6 ms·

All information is not created equal. Classified briefings on a virus that may shutdown entire sectors of the economy isn’t the same as unemployment numbers. Ev

All information is not created equal. Classified briefings on a virus that may shutdown entire sectors of the economy isn’t the same as unemployment numbers. Everyone knew a ton of people were going to be laid off. From your blog: “Here’s a trade from David Perdue, the great Senator of Georgia. He actually made nearly half the trades of our dataset, and it makes sense since he’s worth $15.8 million” Why would it makes sense for him to make half the trades because he is worth $15.8 million? Plenty of Senators are worth more than that.

capableweb 7y ago
> he’s worth $15.8 million On a unrelated note, how the hell can a senator sit on so much and be worth so much? Aren't they supposed to have the public in their main interest? Sitting on all those assets looks really suspicious. Seems they care more about themselves than their community/country.
- seibelj 7y ago
  Why can’t you be rich and also care about your community? You don’t start life as a senator, you have a career before it.
  - capableweb 7y ago
    Because you get rich by not distributing what you earn, back into the economy/communities, but by hoarding. Someone who is worth $15.8 million is clearly hoarding and not utilizing the funds to improve what's around them.
    - RHSeeger 7y ago
      Your statement is overly broad and untrue. Someone who is worth 15.8 million could very easily be making enough to be worth 200 million but giving a lot to charity. For Perdue's case, he appears to average around 2% of his earnings to charity, which isn't an amazing amount, but it's not negligible either. But the point is that how much someone is worth doesn't "clearly" indicate what they are doing with their money. There are plenty of very rich folks that give / have given a lot back to society.
      - lonelappde 7y ago
        2% of income at that level where nearly all is discretionary spending, is negligible
    - macintux 7y ago
      That argument could be made down to much lower income categories. “You make 80k/year and don’t give a quarter of that away? So selfish/“ $16 million is a not-unreasonable amount to save for a comfortable retirement that includes travel around the world and making sure your children get a good start to life, and says absolutely nothing about how much the person donates to society’s betterment.
      - lonelappde 7y ago
        This a beautiful display of "1%er" tone deafness and ignorance of reality, like Mitt Romney's advice that people should simply borrow money from their parents if they want to go to college and start a business.
        macintux 7y ago
        FWIW, I’ll be lucky not to be homeless when I retire. The general advice is to have at least, what, a million saved for retirement. 15 is a lot, not so much that it’s unreasonable to my mind for a successful person.
      - capableweb 7y ago
        > $16 million is a not-unreasonable amount to save for a comfortable retirement that includes travel around the world and making sure your children get a good start to life I agree with you. But maybe if that's what you're aiming for, you should not be in decision power over the entire country. If you're seeking out that position, it should be because you want to see the entire country as your children. Those are the people we want as leaders. Not the selfish hoarders that currently hold the power in most countries today.
    - dagenix 7y ago
      It's not like he has his money stuffed into his mattress. Money invested into the stock market is used by companies to grow / hire people / make new products.
      - unreal37 7y ago
        Minor quibble. Companies don't get the money invested in the stock market after the IPO - other traders do. They don't make more products or hire more people when someone buys a stock on the open market.
- wernercd 7y ago
  Why should he do more with those assets? There's nothing that forces him too... if he donates to charity - or as the POTUS does, gives his salary away (or doesn't) - that's entirely on him. Being "rich" and "caring" are two separate and unrelated things... If I care, but do something that makes more than I spend - or invest wisely into something that makes more... I care and make money... "if you have money you don't care" is a seriously flawed attitude.
  - capableweb 7y ago
    I could understand that someone would like to have a buffer in case of emergencies, but it seems like $15.8 million is a bit over the "emergency buffer" line and becomes more like they want more money just to have more money. You're a public servant, supposedly working for the public, why you need so much? Share it with the ones who have zero instead. The US have a huge problems in many areas, like healthcare, homelessness and other serious problems, if these hoarders would actually display a bit of care towards those people, you can solve it. But again, sitting on $15.8 million does not look like you're actually trying to solve anything else but your ego.
    - wernercd 7y ago
      whether its $100 or $100m - why do you get to decide what's right for someone else to have sitting in a bank account? Why is your decision that "$1m is enough for anyone" (or whatever your arbitrary amount is) the correct one? Why not 100k? or 10m? (arbitrary numbers I know you haven't stated as such) "You're a public servant" What does his personal finances have to do with his public service? as long as he's not making his money from his service (IE: Kick backs, sweet deals for family, etc)? Nothing. "The US has huge problems" everyone/every country has huge problems in all these areas - each in different flavors. You could take 100% of money (or value, since a lot of "value" is in intangible stuff like property or stock that isn't "money") from everyone above $1m (or your arbitrary cutt-off) and guess what? We still couldn't afford "heatlhcare for all" and people will still be homeless. Money isn't the problem and it doesn't solve all problems. Just look at places like CA that are spending more and more and having worse and worst problems - the issue isn't money. At the end of the day... his having 15k, 15m, 15b or 15t means nothing about his attitude, ego or ability to care.
bko 7y ago
He's the 25th wealthiest member of the Senate. To be fair, out of 240 trades, 206 of them were between 1,000 and 15,000. Turnover in his account between those three month was somewhere between 950k - 5.34mm, with up to 536k - 3mm in purchases. I don't think this is unusual volume for something with a net worth of 15.8mm, but I could be wrong. He seems to like day trading.

