Maybe, it sounds familiar. But if past trends are any indication, once enough of the market is dominated by EVs, there will be a lot more money to be made by lowering quality to a bare minimum.
And the infrastructure argument still stands in that case.
They haven’t shied away, it is just more profitable to mine outside your borders using slave labour. The fact of it is, with planned obsolescence being the best way to ensure a steady demand of a product, and the environmental destruction required to support the manufacturing and use of EVs, they still are not a solution. They are a market solution which means it is profitable, and a lateral move at best, and a back step at worst.
If EVs help the environment that is secondary.
https://miningwatch.ca/publications/2023/9/6/contemporary-forms-slavery-and-canadian-mining-industry
The criticisms are also that companies use slavery to acquire the materials to make EVs. And they don’t work well in the cold (see current cold snap in Canada), the lifetime of the batteries aren’t great, and we still need to destroy huge swaths of land to create cars, park/store cars, and drive cars.
EVs are only going to save the car industry. To fix it requires a redesign of cities (see Strongtowns, not justbikes, city beautiful, etc.).
No need, the Soviets made a river of natzi blood in the 40’s.
A well thought out response. You got me lol. One day I hope to live up to your intellectual standards.
/s
And what are you going to do about it? Be upset? That sounds like a waste of your time, emotions, and intelligence.
Like I said in another response, I’m sure what happened is mostly true, but the framing is for political purposes. It’s important to be critical of the purpose of an article (to inform? Or to influence?) so you can focus your energy on the politics that you have influence over.
I remember the article. And I’m not saying that didn’t happen, in fact I’m sure the Russian Oligarchs are siphoning tons from the Russian people.
But the fact remains, the article you shared is American propaganda being used to drum up support for more sanctions, or war, or some other purpose, which will just result in American Oligarchs sending Americans and/or their money to places they should never be. There is truth to the article, but the framing is for political purposes.
You want to support oppressed people? Great! You want to denounce a tyrant? Great! You see folks across the Atlantic rising up in revolution against oligarchs? Also great!
But being critical of how the media is presented can go a long way towards supporting the right causes, being upset about things that are worth being upset about, and making sure you don’t waste your energy pushing the agenda of some government which should be minding its own business.
And the working people always suffer, and will always suffer, as long as our representatives don’t represent us.
Good point. North east US.
And you are right they didn’t mention a storm, but that’s not my point. The article title clearly exacerbates the problem, and points the blame in a way that suggests the Russians are either too stupid or too poor to fix the problem. Why should any of us care about such a small thing for one? And two, what is their intention? It’s well known that NYtimes toes the state line when it comes to propaganda against American “enemies” .
Really the only thing useful from the article is:
“20,000 without heat in Russia due to infrastructure failure. Crews working to fix it.”
But then why would anyone care about that?
Lol. I wasn’t showing any support for anyone, just pointing out the clear goal of the article, and especially it’s headline. It’s important to check sources, especially when there is a news article pertaining to your geo-political enemies.
Wow, infrastructure breakdown left 20,000 without heat for a few days? That’s not news. A good storm in the northeast can knock the power system out for days here. Just more mindless propaganda trying to make you think a certain way.
I prefer to only read the top line of a meme then post. And no that’s not a Lemmy user, that’s squidward
I don’t think there is any data to back that up.
1st year econ says something supply demand curve something something price. But that’s not true in practice
Violence is the only option, even if you don’t like it. Ask Nelson Mandela.
Alternatively, like in Canada, have your people become the majority and give them Independence, and forget about the destruction of the natives.
Liberation will never be given to you by your oppressor.
Probably important to point this out: private property is not personal property.
E.g. An apartment building rented to tenants is the landlords private property. They have exclusive rights to the decisions, especially economic ones, regarding the building and the profits of the rent.
A car, book, house, pizza, are all your personal property so long as you don’t owe a lender anything for them.
So no private property might look like:
The people who live in an apartment building own the building collectively and have the full right therein, but the individual units are each their own personal property.
You might not, but the majority of people who know what neoliberalism is would.
A neat thing is no one actually needs to even die to meet the definition of a genocide
The problem with these counts is there is no way of making them look good, like lives saved due to “x”. How many people lived because the Soviets managed to eliminate all famines in their territory after that? A huge feat given their relative frequency beforehand.
And then you can blame countless deaths on capitalism, feudalism, slavery, but then do you normalize those numbers based on total world population?
What about blaming AK-47s? The police?
My point is that it’s a pointless metric that is only used to drum up support against some group of people, not a useful one for objectively understanding anything. It does away with all context, and replaces it with some inane number.
Them: “Gee things are getting bad… The last time the poor were this bad off heads started rolling… How did we avoid that? Ohh yeah! Concessions! What if we SAY we want to give them concessions, and then tell the government not to? That should work!”
-The wealthy leeches, enemies of humanity