jl2718

79 ms·

781.
by jl2718 5y ago
Just say no to this garbage. Your kids will only learn how to be like them.
782.
by jl2718 5y ago
There is a difference. Capitalists are not allowed to arrest and/or kill for non-compliance. Well... (noting the date) not anymore at least.
783.
by jl2718 5y ago
So glad you asked... > Controlled inflation/devaluation fuels growth Sure - if you measure 'growth' in terms of the inflated asset. However, well, just look at this chart: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph&
784.
by jl2718 5y ago
You’re stuck in a dollar mindset. Bitcoin doesn’t deflate against Bitcoin. Nobody’s making any more land, and yet there are farmers and developers, not just hodlers. The alternative is an inflationary economy where these people get driven o
785.
by jl2718 5y ago
Everybody said the same thing about the 1987 automated trading crash. Get rid of those darn computers! Sorry; decentralized autonomous finance is here to stay. There will be less disasters as we go along, but they will be much bigger.
786.
by jl2718 5y ago
You're right. Sloppy thinking. I had something in my head about what might be causing the tendency for stronger gains toward the top end of capitalization-weighted indices.
787.
by jl2718 5y ago
This bubble is not speculative. It’s defensive. There is a small X% chance of the USD failing catastrophically. So assets that are backed by cash flows in any denomination have a premium of (? something huge ?) * X%. A lot of people got bur
788.
by jl2718 5y ago
You can always issue centralized physical bearer notes like cash.
789.
by jl2718 5y ago
I think the point is that the deterrence effect has diminishing marginal gains. Works well for petty crimes with clear intention.
790.
by jl2718 5y ago
Sure, but there are many popular cases where the courtroom was used as a sympathy circus to establish both guilt and impact. It should be against jurisprudence to allow this.
791.
by jl2718 5y ago
Firstly: I don’t see punishment as separate from deterrence. If a different deterrence strategy works better, it should be used preferentially. Secondly: This doesn’t capture the need to remove people incapable of integrating with society.
792.
by jl2718 5y ago
Maybe unpopular, but I don’t think the victim’s pain and suffering should be relevant in determination of guilt, sentencing, or reintegration, just as a victim’s resiliency is obviously not. The important thing is the demonstrated intent an
793.
by jl2718 5y ago
I think this is conflating two separate effects. One is pay transparency, and the other is legislated pay equity. Legislated pay equity will always result in lower wages simply because the employer is legally unable to raise their bid for t
794.
by jl2718 5y ago
I’ve struggled to find an explanation for tulip mania, but there are some hints at it. It’s important to realize that the Dutch monarchy was spending themselves into incredible debt for these explorations, and the lenders expected them to r
795.
by jl2718 5y ago
Okay, so… there is a way. You can value things by tax auction. - first every owner self-values their assets at $V and pays X% of $V - then an interested buyer bonds $W>$V earnest money - then the owner pays Y% of $(W-V) or the buyer gets
796.
by jl2718 5y ago
White collar law enforcement picks easy targets. They know these guys will outspend their legal budgets.
797.
by jl2718 5y ago
People always look to irrationality as the first explanation for bubbles. This is lazy thinking. I find that there are almost always structural cash flows that create them by some sort of economic or regulatory intervention, and the crash b
798.
by jl2718 5y ago
Idea: an efficient market would be one with zero long-term covariance between investments. So, index funds would disappear. So, index funds are not really based on the efficient market hypothesis, they are based on the assumption of plutocr
799.
by jl2718 5y ago
Well, yes, it depends on how you define demand for a transactional medium, which is not easy. You could see it as having something to do with the sum of all immediate capital obligations, like loan payments or salaries, plus consumption at
800.
by jl2718 5y ago
The 90% carbon tax rebate is interesting, because everybody thinks they are at least 10% better than average.
801.
by jl2718 5y ago
I don’t think you mean that exactly. I think what you mean is that the super-wealthy are the primary benefactors of the system which everybody else (mostly the moderately wealthy) is forced to pay for. But you’ll never get ‘fairness’ by for
802.
by jl2718 5y ago
There are lots of research economists at the fed with many different views. The St. Louis fed in particular produces many excellent reports. But… the fed is a business. They will operate to expand their domain to the maximum extent possible
803.
by jl2718 5y ago
For most citizens, the benefit of spending goes negative after a certain point. But each additional dollar does benefit somebody, and everybody is fighting for it to be them. The strategy of reduced spending is a global optimum, but not a N
804.
by jl2718 5y ago
First consider: Inflation occurs when supply of dollars exceeds demand for dollars. Demand comes mostly from investment. Taxes try to exert a direct effect on supply and demand, but they also exert a massively negative effect on private act
805.
by jl2718 5y ago
Just wait until he sees how much BS is baked into startups that don’t have to expose their entire codebase to the world, get independently audited, etc.
806.
by jl2718 5y ago
I opened a restaurant and nobody wants to pay for the food. Obviously it’s because McDonald’s exists.
807.
by jl2718 5y ago
tl;dr: sort first Better: recursive bucket accumulators using the exponent
808.
by jl2718 5y ago
You’re ignoring the part about future liabilities. What is so hard to understand here? Decreasing average wages makes the system less sustainable. This should not be controversial.
809.
by jl2718 5y ago
Irrelevant to statement. Higher average wages make the system more sustainable.
810.
by jl2718 5y ago
Ironically this is exactly why it has value to begin with.

More ›