daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I don't think they should drop economics. Basic macro and micro are good to have, if for no other reason than it might lead more people to actually know what U3 and GDP actually represent, instead of going with whatever their gut thinks they mean. Even better if it might help people understand things like automatic stabilizers or the actual impact of stimulus spending during a recession. This stuff is complicated, but it's not that complicated. It's just that right now I'm not sure how many people know their ass from a hole in the ground on the subject unless they've actually hit Econ 101 in college or grad school.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
It just occurred to me that what the Apes* are doing doesn’t end in the MOASS, it ends with them having to run GameStop (well it doesn’t end in that either, just hypothetically)
The thing that strikes me is that for all their inspiration from the Big Short, they forgot the very ending of that movie where the government stepped in to avoid actual collapse. Do they think that if their scenario plays out the government wouldn't do so again? It wouldn't even have to be a bailout, couldn't regulators just declare GME shares void?
The thing that strikes me is that for all their inspiration from the Big Short, they forgot the very ending of that movie where the government stepped in to avoid actual collapse. Do they think that if their scenario plays out the government wouldn't do so again? It wouldn't even have to be a bailout, couldn't regulators just declare GME shares void?
Oh they’re counting on the government stepping in - see that’s where they get the infinite money from.
Just so much dumb.
I wonder if Daniel Craig would be willing to cameo in Dan’s next video.
The line at the end about blackjack is just perfect.
A fundamental misunderstanding of the game with layers of magical thinking stacked on top.
Yeah this 100% belonged in the conspiracy thread; assuming G&T doesn't have a speed run megathread. Those people went from a basic "get rich quick" scam to "One weird trick to establish the New New World Order," in what, a year? Two? Driving their accidental cult leader off the internet in the process?
Even in the early days of Amazon. You know Bezos secret was? He figured out that not only could he sell books online, but he could also sell books at full-price AND get someone's cash instantly, while buying books from the wholesaler with net 30- or 60-day terms. He got the cash up front, reinvested in his business, then paid his bills later. From day 1, Amazon was a cash positive business. And what do we do with cash. We reinvest. And what happens when smart people invest in long-term growth. They make even more cash.
God, I dimly remember when Amazon only sold books.
Even in the early days of Amazon. You know Bezos secret was? He figured out that not only could he sell books online, but he could also sell books at full-price AND get someone's cash instantly, while buying books from the wholesaler with net 30- or 60-day terms. He got the cash up front, reinvested in his business, then paid his bills later. From day 1, Amazon was a cash positive business. And what do we do with cash. We reinvest. And what happens when smart people invest in long-term growth. They make even more cash.
God, I dimly remember when Amazon only sold books.
Even in the early days of Amazon. You know Bezos secret was? He figured out that not only could he sell books online, but he could also sell books at full-price AND get someone's cash instantly, while buying books from the wholesaler with net 30- or 60-day terms. He got the cash up front, reinvested in his business, then paid his bills later. From day 1, Amazon was a cash positive business. And what do we do with cash. We reinvest. And what happens when smart people invest in long-term growth. They make even more cash.
God, I dimly remember when Amazon only sold books.
Even in the early days of Amazon. You know Bezos secret was? He figured out that not only could he sell books online, but he could also sell books at full-price AND get someone's cash instantly, while buying books from the wholesaler with net 30- or 60-day terms. He got the cash up front, reinvested in his business, then paid his bills later. From day 1, Amazon was a cash positive business. And what do we do with cash. We reinvest. And what happens when smart people invest in long-term growth. They make even more cash.
God, I dimly remember when Amazon only sold books.
World's largest killer of local bookstores.
And then Amazon got ambitious.
The first thing I bought from Amazon was Hennessy & Patterson because it was way cheaper than the either the campus store or the bookstore just off campus. They only sold books back then.
0
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
My only economics education was realizing the student loan I had signed up for was designed to screw me, then a career in fraud prevention, realizing that many people are trying to screw you. I don't understand many many things about economics but a healthy skepticism that people are often trying to screw you seems to be a reliable basic guide to how things work and could be healthily applied to why crypto investment platforms are eager to take your cash despite saying it's rubbish and their online money is much better.
My only economics education was realizing the student loan I had signed up for was designed to screw me, then a career in fraud prevention, realizing that many people are trying to screw you. I don't understand many many things about economics but a healthy skepticism that people are often trying to screw you seems to be a reliable basic guide to how things work and could be healthily applied to why crypto investment platforms are eager to take your cash despite saying it's rubbish and their online money is much better.
