Miscellaneous news items that don't warrant their own thread

[BDKJMU]

This guy’s company has been rewarded for doing things right all along. Now he’s giving the $3 billion company away to help fight climate change.



https://www.businessinsider.com/patagon ... sis-2022-9

Patagonia Billionaire Who Gave Up Company Skirts $700 Million Tax Hit

Founder Yvon Chouinard structured the transfer of his firm in a way that keeps control within the family and avoids taxes.
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard described his decision to give away the outdoor apparel-maker as his last-ditch effort to do all he could to protect the planet.

The deal is structured in ways that also bring the billionaire other perks, by letting him and his family keep control of Patagonia while shielding them from tax bills that could have totaled hundreds of millions of dollars.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... on-tax-hit

Tax avoidance by the uber rich is only evil when conks do it. When limosuine liberals do it, its noble..

[UNI88]

This guy’s company has been rewarded for doing things right all along. Now he’s giving the $3 billion company away to help fight climate change.



https://www.businessinsider.com/patagon ... sis-2022-9

Patagonia Billionaire Who Gave Up Company Skirts $700 Million Tax Hit

Founder Yvon Chouinard structured the transfer of his firm in a way that keeps control within the family and avoids taxes.
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard described his decision to give away the outdoor apparel-maker as his last-ditch effort to do all he could to protect the planet.

The deal is structured in ways that also bring the billionaire other perks, by letting him and his family keep control of Patagonia while shielding them from tax bills that could have totaled hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... on-tax-hit

So he's not "completely pissing 3 billion away"?

[BDKJMU]

Patagonia Billionaire Who Gave Up Company Skirts $700 Million Tax Hit

Founder Yvon Chouinard structured the transfer of his firm in a way that keeps control within the family and avoids taxes.
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard described his decision to give away the outdoor apparel-maker as his last-ditch effort to do all he could to protect the planet.

The deal is structured in ways that also bring the billionaire other perks, by letting him and his family keep control of Patagonia while shielding them from tax bills that could have totaled hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... on-tax-hit

So he's not "completely pissing 3 billion away"?

I doubt all three billion is being spent on ‘fighting climate change’. Bur whatever portion is being applied to “fighting climate change’ is being pissed away. No different than if he was using stacks of $100s as firewood. Its his $$$ to piss away as he pleases.

[kalm]

Patagonia Billionaire Who Gave Up Company Skirts $700 Million Tax Hit

Founder Yvon Chouinard structured the transfer of his firm in a way that keeps control within the family and avoids taxes.
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard described his decision to give away the outdoor apparel-maker as his last-ditch effort to do all he could to protect the planet.

The deal is structured in ways that also bring the billionaire other perks, by letting him and his family keep control of Patagonia while shielding them from tax bills that could have totaled hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... on-tax-hit

So he's not "completely pissing 3 billion away"?

He’s not. Unless only people who don’t piss away their money should get tax benefits. I think that’s what BDK is suggesting.

[UNI88]

So he's not "completely pissing 3 billion away"?

I doubt all three billion is being spent on ‘fighting climate change’. Bur whatever portion is being applied to “fighting climate change’ is being pissed away. No different than if he was using stacks of $100s as firewood. Its his $$$ to piss away as he pleases.

Why is fighting climate change pissing money away?
- The climate isn't changing.
- The climate is changing but there's nothing humankind can do about it.
- I'll be dead by the time it really matters so who gives a sh!t.
- Something else?

[BDKJMU]

I doubt all three billion is being spent on ‘fighting climate change’. Bur whatever portion is being applied to “fighting climate change’ is being pissed away. No different than if he was using stacks of $100s as firewood. Its his $$$ to piss away as he pleases.

Why is fighting climate change pissing money away?
- The climate isn't changing.
- The climate is changing but there's nothing humankind can do about it.
- I'll be dead by the time it really matters so who gives a sh!t.
- Something else?

All of the 1st 3 answers.

[SeattleGriz]

I doubt all three billion is being spent on ‘fighting climate change’. Bur whatever portion is being applied to “fighting climate change’ is being pissed away. No different than if he was using stacks of $100s as firewood. Its his $$$ to piss away as he pleases.

