Phew, that is hideous! I expected this headline was super exaggerative, but no, they were right.

I never said it would be a substantial drop, but if the 100% adoption was consistent for a year or so you’d probably start seeing insurance companies start undercutting each other through competition until a new market norm was established. Now if that was a 3% drop or a 13% drop, I have no clue.  Also, I can’t…

I wouldn’t say those numbers prove your point at all. But call an insurance company and ask them if those numbers doubled, like you suggest, would insurance rates change. If the number of natural disasters doubled each year home insurance would go up too! That’s just how insurance works. They assess risk and then…

I’d appreciate if you would read my comments further down. I clarify that I was only talking about the statement of digging a six foot hole completely separate from story of tunneling under a city for transportation purposes. Of course you need permission to do something like that.

You can honestly tell me that insurance prices wouldn’t go up if 100 percent of people did not wear seat belts, or visa versa? I’m sure the cost for a small percentage change would be negligible, but taken to its extreme the point bears.

On site deaths I believe are a low percentage. When people don’t wear seat belts they might get more severe injuries that cost a lot more than with a seat belt but don’t automatically result in death. And of those who do die many have a longer drawn out death in a hospital.

Not necessarily. Some examples: if you crash with a seat belt on and break your arm and some ribs that’s fairly mild in terms of costs and procedures. In the same wreck where you’re aren’t wearing a belt you might get the broken arm & ribs plus severe head trauma, internal bleeding lacerations etc. You may not die but…

But it does probably effect you in the form of your insurance payments. All the additional injuries sustained cost more to pay for, and thus increase the risk pool for all drivers and their premiums. I suppose there is a chance that the increase in on scene deaths reduces care costs and thus insurance costs, but not…

I think you are completely missing what myself and I can only assume the original poster were saying. What I was saying was completely unmoored to the story about Elon.

It seems every company has their own hot 2.0L turbo these days. Is there some sort of regulatory incentive to be under 2 liters? It feels like there used to be more 2.2's and 2.4's, etc.

So here in GA they say to call Dig 811, and they will send a county official out to verify there shouldn’t be any problems where you’re about to go digging. Then they leave. I wouldn’t consider that regulatory approval, but if that is all they saying needs to be done, then sure, but that isn’t what this sounds like.…

My thoughts exactly. Stupid government. So do you need regulatory approval every time you bury someone six feet under, or do they bury them just a little shallower in CA?

Just a mental exercise. I know next to nothing about the Volvo powerplants, suppose this new cousinhood results in them being obligated to use Volvo engines. Do they have anything that would suitable and reliable like the 1.8 and 3.5 Toyota engines?

I never got a song to work on Real Player. I’m not entirely convinced it even worked, it was probably just early spy-ware.

There were some many songs on kazaa mislabeled. I’d always go on artist direct to find the precise track length and if the song didn’t match that, I’d not download it. Ah, those were the days. I actually listened to music more because the anticipation to listen to an album in its entirety would grow over the course of…

Unless you’re on the autobahn and can go 256MPH for 256KBS in your Veyron!

Unless you were going too slowly, then you’d get... BUFFERING! No, please don’t bring back the bane of 2006.

That looks a lot better to me than Sauber’s 2016 effort.

That carpet vacuuming is fitting. Could some vacuum an eagle into a Chevy trunk?

Yeah, I actually am quite attracted to it.