I had this moment of waking madness when am alert on my Android phone from the WSJ stating “Elon Musk’s Flawed Plan for Tesla’s Shareholders”
It says, … “his efforts to take Tesla private is a slap in he face for shareholders.”
For a minute there, I thought I was reading news from a P.R.Chinese censor camp. Wowah! That’s a piece of factual news being push-notified to THE JOURNAL’s subscribers??!!
My face is kinda smarting, although mostly from the embarasement at how long it took for me to realize that the author was probably just a short-seller venting.
This author may also have never worked for a young unprofitable public company, or if he had, he must have had extra-human endurance to not have suffered miserably as his employers stocks rocks up and down 5%, 10%, 15% or 30%, 40% from one day to the next… It doesn’t matter how much the CEO and the CFO shouts at the mic to “do not watch the stock price…” It really does affect shareholders emotions. Employees who are shareholders are always affected. And yes, you’ve heard them brag that they endured it with full confidence, but you know they were always wet in the crouch, and please pardon my crudeness and perhaps sexual specificity, but, from jizz of fizz or piss of miss.
Come, that is an opinion piece to the extreme. Why is it being shoved at my face as news? I would depend on The Wall Street Journal to provide news of facts and in-depth logical analysis of the facts. These emotion riddled rant are difficult to digest for objective information.
And now we come to the matter of freedom to succeed. Could a reasonable person reasonable wonder if the SEC is evil? I mean, just from the monthly news blasts (also in the form of push notification on phones and as-it-appears-to-me the only front page article, simultaneously, on every news site I read) of insider trader being caught and sued based on their personal emails and internet search history that SEC had as evidence prior to accusation in court. That seems evil, so evil, so true.
But is it evil in these rules against information release? If the company faces massive crew exodus, can the CEO not do something to keep everyone working? Why not give CEO’s the freedom to do what they need to do to succeed? If there are so many rules on what can or cannot be said, and then there are also rules on complicated it is to figure out how much money you can keep from taxation, I mean, all these things really can get in the way of truly productive work.
America, the home of the brave and land of the free, and yet every word we type, they are under chains of rules of incomprehensible perplexities; every word we type and utter are under surveillance of secret police, aided by AI that are necessary for other advances of humanity; Every word we type and utter can and will be used against us in a court of law.
But yes, I suppose I can understand how it got here–many may have suffered in abscence of these rules and secret police.
This phenomenon of opinion as news is probably what Facebookers suffers too, in part. I had never felt high regards of Mark Zuckerberg until he stood up allow Holocaust deniers their speech rights on Facebook while taking flack for it from wallstreet… And all around.
I have heard, trying to not be too specific here, some Asian people say to me that Nanking massacre never happened or not to the scale that we commonly believe to have happened. (Btw, 300k dead in six weeks according to Q3 2018 Wikipedia)
The Nanking Masscre kill rate is above 7kilokills/day. If we use wiki numbers obtained on the same day of 6 million kills between 1941 and 1945 is a bit over 4.1kkills/day, and the broader definition 17 million kills between 1933 and 1945 is 3.9kkills/day. So by the aggressiveness, the killing in Nanking seems more chilling despite a smaller total. My memory of those deniers, especially childhood ones, those that deny it innocently… Their casual comments haunt me to this day, they and gives me deep fear of where those kids have meant and now believe and later will do.
(Of course all of these if happened simultaneously could not match the 100kkill/day of the atomic bomb US dropped on Japan, but we generally believe that was for.a just cause, if not by just means, where as the foregoing kills/day were not towards a just end)
I struggle with this individual rights idea from Harvard class(sorry all my teachers, friends and colleagues, forefathers of USA, etc., who has tried to teach this idea to me, I have to cite Harvard Justice class as a most recent reference). Egalitarianism dictates that each individual have equal rights. But how do we commingle that (deniers’) believe with our believe that something truly evil and cruel happened during the world war II? How do we combine our believes that people should be allowed to hate and the believe that hate leads to unnecessary human suffering? How do we value, equally, the personal believe of a racist and the personal believes of a non-racist?
Okay, yes, I should finish the class, but I am almost sure it will not satisfy me. If the answer is already given, why do we have all of this trouble? If the balance between egalitarianism and humanity is resolved, Zuckerberg should have no trouble sailing through this denier controversy.
This is an opinion post. This post is more driven by my emotional response to these happenings than by logical deduction based on facts. I, at the time of writing, hold financial investments in FB and TSLA, but nothing in NWS.