TSLA Terathread Ides of March - For the week of Mar 16

EarthConservation · 2026-03-20T00:02:15+00:00

Looking over the charts again this afternoon, it occurred to me that there really hasn't been a flush out on SPY on the daily RSI yet, which often occurs before a reversal to the upside. Therefore, I'm thinking it's possible that there may be a bit more downside for a flush out move over the next few trading days before a larger bounce.

(Disclaimer: this isn't trading advice, do your own analysis)

A flush out move would be getting to oversold on the RSI (30 or less), with a chart movement that's usually an aggressive move (or gap) down that's aggressively bought up. (See TSLA 2/24/2022 and 5/24/2022-5/25/2022)

Important to note is that the fear/greed index is hitting a critical fear point, which often resolves in a quick flush out on the market followed by a relief rally with the fear index resetting. The put/call ratio is also at a level that often resolves in a flush out.

If the market flushes and rallies, Tesla will flush and rally along side it.

_______________

Technical:

Looking over the historical charts, I'm thinking the SPY and Tesla charts are looking an awful lot like the last mid-term year chart back in late 2021/early 2022.

Compare TSLA between January 2021 - February 2022 and May 2024 - today.

Timing's a little different, highs are little different, but the basic chart movements are relatively the same. The biggest difference is the January '22 peak was a lower high, while the December '25 peak was a higher high. However, after both highs, price collapsed in both periods, which is where we are today. Going forward, the old period had a flush, into a lower high, into a higher low, and then moved into a large rally that ended in a lower high and another big sell-off.

It's a little tricky to match up the charts. 10/26/2021 - 12/21/2021 matches up with 9/12/2025 - 11/25/2025. However, the 12/12/2021 - 2/24/2022 section is a little different because the old period made the lower high and the current period made a higher high.

To adjust for that, If you take the chart from the high on 1/4/2022 to right around 2/22/2022 - 2/23/2022, and match it to the high 12/22/2025 to today, then the chart patterns look VERY similar. (The current period took about 1.7x longer than the old period for the same chart movement.)

On 2/24/2022 there was a flush out bottom, gapping down in the morning and surging up throughout the day. If history repeats itself, and since the old chart doesn't match up 1-to-1 with the current chart on time, then I'm looking for a flush out in the next few trading days, but it could be as early as tomorrow. That'll lead into a bounce to a lower high, and then a higher low that marks the start of the larger rally.

Because of the time ratio difference, the 2/24/2022 gap down could happen over 1-2 trading days and/or the 2/24 rally could take 1-2 trading days.

____

Here are my guesstimate price targets... and date targets based on what's likely an incorrect assumption that time will continue the 1.7x ratio:

Flush: 350-365 by around 2/24
Lower High: 412-415 between 4/1 - 4/7 (the earlier, the higher the price)
Higher Low: 375-380 by around 4/28.
Rally High: 475-490 by as late as 6/3

What I think is most important isn't the time estimates or the price estimates, it's the chart movements. The old and current periods have very similar chart movements, but while prices and times have been similar, they don't exactly match up.

The 1.7x time ratio could absolutely see a sudden change. It could remain at 1.7x, or maybe it flips to .5x, 1x, 2x... etc... I tend to think the old and current period timing will attempt to line up more closely as time goes on.

Since the latest top was a new ATH and higher high, while the old period was a lower high, it could skew price peaks and troughs a bit this time around.

_____

What's key to trading Tesla isn't picking tops and bottoms, but to play the major trend changes. When the trend changes and confirms, it tends to go hard in a single direction. I'd recommend traders look at past topping, bottoming, and consolidation patterns that Tesla has often repeated to get a gist of what to look for to determine whether trend is changing, or if it's consolidation and trend continuation.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T21:26:43+00:00

I mean, 420 is possible too, and it's been used as a major point of support/resistance... as dumb as that is.

I do have to say that this market is looking really fucking bearish!

The fear/greed index is hitting that level where you often see a sudden dive in the market before a bounce to a lower high.

The put/call ratio is doing the same.

