Yup
it dawned on me why everyone on this site is so obsessed with short term trading.
the vast majority of ppl have only been here since 2021 let alone 2017. they’ve never experienced the joy of developing long term theses and be proven right after 100-10000x. on top of that with the sheer amount of garbage launched after 2021 statistically most things ppl hold go to zero.
but having hit one 10000x, one 1000x, and a handful of 10-100xs, i can tell u from experience long term investing is financially, intellectually, *and* emotionally far more rewarding than short term games. not only will u make more money, u will learn more about the world and feel great watching a project succeed after years of ups and downs.
1% of short term traders will ever make it (and im increasingly convinced u r either born a great trader or u aren’t.) yet everyone thinks they are the chosen one. and even then, observe that the greatest of all time have made almost all their money from long term stuff (like buffett). these are the right role model for the 99%.
3
25
3,136
And again, this is structural to communism, not some accident. Break the price signal, and your economy cannot produce what it needs; then you get shortages and starvation, and the only way to keep order is to develop a brutally oppressive state.
Spot on
i think one of the biggest mistakes we've made as a society is convincing people that starting a family is something you do only after you've figured out everything else in your life
we've taught young people that first you get your degree, then you find a good job, then you work on your career and become successful, then you need enough money to buy a house, travel, enjoy life, go out with friends because 30 is still young, and only when you turn 40, maybe, you can start thinking about having children
i understand why people would think this way. that's what they've been told since they were born, and obviously you want to be able to provide for your children and give them a good life. but somewhere along the way we've completely reversed the order of things. marriage and children used to be part of the process of becoming an adult, not what you do when you think you've arrived
family used to be something you built your life around
my father always told me that you should never look for reasons not to have kids, otherwise you'll never have them. he was unemployed when he had his first. now he has seven and none of us missed out on anything.
we got to a point where having kids is something you're supposed to do once you've already built your life, old and tired. we have our priorities backwards
we force people to spend the most fertile years of their lives preparing for a future that never arrives for most of them
having kids is the thing that makes your life worth it in the first place
If you're not a "trader"*, the trick is to hold multi-cycle coins for a long time. This also biases you towards coins that have already survived multiple cycles, but which remain underappreciated.
* and if you are a trader, consider that most of the longtime successful traders in crypto probably made the vast majority of their wealth by holding one or two good assets for a long time.
At least 2 reasons this is correct:
1) Wall St is terrible at pricing asymmetry; they almost categorically cut off the true right tail in their models, where most of the value is.
2) ~Nobody has patience to hold for a decade+
^ the 2 best sources of alpha for individuals imo
One of the more reasonable possibilities
BREAKING: Senator Jon Ossoff surges past AOC & Gavin Newsom in 2028 Democratic presidential nomination odds following the midterms.
28% chance.
🔗 polymarket.com/r/Ossoff28
1
18
2,257
It is incredible - and terrifying - how governments can enforce an *obviously* terrible, destructive, murderous system, due to broken ideology.
Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward killed an estimated 45 million people between 1958 and 1962, and the backyard steel furnace campaign sits at the center of that catastrophe as a textbook case of central planning consuming itself alive.
Mao's logic was simple. If the Soviet Union had industrialized through state-directed production, China would do it faster and bigger. He ordered peasants across every province to smelt steel in small furnaces built on collective land. Party officials set output quotas with no reference to the resources, skills or demand that actually existed. Farmers melted down their own plows, woks and door hinges to hit the numbers, and stripped hillsides bare for fuel. What came out of those furnaces was mostly pig iron so brittle it had no industrial use. The quotas got reported as fulfilled, the statistics traveled up the command chain, and Beijing celebrated a triumph that existed only on paper.
Think about what those farmers abandoned to stand at furnaces all day. By most estimates, the 1958 harvest was decent. With the rural labor force diverted to smelting, the crops rotted unharvested in the fields. Free market economists call this opportunity cost: every hour a farmer spent producing worthless slag was an hour not spent producing food. Had anyone been allowed to use the price system, it would have made that tradeoff visible at once, because prices signal scarcity. Planners issue directives and wait for reality to disobey them.
Local officials who reported shortfalls faced execution or the labor camps, so they reported surpluses. Beijing then exported grain, partly to pay its debts to the Soviet Union and partly to project an image of socialist success, while provinces like Anhui and Sichuan descended into mass starvation. The state had monopolized food distribution, so when the numbers were wrong, there was no private market or informal trade left to move grain to the dying. The apparatus built to feed people became the mechanism that starved them.
Abolish private property and price signals, and you get 45 million corpses and a generation of Chinese children stunted by famine.
4
13
1,509
Hey podcasters: just FYI, no one is forcing you to produce episodes about the midterm results for the next week. You can do something interesting instead; that's actually an option.
1
18
1,202
Not surprising...the Freedom index is about voting for smaller government.
The difference is pretty stark though. So if smaller gov is the goal, all the other stuff doesn't matter.
Republicans vote the pro-liberty way ~69% of the time.
Democrats vote the pro-liberty way about 9% of the time.
Every single Republican (except one) votes better than every single Democrat.
You have to be either stupid or ignorant to not see a difference here.
1
9
1,600