Adding to OP:
Framework: You are self-employed.
Actually, ban evading is creating an alt account to purposely continue post into banned forums or on banned instances.
I addressed this in my comment. You're making up a magic bullshit definition of ban evasion that ignores the intent of the action. Incidentally, this is why I said you seemed like a shithead and 'the moderator' should check you out (IIRC). I expect the reason they didn't ban all users named "Universal Monk" on all instances is some combination of not expecting you failing to understand the purpose of a ban, not wanting to trigger abusable false positives (e.g. if I created a "Universal Monk" account on several separate instances and then spammed CP to get all of your Universal Monk accounts banned, that would be me abusing such a system to inflict a false-positive against you), and not having the tools to do so.
I wasn't "calling you names", I was explaining my personal conclusion after having read your comments and the context. The difference is that calling names is intended to hurt, whereas what I wrote was a frank statement of my conclusion. And I stand by it. I don't remember my exact words (although I'm 99% sure I wrote "seems like a shithead", which is different to calling you a shithead - the former is an observation of how you come across, the latter is a conclusive judgement on your personality) so if you could quote the entire report then I'd be happy to address any specific problems ("calling me names" is broad and vague), but honestly I don't lie to moderators in reports so this is very-much a You problem.
And to reiterate: you are practicing ban evasion. Not on this instance, but on other instances. The fact that you don't (claim to) understand that, is even more damning - it means you don't recognize you're breaking the rules, and therefore will do it again in future.
The fact that someone is ban evading in other communities (and seem to be willfully missing the point of a ban) is a good enough reason to report anyone to a moderator so that they can keep an eye on them or possibly just pre-emptively ban them outright, depending on their moderating philosophy - the point of bans is to curate the community and that means rejecting both bad-faith arguers and rules-lawyers who make the community worse (and to be clear, I don't know which one of those you are but I don't care because both suck). See Well-kept gardens die by pacifism.
And, as I mentioned in my comment above, I've never heard of you before so please kindly do some introspection here - on why a random stranger would conclude "this guy seems like a shithead" in 20 minutes flat just from reading your comments.
Yeah, I want an airship too.
and Chinese companies are not actively bribing EU governments for months
Is the US doing that? What are you referring to?
WTF is going on? What's up with UniversalMonk? I've never heard of him before, or any of this drama.
Okay, I read some of those links he linked and as I understand it this is what's happening: UniversalMonk is creating alts on different instances to evade bans. He then complains that he wasn't notified about his bans, as justification for his ban evasion.
The problem here is that the ban was never about banning his account, the point of a ban is to make someone go away, and either 1) after he was banned he tried to post on his account, failed, and so made a new account on a different instance then posted from the new account (i.e. normal ban evasion), or 2) he was posting from several different accounts and simply switched to a different account to post without even noticing his other account was banned - in which case, yeah, if he's doing the behavior simultaneously across multiple accounts, all that's left to do is ban all of his accounts.
wut
no, it's this
There's only one door, it opens from the front, it's gorgeous. I just wish the door opened upward, instead of sideways.
A side-effect? No. You're just describing climate-safe housing being more valuable. It's always been more valuable.
In a functional market system, higher rents will result in more housing construction in those areas. I'm not delusional enough to think that the housing market is functional, but that's a can of worms that will exist regardless of the climate problems or not.
Or to rephrase a bit: yes, if people all try to move to more climate-safe areas, then we'll need to build more housing in the climate-safe areas for them to move into. Obviously.
Depending on your definition of "possible":
Point 2 and 3 would require major political buy-in (and they're also sort of the same step anyway), which strains the definition of possible. But it's quite financially feasible.
They’re $15k because the government is paying for the rest of the car, they control the lithium, they don’t give a shit about environmental regulations, and they use slave labor to produce these materials and cars.
Hey, maybe it's because:
The industry experts have done teardowns of chinese EVs, and concluded shortcutting and labor abuse alone can't explain the low pricepoint. As shitty as the CCP is, if we don't recognize that China is ahead on EVs then they'll eat our lunch. EU/US tariffs on Chinese EVs won't stop them, because they're selling to the entire world, not just the EU/US. It'll be Harley Davidson all over again (who received protectionist tariffs against japanese motorcycles until Harley Davidson could "catch up" on affordability - and the rest is history).
Even if Chinese labor standards were the problem (and people don't mention that US/EU cars have plenty of Chinese components, made by Chinese workers with Chinese wages - Ford, Tesla etc have ), the result of the tariffs is that they're setting up factories in Mexico (just like Ford/etc) where they'll be bound by the same labor standards as everyone else. And they're still undercutting everyone.
Some places are being hit harder than others. All else being equal, people should move to the places being hit the least.
Okay, counterpoint: If fascists can't produce decent engineers, then why did the US hire the nazi rocket scientists after WW2?