But including a company that hand-builds a handful of hypercars annually in a conversation about the auto industry in Sweden is not the flex you think it is.

I'm genuinely curious to know what you think the author's pre-existing beliefs are.

You seem to have a few of your own: "Canada only has to patrol its northern border"

Other things that change the math:

- Only allowing individuals to rent living spaces (no corporations)

- Only allowing individuals to buy houses (no corporations)

- Not allowing corporations to buy influence in Washington DC

Anything that puts the focus back on what's the ethically and morally right thing to do for humans changes the math.

And don't get me wrong: I'm a capitalist. But for some reason, some capitalists really get upset with this kind of language.

I wonder why?

This is like saying, "you don't need to hedge inflation as long as everything goes right"

You don't need to hedge inflation ... until you do.

Renting has no similar protections. Your choices are, "Pay the (increased) rent" or "Move"

Pedophiles.

They were always there, even inside of families and churches. Just underreported.

"We take full responsibility for the architectural decisions that allowed a single upstream provider action to cascade into a platform-wide outage, and detail below what happened, how we recovered, and the changes we are making to prevent this from happening again."

My guess is they will be switching away from Google Cloud. Because anything else would be nuts.

If you notice, it's mostly the higher priced burgers that seem to be 'askew'

Prop 13 actually limits property taxes and the assessments that can happen. You're actually hurting your argument with this point.

Regulations don't reduce supply because regulations don't purchase properties. People purchase properties and then that property is off the market.

The Bay Area is proof that limited supply (because there is only so much land in the area) + steady (or increasing) demand (because people need to live close to where they work for some baffling reason) will cause property values to raise steadily over time.

Again: It's supply and demand. Regulations have very little to do with price increases.

To be clear: I'm not anti-capitalist ... I'm just anti "wrong context"

You should be careful saying things like "high housing costs which driven up by overregulation". It sounds like you're trying to frame bad economic news like it's the fault of a more liberal political party in the US.

High housing costs are just an effect of capitalism. It's supply and demand - as simple as that. If they were grass huts in downtown San Fransisco, they'd be just as expensive. "Overregulation" is a fallacy.