this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
29 points (83.7% liked)

United Kingdom

4184 readers
482 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
tom@feddit.uk
GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
29
‘I was a multimillionaire, I had a beautiful girlfriend, I was unhappy’: the ups and downs of a supertrader (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 days ago by RubberDuck@lemmy.world to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 7 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

“The rich have got a choice,” he says. “They can lend the money to the government or they can buy the assets. I know what I’m doing.”

“OK, what’s that?” I ask, trepidatiously, knowing the answer.

“I’m buying the assets. Stocks, gold, commodities, property, everything. The rich have got a lot of money, they can buy everything. The government has got to compete with that. They can’t. They’re trying to play chess with no pieces.”

This doesn't sound like the activity of a leftist. But it's an interesting question, to what extent you can play the capitalist game while still claiming to be a leftist? When are you undermining from within and when have you just gone over to the other side, no matter how you conceive of yourself?

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 5 points 15 hours ago

Philanthropy. How many millionaire CEOs declared their past actions unbecoming and vowed to donate their fortunes to charity and pursue a different career path after Luigi did his deed? None. Not a single one.

If you take and take and take it doesn't matter who it's from. If you take so you can give then worst case you are at least putting money back into an economy. Best case is you are helping people.

[–] SamboT@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

Puts his significant other in the same pile as his treasure. Cant get rich enough to be happy with those values.

[–] Arehandoro@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Now he says he’s the only person on the left who really understands the British economy – and the people who wield the power

Humble, huh?

Stevenson still makes a lot of money trading, which he does “to demonstrate to myself that I’m not insane. A lot of people can say pessimistic things, but not a lot of them can make hundreds of thousands of pounds every year on financial markets. I don’t just say these things; I bet on them. And I make money every year. You can’t do that if you’re not right. If you made every economist who chats shit on the media bet their own personal money on what they’re saying, there’d be a lot less bullshit on the news.”

If he makes money off properties, gold and stocks without realising that that affects the housing crisis, the environment with gold mining, or there's no ethical approach to what kind of companies he gets stocks from... He is still part of the problem. I don't care how much he says he's on the left.

[–] byroon@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

If he stopped doing all that we'd still have an economy where the rich exploit the poor. The only solution is system change to make a fairer economy - which he advocates for through measures like taxing the rich. The question is has his actions undermined your trust in him to the point that he should be ignored, or do you think he really is advocating measures that would work?

[–] Arehandoro@lemmy.ml 1 points 14 hours ago

I think what he proposes would make certain things better, but it would still be just a patch to a broken system.

Don't think he should be ignored, but I also don't think he is this saviour he thinks he is.

[–] MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

No you don’t get it he’s a leftist just like my buddy who owns a bunch of apartments in the slums he bought with the money he made off his “Asian massage” parlors. He’s totally not exploiting people for wealth /s

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

IMO with stocks, one is only responsible when buying from an IPO or other emissions directly from the company. otherwise the buyers money goes to another investor, not the company. at least unless one buys enough that votes actually make a difference.

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You may not pay the company when you buy shares from another trader, but you buying the shares drives the price of the shares and with that it makes the company more valuable.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

no, the share price doesn't reflect the worth of a company, but the worth of the shares. if all shares just suddenly vanished, the company would still be there and still be worth the same. the share price may just increase the money they can make by emitting more shares.

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

The share price does reflect the worth of the company in that a low share price will prevent companies from taking on loans to expand or keep operating. That was the whole idea behind the GameStop shorting saga. Also, the share price also benefits those that hold a majority of the shares. Musk is the richest man on earth because he holds the most Tesla shares. He can use the fact he owns these shares in order to take out loans with great conditions and to buy influence.

[–] the_wise_wolf@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That doesn't make any sense. That way you could only buy stocks and never sell them. Then what's the point of investing? Also you couldn't just leave the company behind if you stopped believing in it and its leadership.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then what's the point of investing?

It's basically gambling, getting tiny dividends and getting votes in the shareholders' meetings.

That way you could only buy stocks and never sell them.

No, you can sell them to other gamblers, like trading cards.

[–] the_wise_wolf@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No, it's not gambling. It's people coming together in order to build something. And a place where people can sell their stocks is a stock market.

There are many problems in this world. But there existence of stocks and the fact that they can be traded is not one of them.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

i'm not saying it's a problem btw.. i gamble with stocks myself. it's just silly fun if you have some spare change

[–] the_wise_wolf@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

Alright. Your messages sounded a bit different to me at first. You can certainly gamble with stocks. But you can also invest more or less safely.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

stocks are only sold after the company is up and running. it has nothing to do with building anything. the money raised by the IPO is usually blasted away in top manager fees in the following coupla years.

[–] the_wise_wolf@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

Early investors geht stocks. And they can even sell them before the company goes public (if it ever does). The IPO or direct listing or whatever process is chosen, brings the stocks to an open exchange. And a company usually issues new stocks during an IPO and can issue new shares at any time.

The fact that IPOs are overpriced and kinda shady is true, but that's one of those problems I meant, which are not explicitly due to the existence of stocks.

[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why?

Sometimes it feels "the left" has no idea of what society should be like solely what it shouldn't be like and that's no solution to anything.

This guy is a douchebag but using the system around you that exploits people isn't your fault and we shouldn't treat it that way, this guy can't change that. Why are you blaming him?

The left fails because they're too worried about doing no wrong than doing one thing right.

[–] Arehandoro@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago

The left fails for many things but mainly because the media works with the elites and blame, create fake news, and dictate what the public think, want and feel.

Using the system around him and ultimately exploiting people, even if he advocates for good will, it is a choice, and something he can change. That's what I'm blaming him for.

To me, what he wants is maintaining capitalism but just a little less biased in how wealth is shared. To me that is not real left. It does not address the many problems of capitalism.

[–] zante@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 days ago

Read the headline. Knew exactly who it would be

….. Not quite sure what his angle is yet, but it will reveal itself in time. It always does .