Tesla’s Model Y Is Getting Horrific Quality Reviews Tyler Durden
Mon, 06/22/2020 – 12:35
Recall just a couple days ago we wrote that Tesla was having issues with ramping up production of its Model Y. And it looks like whatever the company is doing to try and rush vehicles out the door is being reflected in the poor quality of the vehicles when they reach their owners.
We say this because the only hype Tesla’s Model Y seems to be getting is a litany of complaints about its quality online. And it isn’t just social media reports, names like Forbes and Electrek have also weighed in with articles critical of Tesla’s newest Model. Complaints include issues with paint, trim issues, indentations on the seats and even loose seatbelts.
Even Kelly Blue Book was forced to make note of the awful quality of the vehicle it tested on its YouTube channel: “As for quality issues. Our car’s b-pillar trim doesn’t fit right and neither does this lower bumper trim, the rear door alignment is slightly off, the rear seats are similarly uneven, and there’s a loud rattle coming from the rear somewhere.”
Electrek pointed out that one of the biggest problems a potential owner had when going to pick up his car was that “the backseat wasn’t attached to its base”.
One owner even sent the blog a photo of his backseats coming off, telling Electrek that he was “extremely disappointed by the quality control” of his vehicle.
Even the pro-Tesla bloggers at Electrek had to admit:
We covered the Model 3 launch closely and it certainly wasn’t without quality issues, but it was nothing like the reports I am seeing for Model Y these days.
Of course, what we don’t see are the happy Model Y owners reporting deliveries of flawless vehicles because they are too busy enjoying their new car, but I wouldn’t chalk this up to a vocal minority having issues here.
This video of the Model Y shortcomings was posted on YouTube:
And other samplings from social media also show many of the Model Y flaws:
I was disappointed w overall quality of #ModelY especially coming from #Porsche. After seeing horrendous pics n videos from other Y owners, I’m stoked that mainly I just have to drive w rear seat down n touch-up a few scratches. Get it together @Tesla@elonmusk quality > quantity pic.twitter.com/5ksivaiHrj
— Danilo Kawasaki, CFP®️ , CPWA®️ (@DaniloKawasaki) June 17, 2020
Today the Supreme Court decided a single case: Liu v. SEC. Last week I predicted by Justice Sotomayor would write the majority opinion. My prediction was accurate. I am now more confident in my other predictions. There are now four cases pending from the January and February sittings. Here are my predictions for the majority opinions.
Espinoza: Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Breyer.
Seila Law: Justice Breyer
Thuraissigiam: Justice Alito
June Medical: Chief Justice Roberts
I suspect these four cases will be decided by next week, and the remaining ten cases from May will spill into July. But who knows? It is going to be a long Blue June, and perhaps a Blue July.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2YYVV3B
via IFTTT
Today the Supreme Court denied review in Kansas v. Boettger. This case considered whether “the First Amendment prohibits States from criminalizing threats to ‘[c]ommit violence . . . in reckless disregard of the risk of causing . . . fear.'” Justice Thomas dissented from the denial of certiorari. He concluded that “the Constitution likely permits States to criminalize threats even in the absence of any intent to intimidate.” And he did not think this case was governed by Virginia v. Black (2003). (Thomas dissented in Black).
At the outset of his analysis, Thomas once again rejects substantive due process incorporation. instead, he says that the First Amendment–an enumerated right–is protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[n]o Stateshall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” §1.As I have previously explained, “[t]he evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the privileges and immunities of such citizens included individual rights enumerated in the Constitution.” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 823 (2010) (opinion concurring in part and concurring in judgment). One of those rights is “the freedom of speech” in the First Amendment. See, e.g., Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 2765 (1866) (speech of Sen. Howard).The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[n]o Stateshall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” §1.As I have previously explained, “[t]he evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the privileges and immunities of such citizens included individual rights enumerated in the Constitution.” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 823 (2010) (opinion concurring in part and concurring in judgment). One of those rights is “the freedom of speech” in the First Amendment. See, e.g., Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 2765 (1866) (speech of Sen. Howard).
This conclusion follows from McDonald. This is the first time (as best as I can recall) that Thomas has grounded the freedom of speech in the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Thomas then expressly considers historical evidence leading up to Reconstruction.
The prevalence of statutes from the founding through Reconstruction that did not require intent to intimidate provides strong evidence of the meaning of the freedom of speech protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Thomas raised similar points in Elonis v. United States. But that case did not involve incorporation.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2NmLEZQ
via IFTTT
Across the Land of the Free, and much of the world, local governments are finally starting to allow businesses to re-open and employees to come back to the office.
