Dak
mentat
I haven't read enough to know whether in fact those arguments do come from Hobbes and Locke, or whether that's an accurate reduction.
Dakryn's Batshit Theory of the Week
- Thread starter Ender Rises
- Start date
zabu of nΩd
Free Insultation
- Feb 9, 2007
- 14,620
- 805
- 113
Mathiäs;10602023 said:
So what kind of strategy do you have for long, short, timing, hedging, taxes etc? You didn't say much in pics.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Dak
mentat
Matt
Active Member
Krigloch the Furious
Pants full of poo
Matt
Active Member
zabu of nΩd;10604548 said:
I didn't go back to the thread, my bad. I'm an intern with a investment/holding firm, and get to manage a couple of accounts. The company is very long term oriented and prefers my strategy be similar (though I get a lot of leeway). They have a lot of capital to work with and prefer established stocks that are predictable (or predictably unpredictable). Up until this week, I was averaging a 50% return and it was the highest in the firm. This week pretty much destroyed that though.
Here's an example of an account I'm working with. For long term stocks, I bought 3 BRK A shares (which were doing really well until they REALLY tanked this week but rebounded today) and 2000 shares of the b stock. The only problem is that these stocks are generally reflective of the overall market and ten to win or lose big. So to counter that, I go ultra safe and buy into Johnson and Johnson and Proctor and Gamble because they slowly and consistently tend to rise (J@J especially) and are generally more recession resistant. Plus they are well run companies and provide products that will be purchased constantly even in a depression. I try to find companies like that for my long term holds - other examples of steadily performing (but expensive) stocks I like are Autozone, Bilgari Holdings, DirecTV, Amgen, Deckers Outdoor, and Chipotle. IBM was included in this group until it had a really shitty earnings report this week and its price dropped like 10%. I think they can rebound, but I might sell in the near future.
I stay away from banking and holding firms (Berkshire and Bilgari are the exceptions; Buffet is a genius and Bilgari was founded by an ex-Berkshire exec - they own Steak and Shake and some other big chains) because they are very susceptible to market quakes and bad economic data. When I first started I tried buying into American Express, Wells Fargo, BofA and will not go back into it. However, I sometimes take advantage of that and buy when their prices drop significantly (with banking its very common for that to happen) and then sell in a week or so when they are back up to their equilibrium price. I do this with other companies that have a bad quarter because they usually really try to bounce back and prove that it was just a fluke; after their stock bounces back the next quarter I sell. My short term strategy usually includes waiting for a company's stock price to fall, buying, and then selling when you've reached a certain amount (my goal is usually around a 3-4% return). That is pretty much it as far as my day trading goes.
Dak
mentat
I'm surprised DirecTV is "steadily performing". I thought dishes were slowly declining in popularity.
As far as the Chechen, nm. Obviously it's laughable to think anything else than what my TV tells. MUSLIMZ KILL PEEPLEZ!
As far as the Chechen, nm. Obviously it's laughable to think anything else than what my TV tells. MUSLIMZ KILL PEEPLEZ!
Einherjar86
Active Member
It's not laughable, but you're not telling anyone anything they aren't already entertaining notions of. There's no way to verify anything in that meme, it's total speculation, and everyone here has probably already had the thought cross his or her mind.
There's just no food for thought in that suggestion.
There's just no food for thought in that suggestion.
Jimmy... Dead.
contemplative curmudgeon
Dak
mentat
I see little evidence of broad based questioning. Not necessarily referring to you.
Well I read, not watch the news. But yeah
Incidently that was my favorite character on Scrubs.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Most people won't come right out and say it; they'll think it, and retain it. People don't need to voice the possibility in order to consider it.
Most people will consider it, and will ignore it because they'll naïvely contend that it couldn't possibly be a conspiracy or a setup. Now, that's an unfortunate dismissal; but it doesn't mean the notion hasn't crossed people's minds. With so many suggestions of conspiracy even in the mainstream media, people are considering it, trust me.
The more appropriate dismissal, of course, is that the far simpler and more likely explanation is that these two brothers were fanatics of some sort and they organized a plan to bomb the Boston Marathon. Speculating on theories like that meme does just doesn't get us anywhere.
Dak
mentat
Einherjar86
Active Member
Dak
mentat
It's only empty as in it does not present a conclusion. I don't see a problem with that. I do not believe we must always have an answer with every question.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Conclusion? It doesn't present any evidence. It's a hypothesis backed by nothing but sensationalism. It's utterly useless.
Dak
mentat
We might throw a charge of "Sensationalism" at anything. Evidence is interesting because most of what we take to be evidence really isn't. Like what some guy standing behind a podium on TV said.
Einherjar86
Active Member
That isn't true at all; you're evading the criticism by claiming it could be applied anywhere (you do this a lot). There are legions of academic journals that provide in-depth analysis and evidence-laden arguments. Simply reducing all argumentation to "sensationalism" is reactionary and regressive.
Dak
mentat
I'm not saying you can't levy criticism, I'm saying you are being biased in your application of it. I don't put a lot of stock in legions of people writing on X, since you can find people doing that for any number of conflicting things. As far as whichever group is "official", that goes back to who is benefiting the "money", as you have argued.
I'm only reducing all arguments to sensational in the same sense that you insist on trying to attack asking questions. Why is the possibility of a setup more sensationalist than a jihadist bomb plot?
