• Zuckerberg loses almost $2bn due to Facebook's stock dive.
    63 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Bobie;36041089]i think you'd better read up about resource based economies before you make assumptions like that.[/QUOTE] why dont you tell me about it and do it like this guy [img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FwHpLFLVT6A/TrCsvRm-weI/AAAAAAAAAjw/HuYxVu8T7JI/s1600/master-blaster.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Bobie;36041089]i think you'd better read up about resource based economies before you make assumptions like that.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity#Unavoidable_scarcity[/url] Even if we reach a post scarcity society, which scientists are still debating about whether or not this is possible, we're still fucked. The universe has a carrying capacity that humans would overwhelm in a relatively short amount of time, especially in a post scarce society.
[QUOTE=Lankist;36041107]why dont you tell me about it and do it like this guy [IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FwHpLFLVT6A/TrCsvRm-weI/AAAAAAAAAjw/HuYxVu8T7JI/s1600/master-blaster.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] because somehow i just don't think you would take it seriously [QUOTE=BusterBluth;36041088]We all know how successful attempts have been at developing resource based economy's.[/QUOTE] i am not quite sure what you mean by this; never in history has a post-scarcity economy or resource based economy been attempted. i think you mean communism [quote]Even if we reach a post scarcity society, which scientists are still debating about whether or not this is possible, we're still fucked. The universe has a carrying capacity that humans would overwhelm in a relatively short amount of time, especially in a post scarce society.[/quote] education curbs population increase, this is a fact. once the world is educated that we cannot have more than 2-3 kids per family without causing serious consequences i believe that there would be a stable population
[QUOTE=Bobie;36040977]i am for a resource based economy, and to trotskygrad, no i do not believe in the 'illuminati'. what a silly assumption[/QUOTE] that's cool and all but you can't just flick away the value of shares because of it
[QUOTE=Bobie;36041134]because somehow i just don't think you would take it seriously[/QUOTE] I will certainly be reading everything you type like you're Tina Turner in a chain-mail bikini, but that's no excuse for you to come in here on a high horse and then refuse to explain yourself. "My opinion is supreme. I'd explain it to you but you'd just laugh at me." ????
[QUOTE=Lankist;36041107]why dont you tell me about it and do it like this guy [IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FwHpLFLVT6A/TrCsvRm-weI/AAAAAAAAAjw/HuYxVu8T7JI/s1600/master-blaster.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Master used to run Barter Town like Tina Turner, but then he took an arrow to the Blaster.
[QUOTE=Lankist;36041153]I will certainly be reading everything you type like you're Tina Turner in a chain-mail bikini, but that's no excuse for you to come in here on a high horse and then refuse to explain yourself. "My opinion is supreme. I'd explain it to you but you'd just laugh at me." ????[/QUOTE] i've not once said that my opinion is supreme; because it is simply an opinion. its my view on the world, not scientific fact nor is it entirely unbias. the only reason i say this is because you've attempted to ridicule me since i've entered the thread, until you actually express some serious form of interest i'd expect you to do research on your own, starting with jacque fresco's ideologies. [quote]that's cool and all but you can't just flick away the value of shares because of it[/quote] value is subjective, 20 billion can sound like a lot on paper but if you consider what facebook's assets actually are you'll probably find it holds nowhere near that wealth- especially in comparison to what can be 'purchased' with any amount of billions.
[QUOTE=Noble;36040351]If it has value to people, it's not worthless[/QUOTE] Yeah exactly because value is entirely subjective and if people stopped believing *x* had value then it would no longer be worth anything.
ITT: Internets best business, economic and stock analysts.
[QUOTE=Bobie;36041134] i am not quite sure what you mean by this; never in history has a post-scarcity economy or resource based economy been attempted. i think you mean communism [/QUOTE] I apologize you are correct. I was unfamiliar with the term and was thinking of what Pol Pot attempted to do.
[QUOTE=FingerSpazem;36040404]I don't understand the stock market[/QUOTE] That's the idea of it. You're not supposed to understand it because if you did you would realise what a bunch of shit it is and how people gamble the value of your labour capital every day and get pissed.
[QUOTE=Pirate Ninja;36041263]ITT: Internets best business, economic and stock analysts.[/QUOTE] Actually I was hoping we would just segue into Mad Max references and stay there.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;36041295]Actually I was hoping we would just segue into Mad Max references and stay there.[/QUOTE] Yeah that's what I was going for too. Resource based economy. I'M JUST HERE FOR THE PETROL.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;36040282]It's not real wealth, stocks are inherently worthless until you sell them for actual money.[/QUOTE] Money isn't real wealth, money is inherently worthless until you buy actual goods.