Offices in New York City opened this morning for the first time in months, after Comrade Mayor Bill de Blasio’s politburo finally approved the policy.
The Republic of CHAZ, formerly known as Seattle, was approved for ‘Phase II reopening’ on Friday, both by state health authorities as well as local warlords.
Other major cities and anarcho-communist enclaves around the world have been slowly re-opening over the past few weeks. And so far one key trend is obvious:
A lot of people aren’t showing up.
New York City’s major Wall Street banks, for example, are still keeping most people at home.
Goldman Sachs only expects 10% of its workforce back in the office, and those are all ‘volunteers’. Morgan Stanley has less than 10% of its workforce nationwide at the office.
Citigroup expects 5% of its workforce back in the office over the next few weeks, and JP Morgan isn’t requiring anyone to return to work right now.
Companies in a variety of other industries have taken a similar approach.
Microsoft, Disney, Twitter, Mastercard, Facebook, Nationwide Insurance, Google, Amazon, Square, CNN, Slack, Sales Force, PayPal, Shopify, and Apple are among countless others who have told employees they can keep working from home.
And many of those changes are permanent; Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, for example, has said that potentially half of his company’s work force could end up working remotely forever.
Twitter and Square have told employees they can work from home “indefinitely”. Nationwide Insurance announced a permanent transition to working from home.
The CEO of banking giant Barclays called crowded offices with thousands of workers “a thing of the past”. Morgan Stanley’s CEO expects his bank to need “a lot less real estate” in the future. Disney’s chairman said his company will reopen “with less office space.”
This is a pretty obvious trend– there will continue to be a LOT of people working from home.
And if you can work from home, you can work just about anywhere within reason.
We talked about this briefly last week– I told you that I expect a massive trend in migration from high tax, high cost urban places to lower tax, lower cost suburban and rural places.
And the reasons are obvious.
Plenty of people have been miserably cooped up in shoebox-sized apartments for the past three months due to local lockdown restrictions. And now they’re finally realizing– ‘if I don’t need to go to the office anymore, I don’t need to be in this city anymore…’
Plus they’re wisely thinking about the future.
Sure, maybe medical researchers find the miracle drug to treat Covid-19. Or they develop a vaccine that Bill Gates will personally inject into each and every one of us at gunpoint.
But then what happens if Covid-20 hits? Or an antibiotic resistant superbug is unleashed upon the world?
Or people simply decide they don’t want to raise their children in a place where arson, vandalism, and looting are considered acts of heroism?
This is not a passing trend. It’s a way of life.
It’s unlikely that cities will become ghost towns… but people who understand what’s happening are really starting to consider new places to live.
The arithmetic is quite simple. Someone can trade a $5,000/month hamster cage in Manhattan for a 4,000+ square foot home with water views and a spacious yard in sunny Florida, and still have plenty of extra money left over… with the added benefit that Florida has no state income tax.
This logic makes five places very interesting for prospective migrants.
Texas, Florida, Nevada, and Tennessee are four states with warm weather, plenty of wide-open spaces, cheap living costs, access to big city amenities, and no state income tax.
We’ll talk about this a lot more in future letters because there’s a LOT to digest– from the decline of office property (WeWork has already started skipping some rent payments) to the ridiculously low mortgage rates available to investors.
But before we get to that, there’s a fifth place worth mentioning– and that’s right here in Puerto Rico.
Lately there’s been a surge of prospective residents who have arrived here over the past few weeks looking at property.
I live in a fairly high end, luxury resort, and most of the residents are investors and entrepreneurs. One of my neighbors, for example, is a prominent hedge fund manager, another is an acclaimed tech entrepreneur, and another is a former pro-athlete who built a highly successful sports business.
I’m fairly close with the executives in my development, and they told me there’s been a flood of people from the mainland (mostly from New York) who are trying to get out of Manhattan as quickly as possible.
And they’re looking very hard at Puerto Rico.
That’s because, in addition to the great weather and time zone (Puerto Rico is currently in the same time zone as New York), the tax incentives are unbeatable.
New Yorkers who move to Florida no longer have to pay city or state income tax. And that can easily save 10%.
But as we’ve discussed many times in the past, bona fide residents of Puerto Rico who meet certain conditions are exempt from US federal income tax as well.
Puerto Rico’s tax incentives can reduce your business profits tax to just 4%, and individual tax to ZERO… plus you can live on the beach and never be cold again.
