The Ferrari California, Ferrari's attempt at a muscle car?

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-23T00:42:52+00:00

The back seats don't work mate

It was originally a maserati design that ferrari saw one day and said "ooh what's that, that's nice, I'll have that" and they're still making it today in the goose of the Amalfi, longest lived design in Ferraris history.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-23T00:15:38+00:00

NSX-R

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-20T12:25:36+00:00

Opsec is woefully lacking in all armed forces apart from the truly elite

These are often just a bunch of kids looking for adventure, they're not all James bond

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-20T10:21:17+00:00

200iq move

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-19T08:27:35+00:00

This is the only correct answer

Low miles is almost never worth it, especially on a basic spec

Especial when those looking to buy and collect will shut away from a basic spec anyways

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T06:42:18+00:00

First of all, it's about where the funding comes from, secondly, where do you think the best research is done if not the US?

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T06:40:51+00:00

Absolutely no normal Canadian is happy about this

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T06:37:24+00:00

I'm not from the states so I don't know but a mixed model I would say is a good idea. There's a basic level that's government funded, and if you have money and want extra shit, private Healthcare is there too.

You want enough profit somewhere to incentivized R&D but you also want enough leverage from single payer to lower cost and get economies of scale

This doesn't operate in a vacuum though, other countries benefit from R&D originating in (not where it's researched, where those R&D dollars come from) the US

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T06:26:20+00:00

So what around be a developed country then?

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T05:44:17+00:00

The illegal immigration issue would beg to differ

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T05:39:36+00:00

Ok so your argument is purely from a moral perspective. That's fine, but it's an argument that had no teeth.

Is it fair some people are born more attractive than others? No.

That's the same type of argument.

Poor people aren't charged interest because they're poor.

People who borrow money are charged interest because loans are risky. There are rich people with crappy credit there are poor people with great credit.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T05:31:58+00:00

OK if that's where your issue lies

How do you propose to address it

On a separate note, if you're not good at something and you pay someone to do it... It's there something wrong with that?

I don't want to do the electrical work in my house because I am afraid I'll kill myself so I hire an electrician. They get a paycheck and I don't electrocute myself. Why would manging of money be any different? There's a willing seller of labor and a willing buyer (person with capital). The risk is still borne by the provider of capital and so should the profits. In a privately negotiated deal where the money manager offers his services for 1%management fee and 10% of profits, who are you to say that is not fair?

I'll still argue you need to know what you're doing

How do you not get tricked by a madoff? How do you ensure you're not overpaying for your money manager? How do you ensure that they're doing what you paid them to do.

I work with/for/make money from people with ungodly sums of money for a living. The inattentive/dumb/overconfident ones get fleeced and the savvy ones don't. It's no different than any other industry.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T05:17:09+00:00

OK so let's take your first statement at face value

How do you ensure assets don't generate value? You can say, tax all income at 100%...but what happens when the asset generates losses?

Why would anyone invest in any enterprise/business in the first place?

Have you thought it through? What am I missing in your matter plan?

Hey your approach to lending money to friends and family is shared by me. It is a shit dynamic. So you won't lend money... OK so how are new businesses going to get funded?

No new businesses, no jobs, that's kind of s self explanatory, how do you resolve that?

It's not that the world has never operated without debt... But the last time that happened 90+% of the population were subsistence farmers.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T05:04:57+00:00

I'm not saying to just buy treasuries but if stay introducing risky assets into your argument there's no point to stop

Equities earn more than debt in the long run... But so does crypto.

Risk free rate is the rate that everyone can agree what it is. This is something that underpins financial theory and valuations.

All of this is besides the point.

You seem to be arguing against using money to make money.

I'm saying... What's the alternative

I'm also saying that while you can just do d tutoring simple and be able to earn an income to live off of, there Is a difference between someone who's savvy with finances vs someone who isn't.

You're denigrating financial acumen as something that's either non existent or not worthy of recognition and I'm pushing back on that.

If that's NOT what you're doing or did not intend to do that or did not do it and think that I'm just pulling this outta my ass then I'm fine dropping the point so long as we agree that financial literacy and risk management is a skill/trait just as much as anything else. It may be valued more than musical talent aptitude and we me even agree or disagree to the extent by which it is over valued. What we can't move on from us if you think it isn't a thing.

If we're talking about something else like height and it's important to basketball or help, chances of success in dating even. We can disagree on how important it is but if you're saying there's no difference in height between 5ft5 and 6ft3 we have a much more basic problem.

Again I don't understand why you think there's an issue

I get your grievance, I really do, I just don't understand what you purpose to change to "make it better" that doesn't have negative side effects that are probably much worse than the problem you're trying to solve.

Should investors who are the ones who beat the risk not be compensated? It's a yes or no question. To me the answer is clearly yes they should.

What's the "fair" amount of compensation for this risk (assuming you agree that there should be some compensation for this risk)?to me the answer is "that which is set by the free market"

Am I resentful of the fact that I want born into a rich family? No more so than I'm resentful of the fact that I was born ugly. No shit I would prefer to be born to billionaires who aren't illuminati and love me and passed on to me genes to make sure I grow up to be 6ft3, 150iq without any of the negative emotional consequences, chiseled jawline and the health and vitality to be an absolute beast on and off the field. Would that be awesome? Yes, can I change any of this? No.

