randall146

So?

To be fair, the ultra-rich already decide where Government money is spent.

In college I had a conversation with a friend about the NBA playoff format. I grew up with a 2-2-1-1-1 format for 7 game series, and 2-2-1 for 5 game series. They were going to change it to 2-3-2 that year, and I was strongly against that. I thought it was unfair that the lower seeded team could have a chance to win in 5 games with more home games than the higher seed. My friend didn't see the problem. Debate ensued. I argued that ideally all series would be 1-1-1-1-1-1-1. It seemed fundamentally undeniable to me that this was fairest. I was dumbfounded that he could disagree with this f

That doesn't seem entirely fair. Most of the posts in this thread have opposed or supported for substantive reasons. Sure, the opinions are mostly divided along "team" lines, but I think in this instance that's because tax policy is one of the main differences between the teams.

Kids love malls because they don't have houses and can't go to bars. But malls are dying/have died because kids don't have money and adults don't go.

A picture of pizza would have meant Gamestop is getting into child sex trafficking, but softserve just means BUY.

Can someone explain to me why my fundamental concern about SPACs is incorrect? I admit I am a total newb but here goes: SPAC gets listed for $10. You get in somewhat early for $10.50. Rumors start flying that SPAC is going to acquire XYZ. XYZ looks like a good company and is in a hot sector so SPAC rises to $15. Then for a while rumors continue and people debate the merits of XYZ and SPAC numbers go up or down. Then at some point a deal becomes more likely and again the price rises or falls based on what the market thinks of XYZ. But what never seems to be discussed until it's an afterth

See, even the underwear part of Gamestock's business model is outdated.

The idea that Gamestop just needs to retool and relaunch as something new seems alot like 1. Take underpants 2. ?? 3. Profit Sure, they have a database of customers, but it's largely outdated, and Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Twitch, EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar etc, all have better current lists and direct daily relationships with their customers.

The default is daylong, but you can set limit orders as instant, daylong, or open until filled (or canceled). So if I have a current, good until filled order to sell XYZ at $10,I'm wondering what happens if someone bids $10 after hours.

OK, another fidelity /trading question. If I have extended hours trading enabled, will it execute my standing limit orders? Or do I have to re-enter the orders as extended hour orders? Thanks, and sorry. I haven't found the answer looking myself.

You just update the watch lists whenever you trade? I could do that. But there should be a way to tag a position to have it auto-populate to a watchlist.

is there a way on fidelity to divide my positions page into a few different pages? Like having all my long-term holds on one page, "trading" stocks on another, SPACs on a third?

Sold all SPACS that were above 11 and still green for me overall. I wanted cash and will reevaluate after things settle down. HAACU, JOFFU, CBUHU, CBAHW Kept those under 11, as they don't have much more downside potential, at least pre-announcement. Out of all my positions, I don't have much up overall anymore. Really only the bluechips.

everything . . . Wait