Anyone trading on the stock market?

[Vang]

I bought around 100 shares of AMC last week, might by some more in the morning. Figure it's a solid buy and if it tanks, it is cool as it isn't anything more than me investing and diversifying. Should of bought on the dip though Wednesday night.

 

[Glurin]

Same rule of thumb that applies to gambling also applies to investing. "Never bet more than you can afford to lose." If people want to buy at what looks like the peak, they should be able to do so.

 

[krischan]

Please give us specific, credible, verifiable data on the percentage of people below the poverty line who have flat screen TVs, designer sneakers, and a car.

Well, flat screen TVs aren't that expensive. A 1080p one would match anybody's demands with average sight and the cheapest one I could find in the internet costs around €100 here (which includes sales tax BTW). Recipients of social welfare in Germany can afford one. Not a car though, that would disqualify you for welfare. Before receiving welfare, you have to spend all resources you have that aren't needed for basic needs (which includes a car, but not a cheap TV or future pensions).

 

[Glurin]

Just FYI, poverty line in the U.S. for a family of four is just over $25,000 income. Unless you live in California, in which case you're probably living in a tent in the middle of the poop lined street if you don't make at least $100k a year.

 

[Glurin]

Welp, here we go again folks. Long Beach California just passed an ordinance stating that grocery stores are required to pay their employees "hero pay" in the amount of an extra $4 per hour added to their paycheck. As a result, all the employees at two grocery stores will no longer be receiving a paycheck.

But that's ok, because all the other employees at all the other grocery stores will be getting extra money, right? So I guess all those people who now won't be getting any money at all can just go pound sand because they don't matter.

 

[zemaj]

Welp, here we go again folks. Long Beach California just passed an ordinance stating that grocery stores are required to pay their employees "hero pay" in the amount of an extra $4 per hour added to their paycheck. As a result, all the employees at two grocery stores will no longer be receiving a paycheck.

But that's ok, because all the other employees at all the other grocery stores will be getting extra money, right? So I guess all those people who now won't be getting any money at all can just go pound sand because they don't matter.

An excellent microcosm of how raising minimum wage without first addressing the larger issues that have far more influence of economic considerations is essentially consigning even more people to poverty. I bet the stores that are staying open also have the most self-checkout lanes, and will be expanding those directly. I mean, gods forbid that the upper-echelon of those 'employed' by the stores in question have to face the horrors of a slightly decreased pay to increase the pay of the peasants, right?

But it's ok! This is how those in power help the poor 'eat the rich', right? I'd be willing to bet that 'hero pay' puts those employees just on the lowest end of a higher tax bracket, to boot...


While I'm here, how about the Pelosi's buying $1, 000,000 of Tesla shares a month before Biden's new plan for promoting electric vehicles is totally not stock market manipulation or insider trading, but a bunch of redditors are going to bring about the financial collapse of the nation by playing the same game. Don't you see how leftists politicians are totally trying to help low income citizens? So obvious, after all, the news says so.

I hate the general populace this country... Idiocracy was set too far into the future

 

[jmervyn]

Please give us specific, credible, verifiable data on the percentage of people below the poverty line who have flat screen TVs, designer sneakers, and a car.

Well, both kris and Glurin already provided some input - here's a nice piece about the broad strokes:

Air Conditioning, Cable TV, and an Xbox: What is Poverty in the United States Today?​

The summary bullets are -

• The typical poor household, as defined by the government, has a car and air conditioning, two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR.
• By its own report, the typical poor family was not hungry, was able to obtain medical care when needed.
• The typical average poor American has more living space in his home than the average (non-poor) European has.

It's worth reading in full, even though it's fairly dated. The report doesn't use the term "poverty pimps", but the implication is certainly there.

You obviously prefer to attack my claim as being unfounded hyperbole, using my inability to satisfy an increasingly high burden of proof (i.e. designer sneakers AND flatscreen AND car). For example, the report seems pretty strange mentioning VCR's & DVD players, but that's because it's from 2011 with some elements (above) from 2005.

A less stats-oriented Heritage report with similar intent is How Poor, Really, Are America’s Poor? It points out that 43% of the "poor" own two or more cars in 2020. Other reports highlight the individual elements, such as that under 20% of the "poor" in 2016 didn't have a car.

The point of these reports, however, is precisely what I'm saying. The "poverty line" in the U.S. is based on Census Bureau numbers (I worked for them in days of yore), and has numerous problems beyond purely political ones ("poverty pimps") but even implicit statistical flaws.

For example, the Bureau considers neither longer-term investment nor household debt in their numbers, despite the conclusions which will be drawn. Simultaneously, they do NOT measure public assistance - as the report delights in pointing out, the plethora of assistance & welfare programs beloved by the Progressive Left won't actually 'lift people out of poverty' because the 'poverty' in question is only measured as monetary income.

