1,010 karma · joined July 24, 2013
Trump was the UK's best chance at a US trade deal and the terms were too unpalatable for the Conservatives. This imho was a self inflicted economic injury. Demographically most of the West (including the EU) is in terminal demographic decline and in particular the European flavour of socialism (i.e. a deep belief that the State is a necessary part of economic development) will start to fail under the crushing weight of an ever larger aging population.
The US and Mexico will be the most important growth export market for the UK going forward into the next several decades, and the cost of a trade deal with the US will increase the longer the UK gets desperate.
Alternatively the UK could try to create a Commonwealth free trade zone (and include the 2nd most important market India) but that takes imagination and leadership that again I think is lacking.
There aren't many solutions to this problem besides better voluntary ethical treatment of employees or compulsory enforcement via a set of professional standards set by a 'management body', a 'management regulator' or well written employment laws.
However, having said this, I don't think many US based management or executives would want to be constrained in this way due to cultural perspectives around capitalism. I've spent a lot of time thinking why socialist policies are part of the zeitgeist in the UK but not the US. I think it's due to a historical hangover of industrialization and having a society where there was the rapid exploitation of workers and especially children. I think socialism in the form of worker rights and healthcare was an upper-society response to squalor and destitution being in the face of the political elite in London. My somewhat jaded view is that socialist policies in the UK are setup so that instead of the wealthy paying for a greater proportion of the negative externalities caused by industrialization and capitalism, everyone, would pay in an "equal" way. However equal isn't quite equitable because National Insurance employee deductions are capped out at 2% above a salary threshold of £4,189 a month.
No I'm not saying capitalism is bad or that socialism doesn't have problems. I think free market capitalism is good in many cases, it just needs to be constrained by high ethical standards. However, I don't think free market capitalism can solve all the challenges we face in society and Western democracies need a Government mechanism to address wealth inequality otherwise the foundations of society start to break down.
In comparison the US, with it's vast land mass and varied dispersed resources, industrialized in a more distributed way, the exploitive effect of industrialization was far away from Washington DC. Even now I think US politicians still don't viscerally understand the human suffering caused by the hollowing out of blue collar jobs due to globalization.
For a time I thought 'triple bottom line' might work, but it seems like ESG has taken over with an emphasis on the environment and not people. While I care deeply about Mother Earth, realistically I think people who are struggling to survive have no mental space to consider their environmental impact.
Too often despots and their cronies get countries into economic trouble, countries that have been taken advantaged by Western interests for hundreds of years.
When the country collapses, the IMF and World Bank subjugate the country to Western interests further often to the destruction of the environment and detriment to upward mobility of the population.
Using statistics like reduction of extreme poverty or wage growth when not taking into account other factors like inflation or mortality for example does not help when discussing the complex topic of the IMF and the World Bank and if these institutions are a net benefit to the impoverished.
That said, I'm glad you're able to identify and parse out the less positive aspects of his perspective.
If you're looking for a similar no nonsense, but without the more controversial and negative aspects I recommend looking into David Goggins.
We are like cosmic ants on our little ant hill of a planet that can be kicked over by any number of events not least self inflicted annihilation through nuclear war.
It makes sense to me that most people without meaning will fall into distraction, hedonism or nihilism.
In a way I was lucky as my meaning was thrust on me as a parent. The best way I've heard it put is that the voluntary acceptance of responsibility creates meaning. That said, I was never going to shirk my responsibilities as a parent.
Having someone else who needed me gave me the meaning necessary to endure enormous suffering, to never let go, and to keep pushing through.
If I wasn't a parent I don't know how I would have done.
It's strange now to reflect because my life is so much better now and I'm oddly thankful for the ordeal.
Meaning is a more solid foundation to build a life around. It will get you through dark times, but it surprised me how much more I appreciated happiness as a result.
