[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Let's compare with another case.
What can be learned from them?

Norway boasts the highest electric vehicle adoption rate in the world. 82% of new car sales were EVs in Norway in 2023. In comparison, 7.6% of new car sales were electric in the U.S. last year, according to Kelley Blue Book estimates. The Norwegian government started incentivizing the purchase of EVs back in the 1990s, but it wasn?t until Tesla and other EV models became available about ten years ago that sales really started to take off. Norway?s capital, Oslo, is also electrifying its ferries, buses, semi trucks and even construction equipment. Gas pumps and parking meters are being replaced by chargers. It?s an electric utopia of the future. CNBC flew across the globe to meet with experts, government officials and locals to find out how the Scandinavian country pulled off such a high EV adoption rate.
Chapters:
2:01​ - Incentives and subsidies
11:51​ -Charging and energy stations
20:54​ - Charging anxiety
20:56​ - Next phase of Norway?s EV transition
32:08​ - Lessons for the U.S.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The (Overdue) Collapse of the 9-5 Job

Companies are doing mass layoff while complaining about not being able to find enough employees, some workers are min-maxing the system by working multiple full-time jobs at the same time, while others need to work hours of unpaid overtime at just one job? This is not to mention that the gig economy is consuming entire sectors of the workforce? The 9-5 was created by American labour unions in the 1800?s and became mainstream over one HUNDRED [100] years ago, when jobs looked like this, and this? it was revolutionary for its time? but how many of the modern problems in corporate America are caused by trying to make an outdated system fit with every single modern job?

A report by the management consulting firm McKinsey and company found that two thirds [2/3] of the average humans wealth is in the work they can do over their lifetime. Everybody has time, effort and experience that they can trade for money and those tradable commodities are worth twice as much as all of the other assets that the average person possesses. A regular nine to five [9-5] job has been a great way for billions of people to safely exchange a predictable amount of their time for a predictable pay check, with predictable career advancement as they gain more experience.

But this one size fits all model for work doesn?t fit with every job and trying to make it work has been bad for employees AND bad for companies for three reasons, which is causing three equally terrible trends in the job market. The first trend is that it makes time a worthless asset. The Ford Motor Company was one of the first businesses in America to adopt the nine to five forty-hour work week. Henry Ford did this to make his company THE most attractive place for auto workers to get a job. This allowed him to pull talent away from other automakers without paying his workers more. In order to compete with Ford other automakers were forced to offer the same forty-hour work week with paid overtime. Eventually in order to compete with the automakers other companies were also forced to offer 9-5 jobs so that their best workers didn?t quit to go and work on a car assembly line. These auto workers had tightly defined and repetitive tasks, so unless the workers succumbed to exhaustion, they could do a consistent amount of work for every hour they spent at their post, and every additional hour would produce the same amount of output.

If you work in a modern office job you will know that your work is nothing like this. Sometimes there is a lot to do, and sometimes there is nothing to do, but you still need to be there eight hours a day looking busy no matter what. Back when the 40-hour week was being fought for by workers unions, most Americans worked in manufacturing, but today most people work in the service sector which is more diverse than you might expect.

Clearly these jobs are very different, and should have a different schedule but most of the corporate world has tried to make the 9-5 fit all jobs? Work comes and goes as internal and external customers make demands, and that means when people are busy and need more than eight hours in the day to finish their work they are expected to work ?reasonable unpaid overtime? ?

According to an ADP Research Institute Study of office professionals unpaid overtime jumped to an average of NINE point two HOURS per WEEK in 2021, more than a full extra day to keep up with employer demands.

BUT when there is little to no work to do because a project has just been completed or sales are seasonally slow, workers are still expected to put in their 40 hours a week, because ?that?s what the business is paying them for?.

If you are in this kind of job your best option is to try and find something that makes you look busy, but ?if you don?t have something to work on? you are probably going to be given meaningless tasks just to fill the mandatory eight-hour day? 

So it?s time to learn How Money Works to find out why we might be in the midst of the overdue collapse of the 9-5.

[alancalverd]

Norway boasts the highest electric vehicle adoption rate in the world.

And the lowest electricity prices in Europe. All you need for this bit of utopia is a very low population density and more hydroelectric power than you can use. Plus a reliable railway service for long trips.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What can be learned from them?

Let's start with a reflection from the past.
- We are here because our predecessors (including our past selves) do something that led to our current existence. We don't come out suddenly from vacuum randomly.
- Something that our predecessors did make our current lives easier, while some others harder, and they have different significance.

[alancalverd]

What can be learned from them?

See reply #1242 above.

