top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 162 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Bruh, if you had invested your school lunch money instead of literally eating it and thus draining it down the toilet, you would have been a millionaire by now. Subscribe for more of my finance tips for just $20 a month.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    i was so fucking dumb at 8 years old. instead of buying a house for renting for passive income i bought a 5 dollar guitar hero rock the 80s game on ps2

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 93 points 2 years ago (30 children)
  • [–] 83 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    If you mean a small tax per share when purchased then that would be a great idea. Make high frequency trading, that contributes zero to society, unprofitable. It wouldn't hurt household investors as the tax would be small but it would hurt the assholes who manipulate prices through trading back and forth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    High frequency trading is fully automated insider trading done in broad daylight, but nothing gets done about it because most people don't understand what it is. It shouldn't be taxed; it should be illegal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I wish I remembered the name of it but there was a really interesting documentary/video about how crazy the rapid trading got, to the point that companies were trying to install systems as close as physically possible to the physical location of the NASDAQ so their requests would have less "travel" time and show up before anyone else.

    Absolute insanity...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [+] 32 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Don't worry, they'll raise a panic alarm about how everyone and their brothers retirement pensions are invested in the market, and so "you'll hurt the poor" will resound, ignoring that a lot of those poor never had a choice to not have their pensions gambled on the fucking market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (27 replies)
    [–] 43 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Don't worry, it'll trickle down.... Annny day now.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 2 years ago

    Well of course they do. That's the whole point of the legal scam of investing. If it benefits regular people it wouldn't exist.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    This is an important thing to note when someone claims that you should be eager about stock market performance because of your [comparative handful of] shares in your retirement account. Accounts such as the 401k were probably devised to tie up regular people's money into the stock market, injecting more money into it and making it seem more important (and thus worth bailing out).

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    They were devised to get rid of pensions so companies didn't need to care for their employees, they could just have the option to match input, but retirement was made to be 100% on us.

    More bullshit to benefit corporations, but to be honest there are so many scumbags out there and so many pension plans that were stolen from, I don't know how to feel about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    And you thought Monopoly was just a game!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 22 points 2 years ago

    Billionaires shouldn't exist.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The "Eat the rich" crowd continues to do absolutely nothing.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    No no you guys all don’t understand that this is a good thing because… (let me check my notes…) ….uh…hm…derrr…communism.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Seems weird to make this assertion, and fail to provide what the total holdings cutoff is to be in the top 10%.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Right. Is it 10 figures? 7 figures?

    ... 5 figures?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    Historical data would be great. How was that figure in each previous decade? Isn't it true that at the peaks this tends to happen, and when we get a stock market downturn, the rich get poor faster then anyone else?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    Click on the link. Literally the first thing in the article is a graph over time.

    tl;dr it was about 80% in 1990, and is now 92.5%. Or alternately, the bottom 90% of the population owned 20% of stock market wealth in 1990, and now they own 7.5%, so around one third as much as a generation ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    My wife and I constantly lament how we were born a few decades too late. For everything

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    One thing the article doesn’t make super clear to me is if that figure includes investment funds and whatnot, and to what degree. It sounds like it might but elaborated very little beyond a vague statistic.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    Cause and effect

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    No shit. If someone does not have money they don't need then they can not buy stocks or any investment.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Is this really a new thing? Haven't the rich always been the stock-holders?

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    Gasoline is relatively cheap.

    Just saying...

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I don't think it's good to have such wealth inequality, but I do this general investment into the stock market should be encouraged.

    401ks are so much better than pensions as a retirement vehicle. Better return on investment and more financial separation from the company I work for. I never worry about someone raiding the pension fund or a company going bankrupt, and I've received much better return on investments than the numbers you hear from pension funds! That's not even considering 401k matching......

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Tax stock over 100,000 shares 1% per current price, per stock, per quarter.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›