I think TSMC knows that tech is at the top of a pyramid that relies on industrialization and military might to secure it. IMHO we are going into a very unsecure future where we will see an accelerated decline in all the factors that contributed to globalization. In particular, I worry a lot about food security and supply when global markets in fertilizer are disrupted, energy security when global markets in fossil fuels are disrupted, and manufacturing of all goods when commodity markets are disrupted. As much as I want a clean energy and EV revolution in my estimation, it cannot happen without Russian raw materials.
Furthermore, unless there are amazing leaps or breakthroughs in energy generation, energy storage, and food production without fertilizer, the rest of the world—but not the US—will be in for an uncomfortable few decades.
TSMC executives will of course try to influence US politicians, but I think US politicians know that US voters are fatigued with foreign military excursions. US active-duty numbers are already historically low, and I suspect this has to do with difficulty with recruitment. I think it is fair to ask, "Am I defending my country by fighting China in Taiwan?"
a) Come from a financially privileged background and have never experienced living paycheck to paycheck or losing a job they needed due to a "necessary corporate restructure" or staff cuts.
b) Come from a 'blitz-growth' ideological stance (and VCs) that see new venture as a winner-take-all 'grow big or blowup' world.
These entrepreneurs (and the people backing them) talk about the virtues of teamwork and ethics but it's all secondary to their greed.
If I was an employee I would stay away from such people, the problem is employees have no idea who they're working for until it becomes too late.
The way I see it, employees are paid first and entrepreneurs (and by extension investors) deserve profits because they're paid last.
However, if capitalism is abusive people aren't going to tolerate it and entrepreneurs will find themselves in an ever difficult political environment where taxes will erode the risk premium successful entrepreneurs enjoy.
From what I've found on Wikipedia, it sounds like wearing the shoes is an, "integration of some artificial component or technology that relies on some sort of feedback."
This got me thinking that the Nike shoes Marty wore in Back to the Future 2 could also be considered a cybernetics enhancement.
To what degree does a device need to be integrated with a human body for that human not to be considered a human any more?
It's a fantastic idea trying to make the concept of the time value of money, and purchasing power more accessable to the masses. It probably took a lot of work and I appreciate the effort. Imho the correct way to do this is to hold as many variables constant over the timeseries.
My point is that since official CPI isn't constant, and imho a bad measure of inflation anyway, using M2 or Shadow Stats woudl be the better way to go.
I think part of the problem is established dogma (and regulatory regime) that believes bonds offer diversification from stocks. However this seems to have broken down post 2008, as they have become increasingly correlated.
Imho it's healthy to expect that market regimes change, especially since we do not operate in free market, but a semi-intervined market (where the Fed sets the price of money which is an incredibly important input to the global economy).
I also think it's important to not think of diversification in terms of asset classes anymore, but in terms of alpha source.
I know this is much harder to do because, as far as I know, only by actively trading can you isolate and quantify alpha sources like this.
Having said that, it seems a little childish to me that Ron just shut down the haters. I think that there might be a bit of his ego attached to the outcome versus the process. I can only speculate that perhaps he wanted recognition and adulation for this bold choice and was hurt when feedback didn’t match expectations.
Sure people might be rude about it, but it seems that there is clearly a market for the retro pixelated aesthetic, so why not give people what they want if his goal is to satisfy the fan base and continue the story? I have no doubt the story, set, characters and jokes will be great. I guess the comment asking for Ron to do a Sonic might have been too on the nose for him.
I think that any creator has to reconcile that if they create for others, their art becomes something more than just theirs, like a sort of reflexive co-creation.
Seems to me the best artists understand this while not letting it stifle their creativity.
Source: https://www.gov.uk/online-and-distance-selling-for-businesse...
Imho this is sharp business practice and one of the reasons I still buy physical video games.
If there are any lawyers lurking, can this refund policy be circumvented if purchasing with a Credit Card under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act? I'm assuming you'd need to somehow prove it wasn't what you expected (accidental purchase)?