james1071

That all depends - there are some geography departments that do a lot of data driven analaysis, as do some economists. There really is a lot of overlap - with various disciplines doing data driven work. Would also expect that criminologists might be doing similar things.

Basically - you can learn to do it. You can learn to like it and get really good at it.

Pointing out that someone does not really fit a negative stereotype will ussally not be perceived as a positive.

I said usually, because it is possible to convey different meanings by tone of voice and other non-verbal means.

But, based on the words alone, it will not be interpreted positively.

not a compliment.

I think there might be a lesson in that people who made their money as employees in startups that get sold generally don't repeat the process. They more often become investors.

That's diversification, all the upside and none of the trouble of actually doing any work.

Here is a good reference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism

I did not say that every action was done for the benefit of corporations.

The Nazis were not Socialists. They came to power by opposing Communists and Socialists, who were seen as a threat to middle class Germans and their property. The Nazis and facists in Italy operated a dictatorship for the benefit of corporations.

I am only a hobby programmer, but have some observations based on the developers who I have met at various meetups and other gatherings.

1 There is probably a wider range of ability in software developing than in many other fields.

2 Other fields have better methods of filtering the good performers to the good employers.

Hence the problem of mismatched employers and developers.

oh no

if he plays it right, he will have an easy job for life

that is why the private sector cannot alone supply medical insurance

There are certain features of insurance that make it very different from other products - competition does not necessarily lead to optimum outcomes with insurance.

Checkout adverse selection and moral hazard.

Insurance is a misnomer for such a scheme - premia aren't priced according to actuarial risk. The scheme only works because the low risk young have to join and subsidise the higher risk old.

a suggestion - loss aversion might be a manifestation of something else - namely poor decision making under stress.The loss causes the stress, which causes the poor decision making.

You need to understand that asking for advice doesn't mean you will get helpful answers.

It would be a mistake to ask people about problems they can't comprehend.

You have some things to do - sort your life out, get a job, any job, then progress your career.

The people who can help you with your career might not be the people who can help you with the other stuff.

Learning technologies, getting a position, moving up are all things that take time.

Sorting your life out, earning some money, having fun are what you can do immediately.

this is a bit late, but hope this helps: 1 there is a standard argument for free trade, which states it is optimal for all countries to have zero tariffs (given usual conditions for such arguments).

2 there are arguments that, in certain, very special conditions, optimal for a single country to have no tariffs even if others do

3 more generally one cannot say - this is called argument of second best - and adding a tariff may make situation better not worse

suggest you google 'second best', which has a particular meaning in economics.

That's not correct. See 'second best'.

unexplained wealth - money goes to UK govt.

The UK authorities have the power to ask people to explain where their money came from.

So, if a former Russian public official is revealed to be the owner of a £10m property in London, he is at risk of having it confiscated.

You have no idea what you are talking about. This is not about raising revenue.

We know what happens when labour saving machines, such as washing machines, were invented - married women, who used to spend most of the day on housework entered the workforce.

That's not correct.

In general, the effect of new technology is to increase the output of the economy - we get more stuff.

This translates into a higher GDP.

Now, consider your specific example.

The effect of the machine would be to free up time for people to do other things.

Some of this might be increased leisure (not capured by GDP) , while some of it will be increased output in the economy, which will show up as increased GDP.

Your comment about individuals striving to increase GDP is silly - GDP is an aggregate statistic and the result of people trying to maximise their own personal welfare.

didn't realise you could hire a 'co-founder' suspect it means subordinate who is paid in share options

Suspect the reasons are:

1 very good free secondary and university education system

2 good English language skills

3 social safety net

The problem is that the US government is able to get private companies to do its bidding without being liable to scrutiny from politicans our the courts.

The problem is as follows: a small number of private companies have huge power over the internet.

No surprises here - there is a conflict between making money and providing high quality education/training.

Turning away customers is bad for business,but essential to keep up standards.

So, is she threatening or bribing the tech companies? Otherwise, I can't see why they would take any notice.