Is Mitch McConnell Being Played?

James___ wrote:
Sidney Powell, the pro-Trump election lawyer who was cast aside by the US president's legal team last month, has racially attacked the Republican senate leaders's wife, Elaine Chao, whom she referred to as "China".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pro-trump-election-lawyer-shares-173029689.html


The issue here is who controls Foremost Group? It's China. China finances their ships as well as provides them with cargo to transport. China can also decide that if the People's Party is unhappy with either Elaine Chao or Mitch McConnell, then the People's Party could suddenly find there isn't as much cargo for the Foremost Group to transport.
This is one issue that they'll probably fight. It's China's Most Favored Nation Status which is for developing economies or normal trade relations. China is not an open society. It also does not allow for free trade. Why China does not import much from the US. China is a communist country so it should not qualify for MFN status.


https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-introduces-bill-to-end-china-and-146s-permanent-most-favored-nation-status

If China loses this status, it will lose jobs. With Mitch McConnell as senate majority leader, the trade deficit with China reached $350 Billion. This created work for the Foremost Group of which it's owner gave Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell over $30 Million as a gift.

Spongy Iris wrote:Do you think your Senator Cotton's bill will pass?

James___ wrote:
Sidney Powell, the pro-Trump election lawyer who was cast aside by the US president's legal team last month,

James___ wrote:
has racially attacked the Republican senate leaders's wife, Elaine Chao, whom she referred to as "China".
...deleted remaining irrelevant wanderings...

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:
Sidney Powell, the pro-Trump election lawyer who was cast aside by the US president's legal team last month, has racially attacked the Republican senate leaders's wife, Elaine Chao, whom she referred to as "China".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pro-trump-election-lawyer-shares-173029689.html


The issue here is who controls Foremost Group? It's China. China finances their ships as well as provides them with cargo to transport. China can also decide that if the People's Party is unhappy with either Elaine Chao or Mitch McConnell, then the People's Party could suddenly find there isn't as much cargo for the Foremost Group to transport.
This is one issue that they'll probably fight. It's China's Most Favored Nation Status which is for developing economies or normal trade relations. China is not an open society. It also does not allow for free trade. Why China does not import much from the US. China is a communist country so it should not qualify for MFN status.


https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-introduces-bill-to-end-china-and-146s-permanent-most-favored-nation-status

If China loses this status, it will lose jobs. With Mitch McConnell as senate majority leader, the trade deficit with China reached $350 Billion. This created work for the Foremost Group of which it's owner gave Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell over $30 Million as a gift.

Who is playing McConnell?

Foremost Group is based in New York. Its fleet is focused on China, with roughly 72% of the raw materials it has shipped since early 2018 going to China (as of June 2019).

The company reportedly constructs almost all its vessels in state-owned shipyards in China, some with loans from the Chinese government.

McConnell's wife Elaine Chao who he married in 1993 now serves as the US Secretary of Transportation. Her father founded Foremost Group, which explains why he can give such large gifts to his daughter and son in law.

Do you think your Senator Cotton's bill will pass?

keepit wrote:That is how the great depression occurred.
There was too little money in the hands of the lower earners

keepit wrote: ... and as a result they didn't have enough money to spend.

keepit wrote:That made it so the upper earners couldn't earn money off the lower earners and then GDP went way down.

keepit wrote:
That is how the great depression occurred.
There was too little money in the hands of the lower earners and as a result they didn't have enough money to spend. That made it so the upper earners couldn't earn money off the lower earners and then GDP went way down.

keepit wrote:
That is how the great depression occurred.

keepit wrote:
There was too little money in the hands of the lower earners and as a result they didn't have enough money to spend.

keepit wrote:
That made it so the upper earners couldn't earn money off the lower earners and then GDP went way down.

keepit wrote:
What a crock of baloney ITN.

Spongy Iris wrote:Squawk squawk fake news from The Parrot. Phoney Baloney narrative.

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:Squawk squawk fake news from The Parrot. Phoney Baloney narrative.