Census sampling therefore really doesn't correlate with ownership of goods or quality of life, and in the contemporary setting, one could consider just how many people "in poverty" have cell phone service.

The last report indicates that 82% of the poor have one OR MORE smartphones.

As to the last part - designer sneakers? It's slightly different from the smartphone issue. It has to do with urban status symbols. A coworker's son as well as a few kids in my son's old school actually treat them as investment opportunities, because by buying in early they are able to sell when a particular shoe suddenly becomes popular. They do so using a credit card, which again, isn't reflected in the Census numbers.

I've just suffered an Internet outage, so I'll try to post this & reboot.

 

[Noodle]

I haven't attacked anyone's claim, nor have I made any of my own. I just find that in my experience people presenting arguments (especially online) without verifiable backup lack credibility and too often try to compensate by yelling louder.

 

[Noodle]

Welp, here we go again folks. Long Beach California just passed an ordinance stating that grocery stores are required to pay their employees "hero pay" in the amount of an extra $4 per hour added to their paycheck. As a result, all the employees at two grocery stores will no longer be receiving a paycheck.

But that's ok, because all the other employees at all the other grocery stores will be getting extra money, right? So I guess all those people who now won't be getting any money at all can just go pound sand because they don't matter.

You conveniently forgot to mention that the two stores in question had been struggling and under performing for years, and that Neil Saunders, an analyst at GlobalData Retail, has averred that healthy stores should be able to absorb the extra cost. You don't seem to like to acknowledge both sides of an argument.

 

[Glurin]

You conveniently forgot to mention that the two stores in question had been struggling and under performing for years, and that Neil Saunders, an analyst at GlobalData Retail, has averred that healthy stores should be able to absorb the extra cost. You don't seem to like to acknowledge both sides of an argument.

Not at all. The fact that they were already struggling just means that the mandatory pay increase was the final nail in the coffin, proving the point. I didn't mention they were already struggling because the fact that they had to close down completely because of the pay increase should have made it obvious. Otherwise they could simply lay off people or not hire as many new employees as they were planning to.

It's basic mathematics. $4 * 40 hours a week * 48 weeks a year = $7,680 per employee labor cost increase. Multiply that by say, twenty employees and you're looking at over $150,000 in additional operating costs you didn't have before. And that's before getting into the details of any other costs that may be affected, such as benefits, fees and taxes. That money has to come from somewhere, and contrary to popular belief, employers do not have a secret dungeon filled with magic money trees tended to by enslaved magic money gnomes who poop gold bricks.

 

[Vang]

Not to divert the topic, but I work with children of all different backgrounds and SES levels, from can't eat to both parent's make over six figures.

Sometimes having something nice makes you feel richer. My old supervisor walked into a home with a dirt floor and a nice TV in the house (she was renting and the owner was a slumlord) and she said, all I wanted was something nice to make me feel richer and a tv is something of great value as it will get used a lot. How can you judge that person by a blanket statement, you can't and if you do you need to start looking at people differently and more of a systemic way to see how it all ties together to get a person there.

Any figure on cars is about as void as possible unless it says the cars are in good working order and able to get said person to and from job and grocery store. I've been to houses to where people have 5 cars and not one works.

Each person (family) has a value system to spend their money on. Some use it to go out to eat, some buy the newest popular shoes, others on substances (legal or illegal), Hobbies from TCG to board game or video games/systems. Some save for a home, a wedding, etc. Then others, spend it on a nice car and sleep out of it.

What is your value system and who am I or anyone else to decide your value system is wrong? (**If you have children or a dependent then, and only maybe, will someone step in to make sure their basic needs are met, and working with children I'd say its a low maybe, note I'm talking about the US here, not other countries)

The only thing I even want to quote is this bold face lie: "By its own report, the typical poor family was not hungry" Read some articles on how many School districts started to deliver food otherwise kids would go hungry. This isn't in a specific area. I have rural, urban, and suburb schools in my area all providing lunches. Hell, Ohio finally stepped da heck up and made all lunches regardless of income free. You know why? Because if your just at that line for free lunches and not qualify, you may not be eating lunch.

 

[Glurin]

The problem is not that they have these things, Vang. Sure we can talk about priorities if you want, but the real problem is the "solutions" certain political factions keep carelessly shoving down our throats that ultimately just make the situation even worse. Pointing out that those at or below the poverty line have nice things is merely to illustrate that the situation is not nearly as dire as said political factions pretend it is. It is meant to shock people into rubbing two brain cells together so that they maybe think things through before instituting massive social changes based on nothing but raw emotion.

