So Consuela went all in because he thought normal function of markets = fraud?
| Sepia senate crotch | 05/10/24 | | fluffy point | 05/10/24 | | Garnet set dragon | 05/10/24 | | fluffy point | 05/10/24 | | Garnet set dragon | 05/10/24 | | vigorous unholy messiness son of senegal | 05/10/24 | | cracking tanning salon | 05/10/24 | | Sepia senate crotch | 05/10/24 | | Garnet set dragon | 05/10/24 | | Aromatic property | 05/10/24 | | Garnet set dragon | 05/10/24 | | Sepia senate crotch | 05/10/24 | | Sepia senate crotch | 05/10/24 | | vigorous unholy messiness son of senegal | 05/10/24 | | Sepia senate crotch | 05/10/24 | | fluffy point | 05/10/24 | | fluffy point | 05/10/24 | | Sepia senate crotch | 05/10/24 | | arrogant lascivious trust fund | 05/10/24 | | fluffy point | 05/11/24 | | Sepia senate crotch | 05/11/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 10th, 2024 3:45 PM Author: Garnet set dragon
Look I'm all for good natured ribbing of consuela but what exactly are you trying to insult him for?
If he purchased a bunch of physical silver at some point, that physical silver has the same intrinsic value as when he purchased it. That's the entire principle behind hard assets. He hasn't "lost" anything. That silver could sit in his basement for the next 50 years and it will be worth the exact same. He's not "losing money"
If he bought an entire warehouse full of physical silver that he's paying rent or property tax on? Okay, now we can laugh at him
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5527210&forum_id=2#47651302) |
|
Date: May 10th, 2024 4:01 PM Author: Garnet set dragon
He "loses money" if he decides to sell his physical asset at a price lower than what he paid for it (taking into account inflation, opportunity cost, etc). This isn't actually a precise way to think about it, but it's a close enough approximation for practical purposes
No one is ever "losing money" by the act of purchasing a physical asset itself. Your brain is playing tricks on you if you think this is a real thing. It's like those lists of the "100 Richest People In The World" and all their "net worths" include the "value" of all of their abstract assets if they were somehow magically liquidated into cash at their current market value for one share, instantly, with no repercussions or order effects. Not a real thing
Don't get tricked by abstractions
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5527210&forum_id=2#47651350) |
|
Date: May 10th, 2024 4:10 PM Author: Garnet set dragon
Yes.
It's totally the physical object that's changing and not the abstract monopoly money, bro
*Seth Rogen soy-facing as he hits the bong*
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5527210&forum_id=2#47651376) |
|
|