Go read the Capgemini and Merrill Lynch "World Wealth Report 2011". Currently the "high net worth individuals" which are the ~10 million richest people in the world, hold 29% of their $42.7 Trillion, or about $12.4 Trillion in savings accounts and similar (fixed income). They hold another $4.7 Trillion in cash and deposits like gold. That means that of the $42.7 Trillion only $25.6 Trillion is actively being invested into the economy.
Or in other words, about $12.4 Trillion is locked away in accounts in Switserland, Luxemburg, the Cayman Islands and such, where maybe those banks might indirectly do something with the money, if it's an interest bearing account. About $4.7 Trillion is literally sitting in a vault somewhere.
I would call that hoarding money.
If I, and 1000 people like me earn $50k and spend it, it's much better for the economy than one person earning $50M and spending $10M. Especially because I'm more likely to spend that money on locally produced goods.
I also don't agree with your definition of "rich". I think that if you spend your money you don't get rich. And if you're rich you'll soon be poor. You either hoard it, or invest it. I think the numbers in the report speak for themselves that this is exactly what rich people do. 40% of the money is being hoarded, 60% invested.
Being ruled a monopolist doesn't have any consequences. Leveraging that monopoly to gain dominance in another market is what gets the lawyers sent after you.
I haven't seen Apple do that. You can freely compete with them in any market they're active in.
It would be a different story if they would ask Best Buy not to sell the Xoom if they wanted to sell the iPad.
As long as you can make a free choice as a consumer between Apple and their competitors there is no foul play.
However, the issue here is not whether Microsoft should be able to market their own-brand locked down tablet - its the hypothetical idea that MS could use its leverage with OEMs (i.e. the cost of MS software licenses, and other incentive schemes) to encourage them all to lock out non-MS operating systems. Hypothetical, but a plausible extrapolation from their past practices...
Exactly, it's not the issue if you have a (near) monopoly, but if you leverage that to get unfair advantage against competitors in other markets. Although I think rules in the US are a bit more lax than in the EU, they are generally similar.
As far as I can see Apple hasn't used their leverage like that yet. Anyone can compete with them feely and many successfully do. It's just MicroSoft who's struggling because it's not used to playing on a level field.
Especially because I'm also relying on a lot of plugins, I can't upgrade to a newer version of FireFox. Most plugins I use only work on Windows in newer versions of FireFox.
I'm stuck on 3.6 because I don't use Windows but Linux and OSX.
I have used nothing but Netscape/Phoenix/Firefox since I switched from Mosaic in early 1995. I have been very loyal in using these browsers even through the Netscape 4.x cycle.
Now I'm stuck on Firefox 3.6. The addons I'm using are only being updated for Windows, the latest versions that work for me still are stuck on 3.6. It seems addon developers can't keep up. The new release schedule seems to have meant that support for Linux and OSX has become too much effort.
I'll keep using 3.6 as long as it gets security updates and nothing obvious breaks.
Mostly you see the efforts of massive marketing waves and a decent user interface.
I don't think that's true, but even then, what OSS usually lacks is a well designed user interface.
I'm sure if you funded an open source project as well as you funded some closed source projects
Well apparently OSS isn't being funded on the same level then. Maybe because it's harder to make money that way. Sure RedHat, MySQL(now Oracle) and a few others make some money, but none of them seem to have been able to become really large scale players.
If you look at the OSS that is successful, it seems to be mostly stuff that doesn't have a user interface, like kernels, and mail, database and web servers.
I think that the iPod Touch features heavily in the gaming purchases. It allows parents to give their kids a device capable of running the smartphone applications without it being a phone. I think Apple underestimated it's popularity a lot initially.
There is a misconception that the rich are job creators. The real job creators are the middle class that can't afford lavish trips abroad or expensive goods manufactured offshore and instead spend their money closer to home.
This is very true. The wealthy can simply afford to hoard their money, the middle class and lower can't, they live much more hand-to-mouth and are a much bigger boost to the local economy.
It's not the middle class and low income workers that have an estimated 5 Trillion stashed away in Switserland (The number was in the news because of UBS).
I would even argue that the wealthy can afford to pay a higher percentage than the middle class. The middle class and lower need most of their money to pay for their food, housing, transportation, energy, healthcare, tuition, etc. If you're talking about the real middle class, they often do have the income to save some, go on a holiday or buy an iPad. But it's nothing compared to those that can afford multiple homes, yachts, business jets, etc.
I've seen it happen in the other direction as well, with someone I know getting treated with an experimental procedure in the US.*
*) He is still alive and basically cured eight years later, although there are some lingering effects.
This person only had slightly above average wealth. He was very well connected in academic circles though.
I do think that for the common man European healthcare is much better than in the US, both in results and in costs. All the statistics seem to point in that direction.
