The bigger problem with MDR is the insistence by policymakers that merchants cannot pass it on. The case for MDR relies on market logic: payment services cost money and therefore require a price. But the policy then abandons that same logic when deciding who should bear the price.
You cannot invoke markets to justify a charge and then reject markets when determining its incidence. Who ultimately pays depends on elasticities and competition, not an administrative instruction. Enforcing otherwise will require monitoring prices, discounts and payment choices. It could become another tool to harass merchants and extract rents. This is how Inspector Raj begins. That is what I fear most, even more than the charge itself.
The 2020s are arguably one of the worst decades for Europe in modern history.
It began with the pandemic lockdowns which contracted GDP by -6.1% across the EU, the biggest drawdown since the 1930s.
This was followed by the Ukraine War which began the ongoing energy crisis.
Then, the AI Revolution began in 2022, in which Europe has fallen significantly behind the US and China.
Between 2020 and 2025, the US deployed roughly ~$500 billion of venture capital into AI compared to just ~$50 billion in Europe.
Europe was then hit by the highest tariffs in US history, impacting $600+ billion of annual European exports to the US.
Now, the Iran War has pushed Europe into its worst energy crisis ever, with central banks being forced to raise interest rates.
The 2020s will be remembered as one of Europe's most disruptive decades in history.
BREAKING: India’s fertility rate has fallen below the replacement level for the first time, as the world’s most populous country heads toward eventual population decline. — The Economist
BREAKING: President Trump says he will issue a $5,000 "dividend" to every adult citizen in the US if the Republicans win the midterm elections.
There are currently ~245 million US citizens age 18+, meaning this dividend would cost ~$1.2 trillion.
This would mark the biggest economic stimulus payment since the pandemic.
It's time for judicial review of the amendments made in 2018 to SC/ST Atrocities Act which removed the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court to check its rampant misuse.The Amendments have made it worse. Every affected party must prefer a constitutional challenge to the Act.
This is because the anti-capitalist left is not actually against people being crazy rich. They're against certain types of people being crazy rich.
Artists and athletes make sense to them because they've played music and sports and because their success can be explained by "luck" and "talent". Messi's wealth is not offensive to them because they understand Messi is much better at football than they are.
But when it comes to business, the anti-capitalist leftist has no framework for understanding why Jeff Bezos might be super rich since 99% of them have never ever created a product, business or service that was of value to other people. They've never taken entrepreneurial risk. They've never employed people and felt the burden of responsibility that comes with that. They've never pick up a business and given it a play in the way they've picked up a ball or a guitar.
They *literally* don't understand wealth creation. They think there is a fixed amount of money and the only thing a business does is split it unfairly.
It's why they rage at Elon and other successful business leaders. Because they genuinely don't understand why they're wealthy.
Also, and this is just as important, athletes and artists are disproportionately young, attractive, "diverse", left wing etc. Business leaders are "evil" middle aged white men whose success offends the average anti-capitalist leftist because they don't understand a) what it is they do and b) that Elon Musk has the same talent advantage on them as Messi does, it's just harder to measure.
We think the Economics Nobel Prize confers some kind of real economic insight about how a poor country becomes rich. It does not.
If you want real insight about how a developing nation gets rich, study Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, study Japan, study South Korea, study Taiwan, study post-Mao China. They have all lifted people up from poverty, produced widely shared prosperity but they do not produce Nobel Laureates in Economics.
The book "How Asia Works" by Joe Studwell is a great read.
Tldr; ignore Nobel Laureates in Economics. That is not the path to wealth.
@jawwwn_@60Minutes There is obviously no “degree” you can get from a university that actually teaches you how to make an orbital rocket, as none of the professors know how to do it!
the internet created global liquidity in everything. this includes talent markets, jobs, dating, attention, & status among many other things. this is the single most under realized structural change of the last 20 years. almost no one understands this well.
what this means practically is that whatever you're pursuing, you're now competing in a pool that's orders of magnitude larger than any previous generation faced. the distribution of outcomes gets fatter on both tails & the middle hollows out. you either benefit from the expanded opportunity set or you get crushed by it.
the people who thrive in liquid markets are the ones who figure out which game is still inefficiently priced & get there first. but these windows close faster than ever before.
#BREAKING#SupremeCourt stays UGC Promotion of Equity Regulations 2026.
SC says the provisions are prima facie vague and capalbe of misuse.
SC asks Union to redraft the regulations, till then its operation kept in abeyance.
#UGCRegulations
Yes, everyone has medical and life insurance.
Career progression for an unskilled job? This is not a permanent job for anyone. Most people do this for a few months in a year and move on to something more permanent.
Anybody with a valid drivers license, and clear background check can work in gig.
Nothing happens if they don't deliver on time. We understand that things go wrong many times.
Attrition percentage is 65% in a year, indicating that this is truly "gig" and not a permanent job for anyone.
I agree. It should take less than 10 mins. But delivery partners drive safely, and sometimes get stuck in traffic in dense neighborhoods.
The debate over NREGS highlights the Programmes vs Policies debate once again.
Programmes refer to government-led measures involving public expenditure. Policies are government directives that allow or disallow specific economic activities.
Programmes are easy to begin. There’s little opposition to additional government spending. Many academics love programmes as they are good sites for RCTs, clean data, and natural experiments.
On the other hand, steering new policies is complex and requires politicians to undertake the real political work of convincing, persuading, cajoling, and punishing.
As a result, every policy domain is littered with multiple programmatic ideas but has fewer policy ideas. You can often judge the maturity of policy thinking in a domain by observing this ratio of policy ideas to programme ideas.