No oils should be in properly made nicotine vape juice…but there is glycerin that comes from vegetable oil and often still contains oils, propylene glycol that’s not safe to breathe, sugars, formaldehyde, acroline (used in herbicides/damages DNA), unregulated “flavorings” and more, all of which are carcinogenic when heated.
Also, there’s plenty of fly by night nicotine vape juice makers that use whatever smokes, including massage oil in some cases.

The only way to be SURE what’s in it is to make your own from ingredients you either produce or vet well. Don’t buy it by the gallon on eBay or Craigslist.

As I mentioned above, I vape live rosen, which has zero additives and is simply heat pressed from fresh flowers. I’m not saying that’s healthy, but it is free of all carcinogenic man made chemical adulterants unlike ANY nicotine or most cannabis juices, and free of nearly all cellulose unlike plain tobacco or marijuana.

Your video, Meet Your Maker - Trailer, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

But isn't it kind of ironic that it's probably Americans (or at least its media) that's MORE enamored of royalty than people of countries that actually do have ceremonial monarchies?

You have your Queen B, GOATs real or imaginary, all the Yas Queens that Americans in general treat BETTER than actual royalty. Yes I know, the difference is talent instead of hereditary. But it's still a sort of human worship. The MAGA crowd elevate Trump to God-like level of royalty in terms of devotion for whatever f**k they believe.

There's not much a difference to me in terms of rationality.

Besides, the British monarch as a net money maker for the government. Bringing over 1 billion BP per "normal" (read: non-Covid lockdowns) year while costing a little over 100 millions supporting the Monarchy per year on average, from merch & tourism dollars the Firm brings into the government's coffer. It's more a Win to keep them than abolish the Firm... still. After Queen Elizabeth II's death... we'll see.

I think Tesla does some innovative stuff - like using the worlds largest metallic moulds (built by some Italian company if I recall, which make those exclusively for Tesla). But ultimately Elon is a "hype man", and most of his promises have fallen flat (check out Thunderf00t's youtube channel - he debunks many scammy startups as well as Elon's claims, using high school chemistry and physics).

I do applaud Tesla for opening additional factories in Germany and China so quickly, but exponential growth (for any EV maker) is impossible - there's simply not enough easy-to-mine lithium in the world. (Maybe Elon is planning to mine some asteroids instead of going to Mars? who knows)

The GM battery tech isn't exciting or sexy, but it is a means to building a more affordable EV. Ford is already shipping F-150 Lightning (assuming its not affected by the same contactor recall as the Mach-E). Rivian has been (slowly) shipping trucks.
Where's the CyberTruck? I bet even the electric Silverado will start shipping before the CyberTruck.

Lol.

Tell that to the makers of “a scanner darkly”.

This wasn’t a color corrected crop of a still photo, it was a complete change of a short film.

Technically any digital photo is cgi, but that’s a red herring…this was digitally altered video, a much higher bar.

If the term is so meaningless, why argue against it?

You exaggerate to the point of hyperbole, which indicates you know you’re wrong. This argument isn’t about any still image ever digitized, it’s about a video digitally altered so much that it no longer resembles the original. Just because it’s a simple process doesn’t change that it’s an image generated by a computer.

"The car-maker’s share price has cratered since Musk announced his buyout plan, shedding more than 30 percent of its value over the course of a month."

https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/25/23141940/elon-musk-tesla-twitter-margin-loan-buyout-deal

You're right about it being a relatively good time to buy the stock (always buy on bad news) but last I checked, you seemed keen around here https://videosift.com/video/Why-I-8482-m-ALL-IN-On-Tesla-Stock


At the very least, unless you bought stock in Tesla before Dec 2020 - OR - very specifically the month of June 2021, you're in the Red. At worst, you're down 30%.

But you're right, it IS a great time to buy that stock...because it's doing so amazingly fucking incredibly poorly. However, what's the stock gonna do when the S.E.C. comes ah-huntin for them shady deals that Musk seems to be runnin by acting like a lunatic in thinly veiled price manipulation schemes???

One maxim i've found true, rich people get mad when you mess with their money. They even get mad when other rich people do it.

About your brain damage, how exactly is it joe biden's fault? EXACTLY?

Not smart for some/ most, agreed. Most people let some one else manage their $. Most people don't watch day to day.

I've been buying stocks for last 20 years. Took a lot of lumps. My main goal was to not to loose my shirt. A lot of lessons learned, mainly what not to do.

Main lesson learned was to find a Amazon.Target, Starbucks or Apple just as they become trendy. If you had bought and hold any of these for the last 10 years, you would be doing just fine. Tesla fits this model. Its 20 years old and finally over last 2 really planted its stake permanently as a auto maker. They are the EV leader.

That being said Tesla is easy to follow and see. There is enough active YouTube channels people reporting daily from around the world on Tesla. A person can fully understand this business and what is going on.

Other companies are more secretive and also no one really cares.


My final thought is this. IMO Tesla is at the same point as when Steve jobs introduced the iPhone in 2006.

Dont you wish you loaded up on apple back in 2006 @ $7 bucks a share? Apple close Friday was $168.

Its about the long game.

So, time to end the subsidies and tax breaks for Tesla then. No more government handouts for them.

They’re not going to be so dominant when actual competition is available, coming soon from every maker. (High demand, low inventory, double sticker price gas cars aren’t a fair comparison.).
They also wouldn’t be so profitable if they paid taxes.

It was not a good move to program the self driving unit to run stop signs. (Yes, they programmed it to just “rolling stop” at stop signs recently which is not just illegal it’s also dangerous.). That’s the kind of upgrade you get with Tesla, without warning. How many recalls now?

