bubbajoe123456
bubbajoe123456
bubbajoe123456

From the coverage I’ve read, it sounds like the contract here was very badly handled from Ford’s end, so that there apparently isn’t a piece of paper with “you may not sell the car within 24 months” somewhere on it and John Cena’s signature at the bottom.  Since the card was technically sold by a dealer, that may have

Ugh, we have been over this a hundreds times. These kinds of contracts are unenforceable.

I’m certainly not saying Ford’s claim is a slam dunk here, there’s a lot they’d presumably have to show (again, speaking generally, by no means an expert on CA law, or even a lawyer), including that the dealer knew about the terms of Cena’s contract with Ford, and that the dealer at least to some degree encouraged

“How can Ford enforce clauses on an outside party not part of the agreement? Sure they can sue Cena for breech of contract depending on specifics but this should be a non starter.”

Sure, they could up the manufacturing capacity if they wanted to. It’s not like the GT’s engine requires the blood of one particular individual, who can only give so many pints per week without dying.

Basically, these guys have standardized the “person in the US does measurements, people in Asia make the suits and ship them” model that’s long been done in the form of “Mr. XYZ will be visiting your city on June 2-4, and is available for appointments for measurements and fabric selection at the Hilton.”

Basically, these guys have standardized the “person in the US does measurements, people in Asia make the suits and

“which commonly have enough assets to trigger the tax”

As noted above, we’re talking about roughly 1 in 500 people being affected.  It’s not just the top 1%, it’s the top 1/5 of 1% who pay any estate tax at all.  

“As mentioned by some other comments, these taxes are potentially ruinous to larger family farms.”

Complex multi-party negotiations are much easier in person. Even extremely good videoconferencing systems result in a loss of nuance.

The issue is that the “list price,” which people without insurance pay, is vastly higher than the price that people with insurance (the large bulk of the population) pay.  As an example, when our child was born, the “list price” came to about $28k.  The insurance actually paid about $11k, and our portion came to about

Really, we should pay our government officials more. Like a lot more. It would reduce the incentive to cash out as a lobbyist and ensure that people aren’t turned off by running for office for financial reasons.  

Given that negotiation and compromise is supposed to be a key element of governance, not having people in the same place would make that even harder. 

That was my immediate reaction as well...

Agree 90%, although the model is similar in that, for gyms, if utilization is too high, your costs don’t go up, but your revenue goes down. Gyms sell far more memberships than the facility could handle if a large portion of the customers started showing up regularly.  So, heavier-than-expected utilization means that

Tesla, maybe, but not Amazon or Facebook.  The more you shop at Amazon, the more money they make (since their gross margins are positive).  For Prime Video, their costs are essentially fixed, so if you love the service and use it a lot, it doesn’t cost them more.  For Facebook, the more you use the service, the more

Living Daylights is the classic, clearly.  

It’s not bad, but nothing tops Pussy Galore.  

Was recently at a conference where, when Q&A rolled around, the moderator said “as a reminder, questions are a sentence which ends in a question mark.”  Said it in a “I’m joking, but really, I’m not joking” tone, and it worked. 

Given their budgets, that means he’s getting paid about eighty bucks.