I just assumed he’d flee to Russia and act like a king in exile for the rest of his life. He’d probably conveniently pop up from time to time to spew some pot stirring thing that just hurts the US.

Honestly surprised he hasn’t already, I thought he would flee back in 2021.

Eh, a quick Google search said that Tesla wasn’t profitable for 17 years and survived due to government subsidies and investor funding. After that they’ve been making ~$15 billion per year and sold around 1.3 million cars worldwide per year.

In contrast Toyota sold 10.3 million vehicles and made $61 billion in profit.

As with their 17 years of unprofitable business they are currently more proportionally profitable, but a big portion of that is Musk fanboys and limited supply. If they actually started selling more cars they probably wouldn’t be as proportionally profitable.

Additionally, Tesla is supposedly becoming less profitable due to several factors including not making a new model in 10 years, reports that they fraudulently marketed features (being sneaky with how range is calculated so that the true range is way less than advertised), and Elon’s antics hurting sales. Elon’s antics are a big deal, some people who wanted Teslas before don’t want them anymore because they don’t want to be associated with him (like flying a Gadsden Flag in the mid 2000s vs now).

Elon’s antics don’t stop there, he’s also hurt the investor’s opinion as well. A big reason Tesla’s stock was so high is because people were buying them and not selling them. This caused their price to stay super high, but when Elon bought Twitter he sold a ton of stock. The price was at an all time high over $400 per share, his selling cratered it to ~$115, and is currently around $165. Investors don’t like it when the owner of a company single handedly tanks their investment so the owner can make a bad investment, even more so when the writing on the wall says he’ll sell even more of the stock to fund the bad investment.

Absolutely agree

I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn’t be praising people’s deaths, but I want to point out the cold part

Texas Hill Country loosely covers an area around Fredricksburg Texas with San Antonio and Austin being just on the outskirts. Looking back at the weather reports, and not knowing the exact location, the temperature on 2/10 was a low of 45-65 degrees F. Considering the lows typically come in in the late hours of the night the more realistic temperature was somewhere between 50-75 degrees F.

Also, you can see the picture of the ranch in the article which also says it’s a 900 acre ranch. 900 acres is only 1.4 sq miles. It’s one thing to say a 4 min drive at 35 mph vs walking, but realistically it’s a lot slower speed and thus a lot shorter walk.

January 6th occurred, Trump has been relatively unscathed, and Trump is running again. That’s what has changed since 2019.

If Trump had been fully prosecuted, or had decided not to run Biden likely wouldn’t be running.

The example is the Telluride though? That’s the whole point. Of course any sane person would pick a cheaper car. For that matter why would you ever buy a brand new car?

I definitely agree, but I went with the option which would have the lowest monthly payment. On the other end local rates have a 36 month loan at 6.75%, but that’s $1,800 per month.

I just Googled and the 2024 Telluride has an MSRP of ~$55,000 in my area, used 2023 models are about ~$45,000.

Looking at an auto loan calculator, that’s between $700 and $900 per month with a 96 month 9% auto loan.

Point is, if you can afford the car you’re probably not worrying about the subscription except on principle. If you can afford the car and have principle concerns you’d probably buy a different car.

That’s still going to be a second residence, it may not be a $2500/month residence, but it’s not going to be free.

I think you’re confused by my original reply, I wasn’t saying it should be free or that they could just drive from their primary residence. I was saying that using the cost of DC housing as a reason for higher pay doesn’t make sense when they don’t have to live in DC itself. It’s perfectly reasonable that they may have to have a place outside of DC and commute in.

So, while there isn’t a rule that says specifically “congresspeople may not sleep in their offices”, there are all kinds of rules about what constitutes housing in DC that are not met by congressional offices:

Part of the issue is that you’re applying normal rules to an abnormal group. Traditionally I would agree with you that people shouldn’t sleep in their work offices, but this is hardly the weirdest thing that is normal in Congress. Also it doesn’t really matter if it meets the fire code or DCs building standards, Federal law has priority over local law. Even the DC Fire Code specifically says that it does not apply to any building or premises owned by the US Government.

