Netflix is now worth more than $100B • Hacker News Board

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#311

Post by specialist » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 10:40 PM UTC

virmundi wrote: post #191

losteric wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what degree does income inequality, consumer debt, and rapidly rising barriers of entry to high-income fields contribute slowing GDP growth? Is there research and evidence on the subject? I'm just an engineer with basic financial survival skills... but blind intuition suggests fixing those problems is necessary for a sustainable growing economy. "Trickle-down" theory and growing inequality drains economic activity…

I'm not saying you're wrong. I understand where you're coming from. You raise good points. I think we need to add to this list one simple idea: regulation. Housing costs are terrible. They're getting bad even in small towns like mine. There is no way that my house is worth 172k. For many, especially in California and states that followed their lead, housing cost are largely, not solely, due to regulation on new house…

When you say “regulation”, I hear “market protections.”

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#312

Post by bonesss » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 11:34 PM UTC

Balgair wrote: post #297

bonesss wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4) Unmanned mining in space - as automation and machine learning progress capturing the right asteroid could bring in a few Billion or Trillion worth of nickle or whatever.

Honestly, I'm bearish on space mining. The Earth has a lot of unexplored volume left. The oceans' floors are relatively unexplored in terms of mineral wealth, even just 100 miles offshore. Antarctica is also a giant mystery, with many potentially rich mountain ranges sitting under 1/2 mile of ice. Heck, in Australia people will buy land, walk around, and just find nuggets of gold sitting on the dirt, it's something o…

Well, there is significant investment in this space (har har), with timelines much closer than a century making investors open their wallets today. And costs aren't really relevant in isolation, it's the ROI that matters.

Space mining is not the answer to things we can find otherwise on the ground. It is the answer to how we build things in space, and get things we can't get in bulk down here. The right rock could reshape our relationship to some of the rare earth metals, for example. Mining en masse in remote regions is no picnic, so if hundreds of millions invested in going up can bring many billions down on demand, the economics will make sense. Mining Antarctica for hundreds of millions of tonnes for a not-so-interesting minerals offers an upside that pales in comparison to the amazing nuggets we have floating around the solar system...

And if the economics are sound, technologically: if you combine a UAV and a brain about as good as we get in a Tesla you're just a few rockets away from some insane riches and the power to crush terrestrial markets on a whim... No soup for you ... that's the kind of thing Billionaires dream of.

The promises of low and micro g manufacturing, the decreasing weight requirements and increase intelligence systems, and holding the economic 'high ground' for humanities next step offer the potential to move the needle more than a little. Launch tech is the big bottleneck, so keep an eye on SpaceX :)

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#313

Post by textor » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 3:17 AM UTC

Gustomaximus wrote: post #293

Tasboo wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cited an article that basically says 'Trickle down doesn't exist, plebs. But hey, trickle down totally works! Here's why!'. What he describes is the policies that people refer to when they say Trickle Down.

Not sure why your getting downvoted. The article largely tries to debunk TD exists because 'no recognised economist of any school of thought has ever had any such theory or made any such proposal' TD has been referred plenty, not under than name. You'll find a bunch of economist views (positive and negative) under supply side theories which is often steeped in trickle down theory. And then the article promotes TD und…

This isn't about the number of examples. It's plainly disingenious to say that "TD has been referred plenty, not under that name". Basically, in such way one demands the right to reduce supply side theories – or, in popular practice, to reduce every argument in favor of any taxation rate lower than proposed by the opponent – to a strawman of choice, as if the strawman was the original idea that's "covered up" or "dogwhistled" or whatever. Like this, in extreme:

A: We need to impose 100% tax on the top 10%, to achieve economic growth and lower inequality.

B: This isn't even wrong, this is asinine.

A: Oh, trickle-down much?

Why do this? Naturally, because genuinely debubunking the specific arguments against high tax rates is a lot harder than joking about the bourgeoise that promote TD because of their greed.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#314

Post by Balgair » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 3:24 AM UTC

bonesss wrote: post #312

Balgair wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I'm bearish on space mining. The Earth has a lot of unexplored volume left. The oceans' floors are relatively unexplored in terms of mineral wealth, even just 100 miles offshore. Antarctica is also a giant mystery, with many potentially rich mountain ranges sitting under 1/2 mile of ice. Heck, in Australia people will buy land, walk around, and just find nuggets of gold sitting on the dirt, it's something o…

Well, there is significant investment in this space (har har), with timelines much closer than a century making investors open their wallets today. And costs aren't really relevant in isolation, it's the ROI that matters. Space mining is not the answer to things we can find otherwise on the ground. It is the answer to how we build things in space, and get things we can't get in bulk down here. The right rock could re…

> it's the ROI that matters.

So true!

Your points about some unknown material/process in space being the key are correct. However, I don't think there is anything up there that we can't figure out how to make down here. There are some long, single grain, high weight elemental crystals that we can't make here, but they also takes millions of years to cool down in a vacuum. Space is really empty, and there really aren't any magic rocks up there. It's mostly just feldspar.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#315

Post by krageon » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 1:25 PM UTC

Freak_NL wrote: post #259

vitorgrs wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always found that interesting in Europe. In Brazil, you don't pay for "public-broadcast" (as we call here, open TV). But could you tell me more about private channels on public TV?

