Well, you’re right, but then the group’s tactics would need to be fundamentally different.
Well, you’re right, but then the group’s tactics would need to be fundamentally different.
Aren’t organization and group synonymous?
And of course, this is assuming that Trump isn’t going to establish himself as a dictator. Of course, the thing is Trump is too old to be dictator. And the people around him don’t seem to be the most competent, either. So I sort of don’t know what’s going to happen. In any case, I’m glad that I don’t live in the US, thought authoritarianism is advancing globally.
What is needed is a socialist organization of voters who together have enough voting power to make our break a Democratic representatives career.
Yeah, if Trump pulls the stuff he said he’d pull (Tariffs and mass deportations), then the supply of goods inside the country will fall drastically, resulting in stronger inflation. Which will then result in consumption of anything nonessential to collapse. This will lead to increasing unemployment.
Kamala Harris did everything right
She presented her message of ‘vote for me to keep things the same’ flawlessly. Unfortunately, people who live paycheck to paycheck don’t want things to stay the same.
Even more obvious in the book, where its mentioned that even the commander can’t afford to eat meat whenever he wants.
Did they give you a playbook, or something?
How much are your Mossad handlers paying you to type this?
A big question is, how many sales are actually lost to pirates, or, how many pirates would have bought the game if they couldn’t pirate it. The answer is neither zero, nor all of them, but I don’t know what the actual answer is.
The reason why DMR tends to get cracked is that the concept is inherently flawed. If the entire game runs on your machine, then everything needed to run the game has to be on your machine at some point. DMR is security by obscurity.
Idea: Governments maintain a list of entities that are evading the law like that, and then doesn’t prosecute people who are accused of crimes against such entities. The idea being that if you place yourself outside of the law’s reach, you also place yourself outside of the law’s protection.
I figure with Lemmy having much fewer users, there’s less potential for toxic communities to form.
So, in the post you’re replying to, it’s laid out how insurance wouldn’t work, and your reply is “Have you considered insurance?”
Well, given time, prices will move to where the businesses make the most profit. If relationship between price and demand is linear, then an increase in expenses will move the ideal price point by half as much.
Assuming a linear relationship between price and demand, then if you increase the cost of product, the price where the most profit is generated moves by half of this amount.
I suppose that’s true. But it just bothers me when people talk about the market cap like it’s an amount of money that exists somewhere, instead of being an abstract valuation.
Looking at a different example, Ford’s market cap is $42.61e9, and its revenue is $47.81e9, while the profit is $1.83e9, 20 times of which is $36.6e9. If we average both of them we get $42.205e9. So Ford seems to have about the right valuation.
Market Cap of a company is sort of a meaningless number. As in, it’s shares in existence times price per share, which is just another way of saying its the share price. If somebody were to sell $100 Billion worth of Tesla shares, the market price would plummet and he’d not get the $100 Billion the shares were originally worth.
Of course, a rule of thumb is that a company is worth 20 times it’s annual profit, or its revenue. So, by that valuation, Tesla is worth 28 Billion dollars, or 25.5 Billion dollars if we go by revenue. (I’m surprised that both approaches lead to results so close to each other) Compare with a market cap of 682,47 billion, we can see that Tesla is ridiculously overvalued. So, I guess you should go and buy puts on Tesla. Or sell your shares if you have any.
Having the numbers isn’t enough, there needs to be organization. A group of 8% of the electorate that votes in lockstep could affect policy pretty fundamentally, more than any amount of money could.