There is nothing in the algorithm tied to BTC price. Sure, you’ll likely tend to get less miners as the price decreases, but that doesn’t guarantee that it’s profitable. Plenty of people, organizations, governments, etc do things that aren’t immediately profitable and may never be.

deleted by creator

“Works for me and my sister.”

Lol, agreed. Though, I’ll point out that many, many buildings (and people) easily predate the internet.

You can easily do a same-day wire transfer of this amount. Technically there’s no limit on the size of wire transfers. There’s probably a point where the bank will start asking questions, but car / mortgage down-payment sized transfers aren’t an issue.

But, yeah, I bet cash withdrawals are another ballgame. Not least because the bank probably doesn’t actually keep that much cash in typical customer-facing locations.

Key word is “watching”. They’re more than happy to have an audience as long as they get what they want. And they do and they are.

Ha, ok that makes more sense. I was like “this guy is saying reasonable stuff in other comments and now they’re subtly pro-kkk?” Didn’t add up 😂

Lol, I’m genuinely confused by this. I have conflicting feelings on H1Bs and agree with the OP that it’s the oligarchs’ faults, but that doesn’t automatically make them good or bad. The oligarchs like H1Bs because it lets them exploit the working class more effectively.

Also, and this is the most confusing part, are you implying that hating the KKK is a bad thing? Or is that supposed to be more nuanced, like “killing the KKK on sight is bad, they deserve a fair trial and punishment”? Either way, kinda bad taste tbh. There are plenty of other non-universally-agreed-upon evil things you could have used instead. It’s just bad rhetoric.

No, not any circles. I said the circles I frequent, which tend to be more progressive towards immigration. I’m sure someone blames the immigrants themselves, but it’s not a widespread/both-aisles belief like the post insinuates.

I’ve seen understanding and sympathy for the immigrants trying to better their lives and being given the ugly end of capitalism. Working for less pay than your peers and being under constant thread of deportation is no way to live. And if, as a country, we’re so desperate for workers that we’re bringing in people from overseas, we better be giving them a path to permanent residence since they’re obviously beneficial to have around and they should have some skin in the game and the chance to be treated as equals rather than expendable cost-savers.

Labor is already significantly cheaper overseas than via H1B visas. There are many influences on business location besides employment costs. For example, Disney is a high-profile abuser of the H1B system, and I hopefully don’t need to explain why Disney might want to remain in the US, even if it means paying workers a little more.

I personally haven’t seen people blaming the H1B workers in any circles I frequent. It’s mostly that H1Bs are generally bad for both the American and Immigrat workers, but great for corporations that get the screw both of them over.

It’s hard to see how adding 600k workers to the job pool doesn’t make it less competitive, with higher American unemployment and lower wages being the inevitable result. Companies like to make jobs less appealing to American workers (or just fire them en mass) so that they can claim they can’t fill positions and higher H1Bs, which they can pay far less and take advantage of the extreme leverage they have since it is much much harder for H1Bs to change jobs and if they lose their job they are forced to uproot everything and leave the country.

What’s really interesting is that H1Bs fail on both sides of the immigration issue. They fit the anti-immigration “took our jobs” almost by definition, and they are a temporary visa that does not lead to permanent residency, so they don’t even create full citizens with an investment in the country! It’s complicated and I personally have a lot of conflicting feelings about them, but they really do appear to encourage replacing American workers with cheaper and easily abusable foreign workers in the name of corporate “progress” and profits.

Congratulations you kicked out all the H1Bs now it takes you 14 months instead of 16 months to find a new job.

If this were true, it’d be a strong argument against H1Bs. It would show a direct correlation between H1Bs and unemployment and mean that H1Bs are being abused to fill positions with cheap labor that can be easily filled with domestic labor, and Americans are facing higher unemployment as a result.

As you said, there is a confluence of things contributing to the issue of people getting jobs in the tech industry right now. That means that real solutions and progress do not look like 16 -> 0 months. They look like 16 -> 15.5 months. No one action is going to completely solve unemployment and wealth inequality. A 12.5% reduction on job lapse duration from a single change would be absolutely massive.

If we only did things that completely fix issues in one fell swoop, we’d never do anything.

Kinda. Though, it’s more optimistic than that. The beauty of broad market funds is that the entire stock market doesn’t go to zero or crash forever like an individual company/industry might. Short of the country ceasing to exist, the market is virtually guaranteed to recover eventually. That’s why if you regularly invest no matter what and don’t try to time the ups and downs, you always come out on top in the long run. Just look at 2008 or covid. You may be down 50% this year, but 5 or 10 years later, odds are you’ll be up a good amount. Long-term investing is easy that way. Gets more difficult if the market crashes right before you were planning to retire and now you have to work 5 extra years because your portfolio wasn’t hedged. Hence the bonds and other low-risk investments.

