52 karma · joined December 23, 2020
I especially agree that some dams on the Mississippi need to destroyed and have agriculture be moved away from the river, as the dead zone in Gulf of Mexico is caused by upstream agriculture states.
Don't really care much for it.
Overall, as presented by the article, it makes sense limiting who can receive the credit based on income level and car price.
It will create more "working-class" EVs that a middle-class consumer can buy.
If you make more than $100k, you can afford an EV full price, you just need spend your money wisely.
Overall, it seems like a decent that I hope makes it to pass the House.
So I can't really blame a company for taking over a market underserved. They are a symptom of larger changes in the economy and society, that which one SHOULD criticize.
While there is increased competition, it has allowed many writing voices to be heard that would have not been heard pre-internet.
Thanks for the information.
EDIT: Specify the part of the post that bewildered me.
While I can tolerate it, I do agree it is really annoying from a user experience POV.
But renewable can reduce emissions and has been proven to do so.
1) They might need to head into the office for facetime in situations where working abroad does not work.
2) They still have access to amenities they are use to having without paying the price of living downtown.
Gonna miss it when I leave.
Sucks to hear you having that issue.
Weird.
Anyways, I hypothesize that some TV shows from taking place in Iceland brought a lot of attention to the landscape which was capitalized on by the Tourism departement.
Anyways, I find the idea presented in the article really interesting, and I honestly can see this system being used in cities that are "Degrowing" to provide similar services on a slimmer budget, while providing job opportunities for locals, and a new industry for a city to increase income flow.
As a writer, I have a couple stories that I could tell with twine. However, beyond that, I don't really have much use for it.
Which is sad, as it is actually good at what it does.
Personally, I love the contents of the article.
Just wish the editor gave it a better title.
Conflict of belief systems or maybe anomie?