- Yooo get in here peeps, *State Of The Subreddit*, guidelines for political threads, and setting some aggressive penalties for violations - Discussion Thread. Speak now or forever hold your temp ban.
- Daily Advice Thread - All basic help or advice questions must be posted here.
- Trump Asserts He Can Force U.S. Companies to Leave China
- How do rich people invest?
- Why tariffs terrify the markets: The Legacy of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act
- What is the likelihood of a recovery in the next month or so for SPOT? It has dipped quite a bit recently (I think the timing aligns with the recent tariff announcements). I have a position at 145, or should I just cut my losses now?
- Would Berkshire hathaway be a good hedge against a downturn?
- Where will US stock markets go this week (Aug 26 to 30)?
- Biased opinion as I own stock (but not a fan boy) - That said I think Disney’s reveal (at D23 convention) of some of what to expect when Disney + launches is pretty impressive. What’s people’s thoughts ?
- Anheuser Busch (BUD) opts not to buy Portland's Craft Brew Alliance (BREW)
- ELI5: As a European, what do you guys mean with 'max out your 401(K)'
- Vanguard REIT VGSLX diversification?
- What exactly change the price of a stock is it mainly bye investors buying and selling the stock or the profit the company make?
- What does this quote on interest rates mean?
- Is there a way to reinvest without incurring taxes?
- Please critique my recession planning strategy (asset allocation % based on S&P price)
- Why aren't you shorting Lyft/Uber if it's so obvious they are doomed?
- Market dips
- New to investing. Microsoft has around 1 trillion dollars in market cap, where is that number comes from? I looked in the balance sheet I don't see it anywhere. Or is it amount of money invested by stock holders ?
- How will a recession affect the housing market?
- Indoor Vertical Farming Companies?
- Why Uber and Lyft Won't Exist in 10 Year...
- Finviz style charting in Tradingview
- What's going on with VMWare?
| Posted: 24 Aug 2019 08:21 AM PDT Alright guys, first I'm going to lay out my thoughts, feelings, and aim for the direction of this subreddit. I've heard this echoed several times but I'll be blunt: the quality of discussion here has slipped over time, especially concerning anything that's remotely political. My goal is to maintain a higher standard of investment discussion than your average financial subreddit (looking at you /r/personalfinance). Obviously this is a general investing forum so we're open to all but I rarely see white papers posted anymore and I see a lot more stuff that isn't really that relevant to investing. I personally have taken to removing these threads automatically - something like "elon musk tweets that he wants to build an elevator to the moon by q12020 just isn't really investing news. Sure it's interesting and funny, perhaps even newsworthy, but it's not something that really deserves to be on the front page of the subreddit. So guidelines on corporate posts, /u/crasymike has guidelines here: https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/b3ss3q/topics_being_removed_corporate_news_vs_investor/ I feel like these are very thorough and complete. Feel free to weigh in here but I'm largely just reiterating what he said. I think those are super good guidelines and I'm happy with the clarity it provides us in describing why we're removing threads that we don't think are investment related. If anyone wants a real world example a lil bit back I removed a thread that was about BOA raising their minimum wage to $15/hr. That's great news, it's definitely newsworthy somewhere, it's not relevant to investing. Now if someone broke down staff costs for BOA and which percentage of those were low earning employees then in turn described how this would impact BOA's cashflow then perhaps it would have stayed. But that wasn't the case. Hopefully that provides some good clarity on what we're looking for here. So on to the big question mark. We've been cracking down on this for months but I'd like to lay out some firm guidelines for political posts and comments. Basically I'm going to mimic Mike's post above but also I want to discuss how we feel about aggressive enforcement. First let me start by laying out my reasoning: Anyone that's been slumming around this sub long enough remembers that it used to be a lot different when we were south of 400k subscribers. Things change, that's fine. But back then we had a higher percentage of industry professionals and more seasoned investors. When politics came up most people weren't interested in the low effort mudslinging. Most people here just stuck to discussing the investment aspect of something naturally, here's a great example of a thread on Bernie's transaction tax in 2016. Now lets be