Just honestly asking Im not a statistician. From a lay person looking high level this seems weird. The conclusion also does not match up with insurance prices that I've personally seen nor correspond with my experience.
I'm here for discussion not trying to put anyone down. Could someone just explain to me what I'm missing. No need to downvote. So if you take a non random sample of data how can you extrapolate that out so much? Does this data line up with other people's data? What am I missing?
I think a lot of people would disagree with you about X. Objectively he bought the company for $44B and now it's worth $9B that's a huge loss. Most people attribute the decline to his "efficiency" measures. Basically losing all the good talent in his company causing a significant decline in users ( because of quality of service). His running of Twitter I think would be a better example of a failure.
That aside hypothetically even if X was doing well - How would the strategy / approach he used in a public company be good for government. These are two very different places?
A better question would be do you have any examples of him actually creating efficiencies? I don't mean this in a condescending way but he did do a great job with Tesla but basically no where else. Every time he goes out of his wheelhouse it seems to end in disaster? Honestly I don't follow him but it's impossible not to hear about him. So can you elaborate on what his successes were and how'd that translate into making the government more efficient?
Okay a lot going on here and not really a lot of information
First thing I would check is does your motherboard have error lights? Even my computer thats 20 years old has lights that flash in patterns as booting. You use this to find out which part of the booting sequence failed, power, ram, video card, CPU etc. Find out which motherboard you have and find the owners manual. If you have SLI available it's an expensive motherboard and most likely has this feature.
Second, double check everything is plugged into the motherboard, ram all cables etc. Something may have shaken loose?
Might be worth physically inspecting the video card. That you could boot up once makes me think this failed. Maybe a capacitor on the video cap exploded or got knocked off.
Lastly try and take the 1080 out of your girlfriends computer and see if you can boot with that. This would help narrow down issues?
One more thing check if you have an igpu. Something may have failed and the motherboard switched to on board graphics. They'll be extra vga/dvi/HDMI ports on the back. Your lack of video could just be from having your display plugged into the wrong port. So try to hook up into any video out put there.
Also perplexity, chat gpt and Gemini can be helpful in trouble shooting.
Godspeed
That's exactly an instance where this would happen. Since the value of the land itself not what's built on it is valuable in this instance. Look at the value of the land near any ski resort town over the last 10 years.
Okay that kind of makes sense. There is a problem though, well three.
Imagine you live in a small town. Something happens (COVID for instance) and your town becomes popular and your land value goes up. Yesterday your house was worth 100k but now it's worth 500k+. Your saying those people should essentially be forced out of their homes? To be bought up by rich people?
Additionally this means only the super rich would be able to afford homes? This tax would essentially mean only the top 1% could have a home and basically give them a free for all on any land they want. Why would we want that?
Lastly if you increased land tax by that much landlords would have to increase rent prices to offset this? So even with a govt subsidy the renter is still the person paying this increase.
Honestly I'm intrigued by this idea but once you start thinking about how it would work it falls apart. There is probably some variation of this that could work. Maybe in cities they'll be an extratax if you don't build some sort of minimum housing? But this is already pretty similar to just basic property taxes.
I don't understand how would a 100% land tax work? If you own a 300k house you'd have to pay 300k in taxes every year? So basically making housing unaffordable except for the ultra rich?
Also why would anyone build apartments if they weren't going to make a profit? What's the incentive? No one would do anything if they couldn't make money doing it.
If landlords are bad or too expensive why not move, another building another state another lower cost of living area? Agreed rents are super high but that's mostly in dense urban areas. You're paying a premium for location.
I'm really not seeing any honest answers here about how to fix this problem. Besides the government should provide everyone free housing? How would that work how would you decide who gets to live where? Who gets the apartment on the lake vs next to the airport/oil refinery?
Like I get it housing is expensive but I haven't seen anything here that would actually help fix that? Ironically more landlords and more apartments would probably help.
You're not wrong that would help but this is one thing I actually don't mind. Roads and infrastructure costs are paid partially by taxes on gas which electric cars don't use. Electric cars are also worse for roads (ie heavier). Would I prefer to pay less? Yeah duh of course, but at least (for me) this particular increase in cost actually makes sense so doesn't bother me as much. This is common in a lot of states not just Georgia.
This is just sad. Whether she lied about McDonald's or not has no bearing at all on who I will vote for in the coming election. In the grand scheme of things this is meaningless. In fact if this is literally all that can be dug up about Harris it kind of speaks highly of her.
At the end of the day we all lose cause essentially elections are coming down to whoever is the lesser of two evils and not someone you stand behind.
Ok cool 😎
This is not a trolly problem. Insurance companies are companies ir they are designed to maximize profit. That is the problem. The objective of insurance companies is to make a profit not save people's lives.