Uhm, no.

> Donald actually received $413 million from Fred over the years [1], [2]:

And as to whether he is any good at investing, he is literally worse than average S&P500 [3].

[1]: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/donald-trump-received-... [2]: https://apnews.com/article/0452d29cd2564eaf97605ab90acc3a67 [3]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2021/10/11/its-off...

What I'm saying is that the U.S. is currently in decline, and many will agree with me. Where this leads your (I'm assuming) country, nobody knows. But to me, it doesn't look great.

[1]: https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide...

Seriously though: I don't know what the latest numbers are, but I think we are around 15 people owning ~50% of the global wealth, iirc. So I don't know about you, but unless you are a billionaire, common ownership of the means of production sounds pretty great to most people.

This is really much less of a thing in Europe, or at the very least in Germany and Spain. Mostly it's the overdraft from banks that you can use as what you call a revolving loan. Most of the visa and mastercards I've had in my life simply debit from my main account.

2. The feature is in fact useful, so most people enable it. It may even become company policy to have it enabled.

3. Companies who buy this feature ask for a way to force their employees to use it, as it's "confusing" if location data is only available for 90% of the employees. Not it's an opt-out feature, in the best case.

4. VeryGoodCorp is in a bit of trouble with its shareholders. Revenue growth hasn't been as great lately. They realize that they are sitting on a mountain of location data, aggregated from multiple harmless features, that would tell its customers if their employees are slacking off at work. Surprisingly, the customers are willing to pay good money for a "employee productivity score".

5. Profit..

Edit: formatting

Edit 2: Now you may say "well that wouldn't be legal", and depending on the jurisdiction I'm sure it isn't. But that hasn't kept VeryGoodCorp from collecting this data, they just forgot to turn off the toggle for EU you know, honest mistake. But they still have the data, and laws can change, or, you know, made to change.. (Prop 22 anyone?)

I really hate that everything has to be seen from the consumers' lens, especially the consumer of luxury goods (I'm talking SUVs and the like, cheap cars exist in Europe).

What if we didn't just look at it from the POV from people who buy or want cars? I don't own a car, nor do I plan to. I have to pay for roads, which I understand to an extent. But why should my life be at risk from people wanting to buy SUVs cheaper?

Edit: Also, looking at "cars" without distinction really just obfuscates the real issue. The most dangerous cars (for pedestrians) are the biggest (and sometimes the fastest) ones. Plus most pedestrians die in cities, not on a Highway. So yeah, if you want to drive an SUV in a dense city, then I'm all for making it 10x more expensive for you, because it makes no sense (to me) and puts me in danger :)

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46131693

Points: 69

# Comments: 47

But seriously though: why do people argue that „investing money“ leads to „I can do whatever the hell I want to my client base“? Even if this argument were to hold for all future customers, companies change their TOS all the time. Can I ask for all my money that I paid them back, to exit their ecosystem?..