I'm not saying you are ignorant since what you said is probably correct on the publishers intentions.
But when people decide to make a purchase they are paying the current price for all future value discounted to the present. Let's say I want to buy a knife. I can get a piece of crap that will last a year for $10. Or I can buy a nice Knife that will last me my entire life and I can hand down to my kids for $60. Everyone will have their own appraisal of this situation.
For games right now there is a group of people willing to pay the asking price with the knowledge they can trade, lend, or resell games. Those features are already included in the current prices. If publishers want to eliminate those features they obviously can but the result will be fewer people willing to pay the current asking price which is reduced revenue. Now it could be that they plan on reducing the price to go along with reducing the features. By reducing the price they will get some increase in sales. The question is "Will this strategy increase revenue?" This can't be determined theoretically. You have to experiment by actually seeing how the marketplace responds.
You get a natural monopoly just by being the first to do something. The good thing about the natural monopoly is it automatically takes into account how big of an advance you made. If it's just a small step and if the market approves it will be quickly adopted. If it is a huge breakthrough it may take months or years for competitors to figure out how to do it and by then you can move on. Unlike the artificial monopoly of patents where you have a gatekeeper decide if it is a big enough step to deserve monopoly protection. And then they only have a few choices of how long that protection lasts.
If you get rid of patents the result will be smaller more frequent advances as companies concentrate on bringing them to market and not in front of a patent examiner. Overall progress will be much faster. Also all of the overhead will be eliminated which will free up people for more productive work.
Economics is definitely a science. You just have to be realistic about what you can and can't do with it. At it's heart economics is about peoples preferences and transactions. Since both of these things change at each individuals whim you can never predict the future. You can predict is what the outcome of actions will be, you just can't predict what action people are going to take.
The presidents view that another country having productive people hurts your country is idiotic. Every productive person creates things for other people. The more productive the human race becomes and the more free we are to trade the better off we all are.
The only point of view in which another country having productive people is a threat is if you think of the tax payers at cattle. The more productive the other farmers cattle are the more it hurts you.
I honestly WANT every charge to go to trial. Of course judges, DA's, and lawyers don't want that because it would mean they lose their power. But the key here should be a jury of peers deciding the following. 1. Is the law just? If so 2. Is the person guilty? If so 3. What should be the punishment.
The difference has to do with sensibilities. You can say things about your family members that if a stranger said the same thing it might start a fight. The same dynamic applies to all people that consider themselves a part of a group. People in a geographic region or country know they have problems and can argue passionately about how to solve them. But if some loudmouth from the other side of the planet says the same thing the people that were arguing will join to fight the outsider.
Remember how after 9/11 there wasn't much infighting between the political parties? They united behind a common enemy. As the threat faded the political fighting resumed. If you keep political and military pressure on a country all you do is keep that regime you hate tools to stay in power.
From all of these anti-Iranian comments I guess the US propaganda is working well. Pretty soon you all we clamor for war and sign up to fight. It's amazing how people can hate those they never met.
The value of everything is purely subjective not just precious metals. The specific value (Price/weight) is what is high compared to other things because of many factors rarity being one of them. But you are right if tons are brought back it will lower the price. This happened many times in history during gold and silver rushes. Pretty soon the market adjusts to the new supply.
The key isn't the number it is how it's done. Where I work we have 4 major milestones.
First is the pitch to get the project approved in the first place.
Then the first design review is just an overall layout and functional requirements. This represents about 10% of the work. This is where a project should get cut. It should be clear what is and isn't possible based on cost and schedule.
The second design review is where all of the parts are identified and roughly designed. This is about 30% of the work This gives the analysts something to work with. If there are any big show stoppers it's a good point to cancel or re-evaluate. When this gets approved the rest of the work is finishing all of the detailed work which is about the remaining 60% of the effort.
The final review is pre-production. All of the design work is as done as it's going to get before manufacturing starts. When a project is killed here it is very detrimental to moral because the detailed work is tedious. You don't mind doing it if you know a project is going to ship but if it's canceled it is usually due to poor management and planning.
Entrepreneurism cannot be easily taught. That because formal education typically teaches what has always been done. That's why so many of the big innovators didn't come out of Business school. They created industries. Now the business guys may be important for managing an established business but you aren't going to get much innovation.
