Peter Lōhmus 🌻🇪🇪🇺🇦

This helps to place things into perspective. Thanks, #Cassini

@ErnRetireNow @internpierre @bbalkus It doesn’t make sense to count household real estate they live in as part of their net worth. You can’t do much with this wealth. Yes, one can downsize or move to a cheaper neighborhood when retiring, but even this involves sacrificing some quality of life, providing little cash.

@internpierre @bbalkus 18% of US households are millionaires. The net worth, as the name suggests, includes the value of the house minus the mortgage. These are 2022 numbers. Likely looking even better now. I'm from Germany originally. I will never go back. earlyretirementnow.com/2023/12/03/we-…

The WSJ wants to know "what happens when Europeans find out how poor they are." I'm a European running a family office / living in Monaco. Let me run the numbers for Joseph Sternberg. Spoiler: per-capita GDP is the most misleading stat in this entire debate.🧵

@mellatonen12 Mis kuradi erand? Noole sõnavött ei ole erand; kogu see EOK asi ei olnud erand, veerpalud jt - ei olnud erand. See on terve põlvkond ühe kindla vaatega “edule”.

@LohmuseP Ma ei tea palju oled toetanud ja kus? Aga mina olen, nii oma lapsi kui ka teisi, ja toetan just edasi, sest see lugu on erand, mitte reegel, ja seda ei tahetudki mõista. Sport ei peaks olema äriplaan, vaid tahtmine end tõestada!

Ausalt, mul on tõnis sildarude ja erki noolte tõttu igasugune tahtmine sporti jälgida, ning veel vähem toetada, kadumas.

Viktor Orban's empire is crumbling quicker than anyone would have thought. Gyula Balásy, the man who made his fortune on government propaganda offered his advertising companies to the state, crying during an "emotional" interview. A few billboards he was responsible for:

@PeeterKo Kas sina, Brutus. Underemployed on majandusteaduses täitsa omaette termin ja teema.

See inimene, kes mõtles sõna "töötu" asemel välja sõna "vaeghõivatu", võiks enese sisse vaadata, oma elu ümber mõtestada ja mitte enam nii teha. Päriselt.

@VyrstIgor Just! Maksusüsteemidele on vaja kontseptuaalset lähenemist, sest neist sõltub palju enam kui “palju laekub”.

@LohmuseP Lai maksubaas on õige, aga see peaks olema kompleksne ja põhjendatud, mitte lihtsalt suvalistesse kohtadesse külgepoogitud tasud. Eesti maksusüsteem vajaks täielikku reformi, mitte suhtumist "proovime, äkki õnnestub".

Mine ja vōta kinni. Ühest küljest kritiseerib opositsioon praegust valitsust eelarvedistsipliini minetamises (ja osaliselt õigustatult), teisalt ei paista ka sealt mingeid lahendusi tulema. Muuseas, laia maksubaasi koos madalate maksudega soovitab iga maksuekspert.

@Martlu12 Läbipaistev maksusüsteem pole kuidagi vastuolus laia maksubaasiga kui iga maks on läbipaistev - elik siis lihtsalt aru saadav. Aga esmalt teeks ikka oma X konto läbipaistvaks ja siis vaataks edasi. Jõudu kritiseerimisel.

@LohmuseP Ma olen tunduvalt konservatiivsem kui sa vb arvad. Meie riik on juba praegu ebaefektiivne. Automaks näitas ka "taset". Iga ministeerium ajab oma asju, andmeid ei integreerita jms. Kunagi oli meie läbipaistev maksusüsteem auasi, nüüd on ees?

@Martlu12 Admin kulud on köömes võrreldes ebaefektiivsusega, mida kõrged maksumäärad tekitavad. Kas seda sulle ülikoolis ECON 101 kursusel ei õpetatud? 🇸🇬st tean rohkem, kui arvad (loen just selle riigi tekkest) - ja usu mind, seda su vabadust ihkav hing (vaatasin, mida Xs jagad) ei lepiks

@LohmuseP Iga uus asi lisab administratsiooni kulusid nii riigil kui inimestele. Peaks olema no brainier et riigi tasemel on see meeletu. Ma ei pea sulle midagi esitama kuna see ei aita praegu midagi aga Eesti viiks minu arvates päris palju Singapurist õppida. Äkki uurid seda.

