111–120 of 125 posts
I feel like investing in market pathologies has become too common and modern democratic governments are far too slow at doing there roles and curbing such behaviour. Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto), but there are so many examples coming up daily, if there was ever any faith in institutions it's eroding quickly, and once you remove that…
I feel like investing in market pathologies has become too common and modern democratic governments are far too slow at doing there roles and curbing such behaviour. Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto), but there are so many examples coming up daily, if there was ever any faith in institutions it's eroding quickly, and once you remove that…
Start by banning gold, then, which pollutes far more than Bitcoin. I'll wait.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto) not that i would invest in bitcoins (or any crypto), but i don't see it as an obvious ban. The only reason i can deduce from your "obviousness" comment is that proof of works "wastes" energy. But then it is hypocritical to argue this when other modern conveniences also "waste" energy, and yet you don't…
What is the utility provided by crypto ? Money laundering, avoiding capital controls, financial speculation ? All while burning insane amount of energy and hoging up limited chip making supplies. It's clear cut that o the whole crypto is a huge negative for society.
I can't imagine Xi is thrilled with this. More likely: zealous deputies, looking ahead to next year's National Party Conference, are looking to curry favor and build their resumes. When everyone is simultaneously dialing it to eleven in a zero-sum game, fuckups are almost assured.
Honestly I don't think they care, since they are playing the long term game (probably in decades, if not 100+ years). Not only that, but China just has too much momentum for any of this to make a big dent. I think it was Warren Buffet that compared the US economy to a fast moving train, and that a stick or a stone in the rails won't make it derail. We also have to acknowledge that China is also a massive moving train…
This was true ten years ago. It hasn't been since Xi became more...permanent.
The headline case is Hong Kong's accession, where a territory that would have--without much controversy--reverted to Beijing within a generation was accelerated to meet a 68-year old man's timeline. This not only cost China internationally, not only cost it in Hong Kong, it also neutered support in Taiwan for peaceful reunification. Bad for China. Good for Xi.
> haven't seen a single Chinese company issue apologies for anything related to offences to western countries
Corporate apologies to governments have zero value in the West. One could argue its pragmatism. One could argue we're jaded. But a Chinese company doing something wrong and apologizing for it could be seen as possibly more insulting than paying the fine and fixing the problem.
Similarly, if our companies can save money or gain advantage by issuing apologies, power to them.
I feel like investing in market pathologies has become too common and modern democratic governments are far too slow at doing there roles and curbing such behaviour. Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto), but there are so many examples coming up daily, if there was ever any faith in institutions it's eroding quickly, and once you remove that…
> Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto) not that i would invest in bitcoins (or any crypto), but i don't see it as an obvious ban. The only reason i can deduce from your "obviousness" comment is that proof of works "wastes" energy. But then it is hypocritical to argue this when other modern conveniences also "waste" energy, and yet you don't…
While other activities may be wasteful, proof-of-work is waste distilled almost to its purest essence. It's literally a race to see who can waste the most. There's really no comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin uses energy without providing substantial utility unavailable from other vastly less wasteful alternatives. Additionally it provides a place for the rich and ruthless to prey on the weak and gullible with endless washtrades and exchange scams. It should be banned.
The utility is hard to measure, but brushing it off being valueless is subjective. It should be clear to you at this stage that not everyone agrees with you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why are people so set on getting a fancy "educatiom" at all? I mean, I'm not against it by any means. Education has dome alright by me. But maybe part of the problem is also a divergence in quality of life for the educated or a rampant credentialism whoch tells people their worth is tied to credential attainment? Obviously educating citizens is good for a nation. And if it is really what people want to do, that's…
> But it would also be good to ensure people can make a good living and self actualize without a formal education. How? Wanting magic to be true doesn't make it possible. If your economy is already strong enough to provide a good living to anyone who wants to be a noncontributing poorly educated self-actualizer, then OK, let them enjoy that. But what if it's not? Who supports them? Even developed countries with good…
You twisted my comment into a false dichotomy. Societies obviously cannot fully subsidize people to enjoy a life of the most self indulgent or pretentious interests. But a society can acknowledge that not everyone is going to grow skills, discover talents or develop interests in the same way. Perhaps the most efficient thing is to shrink agriculture work to the bare machine assisted minimum with a dichotomy of skilled labor at the top and a balloon of grunt workers at the bottom. On the other hand, growing a wide professional class of ag workers with more stake in the system may lead to happier workers and perhaps a more sustainable and durable ag sector. If a society needs to subsidize that or create a pipeline that carries workers out of primary education into that kind of work it may be preferable for less tangible reasons. It's absurd that we should drive forward with efficiency no matter how much it emiserates people. And to insist upon it with so much of the reward for it accruing at the top is downright feudal.
Even still, it's not necessarily true that funneling everyone into the knowledge economy is in fact better. If someone would be happy and productive farming five acres but they go to the city, get half a degree, crash out and end up in a very low value labor market, society has probably lost out. It is my opinion that economists view labor markets aa far too fluid. They don't account for the fact that people are more like bits of rock, sand and clay than they are like water. They clump together, break apart and get stuck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why are people so set on getting a fancy "educatiom" at all? I mean, I'm not against it by any means. Education has dome alright by me. But maybe part of the problem is also a divergence in quality of life for the educated or a rampant credentialism whoch tells people their worth is tied to credential attainment? Obviously educating citizens is good for a nation. And if it is really what people want to do, that's…
Education as a way up in society has been in China for a long time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin is the obvious example of something that should have been banned years ago (and all proof of work crypto) not that i would invest in bitcoins (or any crypto), but i don't see it as an obvious ban. The only reason i can deduce from your "obviousness" comment is that proof of works "wastes" energy. But then it is hypocritical to argue this when other modern conveniences also "waste" energy, and yet you don't…
It wastes entrepreneurial energy too, since it doesn't actually provide value to anyone. Not the way a car, a phone, a hairdresser, a movie or Google maps does. The economy is just what everyone does/make. Think of the opportunity cost of all that human resource being wasted on a pyramid/ponzi scheme, which does not produce any value. It only redistributes it, poorly. Yeah thanks. We really need more gambling infrast…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t know why tests are easy and then the people who can’t ace the watered down tests compete amongst themselves for the less less able titles The tests are not easy, and the "passing score" is set by the sum of competition. The techniques allowed to be taught, and which get tested are obtuse. Instead of allowing brilliant students to progress into more difficult subjects the tests funnel the entire country into…
That’s my point. Why not test the brilliant students (and optionally allow everyone) on the more difficult subjects to begin with ?