wachtwoord

That's a philosophical and possibly ethical position you hold. You may think that your position is universal, but it's not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism I'm saying it's not inherently right, neither logically nor ethically. You are saying it's inherently right (it holds for you so therefore it must hold for everyone). Who's imposing their viewpoint on others. Utilitarianism is stupid. I have very very often been the only person in a room with a certain conviction and the vast majority of the time I am right (in cases where this can be determined objectively). People disagreeing with me never invalidates my viewpoints (even if it's every single human being except me). Good arguments can. (also do you really believe most people have the ability to choose what is best for them? really?)

Persuade others to adopt your laws and morality or create your own country. Calling it "legalized theft" is just your opinion. It doesn't make it a fact. Yes it does because it's true by definition. Asking me to convince others shows you do not understand. The fact that most people want something does not make it inherently right, neither logically nor ethically. And create my own country? I'd love to, many have tried but nation states don't except. Read what happened to the last person that tried: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/05/10/liberland-president-arrested-by-croatia-for-trespassing-in-no-man-land/ Beneign dictatorship is already far superior to democracy. I agree that you cannot go much lower than communism, and the socialism we have in Europe is also referred to as democracy (and terrible might I add).

As for the current system: Taxes are not theft: they have been voted for democratically by the population in most cases. So the masses steal from the few. It's legalized theft. If you don't believe in democracy, well then nothing more to say. Well I guess you're going to be silent then as democracy is terrible, As long as we're talking about the democracy in which everyone, contributing or not, smart or stupid has an equal right to vote. In such a democracy leadership will never be competent and always a mix of incompetent and bought.

Just out of curiousity, in your libertarian Nirvana, what happens when someone takes something they don't own, poisons a river they don't own, or takes a human life they don't own? What's the alternative to society agreeing to beat such a person with a big stick? Thanks, Richard Right of the strongest will always be the inderlying. That is true today, but in a less transparent fashion.

Something which Snowden, Assange and Manning also only know too well. Btw my compliments for bringing this up rkabang. Takes some guts to voice this opinion on a board where potentially no-one will agree and just think you're crazy.

He is. He is aa freedom fighter and martyr on par with Mandela. Future generations will curse the USA for their cruwelty. And about the murder for hires: those were CIA agents pretending to blackmail him for huge amounts via one username and offering to take out the blackmailers via another. It's quite obvious why they dropped this from the charges.

99.9% of those are the tools of swindlers. Only a handful are not. Bitcoin is currently by far the best and a couple have something else going for them (Monero for example has anonimity at the core through ring signatures).

I believe the value and applicability of blockchains is overestimated grately like Hielko says. If you look at what it actually DOES accomplish it's revolutionary though (the Byzantine general problem it solves is a very old problem), worty of at least a Nobel prize (and seeing how those deflated in recent years several). The importance of Bitcoin on the other hand is vastly understated which is most directly shown through it's still extremely low market cap (it's a better version of gold and so will ultimately replace it for all it's non-industrial and non-jewelry purposes). BTW maybe this whole OT chain should be moved.

Agreed that as at today, block chain IS inefficient, and that IS a problem - but it is NOT a show stopper. The solutions mechanics are routinely applied in other applications. SD It is NOT a problem it's a feature.

Thanks to both :) And no, the blockchain doesn't have much value without the currency aspect as that is what causes the extremely high distributed security. It's funny how few people seem to get that ;)

Do you have interesting outcomes to share? (In the Bitcoin topic perhaps). I still hold the viewpoint that the chance of XBT making it (over what you call 3G and 4G) is vast so I'd like to hear arguments against it. At least you're not in the camp of people that think the Blockchain can work without a currency aspect lol ;D

I bought more NOV, the second stock after Altius in my portfolio.

Wait until she has 5k (or 10k above 26) and have her open a IB account herself. It's the cheapest and below that she'll just bleed fees anyway. She can use a simulation account (real markets with play money) until she has the required amount and is confident enough to use it.

My condolences.

INTJ by nature but others often think I'm ENTJ. That's learned behaviour, but I've found it to be very useful at times.

Increased ATUSF (ALS.TO), SE and BBL and reduced SLB, EXC, HAL and CAM

I love Gordon Gekko :)

There's overlap in those holdings right? Total is still 9.9?

The trick is that reinvesting dividends back into the company is cheaper than via buybacks. This is because of my small scale and because not everyone will reinvest their dividends.

As ai don't pay dividend tax I prefer dividend and decide for myself. Also because stock of companies that don't do buybacks tends to be more undervalued (no buy back to artificially hold it up) providing me with the opportunity to buy for cheaper.

Why only 9.1%? The prefs are trading at an average of like 11% of par. And of course if you add in the time value, the number should be a bit above 11%, depending on how long it takes to break or make it. In his example he gives a purchase prices of 5 and a max profit of 50. So: -5*10/11 + 50*1/11 = 0 So at least an 1/11 chance of succes is needed for this to be +EV.

For your pay off estimates you need at least 1:11 (9.1%) for this to be +EV. Of course you oversimplified (nothing is this binary).

CBI

Bought more NOV (exited the last of my FCAU for that)

I every market something's undervalued (and it's never cash).