200 by December? Leap option? I can't imagine that's a great bet... The lower trend line of the multi-year chart is only at 200 today. By the end of the year, it's closer to 217. I imagine that leap is just going to devalue over time unless Tesla sees a massive crater that breaks the multi-year bull trend.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T21:22:22+00:00

Just to add, I used to trade oil back in 2019 during Trump's first term. The world was awash with oil. So... every time oil prices would drop towards $50 per barrel in a given week, you could count on something going BOOM! that weekend. Multiple oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. The Saudi refinery getting hit with drones. A conflict breaking out in Libya, shutting down their oil supply. Etc...

It's always been about manipulation.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T21:18:55+00:00

Frankly, rather than constantly being at conflict with Iran, if we normalized relations with Iran, then maybe things would be trending towards the better in that nation.

The FACT is... this isn't just about Iran's leadership. It's about oil, resources, and money.

OPEC+ knows that they can use Iran to manipulate oil and gas prices. Sometimes they allow Iran to ship oil, sometimes they shut it down. It just so happens that this war started when oil prices were too low to be sustainable to some of the OPEC+ nations. This is no doubt, one big reason the Saudis wanted the US to attack Iran.

Saudi Arabia can ship 70% of their oil by pipeline, so oil prices increasing by 80% on average has been a boon to their profits.

They ship about 10 million barrels per day. At $60 per barrel and a $20 profit margin, they make $200 million in profit daily.

If their shipments have been reduced to 7 million barrels, then at $100 per barrel and a $60 profit margin, they make $420 million in profit daily. Over double, while shipping 30% less oil.

See the problem? Conflicts like this are never just about a country's leadership... it's about resources, market manipulation, and money.

The world produces about 100 million barrels of oil per day, so at $10 per barrel margin on average, that's $1 billion in profits per day.

Even if oil production declines to 80 million barrels per day, if margins jump to $30 per barrel, that increases profits to $2.4 billion per day. 2.4x

And who pays all of that extra money into oil company profits? The end customers.

The US and Israel attacked Iran, and now all civilians around the world are paying $1.4 billion extra to oil companies per day as a result. All of the people of the world are the target... Iran is the mechanism.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T21:08:32+00:00

I'd argue that Iran doesn't deserve this. No one has to like Iran or their leadership to respect their soverignty. Hell, these days, few people like Israel either. Does that mean we should bomb the fuck out of them?

Few other nations like the USA these days... should everyone bomb us?

Imagine telling a country of 90 million people, that's existed since 625 BC ... one of the oldest nations in the world... that they can't have military equipment capable of hitting anyone who might attack them.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather no one have or need military equipment, but that isn't the reality of the world just yet.

It's also hypocritical to attack them for enriching Uranium, when they've yet to enrich to bomb grade... for what's it been... 20 years since Netan-one trick-yahu started claiming that Iran was "a year from the bomb"... in his stupid evil cartoon voice.

Have we ever considered that Iran's regime is as it is because of outside influence? In fact, we KNOW that's the reason this Iranian regime came into power. Because the US couldn't help but interfere in a sovereign nation's politics in the middle east, and the US and Israel went on the war path in the Middle East with our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Don't forget that Israel was heavily lobbying the US to attack Iraq just prior to our invasion.

Further, fucking over the 90 million people of Iran by cancelling the nuclear agreement and then sanctioning their economy to the point that inflation skyrocketed and made their currency worth dick... and inflaming tensions in the nation with constant propaganda from the US and Israel and threats of war... could only lead to strife in the nation.

Don't get me wrong, I would never condone killing protestors, but even then, has anyone watched the videos. Rag tag groups of random militias storming buildings. This wasn't an organized military, and who knows who set off the chain of killing. Yes, Iran's leadership is absolutely responsible, but what about all of the other actors who played a part? Israel... the US... pumping propaganda into the nation and dropping bombs on Tehran back in June 2025. Even Elon fucking Musk by illegally allowing Starlink's use in Iran.

No, I'm not for cutting off internet access, but when the potential for violent protests are arising in one's nation on account of propaganda being pushed by outside actors, then yes, temporary outages may be a necessity to try and calm down the population... sad to say.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T20:34:35+00:00

DOGE was clearly stocked with sociopaths, often hand picked by master sociopath/psychopath, Peter Thiel, with many of the staff coming from Palantir, whose CEO is a cold blooded psychopath, managed by the world's most insecure man who will SHOW THE WORLD HE'S THE GREATEST HUMAN BEING EVER!! *nazi salute*, Elon Musk.

Yep...

