kapuasuite

5 ms·

1.
by kapuasuite 4y ago
How dangerous is it to dump it in the river now?
2.
by kapuasuite 4y ago
Land ownership, for example, is highly concentrated with the aristocracy/gentry. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/money/2019/...
3.
by kapuasuite 4y ago
> When it comes to growth, Britain’s politicians will the ends but not the means. They run scared of the homeowning elderly, who turn up to vote and make up a growing share of the electorate. So tax rises are heaped on businesses and wor
4.
by kapuasuite 4y ago
> a new group who are there to just enrich themselves. The UK’s been ruled by a relatively small hereditary aristocracy for, what, 1,000 years? A self-interested political class is hardly a new phenomenon there.
5.
by kapuasuite 4y ago
The problem is, one, that those vacant homes are not necessarily in places people live or want to live (unless we’re shipping homeless people off to empty homes), and two, that homeless people aren’t the only ones in need of housing - there
6.
by kapuasuite 4y ago
South Vietnam was already an independent nation…
7.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
> Hopefully, some security researchers will get their hands on it, de-anonymize the data set, and then regulators will burn the industry to the ground. Who does this benefit, though?
8.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
The only compelling reason is to give broader and cheaper access to past works. If you don’t find that compelling then I don’t know what to tell you. What’s the compelling argument for them to exist as is? The big extensions came in the mid
9.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Congress is the one that’s dramatically extended copyright length, not the courts.
10.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
There’s no counter-argument to make beyond my self-interest in consuming creative works at very low cost and with very few limitations outweighing your self-interest in profiting from your works.
11.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
The Soviet intelligence apparatus spent a good deal of time and effort post-1945 ensuring that pretty much every state in Eastern and Central Europe would be dominated by the local communist party, parties which largely took direction from
12.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
I don't see the point of the corporate tax at all unless people think the IRS would be incapable of auditing people that incorporate.
13.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
A carbon tax could easily be coupled with a dividend...
14.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
We would be better off with taxing the unimproved value of the land (possibly until the market price of the land itself is $0) and rolling back the barriers to building new housing. That would result in cheaper, more plentiful and higher qu
15.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
I don't know - just thinking of construction, for example, we would probably have seen more innovation in that sector over the last century if every town and city in America didn't have its own zoning and land use laws that strict
16.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
>I always give benefit of doubt where it's due, but Twitter has definitely something sinister going with their Indian Operations. If Indian companies goes abroad they are expected to follow local laws, and if Twitter wants to operat
17.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
>Fighting the govt is rarely productive, but they probably know something to do this crazy in-your-face stuff. Depends on your definition of productive, I suppose.
18.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Yes, there are tradeoffs anywhere - which means we should rationally assess what we're putting into education and whether at least some of those resources can be put to better use in other ways.
19.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Tax dollars that go to universities for one reason or another are tax dollars that cannot be spent on healthcare - tax dollars that can't be collected from tax exempt institutions (like almost all universities) are tax dollars that can
20.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
There are tradeoffs, though - the resources that are poured into higher education are resources that cannot be spent on other vital things.
21.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
What’s the actual cost/benefit here?
22.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Yes - corporate income tax should be eliminated entirely - the revenue can be made up in other, less terrible ways. Corporate incomes taxes are a poor way to address inequality because they tend to fall, at least in part, on workers, and no
23.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
The government could tax shareholders, i.e. the people who receive a corporations profits to begin with.
24.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Why tax a corporation's income at all when you can tax its shareholders income instead?
25.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Capital gains taxes (paid by shareholders) are completely separate from corporate income taxes (paid by corporations). You're also forgetting (or ignoring) that the legal incidence of a tax and the economic incidence are completely sep
26.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Those would be taxable for the employees receiving those perks, giving away shareholders' money to employees to reduce a tax bill is absolutely nonsensical in financial, and if a publicly traded company were to do this for "every
27.
by kapuasuite 5y ago
Only a few of the items in Gebru's "controversial" paper are even worth discussing - do we really need an Ethics department to calculate the carbon footprint of training a model, or point out that a model based on scraping th
28.
by kapuasuite 6y ago
Somebody better let Denmark, Finland, Italy, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland know they are barbarian societies for want of a minimum wage!
29.
by kapuasuite 6y ago
>Information is not a harmless dingus. Its a weapon, just as the gun was in the last century. This is a silly analogy, what is Google doing or planning to do with this information that is dangerous, and how does that stack up against the
30.
by kapuasuite 6y ago
> Because ultimately, all the finance whiz bang talk doesn’t change common sense that only allowing trades in one direction is unfair Trump’s executive order in November is forcing Americans to divest from a bunch of Chinese companies -

More ›