• very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 years ago

    But that’s how capitalism works. You invest your money into something instead of using it on yourself.

    And in exchange for the risk taking, because each investment is a huge risk, you become (in case of stocks) a shareholder. And a as a shareholder and risk taker, you get compensated for your risk taking with dividends.

    Why invest your own cash into something and take a risk without getting something in exchange? That would be considered stupid.

    I invested into Wirecard back then and guess where the money went… Investments are bound to risk. And taking a risk must be rewarded.

    • _HR_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 years ago

      Investments are bound to risk. And taking a risk must be rewarded.

      Err, no. Risk taking could be rewarding, but it inherently should not be guaranteed to be.

      • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        And it is not. Sometimes your investment looses a lot of worth if the companies value falls.

        Bought Amazon stocks at the wrong time and lost 40% of value 3 months later. Climbed back to 15% loss.

        It definitely is not risk free. Not even the biggest, most stable companies are safe from risk.

    • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      and I’m just supposed to give a fuck?

      you have to do zero real work to get profits that way. The profits you are getting are just a share of the wealth the workers of the company produce. There is no such thing as passive income, the money is always taken from working people. The really rich people take 0 risk. The instant they start making serious losses banks and goverments step in and give them taxpayers money.

      Also: to get relevant income that way you already need to have a lot of money, which you either get by inheritance or exploiting others. Either way you had to do zero real work yourself. (and no, just shoving capital around is not real work)

      • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        2 years ago

        Well, most of what you state here is wrong.

        People like you never analysed a company. Looked into the paperwork.

        I am working 8 hours a day and 2 more hours, I take my time to look into companies to invest my hard earned money.

        I am by far not rich. It I can tell you, that the more money you have to manage, the harder it gets.

        No human on this earth, except trust fund babies, who just throw away their inheritance without investing, are living off their money without personal time investment and hard work.

        It just doesn’t work the way you imagine it.

        The moment the government intervened with Tax payer money, they usually ask for dividends as well, or another kind of favour. Nothing comes for free.

          • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            2 years ago

            But your investment can fund this creation of value. And that’s how economy works.

            The research and identification of where value can be expected with proper funding is simply a part of finding what will work best.

            And it is only reasonable to find the things that will work out best at first.

            One step after another. That’s how progress works.

    • 30isthenew29@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I believe that’s how it works, but I just don’t understand how that makes any sense. They’re just playing with numbers in the air, making a line diagraph go up and down… I just don’t get it.

      • skelpie@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The “line diagraph” represents real physical things that you can eat or sleep in or wear.

        • 30isthenew29@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          So they make the worth of that different? People give money so the worth of those things change? Who decides what worth is? What am I missing?