This is about the UK. The original article has the price quoted correctly, as £2.

Why would someone receive 10,000 AI lawyer's letters from (presumably) 10,000 bullying corporations? I don't understand the circumstance you're envisaging

At least keep the original currency and show the converted price, instead of making the FT look like dimwits writing about English lawyers working in England and charging in dollars.

You're just asserting what you'd like to believe. You have offered absolutely no evidence that university researchers move from Europe to the US for a lighter regulatory burden, and not pay or indeed other factors such as resourcing or career management (eg having Harvard or MIT on your CV). Cite some evidence for your claim, if you're interested in appearing credible

While it's a reasonable rule-of-thumb to assume that pasteurisation status is a proxy for quality, it's not close to being 100%. Here's 27 delicious pasteurised cheeses: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nealsyarddairy.co....

Glad to see fellow cheese-lovers on here. I know there’s some artisanal production in the US, and I know it can be quite good. I’ve yet to find anything that is up there with the best of the UK. And I won’t be able to try for the next few years, at least. No plans to go to the US for a long time now.

We are talking about scientists. They may not really give too much of a shit about entrepreneurialism. The regulation they care about is the regulation from a batshit government that prevents them from pursuing some lines of scientific endeavour, eg anything that mentions climate or working at a disfavoured university.

Being friendly to business is just not that important to a university-based research scientist. But a good place to live certainly matters

Do you really, truly, honestly believe that violence against schoolchildren in Europe is remotely comparable in scale to violence against schoolchildren in the US? If so, you are even dimmer than you appear to be. Note that the Norway attack took place *fourteen* years ago, and no schoolchildren have been killed since then. None. Zero. By contrast, the US has seen hundreds and hundreds of such deaths, and far more even when accounting for the larger population. And of course you haven’t included all the dozens of European countries which have seen no terror attacks on schoolchildren.

I don’t know anyone who knows anyone who has ever been a victim of, or adjacent to, gun crime. Three degrees of separation in the UK isn’t nearly enough to get me there. Betcha can’t say the same.

When you find a US cheese that begins to compare with a Montgomery's cheddar, a Stichelton or a Brefu Bach, or indeed any of the other glories of the cheeseboards of the British Isles, let me know! I've never come across one.

Neal's Yard has no comparison in the US (but of course, it definitely does in France, Spain and Italy):
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nealsyarddairy.co....

Hahaha. His posts serve as an excellent reminder that stupidity is not limited to those whose writing is completely illiterate. A fully formed sentence and a confident air is no guarantee that the content is even in the same ballpark as correct.

This ought to be an obvious point, but we are so inured to El Presidente and his acolytes spewing out badly spelled, poorly punctuated gibberish with copious use of the wrong words for the meaning they intend to convey, that I, for one, am prone to giving too much credence for passable use of English in idiotic arguments.

1. "Because tariffs can involve the percentage of a product that is made in the USA vs foreign made."
We all know this. So why are you talking about *consumer choice* in relation to tariff policy?

2. Because time is easily quantifiable. It's embedded in exists product and accounting info. Also, it's just one example of a practical calculation for a movie. Where parts may be a more practical calculation for an auto.
I asked why time was a *more important* metric than value-add. You've responded by saying it's easier to measure. The two things, importance and ease-of-measurement, are completely orthogonal.

3. In auto metrics they chose to ignore design, offering only parts manufacture and assembly. They certainly could do that in film too, or not. It's up to whoever determines and designs the metrics to be published. As an artistic effort, time would seem more important physical nuts and bolts so if writing and other pre-production efforts are reasonable possibilities for metrics.
The "they" in your first sentence appears to refer to auto OEMs. But we are talking about tariffs, which is about what the *government* chooses to measure.

4. Except for the part about the percentage of a product being USA made factoring into a tariff computation.
A movie is a *service* in terms of trade, not a product. Treating it as though it were a product is the root of the policy stupidity and your misconceived comparisons.

Because propaganda has always been a pretty effective tool in making a populace willing accomplices to evil

Yes. People seem unwilling to accept that the path to modern dictatorship is to keep the institution but cuck it. You have courts and legislative bodies and the press and universities and other elements of civil society and you make them complicit in pretending that they're functioning normally while you just do what the fuck you want. There's enough cowards, useful idiots and active sympathisers to hollow it all out to the husk in very short order.

The metrics are also idiotic in the first place. Human time / billable hours is going to be a small fraction of the value-add provided by ILM, for example?

1. Why are you talking about "industry can disclose metrics on its products, and consumer can draw whatever conclusion they want from those metrics" when this article is about *tariffs*, which have nothing whatsoever to do with consumer choice, and are instead about taxes being imposed by the government
2. Why is time a more important metric than value-add? Whose time are you counting anyway? Human time only? What about computing time? And then what about computing power required? And then what if the computer runs a more efficient program that requires less time to create the post-production FX?
3. You said up above that film writing should count about as much as auto or iPhone design. For the purposes of tariffs, those design efforts count for precisely nothing. While there is at least some vague logic to not counting those things for a tangible product that the USG is nominally trying to get to be physically made in the US, what is the logic of not counting writing for a movie that's not a material good? Why do you want the filming done in the US but not the writing?

None of this makes any sense at all as a tariff policy.