Interestingly, this is a situation created by previous Conservative governments. When the national rail system was privatized, lots of smaller individual train operating companies were created, each with a franchise to run different lines. They are incentivized not to cooperate with each other, because taking over another franchise, if another operator fails, doubles the size of your business.
So the employers were divided and the highly unionized employees were united, which meant that they did extremely well in negotiations. The membership overall are extremely loyal to their union leadership, because of how successful they've been in maintaining conditions and improving wages.
Perhaps the drivers should be paid a sum of money which closer reflects how much marginal value they add to the city, and this would convince them not to strike.
You put your finger on the real issue with the London Underground - the maintenance needs which are onerous and prevent the trains from running overnight on most nights.
But this still isn't the whole story. The Chinese-American population is bigger and more diverse than the Indian-American or Pakistani-American one. There are lots of families in all these groups where the generation that immigrated to the US was well-educated and professional. Even if that generation had to work extremely hard to get a foothold in the new country, the children benefited both from the high education level of the parents, and from the hard-working/aspirational mentality of the recent immigrant, and (she argues) from the traditionalist approaches to discipline and education which the parents brought with them.
These are the people whom Amy Chua is talking to and about.
The average Chinese-American income reflects relatively fewer of these highly successful immigrants, because there are many more Chinese-Americans who arrived in the US poor and with few options. That doesn't disprove what she said.
She has since written some extremely questionable things about race and identity, and been credibly accused of grooming her law students to be sexually harassed both by her own husband and by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The exact point is that because taxation does not consider this income, the vast majority of the money made by very rich people takes this form. Pro Publica's point is not that these people are breaking the law, but that the tax system should be different.
You would be very lucky to spend more than a minute in Hampstead Heath without another human being in view, at least at most times and in most parts of the park.
Take a full dose. Go outside to take a walk. Get arrested. Realize in lockdown that all societal control is just an illusion and an ego trip by those who think they need to pretend to exert power, and that nothing can hold down your divine, free essence as a living god.
Perhaps interventions in diet, exercise and sleep and 'talking cures' such as therapy are both required for a real improvement in mental health.
So there are lots of people who claim that effort spent on general health did not solve any of their mental health issues, and others who claim that therapy was useless because they still had the same bad sleep and diet patterns and generally felt physically crappy.
Lots of people take psychedelic drugs, or other drugs such as cannabis and MDMA, and would claim that they are much much more successful at improving mental health than psychiatric medication.
This includes people who have to get hold of them illegally.
I believe you that Klarna are shady about how they manage data, however, my understanding was that they got a banking license because they want to fund themselves via brokered deposits? A banking license means that they can get money from anyone in the EU and it will be insured up to €100,000. Without this, almost no one would want to deposit with them.
If you have other information about other reasons they might have become a bank, I would be genuinely interested in hearing them.
So the employers were divided and the highly unionized employees were united, which meant that they did extremely well in negotiations. The membership overall are extremely loyal to their union leadership, because of how successful they've been in maintaining conditions and improving wages.