And any economist will tell you trade creates wealth
What they'll actually do is cite a simplistic theory that claims that. Empirical verification is another story. But even the simplistic theory only holds under a very restrictive set of assumptions, like balanced trade. We haven't had balanced trade in 30 years.
The United States became an economic superpower because it has steadfastly refused to take up the ideology you're preaching
You're joking, right? Throughout most of its history the US was famous for its high tariff barriers, including the period when we became the world's foremost industrial power. Turns out Al Hamilton was a pretty smart guy.
Besides violating over a dozen international treaties
Which would be so awful because China always honors its treaty obligations. Oh, except for not having a convertible currency, even years after they were obligated to by treaty, and manipulating their currency, and having illegal tariffs of as much as 35% on car parts (not to mention many other things), and...
The first couple of times you don't retaliate you're taking the high road. After that you're just being a chump.
due to a long two hundred plus year history of using this labor-saving device known as chinese people to build our railroads, infrastructure, factories, etc., we don't have much in the way of domestic production capabilities for many of the major components of modern IT systems
Wow, talk about confused history. Those Chinese people building our railroads were called immigrants, hence that production was domestic. As incredibly hard working as those people were, I don't think they spent much time building IT equipment. However, many of their descendants did, but they're now getting screwed just like other American citizens.
And let me be clear: No government or private agency has come forward with conclusive proof that any product made in China for commercial resale has these capabilities built into it at the direction of the Government.
Good point. Never take precautions. Here in NY we've decided not to prepare for another hurricane because we have no proof that another one will occur.
China already protects itself from US-influence. This is protectionism, and we should all respond in kind.
Agreed, but I've been saying that ever since Billy Clinton, at the behest of his Wall St. masters, pushed so hard for premature PNTR and WTO membership for China. Sometimes I feel like I'm giving advice to 5th century Romans about how to keep out the barbarians - a little late.
What's your point? Maybe good advice to the Chinese government is not to use US made networking equipment (if there is such a thing anymore). That doesn't mean the US government avoiding Chinese equipment is a bad idea.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
The high school and college stories I hear from the US are pretty depressing usually.
How so?
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
Faith in a free market is not some delusion as your post implies.... it is just not the cure-all solution that.
My post implies no such thing, as it only refers to faith in the infallibility of free markets. Given that, and the last statement in your post, it's hard to figure out what your disagreement is.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 2
What is it about extreme libertarianism that makes so many people go after it like eccentric Spanish noblemen tilting after windmills?
I suspect it's the allure of simplicity, and the certainty comes with it. Like an equation that explains half the universe, the idea that everything can be derived from a few simple principles is enticing. Perhaps that's why it seems to have a particular allure for nerds, as people who prefer things systematic and deductive. I prefer things that way myself, but my realist side says empirical data trumps everything.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 2
Out of curiosity, what post were you replying to? Where did I say that people should be forced to go to college, or that everyone, regardless of academic ability, should be funded to go? And when is calling the fire department an example of government force? Your "reply" is almost random, standard issue, libertarian talking points rather than a coherent rebuttal.
of Government force
Hint: in the English language only proper nouns are capitalized.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
So indentured servitude is what you really mean.
WTF? People burdened by student loans in this country would kill for a deal like that. Because, sanctimonious pleas about the intrinsic value of education aside, people usually go to college to earn a better living. It's reasonable that they pay back some of the cost. OTOH having them take all the risks is absurd. Student loan not even dischargeable in bankruptcy is absurd, as is the individual risk of say, having the bottom fall out of a field that was lucrative when you started college. Spreading that risk around is like an insurance pool, but having the beneficiaries pay a reasonable amount is also a good idea.
If something doesn't happen to control college costs in the US, I'm going to vote to revoke the Declaration of Independence.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
Hear, hear!
Even other than universities, here in NY State we have a notorious things called "public authorities". All the power of government and almost none of the accountability. If my tax dollars are funding it, I want the government to be able to throw its weight around and tell these institutions what to do. Most of all I want to help the son-of-a-bitch wasting my money to loose the next election. Public-private hybrids and "public authorities" are the worst of all world's, having the disadvantages of both public and private, not the virtues of both.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 0
The high price of education is primarily due to government-backed loans providing unlimited income to colleges.
Of course the government getting involved in higher education is the reason that costs are outrageous. This explains why places like Canada, where university is practically tuition free and they have about the world's highest percentage of university graduates, is being dragged to its knees by the costs. Oh, wait...
It's easy to find an ideology strong enough to resist empirical debunking, but do you really want to spend your life that way?
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I think the U.S. should be seriously considering something more like the German system.... If you've ever worked with fifth graders, it's pretty obvious which ones will never be on the academic the track or the one just "below" it.
How do you know "which ones will never be on the academic the track"? Did you follow former 5th graders for life?
While I agree "Ph.D.'s for everyone" is nonsense (other than filling the pockets of the education-industrial complex), the German system is too rigid. Should your performance in the 5th grade determine the path of the rest of your life? I refused to do anything in the 4th through 6th grades (family problems) but wound up getting an MSEE (ok, that's the sort of thing you usually keep in the closet, but I know people who got real degrees too). Similarly, an old friend of mine dropped out of high school and 10 years later went to Harvard Law.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
What's this free market thing you speak of?