Heck, there are a ton of special laws which Congress has passed which only apply to Congress, including prohibiting DC local government from charging property tax or income tax on Congressmen. There are even laws regarding allowances that Congressmen get which essentially says that there are quantifiable benefits of the job which cannot be counted as income for taxes.

The only rule that matters is whether Congress has specifically blocked it.

EDIT: I just double checked and the DOB link you sent says at the very top

“The Department of Buildings (DOB) is mandated to ensure public health, safety, and welfare by enforcing property maintenance codes on all residential and non-residential structures in the District of Columbia, excluding federal government buildings.”

They’re not allowed to do that though. Most of them get away with it, but it’s against the rules.

Do you have a source on that, because when I googled it the only thing to come up was Jackie Speier recommending banning it in 2020. There is even a recent Business Insider which talks about Mike Johnson doing it and makes no reference to it being against any rules.

https://www.businessinsider.com/speaker-mike-johnson-sleep-in-his-capitol-hill-office-2023-11

Here is a 2015 NPR article that says there are no rules against it https://www.npr.org/2015/12/26/458207661/meet-the-lawmakers-who-sleep-shower-work-all-on-capitol-hill

From California?

How about Arlington or Alexandria?

I am not fundamentally against giving Congress a pay raise, their last pay raise was in 2009 and it’s probably time to give them a cost of living adjustment. I’m not opposed to giving Congress a pay raise to encourage a wider range or people to run in the hope that we can have better Congressmen. There are Congressmen who come from already expensive areas where $174,000 isn’t a lot (such as AOC) and so they may need more pay. Washington is an expensive place and so are the surrounding areas, there is an argument that they need high pay to run their house in their home state and pay for expenses in DC.

The problem I have is with the argument that paying Congress more would either help eliminate corruption or that Congressmen can make more money working somewhere else.

The first paragraph of arguments is a real discussion and should be solved. Patrick McHenry doesn’t fit that criteria. $174k is a very good wage in his district and a quick search of some public records shows he has owned multiple properties and even owns a separate lake property as well.

So if living very comfortably, almost lavishly in comparison to the people in his district, isn’t enough then what is? What is the lifestyle expectation for a Congressman? I personally don’t think a Congressional job should be about making people wealthy. If this isn’t enough then nothing would be.

I 100% agree, if you’d take a bribe at $174k as a civil servant then you’d take a bribe at any price point. Raising pay doesn’t stop corruption, at best it just raises the price a bit. Trump was supposedly selling pardons for $2 million, he issued 143 pardons (let’s say he was only paid on 10% of those). That’s $28 million in bribes.

If we have to match the bribes to stop corruption then $28 million times 535 members of Congress is $15 billion.

One problem is that they’re legally required to have two residences, one in their district, and another one in DC

They are not required to have a residence in DC, many members of Congress sleep in their offices to save money. There’s nothing saying they couldn’t commute to work.

Also, the House only meets for 4-5 hours, approximately 160 days a year, and they regularly skip sessions.

I’m sure there’s another rule requiring them to have an actual residence in DC as well, not just a PO Box, for example.

This is not true, they don’t have to have a residence in DC. Also, the House only is in session about 4-5 hours per day, ~160 days a year and they aren’t actually required to show up (they might not get reelected if they are skipping but voters rarely actually care)

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2022/house/missed-votes

With that kind of schedule I’d fucking commute or like many congressmen, I’d sleep in my office.

I think that federal wages should be supplemented by state pay to account for high cost of living states and counties.

$175k may not be a high wage in areas of California, but in most parts of the country it’s enough to outright buy a house and live very very well.

California has a cost of living problem

17 does not equal droves

If you’re on desktop and open several videos at once (such as getting home from work/school and opening all the new videos on your subscriptions tab) you really don’t notice.

What I do notice are the ads at the beginning, quarters, middle, and end of a video

I have Windows 10, so things may be different for 11 or whatever version you’re on, but can’t you just uninstall OneDrive without specifically closing it? I feel like that’s what I did when it was default installed.

Weird, you’d think that Google would give them more options than that and allow them to tailor their ads to their audience. I guess this is how google puts forth the minimum effort for the maximum profit. Thanks for the insight.