Either from the Tesla factory safety issues you mentioned, or from the MediaMatters / Twitter allegations and lawsuit. Plenty of reasons for him to want people to look elsewhere.
What I find interesting is how many people rush to blame vaccines for this when the easier explanation, occums razor, is that the thing that killed +1m in the US has long term and secondary effects. Could it be the vaccine? Maybe because it isn’t impossible but let’s be reasonable and acknowledge we already know COVID caused blood clots and this is highly likely the culprit. I mean the damn virus was so weird and severe it caused temporary and delayed brain damage in the form of parosmia.
The YouTube issue you describe could be on purpose to limit abuse/gaming of the system. Since we don’t deal in YouTube’s moderation day to day we aren’t privy to the reasoning that feature was never developed. Maybe they did it early on and realized before they released it could be abused to make copies of your YouTube channel with slightly different language optimized for different search terms. Hard to say intent without working on it day to day. Sometimes things are hard on purpose because a small part of the population suck and will abuse a feature.
Yes, that was my point. I know that the current flow is not what I want, but I understand there obviously are reasons I'm not privy to, but then again it looks obvious to me from the outside.... but then again I'm not aware of all the reasons they've done it like that.
The fact there exist reasons something sucks does not make it suck less for the user, even taking into account the user's awareness of these reasons' existence.
Seriously, most billionaires are so fucking boring. Imagine all the interesting things you could do. Most of them just buy homes and yachts. Who’s spending billions on a future tech iron man suit or building a utopia under the sea? Not that those are worthwhile but it would at least be interesting.
That stuff is only interesting if you find it interesting.
I like the idea of an undersea utopia, but I don't think I'd enjoy the reality of funding and developing it enough to want to spend my fortune on it. It sounds like a lot of work and more than a full time job, you can't just throw $100M at your cause and expect it to be done in a way that meets your vision, you need to be there to oversee and guide it and make sure your money is being spent wisely. (a good example is Disney's EPCOT -- Disney's vision was to make it a real living city, after his death it was turned into just another theme park)
A home in the Mediterranean and a yacht sound much more inviting, not to mention less risky than living in an undersea habitat that I just built.
Do you happen to know most billionaires or something? Asking because this summary of "most of them just buy homes and yachts" sounds curiously like one of those straw man POVs.
It’s quite possible that billionaires are doing low-cost, low-profile activities that fly under the radar. But for the expensive ones that leave behind accessible evidence we see them owning sports teams, sailing and yachts and purchasing art.
Most Billionaires are only Billionaires because of the value of the company they own a huge number of shares in, and they’re busy running that company which consumes all their time and energy. They also can’t cash out their shares (or at least not most of them) without risk of losing control of their company, so they don’t actually cash in on their vast wealth. Instead they’re happy to be a Billionaire on paper and “merely” live as a Millionaire.
Edit since I’m getting downvoted: yes the ultra rich can and do live off debt with their stock as collateral, but that gets you to the “merely” living a luxury lifestyle point. It’s not a viable mechanism for funding SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, etc, which is the kind of “interesting stuff” this thread was talking about.
Not really. They just get loans at incredibly low interest rates, using their equity as collateral.
They can deduct dept/interest payments from taxes and never actually have to sell a lot of their stock. That way their wealth can accumulate and they don‘t really generate income. Almost like the tax code is skewed in their favor.
I’m not really familiar with US tax laws tbh. But even if you can’t you would only ever need to liquidate equity to pay the interest. Only those payouts would count as income.
The parent comment was complaining about unequal tax treatment, not about interest rates.
The interest rates aren't particularly important in this concept. Just that you have enough collateral so that you can life off the loan while the collateral appreciates in value, so that you're not forced to sell it.
If you move to Phoenix now and plan to live in your house for 30 years, then you are going to have a bad time because Phoenix will be unlivable if there aren’t drastic measures put in place. 118 is the ceiling now. Not the ceiling forever.
Yes but You'll've always had a bad time because it was always bad. Yet people somehow still live there. So having a "bad time" isn't a reason not to live there.
"Arizona already averages more than 50 dangerous heat days a year, the second highest in the nation. By 2050, Arizona is projected to see almost 80 such days a year."
From 50 days to 80 is the difference between good and bad place to live? No. This is just handwaving nonsense. Not every worsening is a showstopper.
