In a liquidation sale, common stock holders only get paid if there is money left over after everyone else gets their cut. Creditors, bondholders and preferred stock holders are ahead of them in line.

It’s also worth pointing out that the company is not publicly traded, it’s privately owned, so in effect the shares were always worthless. It’s not clear to me if they were actually ownership shares or just options against the possibility of the company going public at some point in the future.

At what point do they stop pretending they are all about reducing government waste?

Starbucks has a huge corporate office in Seattle.

I’m pretty sure the avian flu outbreaks have had a much more significant impact on the price of eggs than any state regulations. I suppose they’ll try to blame California for that, too.

“We can’t have people working remotely. Look, I’m the CEO and even I’m commuting into the office every day!”

Edit: apologies - it’s not 30%, it’s closer to 6.5%.

You’re still way off the mark, here. Market cap is the total value of their stock shares on the market at the current stock price. It has zero relation to GDP, which is meant to represent the value of actual goods and services produced. For that, you need to look at their actual revenues. In 2024, Nvidia had total revenues of about $61B. That’s about 0.2% of the US GDP. Which is still massive, but nothing like what you’re suggesting.

And that totally makes sense. If you’ve been pulled over for, say, speeding, and the officer notices that you aren’t wearing your seat-belt then that should get added. But it seems like that would be really easy for the officer to make a mistake or simply lie about as a primary offense. I did look it up and Florida has a primary enforcement law for seat-belts, which means technically they can pull you over for not wearing it without any other reason for the traffic stop. So that sucks. I mean, I want people to wear seat-belts, but that just seems like a statute ripe for abuse.

He refused to provide his license during a traffic stop which is certainly an arrestable offense. However, it kind of sounds like the stop might have been illegal in the first place. They pulled him over for not having his headlights on. During the day. In clear weather. They also say they pulled him over for not wearing his seat-belt, but I don’t see how they could have possibly known that until they had already pulled him over. So you start to see how this looks more like profiling/harassment than a legit traffic stop.

If the traffic stop is illegal, then you are well within your rights to refuse to cooperate.

This seems really important and not like a petty attempt at distraction at all.