Comments by "looseycanon" (@looseycanon) on "Louis Rossmann"
channel.
-
Louis, you should get less emotional when discussing complex stuff. I have economics degree, I have been through a subject on the financial market and I didn't understand your explenation, despite knowing, what shorting an instrument is. I know it's hard with mess of this scale, but still, you want us to learn somthing. You need to be understood perfectly.
And yeah, I have to agree. This need's to be more regulated... I would actually go as far as putting a ban on shorting altogether, precisely because it can destroy completely healthy company, just like that. I believe this risk outweighs all benefits of shorting, even potential ones.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yeah, you guys need more regulation... and regulation on corporate speech, that would disallow companies to do damage control. However, the problem is bigger. Amazon delivers to all over the world! There are things you literally can't find in local markets anymore. For instance, I bought a passport wallet on Amazon, because nobody sells those where I live. My dad wanted to buy these special tongues for our kitchen to replace broken ones, which we bought years ago in Italy, guess what. He rode Italy from Venice to Catanzaro and no luck. He didn't find it anywhere in Europe. This lasted for eight years of fruitless searching ended by one hour search of Amazon... Make no mistake, I believe, that change must come here, but I don't believe that companies are even capable of changing from current state of the affairs. It's written in too deep in their DNA. And you can't cause them complete revenue meltdown, because there will always be markets, where something strange or unique will be missing and they'll be delivering to, because local customers have no alternatives.
1
-
We need to change laws a bit... something along the lines of:
1) advertisments are binding in the language used in said advert (basically, adverts imply contract conditions). Eg. to illustrate on an actual case that had been to trial, Pepsi co. would have to find a way to deliver a harrier to a campaign participant, just as depicted in their ad and they'd be forced to expend all company resources to do it to the point of ceasing operation and releasing all their trade secrets to the public.
2) EULA is inammendable after signing up for services, unless law makes that mandatory and ammendment in such case must be strictly to explain provisions of the law, that are mandatory to introduce. If you sign a contract to date X, those are the terms and conditions by which that business relationship is governed. Ony new business, to the extent to which it is new, may be governed by new terms and conditions.
3) This kind of stuff was ripe for a class action and reminding ourselves, that class actions usually deliver 4 to 5 bucks to each participants, even though the pot was much, much bigger. The new rules for them need to be, that the amount paid out are based on the most damaged party and these damages are then multiplied by number of even remotely eligable participants in the class action, and only then this amount calculated amount is then considered for punitive damages, whcich can not be capped. Parent companies and individuals are then responsible with all of their equity for these judgements and they are not dischargable through bankruptcy. Once class action is filed, it can not be ended with agreement.
5) Contracts are, going forward, forced to use not legal clauses, but plain old English as defined by dictionary universally accepted by the court. EG, companies don't get to define the meaning of a word. That is for the courts.
6) Companies are mandated to provide non-lease like options to the market at such price, that the end consumer actually buys. Penalties for even single accidential incomplience will result in fines in tens of percent of highest company value in the past decade.
1
-
Or by building your own cloud, by purchasing a NAS... To be frank, though, there are other reasons, we are buying worse things than we had before. Take Windows for instance. Eversince the era of XP, things had been more and more locked down, the product has been getting worse and worse for the user, yet, we have to upgrade, or face threats and loss of support for the operating system from the software we need to run. Sadly, we can't recompile software in order to make it run on other systems, because that would be breach of copyright, not to mention the technical knowledge necessary, hence, we're on the hook. We need to criminalize these kinds of practices.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Louis you're making one major mistake in hiring. All of what you've described is only good for hiring people, who already did the stuff. Problem is, fewer and fewer people are available, because there are careers out there, that will pay better than board repair. Meanwhile, you have a bunch of young, agitated people in the market, who seek their first jobs and can't find any, so, they don't buy stuff. So by doing this "industry standard" hiring practices, all be it streamlined to the actually useful stuff, you're depleting your potential employee pool, while not helping it to refill, thus increasing the wages you have to pay for new hires, and at the same time, lowering the pool of your future customers, because nobody's gonna need repair, if they couldn't get a job to get the money to spend on a thing to repair.
I'm quite certain, that your hiring procedure is a lot more effective and, frankly, better experience for the employee than most, but it fails to identify the guy, who actually want's to learn board repair. So what you should do, is watch his reactions and if he show's interest in to "why did my attempt fail?" or "what was wrong with the board then?", you should hire him and train him. Sure, he might not linger, but then we're talking about ineffective retention policies, not about hiring nor how expensive that employee is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Louis, this is normal. In Czechia, you can end up getting sued for wrongful termination. When that happens, the court can outright annul the termination until such time, that the employer terminates the contract legally... meaning there is no upward limit to the amount of years, how long can the employee be paid. All it takes is one incompetent clerk at the courthouse, and you're paying a decade and have to fire that employee again. But, there is, fortunately a way around this:
1) maintain your records and don't take the idea of "now I don't need them anymore" to ever come into your mind. Put everything on paper.
