workerONE

They shouldn't vote then.

What are you going to invest 100 mil in that is ethical and returns 5%? Seems like this is a discussion about wealth inequality. Investing in the stock market doesn't improve human conditions.

You make some good points but I really disagree with your statement that auto deaths are caused by drivers inability to use their cars features. Yes most fatalities are probably avoidable and are caused by bad and distracted drivers. But your example of back up cameras being unnecessary is a poor one. They are mandated because children walk behind cars and they're too small to see in mirrors. With headlights, a driver cannot adjust their headlights to be less bright if they are already on low. These intelligent lights don't just control high and low beams. They will actually black out a circle so that the beams don't shine at other cars but shine around them.

The issue is really that modern headlights are too bright. LED headlights are great but their output needs to be limited. Consumers should have a choice between vehicles with headlights that are less bright and vehicles with intelligent headlights.

Ha, thanks!

Politics itself seems like a business

And if there are too many births there will be a culling.

Intelligent car headlights can cost as little as $200 to produce.

I understand what you are saying about added complexity and difficulty to replace.

This is a matter of public safety though. People die because they are blinded by other drivers headlights. It's also a quality of life issue. Nobody is happy with the brightness of modern headlights.

I mentioned the car stereo as an example because the components are ridiculously cheap to produce. Terrible quality tweeters that are installed in Bose and Harmon Kardon systems cost about $3 per pair to produce. If you want to buy OEM replacement you pay about $120, for the same $3 speakers.

While there won't be a big aftermarket selling compatible headlights I think car makers will be installing them at cost into every car, rather than profiting from people who select an expensive and overpriced add-on.

They cost $2,000 in a market where it's considered a luxury upgrade. They wouldn't cost the vendor that much if they were standard on every vehicle. Look at the price of upgraded stereo systems in cars. The components cost about $100 and they charge customers over $1, 000 as an add-on.

I said GDP doesn't include purchases from international vendors. They're not subtracted they're never included to begin with

The GDP includes all goods and services produced in a time frame. If you buy equipment yes it is a cost but it doesn't change the equation because that equipment is a product from a vendor that is also included in GDP (unless it's purchased from an international vendor). I believe servicing debt is a service and included in GDP. I'm sort of trying to back into the correct number using gross figures. The way you are describing, which is the way each company does it, is the correct way to do it.

One company's costs are another company's product or service, so they are included. However it doesn't include costs from international vendors. I'm sure there's more I can't think of