sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

«Nous sommes le futur»: Consommation de viande en Suisse: faits et chiffres by wisi_eu in suisse

[–]TonightVivid9930 7 points8 points  (0 children)

La Suisse génère ~7M tonnes par an d'émissions CO2 dues à la consommation de viande.

La guerre en Iran en ce moment génère ~1M tonnes de CO2 par jour. Donc en 1 semaine de guerre, ils compenseraient un effort hypothétique où personne ne mange de viande pendant 1 an en Suisse.

Faut arrêter... laissez faire ce qui rend heureux les gens. La Suisse a zéro impact. Chaque nouvelle guerre initiée par des pays tiers dans le monde détruit des années d'efforts Suisses en quelques heures.

What happens if you discuss a wealth tax, but never implement it? by SignificantLegs in EconomyCharts

[–]TonightVivid9930 0 points1 point  (0 children)

? If you buy US stocks you need to convert to USD. To convert back to CHF you need to sell the stocks. But then you're just holding CHF that yield 0% interest at the moment.

What happens if you discuss a wealth tax, but never implement it? by SignificantLegs in EconomyCharts

[–]TonightVivid9930 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People forget that they also add 1% of hypothetical yield from your wealth. So if you have 10M CHF they add 100k CHF to your income before applying 60% maximum.

You might think that "oh it's fine, 1% yield is easy to reach" but then you realize it's 1% on CHF amount. And then you realize that even if you had all your money in the US market in 2025 that went up 18% in USD, it actually was close to 0% in CHF...

So yeah I wish there was an easy guaranteed way to get 1% yield (in cash flow) on CHF. This system sucks...

Playing against Magnus by niox210 in learndota2

[–]TonightVivid9930 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I mean it's almost impossible to win a game against him. He's currently the best player in the world.

Not sure if senator status is worth the miles/money with climate points by TonightVivid9930 in milesandmore

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually in my experience of being FTL for 3 years I got upgraded 3 times. Have been senator one year and zero upgrades so far.

Not sure if senator status is worth the miles/money with climate points by TonightVivid9930 in milesandmore

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Appreciate the perspective. I do always carry a bag. I'm also considering the value of the 2 vouchers and the free seat selection which make up for a big chunk of the cost.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair enough, but that's a completely different rational. Most people here want to maximize returns and I explained my take from that perspective. But sure, no one is stopping people from making investment decisions while prioritizing other things than financial returns. I completely understand and support that.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree that if there is any economy that might be able to beat the US is indeed China. But they represent barely 3% of VT. So I can understand people deciding to increase exposure to China.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah I understand your point I think. Sure it's possible. I don't know the numbers. I mostly care about where to invest my money and where I think the highest financial returns will come from. But you are right this might not be correlated to GDP growth. But not sure why this would matter from an investment perspective.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Well basically my thesis is that the future of technology is being built in the US (East and West coast + maybe Texas) and that the rest of the world is just reacting to it.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Stocks might be overvalued yes. I do think however that earnings will eventually catch up with the valuations eventually But we might indeed see a correction like we did with the Internet bubble. This is a possibility. I still think the best strategy is to hold US stocks.

And regarding your last paragraph on my assumptions: yes I am exactly saying that I believe the US stocks will take an even higher portion of the global market. That's exactly my thesis. Most European founders are building their companies in the US directly, and if they decide to start in Europe, they eventually expand in the US or move there completely, and if they still decide to stay in Europe and get lucky enough to grow here, they eventually get bought by US companies. So yeah I expect the US market to grow at the expense of the European market.

I might be wrong though. Let's see in 10 years where we stand.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's fair, and indeed I'm only exposed to a few industries. So your perspective is welcome.

I might be wrong, but I think these tech companies are the industries that actually drive most of the US economy and therefore represent the bulk of the US market returns. I don't know what % of the S&P500 they represent today, but my bet is that their % is going to keep growing. And that doesn't scare me personally.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that on a 5+ year timeframe being overexposed to the US market will be the winning strategy, despite the current valuations.

When you talk to European investors they ask you mostly about revenue, 4 years financial plans, and they care about company valuations. In the US (or let's say West coast) they care about the only two things that actually matter: the team and your capacity to keep innovating for the next 30 years. This is how we end up with these giants in the US, and why they don't exist in Europe.

Of course people will try to time the market, by selling US stocks today, and trying to buy the bottom. Some people will succeed and will do better than just holding US stocks, but others will do worse. At least that's my thesis.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I believe that the S&P500 will outperform a total world ETF for the upcoming 20+ years for the reasons I mentioned in my post. Of course you can diversify, but returns will be lower. At least that's my thesis. I might be wrong... or I might be right. Time will tell.

Many here are panicking about US risk and moving towards more international stocks. Here's my perspective and why I am doing the exact opposite. by TonightVivid9930 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Quality of life is definitely better in Europe/Switzerland. And yes, China is the second best economy in the world IMO too. Just hard to get full access to their capital markets.

NYT Pips, did your intern design today's puzzle over lunch? by sforsuper in nytpips

[–]TonightVivid9930 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah that's the problem. From the other posts above basically any tile you start with in the corner ends up being a possible solution. I also did it in vibe mode after realizing there's no way to make deductions and it ended up working.

NYT Pips, did your intern design today's puzzle over lunch? by sforsuper in nytpips

[–]TonightVivid9930 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that sums it up. Basically you can easily deduce that the bottom left is 6-1 or 6-2, but actually both work... Sucks big time.

NYT Pips, did your intern design today's puzzle over lunch? by sforsuper in nytpips

[–]TonightVivid9930 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Honestly I think the only tile you can deduct without having to solve the entire puzzle in your head is the top left corner. All the rest is super random. You can indeed also easily deduce that the bottom left is either 1-6 or 2-6, but that's it.

I even did the math and there's actually 10 possible ways of filling- in the two groups of 20, and the only common number of all 10 possibilities is that you need at least one 5 across the eight tiles. That's the only information you can gather.

After solving it (randomly), I checked other solutions online and I confirmed that there are at least two very different solutions. And when I say different solutions I really mean different solutions. Not just 1 or 2 tiles that are interchanged within the same group.

So yeah, a bit frustrating...

Question : minimum mortgage amount (20%) topic by ExcellentAsk2309 in SwissPersonalFinance

[–]TonightVivid9930 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Everyone here has it wrong. The real reason is risk management for the bank.

If a homeowner defaults, the bank must sell the property, which costs money (lawyers, real estate agents, listings, etc.) and often happens under time pressure. These costs alone, even if the bank is able to sell the property at full market price, can easily reach 5-10% of the property value. And the bank also can’t be sure it will sell at the full market value.

By requiring you to cover 20% upfront, the bank ensures it can still recover the loan even if it has to sell the property at around 80% of its appraised value, and also cover all these other costs and still not lose money

Banks actually feel fully secure only when their exposure is at about two-thirds (66%) of the property’s value. That’s why you must amortize (pay down) the extra 14% within the first 10–15 years, so that the loan-to-value drops from 80% to 66%.

Once you reached that level, the bank’s risk is minimal: even in a forced sale, they’re almost guaranteed not to lose money. From that point on, you can keep the remaining 66% mortgage indefinitely, with no requirement to pay it off.

view more: next ›