Also not a good move for Elon to admit he’s far right, pro corporate subsidy, anti tax. It alienates most of his customers.

projecting is what Democrats do.

IQ less that 90? Tested decades ago but it was 124
Find a Engineer with IQ less that 90.

Biden Economy is doing great. Would be better if lock downs were eliminated.
We can thank Trump for it due to the tax cuts which stimulated strong growth. Democrats wold raise they if they could and then we could go back to the appalling 1.5 20% GDP rate under OBAMA.


Biden and the Democrat party are so out of step with what Americans want that they will get a beat down in the mid terms. Do yo not see this coming?

Even main stream media is coming to this conclusion. And they carry the Democrat water day in day out.

Tesla not in a bubble. They will crush legacy auto makers this decade.
They are gowning 20% qtr/qtr and 70% YoY .

I have about 1400 shares and have no plans to sell for 5 years or so.


.

This comment is only for people with a dark sense of humour. I apologise in advance.

For a popcorn theme they could probably have put in a popcorn maker and holes in the sides of the buildings. That way as the corn pops, the little popcorn people jump out.

It took me an hour to click 'submit' on this.

Kind of, but the head of department is morally and ethically obligated to make note of the subordinate who made the actual discovery or breakthrough and usually shares the prize at least if it doesn’t go directly to the discovery maker alone. This is especially true when the head misinterprets and discards the data and denies any discovery was made until the discoverer, on their own, forms a hypothesis, tests it, and repeats it, all without the head of department’s involvement.

In this case, one person made the discovery and the department head dismissed it, then that subordinate on her own continued her investigation and formed her own hypothesis, tested and verified it, and only then her department head became convinced, then took ALL credit for the discovery with no mention of her. That is NOT how scientific teams work.

This wasn’t just her discovery, she figured out what it was too…her hypothesis and her testing, her repeating the discovery, almost certainly her writing it up. If she were a man, she definitely would have gotten credit for both the discovery and the hypothesis, and for confirming her hypothesis. She might not have been given the “prize” individually, but she would have definitely gotten the credit and shared in the accolades. (I think a male in the same position would have shared the prize at a minimum, and had the department head claimed credit as they did here, would have publicly disgraced the department head by proving they not only had nothing to do with the discovery, they had dismissed it when shown and added nothing at all to the hypothesis or testing it, and they would have been drummed out of the scientific community for plagiarism and theft of intellectual property).

When he dismissed her findings completely, he removed himself from the discovery and she became group leader of her own separate project. She deserves both prizes, both monetary awards, a public apology from the man who stole her work without giving her credit, and a serious civil judgement against him for any bonus, advancement, raise, accolades, or paid engagements he received based on his lie that he discovered pulsars. That’s her money that he stole.

Your video, Car makers sue to UNDO Right to Repair in Massachusetts, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

You are projecting.

Marriage takes the honesty away from a relationship.
It's no longer me and you.
It's me and you and uncle sam.
I want *consensual* relations where me and my partner set our rules, not some 3rd party, and not when the rules are stacked against me.

Congratulations to your brother. Lucky him.

I never said women don't work.

I said that men make more personal sacrifices for their work - a true statement about men as a group. Exceptions don't alter the rule.

Yes, women under 35 out earn men now. And as legacy earners retire, we will be facing a situation where women out earn men at any age. Preferential admittance and hiring tend to have that effect. It's by design.

And women don't get paid less for the same work - the studies saying that don't account for hours worked and don't provide any breakdown of job title. E.g. Women doctors get paid less - because the type of doctor they choose to be is more likely to be a pediatrician than a heart surgeon or anesthesiologist. But within each category of doctor, per hour worked, and per year experience, their income is essentially identical.

And you don't need to be a home maker to get paid in a divorce. Just make less than your partner.
Historically the divorce rewards scale higher for women given mirror situations.

Why would I want to deal with a 50/50 split when I brought 90% of the assets into the marriage? A 50/50 split would set me back decades. I just want to keep my stuff, I did pay for it after all, which cost me money, which cost me time, which cost me life.

And why should /anyone/ have their life supported by anyone else?
(*context=spouses. Not interested in some bad faith out of context argument bringing up children or retirees supported by taxes, etc)
Are you able bodied? Then get working.
Is it tough? Too bad.
It's harder for both people supporting themselves alone, you aren't special. You were in this situation before you got married, you can go back to it.

In any case, the homemaker job argument is senseless. There are benefits (time with kids), and there are pitfalls (hole in your resume). You make your choice, and you deal with the consequences.
You are paid by the home over your head and the money you're given while you are a home maker. What other job do you get to leave and still be paid. People act as if the working partner was just chilling this whole time. Where are the working partner's continuing post divorce benefits?


I have no mindset about women. More projection.
I couldn't care less if I marry a stripper with 2 kids - so long as in the event of a divorce we go our separate ways with ZERO obligations to one another.

I have a mindset about the dangers of divorce, and the fact that most marriages end in divorce, and most divorces are initiated by the female partner.
I am on average more likely than not to face a divorce.
Hence the risk reduction by being more 'picky'.


I am in a nearly 20 year happy relationship - unmarried.
She's the boss of the relationship. And I'm fine with that because I *consent* to it. I can always walk away if I decide otherwise.

So long as laws and family court are how they are, I won't even consider marriage.

-scheherazade

Not sure what you point is.

Media is mess largely because of GE buying NBC. Before this news was a public service paid for from other program profits. News was not a money maker. When GE bought NBC GE argued that news should also a money making show.
News slowly morphed into the mess we have today.

And to you comments. FOX is 1 right leaning VS 6+ all late night + all Hollywood left pushing media. So who did this hurt most?

MEGA Job maker.

Next 4 years will be even better.