3 ms·
You'll end up in a slippery slope there, though. Lots of stocks don't pay dividends, and you can't eat them either. But one use is to get around currency cont
by lallysingh 2y ago
You'll end up in a slippery slope there, though. Lots of stocks don't pay dividends, and you can't eat them either.
But one use is to get around currency controls / manipulation by the government. Not a big deal in EUR/USD countries, but some places limit how much money you can take with you outside, or occasionally invalidate their old currency for a new one altogether.
- lottin 2y agoWhether a stock pays dividends or not has no relevance to the stock returns.
- mschuster91 2y ago> You'll end up in a slippery slope there, though. Lots of stocks don't pay dividends, and you can't eat them either. If you get enough shares you can force a dissolution of the company and get paid the proceedings. Of course that only works for stocks that are not overvalued, but stocks in that territory are for gamblers only anyway.
- kortilla 2y agoThe stock of every healthy company is overvalued by that measure. The dissolution of the company resulting in the share value means there were 0 expected earnings.
- popcalc 2y ago> Lots of stocks don't pay dividends, and you can't eat them either. Yes, you can. If you are an UHNWI your private banker who also manages your portfolio will organize cash loans to you and your family using the shares as collateral. It just shows up in your bank account and you pay your bills, go eat out and live off that tax free income. If you don't have major equity holdings (say a kleptocrat living in London who, coming from the wild-west has an aversion to publicly listed equities) your banker will do the same but using your real estate holdings, yachts, etc. as the collateral.
- kortilla 2y agoThey will also do the same thing with bitcoin as collateral. Ability to be used as collateral doesn’t mean anything
- popcalc 2y agoExtremely small market. The reason is there is a real risk that past margin call for the lender there will be no one to offload the crypto onto, even at fire-sale prices. With AAPL and condo developments in LA/NYC there is very low cost of insuring an annihilation of value for obvious reasons -- because it's unthinkable. Not so much for magic internet beans.
- vlovich123 2y agoBitcoin’s market cap is $1.2T and the 2008 banking crisis wiped out a huge amount of value of condo value by in LA/NYC. While condo’s may be less volatile, I don’t think Bitcoin is particularly more volatile than the stock market overall. Indeed one of the criticisms is that it seems highly correlated indicating it’s not really a unique asset class from a stock.
- popcalc 2y agoIt's not volatility, rather underlying real value. You can't live in a bitcoin.
- vlovich123 2y agoYou can’t live in a stock either. What’s your point? Value is what we assign to something collectively. It’s not a measure of some intrinsic reality.
- popcalc 2y agoAAPL and MSFT create value for their customers. >Value is what we assign to something collectively. It’s not a measure of some intrinsic reality. I beg to differ.
- popcalc 2y ago>limit how much money you can take with you outside Bearer shares were once a choice tool for cross-border money laundering. Once commonplace, now outlawed or neutered virtually everywhere on earth. What you are describing is money laundering. It is a crime. We are not debating whether it should be considered so, or that all engaging in it are the bad guys (some are ordinary wealthy/middle class fleeing warzones/regime-change/political persecution), but it is ridiculous to use this as a line of defense for the existence of something.