Since these days it is simple to get a bank account that has no minimum or open multiple accounts. I think a good option for people is to open separate accounts for each expense.

Have you considered setting aside money in a separate account as a last resort fund for surprises? Make sure it is in a seperate account and pretend it does not exist. The fund would only be used for situations like you described and nothing else.

Not surprising, a lot of people are shocked how bad even accountants are at math. A friend of mine who works in the accounting deparment went around asking accountants in his department if it is better to have a lower interest rate, or a higher principal on a house with examples. Out of the department of 50 people, 0…

I think it is sad that schools do not teach people personal finance. It is one of the most important thing a person can learn. But I figure they want to output consumers instead of savers.

Why do they need to redo the legs? In reflight it isn’t going to be traveling at the speed it comes down, and with plenty of fuel it can do a soft landing.

The flying back home is what SpaceX said they are aiming for. The risk would be minimum. And the fuel is cheap.

You are still carrying the fuel upwards, which means you are sacrificing weight that can be taken to space. If they plan to launch light things and have plenty of spare capacity, sure. But when talking about launching something with little spare capacity, that isn’t going to cut it.

It is sped up by only 4X, it is still pretty darn fast.

What he is talking about is how the idea and plans to make the landing existed for a long time. But when US switched to first to file, BO patented the idea (which wasn’t even theirs). SpaceX who was actually doing the testing for the landings already sued and the BO patent was dismissed. It was really a silly patent…

I think you are missing what getting to space means. It isn’t about going up as it is about getting into orbit. The center core will have a far longer downrange than the 2 outer cores. Which means it would require far more fuel to make it back to land for the primary core.

You will never have it always land on land. Water landings will have to happen. Especially the center core of the Falcon Heavy.

But what they plan to do is after it lands on the barge, fuel it up on the barge and have it fly back to base. Thus having rapid turnaround even on the water landings.

I don’t know what is so funny.

The argument is not “everyone does it”. The argument is that everyone does it and makes Tesla take the blame.

A myth created by the establishment to use Tesla as a scapegoat for the establishment’s subsidies.

Tesla does not survive on subsidies and is the LEAST subsidized automaker.

Because it won’t. Auto summons only works within 40ft of the fob holder, and can be controlled via fob. On top of that at 35mph, I don’t think even a semi would endanger the kids life if he is in a Tesla. That thing is built like a tank.

If you have no clue what you are talking about, STOP TALKING.

If you don’t know what I am talking about, just say so and I will explain it more simply so you can understand.

Except that is between 3 businesses. Most of the Tesla share is is in the form of tax breaks on land and sales tax earning no tax revenue anyways over 20 years into the future. (so they have not actually gotten those subsidies yet).

It could be worse NEDC, or god forbid JC08.