It's Free Thursday! Today we talk Schilling, racists who aren't Schilling, gambling, the Hot Stove, misogyny, dumb money, the New Deal, and seasonal affective disorder
- Glad I am not the only one itchy about the nexus of gambling and sports. Though my own objection is less "it will ruin the game" and more "there will be a lot more gambling addicts."
- Putting aside how much I want the Mets to not sign Bauer, the notion that even the richest owner in baseball is making a salary dump is dreary. It's as if Cohen was made to promise he would stay below the tax threshhold lest he set a bad example and spend more money to win.
- I do, however, like the Mets' signing of Loup.
- If Schilling wants off the ballot, why not let him? The same way George C. Scott could refuse his Oscar, the same way John LaRoquette didn't accept an Emmy nomination after winning it too often for Night Court.
- Leachman was great on Mary Tyler Moore, and deserved her Emmys. Phyllis was usually difficult, sometimes loathesome, and probably an anti-Semite, but Leachman always imbued Phyllis with humanity and inner strength even when I wished Rhoda would punch her. The episode where Sue Ann has an affair with Phyllis's (never seen) husband is so wonderful as we watch Leachman and Betty White square off, two women who don't take any crap but do it in such different ways.
I don't want the Mets to sign Bauer either. Which I guess proves us Mets fans are self destructive masochists who active encourage the pain the team brings us.
Some of us Mets fans are old ladies who have just fucking Had Enough with the bad actors whose bad actions are excused because they can throw a baseball harder (and more accurately) than most mortals. And Bauer is a particularly bad actor.
Why, yes, being a Mets fan is a particularly pernicious form of masochism.
Not sure what "wanting to feel woke" has to do with it? Porter is a prick (ahem) what he did was disgusting, and sexually harassing your colleagues should be enough to shun you.
Bauer isn't on that level, to me. His political idiocy doesn't even slot into Left or Right, like Schilling's. It's just crazy.
When I say "feeling woke" I mean, is me not wanting Bauer just an easy way to take a stand about systemized sexism without having to challenge people I know and even myself? Sure, I will feel like I am taking a principled stand, but does it really change anything? Shouldn't be doing more?
“It's as if Cohen was made to promise he would stay below the tax threshhold lest he set a bad example and spend more money to win.”
That’s 100% correct. Remember that owners are approve by other owners and in the end they’re all in it together. It’s another variant of George Carlin’s “big club” bit.
Schilling being off the ballot makes it about Schilling, not about the Hall and the last thing the Hall wants is for the player to become more important than the Hall. It already happened once. They don't want another one of those.
I'm not sure there will be more sports addicts? I mean it's so, so, easy to gamble already. And in a few decades gambling has gone from being a seedy, dirty, vice associated with the mob and losing your job and family, to a big corporate, mainstream, family friendly thing. The government runs lotteries, for heaven's sake. Scratch offs are advertised on TV shows kids watch.They have TV show branding. And sold in every convenience store and drugstore chain, right at the cash register. Every school fundraiser and charity event is a raffle.
What bothers me about leagues getting so directly into bed with the big gambling concerns isn't addicts, but the integrity of the sport. How many cheating scandals has baseball had already? I want to watch baseball, not pro wrestling. Whoever pays the money calls the tune, and like Craig said, gambling concerns aren't going to be like camping equipment. They won't just pay the money and leave. They have a vested interest in close games, big spreads, Red Sox vs Yankees everything, injuries, health or personal issues with players kept secret, and all sorts of things that are bad for both baseball and the culture that watches baseball.
My own personal moral code, informed by rabbinic Judaism, is opposed to all gambling. I don't even like it when my synagogue has a raffle, which is permitted under Jewish law. I never, ever buy lottery tickets now no matter how big the prize. (I hate that the government enables gambling addiction, and I have seen people spending hundreds of dollars on those stupid scratchoff tickets at NYC newsstands.) Gambling will never be something I consider personally respectable. But I know that very few feel that way now.
TIL (courtesy of that Civil Standard link) that the little pockets on the front of a hoodie are called “kangaroo pockets.“ And it’s not even 7:30 AM yet. Calling it a win.
Guess you hit publish before checking out The Athletic this morning, where their lead story was about the addition of a Sports Betting section...with “insights and offers from BetMGM” of course.
