Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ggersh who wrote (187622)	5/15/2022 2:31:29 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By whistler3000 Respond to of 219960

Dude.... Yelling in anger into an empty well ? I'm not in there... Reality is this... If you insist that you will not play the game by the rules that DO exist... because you don't like the rules... for whatever reason ? You CAN do that... no one can stop you from making that choice ? But, be aware that making that choice also might well end up with you in the dock at Nuremberg... if you don't succeed in winning outside the rules ? But, WHEN you do that... having made the choice and having committed to "play" outside the rules... you'd have to be a moron (like Putin) to think you can do that... while expecting the OTHER guy will have no choice but to continue to play by the rules you won't submit to play by ? Bringing knives to contest a basketball game... might get you "a win"... but, your next road game will not be survivable ? So, when the rules ARE being violated in that way... you'll probably see the basketball supply chain quit working ? "Be careful what you ask for... because you might get it"... pairs perfectly with Buffett's "Risk comes from not knowing what you are doing" ? So, you may not like the rules... but you better know what they are, why they are, and what your objections to them, and choice to act outside them... really means... if you want to survive the game ? I keep repeating... that I think the quality of global leadership is near all time lows... so it shouldn't be too surprising that you see a lot of stupid shit happening... including the idiocy of objections to rules... and the choice to act outside them... both coming from clueless people who act "not knowing what they are doing" ? With that out of the way.... Maybe we should move on to discuss what happens... when the rules that do get promulgated... violate "the fundamental rules" that do still exist... whether you codify them properly or not... or try to codify them away ? Central banks imposing rules... is one issue. Contests between various teams of central bankers trying to "win" the games they play... by the means they employ... thinking themselves above the law... yada, yada,. Or, if the central banks all fail... and the central banks all go away... that doesn't mean there are "no rules"... ? It just means that the REAL rules are going to be defined by some bit of reality... without thoroughly corrupted striped shirts getting paid for calling the game one way ? The "home court advantage"... is what it is... for a reason or two ? To be clear... I'm the guy saying... "we don't need banks any more"... central banks least of all... So, I'm not overly distressed by the swirl... and care little about relative positioning mid flush ? That doesn't have me saying "rules don't exist" or "rules don't matter" ? It's more just... advocating basic economic system hygiene... seeing "corrections" as a necessary function... to rid of us living in accumulated waste... while seeing those advocating not flushing to save water... as having made poor choices of where to live.

To: ggersh who wrote (187622)	5/15/2022 2:44:31 PM
From: sense	Respond to of 219960

including the idiocy of objections to rules... Some of that becomes unavoidably obvious ? The "unwritten" rules include the obvious... like... the difference between the sexes ? The web is full of vids that have man on the street interviews... with people melting down over being asked "what is a woman" ? It's not a hard question. The "science" in the biology of gender is not linear... for a variety of evolutionary reasons... but it being not linear... has it still predictable enough... at a "success" ratio in differentiation that is far greater than 99 : 1 ensuring it is not a reason to affect confusion on "the obvious" ? So... I think "the confusion" has a source... that has nothing to do with biology... And, those "confused"... perfectly fit with Buffetts observations on the nature and source of risk... Gender... is different from economics... how ? Confusion re "the rules"... is confusion re "the rules"... So, extrapolating... If you are confused about rules existing... it likely means... "you don't know what you are doing"... which is as true in one thing as it is in another ?