The catch is they don’t have any

Do voice controls work for the headlights?

Well, look at it this way: Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group owns a large percentage of Toyota. In turn, Toyota owns something like 16% of Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance. So... you can see how that could be problematic, especially considering Mitsui Sumitomo is Toyota’s main global insurance carrier...

Man, the simplistic “supply and demand” answer annoys me. Especially because it is the exact wrong conclusion.

Clearly they’re trying to make Wagoneer a brand akin to Land Rover vs Range Rover.

Sounds like they reinvented the golf cart.

Yeah the fixed costs to retool a factory for like completely different vehicle propulsion technology are enormous. So that number will go down the more of these they sell, as long as they’re selling them for more than their variable costs and the fixed costs of each new one (less their sunk costs).

I can’t believe how shitty the interior is on this. I’m sure the seats feel nice, but the dash looks like something out of an economy car.

Is it? As long as the upfront price is fair, if you’re getting 0% interest and own the car outright after 4 years and it has a strong resale value at the end of that time period, you did pretty good. You can get into time value of money and longer-term financing at low non-zero interest rates and cash-back offers, but…

“The Boebert Crime Family”

exactly.

Yeah. On the other hand, one pulled up to the playground yesterday and when the doors popped up, my four year-old son said “whoooooooaaaaaa.”

Lol this slideshow is a repackaging of the Wikipedia article on the Taxis of New York City.

Yeah these are dope - I couldn’t remember who made them. You still see a pretty decent amount of these in NYC taxi guise and as other random commercial vehicles in NYC.

These are still the “official” NYC taxi cabs. What a wack slideshow.

Good! If they can’t afford the premiums they shouldn’t be in business. If they can’t afford the premiums, they can’t afford to maintain their trucks or train their drivers or any of the other expenses that go into secure trucking operations. 

And how do you supposed they get this insurance (which is called reinsurance)? Is it free?

Counterpoint is that if minimums were higher and trucking companies were forced to pay more for their auto liability coverage, that would raise the bar for entry and force out the companies that are operating on a shoestring and hiring marginal drivers and using bad equipment (or owner-operators)

The title of this article is poorly written. It should be convey the message that liability minimums for truckers are too low. To say they are “paying dirt cheap insurance minimums” makes no sense. They’re not paying minimums - that doesn’t make any sense. They’re buying coverage, and the minimum mandated coverage is…

Yeah! There are even big signs saying to use both sides lol