Good point, a true apples-to-apples comparison would be based on age rather than grade level.
1,404 karma · joined August 28, 2013
The lesson may even be the opposite: "If your school's biggest problem is 'too much money', outcomes will be pretty good."
https://www.chadaldeman.com/p/which-states-actually-have-the...
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2024-12/States_Dem...
And MEXICO is going to pay for the Wall!
No, the article estimates it would cost less than a single penny to scrape all pages of 1,000,000 distinct Anubis-guarded websites for an entire month.
Nothing else ("% of housing owned by investors"?) is even close.
edit: Yes, obviously I included a time lag (3 years).
[1] https://constructioncoverage.com/research/cities-investing-m...
[2] eg, https://www.zillow.com/home-values/10221/austin-tx/#/
Thus, any UBI that doesn't cut the poorest people's benefits would cost 3x the current amount.
I don't think a 200% tax hike would be very popular.
Making these benefits universal would require spending 200% more, and save at most 10% in overhead.
Thus, optimistically, you'd be spending +190% more.
Administrative overhead is nowhere near as high as you estimate.
SNAP covers ~12% of the population with 5% overhead costs.
Medicaid covers ~20% of the population with 5-10% overhead.
Social security covers ~20% of the population with <1% overhead.
The extra spending to make benefits universal is an order of magnitude higher than any savings from eliminating bureaucracy.
No, their actions were the opposite.
They were pushing the price in the same direction as their derivatives holding. A hedge would push it in the opposite direction. (Eg: If you're long calls, you would hedge by selling the underlying, bringing its price down.)
But they're priced at P/E of 7, while TSLA is P/E of 170.
Negative growth at 170 P/E is... Much, much worse than negative growth at P/E of 7.
> This Court's prior cases... cannot be distinguished on the asserted ground that persons who have entered the country illegally are not "within the jurisdiction" of a State even if they are present within its boundaries and subject to its laws. Nor do the logic and history of the Fourteenth Amendment support such a construction. Instead, use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" confirms the understanding that the Fourteenth Amendment's protection extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory. Pp. 457 U. S. 210-216.
This may hold true for "moonshot" startups, but the tax would still devastate "small-business"/"lifestyle" startups, where cost ~= revenue.
Milk: 2.5% (*low-quality data)
CPI: 2.9%
Copper: 3.4%
Gold: 5.2%
https://web.archive.org/web/20191107043435/https://static.nf...
"we have concluded that it is more probable than not that Jim McNally (the Officials Locker Room attendant for the Patriots) and John Jastremski (an equipment assistant for the Patriots) participated in a deliberate effort to release air from Patriots game balls after the balls were examined by the referee
...
Our consultants confirmed that a reduction in air pressure is a natural result of footballs moving from a relatively warm environment such as a locker room to a colder environment such as a playing field. According to our scientific consultants, however, the reduction in pressure of the Patriots game balls cannot be explained completely by basic scientific principles, such as the Ideal Gas Law, based on the circumstances and conditions likely to have been present on the day of the AFC Championship Game. In addition, the average pressure drop of the Patriots game balls exceeded the average pressure drop of the Colts balls ...
...
Based on the testing and analysis, however, Exponent concluded that, within the range of likely game conditions and circumstances studied, they could identify no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the Patriots halftime measurements or for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls, as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls. Dr. Marlow agreed with this conclusion. This absence of a credible scientific explanation for the Patriots halftime measurements tends to support a finding that human intervention may account for the additional loss of pressure exhibited by the Patriots balls."
GP is hinting at a common fallacy -- I call it the "strong hands fallacy." It's common in crypto: "Every time the price of $fartcoin goes down, it's moving from weak hands to strong hands. Price drops are just more reason to be bullish!"
At the end of the day, does it really matter who's the marginal buyer and who's the marginal seller?
Do we learn anything about the value of Apple Inc by learning that the marginal buyer was an HFT hoping to offload inventory in 500ns, a mid-frequency shop who will hedge delta at end-of-day, or a value investor who will hold for a lifetime?
I claim any such information would be rapidly priced in by flow-analysis algos, and thus reflected in the closing price.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/markets/retail-bought-stocks-largest...
[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/retail-investors-buy-dip-tru...
> The European Commission says it charges an average tariff of just 1% on US products entering the EU market, "considering the actual trade in goods". It adds that the US administration collected approximately €7 billion of tariffs on EU products in 2023 compared to the EU's €3 billion on US goods.
> A World Trade Organisation (WTO) estimate puts the average tariff rate on US products entering the EU slightly higher at 4.8%.
> In both cases, this is far off the 39% figure quoted by the Trump administration.
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/04/03/fact-check-are...
I suspect it's selection bias: Non-workaholics rarely build vast wealth.