GameStop Stock surges due to meme traders

[Dreiko]

I just don't get how someone sees a dude take risk that in their mind may compromise people's jobs or pensions, and instead of being mad at that guy is mad at the guy who is making him pay for his reckless behavior.

So, what, are we supposed to let them screw us because they have us over the barrel? If so what prevents those PROVEN risk-takers from slowly destroying those jobs or pensions anyways to make more profit, since with this attitude we'll let them do it until they've taken it all and we have nothing left to protect any more, by which point it'll be too late.

 

[Seanchaidh]

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I just don't get how someone sees a dude take risk that in their mind may compromise people's jobs or pensions, and instead of being mad at that guy is mad at the guy who is making him pay for his reckless behavior.

So, what, are we supposed to let them screw us because they have us over the barrel? If so what prevents those PROVEN risk-takers from slowly destroying those jobs or pensions anyways to make more profit, since with this attitude we'll let them do it until they've taken it all and we have nothing left to protect any more, by which point it'll be too late.

Man we're already there.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

The moment that the Stockbrokers who have been selling shares they don't own and don't actually even have realise that they now have to actually provide shares to people who just bought them.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

 

[Eacaraxe]

View attachment 2805

Reported for personal attacks.

 

[Dreiko]

I've seen people try to link this to "trumpism" and I expect gamergate to come up too in this context as soon as some female person is attacked rudely for being a corrupt criminal. (maybe it'll be about Yellen, the lady who took 800k for speeches from the people who bailed out the hedgefund that was about to go bankrupt and is now the treasury secretary).

This, this is why we need principles. Because even when you do everything right they will still smear you all the same as soon as you threaten the powerful. Everything else is divide and conquer based on arbitrary characteristics that we are not actually really divided by.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

 

[Gergar12]

As opposed to getting checks off the hard work of others who are actually working, managing, and taking a significant risk creating businesses. This guy collects dividends checks and sells stocks when he needs to buy something more expensive.

Seriously, and he also on TV ranted about fair taxes, and saying he doesn't know what fair means.

Fair in terms of the capital gains tax means one of two things.

1. Income tax rates = Capital gains tax rates

2. A little more complex but basically income tax rates < Capital gains tax rates

Let me explain the second one. Basically depending on someone's wealth, and income; a dollar for someone who is working-class means a lot more to them than someone who is a billionaire. So we shouldn't tax people at the same rate as other people making more money because that wouldn't be equitable or "fair". that's why we have a somewhat progressive tax rate income tax, and why we should tax capital gains which are owned mostly by the wealthy, and some gainfully employed people more.

For reference right now capital gains tax rates are lower than the top marginal tax rate and generally lower than the income tax.

But for people like that who are in a bubble, I doubt they care or understand.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

As opposed to getting checks off the hard work of others who are actually working, managing, and taking a significant risk creating businesses. This guy collects dividends checks and sells stocks when he needs to buy something more expensive.

Seriously, and he also on TV ranted about fair taxes, and saying he doesn't know what fair means.

Fair in terms of the capital gains tax means one of two things.

1. Income tax rates = Capital gains tax rates

2. A little more complex but basically income tax rates < Capital gains tax rates

Let me explain the second one. Basically depending on someone's wealth, and income; a dollar for someone who is working-class means a lot more to them than someone who is a billionaire. So we shouldn't tax people at the same rate as other people making more money because that wouldn't be equitable or "fair". that's why we have a somewhat progressive tax rate income tax, and why we should tax capital gains which are owned mostly by the wealthy, and some gainfully employed people more.

For reference right now capital gains tax rates are lower than the top marginal tax rate and generally lower than the income tax.

But for people like that who are in a bubble, I doubt they care or understand.

No you don't understand. Everyone could be just as rich as him if they just rolled up their sleeves and stopped eating avocado toast and drinking starbucks.

 

[Trunkage]

Saw someone mention this on Twitter; how long until they try to link this back to "that which we cannot name"?

