For scale: The global box office revenue of every single nation's film industry combined is about 42 billion dollars as of 2019. Nvidia's growth in market cap of ~350 billion since end of 2022 to 2 trillion today is almost enough to account for the entire 1.6 trillion (6%) growth in US economy for 2023.
Nvidia single-handedly carried the United States of America's 2023 GDP from recession territory (0% growth) to unprecedented massive economic boom (6% growth)!
Or maybe NVidia was just heavily undervalued and the market just caught up.
It wouldn't be the first time it happened. When AMD released first Epic/ThreadRippers which made it obvious they are going to wipe the floor with Intel, it was more than 10x cheaper than it is today.
People were shouting "P/E" and "Dividends" back then for a few years as well thinking it's crazy AMD approaches Intel's market cap.
Campus activism has been tainted by Marxism. "Critical [race|gender|disability] Theory" is just standard Marxism applied in the social science context. Since Marxism pre-requisitely requires framing everything in the world into a "oppressed vs oppressor, have vs have-not, good vs evil" binary, you will become a target for hostility/harm if you are perceived as somehow privileged.
If isolating/targeting people based on on race/gender/ability bothers you, you should stand up against "Critical (Marxist) Theory" infiltration of activist circles in the social sciences. Activism should be about empowering the needy, not harming the need-nots.
> Cannot the system itself be the oppressor, instead of "white people"?
Sure, and that begs the question "who created the system?", "who does the system benefit?", "why is the system structured this way?". All of which are /good/ questions to ask, that critical theory advocates are all too willing to provide easy non-nuanced answers to, answers that boil down to "white people". Unfortunately, it turns out that anti-racism (at least as currently implemented/advocated in the majority of colleges and universities) is just racism with a different label.
>All of which are /good/ questions to ask, that critical theory advocates are all too willing to provide easy non-nuanced answers to, answers that boil down to "white people".
Then the problem is the the advocates and not CRT, no?
>Unfortunately, it turns out that anti-racism (at least as currently implemented/advocated in the majority of colleges and universities) is just racism with a different label.
I apologize for editing my comment to remove that context in trying to create clarity about my point. I had actually meant to reply to a different (similar) thread. I will reply to your point while acknowledging I edited my original point hoping nobody replied yet.
--
Sure. There could be a racist judge, corrupt cop, or absurd law oppressing people in any government system ever. But that does not meet the bar required justify totally "tearing society down and rebuilding everything from scratch" as a Marxist might suggest.
There is no evidence that any alternative system would be better. There is much evidence that alternative systems end up worse. Why not fix problems where you find them instead of throwing the baby away with the bathwater?
> There is no evidence that any alternative system would be better.
Bull roar. The Haudenosaunee had a collectivist, shared-ownership, woman-led society that thrived for hundreds of years if not longer, and became something of an empire in what is now the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada.
This is what inspired Engels to consider collectivist approaches to society building as an alternative approach to the intrinsic oppression of capitalism.
My reading of wiki does not match your "collectivist, shared-ownership, woman-led society" claim.
I read that they had a matrilineal kinship system that treated women as equal, not women led.
As for the collectivist, shared-ownership: Then they destroyed other Iroquoian-language tribes, including the Erie, to the west, in 1654, over competition for the fur trade.
No other Indigenous nation or confederacy had ever reached so far, conducted such an ambitious foreign policy, or commanded such fear and respect. The Five Nations blended diplomacy, intimidation, and violence as the circumstances dictated, creating a measured instability that only they could navigate. Their guiding principle was to avoid becoming attached to any single colony, which would restrict their options and risk exposure to external manipulation."
The discredited right-wing conspiracy theory is that Jewish scholars worked to substitute "people of color" and "white people" for "the proletariat" and "the bourgeoisie" in Marxist theory in order to make it more modern and appealing in postwar America, so as to destroy America and... pave the way for Jewish world rule, I guess.
If you want to complain about pro athletes making too much compare to STEM, consider that the average aspiring pro ends up making less than minimum wage over the duration of their career.
Only a tiny handful of about 250k high school football-playing seniors are able to find any at all job in their sport (if they even make it to college). Meanwhile, the roughly 100k yearly US CS grads have an unemployment rate of maybe 10%.
I have been colonized with "mostly" dormant MRSA for a couple years now. The idea of ever needing surgery terrifies me because I know I could die from a flareup in the "weakened" part of my body.
I tried fighting it in the past but the stomach damage from long treatment regiments just wasn't worth it, not to mention the risk of getting reinfected from my home. I hope a non-harmful and reliable cure is available someday.
I didn't pick up regular staph -- I picked up an already moderately resistant strain that became more resistant due to treatments stopped too-early due to both allergic reactions (my issue), illness/vomiting due to collapsed "stomach biome" (my issue), and undersized prescription lengths (doctors issue).
I could probably get decolonized by simultaneously hospitalizing myself, my family, and bleaching everything we own while we get pumped with heavy anti-biotic cocktails -- But that just isn't worth it to me.
