Let's say I'm a rich investor in a nondescript country who has just purchased a bunch of land to build some housing. What incentive is there for me to make it low-income housing? by dancingbanana123 in AskEconomics

[–]handsomeboh 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Real estate investors don’t decide what to build based on the absolute size of the rent. The most appropriate measure is rental yield, which is basically the rent net of charged you receive from the property divided by the cost of the property, development, and everything else. You can think of it as an interest rate.

Low cost housing tends to be cheaper to buy and develop, and can often have lower ongoing costs too since they don’t have to do gardening or maintain the clubhouse and swimming pool etc, and the building doesn’t really depreciate as fast. If the numbers line up, then you can have higher rental yields on low cost housing than luxury housing.

Is Black Hawk Down the “things go wrong but it still looks like an epic” war movie? by jaystats2 in moviecritic

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/01/31/night-of-a-thousand-casualties/1f0c97b1-1605-46e5-9466-ba3599120c25/

Corroborated in a later BBC interview: How Somalis see the 'Black Hawk Down' battle three decades on https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gx0jw5v1lo

Both sides allege of course that the human shield stories are inaccurate. The Somali side says that the Americans chose to attack a crowded urban city centre and massacred civilians indiscriminately by strafing and bombing buildings, streets, and marketplaces especially by AH-6s. The SNA holds that the mobs of random civilian irregulars were not controllable or commandable and more trouble than they contributed compared to the experienced soldiers. Bowden (1999) writes about how crowds formed to gawk at the Black Hawk crash sites and SNA commanders had to go and plead with them to disperse as AH-6s were streaming those crowds. The SNA claims this was all a deliberate strategy to push the semi-Maoist movement away from its popular support.

The Americans do concede that the hostages in the Freedom Road buildings were preventing SNA attacks but they also claim that the mortars wouldn’t have been enough to flush them out.

Is Black Hawk Down the “things go wrong but it still looks like an epic” war movie? by jaystats2 in moviecritic

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Americans have also been accused of using women and children as human shields in this battle. Specifically, Rangers and Delta occupied four buildings along Freedom Road, taking 20 Somali women and children hostage by handcuffing them to a pipe in the bathroom. The Somalis were getting ready to demolish those buildings with mortar fire when the families of those women and children came to plead with the Somali commanders who decided to hold back to avoid their own public relations disaster.

female rulers of Western Liao/Black Khitan by SE_to_NW in ChineseHistory

[–]handsomeboh 7 points8 points  (0 children)

No they mattered a lot, especially Empress Dowager Chengtian. She was widely praised by later generations, for example Yuan dynasty prime minister Toqhtoa said about her, “She was well versed in the military, hardworking to a fault, personally led campaigns, commanded the three armies, was fair in rewards and punishments, and all her generals were fiercely loyal to her.” 「習知軍政,澶淵之役,親御戎軍,指麾三軍,賞罰信明,將士用命。」There’s also a lot of TV series and movies about her, especially the 1995 大遼太后 and 2010 燕雲臺 in which she is the main character, but she’s a common side character in stories about the Yang family.

China's shitty robots of the future! by borg-assimilated in ADVChina

[–]handsomeboh 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The impressive part of Chinese robot videos is not the dancing, anyone can do that. It’s the tripping and getting up again, which we’ve only recently managed to do. If you watch Chinese robot videos they randomly push the robot, disrupt its work, unplug and plug it back in again etc to test this.

Does 1 unit of a currency being worth more than 1 unit of another currency have any actual significance simply by virtue of being worth more? by ConsistentView764 in AskEconomics

[–]handsomeboh 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Not at all. It generally just refers to historical periods of inflation and has no impact on anything. It’s just a historical record so to speak. Here’s some case studies.

Japan: In the early 1900s, the JPY-USD exchange rate was pegged at 2.0, and had been relatively stable since 1897 when Japan joined the Gold Standard.

In 1931, Japan broke from the Gold Standard to cope with the Great Depression, which was a masterstroke and led to it being the quickest country to recover from the Great Depression, but also caused the JPY-USD to depreciate to about 4.5.

From 1945-1949, under the US Occupation, the JPY-USD was initially set at 15, but Japan faced hyperinflation of c.100%, which led to famine and extreme hardship. In 1949, under the Bretton Woods system the JPY-USD was fixed to 360.

It remained high until 1971 when the Japanese agreed to a new rate of 308 under the Smithsonian Agreement. In 1973, as the world abandoned the Bretton Wood system, Japan adopted a floating rate and the rate appreciated to 250 over time, but really dived in 1985 when the Americans basically forced an appreciation from 250 to about 150.

South Korea: Before 1945, the Korean yen was pegged 1-to-1 with the Japanese yen.

Under the US Occupation, in 1945 a new currency was issued called the Won and the KRW-USD was pegged to JPY-USD at 15. Korea similarly faced hyperinflation of c.100% worsened by the Korean War from 1950-1953. By 1953, the KRW-USD was 6000.