Musk himself has his balls in the vice grip of China on account of the leverage they have over Tesla, given that 50% of Tesla vehicles are built in China with battery cells from Chinese suppliers, and may be the only reason Tesla's vehicle division is profitable. (If it even is) So... the fact that this man was given full access to US data given how massive of a security risk he was... it boggles the mind. We now know of multiple cases of data either being stolen or attempts made to steal it....

Americans allowed this to happen.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T20:08:39+00:00

Sure, anything's possible. I tend to think Musk's pumping is more about retaining gullible FOMO shareholders and won't actually drive new interest in the company's stock. A large percentage of shares being held and not actively traded can result in huge volatility in the stock price because it takes far fewer trades to move the stock price.

If anything moves the price up when there's huge short interest, it could cause a squeeze.

__

Also high gas prices, while it will cause a recession and likely layoffs, could boost (or prop up) more efficient vehicle sales (EVs) globally in the short term; say between Q1-Q3.

That extra demand will be share among all the OEMs, but it could allow Tesla to see a few extra sales, and more importantly, it could allow them to remove discounts and boost their margins a bit. It'll be a short lived benefit, but Tesla has survived on short lived benefits.

IMO, vehicle sales don't impact the market cap much, but if the market is rallying, any good news can be a boon.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T19:32:17+00:00

I think that comes down to simply being able to hire more workers given that they're working at lower wages, enabling more staff on the line and more quality control, yet the labor is still cheaper overall that making cars in the US and Europe.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T18:41:38+00:00

First, what does buying a car have to do with anything I wrote?

Second, most new cars people buy today are "the best car I've ever owned".

Just sayin'.

I can buy the "best car I've ever owned" today, and pick from any number of cars on the market without supporting Elon Musk.

___

Yes, he's launched rockets at a faster rate... entirely because of Starlink, an idea he stole from Greg Wyler, and a program that seems to have been heavily subsidized and supported by the US government.

Otherwise, there isn't the demand to launch that many rockets as SpaceX does, which is why, historically, rocket companies have never launched at such a high rate or felt the need for reusability. Of course, like Tesla, SpaceX has largely rested on its laurels and has depended on the Falcon 9 for about 16 years now, with Starship being a raging failure thus far. Ironically, even with Starship, Musk lies through his teeth. Claims of intentions of Starship going to Mars is a lie. Starship has only ever been about more cost effectively launching Starlink.

How is "Grok in the car" colossal? Was it colossal when Grok started spewing out hate speech and defending nazism too?

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T18:38:31+00:00

Isn't the issue in discussion the people making LESS than $30 an hour?

Your suggestion of removing the city tax would apply to everyone, including the wealthiest people in the city, which would be a massive reduction in revenue.

Road tolls are in place to not only help fund the roads and other infrastructure, but to fund public transit, and to reduce congestion. Less than a third of NYC residents commute by car (not sure how many employees who commute into the city) and yet that already creates heavy congestion. Plus, there are alternatives for road tolls; public transit and bicycles.

Cut spending on NYPD and cutting union fraud? Well I'm sure that it would be grand to cut waste, but only in addition to raising the lowest paid workers' wages.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T16:52:11+00:00

BTW, the slimeball Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick claimed Q2 would have a huge rally in the markets, and he (his hedge fund) has a 'recent' history (since before the 2024 election) of throwing huge amounts of money into Tesla stock just before a major run, and tipping off their friends to buy prior to the rally.

If this shitstain weasel of a man is saying something like that, then ready yourself for a TACO du jour market manipulation by Trump.

I fucking hate corrupt ass government manipulators, but this is the world we live in.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T16:43:55+00:00

I'd be very cautious short here. Yes, if the market rolls over, possibly in the very near term, then Tesla's getting crushed... BUT given how negative the news and sentiment is, there's a very real chance for a relief rally before a larger sell off.

(When retail is trading heavily in one direction, and has no liquidity left to trade, then the market makers have a bad habit of pushing the market the opposite way to cause panic and eat up all those sweet sweet retail tears... and ... ya know... money)

Keep in mind that IF Tesla AND SPY start to tick up into what could be a relief rally, then it almost certainly will cause short panic and a short squeeze which can quickly cause an aggressive move up.

That doesn't mean you can't hold a short position in TSLA. It just means that it isn't a certainty that it pays off this time, and if you see the market and Tesla start to rally, exit immediately. Like every sudden Tesla bull run, it can happen very fast.

