A newspaper that read more like analytical research would be more appealing. The media would benefit as a whole, and prosper, if they strove to remove the personal opinions and beliefs from their reporting.
1,219 karma · joined July 18, 2021
A newspaper that read more like analytical research would be more appealing. The media would benefit as a whole, and prosper, if they strove to remove the personal opinions and beliefs from their reporting.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-founda... https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/clinton-foundation-la...
In short, really no country on earth as the freedoms of speech and expression that America does but it's all changing. It's possible you could be arrested but it would really depend on the situation, and the person. You, arrested? Probably not. Jordan Peterson, maybe.
1. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/thai-man-faces-record-50-...
2. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12557713/Our-silent...
My concern has always been the capitalist conundrum with vaccines. If you are a drug company and create a vaccine, the natural business question is "how can we make this vaccine a requirement" to guarantee profits? We should NOT want drug companies to view vaccines as a profit generating drug, because then they will find ways to make them mandatory, regardless if they are effective or even needed.
There is very little to stop a drug company from creating a vaccine out of thin air, regardless of its efficacy, convincing government that it must be mandatory, and then sitting back as the profits roll in.
It is possible that little changes for consumers in the near term because many sellers are used to including the cost of a buyer’s agent in their sale price. But over time, new brokerage business models could emerge that make it easier for buyers to choose low-cost options
"could" not "should" or will.
Except for a huge payout for the lawyers, I don't see how this ruling is going to affect home buyers, or sellers in the near future. There would have to be a law put in place, so going forward it's still an agreement between private parties to sell or buy a house.
I'm also troubled by what the Wall Street Journal claims is that this might push a lot of young realtors out of the career field. That can't be seen as a positive outcome.
Overall, I'm still unclear exactly how this is going to help anyone. Especially for the overwhelming majority of buyers and sellers who DON'T want to be their own agent, and want to hire the best realtor to do it for them. I remember when this first came out and lots of people on HN said I'll just be my own agent. Well, that's fine, but that's not an option for most people.
I think regardless there will still be plenty of realtors doing business, and they will still make bank.