I know these laws forbidding people to pump their own gas seem silly on the surface, but they actually serve a purpose: they force corporations to create jobs (low income jobs, but still)

The delusion of people that wanted this was that gas would be cheaper if stations didn’t have employees pumping gas, which is not how it works.

BTW - gas in Oregon is about $1/gallon cheaper than the neighboring state of California.

Is gas more expensive in Oregon than in, say, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, or California (taking into account different tax rates)?

On the flipside, our gas is typically a bit cheaper than Washington, and ALWAYS cheaper than California, so adding self-service is purely a time saver, not a money saver.

So you’ll get a car that isn’t as good or enjoyable now, because theoretically it will be worth more later?

no it wouldnt matter at all because only an idiot buys a car as an investment or trades it in every 2-3 years. people that do that are shitty with money and dont matter. thats why car debt is at an all time high. 

If a feature can be called “amazing” then it’s probably worth an extra $500. But I’m generally the kind of person who prefers ala carte options over lumping features into expensive packages or inflating the price of the base model by including them as standard.

First, the rate at which new cars depreciate is a silly point to bring up.

Remote start is a $500 add on for a $50k car? Am I spoiled with my ATS where it’s pretty much standard, and I can start it from my phone?

Is the Kia worth it’s price premium over the mustang if I don’t need the 4 doors or the big trunk? (more comfort, possibly cheaper to insure or maintain?)

Or you could just buy a car to enjoy and not worry about how much it will be worth in X time.

Oh? Which world war was caused by technological unemployment?

Be worried for the taxi drivers, every lost job is a tragedy for the person who lost it. It is called basic empathy.

To what? Leave faith to religion - putting our faith in some unknowable power shouldn’t be the providence of economics.

That technology is very far away for me and I’m solidly middle aged with a darn good job. How in the hell is any of it supposed to benefit anyone when they can’t afford the loan and feed themselves at the same time?

So really, the pillagers and the gougers are the same people and my argument is that there is no place for those people. not JUST price gougers. If A is bad, you can’t say “so is *some* of not-A so it doesn’t matter”. that isn’t a rational argument. if you want this to happen properly you need Both no price-gouging An…

The problem you seem to be missing is that that those price ceilings place more people into the “you’re fucked” category than they took out, because they encourage people to take more than they need and provide less of an incentive for suppliers and retailers to bring in more.

You’re right. The issue here is arcane ideological debates and not A FUCKING HURRICANE.

It’s not an either/or scenario. For-profit suppliers and charities can complement eachother as Atohi already pointed out.