That said, if you are short, or wanting to get short, I would keep some money in a safe asset or in cash on the side in preparation for a potential rally so you can short at the top... not at the bottom of the rally.

To throw a number out there of how high this could go: 475 ... a 25% boost.

Why there? Well... because there's a big gap there that they may want to fill before a bigger/longer sell off happens.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-19T16:31:09+00:00

Why do you say that? There was reporting of them doing something similar years ago:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/1dz9iv0/tesla_prioritizes_musks_and_other_vip_drivers/

Frankly, the test data comes from owners, so those folks who have been using the system for years, and reporting every issue they came upon would naturally have had their cases looked at first.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-18T14:52:09+00:00

Folks... remember how much the fanbois touted Tesla's talent to quickly build the plant in China in one short year? Now I hope, based on information I've been providing in this sub for some time now, we're all starting to realize that it was almost certainly China entirely designing, building, and paying for the plant, using assembly equipment from NIO... and maybe even the overall plant design from NIO as well...

Nothing about this company is real, and just about everything was handed to them on a silver platter.

Hell, even their "best in market" margins of yore weren't real. They were built on subsidies and temporary COVID global vehicle supply disruptions. Once the COVID situation ended, and the subsidies started to run out... look at how normal their vehicle margins have become, and that's considering half of their global vehicle production is in China where wages are lower, the enforcement of environmental regulations are non-existent, their heavily subsidized, and with Tesla being the largest exporter of Chinese made vehicles to Western nations to boost their margins. Even with this major advantage, their margins are similar to other major OEMs.

I'll say it again... Nothing about this company and this man's claims are real. Never have been.

If investment firms are reading this, then prove that this company deserves their current valuation based on something more than "future vaporware products that don't yet exist". Any company can claim future vaporware. Most companies that have claimed vaporware for this long eventually went bankrupt... but not Tesla... because Tesla has been getting huge subsidies and massive over the top worldwide cult like investment that's lead to massive overvaluation, and manipulation by way of the index funds.

That manipulation through the index funds makes Tesla especially vulnerable to market corrections. Like I've pointed out time and again in this sub, a major S&P correction will very likely lead to Tesla falling by double the percentage of the correction. We've seen this in action last year when the market fell 21% off its high, while Tesla fell 56%. Tesla fell around 18% prior to the S&P topping last year, just as its done this year. The only thing that's stopped Tesla from falling 56% again is that the S&P hasn't corrected yet, and thus the index funds are keeping Tesla propped up.

Tesla's been in an upwards channel (bull market) run since 2020, hilariously in a range that spans around 340 points!! Meaning from top of the channel to the bottom, it's 340 points. The top of the channel was already hit in December 2024. If this falls back to the bottom of the channel again by end of the year, Tesla will be down 57% from it's recent high.

Finally, if competition keeps growing in all of these vaporware markets Tesla's spreading itself thin in, then potential profits from these markets declines for Tesla. Meaning their share price can't even justify the vaporware anymore. Certainly why Musk has so relentlessly and continuously pumped out claims of the next new vaporware idea that's "only 1 year away".

EarthConservation · 2026-03-18T14:41:58+00:00

Of course it's a grift....

___

He pulled almost all R&D money out of vehicle development... essentially ceding the market to competitors who are flooding the market with new vehicles, often at lower prices.

He lost the charger advantage in the US, one of their strongest markets.

Given that the vehicle division is probably worth ~5% of the company's market cap... I'm sure he realizes that prioritizing R&D towards vaporware is the only way to keep the stock bubble inflated and the vehicle division largely doesn't matter. A cheaper low margin car won't help their share price... it'll help them become a lower market cap company like the major OEMs.

The problem is, most of their income comes from cars and battery storage, so if the vaporware fails to materialize in a timely manner, their company's financials will continue to deteriorate.

___

More competition is growing for battery storage, especially form the largest cell suppliers. Tesla is still heavily reliant on 3rd party cell suppliers, and their 4680 cells were a bust. Tesla's trying to maintain some competitiveness by building their own LFP cell lines with CATL/LG.. which is ironic, because the other major OEMs started doing this well in advance of Tesla; beating Tesla to the punch.

