search results matching tag: cali

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (12)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (1)     Comments (124)   

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

ROTFLMFAHS!
The numbers are what they are. Sales down. Prices down. Profits down. Value down. Demand down. Monopoly gone.
Grows at 45%??? Only if you start from the years when it was worth absolutely nothing. Last year they lost over 51% of their value, in the last 18 months they lost even more than 60%, and every metric of future success is looking bad for them today.

A few years ago they had almost 100% of the ev market, with better options just now coming on the market they are already at 50% and are in a market share freefall.

Like I mentioned, Forbes economists all expect further TESLA stock decline, one expects it to reach $25 a share, but you know better. (If profits hold, I say $50 is realistic).

You again pretend you didn’t know that the big 3 spent tens of billions tooling up for ev production lowering their profits while Tesla has drastically slowed expansion (boosting profits) since they can already produce more than twice what they can sell and because their operating capitol has evaporated…and still their profits are shrinking like a shrinkydink in a volcano. 11% buddy. Down to 11% profit margin AND SHRINKING.

Are you saying Tesla stock hasn’t tanked?!? WTF?!? Really, I’ve got to hear this.

Lowered prices why? Because they can’t sell the cars they built. Duh. Also because the large government rebates are ending, making the cars COST more for customers without a price change. You blame covid (which you say isn’t real) but Covid isn’t hurting other manufacturers like Tesla.
I’ve seen plenty of F150 ev’s around…but still no Tesla truck. I see more ev’s on the road from every OTHER manufacturer daily, but the number of Teslas I see has plateaued. I’m in Cali, so I see plenty of ev’s.

Derp. I said clearly I called the TESLA STOCK crash. I told you it was insanely overvalued with a PE near 200. I did not say the stock market would crash, although I did expect a recession late 2020 possibly becoming a depression in 21…Biden’s leadership avoided that. 😂 Your damaged brain can’t stay on topic for two seconds. Jeebus.
The market isn’t tanking, my investments have done well for the last two years…unlike under Trump when I lost money….hand over fist in 2020. But I didn’t put every dime I had in one insanely overpriced inflated bubble stock like you claim you did….of course the economy looks shitty, your stupid investment strategy guaranteed you would lose your shirt.

Truth is, yet again, you can’t follow a short conversation without bending yourself in pretzels and changing subjects. That’s ok, I don’t write these for you. You aren’t capable of comprehension. That’s quite clear.

bobknight33 said:

Clearly you have shit for brains.
Tesla grows at 45%+ YoY
ICE manufacturers have been falling about 7% YoY in growth since late 2017.


You shit for brain takling points:
losing major market share -- ARE you on acid?

FACT they lowered prices 6 times -- thats true. -- Go find why.

FACT that now that they have competition,------ Where in your dreams.Ford GM VW ?? Not even close. by what measure are you using? The bolt is possible but it keeps catching on fire. BYD is the closest.


FACT that I called the crash before it happened -- Lets claim Bull shit. The market is tanking -- Yet to you Biden economy is on fire doing great .. Which is it nutboy?

Truth is, yet again you dont know what you are talking about.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Incorrect, you have for years now undeniably (by honest people) been hell bent on exposing all fantasy Democratic fuckery you either made up or believed without evidence… and hell bent on hiding and denying the 99% of anti democratic fuckery that comes from Republicans.

If there are piles, why can’t you find more than one actual case for every 100 I offer you of Republican death destruction and debauchery?

You spend plenty of time and hatred on your silly fact free replies, that’s self evident in your dishonest often racist, allways hateful posts. Pretend you don’t, it only makes you more dishonest. Better, you completely waste your time posting them here where absolutely no one will be fooled, we all know how silly and dishonest you are. I get the benefit of learning a little something every time I debunk some nonsense propaganda you posted.

I have plenty of time, early retirement debt free is nice, but the posts you refer to are simply replies to your hatred and lies. It’s true, I do hate lies and liars, but I don’t spend much time on you. 5 minutes to research and reply while watching TV more often than not. I know the same takes you an hour, usually without the research part. That’s the advantage of actually knowing things. It’s true though, it still takes longer to debunk the fact free stupid lies you spout than it does to spout them….or would if I didn’t think you type at 15 wpm…and I never just disappear when I’m proven wrong (largely because you’ve never proven me wrong about anything salient, but others have and I’m happy to admit it, even thank them).

