drelihan

Comparing Python to Perl ( assuming equal experience with both ):

If you are a good programmer, you will write good Perl and Python code. If you are a bad programmer, you will likely write terribly horrendous Perl code and slightly less horrible Python code.

For those looking to make a good investment to “create a desirable urban space”, there are many ways to donate to non-profit (museums, theaters, local schools, libraries, co-ops, etc) to achieve that. A coffee shop, or even funeral home, could set itself up as a non-profit, with the employees and managers making market salaries but relying on community donations, in addition to community business, to keep the place going if needed.

For businesses who set themselves up as for-profit, or those who wish to invest in for-profit businesses, a return on capital is required for those systems to work. Investors may accept a lower return on their money in a local business compared to one they will never see, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with making sure there is a investment return. Otherwise, how do you suppose the next business gets funded?

Was expecting more info on how repayment works thru the revenue sharing notes - not clear what percentage of revenue a business is agreeing to pay or how much teeth these notes actually have. I would expect most of these “investments” to end in a almost complete write downs. Could be a great funding alternative if the details / investor protections were fleshed out. I personally would not touch any of these until then.

Pay attention. This is how you rant.

Agreed! Once we automate one task, we move onto the next. Some of the automation requires tending over time, but order of magnitude less than the manual intervention than before.

There is always more to do, even if it might not be in your immediate job description. If you work at a company that rewards productivity, then you will do well. If you don't work at a company, or for a boss, who rewards productivity, regardless of automation, why would you stay?

The only thing I can think that is worse than doing an automate-able task over and over is lying fallow while a program does it for me.

I’d rather invest in just that company, one that can continue reinvesting profits in itself at attractive returns year in and out. I can sit back and let compounding work it’s magic ( although at some point in my life I will switch from a net producer to a net consumer and opt for cash ). In cases where a company does not need all the cash it generates to continue its growth or does not have growth prospects ( not necessarily a bad thing), then I’d rather have cash to invest more productively elsewhere.

No, the corporation retires the shares after the buyback. Total outstanding shares decrease. All remaining shareholders get a larger percent ownership of the corporation

Buybacks are effectively taxed at the same rate as dividends, at least qualified dividends, just timing differs:

Simple case with a corporation worth $200 with two equal shareholders, who each paid $100 for their half of the company and are in 20% capital gains tax bracket, ignoring net investment tax of 3.8%:

Dividends:

Corporation pays $100 in qualified dividends, $50 to each shareholder. Each shareholder pays their capital gains tax rate on the $50. If that rate is 20% for each, then a total of $20 is collected by the US Treasury. Each shareholder then reinvests or spends the remaining $80 in the economy, while the government puts the $20 to work.

Buy Back Case:

Corporation buys back $100 of shares from 1 shareholder. No taxes were due there as there were no capital gains for shareholder 1. Shareholder 2 now owns 100% of the corporation, so their investment is now, all other thing equal, worth $200. When shareholder 2 sells, a bill for $20 is due ( $100 in capital gains x capital gains rate ). Shareholder 1 reinvests/spends $100 in economy, government gets no additional cash now, but will eventually when Shareholder 2 sells.

In the end, government gets the same $20 in tax. Benefits of the buy back are that investors are able to choose whether or not they want to cash out, whereas a dividend forces it on all investors. Downside is that government has to wait for the $20 in capital gains taxes. However, if shareholder 1 owed capital gains on the buy back ( perhaps they bought their share for $50, so would owe $10 in the $50 it made on the sale ), the government would get $10 from that sale + $20 down the road when shareholder 2 sold.

My two top ( by dollars and attention ) are:

- Walker School ( walkercares.org ) - special education and behavioral care for children and their families. Why Support? This is a local organization that serves a population of young children that often, but not always, have endured tremendous trauma and/or abuse, and typically have no where else to go. The Walker School helps them recover and rehabilitate and find them a permanent, safe home to re-enter mainstream society and become productive happy kids and eventually adults. A $1 to help get a kid back on track early saves a $100+ supporting someone through adulthood.

- Museum of Science ( mos.org/ ) - if you are ever in Boston, please make a trip halfway across the river and check it out. It is one of the best science/engineering museums in the country. Why Support? Not everyone is going to be a scientist, engineer, mathematician, etc, but the Museum offers vital community outreach to show what these disciplines can offer society. We can't all play for the Patriots/Celtics/Bruins/etc, but a lot of people can enjoy watching them and enthusiastically support them. I see the museum as the "Local Sports Team" for STEM.

Big difference is that a surgeon cannot fiddle around with a liver, jam it back in the body, wake the patient up, test how the change works, and address (or revert if really messed up) any unexpected and unwanted behavior.

I agree "Web dev" has a very long learning curve, but there is opportunity to be productive and helpful at many, many different points along that curve.

Others.

Have it do one thing very well and document it clearly so users can build it into their own processes.

If it is more complicated than that ( i.e. must do several things very well with ever-changing needs ), document it clearly and include a link to the source code and build instructions.

You own 40% of the company right now and Jim owns 60% ( assuming all common stock ). If you sold the company right now, that should be the ratio to use to divvy up the proceeds due to the common shareholders.

Assuming no vesting / clawback agreement was in place:

Simple option: have Jim buy your shares at fair value, which may be very close to 0.00. If Jim is unwilling / unable to pay with cash, have the company write you a note for the shares. In both cases, Jim ends up with 100% equity, which is what you say he wants, while you are compensated for value created to date.

Imagine there was a cookie market made up of two types of cookies, tasty and meh. An active investor in cookies would spend time determining which cookies are likely tasty and which are meh. They would pay more for the tastier cookies so they can savor the flavor and less for the meh ones they can binge eat in the shower when no one is home.... A passive investor comes along and says, I don't want to do all this research, I'll just assume the market was able to price these accordingly and buy any cookie at the market price. At the beginning, it is great. They just sit back and buy baskets of cookies, some tasty, some meh... but they always pay the higher price for tasty and lower price for meh, so it is fair. Over time, more people start buying baskets of cookies rather than spending time/money figuring out what to pay for them. At some point, no one is left to figure out which cookies are tasty vs meh, so the price of all cookies converge to a single price. Cookie manufactures notice this and figure might as well just make meh cookies as no one can tell the difference until after they buy them... and then we are stuck in a world with meh cookies. With some critical mass of active cookie investors, prices could be set fairly for all cookies. Too many active investors, and there is a drain on the system as there is likely a lot of duplicated work among the investors ( each one has to have a research team, back office cookie trading systems, etc, etc ). Too little and prices become less accurate.