Luke

Was your phd such a freebie and what do you consider as a "fair salary" for someone with a phd?

You make it sound so easy. You need a 3 years bachelors, 2 years masters, and a Phd takes a minimum of 5 years where i live. Thats a total of 10 years full time hardcore studying. Then you have to consider that more than 50% take longer for either bachelors or masters. So maybe you are done with 30 after going through the grinder. Meanwhile the trade school guys already have a house, kids, fat portfolio etc while you were in school studying your ass off. Weren't you the one who said you are not rich with 10m in your account? How the hell are these guys living on 170k-250k after having studied for a decade+?

I can absolutely not understand how people think Xi wants a Stalinist communism while he travels far to the US to talk with CEOs etc for investment, leaves a wide room for private economy etc. But the state will play a bigger role than it does in the west from now on and i think people see that too negative because the fordist type economies also had way more growth than the kind of deindustrialized neoliberal service economies in the west.

He differentiates between industrial capitalists and financial capitalists. Private equity who buys up apartments, lobbies the government for rent liberalization and then squeezes working class families with high rents are parasites. People who abuse their workers, prevent unionization etc are parasites. Not ALL capitalists are parasites and he never said that. But there are some folks that do only harm in this system and thats whats important to point out. The more important point is: The left is lost in fights that benefit the financial type of capitalists, gender equality, diversity etc. Even if they focus on economic abuse they forget the most important thing: HOW do people get rich and HOW do societies get wealthy? And how can we politically use that knowledge to increase the wealth for our societies? The way he framed china seeing this is, that china allowed the western market mechanism and benefitted of it but also received the bad parts of the west, high inequality, monopolization, overleveraged gamblers that do no good (real estate developers hello) etc. Its now for them to decide what kind of ways are endorsed to get rich and which ways are not endorsed or even regulated.

Those guys are from the previous generations and indeed had much better times and prospects. But the times have changed and the liberalization at universities really lead to what @thepupil described. The suicide rate for PHD students is by a large factor higher than to the already higher rate for normal students compared to non studying peers in the same age group. A phd is a race to the bottom and really badly paid. In my opinion you must hate yourself to a degree to put up with it. For the few who attain the PHD and then go into university, i think they deserve a high salary and good working conditions considering they did almost 10 years of high level studying. Of course that is likely different for literature and arts where i do understand that some things are questionable. But anything science related is a tough nut.

I dont know about the situation in the US but professors in the EU are suffering shitbags, slaves during exhaustive PHDs, tons of debt, bad pay compared to efforts, hard to become tenured, hard to get funding, publication pressure etc The professors i know dont make bank, work hard and are an asset to the country. Maybe a tiny percentage of gender professors do weird things but its super hard to get to these positions too.

If you would have listened to the interview, he talks about exactly that at minute 50:00. The problem with today's left, wrong focus of the problem, china and milton friedman etc He also didnt celebrate Marx, but he pointed things out that marx already talked about, which are a correct assesment of the current economic situation.

i loved all of the movies, alien original, prometheus, covenant, alien vs predator. I fear this one will be to generic, they should have done a sequel to covenant...

He is not a communist advocate, but you can't deny several observations Karl Marx did. Being a professor is an important job in our societies, and he certainly provides a lot of value too, nothing about being a parasite.

Reigniting labor and focussing on the real economy, investment in technology and productivity growth while keeping the consumer's buying power high enough. The only problem for china would be tariffs and artificial suppression of demand by the west.