The economy ALWAYS does better under Democratic control, always worse under Republicans. Laws always become more draconian, more one sided, and more unfairly applied under Republicans. In my lifetime, business always takes precedence over citizen’s rights, health, or even life under Republicans. Your leader actually called for suspending the constitution because he lost the election…and you STILL ridiculously claim Republicans are better. Just absolutely asinine even from a brain dead slug like yourself.

You watch OAN propaganda and believe all of California is skid row, every bit of it, and nothing can convince you differently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP

If you can find someone to explain these statistics to you, you’ll see California adds >$93k per person to the economy, N Carolina < $64k per person, and Cali is over 15% of Americans economy, N Carolina 3%. I guess MAGA doesn’t like success.
I live in a state with the biggest, most robust economy in America, that more people want to move to than any other state if they can afford it, where there are services for the indigent and mentally unstable and a >$30 billion SURPLUS last year…more than your state’s entire budget.

Red states are going the wrong direction. Consistently more gun violence, far worse economy, worse unemployment (hardly bad thanks to Biden though), more welfare, more draconian laws, less freedoms, fewer rights. The right has drug their populations down like a lead balloon. You like to point to “democratic cities” but hide when it’s pointed out that states make gun laws and red states are MUCH worse.

You are NOT an independent, bob. Why would you lie such a stupid blatant lie? You are HARD CORE MAGA.
You would want that for your state because having more money and freedom are GOOD THINGS….unless you’re MAGA I guess. Derp.

bobknight33 said:

That's because I'm not hell bent on exposing Democrat fuckery.
There are piles of fuckery on the left - If one were to look.

There is more important things to do in life.

You have nothing to do in life except stew in you hatred. This is self evident in you posts.

All one needs to know is that Democrats are more wrong in how America should be run.


You live in a state totally run by democrats and it is going in the wrong direction.

Most cities in the US are Democrats run and also running in the wrong direction.

Why, as an independent. who votes Republican want that for my state?


Somehow you can't see that.

Girl Demands To Be Arrested When Her Best Friend Gets an OWI

newtboy says...

While I agree about not trusting police, I posted many of those videos btw, she wasn’t concerned that something untoward would happen to her friend that she was somehow going to prevent, imo. Those police were being quite professional. She wasn’t going to even see her after their arrest, so they said.
She was drunk and got a crazy idea she wouldn’t let go of is what I saw. She’s definitely not used to hearing “no”.

My argument is people should get the same response male or female, black, white, or green, and that any non white female acting like she was wouldn’t be likely to get off so easily and near consequence free.
Do I think she needed prison for this behavior, no, but do I think she needs 20 hours of community service or probation instead of a small fine daddy will pay, yes. I knew kids that got much much worse than that for just simple alcohol possession/drunkenness as a minor. In Cali when I was a teen they took your license until you were at least 21 for any underage drinking, even if you weren’t driving.
I think in a fair world she would be made to understand she has to live by the same laws we all do by having some consequence, not to expect to get special treatment because she’s (apparently) rich, white, and cute….but I understand that’s unrealistic to expect.

The driver needs some jail time if I understand correctly and she was driving recklessly at what ended up being a .20% bac. That’s sloshed.

Hef said:

Um... what!?
Best I can tell, this young person was just concerned for the wellbeing of her friend, and given the number of videos that we see on the Sift of cops showing that they absolutely cannot be trusted, I think that's fair enough.

If your argument is that it's wrong that her boyfriend would probably get much worse treatment for the same behaviour, then you've phrased it really strangely, but I agree; we need fewer people caught up in the justice system for minor stuff, not more, regardless of gender or race.

Good on the cops in this case for getting the balance right and only charging the idiot who got drunk and endangered others by getting behind the wheel.

Ken Casey of Dropkick Murphys on an epic rant against MAGA

newtboy says...

Nope…and if a tiny victory garden and not wasting gas is all it takes, anyone can do it.
I live in Cali, with high grocery and the highest gas, the closest real grocery store is about 15 miles (there’s a market close, but expensive) and we do just fine on under $40k. My wife works over 30 miles away, she burns near a tank a week, I burn about a tank every 2-3 months.
I can’t understand why others can’t do the same where gas and produce are cheaper. I grew peas, beans, and lettuce on my balcony in an apartment in the Bay Area. Most don’t have such only because no one told them they could, and how. Sad, I taught myself and didn’t find it difficult, only a few failures over 30+ years of growing. I had a few years here when I grew at least one veggie for every letter of the alphabet (I think I didn’t have a q).

