They didn’t forget: they explictly and knowingly realized they could abuse the checks and balances and there would be no consequences. And they have so far been right.

Yeah those corpos tipping the scales for progressives. Such a thing.

Is a tree connected to its leaves?

Reading the word as ‘um’ or ‘uh’ in a sentence makes it easier to read. I think a proper editor of the commentary would have truncated excessive ‘like’ use as they would a stammer.

Well no one in this chain of comments was saying nuclear is bad and shouldn’t be supported.

There is commentary on the kind of profit motives that result in things like: failed nuclear energy facilities and cobalt slave mining, though.

My guess is: pursuing bipartisanship with the right wing, relentlessly.

While I am inclined to agree: those upfront costs translate directly into time. Time that we don’t necessarily have. Solar and wind are deployable and much less complex of a facility to run overall. For me it isn’t about the best energy producer as it is whichever method gets us of fossil fuels the fastest.

Nuclear has long term capabilities and should be used, don’t get me wrong, but solar and wind are bridges, if you will, to when it can have all the time and money it needs.

Deep blue states can be this way as well. The primaries effectively decide the winner if there is a Republican or else it is a Democrat v Democrat election where its a referendum on the incumbent.

Nuclear disasters vs not producing consistently due to nighttime.

I do find it interesting the method of resource extraction matters for solar components, but rarely any other minerals mined inhumanely for energy.

Like human rights policies are inherent to a solar panel.

Lula’s Brazil had Bolsonaro handled within six months. Banned him from running until 2030 over his January 8th coup attempt in 2023.

The failure to respond in 2021 doomed us all.

Ah maybe it is. It does have that kind of meter to it.

You could defend her?

They learned they love ad revenue more than anything.

Which was nothing new to learn.

I did look into it and yes, it does look like the averaging is done harmonically and not arithmetically. That’s how it cuts the outlier strategy.

So I guess the theory of gaming the system that hard is not as possible or at least mitigated to an effective degree.

Still though, even that they’re using harmonic mean doesn’t deviate to far from the reality this regulation was written by industry.

This is mpg across a product line. Not per vehicle and apparently without regard to production level or pricing. And since it’s an average across a product line an automaker could add a hybrid deluxe version at 300% markup that no one buys and still achieve compliance. Theoretically an automaker could actually worsen fuel economy if they added EV or hybrid versions to the product line.

I can’t even sarcastically joke these standards were written by industry.

Debate perverts, they’re called.

Marginally. The paper analyzes the capabilities as they existed in the 1980s, but doesn’t draw strong conclusions as to why that may be. It does demonstrate how reliance on central planning results in inadequaciea when said central planning is not operating well, though.

The paper doesn’t really mention it but the central planning of the USSR was actively reeling from Brezhnev dying, Andropov dying, and Chernenko either dying or about to die at the time the CIA thing was written. So yeah, correct is an accurate if imprecise way to put it.

I mean they went with a literal cia link.

…Did they just figure this out now?

Dude’s face alone has accounting credentials: https://www.congress.gov/member/brad-sherman/S000344