You’re right, 50k is the same as 30k, a 5ft tall hood is the same as 2.5ft, 40 mpg is the same as 20 mpg, and getting hit by a pickup is the same as a crosstrek. Look I ride a cargo bike most of the time and am very much fuckcars, but pretending like every since vehicle that isn’t a sedan is equally dangerous and polluting isn’t helpful.

So you’re saying that millions of fragile men are bullied into buying full size trucks and they have no agency whatsoever into their purchase? This is no different than exposing your kids to second hands smoke because you are afraid if you don’t smoke you won’t look cool. I seriously don’t understand why we’re making excuses and coddling these weak egos instead of actually supporting the victims of the violence these people inflict on other road users. I’m more than happy to criticize the regulatory bodies and the manufacturers for failing society as well, but that doesn’t mean the purchasers that make this all possible are innocent. It’s a rotten subculture that needs to be called out at all levels.

There’s a world of difference in pedestrian safety between a RAV4 and a Suburban or F150. Just because they call an e.g. CX30 a crossover doesn’t mean it’s as dangerous as a full size pickup truck. Your affordability argument doesn’t even make any sense - smaller vehicles are cheaper than larger vehicles. If affordability is such an issue why don’t we see more crosstreks? The mental gymnastics to avoid blaming a bunch of fragile dudes for buying ridiculously pickup trucks is absurd.

Americans don’t have the choice not to buy gigantic pickup trucks and SUVs? Gimme a break. I have never bought one, it’s not some kind of one weird trick thing, you just literally don’t fucking buy them and buy something smaller and cheaper instead.

It will still be a dramatic improvement because these packs will be able to hold the max charge that the charger can support for much longer. E.g., a car that can hold 350kW from 0-90 is much better than one that peaks at 350kW for 2 seconds before dropping to 150 or 100kW for 40-90%.

I think you’re conflating two different things. There are a variety of social factors that affect age cohorts differently, and a lot of that comes down to the experience during formative years. We are a product of our environment in many ways, and it’s not nonsense to study and opine on these shared experiences and how they shape us. Class solidarity is an entirely different subject. You likely do have more in common with your social class across generations, but that doesn’t mean you don’t have anything in common with wealthy millennials. I wouldn’t let lazy journalism own the concept of generations itself.

UCI takes a classic approach to racing so that the bikes don’t become the story, and that’s ok. Recumbents are weird, and nobody is stopping you or anyone else from creating a recumbent league. There has already been a gravel UCI WC since 2022 as well. Disc brakes weren’t universally praised immediately either - it took years for the pieces the fall into place, like carbon rims, wider tires, through axles, etc. and now everyone uses them. I really fail to see the harm here over “slow” adoption. You can’t please everyone.

Some of us also are against massive overuse of glyphosate.

They said it was orange corn flour all along, and they have a history of not actually damaging anything but using the appearance of “damage” to make a point. Corn flour is a very simple, inert substance. You’re actually demonstrating the hypocrisy that this group is trying to highlight - more concern over something like corn flour damaging these rocks than the damage done by millions of barrels of crude oil extracted every day. Where’s your outrage over acid/micro plastic in rain that falls on these stone every week? There will be new species of moss that grow on these rocks, or pollen that blows on them from invasive species, possibly damaging them as the climate heats up - are you worried about that? Why can folks summon outrage over something inert that touched a famous rock, but not for destruction of the actual biosphere? If Stonehenge is that fragile, why are people allowed anywhere near it? You’re more than welcome to disagree with them, but if you spend more energy complaining about Just Stop Oil than you do complaining about actual oil companies, you’re actually just supporting the oil companies.

https://professortorberts.com/shop/

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know it wasn’t permanent from the get go.

That’s just the reality of allowing presidents to serve two terms though. There’s an incumbent advantage, so to forgo that for the sake of choice every 4 years for both parties vs 4-8 years for both parties is a tradeoff. It’s just part of the reality of the framework.

I disagree, a vote for Biden is a vote for his whole apparatus - appointments, advisors, the people at EPA trying to regulate PFAS and carbon, etc. I’m happy to support the majority of this coalition because they are doing some good stuff. I don’t understand the need to try and paint Biden voters exclusively as anti-Trumpers, it just serves to gloss over the good that is going on.

Yes. Use stainless steel, cast iron, and carbon steel. You can cook everything with these just as easily once you learn some basic cooking skills.

What does a Roth vs 401k have to do with any of this? I buy index funds in both accounts, nothing to do with company stock programs whatsoever.

Na, relying on individuals to be competent and not distracted is not the logical way to make the system safer. There’s a well established hierarchy of how to design safe systems, and relying on individual expertise is at the bottom right above asking pedestrians to wear helmets to cross the street. We need safer streets, fewer, smaller, slower cars that have automated braking features. We need enforcement of speeding and distracted driving. It’s fucking absurd how many drivers are on their phones. Making folks take a competency test does nothing for this (although I’m also for stricter licensing, but we also need alternatives to driving so people can live normal loves when we take their driving privileges away).

https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/Hierarchy_of_Controls_02.01.23_form_508_2.pdf

Right, but only the first buyer gets to decide what’s produced. So someone buying new dumb pickups every two years is flooding the market with gas guzzlers and this results is much more waste than someone doing the same with Camrys. That’s not the same definition of waste that you used though, but I wanted to chime in because the new car buyers define the future used market.

Saying cars aren’t improving in reliability, safety, and efficiency anymore is a bit of a simplification given the massive upheaval underway as the industry electrifies. BEVs are a massive step change in efficiency. My takeaway is just that shortages during COVID increased prices, coupled with inflation and high interest rates making the payments mind boggingly stupid as people are squeezed financially. I wish it was people driving less and riding ebikes more, but not sure any data points to that.

I’m not trying to convince you, I’m offering a counterpoint to the other 3 people that might read this and otherwise think your strategy goes without question. I just don’t understand how you can support a bunch of progressives that largely, if not exclusively, vote for Biden/Hillary as needed, seemingly agreeing with them in everything except this critical point where they make obviously correct choices to vote for least harm. Why wouldn’t you just listen to their reasoning? What makes you think you’re right on this?

The reason things get shittier is because shitty people like Bush and Trump get elected. The way to defeat them is to actually defeat them, not let them win and hope for a progressive uprising. I don’t see how moving backwards helps you move forwards, that’s all.

Being a Bernie voter isn’t an insult and that was certainly not my intent, I voted for him too in the primaries. But being a Bernie voter/progressive and then completely ignoring his advice to vote for the actual Dem candidate (Hillary/Biden) becuase you have a super secret strategy that involves effectively not voting, is what I would describe as a gibberish strategy. Pretty sure he understands the stakes and strategies much better than you. The game I’m referring to is our highly imperfect first past the post system, and you’re not playing it.

The part I don’t understand is why you some folks feel their vote is so sacred that they can’t compromise for someone like Biden given the stakes. It’s just a vote, I give them out like candy to whoever is better. It’s super simple, it’s not a marriage vow and it doesn’t define you as a human. Real, actual harm will come to our allies with Trump and your thinking implies they’re an acceptable sacrifice. Women are literally dying because Trump appointed 3 dog shit SCOTUS justices. Bernie doesn’t agree with your strategy, AOC doesn’t, but you seem to think you know something special that progressive leadership doesn’t.

I’m guessing you would have/did vote for him though. Good luck with your strategy of not even playing the same game