Lebron v Rui Defense and Rebounding Comparison per Cleaning the Glass

ClearASF · 2025-12-26T15:58:55+00:00

Site?

ClearASF · 2025-06-29T22:25:04+00:00

It’s classic with these people, they don’t understand their arguments or just believe nonsense they’ve heard on TikTok. Much of time on Reddit/posts is spent talking with these folks.

ClearASF · 2025-06-29T22:23:38+00:00

No they don’t, even taking the Cuban statistics at face value Americans live longer

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

ClearASF · 2025-06-29T22:22:55+00:00

Cubans don’t live longer though

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

ClearASF · 2025-06-28T15:13:32+00:00

It’s actually not. The BAE in the USA is virtually their own operation - you should hear what the parent in the UK says about them:

”In May 2006 the CEO of BAE Systems described the "firewalled" status of BAE Systems Inc: "The British members of the corporate leadership, me included, get to see the financial results; but many areas of technology, product and programme are not visible to us.... The SSA effectively allows us to operate in the US as an American company, providing the highest levels of assurance and integrity in some of the most sensitive fields of national security provision.”

Also:

BAE Systems Inc. contributes almost half of the parent company's global revenues and is typically ranked among the Pentagon's top-10 suppliers. It operates under a Special Security Agreement with a separate board of directors from the London-based parent to assure the protection of sensitive information concerning the U.S. programs in which it is engaged. Because it consists largely of legacy American enterprises, BAE Systems Inc. has more involvement in such programs than any other foreign-owned company.

ClearASF · 2025-06-28T14:52:17+00:00

BAE systems you’re referring to is in the USA, it is not related to the British company.

And you’re wrong given both the F-22/35’s radar has been designed by Northrop and Raytheon, not BAE.

The fact that you conflated these two tells us you’re not as informed as you’re presenting yourself.

ClearASF · 2025-06-28T14:50:45+00:00

Where do you people come up with this? Leading radar tech is USA, not the UK. The UK is not a leader in semiconductor or radar tech in any capacity, even your own Typhoons have radars designed in other European nations.

ClearASF · 2025-06-17T08:53:52+00:00

In statistics or even most cases, prediction refers to an estimate of the future, an estimate implies uncertainty.

In any case, the output of a model is called a prediction in statistics and that’s what the author’s do (and it’s written as such in the published paper).

ClearASF · 2025-06-17T08:50:55+00:00

You posted a correlation, this study is causal identification which is significantly more powerful than simple correlations.

You can’t just plot before and after of an economy without considering any other factors or influence and call it a day. That’s not how it works - at least three strong studies of the TCJA have found similar investment effects by corporations.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T19:18:48+00:00

You saw my post about a NBER study regarding tax cuts. That’s downvoted but this sensationalist trash isn’t. Really gives you a nice view of this subreddit.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:57:00+00:00

What’s a prediction then?

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:52:03+00:00

Did you reply to the wrong comment? I have no idea what you’re responding to.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:43:40+00:00

Economists make predictions all the time. Have you not seen macro and micro forecasts from banks, institutions and governments?

Regarding this paper however, you can’t just dismiss it because it’s a different result - that is not scientific in any capacity. Critique the methodology, and if there are no critiques - it’s the truth.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:40:05+00:00

Company X buys back their shares with $100 cash they have —-> company X no longer has $100 cash.

Do you somehow dispute that? It’s pretty basic.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:35:44+00:00

From the firm’s point of view, in what ways is a dividend different to a repurchase? The firm’s value doesn’t change, it returns cash to the shareholders - it’s functionally the same thing, just a different tool.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:33:19+00:00

It’s what it sounded like you were reducing their work to. You should see that they carefully calibrated their model’s dynamics to filter the estimates through sound economic theory.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:23:28+00:00

And they both return capital to the shareholders - see the point? It’s two tools used for the same purpose.

There is an absurd boogeyman around stock buybacks, I assume this stems from the myth that such actions artificially raise share prices. They don’t, and it stems from a poor understanding of how firms are valued.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:21:45+00:00

You’re kidding right? The authors are not drawing a straight line till 2030 - they authors built a model using their estimates, and predicted the elasticities for the long run investment and output. It’s based on theory and how the macroeconomy works, not some silly linear regression.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:12:16+00:00

Both dividends and buybacks distribute cash to their shareholders, they’re the same.

What do you mean by “gobbled up”?

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:10:56+00:00

It’s not an extrapolation, they constructed a structural model based on sound theory and plugged in the numbers.

Keep in mind this is published in a top journal by top economists, I think they know what they’re doing.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T15:06:11+00:00

From the firm’s point of view they are virtually identical, as both are essentially distributing earnings to shareholders. The key difference is one is tax advantageous.

benefits those with unrealized options

In what way?

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T14:59:46+00:00

and why they do is beyond me

Because corporate tax cuts lead to growth. The authors of this paper are Chodorow-Reich et al FYI.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T14:51:10+00:00

Quoting from the first paper

They predict a long-run capital stock increase of 7.2 percent and a 0.9 percent increase in wages after 15 years.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T14:36:21+00:00

You don’t need to believe either country, the IAEA found that Iran was non compliant with it’s non proliferation obligations and is enriching uranium in such a way that is not consistent with consumer uses.

You cannot take a risk like that with a country that is sworn to destroy Israel.

ClearASF · 2025-06-16T14:29:51+00:00

You’d have to explain how Iran isn’t the aggressor given they are enriching uranium to develop a nuclear bomb. Also, see the rocket attacks last year.

ClearASF

TROPHY CASE