It roughly correlates to cost of living, but Hawaii and Washington (which have high cost of living) are still pretty low in this measure.

It's just a combination of cost of living and unadjusted poverty rate. Hawaii and Washington have very low unadjusted poverty rates. California has very high cost of living.

Why would it matter if they're not considered poor in the majority of the country, when their income makes them poor where they actually live? If you tell someone making $40k in San Francisco that $40k isn't considered poor in Mississippi, that doesn't help the fact that they can't pay their bills every month

It does if you have sufficient reservoirs

We have reservoirs for a reason, so that we don't have to rely solely on natural moisture retention

They can't prove that a low dose is safe. That's not the same as saying that a low dose is proven to be dangerous.

The length of the petals is ocean waste per capita. The size of the circles is total.

The US has extensive anti-littering campaigns so the vast majority of our waste never touches an ocean.

You're misreading it. The total plastic waste circle and the plastic waste into oceans circle have different scales, so even though the total plastic waste circle is smaller for the philippines, it's still about 1 million tonnes while the plastic waste into oceans circle is amount 500k tonnes.

Corporations generally pay a 15% income tax

Also half the stores are closed on Sundays lmao

(Lower manhattan car commuters who live >10 minutes from a train/express bus stop)/(total lower manhattan car commuters) = some number less than 0.1%

Minimum wage isn't the entire economy, it's like 1% of the economy. That's basically meaningless

This is why it's hilarious when people think they should get paid a lot of money for their data. Your own data is worth like $5/year max. You might be able to generate $10-15 worth of ad revenue but it also costs $5-10 of computing and overhead to get that revenue, so no company is gonna pay more than $5/year for your data

Revenue vs profit

Planes aren't a cost. If you spend $100 million in cash for a $100 million plane, your total assets are still at $100 million. However, planes depreciate over time, which is a cost. When that $100 million plane depreciates so it's only worth $90 million, that $10 million drop in value from depreciation is a cost.

For any rented planes, they'd be accounted for in the 'aircraft rent' category.

They both do the same thing. They both create an endothermic reaction (which sucks up heat and makes the surroundings cooler) by melting ice.

For streets, we don't care if they're cold as long as they don't have solid ice/snow on them. So melting accomplishes this.

For ice cream, we want the ice cream to become cold, so adding ice+salt outside accomplishes this by melting the ice and making the ice cream container cooler.

Depends on whether or not the ASIC is turing complete. If it isn't, then there are some operations you wouldn't be able to run on it.

This isn't viable in many places though because the people downstream of you have a right to your runoff

Oh CO2 is definitely bad for the environment (and to an extent so are landfills) but microplastics (and plastic) aren't the main concern.

Landfills are sealed off from the environment. Incinerators incinerate the microplastics into CO2.

Most countries landfill or incinerate their plastic. However that's dependent on people not littering

You have the option to not litter

They had a lot of losses prior to 2021

I think the investment gains include unrealized gains, which are not generally taxed. Out of their taxable income, they paid like 16% which is pretty standard for a corporation.

Normally, when you apply a lot of force on an object with a sharp tip, the tip will bend. For example, if you try to stab glass with the tip of a kitchen knife, the knife will most likely just bend (obviously don't try this at home, very high chance of injury)

Ceramic is very non-bendy. This means that when you use a sharp ceramic tip to hit a piece of glass, all of the force gets transferred to the glass (at a very small point) instead of being lost to the bending of the tip. A lot of force on a small point will punch through glass and shatter it, kinda like how bullets work.

In addition, as others have mentioned, ceramic is harder than glass which can allow it to slice into the glass, giving it a better 'bite' into the glass instead of just slipping off like a softer (lower Mohs scale material) would do. However this isn't a full explanation. For example, bullets can shatter glass despite being lower on the Mohs scale.

Diamond is also harder than glass, and can slice glass, but it will shatter before the glass will. Ceramic is much more shatter-resistant than diamond and will stay intact long enough to transfer most of its force into the glass.

That's not really the case here. Most of the suppliers for chip manufacturing are Japanese or American. However those suppliers will have field offices in Taiwan due to the large number of customers there.