There's a tweet I read that says something along the lines, "as long as any change, despite how beneficial for most poor people will hurt some poor people, it is the progressive position such change is bad. From that the progressive position is keep everything the same."
The irony is of course that poor people disproportionately suffer from car fatalities, so "change" is already being wrought on them by the increasing size of cars and increasingly more expensive and difficult car culture. They just lack the voice (or awareness really) that middle class people who want to protect their position and privilege do, and the latter do not hesitate to use the poor as props whom they otherwise have contempt for the moment they need relief in other areas.
This is overly dismissive of a legitimate concern. Laborers, tradesmen, and people who can only afford a single vehicle that must meet all their needs predominately try to get trucks and SUVs.
Just because you can bike to work does not mean everyone else has the same luxury.
I work construction. at least half of the people on the same jobs as me drive their personal trucks 80km to work, park them until the end of the day, and drive home. Not a single tool in them.
In my neck of the woods the foreman/boss often drive a nice pickup, but he never has anything on the flatbed. The guys actually building drive a Hiace or Sprinter or something like that (company vehicle).
Yeah my girlfriend works construction and drives a Honda Civic. It fits all her tools just fine. On the job she drives a company truck. Still 75% of her coworkers drive their own personal trucks to work. It is more of a cultural thing.
You probably see a ton of trade vehicles with tools in them, you just don't associate them as personal vehicles. Or your project is only subbing out to commercial trade companies.
No, it's because I work in civil construction. "Tools" are brought to site on flatbed trailers or in panel vans. Foremen drive company branded pickups, they move smaller tools around site. Most crew drive their personal vehicles to site as described above, and the only gear they have is a safety vest, boots, and their lunch.
Do they really need a pickup truck? There are so many alternatives to carry around loads which are much lighter. What do you think construction workers and farmers use in Europe?
I can count on one hand the time I have seen someone driving a pickup truck with something actually in the back of the truck -- and it doesn't even make sense to put anything in the back of the truck unless you bring a stepladder with you as well in case you need to retrieve it.
Not to mention that the IRS requires a vehicle to be at least 6000 pounds in order to deprecate for business purposes. Buying anything under 6000 pounds for business means paying more taxes.
Doesn’t look like any of the 2021 F-150s are over 6000 pounds curb weight (1). It’s not particularly close, so I would expect most of the newer model would be under 6000 pounds too (I didn’t easily find the newer brochure)
Curb weight is an irrelevant number, interesting only to calculate payload (which many ignore, albeit at their peril). The number of interest for regulators is Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR), as that's the manufacturer's specification of the heaviest the vehicle can be in as-sold configuration and still drive down the road safely.
Thanks for the clarification. The lowest GVWR among the f150s is about 6010 lbs which makes the IRS' apparently minimum weight make more sense.
> Curb weight is an irrelevant number, interesting only to calculate payload (which many ignore, albeit at their peril).
Not just their peril, also any road users or others nearby. If you've ever seen an overloaded pickup, they tend to drift around their lane as all the extra weight in the back reduces the steering authority on the front. Double so if it's pulling a badly loaded trailer that puts a lot of weight on the hitch
> When your product is so worthless and uncompelling on nearly half customers don't use it and your business model relies on them forgetting they're paying for it, then your industry is DONE.
I think this is the model most commercial gyms operate on.
And with that let me plug the YMCA. It might vary by region, but the ones around here (PNW) are month to month payment, no sign up fees, far larger and cleaner than any LA Fitness or Planet Fitness. All around a wonderful gym option.
After traveling the world a bunch, I've learned that you can travel almost anywhere in the world and not know the language at all, and still get along fine. If you make a genuine effort to be a kind respectful guest/traveler, people all over the world will go out of their way to help you. All the core needs can be expressed universally by humans. A little money and small gifts of course helps to repay kindnesses.
I was traveling with a guide who knew Greek and had visited Mt. Athos at least tens of times. It was very valuable as he knew monks from different monasteries and arranged visas and accommodations. But during my trip I also met few travellers who had arranged everything themselves and didn't speak any Greek. You can stay at a monastery one night without a charge, meals included but I think it's suggested that you book it in advance because some monasteries have limited capacity for pilgrims.
Worth to mention that even some native greeks and russians have hard time understanding the services as russian monasteries are using Church Slavonic [1] and greek monasteries very old version of the Greek.
> Client orders are protected in this scenario by FINRA Rule 5320
That’s front running. It is illegal.
Market making is done at risk. Citadel fills the client’s order at the NBBO out of its own book. It then turns around and sells stock at the best price it can find, which it hopes will be better than NBBO. (It may not!) This is market making and it’s quite legal.
