31–40 of 125 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that were true then the entire education industry globally is a scam which i simply can't believe. Have you never had a great lecturer who can deliver information in a way which makes more sense to you then just reading it off a website?
Online Education industry is a scam in India - high fees ($500-$1500 range) along with low wage mediocre teachers!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only if you don't understand what the "tutoring" industry in China truly does. They are all test prep, not general teaching or education but cram schools for scoring better on a specific test. For example they are not allowed to teach calculus, despite calculus making the tests easier, for the exact reason public schools do not introduce it in the standard curriculum. Instead the schools are places to drill test taki…
Because such calculus what ? Why don't they teach calculus, i'm genuinely interested, you've left us hanging! Edit: thinking on it a little, I'm guessing the missing sentence is 'because such calculus is not on the test '.
This article is pretty ridiculous and lazy. > After 40 years of allowing the market to play an expanding role in driving prosperity, China’s leaders have remembered something important — they’re Communists. China isn't a true communist state and hasn't been for a while. Yet the author feels the need to dunk on this straw man and defend capitalism and venture capitalists who lost money in the tutoring crackdown. The m…
I feel a bit too far removed from this, so my comments might be a bit too curious without considering other perspectives (aka I am a bit naive on this topic). With that said: Global investors are getting squashed. But there must be global investors who shorted these stocks or bought put options. Why aren’t they covered in this article? I’m missing nuance on the investment side. From a political standpoint, I want to…
But even so, shorts "dont make the world go round". They are a necessary mechanism against exuberance, but companies selling shares and using those to invest/grow -- that's the heart of the promise of shareholder capitalism.
In America, politicians are controlled by billionaires. This comes at the cost of national interest, given that winner-takes-all systems are gini coefficient maximizers. In China, politicians control billionaires. At least in theory, especially given how much the Chinese political establishment is attuned to the needs of the Chinese commoner, this does protect the national interest.
Once you accumulate enough wealth and/or power unintended consequences just keep increasing. They never decrease. And the 6 inch chimp brain everyone has dooms it to blunder.
The East India Company did hand over ownership to the Queen after 200 years of raking it in. Why? And look at the state of the Queen today.
Xi and the Billionaires are trapped by their own hubris.
In America, politicians are controlled by billionaires. This comes at the cost of national interest, given that winner-takes-all systems are gini coefficient maximizers. In China, politicians control billionaires. At least in theory, especially given how much the Chinese political establishment is attuned to the needs of the Chinese commoner, this does protect the national interest.
Hah... here is how common people are treated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_internment_camps
In America, politicians are controlled by billionaires. This comes at the cost of national interest, given that winner-takes-all systems are gini coefficient maximizers. In China, politicians control billionaires. At least in theory, especially given how much the Chinese political establishment is attuned to the needs of the Chinese commoner, this does protect the national interest.
The problem is when said politicians are a small faction of fallible people with unlimited power and no procedure of being peacefully replaced. Such a setup strongly hints at the fact that they really don’t want to give up control, which implies any policy is bound to protect their position first. They might act selflessly or benefit the nation at some particular point in time, but blindly counting on it being consistently so seems foolish.
The native citizens will come to HN and offer some rationalization. The non citizens will offer others. The reason is very simple. The dictator is paranoid about losing control and getting killed. Simple as that
In America, politicians are controlled by billionaires. This comes at the cost of national interest, given that winner-takes-all systems are gini coefficient maximizers. In China, politicians control billionaires. At least in theory, especially given how much the Chinese political establishment is attuned to the needs of the Chinese commoner, this does protect the national interest.
Xi Jinping is literally a billionaire.
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 you accelerate the pathologies (people start acting like anything goes) and society starts to destabilise.