This from the service that was supposed to be ad-free and exist solely from subscriptions. Oh well, was good while it lasted!
Yeah, I guess I agree. I’m just annoyed at how they’re framing it. If they limit the BetMGM mentions to the gambling area, then that’s probably fine. But my worry is if they start having ads all over the interface, or casually work it into non-gambling articles.
Yeah, writers are going to be pressured to include gambling/odds content in all their articles, from game recaps to profiles to season previews. I'm already hearing it on podcasts. One of my regular hockey podcasts came back this season with a regular segment from a Canadian betting company.
It’s depressing. I love The Athletic, it’s what I always wanted from older haunts like SI and ESPN+, and yet here we go with more of the gross gambling crap seeping in like it is everywhere else.
I look forward to what he has to say, but knowing how dysfunctional the US is, and how long the pandemic road is, I could see a compelling argument for just going home to make millions there in a country where they’re actually trying to survive a deadly disease.
American Family Field sounds like a place a family goes to on vacation with the idea that it will "reprogram" the kid that doesn't identify as heterosexual.
Yep, my first thought when hearing about this story was that this company's name sounds like it might be some creepy, Christian fundamentalist, anti-choice operation that probably pays Tim Tebow to be a spokesman for them.
Fox Sports esthetic has always been horrible, and I have no idea if Sinclair will improve it at all other than add a Sebastian Gorka editorial to each broadcast, presumably. But any time I see a rebroadcast of an old Fox game, whether on the network or RSN, it just looks like absolute garbage.
As far as men failing upward, I do find it amazing the lack of consequence for so many. What line does one have to cross to become anathema? When Ken Starr is a talking head on Fox News (another esthetic travesty) it is clear you do anything and someone will still be there to catch you when you fall. Incidentally, the op-Ed page for the Times still has some abjectly terrible takes even after Bennett and his absenteeism. At least Jamelle Bouie is there.
To be fair, I do enjoy Krugman and Goldberg. I just love Bouie. I’ve been reading him for ages and he is such a great writer and thinker. Except for his love of Spider-Man 3.
I don't see how. We've already seen how easy it is to cheat, with the Astros and Red Sox sign stealing. And the Cards hacking into the Astros' database. And clubhouse managers providing stuff to doctor balls, and recration drugs. And rampant PED use, still. Don't tell me the Mariners, which like every team, monitor every aspect of their players' health, were surprised their best player was taking PEDs.
There are a million ways for some random employee to affect the outcome of a game, or many games. Now big money has a direct interest in doing that. It could be as easy as keeping news of an injury quiet. Or something far more elaborate.
But in baseball cheating to win IS cheating to lose. Baseball had this discussion with the whole Pete Rose cluster. You overuse your best pitcher, you're more likely to lose in later games, or games where you're stuck with the replacement guy.
I know it was a different time, but baseball famously had an entire team playing to lose. And that's just the famous one. It happened all through deadball. And as we saw with Pete Rose, you can have money and still have a raging gambling problem. And I've never heard of anyone happy with the amount of money they have. Look how greedy the owners/real estate developers/private equity firms are. How many people buy baseball teams just to run them as cheaply as possible and not care if they finish 40 games behind? Which is a long way of saying I bet plenty of managers, coaches, or one of the zillions of anonymous front office people, would be open to being bribed to lose.
It's almost a cliche for the media to accuse players of laziness or managers of dumb moves. It's a short step from there to "deliberately tanking."
Hal Chase, the Black Sox, and every deadball era player, manager, and owner, including Nap Lajoie and Ty Cobb would disagree.
Landis's grave is probably spinning enough to drill right through the centre of the earth. Sometimes I think about how he would hate every single think that's happened in the MLB (with the possible exception of the DH) from his death onwards. Players of every ethnicity and public efforts to do the same for front office positions, owners calling the shots and the commissioner being their lapdog, rich players and free agency and the end of the reserve clause, and now partnering with casinos .
It’s hard to root for a team or love a sport as an adult like you once did as a kid - the team I love most is currently owned by a guy who cozied up to our former wannabe dictator - but ad patches on jerseys, personal politics, and in-broadcast advertisements will all seem warm and fuzzy compared to the endless deluge of gambling crap. Fantasy football was a minor annoyance, but every other commercial online, every sports source, and soon every broadcast will be tailor-made for the personal gambler and their infinite bets on every component of the game I used to just watch.
