Local NIMBYs and landlords love constrained supply. They leverage zoning codes, claims about aesthetics, parking and traffic concerns, and worst of all affordability percentages to constrain local supply so that their home values and rental incomes will rise. This happens with so much political strategem that the only obvious thing about it is how vested and deliberate it is.
Core is an early-stage startup helping fitness instructors thrive in a post-covid digital world. We're building an instructor-first platform that empowers anyone with passion and talent for teaching to easily build a sustainable digital fitness business. We're breaking free from the tired stereotypes and making fitness more accessible, creating a happier, healthier world for every body.
We're looking for engineers looking to join a very early stage startup to take on broad ownership to architect, build, and collaborate across business/product/design:
Can you be more specific on why you think the t-test is invalid when the data is non-normal? Duration data may be non-normal, but given finite visits and a reasonable number of visits, sampling for the mean surely is.
But why pay the doctor less than the hospital for the same treatment? The doctors can figure out themselves whether it makes more sense from a cost perspective to join a hospital, a clinic, or to remain independent.
How overbooked does Amtrak get? Maybe Amtrak should be selling subscriptions. Or bulk discounts, but the passes are per person and expire end of the month.
There's a very important difference that you're missing. In the scam you're applying you're random machine over all possible results. In the sabermetrician example, the random machine is being applied across methodologies of picking prospects, ie bunch of different "moneyball" hobbyists trying out different stats and weights to rank players. The end result is the possibility of the discovery of a very good methodology that has found stats that traditionally are not important.
In a scam, you don't have any way of making any future correct predictions--it's just random. This analyst has a reasoned system that can be tested against past players and against future prospects. Sure, there's going to be someone out there that picks Jeremy Lin. But the trick is, can you correctly identify players who are already known to be good based on their college stats, make the right call on Jeremy Lin, and go forward and continue to make good calls on draft prospects?
I'm not saying this sabermetrician generally makes good calls; I haven't looked. But dismissing his call as the result of a series of Bernoulli trials is completely missing the point.
One thing that Chrome doesn't do is even when there are zero windows open, you still have to hold down Command-Q to quit. If no windows are open, there doesn't appear to be any danger in quitting right away--after all, the major mis-press is when you try to hit Command-W to close a window and instead hit Command-Q, but if there are no windows open, there's no reason to be hitting Command-W.
That would leave app makers susceptible to a major player with large amounts of capital that can sell at a loss until all other players are driven from the market and then raise its prices once it has gained pricing power.
Book publishers appear to have wizened to Amazon's game here and have refused to allow Amazon to use discounts to drive other sellers out of business. Many publishers have moved to an agency model where Amazon takes 30% and the publishers set the retail price of the books.
I mentioned Walmart because they sell some furniture too, though the article points out that IKEA doesn't really have true competitors. You're right, Walmart has avoided quite a bit of tax, and that would be unfair relative to other big box stores or supermarkets. However, I don't think the magnitude of tax savings is anywhere near that of IKEA running in the guise of a charity.
In any case, I'm certainly not arguing for Walmart. I'm merely pointing out that these tax avoidance schemes lead to unfair competition when not all players have access to the same schemes. It should be a level regulatory environment for everyone.