> the point of all of these models is to protect workers’ incomes against the capriciousness of capitalism [...]
> Europeans are unlikely to embrace the American model, but they might accept the Danish one
The point seems to rather be that European economy could have a better outlook if the labor market was more efficient. Not that safety nets should be cut.
Important to consider that your stat is likely comparing primary energy, not secondary energy. E.g. an electric car or a heat pump use less primary energy than the fossil equivalent.
Opus being a frontier model and this being a superficial failure of the model. As other comments point out this is more of a harness issue, as the model lays out.
We have speed pedelecs (45kmph) where I live with extra restrictions compared to normal ebikes which are capped at 25kmph. On the countryside 25kmph just doesn't get you places fast enough.
> And I dont think I would want to share cycling lanes with people doing more than that either
The regulation I wish for is for speed pedelecs to be allowed to use cycle paths whenever the street has a speed limit > 50kmh. Being on a 70-100kmph road as a 45kmph bike is needlessly dangerous when there's a usually idle bike path next to it.
In the late 2000s i remember that "nobody is willing to pay for things on the Internet" was a common trope.
I think it'll culturally take a while before businesses and people understand what they are willing to pay for. For example if you are a large business and you pay xxxxx-xxxxxx per year per developer, but are only willing to pay xxx per year in AI tooling, something's out of proportion.
The point seems to rather be that European economy could have a better outlook if the labor market was more efficient. Not that safety nets should be cut.