Maybe the minors and indie ball will be less impacted, but it’s just depressing.
It is interesting to see the Mets acquiring all these additional pitchers, while still having their eye on Bauer. To me, this signals that Rod Manfire might have given them a heads up behind the scenes that he's finally about to dole out a lifetime ban from the game to Cinder Guard for admitting to betting on himself in free agency (https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2019/02/20/noah-syndergaard-i-feel-like-im-going-to-bet-on-myself-in-free-agency/).
It's possible that Manfire was holding off on the banning until he got all his ducks in order with game-wide gambling, from the Nationals' casino to allowing Neville Sinclair to name the sports networks after Bally Sports. Manfire's play might be that he can quell the fan outrage over the gambling takeover by showing that he's still "tough on gambling" by doling out that ban to Guard.
Craig: I've thought about getting a SAD lamp but wasn't sure I would do the whole "bask in the light for 30 minutes" thing ... do you just use it as a desk lamp? Does it help?
The key I think is to have it on, but not RIGHT in your eyes or on your work. Just sort of in the periphery. It can function as a desk lamp I suppose, but I don't use it that way. I just turn it on for like 20-30 minutes when I first sit down to work in the morning and then turn it off.
It's hard to say if it works. My lows aren't as low as some people who get SAD, so it's not like I can immediately identify a benefit, but I operate on the assumption that it's at least not hurting. I dunno.
Thanks. Like you, I'm usually up way before the rest of my family (Progressive commercial: "no one cares") so I'd feel a little less self-conscious about sunning myself with an appliance to start the day right. I might give it a whirl.
Thanks. I've been thinking about it too. I feel the same way about running. I'm sure it's great for my physical health, when I don't slip on the ice, but I still feel mentally . . . me. If I stop for a bit, I can't tell if I feel worse because of what my baseline is. Maybe I just need to run more to get the benefit.
I'll look at the lamp. I wish there was a way to rent one for a month and see if there's a difference.
Former therapist here: A psychiatrist I worked with for a long time used to say that she thought everyone above the Mason-Dixon line should be issued a SAD light from time change to time change. I believe it is helpful. However, if you have any history of mania or bipolar symptoms, it can be a potential problem. But I've often felt that's more of a disclaimer than anything I saw in my 10 years working. Totally worth a shot and yes, just have it on while you read Craig's newsletter even.
I have so little respect for Wallstreet day trading I struggle to care much, but I do find it mildly amusing that "dumb money" managed to beat Wallstreet on this one trade. They wont win in the long run, I don't think, but it makes me giggle.
Story I'd like to read but haven't seen: how, if at all, do these hedge funds' beatings affect me and my 401K? I suspect the answer is "not at all; these positions are for the hedgers' benefit only" but I'd like to know. I'm all for David over Goliath but not if it means I have to work well into my 70s.
I actually think this is the part of the economy they have massive potential impacts in your 401k
Day trading is basically gambling but using real companies and the real economy as leverage. It can harm banks and savings while offering the economy zero actual benefits.
Asking not arguing: aren't the hedgers doing the same thing on a larger scale? They were betting (a lot) on GameStop's demise - and apparently using shares they didn't even own to do it.
I'm willing to tolerate some self-serving nonsense at the margins as long as the overall structure of the market is sound. If the market goes south lots of people like me - who were told to save for ourselves because the federal government is essentially out of the retirement security business - are going to be in serious trouble.
I'm just hoping this funny little plant doesn't run out to be kudzu.
Ok first I misread your first comment I thought you were discussing the initial people shorting GameStop.
The answer to your question is yes, and it’s why I hate the stock market. (I’m still in it: you can’t afford retirement without it) but I don’t like it
If the stock market didn't exist, how would investment work? It seems there should be a method for investment that doesn't allow for shorting in general. More so after the housing crisis than this.
I am actually worried, but mainly because stocks have bizarrely skyrocketed since the pandemic began. It's a bubble that makes no sense and will pop at some point.
Of course. It's always great when David beats Goliath, and no one if Bible era could have ever imagined a Goliath as hateful and douchey as a Wall Street trader laughing about "dumb money." Like the ancient Israelites would have said "Tone it down. No one's this awful."