Generally works well enough for the most part. Or at least it did until our society went absolutely insane and declared math, rational arguments and logic itself to be racist. That's not hyperbole by the way. Those have literally been declared racist.

 

[Glurin]

Looks like the Gamestop situation just took a nosedive, as could only be expect to happen. They're down to $90 now. Still way above where they started out, but way down from where they were.

 

[superdave]

The 2 supermarkets in question above? Owned by Kroger. The #2 retailer in the US behind Walmart. These were not Mom & Pop neighbourhood stores.

Kroger is the largest US supermarket chain with sales of 125 billion plus per year.

They closed these stores, not because they were not viable, but to stomp out the Hazard/Heroes pay thing before it becomes state or country wide.

The execs would have a smaller bonus if they had to pay an extra 4 bucks an hour to the frontline workers risking their health and lives to keep Americans fed.

 

[Glurin]

Superdave, if you are the owner of a large chain of stores and one of your stores is operating at a net loss, you don't keep the store open just because "you can afford it". That's what's referred to as flushing your money down the toilet. So it doesn't matter if they were part of a larger retailer or if they were just a small mom and pop shop. The effect is the same.

 

[superdave]

"Underperforming" does not always mean operating at a loss. No article that I read quoted anyone at Kroger saying the 2 stores were losing $. Any bets these 2 stores are rebranded and reopened next month after the hero pay law goes awy?

 

[Elly]

If the socialists get their way, hedge fund managers will always be able to get a minimum wage job that pays 15 bucks an hour.

That would be nice.

 

[Elly]

I bought around 100 shares of AMC last week, might by some more in the morning. Figure it's a solid buy and if it tanks, it is cool as it isn't anything more than me investing and diversifying. Should of bought on the dip though Wednesday night.

I missed Gamestop. I did go in (FOMO struck) and got royally rodgered.

I found the Silver situation interesting. It shot up to an 8 year high and even after it promptly fell for a few days the financial media were reporting how the same thing that happened to Gamestop was now happening to Silver.

The rally had long gone but fresh reports were going up. I couldn't figure out why.

I'm in Silver but went in a long time ago before all this malarky so I'm well into the blue anyway. I'm sitting tight.

 

[jmervyn]

How can you judge that person by a blanket statement, you can't and if you do you need to start looking at people differently and more of a systemic way to see how it all ties together to get a person there.

That's why I mentioned designer sneakers as a special category. In fact, the "looking at people differently" is part of what my 'contrarian' citations were pointing out; wealth is not being measured correctly because there's big money in promoting poverty. There's a deep difference between new designer sneakers or the latest video game as your prized possession, versus a pretty rock, book (Bible? quelle horreur !) or a decent pair of shoes.

I grew up in a trailer, living on food stamps, in what would colloquially be called a 'barrio'. I now earn far above what many people in America do, and guess what? I still have to determine if I can afford my next meal (I can, but having been in a debt trap more than once I'm hypervigilant about it now).

I'll never forget watching a CNN segment on a vast sea of mud, which as it turned out was Tegucigalpa, Honduras post-Hurricane Mitch. I realized as I watched the ignorant newsie blabber that he was standing very close to if not where I had lived while there.

The only thing I even want to quote is this bold face lie: "By its own report, the typical poor family was not hungry" Read some articles on how many School districts started to deliver food otherwise kids would go hungry. This isn't in a specific area. I have rural, urban, and suburb schools in my area all providing lunches. Hell, Ohio finally stepped da heck up and made all lunches regardless of income free. You know why? Because if your just at that line for free lunches and not qualify, you may not be eating lunch.

Sorry, but it's not a lie at all - the issue is how one defines hunger. In America, there essentially is none, as defined by the same metric used for foreign nations - it's just that how many people are actually willing to take their family to the local soup kitchen (or God forbid, Christian missionary group) to get a meal? Using school lunch programs as a metric is deeply flawed; those monies are simply used by the family for different purposes because they know they can get their kids fed breakfast & lunch by the Gov't.

Again, I'm not giving you grief about your statements, but the plain fact (as mentioned in a couple of the secondary citations) is that Americans are told to obsess over how bad they have it, to the point that foreign nations use the propaganda to tell their own oppressed populations that at least they don't have it as bad as those oppressed by the Capitalists in America do.

I'm in Silver but went in a long time ago before all this malarky so I'm well into the blue anyway. I'm sitting tight.

Dunno, I bought between $14-15 and this would be double my investment in well under 20 years.

I'm just not sure it's worth going through the efforts, given that I expect fiat currencies to start approaching toilet paper again in the near term.

 

[superdave]

Using school lunch programs as a metric is deeply flawed; those monies are simply used by the family for different purposes because they know they can get their kids fed breakfast & lunch by the Gov't.

JFC