honest, if that thread was posted today within 30 minutes the entire thread would be people arguing about socialism, student debt, boomers, Trump's haircut or skintone, really just about anything but the actual impact of transaction tax on markets. And the rest would be "why does bernie hate retirement funds" or some other similarly low effort bullshit that displays absolutely no analysis. That's bad. Now, to be clear I believe we need harsher enforcement of comments in political threads than regular threads. Lets be honest with ourselves, people personally identify with politicians and take personal offense to political attacks. That's just the way it is. Everyone is just so damn worked up and angry about politics. If I say I think Jack Welch was a shitty CEO or that the management team over at Exxon is full of idiots I may have people disagree with me but it's not going to create a situation where some mob of Welch supporters starts calling me a fucking moron. If I say Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders is an idiot then people are going to lose their shit. So here's the thing: top and high level comments are key. As much as I hate it people upvote these inflammatory comments, then people respond aggressively because they've been personally offended, then all of the sudden I can't actually discern /r/investing from the comments section of your local news station on facebook. Seriously, if you ever want to feel like a genius go to the facebook comments on a local news article, any news article, really. it's filled with complete idiocy. That's what we're fighting, because if this is left unchecked all of the sudden this place looks like /r/politics or /r/the_donald and nobody wants that. If you want those sort of posts then you can go there. So here's what I'm proposing, you're free to express your opinion so long as it's tied to investing, you put effort in to it, and it's civil. Tied to investing: This should be obvious but damn I can't tell you how many top level comments I remove concerning immigration, social rights, literally just people's disdain for [politician], how hard it is out there for millennials, etc. you have to understand what your comment does, it attracts other comments that are discussing this subject and all of the sudden we've got a thread about manufacturing filled with comments discussing how it's hard to make a down payment on a house. Look home ownership is nice but that's not topical and not related to investing. Effort: This is admittedly subjective but lets give some examples: Bad: This is fucking stupid, why does bernie hate savers, MAGA!, Trade wars are easy to win right?, Orange man bad, lots of TDS here, Pocahontas just wants to tax your money away, Tulsi Gabbard's workout video on instagram is hot, [republicans/democrats/specific politican] hate america, etc. Do these add to any sort of conversation in any manner? No. Good: "Wow, I think Trump's recent move is pretty bad, China can do XYZ which will cause imports to go up/down and this is bad because ABC." or "Trump is in the right here, with the current IP theft we need to take strong action, this will set us up for XYZ" these are both differing positions that people may agree/disagree with but you're making a good faith effort to have a discussion. This is good. Civility: I'm having a lot of people that don't post here a lot telling me that the current political climate warrants outrage and they need to be able to express that. No you don't. There's literally hundreds of politically oriented subreddits for you to go rant about how outraged you are. You'll get plenty of upvotes and no crabby mods are going to ban you for shitting on their lawn. True story. I'm going to be completely honest: if people are not capable of discussing a topic that impacts investing without losing their shit and lobbing insults then they are not the sort of person we're catering to. So lets quantify that too: Bad: this fucking idiot is going to ruin the country. Bernie is a socialist and will ruin everything. Trump is literally incompetent. He's a criminal. Republicans are literally just in it for their own self interest. Democrats hate America. Good: I definitely disagree with this approach, so far I'm not happy with this presidency because of [investment related XYZ]. I don't like [candidate] because of [investment related XYZ]. I don't think it's too much to ask for everyone to not use this sub for their partisan word vomit. Now on to enforcement Here's my proposal, I haven't run this by anyone yet so I'm sure other mods will chime in and we'll all arrive at something together. When I remove comments that don't fit in the conversation I check a lot of post histories. 