gowlerk

Perhaps soon, if you are a qualified investor one of these investments banks will be able to sell you a piece of X. At a loss of course. https://gizmodo.com/pour-one-out-for-banks-invested-in-musk-s-twitter-1850957287

Deploying with no brake setting seems to work well on some tandem canopies.

Is that a fancy name for Dotard?

Sales taxes are a strange thing. Very unpopular to impose. I remember the fuss over Mulrooney modernizing our hidden production tax and replacing it with the very visible GST. I was very much opposed and I was wrong. Resource rich states and Alberta in Canada have no local sales tax and use it as a promotional gimmick. Most western nations have some form of VAT. Can you imagine ever getting one in the USA?

Yes, I'm aware of that. As anyone with any savings or money in a pension fund knows we are all in the game of risking capital. Still, it feels wrong that those with trust funds inherited pay a lower rate than as Warren Buffet claims, his secretary does. This issue is not simple but there is definitely an advantage given to those powerful enough to own politicians.

At a small fraction of the rate for income earned by labour.

Earned income is easy to tax. They set it up that way so the ordinary employee pays the bulk of it. Sales taxes are the next lucrative. Capital gains and wealth are barely touched.

We all know that even without the NPR story. We keep skydiving anyway.

A use tax using information from transponders is likely easy to implement in this kind of vehicle.

Old enough not to be affected by the interest rate increases nor rising sea level. Or....."I'm alright, Jack".

The world is full of stupid. I guess we all have to pick our own battles. I won't go over the arguments here. I'm sure you heard them all and it is off topic anyway.

They need Apple to get involved.

Even more importantly the bulk of R&D is going into EVs. Modern ICEs are pretty impressive compared to not very long ago, but improvements beyond what has been accomplished already are unlikely because there will no longer be enough volume to pay for it. EVs are going to have incremental improvements and of course lowered costs. Time marches forward, a delay is not a step backwards. The future of personal vehicles is clearly BEV for many reasons and carbon emissions are only a part of them. EVs are simply a better technology at this point in time. The only thing holding them back is the massive size of the needed changes to infrastructure. It took several decades for diesel locomotives to completely replace steam power but now steamers are museum pieces. Just like Hemi 'Cudas will be one day.

He probably has a better chance of success going with your assistance than going alone.

Right. In other words he is successfully playing you.

Maybe be careful here. It seems that this time at least he is correct. Several dependable news sources are reporting that major car makers are slowing their EV manufacturing investments. It seems like a case of getting a little ahead of the curve. This doesn't mean the trend is reversing, it just means that in an effort to not be left behind they were a little too aggressive. The fact remains that EVs will dominate because they are better than ICE models in so many ways.

When you consider the enormity of the task, the change over to EVs in personal transportation is gaining steam and happening remarkably quickly. Even so it will probably be well past the end of the decade before they surpass the 50% of sales mark and then even longer until the used market has a lot of availability.

Thunderbirds were last built in 2005, Mustang is what Ford calls one of it's EVs.

My wife has a Tempo 150 from 2001. Yes, I still love her and yes I still repack it for her. Actually I pack several Tempos for a few customers. Including 6 or so 250s in our student rigs. There is no time limit to the airworthiness of nylon parachutes. There may be reasons for you to consider a new reserve, but age is not one of them.

He did it by allowing women, African Americans, and other less worthy people to vote.

Why would you do that? Parachutist is a publication of USPA which does not have anything to do with BASE.

Good timing because at least the US Congress has a speaker now to deal with the needed legislation.

So they rallied around an inexperienced and to them less offensive placeholder instead of a leader. Let the games begin anew.

I would note that many of the swoopers I know personally are also BASE jumpers.

It isn't really a question of how many deaths or injuries a DZO finds acceptable. There are far too many variables and random events in life to make such a determination about almost any activity. The relevant question is what level of personal responsibility and what efforts to reduce the number of injury incidents is the operator willing to take on. Leadership and cost effectiveness are both parts of this equation. USPA and other national bodies are largely run by industry insiders. Either in operations or equipment sales. They are the leaders and so far they seem quite willing to actively promote and profit from HP canopy activity at the level of harm it is now causing. If you don't like it you don't have to participate. I along with many others actively discourage participation in HP disciplines because of the high rates of injury among those attempting to learn it. It is notable that canopy manufactures can charge the highest prices for what are essentially their most dangerous products. And that they are in a serious competition with each other and sponsor athletes in order to promote these products. But skydivers are and have always been risk takers and thrill seekers. We all have to find our own level of risk.