maxerickson

What happens if you avoid conflating cost and price and also assume that pricing is vaguely competitive, rather than cartoonishly favorable to tariffs?

The pre decimal systems were built with lots of prime factors. The divisions were less obvious but arguably more convenient (it's often simpler to separate something into 8ths than 10ths, and so on).

Pretty hilarious that they call enabled by default "opt in".

Did the price of eggs come down because of tariffs or because of increased imports?

Please provide this fact also.

Mislabeled parts is in fact always a bad thing.

Being able to source a non OEM replacement is different than that.

What should they have done differently to prevent a competitor from entering a valuable market?

"Pricing power fell when someone else entered the market" isn't dropping a ball is why I ask.

You are talking as if law is something more than a construct.

Should we be optimistic that current law will be followed? Maybe. Does the existence of the law ensure it? Not at all.

Seems like there are lots of approaches that are technically viable for seasonal storage, hard to work out which one is better cost wise.

Usually the pilot energizes a thermocouple+solenoid that is used to hold the gas valve open, so the valve shuts if the pilot goes out.

There are models that include a battery to reduce the input power requirement. That's not quite the same as the question, but it answers it, you just need a big enough battery and they are fine.

Matches work fine to light burners.

I mean, it is obviously a statement about the likely consequences of a hypothetical action.

They could still have a price limit, paid for by charging a bit more when prices are lower, it doesn't have to be priced directly to the grid to have impact on usage.

A max price guarantee would also give the supplier an incentive to have their planning in order.

The whole gimmick with that supplier was that they exposed their customers more or less directly to grid pricing. You don't need to do that to charge different prices during different parts of the day.

Residential is expensive anyway, larger installations are plenty viable. My town in a northern Michigan is installing solar to help stabilize the rates they offer (I pay about 11 cents per kWh).

You responded to my question about the guy that shits on the floor with a question about a guy who breathes loud. Why would I bother addressing your questions?

To what extent are you pretending to be obtuse?

What's the point of a defense treaty with a partner that has demonstrated itself to be completely untrustworthy? Or would you describe a potential betrayal of Denmark in some other terms?

Also, it's spending rather than funding.

Germany is simply further from the origin of the Maize incident.

I would you my statement about relatively free markets addresses that.

Businesses that expand their licensing agreements with Microsoft aren't doing it because they are being coerced.

You are making the mistake of asserting that the buyer exactly shares your values.

With Windows, I didn't assert that it was the value maximizing case, merely that it benefits both parties. Which it does, mostly likely to the advantage of the buyers.

It's literally everything that people in relatively free markets buy.

Microsoft Windows is a great example that people will get really angry about, but like bubble gum also enriches the producer, seller and buyer.

For gasoline engines, electronic fuel injection is far better than a carburetor, it isn't just the emissions systems.

Sure, it's harder to work on. The trade off there is that you don't have to work on it.

Ready to eat food at larger gas stations has probably replaced some of the cheaper fast food.

Why make 2 stops and all that.

The specifics do matter if your argument is that some actions are a complex response to something and then the specifics are that the actions are stupid and nearly random.

But for example, Venezuelan oil is worth very little to China. It's literally stupid to use violence to prevent them from accessing it.

Meanwhile it's sort of becoming very clear that Venezuela is about Cuba.

In the last 100 years, we managed to prove that cooperation beats competition.

Of course we do have competition, but where it has worked the best, it has been done in the context of cooperation, economic trade that follows norms and laws.

Too bad we gave stupid people power.

The combined margin in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania (which could combine to flip the election) was about 250,000 votes. That's not all that emphatic.

Baader–Meinhof phenomenon.

The fact that it is consistent across vehicles sort of mitigates the problems with it. "Arrow points at fuel door" is not actually hard to remember.

No.

But if someone uses one, it can make sense to illustrate that it doesn't apply as cleanly as they think.