Green privileged? I do live in Humboldt, so you could say that.

bobknight33 said:

So you aren't loosing your shirt at the pump or grocery store.

Lucky you.

You are a rich man with your garden. Most dont have such.

You must be Green privileged

Aptera Test Drive

newtboy says...

I believe that’s the case, at least in Cali.
Cheaper insurance too.

TheFreak said:

There should be an Ultra-Light vehicle designation for cars like this so benefits can be directed at them to encourage more adoption. For example, in a lot of cities, motorcycles can travel in the commuter lanes.

Doc Rivers

newtboy says...

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

Luxury Bentley Smashes into Pensioner's Car

newtboy says...

I find it disgusting that maiming two people and leaving them to die (if they had survived, runners rarely check) would get 8 years and fleeing 10, but I don't doubt it.
Depends on the state, but I think convicts with good behavior do less than 1/2 in most cases. Time served is often even better for them, getting 10 days credit for every 4 served in jail awaiting and during trial. In cali, if it's non-violent and under 4 years, you might get parole instantly, our prisons are full to bursting.

Fairbs said:

a guy hit and killed two people in my neighborhood and ran away from the scene; I think he ended up with 18 years which I'd guess he ends up serving half (I really don't know how that works); 10 of the years were for fleeing the scene; I would guess fleeing is pretty common; ties into flight or fight
if I remember correctly, I think he was going either 55 or 65 in a 25

L.A.’s Best Indian Food Is in This Gas Station

StukaFox says...

If you live in the California Bay Area, here's a little secret:

Half-way between Santa Cruz and Half Moon Bay is the little town of Pescadaro. Hidden in the gas station there, across the street from Duarte's Tavern, is a tiny Mexican food place. Like a counter and two tables.

Order the carne asada tacos. They're the best tacos in northern cali.

radx (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

It's pretty horrific to think that this precipitous decline is being measured in reserves in a country with some of the stricter regulations on toxins.

Since you've noticed such a decline in insects where you are, have you noticed a corresponding increase in pill bugs (really crustaceans)? I have here in N Cali

radx said:

The data of the study came out of Germany, where the effects of a change in temperature are much more moderate than in many other areas. Basically, this decline is attributed mostly due to farming, the saturation of everything with pesticides, and, generally speaking, the destruction of the ecosphere. Even worse, this is in a country with comparably extensive regulation on all these matters, unlike, say, India.

As you say, this really is no bueno.

Driving past fields of rapeseed in the late '90s meant a windshield full of bugs. We used to head into the fields wearing yellow shirts just to see who can get the densest armor of bugs. Now, I can walk past the very same fields outside the town I grew up in with less than 5 bugs on a yellow shirt.

Or how about another anecdote: when I grew up, barbecue in my (grand-)parents yard meant paying attention to all the wasps, so that you don't swallow one by accident. I haven't seen a single one over several barbecues this year. Bees and bumblebees are still around, though less plentiful, but wasps are a complete no-show. Haven't seen a hornet in two years.

Terryfold-Rick And Morty-Full Song

Millennial Home Buyer

people are awesome 2015-LED poi-NcCrullex

>250000000 Gal. Of Radioactive Water In Fl. Drinking Water

newtboy says...

Only if it spreads evenly to the entire Florida aquifer instantly.
Local users will see a far less diluted effect than those, say, 300 miles away.
Because there's absolutely no method available to test the water until it's pumped to the surface for use, prudence demands you assume maximum contamination level until proven otherwise.
There's also absolutely no measure of the aquifer itself, how it moves, mixes, flows, etc. The system is mostly unmapped. That means it could (not will) stay in the local area and not be diluted much at all, or could go directly into the main body and be diluted 1000 times per day. There's no way to know until they test the aquifer itself, something they have no way to do at this point, they can only test what they draw off at individual wells, with no knowledge of how they're connected underground.

Also, let's be clear, the 250000000 number comes from the polluter, not some independent measurement. If history is a guide, we can expect that number to rise to > 10 times that amount when independent investigators look into it. (Think BP).

Even in the best case scenario, it's exposing the already short supply of fresh water to more toxins. Just because it might be below the level that would condem your home if found there doesn't make it 'safe' by any means. Radiation exposure is cumulative, low levels over a long time can be as dangerous as high levels over a short time.
IMO, your contention is comparative to me saying 'no problem that I'm putting arsenic in your water, I put in only 1/10 the lethal dose...and arsenic is found in nature, so no harm no foul'. You would still get sick, might die, and would likely have problems and stress the rest of your life. I could still be convicted of attempted murder, and rightly so. I get that this wasn't intentional, but it was foreseeable, so more like manslaughter I suppose....of >an entire county.