I'm not so sure. I think it's a sign that more and more of those who grew up on MP3s, basically the Napster Generation and beyond are now old enough to vote. It might be slightly lower in rural areas, but in general youth culture is quite connected especially since the Internet came along. This victory will give the PP credibility that voting for them can get them past the 5% rule in Germany. 9% in Berlin could well translate to 5+% in at least some of Germany's states.
Of course it also could be a blip, but demographically the PP has a growing potential electorate, unlike most other parties.
I understand that both this guy and the guy who lost a couple billion at some French bank a few years ago had come up though the back-office, so would know what limits would set of the alarm bells and would fly just below the radar.
I think the real problem is too much risk taking because in general if you do well, you get a fat bonus (all the way up the management chain), and if you fail most of the hurt is on the customers, shareholders or taxpayers. Usually the worst thing that can happen is that you get fired.
It's like gambling at the casino, but every time you loose, people give you new money.
I'm no expert on financial markets, but to me the whole things just doesn't look Gaussian. But even then, the events in the tail outside a few sigma should still happen every now and then.
But I don't believe the whole problem is Gaussian to begin with.
I'm assuming this sigma you're talking about is supposed to be the standard deviation from some mean?
Does this mean that simple Gaussian statistics are being used to evaluate things that probably aren't? (I'm no expert on financial market statistics, but it doesn't look Gaussian to me at all).
I have a Spotify subscription. I use the service on my iPhone, but not to the extent that if I would buy all the songs I listen to on iTunes instead, it would make much of a difference financially. I think that the Spotify model is the way to go forward, that's the reason they're getting my money. I hope they succeed, but I'm afraid the music companies will get too greedy.
I wish I could do the same for movies and TV series.
I had a nest of Starlings under the roof as a teenager. When the hatchlings started to move around the neighbourhood, you could hear the sounds of DOOM everywhere, as I had been playing that a lot.;-)
There were about 6 of them going "ratatatata Boom Psshhh" all the time. It was funny.
I think one of the TinTin/Kuifje comics already used this as a joke, or otherwise it was an early Suske&Wiske. Which means it's from 1960 or before, so nothing new here.
Slashdot Mirror
Go read the Capgemini and Merrill Lynch "World Wealth Report 2011". Currently the "high net worth individuals" which are the ~10 million richest people in the world, hold 29% of their $42.7 Trillion, or about $12.4 Trillion in savings accounts and similar (fixed income). They hold another $4.7 Trillion in cash and deposits like gold.
That means that of the $42.7 Trillion only $25.6 Trillion is actively being invested into the economy.
Or in other words, about $12.4 Trillion is locked away in accounts in Switserland, Luxemburg, the Cayman Islands and such, where maybe those banks might indirectly do something with the money, if it's an interest bearing account.
About $4.7 Trillion is literally sitting in a vault somewhere.
I would call that hoarding money.
If I, and 1000 people like me earn $50k and spend it, it's much better for the economy than one person earning $50M and spending $10M. Especially because I'm more likely to spend that money on locally produced goods.
I also don't agree with your definition of "rich". I think that if you spend your money you don't get rich. And if you're rich you'll soon be poor. You either hoard it, or invest it. I think the numbers in the report speak for themselves that this is exactly what rich people do. 40% of the money is being hoarded, 60% invested.
Being ruled a monopolist doesn't have any consequences. Leveraging that monopoly to gain dominance in another market is what gets the lawyers sent after you.
I haven't seen Apple do that. You can freely compete with them in any market they're active in.
It would be a different story if they would ask Best Buy not to sell the Xoom if they wanted to sell the iPad.
As long as you can make a free choice as a consumer between Apple and their competitors there is no foul play.
However, the issue here is not whether Microsoft should be able to market their own-brand locked down tablet - its the hypothetical idea that MS could use its leverage with OEMs (i.e. the cost of MS software licenses, and other incentive schemes) to encourage them all to lock out non-MS operating systems. Hypothetical, but a plausible extrapolation from their past practices...
Exactly, it's not the issue if you have a (near) monopoly, but if you leverage that to get unfair advantage against competitors in other markets. Although I think rules in the US are a bit more lax than in the EU, they are generally similar.
As far as I can see Apple hasn't used their leverage like that yet. Anyone can compete with them feely and many successfully do. It's just MicroSoft who's struggling because it's not used to playing on a level field.
Especially because I'm also relying on a lot of plugins, I can't upgrade to a newer version of FireFox.
Most plugins I use only work on Windows in newer versions of FireFox.
I'm stuck on 3.6 because I don't use Windows but Linux and OSX.
I'm avoiding Google as well.
I have used nothing but Netscape/Phoenix/Firefox since I switched from Mosaic in early 1995. I have been very loyal in using these browsers even through the Netscape 4.x cycle.
Now I'm stuck on Firefox 3.6. The addons I'm using are only being updated for Windows, the latest versions that work for me still are stuck on 3.6. It seems addon developers can't keep up. The new release schedule seems to have meant that support for Linux and OSX has become too much effort.
I'll keep using 3.6 as long as it gets security updates and nothing obvious breaks.
