decakay.bsky.social
From finance to neuroscience to aquariums
123 posts
16 followers
16 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
If Ford permanently damages the Ontario economy, it has to be a last-ditch effort. Because Smith won't help him, it will basically permanently give a huge (relative) economic boost to Alberta and truly damage Canadian politics.
It makes sense that he's embracing any diplomacy Trump throws him.
comment in response to
post
It's my favorite, and every time I try to use it as a metaphor, I end up seeming like a monster
comment in response to
post
I've seen reasonable analysis that Mr Bankruptcy is seeking to erode the nominal value of the US dollar, so that he can more easily get nominal surpluses.
But his spac also took a crypto position, so who knows. Why not both?
comment in response to
post
I'm waiting for more analysis, but the crypto reserve seems like a very weird power play.
It's the central bank's job to purchase international assets in order to hedge or manipulate the value of your own currency.
Federal government doing it feels like picking winners and losers
comment in response to
post
Holy smokes
comment in response to
post
Where mine is lacking is by Danish artists, so I can throw them some streams while we build solidarity
comment in response to
post
Oh, I understand that it's legally complicated. And it's okay that it's legally complicated, since Alberta belongs to Canada. If we were talking about corporate entities, it would all make intuitive sense.
comment in response to
post
Can someone help me source that transcript? Date and website?
comment in response to
post
Normally I am biased towards secessionists, just because of the phrase "you're not really free unless you can leave". BUT, there's no way it should be a 50%+1 style question.
"Canada owns this land, but it's ours because we work it" is kinda Marxist haha. See also: capitalists owning the factory.
comment in response to
post
Conservatives: "Government shouldn't be picking winners or losers!"
Trump: "We're buying crypto!"
The New Right: [High fives each other]
comment in response to
post
A weak dollar is 'good' for Crypto, only because we like denominating things in USD (and our debts are in USD). The fact that we don't have a 'gold:bitcoin' index kinda shows that the 'real money' people don't really believe it.
comment in response to
post
Guys, this is our ONE CHANCE to get Conservatives to help pass encompassing legislation limiting the financial interests of our leaders.
I'm reminded of when they were all upset at Twitter and wanted to regulate it, and we missed the chance cuz Twitter was 'friendly' to us.
comment in response to
post
You should also be on Twitter so you know what they're saying to each other. Smith will have slightly different messages if she's being interviewed by CBC vs. Ben Shapiro, because she knows they're different (biased) audiences.
comment in response to
post
I'm glad these actors finally got the chance to showcase that they can dramatically play chess or the drums
comment in response to
post
I once saw climate change mentioned in a proposal looking at heat shock proteins haha
comment in response to
post
It is sad that they don't think it's a legitimate field, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are $8 million worth of grant proposals out there that include various queer keywords
comment in response to
post
I suspect that it's not confusion, using mice as a model organism with regards to cross sex hormones and genetics is a legitimate field of study, and so 8 million is a reasonable number.
comment in response to
post
"No one has crypto any longer" means we'd stop using crypto.
All real property would still exist. You'd still have a car for work. "The rich" own all the crypto anyway.
Brutally destructive as all contracts get renegotiated tho.
comment in response to
post
Hmmm, if you're talking about a brute force transfer of wallets by having enough super computers, you're technically right
It wouldn't really be a theft of wealth, since crypto is an accounting system more than a store of real wealth.
comment in response to
post
(a) a significant devaluation of the USD can lead to nominal surpluses IF people pay their taxes (he's the guy who called for QE in April of 2019, afterall)
(b) his SPAC (DJT) made investments in crypto, so people who like watching values climb in USD want a devalued USD
comment in response to
post
I get accused of being 'left wing', but it's not 'left wing' to be opposed to Trump. He's also anti-conservative.
comment in response to
post
It was harder to do economics back then. So much theory had been done with gold-backed currency, and they didn't have the tools to distinguish it from fiat.
Fun fact, if wages (which is what Social Security taxes) had continued to track with nominal productivity, Social Security would be funded.
comment in response to
post
Here's what to do when you're visiting.
