david927

52 ms·

721.
by david927 6y ago
They never covered their shorts. It's only a matter of time before it goes ballistic and, frankly, threatens to take down the entire stock market. It's a ticking time bomb -- and now it's smoking.
722.
by david927 6y ago
That's a huge question and can only be answered personally. NYC has cleared out and rents are finally somewhat cheap. But I would prefer almost anywhere in the EU to anywhere in the US, so the financial gain from the move would really
723.
by david927 6y ago
Here's a historical account that Michael Burry (The Big Short) posted recently about the beginning of German hyperinflation of the 1920's: "The life of the inflation in its ripening stage was a paradox which had its own unmis
724.
by david927 6y ago
We can build beautiful things but we can’t build them in a beautiful way. We marvel at our pyramids but dream of the arch, of Chartres. Until we eliminate the goose wire and tinfoil, it will be hard to feel satisfied.
725.
by david927 6y ago
Why is this down voted? Things are incredibly unstable. Further, while "increasing debt can be the sign of positive developments" it can also simply reflect a panic dropping rates to zero to try to bail out the boat. The big que
726.
by david927 6y ago
They're fungible assets which are incredibly liquid and easy to transport. Historically, that's money.
727.
by david927 6y ago
Primary residence real estate, yes! But otherwise, no. It's the least liquid asset class and liquidity will be king.
728.
by david927 6y ago
I think you should read the book and get back to me. He makes quite a solid argument. And it's not about the century but more about long-term cycles.
729.
by david927 6y ago
I see what you're saying. Personally, I think that hyperinflation would mean a fire sale on assets for gold and silver -- and that's a really good way to describe a liquidity crunch. But I concede the point.
730.
by david927 6y ago
Because magic doesn't exist. It's not the first time humans have ever thought, "Why I'll just manage my debt by inflating my currency!" Look at Germany in the 30's. You can say that wasn't a liquidity c
731.
by david927 6y ago
Precious metals, commodities
732.
by david927 6y ago
It's not related to Malthus' argument and it's been updated and shown to be utterly prescient: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/limits... Our technologies have made ex
733.
by david927 6y ago
Even 0% interest rate loans need to be paid back at some point. With real estate being over-built, it's going to sit empty. Eventually the payments can't be made. Then you get credit defaults. Then people need cash and you get
734.
by david927 6y ago
That's what Ray Dalio says in "Principles". It's terrifying.
735.
by david927 6y ago
I would recommend reading The Limits To Growth: https://www.clubofrome.org/publication/the-limits-to-growth
736.
by david927 6y ago
There's this optimistic notion that we'll just bounce back from any setback and continue economic growth. Japan had the same thing happen that we're seeing now in the 1980's -- and never recovered.
737.
by david927 6y ago
That's a pretty sanguine take. I'm not so sure that it will end well at all. I think we're still in the winter of the 2008 crisis but now we've burned all of our firewood. But it's worse than that, actually, becau
738.
by david927 6y ago
No, a company's ability to be more efficient (as well as general increasing efficiencies) is priced into its value. That's where P/E ratios come into play. Currently the entire stock market doesn't reflect value, it ref
739.
by david927 6y ago
The adage that "the stock market always goes up" has been true for decades but there's nothing inherently true about that. A Ponzi scheme can also go up for decades as long as there's growth. It's when there are c
740.
by david927 6y ago
It really hasn't. A quick look at WSB shows that there's a large, concerted effort to create this narrative. To me, that shows they're scared about $GME. They should be scared.
741.
by david927 6y ago
It's neither disturbing nor exactly new. The problem is more derivatives in general -- what Warren Buffet has long called "weapons of mass destruction" -- than the use of a forum.
742.
by david927 6y ago
So if I run in with a thousand ballots and shuffle them in with existing ballots, unless you can prove that I changed the outcome, that's fine? I'm saying the wrong doing is invalidating the electoral process.
743.
by david927 6y ago
Oh, hey Sean! I'd rather talk to you about future of programming than this junk, but OK. You're right, that's what the courts are saying. I don't think most people are buying that, though. There's too much video
744.
by david927 6y ago
> Did the US court system show massive fraud? It was never heard in court. I think that's what people are upset about. If they felt it had its day in court, they would feel differently. Instead, they have the media patting their
745.
by david927 6y ago
I agree with you. This video doesn’t have any of that, though. Watch it and then let me know.
746.
by david927 6y ago
Argue the points, not the person.
747.
by david927 6y ago
Here's a John Oliver episode from a year ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svEuG_ekNT0
748.
by david927 6y ago
We really didn't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svEuG_ekNT0
749.
by david927 6y ago
There's a definite "Innovator's Dilemma" situation going on where the most anyone wants to backtrack is a few feet, and the solution is to backtrack a couple of miles. The irony is that everything is that by not investin
750.
by david927 6y ago
Here's a John Oliver special from a year ago that will terrify you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svEuG_ekNT0

More ›