Please don't make fun of other people's religious beliefs. The infallibility of the free market is clearly a matter of Faith, as its proponents are impervious to empirical debunking.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 2
Here's the thing, the free market isn't some magic fairy that shits pots of gold and sprinkles rainbow dust everywhere.
You do realize that's a really stupid thing to say right?
You're right. He could be arrested for blasphemy.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
Appropriate for Mediterranean countries, but I believe cotton picking and chain gangs are more traditional here.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Isn't this more or less the Cuban model
Maybe you mean Canada. All those 'C' countries sound alike to me too, and what's the difference? Universal health care, nearly tuition free university education, a commie is a commie.
And it's getting worse. Even here in America we now have socialized fire and police departments. That's right - no conspiracy theory! If your house is burning down, or you're the victim of a crime, you can request fire or police protection (there's even a hotline for it) and the government will pick up the whole tab. Talk about moral hazard! Before you know it, people will be tossing lighted matches into their homes for fun and walking down the street with $100 bills hanging out of their pockets.
That said, it might be that we have to completely give up the notion of privacy, as Google has claimed all along.
Yes, let's give up something that we've had, in varying degrees, throughout history. Something that, in various aspects, has been enshrined in law because it's so important. And let's do it because it's better for Google's business model.
An interesting argument. Perhaps you could submit an amicus curiae brief to the court.
Our fund keeps our investors informed and happy.
Of course it does. Why would anyone ever think otherwise? Extreme secrecy is always used strictly for legitimate business reasons, just like the state secrets privilege is always used for legitimate national security reasons.
Take your money and go home.
Exactly what UC did ten years ago with their Kleiner and Sequoia investments, yet Kleiner and Sequoia are fighting tooth and nail to prevent disclosure of performance data from a decade ago. Oh, that's right, you already said that it's to prevent disclosure of their strategies. I guess their strategies are so good that they haven't had to change them in ten years, and they might be revealed even though California law specifically requires them only to disclose overall fund performance, and not the details about the performance of the underlying companies that make up the funds.
Boilerplate. Everybody who's heard of VC understands and accepts everything you said. It has nothing to do with disclosing the performance of funds from 10 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's off-topic and should modded accordingly.
Right, because political snark has never been tolerated on /.
And any economist will tell you trade creates wealth
What they'll actually do is cite a simplistic theory that claims that. Empirical verification is another story. But even the simplistic theory only holds under a very restrictive set of assumptions, like balanced trade. We haven't had balanced trade in 30 years.
The United States became an economic superpower because it has steadfastly refused to take up the ideology you're preaching
You're joking, right? Throughout most of its history the US was famous for its high tariff barriers, including the period when we became the world's foremost industrial power. Turns out Al Hamilton was a pretty smart guy.
Besides violating over a dozen international treaties
Which would be so awful because China always honors its treaty obligations. Oh, except for not having a convertible currency, even years after they were obligated to by treaty, and manipulating their currency, and having illegal tariffs of as much as 35% on car parts (not to mention many other things), and ...
The first couple of times you don't retaliate you're taking the high road. After that you're just being a chump.
due to a long two hundred plus year history of using this labor-saving device known as chinese people to build our railroads, infrastructure, factories, etc., we don't have much in the way of domestic production capabilities for many of the major components of modern IT systems
Wow, talk about confused history. Those Chinese people building our railroads were called immigrants, hence that production was domestic. As incredibly hard working as those people were, I don't think they spent much time building IT equipment. However, many of their descendants did, but they're now getting screwed just like other American citizens.
And let me be clear: No government or private agency has come forward with conclusive proof that any product made in China for commercial resale has these capabilities built into it at the direction of the Government.
Good point. Never take precautions. Here in NY we've decided not to prepare for another hurricane because we have no proof that another one will occur.
China already protects itself from US-influence. This is protectionism, and we should all respond in kind.
Agreed, but I've been saying that ever since Billy Clinton, at the behest of his Wall St. masters, pushed so hard for premature PNTR and WTO membership for China. Sometimes I feel like I'm giving advice to 5th century Romans about how to keep out the barbarians - a little late.
And you think the US isn't doing the same thing
What's your point? Maybe good advice to the Chinese government is not to use US made networking equipment (if there is such a thing anymore). That doesn't mean the US government avoiding Chinese equipment is a bad idea.
The high school and college stories I hear from the US are pretty depressing usually.
How so?
Faith in a free market is not some delusion as your post implies.... it is just not the cure-all solution that.
My post implies no such thing, as it only refers to faith in the infallibility of free markets. Given that, and the last statement in your post, it's hard to figure out what your disagreement is.
What is it about extreme libertarianism that makes so many people go after it like eccentric Spanish noblemen tilting after windmills?
