as stated many times before, rare earth mining isn't a major issue, capacity to process into something useful which requires tons of water and toxic chemicals is the real issue for the US since China controls lion's share of the market.
"No Tax on Tips" meant for low income taxpayers so most of the major digital creators won't qualify.
Low income digital creators can deduct upto 25k in tips, so if their income from tips and other sources is below $150k a year, their taxable income will be 25k less.
Generally correct, low income digital creators will benefit the most since "No Tax on Tips" will reduce their taxable income by 50% or more in comparison to someone who earns close to 150k which isn't a low income according to BLS as you pointed out.
If you look at tax brackets plus the standard deduction lowering the bracket it affects, it will be a flat or regressive change in take home income amongst the cohort until at $90K or maybe a bit more, double median income, where you can start writing off against the 22% bracket. Assuming 50% tips.
I have no measure of scale on 150k dollars a year in terms of creators scale...
I remember something like 2k$ youtube ad revenue for 1M views, so that's like 1M video every 4 days? or was it 2M views per 1k dollars, then it's 1M video every day?
I've seen that same figure for YT ad revenue alone. sponsorships can range from $0.015-0.030 per video for channels with 1k to 50k subscribers.
at a biweekly cadence, they'd need ~6M views per video to hit $150k with ads alone. if you figure another $0.025 per view for sponsorships, then they would need 6M views per year or about 240K per video.
looking at Patreon stats, it seems reasonable to assume that a channel with 25K subscribers could pull in about 1K Patreon subs with effort. if each is paying $5/mo, then that would add another $60K/yr in revenue (though I imagine a lot of that would get eaten up by fees and extra costs.
There is some intense FOMO right now. I work for a large SAAS company and our guidelines went from no AI to "Use AI for everything everywhere". This does not come from a position of understanding (the people in charge are the same), but rather a deep fear that we could fall behind. Its not rooted in tangible metrics.
I think he is wrong, in a short run AI will create more jobs. We need more things to run AI and to make more things like power generation, connectivity, sensors, silicone, datacenters, monitoring, security, construction and so on. All of these things and more require massive workforce skilled or not skilled.
Throttle control module (TCM) was replaced twice in the past 2019 and 2023 which is not very usual.
Now pure speculation, both pilots have long record of flying, you have to literally pull up and move each fuel control switches to cut off. Either one of the pilots did this intentionally or control unit was faulty. Considering past history and pilot experience, my bet is on faulty controls but we will never know.
All the scientists who came to the US in 1930s were mostly Jewish for obvious reasons. After victory in WW2, we had Operation Paperclip when we brought thousands of Nazi affiliated scientists to work for us, the whole premise that scientists fled Nazi Germany is very shaky. I just don't believe so many people don't know the history...
I'd put more of the post war explosion on being the only industrialized nation that wasn't actively bombed. Yeah we managed a lot with that brain power but the backbome of that was still incredible position of being essentially untouched economically by the war and having no competition.
Yes, just pointing out that this article implies that Nazi Germany was the reason many scientists moved to the US which isn't the case, many moved when the war was over and they lost.
This article doesn't talk much about mass hiring during COVID period due to high demand, what we see now is unwinding of that trend, feels like people behind this type of narrative are interested in regulating what goes into these models.
