The last 3 out of 6 total (every one since 2012) have had > 50% of the votes for statehood: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rico_political_status_p.... A fourth, in 1998, lost by only a couple percentage points to a 'none of the above' option.
1,974 karma · joined January 2, 2009
Kindof an interesting pattern here.
Just because anyone can be an engineer, it doesn't follow that we can't form partnerships. I could be wrong, but those doctors and lawyers who are in partnerships don't seem to be using that structure due to lack of employment opportunities under other structures.
Another argument I heard was that partnerships are required in certain fields due to liability concerns so that risk can be contained to individual partners. But this only explains why they must, not why we can't.
It asked why couldn't development firms be organized like how doctors or lawyers often organize themselves, as partnerships with the PMs, etc like nurses or paralegals.
https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/JBR-526
I dropped my everything sub over this and then moved on to vscode once its vim plugin was of equal caliber.
> As Cook notes in his book, the top 10 percent of drinkers account for well over half of the alcohol consumed in any given year.
Also notable from this article:
> "If the top decile somehow could be induced to curb their consumption level to that of the next lower group (the ninth decile), then total ethanol sales would fall by 60 percent."
Also what was French voice phone service billed like back then? Did you have to pay per minute for non-local calls (or all calls, even)?
Excited for when resolution improves. Maybe paired with a keyboard like this: https://www.cbkbd.com/product/eek-keyboard
The reason why they are implementing an EV tax partially based on miles driven is because EVs cause wear and tear on roads, but contribute little to none to those maintenance costs through petrol taxes. This is why plug in hybrids pay a lower tax rate in their policy (as presumably they'd pay at least some via the petrol tax).
I'm not going to argue about whether it would be better to push that all onto legacy ICE users, but something or other will need to be sorted out soonish as they plan to phase out sales of new ICE vehicles by 2030. It will take a while to flush out the existing fleet, but it will increasingly be a problem of who pays for the roads?
Will it just be everyone who is too poor to upgrade? It feels decoupled from the carbon usage to propel the vehicles so you can't just jack the carbon tax without goofing everything else & subsidizing drivers as the electricity is fungible.
Eventually it seems like it will need to just be a road tax & be like registration + some miles & weight & whatever else driven calculation. + then also carbon tax the ICE fuel and the EV juice at whatever it is.
I would be interested in seeing what values of ax+b (a being the rate and b being the standard [+ perhaps only] deduction) would work out to be income neutral to our current convoluted algorithm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablespoon#Traditional_definit...