2) have more employees on the same job for comparison and have a robust training program.
3) don't be an ass to your employees.
4) always try to end employment in an agreement, fire only in serious cases (alcohol, felonies, etc.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
So, you think, you have it bad... b*tch please. Look at Czech Republic. Compensations promised, never paid out. 1:1. Since covid started, we had three ministers of health. One resigned, after he was forced to rat out a source of information regarding office. 2:1, second resigned, after he was found in a pub, he ordered closed based on spreading of the infection. 3:1. To make things worse, he was minister for about a month, spawning all sorts of jokes, saying "minister is part time job.", so stop whining. You may have seen a lot. It's nothing compared to us. Oh and rumor has it, there will be fourth minister in like a month!
1
-
The problem is, a lot of this shit is hidden in other agendas, that people " actgually want". Take that emissions lock. That is now being legislated as part of Euro7 (or at least it was. Last time I heard, Euro7 had been somewhat watered down) and nobody's stopping to think for a moment, that five years down the line, the company will drop support for that car/model, and it will brick itself over it, because all commands to the car are done remotely by design and if you attempt to bypass it, it will brick again. And if you'll want to buy a car, that doesn have these technologies? Guess what, suddenly, you have to pay much, much higher tax or mandatory insurance...
1
-
1
-
OK, couple of things.
1) No, they are not different people. If you looked at long term trends (and covid is mere accelerator, not structural change), you'd see, that usually same people move to same places. Eg. California republicans move to republican states, democrats to democratic states. Exceptions to this were major cities, like Dallas or Houston, which have gone somewhat purple to blue, in otherwise red states. That being said, I don't think jobs alone (although they are a factor) and by it caused immigration to these cities are core reasons for this change. That is a different debate though. Facts don't change. Statistics don't lie. Among the factors, which determine, where a person will relocate to, in top ten there are question of politics (red/blue states), guns (rights/control), taxes as well as costs of living... Exodus from New York and other big cities is not the source of gentrification in small towns, because there is actually none. Now, when you filter that thing out, what you are left with, is poor city planing and, frankly, unforeseeable natural catastrophe. If what you've said is true and everything were simple supply and demand with some market manipulation sprinkled in, my studies of macro economics would have been a lot simpler and less of a headache.
2) If you want to point a finger at entities responsible, you need to not point at FED. Why? Simple. FED, or any other central bank, can't take in to consideration only sectors of economy. Sure, we have a bit of hidden inflation problem world wide, because naturally and artificially limited resource of land has been drastically reduced in terms of usability, which has driven prices sky high. I'm in this pot too, thanks to meat prices going up in my country 25% (not kidding). But the fact, that inflation in certain segments of the economy hits low earners much, much more harshly than others is not a question for FED. That is question for the House of representatives, the Senate and the IRS! Make no mistake, those responsible here are the FTC, FCC, AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Hughes Net and other ISPs, who have oligopoly and don't compete for new contracts, don't make serious attempts at reaching these small towns and don't cooperate with WISP providers, which could get fast enough Internet to the smallest hamlet, to the loneliest ranch. US midwest is not Australian outback. The distances are much, much shorter and yet, Internet availability is similar in both places. Your prices are evidence of this. I pay for 100/30+ public IPv4 address about twenty five bucks! My contract with my ISP is a cookie cutter contract + that IP (eg.I don't get double NATed)! Yet similar plans over in the US cost double to triple! In Germany, country far closer in terms of income to the US, they pay the same as I do here, where I live. Nowhere in Europe, there are as high prices for Internet access as in the US. You still have Internet over COAX cable, my ISP does new installs in fiber-to-premises only, yet, for the likes of you, out market is over regulated and taxes are waaay too high... If you had a bit more regulated market, higher taxes for more IRS agents, and, you know... enforced anti-trust laws, you'd have 100/100 to every household in the US by now and this mess of accelerated migration would not have ever happened, because there wouldn't be few and far in between places with cheap houses and serviceable Internet. Sure prices would have risen, but not as sharply, creating opportunity for real wage increase.
3) You might want to bash your employers for underpaying certain professions... cough Amazon cough tipped employees *cough*. It is as if you need 15 USD federal minimum wage and jail time for employers, who don't pay at least it...
So to sum up. This is result of laisse faire economics of the US. And what is the worst on this? The only person, who's doing something about it, is a snake oil salesman with rockets and microstellites...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This will piss you of Louis, but I say, this is actually on the customer. Why?
