What are
/r/economy's
favorite Products & Services?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The most popular Products mentioned in /r/economy:
The most popular Services mentioned in /r/economy:
MarketWatch
Yahoo! Finance
Seeking Alpha
WikiLeaks
Microsoft Bing
The Motley Fool
Khan Academy
Wolfram Alpha
Bypass Paywalls
SemanticScholar
TechCrunch
NPR News
The New York Times
Schwab
Reuters
The most popular Android Apps mentioned in /r/economy:
The most popular reviews in /r/economy:
I am a capitalist and made good money in business. I hate what has happened at the top of the economic ladder.
Some of the ultra-wealthy have used their money/power/influence to corrupt our systems. The Kochs are a prime example. For decades now, they have been creating think-tanks (hundreds) that promote their propaganda, anti-environment, anti-welfare, pro-fossil-fuel. They have also bought many of our elected officials by paying, through PACs, for their election. Those who don't play ball get "primaried" as the Kochs fund their replacements. It's largely been responsible for the lack of integrity of our elected officials today.
Their efforts have also helped to change the court system in America, by helping fund the appointment of numerous lifetime appointees who are beholden to their causes.
This is not capitalism. This is blatant abuse of the system and perversion of our government/society for their own benefit. They care not a bit about those below them except insofar as they manipulate them to cast their votes for the pawns of their choice.
Tons of details in two excellent books:
> WikiLeaks releases today the "Investment Chapter" from the secret negotiations of the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) agreement [...] The document is classified and supposed to be kept secret for four years after the entry into force of the TPP agreement or, if no agreement is reached, for four years from the close of the negotiations.
>The Investment Chapter highlights the intent of the TPP negotiating parties, led by the United States, to increase the power of global corporations by creating a supra-national court, or tribunal, where foreign firms can "sue" states and obtain taxpayer compensation for "expected future profits". These investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals are designed to overrule the national court systems. ISDS tribunals introduce a mechanism by which multinational corporations can force governments to pay compensation if the tribunal states that a country's laws or policies affect the company's claimed future profits. In return, states hope that multinationals will invest more.
>Similar mechanisms have already been used. For example, US tobacco company Phillip Morris used one such tribunal to sue Australia (June 2011 – ongoing) for mandating plain packaging of tobacco products on public health grounds; and by the oil giant Chevron against Ecuador in an attempt to evade a multi-billion-dollar compensation ruling for polluting the environment. The threat of future lawsuits chilled environmental and other legislation in Canada after it was sued by pesticide companies in 2008/9. ISDS tribunals are often held in secret, have no appeal mechanism, do not subordinate themselves to human rights laws or the public interest, and have few means by which other affected parties can make representations.
Taking a pointer out of the book "Thinking, Fast and Slow", what may be a very interesting experiment is putting on the money box a picture of a face staring. Statistically speaking, it makes people act more honest.
/r/personalfinance is really more for this stuff, but I have some very, very hard-won experience with parents with zero financial sense. My own mother is so much like yours that it's almost deju vu to read your post. Given that it's a choice of being a human practice dummy or losing her teeth altogether, consider helping your mother find a dental school that will give her free/low cost dental care.
>I have lent my father 5k+, which is more than I had ever had to my name.
You don't do this. That money is gone.
>nothing has seemed to work to make ends meet
Nothing ever will, until they decide they need to visit /r/personalfinance, YNAB or similar resources and get themselves together. If they can't figure out how to spend less than they make, they can't ever dig out of that hole.
If you want to help them, take /u/feelsgg's advice. Get written in as an owner of the condo if you're going to help with that bill. Consider finding them a lower-cost living solution. If they move in with you, they will never, ever move out unless you do everything for them, as if they're 18 year olds teenagers. They've already demonstrated that they're not capable of taking care of themselves, and that won't suddenly change because you make it easier for them.
>How did Bush, or Republicans for that matter, cause the derivative market to collapse and for the housing market to collapse?
Were you born last week? That was that great Texas miracle maker Phil Gramm.
>The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which is also called the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, repealed the Glass-Steagall Act. Banks were again allowed to have commercial, investment and insurance operations under one roof. This led to banking consolidation, and some say this was one of the key acts that led to the U.S. financial crisis of 2008.
http://www.ehow.com/about_6328681_commercial-bank-vs_-investment-house.html
Actually signed by Clinton but it was a Republican Congress, just in time for W to hand the regulatory agencies over to the regulated communities who went out and had a field day, at our expense.
Did you miss the big Bush push for the "ownership society"? ROFL! Heeeelllloooo, Mc-Fly.
Which Fox News outlet did you get your education?
Gasoline/Fuel has the second highest number of people reporting that they are spending more. But gasoline is cheaper than it was a year agp.