capableweb 7y ago

> he’s worth $15.8 million On a unrelated note, how the hell can a senator sit on so much and be worth so much? Aren't they supposed to have the public in their main interest? Sitting on all those assets looks really suspicious. Seems they care more about themselves than their community/country.

seibelj 7y ago
Why can’t you be rich and also care about your community? You don’t start life as a senator, you have a career before it.
- capableweb 7y ago
  Because you get rich by not distributing what you earn, back into the economy/communities, but by hoarding. Someone who is worth $15.8 million is clearly hoarding and not utilizing the funds to improve what's around them.
  - RHSeeger 7y ago
    Your statement is overly broad and untrue. Someone who is worth 15.8 million could very easily be making enough to be worth 200 million but giving a lot to charity. For Perdue's case, he appears to average around 2% of his earnings to charity, which isn't an amazing amount, but it's not negligible either. But the point is that how much someone is worth doesn't "clearly" indicate what they are doing with their money. There are plenty of very rich folks that give / have given a lot back to society.
    - lonelappde 7y ago
      2% of income at that level where nearly all is discretionary spending, is negligible
  - macintux 7y ago
    That argument could be made down to much lower income categories. “You make 80k/year and don’t give a quarter of that away? So selfish/“ $16 million is a not-unreasonable amount to save for a comfortable retirement that includes travel around the world and making sure your children get a good start to life, and says absolutely nothing about how much the person donates to society’s betterment.
    - lonelappde 7y ago
      This a beautiful display of "1%er" tone deafness and ignorance of reality, like Mitt Romney's advice that people should simply borrow money from their parents if they want to go to college and start a business.
      - macintux 7y ago
        FWIW, I’ll be lucky not to be homeless when I retire. The general advice is to have at least, what, a million saved for retirement. 15 is a lot, not so much that it’s unreasonable to my mind for a successful person.
    - capableweb 7y ago
      > $16 million is a not-unreasonable amount to save for a comfortable retirement that includes travel around the world and making sure your children get a good start to life I agree with you. But maybe if that's what you're aiming for, you should not be in decision power over the entire country. If you're seeking out that position, it should be because you want to see the entire country as your children. Those are the people we want as leaders. Not the selfish hoarders that currently hold the power in most countries today.
  - dagenix 7y ago
    It's not like he has his money stuffed into his mattress. Money invested into the stock market is used by companies to grow / hire people / make new products.
    - unreal37 7y ago
      Minor quibble. Companies don't get the money invested in the stock market after the IPO - other traders do. They don't make more products or hire more people when someone buys a stock on the open market.
wernercd 7y ago
Why should he do more with those assets? There's nothing that forces him too... if he donates to charity - or as the POTUS does, gives his salary away (or doesn't) - that's entirely on him. Being "rich" and "caring" are two separate and unrelated things... If I care, but do something that makes more than I spend - or invest wisely into something that makes more... I care and make money... "if you have money you don't care" is a seriously flawed attitude.
- capableweb 7y ago
  I could understand that someone would like to have a buffer in case of emergencies, but it seems like $15.8 million is a bit over the "emergency buffer" line and becomes more like they want more money just to have more money. You're a public servant, supposedly working for the public, why you need so much? Share it with the ones who have zero instead. The US have a huge problems in many areas, like healthcare, homelessness and other serious problems, if these hoarders would actually display a bit of care towards those people, you can solve it. But again, sitting on $15.8 million does not look like you're actually trying to solve anything else but your ego.
  - wernercd 7y ago
    whether its $100 or $100m - why do you get to decide what's right for someone else to have sitting in a bank account? Why is your decision that "$1m is enough for anyone" (or whatever your arbitrary amount is) the correct one? Why not 100k? or 10m? (arbitrary numbers I know you haven't stated as such) "You're a public servant" What does his personal finances have to do with his public service? as long as he's not making his money from his service (IE: Kick backs, sweet deals for family, etc)? Nothing. "The US has huge problems" everyone/every country has huge problems in all these areas - each in different flavors. You could take 100% of money (or value, since a lot of "value" is in intangible stuff like property or stock that isn't "money") from everyone above $1m (or your arbitrary cutt-off) and guess what? We still couldn't afford "heatlhcare for all" and people will still be homeless. Money isn't the problem and it doesn't solve all problems. Just look at places like CA that are spending more and more and having worse and worst problems - the issue isn't money. At the end of the day... his having 15k, 15m, 15b or 15t means nothing about his attitude, ego or ability to care.

bko 7y ago

He's the 25th wealthiest member of the Senate. To be fair, out of 240 trades, 206 of them were between 1,000 and 15,000. Turnover in his account between those three month was somewhere between 950k - 5.34mm, with up to 536k - 3mm in purchases. I don't think this is unusual volume for something with a net worth of 15.8mm, but I could be wrong. He seems to like day trading.