Kinglink

IF no one has thought of it, has it really been rejected?

with no reason

... If only there was a reason like everyone getting an extra 1000 dollars a month... Oh wait.

Oops I misunderstood the direction. (I think it was if the employee deems they misbehaved. (I assumed "It" was the employee, not SpaceX. More obvious in hindsight I guess, my bad.)

That's kind of the point I was making. (She was the one who didn't get away with it)

"No it'll be so people can go be artists, and be writers and be...."

There are legit people who believe that.

And it's not like this money appears magically the government will need to find ways to pay for this, we still haven't solved that problem but even if we did, we'll see that 1000 doesn't change everyone's situation. Stupid people will still be poor because they spend too much money. The rich will save their money, but the middle class and lower middle won't change much because ultimately, 1000 dollars will eventually be factored into the new price of everything.

more people spending money overall helps the economy

The idea behind this only works IF more people are spending. If Rent jumps that money goes to the landlord, who may (but probably won't) spend the extra money, and it doesn't benefit everyone.

I forget the term, but there's an idea that talks about how many people/businesses touch money. So if you create a dollar into an economy (you can't create money with out causing problems but let's pretend it's magic) if that money goes into a person's bank it's probably a bad thing. If that money goes through 10 people's hands, you're getting taxation on it in every place which is a good thing (for the government). Problem is landlords are usually well off (at least well enough to own more than one property). They might not be "mega rich" but they almost certainly will save that money, rather than spend it.

Besides which stimulus checks are a one time payment... not exactly the same as UBI.

If there was no external stimulus, they would have a slam dunk case. When every gas station jacks the price up 20 cents because the price of oil goes up, it's just the market.

Put 1000 dollars in everyone's pocket, every (smart) landlord will react and change their prices accordingly. That's not "Collusion", and the DoJ will never be able to make a case. That's just landlords paying attention to what happened in the world.

I mean.... isn't that also a legal thing?

If you know insider information that's not public (A company misbehaved being one of them) you are not supposed to trade stock to financially gain from it.

Now that's what you're supposed to do... Politicians have proven that's rules just for peasants, and most stock traders heavily benefit from this type of information, and unless your Martha Stewart for some reason, you get away with it... But my point is legally, if you know they misbehaved, that's immediately insider information?

Edit: I misunderstood the headling/rule. Sorry. Quite a shit thing that granted stock can be revoked, especially after you pay taxes. I wonder how legal it is, because if they can revoke it, is it actually yours and thus do you have to pay taxes on it?

As far as I read/understand, nope. But if it does limit the assistance to 28 miles an hour, that might be required if the bike goes above that speed. (Note: that's only the point where the power would stop assisting, not the fastest speed the bike can do.)

Umm that's not exactly what they're saying.

It would update a 27-year-old law to create three new classes of electric bikes based on the type of motor and how fast they can go.

Hell the ACTUAL statute is just defining what a e-bike is. You can see it here: https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2024r1/Measures/Overview/HB4103

It does say class 1 can be operated by anyone, but 2 and 3 can be limited to 16 and older. Yes that's more restrictive then the past, but really it's "Defining the e-bikes" because they were poorly defined based on an almost hundred year old law.

That being said it does limit the top speed of an e-bike to 28 miles an hour, I assume above that it's now a motocycle, and honestly, that might be a good thing, because at that speed they no will come out of no where (hell at 20-30 miles an hour they still will)

This is hardly as bad as the title.

Do you own a PC?

Do you think you're a gamer?

If the answer is No, and Yes. Then that's interesting otherwise, it's nothing new.

I had a Ps4, and A Xbox One. Now I game on PC. Honestly I'm sick of modern games so I mostly retro game, but a PC is a gaming "console" in that respect.

Heard this two generations straight already.

Maybe PCs. IF Microsoft brings out a cheap and form factor PC instead of a Xbox whatever they call it. And that'd be a good thing. Besides, a Xbox Series X and a PC is about the same thing except less configuration on the console, and that's fine... Microsoft still makes games, they just bring it to PC as well as their console. We should applaud that.

But no, Consoles and PCs will be in gaming as long as people buy millions of them, and the good news is they don't buy millions, they buy HUNDREDS of millions.

And Gen Z continue to buy them too. Because GenZ is 22-38. I hate the phrase but I feel like "OK Boomer" is actually appropriate here.