jack_tripper

You're acting in bad faith now, by trying to draw a parallel on how calling someone clueless (meaning lacking in certain knowledge on the topic) is the same as calling someone stupid which is a blatant insult I did not use.

Or do you mean we shouldn't be allowed to call out people we notice are clueless because it might hurt their feelings and consider it "fulmination"? But then how will they know they might be wrong if nobody dares calls them out ? Isn't this toxic positivity culture and focus on feelings rather than facts, a hidden form of speech suppression, and a main cause in why people stay clueless and wealth inequality increases? Because they grow up in a bubble where their opinions get reinforced and never challenged or criticized because of an arbitrary set of speech rules will get lawyered and twisted against any form of criticism?

Have you seen how John Carmack or Linus Torvalds behaves and talks to people he disagrees with? They'd get banned by HN rules day one.

So I don't really see how my comment broke that rule since there's no fulmination there, no snark, no curmudgeonly, just an observation.

Just like we always have: a world war, and then the economy works amazing for the ones left on top of the rubble pile where they get unionized high wage jobs and amazing retirements at an early age for a few decades, while everyone else will be left toiling away to make stuff for cheap in sweatshops in exchange for currency from the victors who control the global economy and trade routes.

The next time the monopoly board gets flipped will only be a variation of this, but not a complete framework rewrite.

Only if you consider intra-group egalitarianism of tribal hunter gatherer societies. But tribes would constantly go to war with each other in search of expanding to better territories with more resources, and the defeated tribe would have its men killed or enslaved, and the women bred to expand the tribe population.

So you forgot that part that involved all the killing, enslavement and rape, but other than that, yes, the victorious tribes were quite egalitarian.

That was only for a short fraction of human history only lasting in the period between post-WW2 and before globalisation kicked into high gear, but people miss the fact that was only a short exception from the norm, basically a rounding error in terms of the length of human civilisation.

Now, society is reverting back to factory settings of human history, which has always been a feudalist type society of a small elite owning all the wealth and ruling the masses of people by wars, poverty, fear, propaganda and oppression. Now the mechanisms by which that feudalist society is achieved today are different than in the past, but the underlying human framework of greed and consolidation of wealth and power is the same as it was 2000+ years ago, except now the games suck and the bread is mouldy.

The wealth inequality we have today, as bad as it is now, is as best as it will ever be moving forward. It's only gonna get worse each passing day. And despite all the political talks and promises on "fixing" wealth inequality, housing, etc, there's nothing to fix here, since the financial system is working as designed, this is a feature not a bug.

Not just at Microsoft, but it's an entire industry issue. It's not a job most Software companies value, so ambitious people constantly leave for better positions and the jobs constantly get moved around to the cheapest cost center where ownership and knowledge gets lost and quality declines.

To get where you want, you need the venn diagram where what the automakers want, aligns with what consumers want, to align with what the government wants, which isn't happening right now, and it's not something the government can force without massive repercussions. China has had 10+ years of focus exclusively on the EV and battery sector domestically, during good economic times to get to where they are.

And Chinese government can subsidize their industry longer than you can stay solvent, as long as they know they'll bankrupt your industry in the long run and then make you dependent on them for manufacturing. Competing with China can't be done on equal footing because they don't play fair and never had.

I wish my managers would get this. Currently our product shit the fan due to us being understaffed and badly managed due to clueless managers, and what they did was add two more managers to the team to create more meetings and micromanage everrying.

Like your idea sounds good in principle, especially if you're from a country with no automotive jobs, but then what do you do then with tens of thousands of unemployed people of the auto sector being displaced by the Chinese? Will you agree to pay more income taxes to fund the increased unemployment deficits of the others? How do you think those people will vote? What about maintaining some national sovereignty? Shall we just become a vassal state to China on automotive as well?

You can't throw such oversimplified solutions to such complex issues that have very deep ramifications.

If you haven't noticed, the EU economy and jobs market in general is already bad as it is, it won't be able to absorb tens of thousands of unemployed career switchers into to other domains that aren't hiring right now anyway, or if they are hiring, they're very picky due to the increased supply of talent with domain experience.

Currently, the defense sector is absorbing some of the slack of automotive layoffs on the production/manufacturing side in some countries like Germany, but that won't last forever. If peace happens in Ukraine, that will dry out as well as the glut of orders will be scaled back.