I suspect it's the allure of simplicity, and the certainty comes with it. Like an equation that explains half the universe, the idea that everything can be derived from a few simple principles is enticing. Perhaps that's why it seems to have a particular allure for nerds, as people who prefer things systematic and deductive. I prefer things that way myself, but my realist side says empirical data trumps everything.
of Government force
Hint: in the English language only proper nouns are capitalized.
A degree helps you make money.
What a quaint notion.
So indentured servitude is what you really mean.
WTF? People burdened by student loans in this country would kill for a deal like that. Because, sanctimonious pleas about the intrinsic value of education aside, people usually go to college to earn a better living. It's reasonable that they pay back some of the cost. OTOH having them take all the risks is absurd. Student loan not even dischargeable in bankruptcy is absurd, as is the individual risk of say, having the bottom fall out of a field that was lucrative when you started college. Spreading that risk around is like an insurance pool, but having the beneficiaries pay a reasonable amount is also a good idea.
If something doesn't happen to control college costs in the US, I'm going to vote to revoke the Declaration of Independence.
Hear, hear!
Even other than universities, here in NY State we have a notorious things called "public authorities". All the power of government and almost none of the accountability. If my tax dollars are funding it, I want the government to be able to throw its weight around and tell these institutions what to do. Most of all I want to help the son-of-a-bitch wasting my money to loose the next election. Public-private hybrids and "public authorities" are the worst of all world's, having the disadvantages of both public and private, not the virtues of both.
The high price of education is primarily due to government-backed loans providing unlimited income to colleges.
Of course the government getting involved in higher education is the reason that costs are outrageous. This explains why places like Canada, where university is practically tuition free and they have about the world's highest percentage of university graduates, is being dragged to its knees by the costs. Oh, wait ...
It's easy to find an ideology strong enough to resist empirical debunking, but do you really want to spend your life that way?
I think the U.S. should be seriously considering something more like the German system. ... If you've ever worked with fifth graders, it's pretty obvious which ones will never be on the academic the track or the one just "below" it.
How do you know "which ones will never be on the academic the track"? Did you follow former 5th graders for life?
While I agree "Ph.D.'s for everyone" is nonsense (other than filling the pockets of the education-industrial complex), the German system is too rigid. Should your performance in the 5th grade determine the path of the rest of your life? I refused to do anything in the 4th through 6th grades (family problems) but wound up getting an MSEE (ok, that's the sort of thing you usually keep in the closet, but I know people who got real degrees too). Similarly, an old friend of mine dropped out of high school and 10 years later went to Harvard Law.
What's this free market thing you speak of?
Please don't make fun of other people's religious beliefs. The infallibility of the free market is clearly a matter of Faith, as its proponents are impervious to empirical debunking.
Here's the thing, the free market isn't some magic fairy that shits pots of gold and sprinkles rainbow dust everywhere.
You do realize that's a really stupid thing to say right?
You're right. He could be arrested for blasphemy.
Appropriate for Mediterranean countries, but I believe cotton picking and chain gangs are more traditional here.
Isn't this more or less the Cuban model
Maybe you mean Canada. All those 'C' countries sound alike to me too, and what's the difference? Universal health care, nearly tuition free university education, a commie is a commie.
And it's getting worse. Even here in America we now have socialized fire and police departments. That's right - no conspiracy theory! If your house is burning down, or you're the victim of a crime, you can request fire or police protection (there's even a hotline for it) and the government will pick up the whole tab. Talk about moral hazard! Before you know it, people will be tossing lighted matches into their homes for fun and walking down the street with $100 bills hanging out of their pockets.
That said, it might be that we have to completely give up the notion of privacy, as Google has claimed all along.
Yes, let's give up something that we've had, in varying degrees, throughout history. Something that, in various aspects, has been enshrined in law because it's so important. And let's do it because it's better for Google's business model.
he has the upper body strength of a pre-pubescent girl
Bias! I have a 9 y.o. daughter of average build and I'm forever amazed at how much she can lift.
Reuters can go f*k themselves.
An interesting argument. Perhaps you could submit an amicus curiae brief to the court.
Our fund keeps our investors informed and happy.
Of course it does. Why would anyone ever think otherwise? Extreme secrecy is always used strictly for legitimate business reasons, just like the state secrets privilege is always used for legitimate national security reasons.
Take your money and go home.
Exactly what UC did ten years ago with their Kleiner and Sequoia investments, yet Kleiner and Sequoia are fighting tooth and nail to prevent disclosure of performance data from a decade ago. Oh, that's right, you already said that it's to prevent disclosure of their strategies. I guess their strategies are so good that they haven't had to change them in ten years, and they might be revealed even though California law specifically requires them only to disclose overall fund performance, and not the details about the performance of the underlying companies that make up the funds.
That's the secret. Oh, and you get to pocket some of the shells just for showing up claiming to know how to hunt.
Nice line of BS Daddy Warbucks, but you overlooked that they want fund performance from ten years ago.
I believe everything you wrote, but having somebody read through hundreds of business plans does not justify the skim that VC's take.
Boilerplate. Everybody who's heard of VC understands and accepts everything you said. It has nothing to do with disclosing the performance of funds from 10 years ago.