But the poll isn't asking if these things cost more; it's asking people if they are spending more. They are not necessarily the same thing.
Highly relevant quote:
"If it were indeed true that the introduction of labor-saving machinery is a cause of constantly mounting unemployment and misery, the logical conclusions to be drawn would be revolutionary, not only in the technical field but for our whole concept of civilization. Not only should we regard all further technological progress as calamity; we should have to regard all past technical progress with equal horror....Why should freight be carried from Chicago to New York by railroad when we could employ enormously more men, for example, to carry it all on their backs" - Henry Hazlitt (Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics - originally published in 1946)
Wait until this starts happening in mass:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/25/adidas-to-sell-robot-made-shoes-from-2017
Just Adidas moving it's operations back to Germany will cost 1,000,000 Adidas jobs in Asia. Nike is said to soon follow suit to stay competitive.
Ain't that a wrench in the gears.
Yeah, but they like it like that.
If you really want to see how badly we have been lied to watch:
13th.
The title of Ava DuVernay's extraordinary and galvanizing documentary refers to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which reads "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States." The progression from that second qualifying clause to the horrors of mass criminalization and the sprawling American prison industry is laid out by DuVernay with bracing lucidity. With a potent mixture of archival footage and testimony from a dazzling array of activists, politicians, historians, and formerly incarcerated women and men, DuVernay creates a work of grand historical synthesis.
Watch 13th on Netflix to see where this all has led.
That article is discussing whether-or-not there are problems in a specific smoothing function, which I was not referencing or relying on. The problems with pensions being underfunded that I'm talking about does not come from a specific bias introduced by the smoothing function, but from other elements:
Choosing unrealistically-optimistic expectations of future returns. This is a nice way to take money from the pension fund, because it's hard to prove that someone's estimates are definitely wrong. As your own article points out ("Many pension funds absurdly assumed that equities could provide a 10 percent rate of return in the 1990s stock bubble, even as price to earnings ratios crossed 30"), this must be an assumption and can be quite problematic.
Just outright not paying into the pension fund: A lot of states are way behind on their pension payments
Not having pensions insured. If your municipality simply can't cover pensions and there's no insurance on those pensions, they simply don't get covered. Treating a municipality as zero-risk obviously isn't a very accurate assumption, given cases like Stockton and Detroit.
It's one example among several, though. And there's counter examples like Kansas, where Brownback dropped taxes and the economy fell into the toilet.
The more data points we collect, the more we find that Republican tax philosophy is not supported by the evidence.
what collapse ?
moderators should curb spam and extra shitty headlines
[for those who want a basket and not the basketcase http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxy/charts?symb=DXY&countrycode=US&time=13&startdate=1%2F4%2F1999&enddate=2%2F17%2F2014&freq=1&compidx=none&compind=none&comptemptext=Enter+Symbol%28s%29&comp=none&...}
Interesting when read against this article from yesterday on how more than half of millennials have less than $1,000 in savings: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/more-than-half-of-millennials-have-less-than-1000-2015-12-14
Commentary on millennials seems to go in all directions.
The op-ed is written by Neil M. Barofsky, the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program from 2008 until today.
He resigned. See more at this New York Times article.
>It‘s cost $600 billion of your money. And it was supposed to rescue the economy. But has Ben Bernanke’s huge financial stimulus package, known as “Quantitative Easing 2,” actually worked as planned?
this is a somewhat misleading and the rest of the article doesn't do a very good job of explaining QE2 either. I assume most people reading this already know what it is/was but here is a good link for those still unclear:
http://www.khanacademy.org/video/quantitative-easing?playlist=Finance
Also I though it was interesting how he complained about lagging housing prices (presumably in USD) and in the very next paragraph blamed the fed for a massive bubble in "dollar based assets." I guess housing prices somehow don't count...
"I could maybe afford something a little better, but I need to save money so this is how I have to live."
If she's deliberately accepting unpleasant living conditions to save some of her income, how can those conditions also hint at a coming crisis? She could after all avoid them if she preferred to. Maybe she expects a good return on investing her money - then those same living conditions would 'hint' at a coming age of prosperity.
This isn't to say that the property market in Beijing isn't overheated, but the existence of scummy housing doesn't make the case for that.
Next point: 'Real estate investment' is by definition buying real estate to benefit from an expected rise in value. So if you own a house and buy a second just to wait until it doubles in value, that's a pure investment. But if that's what you're doing, you don't need to bother with furniture and appliances, because you're not using it. Conversely, if you're buying furniture and appliances, that's because you're using the house, so isn't a sign of investment. On the other hand, improvements like a new bathroom can be seen as investment, even if you make use of them, because you can't take them with you when you move.