Today the Supreme Court decided a single case: Liu v. SEC. Last week I predicted by Justice Sotomayor would write the majority opinion. My prediction was accurate. I am now more confident in my other predictions. There are now four cases pending from the January and February sittings. Here are my predictions for the majority opinions.
Espinoza: Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Breyer.
Seila Law: Justice Breyer
Thuraissigiam: Justice Alito
June Medical: Chief Justice Roberts
I suspect these four cases will be decided by next week, and the remaining ten cases from May will spill into July. But who knows? It is going to be a long Blue June, and perhaps a Blue July.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2YYVV3B
via IFTTT
Today the Supreme Court denied review in Kansas v. Boettger. This case considered whether “the First Amendment prohibits States from criminalizing threats to ‘[c]ommit violence . . . in reckless disregard of the risk of causing . . . fear.'” Justice Thomas dissented from the denial of certiorari. He concluded that “the Constitution likely permits States to criminalize threats even in the absence of any intent to intimidate.” And he did not think this case was governed by Virginia v. Black (2003). (Thomas dissented in Black).
At the outset of his analysis, Thomas once again rejects substantive due process incorporation. instead, he says that the First Amendment–an enumerated right–is protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[n]o Stateshall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” §1.As I have previously explained, “[t]he evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the privileges and immunities of such citizens included individual rights enumerated in the Constitution.” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 823 (2010) (opinion concurring in part and concurring in judgment). One of those rights is “the freedom of speech” in the First Amendment. See, e.g., Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 2765 (1866) (speech of Sen. Howard).The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[n]o Stateshall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” §1.As I have previously explained, “[t]he evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the privileges and immunities of such citizens included individual rights enumerated in the Constitution.” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 823 (2010) (opinion concurring in part and concurring in judgment). One of those rights is “the freedom of speech” in the First Amendment. See, e.g., Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 2765 (1866) (speech of Sen. Howard).
This conclusion follows from McDonald. This is the first time (as best as I can recall) that Thomas has grounded the freedom of speech in the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Thomas then expressly considers historical evidence leading up to Reconstruction.
The prevalence of statutes from the founding through Reconstruction that did not require intent to intimidate provides strong evidence of the meaning of the freedom of speech protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Thomas raised similar points in Elonis v. United States. But that case did not involve incorporation.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2NmLEZQ
via IFTTT
Eviction protection rules vary widely, state by state, thanks to Covid-19.
Eviction Rules for Renters
Eviction Lab rates states from 0 to 5 with 5 offering the most renter protection.
The Eviction Lab and Columbia Law School’s Professor Emily Benfer have developed a policy scorecard for each state, distilling the contents of thousands of newly-released emergency orders, declarations, and legislation into a clear set of critical measures included in, and left out of, state-level pandemic responses related to eviction and housing.
Texas provides an example what 0 stars look like: “Previous court orders limiting eviction proceedings in Texas began expiring in mid-May, and Texas courts did not halt accepting eviction hearings.”
Florida, rated 1 star, has measures in place until July 1 but allows local discretion.
North Carolina rated 2.74 stars, has measures in place until June 21, with a grace period to pay rent and a prohibition on late fees during the pandemic.
Massachusetts, top rated at 4.15 stars, established a moratorium on evictions and foreclosures during the pandemic and for 45 days after the state of emergency is lifted.
Cascading Problems
If you are a small-time landlord in one of the states where it is hard to evict, you will have a problem paying the mortgage on your properties if your tenant does not pay.
It’s easy to say don’t evict, but there are cascading consequences and not every case is the same.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2BsUand Tyler Durden
While left-wing groups use the backlash against Confederate Statues to remove statutes of other far less controversial figures in the name of “purifying” American history and cleansing the stain of racism (or, at least, what the progressive left identifies as “racist”, which tends to include anything contrary to their fanatical devotion to “equality”, conservative writers are likening the hysterical fervor to another far more dangerous period in modern history: The Cultural Revolution, the BBC reports.
As progressive Europeans take up the cause, a far-left party in Germany has installed a controversial statue of communist leader Vladimir Lenin crafted during the 1950s as leftists around the world continue their push to sanitize and rewrite the murderous history of communist regimes. The tiny Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany – better known as the MLPD, a direct descendant of the Communist Party that ruled East Berlin during the Cold War – installed the statue in front of its headquarters in the western city of Gelsenkirchen.
City authorities had attempted to stop the statue being installed, but courts blocked their appeal and the unveiling went ahead as planned on Saturday. They have since launched a social media campaign claiming there is “no place for Lenin” in contemporary German society.