[QUOTE=gamefreek76;36041404]Money isn't real wealth, money is inherently worthless until you buy actual goods.[/QUOTE] Not a valid comparison, as stocks =/= money. Zuckerberg may be worth $2B less on paper, but he hasn't lost or gained anything until he sells his stock. Having your stock depreciate is not the same as having $2B in money or concrete assets disappear in the same time period. You haven't actually taken a loss on an investment until you've converted it back into money and gotten less than you put into it. In Zuckerberg's case it's a complete wash because he didn't have to buy into Facebook stock at $38, it was essentially handed to him during the IPO.
[QUOTE=gamefreek76;36041404]Money isn't real wealth, money is inherently worthless until you buy actual goods.[/QUOTE] I disagree, for example, you can use it as fuel, use it as wall paper, light cigarettes with it and many other useful applications. In the end the more you have the more amazing applications you can have for it.
Guys there is no intrinsic value in anything. All value is the value we attribute to it. Resources are no more intrinsically valuable than paper as the values we attribute to both are equally arbitrary based upon our whims, needs and society in general. Fucking stop this stupid philosophy train before we hit solipsism and we all break the matrix.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;36040676]Hah poor fucking hobo.[/QUOTE] I could scrunge up that much with the change in my car.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;36041458]Not a valid comparison, as stocks =/= money. Zuckerberg may be worth $2B less on paper, but he hasn't lost or gained anything until he sells his stock. Having your stock depreciate is not the same as having $2B in money or concrete assets disappear in the same time period. You haven't actually taken a loss on an investment until you've converted it back into money and gotten less than you put into it. In Zuckerberg's case it's a complete wash because he didn't have to buy into Facebook stock at $38, it was essentially handed to him during the IPO.[/QUOTE]Yeah, he didn't have to pay ~$20B to get the stocks, they were given to him. He loses nothing on this, he simply gains less.
if i had 20 billion dollars all to myself i'd quit everything and never work again and enjoy my infinite money until i die going public was a terrible idea
[QUOTE=mac338;36040290]It would be nice if some competition could squeeze in between Facebook's monopoly. I don't want Facebook to die, I just want alternatives and competition like in a healthy market.[/QUOTE] go google+ go! [editline]welp[/editline] bah who am i kidding
facebook has been terrible ever since timeline was introduced
His stocks do have value if you consider that he could leverage them in order to gain capital. For instance, a guy with no stocks walks into a bank and says "How much can I borrow?", another guy with 20 billion dollars in Facebook stock walks into the same bank and asks the same question, which guy do you think the bank will fall over itself to hand money to? The guy doesn't have to sell one stock, doesn't even have to act like he's thinking of selling.
[QUOTE=Lankist;36041040]that is code for "I think Mad Max is the epitome of economics." [editline]21st May 2012[/editline] who run barter town[/QUOTE]"Nothing is free in Waterworld" Kevin Costner, Economic Philosopher
[QUOTE=meppers;36044345]if i had 20 billion dollars all to myself i'd quit everything and never work again and enjoy my infinite money until i die [B]going public was a terrible idea[/B][/QUOTE] Why is that? Facebook has just gained access to new finance on a scale of billions in only a few days, and it allows Facebook to diversify it's operations to give more room for growth (for example, like how Facebook acquired Instagram it can acquire more businesses as well). I reckon this was a very smart business decision, but now Facebook must cater for their shareholders of course but take that as you will.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;36040282]It's not real wealth, stocks are inherently worthless until you sell them for actual money.[/QUOTE] take a high school accounting class and you learn EVERYTHING has value, just that some are less liquid then others, with cash being the most liquid
[QUOTE=Rellow;36040465]I still don't understand why they decided to start selling stock when Facebook is at the point where it couldn't possibly grow any bigger.[/QUOTE] Ah, by entering the stock market they are accessing a new and large form of finance to give them more opportunities to grow?
[QUOTE=mac338;36040290]It would be nice if some competition could squeeze in between Facebook's monopoly. I don't want Facebook to die, I just want alternatives and competition like in a healthy market.[/QUOTE] Google+ *cough*
[QUOTE=Bobie;36041255]value is subjective, 20 billion can sound like a lot on paper but if you consider what facebook's assets actually are you'll probably find it holds nowhere near that wealth-[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter what their assets are actually worth, there is a lot of demand for their stock and so the price goes up, everyone is talking about the stock market like it's anything but supply and demand. It has nothing to do with what can be 'purchased' with the same amount of billions, regardless facebook's userbase is worth infinitely more than any physical assets facebook owns, you have all seen the retard pregnant teens that live their lives on facebook, while we would all leave if facebook started pushing blatant and invasive advertising down our thoughts you will find that many others don't.
nothing even happened. they lost stock $$$$$$$$ but not as a result of any real actions on their part lol
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.