You can’t put all of your money into the market, becuase if the market crashes and you lose your job (because the market crashed), the last thing you want to do is sell your stocks when they’re at their lowest point. So the general rule is to keep 3 to 6 months of expenses in a savings account. Then other large purchases like a house or car can be accounted for in savings/other less risky investments too.

Real estate is generally a bad investment for your average joe. Primary residence is good tho, if your living there for about 5+ years, but that’s because it’s an investment AND a thing you get use out of.

Idk, there are some pretty cool sticks out there

No.

Bonds are safe and good for reducing risk if your time horizon (aka the amount of time until you expect to use the money) is short. They aren’t good for long-term or chasing even moderate returns. For example, if you want to retire next year and don’t want to delay things if the stock market happens to crash before then, bonds are an option. That’s why retirement funds tend to shift more into bonds the closer they get to the target date, but it’s a tradeoff of growth for a more reliable retirement date.

Precious metals are just plain bad. https://www.macrotrends.net/2608/gold-price-vs-stock-market-100-year-chart

The stock market even outperforms real estate in the long term. Afaik, generally speaking, there isn’t an option out there that beats broad market ETFs. Optimal investing, statistically, is basically as simple as regularly dumping money into the same fund every year, no matter what. The earlier you start the better, since compounding returns can mean that 5 - 10 years makes a big difference once you hit retirement age.

It’s imperfect, but this helps get the point across. It’s an investing game based on real market data. https://buildyourstax.com/

Well, sure, if we’re talking about complete overhauls, money doesn’t technically need to exist at all.

I just thought it dangerous to spread the idea that you win the stock market by not playing, because that is demonstrably false and will lead to some very poor outcomes if followed in a realistic sense. I agree that an ideal society may very well not have a stock market, but for the love of god, please don’t try to be the change you want to see in this instance.

Inflation is necessary for a lot more than just capitalism. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production, not trading money for goods and services.

It’s really important to understand that money =/= capitalism. That is a widely held misconception that is very effective at stunting societal and economic progress, at least in the US.

For example, inflation encourages people to spend money on innovation and progress rather than simply hoarding wealth, regardless of if an oligarch owns the profits or if the workers do. Yes, there can be other/better motivators for progress than just money, but you can see how it can be beneficial in economic systems other than just capitalism.

I don’t think you’ll find any reputable/knowledgable people that hate all inflation. It’s a widely agreed fact that a little inflation is good for everyone. Politicians/economists are say they don’t like high inflation. It’s better to target something like 2% yoy.

The only way to win is not to play

Not “playing” the stock market is a loss by default. Your money WILL devalue over time, your savings account WILL NOT keep up with inflation, and if you don’t invest in stocks or have some other special financial backing/windfall, you WILL retire many years later (if at all) than you would have if you invested in stocks properly.

Though, you need to be very careful with your definition of “playing”. As an individual/retail investor, buying individual stocks and trying to time ups and downs is not the way to go. If you manage to not lose any money that way, you’re very very likely to make less money than if you had bought a broad market ETF like the S&P 500. In general, “playing” is bad and simply buying and holding boring funds for 30+ years can 10x your money by the time you retire, if you start young. Market up? Good, buy more! Market down 50%? It’s on sale, buy more! Auto-investing is your friend. This is backed by solid math and like the entire history of the stock market.

The thing is, the rich make the rules. They want you to invest in ETFs like that because they can use your money to play their little games, inflate their wealth, and stay on top. As long as you do that, they’ll make sure you make solid and consistent (over the long-term) returns, because it benefits them financially and anything else would lead to a societal collapse.

Trying to beat them at their own game by buying/selling individual stocks is a losing battle. They can see your incoming trades and act on them before your order goes through. If you find a big mistake they made, like GME, they’ll simply change the rules and steal your money. It doesn’t matter if it’s illegal, nobody can stop them. They literally make the market.

For now, while we’re still under the policies they voted against. Didn’t work out too well last time after only a few years.

Dems could run Jesus Christ himself and half the country would still reject him

I mean, that is undeniably true, but we’ve known that for a lot longer than two days.

It is a universal axiom that any question starting with “Will Trump ever face consequences for…” can be answered with “no”.

If, instead of prison, Trump was faced with a free luxury mansion on a private island and a $1B/yr pension to live out the rest of his years Epstein style, Kamala may have had a chance. As soon as the alternative included a hint of repercussions for his actions, the universe simply could not allow it.