Don't want to be too hard on Michael Pettis, who writes very good posts at Seeking Alpha, focusing on mislending and misinvestment. But he has an interest in downplaying growth in Chinese consumption, because that supports an analogy with pre-1990 Japan. The fact is that 1) Chinese consumption is growing very fast, and 2) the Chinese are saving a lot of their income, which, while it lowers consumption in the present, is a critical driver of growth - empirically a prerequisite, actually.
Except as a recent college grad, my chart actually looks something more like this:
Each year, more than 165 million Americans get the flu shot. There were 85 reported deaths following influenza vaccination in 2017; 119 deaths in 2018; and 203 deaths in 2019
Between mid-December 2020 and April 23, 2021, at which point between 95 million and 100 million Americans had received their COVID-19 shots, there were 3,544 reported deaths following COVID vaccination, or about 30 per day
In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 — a period of 15.5 years
As of April 23, 2021, VAERS had also received 12,618 reports of serious adverse events. In total, 118,902 adverse event reports had been filed
In the European Union, the EudraVigilance system had as of April 17, 2021, received 330,218 injury reports after vaccination with one of the four available COVID vaccines, including 7,766 deaths
Update: July 16, 2021. 11,000 Americans Dead, 48,000 Seriously Injured as of July 9. The death toll averaged nearly 100 persons per day for the period from April 23 until July 9, 2021. https://wordpress.com/post/undercurrents723949620.wordpress.com/2113
These covid vaccines are already the most dangerous vaccines in recent U.S. history.
You'd still need pretty big raises to achieve that for the average person though. Given that the median income was paying something like $6,000 in taxes and their marginal rate has gone down by 3%.
You call his other points a distraction, but making the claim that his premise is bullshit because firms only need to give a $3,500 raise instead of a $4,000 is a pretty big distraction from the point he's trying to make.
Informative and zerohedge? I was skeptical.
I wasn't disappointed.
The long read is over at seeking alpha.
Edit: Fixed link.
Trump isn't the problem..
The problem is the blatant violation of "coining" money in the Constitution. There's a reason that it's in there - to prevent fraud! It was put in the Constitution because of the recent fraud of "script" at that time.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=colonial+script+money
"coining" money via numbers in a computer is a fraud.
There is no authority to delegate "coining" to a 3rd party - the Fed.
The newsgroup alt.politics.libertarian goes back to at least 1992. Google Groups Archive
>Despite enrolling just 12% of college students nationally, for-profit colleges account for nearly half (44%) of all federal student loan defaults.
So many reasons to get the for-profit schools under some kind of control or at least in compliance with an accreditation process. They have low graduation rates, low job placement rates, low career advancement success and extremely high loan default rates. I think a lot of this comes from the demographic that they target and selling impossible dreams instead of practical and realistic programs. There's a place for these schools but like all other businesses, they must provide some kind of value for what they are selling.
What's the matter? Your portfolio getting pounded by the market today? 'Cause somebody's either got their rose colored glasses on, or is feeling a little depressed and in need of a lift. Looking at your last four posts, you've obviously mined marketwatch.com for every upbeat article they had.
Perhaps you missed it, but here's the top article on their front page currently:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/analysts-slow-to-admit-fourth-quarter-gloom-2012-10-24
>As earnings falter, prospects for Q4 grow worse 90% of corporate forecasts see results below Wall Street consensus
Let's try and keep things balanced around here, OK? Or do you work for marketwatch or something? You seem to link to them an awful lot. Four posts, fired off in rapid succession, is a bit much and one might even consider that spamming.
I actually wonder which is more relevant, Gallup's poll or the BLS. Gallup's isn't seasonally adjusted, which most people say means it is more accurate. However, the BLS doesn't share how its seasonal adjustments really work. http://seekingalpha.com/article/307787-why-the-bls-employment-report-is-flawed http://seekingalpha.com/article/188472-the-flawed-bls-jobs-report
btw I am not trying to pick the worst possible data to suggest the economy is getting worse like many people. I don't really care what the numbers are right now. I would really be interested to know. Also, I know the links I shared refer to the jobs created rather than the unemployment rate. However, they still got me wondering how reliable the BLS figures are. Not saying the government is lying, just that the methodology seems pretty hard to follow when you consider the huge number of adjustments due to seasonal fluctuations, birth/death etc. Then again, Gallup's polls certainly have their own flaws, so who's to say which one we should look at?
>I think you're subject to the current "positive thinking" pop-psychology malarky.
I'm not looking at pop-psychology malarky. I did a bit of research on this topic before and looked at studies that correlate personality surveys to future wages, adjusting for typical variables such as age, education, experience, etc. The papers looked like this, except I could actually read through some of them without hitting a pay wall. Sure, they can't control for everything, but that doesn't mean that the results should be dismissed out of hand. The whole of the research is probably more accurate than any one person's biases.
