asift

13 ms·

91.
by asift 11y ago
There's absolutely nothing wrong with pointing to empirical evidence to support a claim (in fact, that is an excellent thing to do!). The issue I have with the original claim is that it isn't proven that giving away housing is a
92.
by asift 11y ago
Your claim is sweeping because you're taking the results from one particular case study and extrapolating it out into a generic claim. It's overly simplistic because you're not acknowedging the reality that these conditions c
93.
by asift 11y ago
I'm a big fan of a basic income as a replacement to our existing welfare system, but this: >its been proven that its cheaper to give the homeless housing than to pay for the resulting issues of not providing housing is misleading an
94.
by asift 11y ago
These new regulations are pretty much meaningless: >Regulation A deals will not be fast, or cheap. Kendall Almerico, the lawyer preparing StarShop’s paperwork, says a typical company will need to spend $50,000 to $100,000 on legal, accou
95.
by asift 11y ago
I agree on the bonuses, but if I understand Buffer's compensation properly, this is not how they operate. They take out any possibility for comp that's not determined by their formula, which was my general complaint against the ri
96.
by asift 11y ago
I'm curious what, if any, effect this has on the type of people who are attracted to a company. I'm personally not a fan of arbitrary pay metrics. I want my compensation to be tied to my performance. I don't want to be pigeon
97.
by asift 11y ago
>This becomes more troublesome when modification of the device is made illegal Is this just a theoretical consideration or is there good reason to believe legislation is moving in this direction?
98.
by asift 11y ago
Looking only at the number of ETFs can be deceiving. Let's say that I hold a total US stock market index. This may be one ETF, but I still hold funds within all 9 Morningstar style boxes. You could break this into 9 different ETFs, (LC
99.
by asift 11y ago
This is correct. Also, tax-loss harvesting isn't the only benefit of direct indexing. Charitable gifting of highly appreciated securities is a potentially huge benefit that direct indexing has over ETFs (even better given that it doesn
100.
by asift 11y ago
Vanguard wins in the fee category, but from a tax standpoint, direct indexing wins by a wide margin.
101.
by asift 11y ago
For the right person, there seems to be more benefits to direct indexing than are indicated in this article. Tax-loss harvesting is one potential benefit, but so are things like charitable gifting. Anyone who is in a high marginal tax brack
102.
by asift 11y ago
>My guess is that at some point these companies will pivot to trying to be the backend to a bunch of independents or small shops out there hitting the pavement. It is already happening. See: Betterment Institutional, Schwab Institutional
103.
Designing the Financial Planning Software of the Future(kitces.com)
2 points by asift 11y ago|0 comments
104.
by asift 11y ago
>With that said, I believe that consumer sovereignty should never take precedence over labor rights. Because the buggymaker's job is more important than the consumer's right to buy an automobile?
105.
by asift 11y ago
It does when those unintended consequences are immoral.
106.
by asift 11y ago
>Frankly, consumer's demands and rights take a backseat to the rights of citizens of a country. What? Consumers are citizens as well...
107.
by asift 11y ago
A sweeping statement such as this is almost certainly false. Of course, some labor laws are perfectly moral, but some are immoral as well. In general terms, labor laws such as wage prohibitions and occupational licensing tend to give rela
108.
by asift 11y ago
Why should people respect a system that doesn't respect them? Disrespect for immoral laws is valuable for the continued evolution of liberal societies.
109.
by asift 11y ago
Why should labor rights supercede consumer rights? By trying to regulate an "acceptable quality of life" for drivers, protectionism is imposing a lower standard of living on everyone else.
110.
by asift 11y ago
The government already oversteps their bounds in issuing subpoenas to investigate "threats" that aren't truly threats. It's hard to say where they would draw the line if given authority to police general hyperbole.
111.
by asift 11y ago
Is it normal for sentence recommendations to be that vague? I certainly see your point, but why say "substantially above the mandatory minimum" if your recommendation is actually the maximum?
112.
by asift 11y ago
For anyone looking for more analysis of the alleged threats, Popehat's article is a good read. http://popehat.com/2015/06/08/department-of-justice-uses-gra...
113.
by asift 11y ago
Why do you feel copyright benefits small and large players alike? I agree the relative advantages of some forms of IP are greater than others, but the scales seem to be tipped towards large players in most cases.
114.
by asift 11y ago
You might not get to pick the cab driver themselves, but you can pick the cab company you are willing to patronize (even more so where there is increased competition). If I have a terrible experience with Company X, I probably won't us
115.
by asift 11y ago
Cartel members don't need to agree to not compete against each other, they simply need to agree to work together to restrict competition. In this case, incumbent taxi firms could be in cutthroat competition with each other, while still
116.
by asift 11y ago
Certainly there are valid considerations for infrastructure design and regulations regarding where hailing can be conducted, but if it's okay for a customer to hail a cab from Company A at particular location, I don't see a valid
117.
by asift 11y ago
Worth noting that it's only against Uber's policy because this is one stronghold of the taxi cartel Uber hasn't been able to crack (and partially how Uber initially differentiated themselves to argue existing regulations shou