Thank you for the informative reply. I definitely agree on all counts, especially re "ponzy" etc.
I think that the pandemic forced the entire sector to focus on profitability and cut most loss-leading initiatives, so hearing they're trending towards core profitability makes sense!
I agree with the gist of you're saying, and I didn't personally dig into their last few fillings, but I suppose what the parent comment is trying to express can also be stated as "Uber's core ride-sharing business model is not cash flow positive", which can be obfuscated when arguing GAP vs EBITDA.
Yup. Essentially, housing is an in-elastic demand, and livable land is a finite resource, further exacerbated by the realities of emigration. Combined with extreme wealth inequality, it brings us to this type of dystopia - https://ssir.org/articles/entry/tackling_the_housing_crisis_...
It's not a question of "would it work", the point is that real-estate prices are rising in dozens of countries, and thousands of cities. Zoning is a local issue. Assuming that the reason homes prices are out of control in Santiago, Chile and in Tel Aviv, Israel for the same reasons as in San Fransisco is, well, silly.
I've seen this argument touted frequently in housing related threads and it always confuses me. Housing prices have soared over the majority of the developed world - dozens of countries[1]. Is NYMBYism and prop13 driving the housing crisis in Luxembourg? Chile? Estonia? Do you think the entire world property market, taxation and legislation is structured exactly like in the California bay area?
The whole "just zone more high rises" argument is so obviously reductive, I can't help but think it's pushed primarily by property developers and speculators.
Housing prices continuously rising to slurp up any marginal income has been studied by economists for a couple of centuries (rent extraction), and taxation solutions such as a Land Value Tax were suggested by Adam Smith himself.
Arkansas was one of the last states to seceded the union. The very second sentence in the ordinance linked is "In addition to the well-founded causes of complaint set
forth by this convention in resolutions adopted". You are more than welcome to look up those "causes and complaints" and let me know whether they are slavery related or not.
If only the slaves had any appreciation to the important component they were in their slave master's culture, they'd probably complain a lot less and try harder to accommodate their agrarian needs.
"they accomplish the same goals as full VMs in a different way."
They are explicitly not that. Docker containers do not provide you any real isolation guarantees from a security POV and make no attempts at such. This is extensively documented. [1]
"If you're running Docker in a VM on a bare metal server you're doing it wrong. "
Ummm... Running Docker inside a VM is by far the most common deployment type of Docker there is. What do you think is an EC2/ECS/GKE deployment? Hint, there's a VM running your containers in all of them. This is also what Docker the company recommends - https://www.docker.com/blog/containers-and-vms-together/
GE’s breathtaking growth under Welch was fueled in large part by its transformation into a financial services superpower. By 2000, nearly half of the company’s revenue—$96 billion—came from GE Capital
GE’s exposure to finance proved to be an enormous vulnerability after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and particularly during the financial crisis of 2008. While Welch’s successor, Jeff Immelt, tried to diminish GE’s reliance on finance, his efforts came too late.
First, I agree with your conclusion. The way to address this is to change the law, pushing individual corporation is ineffective.
However, you DON'T have to maximize your profits above all other corporations. There's no such actual fiduciary duty and there never could be.
That's the point the poster is trying to make - something being legal doesn't make it ethical and acting in a unethical, but legal, manner does not absolve you of contempt.
If you're referring to "...investors have been cashing out of US stocks at a record pace", than to further clarify - investors are divesting out of the public stock market entirely. They're not selling their Apple stock in a buyback to invest the proceeds of the sale into an exciting IPO, or a deep value small cap. They're just taking it out of entirely.
Think what that implies about the macro structure of a "market economy" when the majority of new money going into stocks is executive/company initiated stock buy backs, and not "investment".
These results beg the question of just how much weight we should give analysts' earnings forecasts. It turns out, not much, especially in the long run.
Peter Berezin, the chief global strategist at BCA Research, is out with a new report about stock selection and market timing. In it, he asks the following: "How can we distinguish between hidden gems and fool's gold?" The answer, he determines, is not the thousands of analysts Wall Street has bankrolled to do just that
PS - Just to be perfectly clear, I was definitely joking about WSB. Sister comment is right, WSB is the 4chan of "finance".
I’m not going to get into the specifics of this particular article, or public analyst reports in general, but FYI Barrons is possibly the worst source of financial information on planet earth. You’d be better served following WSB’s advice than take anything your read there seriously.
I have no idea what you base this statement on. You are absolutely likely to go to zero by continuously making market trades as a retail investor. Every trade has two sides and the side you're trading against is for the most part significantly better informed than you. That's why Robinhood makes its money by selling their 100% retail order volume.