The point of using that research and other examples was actually to highlight how economic bubbles can get more extreme because the optimists are systematically the ones running organizations. I think that in many cases the pessimists are more likely to be correct and it is dangerous for everyone to be super optimistic. Still, for any given pessimist they are probably better off if they act a little more optimistically (except perhaps lawyers, which is one of the few industries where pessimists are better off).
The Theory of the Leisure Class is free on Amazon for Kindle.
It's also available in other formats from Project Gutenberg.
> What are you trying to say?
I think he's trying to say that if a company's payroll costs are going to shoot up by ~50%, that's going to incentivize the investment towards permanently replacing the human worker with automatic computerized workers.
The bottom line is that companies won't just idly stand by while some third party forced their payroll costs to jump that much. They'll find ways to make their books balance. They might simply lay a few people off to make up the difference. Most companies operate on a very small profit margin; like ~~2%~~ 4% or less (Walmart is 3.6%).. They can't simply absorb payroll increases in the 20% range and higher. Adjustments will have to be made.
Will an increase in minimum wage cause more unemployment? Probably. Will it be noticeable? Probably not. The vast majority of workers make more than minimum wage and will be unaffected.
Actually, there are not too many people here who are well informed about crypto or defi space. To review Midas.Investment check Trustpilot or find like-minded people in their discord channel here.
Corporate media doesn't want to give it much play because it suggests that the conspicuous consumption debt slave economy isn't what it should be and that it is deeply and fundamentally flawed.
I highly recommend watching the documentary, Requiem for the American Dream on Netflix which speaks about these media control issues.
This is back breaking work.
Our crops are not going to get picked.
So here is my conflict.
We used to have this weird system that was much like slavery.
"Illegal" people (God, what a fucked up term) would come over the border and work for less money because actually living in their own country and actually having a life expectancy was totally fucking impossible.
So they would come here and do our hardest jobs until they could figure out how to become citizens and start their own businesses (because they had found out what hard work and dedication was) and grow our economy.
So now if they can't get in at all we are either going to have to stop growing a shitload of food or we are going to have to start making more things a crime so we can arrest more people and put them into slave labor.
13th.
The title of Ava DuVernay's extraordinary and galvanizing documentary refers to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which reads "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States." The progression from that second qualifying clause to the horrors of mass criminalization and the sprawling American prison industry is laid out by DuVernay with bracing lucidity. With a potent mixture of archival footage and testimony from a dazzling array of activists, politicians, historians, and formerly incarcerated women and men, DuVernay creates a work of grand historical synthesis.
Watch 13th on Netflix to see where this all has led.
> The truth is, about the Middle East is, had there been no oil there, it would be like Africa. Nobody is threatening to intervene in Africa.
Are you asking for accounting purposes or economic/inflation?
If it’s the latter start here. https://www.me.utexas.edu/~me353/resources/present_scripts/Infl_real_actual.pdf
And Trump is getting ready to waste more.
And the War On Drugs ain't helping a bit either.
Please watch this and share this with everyone you know.
It is on Netflix and it is 13th.
It explains everything you need to know about the US "Justice" System.
About 75% of American households have cable or satellite TV. Priorities, I suppose.
In 2013 changes were made to the way the GDP was calculated. The effect was to add 3% to the GDP. We would be in recession now under the pre-2013 GDP.
Many of the changes were criticized as not adding to economic production or already accounted in other areas. The worst change was to include the money a pension fund would have made if it was fully funded instead of the actual amount it made from investments. This "invented" money added 0.5% to the GDP. These changes helped the government hide growing debt and mishandling of the economy.
Yes and all tied in with the larger meme that technology is taking away all the jobs. During the Depression they called it the "new science" of "Technography" which held that "new machinery and electricity have replaced many men in industry who will never find a job again." Of course it was just propaganda to cover up for the banks and politicians who caused more trouble than help in the late 1930s. The Great Depression: A Diary. P. 81. See page here. A great book that helps you navigate the propaganda that is being recycled.
This concept came up during the Great Depression. The "new science" of "Technography" held that "new machinery and electricity have replaced many men in industry who will never find a job again." Of course it was just propaganda to cover up for the banks and politicians who caused more trouble than help in the late 1930s.
The Great Depression: A Diary. P. 81. See page here A great book that helps you navigate the propaganda that is being recycled.
Does this article even make sense?
Anyhow, here is an article that does make sense: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/first-gas-other-fuels-top-200739135.html
The bottom line is that we import oil, refine it and then sell it to the highest bidder - people oversees. So, where is the scam?
