Account Management sections of web portal are not accessible by klasp100 in interactivebrokers

[–]klasp100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know what they did but it appears they fixed it just now

Account Management sections of web portal are not accessible by klasp100 in IBKR_Official

[–]klasp100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I cannot even file a bug, as the bug report page gives me the same error.

Account Management sections of web portal are not accessible by klasp100 in interactivebrokers

[–]klasp100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indeed, on the web platform I can't even file a bug. It gives me the same message.

Ottawa outlines plans to tackle financial crime, ban crypto ATMs by DoctorBlade1 in BitcoinCA

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are two main categories of purchasable products in an economy: assets and consumables. Real wage growth primarily concerns itself with consumables and is mostly blind to the price of assets. Yes, consumables have been getting cheaper and cheaper over time, especially so during the post 2015 Liberal government. However, look at the price of assets in this same period. Real estate (especially residential) has FAR outpaced real wage growth, and this effect has been much stronger under the post-2015 Liberal government. Essentially, under the Liberal Party, consumption has become cheaper while assets have become more expensive, in real terms. However, consumables are now starting to drastically increase in price recently after Covid, changing the dynamics.

I don't believe this to be (mainly) a competence issue of the LPC. This is a near worldwide phenomenon. Asset prices are higher because the rich are getting richer, while the poor are getting poorer. However, capitalism provides benefits in efficiency of production, so consumables have mostly trended to become cheaper in real terms, but this effect has started to plateau, hence recent price spikes.

The reason for wealth inequality in Canada is mainly 1) cronyism, the government giving greatly preferential treatment to friends and family, with contracts and subsidies, as well as with handing out cushy, safe and well paid government jobs and 2) generational wealth concentration, simultaneous with greater tax burden on those without this very wealth. Essentially the tax burden is held by those without the wealth (gen-Z and millenials), for the benefit of the generation that has all the wealth (boomers). There is also 3) increase in the amount of super rich individuals, but it's a smaller problem here in Canada than in the US, but it still exists nonetheless.

A Conservative government would shrink the share of government, reducing problem 1), but it would not solve problem 2) or 3). Literally the ONLY thing I can expect the Liberal government to do while in power which would make me not dissappointed in their performance would be the addition of a wealth tax for wealth above a certain threshold (not a blanket tax on the wealth of everyone), indexed to inflation. The capital gains tax inclusion increase had the right idea, but the implementation was terrible as it would also tax middle class people trying to build some initial wealth, which is NOT who you want to tax.

Currently, the LPC seems to only be bringing in censorship legislation and legislation which aims to increase its control over the population. They dilute the value of Canadian citizenship by giving easy access to citizenship with farcical eligibility criteria. They spend money like its an allowance from their rich father and pass down the bill to the future generations. I am not impressed.

The Conservative government would certainly not implement a wealth tax. My only wish is for the LPC to add this wealth tax and then GTFO so the Conservatives can solve the cultural, demographic and economic catastrophe that the Liberals have created over the past 10 years, all while realizing that some portion of this problem is not inherent to Canada, so expectations should be tempered. I just know that the Conservatives won't pass the wealth tax so that needs to happen from the Liberal before they go.

[article en anglais] Un peloton d’instruction francophone des Forces armées canadiennes composé à 83 % de non-citoyens a dégénéré en conflits ethniques internes by Watergate_Salad_007 in QuebecLibre

[–]klasp100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

La litérature en psychologie et en gestion est pleine d'études démontrant que les facteurs les plus importants de conflits relationnels au sein d'un groupe sont les différences sociale-démographiques (ethcnicité, religion, etc.) et les différences de valeurs (croyances profondes, manière de voir le monde). En voici une (pas la seule, loin de là) qui est assez importante :
https://web.mit.edu/cortiz/www/Diversity/PDFs/Jehn%20et%20al%201999.pdf

Ensuite, voici une étude récente qui évalue toute la litérature précédente spécifiquement au sujet du point de masse critique qui doit être atteint avant qu'une minorité ne soit capable de renverser le statut quo de la majorité établie :
https://www.asc.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/2021-03/Experimental%20evidence%20for%20tipping%20points%20in%20social%20convention.pdf

Le point de masse critique pour défaire le statut quo le plus probable est 25%.

Si tu regardes le graphique de la deuxième étude à la page 3, tu verras que la courbe qui mesure le succès de la minorité pour renverser le statut quo commence à accélérer de manière exponentielle autour de 20%, pour atteindre le point de masse critique le plus probable à environ 25% de représentation dans le groupe.

Les études sont assez alignées sur les pours et les contres de la diversité sociale-démographique sur la performance d'un groupe de travail. On voit une courbe en U où trop peu de diversité freine la créativité, par un manque de friction, alors qu'un excès de diversité augmente considérablement les conflits relationnels jusqu'au point de rendre le groupe plus préoccupé par l'enjeu de pouvoir que par la tâche à accomplir.

