3 ms·
As far as I have ever been able to determine, it only makes sense as a strategy under a specific set of circumstances. It is not the general-purpose infinite mo
by jandrewrogers 2y ago
As far as I have ever been able to determine, it only makes sense as a strategy under a specific set of circumstances. It is not the general-purpose infinite money glitch many people make it out to be. There are many scenarios under which it is a suboptimal financial strategy.
- diggan 2y agoIf we take the post at face value, one of the requirements for this strategy to work to have your "net worth exceeding around $300M". Already there it becomes pretty specific, how many in the US has that? As far as I remember, you're already in the 1% with $10M.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- hiatus 2y agoThe US has at least 10k individuals with wealth exceeding 100M but I can't find data for specifically > 300M. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/10/number-of-people-with-100-million-has-doubled-since-2003.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/10/number-of-people-with-100-mi...
- charlie0 2y agoHere's a startup SaaS idea. Take that knowledge and SaaSify it so my broke-a$$ can also use these loopholes.
- detourdog 2y agoI think your right this is just one approach out of many. Once your money timeline stretches to the second generation one can start thinking in much bigger ways that have nothing to do with individual ownership of assets. The amount of assets doesn’t have to be large to start thinking in longer term cash flow cycles.