If you look at places like Reddit where the organizing is happening, they don't differentiate between left-leaning buyers of years past, and in fact call them out for being complicit by not selling their (paid for?) car. It's scorched earth and is not limited to new buyers.
Reddit might not be representative of the larger shift. I am sure there is plenty of hatred, and even violence that makes the news, and that stuff is bad, but I mostly see people politely nudging those they know that own Teslas to sell them.
Which makes sense. The company sold to left-leaning, environmentally conscious buyers, and the CEO has now rebranded Tesla to basically the worst thing for that demographic. Sales are down, resale values are dropping, and insurance rates are rising. And there is no real opportunity on the horizon to save the company and/or the brand (robotaxis without LiDAR..?)
Maybe it looks like scorched earth on reddit, but in reality it's just a lot of people realizing the brand has self-destructed.
It's even more confusing, who are they supposed to sell it to, if no one should drive these cars (and how big of a loss are they expected to take in order to sell it)?
If a foreign government that the US was acting hostile towards was so inclined, they could highly tariff Tesla sales/service and offer buy-outs to make existing owners whole where they simply crush and recycle the cars to deny Tesla any service revenue.
Sounds dramatic (scorched earth! my lord), but the posts I've seen are like, "here's the anti-tesla flyer that was left on my friend's tesla" and then a bunch of upvoted comments replying that it's dumb and counterproductive to target people who bought their teslas years ago.
> It's scorched earth and is not limited to new buyers.
This whole thing is about destroying already bought vehicles to intimidate potential new buyers, and thus lowering future sales. Not that I support the vandalism, but I think that's the kind of logic they are applying here.
Build quality is so bad, those old cars will destroy themselves. Wonder how many of the original 2018 model 3 are still on the road. The other day I saw a comment chastising a person complaining about their 120k Model 3 battery failing and how its already at end of life. I was gobsmacked.
I also see reports of some Tesla making it to 500k miles. Honestly there is so much nonsense on both sides and you can't even trust any numbers coming out of Tesla because they have distorted the truth so many times.
Listen every company will make mistakes at some point in their life. Toyota has earned so much of a reputation of quality over many decades that it has become a meme and is reflected in resale values and insurance rates. Tesla continues to produce sub standard quality and thanks to their actions they have burned their reputation with everyone other than their shareholders so they don't get the benefit of the doubt anymore. How many times are they going to promise this or that and say that they have fixed their quality only to find out they have lied yet again?
Location: Southern California, CA
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: No, but willing to commute/hybrid to SD, OC, and LA markets
Technologies: Enterprise IT infra ops and migrations including the Microsoft stack, networking, hardware, security, and storage
Resume: Email me or https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaydoscher/
Email: jay@doscher.com
I'm recently available after nearly 20 years of Fortune 100 operations, migrations, and project stabilizations at scale. I'm great at running extremely large and complex projects smoothly, and while I've focused on the Microsoft stack during my tenure at Avanade (joint Microsoft/Accenture venture), I am also skilled and knowledgeable with Linux, networking, hardware, and storage. My experience includes over a decade of effectively working with and managing truly global teams across NA, LATAM, EU, and APAC.
My ideal position would be an IT Director lead where I can help a company really scale and apply concepts used by enterprise clients. I've also run sales operations at a very large scale, so I am comfortable and extremely experienced at solutions architecture as well.
When not working, I enjoy cooking and 3d printing, sharing my designs for the latter (some of them have made hackernews!).
I’ll admit to not reading the entire article, but anecdotally fast food prices are within 10% of some table service restaurants here in Southern California. I don’t know if that’s really for or against the law, but calling the bill a huge success or failure depends on cherry picking stats.
In fairness, a number of places I occasionally get take-out from are the same price whether take-out or eat-in. I may prefer to take-out--and any alcohol is probably cheaper--but I don't really view take-out as categorically cheaper. But then I rarely eat at McDonalds.
The problem is the definition of success. Yes, the sector grew and employees made more; but franchisees felt some pain. In fact, I'm sure someone will argue that they had to expand precisely to try and recoup the profit lost to lower margins.
For capital owners, no redistributive policy can ever be a success, by definition.
Their own choice of a time interval to look at (Apr - Oct) looks cherry picked. If you include the next month, it goes from a +1000 job gain to -1200 loss. Overall it looks like the effect on employment at least in the short term is about zero. But it definitely increased cost. So the only winners here are I guess the people whose wages were pushed up by this law, and everyone else is a loser. I wouldn't call this a success, I'd call it a classic california left wing economic shell game.
You claim to refer to choices in the article, yet the content of the article actually bears no resemblance to your post.
> Simply comparing each month’s job growth with the same month the previous year, which avoids the problem of picking a start date, reveals that California’s fast-food sector gained jobs in all but one month since September 2023.
As for who the losers are, the data is quite clear: Mostly corporate profits. The rational response of a corporation when faced with a law that reduces its profits is to lobby against the law and invest in propaganda that disparages the law.