Why is fighting climate change pissing money away?
- The climate isn't changing.
- The climate is changing but there's nothing humankind can do about it.
- I'll be dead by the time it really matters so who gives a sh!t.
- Something else?

Because we have no clue what the future brings nor how to even budge current climate issues. Start incentivizing the ingenuity of reducing our current usage, clean recycling and innovation AS we move towards the future. Stop cramming that future reality down everyone's throat when we aren't ready. Let us adapt our way there.

[UNI88]

Why is fighting climate change pissing money away?
- The climate isn't changing.
- The climate is changing but there's nothing humankind can do about it.
- I'll be dead by the time it really matters so who gives a sh!t.
- Something else?

Because we have no clue what the future brings nor how to even budge current climate issues. Start incentivizing the ingenuity of reducing our current usage, clean recycling and innovation AS we move towards the future. Stop cramming that future reality down everyone's throat when we aren't ready. Let us adapt our way there.

I agree but what you're proposing (incentivizing the ingenuity of reducing our current usage, clean recycling and innovation) has a cost and according to BDK would be "pissing money away".

I'm not a fan of the Donk approach of government dictating what it expects to happen and then expecting the market and R&D efforts to follow. I'm also not a fan of the Conk approach of pretending that the climate isn't changing or that there's nothing humankind can do about it even if it is.

[GannonFan]

Because we have no clue what the future brings nor how to even budge current climate issues. Start incentivizing the ingenuity of reducing our current usage, clean recycling and innovation AS we move towards the future. Stop cramming that future reality down everyone's throat when we aren't ready. Let us adapt our way there.

I agree but what you're proposing (incentivizing the ingenuity of reducing our current usage, clean recycling and innovation) has a cost and according to BDK would be "pissing money away".

I'm not a fan of the Donk approach of government dictating what it expects to happen and then expecting the market and R&D efforts to follow. I'm also not a fan of the Conk approach of pretending that the climate isn't changing or that there's nothing humankind can do about it even if it is.

The unfortunate reality of climate change, though, is that almost anything we do right now, especially here in the US, will have virtually no impact on the environment for a good 50-100 years, if ever. China is not about to stop building coal-fired power plants, and just with the number of plants they have in the pipeline for the next couple of years will exceed anything we do with our own reductions, even if we achieved net-zero by 2030 (which no one is predicting). And that's just China, there are another 3 billion of people living in countries that will also do whatever they have to to climb out of poverty and they too will build and burn whatever they have to to make that economic step up. If we are serious about making a difference in the climate, not only do we need to figure out for ourselves how to be cleaner, but also how to come up with technology that others around the world can use safely to generate all the electricity the world is going to need. That's the real big step. In the meantime, we need to learn how to adapt to a changing climate for the next century or two.

[kalm]

I agree but what you're proposing (incentivizing the ingenuity of reducing our current usage, clean recycling and innovation) has a cost and according to BDK would be "pissing money away".

I'm not a fan of the Donk approach of government dictating what it expects to happen and then expecting the market and R&D efforts to follow. I'm also not a fan of the Conk approach of pretending that the climate isn't changing or that there's nothing humankind can do about it even if it is.

The unfortunate reality of climate change, though, is that almost anything we do right now, especially here in the US, will have virtually no impact on the environment for a good 50-100 years, if ever. China is not about to stop building coal-fired power plants, and just with the number of plants they have in the pipeline for the next couple of years will exceed anything we do with our own reductions, even if we achieved net-zero by 2030 (which no one is predicting). And that's just China, there are another 3 billion of people living in countries that will also do whatever they have to to climb out of poverty and they too will build and burn whatever they have to to make that economic step up. If we are serious about making a difference in the climate, not only do we need to figure out for ourselves how to be cleaner, but also how to come up with technology that others around the world can use safely to generate all the electricity the world is going to need. That's the real big step. In the meantime, we need to learn how to adapt to a changing climate for the next century or two.

Remember when we used to argue about offshoring and environmental regulation? We are complicit in China’s pollution. It’s everyone’s problem.

