Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What Did You Buy Today?
Sold a bunch of pltr weekly puts strike $25.
(02-12-2021, 05:32 PM)vbin Wrote: @Otter March 31st isn't far. The uncertainty can create a pullback( I hope so). I will be watching. Agree on property prices. Rates all time low, stocks all time high so folks shuffling from stocks to property. Bay area good schools multi million dollar homes selling like hot cakes. $100-$500k above asking.  So what u said about 2 parallel system is true. Mostly assets have gone up( seen inflation).
Your comments regarding housing cost variance around the country just boggles my mind.  My 2200SF 20yr old house isn't fancy, but it's modern enough on an acre lot and about the best school district in the state.  The job market is fine, union and professional.  I bet it would take me a year to sell my home for $200K.  Maybe even less.  Sounds like that's the impatient buyer upcharge in SF.  Smile

I'll be interested in the minimum wage debate outcome.  A couple making $15/hr could scratch by and buy a modest home in quite a few states.  Sounds like a single person would be homeless or in government subsidized housing in a major city.  Military or Federal civilian employee pay has been regionally adjusted since forever.  No reason why that couldn't work for minimum wage.  A flat rate nationwide minimum will not.  High enough in NY will indeed kill jobs in Mississippi and many other states.  And here we are with a $7.25 Federal minimum wage that hasn't been adjusted for maybe decades?  Or maybe it actually is a state's rights thing?  I'm not a victim of it but that doesn't seem to be working.
Why would anyone be trying to make a living as a minimum wage earner. Minimum= entry level at best. Entry level doesn't have a house, get married or have kids. That is reserved for the more advanced members of society.
(02-12-2021, 07:55 PM)NilesMike Wrote: Why would anyone be trying to make a living as a minimum wage earner. Minimum= entry level at best. Entry level doesn't have a house, get married or have kids. That is reserved for the more advanced members of society.
What exactly is an advanced member of society?  I suppose I am one, and for most of my life I had a good wage.  I've never had a problem with anyone willing to work hard to be able to provide themselves with food, clothing and shelter.  I much prefer a living wage over them giving up and living off the government because that is the other option in this country.  I believe Amazon, Costco and Target are now at $15.  HD felt the pressure and moving towards it rapidly.  Pull up some charts and earnings reports.  Looks like they are getting by.  My port is getting by for sure.   

Just basic subsistence for a low skilled adult with a work ethic, but perhaps not the mental capacity to become particularly advanced.  I'm not referring to a 16yr old french fry flipper.  

You know what would have been even better?  A very small annual increase gauged to the CPI starting 30 years ago.  The military gives it if you are dumber than a dirt clod with no future.  The US Gov gives it to the many millions of FED workers.  My dirt poor unadvanced grandmothers got a tiny raise in their SS check every year so they didn't have to eat cat food.  OK that was a little dramatic.  Smile  

Otter is right.  Make a reasonable life possible for a reasonable effort or it's never ended well for that society.  I worked about 50hrs a week so don't anybody call me a socialist lol.  Just making conversation.
Advanced member meant, stay in school, keep your head and work you arse off. Those who do, won't need to rely on minimum wage increases.
Sent from my LM-X420 using Tapatalk
(02-12-2021, 09:09 PM)NilesMike Wrote: Advanced member meant, stay in school, keep your head and work you arse off. Those who do, won't need to rely on minimum wage increases.
There has been no increase for decades so not sure anyone was relying on it.  I'll stop now.  Back to stocks.
(02-13-2021, 10:24 AM)fenders53 Wrote:
(02-12-2021, 09:09 PM)NilesMike Wrote: Advanced member meant, stay in school, keep your head and work you arse off. Those who do, won't need to rely on minimum wage increases.
There has been no increase for decades so not sure anyone was relying on it.  I'll stop now.  Back to stocks.

Then why does it need to be raised?
(02-13-2021, 10:25 AM)NilesMike Wrote:
(02-13-2021, 10:24 AM)fenders53 Wrote:
(02-12-2021, 09:09 PM)NilesMike Wrote: Advanced member meant, stay in school, keep your head and work you arse off. Those who do, won't need to rely on minimum wage increases.
There has been no increase for decades so not sure anyone was relying on it.  I'll stop now.  Back to stocks.

Then why does it need to be raised?
We can chat about it via PM if you care to.  I've shared my opinion and I'm not going to drag it out on this thread.
.................................................

Anyone have an opinion on Nike here or a bit lower?  I boycotted them for a few years but that was a violation of my politics in investing rule.  I traded some NKE puts lately but considering adding it to my growthy port for a 2-4 year hold.  If not NKE, any other consumer discretionary picks to recommend?  I started with VSTO but my DD makes me suspect it's going to finish moonshotting itself out of the port before long.
People willing to work full time should be able to support themselves. People making the federal minimum wage qualify for food stamps, because they only bring in $1,160/month before payroll taxes (less than $14,000/year pre-tax). Not everyone has the skills to be an engineer, doctor, lawyer, accountant, etc., and our economy and society requires non-skilled labor to function. I'm not arguing that non-skilled labor should make more than skilled labor, or that non-skilled labor should be a path to riches, but am arguing that non-skilled labor should at least be able to afford basic necessities and not live in peril of a single flat tire or doctor visit causing bankruptcy, and a likely decrease in lifetime productivity or complete exit from the labor force.

The roughly 3.5 million people (~2.1% of the total workforce) out there earning minimum wage shouldn't have to resort to government benefits just to survive. Companies paying those wages are ripping off taxpayers. We shouldn't have to subsidize Fortune 100 companies with our tax dollars. They can take a page from arch-capitalist Henry Ford and pay their employees a living wage. Demand drives the economy, and wages drive demand. Labor costs are 20-35% of gross sales on average for most industries. The multiplier effect to injecting additional wages into the economy among people who tend to spend the majority of their disposable income out of necessity is higher than the marginal rise in the cost of goods and services.

I support a minimum wage increase because I support broad-based economic growth, which is the driver of EPS and dividends and puts money in my pocket. If a company can't provide goods or services without resorting to starvation wages, that is just as poor a business model as no-growth dividend "aristocrats" that get by with <1% annual raises while they play financial engineering games with debt. Legislation and public policy should disincentivize those businesses for being parasites that don't contribute to meaningful economic growth.

No one working 40+ hours a week should have to live in poverty. The fact that sometimes people earning that wage are high school students earning a bit on the side, or other edge cases, shouldn't be the basis for consigning millions who actually work to intractable and permanent poverty. Trying to live on $7.25/hour anywhere in this country is like playing one of those perma-death zombie survival games. Just one small mistake, and it's game over.
added BMY and CVS
Talk to me about PLTR. I know some of you follow it. Are we near an opportunity for those who showed up late.




Users browsing this thread: 187 Guest(s)