More likely they're seen as vulnerable demographic or unwelcome in certain neighborhoods. The people perpetrating these crimes are not the sort of people tracking the US-China relations.
And then the bar of criminal charges for theft is getting higher and higher. In San Francisco nobody is getting bothered by a "criminal according to old stat rules" going through a row of parked cars smashing windows and grabbing everything in plain sight anymore. Not even arrest record would show up in modern stats. We are totally safe these days
Typical office leases are 3-5 years. This is just the tip of the iceberg. So far <20% have been up for renewal since the pandemic started, and even fewer since it became clear that things were not going back to normal within a few months.
> This is a great article around why "corporate welfare" rarely works out.
Any data to back this up? It's generally accepted that subsidies are effective in many cases (see corona virus stimulus packages).
This Foxconn deal was poorly thought out and horribly mismanaged, but it doesn't sound like Foxconn lined their pockets with taxpayer money. The subsidies encouraged them to take a chance, and it didn't work out - spectacularly.
Wearing masks won't make this end any sooner. Reducing transmission rates flattens the curve meaning smaller spikes but likely longer presence of corona virus.
And their trades are typically scheduled in advance and public. Their job and fiduciary duty is to maximize shareholder value, and they make decisions so that happens. If that means allocating $ and rewarding people that will attain that goal, then what should be considered illegal?
There is an obvious conflict of interest between the long term stability of the business and the actions necessary for the huge stock/options grants become profitable in the next few quarters. For example, when mergers and acquisitions should be approved, layoffs be announced, dividends increased, etc.
How much would you be willing to pay for a comparable headset without a required facebook account.
Clearly FB is planning to extract value from this, and is why they can price this at just $299. They're betting customers will give up some data/privacy for that low price.
Interesting point. Anecdotally I had a brown friend walk out of my house in SF late one night, walk to the end of the block, and then get detained by police for supposedly stalking/threatening a women. Would have been trivial to prove they had the wrong guy if there were cameras readily available.