Mmmph-umm-mmmphhh er-mum-mummmph from the sponge.

Brilliance. Pure brilliance.

Into the Night wrote:

keepit wrote:
That is how the great depression occurred.

Nope. That is not how the Great Depression occurred.

The Stock Market crash of '29 was a speculative bubble crash. Normally, left to itself, the economy would be back on it's feet in a year or two. Instead, the government intervened, and horribly. The bubble itself was formed out of policies from Pres. Wilson's administration. His violations of the Constitution and the creation of the Federal Reserve limited normal healthy economy and people started investing in bubbles instead. It all ended in '29.

It was FDR that made the Great Depression Great. His constantly shifting policies and violations of the Constitution made investing in ANYTHING pretty risky. So investors largely didn't invest in anything. Even with war footing, the economy sucked. Factories were converted from what people wanted to making war materials, which only bring about destruction.

The Great Depression lasted longer than FDR's term in office. It was only AFTER the war was finally ended and the soldiers came home that the economy started producing what people actually wanted again.

Finally, it was all over. The economy was booming again, people were building homes and lives, and places like Disneyland were being built.

The boom lasted until the Nixon administration, when gold as a currency was a crisis since many nations had squandered their wealth on WW2 and could never pay it back.

That was when Nixon took the nation completely off the gold standard. The dollar now had no ties whatsoever to any commodity.

That resulting inflation (the U.S. was similarly broke) created yet another economic downturn, this time exacerbated by Carter and his lunatic price controls.

keepit wrote:
There was too little money in the hands of the lower earners and as a result they didn't have enough money to spend.

Many were out of work completely. This is a direct result of the confiscation of gold by FDR, and inflating the dollar against gold, and constantly changing government policies.

keepit wrote:
That made it so the upper earners couldn't earn money off the lower earners and then GDP went way down.

Again, you are trying to establish class warfare. You are a bigot.

Depression is not deflation. The Great Depression saw massive inflation in the value of the dollar against gold. Depression is a downturn in economic activity lasting longer than the usual downturn left to it's own devices to recover.

James___ wrote:Actually the stock market crashed because Wall Street told people to have "faith".

James___ wrote:People bought on margin.

Spongy Iris wrote:
IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

Can anybody think of any other reason to buy a stock?

(P.S. for nitpickers, sometimes stocks pay dividends, if you hold them. This can help you worry a bit less about finding another person to pay a higher price. Even if you find someone to pay a slightly less price to buy the stock from you, after holding it for 1 year, the dividends might still result in positive cash flow for you.)

IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote:Actually the stock market crashed because Wall Street told people to have "faith".

Wall Street is not a person.

I've been to Wall St. It can't assure anyone anything.

However, Wall St. is just like EVERYWHERE else in the world, i.e. full of salesmen telling you that you should buy.

In the end, it's caveat emptor.

James___ wrote:People bought on margin.

Big deal. Futures are traded entirely on margin. More people use credit cards than cash. It is merely reflective of the high velocity of money you would expect in a first-world country.

.

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:
IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

Can anybody think of any other reason to buy a stock?

(P.S. for nitpickers, sometimes stocks pay dividends, if you hold them. This can help you worry a bit less about finding another person to pay a higher price. Even if you find someone to pay a slightly less price to buy the stock from you, after holding it for 1 year, the dividends might still result in positive cash flow for you.)

This is where we get into corporate welfare. This is when companies like Walmart Inc. lose money to run their competition out of business. As a result, they don't pay corporate taxes because they lost money.
And when they make a profit, can't pay taxes because off of having operated at a loss to run their competition out of business.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:
IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

Can anybody think of any other reason to buy a stock?

(P.S. for nitpickers, sometimes stocks pay dividends, if you hold them. This can help you worry a bit less about finding another person to pay a higher price. Even if you find someone to pay a slightly less price to buy the stock from you, after holding it for 1 year, the dividends might still result in positive cash flow for you.)

This is where we get into corporate welfare. This is when companies like Walmart Inc. lose money to run their competition out of business. As a result, they don't pay corporate taxes because they lost money.
And when they make a profit, can't pay taxes because off of having operated at a loss to run their competition out of business.

What does that have to do with people buying their stock?

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:
Sidney Powell, the pro-Trump election lawyer who was cast aside by the US president's legal team last month, has racially attacked the Republican senate leaders's wife, Elaine Chao, whom she referred to as "China".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pro-trump-election-lawyer-shares-173029689.html


The issue here is who controls Foremost Group? It's China. China finances their ships as well as provides them with cargo to transport. China can also decide that if the People's Party is unhappy with either Elaine Chao or Mitch McConnell, then the People's Party could suddenly find there isn't as much cargo for the Foremost Group to transport.
This is one issue that they'll probably fight. It's China's Most Favored Nation Status which is for developing economies or normal trade relations. China is not an open society. It also does not allow for free trade. Why China does not import much from the US. China is a communist country so it should not qualify for MFN status.


https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-introduces-bill-to-end-china-and-146s-permanent-most-favored-nation-status

If China loses this status, it will lose jobs. With Mitch McConnell as senate majority leader, the trade deficit with China reached $350 Billion. This created work for the Foremost Group of which it's owner gave Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell over $30 Million as a gift.

Who is playing McConnell?

Foremost Group is based in New York. Its fleet is focused on China, with roughly 72% of the raw materials it has shipped since early 2018 going to China (as of June 2019).

The company reportedly constructs almost all its vessels in state-owned shipyards in China, some with loans from the Chinese government.

McConnell's wife Elaine Chao who he married in 1993 now serves as the US Secretary of Transportation. Her father founded Foremost Group, which explains why he can give such large gifts to his daughter and son in law.

Do you think your Senator Cotton's bill will pass?

China basically controls it's work. If China did not give the Foremost Group the work, it could not grow as a company. China is not a free enterprise country. The government can give work to a company or it can take that work away. I knew of the 72% figure.
As public servants go, this is a significant conflict of interest because both Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell stand to inherit a significant part of that company.
I doubt Senator Cotton's bill will pass. I think Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell will ensure it doesn't. Their family would stand to lose money if it does. And they are Washington, D.C.'s #1 power couple. Their influence will save China's MFN status.


What else Senator Mcconnell has been getting wrong is college tuition at public universities in Kentucky. Tuition has been outpacing inflation. This pays for research. That research creates no revenue for the schools. What it does is to allow researchers to patent it and then to take it private.
If students through tuition increases are helping to fund research then they should be considered as investors with a claim to any and all parents generated by research at the school.
Public universities receive federal monies.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:
Sidney Powell, the pro-Trump election lawyer who was cast aside by the US president's legal team last month, has racially attacked the Republican senate leaders's wife, Elaine Chao, whom she referred to as "China".

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pro-trump-election-lawyer-shares-173029689.html


The issue here is who controls Foremost Group? It's China. China finances their ships as well as provides them with cargo to transport. China can also decide that if the People's Party is unhappy with either Elaine Chao or Mitch McConnell, then the People's Party could suddenly find there isn't as much cargo for the Foremost Group to transport.
This is one issue that they'll probably fight. It's China's Most Favored Nation Status which is for developing economies or normal trade relations. China is not an open society. It also does not allow for free trade. Why China does not import much from the US. China is a communist country so it should not qualify for MFN status.


https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-introduces-bill-to-end-china-and-146s-permanent-most-favored-nation-status

If China loses this status, it will lose jobs. With Mitch McConnell as senate majority leader, the trade deficit with China reached $350 Billion. This created work for the Foremost Group of which it's owner gave Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell over $30 Million as a gift.

Who is playing McConnell?

Foremost Group is based in New York. Its fleet is focused on China, with roughly 72% of the raw materials it has shipped since early 2018 going to China (as of June 2019).

The company reportedly constructs almost all its vessels in state-owned shipyards in China, some with loans from the Chinese government.

McConnell's wife Elaine Chao who he married in 1993 now serves as the US Secretary of Transportation. Her father founded Foremost Group, which explains why he can give such large gifts to his daughter and son in law.

Do you think your Senator Cotton's bill will pass?

China basically controls it's work. If China did not give the Foremost Group the work, it could not grow as a company. China is not a free enterprise country. The government can give work to a company or it can take that work away. I knew of the 72% figure.
As public servants go, this is a significant conflict of interest because both Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell stand to inherit a significant part of that company.
I doubt Senator Cotton's bill will pass. I think Elaine Chao and Mitch McConnell will ensure it doesn't. Their family would stand to lose money if it does. And they are Washington, D.C.'s #1 power couple. Their influence will save China's MFN status.


What else Senator Mcconnell has been getting wrong is college tuition at public universities in Kentucky. Tuition has been outpacing inflation. This pays for research. That research creates no revenue for the schools. What it does is to allow researchers to patent it and then to take it private.
If students through tuition increases are helping to fund research then they should be considered as investors with a claim to any and all parents generated by research at the school.
Public universities receive federal monies.

I'm still having a hard time seeing how McConnell is being played. Seems like he's the one doing the playing. Idk...

Foremost ships dry bulk commodities to China, so seems like they are pretty necessary to China.

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

The reason Amazon is worth so much is because its business is expected to expand/increase. This simply means that companies that pay dividends on common stock or taxes on profit will lose a % of their customer base to Amazon.

HarveyH55 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

Stock, is a share in the ownership, profit and loses don't figure into your ownership all that much. Your share in the ownership remains the same. You expect the profits, to mainly be re-invested, to grow the business, increasing the value of your share. The value of your share, will only be worth as much as someone else is willing to pay you for it.

Dividends are great though. Walmart owned the company I work for, maybe 15 years ago. They offered us the operatunity to purchase stock, which I did. They sold us, and I sold all my full shares soon after. From my dividends paid on that partial share, 15 years ago, reinvested. I now have a little over 5 shares. Not bad, wish I had kept my other shares, now... I figured Walmart was eventually going to get too big, crash and burn. Probably still will, but even then, I'll still get something back out of it, likely more than I had invested.

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:
IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

Can anybody think of any other reason to buy a stock?

(P.S. for nitpickers, sometimes stocks pay dividends, if you hold them. This can help you worry a bit less about finding another person to pay a higher price. Even if you find someone to pay a slightly less price to buy the stock from you, after holding it for 1 year, the dividends might still result in positive cash flow for you.)

This is where we get into corporate welfare. This is when companies like Walmart Inc. lose money to run their competition out of business. As a result, they don't pay corporate taxes because they lost money.
And when they make a profit, can't pay taxes because off of having operated at a loss to run their competition out of business.

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

The reason Amazon is worth so much is because its business is expected to expand/increase. This simply means that companies that pay dividends on common stock or taxes on profit will lose a % of their customer base to Amazon.

Amazon is obviously never going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings.

They have been losing money most of the time. That's how they have expanded as you implied earlier. Operate at a loss. Sell stuff below break even point, and drive out competition by offering the lowest price.

A reason they can do that, is they have investors who believe one day they will start turning profits, so investors give them money to help them operate at a loss.

Then once they have market domination, the belief is they can start turning a profit because people believe they can raise their prices to whatever they want.

But, as keep it tends to point out, they can't just charge what they want, because the wealthy people have got their money tied up in savings, and the poor people can't afford to buy as much of Amazon's stuff if they raise prices.

People should probably see Amazon executives are scamming investors.

Also, I wonder if Harvey could keep up with the pace of work in an Amazon warehouse. I have heard it to be hellish and the work must be maintained at a feverish pace. I wonder just how sustainable is their warehouse operational model. Cursed be he or she who gets stuck working in an Amazon warehouse.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

The reason Amazon is worth so much is because its business is expected to expand/increase. This simply means that companies that pay dividends on common stock or taxes on profit will lose a % of their customer base to Amazon.

