Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 2564 2565 [2566] 2567

Author Topic: AmeriPol thread  (Read 1574079 times)

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38475 on: August 04, 2020, 09:07:16 am »

It's the total ideological hypocrisy that struck me. Bill Gates is the enemy, and Big Tech in general, but apparently acceptible to have the data they think China is harvesting. Effectively taxing private enterprise, rather than bend over backwards to give it big breaks. And disliking the voice of protest and civily disobedient expressions unless it's pro-2A (and 1A only insofar as it's oj that side of the argument).

It's just weird stuff, really. I caught some of the "press conference" last night and saw any number of other announcements yesterday and it just seems to me that there's too much to talk about, and mayhe that's why sometimes nobody is talking about any of it Same shit, new day, being relegated by so much new shit, same day.
Logged

Bumber

  • Bay Watcher
  • REMOVE KOBOLD
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38476 on: August 04, 2020, 09:36:25 am »

It's the total ideological hypocrisy that struck me. Bill Gates is the enemy, and Big Tech in general, but apparently acceptible to have the data they think China is harvesting.

Bill Gates doesn't have an army, AFAIK. Lesser evil and all that.
Logged
Reading his name would trigger it. Thinking of him would trigger it. No other circumstances would trigger it- it was strictly related to the concept of Bill Clinton entering the conscious mind.

THE xTROLL FUR SOCKx RUSE WAS A........... DISTACTION        the carp HAVE the wagon

A wizard has turned you into a wagon. Was this inevitable (Y/y)?

Doomblade187

  • Bay Watcher
  • Requires music to get through the working day.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38477 on: August 04, 2020, 09:39:37 am »

It's the total ideological hypocrisy that struck me. Bill Gates is the enemy, and Big Tech in general, but apparently acceptible to have the data they think China is harvesting.

Bill Gates doesn't have an army, AFAIK. Lesser evil and all that.
I mean, neither does the company that owns TikTok. And Microsoft's still gonna turn data over to the feds. Not much difference, really, just which government gets the data.
Logged
In any case it would be a battle of critical thinking and I refuse to fight an unarmed individual.
One mustn't stare into the pathos, lest one become Pathos.

McTraveller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38478 on: August 04, 2020, 10:12:38 am »

Dunno I kind of like the idea of the US govt being funded again only by tariffs, excise taxes, and things like portions of corporate sales.  Before income tax, this is entirely how the government was funded.

I'd much rather the US gov't taking 30% of every corporate sale than 30% income.  After all, corporations only exist by the grace of the government; people exist independent of governments.

Sadly the math says that this wouldn't raise too much money; until this year the US annual M&A is between $1-$2T. So you wouldn't make up much of the budget that way.

If you include all stock sales in the US, I think you could do it**: Apparently that is about $23T a year*; you can take 30% of that and get more than the current federal budget.  EDIT: I do mean this as a sales tax, not a tax on profit.  Get rid of capital gains on stock sales, etc. Just a straight 30% stock sales tax.  This would not apply to dividends; as dividends are income!

Something tells me the powers that be would never go for that though.

*Before 2020 though. This year would be tough.

** Also, it's hard to say how that tax would impact stock sales; presumably fewer transactions would be made, so the overall volume may be lower.

(EDIT: Interesting side effect - this approach could be taken as addressing the issues of stock buybacks - would companies be as happy to do that if they were paying 30% of the buyback to the government?)
« Last Edit: August 04, 2020, 10:16:28 am by McTraveller »
Logged

sluissa

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38479 on: August 04, 2020, 12:15:21 pm »

I think a lot of that revenue source would dry up very quickly as well though. A lot of stock trading is based on rapid trading and profits of a fraction of a percent. If you made it unprofitable to sell any stock for a gain of less than 30%, MOST of the current stock trading would end, completely.

Not saying that would necessarily be a bad thing, since stock markets are a major problem on their own in their current form. But I really don't think you'd see those expected revenues.
Logged

Naturegirl1999

  • Bay Watcher
  • Thank you TamerVirus for the avatar switcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38480 on: August 04, 2020, 12:17:26 pm »

I think a lot of that revenue source would dry up very quickly as well though. A lot of stock trading is based on rapid trading and profits of a fraction of a percent. If you made it unprofitable to sell any stock for a gain of less than 30%, MOST of the current stock trading would end, completely.

Not saying that would necessarily be a bad thing, since stock markets are a major problem on their own in their current form. But I really don't think you'd see those expected revenues.
Can you mention how stock markets are a problem? When I took Intro to Macroeconomics, we didnít talk about the stock market. Thatís more of a microeconomics thing.
Logged

sluissa

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38481 on: August 04, 2020, 01:13:03 pm »

It's a much bigger topic than I admit to knowing the full depth of, but a few problems include:

Things like speculation, where a stock is valued, not at it's current actual value, but at a perceived future value, which may or may not actually pan out and gets dangerously close to simple gambling.

Things like high speed automated trading which take advantage of very small price changes to make profits, but also end up having no human in the loop to sanity check and have caused things like massive market crashes in the past. (Luckily they tend to recover fairly quickly on a market-wide scale, sometimes within seconds, but I imagine individuals have gotten severely screwed because of them.)

