Investors get paid back by specific individual companies so the details matter.
5,627 karma · joined April 23, 2021
Their monopolies got broken and the profits disappear in a commodity market.
If nvidia or tsmc got split up i doubt its stock is going to stay at as a high a p/e.
Try two generations. I think it was obvious since the oil shocks that fossil fuels were not a good bedrock of the economy.
At the very end you can see what states they’re talking about and it’s basically just New York and California (no other state enacted a law 3 years before 2019).
California’s median income increased 17% from 2016 to 2019 (the 3 years following the law).
New york income increased 17% too.
Federally it increased 5%.
I think using some random spreadsheet as your data source just isn’t a great idea. NBER should be aware the IRS will let people have access to income data for research purposes.
I mean politicians are so addicted to twitter the nsa makes special phones…
When the risks get written down people tend to behave differently.
If you’re a retireer yeah you just want a steady dividend (or buyback).
But i mean for a 401k that won’t be spent from for 20+ years you absolutely want business to be investing into themselves. Otherwise go buy gold.
The recent Money Stuff newsletter had a blurb about how many anthrophic employees were quitting because you can’t use stock as collateral while working there. That condition only applies to emoloyees so once they left they can do that and rebalance their wealth out of a single position.
But crypto really is just a small thing. I’m not going to design a nuclear reactor but I’ll definitely do stuff that depends on the electricity from one. Similarly one can still do their own authentication; its not like even Apple forgot to rate limit…
If they had shown how bad he was then he’d be a negative endorsement like he is now.
Sure I shouldn’t roll my own crypto but I can write a logger…
Like Iran didn’t retaliate for US assassinating their leaders in term 1.
But also because every day builds on the previous one. His first year he hadn’t figured out he could use CBP (ICE) to remove US citizens from protests but by year 4 he had figured it out.
"Remember that discussion we had about phones? Yeah, so TVs are kinda like that except they're really big so we stick them in a room instead of taking them with us".
The minority’s partys job is not to be looking out for the majority. Sure you shouldn’t sandbag but i mean not even republicans liked what he was doing.
Why?
Both Democrats and Republicans equally seemed to hate him.
Like there was numerous government shutdowns in his first term because nobody actually liked his agenda. Why was it obvious that eventually both parties would agree to enable him?
When a 80 year old "aces" a driving test they still have to take it more times to check for further decline. You only take these tests until you fail them.
Politicians are never having just a debate. They're only nominal arguing with the other contestants and really talking to the audience. It's not surrendering when you tell the audience what they want.
> So we're all stupid pigfuckers, but it's OK
I mean the evidence speaks for himself. One of you two is president. IMO, the solution here is not to re-hash arguements about whether or not he's fit to be president. It's going to be to expand the fair-time rules to apply to cable & not-cable.
If you have some large reach like Fox News then when you run altered footage to make it seem like Donald Trump is in favor of releasing the Epstein files you should have to allow opposition to have equal time explaining why Trump is not going to release files he's in.
Or if you're a financial podcaster like Dave Ramsey, when you have Trump on your show to promote him as good for the economy you then need to allow opposition equal time to explain how he repeatedly attacked Iran and started numerous trade wars in his first time and absolutely is going to do that in his second term leading to inflation.
Increasing the tax rate by ~8x to match Norway would drop 60x to ~8x. What percent of Norway's per capita is from Oil & Gas? I have to imagine that 10% of that is actually still meaningful for an average American.
The crux of Jevon's paradox is that you’re lowering the cost of revenue below the sale price.
If I can generate $10 a sale then I’ll do no sales if it costs me $11 . If gas drops from $4 to $2 then I’ll do as many sales as I can as $9 is less than $10.
I always find these movements very interesting because you can't have everything decrease in price. If demand for Google drops there should have to be an increased demand in something else.
It's bad for the economy when money is turned into a stock and just literally sits.
It's fine for the economy if the government forces a flow from it's citizens (taxes) when it then spends that money.
Printing money also produces a flow so that's fine for the economy too. The issue with printing money is not whether or not the US economy will continue to exist, it's whether or not the government will (in more of the USSR -> Russia sense and not anarchy sense).
Its absolutely practical to trade in gold/silver historically. Its basically just how europeans do small transactions anyways (coins).
Anything larger its still practically because if you need to buy an expensive item well its going on the ship so who cares if you need a ship or cart to transport the cost of the item when you need a cart anyways to transfer the item.
It’s just mostly impractical at the scale of big business. Imagine banks transport gold or $100,000 bills to each other (but actually look up how they used to drive trunks to each other and fling bags of checks).
The bond seller is intending to put it to productive use to generate the yield.
This differs from deflation where people will (more the before) actually sit on money and not buy bonds. Then people who need liquidity cannot get it as the money supply drys up.