Her points are mostly sour grapes and throwing shade at the broader industry/community imho. Does it have diversity(?) - it tends to be very, white, asian, and jewish. Does it have a diversity problem? Perhaps, but at the same time, I don't think diversity will some how 'save' classical music. Ultimately, I think classical music more generally in at least the US is more diverse, has much broader engagement and diversity and gas more appreciated/exposure as it pertains to marching bands and football programs. It's a bit lame admittedly, that music can be so dependent upon sports for it's relevance but I also think one of the most fundamental issues with classical music is it's notion of performer/audience. Many people love to play music as it's a satisfying and communal endeavor, but so much of the classical world is focused on aspirations of getting paid to play for audiences. I hope that one day there will be a bit of a mental shift that reconsiders what about playing in a band or orchestra is so magical and recenters the whole thing on the participation in making art collectively instead of trying to exist merely for the pleasure of an audience. I think it would be a welcome realization that would allow the classical realm to refocus and reengage with society in a more relevant way.

I hear what you are saying but for someone in my shoes (I'm vegetarian, my wife is not), this makes life so much easier.

Ugh. First: The vegetarians that I know don't like meat. So making a veggie burger that tastes like the thing they don't like is just dumb.

Guessing anecdotally, I know as many vegetarians as you. Almost every one of them is happy to have a good burger option. I'm sure some % would be ok without a meat clone but the utility alone of having fast-food chains offer good vegetarian food is amazing. My non vegetarian friends have tried the beyond and impossible burgers and the vast majority have found them to be a satisfactory alternative to conventional beef patties.

Second: When I tasted an Impossible Burger, it was awful. It tasted like a horrible veggie burger.

You are probably in the minority here or you didn't have it prepped well. I'd recommend trying one at umami burger as so far, I have found their preparation the most reliable and delectable.

I personally reduced my meat consumption for environmental and health reasons

That's great, and precisely why this space is taking off.

Misleading phrasing...

"World population projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050. The current world population of 7.3 billion is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100, according to a new UN DESA report, “World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision”, launched today."

http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/population/2015-r...

Population growth is not equivalent to symbiosis...

I have been thinking this way for a long time but was unaware of a formal name for this idea/system. Glad to have a name to put to a concept and signed up for your mailing list.

In general, I do think we can price things, after all, we already do, just poorly (existing taxes). I really do agree that we have a pricing problem but I'm an optimist that worse case, we can calculate mitigation costs and then work backwards from there - not to suggest that is the right/best way to do it - just that it is one simple way to do it.

The simplest example is just phasing in a 'negative externality tax'. First year is x * .1, second year is x * .2, etc.

I think the trade tariffs should be done the same way so that we don't just shock and awe and everyone can reposition in ways that works for all while also ultimately addressing the various parties issues. I don't understand the step function style introduction of change - it seems like a really clumsy approach.

More generally, I hope more will push for taxes on all things we want to discourage as means of weening off. Oil, coal, plastic, high impact animal products. All of them have huge external costs, none of which are payed by the consumer or producer directly.

In general, many funds at that stage are playing the unicorn game (and many raising 100M are already a unicorn or at least not too far away). Unicorn economics is basically, 1/10 will hit >1B in value while X% will be mediocre outcomes and Y% will fail. The 1 unicorn will return the fund generally speaking, after accounting for X, Y, opportunity costs (this is high given the strength of the markets lately) and interest.