When it's an inexpensive product that nobody ever has a reason to buy twice yet remains an ongoing cost for the company? (They keep the data available for review and continue to update it with useful information as knowledge of genetic traits and lineages grows). That's not a way to build an ongoing cash flow to cover expenses. Especially when all the people inclined to be interested have already purchased.
Tinidril
joined 2 years ago
Shit, Oracle was down in the low $400B range in May. Apparently being evil pays well in the current administration.
A little searching finds only one company that really fits the bill. Costco has a market cap of $433B and had a reported $14.8B cash on hand as of May 11. That's an interesting possibility that I wouldn't have guessed. Costco is less evil than most big corporations, so that's a little hopeful if I got it right.
Oracle comes close with a market cap of $583B. That's indeed over $400B, but that would make the description a bit weird. In any case, Oracle makes more sense from a business angle. Unfortunately, they are near the top of the evil scale.
It's not a great business model if you think about it. Customers pay a small fee once then never again.
Biden didn't even fucking do yet.
Yet? I'm not sure how to argue with someone who thinks Biden is still president. It doesn't seem worthwhile.
(definitely couldn't be a negotiating tactic)?
No, it definitely wasn't a "negotiation tactic". It was meant to avoid negotiating without Biden's adoring masses noticing that he did a 180. He caved to AIPAC, as he would continue to do throughout his term.
Why the hell would Iran go back to fulfilling it's obligations under the agreement when the US was still ignoring it's obligations? Why would it bother negotiating with a country that doesn't honor negotiated agreements? Everyone in the foreign policy space knew exactly what it was.
Yes I know how you ended your comment,
Then why the fuck did you haul out "both sides"? Why are so many people desperate to throw everything into that frame?
Absolutely, I just don't think it actually helps Democrats in the long run to pave over their often deep flaws. If we were harder on Democrats 30 years ago, we probably wouldn't have Trump today.
Biden ran on getting back into the deal with Iran, then insisted that Iran must completely return to fulfilling their side of the deal before we would consider returning to ours.
Both sides are not the same but Biden shouldn't be let off the hook for his sudden flip on this issue.
That is indeed a problem but, speaking strictly about competitiveness, it does have it's advantages. For example, the US really needs more strategically important goods to be manufactured at home, but that is really hard to do if market conditions favor offshoring. China can just dictate the sourcing - even in the (so called) private sector.
Movies, fast food chains, clothing chains, etc. The American brand and lifestyle that goes with it. Not exactly the greatest cultural achievements of all time, but they brought in cash.
What makes the US the most powerful country in the world? It's our cultural exports, our educational institutions, and our technology. We spent decades handing all our technology over to China, and undermining education. Now Trump has poisoned the American brand for at least a generation.
China is way ahead on building a science and technology culture, and promoting education. The dividends from those investments are already paying off, and they are going to start compounding.
A lot of Americans still think of China as the place to make cheap goods, but their manufacturing sector has benefited from decades of stolen expertise. It turns out there are benefits from having engineers and factory workers in the same location. Faster feedback means faster development. Now the US is falling behind.
After lawsuits from Trump and friends against government and media for "underestimating" his crowds, both tend to stay out of that game. Just another case of dysfunction in the US.