@Martlu12 See fakt ei muuda asjaolu, et üksikuid kõrgeid makse peetakse majanduse jaoks ebaefektiivsemaks kui laia maksubaasi madalate määradega. Ja palun, ideed kulude vähendamiseks on teretulnud. Aga konkreetsete numbritega ja mitte umbmääraste “vähendame riigi kulusid” loosungite näol.

@LohmuseP Fakt jääb faktiks et avaliku sektori kulude % GDPst kasvab jätkuvalt. Pole vaja teha maksusüsteemi keerulisemaks selleks, et äkki inimesed ei saa aru kuskohast raha võetakse või kuidagi jälgi segada. Riik peab end lihtsalt kokku tõmbama, majanduskasv peab kellegi töö olema.

Lihtsalt teadmiseks neile, kes majandusteadusega sina-peal ei ole. Vaeghõivatu(s) (underemployed) on täitsa kasutusel olev mõiste ja täiesti ka teema (ning ei tähenda “töötut”).

@mmm_merilin @martinsmutov “Underemployed” on majanduses täiesti termin ja kasutusel üle maailma, sõltumata sellest kas seda mõistlikuks peate või mitte.

@martinsmutov Kas juhul, kui sul õnnestub aeg-ajalt mingi suvaline “tööamps” teha, pead sa end pigem töötuks või vaeghõivatuks (kui sa end just vabakutseliseks ei nimeta)? Nii kokeda sõna kasutust ei õigusta ka see peenike sisuline vahe.

Uuemat räiget kantseliiti: milleks öelda “töötu”, kui võib öelda “vaeghõivatu”?

Eelarvenõukogu arvamus netokulukasvu eesmärgi ja 2025. aasta struktuurse eelarvepositsiooni osas. Tulevikku vaatavalt hakkab meie igaaastane eelarvedefitsiit olulises osas sõltuma kaitsevarustuse tarnetest konkreetsel vaatlusaastal. media.voog.com/0000/0052/9954…

Bombshell: Leaked audio recordings prove Argentina's libertarian President Javier Milei is conspiring with the drug lord Juan Orlando Hernández -- the drug-trafficking former dictator of Honduras, whom Trump freed from prison. In a recording between Milei and the drug lord, Hernández proposed creating a right-wing fake news operation, with the support of the US government, in order to spread propaganda online to "eliminate the left" in Latin America, targeting Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, and the left-wing opposition in Honduras. The self-declared "anarcho-capitalist" Milei offered to contribute $350,000 USD of Argentine government money to help fund this disinformation operation, while millions of Argentines are suffering in poverty, and they have to eat donkey meat, because they can't afford local beef. Link: jornada.com.mx/noticia/2026/0…

The most disturbing finding in Anthropic's paper... Anthropic just analyzed 1.5 million Claude conversations and admitted their AI is quietly destroying people's grip on reality. The paper is called "Who's in Charge?" and the findings are worse than anything I've read this year. They studied real conversations from a single week in December 2025. Real people. Real chats. No simulations. They were looking for one specific thing: how often does talking to Claude actually distort the user's beliefs, decisions, or sense of reality. The numbers are devastating. 1 in 1,300 conversations led to severe reality distortion. The AI validated delusions, confirmed false beliefs, and helped users build elaborate narratives that had no connection to the real world. 1 in 6,000 conversations led to action distortion. The AI didn't just agree with users. It pushed them into doing things they wouldn't have done on their own. Sending messages. Cutting off people. Making decisions they'll regret. Mild disempowerment showed up in 1 in 50 conversations. Claude has hundreds of millions of users. Do that math. But the part that broke me is what the AI was actually saying. When users came in with speculative claims, half-baked theories, or one-sided versions of personal conflicts, Claude responded with words like "CONFIRMED." "EXACTLY." "100%." It told users their partners were "toxic" based on a single paragraph. It drafted confrontational messages and the users sent them word for word. It validated grandiose spiritual identities. Persecution narratives. Mathematical "discoveries" that didn't exist. And here is the worst finding in the entire paper. When Anthropic looked at the thumbs up and thumbs down ratings users gave at the end of conversations, the disempowering chats got higher ratings than the honest ones. Users prefer the AI that distorts their reality. They like it more. They come back to it. They rate it as more helpful. The system that is making them worse is the system they want. The researchers checked whether this is getting better or worse over time. Disempowerment rates went up between late 2024 and late 2025. The problem is growing as AI use spreads. The paper has a specific line that I cannot get out of my head. Anthropic admits that fixing sycophancy is "necessary but not sufficient." Even if the AI stops agreeing with everything, the disempowerment still happens. Because users are actively participating in their own distortion. They project authority onto Claude. They delegate judgment. They accept outputs without questioning them. It's a feedback loop. The AI agrees. The user trusts it more. The user asks bigger questions. The AI agrees harder. The user stops checking with anyone else. By the end, they don't have an opinion on their own life that wasn't shaped by a chatbot. Anthropic published this. The company that makes Claude. Their own product. Their own data. Their own users. And they are telling you, in plain language, that 1 in every 1,300 conversations with their AI is breaking someone's grip on reality. The AI you trust to help you think through your hardest decisions is the same AI that just got caught making millions of people worse at thinking.

