arebop

The median Penn grad ends up making a bit more money than the median Stanford grad and less than the median MIT grad. They all make considerably more than a Berkeley grad, who makes considerably more than someone from Iowa State University.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit... https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit... https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit... https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit... https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit...

SF City Economist Egan took a more careful look and estimated that SF's housing prices could be changed significantly by adding 100k housing units [https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/leveling-sf-housing-field-co...]. Maybe in some markets, like Venice Italy, you could make housing a lot cheaper by enacting a total ban on tourism. But I remain unconvinced that tourism in general or AirBnB in particular is a major factor in general. We can see from Egan's study that it isn't in San Francisco where tourism is our #2 industry, it's impossible to believe that across the country and around the world travelers are meaningfully preventing locals from finding a place to live. People just don't travel that much!

Also, this trick only works once. After we've eliminated global tourism to add fewer than 5% more houses globally, we cannot do it again next year and forever after to keep prices down while we continue to allocate increasingly more of society's wealth to the fixed supply of housing.

And in Venice Italy it is more like 67%. But this is not common.

There aren't many localities in which AirBnBs are a significant fraction of the real estate market. For example, San Francisco sees 40k tourists/day vs. a population of 800k. That's just 5%, and bear in mind SF is the cultural/tourism center of the SFBA with a population of 8000k. Prohibit short term rentals and convert all the hotels to housing while you're at it and you still won't move the needle much on housing prices.

I normally don't get much from presentation slides; they aren't even intended to be consumed independent of the speaker's remarks and they often amount to the bullet points of someone's outline. But in this case, the article is an extremely poor summary of this comparatively rich and substantial presentation. Thanks for sharing this link. It is much more comprehensible than the article itself.

It takes many months to develop new housing in the U.S. Even when you have local political support, there's a lot of custom manual work and so forth.

It's also very hard to find examples of long-term successful large-scale (town-scale) growth. So we can't just move substantial fractions of people from our largest cities to mid or small-sized cities in a matter of months or years (and get satisfactory results).

Undoubtedly NIMBY forces around the U.S. are partly to blame, but the Covid/WFH exodus is surely the more important factor at this point in time.

1/3 of Microsoft's revenues and operating income come from their cloud business, which has done much better than Google's.

San Francisco

Suppose you did pay each legislator $50M to work for the good of the whole country. Do you think this would prevent Manchin from being influenced by a $5M lagniappe? It's an extra 10%! And a certain well-known politician infamously took care to fleece the secret service for overpriced golf cart and hotel room rentals, despite getting hundreds of millions per year in emoluments revenues. Some people are really motivated by every penny despite what economists might tell you about marginal utility.

Google does not pay less than Amazon (source levels.fyi https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Amazon,Google,Salesforce&tra...).

I have heard people claim that Amazon pays more and by that they mean that if you hold your Amazon stock until vesting, it appreciates so much that it ends up being worth more than whatever the Google grant would have been worth. But then you have to ask if the relative performance of the stocks will remain stable over time despite having changed recently, and factor in differences in employee churn and so on.

The incentive is also much lower, given the ratio between driver comp and freight volume.

Every ex-Oracle engineer I've met says it was a terrible place to work compared to the big tech company where I work now. I also don't know anyone who went to work for Oracle after leaving my current company, fwiw.

One Medical is mass-market quasi-concierge medicine. It's a good compromise for middle class people. But the level of service is starkly different between One Medical and MD2. As you should expect when the costs are two orders of magnitude apart.

For something in the neighborhood of $50k you can sign up with a concierge medicine practice such as md2. You would get an excellent primary care doctor with great connections who is able and willing to coordinate and expedite all your care. It doesn't scale to the broad population, it's not efficient, etc. but in the U.S. you can get excellent, timely care with no compromises as long as you're rich.

Distributing it gives freedom of choice. No need to nominate a blessed CA that everyone has to use.

It's fine for anyone to mine cheesecoin. Probably better for this specific trade group in fact, if nonmembers decide to use this same blockchain for their cheese as well! Customers can still check if they are buying DOP specifically vs. 150mi-local worker coop biodynamic or whatever. The more widely used this system is, the more wholesalers, merchants, and consumers will learn of it and use it, and the harder it will be for fraudsters to pass off their goods as the Genuine Article.

Who's going to run the CA? Who's going to pay for it? Can you get all the customers to add the CA's public key to their trusted list? Will all the producers and merchants agree as well? The producers are the easy part, they are the ones coming up with this plan. Everyone else in the cheese economy: that could be harder. It's not just verifying the "this cheese was made by X" claim, also at every step of distribution you have to update the log "this cheese was sold to Y" and get that signed too, so all the distributors and merchants need to get certificates and learn how to apply the secret keys to cheeselogs. Using a blockchain also requires some crypto-effort, but it requires participants to agree on fewer things, gives the participants more freedom of choice. I could imagine someone proposing the centralized version you suggest, but apparently this particular group think it is better to do it in decentralized fashion and I can definitely see some advantages to that.

No, I don't think so. From the article I think there is a trade association that views fraud as a problem and thinks that that a verifiable provenance would help. I don't see an implication that the trade association or its members are particularly concerned about internal diversion or substitution of the product. It seems plausible that they think enabling consumers or merchants to verify cheese authenticity will reduce fraud, and they may see a distributed means of maintaining the records as a good way to achieve that.

Only if you have a trusted central database. With blockchain you can move your cheese independent of central authority.

Yes, and I became a user of Uber (ubercab in those days) because I preferred being able to book a ride just-in-time using the app rather than well in advance on the telephone, not because it was much cheaper than the car service or the taxis (as I recall, Uber and the car service cost about the same in those days, which was slightly more expensive the taxis for much more reliability and a better UX).

USDT has about $84 billion market cap, USDC has about $49 billion, UST had about $18.7 billion, as of 7 May [https://cryptonews.com/exclusives/usdt-vs-usdc-vs-ust-how-do...].

What's the incentive for the fraudster in this? The article doesn't really say, but it does link to one example YouTuber who demonstrates this fraud; he says this is a great way to get a free email account. You seem to suggest this is more about $5000+ than an email account; is the financial aid sent to students rather than the bursar's office?

The exact amount doesn't matter for this, all that matters is that you vote against taxes. It is sufficient that you suspect you may owe some amount and realize that you are required to figure it out. If it's hard to figure out, that serves the purpose of those who want you to associate negative emotions with taxes so that you'll vote against taxes.

Interesting, I see nothing available from store.apple.com until 6 April earliest, and 29 April for m1 max and even later depending on options.

Though, there is a shortage of m1 MacBooks. Is it really because they are low value (margin?) products relative to iPhone? I'm not sure.

I live in CA and according to my W2 box 12 DD, my cost is much more than this. Sure, maybe under this tax proposal my personal expense would go up but judging by my W2 and a quick scan of ACA estimated costs for a 22yo, the aggregate cost of this is much lower than what we're collectively paying today.

This is much cheaper than the cost of my big tech health insurance. It's at about the bottom 25th percentile by total estimated cost of ACA plans for a 22 year old. The article discusses some issues with the details but I'd happily approve a tax increase of this magnitude in exchange for achieving this efficiency of healthcare provision.

Probationary hiring also doesn't work that well for many candidates. Despite at-will employment, there's an understanding about W2 white collar employment that gives new hires the confidence to buy and sell houses, move across the country or around the world, terminate talks with other prospective employers and pause interviewing, etc. This is a cultural thing that could change over time, but it would be a significant change.

Yes but they may rate-limit you on getting more interviews (like they may tell you that you can try again next year).

If the cost of electricity rose 100% now, the kwh used to mine bitcoin would drop correspondingly.

IOW, Bitcoin isn't a scheme to destroy the world by exhausting energy or destroying the planet, it's just a bunch of people who want distributed consensus and they're willing to pay for it and you can't fathom why. You don't complain about aluminum fiends or anybody else spending money and potentially exploiting carbon externalities, ask yourself why not.

If you care about the environment so much then impose pollution controls rather than singling out one particular use you don't understand.

nope, not for adult content/services https://commerce.coinbase.com/legal/terms-of-service-2021-08...