"Just wear a nice business suit to get your foot in the door" is just such laughably simplistic boomer advice regardless of the age of the person dispensing it.
Not to mention the advice of actually buying a physical cookbook -- what year is it?
I mean, yeah, NFTs are a massive speculative gamble and probably a poor one ATM, the space is too oversaturated. That doesn't make speculation in general a bad idea.
His advice of "don't speculate with free stimulus money even if you can afford it, spend it on consumer goods instead" is still bad advice.
Young people are the ones who can afford to speculate without it hurting them too much. They have an entire lifetime to make lost money back, and if they win on their speculative play, an entire lifetime to compound it.
Yeah, don't speculate in anything high risk. Leave that to important people. Instead, just consoom and spend your stimulus on business suits and concert tickets.
These people cannot stand the idea of speculative investments (such as DeFI) being available to the unwashed masses. Understandable, the author is a Financial Advisor after all and benefits from the impression that investing is some mystical voodoo that only Trained Professionals™ can do.
>Why do people keep posting this tired argument over and over?
Sour grapes. Easier to pretend _nobody_ beats the market than honestly admit you're not willing to put in the effort to constantly discover new alpha. And it's fine to not be willing to do that -- it takes a lot of effort and skill to discover alpha and most people will be better off improving their skills in their day job and just tracking indexes.
Doesn't mean it's impossible to beat the market, especially as a small investor where you have some advantages over larger players (your orders aren't large enough to move markets and reveal valuable information)
"Random Walk Down Wall Street" is somewhat outdated and a lot of the evidence from behavioural finance doesn't really support its central thesis. It's more dogma than anything.
It's kicking a person (or rather, a company) while they're down. Seems kind of tactless and tone-deaf to gloatingly tweet out your company's failure is a "lesson" a mere day after disaster hits the news.
The popular perception is that the people leaving California bring their politics with them and vote for the same things they did in California, therefore making their new state just as miserable as the parts of California they fled.
One would think that if you are moving away from California for reasons in part caused by political factors (progressive NIMBYism that opposes new housing development, tent city promotion), you would reconsider whether your politics are really that beneficial to the community you're moving to.
Alas, people don't really learn and Austin is already starting to have a flourishing tent city complete with typhoid fever and all. I'm beginning to understand the "Go back to California" sentiment.
Vaporwave aesthetics are pretty interesting. The late 80s - mid 90s period of pop culture seems to have a lot of nostalgic and pseudo-nostalgic appeal for a lot of people.
Why is this "cognitive dissonance" and not someone simply having a different sense of morality than you? Is everyone with different moral values than you suffering from cognitive dissonance?
I can't speak to how well-backed their reserves are but the idea of a "wildcat bank" [0] almost certainly comes to mind whenever somebody mentions tether.