1,324 karma · joined November 11, 2013
You can have all the magic in the world upfront with planning and have it fail spectacularly without the right execution that is accurate, on-time and on-budget.
Patagonia also has an Ironclad Guarantee [1] - "If you are not satisfied with one of our products at the time you receive it, or if one of our products does not perform to your satisfaction, return it to the store you bought it from or to Patagonia for a repair, replacement or refund."
They stand by their products. You can even return more than a year later and get credit. Some buy stuff on resale and get it repaired or exchanged for new for cheap.
Broadly speaking? Ok well what happens to the AUM when the market goes up or down? More or less AUM. More or less money no?
Am I missing something? Wouldn't they have a ton to lose during these times?
> Today, BlackRock has been selected in more no-bid contracts to be the sole buyer of corporate bonds and corporate bond ETFs for the Fed’s unprecedented $750 billion corporate bond buying program which will include both investment grade and junk-rated bonds.
Seems like a nice setup. Especially now.
Of course kids are into influencing in any generation. I was commenting on what they're into now.
Also, people often have a short memories when it comes to people that help them out financially. They might remember and appreciate it more if you help them move, or help them learn a craft.
This is simply not true. The only things that are rigged are the two party system that spit out bad candidates (seemingly more often than before), has mechanisms to suppress other parties, and no term limit career politicians that are bought out by special interests. But the voting system itself is not the problem.
Americans are still freer than the rest of the world in general. None of this changes that. "As better" - still hasn't changed either if by better you mean better off. If you're born in the US, in general, you're in a position to be better off than most of the world. These two things also apply to most European countries. We aren't going to apologize for it. I understand if American patriotism and confidence puts off other countries. It's not for everyone. Different cultures have different values. It's ok.
Sad we have to address police corruption and brutality, but it's part of the process. Many nations don't have the ability for civilians to enact change. It's core to our foundation. We've done it many times before.
I've started watching foreign news coverage of the US. It seems better, but I can't yet tell how much; all news still love the sensational stuff.
Vitamin D does wonders for my skin. Not once did a dermatologist suggest I could be deficient. I figured it out on my own.
Here is a good resource for research on vitamins and minerals and their applications:
https://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/snake-...
[1] https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminD-Consumer/
[2] https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/how-much-vitamin-d-is-t...
This is precisely my point. The looting and destruction creates a major secondary storyline that has taken over. And that you're delusional if you think it isn't hurting the cause.
Using adjectives to describe the headspace of people who are committing crimes or supporting those that do that aren't even related to the injustices at hand, destroying businesses and other people's places of work, etc, is not name-calling.
Now, I don't think the bulk of the looters are bad people. But to change the narrative to be anything other than a REALLY TERRIBLE PR move by young people being opportunistic is absurd. For the truck driver who was beaten, the MSM were calling the violent protestors brave.
It comes down to this - are you helping the cause or hurting the cause? Only delusional, heavily-biased people / social justice warriors think looting is helping the cause and they're making every excuse under the sun. To think that humans, by and large, will look past it (for right or wrong) is out of touch with reality.
And if you criticize the means in any way, you get attacked even if you support the same change. In my opinion, to suggest that young black people are so pliable and incapable of thinking that some posts by a rogue group would turn them into robotic looters is racist in itself.
Young people semi organized and did some dumb stuff and justified it because of rightful injustice. Are they bad? No. Was it wise? Of course not. That's what happened.
Outside of that - I've been involved in a coroner's inquest before as my jury duty and it was very interesting. You basically are tasked with deciding whether a death was homicide, suicide or natural causes. I've heard about these civilian oversight boards as the answer but they have challenges with "local political manipulation" and require "steep budgets for investigators" [1]
So from my coroner's inquest experience, I was thinking - you already have civilians. It's efficient. If an officer is involved and the coroner's inquest participants rule it to be a homicide - boom, you could mandate an automatic trial!
This seems like it would be easier to roll out, more efficient, and provide pure accountability to any officer involved shooting. They'd know they would be legally required to go to trial if the coroner's inquest ruled a homicide.
Certainly, some evidence could still be tampered with by the powers that be, but that would elude the civilian oversight boards too in those cases. And with body cams, social media and business and civilian cameras, it's gotten much harder for them to hide evidence. So if you have an easy path to a trial originating from jury peers after coroner input, then you have a ton more accountability.
[1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/is-civilian-overs...
"BNP Paribas has been present in the United States since the late 1800s and currently has over 16,000 employees in North America." [1]
From the article: "The sentencing followed BNP Paribas’ guilty plea in July to conspiring from 2004 to 2012 to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act."
You violate Acts and you want to operate in the US, you get sentenced. If they want to play ball, they need to follow the laws.
"Authorities said that BNP essentially functioned as the “central bank for the government of Sudan,” concealing its tracks and failing to cooperate when first contacted by law enforcement."
You had written - "The US have a long track record of using soft power and extraterritorial law to punish foreign states and companies, including supposed allies"
Again, you submitted a terrible example.
In addition, if they were merely inflating expenses, then they'd be able to adjust and have plenty cash. This doesn't seem to be the case.
"Georges Dirani, BNP’s general counsel, told the judge that the bank accepted “full responsibility for its conduct"
"There’s no question the organization will not tolerate the kind of behavior we have seen in this case,” Dirani said."
Am I missing something or did you just submit a terrible example for your allegation?
Put that in a pitch deck and raise whatever you want!
J/K! Congratulations on the career, success and evolution!
If you believe your side is the good one and the other is bad, it's probably because it's part of your identity. And that prevents you from thinking about it honestly and results in more polarization. Once you accept they're all full of it, you will think more clearly. And you'll have better dialogue with opposing viewpoints.
I do know that certain countries limit what you can send them as far as $ each month as part of anti-money laundering regulations. And it's a pain.
What other implications are there? Is it because some of the offshoring countries force you to register there to conduct business?
Or is it because they want to create a separate P&L for tax and/or liability purposes? Or to park IP?
Also, some states, like CA, are very unfriendly which regard to the extra costs required for employees in terms of benefits, wages (salary exempt) and classification of employees with the ABC test [1], so the wins that states make for employees incentivizes many employers to look elsewhere instead.
In a more remote work culture, even ignoring offshoring/nearshoring, this is going to be really bad for people in certain states. And it will be bad for those states themselves.
The increased competition among states to attract higher income workers will be interesting. States like Tennessee, North Carolina, etc have a massive opportunity in front of them as they were already pretty well poised to attract younger professionals.
Seriously? What do you think of Russia, Germany, Italy, Japan, China, etc? So dramatic people are these days.
Most firms will pay less for remote workers. It is a little odd given they save a decent amount of money, but most people save a lot of time by not having to commute and they like the flexibility so the rates for remote workers are lower.
The dog could sense that so he got you.
> lots of self-debt that we cant pay back.
Neither of those work that way. I agree on the 2-party stacked system though.