At those speeds you need the barrel, track, or rail straight to extreme precision. Any deviations will set up a wave in the track that will destroy it. We built a 1000 ft light gas gun and had it happen. A couple hundred feet down the track the projectile existed through the wall of the tube and the tube was bent into a sin wave.
There is no shortage. The problem is the price is increasing. But most likely the reimbursement rate by Medicare hasn't gone up to keep pace so they can't fill the orders for the price Medicare is covering. Most of this GI stuff is for seniors anyway. This is most likely a political move to get people scared so they can get the lobbyists to jack up the reimbursement rate.
Nope. Someone asking you to take a drug test as a condition of a contract is not unreasonable search because there is no force behind their action. You can avoid taking the test by refusing and getting a job elsewhere. Someone in law enforcement doing the same thing is a violation of your rights because you cannot avoid the situation. If you try to leave they will imprison you.
Let's say you work for a company and in it's rules and regulations there is a sexual harassment policy.Then your boss say's what you said. You can go to his boss or higher and report them until you get satisfaction. If you don't you can threaten to go public and hurt their bottom line.
Now if you are hired in Nevada by a brothel and are given the same ultimatum it might be a different story.
Here is the problem with your comment. When someone is making an investment you look at the total rate of return. Taxes affect the rate of return. If a certain investment or asset gets taxed away you will just choose to do something else with your money.
Take the inheritance tax. If the idea is to punish people then make the tax 100%. If the idea is to raise tax revenue than you want it much lower. This is because if you know your assets you give to your heirs will be taxed away you will spend it all, with the loss of capital and productivity increases that go with it.
Second people place a value on leisure. If the tax rate is increased to the point where your marginal income from working is less valuable than your leisure you will stop making more.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't even need a bigger budget. Just make realistic long term goals and don't change them every 2 years will be enough.
For your health you should be taking a break after 4 hours of driving anyway.
Crap.
I'm not saying you are ignorant since what you said is probably correct on the publishers intentions.
But when people decide to make a purchase they are paying the current price for all future value discounted to the present. Let's say I want to buy a knife. I can get a piece of crap that will last a year for $10. Or I can buy a nice Knife that will last me my entire life and I can hand down to my kids for $60. Everyone will have their own appraisal of this situation.
For games right now there is a group of people willing to pay the asking price with the knowledge they can trade, lend, or resell games. Those features are already included in the current prices. If publishers want to eliminate those features they obviously can but the result will be fewer people willing to pay the current asking price which is reduced revenue. Now it could be that they plan on reducing the price to go along with reducing the features. By reducing the price they will get some increase in sales. The question is "Will this strategy increase revenue?" This can't be determined theoretically. You have to experiment by actually seeing how the marketplace responds.
You get a natural monopoly just by being the first to do something. The good thing about the natural monopoly is it automatically takes into account how big of an advance you made. If it's just a small step and if the market approves it will be quickly adopted. If it is a huge breakthrough it may take months or years for competitors to figure out how to do it and by then you can move on. Unlike the artificial monopoly of patents where you have a gatekeeper decide if it is a big enough step to deserve monopoly protection. And then they only have a few choices of how long that protection lasts.
If you get rid of patents the result will be smaller more frequent advances as companies concentrate on bringing them to market and not in front of a patent examiner. Overall progress will be much faster. Also all of the overhead will be eliminated which will free up people for more productive work.
I'm pretty sure whoever figures that one out will be famous.
Economics is definitely a science. You just have to be realistic about what you can and can't do with it. At it's heart economics is about peoples preferences and transactions. Since both of these things change at each individuals whim you can never predict the future. You can predict is what the outcome of actions will be, you just can't predict what action people are going to take.
The presidents view that another country having productive people hurts your country is idiotic. Every productive person creates things for other people. The more productive the human race becomes and the more free we are to trade the better off we all are.
The only point of view in which another country having productive people is a threat is if you think of the tax payers at cattle. The more productive the other farmers cattle are the more it hurts you.
I'm pretty sure he wants to sell the whole package. You know he has to manage the batteries as well.
I honestly WANT every charge to go to trial. Of course judges, DA's, and lawyers don't want that because it would mean they lose their power. But the key here should be a jury of peers deciding the following.
