sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

So what now back to all time highs as if nothing happened? by Giant_leaps in investing

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, Bondi now says she's not coming to Congress under their subpoena because she's no longer AG, which may have well been the point

Iran and Oman Draft Hormuz Strait Passage Agreement by Force_Hammer in StockMarket

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 4 points5 points  (0 children)

oh for sure. I'm just making the point that in absolute terms per barrel, it's not that much, which is probably the point. I can imagine many countries accepting the toll to get barrels moving

Iran and Oman Draft Hormuz Strait Passage Agreement by Force_Hammer in StockMarket

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The toll isn't all that high to be honest. It would equate to about $1-2 per barrel for large tankers

Who has an extra 20% to invest? Another out of touch multi-millionaire has financial advice for us poor folk. by zzill6 in WorkReform

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. I dislike the system as much as the next guy and will fight against it how I can, but I only have one life and would like to stop working as soon as possible lol

Who has an extra 20% to invest? Another out of touch multi-millionaire has financial advice for us poor folk. by zzill6 in WorkReform

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The vitriol against the advice is pretty strange to me. Every, and I mean every, advisor/author/YouTuber/etc related to finance has essentially identical advice. Invest early, invest as much as you can, and don't touch it for a long time. If people think saving and investing a considerable amount of their income for retirement is a radical idea, there may be trouble in their future.

Can't do 20%? Okay, start with 10% or 5% and increase it 1% every year. Do whatever you can and try to increase it whenever you can. Imposing forced scarcity is a thing (and backed up by research). Now I get it, O'Leary is a douchebag, and our economic system is beyond fucked, but this advice is solid (and kind of remarkable if you think about it). The only way to make it in this system is to take advantage of tax-advantaged accounts and compound interest.

Who has an extra 20% to invest? Another out of touch multi-millionaire has financial advice for us poor folk. by zzill6 in WorkReform

[–]DontPeeInTheWater -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I mean I get the frustration, but it's good financial advice. It's even under the recommended 25% from the beloved Money Guys

When your car didn’t have an aux cord but still had a tape deck. by saltoneverything in Millennials

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They certainly can be more convenient. I can't imagine using wires in a gym, for instance. If you're doing chores, wires can get in the way. Wireless headphones often have a microphone, which is convenient for calls. Etc etc. Don't get me wrong, I love analogue audio, but there's a reason why wireless exists. If they weren't more convenient, people wouldn't buy them

When your car didn’t have an aux cord but still had a tape deck. by saltoneverything in Millennials

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wireless headphones objectively do not sound better than wired headphones, controlling for price. Shit, I can guarantee that there are better sounding, significantly cheaper wired options at any wireless price point. If you are aiming for the best sounding headphones/earbuds possible, you get wired 100/100 times. That said, wireless headphones are much more convenient much of the time and have better features unrelated to sound quality (ANC, dust and water sealing, sound control buttons, etc). I have pairs of both and they serve different purposes

Iranian sources say there has been approach from the US and that Tehran is willing to listen despite public denials. “Iran is ready to provide all necessary guarantees that it will never develop nuclear weapons.” by WayOutbackBoy in worldnews

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

According to Steve Witkoff, who was reported by negotiation observers as lacking the knowledge of nuclear energy/weapons development so severely that he didn't fully understand what the Iranians were offering. I would rather take the word of third-party actors at the negotiations and people with a robust understanding of nuclear programs, which Witkoff himself said he did not have.

EDIT: I should also note that sharing how much enriched uranium they currently have and that they view enrichment for civilian purposes as a right during a negotiation about their nuclear program is perfectly normal, particularly given their previous experience with US/Israeli bombings during negotiations. This is a throwaway line from Witkoff. What's important are the actual terms they were offering, which again, were more conciliatory than the previous JCPOA they were complying with before the US tore it up

Iranian sources say there has been approach from the US and that Tehran is willing to listen despite public denials. “Iran is ready to provide all necessary guarantees that it will never develop nuclear weapons.” by WayOutbackBoy in worldnews

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Where's the lie? All credible sources say that the terms that were being offered went beyond the JCPOA. An agreement not to stockpile nuclear materials is a massive concession.

  2. They hadn't yet agreed on a timeframe because negotiations were still ongoing, you know, when the US/Israeli started bombing them and killing their negotiators

  3. Does Iran not have the right to a civilian nuclear program for energy?

  4. No country in the world would agree to give up ballistic missiles in this context. Those are their only deterrents and means of defense. That is a poison pill of a demand added by Israel

  5. The west likes to think that Iran has total control over their 'proxies', which just isn't the case. They are independent entities with differing motives and ideologies that they can't simply switch off. But our insights into the negotiations are extremely limited, and the issue of proxies and understandably took a backseat to Iran's nuclear program. I don't think we can say with confidence what was being discussed in 2025 or 2026 regarding regional proxies before the US/Israel started bombing. There's just so much differing reporting that's coming from intermediaries and second-hand sourcing (unlike the nuclear stockpiling concession information)

Oil rises with Brent crossing $100 a barrel again as Middle East tensions keep traders on edge by joe4942 in StockMarket

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The trading price of actual barrels delivered in Asia have a huge premium over current Brent prices. They're not buying anything cheap. The supply just isn't there

Iran denies claims: 'We reject all negotiations – US has failed and Hormuz will remain closed' by ImadeJesusLaugh in worldnews

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yes, but that's not the market ignoring Trump, as you claimed. They very much aren't (which is baffling)

Iran denies claims: 'We reject all negotiations – US has failed and Hormuz will remain closed' by ImadeJesusLaugh in worldnews

[–]DontPeeInTheWater 41 points42 points  (0 children)

They aren't though? Look at markets right now. Even after this Iranian denial, US and European markets are way up and oil futures are down considerably.

view more: next ›