Amazon is obviously never going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings.

They have been losing money most of the time. That's how they have expanded as you implied earlier. Operate at a loss. Sell stuff below break even point, and drive out competition by offering the lowest price.

A reason they can do that, is they have investors who believe one day they will start turning profits, so investors give them money to help them operate at a loss.

Then once they have market domination, the belief is they can start turning a profit because people believe they can raise their prices to whatever they want.

But, as keep it tends to point out, they can't just charge what they want, because the wealthy people have got their money tied up in savings, and the poor people can't afford to buy as much of Amazon's stuff if they raise prices.

People should probably see Amazon executives are scamming investors.

Also, I wonder if Harvey could keep up with the pace of work in an Amazon warehouse. I have heard it to be hellish and the work must be maintained at a feverish pace. I wonder just how sustainable is their warehouse operational model. Cursed be he or she who gets stuck working in an Amazon warehouse.

HarveyH55 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

Stock, is a share in the ownership, profit and loses don't figure into your ownership all that much.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Your share in the ownership remains the same.

HarveyH55 wrote:
You expect the profits, to mainly be re-invested, to grow the business, increasing the value of your share.

HarveyH55 wrote:
The value of your share, will only be worth as much as someone else is willing to pay you for it.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Dividends are great though.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Walmart owned the company I work for, maybe 15 years ago. They offered us the operatunity to purchase stock, which I did. They sold us, and I sold all my full shares soon after. From my dividends paid on that partial share, 15 years ago, reinvested. I now have a little over 5 shares. Not bad, wish I had kept my other shares, now... I figured Walmart was eventually going to get too big, crash and burn. Probably still will, but even then, I'll still get something back out of it, likely more than I had invested.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

The reason Amazon is worth so much is because its business is expected to expand/increase. This simply means that companies that pay dividends on common stock or taxes on profit will lose a % of their customer base to Amazon.

Amazon is obviously never going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings.

They have been losing money most of the time. That's how they have expanded as you implied earlier. Operate at a loss. Sell stuff below break even point, and drive out competition by offering the lowest price.

A reason they can do that, is they have investors who believe one day they will start turning profits, so investors give them money to help them operate at a loss.

Then once they have market domination, the belief is they can start turning a profit because people believe they can raise their prices to whatever they want.

But, as keep it tends to point out, they can't just charge what they want, because the wealthy people have got their money tied up in savings, and the poor people can't afford to buy as much of Amazon's stuff if they raise prices.

People should probably see Amazon executives are scamming investors.

Also, I wonder if Harvey cou

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

The reason Amazon is worth so much is because its business is expected to expand/increase. This simply means that companies that pay dividends on common stock or taxes on profit will lose a % of their customer base to Amazon.

Amazon is obviously never going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings.

They have been losing money most of the time. That's how they have expanded as you implied earlier. Operate at a loss. Sell stuff below break even point, and drive out competition by offering the lowest price.

A reason they can do that, is they have investors who believe one day they will start turning profits, so investors give them money to help them operate at a loss.

Then once they have market domination, the belief is they can start turning a profit because people believe they can raise their prices to whatever they want.

But, as keep it tends to point out, they can't just charge what they want, because the wealthy people have got their money tied up in savings, and the poor people can't afford to buy as much of Amazon's stuff if they raise prices.

People should probably see Amazon executives are scamming investors.

Also, I wonder if Harvey could keep up with the pace of work in an Amazon warehouse. I have heard it to be hellish and the work must be maintained at a feverish pace. I wonder just how sustainable is their warehouse operational model. Cursed be he or she who gets stuck working in an Amazon warehouse.

I've worked in a huge distribution warehouse, for the past 28 years. Most of it doing basically the same job. No, probably could keep up, in an entry-level, selection job, even where I work. Though, I can hold my own, where I work now, if I need to fill in occasionally. That's where experience kicks in... To do it 8-12 hours a day, 5+ days a week, is a younger persons game.

