If the only goal is to reduce emissions, your concerns of the production and use of more EVs should absolutely be taken into account. However, I don’t think that should be the only concern when thinking about the ethics of the proposed policy.
If that’s all one wants to consider when evaluating the ethics of the policy in question, then it seems like the “correct” policy.
You seem to have presented a non sequitur based argument.
I wasn’t making any positive claims. I was clarifying the terms of what one might consider “working”. And how we may want to consider how we value people without regard to geopolitical boarders.
You’re defining “work” as Chinese manufactured EVs having less market share. But if that means everyone that buys pays more for an EV and fewer EVs are sold, did it result in the most benefit for American citizens? What about the rest of the world’s population, in which situation is the net benefit greater?
Tarrifs are only a positive in cases where they are conditioned on labor, environmental, and other externalities being priced in and regional subsidies being countered. That seems like the case here.
But I suspect that the threat is being used as a negotiation tactic and China will call the bluff.
I’m not trying to downplay the pollutants from incomplete burning of methane (or other gas) combustion. I’m trying to highlight that it isn’t the only consideration when discussion policy or making personal decisions.
Cooking with an electric heat source will produce an equal amount of pollutants from burning oils and organic matter compared to a gas heat source. But a methane or other gas heat source will produce additional (and different) pollutants. Ventilation is important in both scenarios.
FYI - Cooking indoors on electric power sources also screws indoor air quality anytime any fats or organic matter reaches its smoke point or burns. In fact, relative to the food, the methane heat source isn’t as big a factor.
Nostr seems like it’s set up to allow for unmitigated abuse.
This is an excellent introduction for those that want to try it out.
Are you going to report balances in € now?
Probably not. There are several alternative projects being worked on with varying states of completeness and refinement. But the alternatives all seem to have off set visions for their projects.
That sounds like an opportunity I’d be foolish to turn away.
How do we make it happen?
I could not wrap my head around that game. I feel like I’m placing stones with 60% guesswork. I haven’t played much, but I couldn’t see the difference between good and bad placement.
It would be the difference between paying no taxes to either a) paying taxes on all funds received at regular income tax rates without the benefit of deduction of expenses or b) doing 99% of the work to still need to pay income taxes on net income (revenues less expenses). So if you’re going to do the work, it’s worthwhile to do the additional 1% to get all of the benefits.
Thank you for this comment
Does the NSA need a warrant to purchase information that’s being legally gathered and sold?
The governments in the US shouldn’t be collecting non-public information without a warrant if acquiring that information directly would require a warrant. Seems like a clear infringement of the 4th amendment.
We should look out for all the villagers and reduce the risk of tiger attacks.
Why not use the $9 plan at ghost.org?
Solution? What do they think the problem is?
They’re adding opportunities for new app store sales to replace the functionality being removed.
That’s exactly my point.