Whenever someone is trying to sell me on a financial service I always ask them to explain how they (the company, not the person) make money from the service. The response to that question can be very… illuminating.
Even in the early days of Amazon. You know Bezos secret was? He figured out that not only could he sell books online, but he could also sell books at full-price AND get someone's cash instantly, while buying books from the wholesaler with net 30- or 60-day terms. He got the cash up front, reinvested in his business, then paid his bills later. From day 1, Amazon was a cash positive business. And what do we do with cash. We reinvest. And what happens when smart people invest in long-term growth. They make even more cash.
God, I dimly remember when Amazon only sold books.
World's largest killer of local bookstores.
I thought it was a private equity buyout that killed borders and waldenbooks?
My only economics education was realizing the student loan I had signed up for was designed to screw me, then a career in fraud prevention, realizing that many people are trying to screw you. I don't understand many many things about economics but a healthy skepticism that people are often trying to screw you seems to be a reliable basic guide to how things work and could be healthily applied to why crypto investment platforms are eager to take your cash despite saying it's rubbish and their online money is much better.
See, I think that’s actually the weird thing - a lot of these people do operate with the sense that somebody is out to get them. But I think they’re easy marks precisely because that (not entirely inaccurate) paranoia is an easy tell for exactly how to get past that person’s defenses. I think it’s often an indicator of insecurity. Just tell them that they’re right, the system is out to get them, they’re smart to see it… but there’s actually a way to get one over on the system that they don’t want you to know about!
And once they’re hooked, they’re hooked deep, because that fear of being scammed is a driving force in their life - to admit they fell for the scam is going to do some real deep damage.
I think there’s gotta be a lot more complexity than that on the individual level, but I’m increasingly confident that’s the basic cycle - insecurity reflects vulnerability, conmen read that and make the ‘you can be on the inside’ pitch, and then that same insecurity prevents people from just taking the hit and walking away.
Having watched a lot of MLM and bro finance deep dives recently. Dan's recent video has the same kind of cultist/scientology (but I repeat myself) talk and terminology. They have their own terms to other people out and find out the bad undesirables so you only get the good tech.
What's weird is like this scam already happened, the people who are perpetuating the MOASS cult are just as much the victims as the ones running it. Its fucking weird. Its like a self help group for the conned where they just keep conning each other for increasingly sadder amounts of money.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I don't think they should drop economics. Basic macro and micro are good to have, if for no other reason than it might lead more people to actually know what U3 and GDP actually represent, instead of going with whatever their gut thinks they mean. Even better if it might help people understand things like automatic stabilizers or the actual impact of stimulus spending during a recession. This stuff is complicated, but it's not that complicated. It's just that right now I'm not sure how many people know their ass from a hole in the ground on the subject unless they've actually hit Econ 101 in college or grad school.
I think we have a misunderstanding here of what they teach in economics classes in high school. The only thing available to me was home economics and we learned how to bake cheap cookies and sew a pillow. At no point did what to do should you stumble into a bank come into it.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
I don't think they should drop economics. Basic macro and micro are good to have, if for no other reason than it might lead more people to actually know what U3 and GDP actually represent, instead of going with whatever their gut thinks they mean. Even better if it might help people understand things like automatic stabilizers or the actual impact of stimulus spending during a recession. This stuff is complicated, but it's not that complicated. It's just that right now I'm not sure how many people know their ass from a hole in the ground on the subject unless they've actually hit Econ 101 in college or grad school.
I think we have a misunderstanding here of what they teach in economics classes in high school. The only thing available to me was home economics and we learned how to bake cheap cookies and sew a pillow. At no point did what to do should you stumble into a bank come into it.
When I did home ec, they covered basic household finances and budgeting, including filling out a 1040EZ. Then as a senior I took AP Economics (which was introductory macro.)
Growing up in Texas, we had a macroeconomics class that was mandatory for a public high school diploma. It was basic as hell with with stuff about supply and demand, GDP, inflation, and how compound interest and the stock market works. It focused on neoclassical theory, as I recall. But to make it fun for the kids, we sang songs about scarcity and played a stock picking game for small prizes. Yes, in high school. This was during the dot com boom, so we got to witness some wild daily swings in certain tech stocks and IPOs. The course did not, however, contain practical home budget concepts like how to open a bank account or do your taxes. Like sex ed, it was a class that was commonly taught by an athletics coach. Not sure if it's still a thing in Texas - wouldn't surprise me if it was cut years ago.