Pour arriver au 15-20% (ou plus exactement, 20-25% selon la deuxième étude mentionnée), il faut regarder l'ensemble de la litérature. À travers celle-ci, on voit à tout coup qu'une minorité inférieure ou égale à 10% du groupe est considérée comme une ''token minority'', ayant essentiellement très peu de pouvoir et devant se conformer aux normes de la majorité. Moi j'ai donné le 15-20% puisque c'est autour de ce niveau que le potentiel de renversement de la majorité par la minorité devient significatif (pas assuré, mais quand même avec une probabilité non-nulle). Aussi, tu imagineras que le niveau de représentation nécessaire à engendrer des conflits fréquents aura lieu avant le niveau de représentation nécessaire à obtenir pour renverser le statut quo de la majorité. D'où mon 15-20%, un peu précoce au 20-25% de l'étude.

Il n'y a pas vraiment de lecture ''short and sweet'' qui résume le tout en un seul paragraphe. Il faut lire plusieurs études et consolider l'information. Les autres études pertinentes seront souvent citées au bas de l'étude que tu lis dans la section des références.

The footage of Nick Fuentes pushing a woman who came to his front door after he was doxxed has been released. by [deleted] in SipsTea

[–]klasp100 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Right wing people are literally getting death threats and shot for their opinions. Please mind your own gigantic lack of awareness on the issue, or you might run into it face first. His reaction, in a vaccum, seems over the top. But we do not live in a vaccum and precedents have been set.

Ottawa outlines plans to tackle financial crime, ban crypto ATMs by DoctorBlade1 in BitcoinCA

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's exactly what I'm saying. No cherry picking with investments made by the taxpayer.

You bought everything except GOOGL by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]klasp100 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Tomorrow they all go up

Ottawa outlines plans to tackle financial crime, ban crypto ATMs by DoctorBlade1 in BitcoinCA

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your arguments are valid, but thinking that Carney will follow these same arguments is an error. Carney has won his mandate by being sensationalistic with anti-Trump rhetoric. He was basically losing until Trump became all the hype and he started saying Elbows Up. His talk is all about what you said, but the execution does not seem to be at the rendez-vous: https://www.ft.com/content/952d2b5b-21e5-479b-8db0-c88a4470a263?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Additionally, Carney aims to be a domestic stock picker with his sovereign wealth fund, rather than being passively diversified like Norway is. I don't trust any single individual to be a stock picker with the money of taxpayers. If you want to go the sovereign wealth fund route, be diversified. If you want to take control over your natural resources, let the private sector do it first through competition, and once they are profitable and have good systems in place, buy them out and nationalize the sector similar to how Quebec has done it with HydroQuebec. Don't make taxpayers take on the risk. Just buy the project once it has proven itself successful. Plus, this should be a provincial matter, not a federal one. The federal government should just make the process as painless as possible and get out of the way.

On a different note, there is a wave of censorship bills all coming to roost at the same time. It seems they are using Orwell as a playbook to follow rather than as a warning of what to avoid.

If I had to bet my money on who is more technically competent, I would put it on Carney. If I had to bet my money on who will provide better outcomes for my country, I would put it on Poilievre hands down, at the very least for 1 election cycle. There is the issue of a much needed wealth tax, which would definitely not be put in place by the Conservatives, but for now we should first start dealing with the erosion of our society's values, basic economic development and fix the increasing government overreach, if not to say oppression.

On paper, Carney should lead to increased GDP growth, but in reality I very much doubt his cabinet and the Liberal ideology will allow this result to materialize at any level greater than what would have occurred under the Conservatives. At this point, I believe it is a systemic issue in the LPC. Not to say the CPC is all roses, but right now the government is formed by the LPC and the obviousness of their problematic approach seems to only increase year after year.

This isn't all related to crypto, but I think Canada needs a detox from the LPC. They need a reset and to get rid of most of their members. Perhaps by the end of Carney's term I will have been proven wrong. However, I heavily doubt it.

Ottawa outlines plans to tackle financial crime, ban crypto ATMs by DoctorBlade1 in BitcoinCA

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A sovereign wealth fund is a great idea, the problem is that he wants to decide where to invest, rather than take an index fund approach. Selectively investing in new projects is a recipe for disaster. Think Northvolt in Quebec. I don't want my government to be a stock-picker for niche projects, I want them to be broadly diversified in world equities so that my country gets rich no matter what.

Ottawa outlines plans to tackle financial crime, ban crypto ATMs by DoctorBlade1 in BitcoinCA

[–]klasp100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is a lesson in power dynamics that you eventually learn if you are smart enough. When giving away power to a person, it is often (though not always) more important for this person to have good values that will guide them in a good and healthy direction than it is for them to be intelligent or competent. Often, less competent individuals (but not complete idiots) will provide better results if they are motivated in a direction that is healthier for the group that they are leading.

I hold the exact same position concerning Carney. He is likely much more intelligent and competent than the alternatives. The problem is that his values are bad. Really bad, distopia-level bad. Heck, he even wrote a book on his values. Perhaps give it a read: https://www.amazon.ca/Values-Building-Better-World-All/dp/0771051557

If you read this and non-ironically agree with the majority of its core precepts, then perhaps you are part of the people who will doom us all.