But also, Merz is not alone in this, but a lot of Eastern Europe can't afford EVs at current EU prices so the EU has to make some concessions. People in Romania or Bulgaria can't afford to buy a Polestar like people in Netherlands can.

EU leaders needs to account for the massive disparities of purchasing power between places like Nordics and Romania/Bulgaria for example when they make sweeping legislation like that.

Sure it would be nice if all of EU was like Norway with only EVs everywhere, but this way you'd basically be bankrupting and turning against you the people in the poorer countries of the union who are already disproportionately affected by the CoL crisis of the EU, who are effectively paying German energy and grocery prices but at Eastern EU salaries and pensions. This is not sustainable.

Not to mention the disparity in public transportation infrastructure where a car is basically mandatory for commuting outside big cities in place like Romania.

Germany isn't the only economy dependent on the legacy auto sector. France, Italy, Romania, Czechia, Slovakia and Belgium also have a lot of jobs, or had, in the auto industry, before the mass layoff of the last 2-3 years.

And my current EU country would also draft me by force after I applied and got citizenship, which is why I don't do it. Sure, unlike Russia or Ukraine, I wouldn't be sent to fight in a war (for now), but many countries have mandatory conscription for their male citizens.

So there's nothing special or noteworthy about Russia's conscriptions of its own naturalized citizens, especially given its at war, so I don't get the point you were trying to make with that article you shared.

Did you assume that naturalized citizens would somehow be spared obligations of military service just because they weren't born there? That's not how citizenship works.

It's not that they get conscripted that's the problem, it's that people are being chased and violently thrown into vans of the street without any kind of warning or check of conscription status beforehand, Which I argued is proof the government doesn't need any kind of digital ID to oppress you..

There's video evidence of such events online, check X and Telegram. Just because it doesn't happen in the capital and places where tourists like you go to, doesn't mean it's somehow OK or that it's not happening in other regions like villages where it's less likely important people with influence live unlike the capital or large cities.

With the right papers clearing them of draft obligations, sure.

>2. Why single out Ukraine here?

Because this is the best example right now that everyone knows and can somewhat relate to. Unless you happen to know any other western country currently doing this.

That's why I just buy something when I need it or when I think the price is reasonable, because nowadays, if I wait for something to get cheaper like I used to do in the 90s-00s, chances are it's gonna get even more expensive as time passes, not cheaper.

The days when you would wait 6-12 months and get the same thing for 50% off or a new thing with 50% more performance for the same price are over, when there's only one major semiconductor fab making everything, 3 RAM makers, 3 FLASH makers, 2 GPU vendors, 2 CPU vendors, controlling all supply, and I'm competing with datacenters for it.

Because most buys SUVs instead.

>massive pickup trucks, the majority of which are never used for anything more than a commuter vehicle for 1, maybe 2 occupants? Marketing, an arms race, manufacturers not offering much else because their marketing works, Americans being very aspirational about what they'll do with their vehicles, idk.

Not sure why you have this judgmental and holier than though "Europeans better, Americans stupid for buying trucks" stance throughout this conversation. It's not like Europeans are immune to marketing car oversizing with their affinity for SUVs which is why Volvo only makes SUVs for the past 8+ years now.

Austria, central Europe.

>the ones I see while living in one big European city

Except that statistics don't give a damn about what you see in your city. In 2024 54% of vehicles sold in EU are SUVs.[1] And indications point to 2025 being 57% in some months.

Which matches what I see where I live with a lot of Tesla Model Ys and BYD SUVs. Plus, Volvo only makes SUVs, which should tell you why SUVs are becoming majority.

Also matches the purchases I see amongst my acquaintances where their wives push for bigger cars for perceived safety of their family so they all got SUVs.

>it's on the smaller side (e.g. a Renault Captur, not a Escalade 8 wheeled 65ton)

Now you're moving the goalposts to what a SUV is. A Renault Captur is still classified as a SUV, which is what I was talking about. Don't try to spin this around just because European SUVs are smaller than US ones.

[1] https://www.jato.com/resources/media-and-press-releases/euro...

That hasn't been the case here in a long time. SUVs and crossovers are outselling all other categories.