my high school had AP macro; in hindsight it was... rudimentary. It probably covered about half of proper macro 201, a course which itself would not provide really any armor against falling into this type of investment scheme (aside from the general critical thinking skills associated with undergrad, anyway)
this is one of those situations where a little bit of knowledge can be more dangerous than none at all; a total neophyte might find the whole WSB/GME shenanigan confusing enough not to get involved. Meanwhile the kind of basic knowledge gained from intro micro/macro courses might juuuuust be enough for someone to convince themselves it all makes sense
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
My only economics education was realizing the student loan I had signed up for was designed to screw me, then a career in fraud prevention, realizing that many people are trying to screw you. I don't understand many many things about economics but a healthy skepticism that people are often trying to screw you seems to be a reliable basic guide to how things work and could be healthily applied to why crypto investment platforms are eager to take your cash despite saying it's rubbish and their online money is much better.
See, I think that’s actually the weird thing - a lot of these people do operate with the sense that somebody is out to get them. But I think they’re easy marks precisely because that (not entirely inaccurate) paranoia is an easy tell for exactly how to get past that person’s defenses. I think it’s often an indicator of insecurity. Just tell them that they’re right, the system is out to get them, they’re smart to see it… but there’s actually a way to get one over on the system that they don’t want you to know about!
And once they’re hooked, they’re hooked deep, because that fear of being scammed is a driving force in their life - to admit they fell for the scam is going to do some real deep damage.
I think there’s gotta be a lot more complexity than that on the individual level, but I’m increasingly confident that’s the basic cycle - insecurity reflects vulnerability, conmen read that and make the ‘you can be on the inside’ pitch, and then that same insecurity prevents people from just taking the hit and walking away.
Yes an interesting point. I think my statement was incorrect and an oversimplification.
Specific knowledge of eg. what a ponzi is and how they may construct a story of alleged profits is important as well.
It’s news that could rattle Bankman-Fried even more than he already is as the once-crypto kingpin enters the second day of a federal fraud trial. Alongside federal campaign finance violations, Bankman-Fried is accused of using billions of dollars of stolen customer funds to prop up his massive crypto empire. According to unnamed sources speaking to The Wall Street Journal, employees at FTX discovered there was a backdoor Alameda had into FTX customer wallets several months before the news went public. They brought it to the attention of one member of FTX’s senior leadership, but the company reportedly ignored the problem.
Michael Lewis at book launch event says Sam Bankman-Fried watched his 60 Minutes interview with his cellmates, the former president of Ecuador and the former AG of Mexico. "They all loved it, and afterwards the prison guards were asking them for crypto investment advice."
Michael Lewis at book launch event says Sam Bankman-Fried watched his 60 Minutes interview with his cellmates, the former president of Ecuador and the former AG of Mexico. "They all loved it, and afterwards the prison guards were asking them for crypto investment advice."
See, the lack of an Oxford comma is important
okay, so there is a former AG of Mexico and a former Equadorian President who are currently in prison.
for the Oxford comma to matter... SBF watched the interview with a different former president of Ecuador and the former AG of Mexico who aren't prisoners?
Or they are the same ones and they all got transported together to for a watch party?
or it's the same people( who are in the same prison but different cells) and some additional unnamed criminals who share a cell with SBF?
Why have we not monetized former world leader prison into a reality show?
Apparently, Sam Bankman-Fried's lawyers forgot the first rule of trial lawyers - don't piss off the judge:
How fed up? So fed up I could barely count the number of overruled objections I’d recorded in my notebook, marking hiccup after hiccup for the defense. Kaplan’s sheer exhaustion with SBF’s lawyers was manifest—through skeptical facial expressions, muted gesticulations, multiple sidebars, and on-the-record comments (alternating between snarky and serious) that were aimed at unmistakable targets. Sitting near the back of the courtroom, I felt like I gained a firsthand understanding of what the former federal prosecutor Robert Katzberg meant when he wrote in Slate that Kaplan “has a remarkable record of keeping a tight rein on lawyers appearing before him.” What did SBF’s legal defense, consisting of attorneys from Cohen & Gresser, do to warrant this? Mostly repeating themselves. A lot.
Edit: In Hollywood Would Call This Cliched:
The judge was so primed for both the defense’s strange questions and the prosecution’s willingness to push back that at one point he yelled “sustained” before government attorneys stood up to register their objection.
the defense is really trying the "SBF couldn't have intentionally stolen the money because he didn't spend it on a yacht or a lambo" strategy
just a $30M penthouse, private jets, a $16M house for his parents plus $10M in cash, chartered planes for their amazon packages...
