“Mercedes claims they have a total addressable market of $30 trillion by demonstrating that everyone has sold their vehicles and switched to driving a Mercedes on the new $20/month leasing program. Mercedes has not provided a response when asked how much their cars actually cost to own.”
Someone sets it into a prompt loop.
I think this is a good example of risk through the lens of policy versus risk through the lens of personal choices.
There is no safe amount of alcohol when it comes to a government recommending the use of a substance. The decision to say “one glass a day” by the government has been shown to lead to adverse health outcomes in the population.
You are speaking to the chance that a single individual will experience adverse health outcomes from choosing for themselves to have a glass a day. You are probably right that on an individual basis it is a reasonable risk to take (though I don’t know what the exact numbers suggest).
People often confuse policy level risk assessments with individual risk assessments, without considering the law of large numbers, and how a policy maker must make decisions for the population, not an individual.
I think it’s unrealistic to think a new party would have been successful in 2020 and 2024, however, I think if he did choose to build a new party in 2016, the US would have had a third option for the 2028 presidential election. These things take time and we are now seeing what “could have been” from decisions ten years ago.