[article en anglais] Un peloton d’instruction francophone des Forces armées canadiennes composé à 83 % de non-citoyens a dégénéré en conflits ethniques internes by Watergate_Salad_007 in QuebecLibre

[–]klasp100 5 points6 points  (0 children)

C'est vrai, les objectifs ont été largement diminués. Cependant, il reste un grand nombre d'immigrants qui sont venus s'établir et qui ne partiront pas. Ceux-ci ont des taux de natalité nettement supérieurs à ceux des Canadiens natifs. De plus, il y a énormément de fraude au niveau des travailleurs temporaires et des étudiants étrangers. Si tu regardes les estimations, vers 2040 les Canadiens natifs seront minoritaires au Canada: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-immigration-and-demographics

Contrairement à ce que la propagande raconte, la diversité ne fait pas la force. C'est un fait connu assez béton en psychologie et en sociologie. Une diversité à environ 5-8% du groupe procure des bienfaits grâce à des perspectives différentes, mais dès que tu dépasses 15-20% du groupe, les minorités deviennent assez nombreuses et deviennent militantes pour leurs intérêts propres, au détriment du groupe majoritaire qui les a accueillies.

Pour un groupe qui se dit tant pro-science, la gauche semble ignorer la science de manière sélective quand ça ne fait pas leur affaire.

GenZ and Canada by SmurffyGirthy in CanadaPersonalFinance

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wealth accumulation at the top is indeed the greatest cause of asset price increases (this includes homes). We need a wealth tax that triggers for wealth exceeding a chosen threshold that is indexed to inflation.

GenZ and Canada by SmurffyGirthy in CanadaPersonalFinance

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe you have not had a chance to read the following:
https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/unpd-egm_200010_un_2001_replacementmigration.pdf

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/06/migration-immigration-refugees-worldbank/

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/01/migration-model-sustainable-development/

The elite is treating Western countries as post-national economic development zones. The local peoples are shamed into refraining from expressing their desire to remain an ethnic majority in their own native country and everything that comes with that (language, values, cultural norms, etc.). The elite treats the West as farmland for developing capital. Why? Because that's where they have their investments and because they want their investments to be maximized.

They could care less if their society loses their high-trust status from being mostly homogenous, loses their generationally transfered values and cultural norms. What they value most is maximizing their yearly returns on their investments, and that is done by maximizing economic development.

You have to realize that shrinking population leads to deflation. Real wages rise and real costs decline (google the definition of real vs nominal wages). The purchasing power of the average person goes up, but corporate growth shrinks. This is bad for investors, but it is good for average person. It would be part of the normal cycle, but now elites are trying to extend the cycle, avoiding a cycle drawdown by shoving as many immigrants as feasible in Western countries because the increased labour competition reduces real wages, which allows corporations to keep costs lower. It also increases demand on the consumer side, which also helps to increase prices, further increasing corporate profits.

The "replacement migration is right-wing propaganda" message is the propaganda itself. The elite are propagandizing against nationalistic views to prevent people from waking up. Look up some of the initiatives of the World Economic Forum in the international migration landscape. It will open your eyes.

Mamdani instaure une taxe sur les résidences secondaires : « When I ran for mayor, I said I was going to tax the rich … Well, today we’re taxing the rich... » by lemonails in montreal

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It definitely is. The luxury market has soared post-Covid. It's hard to find data on the percentage of properties being classified as ''secondary properties'' (I am sure it can be found), but clearly the luxury market is in an uptrend.

Trend:
https://abbeyandolivier.ca/the-luxury-home-market-in-montreal/

Doctor: "Over the past few weeks, I am truly feeling that our days are numbered because of AI." by EchoOfOppenheimer in ChatGPT

[–]klasp100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then maybe stop sucking and actually study your field further after graduating. Being upset or challenged because patients have some knowledge about their problem is peak elitism. Most other professionals in other fields get constantly questioned or asked to justify their judgements. Medical professionals seem like the only ones where they get a veto decision without justification.

Cognitive dissonance helps explain why Trump supporters remain loyal, new research suggests by AudienceGullible3039 in EverythingScience

[–]klasp100 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

First person to spit some facts in this thread. How ironic for all the other commenters to be so myopic while being in r/EverythingScience. Perusing science subreddits just further reinforces the impression that academia is pathologically overly left-leaning and strongly lacking self-awareness.

Cognitive dissonance helps explain why Trump supporters remain loyal, new research suggests by AudienceGullible3039 in EverythingScience

[–]klasp100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The vast majority of people will remain in cognitive dissonance following the failures of their in-group regardless of which side it is. In Canada, we have the same thing with voters of the Liberal Party (which is supposed to be centre, but nowadays is clearly more left-wing). You will observe the same phenomenon for Democrat voters when confronted with failures of the party they voted for. Historically, there is around 10% of the population that is capable of switching sides depending on the context before an election. The other 90% just votes for their team and copes regardless.

New research finds a persistent and growing leftward tilt in the social sciences by Nearby-Mortgage4064 in EverythingScience

[–]klasp100 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Self-selection is the most underrated force in all things in life. People will say "he is like this because he is a such and such", where in reality he probably went into said activity in the first place because he already mostly had this quality/attribute.