Phage treatments are nothing like that. They are viruses that target specific strains of bacteria. So if someone has produced a phage for your specific strain you would only need to take the phage with no nasty antibiotic side effects. Going to the hospital and taking a antibiotic cocktail seems like the perfect way to get more antibiotic resistant bacteria.
Unfortunately, as a practicing Muslim, I can report that doesn't help much. On the plus side, my infection doesn't flare up too often -- And when it does, I have some mitigations I usually take to get it to taper off.
Crime is high when people have nothing to lose and something to gain. It shouldn't be so politically controversial to say that both carrot and stick are needed to prevent+reduce crime.
Capital gains tax should be split into two categories: Medium term (1+ year) and very long term (7+ years). Very long term tax would be much lower than today's tax, while medium term would be higher. This reform would reduce MBA's plundering company goodwill and trust for short-term quarterly boosts and reward long-term thinking.
You're trying to exacerbate an existing problem with the tax code.
If you invest in a company that goes on to become a conglomerate, nearly all of the value is now a capital gain. You can't invest it in something else without inducing a taxable event. Which means that investors prefer to keep their money in existing conglomerates than move it into prospective competitors. It's a huge tax preference to keep money invested in megacorps rather than new challengers.
It may even be the cause rather than the solution here. Because selling shares of a company that had previously been growing has a major tax disadvantage, investors then want those companies to keep growing even though they've saturated their market, so they demand abusive practices which are long-term detrimental to the company in order to keep the short-term growth rate competitive. Meanwhile this deprives potential challengers of capital which makes abusive practices more effective by making markets less competitive.
It could even make it worse. If you've invested in a company 5 years ago, you're stuck holding it for another two years and now you want to goose the stock price so it peaks when you hit the lower tax rate.
We may be better off with the opposite -- allow basis transfers without a taxable event when you're only changing what you're investing in rather than divesting in order to spend the money. Remove the tax preference for abusive conglomerates.
> allow basis transfers without a taxable event when you're only changing what you're investing in rather than divesting in order to spend the money
This is an appealing idea, but it comes at the expense of even further reducing taxes that are typically paid by wealthy people.
How to beneficially tax equity-related transactions is a really tricky problem to solve.
Trying to lay out the balance of an ideal solution:
(1) We want people to invest in equities (2) we do want to [eventually] tax profits (3) We do want investors to adjust allocations from low-growth-expectation assets to high-growth-expectation assets, because high-growth-expectation is a signal of filling a gap in demand.
I think I'd be on board with your suggestion, which essentially trades off 2 for 3.
I think we'd need to bundle it with a serious revision of estate taxes and the various schemes people use to get around them. So you're definitely taxed when you convert your tax-aware capital gains into income, or your heirs are taxed when those capital gains become their inheritance.
Maybe if we bundle two unpopular reforms together, we can get a popular reform. :)
> This is an appealing idea, but it comes at the expense of even further reducing taxes that are typically paid by wealthy people.
It is in theory, but in practice it's already avoided in a thousand ways. The first is, of course, by just not selling the shares in whatever you hold right now, which is the perverse incentive we're trying to fix. Then there are the outright avoidance strategies, like foreign holding companies in jurisdictions with different tax laws, and even the fully intentional ones, like tax-deferred retirement accounts.
> I think we'd need to bundle it with a serious revision of estate taxes and the various schemes people use to get around them.
Combining this with the removal of the step up in basis on inheritance would basically do it, and would remove a major justification for keeping that -- it exists in large part to allow the heirs to sell the asset instead of being coerced by tax incentives into investing into whatever their parents did, i.e. the same thing we're trying to fix here.
This way the heirs could sell the asset and buy another one without a taxable event, but don't get a basis reset. So if they want to spend the money, they have to pay the tax.
Of course, the even simpler version of this is to just eliminate income taxes in general and use a consumption tax, then make it progressive by adding a UBI. But maybe one step at a time.
Interesting idea. I have recently been reading John C. Bogle's work (of Vanguard fame) and he seems to be of the opinion, from my interpretation, that short term speculation will have disasterious consequences for the Stock Market and that we need a sort of Sin Tax to discourage such behavior. Your idea would track with that.
Not just the stock market. The short term thinking person induced by that has knock off issues all over the place, from environmental to healthcare to the physical harm of workers being pushed too hard in the name of short term profit.
I think you can get around this by just keeping ownership for 7 years, but promising any profit/loss from 6 of those 7 years to someone else via a private contract-for-differnce.
I have a 2013 Samsung Ativ Book 6, the younger brother of your machine! The display broke twice, the keyboard is 85% unresponsive, HDD got replaced with SSD, and jampacked a larger (Ativ Book 8) battery inside.
Physical issues aside, it runs Windows 11 passably for a backup PC -- Not bad!
Nvidia single-handedly carried the United States of America's 2023 GDP from recession territory (0% growth) to unprecedented massive economic boom (6% growth)!
--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry
https://www.bea.gov/news/2024/gross-domestic-product-fourth-....