Congress (Article I) has passed many, many laws without veto from the president (Article II) which have withstood challenges in the Supreme Court (Article III) which have established policies of wealth distribution,

Err....exactly which many laws have given us wealth redistribution ?

"/me - Thumbs through my copy of the US constitution looking for anything in the limited, enumerated federal roles and responsibilities alingning with wealth redistribution."

Funny how most people who cite the constitution gloss over Article III like it's non binding.

If I recall.....Article 3 of the US constitution has to do with setting up the judicial branch...Supreme Court, etc.

I fail to see how that has anything to do with wealth redistribution, the subject I was addressing originally where you quoted me....?

"The asset tax is dumb. how is he supposed to pay that tax without diluting his ownership stake? "

That's the goal. The government exists for the benefit of the people, the people suffer when all wealth accumulates at the top. Massive ownership stake is not only NOT a goal of the government, it is the problem to solve.

/me - Thumbs through my copy of the US constitution looking for anything in the limited, enumerated federal roles and responsibilities alingning with wealth redistribution.

Hmm....On a state level, well I guess they can but thankfully precious few even think about doing this.

If nothing else, it ends up pushing wealthy people OUT of your state and overall you stand to have a tax revenue loss over a short period of time.

People are mobile you know.....

I'm guessing from your context...they had a figure 8 painted on the ground for you to follow?

Interesting....no such thing for me....just do one using your imagination for where the 8 was and how big i was,etc.....pretty easy that way.

Yup, often times, the smaller scooters are harder to keep up and precisely turned than a full blow motorcycle....at least I've found that to be true.

Nothing of value is lost if they're not provided with ever-increasing amounts of RAM.

wouldn't that require taking and passing a motorcycle test?

Well, er....yes.

But why not if for an e-bike they're talking about licensing, etc those...for which a test would be required too.

And besides the motorcycle test is do a figure 8 in a parking lot and basically you're done....no big deal.

I recall, since I already had my drivers license I didn't have to take any written test just to have the motorcycle endorsement added to my drivers license.....road rules are the same.

And we in the US wonder why all you EU folks actually thing 6-8 hours is some sort of abnormally long driving trip...??

And I said I take usually 1 break in the middle...to refuel, pee and maybe grab a burger (possibly to go) and that generally takes all of 10 minutes....

It's quite practical to build completely fireproof homes. Some Californians do, which proves the rest can do that too. None of these things are difficult. Concrete domes shrug off embers. So do eaveless steel buildings which make ideal garages easy to erect with a very small crew (which I did). Both are easy to make quake-resistant.

Of course it's CA and art is more important than public safety so they'll continue to burn and I'll continue to scorn their silly choices.

There is nothing new to invent, only choices to make.

Amazon can afford to build seriously hardened data centers only a large aerial bomb could penetrate.

There is every reason to dig in when you live in a combat zone. (Why the USAF didn't build serious HAS at PSAB when it ate Scuds on the reg during Desert Storm is a mystery, but hubris doesn't make for wise decisions.)

Bunkers are really quite comfy in hot climates thanks to high thermal mass. Barriers raise the bar to successful attacks. See the old U-boat pens on the Channel coast for specs ample to protect against any drones (provided suitable end doors were fitted).

Americans viscerally resent playing defense with predictable results. Multi-billion dollar companies have little excuse for failure to build utterly robust facilities impervious to natural disasters and barely pervious to conventional military attack.

There are only individual adaptations whose outcomes are not guaranteed. Be genuinely versatile for your own benefits. If all you do is one "job" then you're helpless without it.

That's why I have zero economically useless interests or hobbies. If one makes the effort it's not difficult to learn to repair, modify and maintain nearly everything you own. Any techy should enjoy that stuff and many do.

If you're smart enough to be competent using computers you're smart enough to learn vehicle repair, home maintenance and repair and much more. Tools often pay for themselves at first use. No need to be deterred by lack of space. I and many others who lived in dorms and barracks while doing all our own vehicle work are proof. Learn one discipline and you'll soon notice related uses for your learning.

Unemployment may take you off your job but skills can buy time to adapt and change. For example my businessman neighbor was a skilled wood worker for the fun of it. When he lost his job he kept up his house payments (not cheap in the NY metro area) doing handyman work, cabinetry etc for several years. Without his hobbies he and his family would have been homeless. While I'd not want to do auto mechanics as a career it's saved be buckets of cash over a lifetime, ensured I never went without a vehicle and was able to help others who in turn helped me. Life is a team sport and being capable is a fine way to meet other capable, interesting humans.

Citing freedom as a reason to rally against perfectly reasonable common sense legislation is dumb

We, in the US, have PLENTY of sensible common sense laws already passed by legislators...actually probably too many currently.

But why not start enforcing those first...before you start infringing on the rights of people living and using their tools lawfully?