3 ms·

Last month, Taibbi also wrote this: Instead of stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, the American version takes in the young and sells them to compute

Last month, Taibbi also wrote this: Instead of stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, the American version takes in the young and sells them to computer-powered hedge funds; this Robin Hood is the house that always wins. https://taibbi.substack.com/p/pandemic-villains-robinhood https://taibbi.substack.com/p/pandemic-villains-robinhood Except when it doesn't, apparently.

Ygg2 6y ago
> Except when it doesn't, apparently TIL Matt Taibbi is not the perfect Oracle, that pierces the veil of unknown future. If you asked me that Reddit would use RH app to cause ruckus on Wall Street, I would have laughed that as implausible, one month ago.
- Clewza313 6y ago
  If you read the articles, last month he was arguing that RH should be better regulated if not banned because it's exploiting poor unknowing victims who don't understand what they're getting into, and now he's arguing that it's just "ordinary people acting — out of self-interest, but also out of sheer enthusiasm for one of the best reasons to do just about anything, because you can". Which one is it?
  - 317070 6y ago
    It looks like he changed his mind. I don't know the guy, but I like him even better for it.
  - hef19898 6y ago
    It can be both. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. And if you still do, and someone enables you, well you can again be a "a poor unknowing victim". RH's business model of "selling" clueless retail investors to the big funds worked. Untill there were to many of those retail investors and RH risked running out of cash.
  - Ygg2 6y ago
    That's a false dichotomy. Some of the people might want greater regulation, some might want less regulation. RH is still very weird thing and it being able to basically hold your stocks hostage and sell them on their own terms, should be regulated. Imagine if you bank basically freezes your assets and sells them off, without your input. You'd want your bank regulated, no?
pjc50 6y ago
He's still right. Once the smoke has cleared a lot of people will have lost money on GME. Only those who got in and out early will have done well.

Ygg2 6y ago

> Except when it doesn't, apparently TIL Matt Taibbi is not the perfect Oracle, that pierces the veil of unknown future. If you asked me that Reddit would use RH app to cause ruckus on Wall Street, I would have laughed that as implausible, one month ago.

Clewza313 6y ago
If you read the articles, last month he was arguing that RH should be better regulated if not banned because it's exploiting poor unknowing victims who don't understand what they're getting into, and now he's arguing that it's just "ordinary people acting — out of self-interest, but also out of sheer enthusiasm for one of the best reasons to do just about anything, because you can". Which one is it?
- 317070 6y ago
  It looks like he changed his mind. I don't know the guy, but I like him even better for it.
- hef19898 6y ago
  It can be both. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. And if you still do, and someone enables you, well you can again be a "a poor unknowing victim". RH's business model of "selling" clueless retail investors to the big funds worked. Untill there were to many of those retail investors and RH risked running out of cash.
- Ygg2 6y ago
  That's a false dichotomy. Some of the people might want greater regulation, some might want less regulation. RH is still very weird thing and it being able to basically hold your stocks hostage and sell them on their own terms, should be regulated. Imagine if you bank basically freezes your assets and sells them off, without your input. You'd want your bank regulated, no?

pjc50 6y ago

He's still right. Once the smoke has cleared a lot of people will have lost money on GME. Only those who got in and out early will have done well.