EDIT: And you didn't address the orange problem. An orange uses 53 liters of water, and it takes 13-15 oranges to make a liter of juice, for a cumulative dose of 742 times the contaminants if you drink a liter of OJ (based on the assumption that an orange will trap the contaminants, a reasonable assumption). Now, at 742 times the diluted dose, are you going to continue to drink Florida OJ? I'm not....and that sucks, I like OJ. Now I'm going to have to try to grow oranges here on the N coast of Cali if I want them....an impossibility. (although I did grow a pineapple here, another impossibility, so we'll see).

bcglorf said:

If we were talking about whole sale replacement of the waterway with 100% pure waste water from the pond you'd be on point.

The pond in the article held 250 Mgal.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3080/

The stats linked state that Florida groundwater usage in 2005 for drinking purposes alone was 4,242 Mgal per day, and another 2,626 Mgal per day was taken from surface water sources for drinking. So 250 Mgal as a one time release, of water with a very low radiation level already isn't going to hit that hard, nor linger around long enough to concentrate like in your scenarios.

eric3579 (Member Profile)

shagen454 says...

Thanks man,I replied.... I decided that I am going to move to the Sonoran desert, get away from Cali and focus on health, space and money Ayahuasca/DMT definitely influenced that decision. SF/Bay Area/Santa Cruz/Silicon Valley... it's too unwieldy for me to deal with anymore. Shit, is out of control in terms of risk & cost of living.... 15 years, brah, I'm finally off into the wilderness... will be riding my bike across a seemingly infinite wasteland of beauty every day

Progressive Dems To Clinton: This Race isn't Over

newtboy says...

I'm confused, in one paragraph you say the primary is over, but you go on to say it's not really over, it's just really over. If it's not over, it's not over, and FSM damit it's not over yet.
It was pretty improbable that he would win Alaska 82%-18%, but he did. IF he did that well in California, he could get no other vote on the 7th and still win. Improbable, maybe, highly improbable, no, certainly not this election, nothing is.
Even the exit polls have been wrong by well over 35% this year, and they are always more reliable than pre-voting polls. Bernie has HUGE support in California, I've not seen a SINGLE Hillary bumper sticker here in N Cali., despite what the (100% Clinton supporting) media has told you. Sanders winning 53% of California is not even improbable, it's within the margin of error for the polls you mention.

Hammer that message (that Sanders is a FAR better candidate for numerous reasons) into their skulls until the 7th and maybe he'll get enough of California to win...he's absolutely got my vote. Anyone who choses Hillary is rolling the dice on a Trump presidency, THEY are the ones putting us all in danger, not the Sanders supporters. What you absolutely should not be doing is claiming 'it's over so don't even bother trying'. That's simply a lie. Wait until after a nominee is named before saying anything of the sort. That the Clinton campaign has been saying it for months just shows their level of honesty....zero%.

Again, if a Trump presidency is something you fear, you should be shouting for Bernie with all your might right now....it's not over, not by far, and he is CLEARLY far and away the best choice, both for his platform and to defeat Trump.

ChaosEngine said:

We'll have agree to disagree on the merits of Clinton and Trump.

As for the rest....

I haven't been "duped" by the media. The dem primary is over in all but name. Yes, it's not mathematically impossible for Bernie to win, but it's also highly improbable.

I've done the math.

Ignoring the super delegates, Clinton has 1768 vs Bernie's 1494.
There are 714 delegates still up for grabs, so Bernie would need to win 495 of them to be the popular pledged delegate candidate. That means Bernie needs to win 69% of the remaining delegates.

The vast majority(66.6% \m/) of those delegates are in the California primary where Bernie is projected to lose. Even the most optimistic poll has him losing by 2 points. If that happens it is mathematically impossible for him to win. Even if he manages a miracle and wins California by a few points, it's STILL mathematically impossible for him to win. He would have to win at least 53% of the vote in California to even stand a chance.

Finally, you're preaching to the converted. AFAIC, Bernie is so blatantly the obvious choice, I really can't understand why anyone wouldn't vote for him. Well, I can, it's because "boo! SOCIALISM!!! Oh teh noes!", but I find it depressing to accept. I've said before that in a sane political system, you would have a choice between a centre right candidate (Hillary) and Bernie.

And yes, Bernie beats Trump more than Clinton, but the democrats don't seem to have gotten that message.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon