dtwest

If you look at your source, it historically almost always trades at a premium. Today is an outlier, probably due to the big sell off recently.

While I agree with the general sentiment, increasing city density takes careful planning. If a neighborhood doesn't invest in the necessary public services such as transportation and education, more density can be a problem. So the entire community who pays for these services should have some say in what happens.

That said, I'm still pro growth as long as we plan accordingly.

Nope can't do that. MSTR might trade at a premium to its BTC holdings but only because at the moment it allows people to buy BTC through more traditional investment accounts. Your hypothetical ABC wouldn't have any advantage over MSTR so it would trade at parity.

I'm really not trying to be pro or anti BTC/MSTR here, just explaining whats going on. It's valid to think it's stupid/overvalued, but I'm just pointing out that its P/E ratio isn't the reason. And comparing MSTR's P/E to Apple's doesn't really make sense at face value.

A company that owns $100 of cash and does nothing, should be worth $100. It earns $0, but is still worth $100. Therefore, its P/E would be 100/0 = infinity.

MSTR is becoming sort of like that. It very well could still be overvalued, but people aren't buying it for its earnings, they are buying it for the assets it holds (bitcoin).

It's essentially a public holding company for bitcoin now. So using P/E isn't a relevant metric, try P/B, or use P/E after subtracting the bitcoin value from market cap. Your valuation methodology is as broken as the world supposedly is.

They very subtly suggest it here: "In the wake of the attacks several Oakland city council members including Council President Nikki Fortunato Bas, whose district includes Chinatown, have joined social justice groups warning against scapegoating and calling for solidarity between Asian American and African American communities."

What I find more interesting though is this passage: "It's not clear, however, that race or ethnicity played any role in the attack. "There is no evidence of motive related to hate," says the DA's spokesperson, Rachel Marshall, adding "the case is still under investigation.""

It is important to remember that if you take what is said on WSB at face value, you are on the outside of an inside joke.

By some estimates, current living humans make up 7% of the total number of people who have ever existed.

Additionally, many during the last 200 years probably thought they were in the most exciting period of technological innovation. When you factor this in the probability of existing during such a period seems much higher than coincidental.

I love the design of the MagSafe chargers, you point out a great advantage of them, but sadly they aren't durable. And like the parent comment said, they are expensive. I'm on my second for my current laptop and it's frayed on the end so I'm soon to be on my third. Hopefully a next iteration of MagSafe takes this issue more seriously.

Is it really $200k in sales if the people that are buying are guaranteed a rate of return? When I looked at the site a month ago it looked like these PoPs were being marketed as an investment. Given the capped upside, it looked as if the buyers were not buying equity, instead providing more of a loan with an expectation of getting their money back and more.

Don't get me wrong, I think this is a very cool project. I just find the marketing confusing.

If wrapping something in plastic makes it so expensive (through taxes) that it causes the end product to lose competitiveness with something not wrapped in plastic, companies will be incentivized to not wrap their product in plastic.

No, that's not what I think.

In Ant's case, it is the unexpected nature of the action and lack of transparency that I see as damaging. Not necessarily the action itself. I'm still trying to learn what is going on and why, I haven't made a judgement on the action itself.

Isn't China shooting themselves in the foot here?

I don't know the details of the situation so I'd be happy to hear from someone who knows more, but this deal could've been a huge win for Chinese financial markets. Down the road, unexpected government action like this could hurt investor confidence and depress the amount of money Chinese companies will be able to raise from foreign investors.

Does anyone else find it weird when a business like this uses the .org domain? Not to distract from the main discussion, just curious what people think on here.

American cities are clustered differently than European ones, it's not something that can be easily quantified, it really takes some time looking at the maps to understand what I am talking about, as it doesn't seem like my explanations are doing the job. Looking at the footprints this way is simplistic but maybe helpful:

https://external-preview.redd.it/W-GAALExjeE8w0aXg7Kh0gOAHcl...

For example, Paris is one of Europe's largest cities and yet it has a footprint comparable to Cleveland, a city with less than 1/5 the population. Meanwhile, the population density of Ohio is over 5 times as high as France.

I never said high speed rail is impossible, just that there are a unique set of challenges in developing such a network in the US. I'm a huge fan of public transportation and HSR, we just need to be realistic and pair it with smart urban/regional development.

Acela's average speed is 82 mph between NYC and Boston. 66 mph between NYC and DC. When you add the time to get to/from the stations my point makes a lot of sense.

If you remember the history, many of the existing rail lines were built before the suburban explosion post WWII. To make Acela go faster, the route would need straighter track which would require buying a lot of expensive, already developed, land.