[GannonFan]

The unfortunate reality of climate change, though, is that almost anything we do right now, especially here in the US, will have virtually no impact on the environment for a good 50-100 years, if ever. China is not about to stop building coal-fired power plants, and just with the number of plants they have in the pipeline for the next couple of years will exceed anything we do with our own reductions, even if we achieved net-zero by 2030 (which no one is predicting). And that's just China, there are another 3 billion of people living in countries that will also do whatever they have to to climb out of poverty and they too will build and burn whatever they have to to make that economic step up. If we are serious about making a difference in the climate, not only do we need to figure out for ourselves how to be cleaner, but also how to come up with technology that others around the world can use safely to generate all the electricity the world is going to need. That's the real big step. In the meantime, we need to learn how to adapt to a changing climate for the next century or two.

Remember when we used to argue about offshoring and environmental regulation? We are complicit in China’s pollution. It’s everyone’s problem.

And not a problem we are remotely even considering solving. We'll be arguing about electric cars for the next 50 years and never come close to touching this issue. Like I said, start working on how to deal with the changing climate as opposed to preserving status quo. Move away from beachfront property, look for cooler regimes, and for our country, accelerate energy production several years ago (i.e. get the nuclear plants up and running 2x what we have today, with many more to come). Even if we could placate China, we have no plans for the other half of the world after them.

[Winterborn]

Remember when we used to argue about offshoring and environmental regulation? We are complicit in China’s pollution. It’s everyone’s problem.

And not a problem we are remotely even considering solving. We'll be arguing about electric cars for the next 50 years and never come close to touching this issue. Like I said, start working on how to deal with the changing climate as opposed to preserving status quo. Move away from beachfront property, look for cooler regimes, and for our country, accelerate energy production several years ago (i.e. get the nuclear plants up and running 2x what we have today, with many more to come). Even if we could placate China, we have no plans for the other half of the world after them.

The Northern Plains is full.

Try Ohio or maybe Virginia. Better yet, Montana.


Humor aside, the best possible thing we can do is come up with a cheap, efficient power source and spread the tech to the rest of the world. Until that happens, nothing will be accomplished.

[kalm]

Remember when we used to argue about offshoring and environmental regulation? We are complicit in China’s pollution. It’s everyone’s problem.

And not a problem we are remotely even considering solving. We'll be arguing about electric cars for the next 50 years and never come close to touching this issue. Like I said, start working on how to deal with the changing climate as opposed to preserving status quo. Move away from beachfront property, look for cooler regimes, and for our country, accelerate energy production several years ago (i.e. get the nuclear plants up and running 2x what we have today, with many more to come). Even if we could placate China, we have no plans for the other half of the world after them.

Agreed. All on the table. Urban planning, more sustainable ag (avocado toast anyone?), etc.

[kalm]

And not a problem we are remotely even considering solving. We'll be arguing about electric cars for the next 50 years and never come close to touching this issue. Like I said, start working on how to deal with the changing climate as opposed to preserving status quo. Move away from beachfront property, look for cooler regimes, and for our country, accelerate energy production several years ago (i.e. get the nuclear plants up and running 2x what we have today, with many more to come). Even if we could placate China, we have no plans for the other half of the world after them.

The Northern Plains is full.

Try Ohio or maybe Virginia. Better yet, Montana.


Humor aside, the best possible thing we can do is come up with a cheap, efficient power source and spread the tech to the rest of the world. Until that happens, nothing will be accomplished.

I’m going to ship more immigrant workers from Washington down the high line. You’ll be thanked for your contribution.

[Winterborn]

The Northern Plains is full.

Try Ohio or maybe Virginia. Better yet, Montana.


Humor aside, the best possible thing we can do is come up with a cheap, efficient power source and spread the tech to the rest of the world. Until that happens, nothing will be accomplished.

I’m going to ship more immigrant workers from Washington down the high line. You’ll be thanked for your contribution.

Mother Nature is on my side.

[UNI88]

The Northern Plains is full.

Try Ohio or maybe Virginia. Better yet, Montana.

Humor aside, the best possible thing we can do is come up with a cheap, efficient power source and spread the tech to the rest of the world. Until that happens, nothing will be accomplished.

I’m going to ship more immigrant workers from Washington down the high line. You’ll be thanked for your contribution.

What are they going to do? Harvest rocks?

[Winterborn]

I’m going to ship more immigrant workers from Washington down the high line. You’ll be thanked for your contribution.

What are they going to do? Harvest rocks?

Even if every illegal immigrant in the U.S. took a rock we would still have too many.

