Just need to vent...

I'm pretty sure that I was talking about PHEVs that have a minimum range per charge requirement in order to be marketed here in the far future.

But I could be wrong.

 

BEV was in the post.

 

So who should make the rules on technical matters? Some bureaucrats with many years of experience in the field or some elected/appointed politicians/judges?

I worked with many state, tribal and federal employees over several decades and found them thinking little of politics and generally trying to do a good job. I also found the opposite once you got to the political appointee levels within the government. (After Navy service, I went to work for a large stockholder owned firm and never again worked for the government. 37 years)

"unelected, unaccountable" is such an easy slogan. Worse to me is "elected, self interested, politically biased".

I recall a congressman telling me how many hours a week he had to spend fundraising starting the day after he was elected. Think he would be the right person to get into the details or would it be better for him to be limited to voting on a general direction and leaving the details to knowledgeable folk who can devote time and attention and expertise to the matter.

And ask a congresscritter how much of any bill is written by lobbyists because congressional staffs are so limited and have so much political experience as opposed to subject matter experience.

64 years around DC.

 

If the proposed ev mandates were put on a ballot it would be better imo. I don't know if that has happened yet. Put a law that enforces sound volume too on a ballot. There are already laws but not enforced.

 

That isn't what Priuschat showed me then, and still shows me:

I'm not seeing a government-mandated minimum range for a BEV anywhere.

Just a minimum EV range that a PHEV needs in order to gain an exemption from clearly-not-arbitary ban on future gasoline cars.

 

Sorry guys. Not at my best. I'm the first in my branch of the family tree to come down with covid and had to travel 500 miles to catch it from my mom. Carma Sucks.

 

CARB is at least...

Elected politicians, flawed though they may be, are at least held accountable in some cases.....
If they hire stoopid advisors, that write stupid rules there's at least a chance that they can be ousted by the voters.

I know, right?

See also:
Democracy.
THE most horrible form of governance yet devised....(except for all of the others.)

 

The way the kids now shorten 'conspiracy theory' to just 'conspiracy'.

"Naw, can't fool me with that, it's just a conspiracy."

Every now and then, people still do collaborate on doing some crime. Still need to be able to use the word for that....

 

Some grammar is really pathetic. My most hated is irregardless.
It's actually saying the opposite of what it means. I felt so Vindicated decades ago in a constitutional Law class where some poor slob stands up to brief a case and he used that word. Professor Black chops him down in mid sentence saying, "There's no such word!"
Ahhhh ...
I needed a smoke, & I've never smoked.

.

 

I'm mostly ok with that, but have to vent when it means losing a word and maybe the whole concept the word means. Once everybody is used to dismissing things as "just a conspiracy", how does anybody talk about one when it happens?

I haven't noticed the same problem with semi-trailer truck becoming semi. We can still talk about the things and know what we mean.

I once bought aftermarket wheel covers for a Mazda I had, and it really had holes in it for the studs and was secured by the nuts. I was just in time to stop a guy at a tire shop once from trying to just pry it off, thinking they were faux nuts.

 

I think you are raising the idea of this being discussed in a social setting, And, I don't think it would be that much of a challenge:

"Oh hey... this one conspiracy... it's not like the others. Remember how 'conspiracy' really means 'conspiracy theory?'" And there's your branch.

That isn't even the only way to differentiate one 'conspiracy' from another- there would be organic ways as well. Enough surface area that there would be a way to attach to it conversationally, I'm willing to bet.

Conspiracies are so Ohio.

Rizz skibidi...

 

Conspiracies ..... At the root of the word, a conspiracy is when people conspire (ie; a joint effort) to do something bad, illegal, imoral, improper, harmful etc. Hillary's paid for Steele dossier comes to mind.
"Bearing false witness" in the Old Testament was punished by the same harm the false testimony did to another. If it was to grab another's property, you lose your property. If it was wrongfully blaming another for a murder? You get the death penalty.
These penalties still didn't stop everybody, so how much less when there's hardly any penalty at all in most instances modernly.
.

 

A few others I don't like.. I could care less, educator, utilize, lag behind, drop down, rocket up, "having said that" instead of however.

 

i could care less

 

"Not to mention ..." After which one always does.

==
Some others seem particular to me and thus are vents of narrow aperture. Writing "When it comes to ..." is inoffensive in casual speech, yet often appears in formal discourse. An automatic strike-through. What is 'it', exactly? Has it 'come to' this topic logically, or as selected by writer? Wordy and inexplicit at the same time.

The word 'the' has defensible a role signifying 'this and no other'. I invite readers to count words* in formal writing, and find what fractions are 'the'. You will find examples (over)loaded with this humble article of speech. They did not pass this editor's desk Of what use then? If intended to lend gravis to the attendant phrase, that is certainly unearned. Were it up to me I'd delete every one of them, then read through for sentences so choppy/bumpy that some small something will smooth them out. 'The' is among one's options but it is not the only one.

*counting words has become trivial in document production

==
AI write-bots will sample text from wherever, and follow what is encountered most often. Can't imagine this would not dumb down its products. Seems a shame that heroic Strunk and White cannot somehow be algorithmed in.

 

how much less ...

.

 

Language is a living thing.
"But irregardless was first included in Merriam-Webster's Unabridged edition in 1934"

Messing it up is no where as bad as messing up inflammable, and that one is grammatically correct.

edit: search the quote and it'll find a NPR article, including the link has been hanging up the posting.