Given that it includes health care, education, and a ton of vacation, yeah, they will find that they lead a much better life.
The goal isn't to maximize the number. The goal is to lead a good life. The number can help with that, but not if you focus on it to the exclusion of the things that matter.
Are you trying to be deliberately obtuse? Obviously, you can fudge the number with assumptions around churn rates/etc, but of course an investor would want a view of the rough 12m state of the business.
...which is why we have GAAP-recognized metrics, right? To prevent fudge-ability? And those metrics.. they're deliberately not publishing? Makes you think.
GAAP is basically a standards body to recognize practices.
When there are interesting stories that can't be told with GAAP metrics, accountants derive new metrics. Just because they haven't gone through the standardization process yet doesn't mean they're bullshit - investors in Anthropic can hire auditors to ensure the Anthropic metrics are still meaningful. There are a very small number of deep pocketed investors in Anthropic - they're not a public company like Enron trying to sell to the WSB crowd, or like 2007 CDOs being sold to dentists.
And run rate has been a widely recognized metric for SaaS as long as it has existed - it has meaning and can be audited.
You're just going to Galapagos your economy. Consumers won't put up with high prices and inferior goods. Unless you want to restrict internet/information access so your consumers don't know what they are missing out on.
Well the short version is that Robert Rubin and company sold our industries for parts years and years ago. And now we have to rebuild the industrial base from scratch
Nah, I live in the UK, prices are higher than eu, public service is much worse, but public are voting for the party with members that brought this about.
Varies by jurisdiction. Residential leases typically require notice, and inedequate notice (both by time and by method) nullifies the agreement. This is because the legal world generally agrees that contracts that would expose consumers with practically zero legal access or knowledge to one-sided contracts providing one party unilateral control would be unconscionable.
Even if it were technically legal it should distress you.
it also helped that the government stuck the equivalent $1T+ debt for building the highspeed system onto an off balance sheet entity before privatising the JR companies. so investors picked up the (barely) cashflow profitable lines without construction debt.
JR was converted into 7 companies. Most of other 93 existing train companies were not paid for by government. Take Tokyo - The Keio lines, the Odakyu lines, the Tokyu lines, the Tobu lines, the Keikyu lines, the Seibu lines, etc... are all private and have been private since they started.
As for JR, most of the debt was paid back, at least by JR East and JR West.
>Economic benefits can not justify the deaths of people
This is a absurd standard. Humans wouldn't be able to use power stations, cars, knives, or fire! Everything has inherent risk and we shouldn't limit human progress because tiny fractions of the population have issues.
It's not an absurd standard at all. Risks are quantifiable, and not binary.
But the absurdity is that there is a long and tragic history of using economic benefits as an excuse for products and services that cause extreme and widespread harm - not just emotional and physical, but also economic.
We are far too tolerant of this. The issue isn't risk in some abstract sense, it's the enthusiastic promotion of death, war, sickness, and poverty for "rational" economic reasons.
What on earth are you talking about? 1) card collecting isn't gambling because there is no expectation of winning money, 2) Baseball and sports cards have been a thing for like 100 years at this point.
Nowadays a significant number of people who buy trading card packs/boxes do so as speculation of making money via obtaining a card they can sell for money. Baseball and sports cards weren't exchangeable for significant money 100 years ago.
You must be young. Sport trading cards have been there forever and for instance in my country, Spain, OFC some of the rare -soccer related- sticky cards were sold by big amounts of money (not millions like TCG), but for sure you could buy a new cheap PC with some of them.
And don't let me start with the old t-shirts. A weird one from my sports club today it's sold over $1000 even when back in the day no one liked the futurist design. Ditto with books celebrating the 100th anniversary of the club foundation day. These can produce a big chunk of money too.
Even if I don't like Nintendo, these Japanese company didn't invent any gambling. It always was there.
There were no PCs 100 years ago. I didn't think it was common for them to be exchanged for money until around 1980 but yes it did happen before that. Probably would have taken several Mickey Mantle rookies to get an Apple II.
I am not saying that they were PC's 100 years ago; I'm saying that a bunch of marketing items/books from Soccer in Spain can be really expensive. I still have that oddball T-shirt from the Athletic Club with blobs instead of the classic soccer stripes. Guess what? Now it can be sold over $500 and up with ease.
Similar case with retrogaming. Random ROM of Earthbound in 2001? Even the cartridge would be found by $5 in thrift stores. Nowadays I've seen ridiculous prices for it, and with Shantae for GB it's even worse. The news back in the day in magazines/webs? Amazing graphics, the last game for the GBC, but the cool stuff was for the GBA. That's it. Move on, kid.
Can't wait to pulp novels/magazine to raise prices too, even if they can be reedited today at almost no cost. There are zillions to choose from, they are easy to read, they require no battery, and even if tons of them are really cringey, they are jewels found in ease, and not just the Western novels for grandpas. Scifi, spies and whatnot.
Even more today when the average Best Seller it's over 600 pages long and the current generations can't properly focus anymore.
Yes, I love all that stuff its great. I personally think that stuff has more value than modern collectables as far as connection to history, connecting to feelings, and just art expression. I misunderstood thinking you meant the old stuff had value when it was contemporary.
