The EU's love of banning things is lazy policy-making. It's better to disincentivize and let markets take care of it. That way you preserve freedom while also encouraging desirable outcomes. Further reading: "Nudge" by Richard Thaler.
This was the result of Swiss direct democracy within the small town in question - essentially, an idea from citizens, voted on by citizens within the relevant area.
So actually more "free" than most countries can even imagine.
Not that I agree with GP but there is a lot more to freedom than "the decision was made by a vote". "Freely chosen policy" is not inherently the same as "free policy", it's just (often) a good ingredient. Of course there are plenty of countries which can't seem to get any aspect of freedom down so your comparison still holds true regardless.
And no, banning things isn't 'lazy', its 'committed'.
Markets are often the right solution, but in many case its not about manipulating marginal prices, its about making a clear statement.
Our towns will be better, our collective living standard will go up without ads. There is not clear way how we can get a market to arbitrate this.
> "Nudge" by Richard Thaler.
That book is way, way over-rated and also just completely wrong and informed at times. Even the best example of 'Nudge' about opt-out organ donor barley hold up in the real world.
Poster above you (in my hnreader) points out Seattle is pretty ad free, so maybe its not just a Swiss (noted as 'not in EU') thing.
If 'lazy policy-making' improves quality of life, why would you be so against it?
Especially in Switzerland, where voting isn't so much about screaming headlines, but more about maintaining/ improving said qol.
Yeah we should definitely let amoral and psychologically manipulative business practices be handled by the magical market! After all, it's worked so great so far in all the places without a billboard/advertising ban where you definitely don't see an ad on every single public surface where an eyeball might eventually land.
Let's also let companies dump toxic waste into our drinking water, the "market" will surely make sure to reward only the good, clean companies.
This shows that going out on your own is not always strictly better or more rewarding. As a software engineer you can simply rent your skills and be part of a bigger team and company that's arguably doing something more impactful than building widgets.
The finances work out better too. Market salary as a software engineer is easily in the 200-300k range and increases over time with experience and skill. You can also more easily cap your work hours at 30-40 hours a week especially if you're remote. Then if you can figure out a way to do that while living in Southeast Asia, it's hard to imagine quality of life getting better than that as you're now living like a king and should be able to save as much as 50% of your income and retire young.
Going out on your own may not be always strictly better or more rewarding, but this founder story is just one datapoint. Since most companies have an employee equity pool that is sized at only 10-20%, working for them is by definition giving 80-90% of the value you create away to the founders and investors. The rewards of either starting a company or being a sole proprietor (e.g. indie dev or consultant), can therefore be expected to be very substantial, on average, perhaps even 5-10x per unit time worked, and that's not including the secondary non-financial benefits of not working for someone else (e.g. freedom, autonomy, etc.). I do wish more people were aware of this principle, because the willingness of engineers in the aggregate to acquiesce to 10-20% ownership is why VCs and founders become so inappropriately rich by comparison. Just my 2c.
Been doing this for a decade+ and never nor peers are making 200k. Getting close after a lot of inflation though. Lucrative jobs exist but are not available because they simply won’t allow you to join.
This is kind of like saying, just be a successful actor. It’s significantly not up to you.
I've experimented with dumb phones before but in the end I found much more success in ditching my data plan as the ideal forcing function for shaping behavior. There are too many situations where smartphones are extremely useful if not necessary. What's not necessary is being constantly connected. Ideally you have a SIM card that can always do text and calling, and you can opt-in to data on demand e.g. 24-hour prepaid plan if you ever truly need it.
As another Asia-based software dev (Vietnam), this was an interesting read. I am currently going the spousal visa route but this carries its own advantages and disadvantages. I've always loved Japan but generally unsure of living there due to high cost of living, aging population, and strict immigration laws. As least in the case of the latter, it's good to know a path exists!
Actually Japan is significantly lower cost to live than to live in SF. The average salary of a college grad that’s 30 years old is roughly $30K. Their prices are roughly the same because wages are the same, and they can’t afford to increase prices without causing huge systemic problems. As long as you’re not eating kaiseki or expensive sushi, Japan is absurdly cheap from USD standpoint, especially with recent exchange rates. 1 bedroom apartment might only cost you $600/month in more remote parts of Tokyo. A very filling yakitori meal might only be 1000 yen ($7-8) per person.
"non-residents": Did you mean non-citizens? Else, I do not understand the context of this term. Clearly, the OP was talking about living/working in Japan. That would imply residence. Yes, there is national health care. For working age people, it costs about 10-20k yen per month (many factors can change the final cost). Co-pay is 30%.
It's actually better in practice because the state puts maximum prices on all kinds of procedures, and IIRC there is also a maximum annual amount that you can be charged. IOW it's easy to ensure your care costs are bounded.
Great point! First, I didn't know that the national gov't is actively involved in medical pricing. I guess it makes sense when you have national health care. Second, to state the obvious, 30% would be insane co-pay for someone in the United States. However, in Japan, it is quite reasonable. Elderly only pay 10%, and most children pay nothing.
This is a bit of a misconception, at least by East-Asian standards: much easier than China, (surprisingly) easier than South Korea, and similar (maybe slightly stricter) to Taiwan.
As an American living in Vietnam I use a number of these apps, particularly Shopee, Grab, Zalo. Also used Naver a lot when I lived in Seoul. Except for Grab, which is a legit super app, I'd rather use American tech because it's just better. Tech talent in these markets is lacking and they're all chasing the examples already set by big US tech rather than innovating their own stuff.
