heywood on 31/1/2021 at 18:49
I might have missed it, but when have you spoken out about average people's retirement accounts taking a hit when hedge funds with massive amounts of capital manipulate share prices? When have you complained when predator private equity firms destroy companies and put tons of people out of work just so they can make a few bucks by flipping the brand name or selling it to a competitor?
As soon as we have a case of individual investors coming together to take advantage of a maleficent hedge fund, here you are alleging criminal behavior and worrying about those hedge fund investors who might have lost some money.
lowenz on 31/1/2021 at 20:07
Problem is "law" (->criminal) and "morality" are 2 VERY different things.
Here the "criminal" part is not present yet.....wait for the next moves :p
SubJeff on 31/1/2021 at 22:13
Quote Posted by heywood
I might have missed it, but when have you...
I don't have to lay out all my values before speaking about something related, nor criticise every single thing that needs criticising. What gatekeeping bs is this, lol?
Quote:
As soon as we have a case of individual investors coming together to take advantage of a maleficent hedge fund, here you are alleging criminal behavior and worrying about those hedge fund investors who might have lost some money.
No, the criminal behaviour is being carried out by the platforms that have stopped individual investors continuing to buy GME (and other) stocks, whilst still allowing the hedge funds to trade and get themselves out of trouble. If that isn't market manipulation what is? I've heard their excuses and I don't buy it.
You really do love jumping to those conclusions.
bjack on 31/1/2021 at 22:31
Quote Posted by SubJeff
...
You really do love jumping to those conclusions.
That seems to be the case all around this chat site, but then I am jumping to conclusions myself with that statement... Happy 2021! Oh, and I did not buy any of the shorted stocks, but I know a few people that did and made a tiny amount of $. They got in late, but still made some dough.
And yes, I think it is collusion that online brokers shut down trading to protect the hedge fund people. You play the game and game the system? You get to suffer the consequences if the game turns against you. It’s only fair.
Nameless Voice on 31/1/2021 at 23:03
Ireland was deeply religious, but not so much any more.
The Catholic church was involved in too many scandals, and people realised that they had been enduring suffering on behalf of principles that the clergy themselves were not even adhering to.
The abortion referendum - the first one - was one of the last things that the religious did when they were at their strength. They forced extremely draconian laws into the constitution, so no future (more progressive) government could change them without another referendum. Just over those 35 years, the support for those laws dropped from over 2/3 to under 1/3.
Also, as an aside, I think the USA is the only country in the world who treats their flag as a religion, except maybe somewhere like North Korea.
heywood on 1/2/2021 at 00:03
Quote Posted by SubJeff
I don't have to lay out all my values before speaking about something related, nor criticise every single thing that needs criticising. What gatekeeping bs is this, lol?
You attempt to lay out your values all the time, unsolicited, including in this thread. I'm a lefty, I'm a lefty, etc. But I've noticed that in thread after thread, you always find yourself on the right/conservative/authoritarian side of the issue.
And here you are... never showing an interest in stock price manipulation until some hedge funds took it up the behind, for once, and suddenly now it's a problem.
faetal on 1/2/2021 at 01:25
Quote Posted by SubJeff
You really do love jumping to those conclusions.
If multiple people are jumping to conclusions, maybe you weren't clear enough in the first place?
Nameless Voice on 1/2/2021 at 01:33
Quote Posted by heywood
I'm a lefty, I'm a lefty, etc. But I've noticed that in thread after thread, you always find yourself on the right/conservative/authoritarian side of the issue.
The term you're looking for is "liberal".
"Five degrees to the left of centre in good times, five degrees to the right of centre if it affects them personally."
(Though managing to defend both fascists and hedge fund managers in a single week is almost impressive.)
SubJeff on 1/2/2021 at 05:57
Quote Posted by heywood
You attempt to lay out your values all the time, unsolicited, including in this thread. I'm a lefty, I'm a lefty, etc. But I've noticed that in thread after thread, you always find yourself on the right/conservative/authoritarian side of the issue.
And here you are... never showing an interest in stock price manipulation until some hedge funds took it up the behind, for once, and suddenly now it's a problem.
Wow.
I can lay out my values
if I want. I don't
have to address EVERY military conflict in the world before I give an opinion on what's going on in, say, Yemen.
How am I on the "right/conservative/authoritarian side" when the criminality I'm talking about is from the trading platforms please?
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
(Though managing to defend both fascists and hedge fund managers in a single week is almost impressive.)
Oh?
Where have I don't either? Exactly where. Hedge fund managers and fascists, please?
Starker on 1/2/2021 at 07:13
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
Well, our whole discussion seems to be around "what is enough to not be called a capitalist or a conservative". I threw the word "ultra" in, to make sure I think the Democrats are not even close to the middle or even the left. If you compare their actions to European progressive parties. Or if you compare their politics to politics through the last 100 years.
Yes, that's precisely the source of our disagreement -- in my opinion Democrats are a right-leaning centrist party with a significant progressive wing, whereas you claim they are a far right party not very different from the Republicans. Democrats moved significantly to the right at the end of 80s, starting with the New Democrats (or Clinton Democrats) when they latched onto Reagan's neoliberalism. You can see something similar happening with Thatcher and New Labour's Third Way as an eerie parallel to the US. But I would argue that they stayed centrists during Obama and now have slided even more back towards the centre thanks to people like Bernie and Warren.
As for why there has been little change, (and the little there has been has almost entirely been due to Democrats), one part if it is simply that Democrats are not very good at this. If this was in any other place, they'd be the runt of the litter, but in the US they manage to look good simply by virtue of not being Republicans. They are bad at messaging and holistically bad at politics. Every now and then they get a superstar charismatic leader like Clinton or Obama, but most of the time they get their ass handed to them. But, most importantly, they are playing on a tilted field -- the Senate structurally favours Republicans, gerrymandering favours Republicans on a more local level, and being a big tent party inherently makes it more difficult to get things done. Changing things requires a lot of effort whereas opposing change is much easier. And Republicans are very, very good at obstructing things. And that's in addition to the usual pressure from lobbyists and big money interests.
If Democrats wanted to even do something as simple as to proclaim that puppies are cute and cuddly, they'd face fierce, relentless opposition from a sizeable amount of Republicans with a new-found anti-dog position, they wouldn't get a single Republican to vote with them (but a couple of them might make non-committal noises and Susan Collins might furrow her brow at some Republican leader claiming that all puppies should be killed), and they would be endlessly taken to task by the news media how they are are weak on the domestic animal issue.