1. You don't buy HP, even if it's the only MFC you can buy. You smuggle in nearly anything else.
2. You buy the device you intend to use. If you expect heavy duty printing and some light scanning, then by all means. Buy yourself a ink printer. If it's the other way around, buy a laser and if you only expect to scan, you buy stand alone scanner.
And finally, since the market clearly doesn't work, you need more legislation, specifically change patent and copyright law and change your taxation, to prevent companies from being able to raise these shinnanigans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh you're wrong, louis. Mistakes are absolutely going to be done on the billionaire level. There is a reason, why S&P or EY exist. That is, when you'll get large enough in terms of money, only they can make your audit and certify your accounting. At the billionaire level, you have so many transactions, you actually need the guy dedicated to it, because it actually take's a full day to sort it all out.
Also, you don't have to spend x hours doing accounting your self. In my country, you can buy service on a per-value basis, meaning a typical invoice costs you about a Dollar, filing for taxes costs you like forty per quarter, plus there are packages which are even cheaper, and all you need to do, is to get your invoices to your accounting service provider as soon as possible, which is literally a scan and email or a fax away. At that point, what you say here are excuses, not arguments.
1
-
There's similar situation in software space. Case and point, EA. Say you want to buy older NFS title, like Underground 2, the original Most Wanted or Pro Street. EA will not sell you those games, there are no third party resellers, nor is any of these games on Steam or GOG, meaning, if you want to play, you have to find someone, who owns a copy and is willing to part with it, or you have to hoist the colors and Jolly Roger it with a crack, hoping that today's modern system didn't break anything, given, for instance NFS5 Porsche Unleashed, was desinged for 98/ME/XP generation of operating systems!
1
-
1
-
No, that is not considered heartless, that is considered out of touch with reality.
Not everyone can be an entrepreneur! And frankly, no one can be truly successful entrepreneur alone. There is set amount of time in a day. There is only so much, which can be done in those hours. What you're saying, by "Get an extra/better job", or "find something better", or "It's all your fault, you're not trying hard enough!", or "you just have too high expectations, compared to what you can provide."... All of these betray a disconnect between your thinking and reality of time being limited resource. You simply have to sleep for nine hours a day, just to make sure, you won't start dropping your act due to exhaustion a few months down the line. To advance, these days you actually need years, not weeks and months, especially in markets, which aren't as flexible as that of the US.
Look at job postings in some fields. Especially in IT, you'll find absolutely unreasonable demands off people. Ads, seemingly targeting graduates and requiring proficiency and years of experience in multiple coding languages, aren't uncommon. Or take me for example, I, as I stated before elsewhere, am an accountant in search of a job. I happen to also be autistic, which mean's in Czechia, where I live, I can't hold a driver's license (it's outright illegal). Yet, over fifty percent of job listings for my field demand it, regardless of me being able to do literally everything from a PC at home. Where and when are we supposed to gain the documents/knowledge/experience, to fulfill such job requirements only to receive an interview invite. And then we have to impress someone, who doesn't know anything about our field, yet he/she is the gatekeeper. This is the way people get hired and this is a systemic problem, which conservatives tend to overlook, why? Simple, it plays in to their hand and thus they don't want things to change. How are we supposed to find something better, if the system is set to preserve those, who already have everything actually necessary and thus can justify ridiculous demands, sometimes completely disconnected with the work they demand be done. Simple, this has to fall apart eventually, it only gloriously s**ks to live in the interim, which can take decades to pass.
In the eighties and nineties, a guy out of school could come to a factory, ask for a field relevant job and he would get it. Now? A year long selection process, resulting in nobody hired and lost contracts, and employers whining about the quality of workers in the market. They usually start with "it's your fault, you don't get paid enough as a full time janitor, to be able to go to even a free university. Get a degree in this ridiculously specific field and I might hire you. I won't give you a raise during your studies and I won't give you the time off for lectures.". Yes, people, who sound amazingly similarly to you.
That's not heartless, that's just completely out of touch with reality.
1
-
1
-
no, the bail should have been 0... Hell, there should not be bail system at all! You see, if you're sitting in jail, even though you spilled the beans, are not a flight risk (eg. broke), are cooperating with the police, etc. you should be set free to handle your affairs until the trial. Going to jail, because you couldn't meet your money bond on the count of being broke, you're being punished for the offense you're in front of the judge for, while not having your guilt yet established by the court.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Louis, going all bow tie is BS. When dealing with insurance, you are only insured for what is stated in the contract. It's not there, or if there are exclusions, you're not insured against that. So yeah, read and understand the contract, as you should, because there is no other remedy for you. A contract is a contract and in words of the singing lawyer Ivo Jahelka, you sign it, you're on the hook for what ever is in that contract.