"Horses for courses" is the key. If you have lots of cheap electricity, you can run lots of electric cars. If you don't, you can't.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-hydro shows 61 MWh/year of hydropower per capita for Norway, 99 for Iceland, 0.2 for the UK.

An average car travelling 10,000 miles per year uses about 12 MWh. Only Canada (27) comes anywhere near the sustainability of Iceland and Norway. Next in line: New Zealand, at 13, then...nobody.
 
How about wind? Nowhere in the world produces more than 3 MWh/year per capita from wind, and guess who produces most? Norway!

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What can be learned from them?

See reply #1242 above.

"Horses for courses" is the key. If you have lots of cheap electricity, you can run lots of electric cars. If you don't, you can't.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-hydro shows 61 MWh/year of hydropower per capita for Norway, 99 for Iceland, 0.2 for the UK.

An average car travelling 10,000 miles per year uses about 12 MWh. Only Canada (27) comes anywhere near the sustainability of Iceland and Norway. Next in line: New Zealand, at 13, then...nobody.
 
How about wind? Nowhere in the world produces more than 3 MWh/year per capita from wind, and guess who produces most? Norway!

Then others need to learn how they can get lots of cheap electricity in the first place. It must be something that they've done in the past, but others haven't as much.

[alancalverd]

Simply not possible. To get cheap electricity you need a small population and lots of mountains. Hence Norway, Canada and New Zealand. Or a small population and the right kind of  major geological fault: Iceland, New Zealand.

Nobody else has ever managed to make cheap electricity in significant quantities (20 MWh/year per capita)  from renewable sources. However you do the maths, it just isn't possible. Nuclear power might have done the trick for a few hundred years but it's too late to start now: the cost of the fossil fuel needed to build a nuclear power station makes it uneconomic. 

It could be done in the British Isles by using wind with hydrogen storage, if we reduced the population to about 10 - 20% of the present level. Wholly feasible, negligible net cost, but politically improbable. So we have to get rid of politicians: google for "technocratic government" to see how.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Nobody else has ever managed to make cheap electricity in significant quantities (20 MWh/year per capita)  from renewable sources. However you do the maths, it just isn't possible.

What about countries around deserts?
Solar HAS become the cheapest energy source to operate. Batteries are also getting cheaper fast. Sodium battery is expected to support the utility systems, especially because the abundance of raw materials, and no constraints for space and weight, unlike in vehicles.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What can be learned from them?

Let's start with a reflection from the past.
- We are here because our predecessors (including our past selves) do something that led to our current existence. We don't come out suddenly from vacuum randomly.
- Something that our predecessors did make our current lives easier, while some others harder, and they have different significance.

Extrapolate to the future, something that we do will make our successors' lives easier, while some others harder, and they have different significance.
Life is a game for everyone, and the prize is continued existence of our successors.

[alancalverd]

What about countries around deserts?

Generally lacking in hydroelectric potential, and since the  sun only shines half the time, solar arrays need a lot of storage.

Solar HAS become the cheapest energy source to operate.

in the short term

Batteries are also getting cheaper fast.

but have a limited life

Sodium battery is expected to support the utility systems, especially because the abundance of raw materials, and no constraints for space and weight, unlike in vehicles.

and now you need two batteries, one to store electricity for sale, and another in the vehicle. And the fossil energy used to produce solar systems is enormous. And then you have the political problem: if you are dependent on the electricity I make, I won't sell it cheap. Which is already the problem with oil.

[alancalverd]

something that we do will make our successors' lives easier

Very simply, make fewer babies. Everybody wins.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

As the first knowledge, our own existence while we're thinking about it is the most certain thing there is. Its certainty is 100%. A few seconds to minutes before and after that, we can say the certainty is only slightly reduced. But further away from the origin, the certainty drops rapidly. It will look like a bell curve. Perhaps a skewed bell curve, because the past can be less unpredictable than the future.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

something that we do will make our successors' lives easier

Very simply, make fewer babies. Everybody wins.

How few is the best? Is it 0?
What makes it best?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

And the fossil energy used to produce solar systems is enormous.

Why can't we use solar energy to produce solar systems?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Economy is about distribution of resources to achieve the terminal goal of a system effectively and efficiently.

The Trillion Dollar Equation

The most famous equation in finance, the Black-Scholes/Merton equation, came from physics. It launched an industry worth trillions of dollars and led to the world?s best investments.