“We live in a time in which many countries of the world are reflecting on memorials,” said mayor Frank Baranowski in one of a series of YouTube videos. “It’s hard to put up with the fact that a dictator from the 21st Century is being placed on a pedestal and a memorial is being made out of it. Unfortunately the courts have decided otherwise, we must accept that, but not without comment.”
The MLPD, however, described Lenin as “an ahead-of-his-time thinker of world-historical importance, an early fighter for freedom and democracy” even though he helped devise The USSR’s post-independence system of concentration camps that swelled with political dissidents and other accused “enemies of the people” until the early 1950s.
For those who aren’t well-acquainted with the history of socialism in Europe and Asia, Vladimir Lenin was a leader of the 1917 Russian Revolution and, according to the Bolshevik mythology and cult of personality established by his successor, Joseph Stalin, the “founding father” of the Soviet Union.
Lenin’s reign was relatively brief: he led the fledgling Soviet state during the Civil War, overseeing the victory and the first years of the world’s first constitutionally socialist state until his death in 1924, when he was succeeded by Stalin. However, Lenin, whose mummified corpse remains on display in Moscow’s Red Square, has remained a symbol of communism rule across the world.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/315qvLF Tyler Durden
The U.S. is in a Civil War. It began four years ago after Donald Trump’s election and has finally boiled over into open warfare here in 2020.
From the moment the protests against the killing of George Floyd were hijacked into looting and rioting I worried about this turning into something far greater, something with a far higher purpose.
Within a couple of days it was obvious the U.S. was now the subject of a color revolution of the same type and build up that occurred in places like Ukraine, Georgia, Egypt, Serbia and others.
And it’s pretty clear the color for our revolution isn’t orange or brown or violet, it’s black.
The questions I have are why this is happening now? The obvious answer is the full court press to deny Trump a second term. That’s a practically stated goal at this point.
But I feel this is far deeper than that, and likely has to do with knowing that Trump has pieces in place post-Jeffrey Epstein raid/murder to upset the Deep State’s apple cart.
And that brings me to why I’m interested in Hungary again.
I haven’t spoken much about Hungary in recent months but maybe I should have been. For me the two big stories of the week are:
The through line here is that both of these stories attack the heart of the Color Revolution process… the monied interests behind them. Useful idiots shooting each other in downtown Seattle or knocking down statues to Thomas Jefferson are not the story.
They are the means to power to be discarded (they hope).
Useful idiots eventually become useless eaters in any post-Marxist revolution worth discussing.
But for the people who foment these things. They have to start with laying the groundwork. And the stronger the local cultural institutions and local economic power the longer and harder they have to work to undermine it.
The U.S. has been under constant attack this way since before even World War II, going back to Commintern (which never ended, it just morphed into today’s NGO’s)
Trump and Orban represent leaders who understand this problem explicitly and are trying to dismantle the apparatus arrayed against them.
Let’s start with the SDNY. It is close to the most lawless place in the world for all practical purposes because the highest crimes committed there, those of finance and systemic looting by the banks who are the financiers of The Davos Crowd’s push for transnational control, go unpunished.
Headline grabbing fines which are 0.1% of the money and power stolen by Wall St. is not effective government oversight. Regulatory capture is real and the SDNY is the poster child for it.
For those wanting Trump to make good on his promises to Drain the Swamp, the SDNY is the source of the Swamp’s lifeblood, money. It allows the worst crimes to go unpunished, fueling the Marxist rants of the Occupy Wall St. crowd who have morphed into Black Lives Matter and are actively moving towards open warfare with the U.S. government.
And, true to their Marxist teachings, these folks are too dumb they are being played like cheap flutes found at a Mediveal Faire.
Trump removing Berman is a clear case of payback for his string of prosecutions paving the way for the impeachment debacle from this past winter. But, again, it’s far deeper than that.
Trump and William Barr have to go after the funding sources of Antifa, Black Lives Matter and all the other NGO’s operating to funnel money into this brewing civil war. In the process they will rein in the SDNY and create a real climate of fear for those put in power to protect it.
And that’s not going to happen if the SDNY is not under their control. From the outrage and the response from key players like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Jerry Nadler and even Berman himself, it’s clear that’s what is on the table now — they are scared Trump and Barr got close here.
No less than ultimate anti-Trumper, king Neocon himself Bill Kristol tweeted out this tidbit from, of all places, a fact-free screed from The Atlantic:
“Why replace Berman? The answer lies in the firing earlier this year of Jessie Liu, the former U.S. Attorney for D.C…Once they seized control, Barr’s team…interceded in the sentencing of Stone, and made an effort to dismiss the case against Flynn…”https://t.co/SToSRyf8Zj
This is the Swamp in high gear protecting someone who, until Friday, no one in the U.S. even cared about.
