So at least they’re half-honest about this not being a productivity thing. On one hand thay say - help with the turnaround (productivity), but on the other they contradict it with letting people quit voluntarily (cost saving). So then it’s pretty obvious it’s about the latter.

Too many things masquerading as centrist these days.

If the cost of panels drops significantly, there would be more capital available to spend on inverters, even if they stay at the current prices, still decreasing the cost of deployment. But yes. 😄

Why would they stop supporting Russia? China has been under economic attack by the US for three administrations now and the US has been encircling them with military bases. The EU hasn’t helped. From Chinese perspective, their sovereignty is not assured and it’s doubtful that the EU or the US would demonstrate new friendship if they stopped supporting Russia. In that case, throwing one of their main sources of fossil fuels and a giant buffer under the bus doesn’t seem like a good proposition. In a war scenario with the US, the oil shipments from the Gulf are likely to stop one way or another which makes Russian fossil fuels that much more important.

Doubtful as losing Russia means they lose one of their sources of cheap fossil fuels, decreasing their redundancy and increasing input costs across China. The material gain they have in Taiwan is TSMC. However they can replicate that given time, and they can function without sub-7nm silicon till then. Meanwhile they would have major trouble if their fossil inputs increase in price significantly. I think Taiwan is more of a political goal and a long term at that.

Or perhaps replace the leadership that fucked up. Defunding the public broadcaster would likely result in more power of pro-Israeli capital over media, not less.

How many times have we watched this movie? At this point these ceasefire negotiations feel more like hasbara than actual attempts to stop the killing.

Whatever the repo is setup with.

Much more important than the enjoyable culture is the material aspect - how much work each developer has to do. Nice vibes help delay burnout but rarely eliminate it. Or they let it happen with a smile on the face.

Pay the developers instead, so they can reduce hours worked elsewhere, if you can. Or contribute code, if you can. This isn’t aimed at you personally, but anyone reading. I can’t contribute code but I can pay so I do that.

Private companies typically also distribute ownership via shares to people who are therefore shareholders. They’re just not traded publicly. AFAIK only firms owned by a handful of people might use a different scheme, depending on the jurisdiction.

Lidl is better for Lidl’s shareholders and Aldi’s better for Aldi’s shareholders.

Or join the US as the CHERISHED 51st STATE, and then the smoke would be AMERICAN smoke and ket me tell you - don’t we love american smoke!

A moderate Democrat worth tens of millions proposes to tinker around the edges without consulting anyone, fails.

Actively dismantling international law, I see.

This sounds plausible. Has anyone caught him in the act?

Yes. Of course what you said could happen. My point is that in the current status quo there’s still plenty of non-authoritarian countries and billionaires are still operating on easy-to-jump-ship basis when they destroy one democracy or another for increased profit. So I think that’s why this cost isn’t factored in. Competition for increased profits dominates. If we’re left with only a few democracies that tolerate billionaires, then that calculus could change. It’s similar to capitalism’s treatment of any finite resource - plunder that bitch till there’s nothing left, then deal with the consequences. If we don’t, the other guy would do it and we’d lose on the profit, and the other guy gains power over us given by the newly acquired capital.

Probably not unless you have lots or animals crossing it. Ticks require hosts to feed and transport over significant distance I think.

Yes, of course.

Right but how do you make most countries want to arrest them? We currently don’t have a setup allowing for this if no international criminal offenses are involved. It only happens if the billionaire resides mostly in an “authoritarian” country where they could get “arbitrarily” arrested. The rest of the world isn’t currently setup to do this. I’m not saying it can’t be setup or shouldn’t be setup like that.

Smaller scale millionaires perhaps. Once they go multinational, it becomes very difficult to significantly harm them even if one country decides to dispossess their business. This has already happened to large corporations that exist today through nationalization at various places and points in time. E.g. Shell after Venezuelan oil nationalization.