I've seen projections that America will reach productivity adjusted manufacturing wage prices with China by 2015, this could accelerate that. Some multinationals have moved factories back to the American south due to the high unemployment, permissive business environment, high labor productivity, and favorable tariff treatment (goods produced inside the country aren't taxed) Example
I saw a TED talk where the speaker made the point that the difference in productivity has been steadily increasing over time. In an agricultural society the difference between the most productive and the least productive was about 5x. In a knowledge society, the difference between the most productive and the least is 450x. Given this, it's not surprising that the gap between the haves and have-nots is getting bigger and will probably continue to do so...
Found the speech: http://www.ted.com/talks/juan_enriquez_on_genomics_and_our_future.html (look at 18:30)
consider this: Ecuador covets these dollar coins, yet we have a billion or so of them in storage due to poor uptake domestically. Why on earth wouldn't we just dump these dollar coins in the emerging markets that need them? ...because we get a nice 2% to 3% goose from sending degradable currency.
It reads to me that they're going totally off payroll spending, if that's the case then how much of this spending is on overseas workers? Tell me that's not all they're basing this on.
> Legitimately is a moral judgement
The definition of legitimate is "Being in compliance with the law". But I will agree that the law is not a moral code. Many moral actions will land you in jail, and many immoral actions are legal. The existing legal system leaves much to be desired.
Regardless, my argument is entirely logical. All the "but it's unfair" or "but they can barely make ends meet" are the emotional rants.
https://www.amazon.com/Bailout-Account-Washington-Abandoned-Rescuing/dp/1451684932
The reviews are stunning
This is never going to be forgotten. They can’t bury EVERYTHING, and the way it’s going, they won’t be able to bury ANYTHING. There are too many people angry and affected.
Any medium of exchange can collapse, whether it's fiat money or gold. If you do not believe they can collapse, you do not understand how money works.
...it's funny how many people claim to have read The Wealth of Nations, yet not really understand it.
I recently read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. In it, she talks about the idea that big changes or shifts in socio-political landscapes leave the larger population as an almost tabula rasa blank slate. This state of shock allows for ideologues or politicians to create broad shifts in public opinion or even make large fundamental changes to the system.
What scares me, however, is that the Financial Crisis and the fall of the middle class have created this atmosphere of shock and now right-wing ideologues are making huge gains because there's no significant Left in the United States.
> I live in Germany.
>and there is nothing equivalent to "rough neighborhoods
>"Bad weather throughout the country kept some shoppers away from stores," said Bill Martin, ShopperTrak founder. "This past week was their final opportunity to complete their holiday shopping before Christmas – and though many did finish making their purchases, retailers did not see as many shoppers as last year."
People spend the most money on themselves during the Christmas season. My guess is that bad weather pushed lots of gift buying online. People buying "gifts" for themselves likely just delayed purchases until after Christmas. We'll find out when the after Christmas number come out.
China isn't devaluing anymore though. They have been letting their currency steadily rise against the US dollar since mid 2010. They are on the way to a fully free-floating currency in my opinion.
That was posted last year...
Also, you said oil prices, which isn't the same as gas prices.
>Yeah, no.
If volatile commodities are your preferred way of measuring inflation, then I say there is deflation going on.
2019 is the wettest year on record.
This caused delays in planting, trouble getting crops harvested, and mass loss of crops.
2017 and 2018 were also extremely wet.
Farmers are struggling with three straight years of bad weather (including the wettest year on record) and it's happening for crops not affected by the tariffs.
I have direct, first-hand knowledge working in agriculture.
Not everything is Trump's fault.
"...the most important means for understanding the truly anti-democratic nature of what’s taking place is to look at the person whom Brazilian oligarchs and their media organs are trying to install as president: the corruption-tainted, deeply unpopular, oligarch-serving Vice President Michel Temer"
Another 7% drop, another market holiday. Get ready for Friday, when the Chinese 6-month ban on major shareholder selling expires.
Hold on to your butts...
Edit: Looks like they extended the major SH selling ban. Still.
I think this is one of the great joys of being an athlete — hard work and smart work and shrewdness are almost guaranteed to pay off.
There’s a great paper on people becoming MMA athletes because they find that the moral norm of ‘work hard, reap benefits’ meritocracy counts for so little in their daily work lives, but counts for everything in the ring.
Here is the course you really want to take:
https://www.coursera.org/course/money
and read up on Modern Monetary Theory if you want the real macro scoop. There's a subreddit with a good video series in the sidebar to get started.
Nano uses a variation of delegated proof-of-stake (DPoS) called Open Representative Voting.
Under this system, nodes are assigned a “voting weight” based on their account balances. They can then choose to use or allocate their votes to another node on the network.
https://www.kraken.com/learn/what-is-nano
Overall I think Nano is the best crypto for payments because it's fast, feeless and one of the greenest cryptos
Housing is bubble being lead by investors who are buying up homes in order to rent them out in the false belief that they'll reap huge rewards without understanding that being a landlord actually is a low yield investment considering all the costs which creep up and eat at any profits made from renting.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/investors-pile-housing-time-landlords-030000004.html
The reason why this bubble has formed is because government is doing what it did for the housing market with the rental market now. So this should end really well.