If I switch it will be to Safari.
This is actually an awesome idea.
I think I have it on a floppy somewhere...
Mostly you see the efforts of massive marketing waves and a decent user interface.
I don't think that's true, but even then, what OSS usually lacks is a well designed user interface.
I'm sure if you funded an open source project as well as you funded some closed source projects
Well apparently OSS isn't being funded on the same level then. Maybe because it's harder to make money that way. Sure RedHat, MySQL(now Oracle) and a few others make some money, but none of them seem to have been able to become really large scale players.
If you look at the OSS that is successful, it seems to be mostly stuff that doesn't have a user interface, like kernels, and mail, database and web servers.
I think that the iPod Touch features heavily in the gaming purchases. It allows parents to give their kids a device capable of running the smartphone applications without it being a phone. I think Apple underestimated it's popularity a lot initially.
There is a misconception that the rich are job creators. The real job creators are the middle class that can't afford lavish trips abroad or expensive goods manufactured offshore and instead spend their money closer to home.
This is very true. The wealthy can simply afford to hoard their money, the middle class and lower can't, they live much more hand-to-mouth and are a much bigger boost to the local economy.
It's not the middle class and low income workers that have an estimated 5 Trillion stashed away in Switserland (The number was in the news because of UBS).
I would even argue that the wealthy can afford to pay a higher percentage than the middle class. The middle class and lower need most of their money to pay for their food, housing, transportation, energy, healthcare, tuition, etc. If you're talking about the real middle class, they often do have the income to save some, go on a holiday or buy an iPad. But it's nothing compared to those that can afford multiple homes, yachts, business jets, etc.
I've seen it happen in the other direction as well, with someone I know getting treated with an experimental procedure in the US.*
*) He is still alive and basically cured eight years later, although there are some lingering effects.
This person only had slightly above average wealth. He was very well connected in academic circles though.
I do think that for the common man European healthcare is much better than in the US, both in results and in costs. All the statistics seem to point in that direction.
I'm not so sure. I think it's a sign that more and more of those who grew up on MP3s, basically the Napster Generation and beyond are now old enough to vote.
It might be slightly lower in rural areas, but in general youth culture is quite connected especially since the Internet came along. This victory will give the PP credibility that voting for them can get them past the 5% rule in Germany. 9% in Berlin could well translate to 5+% in at least some of Germany's states.
Of course it also could be a blip, but demographically the PP has a growing potential electorate, unlike most other parties.
My VHS versions are getting old and don't look so great on 1920x1080.
2001: A Space Odyssey looks awesome on blue ray and nobody messed with it since 1968.
I understand that both this guy and the guy who lost a couple billion at some French bank a few years ago had come up though the back-office, so would know what limits would set of the alarm bells and would fly just below the radar.
I think the real problem is too much risk taking because in general if you do well, you get a fat bonus (all the way up the management chain), and if you fail most of the hurt is on the customers, shareholders or taxpayers. Usually the worst thing that can happen is that you get fired.
It's like gambling at the casino, but every time you loose, people give you new money.
I'm no expert on financial markets, but to me the whole things just doesn't look Gaussian. But even then, the events in the tail outside a few sigma should still happen every now and then.
But I don't believe the whole problem is Gaussian to begin with.
I worked in risk management in electric power trading till I got sick of the weasels in suits.
Heheheh, I did Electricity forecasting here in Europe. We seemed to have the same weasels, I got sick of them as well.
Your story is soo familiar.
I now am building the largest telescope in the world, much more rewarding work. :-)
I'm assuming this sigma you're talking about is supposed to be the standard deviation from some mean?
Does this mean that simple Gaussian statistics are being used to evaluate things that probably aren't? (I'm no expert on financial market statistics, but it doesn't look Gaussian to me at all).
I have a Spotify subscription. I use the service on my iPhone, but not to the extent that if I would buy all the songs I listen to on iTunes instead, it would make much of a difference financially. I think that the Spotify model is the way to go forward, that's the reason they're getting my money. I hope they succeed, but I'm afraid the music companies will get too greedy.
I wish I could do the same for movies and TV series.
I understand that having a PhD is near guarantee to be dismissed from jury duty.
Yeah, I thought it was TinTin, but I don't have access to any TinTin books right now to check.
Funny, the graph you link only shows Social Security to be larger than the DoD budget.
some other numbers that might enlighten you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
http://www.visualeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/ve-gov-spending-r2.swf
arb? I can't follow what you're saying in the Coca Cola vs Pepsi Cola example. Can you elaborate?
I had a nest of Starlings under the roof as a teenager. When the hatchlings started to move around the neighbourhood, you could hear the sounds of DOOM everywhere, as I had been playing that a lot. ;-)
There were about 6 of them going "ratatatata Boom Psshhh" all the time. It was funny.
I think one of the TinTin/Kuifje comics already used this as a joke, or otherwise it was an early Suske&Wiske. Which means it's from 1960 or before, so nothing new here.