• 16 Posts
  • 118 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 2nd, 2024

help-circle







  • There’s no reason EVs have to be heavier forever

    That’s a bit of a stretch, unfortunately. The energy density of batteries is nowhere close to that of gasoline - joule for joule, gasoline weighs about 100 times less than batteries. Also, a fuel tank big enough to give its vehicle a 400 mile range will get lighter over the course of the trip, as the liquid fuel gets converted into polluting gas and exhausted into the atmosphere - batteries don’t get appreciably lighter as you discharge them.

    Agree that 400 miles range with charging stations as ubiquitous as today’s gas stations would help EV adoption. I do worry about the rollout of charging stations being slowed down by competition with expensive and fragile hydrogen tech (keep the hydrogen on boats and trains pls).











  • Delta_V@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldThat's 3 for 3
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    The value of stocks has no direct impact on the volume of currency that exists, and printing literal paper money is only a tiny fraction of the new currency generated by the banking system. The person you replied to is correct. Most new money is created by banks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking

    As banks hold in reserve less than the amount of their deposit liabilities, and because the deposit liabilities are considered money in their own right (see commercial bank money), fractional-reserve banking permits the money supply to grow beyond the amount of the underlying base money originally created by the central bank.

    For example, if banking regulators set the ‘reserve ratio’ at 1:10, and you deposit $1,000 at your bank, then your bank would be able to give out loans worth $10,000. The effect on the volume of currency that exists is the same as if the US Mint printed an additional $9,000.

    One of the problems with that system is that all that money is owed back to the bank + interest. However, there’s not actually enough currency in existence to pay back all the loans + interest, so the banks inevitably get to confiscate people’s property when they default on loans. Remember that the banks invented that money from thin air via fractional reserve lending - now they’ve turned that thin air into physical, tangible wealth at no cost to them.

    Another problem with that system is that big loans - i.e. new currency entering the system - take time for their full inflationary effects to be felt. The “people” who get the big loans can spend the new currency at its full value, but by doing so they put enough new currency into circulation to devalue it via inflation.

    One of the consequences of the fractional reserve lending system is that increasing the ‘reserve ratio’ will decrease the rate of inflation. Less new loans are issued, so less new currency enters the system. The banking lobby does not want this to become common knowledge, for obvious reasons. Federal taxes can be eliminated entirely, and the regulatory effect those taxes would have had on inflation can be substituted by taking it out of the banker’s profits by reducing the amount of new currency the banks are adding to the economy via fractional reserve lending.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_monetary_theory



  • why the hell would Mozilla be obliged to acknowledge this request?

    That’s what I’ve been scratching my head about too. What leverage does Russia have to force them to do this? What consequences could they impose for non-compliance?

    Does Mozilla own property in Russia? Sell it or write it off, then ignore the censorship request.

    Do they have employees who live or have family in Russia? Either fire them or help them move, then ignore the censorship request.

    None of the above? Perhaps it is we who need to fire Mozilla then.