RIP Twitter

[evillawyer]

Example 9,069 why you are stupid. He's not doing this for free speech or Trump. Anyone who thinks so doesn't see what he's doing. Data data data

But I'm sure you're more competent on financial matters.

Surowiecki's writing has appeared in a wide range of publications, including The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Motley Fool, Foreign Affairs, Artforum, Wired, MIT Technology Review, and Slate.

Before joining The New Yorker, he wrote “The Bottom Line” column for New York magazine and was a contributing editor at Fortune.

He got his start on the Internet when he was hired from graduate school by Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner to be the Fool's editor-in-chief of its culture site on America Online, entitled "Rogue" (1995–1996). As The Motley Fool closed that site down and focused on finance, Surowiecki made the switch over to become a finance writer, which he did over the succeeding three years, including being assigned to write the Fool's column on Slate from 1997 to 2000.

 

[NurseGoodVol]

Elon is not taking a board seat.

Another screen shot living in infamy.

 

[volfanhill]

But I'm sure you're more competent on financial matters.

Surowiecki's writing has appeared in a wide range of publications, including The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Motley Fool, Foreign Affairs, Artforum, Wired, MIT Technology Review, and Slate.

Before joining The New Yorker, he wrote “The Bottom Line” column for New York magazine and was a contributing editor at Fortune.

He got his start on the Internet when he was hired from graduate school by Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner to be the Fool's editor-in-chief of its culture site on America Online, entitled "Rogue" (1995–1996). As The Motley Fool closed that site down and focused on finance, Surowiecki made the switch over to become a finance writer, which he did over the succeeding three years, including being assigned to write the Fool's column on Slate from 1997 to 2000.

What are you babbling about? None of that has anything to do with why he bought twitter. I am sorry your guy is dumb. Look at how musk does everything he does. Tesla isn't a car company.

 

[evillawyer]

What are you babbling about? None of that has anything to do with why he bought twitter. I am sorry your guy is dumb. Look at how musk does everything he does. Tesla isn't a car company.

Tesla is massively overvalued.

Tesla Stock Is Overvalued by $1 Trillion, Analyst Says. A Look at the Numbers.

 

[volinbham]

Sounds super very stable geniusy.

Bumping the revenues should easily cover this. Musk could have chosen to finance this out of his own pool of monies as well.

Sure sounds like more sour grapes than any meaningful analysis of the financial sense of the deal. BTW, Dorsey thinks this is the right path for Twitter.

 

[volinbham]

Tesla is massively overvalued.

Tesla Stock Is Overvalued by $1 Trillion, Analyst Says. A Look at the Numbers.

One analyst said this in November of last year and their prediction was wrong. But keep fighting

 

[volinbham]

one of the gems in the Tweet EL posted.

 

[volinbham]

Oh the irony of Reich posting this - the guy that wants government to subsidize all his pet policies

 

[evillawyer]

One analyst said this in November of last year and their prediction was wrong. But keep fighting

LOTS of analysts say it's over valued. Try this thing called Google sometime. It's quite easy.

Tesla Is Still Fundamentally Overvalued

 

[volinbham]

LOTS of analysts say it's over valued. Try this thing called Google sometime. It's quite easy.

Tesla Is Still Fundamentally Overvalued

I was referring to the link you chose - I'm guessing you didn't read it or see if it really confirmed your point. Funny this article too is when Tesla was in the low 800s and since it went over 1000. Wondering if you read this one and compared it to performance after the publication date.

Plenty of analysts think the entire market is overvalued.

Tesla may or may not be but it sure seems like some passive aggressive response to Musk buying Twitter.

 

[0nelilreb]

But I'm sure you're more competent on financial matters.

Surowiecki's writing has appeared in a wide range of publications, including The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Motley Fool, Foreign Affairs, Artforum, Wired, MIT Technology Review, and Slate.

Before joining The New Yorker, he wrote “The Bottom Line” column for New York magazine and was a contributing editor at Fortune.

He got his start on the Internet when he was hired from graduate school by Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner to be the Fool's editor-in-chief of its culture site on America Online, entitled "Rogue" (1995–1996). As The Motley Fool closed that site down and focused on finance, Surowiecki made the switch over to become a finance writer, which he did over the succeeding three years, including being assigned to write the Fool's column on Slate from 1997 to 2000.

Oh oh oh .. now do a complete run down of Elons success story and his accomplishments.

 

[volinbham]

From the Feb Tesla overrated article

"That’s probably why I wouldn’t touch it right now."

It was 815 then; went to 1136 in April. That's up 40% from the time that analysts gave such sage advice (basically up 40% in just over a month). Even with the market pull back AND the market pricing in the leveraging of Tesla stock it is still up 22.5% since Feb 28 (2 months)

For comparison the S&P is down 2% over the same time period. So Telsa up 22.5%; S&P down 2% but the analyst said not to touch Tesla.

