sovsovsod

4 ms·

1.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
“ to exclude the NT family by mentioning "consumer OS" ” Sorry missed that. Games: I wasn’t much of a gamer by then. But Age of empires worked well :D
2.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
There was Windows NT 4 which was awesome, released in 1996, and Windows 2000, released in 1999. As a kid I used both of those. NT 4 was a bit hard to use since most programs (read games) were written for DOS or win95/98. But Windows 20
3.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
Rents included in the CPI. The argument is that a house is an investment. I.e you sell it in the end. Investments aren’t included in the CPI. I think that’s BS because investments increase in value due to inflation (and not just because of
4.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
That drops the U in UBI, most it’s merits, and creates a poverty gap. UBI only makes sense when it’s universal. It makes most sense when it replaces other entitlement programs. I don’t think UBI is necessarily doomed to an inflationary spi
5.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
You’re right, of course, that if the UBI is giving any meaningful amount of money, then ceribus paribus, (massive) inflation is the result. It’s a basic argument too. Of course you don’t have to keep the “ceribus paribus” condition, Althoug
6.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
I don’t think OP argued to bail out the rich. They only argued that UBI doesn’t make sense. Maybe UBI makes sense. Maybe it doesn’t. I’m on the fence, personally. But bailing out the way we did in 2008-2009, where CEOs and other saboteurs g
7.
by sovsovsod 6y ago
Was he really wrong? If I gift money to an extremely over leveraged banks to save them and, with puckered sphincters (they just saw the abyss), they hold onto it then we won’t “see inflation”. It’s there, but it’s latent inflation. If I dem