CmdrShepard42

Supported by the Labour Party's majority, the legislation seeks to create a “smoke-free U.K.” and combat smoking-related deaths.

vaping was much worse

Why?

because people blatantly use them indoors and wherever else they shouldn't

I don't know if that really makes them worse than premature death.

Definitely this. I've been on the receiving end of this and it's awkward especially if they want to see you using it. Even if they don't you'll feel guilty for wanting to get rid if the clutter that you won't be using anyway.

The president can only pardon federal crimes. This is a NY state case AFAIK.

Exactly. Smoking was dying off due to vaping until all these countries got a stick up their ass over it and decided to either outright ban vapes or put ridiculous regulations on them. This is why everyone uses disposables in the US now and toss their lithium batteries in the trash every couple days.

What does this have to do with the discussion?

Initial poster claimed that companies don't want to sell small cars because of greed.

I argued that domestic manufacturers can't build cars as well as the popular Asian brands and even those brands stopped selling small cars here because of low sales.

Person replies to me claiming the real reason why we don't have small cars is because of stock prices and a loophole in CAFE standards that allow "trucks" to get worse mileage and still be in compliance.

I reply stating that Honda and Toyota have to meet these same regulations and financial responsibilities yet they aren't selling small cars either

You reply with some random comment about Toyota and Honda having to sell their cars in more markets therefore it's easier for them to meet efficiency regulations.

???

Condescending, sure, but I don't see how this makes it disengenous, and I'm only responding in-kind to this user who continues to write snarky-ass, passive-aggressive replies rather than writing an actual rebuttal.

Where is that the case? Dumping toxic shit into the water/air and using slave labor is one of the reasons why they can sell their cars so cheaply. This person is trying to claim it's due to rationalization alone.

The point of China subsidizing their industry and their universities isn't so that their people can "buy a new car every year or two" because they're cheap.

Oh yeah?

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2023-china-ev-graveyards/

It's because that way they progress their technology and manufacturing infrastructure so much that no one else can compete. They chase everyone else out of the market, while their companies pull in massive profits and keep the high paying jobs for their citizens.

And you want to unleash that on one of the few remaining manufacturing sectors left in the US?

Well paid workers can buy their own housing without government assistance, but what happened to all those tax benefits the US gov handed out for EVs? They catapulted Musk's wealth, while the workers are nowhere closer to affording an EV, or a home, or even healthcare.

Auto manufacturing workers are mostly all well paid union jobs, but it sounds like you'd rather put those people out of work so that the Chinese government can grab a little more power and influence and you can buy a dirt cheap car.

Musks wealth catapulted because he owns some very successful companies that are valued at/worth a lot of money either privately (SpaceX) or publicly (Tesla) and have nothing to do with EV subsidies. I do know companies like Ford have jacked up their MSRPs to absorb much of these credits, but then it bit them in the ass because sales slowed and they had to reduce prices again. By your logic, every automotive CEO should be amongst the wealthiest people on the planet since they are grifting the government so bad.

It could be the specific audio or video codecs of those files causing the stuttering issues. I've always seemed to have trouble with EAC3 audio even after 6 or 7 years and a multitude of updates and different hardware.

The same profit margins and CAFE standards that companies like Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda have to abide by too? This makes no sense as these companies were outselling domestic maker's cars 5 to 1 in the exact same financial and regulatory environment.

You think European, Japanese, and South Korean automakers are American companies? That's weird.

Do you really think BYD and other Chinese state-owned auto manufacturers have found some secret sauce that nobody else can figure out allowing them to somehow build a car cheaper than anyone else in the world, or do you think it's more likely that the state is paying for them to have artificially low prices?

Furthermore, let's imagine the rest of the world matches these subsidies, what is your end goal here? Are you wanting everyone in the US to dump their old car in a parking lot and go out and buy a new one every year like people used to do with smartphones? That's not exactly good for the environment and is just consumerism on steroids.

Sure, when that rationalization comes with lax environmental regulations and zero worker protections along with heavy subsidies that expire just after their last competitors close up shop. What are you left with then?