1. Is the law just? If so
2. Is the person guilty? If so
3. What should be the punishment.
That's it.
The difference has to do with sensibilities. You can say things about your family members that if a stranger said the same thing it might start a fight. The same dynamic applies to all people that consider themselves a part of a group. People in a geographic region or country know they have problems and can argue passionately about how to solve them. But if some loudmouth from the other side of the planet says the same thing the people that were arguing will join to fight the outsider.
Remember how after 9/11 there wasn't much infighting between the political parties? They united behind a common enemy. As the threat faded the political fighting resumed. If you keep political and military pressure on a country all you do is keep that regime you hate tools to stay in power.
And mocking and threatening another countries government only helps those governments stay in power. See Cuba & north Korea.
Arggh! To each his own I say. I prefer me women salty.
From all of these anti-Iranian comments I guess the US propaganda is working well. Pretty soon you all we clamor for war and sign up to fight. It's amazing how people can hate those they never met.
The value of everything is purely subjective not just precious metals. The specific value (Price/weight) is what is high compared to other things because of many factors rarity being one of them. But you are right if tons are brought back it will lower the price. This happened many times in history during gold and silver rushes. Pretty soon the market adjusts to the new supply.
The key isn't the number it is how it's done. Where I work we have 4 major milestones.
First is the pitch to get the project approved in the first place.
Then the first design review is just an overall layout and functional requirements. This represents about 10% of the work. This is where a project should get cut. It should be clear what is and isn't possible based on cost and schedule.
The second design review is where all of the parts are identified and roughly designed. This is about 30% of the work This gives the analysts something to work with. If there are any big show stoppers it's a good point to cancel or re-evaluate. When this gets approved the rest of the work is finishing all of the detailed work which is about the remaining 60% of the effort.
The final review is pre-production. All of the design work is as done as it's going to get before manufacturing starts. When a project is killed here it is very detrimental to moral because the detailed work is tedious. You don't mind doing it if you know a project is going to ship but if it's canceled it is usually due to poor management and planning.
Entrepreneurism cannot be easily taught. That because formal education typically teaches what has always been done. That's why so many of the big innovators didn't come out of Business school. They created industries. Now the business guys may be important for managing an established business but you aren't going to get much innovation.
At those speeds you need the barrel, track, or rail straight to extreme precision. Any deviations will set up a wave in the track that will destroy it.
We built a 1000 ft light gas gun and had it happen. A couple hundred feet down the track the projectile existed through the wall of the tube and the tube was bent into a sin wave.
That's funny. I was going to include that in the Subject line but it wouldn't fit.
There is no shortage. The problem is the price is increasing. But most likely the reimbursement rate by Medicare hasn't gone up to keep pace so they can't fill the orders for the price Medicare is covering. Most of this GI stuff is for seniors anyway. This is most likely a political move to get people scared so they can get the lobbyists to jack up the reimbursement rate.
I'd start my own company that didn't have a drug test and no sexual harassment and have my pick of superior employees and rule the marketplace.
Nope. Someone asking you to take a drug test as a condition of a contract is not unreasonable search because there is no force behind their action. You can avoid taking the test by refusing and getting a job elsewhere. Someone in law enforcement doing the same thing is a violation of your rights because you cannot avoid the situation. If you try to leave they will imprison you.
Let's say you work for a company and in it's rules and regulations there is a sexual harassment policy.Then your boss say's what you said. You can go to his boss or higher and report them until you get satisfaction. If you don't you can threaten to go public and hurt their bottom line.
Now if you are hired in Nevada by a brothel and are given the same ultimatum it might be a different story.
Here is the problem with your comment. When someone is making an investment you look at the total rate of return. Taxes affect the rate of return. If a certain investment or asset gets taxed away you will just choose to do something else with your money.
Take the inheritance tax. If the idea is to punish people then make the tax 100%. If the idea is to raise tax revenue than you want it much lower. This is because if you know your assets you give to your heirs will be taxed away you will spend it all, with the loss of capital and productivity increases that go with it.
Second people place a value on leisure. If the tax rate is increased to the point where your marginal income from working is less valuable than your leisure you will stop making more.
with nobody held accountable.