TopRamenBinLaden @ TopRamenBinLaden @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

889

Joined

2 yr. ago

I see what you are saying. I'm not saying that investing all of your money in index funds and then selling your profits every year is by any means the smartest way to invest money. It was more just to illustrate how easy it is to make profit with the kind of money that NFL players are given, even if their careers are short.

What? Maybe I am missing something, but I don't think so.

You start with 2 million. You make 140,000 profit and have 2,140,000 total. You sell 140,000. You still have 2 million to make another 140k next year.

You are just using your profit immediately and keeping your portfolio the same as your initial investment. It doesn't diminish, it just doesn't grow because you are using the profits for expenses.

They are exceedingly difficult to get away with using, nowadays, unfortunately.

Yea but the point is that you get 140,000 dollars of return per year on 2 million dollars principal. You can easily cover the taxes and live pretty comfortably from that. You don't need to grow your portfolio at that point if you don't want to.

You could go the route of investing in stocks with dividends, as well. Most people who live off of their investment returns do a mix of both.

Except it's not the bankrupt lottery. You don't just get money and then have an 80 percent chance to lose it. How you choose to manage the money is what really affects whether you go bankrupt, or not.

All that the 80 percent figure shows is that NFL players have a poor education on money management, just like the vast majority of young Americans. NFL players are usually just beginning adulthood. We all know that if you give most young adults a large sum of cash that they will probably mismanage it and spend it on frivolous things.

If the NFL and teams actually cared about the players and the 80 percent bankruptcy, they could fix it by educating them on money management.

You are correct and definitely using a conservative estimate, like you said. ETF/index funds have an average return of 7-10 percent according to a quick search. These are often considered one of the safest investments you can possibly make, too.

Personally, I have disdain against the super bowl because it costs us taxes that could be going to much more productive things for society. I think it would be fine if we didn't spend so much money on it, and I have nothing against people who enjoy it.

You could argue the revenue brought in from hosting the super bowl replaces the tax money spent on it by the host city, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The NFL pockets most of the revenue, and the host city, itself, often loses the tax money it invested.

I don't think tax money should be involved. The NFL should cover the costs, as they make an insane amount of profit from it.

Just to add on to what you are saying, around 62 percent of us live paycheck to paycheck. On top of that, we have at-will employment laws in most states, that allow an employer to fire a non-union employee for any reason they want, as long as they don't violate federal labor laws. It's also easy for employers to make up a reason for termination, even if they are violating said labor laws.

We need to unionize and get some power to the workers back in this country. People won't do this kind of thing nearly as often if their livelihood isn't at risk of being taken away.

A company where every single employee has control/voting rights. That would be a complete disaster.

Oh no, not co-ops! They give the people, who actually create the products and know how they work, voting rights on the companies direction? So dumb. Everyone knows its best to have a business person, whose sole focus is the stock market and shareholders, controlling the direction of every company.

/s in case it wasn't glaringly obvious.

We could really do with some Socialist policies in the US right about now. If only half of the country wasn't scared of the word, by itself.

You bring up a good point. What qualifies as a mask? Do fake beards and mustaches count? What about religious face coverings? What about people who have prosthetic noses? I have a feeling this is going to be a tricky one for them to enforce in any sort of reasonable way.

You seem like you want to be mad at something. I have no problem referring to you as whatever pronouns, names, sex, gender, etc. It's just that we need words to describe chromosomal differences in biology and sex is what we chose to do that. Just in scientific fields. I am not saying that anyone's personal sex identity is my business, but it is relevant in scientific and medical studies. Those are everybody's business.

Not that I have any problem referring to trans people as whatever sex or gender that they would like to be referred to, and others shouldn't either, but I think the distinction between biological sex and gender identity is important at least when speaking from a medical and scientific standpoint.

99.999 percent of us here would never have this problem because we will never be close to owning a private jet, even if we wanted to for some reason. I also think most of us here agree that owning a private jet is selfish, and since its kind of a problem brought on by her own selfishness, it's kind of hard to feel bad for her.

This is one of the main problems with them. People install the new headlights themselves, or get it done at a cheap place where the mechanic doesn't care, and nobody actually adjusts the angle of the lights like they are supposed to do.

Almost all new headlights come with instructions on how to calibrate and align them by using a wall in front of your vehicle. These instructions aren't always easy to find if you aren't aware of them, to be fair.

Idk where you are from or if you are trolling, but in the US they have school districts, and kids are supposed to go to the specific school designated for the school district where they live. It's bullshit in this case, because the kids are homeless.

The word, Autistic, is just beginning this journey. I've seen people use that as an insult, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is considered antiquated and insulting by the time I am old.