What results have you gotten? You have alianated almost everyone here. You have shown a very dark side of yourself to the world
I am not looking for results, this whole thing started because I responded to a bigoted post, from there people began to address me, and it went on from there.
As for people being alienated with me... well, that is their problem, not mine, sorry I can not help they do not agree with my sense of humor, what can I say?, or more relevant, what's new under the sun?
What ethics say that it is right to call people morons? What ethics say it is OK to laugh at people during their misfortune, particularly in a public forum. Your last two notes have been very informative, well put forth albeit just a little holier than thou in the way that I take it, but it was not rude, it was not mocking, and I do agree with the concept of your words, just not the actions you take in putting them forth.
Only the fact that I have the freedom to express my opinion, in this case, it makes me laugh the fact that in spite of clear evidence, people continue to have faith in the impossible, to me that is laughable, sorry.
Misfortune....? come now, it is not misfortune, it is their own doing, it is more foolishness than misfortune, and they do not have anybody to blame but themselves.
Again, I believe that you dislike my style, but remember, in part, for my benefit, it is a harsh reminder of what not to do. And for me it works.
and as I said.... I do not enter popularity contests, I always lose, even without entering them.
-----------------------
From your other post:
Well that is enough cut & paste. I will say one thing, anyone who bets there life on a long shot, will probably lose, except for those in history like Columbus, JP Jones, Alister, A. Shepard, J. Glenn who made the longest of long shots, against all odds, and in Columbus's case, even against the church and all know science at the time. Just a long shot he believed in.
Yes, indeed, but most of these historical characters had serious backing from large institutions, I mean NASA, and The Queen of Spain, (at the time), et all... and keeping due proportions, gave these individuals more credibility in their ventures than 99 % of the Penny Stocks....
Your example indeed shows the following: (let's take one example, John Glenn):
1. John Glenn was in the military, and so he had already made a conscious decision in reference to "taking risks", he did not put his life savings at risk, he put his life at risk, but he did that the minute he entered the NASA program.
2. NASA is funded by the US government. in essence, they are big time speculators, meaning they can afford to lose big.
The same could be said of most of the above examples, including Columbus.
Now, take the individual investor....
Can he take this type of risk... ALL OR NONE.. can they afford to lose it all ?
If the answer is no, then they are damned fools for even considering it, that is a fact.
Now, if they did a little serious research they would soon realize that the risk/reward ratios are off the scales, so if in spite of the bb stock records, and the daunting task these companies intend to execute, etc... they still choose to plunge their life savings in these penny stock companies....
Sorry, but in my eyes, if there ever was a moron, it is these people..... Particularly when there are other companies that offer much better risk/reward scenarios.
It all boils down to the proper assessment of risk, and in the case of the small individual investor, the real answer is to stick with either mutual funds, or better, more established companies, otherwise, you are speculating, not investing.
z. |
