KarmaTrainCaboose

joined 1 year ago
[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Thank you for posting this. These are the kinds of comments that we need more of on the internet. Ones that aren't afraid to push back on the errors of the hivemind, however justified the sentiment may be.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

What is the unlikely scenario you're referring to? As far as I can tell, his assessment of the situation is correct. I'm not sure why you're so sure that the question was in bad faith.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

Look I agree that these proceedings should move quickly to put Trump behind bars.

But... If I'm reading it correctly, that says that the accused has a right to a speedy trial, not the prosecution, which is what the above commenter asked for.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

See I don't buy into this. To me, this is getting into seriously conspiracy theory stuff. I don't think that there is some grand plan to keep people stupid so that they don't cause trouble.

I think the system just fails at educating students well due to a variety of factors.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (5 children)

This is interesting to me though. Didn't most people (at least in developed countries) take tests in school? Get grades? I would think if you did below average on those you kind of....should know that you're in the bottom half?

I get that it's possible to make changes after schooling, and grades are only somewhat reliable (in that they also rely on effort) but still.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Understandable for GDP, but unemployment should be a factor you consider in measures of well-being. Employment is one of the most important factors in a person's life path. Unemployed people run into more financial difficulties, is associated with health problems, and results in society wide effect like increased crime.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

There may be other political parties but none of them have anywhere near the power of the CPC. They are all subordinate. For example, all election candidates must be approved by the CPC.

Also, the only direct elections in China are at the local level. At higher levels of government everything is chosen by local congresses. This results in a system where the people at the top are very removed from the votes of citizens.

Also, the national Congress largely exists to rubber-stamp whatever Xi Jinping wants. Any opposition would be swiftly stamped out.

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

China is effectively a dictatorship. It has one political party and Xi Jinping ended the two term limit so he could stay in power. What form of government would you say they have?

[–] KarmaTrainCaboose@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (4 children)

What makes it weird?

I believe we already do this to some extent. There are government funded grants for all kinds of things. I guess you just want more of that? I think you have to be careful, because that starts to look like the government picking a lot of winners and losers in private industry. Ripe for misallocation of resources.

The final summary of the article you linked:

"Using 105,950 observations from 32 different studies we find that CVC investments are performance enhancing, for both corporations and start-ups. Our results detect that time, country, and industry moderate the effects. Especially after the Dotcom bubble burst, high performance is detected. Similarly, the performance in the U.S. outreaches the performance of other countries. Due to the high risk of successfully developing a pharmaceutical drug, no statistically significant effect of CVC investments in the health care industry is observed. As expected, strategic performance outperforms financial impacts. Although there is good rationale for a clear strategic focus, the finding that CVC investment does not lead to stronger financial performance is surprising and urges practitioners to rethink their CVC objectives and approach"

Disregarding the fact that this is only looking at CVCs and not traditional VCs, I don't think this really supports your argument that it is a dice roll at best. Seems to me like it is broadly beneficial with some caveats.

view more: next ›