How does a company operate for 32 years and be considered a pyramid sceme?
Institutional analysts seem to think this is a fundamentally solid company.
Like low-income republicans who believe they're all temporarily inconvenienced millionaires, I suppose the new liberal viewpoint is that we're all just temporarily inconvenienced inventors.
Also, if you want to learn more about the recent financial crisis, read "The Big Short" by Michael Lewis.
Edit: Apparently, the Khan Academy also has some pretty good resources on economics.
Not to mention that many oil fields don't make a profit below $40/barrel. The Saudis over-produced on purpose based on that premise, betting that they could drive much of the growing North American production out of business by keeping the price below the point where tar sands and hydraulic fracking could be profitable.
If oil dropped to $10/barrel, few countries would bother pumping it. While Saudi Arabia and some of the UAE could make a profit at that point (for now), even Iraq would be losing money. https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/03/19/you-wont-believe-what-saudi-arabias-oil-production.aspx
That reduced production would drive the price right back up, since oil is still used in plastics, shipping, road construction, etc. Even if every car being sold becomes electric overnight, and all the electric power plants become wind, nuclear or solar based tomorrow, we'd still have a decade or more of existing ICE cars on the road. It's not the world would stop using oil in the next 6-8 years just because "investment pours into electric cars".
If anything, a drop to $10/barrel would slow the move away from oil significantly; what incentive would people have to buy a more expensive electric car when gas at the pump is suddenly is $1 again?
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Bernanke is saying. "Stable pricing" doesn't mean zero inflation, it means a predictable amount of inflation. Look for yourself at the price of goods over the past 30 years and tell me what you see. Looks pretty predictable to me. What's more, I don't even see any blip in the last few data points for people to wildly extrapolate from.
One very consistent feature of economics is that there have always been more people eager to spew opinions than there have been people willing to make sure they're not complete bullshit. You will always be able to find some cracked up blog entry to say just about anything.
I'm honestly not sure whether you're spreading ignorance willfully or ignorantly, and I'm not sure which is worse. Next time, just try to take a second to verify that the author has the slightest bit of credibility, or the slightest bit of data to back them up. I'd settle for either.
The ole google map nicely illustrates the issue.
I’d just rather everyone in this thread start flying a separate travel industry devoid of regulation akin to Texas’ amazing uNrEGulAtEd energy grid. Worked so well last winter 😂. If y’all wanna fly on an airline that doesn’t give a fuck about safety go ahead. ” Muh Freedome”
Tungsten: $230 ?!?
Tungsten: $9.99 Shipped (plus ~21000 more if you don't like that one)
Part 2 of quantifiable verifiable evidence:
> U.S. retail sales jumped 1.1% in September, the biggest increase in seven months ... Sales for August, which were originally reported as unchanged, were revised up to a 0.3% increase
The dollar is worth 40% less than it was in 1990.. so the values for 2001-2011 were adjusted accordingly? That makes this graph even more ridiculous. Look at the past nine years on that graph... they're already almost half of what was produced for the past century. Sorry, the whole graph just looks like bullshit.
What we've produced during the past couple of decades is a 500 trillion dollar bubble in bullshit paper. That dwarfs the production of real goods and services.
There was a US government study that was released a year or so ago that found that the US will lose "superpower" status and the dollar would no longer be the global reserve currency within the next couple of decades. Unfortunately I didn't bookmark it and it got so little media attention I can't find it again.. maybe someone else has a link to it. It came out after this statement..
also, you might read up on the secret meetings surrounding the G8 to discuss a global currency.
Canada's housing market isn't as fantastic as I'd like to believe. Vancouver is the obvious outlier thanks to the city's influx of rich Hong Kongers driving up prices, but other major metro areas have also seen large price increases over the past decade.
well, at least they mentioned Barry Shwartz. I would have appreciated a link to the relevant TED Talk.
Took 'em only 4 years to turn a video presentation of a book into an article.
Look for contrarian funds that are used as hedge/ buffer against negative market shocks. Your investments should already have some portion (say 10%) in a fund like this, it's probably the one that every time you look at your statement it's underperforming and you don't know why your advisor keeps you in this loser. If the market tanks it will be the hero for your portfolio is why. To take advantage of the student loan bubble, look specifically for contrarian funds that focus on financials, forex, and US treasuries. They will probably be heavy on IT, energy, and metals so be aware of how this will affect the balance/diversity of your portfolio. Morningstar has some great tools that will help you drill down when looking for the proper funds. http://www.morningstar.com/ Also be on the lookout for municipal bond issues that might be issued in your state or even by the state run schools designed to cover the shortfall, they are going to do everything they can to avoid laying off staff and to keep kids enrolling. One of the best ways they can do this is through issuing munis, it'll probably be the first thing they try.