> In Brazil, you don't pay for "public-broadcast" […] Are you sure the public broadcasters (e.g., EBC) aren't financed by tax-payer money? In the Netherlands there is no separate fee for public broadcasting, but we all pay for our public, free-to-air television and radio via taxes.

There is a mandatory fee that you will pay for being connected to cable (which most people are, even if they don't necessarily use the TV). This pays for the "free" channels that everyone gets.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#316

Post by losteric » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 4:20 PM UTC

KhanMahGretsch wrote: post #308

losteric wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

National debt is a looming crisis, but the largest impact on the general public has been irrationally cutting government spending in the wrong areas (cutting $M from social programs to spend $B/$T on foreign wars). Of course, the general public is screwed when the crisis hits - we don't have any off-shore bank accounts - and this administration has seriously shortened the timeline to crisis.

If we give the government the ability to appropriate funds for social programs and safety-nets, rather than merely enforcing the rights in the constitution, it is inevitable that these funds will inevitably be misappropriated and allocated in ways that benefit the politician and his buddies, primarily. As we continue on, we discover that, lo and behold, the programs need even more money, time for a tax increase! Furt…

Other nations have no problem funding social programs, because they maintain a reasonable tax rate for high-income/high-wealth entities and avoid expensive indefinite foreign wars.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#317

Post by KhanMahGretsch » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 4:32 PM UTC

losteric wrote: post #316

KhanMahGretsch wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we give the government the ability to appropriate funds for social programs and safety-nets, rather than merely enforcing the rights in the constitution, it is inevitable that these funds will inevitably be misappropriated and allocated in ways that benefit the politician and his buddies, primarily. As we continue on, we discover that, lo and behold, the programs need even more money, time for a tax increase! Furt…

Other nations have no problem funding social programs, because they maintain a reasonable tax rate for high-income/high-wealth entities and avoid expensive indefinite foreign wars.

Keep in mind that a lot, if not all, of those countries exist under the umbrella of protection that the United States military provides, and thus do not have the same budgetary requirements for their own forces. Otherwise, time to start learning how to say "Please don't shoot" in Russian.

(edit: don't take the above as the complete-picture, by any means, it's just another rarely-mentioned factor that I wanted to bring up. I believe there's a sweet-spot to be found for taxation & social-programs that has a net-gain for society.)

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#318

Post by softawre » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 8:34 PM UTC

dvt wrote: post #24

Spivak wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really a boom and bust. As Netflix's 3rd party library continue to be siphoned off more people will turn to piracy because they're not going to subscribe to n different services.

N different services still come out cheaper than cable. I pay for Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime (which comes with Video) so let's say ~ $30 a month. Compared to Cox Cable, it's not even close -- $30 is Cox' entry level cable offering (and I can't share it with my family, nor watch shows at my own leisure). My bet is that there's plenty of cash still left. Until cable companies wise up (which is probably never), Net…

That's entry level cable, with ads (as you mentioned), and that's before you pay all of the BS fees and rentals for the boxes and HD surcharges and recording surcharges and whatever else they come up with this year.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#319

Post by hoopladler » Thu, Jan 25, 2018, 1:11 AM UTC

textor wrote: post #313

Gustomaximus wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why your getting downvoted. The article largely tries to debunk TD exists because 'no recognised economist of any school of thought has ever had any such theory or made any such proposal' TD has been referred plenty, not under than name. You'll find a bunch of economist views (positive and negative) under supply side theories which is often steeped in trickle down theory. And then the article promotes TD und…

This isn't about the number of examples. It's plainly disingenious to say that "TD has been referred plenty, not under that name". Basically, in such way one demands the right to reduce supply side theories – or, in popular practice, to reduce every argument in favor of any taxation rate lower than proposed by the opponent – to a strawman of choice, as if the strawman was the original idea that's "covered up" or "dog…

I think it's more that, when people sit down and debunk the arguments against high tax rates, the people who believe in supply side economics don't read them. Which in some cases is because they'd rather watch old cowboy movies. In others, it's because they simply don't care. It's an extreme case - but consider what happened to the last accademic economist who tried to use economic arguments against the external imposition of supply side. He was called Yanis Varofakis. They ignored him, the press called him a nut, then they just went ahead with the austerity package.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#320

Post by jjeaff » Wed, Jan 31, 2018, 9:04 AM UTC

kgwgk wrote: post #242

jjeaff wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is generating plenty of profit for investors. And the best kind of profit too, capital gains. Why pay out dividends to your investors with after tax money that will be taxed again at a higher rate when you can just stash it overseas and buy more capital assets and let the stock grow in perpetuity. Same with apple. As an investor, you don't need dividends, you just sell a few shares each quarter.

Apple does pay a dividend. And gives even more money to shareholders in the form of buybacks. The total shareholder yield (dividends plus buybacks, divided by market cap) looks quite different for Amazon and Apple: https://advisortools.zacks.com/Research/Stocks/AAPL/Sharehol... https://advisortools.zacks.com/Research/Stocks/AMZN/Sharehol...

That's only recent. Post Jobs.