95% of the time the people that come here to throw political haymakers never post here otherwise. They often frequent political subs(yeah, news and worldnews count) and they are often the worst offenders with derailing conversation. I kinda get it, maybe they subbed here but don't know anything about investing. Investing can have a steep learning curve but everyone knows which politician they hate. So, with the context that I intend to write up a long post of finalized posting/comment guidelines and combine that with the current corporate news vs investment news sticky, then have automod post a sticky to political threads imploring people read said guidelines BEFORE posting and that violating said guidelines results in an immediate ban I propose this: If someone diverts conversation purposefully to political topics that aren't related, they post some low effort meme [MAGA, Orange man, TDS, any given trump insult, stable genius, trade wars are easy to win, Pocahontas, I'm sure I'm missing tons], or they just insult a politician overtly (think "fucking idiot" vs this isn't smart) then they're getting a 30 day ban. If they attack a person directly for their position, their post is a prolonged rant/personal attack against a politician/party, or they're being extreme about violating the above guidelines then they get a 60 day or possibly permanent ban depending on severity. To be clear there have been some subjects that automatically get people permabans already. Racism, homophobia, religious attacks(dude I swear someone asked about Sharia compliant investments and got insulted three times before someone answered), death threats, etc have warranted permabans already. My reasoning is simple: in my observation most of the toxic behavior comes from people who aren't contributing otherwise. I don't really want them as subscribers. I personally am fine with hurting our subscriber numbers if it means better more focused discussion. So thoughts? have at it. Other things I wanted to float that are tangentially related: Possibly instituting character minimums for posts? Either self posts or comments as well. We might grant exceptions to regular contributors? I really have absolutely no idea how or even if I could pull that off. And I certainly don't know if it's a good idea. Any other ideas? Suggestions? Have at it. [link] [comments]  |
| Daily Advice Thread - All basic help or advice questions must be posted here. Posted: 24 Aug 2019 05:15 AM PDT If your question is "I have $10,000, what do I do?" or other "advice for my personal situation" questions. If you are going to ask how to invest you should include relevant information, such as the following:
Please consider consulting our FAQ first - https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/faq Be aware that these answers are just opinions of Redditors and should be used as a starting point for your research. You should strongly consider seeing a registered financial rep before making any financial decisions! [link] [comments]  |
| Trump Asserts He Can Force U.S. Companies to Leave China Posted: 24 Aug 2019 06:53 PM PDT https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/world/europe/trump-g7-summit.html BIARRITZ, France — President Trump asserted on Saturday that he has the authority to make good on his threat to force all American businesses to leave China, citing a national security law that has been used mainly to target terrorists, drug traffickers and pariah states like Iran, Syria and North Korea. "It's difficult to move out of China, and any time they are forced to do so by tariffs, this is a momentous act," said Ker Gibbs, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai. "We are in no position to give up the China market — it's too large, it's too important." Under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a president can declare a "national emergency" in case of "any unusual and extraordinary threat" to "the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States" from abroad. This triggers special authority for the president to regulate "any transactions in foreign exchange" by Americans. [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 24 Aug 2019 07:07 PM PDT I'm a tax-preparer, and when I'm assigned to work on the tax returns for relatively high-net worth individuals, they frequently have 20+ K-1s. They'll be a 0.00001% owner in a ton of different publicly-traded partnerships. On the other hand, most middle-class individual returns I work on simply have a 1099-Div from Charles Schwab or wherever. It got me wondering, why do the rich people's investments look so different from middle class's investments. Should middle-class people try to adopt more of the investing strategies of the wealthy? [link] [comments]  |
| Why tariffs terrify the markets: The Legacy of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act Posted: 24 Aug 2019 04:10 AM PDT History does not repeat. But it does rhyme.