Makes me wonder why the stock market is even a thing, if it functions like a casino. Everyone knows that expecting to win money consistently gambling is for suckers. If you go to a casino except for entertainment (or bet on sports or play poker or whatever) you're an idiot. It doesn't happen unless you cheat somehow. If nearly the whole country were trying to pay for rent and food in Vegas, that would be unsustainable. We get that.
So why is there a system that literally runs on dumb money losing? The stock market and related markets couldn't exist without dumb money. If only the big brokerage firms could play on the market, there quickly wouldn't be any publicly traded companies. Yet the health of the stock market is vital to the economy. It's indexed to pension funds and everything.
I don't understand it. It's become something beyond investing into something that exists for its own sake.
Happens that I just saw Kiss Me Deadly for the first time a few weeks ago -- not sure how I'd managed to not see it before. You're right, it's amazing, and so is she.
You are SAVAGE, sir. I'm here for it.
- Glad I am not the only one itchy about the nexus of gambling and sports. Though my own objection is less "it will ruin the game" and more "there will be a lot more gambling addicts."
- Putting aside how much I want the Mets to not sign Bauer, the notion that even the richest owner in baseball is making a salary dump is dreary. It's as if Cohen was made to promise he would stay below the tax threshhold lest he set a bad example and spend more money to win.
- I do, however, like the Mets' signing of Loup.
- If Schilling wants off the ballot, why not let him? The same way George C. Scott could refuse his Oscar, the same way John LaRoquette didn't accept an Emmy nomination after winning it too often for Night Court.
- Leachman was great on Mary Tyler Moore, and deserved her Emmys. Phyllis was usually difficult, sometimes loathesome, and probably an anti-Semite, but Leachman always imbued Phyllis with humanity and inner strength even when I wished Rhoda would punch her. The episode where Sue Ann has an affair with Phyllis's (never seen) husband is so wonderful as we watch Leachman and Betty White square off, two women who don't take any crap but do it in such different ways.
I don't want the Mets to sign Bauer either. Which I guess proves us Mets fans are self destructive masochists who active encourage the pain the team brings us.
Or are middle aged men who want to feel woke or who really are genuinely embarrassed by how other men behave.
Honestly, part of me wishes no one would sign him, but I know it doesn't work that way.
Some of us Mets fans are old ladies who have just fucking Had Enough with the bad actors whose bad actions are excused because they can throw a baseball harder (and more accurately) than most mortals. And Bauer is a particularly bad actor.
Why, yes, being a Mets fan is a particularly pernicious form of masochism.
Not sure what "wanting to feel woke" has to do with it? Porter is a prick (ahem) what he did was disgusting, and sexually harassing your colleagues should be enough to shun you.
Bauer isn't on that level, to me. His political idiocy doesn't even slot into Left or Right, like Schilling's. It's just crazy.
When I say "feeling woke" I mean, is me not wanting Bauer just an easy way to take a stand about systemized sexism without having to challenge people I know and even myself? Sure, I will feel like I am taking a principled stand, but does it really change anything? Shouldn't be doing more?
“It's as if Cohen was made to promise he would stay below the tax threshhold lest he set a bad example and spend more money to win.”
That’s 100% correct. Remember that owners are approve by other owners and in the end they’re all in it together. It’s another variant of George Carlin’s “big club” bit.
Schilling being off the ballot makes it about Schilling, not about the Hall and the last thing the Hall wants is for the player to become more important than the Hall. It already happened once. They don't want another one of those.
I'm not sure there will be more sports addicts? I mean it's so, so, easy to gamble already. And in a few decades gambling has gone from being a seedy, dirty, vice associated with the mob and losing your job and family, to a big corporate, mainstream, family friendly thing. The government runs lotteries, for heaven's sake. Scratch offs are advertised on TV shows kids watch.They have TV show branding. And sold in every convenience store and drugstore chain, right at the cash register. Every school fundraiser and charity event is a raffle.
What bothers me about leagues getting so directly into bed with the big gambling concerns isn't addicts, but the integrity of the sport. How many cheating scandals has baseball had already? I want to watch baseball, not pro wrestling. Whoever pays the money calls the tune, and like Craig said, gambling concerns aren't going to be like camping equipment. They won't just pay the money and leave. They have a vested interest in close games, big spreads, Red Sox vs Yankees everything, injuries, health or personal issues with players kept secret, and all sorts of things that are bad for both baseball and the culture that watches baseball.
My own personal moral code, informed by rabbinic Judaism, is opposed to all gambling. I don't even like it when my synagogue has a raffle, which is permitted under Jewish law. I never, ever buy lottery tickets now no matter how big the prize. (I hate that the government enables gambling addiction, and I have seen people spending hundreds of dollars on those stupid scratchoff tickets at NYC newsstands.) Gambling will never be something I consider personally respectable. But I know that very few feel that way now.
TIL (courtesy of that Civil Standard link) that the little pockets on the front of a hoodie are called “kangaroo pockets.“ And it’s not even 7:30 AM yet. Calling it a win.
Guess you hit publish before checking out The Athletic this morning, where their lead story was about the addition of a Sports Betting section...with “insights and offers from BetMGM” of course.
This from the service that was supposed to be ad-free and exist solely from subscriptions. Oh well, was good while it lasted!
Yeah, I guess I agree. I’m just annoyed at how they’re framing it. If they limit the BetMGM mentions to the gambling area, then that’s probably fine. But my worry is if they start having ads all over the interface, or casually work it into non-gambling articles.
Yeah, writers are going to be pressured to include gambling/odds content in all their articles, from game recaps to profiles to season previews. I'm already hearing it on podcasts. One of my regular hockey podcasts came back this season with a regular segment from a Canadian betting company.
It’s depressing. I love The Athletic, it’s what I always wanted from older haunts like SI and ESPN+, and yet here we go with more of the gross gambling crap seeping in like it is everywhere else.
oy
Clearly Tanaka signed with Rakuten so he could get a Big Fat Check
I look forward to what he has to say, but knowing how dysfunctional the US is, and how long the pandemic road is, I could see a compelling argument for just going home to make millions there in a country where they’re actually trying to survive a deadly disease.
Totally agree, but my comment was a Rakuten joke and had nothing to do with Tanaka
https://www.rakuten.com/help/category/your-big-fat-check-115001466488
I always forget they are now what ebates was.
American Family Field sounds like a place a family goes to on vacation with the idea that it will "reprogram" the kid that doesn't identify as heterosexual.
{Goes to Google Maps to see how far the field is from Mike Pence’s home state}
Yeah, this checks out
Yep, my first thought when hearing about this story was that this company's name sounds like it might be some creepy, Christian fundamentalist, anti-choice operation that probably pays Tim Tebow to be a spokesman for them.
Fox Sports esthetic has always been horrible, and I have no idea if Sinclair will improve it at all other than add a Sebastian Gorka editorial to each broadcast, presumably. But any time I see a rebroadcast of an old Fox game, whether on the network or RSN, it just looks like absolute garbage.
As far as men failing upward, I do find it amazing the lack of consequence for so many. What line does one have to cross to become anathema? When Ken Starr is a talking head on Fox News (another esthetic travesty) it is clear you do anything and someone will still be there to catch you when you fall. Incidentally, the op-Ed page for the Times still has some abjectly terrible takes even after Bennett and his absenteeism. At least Jamelle Bouie is there.
No love for Krugman or Goldberg?
To be fair, I do enjoy Krugman and Goldberg. I just love Bouie. I’ve been reading him for ages and he is such a great writer and thinker. Except for his love of Spider-Man 3.
All the screeching about cancel culture, no one ever gets cancelled. No one powerful anyway.
If Ken Starr can’t get cancelled, no one really can.
Do you remember the time that gambling became embedded in a sport, and gambling-related corruption did not follow?
Neither do I.
I don't see how. We've already seen how easy it is to cheat, with the Astros and Red Sox sign stealing. And the Cards hacking into the Astros' database. And clubhouse managers providing stuff to doctor balls, and recration drugs. And rampant PED use, still. Don't tell me the Mariners, which like every team, monitor every aspect of their players' health, were surprised their best player was taking PEDs.
There are a million ways for some random employee to affect the outcome of a game, or many games. Now big money has a direct interest in doing that. It could be as easy as keeping news of an injury quiet. Or something far more elaborate.
But in baseball cheating to win IS cheating to lose. Baseball had this discussion with the whole Pete Rose cluster. You overuse your best pitcher, you're more likely to lose in later games, or games where you're stuck with the replacement guy.
I know it was a different time, but baseball famously had an entire team playing to lose. And that's just the famous one. It happened all through deadball. And as we saw with Pete Rose, you can have money and still have a raging gambling problem. And I've never heard of anyone happy with the amount of money they have. Look how greedy the owners/real estate developers/private equity firms are. How many people buy baseball teams just to run them as cheaply as possible and not care if they finish 40 games behind? Which is a long way of saying I bet plenty of managers, coaches, or one of the zillions of anonymous front office people, would be open to being bribed to lose.
It's almost a cliche for the media to accuse players of laziness or managers of dumb moves. It's a short step from there to "deliberately tanking."
Ask Hal Chase, maybe?
Hal Chase, the Black Sox, and every deadball era player, manager, and owner, including Nap Lajoie and Ty Cobb would disagree.
Landis's grave is probably spinning enough to drill right through the centre of the earth. Sometimes I think about how he would hate every single think that's happened in the MLB (with the possible exception of the DH) from his death onwards. Players of every ethnicity and public efforts to do the same for front office positions, owners calling the shots and the commissioner being their lapdog, rich players and free agency and the end of the reserve clause, and now partnering with casinos .
The only way I'm watching that sign video is if you tell me it ends with the cord snapping and the sign crushing the Selig statue.
And Bud is still making payments on it.
It’s hard to root for a team or love a sport as an adult like you once did as a kid - the team I love most is currently owned by a guy who cozied up to our former wannabe dictator - but ad patches on jerseys, personal politics, and in-broadcast advertisements will all seem warm and fuzzy compared to the endless deluge of gambling crap. Fantasy football was a minor annoyance, but every other commercial online, every sports source, and soon every broadcast will be tailor-made for the personal gambler and their infinite bets on every component of the game I used to just watch.
Maybe the minors and indie ball will be less impacted, but it’s just depressing.
It is interesting to see the Mets acquiring all these additional pitchers, while still having their eye on Bauer. To me, this signals that Rod Manfire might have given them a heads up behind the scenes that he's finally about to dole out a lifetime ban from the game to Cinder Guard for admitting to betting on himself in free agency (https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2019/02/20/noah-syndergaard-i-feel-like-im-going-to-bet-on-myself-in-free-agency/).
It's possible that Manfire was holding off on the banning until he got all his ducks in order with game-wide gambling, from the Nationals' casino to allowing Neville Sinclair to name the sports networks after Bally Sports. Manfire's play might be that he can quell the fan outrage over the gambling takeover by showing that he's still "tough on gambling" by doling out that ban to Guard.
Craig: I've thought about getting a SAD lamp but wasn't sure I would do the whole "bask in the light for 30 minutes" thing ... do you just use it as a desk lamp? Does it help?
The key I think is to have it on, but not RIGHT in your eyes or on your work. Just sort of in the periphery. It can function as a desk lamp I suppose, but I don't use it that way. I just turn it on for like 20-30 minutes when I first sit down to work in the morning and then turn it off.
It's hard to say if it works. My lows aren't as low as some people who get SAD, so it's not like I can immediately identify a benefit, but I operate on the assumption that it's at least not hurting. I dunno.
Thanks. Like you, I'm usually up way before the rest of my family (Progressive commercial: "no one cares") so I'd feel a little less self-conscious about sunning myself with an appliance to start the day right. I might give it a whirl.
Thanks. I've been thinking about it too. I feel the same way about running. I'm sure it's great for my physical health, when I don't slip on the ice, but I still feel mentally . . . me. If I stop for a bit, I can't tell if I feel worse because of what my baseline is. Maybe I just need to run more to get the benefit.
I'll look at the lamp. I wish there was a way to rent one for a month and see if there's a difference.
Former therapist here: A psychiatrist I worked with for a long time used to say that she thought everyone above the Mason-Dixon line should be issued a SAD light from time change to time change. I believe it is helpful. However, if you have any history of mania or bipolar symptoms, it can be a potential problem. But I've often felt that's more of a disclaimer than anything I saw in my 10 years working. Totally worth a shot and yes, just have it on while you read Craig's newsletter even.
Not another election map!!
