Something doesn't add up about this:
- Let's assume you agree that £2m in assets is wealthy.
- Then how long does it take for your £200k income to make you wealthy?
By my estimate: 200k/year ~ 100k after tax/year ~ 50k savings/year... so at least 20 years!!!
This is doesn't work on it's own terms: either you think 200k is not a high income, or you think that being wealthy should really start at like ~500k.
... in short, what we consider to be "high incomes" should really kick in much later.
Besides this being beyond the pale even for truly wealthy residents, please note what the UK gov and HMRC classify as wealthy.
Britain is literally proving the term Europoor in all of its glory
In honor of this, will be sharing some items for UK friends on leaving
You wake up to a nightmare.
- You had £100k in an account but someone took £3500 from you and there’s nothing you can do. It will happen every year.
- someone has taken out £100k of debt in your families name. You’re on the hook for it. So are your kids. Every year the interest is due.
Both of these things are real. The UK has 3.5% inflation and £3T of debt (£100k per family).
One of the biggest challenges for biotech founders is setting up a business too early (myself included).
You don’t have the track record to hire good people.
Good people don’t want to work for a popular twitter handle.
the benefit of moving to SF when I was 18
is that even at a "young" age I've already gone through several cycles
so you can get to see how it all works in the long term, and which strategies fail
being this status-oriented and transactional causes flame-out in 95%+ of cases
BREAKING: President Trump reveals his new anti-fraud program set up to reward people who expose fraud with a 1% commission on the money uncovered.
"If you turn somebody in and you, let's say report and you find $1 billion, we are giving a commission to that person of 1%."
So accurate. Governments pat themselves on the back for new elaborate regulation but don’t appreciate how creative people will get to avoid tax.
Solution: massively reduce regulation (and promote growth), whilst having very simple tax structures — that are unavoidable because there is no room for interpretation.
1. Kids set up a new company that becomes the marketing agency for the family business.
2. The marketing agency collects a fee that dramatically reduces the profit in the parents company.
3. The marketing agency acquires a minority stake with savage voting rights.
4. Independent valuation shows that this structure makes the business almost worthless.
5. The marketing company acquires the remaining shares.
Success in the UK is now 50% being excellent at what you do and 50% avoiding the governments latest scheme to derail the success and independence of your family.
There's a story going around: after the drone strikes on Yandex data centres, comments on AfD and MAGA accounts collapsed.
We monitor 17,000+ politicians, media and civil society accounts in 30+ countries. 50,000+ posts a day.
So we checked.
We don't see it. 🧵
Michael I. Jordan, machine learning demigod, UC Berkeley
... the young people who work at these companies operate in a world [Silicon Valley, Berkeley, etc.] where these kinds of discussions are commonplace. Many of them aren’t really engineers; they come from the humanities, philosophy, or other disciplines. They’re 25 years old, they’re naive, they don’t do engineering work, they’ve never worked at large companies where real products are developed for real people, with discipline. And they get together, a bit like in Parisian cafés in the 1920s, to talk about these grand science-fiction ideas. When these young people resign, they know they’re going to attract attention. It allows them to feel virtuous and to be seen as very important figures. They claim to be giving up money, but in reality, they already have their stock options. So all of this is a grand moralizing performance that doesn’t serve the real objective it claims to pursue. There’s a great deal of naiveté here, which goes hand in hand with a certain cynicism…
https://t.co/GwP9zcz7vZ
@mbakovic__@WorksInProgMag Yes and no. Finance is revenue generating and employees have the ability to tie their contribution to company performance. If they are not paid accordingly, they jump ship. This is much more challenging for pre-revenue start ups.
There’s two sides to a flourishing start up scene:
1. A lack of non-competes, and (controversially)
2. The ability to fire quickly!
I think @WorksInProgMag covered this at some point, but not being “locked in” to an underperforming employee means you can reallocate budget to someone new quickly.
A Labour government probably doesn’t want to do this second part, but the irony is: if you can fire easily, you can increase salaries because you can take more risk.
I think we need to agree a bargain: if you accept lower level of employment protection, some share of employment tax can be reallocated from the government to go to the employee directly.
Make it entirely optional, and say that once a company has 100 FTE they have to have at least 50% of employees on the full protection contract.
🚨 BREAKING: Andy Burnham says he will limit non-compete clauses in employment contracts
"Non-compete clauses will no longer be a barrier to hiring for our most promising start-ups"
“ Would a mathematician bother spending 10 years to solve a problem if he/she knew that there is a machine out there that can solve it in three hours, but the owners of this machine are “kind” (or something like that) to not release the proof? “
Mathematicians are in shock because they realize that overnight, the way of conducting their profession is over and a replacement is not obvious.
They can embrace a new model, with AI driving proofs. But a serious issue is that different talents might be needed moving forward. The rare and celebrated gift of crafting mathematical proofs seems to have lost most of its value.
Being grumpy about OpenAI releasing these proofs is an immature first reaction. Would a mathematician bother spending 10 years to solve a problem if he/she knew that there is a machine out there that can solve it in three hours, but the owners of this machine are “kind” (or something like that) to not release the proof?
"Some DeepMind staff in the UK are subject to noncompete agreements that prevent them from working for a competitor for up to 12 months after they finish work at Google"
https://t.co/5q6qp0k18M
This is exactly the right take from @wildtypehuman. Alas we can only dream that the Labour government will tie the removal of non competes to a broader package of pro growth labour market deregulation…
Mathematicians are OUTRAGED that their high social status, with its accompaniment of wealth, women, and general extravagance, has been encroached upon by artificial intelligences of humble background.