Just stick with what Marx wrote: it’s at best a way to make a few bucks on the side at the enemy’s expense
cars posted:“stock speculation” = “class war”
Yeah it's so strange how all the bourgeois party politicians have nothing to lose by presenting market speculation as a popular uprising. lol
cars posted:even Marx saw playing the market as a way of making money off the enemy
really, dude
karphead posted:cars posted:
even Marx saw playing the market as a way of making money off the enemy
really, dude
well, he literally did! he brags about making a profit speculating at the LSE (five figgies, adjusting for inflation!), plus he basically lived off money supplied by engels' sizable investment portfolio
88888 posted:karphead posted:cars posted:
even Marx saw playing the market as a way of making money off the enemy
really, dudewell, he literally did! he brags about making a profit speculating at the LSE (five figgies, adjusting for inflation!), plus he basically lived off money supplied by engels' sizable investment portfolio
i know he did, i just dont think quoting marx in this context, regarding the changes that have happened since he was alive, is cool
karphead posted:b) fuck anyone that leaves the rhizzone
as you posted a little while ago, everyone dies. R.I.P.
karphead posted:shut up cars
If you don't want to talk about it anymore I understand but you can probably understand why I asked you what any of that meant since it was an outburst that came out of nowhere and mentioned me specifically.
karphead posted:i dont want to talk about it anymore
fair enough. All the best
招瑤 posted:what are you nerds still arguing about in a video game forum thread on the internet
*last year's video game forum thread
The GameStop issue brings out several things about modern capitalism.
1. Selling securities, in some manner, is a common feature of all financial markets. What has come to the fore with GameStop is an aspect of selling that involves securities which are not actually owned. But this operation is done by many financial institutions, not just hedge funds and those put under the usual heading of ‘speculators’. When you think about it, how in any sense is buying a security somehow good, but selling one is meant to be bad? Both operations involve betting on the future of financial market prices. You can also bet on a rise in prices without owning the security, for example via the futures or options market. Is that bad too?
2. Financial operations – including both buying and selling, short or not – are a key part of the mechanism of modern day capitalism. You cannot consistently argue against some aspects of this without questioning capitalist markets as a whole, and at least asking whether this is a sensible way to run the world!
3. On the GameStop events:
That you have regulators, brokers and government officials (in the US, at least) railing against the market price volatility and turmoil following the GameStop events is a bit rich coming from people who have consistently defended such markets. That ‘free market’ has seen persistent efforts by governments to prop up equity prices and keep money market interest rates and bond yields low, zero or negative. Such policy moves reflect a serious and deep crisis that has led to numerous zombie companies that would have failed without the state aid the economy has received. GameStop was in the failure queue, and a number of hedge funds sold its shares short, expecting to be able to make money on a casualty that government aid would not rescue.
A key thing that undid these hedge funds is that information on extreme short positions is more easy to get these days. They did not guess that what started out as a good speculative idea could result in big losses. They had the so-called ‘fundamentals’ on their side, but ignored another, financial market fundamental: extreme exposure leads to extreme vulnerability. This is ironic, since many aggressive hedge fund bets are made to take advantage of such situations. Reports suggest that a very large portion of the company’s shares had been sold short by various funds, which meant that at some point they would have to buy them back. The question was at what price, and the answer came when many small, mainly US-based, investors started to buy GameStop. Prices jumped, then soared further as short positions were cut, with many billions of dollars in losses for these hedge funds.
This has been touted as some kind of victory for the ‘small guy’ over Wall Street. It does reflect an instance of prices going against some market speculators. But no doubt other hedge funds would also have joined in the buying to take advantage of their rivals. The outcome so far has been one big group of small speculators winning against a small group of big speculators. Amusing, yes, but not much use as a morality tale of good versus bad.
It is still less so when you consider that amateur day-traders rarely sustain any monetary benefits from dealing in financial markets. Or that financial market trading is elevated to a favourite hobby, or a desperate way to try and get some money. Or, more importantly, when you notice that this event has nothing to teach about the more serious stranglehold that the major powers have over the world economy, one that influences everything from international trade and finance to the distribution of vaccines against disease.
Finally, the recent, general drop in world equity markets is not due to hedge fund losses on GameStop. Big losses do often force a sale of other unrelated assets, BUT the GameStop debacle was not that big and there are plenty of other things for financial markets to worry about!