[link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 25 Aug 2019 01:38 AM PDT |
| Would Berkshire hathaway be a good hedge against a downturn? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 08:01 PM PDT Hi, I am a beginner and just learning fundamentals of investing. However, I had a question , do you think BRK.B would be a great hedge against a downturn? My reasoning is because Berkshire's cash position (100B+ from my understanding) would allow opportunities to deploy this capital in a downturn. The stock is great as a long term investment from my understanding, one of their largest downsides is having their large cash position as a drag on yield. I have not read this idea anywhere after searching, so I would like to get the opinion of you guys. I know Buffet/Munger have a history of investing in sort of low risk / companies with great balance sheets and with predictable returns (no "fancy" stocks). My reasoning is that in a downturn they would be able to deploy capital and pick of value companies for pennies on the dollar, similar to what they did in '08. What are your thoughts? Thanks Edit: (I almost entirely do indexes for investing purposes, I am just curious on your thoughts on Berkshire - even though it is sort of like a mutual fund from a diversity perspective). I am also not necessarily asking because I think a recession is imminent, just curious. Thanks. [link] [comments]  |
| Where will US stock markets go this week (Aug 26 to 30)? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 07:56 PM PDT This past Monday Aug 19, I posted: "The DJIA went up about 250 points today (Aug 19) because: - 10 year T-bill yields were up Sunday night and into Monday, reducing talk of recession; - stimulus announced by China on Saturday (Aug 17) and potential German stimulus discussed on Monday (Aug 19); - US Commerce department's extension for Huawei. So what does this mean for the remainder of the week? Tuesday to Thursday (Aug 20 to 22): If the yield curve does not invert again, expect that US stock markets will either move sideways or increase slightly (S&P may increase to 2950 level). If yield curve does invert again, expect a major drop in stock markets (S&P down again to 2825 level). Friday (Aug 23): If Jerome Powell doesn't give investors what they want to hear, expect the markets to drop, maybe as much as 500 points. And if Jerome Powell does give investors what they want to hear, the market will go up." ------------------------------------------ So this leads us to the million dollar question: where will US stock markets head next week (Aug 26 to 30)? Was the August carnage in the stock markets a market bottom and will the markets now turn and head back up? Will we see a major bounce-back rally next week from Friday's big drop (S&P down to 2847)? Or was Friday's drop (caused by Trump's tweet ordering US companies out of China) the beginning of a downward slide? How will markets respond on Monday to Trump's Friday post-market tweets about increasing tariffs from 25% to 30% and 10% to 15%? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 24 Aug 2019 04:58 PM PDT |
| Anheuser Busch (BUD) opts not to buy Portland's Craft Brew Alliance (BREW) Posted: 24 Aug 2019 10:59 AM PDT
[link] [comments]  |
| ELI5: As a European, what do you guys mean with 'max out your 401(K)' Posted: 24 Aug 2019 10:38 PM PDT I read this a lot on this sub "make sure sure to max out your 401(K) and Roth IRA". I know a 401(K) is somewhat similar to the pension scheme we have over here but unlike in the US, we don't have a maximum amount we can contribute to the pension so this seems strange to me. Would appreciate if someone could dumb this down for me so I feel less clueless about what the heck you guys keep on rambling about :). Thanks [link] [comments]  |
| Vanguard REIT VGSLX diversification? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 05:14 PM PDT I'm a fan of Vanguard and their mutual funds. I have both VGSLX and VGRLX in my portfolio. I was looking at the holdings though and I ranked it from highest to lowest by money invested and it seems heavily weighted towards telecommunication REIT's and also I believe a shopping mall REIT was pretty far up the list. I noticed that there weren't very many residential REIT's high on the list and farmland had a very small portion. Has anyone else combed through the list and if so does it seem lopsided at all? I was thinking that one possibility could just be that these are the funds that increased in value the most and it's not necessarily Vanguard over spending on certain ones, not sure though. I checked VTSAX and noticed that it leans towards tech stocks too but also could be the same situation. If the tech stocks make up a majority of VTSAX and it's because they increased in value the most then it makes sense that the telecommunication REIT's would follow. I'm debating on pulling a small amount out of the fund and buying a couple individual residential REIT stocks to offer some balance. Any thoughts or insights on this? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 25 Aug 2019 12:00 AM PDT |
| What does this quote on interest rates mean? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 07:28 PM PDT "If the rate of interest falls, the capital value (capitalized value of expected income) rises and vice versa." -- Irving Fisher. I think this makes sense if applied in this context. If interest rates fall, the value of capital to be gained from fixed income investments (which take advantage of interest rates) falls. Therefore, the value of that capital as income increases. Is that the right message that Fisher is delivering? [link] [comments]  |
