91–100 of 281 posts
It’s terrifying because so many people have retirement funds tied up in stocks and this has the potential to decrease everyone’s trust in the idea of stocks.
There are people that "trust" stocks? To me it's always been a somewhat stupid casino game for the rich to rig.
It’s terrifying because so many people have retirement funds tied up in stocks and this has the potential to decrease everyone’s trust in the idea of stocks.
I can't.
People shouldn't be trusting stocks simply because they are stocks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parent isn't claiming GME is "real" economics. Parent is claiming GME will help pull down our current fake system, and help the middle and lower classes receive fair compensation from the system. Whether this approach works or not, I don't know. But the status quo isn't tenable for a democratic society. This chart says it all: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
What did happen around 1979 to have such a clear change?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can anyone explain what utility, to the real economy, that short selling stocks provides? Practically speaking, why is shorting useful? What problems in the financial system does it solve. Asking in earnest.
Short selling accelerates price discovery in order to allow for more efficient capital allocation, thus making our overall economy stronger.
Can you explain this more? More efficient on what axes? How does that translate to societal benefits that aren't just on paper?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla is one of the few modern companies whose value actually makes sense to me. They actually make something! that people want to buy! that's way better than most of ad-tech which seems like a multi-layered pyramid scheme.
You know who else makes things that people want to buy? Toyota, VW, Honda, Ford, GM, BMW, Mercedes. Tesla is worth more than all of those combined.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. There isn't any one entity that is short 140% of the GME float. 2. If a stock shouldn't be allowed to be sold short past 100% then we should outlaw subletting apartments. Why shouldn't someone be allowed to pay to borrow something, and then rent it out? How is that manipulative in and of itself?
Could you elaborate on how shorting past 100% is comparable to subletting? How is shorting alike borrowing something?
There's no way of making it comparable without making some kind of derivative contract against the deed to the property but then it's back to traditional shorting.
The only thing more ridiculous than the rise in the GME stock are these attempts to frame this is some sort of culture war. All this is is a bunch of people on an online forum trying to make a quick buck; it's not some grand statement against Wall St. or whatever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm tired of fake Economics where the value of a company or the product is not made from the real value of it I still don't understand how Tesla is valued so high when they're still figuring out panel gaps.
It's hilarious seeing this comment the day after a busy HN thread titled, "Tesla’s charging stations left other manufacturers in the dust" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25930253 ). (I am ambivalent towards Tesla.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla is one of the few modern companies whose value actually makes sense to me. They actually make something! that people want to buy! that's way better than most of ad-tech which seems like a multi-layered pyramid scheme.
So does Toyota, which makes more things that more people want to buy, and yet is only valued at a quarter of Tesla.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can anyone explain what utility, to the real economy, that short selling stocks provides? Practically speaking, why is shorting useful? What problems in the financial system does it solve. Asking in earnest.
Short selling accelerates price discovery in order to allow for more efficient capital allocation, thus making our overall economy stronger.