And now, firing a U.S. attorney is beyond the pale, an example of lawlessness, rampant authoritarianism and all the rest of the usual bromides.
Every time Trump opens his mouth is one of these ‘wow, just wow’ moments and it’s tiresome.
After a series of setbacks in the Supreme Court, where it’s clear Chief Justice John Roberts is compromised in a fundamental way, Trump and Barr going after Berman makes sense. It was Berman oversaw the raid on Jeffrey Epstein’s home and who is, apparently, still in control over what can be done with the materials gained.
You can see how forcefully this defense of Berman is turning into a circus, quickly, as they flip this into another round of ‘Impeach Trump’ for doing his job.
Nadler’s already saying Berman will testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee. And the Twitterati are spinning this as an own goal strong enough to impeach both Barr and Trump.
That’s nonsense. This was a direct shot at the biggest target and even if it didn’t completely hit the mark, forcing Berman out and having his assistant Audrey Strauss take over in the interim, it did move the ball forward.
Since now a new Senate confirmation process can begin for Berman’s real replacement. This is the third U.S. attorney in the SDNY under Trump. He fired Preet Bharaha which led to Berman’s appointment because the Senate refused to confirm anyone.
They are hoping to play the same game again, allowing the SDNY to set its own rules. Berman was appointed by judicial fiat, not Senate confirmation.
Dismantling the cover of the SDNY is key to uncovering, officially, what’s really going on in the U.S.’s Black Revolution as well as everything else and that’s why they are circling the wagons here.
The same way that the European Court of Justice is covering up for the obvious money laundering going on through NGO’s in Europe.
For Hungary, the fight that Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been at the forefront of for years is an existential one. Orban must stop any further destabilization of Eastern Europe on behalf of the European Union.
The infiltration into the younger generations of Hungarians of neoliberalism is deep enough that staying in front of it is becoming increasingly difficult for Orban.
This is why Orban, loudly, passed the so-called Anti-NGO law which made public all sources of money to foreign organizations operating in Hungary. The purpose was to out, publicly, George Soros and the rest of The Davos Crowd who operate in Hungary. It would take away their funding the future takeover of the country, either through the ballot box or color revolution if the former doesn’t doesn’t work.
With Orban being one of the few sovereigntists in power in Europe with a clear majority in his parliament he’s under constant attack from the EU. But, at the same time, Hungary is too small to stand on its own.
It can neither alienate the West completely, as represented by the EU, nor fully turn East and look to Russia to protect it. This is why Orban, like Trump, talks a big game, makes some moves to declare Hungary sovereign but ultimately yields to the jackals in Brussels when they push back because he cannot afford to exist outside of that apparatus lest the country be completely destroyed.
So he fights skirmishes which play well at home, shoring up his popular support while making deft economic and infrastructure moves which just skirt the wrath of the European Union.
I don’t expect Orban to fight the EU over the ECJ striking down the Anti-Soros law. But he will force open some transparency, gaining a real win but nothing on par with what Vladimir Putin achieved in Russia.
For now, Soros’ Open Society Foundation and Central European University are gone from Hungary but you can see the intensity with which this war against independence from The Davos Crowd is fought.
Even lowly Hungary, a country of no great importance and just 10 million people, must be crushed under the boot heel of these pigs who are, obviously, more equal than the rest of us, just like their new shocktroops in the Black Revolution here in the U.S.
At some point Orban, like Trump, will have to make a major move which changes the direction of his country permanently, but this Anti-NGO law is not the hill to fight that battle on.
It is these fights that happen away from the front lines in places like Atlanta and Seattle, that highlight just how big the stakes are and how deep the problems are.
What’s also clear is that Trump just confirmed for us that he understands these stakes and he’s willing to take on the biggest racketeering operation in the world today, the people protected by the SDNY, as he stares at an unbridled assault on both his presidency and the future of the Western world.
* * *
Join My Patreon if you want help unraveling the headlines into a credible action plan. Install the Brave Browser if you want to finally put a limit on Google’s ability to silence us.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Cw2za5 Tyler Durden
Mac vs. PC parody written by Austin Bragg, Meredith Bragg, and Andrew Heaton; starring Austin Bragg and Andrew Heaton; produced by Meredith and Austin Bragg; cameras by Meredith and Austin Bragg, Justin Monticello, and John Osterhoudt
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2V9d9dv
via IFTTT
