Thread has been deleted
Last comment
What is the purpose for stocks existing other then for the rich to get richer and for corporations to screw working class people.
2020-06-29 03:43
Topics are hidden when running Sport mode.
companies cant make income if they dont sell shares
2020-06-29 03:44
Albania brain
2020-06-29 03:44
It's called selling good and making profits then putting it in bank account dum american education brain
2020-06-29 04:16
0/8
2020-06-29 04:23
are you actually retard? they need to make money a different way, using your logic just dont invest in companies, let 99% of them die cuz they can just sell good and make profit and put in bank account! go get a brain and come back after you finish middle school
2020-06-29 04:23
lmao they don't need stocks to survive, only so they can buy the back fan fuck up their employees
2020-06-29 04:28
stock is a type of investment, you buy partial ownership of company company gets money, and can use that money to spend on opportunities they find
2020-06-29 04:39
albania brain does not understand. Thats why he live in tier2.5 country.
2020-06-29 08:16
3kliksphilip BESTEST
2020-06-29 05:13
indeed
2020-06-29 05:19
Banning stocks is dumb, but companies literally buy back their shares to increase the price. So this is completely untrue.
2020-06-30 01:22
The money used to buy back the stocks is completely normal and is used more frequently than dividends. Satisfying shareholder and company
2020-06-30 03:57
Then why are you saying companies can't make income without selling shares? Privately held companies exist and it's evident most large companies buy back more shares than they sell. Your statement isn't necessarily true.
2020-06-30 05:57
Companies offer investments as a corporate strategy that helps with the fluctuations of business of income. Most companies do not offer divedends and when they do it’s about 1 dollar per share: you have to keep that share that receive that dividend. Investing a just a strategy dude
2020-06-30 06:08
The point I'm making is in regard to your original statement. You don't need to sell shares to run a company. And even if a company is at a loss and needs money, if they're big enough they'll just go beg the government for a bailout. They already gave all their bought back shares as stock options to their board, so there's usually very little left to sell. You seem to have a very idealized view of the modern American company, like they have a lot of cash on hand and they actually have shares to sell. This isn't the case usually.
2020-06-30 06:13
??? lol
2020-06-29 04:21
#5
woxic | 
North America bomberNTC 
+1
2020-06-29 04:23
#8
 | 
Netherlands toothpaste 
selling ownership of a company?
2020-06-29 04:24
#9
 | 
Belgium ibuprofenia 
This has to be bait
2020-06-29 04:25
fake account
2020-06-29 04:42
#15
 | 
Belgium ibuprofenia 
Wdym
2020-06-29 04:50
63 comments, trying to be that delusional vitality/zywoo fan could be an alt, did your main get banned?
2020-06-29 04:54
#17
 | 
Belgium ibuprofenia 
How can i be delusional if Vitality is the #1 team right now?
2020-06-29 04:55
ouch, sorry for ban but deserved for spamming so much
2020-06-29 04:57
#20
 | 
Belgium ibuprofenia 
-1
2020-06-29 05:03
#13
 | 
Germany SL3ID3R 
Don't talk about stuff you have no idea about lol
2020-06-29 04:43
+1
2020-06-29 04:44
Banning stock sales is ridiculous. But, if you're not happy about how banks make so much money off trading you can put restrictions on the stock market so its not profitable anymore. If it's not profitable to trade stocks on a short term basis, the only thing people can do is offer IPO's, use long term trading strategies, and use stocks to save for retirement.
2020-06-29 04:56
Retirement? Just save. Stop letting these retarded boomers horde all the stocks
2020-06-29 06:05
The economic system is inflationary, so just putting money in the bank doesn't work.
2020-06-29 06:14
ahahahah I needed this thread today
2020-06-29 05:03
#22
 | 
Estonia RopzTop1 
This isn't even a good bait man
2020-06-29 05:06
you can participate in the stock market too, you know.
2020-06-29 05:06
You know that's not possible right?
2020-06-29 05:10
I kind of understand why you've said that. We were kind of forced to make investments or even gamble. If you put money in banks for 10 years then your real value of that money will reduced a lot! So you need to make an investment even if you suck at it. I know it's not easy for all of us. So don't invest much with your first few years. People say just buy'em and hold'em, but that's for salary people. And we have no guarantee stock market will keep go up. Back in 1960s and 1980s for those 20 years US stock was within range in between 700s ~ 900s(Dow) for 20 years. Whoever invested in those period was very UNLUCKY!!!!!! Nowadays before Covid19 was called "Blessed Era". 6500s ~ 29300s (DOW - 2009/2020) Even if you like it or not you have to train how to invest. But it's not easy so try with little money with your first try. Don't even think you make some money at first try and feel "I'm good at this". No, you are wrong. You were just lucky. Try like $1000 at first then trade 365 days with more than 100% profit. You must sell at the end of every each Friday. And buy at every each Monday. You can day trade if it suits you. You just can't buy and hold for 365 days. GO test yourself and to see where you are at. The reason for weekly trading is because if you are good at weekly trading then pretty much you know how this market works. You will know when to keep hold or fold. Don't hate stocks. Nobody can't solve wealth unfairness. So just accept your fate and move on. Here is a thing. If you become as a master trader then no retirement age!!! That's something sounds good, but it can kill you so keep that in mind.