Things like where companies exist simply to artificially inflate their stock price and then sell the company off with little to no actual productive value for existing. The classic example being tech/single product startups that manage to sell stock based off of an idea that never actually makes it to market, and some people end up walking away with money, but many others end up losing their investments.


There's nothing wrong with the idea of selling stock on a publicly traded market. It's a good way to raise capital for a company that needs outside funds to grow or try something new. The problem is simply that it's gotten out of hand and there's little regulation, and even where regulation exists, it rarely gets enforced except in the most egregious of circumstances. And it seems like every time a regulation does get put in place because of something that happened that caused major damage, then the financial people simply manage to figure out some way to do the same thing again, just with a few extra steps involved that put a buffer between the thing they want to do and the thing they're allowed to do. It's simply become a way for people with a lot of money to print even more money, and anyone without a few billion involved is just along for the ride, for better or worse, and nobody with authority is willing to say "enough is enough."
Logged

JoshuaFH

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38482 on: August 04, 2020, 01:54:43 pm »

I'm not big into economics, but would it be possible to just do away with the kind of rapid day trading that makes the stock market like a shitty casino? That is, if upon purchasing stock, you cannot sell it again until a certain amount of time has elapsed? That way, if you're buying stock, it's closer to an actual investment than a gamble?
Logged

TamerVirus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Who cares
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38483 on: August 04, 2020, 01:56:34 pm »

Buy high sell low
Logged
What can mysteriously disappear can mysteriously reappear
*Shakes fist at TamerVirus*

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38484 on: August 04, 2020, 02:49:40 pm »

That's why you don't want the 30% thing. You put in something like a 0.001% transaction fee on stock sales. This would damp down on the rapid trading stuff, which is largely leeching off the system, make some revenue, while not really turning off longterm serious investors.

The reason that the "time limit" idea won't work is that how do you determine who or what is selling the shares. Say you make a pool of shell companies and you put a few shares from a specific company in each. Then, when the price spikes up you have one of your holding companies sell a few shares, and when the prices dips down, you have another one of your holding companies buy a few shares. These could happen a split second apart if wanted, and they'd be hard to trace or prosecute, since technically they're different shares.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2020, 02:54:29 pm by Reelya »
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38485 on: August 04, 2020, 02:50:40 pm »

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38486 on: August 04, 2020, 02:55:23 pm »

I'm not big into economics, but would it be possible to just do away with the kind of rapid day trading that makes the stock market like a shitty casino? That is, if upon purchasing stock, you cannot sell it again until a certain amount of time has elapsed? That way, if you're buying stock, it's closer to an actual investment than a gamble?
Not quite that extreme, but there are 'slow exchanges' intended to defeat the worst side-effects of HFT/etc. this one is the one I think I first heard of.

The reason that the "time limit" idea won't work is that how do you determine who or what is selling the shares. Say you make a pool of shell companies and you put a few shares from a specific company in each. Then, when the price spikes up you have one of your holding companies sell a few shares, and when the prices dips down, you have another one of your holding companies buy a few shares. These could happen a split second apart if wanted, and they'd be hard to trace or prosecute, since technically they're different shares.
Also there are far too many 'off book' methods of trading. In taking a Short position you can'borrow' shares and ownership can be nominal for the whole process until they get 'returned' (so long as you do fulfill your part of the bargain at all stages, and if you don't you're really in hock for the funds alone if you haven't had to transfer official ownership.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2020, 03:08:46 pm by Starver »
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38487 on: August 04, 2020, 03:11:35 pm »

For reference, what slow exchanges defeat is an attack where you notice that someone has for example asked to buy a share at a specific price, but you've got a faster connection so you connect to the exchange and buy the shares cheaper then when the original buy request comes in, you go "oh you want shares in X? Sure, I've got some!" and you sell them to them for a tiny profit. But you do this thousands of times a day. The problem has come in because the big traders all have this equipment now, so the expected profits from this trick approach zero in the long run, it's an arms race. But of course they still all make a little profit off the trades from all the slower "mom and pop" traders, who don't realize they're being stolen from basically.

What the 350 ms delay does isn't to mean the mom and pop trader can really get online and do a trade in that time, it means the exchange can pick up the original buy request before the fake request comes in, so they can say "oh there are two buy requests, but Request A is offering a higher price, so Request A gets the sale". This is just to explain what it is exactly that they're trying to defeat here. It's not as simple as "fast trading": these are not people looking at share trends and making actual predictions about whether it's going up or down, that's not what this defeats: these are race conditions where they're siphoning off profits that other people should really be making. It's like if in medieval times you knew that a company of soldiers was going to a specific town to buy new armor, so you raced there first and bought up all the armor in town just in time.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2020, 03:24:00 pm by Reelya »
Logged

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38488 on: August 04, 2020, 03:24:26 pm »

That and arbitrage has led to high-stakes data warehousing within the exchange datacentre (to get shorter lengths of cable between racks, at a premium price) and microwave/short-wave transmissions to outpace even fibre-optic communications between cities.

You don't need a high bandwidth, so long as you can get a lower latency for suitably apt trigger-messages.

I imagine that half the experiments to send bits via quantum-entanglement are sponsored by people aiming to beat free-space radio-transmission for this purpose.
Logged

Egan_BW

  • Bay Watcher
  • Abandon that which came before.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #38489 on: August 04, 2020, 03:28:21 pm »

insert relevant smbc here
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 2564 2565 [2566] 2567