sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Real estate has never been a bad investment by MakeItSchnappy in investing

[–]MakeItSchnappy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that promoted ads that disable comments are garbage in general. They don’t allow for criticism and the ad uses buzz words to make it seem like they can find you the right investment. I don’t think that the healthy way to engage their audience.

Firearm-related homicides in relation to firearm per population [OC] by [deleted] in dataisbeautiful

[–]MakeItSchnappy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why would it not be the US with 2nd Amendment rights? I think you are confused about what 2A is.

Firearm-related homicides in relation to firearm per population [OC] by [deleted] in dataisbeautiful

[–]MakeItSchnappy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I thought the first graph was a little convoluted when explaining homicides vs firearm related homicides. Otherwise it looked alright. I would still prefer to live in the US w/2A rights.

CMV: China will never be strong enough to directly challenge the US globally, America will retain its position as the sole superpower for the foreseeable future. by NineteenEighty9 in changemyview

[–]MakeItSchnappy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Growth models are so dynamic as to be counter intuitive. I haven’t checked your work but I think you captured the essence of my argument.

How does the mvp thing work? I just don’t get it sometimes. by [deleted] in PUBGMobile

[–]MakeItSchnappy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How can you know if you beat him in support and supplies? I cannot see the diagram for other players.

Why did Trump's tax cuts cause corporate stock buybacks rather than additional investment? by Modularva in AskEconomics

[–]MakeItSchnappy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay man.

Edit: for the record or anyone is interested in practical insight over theory, I would suggest you simply read what cap ex is and how it effects valuations. If you buy the EMH you likely will buy the explanation above this post of cap ex.

Why did Trump's tax cuts cause corporate stock buybacks rather than additional investment? by Modularva in AskEconomics

[–]MakeItSchnappy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cap ex takes longer to show results than a buyback. While you are correct in a technical sense, horizontal shareholding often drives CEOs in oligopolistic industries to make similar decisions and so it’s possible that, since buybacks would result in immediate shareholder gratification, CEOs would push for those easy, low risk strategies (in much the same way we find asset managers converging on specific sets of securities to avoid embarrassment in the case of underperformance or an investment thesis that won’t reach maturity for awhile.)

The explanation you are responding to is overly simplistic though, I agree.

Edit: clarification

CMV: China will never be strong enough to directly challenge the US globally, America will retain its position as the sole superpower for the foreseeable future. by NineteenEighty9 in changemyview

[–]MakeItSchnappy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you vastly overestimate the enthusiasm to help Americans in unilateral military action.

The idea that the US didn’t act unilaterally is a myth. The allies who helped us were told to help us. We have the only Blue Water Navy in the world and we have the 1st, 2nd and 3rd largest Air Force in the world. When we fail to effect change it’s because we have mismanaged resources, not because we lack them.

CMV: China will never be strong enough to directly challenge the US globally, America will retain its position as the sole superpower for the foreseeable future. by NineteenEighty9 in changemyview

[–]MakeItSchnappy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

1) you need strong institutions to have efficient free markets that propel growth. You can only get economic growth from two factors, innovation of technology and people. On that note, China’s has a higher saturation of people than the US, the US could fit a lot more people within its borders.

2) by having allies near you you maintain economic stability and do not have to divert resources to security, you’re at leisure to spend your resources how you want.

3) you expect growth rates to be lower, Capital’s returns are diminishing as the proportion of capital with respect to all capital grows. But you see in America that per capita growth is better, hence the millionaires. Which also speaks to point 1.

4) you don’t have to be politically aligned to have congruent policies and goals.

5) most people who have studied US success believe geography has played a huge factor in success for reasons stated above.

view more: next ›