References:

The Man Who Solved the Market: How Jim Simons launched the quant revolution, Gregory Zuckerman. Penguin Publishing Group. - https://ve42.co/GZuckerman

The Physics of Finance: Predicting the Unpredictable: Can Science Beat the Market? James Owen Weatherall. Short Books. - https://ve42.co/FinancePhysics

The Statistical Mechanics of Financial Markets, J.Voigt. Springer. - https://ve42.co/Springer

Black, F., & Scholes, M. (1973). The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of political economy, 81(3), 637-654. - https://ve42.co/BlackScholes

Cornell, B. (2020). Medallion fund: The ultimate counterexample?. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 46(4), 156-159. - https://ve42.co/Medallion

[alancalverd]

How few is the best? Is it 0?
What makes it best?

Initially , reduce birthrate to one child per female.

In a civilised society (i.e not the USA) the saving in child welfare costs and manpower can be diverted to the welfare of the post-retirement population (who have paid for it!), and the "working fraction" of the population (effectively, the proportion aged between 20 and 60)   increases gradually from 0.5 to about 0.6, so net wealth and tax income increase.

After about 100 years the total population will have decreased to around 20% of its initial value and everyone will have 5 times the space and natural resources available. This level is indefinitely sustainable in the UK, so you might want to bring the birthrate back to around 2.1

Apparently South Korea is already on track, with the current birthrate at about 0.7. Stupidly, the government (a tautology?) wants to increase it!

[alancalverd]

Perhaps a skewed bell curve, because the past can be less unpredictable than the future.

No - it's a semi-infinite exponential decay because there is no uncertainty about the past! Even if we don't know the details or the mechanism, the result is the observed present.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

How few is the best? Is it 0?
What makes it best?

Initially , reduce birthrate to one child per female.

In a civilised society (i.e not the USA) the saving in child welfare costs and manpower can be diverted to the welfare of the post-retirement population (who have paid for it!), and the "working fraction" of the population (effectively, the proportion aged between 20 and 60)   increases gradually from 0.5 to about 0.6, so net wealth and tax income increase.

After about 100 years the total population will have decreased to around 20% of its initial value and everyone will have 5 times the space and natural resources available. This level is indefinitely sustainable in the UK, so you might want to bring the birthrate back to around 2.1

Apparently South Korea is already on track, with the current birthrate at about 0.7. Stupidly, the government (a tautology?) wants to increase it!

Why should we do that? What's the target/objective/goal/purpose?
Is there any alternative?
How to determine which option is the best?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Perhaps a skewed bell curve, because the past can be less unpredictable than the future.

No - it's a semi-infinite exponential decay because there is no uncertainty about the past! Even if we don't know the details or the mechanism, the result is the observed present.

The highest certainty is 1, or 100%.
There are cases where what we thought we know about the past turn out to be false.
There is non-zero chance that our memory about past experiences are corrupted.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Why Widespread Tech Layoffs Keep Happening Despite A Strong U.S. Economy

The tech sector is having a big 2024. Nvidia just crushed earnings expectations. The AI boom remains in full swing. The tech-heavy Nasdaq index is up more than 8 percent year-to-date.

The U.S. economy is also doing surprisingly well, adding 353,000 jobs in January, well ahead of economists' forecasts. Hotter-than-expected inflation data may also keep the Fed from cutting rates as soon as the market expects, a sign that the economy remains strong enough to support higher interest rates for longer. It's a different story for tech workers, though.

"The layoffs to the start of 2024 signal a dramatic shift in the tech industry," said Jeff Shulman, professor at the University of Washington's Foster School of Business. "We're going to continue to see layoffs happen as the future of work has changed, as the future of technology has changed, and as investors appetite for risk and growth versus profitability has dramatically changed as well."

The number of tech sector layoffs in 2024 has been outpacing the number of terminations in 2023. So far, about 42,324 tech employees were let go in 2024, according to Layoffs.fyi, which tracks layoffs in the tech industry. That averages out to more than 780 layoffs each day in 2024. In 2023, nearly 263,000 tech employees got laid off, averaging about 720 firings each day that year.

There are several factors behind the churn. Artificial intelligence is at the forefront. Companies need to free up cash to invest in the chips and servers that power the AI models behind these new technologies. There's also the stock market effect. Companies that conducted layoffs haven't been punished for it, either by investors or on their bottom lines.

Watch the video above to find out more about why tech workers may be poised to endure another rough year of layoffs, and why the surprising strength of the U.S. economy may not be coming to their rescue.

Chapters:
0:00 ? Intro
2:26 ? Hiring and firing
4:24 ? The AI effect
7:15 ? The end of cushy tech jobs?
9:50  ? What?s next?

It's time to reconsider what we are working for, and ask why so several times until we get the root cause, which is our terminal goal.