They seem to have left out the most interesting part - what does that machine cost?

yeah. I was waiting for at least some kind of portal into the actual engineering and craft of the thing due to the name of the article, and was left with an advertisement flavored sour aftertaste.

What kind of fantasy UN are you imagining? You understand that there are countries in the UN that are explicitly dedicated to the annihilation of other countries, right? How do you envision these countries all working together and WTF would that look like?

Not sure what your point is. This seems like a great way to create another housing option. It is an alternative for those who can't afford the studios or 1BRs (which, BTW, would be a bargain anywhere close to $900).

You can call it (pejoratively) gentrification, but, due simply to demand and not enough houses, there is certainly housing that is not luxe that is quite pricey as well.

$900 for a 1-bdrm in Providence (not between Main St. & Gano) is ...ludicrously expensive historically speaking. Part of that is RI salaries being terrible, and another is that to get a cheaper place you have to live in the shootier neighborhoods on the Westside.

And-I am not complaining about the gentrification; far better a condo in that bldg. than a new McMansion on a greenfield site. I just think the legislation is barely worth the effort.

Is the IRGC wearing burkas to evade detection also a fabrication?

To them, it's like a baby crying.

Wrong place, wrong time. Maybe Iran's rockets are also unarmed.

Why? If you care about the rules based order that we have mostly try to adhere to for decades, all of this is an enormous attack on it.

Is the United States at war or not? What basis is there to sink a frigate leaving a naval wargame exercise? Was it planning to bomb Diego Garcia?

What basis was there to sink several smaller south-american boats in the course of the past months? Alleged drug smuggling, which is not punishable by death afaik, and they still murdered those people.

For a president and party who refuse to declare a war, its paradoxical to claim this is a valid wartime target if there is, in fact, no war...

update on the US death penalty code: Sailing While Iranian is now an offense too

Since the cost was probably split between reduced profit and additional customer cost, it seems pretty impractical to determine who is due a refund - end users or businesses. Or the logistics of refunds to customers.

One possibility would be for businesses to return the fraction of the tariff paid by customers to future customers by offering the items affected with a negative tax until the refund is used up.

> Since the cost was probably split between reduced profit and additional customer

As someone who prices and sells labor and material for a living, nobody ate increased tariffs. They were passed along to the ultimate consumer of the tariffed product. Everyone was facing the same tariffs so they’re all incentivized to pass the cost along, line iteming the tariffs on the invoice would make it abundantly clear. I passed along all increased costs with a note on my proposal that said “Any and all additional tariffs will be paid for by the customer.”

"Since the cost was probably split between reduced profit and additional customer cost…"

Ha ha, that's a good one. I have yet to hear about reduced profits anywhere. Instead, as I said in another comment, I have actual physical receipts with the additional tariff cost (itemized!) in a pile on my workshop (which I'll never see refunded).

If the amounts are under the limit you might sue the company who cut those invoices in small claims court for the amounts of the tariff line items on the invoices.

The invoices give you slam dunk evidence that you paid that amount in tariffs, and the supreme court decision says the payment was illegally collected, so seems like an easy win for you.

> Instead, as I said in another comment, I have actual physical receipts with the additional tariff cost (itemized!) in a pile on my workshop (which I'll never see refunded).

You could ask for a tariff refund from those suppliers.

You're thinking way too much like a programmer

It doesn't need to be a perfect solution, you could just give everyone a flat refund similar to class action payouts.

Well that would seem like a potentially huge mess depending on the size of the purchases. Not to mention that the purchasers are not all easily tracked down. I wasn't suggesting it because it was perfect; I was suggesting it because it might be viable.

Making people spend more money to "save" money is just a sale to increase profits even more.

That's not how capitalism works. Consumers ate the cost. Have you not bought anything in the last year?

Yeah. You're confusing capitalism and how businesses generally work with this particular tariff. Which, based on these comments, was often/always just passed through to customers.

That's what I just said

I know you're being cute, but businesses generally don't pass all the costs of increased COGS on to customers.

Not being cute, being a realist who exists in this world, so take your condescending nickname and go read up on tariffs, will ya, babe.

The Bottom Line: While the goal of a tariff is often to protect domestic industry, the immediate effect is almost always a "consumption tax" paid by the person at the end of the line: you.

So you're backtracking and now are saying that that's how tariffs work; not how capitalism works? Got it.

Pretty sure we are talking about the effect of tariffs in our capitalist economy. Glad you got it.

What do people mean when they say that? Is it just a generic insult or is it something literal?

David Sedaris has a similar hobby:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/shortcuts/2014/jul/31/davi...