3 ms·

How the rich got richer: Reddit trading frenzy benefited Wall Street elite

18 points by lsllc 6y ago

lsllc 6y ago
This is a non-paywall version of this WaPo article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/08/gamestop-wallstreet-wealth/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/08/gamestop-...
- Proven 6y ago
  non-paywall = copied I don't care if and how the rich got richer if it was above the board.
  - MattGaiser 6y ago
    MSN presumably has a license agreement.
  - Centigonal 6y ago
    > I don't care if and how the rich got richer if it was above the board. That's not a particularly meaningful statement - all you've done is move the object of contention to defining what is or isn't "above the board." If your definition of above-board is "legal," I can point you to a litany of history's greatest atrocities that were legal. A more satisfying definition requires deeper inquiry.
betwixthewires 6y ago
I'm going to say that I think this article is mostly nonsense. Unfortunately a lot of news articles are designed to manipulate rather than inform. This one stinks of manipulation. The core premise of the article, which can neither be proven or disproven, boils down to "let's get real, there's no way the little people did this." This premise is not once backed up with any real data, only expert opinions, the usual types of opinions that keep people pumping their capital into these markets to the benefit of wall street. Second, it basically character attacks the whole phenomenon by identifying a leading voice as a professional investor. This is designed simply to disillusion participants and deplete any morale. Finally, they ended the article equating your random guy with a few hundred bucks playing a game hoping to screw over some rich people and make a little money to the institutional leaders that have the secretary of treasury on speed dial. You want to get an idea of what really happened? Look at the reactions by institutions and media while the thing was happening. They were clamoring to get it stopped. There were people going on CNBC to argue that it should be illegal to talk about the markets on the internet. Many of them may have found ways to stop the bleeding at some point, but the big winners here were not the big guys. I suspect this article is simply designed to disillusion naive people and maintain the illusion that Wall Street has some crystal ball, which is their real power, built on a lie. The article is weaksauce.

18 points by lsllc 6y ago

This is a non-paywall version of this WaPo article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/08/gamestop-wallstreet-wealth/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/08/gamestop-...

Proven 6y ago
non-paywall = copied I don't care if and how the rich got richer if it was above the board.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  MSN presumably has a license agreement.
- Centigonal 6y ago
  > I don't care if and how the rich got richer if it was above the board. That's not a particularly meaningful statement - all you've done is move the object of contention to defining what is or isn't "above the board." If your definition of above-board is "legal," I can point you to a litany of history's greatest atrocities that were legal. A more satisfying definition requires deeper inquiry.

betwixthewires 6y ago

I'm going to say that I think this article is mostly nonsense. Unfortunately a lot of news articles are designed to manipulate rather than inform. This one stinks of manipulation. The core premise of the article, which can neither be proven or disproven, boils down to "let's get real, there's no way the little people did this." This premise is not once backed up with any real data, only expert opinions, the usual types of opinions that keep people pumping their capital into these markets to the benefit of wall street. Second, it basically character attacks the whole phenomenon by identifying a leading voice as a professional investor. This is designed simply to disillusion participants and deplete any morale. Finally, they ended the article equating your random guy with a few hundred bucks playing a game hoping to screw over some rich people and make a little money to the institutional leaders that have the secretary of treasury on speed dial. You want to get an idea of what really happened? Look at the reactions by institutions and media while the thing was happening. They were clamoring to get it stopped. There were people going on CNBC to argue that it should be illegal to talk about the markets on the internet. Many of them may have found ways to stop the bleeding at some point, but the big winners here were not the big guys. I suspect this article is simply designed to disillusion naive people and maintain the illusion that Wall Street has some crystal ball, which is their real power, built on a lie. The article is weaksauce.