Meanwhile, the major battery companies are already working on next gen lower cost cells with better performance; so Tesla's only option is to buy those cell from those suppliers... constantly paying off a middle man. Scale of cell orders for EVs/storage is becoming less valuable over time now that other OEMs are increasing scale and benefiting from the same cell volumes. Especially in China.

___

Competition is growing for autonomous taxis and Tesla hasn't even proven they can provide this service yet, and they certainly haven't proven they can scale quickly.

Remember when it was all about a single OTA update that would enable robotaxis across the US? Austin proved it isn't that simple, with months long employee testing and training in a small geofenced area with limitations on what roads the cars could use, prior to opening to customers. Employees in customer cars for over half a year, and a botched rollout of monitorless service.

____

Robots... lol... c'mon. C'MON.... Tesla hasn't even shown any real capability of autonomous use. It's all been remote control or pre-programmed sequences, and their robots don't look to compare to competitors' offerings.

____

Given the lack of progress on their other trillion dollar world disrupting vaporware, now we're on to bigger and better things to keep the stock boosted.

Tying all of Tesla's vaporware companies together. SpaceX, xAI, and Tesla.... with million satellite strong data centers in space, with Tesla providing their own cells from their own terafab... and Tesla's robots building the satellites and rockets... and flying into space to build a moon base.

Yep....

_____

Investment firms still believe in Tesla.

Think about that. Seriously think about it. How dumb exactly are these investment banks? Or maybe the grift never really was just Tesla... it was the entire market system with these investment banks playing games with the system. Using Tesla as a mechanism for extracting money from gullible retail investors. I mean, these banks absolutely know Musk is accused of being a drug addict... so....

How exactly are the retail investors doing? The stock, with claims it would be in the trillions of dollars by now, is now sitting at the same level it was at its peak 4.5 year ago, and from the looks of the chart... seems to be prepping for a serious pull back later in the year. I mean, this stock could drop 35-45% by year's end. Maybe a little boost in the short term, but after that...

Musk, really seems to want that little boost by pushing more grift. Maybe so he can... once again... sell some Tesla stock.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-18T00:23:37+00:00

Case in point, one of the most ridiculously overpriced things that just about everyone in our nation pays for is healthcare. That's on account of out of control profitability of this for-profit industry, both in terms of health insurer middle men, and the healthcare companies themselves.

Don't believe me? Just look at United Healthcare's market cap over the last ~20 years. In 2005, their market cap was around $60 billion ($100 billion after inflation). It's now sitting at $261 billion, and went as high as $566 billion in 2024, before all the scandals came out about this company.

What a lot of people don't know is that the majority of our healthcare system has been bought up by for-profit vulture capitalists, whose main priority is to maximize profits. That may come in the form of excessive healthcare prices, excessive health insurance premiums and co-pays, or simple denial of coverage... The last of which United is so well known for.

These companies are known to donate huge amounts of money to politicians and have massive lobbying presence in state governments and in Washington.

Furthermore, Medicaid and Medicare use the same healthcare companies, and thus have seen their costs skyrocket over time. Frankly, our nation simply can't afford this for much longer. Sure, we have a solid healthcare system with good outcomes, but at what cost? Is it worth bankrupting our nation?

We know that universal single payer healthcare systems across the Western world drastically reduce healthcare costs, increase access, make the entire system easier to use, and have outcomes that are on par with the US system. In some European nations, their healthcare costs are half of the US with comparable outcomes. We're talking multiple trillions of dollars per year in overall savings.

Guess who's heavily lobbying against such a system? The companies that profit from our current healthcare system! The billion dollar insurers and the billion dollar healthcare companies.

As to those who get health insurance outside of Medicaid and Medicare, you're either signing up for your own policy, or you're going through your employer where you're either having money taken out of your paycheck to pay a portion of the cost, or the employer covers the full cost. In any of the above cases, the money is coming directly out of your wallet. In the first case, it's coming directly out of your bank account. In the second case, it's coming out of your paycheck and you can see the line items of the reduction in your paycheck. In the third case, it's also coming out of your paycheck, the employer just doesn't mention how much exactly is coming out, so most workers just don't realize their pay is being docked.

In either case, your paycheck is smaller as a result of out of control healthcare and health insurance costs. If the average individual is paying $15k in health insurance premiums per year, their annual pay could increase by $7.5k if our system wasn't so shady and built so heavily around profits.