| Is there a way to reinvest without incurring taxes? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 07:15 PM PDT There is DRIP in which you can reinvest the dividend proceeds into the same security. Is there a way to reinvest the proceeds from a sale of a position into another position? For example: if I bought 10 shares of $AMZN and I wanted to swap those shares for the equivalent $ amount in $GOOG, is there a way to do that without actually selling the first stock (and thus having to incur cap gains)? [link] [comments]  |
| Please critique my recession planning strategy (asset allocation % based on S&P price) Posted: 24 Aug 2019 09:46 PM PDT Here's yet another recession planning post, just wanted to get your guys' thoughts on my asset allocation strategy with a little bit of a technical analysis twist. I keep seeing people say they'll buy more if the market dumps, but no one really has outlined a strategy on how they plan to ladder in. What do you think of this proposed strategy:
[link] [comments]  |
| Why aren't you shorting Lyft/Uber if it's so obvious they are doomed? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 09:05 PM PDT Everyone loves saying how Uber and Lyft are doomed. According to these people they have no path to profitability and will not exist in 5 years time. My only question is: why are you not shorting these companies if it is so obvious? If you truly believe they will go under then it is literally free money. What is stopping you? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 24 Aug 2019 08:42 PM PDT What point should I buy into Ford? It's steadily dropping but with tariffs looming I don't know when [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 24 Aug 2019 11:55 PM PDT |
| How will a recession affect the housing market? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 06:01 AM PDT I'm a bit ignorant with the intertwining of the stock market and housing market. Are the talks of a possible upcoming recession primarily stock market worries or a repeat of 2007-2009 housing market crash as well? [link] [comments]  |
| Indoor Vertical Farming Companies? Posted: 24 Aug 2019 12:13 PM PDT So i came across this article: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49052317?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science_and_environment&link_location=live-reporting-story And I'm quite intrigued by this industry. Does anyone know of any publicly traded companies focused on this? [link] [comments]  |
| Why Uber and Lyft Won't Exist in 10 Year... Posted: 24 Aug 2019 07:31 PM PDT This is 100% my own belief and I might get a lot of hate for it but I don't think Uber and Lyft will exist as they are now in the future. It could be that I've invested in both of these companies in the last 2 weeks and lost almost 18% so far but I'm started to believe these two innovative companies will be nonexistent in 10 years time. They are still great short term investments as they aren't completely useless (valued about $100 billion combined for a reason). Why? They are not making little to no money right now and just gaining brand popularity and are betting on making money once they can roll out self-driving cars. Uber more than Lyft which is why Uber is losing a lot more money on research than Lyft. Once self-driving cars do roll out, I think a lot more people would use Waymo by Google and its all because of Google Maps. Everyone uses Google Maps, there is no good alternative. Even Uber uses Google Maps. When people search where they want to go, Google can easily advertise their Waymo self-driving cars that can make them tons of money. Noone is competing with Uber or Lyft right now because it's not worth it. These companies are not making much money. Self-driving cars are what Uber and Lyft are both relying on. Uber is making their own self-driving technology but Lyft will probably license something from Tesla or Google. Google, however, have a huge advantage with Google Maps and having Android cover 85% of smartphone users. They can have Waymo pre-installed in the app and integrated with Google Maps. Same goes with food (like UBER-EATS) and groceries. My bet is Google will dominate these two industries with their Android-users and Google Search. The only other competitors I can see is Amazon (using its Amazon-prime members) and Apple (using its iOS-users). Also, anyone can just ask Google Assistant for a taxi and it can call up a Waymo. [link] [comments]  |
| Finviz style charting in Tradingview Posted: 24 Aug 2019 03:01 PM PDT I use tradingview to chart but am impressed by Finviz's rough 'autocharting' to get a quick overview, Is there anything anyone is using similar that plugs into Tradingview? (I'm talking about the channels and rough S/R on the charts https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=dis ) [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 24 Aug 2019 12:03 PM PDT Despite beating earnings yet again VMware is down over 20% in the past month. I have always thought VMware was a stable company and good buy. They have the best virtualization product in the market, and even I myself would never use VMware for running virtual machines over anything else. It is trading at $133 right now and I am tempted to just go all in after this dip since I truly believe the company has a solid business model. Their recent acqusitions will also make them stronger. So what is really going on with VMware? Is it a buy at this price? What are its future hurdles? [link] [comments]  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Lose money with friends!. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment