smallgovt

5 ms·

1.
by smallgovt 6y ago
The argument you’re now outlining is not a subset of the arguments you previously listed (and I was referencing). I agree buybacks create adverse incentives. As I’ve stated elsewhere in this thread, the damages of these adverse incentives
2.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> Many companies buy back shares when it doesn't really make sense Many companies also issue dividends when it doesn’t really make sense. The overall level of shareholder compensation (dividends + buybacks) has not increased over t
3.
by smallgovt 6y ago
All of these arguments apply to dividends as well as share buybacks. And, therefore, do not support a shift back to dividends. If you compare the dividend yield of the s&p500 from 1980 to today, it dropped by around 3%. Based on today
4.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> How Corporations Scam Their Shareholders and Screw over Workers I don't see how workers are getting screwed. The main charge in the article is that executives take advantage of positive signalling around share buybacks to boost s
5.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Yes, but I don't see how that applies to the subject matter at hand. There is no law that says an employer has to provide extra financial support to parents in extenuating circumstances like this. > As a society, we decide what thi
6.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Huh? You're not allowed to walk into someone's home and steal their stuff because we have something called a legal system that will punish you. There is nothing in our legal system that compels you to care about future generations
7.
by smallgovt 6y ago
We don't disagree on your point. I'm just pointing out that the degree of punishment enacted on the professor could be much less severe than most people are imagining.
8.
by smallgovt 6y ago
I agree with you. My claim is that there's "less reason to be outraged at the Dean". If the professor was executed for this, for most people, there's reason to go to war. If the professor was fired, for most people, the
9.
by smallgovt 6y ago
I think it's important to note that nowhere in the article (nor anywhere else I can find) does it state that the professor was "suspended". Rather, it only says that the professor will "no longer be teaching this class
10.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Ah, I hadn't considered that the interviewer was testing the applicant's ability to lie. Interesting, if true.
11.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> The Episerver acquisition is indeed a bad exit, and I think I will lose >$100k in stock I exercised Based on what information? So far, all that's been publicly confirmed is that the sale price was below $600M, which presumably
12.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> These incidents should be treated as severely as drink driving Why? Driving distracted with autopilot is at least an order of magnitude less dangerous than drunk driving.
13.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> (In a May online survey drawing responses from 734 Uber and Lyft drivers nationwide, 71% said they wanted to be independent contractors) As others are mentioning, the survey was very simplistic and most drivers don't understand t
14.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Ultimately, scheduling shifts is going to be both easier to manage and more cost efficient than what you're suggesting. Uber has a good idea of how many drivers they need at any given time. This ideal distribution of supply will neve
15.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Drivers will still take advantage of such a system. Whenever a market is over-supplied, drivers will sign in to collect their free "on-call duty" checks for doing nothing.
16.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Without scheduled shifts, drivers will purposefully all sign up for the same shift to induce supply overflow. In this situation, drivers can game the flexibility of the system to collect a paycheck while sitting in their cars doing nothin
17.
by smallgovt 6y ago
How is this a 'denialist' perspective? The author is affirming that COVID is real and so widespread that some areas are reaching herd immunity...
18.
by smallgovt 6y ago
The antibody test results for this data set don't seem representative of the population at large. Reason being, if you look at the antibody positivity rate, it consistently drops as time goes on (whereas everything I've read sugg
19.
by smallgovt 6y ago
A link to the underlying data: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-testing.pa...
20.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Based on the 27% statistic, 2.27M NYC residents have been infected with COVID. There are 236K confirmed COVID cases in NYC, so ~10% of total cases were confirmed.
21.
27% of NYC residents test positive for COVID antibodies, based on 1.46m tests(nytimes.com)
2 points by smallgovt 6y ago|3 comments
22.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Can you point me to the latest released results? Thanks!
23.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> But we also don't know what antibody/T-cell levels... would = herd immunity. OK, but wouldn't a random sampling at least provide an answer to what pct of the population was infected at some point? That seems like a grea
24.
by smallgovt 6y ago
That crossed my mind as well, but if this were the case, surely a member of the opposing party would fund such a study. Given that this also hasn't happened, I wonder if there's another reason. Is it not as simple as paying 1K r
25.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Isn't this hypothesis pretty easy to validate/falsify? Just take a random sample of 1K NY residents and test them for antibody/t-cell presence. 1K is plenty to make a statistically significant sample size when you're su
26.
by smallgovt 6y ago
Interesting that this is flagged. There are almost no strong claims made in the article. Are people not open to a discussion about herd immunity?
27.
by smallgovt 6y ago
> The only way to get the 45% number is to say your assets didnt grow in 60 years, which is not realistic. This is the misunderstanding I'm pointing out. You will end up being 45% less wealthy regardless of whether your assets grow
28.
by smallgovt 6y ago
My guess is that you're the one misunderstanding the math here. At a 1% wealth tax, you will end up being 45% less wealthy in 40 years than you would be without the wealth tax. There is a 100% cap on what the government can take from y
29.
by smallgovt 6y ago
I agree with that piece of the article. That is, we should make efficient use of our time and resources. I just don't think it follows that you should raise less money. Raising more money (especially on non-onerous terms, as suggested
30.
by smallgovt 6y ago
I really don’t understand why the govt isn’t doing regular testing of a random sample of the population. All it takes is ~500 tests in each state per week to get a significant sample size. And, it would definitively answer what the populat

More ›