Keep up the great research

 

[CagleMtnVol]

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

@Rob .. you can’t combat anything . A private social platform can make any terms they ( HE) chooses to make , and you then have two choices , stay and cry or leave and go start your own . This is going to be so much fun . LOL

LOL at you tagging people on Twitter from VolNation. Ultimate boomer move.

 

[0nelilreb]

LOL at you tagging people on Twitter from VolNation. Ultimate boomer move.

I thought it was funny

Edit : GenXer here and I’ll bet I have had more exposure to technology than you have .

 

[Rickyvol77]

Red flag was BB referencing it as a simple interracial love story that mean, balding conservatives frothed at the mouths to stomp out. Then we find out one of the characters inspired the Gimp on Pulp Fiction.

Leftists are expert gaslighters

 

[luthervol]

What did the author of the declaration ( Thomas Jefferson ) think about a centralized government and “ natural rights “?

So do the Federalist Papers give us insight into the thoughts and beliefs of the writers of the Constitution or not? I've seen them referred to in many other debates as if they clarify the thinking behind the constitution.
I posted from the first two; not only that, but the opening paragraphs of the first two.
I'm guessing that was no accident.

 

[midnight orange]

So do the Federalist Papers give us insight into the thoughts and beliefs of the writers of the Constitution or not? I've seen them referred to in many other debates as if they clarify the thinking behind the constitution.
I posted from the first two; not only that, but the opening paragraphs of the first two.
I'm guessing that was no accident.

No. They give us the insight of the Federalists (whom were in the minority but more powerful and wealthy) in which they published articles in the newspapers of the day. The anti-federalists also attempted to publish papers but their mail was slowed or not delivered at all.

 

[0nelilreb]

So do the Federalist Papers give us insight into the thoughts and beliefs of the writers of the Constitution or not? I've seen them referred to in many other debates as if they clarify the thinking behind the constitution.
I posted from the first two; not only that, but the opening paragraphs of the first two.
I'm guessing that was no accident.

Sure they were written to try to explain and defend the yet to be ratified constitution. It was their way to explain why a constitution was needed . Now what did the author of that constitution think about a centralized government and natural rights ?

 

[midnight orange]

No. They give us the insight of the Federalists (whom were in the minority but more powerful and wealthy) in which they published articles in the newspapers of the day. The anti-federalists also attempted to publish papers but their mail was slowed or not delivered at all.

“In such a titanic struggle, especially for the Antifederalists whose constituency was scattered, poor, and uneducated, rapid dissemination of information and agitation throughout the country was absolutely essential. This vulnerability was viciously exploited by the Federalists, who used their control of the expensive U.S. postal monopoly to delay greatly the mainly Antifederal newspapers as well as letters to and from leading Antifederalists. The postmasters were mainly Federalists: Postmaster General Ebenezer Hazard was a Federalist, and the New York Postmaster Sebastian Bauman was a close friend of Hamilton. And the Federalist Pennsylvania Postmaster openly refused to mail an important address by the Antifederalists at the Pennsylvania convention.”
Murray Rothbard - Conceived in Liberty vol. 5

 

[hog88]

But I'm sure you're more competent on financial matters.

Surowiecki's writing has appeared in a wide range of publications, including The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Motley Fool, Foreign Affairs, Artforum, Wired, MIT Technology Review, and Slate.

Before joining The New Yorker, he wrote “The Bottom Line” column for New York magazine and was a contributing editor at Fortune.

He got his start on the Internet when he was hired from graduate school by Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner to be the Fool's editor-in-chief of its culture site on America Online, entitled "Rogue" (1995–1996). As The Motley Fool closed that site down and focused on finance, Surowiecki made the switch over to become a finance writer, which he did over the succeeding three years, including being assigned to write the Fool's column on Slate from 1997 to 2000.

Oh I’m sure he’s smarter than Musk.

 

[0nelilreb]

Oh I’m sure he’s smarter than Musk.

Im sure he just chose the path of giving people financial advise , instead of using that ginormous brain to become the richest man on the planet . Lol

 

[luthervol]

No. They give us the insight of the Federalists (whom were in the minority but more powerful and wealthy) in which they published articles in the newspapers of the day. The anti-federalists also attempted to publish papers but their mail was slowed or not delivered at all.

Then when people refer to them in other debates, it should be viewed as pretty much meaningless?

 

[kiddiedoc]

Oh I’m sure he’s smarter than Musk.

Listen, even a monkey can land a spent rocket booster on a boat.

 

[luthervol]

Sure they were written to try to explain and defend the yet to be ratified constitution. It was their way to explain why a constitution was needed . Now what did the author of that constitution think about a centralized government and natural rights ?

That a centralized government was absolutely essential and that natural rights had to be taken within the context of the common good.