2020-06-29 05:16
#33
 | 
South Africa @FyreCS 
+1
2020-06-29 05:37
#27
 | 
Switzerland Titan)) 
lul nice bait
2020-06-29 05:13
#29
 | 
Germany Foztinez 
this guy doesnt know how stocks and company business works smh
2020-06-29 05:33
If stocks just make the rich richer, then why don’t the poor buy stocks as well?
2020-06-29 05:34
They lose money. Also even if they gain, their base money is little so gain is little. So they cry. Also myself. lol xD
2020-06-29 05:36
#31
 | 
Canada rayrayrayray 
How will companies ever have cashflow to expand and do operations?
2020-06-29 05:35
Loans
2020-06-29 06:04
#39
 | 
Estonia RopzTop1 
You do realize all that does is give the central banking powers (the rich you are referring to) even more power than the current system? What are you even advocating for? (And if you answer microloans... that's the stock market.)
2020-06-29 06:30
it will be from state bank and the loans will not have that high interest
2020-06-29 06:50
#44
 | 
Estonia RopzTop1 
You do realize most US states are bankrupt or failing to handle their finances. Plus, what government agency will take over investing for the established commercial banks with all the top talent? Logistically your argument falls really flat.
2020-06-29 07:59
they wouldn't be in debt if they didn't shill for big business
2020-06-29 07:59
#52
 | 
Estonia RopzTop1 
The reason why they shill for big business is because they make money off of it. There's many reasons why that's a really bad thing but that's not why they're in debt.
2020-06-29 18:29
LMAO all the capitalist defending stocks. The stock market has gotten ridiculous, all companies are owned by asset managers, the only thing companies care about is their stock price, and no poor person would be able to buy stocks. The stock market has become a replacement of GDP & the economy, no company cares to innovate or provide quality goods anymore.
2020-06-29 06:04
#37
 | 
Canada rayrayrayray 
I cant tell if you're trolling, compare a phone from 2008 to 2013 to 2020, competition is higher than ever so that companies can give their shareholders reason to continue investing with them.
2020-06-29 06:13
"no poor person would be able to buy stocks" Anyone can buy any stock that is the point...
2020-06-29 06:46
You can buy stocks for as low as 1$, and I'm not talking about penny stocks of companies that are about to go bankrupt, you can literally buy Amazon, Apple, Google or any top tier stock for as low as 1$. Many brokers offer stuff like "Stock Slices" or "Fractional Shares". Your arguments are extremely retarded btw, "no company cares to innovate or provide quality goods anymore". First of all, if that was the case, no person would invest in a stock of that company, people invest when they see growth potential. Another thing - look around. Do you not see how fast we progress when it comes to technology? Those companies create things that people couldn't even imagine two decades ago. No offence but you just sound like a mad soycialist who can't stand that other people are more successful.
2020-06-29 06:57
don't care stupid capitalist pig, go buy more mcdonalds and coom on your iphone... corporate dick sucker
2020-06-29 07:58
lmao you're probably a 7Eleven cashier and you believe that being a failure is not your fault but the system is rigged
2020-06-29 08:09
system is rigged though. Its kinda like a poker table but you only have 1 chip. Not that the world would be less rigged without the stock market though. More money makes more money.
2020-06-30 04:42
You dont have to be rich to make money on stocks? Everyone can buy them and you are very stupid if you dont. No point to have savings in a bank when the interests are so low.
2020-06-29 08:00
He's a soycialist, don't even try usic logic against him, it's not gonna work
2020-06-29 08:09
Yes stocks are indeed a way of taking advantages of other work. That's capitalism mate. But it also serve as the main mechanism to create or expend companies. So they are useful. That's also capitalism mate. Now a way I plead for, to limit the con of the system and yet keeping the pro, would be to limit the dividends or the profit of stock exchange by giving a legal minimum of it to the workers of the company. A meaningful part of it. For exemple, on a 1 millions dividends, at least 33% should go as worker bonus (and another 33% for R&D or as worker bonus if the company don't want to). Same for profit on stock exchange. Which would limit speculation by a big chunk. TL:DR : Capitalism yes, but regulated capitalism.
2020-06-29 08:13
In a free market the stock market is more of an enabler for workers and normal people to have ownership in companies and take part of the economic development. Without the stock market, everything would be allocated to very few risk capitalists and banks. You can talk about wealth inequality and how the gap is so high today, but it's more of an effect of capitalism and economic cycle. Another huge factor are the central banks policies around the world which more or less has created a risk free market (for now) with the lowest interest rates we've ever had in history, and huge QE creating a zombie market. It enables already rich people to take risk-free and low-interest loans to invest in equities and properties.
2020-06-29 15:14
Anyone can trade stocks and it is very easy with a little research.
2020-06-29 18:31
yes, stocks are artificially inflated and the whole ponzi will eventually self-destruct when enough people discover that the modern financial system is nothing more than a facade buy crypto
2020-06-29 18:35
As if crypto has any real value either lmao.
2020-06-29 21:39
of course it does because it's the ultimate money what other asset in the universe has such scarcity? there is none. it's unforgeable. can be sent to other side of the world in seconds for mere cents. anonymous. you can store it yourself, safely. divisible, weightless and invisible unlike gold then we can start talking about stuff like multisig which most people find hard to grasp because such an advanced concept doesn't exist with traditional finance (there are multi-party settlements but that depends on a central point of failure)
2020-06-29 22:15
All its value is hypothetical. It's probably would be better than the traditional financial system if it was backed by a government.
2020-06-30 01:17
All the value of everything is hypothetical
2020-06-30 04:39
And crypto is quite literally the most hypothetical of all. Fiat currency is at least backed by governments which have been around for 100's of years.
2020-06-30 05:59
so? Thats exactly what crypto aimed not to be.... Thats the PLUS of crypto not the minus
2020-06-30 10:15
What scarcity? You can launch your own new crypto in under a day. And bitcoin's only value is investor speculation.
2020-06-30 04:32
About bitcoin. So? When fed goes BRRRR expect cryptos to rocket because of inflation in other currencies.
2020-06-30 04:38
I can see a few potential problems with that. - Which crypto? Bitcoin presumably, but there's no guarantee of that. - Will the crypto's network be able to handle that kind of load without slowing to a crawl? The influx of new users will likely outscale the influx of new nodes. - Will people be able to get or fund the electricity required to run those nodes in such a scenario?
2020-06-30 08:16
Pretty much all of them because I dont think any of them will follow inflation as normal currencies will. Cryto network wont see a change. Valuation will. Irrelevant see above. If all currencies massively inflate, which they will. They will have same valuation, because they are all doing it. Cryptos will skyrocket because they wont inflate.
2020-06-30 10:12
True mathematical scarcity. You can't create new Bitcoin or Monero (since you asked which crypto, you're welcome). Of course you can create your own crypto but what does it matter since it's worthless? Same could be said about anything, you could draw on paper and make your own banknotes. Or paint some kind of a rock with golden color and call it gold. It's fake. Value of cryptocurrencies comes from security of the network (which comes from the accumulated proof of work which your crypto wouldn't have) and network effect/acceptance (which your crypto wouldn't have either). Also from utility, which I described in my initial post, but not as significantly as people think. But compared to traditional currencies, even the utility gains alone are massive.
2020-06-30 19:23
Btw regarding your statements "the influx of new users will likely outscale the influx of new nodes" and "will people be able to get or fund the electricity required to run those nodes in such a scenario?": running nodes has pretty much never been a problem when it comes to scaling. The limiting factor is block size / disk space and adding more nodes won't help because the blockchain has to be stored on each one (although for example Monero has pruning which allows you to run a node with only partial data). It doesn't take much electricity to run nodes at all either, you have to be thinking about mining which is where the proof of work comes from. But mining hashrate has nothing to do with amount of transactions / scaling. I don't expect everyone to use crypto for their daily purchases, not in the near term at least. If that ever happened, it would likely be done offchain in a very similar fashion to how credit cards work right now. It would be a massive waste to permanently record every coffee cup ever purchased to decentralized ledger capable of resisting nation-state level attacks.
2020-06-30 19:49
lol op definitely kid with no idea of working world
2020-06-30 01:21
Middle class Albanian mad lul
2020-06-30 01:28
Someone lost his savings, what did you do? Buy GNUS at the top?
2020-06-30 04:37
Good bait man
2020-06-30 06:11
Ban usury.
2020-06-30 08:20
+1 i hate when there is no equality.
2020-06-30 19:21
ALTERNATE aTTaX
1.39
Lyngby Vikings
2.91
Third Impact
1.72
Hyper
2.08
Syman
1.56
Illuminar
2.38
Bet value
Amount of money to be placed
Winning
Odds total ratio
-
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.