Efficiency and power are not equivalent. All you need to do is look at the most powerful (hp per liter) cars and the exhaust systems they use for proof.
The people were talking about are slapping shitty cat deleted straight pipe exhausts on what are typically engineered to be economy or family cars, or small displacement motorcycle engines. People who don't see the offensively selfish stupidity in tripling or quadrupling the noise output of their mode of transportation just to get an extra 10% power, if that.
They're not running million dollar F1 cars around closed environments dedicated to the purpose.
I hope you can take a step back and understand how wild it is that carrying a plastic card in your pocket for 2 minutes while you exit your building and hand it to pretty much anyone is too "inconvenient" and you'd rather throw away the $$.
Yes. A lot of people are being affected by his poor choices and a lot of people are watching said outcomes play out. This means there will be a significant number of people writing about it.
My anecdotal experience is that none of the ~10 or so pro-Charter School people I know are in the bottom 30% of incomes (even talking about bottom 30% of my network). Most of them reference the curriculum and their objections, whether from religious beliefs, pseudoscience, or similar. Others planned to send their kids to private school anyways and want to save money.
If you know anything about building a house you'll know that; 1) not everything shitty is visible, and 2) not everything shitty can be understood by homeowners, otherwise we'd need no codes/minimums (we'd all be perfect architects/building scientists/craftspeople).
I could get behind removing almost all zoning, but code is just sensible.
Code is an accumulation of things we have learned to make a house last longer and be generally safer. That doesn't mean a house that isn't built to code is less effective as a house. Infact most houses older that 20 years old will no longer be up to the current code.
I have built a house. If somebody is building a house for their self they will make it as safe and sturdy as they are able. Somebody building a house to sell will cut cost wherever possible to make more profit.
I would be fine if building code was administered more like Underwriters Laboratory. Let people build however they want but give the option to certify it is up to the code at the time it was built. Not all homes would be certified but there would be more homes. Over the long run the majority of homes would be certified due to the higher value certification would carry.
Penalizing undesired behavior is much less effective than incentiving the desired behavior.
Bingo. As someone who started a brick and mortar business that is tied to our home, the financial failure would have very real impacts on us, regardless of having an LLC.
That's $2k/year, which works out to $10,230 on a five year loan. Plus the $2k/year savings every year after that when the car is still in service.
It's a classic stock versus flow problem in economics. People irrationally over-weight the pain of a big lump sum, and under rate the pain of ongoing monthly payments. They misevaluate even as they convert a stock into a flow with an auto loan.
Similarly, people underestimate the cost of driving everywhere, when they have already sunk so much into the units investment.
I swear that there's something about cars that turns people's brains off. They are so deeply ingrained into our way of life that we basically refuse to consider costs and alternatives.
As an outsider, I think the conversation went off the rails here when you assumed the OP wasn't "going to connect with the article" based on their comment. This is now the 2nd time w/o reason you're implying that, whereas the OP is talking about general implications of the word choice (on the author and on people in general, not on people's emotional state while reading it).