SBF's lawyer: Then you got $6 million in cash in mid 2022, right?
Yedidia: Yes.
SBF's lawyer: Sam was making a lot of money too, right?
Yedidia: Yes.
SBF's lawyer: But he didn't buy a yacht, did he?
AUSA: Objection!
Posts
*the marks, not the ones doing the pump and dump
Oh they’re counting on the government stepping in - see that’s where they get the infinite money from.
Just so much dumb.
I wonder if Daniel Craig would be willing to cameo in Dan’s next video.
Yeah this 100% belonged in the conspiracy thread; assuming G&T doesn't have a speed run megathread. Those people went from a basic "get rich quick" scam to "One weird trick to establish the New New World Order," in what, a year? Two? Driving their accidental cult leader off the internet in the process?
Bananas.
God, I dimly remember when Amazon only sold books.
World's largest killer of local bookstores.
Do not engage the Watermelons.
And then Amazon got ambitious.
The first thing I bought from Amazon was Hennessy & Patterson because it was way cheaper than the either the campus store or the bookstore just off campus. They only sold books back then.
twenty here and economics was a semester long course with the over half being like, goverment and civics or something. Both had AP variants too.
Whenever someone is trying to sell me on a financial service I always ask them to explain how they (the company, not the person) make money from the service. The response to that question can be very… illuminating.
I thought it was a private equity buyout that killed borders and waldenbooks?
See, I think that’s actually the weird thing - a lot of these people do operate with the sense that somebody is out to get them. But I think they’re easy marks precisely because that (not entirely inaccurate) paranoia is an easy tell for exactly how to get past that person’s defenses. I think it’s often an indicator of insecurity. Just tell them that they’re right, the system is out to get them, they’re smart to see it… but there’s actually a way to get one over on the system that they don’t want you to know about!
And once they’re hooked, they’re hooked deep, because that fear of being scammed is a driving force in their life - to admit they fell for the scam is going to do some real deep damage.
I think there’s gotta be a lot more complexity than that on the individual level, but I’m increasingly confident that’s the basic cycle - insecurity reflects vulnerability, conmen read that and make the ‘you can be on the inside’ pitch, and then that same insecurity prevents people from just taking the hit and walking away.
What's weird is like this scam already happened, the people who are perpetuating the MOASS cult are just as much the victims as the ones running it. Its fucking weird. Its like a self help group for the conned where they just keep conning each other for increasingly sadder amounts of money.
pleasepaypreacher.net
But what if everyone is the greater fool in a scam and all literally wasting money?
pleasepaypreacher.net
If everyone is the greater fool forever you just have a market.
I think we have a misunderstanding here of what they teach in economics classes in high school. The only thing available to me was home economics and we learned how to bake cheap cookies and sew a pillow. At no point did what to do should you stumble into a bank come into it.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
pleasepaypreacher.net
When I did home ec, they covered basic household finances and budgeting, including filling out a 1040EZ. Then as a senior I took AP Economics (which was introductory macro.)
this is one of those situations where a little bit of knowledge can be more dangerous than none at all; a total neophyte might find the whole WSB/GME shenanigan confusing enough not to get involved. Meanwhile the kind of basic knowledge gained from intro micro/macro courses might juuuuust be enough for someone to convince themselves it all makes sense
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Yes an interesting point. I think my statement was incorrect and an oversimplification.
Specific knowledge of eg. what a ponzi is and how they may construct a story of alleged profits is important as well.
It is morally wrong to allow a sucker to keep their money
I always knew that like financial writers are fucking idiots but my god.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Remember, this is the same man who has been publicly shitting on Michael Oher in order to protect his friends (and his own reputation.)
pleasepaypreacher.net
okay, so there is a former AG of Mexico and a former Equadorian President who are currently in prison.
for the Oxford comma to matter... SBF watched the interview with a different former president of Ecuador and the former AG of Mexico who aren't prisoners?
Or they are the same ones and they all got transported together to for a watch party?
or it's the same people( who are in the same prison but different cells) and some additional unnamed criminals who share a cell with SBF?
Why have we not monetized former world leader prison into a reality show?
What I’m saying is that if it has to involve the blockchain to rein in Netflix’s crimes against humanity and decency, I’m willing to hear them out.
Edit: In Hollywood Would Call This Cliched:
- Those lawyers, probably
pleasepaypreacher.net
Given the "quality" of arguments he's getting from the defense:
...can you blame him for his lack of patience?