Page Summary
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Active Entries
- 1: Interesting Links for 11-05-2026
- 2: Interesting Links for 09-05-2026
- 3: Photo cross-post
- 4: Interesting Links for 08-05-2026
- 5: Interesting Links for 06-05-2026
- 6: Life with no children: Art And Tidiness
- 7: Photo cross-post
- 8: Interesting Links for 03-05-2026
- 9: Interesting Links for 29-04-2026
- 10: Photo cross-post
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 01:54 pm (UTC)Which probably means it's fairly accurate.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 11:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 11:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 02:58 pm (UTC)Edited to clarify: I'm aware that any line that does broadband internet right now will automatically also take phonecalls and that's like asking for a hat feather without a hat, but what I'd like to see is packages that are geared toward users who are only interested in internet and therefore don't come with pesky 'friends and family' call allowances and so on that basically just get in the way and give the net-only users extra stuff to worry about and pay attention to that they don't need or want.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 03:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 11:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 12:03 pm (UTC)Finally... people have been citing this like it was handed down on stone slabs. Some guy (Maslow) made it up, it's never been subjected to any kind of test (except now and it failed that). Apart from telling us that it's rather nice to be fed, have shelter and have friends, his theory is not really that useful and apparently doesn't match data.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 12:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 01:12 pm (UTC)Also the choice of Ender's game as the jumping off point was really just bizarre. I guess the writer never finished reading it or read the sequel (where Ender empathises with the aliens and helps them restart their race).
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 01:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 01:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 08:09 am (UTC)I read The Story and was struggling to see much I was recently familar with in the way of tropes.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 10:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 02:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 02:31 pm (UTC)I wonder how high it can be pushed before you push people offshore.
It's nice to know that anything about 67% is counterproductive - useful as an argument next time someone says that taxes should be 90%. Knowing what would work in a real life situation including emigration would obviously also be handy.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 09:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 08:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 08:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 10:15 am (UTC)If my wage is £100 my employer will have to pay £110* (ish) for my labour. I keep about £60 of my wage**
So in the same transaction I appear to sell my labour for 55% of the price my counter-party is paying for it.***
So, what is the price of my labour?
*In theory the value I create is £110 but in theory the theory is wrong.
** Before consumption taxes like VAT
*** Of course it’s more complex than that because I’m “spending” the £50 taxed from my price on public services and also buying**** a future pension.
**** For buying a future pension read buying the right for the government of the day to right me out of benefits I thought I had paid hard money cash for.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 11:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 12:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-05 09:04 am (UTC)Depends a lot on how you define “the value you create” and whether you are looking at things in the short-run or the long-run.
There are two questions when considering one’s corporate strategy. How can I create value? How can I appropriate value?
If one enjoys a monopoly position then one can appropriate value that one hasn’t created (for a given value of created).
no subject
Date: 2011-07-05 09:32 am (UTC)If you have to have an accountant with certain certification in order for your company to exist then their value is, effectively, the same as the whole company.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-05 10:10 am (UTC)For me it all depends on how you chose to interpret the word “created”. Any of the definitions “Value that my intervention has added to the process”, “The value of the opportunity cose of my intervention” or “Value that I am able to extract from the process” are correct and useful in different situations.
I like the analogy of the correct kind of certified accountant. I am constantly looking for that kind of job. I fear all the rent would go to the person making the appointment as I would be prepared to offer them a pretty hefty bribe in order to appoint me. As would my competitors. In fact, the bribe would about the same size as the value created by the whole organisation. Alas, I have dropped my economists fiver.
I’m currently thinking about the situation where a company could only exist if it had two such certified accountants and only two such accountants existed. How would they share out the value between them?
Also on my mind are these situations where one individual acts as a bottleneck for the output of awhole organisation.
Your special accountant – who adds nothing to the process that is valued by the end user but must exist for the entire operation to proceed (an old fashioned absentee landlord).
An Appointed Actuary – who signs off that his insurance company is not doing anything bonkers. A difficult to replace sine qua non for the organisation whose opinion on the risk and compliance of insurance products is of some value to the end user.
The creator and copyright holder of a valuable intellectual property being asked to give permission for their work to be published.
Each of them will be rewarded handsomely for signing a bit of paper.
In the long-run it ought to be the case that the three definiations yield the same reward in the form of a wage but empirical evidence suggests that this is perhaps not the case.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-05 10:57 am (UTC)"Value that only exists because you were involved." or "Value that would be impossible without you."
So, for instance, if there's a project that's going to produce a million and one pounds worth of widgets, and requires a manager, analyst, and a widget expert, plus £700,000 worth of materials. Therefore, it is worth the company paying up to £300,000 to the three people involved (assuming that a profit of £1 is worth it to them - let's assume for a moment that any profit is worth having). And because all three are vital to the process they can charge whatever they like (up to the point where it becomes non-profitable).
So with a ceiling of £300,000 on their combined salaries the question is then how much you can get away with paying them. And that depends on how replaceable they are, and how much similar workers are prepared to underbid them. If you can find a widget expert prepared to work for £30,000 then that's fantastic, it's more profit for the company.
Of course, this is all in an ideal market, but property markets are large enough that they're not awful. Except that information is lacking - because almost all companies demand that you keep your salary information secret.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 09:44 am (UTC)I think this is the crucial paragraph. The study suggests 67% as a top rate of income taxes in a closed economy but labour mobility within the EU drives that down to the level of other states. So the incentive for inter-state collusion (illegal for private companies, de rigour if you are a state) is huge.
The strategic positioning around this would be fascinating. If you consider taxation as the price you pay for living near people you know and the range of public services you enjoy you get some interesting market dynamics.
Lots to think about here.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 12:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-05 08:55 am (UTC)Murky territory for game theory, lots of (potentially) conflicting pay-offs but that makes it all the more fun.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-30 10:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 08:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 08:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 11:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-01 10:06 am (UTC)