And with that guy, make sure you get paid up front. He has an extremely long and well-documented history of abusing the system to not pay contractors, workers, counter-parties, etc...
Look at the NDP party this last term for their true colors. A leader who in his own words votes against a no-confidence vote made up of his very own words. Is an equal partner in every decision the liberal government made this term with their coalition.
A wolf in sheep disguise. I didn't want PP to be the next prime minister for comments in parent of the thread, but who else is going to win this running now?
I guess I'm not sure how you can fully square the two statements here.
- You don't want PP to be PM
- You're angry at the NDP for not voting to bring Trudeau down (and effectively make PP the PM)
I share your frustration with the NDP under Singh. But I'm not sure what alternative he has, tactically. Voting down the government at this juncture would only have led to an election that would have brought PP to power as PM. Which is notably not in the NDP's interests. (Or, I'd argue, the public's)
But, yes, I understand it tactically. But it's strategically inept. For 4 years the NDP has "won the battle but lost the war" -- all the policy planks they forced the Liberals to adopt will simply be dismantled by the conservatives now.
What they were hoping for is some recognition from the public that the progressive moves made by the Liberals in the last parliament were in fact NDP initiatives forced on them. Instead they're just tarred and feathered with the same image that Trudeau has.
Why does everyone have to suffer at the hands of a few?
Overwhelmingly Canadian's wanted the vehicles removed - I recall no public empathy. If not, there would have been overwhelming public outcry and a follow up larger movement protest that would have called for no-confidence motion in that moment.
The disclosure should be outside the phone conversation prior to funds transferring.
Send them to confirmation who should have a process of, we're sending you the email now where you enter you make an account and enter payment details. Stay on the phone with them while they do it to avoid drop off rates. During the account creation is the disclosures.
Has anyone ever been contacted by these companies when they're doing their "research"? They're usually upfront negative about the company, "We believe this company to be a fraud. Con. Disrespectful and evil place.", then they spam every available ex-employee they can scrap from LinkedIn and then the subset that respond are the disgruntled burn the company to the ground kind.
I've seen even employees make factually incorrect statements about their employer because they didn't understand or they wanted to rumour spread.
Saying "this company is bad, we have a short in it" is not a new tactic, and is definitely not market manipulation according to the legal definition. Basically they are saying the market price is incorrect, and this is why they think so.
IANAL, but this is not a new tactic, and plenty of companies who are shorted would have challenged it if it were.
I mean, saying positive things about a company that you've bought shares in is essentially the same thing, and that happens all the time.
Not being a US citizen or living in the US I can still understand how the upcoming president was elected - regardless of how one feels politically about if they should or should not have been.
Reddit has become an extreme echo chamber of a particular ideology to the point I find myself even with agreement on many points leaning the other way out of the exhaustion of the echo chamber. It feels like some amount embrace, get off on the echo chamber and then there are others (myself?) who get so sick of the constant echo chamber end up being just opposed to engaging even in things we normally would support.
It's not a perfect analogy, but it reminds me of kids who left to their own free will, will eat boat loads of candy to the point of being sick of candy and don't want it anymore even though they did/do enjoy candy they're simply maxed out on having it.
Could you possibly read the article you're replying to again?
Even skimming through it discusses the coverage of wind and a not 50/50 system particularly to cover winter & night time. There is also discussion of a ~2% from "other" and how much storage capacity is required.
The article even goes into using wind & solar data for the simulation and reducing further the output to be conservative.
I obviously understand it's not a 100% solar system. If it was you would need to be able to deal with at least 2 weeks of bad weather, not two days, and you would have to take into account winter (dropping to about 5 hours instead of 8).
Additionally, mixing solar and wind is not as easy as it seems, because the two are correlated. If you have a major storm that makes wind energy impossible due to wind speeds above ~100km/h, you will also have clouds making solar energy unworkable. I'm not aware of any simulations modelling a 95+% solar/wind grid for storage needs, taking into account extreme weather patterns, grid topology, and equipment damage, but if you do then please link it.
I don't see any article linked in the comment I replied to. Perhaps you're mixing up two comment chains.
