Electric Cars Require Fewer Jobs to Build

Holy shit, it's Casper the friendly ghost!

A sign of a business that thinks TO220 triacs are the valuable things but good techs are fungible, look we just put out an ad and they show up! Amazing!

they didn't last much longer I'd expect.

It was the boss' fault at the end of the day I think for letting his missus work at his business like that's somehow always a great idea. She was always an asshole. He married the broad, after all.

People who have to resort to hiring their family tend to be tyrants who can't keep employees they get from the open market for any length of time. Whatever job you have that needs doing, I guarantee someone from your family is not the most qualified to do it. I seem to remember there's someone here who does that though...

The teenage office staffer probably liked you. Was she 18? Was that even the age of consent in Australia at the time?

If I were a younger man I'd have least tried to get her phone # on the way out

I've not found your first sentence to be correct because of the second. Sure, I've been the "victim" of age discrimination but only when HR is involved, and before the on-site interview. The manager who hired me for my current job considered gray hair a requirement of the job. I don't want to be a boss, not even my own. Too much paperwork.

What do you mean "Not True"???? TRUE! it is the law here, no matter how often you say "Not True".

I know that people from the USA think that the whole world is the USA and everything turns around the USA.

That may have been true for some time, but those times are gone. You know are a silly country with silly backwards laws and a monkey president.

It does not matter that the owner isn't the driver. The owner is the one responsible for offenses made by people driving the car he owns, unless he can prove that the car was stolen (he needs to report that fact to the police, and doing so when it is not true is a criminal offense) or that he has a contract to rent it to someone else (like car lease companies have). If not, it is their own responsibility to get the fine reimbursed from the person who actually drove the car.

---------------------

** Not where I live Australia) and I bet most other places too.

The owner only has only supply authorities with correct details of the driver at the time to be off the hook. That person will then receive a fine notice and be subject to loss of licence if they fail to pay.

** You are just making this mad shit up aren't you ??

The law is NOT what you fondly imagine, is IS what legislation says it is.

Try looking it up sometime.

..... Phil

The customer is always right. The president isn't in the same class.

I said "here". "Here" is in the Netherlands. Here the registrant of the license plate is responsible for most traffic offenses made with the car. The only exceptions are when the car is stolen, or when a rental contract (signed by both parties) exists.

No.

It is how I described that it is.

We have many more laws that you may find mad shit (and we do, too) but still they are what they are.

Another one is that for the administrative traffic offenses like parking in an illegal spot or driving a bit too fast (not by a huge amount) the ticket has to be paid BEFORE you are allowed to appeal.

So when you receive a ticket that you believe cannot be true (e.g. refers to a spot where you never have been), you can send a letter to the agency claiming that it wasn't you, but it will not be processed until you have paid. Only then the case will be evaluated and possibly you will get your money back. When you do not pay before, the usual payment period and increases apply.

Sure it is harsh, but it has been made this way after lots of people just refused to pay and made appeals even when they knew they were false, just to delay the case and generally disrupt the system.

e

ade.

sume the two are the same unless you can prove or at least make an official statement to the contrary. To make the official statement at least requir es taking a day off and dealing with the hassle of going to a hearing in a very inconvenient location.

OK, not true here!

--

  Rick C. 

  +-++- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  +-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

" in

...

LOL... I am sure the President is always right... just not about thing bei ng discussed. But he is right about something all the time.

I recall when Reagan became President in spite of the fact that most of his campaigning was just him acting. I was amazed that a decent actor could f ake his way into the Presidency (compared to the many very bad actors that most politicians are). But now I am completely floored that we could elect a total buffoon on the same basis that we select hosts of reality shows, b y how much drama they can create.

I know there have been a number of stories about government being run in st range ways like in Idiocracy, but I never expected any of them to come true .

--

  Rick C. 

  +-+++ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  +-+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

a

to try

nd

h

ideas I

n

sued

hat

red

here.

.. i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has lit tle incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue sum mons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, th ere is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions the y don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

a cop. How is this different?

usually yes, though for small speeding fine that won't affect your license it isn't needed the owner just gets the fine

technically the law requires the owner to tell who was the driver at reques t of the police, but at the same time can't be forced to incriminate one se lf or family

I'm legitimately curious what would happen if one went with the above defense when facing a judge in a US traffic court.

99.9% of people wouldn't have the stones to do that during a bench hearing in front of a real judge with 50-100 other people in court with you listening to everything you say. I bet it's rarely if ever been tried.

I'm totally confident the court would not just say "Oh, we hadn't thought of that!" and just waive your fine and waive everyone else's, too.

Of course you would still get the fine. Maybe you would get away without the points on your license.

------------

** Jesusu H. Christ - NOW he tells us ......... ** So parking tickets and that kind of thing ?

Not speeding through red lights or otherwise driving dangerously or illegally.

Stuff that could result in loss of license.

** Remains to be seen.

The Dutch are loopy, but not that loopy.

..... Phil

Rick C wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

I agree. There were Twilight Zone episodes that came close to what is going on right now, but Rod would have to write a whole new series to encapsulate the utter crap we have been expected to accept as leadership.

ot a

s to try

and

igh

t ideas I

hen

issued

that

uired

ns here.

y... i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spot s.

n a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has l ittle incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue s ummons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, there is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions t hey don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

y,

y a cop. How is this different?

s

,

e

est of the police, but at the same time can't be forced to incriminate one self or family

So if exercising the right to not incriminate a family member how can the o wner be given the fine? Is it just set up to say someone has to pay withou t caring if it is the person who was driving?

--

  Rick C. 

  ++--- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  ++--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

. .

I've gone to court with similar levels of arguments many times. Once the j udge kept asking me if I had anything else to say and I thought that meant he thought I hadn't said enough to get off so I continued with basically th e same information. The third time through he stopped me by say, "The ligh t was green? Not guilty."

I could go into detail but it's too wordy. Bottom line is all you need to do is create a "reasonable doubt" which not being able to identify the driv er satisfies.

You don't really have an argument other than feigning incredulity.

--

  Rick C. 

  ++--+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  ++--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Here it doesn't work that way. The court is about the ticket. It is up to the DMV to assign points. The judge can't waive them.

--

  Rick C. 

  ++-+- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  ++-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

So, moron, you think one prototype, somewhere, is the same as production? Yes, you _are_ a moron. It was not a compliment, moron.