Most warehouses are fast pace, and aren't that bad, if you stay focused on the task you are being paid to perform. Something I've always been very good at. I learn and improve quickly, something I've always had to do. I'm taller than average, and had to figure out for myself, how to adapt what a smaller person does, to fit with my size. Usually, I have an advantage, but it's not always easy to apply.

Spongy Iris wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

James___ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:IMO, There is only one reason to buy a stock. To sell it to somebody else for a higher price than you paid.

You are in error. Stock means ownership. Ownership means shares of the profits.

Question: Why does someone start a business?
Answer: To generate a stream of income. While there might be a possibility of selling the business to someone else for a profit, the business is created for the revenue.

Question: Why do non-speculators buy stock?
Answer: For a share of the income stream generated by the business.

Speculators are the ones who buy stock (or anything else for that matter) with the intention of making a profit on its sale, i.e. buy low, sell high.

Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

.

It sure seems, stocks are entirely speculative. A crock of bull, this talk about sharing in a company's profit.

The closest thing to what you are talking about is dividends. It will take a very long time to recoup your investment solely waiting for dividends to pay out. No prudent risk manager would wait that long.

Amazon's stock market valuation is worth $1.62 trillion and they have so little saved after expenses that they didn't have to pay any taxes in 2018.

Do you really think Amazon is going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings in their lifetime???

As they say, All stocks must be sold.

The reason Amazon is worth so much is because its business is expected to expand/increase. This simply means that companies that pay dividends on common stock or taxes on profit will lose a % of their customer base to Amazon.

Amazon is obviously never going to generate $1.62 trillion in savings.

They have been losing money most of the time. That's how they have expanded as you implied earlier. Operate at a loss. Sell stuff below break even point, and drive out competition by offering the lowest price.

A reason they can do that, is they have investors who believe one day they will start turning profits, so investors give them money to help them operate at a loss.

Then once they have market domination, the belief is they can start turning a profit because people believe they can raise their prices to whatever they want.

But, as keep it tends to point out, they can't just charge what they want, because the wealthy people have got their money tied up in savings, and the poor people can't afford to buy as much of Amazon's stuff if they raise prices.

People should probably see Amazon executives are scamming investors.

Also, I wonder if Harvey could keep up with the pace of work in an Amazon warehouse. I have heard it to be hellish and the work must be maintained at a feverish pace. I wonder just how sustainable is their warehouse operational model. Cursed be he or she who gets stuck working in an Amazon warehouse.

I've worked in a huge distribution warehouse, for the past 28 years. Most of it doing basically the same job. No, probably could keep up, in an entry-level, selection job, even where I work. Though, I can hold my own, where I work now, if I need to fill in occasionally. That's where experience kicks in... To do it 8-12 hours a day, 5+ days a week, is a younger persons game.

Most warehouses are fast pace, and aren't that bad, if you stay focused on the task you are being paid to perform. Something I've always been very good at. I learn and improve quickly, something I've always had to do. I'm taller than average, and had to figure out for myself, how to adapt what a smaller person does, to fit with my size. Usually, I have an advantage, but it's not always easy to apply.

Never worked at Amazon but have worked in a couple warehouses.

Toughest one, We usually had 4 to 6 pullers, 2 or 3 loaders, moving out +20,000 boxes of meat per week.

It was a small warehouse packed full on Monday, and looked like a war zone by Friday.

I never bothered to learn how to drive the fork lifts and pallet jacks, because the workers there drove like maniacs, and I didn't need to risk that.

But I was an awesome scanner, the fastest pallet wrapper, the most consistent at finding missing boxes, and there will never be a more accurate biller than me.

I lifted that place up. Corrected countless phuk ups. Which protected a lot of people from getting fired. If I may toot my own horn for this pride week.

I only lasted almost 3 years. Those jobs don't pay enough to live a good life.

James___ wrote: p.s., margins are paying a % of what you are buying.