No what you said was some ■■■■■■ shit and then you tried to quote a wikipedia page to prove me wrong but the wikipedia page just says what I said
No that's exactly what it means, cheaper labor costs (and some other factors making it cheaper) meant it was no longer profitable in the US and therefore US steel production died
Not when the price of fucking Chinese steel was still more than the fucking cost of producing it in the US. Hint: companies moving to a country for a higher profit doesn't mean that there isn't profit here
This guy just argues endlessly about the dumbest shit and for some reason I waste time responding to it
You have zero grasp of anything. You never make a point that is coherent or based on what the argument is. You can't fucking respond to arguments about why you're wrong because you're too fucking stupid to figure out an answer. So, you just post dumbshit quips to try to appear intelligent.
Got a source on hedge funds not providing a minimal-risk investment yet?
I don't need to provide a source ewhizzer I know a lot more than you and the stuff you were saying was nonsensical. I provided like 5 massive essays on it and if you'd read them and understood them instead of looking for ways to weasel out of being wrong this wouldn't still be a discussion
You're a shockingly unregimented thinker whose main aim is to never lose an internet argument so you end up doing shit like googling for and then posting WSJ articles from Apr 2020 that say "Are hedge funds on the rise again???" without even being able to read between the lines of those very articles and understand why your claim of "incredibly lucrative and risk-immune assets of the super-rich" was some uneducated and unsubstantiated nonsense
You quoted a NYT article saying HFs weren't the massive returns that they used to be. They were still returning and we're still much more profitable than the stock market during 2000-2020. You quoted another source where there were multiple quotes I posted saying HFs are designed to be minimal risk (the term was "absolute return")
Want to source some data on HFs not providing a better return? How about how they're minimal risk? How about how they are effectively the same as EW index funds? Because I posted a shitload of stuff saying they have inverse to no correlation with those funds and you can't seem to show otherwise
Chicago police
- Balkanized the gang organizations (taking 2-3 large gangs and splitting them into 80something or so pieces, creating self-imposed genocide)
- Would straight up disappear people, necessitating the 2-3 main gangs to police their own neighborhoods
- were largely nepotistic hires, and had families that lived above the law (on my dads 1970s block, one of the sons went on a shooting spree with his father's service weapon, no charges even though a neighbor was shot)
- are raging drunks + wifebeaters
3 Likes
As pointed out many times: the point of that article was to make you specify a timeframe over which to evaluate them, because you said looking at the timeframe 2000-2020 was too long. You never gave what an appropriate timeframe for evaluation was.
They are functionally risk-immune. They have inverse correlation with downturns in the market and weak correlations with upturns in the market. I posted multiple sources with the fucking data. They are only accessible to investors. How is 11% over 20 years or even 4% over the past 10 not lucrative when the periods of market downturn caused incredibly minimal to no loss in that term?
4 applies to all police departments
Now:
Gangs and policing/security are much the same as those voluntarily joining armed forces. They either have
- Economic gains : they can't find another opportunity that will pay well, the policeman's union is the only unskilled union, SEIU baggers are smarter than police/fire in most situations
- Have no other choice: they've exhausted each and every one of their other jobs and asked an uncle or their father for a position
- Want to play CoD in real life: slave away doing crossfit and picking cotton and playing MW3 and now they're super obsessed with EDC, ""criminal" "justice"", etc., etc.,
shut up my main man. - Black person who is not me but is living vicariously through me, an acquaintance of ewiz online @anyone_who_is_black confirm???
?
are you okay?
What?
I don't want to appropriate.
A problem or more importantly an inflection point in Karl Marx's das capital is he wants a closer version to anarcho communism but says also totalitarianism at some point in some way will be needed to achieve the setting possible for it to flourish, and as human beings go we fail that test.
Im kind of dumb but i likened it sorta to the fermi paradox great filter dichotomy
Reminder that HFs profited in the 2008 recession and during the dip in the beginning of the 2000's. So much so that they beat stocks by 11% over a decade.