Lmao, would blowing up an effigy of Hitler be racist towards Germans?
Conflating disgust towards and individual with disgust towards the race/religion/nationality that individual belongs to is such a transparent attempt to shed well aimed criticism.
Like most taxes it’s possible to do a progressive property tax, where the more your properties are collectively worth the higher rate of tax you pay. This doesn’t sound like what is being proposed here, but it is very-much possible and hopefully it gets changed before it’s passed.
Done right this will leave owner/occupiers in the same state they are in now, mildly reduce the profitability of small time landlords and make large scale landlords financial nonsense viable forcing them to sell.
The actual risk is that because it lowers house prices by artificially reducing the demand it won’t encourage housebuilding which is the only real solution when more people want or need to live in a place than there is housing.
That said, I am optimistic this increases supply enough by forcing sales of under occupied properties to offset the reduction in built supply.
Fixed, thank you.
Yeah, fair that is probably a truer reading of their intent, I will edit my post to refer to yours.
I would still argue that taking proven approaches that cut security services related murders by up to 98.5% is worth doing and dismissing that on the basis that anarchism if somehow implemented in the US would solve the last 1.5% is…
Well whatever, I don’t want to try to debate people out of anarchism, especially not here.
Declaring something happens in every country with armed police Is asinine when it happens 55 times more in some places and 66 times less in others.
When there are countries with such a dramatically lower rate of security services killing civilians there are important lessons to be learned there, rather than throwing up our hands and saying something like “well states will murder wherever states exist, don’t worry about it, it’s normal”.
Edit: better characterisation in pupperdreams’ reply below
They are arguing the definitions with someone who was “arguing” with someone who lived through the reality
It’s generally not even Londoners re-posting crime “news” about the capital (we live there, so we know) it’s more certain people from rural areas who neither live, work or visit London.
Those certain people are either the ones who have a chip on their shoulder about how London is a success despite not catering exclusively to white native born people, or people who just got sucked into an alternate reality where they read so much crime news that everyone in London must get stabbed once a year.
There is also a healthy dosage of conflating per square mile and per capita crime
Valid, I got 15-20 from a Google search, but further research puts your numbers as more reasonable, I will edit the patent post.
I think it’s hard to definitely call something a bubble until it pops.
The definition of a bubble goes something along the lines of market prices exceeding the intrinsic value of the investment they represent, which may be true here?
If you want to read more about this the rough name for these companies was “the magnificent seven” a year or so ago when I last looked at this. A quick Google suggests represent about a third of the SNP 500’s value now and have a cape ratio (cyclicly adjusted price to earnings) of ~37 compared to 15-20 being normal.
Edit: the above baseline is incorrect; see sugar_in_tea’s comment for a more accurate baseline and some interesting counterpoints
I can’t find a good numerical source for the correlated risk within this group, and I suspect analyzing it is very difficult. Given they all used to be a lot more diversified in the past but now a large % of their valuation is predicated on AI historical correlation analysis probably fails. But the diagram linked here suggests it’s probably bad to put all your money in these companies. (Or even a 3rd if you are in an s&p 500 index tracker 😶)
Like, none of this definitively says this is a bubble, since if it were possible to divine that the bubble would immediately pop, but it does suggest there is a strong likelihood we are seeing a bubble.
The letters that make up words is a common blind spot for AIs, since they are trained on strings of tokens (roughly words) they don’t have a good concept of which letters are inside those words or what order they are in.
Technically the act passed in 2023 under the Sunak government.
That said; I can’t seem to find a vote breakdown and I would not be at all surprised if labour also backed it.
I’m hoping enough public dissatisfaction leads to labour repealing it but I won’t hold my breath.
Even if you don’t buy into this logic, you still have to do it in quite a few places because the security auditors have a line in their checklist about being able to extract any internal information from error pages
Best of luck with the job search, linkedin is awful, but at-least the need for it passes.
Because companies have been talking up how their adoption of AI is going to make them faster and more able to capitalise on opportunities in order to prop up their valuations for a while now and it seems to work as far as share price goes.
Being able back up this talk with metrics showing that their employees are all in on AI reinforces this, since the share price is the metric the business optimises for over product development employee reviews will index on this over cost effectiveness, and at most big tech companies engineers are very much making every decision with an eye to performance review optimisation (i.e. how it will affect their next review rather than the product they are building)
There is also some lesser incentives in that meta employees care directly about the meta share price since a lot of their compensation is in the form of RSUs.
I’m not condonig this as a desirable state of affairs, just explaining the incentive curve that the actors are following.