> My dad has been investing in his retirement for decades, and in the last two years, it lost $50k in value.
That's tough to take. I lost a ton of money in my 401k and IRA back in 2008ish.
There's a reason to stay diversified and to stay invested. The last two years have been a good time to be in the stock market
Check this article out...more complicated (read: more $$$$$) offshore drilling sent oil prices higher, meaning that other alternatives will look more attractive, in this case oilsands. Also, not to be overlooked, higher oil prices mean more revenue for any oil company. As others have said, in a penny stock like that, any movement will have a larger effect, and most graphs are scaled to show dramatic shifts.
Whenever I see the name Jamie Dimon, I always mentally hear it as "Hymie Dime-own" and think of how his goal is to extract all of the money from everyone's wallets, one DIME at a time.
No problem! Here it is. I’d recommend it to the naysayers in this thread but we both know either they won’t read it, or they’ll read it and never truly absorb the information or do anything about it.
bingo. The same mistakes from the Clinton administration. It's sad to admit I expected as much. (Biden and Clinton have a history of writing bills together. Biden's voting history and bills is closer to Hillary than to anyone else.)
I was so sad when Biden got nominated out of all of the other democrats running, but anything is better than Trump. We should have elected this instead.
Oh yeah, that’s what keeps happening. If you ever want to get a good overview of how everything works, I recommend this book. It’s not too long and speaks in plain language. No charts or equations needed.
Start with a history lesson: Adam Smith and his <em>The Wealth of Nations</em> is considered the beginning of modern economic thought and theory. It's an interesting read from any number of different perspectives.
i taught myself investing over the past 6 years, spending 10,000+ hours, reading 50-75 books on a variety of relevant topics, studying 2000+ businesses, attending numerous shareholder meetings, and writing a blog for awhile (now taken down due to my job).
i got started/interested when i picked up "One Up on Wall Street" by Peter Lynch in high school. From there I just kept picking up book after book and reading the newspaper. This proceeded into studying companies and developing my own valuation methodology and learning financial analysis. Definitely takes a lot of time and dedication.
Biggest mistake was trying to read as many books as possible instead of just opening up annual reports and studying actual companies to develop my own methodology. I eventually fixed this however and haven't looked back.
Feel free to ask anything! I'm here to help.
Aristotle is a lot smarter about money than those links give him credit for. He understood the difference between a currency, which is a creature of law, and a commodity found in nature.
The jobs are not the desired product, the wealth created from them is. This is a source of enormous confusion when it comes to economics, particularly from those on the left. Jobs in and of themselves are not valuable. You have to look at the bigger picture. Read Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" to learn more.
Before you start, you need to be warned that there are websites like zerohedge.com, which are extremely negative in their assessment of state of affairs. They may or may not be right, but if you take them too seriously, you may end up slitting your wrists.
How to know you have stumbled on such a website? They can't write 3 sentences without mentioning "fiat" and they are not referring to cars.
That said, I suggest reading "A Random Walk Down Wall Street". It is quite balanced in that it does not give you merely the conventional textbook view of economics and finance.
So you'd rather dismantle the system and erase all the benefits it provides people just to stop a handful of greedy people? That's pretty heartless, and bad economics besides.
Also, you're still implicitly arguing that people are perfectly rationally self-interested. My argument is that the difficulty and emotional distress of applying for welfare tend to dissuade many of those who would otherwise take advantage of it (that is, the vast majority of the people at the high-end margin--where the "cliffs" supposedly exist--don't actually bother, because it's really embarrassing to expose your whole life so some bureaucrat can pass judgment on you, and it takes significant time and effort to do so besides.) What you're arguing is that the incentives alone influence how people act. In fact, considerations like emotion and inconvenience play a much bigger role in people's decision-making than Austrian economists would like to think (their whole paradigm is that people are perfectly rational and completely self-interested). For more on this issue, read up on behavioral economics; the book Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely is supposed to be a good one on the subject (though I must admit to not having read it).
I'm reminded of another point libertarians and Austrian economists like to make: that the market will self-regulate by way of those harmed by industrial malpractice suing the companies/individuals at fault. All I can say is, I highly doubt the people making that argument have ever sued anyone--it's a really painful process; the opposing lawyers will do anything they can to make you seem like the worst of people.
@redditcirclejerk69 You response: "Overall, I'd say this guy sucks at economics. His only good ideas are more infrastructure and educational spending and investments, which is a no brainer. I'd give it a D+."
You say that all of my ideas regarding investment in infrastructure and eduction etc. is a no brainer. Really? Where have you seen anything like this published by Government in recent years?
