“Building a portfolio around index funds isn’t really settling for the average. It’s just refusing to believe in magic.”
~Bethany McLean of Fortune
Good morning.
Terrific hockey last night, Wash, vs. Lightening.
We still are being ticketed for parking in front of our house.
Terrific hockey last night, Wash, vs. Lightening.
We still are being ticketed for parking in front of our house.
Elizabeth Warren supports the elimination of the electoral college, a concept basic to the thinking that created the constitution. It is a great proposition: It should show if the modern American understands anything about the notions that formed the foundations of the nation.
I must admit, though, for the first time ever I am beginning to wonder if the American culture is able to support its government. The Chinese have always had an emperor; I would expect nothing less. But the idea of liberty is not historical, it is philosophical and requires reflection and belief, not habit.
I must admit, though, for the first time ever I am beginning to wonder if the American culture is able to support its government. The Chinese have always had an emperor; I would expect nothing less. But the idea of liberty is not historical, it is philosophical and requires reflection and belief, not habit.
“The statistical evidence proving that stock index funds outperform between 80% and 90% of actively managed equity funds is so overwhelming that it takes enormously expensive advertising campaigns to obscure the truth from investors. In fact, one of the reasons that actively managed equity funds under‐perform stock index funds is because they are spending so much money to advertise — money that otherwise would be invested on behalf of the mutual fund shareholders.”--Internet Advisor, ʺThe Motley Fool ʺ
China's ambitions in the China Sea have serious implications. If China is allowed to hold the Sea as their territory, forty percent-40%!--of international markets will be under China's wing. Countries like Vietnam would essentially be landlocked.
Alexandra found an interesting article:
"Having conducted a meticulous and fairly exhaustive inventory of the contribution of ICT —including devices like PCs, laptops, monitors, smartphones and tablets — and infrastructure like data centres and communication networks, we found that the relative contribution of ICT to the total global footprint is expected to grow from about one per cent in 2007 to 3.5 per cent by 2020 and reaching 14 per cent by 2040.
That’s more than half the relative contribution of the entire transportation sector worldwide.
Another disconcerting finding is that all this extraordinary growth is mostly incremental, essentially shattering the hope that ICT will help reduce the global carbon footprint by substituting physical activities with their virtual counterparts.
We found that the relative emissions share of smartphones is expected to grow from four per cent in 2010 to 11 per cent by 2020, dwarfing the individual contributions of PCs, laptops and computer displays.
In absolute values, emissions caused by smartphones will jump from 17 to 125 megatons of CO2 equivalent per year (Mt-CO2e/yr) in that time span, or a 730 per cent growth."
More than half the contribution of transport worldwide!
"Having conducted a meticulous and fairly exhaustive inventory of the contribution of ICT —including devices like PCs, laptops, monitors, smartphones and tablets — and infrastructure like data centres and communication networks, we found that the relative contribution of ICT to the total global footprint is expected to grow from about one per cent in 2007 to 3.5 per cent by 2020 and reaching 14 per cent by 2040.
That’s more than half the relative contribution of the entire transportation sector worldwide.
Another disconcerting finding is that all this extraordinary growth is mostly incremental, essentially shattering the hope that ICT will help reduce the global carbon footprint by substituting physical activities with their virtual counterparts.
We found that the relative emissions share of smartphones is expected to grow from four per cent in 2010 to 11 per cent by 2020, dwarfing the individual contributions of PCs, laptops and computer displays.
In absolute values, emissions caused by smartphones will jump from 17 to 125 megatons of CO2 equivalent per year (Mt-CO2e/yr) in that time span, or a 730 per cent growth."
More than half the contribution of transport worldwide!
From Don: A new U.N. survey starkly outlines the DPRK's (North Korea)continuing humanitarian challenges. The humanitarian document "DPR Korea Needs and Priorities" outlines a troubling situation in the communist country of 25 million. "An estimated 11 million ordinary men, women and children lack sufficient nutritious food, clean drinking water or access to basic services like health and sanitation," the report states adding, "Widespread undernutrition threatens an entire generation of children."
Some guy named Rickard wrote this about the MMT: "MMT supporters will point to 2008 and say, “Just look at QE. In 2008, the Federal Reserve Balance sheet was $800 billion. But as a result of QE1, QE2, and QE3, that number went to $4.5 trillion. And the world didn’t end. To the contrary, the stock market went on a huge bull run.We did not have an economic crash. And again, inflation was muted....
Fed chairman Jay Powell has criticized MMT, for example. But its advocates say Powell and other Fed officials hoist themselves on their own petard. That’s because they are the ones who actually proved that MMT works. They point to the fact that the Fed printed close to $4 trillion and nothing bad happened. So it should go ahead and print another $4 trillion."
His argument is that the MMT supporters misunderstand how money is valued--it is valued through trust and when trust is lost the system unravels non-lineally.
Grading Schools
An article in the National Review raises this idea about our national higher education, with perhaps more irony than seriousness: "....the best reform would simply to be to force universities and colleges to offer the same sort of exit exams as the admission exams they insist on for entering students. In other words, to earn a bachelor’s degree, graduating college seniors would be required to taking a national standardized test to ensure minimal competence in verbal and math skills. This would certify that the four- to eight-year undergraduate experience has led to at least minimal knowledge — much as welders or carpenters must show minimal competency to be licensed or to advance into union apprenticeships. Again, how ironic that the Obama administration once went after for-profit trade schools and colleges on grounds that their job-placement record was wanting, when supposedly nonprofit colleges (which are actually quite profitable for those in their administrative hierarchies) have a dismal record of ensuring that their graduates leave with basic language and computational skills."
But why not? These people want to regulate everything, create standards everywhere. Why not something here, an area crucial to our national economy and the growth of our culture? There is a lot wrong with the idea but that has never stopped these people before. They always overlook the means for the ends.
His argument is that the MMT supporters misunderstand how money is valued--it is valued through trust and when trust is lost the system unravels non-lineally.
Grading Schools
An article in the National Review raises this idea about our national higher education, with perhaps more irony than seriousness: "....the best reform would simply to be to force universities and colleges to offer the same sort of exit exams as the admission exams they insist on for entering students. In other words, to earn a bachelor’s degree, graduating college seniors would be required to taking a national standardized test to ensure minimal competence in verbal and math skills. This would certify that the four- to eight-year undergraduate experience has led to at least minimal knowledge — much as welders or carpenters must show minimal competency to be licensed or to advance into union apprenticeships. Again, how ironic that the Obama administration once went after for-profit trade schools and colleges on grounds that their job-placement record was wanting, when supposedly nonprofit colleges (which are actually quite profitable for those in their administrative hierarchies) have a dismal record of ensuring that their graduates leave with basic language and computational skills."
But why not? These people want to regulate everything, create standards everywhere. Why not something here, an area crucial to our national economy and the growth of our culture? There is a lot wrong with the idea but that has never stopped these people before. They always overlook the means for the ends.
No comments:
Post a Comment