[SeattleGriz]

Holy shit. Guy's been talking about racist roads for about a year now and he just can't stop, like that's some sort of an achievement.

How about he stop wasting our time until the "racist" road has been replaced. Talk about doing nothing and acting like you actually did something.

[UNI88]

Holy shit. Guy's been talking about racist roads for about a year now and he just can't stop, like that's some sort of an achievement.

How about he stop wasting our time until the "racist" road has been replaced. Talk about doing nothing and acting like you actually did something.

Do you think racism wasn't a factor in where roads were built in the past? That planners wouldn't build roads to create a barrier between white and black neighborhoods? That planners would bend a road around a white neighborhood/community but would put one right through a black neighborhood/community without a second thought? It's not the asphalt, concrete and rebar that's racist.

[SeattleGriz]

Holy shit. Guy's been talking about racist roads for about a year now and he just can't stop, like that's some sort of an achievement.

How about he stop wasting our time until the "racist" road has been replaced. Talk about doing nothing and acting like you actually did something.

Do you think racism wasn't a factor in where roads were built in the past? That planners wouldn't build roads to create a barrier between white and black neighborhoods? That planners would bend a road around a white neighborhood/community but would put one right through a black neighborhood/community without a second thought? It's not the asphalt, concrete and rebar that's racist.

That's not the point. He's been talking about racist bridges and roads for a year. WTF has he been doing in that time? Less talk and more action.

[UNI88]

Do you think racism wasn't a factor in where roads were built in the past? That planners wouldn't build roads to create a barrier between white and black neighborhoods? That planners would bend a road around a white neighborhood/community but would put one right through a black neighborhood/community without a second thought? It's not the asphalt, concrete and rebar that's racist.

That's not the point. He's been talking about racist bridges and roads for a year. WTF has he been doing in that time? It's a year later.

Infrastructure planning and spending takes time.

Can we hold trump to the same standard? He's been telling us the election was stolen for 22 months but has produced no real evidence. Time for him to put up or shut up.

[SeattleGriz]

That's not the point. He's been talking about racist bridges and roads for a year. WTF has he been doing in that time? It's a year later.

Infrastructure planning and spending takes time.

Can we hold trump to the same standard? He's been telling us the election was stolen for 22 months but has produced no real evidence. Time for him to put up or shut up.

Shovel ready jobs!

See, you can't even reply without bringing Trump in. Full blown TDS. If we give you a doll, can you show us where Trump touched you?

[UNI88]

Infrastructure planning and spending takes time.

Can we hold trump to the same standard? He's been telling us the election was stolen for 22 months but has produced no real evidence. Time for him to put up or shut up.

Shovel ready jobs!

See, you can't even reply without bringing Trump in. Full blown TDS. If we give you a doll, can you show us where Trump touched you?

Crying TDS or BDS, the last gasp of the beaten.

[UNI88]

I believe this is called the Cap'n's Gambit ...

[BDKJMU]

Fed circuit court ruling with YUGE implications, as the 5th Circuit rules the opposite of what the 11th Circuit ruled prior.

Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'

A federal appeals court upheld a Texas law on Friday that seeks to curb censorship by social media platforms. The ruling, a major victory for Republicans who charge companies like Twitter and Facebook are limiting free speech, is a step in a major legal battle that could end up at the Supreme Court.

The lawsuit is challenging HB 20, a Texas bill signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott that regulates social media platforms with more than 50 million monthly users, which includes Google, Facebook and Twitter, and says they cannot censor or limit users’ speech based on viewpoint expression.

In his opinion, Federal Judge Andrew S. Oldham of the Fifth Circuit said the platforms argued for "a rather odd inversion of the First Amendment" that "buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’s unenumerated right to muzzle speech."

"Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say," Judge Oldham continued…

….NetChoice, a nonprofit group representing Meta in the challenge against the Texas law, said in a statement they are "disappointed" with the decision. "We remain convinced that when the U.S. Supreme Court hears one of our cases, it will uphold the First Amendment rights of websites, platforms, and apps."

Friday’s ruling created what is known as a "circuit split," since the eleventh circuit struck down a similar social media law in Florida. A circuit split generally increases the likelihood of the Supreme Court taking up a case.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/feder ... r-AA120ukJ