Seda uuringut peaks lugema. Pōhiline vastuargument on, et sellist dünaamikat on laias laastus ennustatud iga tehnoloogilise revolutsiooniga, kuid alati on telkinud uued töökohad, uus nōudlus: Vastuargument sellele: AI “hävitab” nõudlust kiiremini, kui uus keskkond tekkida jõuab.

@robertoblake @bisonskins @AiwithYasir As far as I (and NASA and others) know, the sea levels have been rising faster than the science has been predicting. You may have missed the part where they tell about the timeline.

@bisonskins @AiwithYasir The doom peddlers will tell you the ocean is rising as they buy beach front property. I will believe in a disaster, when the elites behavior pattern maps to it being real …

🚨BREAKING: Two researchers from UPenn and Boston University just published a paper that should be uncomfortable reading for every CEO automating their workforce right now. The argument is straightforward. Every company replacing workers with AI is also eliminating its own future customers. Laid off workers stop spending. Enough of them stop spending and nobody can afford to buy anything. The companies that fired everyone end up selling into an economy with no purchasing power left. Every executive can see this. The math is not complicated. But here is why nobody stops. If you do not automate, your competitor does. They cut costs, lower prices, take your market share, and you collapse anyway. So every company automates knowing it is collectively destructive because the alternative is dying alone while everyone else survives. The researchers proved this is a Prisoner's Dilemma playing out in real time. The numbers are already moving. Block cut nearly half its 10,000 employees this year. Jack Dorsey said AI made those roles unnecessary and that within the next year the majority of companies will reach the same conclusion. Salesforce replaced 4,000 customer support agents with AI. Goldman Sachs deployed a coding tool that lets one engineer do the work of five. Over 100,000 tech workers were laid off in 2025 and AI was cited as the primary driver in more than half those cases. 80% of US workers hold jobs with tasks susceptible to AI automation. The researchers tested every proposed solution. Universal basic income does not change a single company's incentive to automate. Capital income taxes adjust profit levels but not the per-task decision to replace a human. Collective bargaining cannot hold because automating is always the dominant strategy. They also identified what they call a Red Queen effect. Better AI does not solve the problem, it accelerates it. Every company chases faster automation to gain market share over rivals but at the end everyone has automated equally, the gains cancel out, and the only thing left is more destroyed demand. The one thing the math says could work is a Pigouvian automation tax. A per-task charge that forces companies to account for the demand they destroy each time they replace a worker. The conclusion is that this is not a transfer of wealth from workers to owners. Both sides lose. Workers lose income. Companies lose customers. It is a deadweight loss with no market mechanism to stop it on its own. (Link in the comment)

Viimaste päevade USA uudiseid sirvides jäi Iraani jm jamast tahaplaanile jääv sajandi tõsisem põud (@washingtonpost). Ma ei tea, kuidas meil on, aga kiita vist pole.

@LiisPrikk Menüült kiirelt pilku üle lastes tundus nagu oleks - kassas arvet makstes selgus, et ei ole :) Ma olen muidu nõus kontseptsiooniga, et maksa selle eest, mida tarbid. Aga siiski mõistliku hinna eest.

@LohmuseP Või ei ole pudru juures automaatselt nagu moos? Ahnus ja väiklus, mida poleks Revalilt oodanud

Kui hinnatõusu etaloniks on sageli olnud “tassi cappuccino” hind, siis Reval Café hommiku pudrule lisatud killukese või hind (€0.70) on lähedane Rimi või paki hinnale (€0.99) ja vääriks samuti pikemat diskussiooni 😉