Have you considered that to some, my plans in respect of banking are also a 'no brainer' to some?
It is true that I have no qualification in economics, but maybe that allows me to think outside of all previous models of how to run a country.
Adam Smith studied and lectured on moral philosophy, and yet went on to write "The Wealth of Nations". I wonder what critics of the time thought of his ideas. I imagine the establishment also gave him a D+.
;-}
Gordon Styles
Why does earning more money mean the government should take a higher percentage of your money?
According to The Millionaire Next Door, 80% of millionaires are first generation. Those are the people that give our economy and country any edge we have. Every entrepreneur I know works at least twice as many hours as the standard wage slave, and earns every single penny they make.
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Your attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today, is noted
I'm not gonna write a book on reddit. If you want a book I recommend these. Although I worry because you don't get analogies.
https://www.amazon.com/Solutionary-Rail-people-powered-electrify-railroads/dp/099809630X
And our conversation has come full circle.
I agree on all points.
The problem is that America is going to implode into Fascism before such ideas are taken seriously. Why? Because the fatcats will destroy everything before they give up anything. It is the Achilles heel of humanity.
I pray we survive.
Commodities are good too IMO.
If he wants to invest in stocks, he should invest a little bit across the board, but mainly--or only--in strong stocks with a record of being stable. Also, companies with something new being released soon that will probably be good are possible investments. For example, I did a little research on Sony and IIRC their stocks went up a little bit with each PlayStation release. It was a somewhat small amount, no more than 10%, but a lot more around the time the PS2 was released, but there appears to be a trend. However, the PS Vita, which was released in February 2012 for most of the world, was followed by a minor increase in Sony stocks and then a plummet. I'm not suggesting that correlation=causation, but there is a trend, and considering the PS4's hype, Sony Stock will probably jump up.
Source on Sony stock: http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=SNE+Interactive#symbol=sne;range=my;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;
There was the 80/20 rule, limiting the profits of insurance companies. Insurance companies in many states fought it tooth and nail and asked for (and many times received) extensions to the rule.
https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-review/
> Free Ferraris to everyone is impossible because there aren't that many Ferraris. This was a deliberately extreme example, but the same is true to houses -- who gets to live in the nice house on the top of the hill? Houses are not interchangeable in many ways.
Great questions. So whenever confronted with this sort of concern, we just look at how the market would react. So, dramatic cost reduction in the cost of goods, career lengths decrease from 50 years to 25 years, and then to 5 years. Perhaps one person says, hey, I want to retire after working 5 years, and another person says, I'll work 10 years so I can buy a ferrari or the luxury house on the hill. Markets are naturally balancing thing, and this is how supply and demand works.
For example, in 1900, the cost of taking a ship around the world for a vacation cost perhaps 200 times the median annual income. Today it costs about 300 times less than that. And yet, not everyone wants to do it. So supply and demand solves for this.
> Without prices and a market, major production misallocations can happen too.
Obviously there will always be prices and markets. I'm just saying that more prosperity will be in reach, for less total time laboring than the same prosperity required in the past. For example, we are super close to staple products being free. Here is 230 servings of rice for $50. At minimum wage, it only takes 7 hours to earn these 230 servings. This sort of food accessibility is unmatched in all of human history.
All I know is that our current ungodly wealth disparity is unsustainable, and it's killing us.
CEOs salary aside, the very last thing we should be doing is providing trillions of tax cuts to those at the very top, starving the only thing that stands in the way of our impending authoritarian oligarchy: A government of the people.
Ignoring the size of the disparity itself, or suggesting it harms nothing would be abject ridiculousness, just to stem a theme.
But, a little friendly advice ... there are lots of people like me, that do actually understand business, but we've also had enough of the tyranny, damage to society, and coercive misery that all comes from the finance psychopaths.
Lots of us are actively working, deliberately, using economics and business, to commoditize and eradicate the vampiric industry that is finance and we couldn't be happier about it.
It sounds like your livelihood depends on it. We are going to be successful and there won't be a financial services industry around by the time we are done with it, it will all be automated away, with no profit anywhere, transformed into micro-pennies which will be far better than the disease that has become modern finance.
I wasn't involved in this one, but, like I said, I'm not alone. ;)
http://techcrunch.com/2013/12/18/zero-commission-stock-trading-robinhood/
You might want to start thinking of a career switch.
People like me don't like people like you, and you couldn't be more wrong in your assessment of me.
You are replying to a long time Reddit troll. He has used several user names; NoLibertarian (banned) and NoLibrarian to name a couple. He attempts to insult everyone by calling them son. I'm not sure what his agenda is other than he is a bulltard, and he has a bug up his ass for Ron Paul.
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Thus article’s attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism because it’s an immoral failure of a governance framework as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today is noted