The market implied rate (from swaps/forwards curves) for the following period is something like 27bps cut, so they say:
- 27 Is bigger than 25, so 0 cuts is 0%
- attribute 2/25bps likelihood to 50bps cut
- the remainder is left to 25bps cut
The reality is that there's a non-zero probability to unchanged, and a non-zero probability of 75bps+ cut etc etc. However this information would probably be in swaption prices and too complicated for anyone like the CME or media to make sense of. But at least with the way people talk about it they get to feel like they're making sense of the world.
You're right - I'm so used to looking at the probabilities waterfall diagram where there's always some percent for status quo I glanced right over it not being there.
In the time since I originally posted that the 400-425 basis point level has dipped another 2%, with that amount going towards a 50 basis point cut. Very muddy waters indeed.
Powell has been adamant about fighting inflation so I struggle to understand how the market gives a zero percent chance of status quo.
The company accused of being involved in collusion is RealPage, they have a local market analytics platform which shares rental information between landlords.
> There is similarly little discussion on the origins of peer review and impact factors and journals, it's just taken as the obvious hallmark and basis of good science.
Pioneered and exploited by Robert Maxwell (father of the infamous Ghislaine). Good summary below; was an all around eye-opening revelation for me.
> [Maxwell] entertained guests at parties with booze, cigars and sailboat trips. Scientists had never seen anything like him.
> “We would get dinner and fine wine, and at the end he would present us a cheque – a few thousand pounds for the society. It was more money than us poor scientists had ever seen.”
Jeffrey Epstein is speculated to be a Mossad agent, but Robert Maxwell was known to be one. Not exactly a innocent patron of the sciences, as GP sort of implies.
After disabling Apple Intelligence I'm no longer able to use CarPlay with a message saying Siri needs to be enabled. It doesn't appear Siri is available independent of Apple Intelligence, is that correct? Any way to enable Apple Intelligence exclusively for CarPlay?
It's funny. If you had 100 people in a room, there's one guy paying for about 45 people. And the next 4 people are paying for about 5 people each (20 total). And the lowest paid 50 people combined are paying for about 2 people total.
I think we should just not have the bottom half of income earners in the US pay any taxes. It wouldn't change the numbers much, and then it would be one less thing for them to complain about.
However, I don't expect anyone to put down their torches and pitch forks any time soon. It's too easy to use this to get people spun up, even above average educated people as in this forum.
That data is not adjusted for wealth transfers and other social programs. If you do make the adjustment, you will find that a majority of Americans are not net taxpayers at all. That number may be as high as 60%. The data on this is obfuscated by having 10000 different programs partly so you can't see what the real distribution of federal revenue is like.
Those 50 under-paid and exploited people own just ~3% of all the wealth in the room, even though they're doing about 30% of the work.
Where does the vast, vast majority of the value of their work go? It goes to the asset class - the top 1 or 2 people.
And you call the top guy generous because he pays ~40% tax on the money the bottom 90% made for him.
Even as he buys politicians, runs monopolies, subsidizes fossil fuel, and strip mines the planet for even more.
Don't make out like the 50% of people making 2 or 3% of income are just ungrateful, or bad at math. The insane level of inequality in America is literally an existential threat to humanity.
No such thing as free lunch. Up to the individual to decide whats worse but the "miracle cure" positioning these drugs are enjoying in popular media is troubling.
Thank you. "No free lunch" is perhaps my least favorite saying.
Free lunch is good. We should strive for free lunch. You can actually make things better with no cost.
These days is feels like a good segment of the population is decidedly anti-solution. Doesn't matter what the solution is, they don't want it. They take a "do nothing and hope it works" approach to everything.
IMO "No free lunch" is not anti-solution at all, on the contrary its a problem solving (engineering?) tenet that simply acknowledges there are always trade offs and constraints. Just like any software engineering project can't be expected to do everything for all people with no cost.
The "magic pill of health" aura that surrounds these new drugs is clearly opaque in terms of what the trade offs are, partly because its still way too early to know.
Back to my original post, there is some evidence of risk of going blind as a result from taking Ozempic et al. Might be worth the risk for some, even many. I'm fully in support of options and letting people make informed choices. Informed being the key word here. It will take time for things to shake out, I do hope there is a net positive since we are talking about millions of people after all.
Your study you linked compares the diabetic population taking GLP-1s against a healthy population. Of course they're going to find more eye problems in the diabetic population, diabetes damages the eye.
Correlation does not imply causation. Especially this one.
"The researchers compared patients who had received prescriptions for semaglutide compared to those taking other diabetes or weight loss drugs. Then, they analyzed the rate of NAION diagnoses in the groups, which revealed the significant risk increases."
I don't interpret it at all as you do - if they're taking "other diabetes or weight loss drugs" they're clearly not part of the "healthy population".
Thinking about an LLM use case, not needing a query language should remove translation risk I'd assume?