Well, to be fair, it's probably a bunch of Dirtbags doing it. This seems like their sort of play

But it makes about as much sense as Pelosi and Hillary calling for Trump phone registry after Jan 6. You know, because Putin told him to do it.

Fucking Centrist conspiracy theories can make Qanon seem sensible

Edit: Anyone catch Saagar trying to claim this as the his version of Right?

 

[Agema]

Seriously, and he also on TV ranted about fair taxes, and saying he doesn't know what fair means.

And I believe him that he doesn't know what fair means.

I suspect he pays less tax (as a proportion of earnings) than his secretary, and doesn't blink at the fact.

 

[Bedinsis]

Why does short selling even exist as a concept?

"Because someone can make money off of it" is the obvious answer, but on some level I thought investing was to provide people with insight into businesses and help them grow stronger if they provided something people see as worthwhile; short selling seems to only have the social benefit that people can make money of the practice.

 

[Worgen]

Shits complicated.

 

[stroopwafel]

Why does short selling even exist as a concept?

"Because someone can make money off of it" is the obvious answer, but on some level I thought investing was to provide people with insight into businesses and help them grow stronger if they provided something people see as worthwhile; short selling seems to only have the social benefit that people can make money of the practice.

With short selling you're pretty much speculating that a share will take a falll in six months and buy the share at that speculated price. The difference between actual and speculated price is then for your account. Ofcourse this can go either way. When the share actually increases in price you sell the difference in loss.

So short selling isn't really the problem, but when hedge funds do it they speculate with such astronomical amounts that it actually manipulates the stock price. The fact that Melvin Capital is in financial problems indicate the amount of money involved. They put the company in a corner and investors lose faith, plummeting the stock price further. Then often the hedge fund, or some other investment firm, moves in to break up the company and sell it at the highest bidder. They are like a swarm of locusts. Investors happy, clients happy, corporate buyers happy. Except the people working for the company ofcourse or small time investors or even consumers. They get royally fucked over. It is the typical modus operandi of hedge funds and large capital investment firms which is why they are so bad. Even ceo's hate them.

The obsession with short term stock price is probably 90% of why shareholder capitalism has such a bad rep. Hedge funds have absolutely no benefit other than making a very select few filthy rich at the expense of everyone else. Reddit have now given them atleast a taste of their own medicine.

 

[gorfias]

I thought this pretty touching.

 

[Agema]

With short selling you're pretty much speculating that a share will take a falll in six months and buy the share at that speculated price. The difference between actual and speculated price is then for your account. Ofcourse this can go either way. When the share actually increases in price you sell the difference in loss.

I don't really get shorting stock.

I think if you want to bet a company's shares are going to decrease, fine. But do it in bookkeeper's, not a financial market.

 

[tippy2k2]

I thought this pretty touching.

Man, I don't recall 2008 to be that bad but I had also just gotten out of college and got murdered trying to find a job so I ended up having to take some shit level iPod Tech Support job for some company that wasn't even Apple (just a "Third Party Partner, though we identified ourselves as Apple when people called).

So I suppose it did suck in 08 for me but I kind of assumed that was just because I jumped into the job market at an incredibly shit time. His description makes it sound like a lot of people had my problem except they were already older with careers and mortgages and shit that they lost and had to settle for their own shit level job at Fake-Apple like I did...

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I just don't get how someone sees a dude take risk that in their mind may compromise people's jobs or pensions, and instead of being mad at that guy is mad at the guy who is making him pay for his reckless behavior.

So, what, are we supposed to let them screw us because they have us over the barrel? If so what prevents those PROVEN risk-takers from slowly destroying those jobs or pensions anyways to make more profit, since with this attitude we'll let them do it until they've taken it all and we have nothing left to protect any more, by which point it'll be too late.

I just hope it doesn’t get to the point where Congress butts in and says shame on
virtuous young money for fucking with corrupt old money. If they’re able to get away with what they have been, there’s no right to interfere with the current turn of events.