When dealing with these insurance leeches, you need to play their game and you play it, by understanding your contractual relationship to the T. That's how you get money out of insurance agency.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Louis, business appraisal is not that hard, as far as physical assets are concerned. Most businesses have some kind of solution, for their accounting needs, be it external accountant, which handles things, or having an ERP and spending some eight hours, learning how different parts of system work, how to automate ammortization, what categories of physical assets there are and marking that down for future use. Best part, this is part of tax/accounting law, that actually doesn't change every few years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
There is a fundamental problem with everything being connected to a third party, be it manufacturer or anyone other, than the person, who owns it. Imagine these kinds of shenanigans with pacemakers. You won't pay subscription, we'll turn it off. You're accused of being a racist (something which is actually not a crime, just acting on it for those reasons) and Amazon turning off your pacemaker (we all know, that Amazon will enter that field eventually). Or imagine you not being able to start your car, because it detected higher than permitted emissions of CO2... Yeah that's in Euro 7!
The problem is, I really don't see many ways out of this. You'd have to reform copyright and patent laws to the extreme. You need to understand, when a company "dies", it's "corpse" doesn't just whither in the sun. Vultures come and tear it apart. That is why we never got FreeSpace 3 and what contributed to such a long hiatus in Star Trek. One company owned one part of the rights, second the other, but you need consent of both, to do anything. And these new owners will want exorbitant fees, if they were to let others use now their property, which encompasses any services being provided, that they bought from a dead company (like Nvidia did with 3dfx SLI), because this way, they can increase their revenue, while having little to no expenses. You'd essentially have to end trade of appreciable intangibles... which would wipe out a lot of worlds GDP, cause there is no way, you could do this in one state or coutnry, if desired effect were to be obtained. And that's before you'll get the "someone will kill you over WiFi attack ads"
1
-
1
-
That is one way of looking at things, however, let me draw Chuck Norris in to this... a few years (decades) back, Chuck was called as expert witness in a case involving the use of firearm against someone unarmed but trained in martial arts. Whether in such circumstances the use was justified. The prossecutor requested a demonstration of effective use of martial arts against someone with a firearm. After four times, when the prossecutor couldn't aim an unloaded sidearm, courtesy of the bailif, at Chuck, before he had Chuck's foot in his chest, the case was decided in favor of the gun holder. So much legal anals
There is a similarity here. Much like with martial arts. Unless the person in question show's signs of his condition (be it kimono with a black belt or unstoppable caugh), one can't tell, whether the other person is dangerous or not. There is a considerable portion of infected people, who are completely asymptomatic and thus may appear harmless, but can actually be harmful to be around. That combined with a standing order (if still enforced) could lead to exonoration. There is a major pandemic about. There are people on the fringes of the society, who refuse to wear masks/vaccinate, who actually do spread the desease. Not all of them, but they are the more common ones.
If we take all of this in to consideration, Could a reasonable juror find, that it was someone could believe, he/she is in imminent mortal danger? Given the general coverage of the epidemic by the media, I'd say yes and therefore the use firearm of firearm should be considered legal and thus called for. (obligation to retreat aside, as that isn't really an option here, given the shooter's occupation.)
1
-
Yeah, there are problems with urban sprawl, but people, who advocate against use of cars are delusional. Sure, they may heat the planet a little. Well, there aren't really alternatives present, because you don't buy a car to get from A to B, you buy that car to get from A to B at your convenience. I live in the city of Brno. I can buy a single ticket and ride it in the city and out of it, even leaving my county and country. I can take a tram or a bus from basically anywhere in the city to anywhere in the city at any time of day, but I'm limited at some times of day, because the bus runs once in an hour or every thirty minutes (depends on the day). It is still not enough. Imagine you live somewhere in the city and you have to wait thirty minutes in cold, because you've missed your bus, when your teeth ache like there's no tomorrow. That is the reason people buy cars. So they don't have to deal with this shit and no amount of public transport refinement is going to change that. And believe me, there is no way that in my city, there aren't at least fifty people a day, who have to get in to their cars and drive to emergency dental facility every day. No my city has about 400k. Imagine how many people need to do the same in NYC.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@radekmojzis9829 Well, on the other hand, we have to pay conversion fees, whenever we're trading with our immediate neighbours, three of which have Euro already, in a pro export economy, that, like most economies in the world, trade's the most with their emediate neighbours. And can't take advantage of West African (CFA) Frank, which is linked on fixed rate to Euro... And until next jaunuary had to pay our income tax based of employer expences, not agreed wage and have effectively the highest taxation of labour in the world... Yeah, fun country the Czech Republic :D
1