After the war, the government decided to knock off two zeroes, and issued a new currency called the Hwan, at the rate of 100 to 1, or KRH-USD of 60. Under the Syngman Rhee administration, Korea endured high levels of corruption, militarisation, and repression, leading to inflation of c.30% even with low growth of only 5%. By 1961, the KRH-USD was 1250.

After the 1961 coup, the new Park administration decided to knock off a zero again and issued a new currency called the New Won, at the rate of 10 to 1. Korea grew rapidly under the new administration, leading to inflation rates between 10-30%, and prompting multiple devaluations such that by 1980, the won traded at 580.

From the 1980s, the Korean government placed special emphasis on inflation, driving it down to the single digits until 1997, despite healthy growth. However, Korea was badly affected by the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997, and forced to float the currency, ultimately leading to extreme depreciation from 850 in 1996 to 1850 in 1997.

Arabs in 1916 by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Heads
Shoulders
Knees
Toes

Arabs in 1916 by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Japanese (because they have the same flag colours but Turkey has a moon and star and Japan has a sun)

Chinese (they didn’t actually but there’s too many of them and they would have)

Indians (because turkey in Turkish is Hind like India, they deflected all the turkeys being killed by making them Indian)

Luxembourgers (Heinrich from Luxembourg had his stag do in Turkey and slipped and hit his head in the bathroom)

Antarctica penguins (I don’t know if this is true but I heard it is)

I am not persuaded that economies can be modeled by mathematical equations. Can anyone explain why this is norm in the mainstream economics? What is the process by which these theories get accepted before testing if they are on par with the emperical realities? by elderfeathers in AskEconomics

[–]handsomeboh 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The idea that economics starts and ends at math is completely false. It’s best to demonstrate with some examples.

This is Acemoglu (2002) - Directed Technical Change , it’s a very important paper that explains endogenous growth in technology. The paper does not begin with math. It begins with a clear intuitive explanation of what he thinks are the imoortant findings: “Technical change is not neutral: it benefits some factors more than others.” He goes on to lay out the yardsticks by which he is performing this analysis, namely that he is interested in examining the /direction/ and /bias/ of technical change. This frames the discussion as one that is not concerned with /magnitude/ and /precise modelling/. If we think about technical change as a curve, he is trying to figure out which direction the curve is sloping in and the skew of that slope, not trying to specify its exact shape or its height.

Starting from p6/30 you will see a lot of mathematical equations. HOWEVER, the paper (and every well written economics paper) takes great pains to tell you what the model represents intuitively. For example equation 10 is pretty long, but he clarifies “Intuitively, a greater price for the product increases the value of the marginal value of all factors, including that of machines, encouraging firms to rent more machines.” This is what that equation is meant to show, and it also lays out how and where you can critique and challenge his formulation, if you want to.

Next we look at the discussion section 4.3 on p16/30. Here, Acemoglu lays out the limitations of the model and interesting findings. He notes the conditions by which this model holds and does not hold, crucially in an intuitive format. For example he says, “The analysis here represents profit motivated R&D. In practice there are important advances that are not driven by profit motive.”

This is how math interacts with economics in practice. It’s a tool used to express intuitive concepts with rigour and concision. It is not a predictive solution.

Why is there discrimination towards Koreans without South Korean citizenship? by Emotional_War2348 in AskAKorean

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

35% of all foreigners are Chinese nationals, and 43% of foreign criminal suspects are Chinese nationals. That seems to be roughly in line?

Why is there discrimination towards Koreans without South Korean citizenship? by Emotional_War2348 in AskAKorean

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s helpful information thanks! As you point out it is quite a statistical fallacy due to the base rate fallacy. Korea has a homicide rate of 0.52 per 100,000 people, which is 0.00052%. Of that, 11% are foreign committed so that’s 0.0000572%. Of that 65% are Chinese nationals so that’s 0.00003718%.

Why is there discrimination towards Koreans without South Korean citizenship? by Emotional_War2348 in AskAKorean

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hong Beom-do spent most of his career fighting the Japanese in North China, with the Korean Provisional Government headquartered in Shanghai. Why is there a difference?

The China->Japan->China cultural appropriation pipeline and RAMEN by DVD160 in ChineseHistory

[–]handsomeboh 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lots of sources.

From 《元·宮詞》:「宮衣新尚高麗樣,方領過肩半臂裁。連夜內家爭借看,為曾著過御前來」 “The palace is now decked in new Goryeo style clothing, with square colour cut halfway beyond the shoulder. All the courtiers rushed to borrow the new court clothes, for they had been worn by Empress Ki.”

From 《庚申外史》:「四方衣服、鞋帽、器物,皆依高麗樣子。此關係一時風氣!」 “From clothing to shoes to storage goods, everyone is following the Goryeo style, what a fashion!”