I mentioned the Northeast Corridor because it is the most viable location to have passenger rail in the US. But even there presents some issues (which I may not have explained very well in my original post).

I disagree with your assessment because American density is very different than European density. If you look at Google Earth, there is almost continuous suburban development along the entire Northeast route. In Europe, populations are clustered in smaller urban centers. High speed rail can only stop so many times and because of this, it is more difficult for the average American to get to a train station.

This situation is obvious to people who have lived in suburban America but can be surprising to those who have not. Imagine driving up to an hour to a city center, finding a place to long term park your car near the station and then taking a mode of transportation that isn't significantly faster than your car would've been. Then needing to take an expensive taxi once you arrive because your destination city has a limited public transportation system.

Comparing region densities at face value misses the issue, the way cities and regions are designed present unique transit challenges around the world.

Building such a network is less economically feasible in America compared to Europe or China because of America's suburban sprawl. First, it'll cost more to build because you'll need to clear out a route of suburban housing to get between any two cities. Second, the population density of the US is less concentrated, which makes getting to the station take longer, and improves the relative attractiveness of other transportation options such as cars/busses on shorter routes and planes on longer routes.

It's really disappointing to me as a transit enthusiast that the US doesn't have great high speed rail service in the Northeast Corridor, but to do so would involve clearing way for new, less curvy track, and that would be extremely expensive. Even if we did it I'm not sure it would get the usage rates that occur in Europe. The issue here is sadly more complicated that tax policy.

The list is by county.

You think it's because the ticker is similar to TSLA? They are trying to develop treatments related to COVID-19, I bet that's the real reason it spiked this year. I don't know anything about the company, just took a minute to look at their website.

If the cofounder of ARM wanted it to stay a British owned company, why did they let it go public in the first place? And then did they make the same case when it was bought by Softbank?

"If you do not make Arm a British owned company again with a Golden Share for national economic security, history will remember you as the person who, when the chips are down, failed to act in the national interest."

And then they blame this on the Prime Minister?

I imagine meat alternatives will really take off once they are cheaper than meat. There seems to be a lot of potential for cost savings if you don't need to raise a large animal to create the product. So far I haven't seen much of a cost advantage to meatless products, but perhaps with more funding this would be achievable. While I don't thing Impossible tastes better or even as good as the real thing, it isn't too far off. Having a price advantage would tip the scale for many people, especially in the fast food space.

Why is the Gates Foundation a foreign "charity"? What does that mean / what do the quotes imply?

I didn't downvote, but I'm not really following what you're saying.

There was a big acceleration of cases in March (largely in NYC), and a second, even bigger acceleration (mostly in the Southern and Western regions) in June. Your point is valid, but there were two large increases in new cases that some people are calling waves, what would you prefer they be called?

72% say they would get vaccinated, you aren't reading your articles correctly.

No, the vast majority of Americans think covid-19 is real. Vox had a poll saying it was in the area of 1%. The issue is many don't want to be forced to wear masks, which is dumb and selfish, but not what you are saying.

Meanwhile as of 2019, over 20% of Americans doubt climate change, a much more significant number. This is far too high in my opinion, but it is steadily improving.

Having grown up in Cleveland and having spent plenty of time in Detroit, it is true that the school systems are in very bad condition. However, quite shockingly, they spend more per student than the nicer suburban school systems.

I don't know why this is, or how it is explained, if anyone knows I'd be all ears. It does seem like teachers get paid more in the suburbs, so that's not the reason. If I remember correctly, I saw some data suggesting that administration and building expenses are much higher, but it's hard to imagine they are getting their money's worth given the current state of things.

I didn't mean representative of the people living there, I mean representative of the news sources there.

I am not taking a political side, just pointing out that this is not a complete survey of all sites, and the article at times suggests conclusions that can't be fairly made from this data unless it was a complete survey.

Another example: there is not a single site on the map in New York City. It would be very surprising if there wasn't at least one partisan local news site in NYC.

It's pretty clear from looking at the map that they didn't attempt to include as many of the left-leaning sites for whatever reason. All but one of the sites in New England (one of the most liberal areas of the country) are right-leaning. This is not a representative selection of the news sources in the area, they are missing lots of data.

Edit: I am not taking a political stance here. Just saying there are news sources left out of this survey.

Software gives the agriculture industry new tools, it helps gather information, it helps build better machinery and can even help train people. Of course software engineers won't be the only ones contributing to solving these problems, but farmers are very resourceful and tend to welcome any new tools to improve their businesses. They've been improving for the last 10,000 years, why stop now?