No, of course they don't.

The worlds most popular tractor brand (Mahindra) doesn't even crack the top 5 in the US.

If American farmers wan't the most repairable tractor, they should just buy the one that is used in poorer, less-connected regions of the world. Those are built for durability and repairability.

Mahindra's line up tops out at 71 horsepower. Americans use 400-800 horsepower row croppers towing 36 row planters.

Some farm, typically agriculture. Your average cattle, sheep, or other livestock farmer will not be running a 400+ HP tractor in most cases. 50-110 hp is common for general property use such as clearing, slashing, loading, material moving. In these cases a Mahondra, or any number of others is ideal. You can get John Deere in the same size, but would be mad to do so with the repairability issues and higher cost.

> Your average cattle, sheep, or other livestock farmer

is a very different person in different countries. The US has large scale agriculture and use large scale equipment.

Those large scale farms aren't the ones who have a problem with John Deere or repairability. Corporate will handle that.

The most popular tractor on American farms right now is the John Deere 5075E, which has between 73 and 75HP.

So you're wrong.

So my keys have never truly been missing, eh?

You have a valid reason to expect that your keys are in the place you remember leaving them.

That’s not the case with large flocks of living animals. In that case, you’re simply making a category error in imagining that those living animals behave much like your keys.

So everyone else's keys are missing materially all of the time?

In an age where cameras are everywhere, all one has to do for good PR is good.

Only if you own the camera system, otherwise they won't publish the video of you doing good

Which is why another Democratic mayor in another blue city, who Mamdani considers “the most effective Democrat in office”, someone who inspires him - nobody knows that politicians name unless they’re really into politics. I’ll admit, even I’ve only heard of her because Mamdani name checked her.

Mamdani’s every tiny initiative gets tonnes of PR because Mamdani and his team are masters of media. That’s what sets him apart from Michelle Wu or anyone else.

I know her name, but I definitely can't name anything she's done.

Mamdani is the mayor of the largest city by far. Of course he has the most visibility of all the mayors.

Not just the largest city, but also the city where much of our national media is based or has a very large presence. It's so bizarre when I visit friends and family in other parts of the country and they know more about my local news stories than their own cities.

I never heard of Eric Adams doing anything, ever. I couldn’t name the mayor between Adams and Giuliani. And I only know Adams because he was corrupt beyond belief. Mamdani is an outlier in how much positive attention he garners, even considering he’s mayor of NY.

"All my haters become my waiters when I sit down at the table of success."

It is actually annoying that as a UK user of bsky and HN, I hear more about Mamdani than about Sadiq Khan. Mamdani is everywhere. Mind you, I'm also hearing a lot more about the former mayor of Manchester these days.

Brings to mind this: https://x.com/NYCMayor/status/1971618033115550180

Ha! That is genuinely confusing for a moment. What is the solution? Wipe the account and archive it all somewhere? That destroys all the meta-commentary that exists in other Tweets. Maybe just some system that lets you mark all previous posts with something that says "This account is for a government official. This post was made under the tenure of a prior holder of this position."

While clunky, I think what you suggest is the best method.

Yes they all do this. "Anyone can apply. This company does not provide visa sponsorship."

Is this in retaliation for a federal judge ruling three days ago that Trump's pause on Diversity Visa processing was unlawful?

Or is this in retaliation for a federal judge ruling 6 days ago that Trump's ban on immigration from 75 countries was unlawful?

Yes.

I think the Japan tsunami videos showed as many, but it was spread out over the course of almost 2hrs and happened in slow motion over a large area. You could see some cars speeding to safety while others were washed away. Some stayed in taller structures assuming they were safe and were slowly washed away.

What if Vail owns all the ski resorts?

The beach? In winter?

The actual thing that skiiers in NA do now is fly to Europe or Japan, where Vail has not yet ruined skiing.

Summer vacations compete with winter vacations for people's money. You can do fun stuff at the beach even in winter, and the beach was just one example.

Thanks for bringing up international competition, too.

Btw, just because it's cold in one part of the world, doesn't mean it's cold in another part.

"Don't ski" is not a solution to a ski resort monopoly.

Yeah, it is. Recreational skiing is one of the purest of luxury goods.

There are plenty of other exclusive hobbies that can more than soak up the demand. Bird hunting is basically a straight drop in replacement (expensive travel, expensive equipment, outdoors, etc).

None of the skiers I know ski because they want to spend a lot of money, they spend a lot of money because they want to ski. (Hauling yourself up a freezing cold mountain might not sound like much fun but they quite enjoy it.) Nothing but skiing will do.

None of the hunters I know hunt because they want to spend a lot of money, they spend a lot of money because they want to hunt (birds or otherwise.) (Crouching in a tree or a swamp for hours on end might not sound like much fun but they quite enjoy it.) Nothing but hunting will do.

Hobbies are almost never drop in replacements for each other.

My point was that if skiing kills itself something else that scratches most of the same itches will become fashionable among the same demographics. I have no idea what it would actually be (if I did I would invest in it, lol).

Kind of like how the cruising industry has exploded over the past couple decades as the "traditional" US vacation spots have become unaffordable to the masses. It's not a straight drop in, but it's close enough. The same people who used to go to the Poconos, Tahoe or Cape Cod or still do, but they're not being replaced because people see the cost vs the fun you get and say fuggit. The old places continue on but they cater to a small exclusive clientele because the other potential customers are doing something else, probably at the same price point but a better value.

>(Hauling yourself up a freezing cold mountain might not sound like much fun but they quite enjoy it.)

The vodka makes you warm on the inside. (joking but also not)

I guess you can argue that the monopolization of a luxury good has no victims. Who feels bad for the consumers of luxury? But the monopoly itself is the harm, and especially highlighted in this example since its private monopolization of a public resource.

I think your argument would need to be that it has no sympathetic victims.

In any case, local monopolies that come from land are a common theme, not just for ski resorts. It's literally what land ownership is--or even just a 99 year leasehold, even with no freehold 'owning'.

The usual solution is property taxes (or land value taxes) to have the taxman soak up the benefits of any monopoly.

99.99% actually.