> That doesn’t mean raising the minimum wage had no negative consequences. Reich and his co-author, Denis Sosinsky, found that the higher minimum wage caused menu prices in California fast-food chains to rise by about 3.7 percent. That number is far lower than the “$20 Big Macs” that critics of the law warned of, but it’s still significant at a time when many consumers are deeply upset over the post-pandemic spike in food prices. Even so, Reich points out that this number pales in comparison with the 18 percent raise that the average fast-food worker received because of the new law. (The authors calculated that about 62 percent of the wage increase was absorbed through higher prices, while the rest was likely absorbed by a mix of reduced turnover and, crucially, lower profits for franchisees—hence the massive industry resistance.)
Finally, why a shell game? There is nothing hidden here, there is no con. No money is secretly moved around. Workers have more money. Owners and consumers less (the latter very slightly so).
> As for who the losers are, the data is quite clear: Mostly corporate profits.
Amongst the problems I have with the policy are around reducing profits being presented as something purely beneficial or at no cost, and claiming that we have seen enough to "call it good" within 6 months of implementation. Corporate profits drive investment and investment grows the pie. You won't see these impacts over 6 months but you will see them over 1-5 years. Restaurant closures in response to these policies can take 6 months to few years because the medium/large size franchisees will run a franchise operating at 0 profit for a year or two until the franchise requires capital investment (replace the parking lot, buy a new grill etc) or their financing situation changes against them such that they can't maintain working capital. "20 dollar big mac" is and was unrealistic fanfare, the most likely scenario is languishing for a while.
What we’ve done is change who makes the decision for how to spend a certain amount of money from wealthy investors to fast food workers, right? The thing is, we know that fast food workers are generally not doing too well financially. A surprisingly large portion even need to draw on government assistance like food stamps to get by. Like most poor Americans, we can also expect them to be in a degree of debt. If you give these people a bit more money, you reduce strain on taxpayer-funded assistance, you pay off debts, and you get the added bonus of increasing the quality of life for some people. What I need you to do is explain to me what you expect to gain by having wealthy people invest the money used to achieve these ends. Call me a cynic, but I don’t personally expect the same good to come of it.
From the article: "choosing a start date of either September 2023 (when the law was signed) or April 2024 (when it took effect) would have shown that the number of jobs had risen."
This statement is literally false if you include november.
The whole bit about comparing employment numbers to the corresponding month a year prior doesn't make any sense. One reason is that the law has only been in effect since April and another is that the employment trends in 2023 in fast food restaurants match trends in overall employment which you can look at here:
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/SMS06000000000000001?amp%253...
I suppose arguing over whether this redistributive scheme constitutes a shell game or simply wise governance isn't very interesting.
> This statement is literally false if you include november.
look at other states, they also had a decline in fast food employment from October 2024 to November 2024. E.G. Nebraska had a 0.62% decline and California had a 0.29% decline.
> Their own choice of a time interval to look at (Apr - Oct) looks cherry picked. If you include the next month, it goes from a +1000 job gain to -1200 loss.
I didn't check all states, but most show a decline in fast food employment from Oct to Nov 2024, based on "All Employees: Leisure and Hospitality: Limited-Service Restaurants and Other Eating Places in X" data from St Louis Fed.
Nevada Oct 2024: 65.424 Nov: 65.192 0.35% decline
California Oct 2024: 740.069 Nov: 737.886 0.29% decline
Utah Oct 2024: 69.571 Nov: 69.406 0.23% decline
Nebraska Oct 2024: 37.732 Nov: 37.4999 0.61% decline
They offered several other forms of analysis besides just looking at April - October (for instance comparing each month to the previous year’s month and comparing other states that didn’t change their minimum wage laws.)
As for if it was effective: if the point of the law was to increase the money flowing to fast food workers it managed to increase their wages without decreasing employment, so I think it was pretty clearly a success. Now if that is a worthwhile thing to try to accomplish is completely a matter opinion.
The framework just about fits well with a 13" display in the Pelican iM2200. The challenge with the framework is the USB display, and the all-USBC nature of their board- all solvable problems though. I almost made one and may yet, but these builds take months!
Charging at home easily wins, especially if you have built out your solar accordingly. Many states like CA require a limit of 150% current use as the max for what you can build, but it's just as easy to get the car first. On top of that, the article doesn't mention maintenance. That may not be as much of an issue with a mid-market car like a Toyota, but cars like Tesla have far lower maintenance bills that up-market brands like Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, etc. It's easy to spend $2k/year on maintenance for luxury cars- sometimes far more than that.
I would encourage you to either take a look at the cyberdeck.cafe website or drop into the Discord server- you may be surprised how many different builds there are, and you probably would find the original designer pretty happy to share design files or suggestions.
This comes up in response to this hobby frequently, and the answer is pretty simple- it does whatever you want. There are pretty much an endless variety of cyberdecks, and some are more useful that others. Even the ones that are for different aesthetics go on to inspire specific builds.
I think you're asking the question in good faith, but it's a bit like looking at an Arduino, Raspberry Pi 2040, or Raspberry Pi 4B and asking, "what can these do that an Intel laptop can't do better?"