Oh wait, sorry. Rewind. It’s just the Bally Sports map. My bad.
Speaking of which, I was surprised Craig didn't dunk on their Ohio geography skills. I guess that was just another CalcaTwitter Special(tm)
I have so little respect for Wallstreet day trading I struggle to care much, but I do find it mildly amusing that "dumb money" managed to beat Wallstreet on this one trade. They wont win in the long run, I don't think, but it makes me giggle.
Story I'd like to read but haven't seen: how, if at all, do these hedge funds' beatings affect me and my 401K? I suspect the answer is "not at all; these positions are for the hedgers' benefit only" but I'd like to know. I'm all for David over Goliath but not if it means I have to work well into my 70s.
I actually think this is the part of the economy they have massive potential impacts in your 401k
Day trading is basically gambling but using real companies and the real economy as leverage. It can harm banks and savings while offering the economy zero actual benefits.
Asking not arguing: aren't the hedgers doing the same thing on a larger scale? They were betting (a lot) on GameStop's demise - and apparently using shares they didn't even own to do it.
I'm willing to tolerate some self-serving nonsense at the margins as long as the overall structure of the market is sound. If the market goes south lots of people like me - who were told to save for ourselves because the federal government is essentially out of the retirement security business - are going to be in serious trouble.
I'm just hoping this funny little plant doesn't run out to be kudzu.
Ok first I misread your first comment I thought you were discussing the initial people shorting GameStop.
The answer to your question is yes, and it’s why I hate the stock market. (I’m still in it: you can’t afford retirement without it) but I don’t like it
If the stock market didn't exist, how would investment work? It seems there should be a method for investment that doesn't allow for shorting in general. More so after the housing crisis than this.
I am actually worried, but mainly because stocks have bizarrely skyrocketed since the pandemic began. It's a bubble that makes no sense and will pop at some point.
Mine's lost ~5k over the week, hopefully just a blip. I gotta play the long game.
I'm in the same boat. Several decades until retirement, so mostly I just check it out as a curiosity, but definitely down from just a few days ago.
Of course. It's always great when David beats Goliath, and no one if Bible era could have ever imagined a Goliath as hateful and douchey as a Wall Street trader laughing about "dumb money." Like the ancient Israelites would have said "Tone it down. No one's this awful."
Makes me wonder why the stock market is even a thing, if it functions like a casino. Everyone knows that expecting to win money consistently gambling is for suckers. If you go to a casino except for entertainment (or bet on sports or play poker or whatever) you're an idiot. It doesn't happen unless you cheat somehow. If nearly the whole country were trying to pay for rent and food in Vegas, that would be unsustainable. We get that.
So why is there a system that literally runs on dumb money losing? The stock market and related markets couldn't exist without dumb money. If only the big brokerage firms could play on the market, there quickly wouldn't be any publicly traded companies. Yet the health of the stock market is vital to the economy. It's indexed to pension funds and everything.
I don't understand it. It's become something beyond investing into something that exists for its own sake.
Cloris Leachman's first role, in the very great Kiss Me Deadly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?fbclid=IwAR10JrcSS1np0t0ZDXjsp7URDMNBAnyZH2GLA6uvAYIqPugNGU69XEcVSOk&v=0R397H6iKCc&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=Mr.FlapjackPresents
One her best post-Last Picture Show, in Jonathan Demme's glorious Crazy Mama: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSFyTT-gwWU&ab_channel=RogerCorman%5BOfficialYouTubePage%5D
Happens that I just saw Kiss Me Deadly for the first time a few weeks ago -- not sure how I'd managed to not see it before. You're right, it's amazing, and so is she.
It takes a marxist to comprehensibly explain the Game Stop affair: https://jacobinmag.com/2021/01/gamestop-stock-market-reddit?fbclid=IwAR11ld9Mq1NwkLonXOEE91prL_YztTn8kCHYrkzJjMdBuMATULwdT5Im_F0
I also found Luke O'Neil's newsletter (he interviewed someone who understands the markets and Marx) did a good job explaining how it all worked for me, a stock market idiot https://luke.substack.com/p/you-always-think-you-can-get-out
Yes! That's also good, and it's the same guy: Doug Henwood, one of the best lefty writers and thinkers on the economy and related matters.
Ha, guess I should have read your link first!