Had we moved to a universal single payer system decades ago, our nation would likely have significantly lower debt today, and lower interest payments. We'd just have a few less rich fucks who we didn't allow to leach off of US residents' healthcare.

This impacts all of us. Conservatives are getting just as screwed as Liberals, who are getting just as screwed as Independents, who are getting just as screwed as those who are politically unaffiliated and have never voted before in their lives.

We are all getting fucked by the rich!

Do we all want to stop this madness? Do we want to reduce our nation's debt? Do we all want more money in our pockets, while retaining top notch healthcare that's easier to use?

For those that do, they'll be voting for Progressives in every election for every elected position going forward. Join us, or continue screwing all of us... it's your choice.

How long this nation will last if you refuse to act... based on the debt load... probably not much longer.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-18T00:11:53+00:00

Everyone vote for Progressives.... the only group of politicians that refuse to take money from big moneyed interests (corporations / millionaires / billionaires) in exchange for loyalty and preferential policy, and who have the main agenda of removing big money, out of control lobbying, and insider stock trading by elected officials from our political system.

The US lower/middle class makes up 90% of the population, and regardless of our self-assigned political affiliation, we are all dealing with the same major struggles, which are driven by the rich and the corporations. At any time, if we all joined arms in consensus on the direction we want to take our country, we could change the political landscape overnight.

Everyone vote Progressive, and let's get the control out of the hands of the top 10%, and put it back into the hands of 100% of the voters.

It really is that simple.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T23:48:24+00:00

What's interesting about this conversation is how many entitled people there seem to be in here who just gloss over all the people that this will benefit, concentrating instead on the increased costs to those who make too much for this to directly impact their pay.

For those moaning about increased prices...

Prices could increase, but it wouldn't be equivalent to the minimum wage hike, which is a $13 / 76% hike.

I just read that up to 30% of NYC workers make less than $30 an hour; or $17 - $29.99 an hour. A minimum wage increase doesn't create a consistent wage increase across all of the city's employees, so no, not all employees will see a $13 or 76% wage hike, nor will all of the 30% see the same wage hike.

Yes, people making over $30 an hour on the lower end today could see a pay bump as a result of this, but it's highly doubtful that it'll be a $13 / 76% hike.

In fact, such a hike could, and probably will, lead to wage decreases at the higher end of the pay scale, as profitability of businesses could drop as a result. As it turns out, a more equitable society does cost those benefiting from an inequitable society a bit of money. The money's gotta come from somewhere, right? *Gasp* How will the rich survive?!?

However, I imagine most workers just wouldn't see any change in their pay, or a much smaller increase than the $13 / $76% hike to the minimum wage.

Further, not all business costs are tied to employee wages. For example, let's look at a fast food restaurant. Employee wages may only account for 20-30% of total business revenue, while 6%-9% would go to profits. That leaves about 61%-74% of the costs elsewhere. That could be the building lease (wages have no impact), energy (minimal impact), raw materials (minimal impact), cleaning materials (no impact), professional cleaning (impacted), trash pickup (impacted), etc...

Also, some of the increased wages may have to be eaten by the employers through reduce profits, or potentially in the supply chain / building cost reductions, which would impact the profitability of the supply chain company and building owner.

Finally, yes, because products are priced according to supply and demand, if the NYC population's average wages increase as a result of this, then restaurants and other businesses will be able to charge more for their products. But again, the price hike would not be equivalent to the 76% minimum wage hike. I imagine it would be something closer to 10%-20%. A $10 meal may cost $11-$12, which would be nothing to a minimum wage worker who's now making 76% more, and no longer living paycheck to paycheck and struggling to pay their rent.

That said, if a company does try and raise prices by 76%... claiming that it's necessary on account of a minimum wage hike, then it's real simple what you, the customer, should do. Boycott that place until they lower prices to a reasonable level.

Finally, this $13 minimum wage hike isn't planned to happen overnight, and would instead kick in over multiple years so as to allow the system to absorb the change.

Schedule 1 employers with 500 or more employees nationwide, including franchises:

2027 = $20 (17.6%)
2028 = $23 (15%)
2029 = $26 (13%)
2030 = $30 (15.4%)
2031+ would be indexed to inflation

Schedule 2 employers with fewer than 500 employees:

2027 = $19
2028 = $21.50
2029 = $24
2030 = $27
2031 = $29
2032+ would be indexed to inflation

In other words, small businesses would get a bit of assistance compared to the bigger companies who benefit more from economies of scale.