Also regarding "chinese marxists thought". This rings the bells regarding CCP interventions that tackle exactly this: Marx and many of his less radical contemporary reformers saw the historical role of industrial capitalism as being to clear away the legacy of feudalism—the landlords, bankers, and monopolists extracting economic rent without producing real value. However, that reform movement failed. Today, the finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE) sector has regained control of government, creating neo-rentier economies. The aim of this postindustrial finance capitalism is the opposite of industrial capitalism as known to nineteenth-century economists: it seeks wealth primarily through the extraction of economic rent, not industrial capital formation. Tax favoritism for real estate, privatization of oil and mineral extraction, and banking and infrastructure monopolies add to the cost of living and doing business. Labor is increasingly exploited by bank debt, student debt, and credit card debt while housing and other prices are inflated on credit, leaving less income to spend on goods and services as economies suffer debt deflation." Hudson also argues Marx was too optimistic. History did not go in the direction of Capitalism evolving into Socialism—at least not yet. Since the 1930s today's modern capitalism is dominated by non-productive rentier classes. In classical economics, which includes Marx, the proletariat as a class is better off paying as few rents as possible. This is because wages can be lower if workers have less overhead. This lowers the price of goods they produce lower, making them more competitive on the international market. This is also the logic of making healthcare a public commons run not-for-profit by the government. This enables wages to be lower for workers. Non-productive rents, tactics and strategies are making all countries, the US included, less self-sufficient. This connects back with the idea of a debt jubilee; and, with taxing non-productive activity, not workers and manufacturing. The cost of doing nothing is high. Left to run wild, the ever-growing need for debt and rents causes history to regress back to a neo-feudal system; where, your employer pays for your healthcare, provides you your housing and keeps workers in debt permanently.

Michael Hudson (born March 14, 1939) is an American economist, Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri–Kansas City. Hudson notes that the existing economic theory, the Chicago School in particular, serves rentiers and financiers and has developed a special language designed to reinforce the impression that there is no alternative to the status quo. In a false theory, the parasitic encumbrances of a real economy, instead of being deducted in accounting, add up as an addition to the gross domestic product and are presented as productive. Hudson sees consumer protection, state support of infrastructure projects, and taxation of rentier sectors of the economy rather than workers, as a continuation of the line of classical economists today. I have enjoyed this interview, Hudson is really coming into it from a different angle but makes many good points that especially hit home to how the chinese government sees the economy right now: Financial capitalism vs industrial capitalism. Real economy vs empty factories in NY that are revamped as luxury apartments. Especially his points regarding using other countries cheap labor force with preventing their development rings a bell. I think he is worth reading and listening to. EDIT: He was also sceptical about the mortgage fiasco pre 2008: In an April 2006 article in Harper's, just before the Great Recession of 2007-08, Hudson predicted a crash of US housing prices.

Bought more Lufax as already said in the thread, this time on NYSE.

I didnt know he deleveraged from margin. In that case, yes, i understand.

If you are talking about margin of safety, yes it is less here, but the overall market is way worse. If you can find something a lot more attractive i would of course understand selling

There are so many catalysts, Fairfax India, Eurobank, further capital allocation of the really significant cashflow compared to market cap, EVEN if underwriting slightly declines. If they are successful, Fairfax will look very different in 5–10 years compared to now. It's hard to find this ability of compounding in any other stock for a decent price. I'd maybe start selling the stock from my monstrous position at 40-50b marketcap. Still a buy here honestly.

I'm here for the rally Jerome! Surprise us!

If I compare Adulph hidler Coin to the n**** butt token, it looks quite undervalued honestly

https://twitter.com/hkuppy/status/1770495938676588625

26b marketcap and 4b operating income for 4 years+. Thesis is still at the beginning of playing out

Seriously? Why is that? 0 Problems buying this for me as a german. Just executing the order on IB easy.

All i said is that he doesnt like the idea of military bases croaching closer and closer to where he spend his time. Is that not a valid argument? The US clearly doesnt like that either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis To my information they have 3 coordination systems of one has to be programmed in a way Ukrainian soldiers can not do (Harald Kujat as a general should probably know). Especially if they want to circumvoid russian air control, one system that uses local geographic information points is especially important, apparently. Directly from our state media: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/scholz-taurus-ukraine-102.html France and UK can program these without having problems with their own constitution. We cant do it.

Hope you enjoy your amusement! It's amusing to me that you think Russia won't notice that and will immediately retaliate that move. If the us decides to push their military bases further and further to russia, i understand that they are doing something about it. What do you think will happen if china builds military bases at the border to mexico? Do you think the US will "negotiate"