Convenience is often more important than the traditional price vs quality tradeoff. Water is free. The convenience of bottled water is worth a lot. Apple's "it just works" was marketing gold that recognised the importance of convenience relative to price and performance (something many, many 'computer enthusiasts' never understood).
SaaS will survive. We pay a lot for convenience. You'll never go wrong appealing to laziness ;)
> But the more serious risk, Mr Lipsky notes, is that countries’ pursuit of payments sovereignty may one day mean various regional systems become incompatible. That would increase financial fraud and sanctions evasion.
A risk from the US point of view, but for many states, this is quite the opposite - these developments are in large part aimed at removing the risk of US financial abuse in the form of unilateral sanctions.
> I keep thinking about that (so far anonymous) company that blew 500 million dollars worth of tokens in a month
First I've heard of this. Do you know any more or could you maybe point me to a source? Kind of astounding if true! Agree that it would be very interesting to know what kind of output they got for all that effort.
There are people who think it's a good idea to aircondition service station forecourts. I find the irony of the situation tragically absurd. There's a little of that in the comment you are responding to.
We don't always have to consider the apparently very fragile and fickle motivations of investors. Social housing can and has worked very well in many cases.
> I would continue to bet on it going up in most markets since the conditions which made prices increase have not changed.
I think they have. As mentioned above, the past 40 year trend of declining interest rates appears to be at an end. It was the most significant factor in rising prices in my opinion.
The 96 million members of the CCP and the entrepreneurs incentivised to make decisions based on the policies they introduce?
Who are the decision makers in western democracies?
I'm being slightly facetious - there are many answers to these questions.
The one that actually matters to me though is "do the people that are making the decisions do so in the interests of society?" Not in my 'democracy', that's for sure.
If I remember correctly, US per capita CO2 footprint is around 14 tonnes (this includes industrial activity). Average US driver of an ICE vehicle produces around 4 tonnes of CO2 per year.
Which, when you think about it, shows that the 'Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb' argument for this war is not exactly the true motivation (not to say that the US and Israel really don't want them to have a bomb).
This war is about trashing Iran. Adding it to the string of other failed states in the area. It would be more honest for Trump and Netanyahu to say that the motivation for this war is to ensure that Iran becomes a state that is incapable of developing the bomb (i.e. a failed and fractured, or weak and compliant).
It's worth remembering that the Iranians have as yet never claimed that the strait is mined. They have said that it may be. A lot of reporting misses this and assumes (perhaps deliberately) that the presence of mines is a fact.
But of course Iran doesn't need mines to enforce the blockade. They have drones and missiles that can be operated safely from 100's of kilometres away. They have anti-ship sea-skimming missiles. Not to mention the very large fleet of small armed fastboats.
Makes you wonder if less public debt and less focus on growing cash crops to service that debt might actually make for a more comfortable 'simple agrarian life' overall. Even if this meant lower GDP.
I've often thought there's something wrong with the way we put a simple dollar figure on poverty. Less than $3 dollars a day with or without easy access to land, shelter, and fresh water?
SaaS will survive. We pay a lot for convenience. You'll never go wrong appealing to laziness ;)