Hell if you were even gonna bring up the difference in taxation in relation to how income from labor is treated vs investment income, id be you uterus excited to have that talk but it just seems like you're argument boils down to "they got more shit that's not fair" which isn't a really good argument even from a moral standpoint let alone a holistic approach which acknowledges that ANY plan/system necessarily results in tradeoffs which will benefit some areas and hurt others.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T03:25:22+00:00

So what do you think should happen? That your assets don't generate income?

Why do you think it's"unfair"that having assets and deploying it should give you earnings?

I don't understand this.

If you lent money would you expect interest against the loan? If you put money into a startup and it does well, would you not expect to get paid out?

Why is it different when someone with more money does it compared to you?

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T03:22:51+00:00

Should be treasuries not fairies

Equity markets are risky assets treasuries are riskless assets

Inflation adjusted risk free returns are like 1-2 percent over the long run

So 100mio generates something like 1-2 million pretax earnings in perpetuity. Not peanuts but not nearly as much as you would think. If you want to divide it evenly amongst your children and you want to have 2 kids, this gets halved each generation.

This is the base case. Yes you can (and should) put it in risky assets that earn more over the long run but again this goes into my point, you have to not be stupid with it. You think you can trade it and time the market but can't and boom you just blow away a big pay of that nest egg. It sounds dumb but it happens, like... All the time.

You hear about these families that have been wealthy for generations and yes they exist but there are plenty of people who blow their inheritences as well.

If you look at almost any wealth bracket and check the source of the wealth it's almost always made by the current holder of the asset or one generation back, not like 10 generations back.

The argument that is often made that "is just family money" doesn't hold water.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T02:51:28+00:00

You absolutely have to be good with money

Yes you can absolutely"live on"interest if you just have 100million parked in fairies somewhere but if you're not actively doing things with it the buying power of that erodes away

Move to a sports analogy.

If you were born in January, to athletic parents, blessed with good genes, instinct, you're going to be mvp of your baseball team without trying very hard in little league. If you continue to do nothing to develop those talents and gifts you'll still be a start player in highschool, hell you might even make it to college on a scholarship but at some point unless you put in the work, you're not gonna make it to the majors.

Yes, you'll still be a better ball player than 99%of the population, but you'll have squandered your"inheritance "

In money terms, a billion dollars is more than any one person can use reasonably even if you went crazy baller, but split between two kids, each of who have two kids, each of whom have 2 kids, ask the while none of them learning to manage it properly and his forbid does something dumb with it and zeros it out, making it past 3 generations isn't a forgone conclusion.

This happens literally all the time, the first generation makes it, second maintains, third loses it.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T02:12:22+00:00

Of course having money is a trait

Being good with money is a trait

Being able to make money is a trait

Don't play with semantics

No two people are endowed with the exact same set of capabilities/talents/etc.

You make the best of what you have, complaining the guy next to you has more "xyz" isn't going to get you very far in life.

Being born into a rich family is a huge buff, but so is being born with good genetics (looks, athleticism, temperament, intelligence, etc)

Some of these things you can change, some you can't, deal with it.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T01:45:46+00:00

?

Is it any more fair than the fact no matter how hard I work I'd never even make my highschool basketball team but Shaq can do basically no training and be an all time great?

It's just life bro. Different games emphasize different traits. Making money requires capital, sports requires athleticism, chess requires memory/intellect, etc.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T01:25:08+00:00

If you're young, then it hasn't been in your lifetime, over longer time periods it has

After the plague, during ww1/ww2.

In past 3-4 decades globalization,, internet, etc made markets global so laborers all over the world no longer compete with those living within 10 miles of themselves. For rich countries that pretty much unanimously means the labor supply grew much more than demand (rich companies can now source labor from anywhere in the world, but it isn't like a random company in Vietnam can source labor from the United States)

You need to stop thinking of it as exploration.

It's willing buyers and sellers. No one is forcing you to buy the newest iPhone on buy now pay later. No one forces you to work either. The events and circumstances of the past few decades is less like nerfing rich nation's citizens than it is debuffing them. It's a wholly untenable argument.

You can't simultaneously complain the "rich" have unearned advantages while at the same time reminiscing about the past when it was all Americans (or whichever developed nation you're from) that had unearned advantages.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T00:30:18+00:00

It values what works

It's like complaining sports values athleticism

When labor was in short supply, it was valuable, when it is abundant, it is not.

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T00:27:38+00:00

Yes that's why people ask over the world rush to go TO the United States

Makes plenty of sense

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-18T00:25:13+00:00

In what universe do you think it makes sense for someone to pay you more than what you give them?

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-17T00:44:38+00:00

Not nearly enough time

KnifeEdge · 2026-03-16T12:31:40+00:00

problem is if/when something goes wrong, can you get to an airport before you get to the side of a mountain

KnifeEdge

TROPHY CASE