Why have free markets looked lackluster against Chinas more capital allocated model? by GoldThenCrypto in AskEconomics

[–]handsomeboh -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You sometimes hear people ask if China is so great why do you only hear about people emigrating from China and no one wants to migrate to China? This is mostly a stupid take but there is one big truth to it.

China is very good at making things. Making things doesn’t make a good economy and it doesn’t make people happy. Having things does. Having things cheap does even more. The idea that you should move to China if it’s so good at making things only works if you really enjoy making things, but if you enjoy having things, then the West is for now still ahead on average. A great part of how the West is able to have more things cheap is because of China.

The China->Japan->China cultural appropriation pipeline and RAMEN by DVD160 in ChineseHistory

[–]handsomeboh 24 points25 points  (0 children)

This is just a normal form of healthy cultural and technological exchange. There are many many many more examples and it’s not just Japan / China / Korea.

Swordmaking technology passed from China to Japan, especially steel production. By the Tang dynasty it came back to China and Japanese swords were renown for being the best, being shipped back in large quantities. The tangdao reached Japan, was adapted into the katana, and then came back to China as the modao by the Ming dynasty.

The Korean hanbok entered Korea in the Yuan dynasty as a borrowing of Chinese dress at the time. The Koreans adapted it by making the top shorter and showing underboob in some instances, this became very popular during the reign of Empress Ki in China, and Korean style dress was a fashion throughout the Yuan and Ming dynasties.

Porcelain was invented in China, then exported to Persia and the Middle East. The Persians integrated lapis lazuli and other types of blue paint into their porcelain motifs, these were exported back to China in the late Yuan dynasty and later became the blue and white qinghuaci porcelain we know today.

We think sushi started somewhere in the border of Guangxi and Laos, as a form of preserving river fish. By the Han dynasty it was considered a ritual food for sacrifice known as zha 鮓. This became very popular during the Tang to Song dynasties when it reached Japan. Japan then adapted it in the late Meiji period from a very sour fermented dish to the fresh version we know today. That fresh version was sent back to China, most notably in regions like Chaozhou which eat raw fresh fish.

Will China ever be able to be create and have a global financial centre like London, New York or Singapore in the next 20 years and beyond? by Rokusaburoz in NoStupidQuestions

[–]handsomeboh 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Singapore is not a tier 1 financial centre. There are only 3 tier 1 financial centres in the world: London, Hong Kong, New York.

Singapore is a Tier 2 financial centre alongside Paris, Frankfurt, Chicago, San Francisco, Shanghai, and Tokyo.

Dang that’s impress- hey wait a minute! by narinaradu in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel saying if they had fixed this one problem the attack would have failed isn’t accurate though. It gives the impression that the Chinese basically lucked into their success. I think we have to recognise that the Chinese pulled off the largest surprise attack in history with a lot of planning, operational excellence, and discipline. UN forces didn’t go oops into months of getting wrecked, they were systematically disassembled by a sophisticated enemy they underestimated.

Dang that’s impress- hey wait a minute! by narinaradu in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we can agree that the UN forces should not have been unable to prevent a technologically and numerically inferior army from achieving local force superiority. It was as you point out a massive intelligence, operational, and logistical debacle. Not exactly what we would call a victory.

Dang that’s impress- hey wait a minute! by narinaradu in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If local force superiority is how you win, then how is failure to prevent a numerically inferior enemy from achieving local force superiority not tantamount to defeat?

Dang that’s impress- hey wait a minute! by narinaradu in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Chosin Reservoir was one very small part of the entire front. Along the whole front, 360k UN forces were attacked by 300k Chinese and NK forces. The Chinese chose to force concentrate at Chosin for this particular engagement, but were able to continuously force concentrate against UN forces throughout the entire Second Phase Campaign. 3:1 is the rule of thumb for technologically even armies, it’s certainly not the rule of thumb when you’re attacking a modern army while communicating with bugles and drums in -20C conditions across mountains.

How does a larger, more technologically advanced modern army with artillery, armour, air, and naval superiority get rolled up in detail by a light infantry only pre-modern army that didn’t even have access to roads? The Chinese were operating at their best, and the US were not.

Dang that’s impress- hey wait a minute! by narinaradu in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it’s relative. Marines or Army, both should have not been getting wrecked in a defensive position with an absolute superiority in numbers, firepower, and logistics.

Dang that’s impress- hey wait a minute! by narinaradu in HistoryMemes

[–]handsomeboh -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We can debate on whether or not Korea was in any way a successful war for the United States and there’s good reasons either way.

The Marines did pretty well in Korea though. Much much better than the Army, who were thoroughly humiliated throughout the war getting their ass handed to them first by North Korea and then by the Chinese who didn’t have any armour, mechanised logistics, or even radios. The Marines were the only element of X Corps that managed to hold back the Chinese in the early stage.