Stand in the middle of downtown, open a stopwatch and a map. Count to see how long until someone offers to help with directions.
In Halifax, I was *pulling out the map* when they offered.
comment in response to
post
There is a more nuanced concern. Those payments will stop, but if there are other supports that use the social security system to 'confirm' someone is still alive, then those other supports can continue to be milked.
But I've not seen a report that they've found an example.
comment in response to
post
I think there's a bit of irony, and people should look up the connection between cartels and avocados.
comment in response to
post
Is IS a betrayal. It's not the first time the American rightwing has destabilized an oil producing nation to make them more dependent on oil exports. Actually, Australia might have hints for us, since China tried to do the same.
comment in response to
post
Strong odds that paying attention too much is bad for your health. Watching the news is not really the same thing as building up an education base in order to bring more resources to bear.
comment in response to
post
I will object on a technical basis, since they were Memoranda and not a Treaty. Legally, they're different things.
Colloquially, we think of them as kinda the same, but 'breaking the treaty' will mean something legally different - especially in the US, where the Senate ratifies them
comment in response to
post
How is that MAGA hat not a violation of the Hatch Act in that context?
comment in response to
post
How is that MAGA hat not a violation of the Hatch Act in that context????
comment in response to
post
I know we live in a world where certain laws aren't enforced, but how is wearing a MAGA hat while reporting on DOGE not a violation of the Hatch act?
comment in response to
post
Is Trump the orange guy who had phone calls with Putin as a private citizen while in illegal possession of classified documents?
comment in response to
post
criminal code 46(II)
comment in response to
post
It really is about kinetic violence although I betcha cybersecurity attacks casually falls into the common law interpretation.
comment in response to
post
But it involves neither force nor the transfer of secrets.
It goes like this
(a) using force or transferring secrets
(b) conspiring to do (a)
If your definition is too broad, any Fox News reporter in Canada could be arrested.
comment in response to
post
Mainly because 'treason' usually involves committing (or conspiring to) 'use force' or 'transfer secrets'. Obviously it would have a pretty high bar.
Being pro-secessionist wouldn't be treason, for example.
comment in response to
post
That petition is a terrible idea. We'd have to make a change to our common law to do it that it would enshittify Canada.
I'm actually sad so many Canadians signed. They didn't know what they were asking for.
comment in response to
post
That's ignoring the hedging calculations of a balanced portfolio, obviously. It's more of a simple retail analysis
comment in response to
post
To compare, the Jan 2026 calls selling for $30 have a strike price of $410, which means they think it might go above $440.
comment in response to
post
But there is also a huge expectation that it can crash. January 2026 puts for $250 (roughly the Nov 05 valuation) are selling for over $30 ... which means buyers are betting that it will fall below $190
comment in response to
post
I'm not disagreeing that it might go down. Exactly 50% of the people in each of those trades agrees with your thesis. The other 50% think it's a reasonable price.
I just wouldn't be surprised either way. Most people who think they can outthink the market find out they're incorrect
comment in response to
post
My warning is that fighting him is wise, but underestimating him is very dangerous
comment in response to
post
Caveat that he overpaid for it (if it *was* worth $22B but is now worth $44B, then it's gone up in value)
I'm referring to the various finance gossip. The CNN article titled "Elon Musk may be on the brink of achieving the impossible: Salvaging his $44 billion investment in X " captures some of it.
comment in response to
post
Yeah, that's my intuition as well. BUT, there are very common lessons in finance, and one is that you're not smarter than the market. People with money in the game disagree with your analysis, or they'd sell now.
I'd not be surprised if it goes seriously down. Also not surprised if it goes up.
comment in response to
post
Not really 'tanking'. Twitter has gone up in value (not from his purchase price obviously, but its value)
TSLA is worth more today than Nov 05
Resist him, but don't underestimate him
comment in response to
post
Tell your steel unions to stand with us. We're like .... 30% of the membership of these international unions that we've been paying into.
comment in response to
post
Can you do a bit why creating new laws to strip Canadians of citizenship is such a bad idea?
I'm distressed that the word 'NDP' is associated with it, so I need to know our leaders understand