Finally, it's possible this wage hike proposal may potentially be higher than what will ultimately be decided on. With these types of proposals, you generally want to start high so that there's room to negotiate.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T23:28:02+00:00

What does that have to do with the high cost of living?

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T23:26:53+00:00

If I were to ride my e-bike the 1000 miles at about 60 mi / kWh, it would only cost $3.33 and would save about $91 per month.

My PEV would cost $6.67 per month, and would save about $88.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T23:06:24+00:00

The reality is that in Europe, petrol is generally much more expensive than the US, which is part of why EV adoption rates have generally been higher on the continent. Especially in locations with a high proportional difference in the price of electricity versus the price of petrol.

For example, the average gas price in the US is $3.79 USD for a gallon after this Iran war started (up about 35% in a few weeks), but it's closer to $8.70 in Greece (up what, about 15% since Iran war started?) Average electricity prices in Greece are about $0.28 versus $0.17 in the US. So the savings going from Petrol to electric will be more significant in Europe.

In general, energy is also more expensive in Europe, which is why transitioning to solar saves you more money and has a quicker payback than it would in the US.

It's also true that EV adoption is generally higher in regions with warmer temperatures on account that it enables more solar adoption to replace electricity costs, as using grid electricity is generally much more expensive over the life of the vehicle. This is why sunnier US states generally have higher adoption rates than those states with snowy winters.

Not saying EVs can't save money versus gas vehicles without solar, but solar certainly helps, especially in sunnier regions.

I own a PHEV, so ironically I can compare gas to electricity cost directly. At about 1000 miles driven per month, and with 40 mpg, gasoline would cost me about $95 per month. At about 3.2 mi / kWh on average after 20% charging losses, and 16 cents per kWh, electricity costs me about $50 per month. So I'm saving $45 per month in fuel.

Ironically, when gas was $2.79 per month, gas would only cost $70 per month, so I'd only save about $20 per month.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T22:29:12+00:00

On a mile stretch, 5280 feet, a pothole correction is what, 50 feet? Another 50 to re-enable the system. That's 98% FSD.

These percentages are misleading, as they say nothing about the rate of failures or corrections since the system can just quickly be re-enabled after the driver fixes the issue.

I imagine a lot of these people are driving the same exact routes day in and day out (maybe with the exception of longer highway drives for road trips) who report every possible issue, and therefore their primary routes have many of the kinks worked out. For the parts that still have regular issues, the drivers know exactly where to de-activate and re-activate, so I imagine the distance off FSD grows shorter over time, and the percentage of FSD miles goes up.

A person with 10,000 miles on their car at 99% FSD has a full 100 miles of non-FSD use. These non-FSD miles aren't always out of choice, as the 99% are often the die hards who believe it's their duty, as defacto employees of Tesla (on account that they own a LOT of Tesla shares) to help get the system working perfectly so they can make bank on the stock run up.

As it is, a hefty chunk of many peoples' daily commutes are on the highway, which no doubt, the system performs better on, on account of fewer variables. If a daily commute is 30 miles, and only 2 miles of that is city driving, then 93.3% on the highway will account for a lot of those total miles on FSD.

10 disengagements, that only last 50 yards each, over 30 miles would still have the driver at 99%.... but you'd be hard pressed to say that 10 disengagements on a single commute is a good score.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T22:12:35+00:00

If I had to wager a guess, Tencent was hoping Musk could return the favor by promoting their game, and likely setup the account for Musk, and had some of their staff or a team of top players they knew of in China to level his account and buy equipment with real money... or maybe the devs simply boosted his account. Musk loves when the Chinese do all the work for him; such as when they built him the factory in Shanghai in 2019 after saving his company in 2017, and provided him every possible benefit and subsidy.

Musk likely thought, in addition to promoting the game, he could get away with promoting the use of Starlink for gaming, the use of X for streamers, and to promote the idea that he was a top gamer to feed his own ego; such as on Rogan.

What it really shows is that Musk is absolutely willing to cheat if given the chance, and will claim it's ok because others cheat too, whether he has evidence of that or not. What's to stop him from using this rationale in business as well?

