mrow84

38 ms·

301.
by mrow84 12y ago
I certainly agree with your sentiments, but I thought that Amazon had also had problems, with contractors in its fulfilment centres being denied guaranteed hours, though perhaps I misunderstood the issue. There have certainly been problems
302.
by mrow84 12y ago
Probably because it would be expensive and risky to roll out something across a large, already existing network, but at the same time running an innovative "side project" may well be met by anxiety (and corresponding resistance) b
303.
by mrow84 12y ago
>> significantly drop wages (primarily due to competition in cities with multiple ride-sharing services) > Companies competing for workers drops wages? I think that moab's point was that competition between ride-sharing compan
304.
by mrow84 12y ago
I'm totally with you on personally sticking with indexed funds, but, out of a sense of charity, could it not be the case that the average cost of your friend's failures is lower than the average returns on his successes, so that h
305.
by mrow84 12y ago
Are the current generation systems in a state where they can recognise and deal with some high percentage of that 1% by bringing the car to a safe stop? I realise of course that stopping can in itself be dangerous in certain situations, but
306.
by mrow84 12y ago
No, my definition would be that multi-national corporations are effectively above the law if, in a particular jurisdiction, they can engage in behaviour that companies constrained solely to that jurisdiction cannot engage in. I am glad that
307.
by mrow84 12y ago
Your definition of illegal behaviour seems to rest on a very narrow view that unless behaviour is prosecuted then it is not illegal. By this view, corporations are not above the law because when any illegal behaviour is discovered they are
308.
by mrow84 12y ago
Omniusaspirer actually wrote "they're effectively above the law", which is hardly hyperbolic, and was directly preceded by a decidedly relevant example: "Without a global government agreement you simply can't bust u
309.
by mrow84 12y ago
As I'm sure you're aware, there is some room between "completely law abiding" and "totally above the law", where corporations find themselves quite comfortable. Corporations are amoral, and so conform to local
310.
by mrow84 12y ago
Yes, I think at this point it's really just a difference of opinion as to what the effects of BI would be. My view is that the marginal utility of those dollars spent by the high end on investments is lower than the marginal utility of
311.
by mrow84 12y ago
> The issue here is not distribution of wealth, it's consumption. The more we consume now, the less we invest in the future. Do you disagree that BI will increase consumption? The point of BI is to redistribute consumption to the lo
312.
by mrow84 12y ago
> With more consumption and less investment, we expect the economy to increase more slowly than in the counterfactual (no BI). So holding money supply constant (which is of course ridiculous), we'd expect more inflation in the BI sc
313.
by mrow84 12y ago
Inflation is measured by an increase in the price of a basket of consumption, not the value, which is almost unmeasureable. If the size of the economy increases faster than the increase in the money supply then there is a greater demand f
314.
by mrow84 12y ago
Can you see any good argument against such monopolies being forced to be non-profit making entities? The only argument that comes to mind is that it would create a disincentive against the drive towards monopoly that Theil apparently claims
315.
by mrow84 12y ago
"We shouldn't increase the minimum wage because employment will go down". Appeal to consequences. Try another. Did I get the right level of condescension?
316.
by mrow84 12y ago
You can download the episode, without subscribing, from the EconTalk "page", or whatever it's called, in the iTunes store.
317.
by mrow84 12y ago
Yes, I do believe that they will, and those judgments can reduce the effectiveness of legislation as it is originally conceived. I only see that as speaking to the point, not against it.
318.
by mrow84 12y ago
I'm not sure your strong criticism of Goodhart's Law is quite fair. It is stated so as to be pithy, but I think it is fairly obviously meant to be applied only to those situations where the thing being measured in some sense &quot
319.
by mrow84 12y ago
Your definition of environmental sustainability implicitly assumes a fixed, or arbitrarily bounded, population size in steady state. Whatever set of foods we choose to feed the population with, it is always possible (and historically has be
320.
by mrow84 12y ago
This video about the Bus Electronic Scanning Indicator, from the late 1950's, might be of interest as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGwZwe6izTg
321.
by mrow84 12y ago
How are you defining effectiveness? Many campaigns for justice take years if not decades, and can produce numerous protests during that time. Those protests are only 'ineffective' if you imagine that conducting a single protest ma
322.
by mrow84 12y ago
Ok, I get you now - I find it more clear now that you've explicitly spelled it out as a kind of "expected upper bound". And of course, I completely agree with your conclusions, but that should by now be a given. Also, apologi
323.
by mrow84 12y ago
I suppose that really I just don't find your model compelling - I don't think that is how copyright revenues work. I understand that you are simplifying for the purposes of discussion, but in reality most copyrightable works of th
324.
by mrow84 12y ago
I was under the impression that the main point of government was to record and enforce property rights, which are, therefore, by definition artificial. How do you decide which rights are "right"?
325.
by mrow84 12y ago
I interpret your final paragraph as suggesting that copyright should be of short fixed terms, for some meaning of 'short'. Is that right? As to the rest of what you said, isn't it somewhat obviated by the article, it saying t
326.
by mrow84 12y ago
If you examine those who have failed alongside those who have succeeded, and are unable to find an explanatory variable, related to personal contribution, that cleanly distinguishes the two groups, then you might conclude that external fact
327.
by mrow84 12y ago
Yes, that makes sense. From what I understood of the article, and it really isn't my area so maybe I got something wrong, a buy order was not filled completely even though there were sell orders available to fill it. Doesn't that
328.
by mrow84 12y ago
Somewhat farcically perpetuating the metaphor, is it not the case that Bill gets to know that Joe is interested in buying sheep once Joe has bought a few of them? And at that point Bill can outrun Joe and make money from his (very near) fut
329.
by mrow84 12y ago
Thanks for replying. I like your time averaged argument, that seems to be a good explanation of why it is useful, both to the trading entity and to the market, to be able to change orders quickly. I think my final question about the balance
330.
by mrow84 12y ago
What you've said sounds very reasonable to me. I find it interesting that the line of reasoning you have presented doesn't appear to require super-fast trading. That there has been an "arms race" to become faster and fas

More ›