not be supportable, something like 100,000:1 would work in a much larger hall. This would more naturally lead to proportional representation in the House and in the EC. It would also have downstream effects on states because states choose their districts for the House. If the ratio is 100,000:1 then it's much harder for states to gerrymander because the smaller the number of people for a given rep, the harder it is to mess with the boundaries to force districts that are just barely noncompetitive.
It's a bad argument and irrelevant to the notion that somehow Elon did it. Each state gets electors equal to the number of senators plus the number of house representatives. Each state gets 2 senators. The house representatives are based on population. Every argument about this fixates on the minimum 2 EV for the 2 senators, but this is the United STATES of America and every state has an interest in the Presidential election. California has 54 while multiple states only have 3. I'd argue that DC shouldn't have 3 electoral votes, they are not a state.
You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.