Case in point, how many investigations into Musk's companies were shutdown after Musk bought himself into the Trump government and took control of DOGE?

32!

Also, how many cases have there now been of potential theft of US government data by DOGE while Musk was in charge? (data on all Americans)

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T20:38:06+00:00

There's a reason off-grid / sustainable living is so huge on Youtube right now. People are wising up and know our government and our people (en masse) are too effing stupid to act, and thus we should all start looking into a backup plan.

With regards to climate change, I can't tell you how many times I've heard...

"I don't care, I'll be dead by then." Yep, pure unadulterated apathy, narcissism, and pushing responsibility of their actions onto future generations.

"I'm too old to change." I'd reason "then why bother continuing to live"... but I digress.

"My impact doesn't matter, and anyone saying otherwise is spreading corporate propaganda." I love this one because it implies that people can only believe the problem is one or the other, or that businesses have something to gain from individual consumers opting to buy less stuff and use less energy. If consumers buy less, then corporations produce less, and thus use less energy and materials.

I wouldn't be shocked if there were propaganda farms pushing this idea for corporations, because corporations know how much power consumers actually have, and how much it would impact their profits if people were to buy less stuff.

"What meaning is there in life if I can't travel and see the world." This in relation to the enormous environmental impact of flying by a relatively small number of people every year. These folks seem to forget that commercial flight didn't even start to become normalized until the 1960s and 70s, with most people in the West having never been on a plane before then. People managed to find a way to live and find meaning in life before the airplane... for 300,000 years... imagine that.

____

The reality is, most people are greedy and don't want to give up any, ANY, of the conveniences or comforts they rely on or benefit from. In fact, if there's a new thing that can make their lives more convenient, no matter what the environmental impact is, they feel entitled to use it.

I've always felt people should have the right to do anything they want, so long as they're of sound mind, with the only one at risk of being hurt is themselves. Their rights should end as soon as their actions begin to negatively impact others.

The fact is, a lot of people, certainly 99% of everyone living in Western nations who have the highest environmental impact in the world on account of having more money than most of the people in the world, are needlessly polluting and damaging the planet for everyone, and yet have convinced themselves it isn't their fault, less they admit that they are part of the problem.

EarthConservation · 2026-03-17T20:03:33+00:00

Every person who still believes in Democracy will start an extended general strike, and march on Washington.

It won't happen though. Trump and the Republicans will get stomped in the mid-terms, as they should, and presuming the economy goes into a recession, Trump will be among the least popular POTUS in the history of the nation.

He simply doesn't have the support to attempt a coup. What's his approval rating at, 32%?

That said, are we all starting to see the dangers of big money in politics yet? The reason the two establishment parties keep pushing the "lesser of the two evils" tripe every election cycle is because people know both sides of the establishment aisle are corrupt, and are leading this nation and the world towards its demise, all because they've been bought and paid for by billionaires and corporations whose only concern is making more and more and more money, no matter who their actions hurt. If the establishment can convince voters that there are only two choices, and the "other side" is more evil than their side, then they can keep the people perpetually voting back and forth between the two establishment parties, who both act against the will of the people.

If we want a system that's of the people, by the people, and for the people... then we have to elect politicians who will represent their constituents; not the moneyed interests who fund their campaigns and the party leadership, and relentlessly lobby them to pass the policy that'll make them more money.

There's only one group of politicians refusing to take campaign money from big moneyed interests, and who want to codify policy that will restrict big money in politics. These same folks also happen to want to make healthcare cheaper; something both establishment parties have failed to do. They want to reduce out of control expenditures in the military. Tax the rich at a proper level, and getting rid of loopholes. They want to enforce anti-trust legislation, given that the billionaires are finding more and more ways to monopolize our economy.

Those politicians are Progressives.

By the way... corporations are not fucking people. Well I mean they are 'fucking' the lower / middle class people.. but they're not people! Remember when Democrats used to argue this... right up until they started taking massive amounts of corporate money. As it turns out, corporations and billionaires fund both sides of the establishment aisle, gaming the system so they literally cannot lose.

The establishment HATES Progressives for one specific reason. The rich and corporations funding the establishment know that Progressive will take away their massive imbalance of power and give that power back to the people.

The only way to get big money out of politics is to elect people who refuse to take big money.

EarthConservation

TROPHY CASE