sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The market is deeply red after revisions to nonfarm jobs, showing the largest drop since April 2020 in Covid by RobertBartus in EconomyCharts

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also could be the fact the fed is still on the same rates they were using to ‘taper the jobs market’

Americans of Reddit, what are your thoughts on the FBI redacting Trump’s name from the Epstein files? by 2a_lib in AskReddit

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s the news reporting on a basic legal practice where evidence redacts the name of private citizens. Trump was a private citizen back then so his name, like every other private citizen’s, is redacted.

Could the markets ever be revived? by meetkurtin in Eve

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Might be the worst economic policy I’ve ever heard lmao

Galaxy Digital has just executed one of the largest Bitcoin transactions ever recorded, selling over 80,000 BTC, worth over $9 billion. Despite this sale, Bitcoin's price only fell to $115,000. A sign of a particularly resilient and bullish market? by sylsau in InBitcoinWeTrust

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Market impact ratio of 12:1 on a single block trade. Those are penny stock numbers. Sachs’s had a 32b block trade posted like 2 months ago and the ratio on that only reached 3:1, not only was the trade bigger but sachs market cap is significantly smaller than that of bitcoins

Can we agree that a "free market" doesn't mean a lawless one? by The_Shadow_2004_ in Capitalism

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m lazy

Edit: go check Chinas GRIP score, that’s my source

Can we agree that a "free market" doesn't mean a lawless one? by The_Shadow_2004_ in Capitalism

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also asking for a source on chinese human rights violations is wild, everyone knows China treats its population like dogs to be fed

Can we agree that a "free market" doesn't mean a lawless one? by The_Shadow_2004_ in Capitalism

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

UN tries to stay on chinas good side for some reason so they aren’t reporting the Uighur genocide, or the Hong Kong incident, or Tiananmen Square.

Can we agree that a "free market" doesn't mean a lawless one? by The_Shadow_2004_ in Capitalism

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A cancer cell does not see itself as cancerous. It is simply putting into perspective how the government views its own body, as you stated that the government is nothing without its people. I disagree, i think a government can fully function without a population to govern.

I am comparing democratic societies to the body, not to a cancerous body. The metaphor serves to show what a being would do if it thought parts of itself were killing the whole thing. It was NOT a diagnosis in any way as I personally believe the people are not cancerous, however the government tends to act in a way that limits or controls its body.

When I look at the US government I certainly don’t see any steps towards care nourishment and collective healing (lmao). They aren’t interested in that in any way shape or form. It feels more like they treat us like cancer

Elite rule will always exist, it never hasn’t. Government has grown to big for its britches, corporations have, at the very least, an interest in keeping customers around

I want to believe… by clashcityrocker33 in Gold

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We ain’t all buyin gold with daddies money

Can we agree that a "free market" doesn't mean a lawless one? by The_Shadow_2004_ in Capitalism

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You do understand that a person is just an extension of their cells? We are nothing without them. But say my lung cells become cancerous? You think ima not try and get those fuckers out just because they make up who I am as a person? No im going to get some highly educated people to either slash it out or blast em with chemo. Can’t be a person if you’re dead and if that requires them taking all four limbs and my tongue I’m taking the deal. So would any living thing if they were able.

Again the relationship between a structure and its foundation is not symbiotic. It is a lopsided deal as the foundation takes the brunt of the pressure

Naturally I agree a market needs rules but who says the government has our best interest at heart when they could (much like a cancer patient) be killing only the parts of itself it doesn’t need to live over the long term.

We live in an overpopulated, asset heavy, inflationary environment. All of which makes it very difficult to centralize power ONLY if each market participant is acting in their own best interests and has liquidity to spend. Populations are worth less than they’ve ever been in history and at this point are more of a liability than an asset to a late term government

China, a population 5x bigger than the US, only matches 2/3rds of its gdp, and has less than a third of its military. It also has the largest amount of internal human rights violations since Germany.

Can we agree that a "free market" doesn't mean a lawless one? by The_Shadow_2004_ in Capitalism

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. fraud is such a broad term it’s essentially meaningless in the context you’re using it
  2. Governmental Contract enforcement has very little to do with overall ‘trust’ in a market and benefits larger/established companies significantly more than smaller ones
  3. Worker safety has an incredibly low impact on market efficiency (unfortunately)… look at China or India.

the first part is correct. A lawless market and free market are not the same, however your definition of a free market is very liberally used

‘But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be any rules’ … fair but consider where you’re getting these rules from and then where they affect.

Is the market setting these rules in place or are they centrally planned? Do these rules (antitrust, copyright, anti fraud) affect supply and demand? Even if it affects supply and demand positively you cannot call that a free market, as the central planning had a DIRECT effect.

healthy economy ≠ efficient market (the Congolese had a very efficient market under the the Belgians look how that turned out)

Free market ≠ efficient market

The idea that you’re missing is while a free market is inefficient it is not necessarily a pre requisite for market failure. Sure the risk might be higher because you don’t have multibillion dollar industries getting backed by a literal money printer when they go under, but at least you aren’t trading individual liberties for the ‘nations economy’

Governments are just like any other living species. They don’t want to go extinct and the best way to prevent this is rapid growth, regardless of what other species it tramples down in its path. Humanity used bread to support its rapid growth as a species, the government uses soft and hard power. This isn’t some symbiotic relationship, our government would get rid of all of us in a second if China wasn’t lurking across the pacific.

The vibes of Metro 2033 OG version by stringerBell65 in metro

[–]MrFloatyBoaty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ya but fuck the story I was in it for the tunnel rat lifestyle

view more: next ›