@@metalcake2288Nah, it's easy. Put C-levels in jail. That's what their golden parachute should be for. For being the fall guy. See how long people keep signing up to be execs of corrupt companies.
@@metalcake2288 The much better answer would be to make a law that stipulates that fines for financial crime must be paid to the amount stipulated by the judge plus the independently assessed profits from the defrauding.
Yep, while working in the office, I could walk over to someone's cubicle and ask them something that I would never put in an email or a MS Teams chat. Bumping into someone in the hallway was even better.
I have always said that the one application for the blockchain that really makes sense is in creating transparent, easily-audited bank records. So, naturally, that's not on the plan.
@@robertbeisert3315 Considering that fraud and theft occurs openly even on the open blockchain just shows that bad actors will commit crimes even in the daylight... The government can track down and get some of them, but never all of them, and never fast enough to get victims their money back before its spent/sent..
@@robertbeisert3315 You don't need a blockchain to do that. And in some ways blockchains are actually less transparent, as while the chain is public, its users are not. We've already had several infamous blockchain scandals where the stolen money is even known where it is, but without a major fork it can't be returned nor does anyone know who's controlling it. There's a reason why crypto is such a popular payment choice for criminals and extortionists - you can't trace it to them.
Forget a important point: when interactions/negotiations happen in person, theres a peer pressure for you to sign instead of reading the contracts\emails\ToS
Technically this would be a bad move as Governments can set up their own banks and call it the Federal US Bank. Also banks rely on Government so much for licensing and assurance to customers. I really can't see banks coming out well against a top level government..
@@mariokarter13 I think you underestimate the abilities of a government to take what they want. Those payment platforms exist because they are allowed.
Right, WFH limits what education is possible when framed and delayed with a screen. It's especially detrimental to junior workers who are still figuring out all the processes and contacts. There's a reason MOOCs flopped, and remote learning is getting reversed wherever practical.
@@davidpilibosianinstitutional knowledge: Which crimes to commit, how not to get caught How to violate someones rights, "legally" Few examples Doctors: how to justify giving pills, treatments, tests you don't need Retail: who to follow around the store, intimidate, make feel uncomfortable Managers: who not to hire, nepotism, justify hiring your less qualified friends FascistPigs: "turned as if to shoot" " this a high drug use area"
Yes, this is a legitimate, non-exploitative downside of work-from-home. That's part of what makes the whole WFH conversation tricky, there isn't a definitive "always right" or "always wrong" solution, but rather tradeoffs.
@@Sk0lzky Also can agree with that as well and considering our times with those Hollywood Strikes and heatwaves along with inflation the situation is only getting worse.
Insider trading information to junior staff are massively exaggerated in this video. It might happen in some institutions but it’s not so common until you get to a senior level. It also depends on the definition of junior which is quite different in different regions and financial institutions.
Great video as always! Could you make a video at some point on what happens if most white collar workers go fully remote? I.e, commercial real estate implications, what the domino effect is on the wider economy and anything we might not anticipate?
In the description: A recent study by the European Journal of Financial Management found that FIVE TIMES less likely to engage in financial misconduct when working from home.
@@RBzee112 Perhaps a link to this... The internet is a wide place and you didn't name the study so far as I know. You know. A source? So fars I can tell it's probably behind a paywall but I mean, if it's for something like that you could mention the study, what page you'll find the pertinent information on. I tried looking myself but I mean, I can't verify this given about 10 minutes of poking around. At which point I mean, it's pretty likely this is true, is sounds correct, but I don't see where you are pulling this information from. Or for that matter any other information that might colour this differently.
While I don't work in banking, I assume that any emails or messages I send to coworkers will be archived so I write those accordingly. Face-to-face conversations, not so much. We're not talking about anything shady, but these conversations are definitely less professional than if every word was recorded.
Fraud is harder at home because doing Fraud in your underwear is hard, just look Patrick has to dress in a suit but little do others know that he is in his boxers below.
The most important factor when considering where to live is PEOPLE! People you know living in the area, and the kind of people in general who live there! For example San Francisco is great for making connections with people in technology, and certain places have different cultures than others. Where would you want to build a family and community?
Just spells out who is invested in real estate, whose disinterested in employee efficiency, and whose reliant upon nepotism and/or social skills as opposed to the inverted. WFH, by recording everything, simply makes it harder to lie or conceal something, and as we know, the likelihood of getting caught has a greater influence than the severity of punishment.
The term 'financial fraud' is a bit misleading in the title. This is all about insider trading, one corner of financial fraud. Most average people are more likely to feel the effects of other forms of financial fraud, from identity theft to romance scams, than any type of outwards ripple from junior analysts making trades. Still a good video but I was expecting a lot more.
This is why if we do go cashless which it looks like we are slowly doing we need some kind of public bank (a lot of people in the US have proposed postal banking). If you have to use a third party to store all of your money your only options can't be for-profit megacorps. Of course smaller banks and CU's exist but how do you force them to accept everyone and build branches close enough for everyone to use?
@@ameyskulkarni Isn't the entire point of this video that it's easy for banks to make rules about this stuff but for-profit banks don't see any reason to make them or enforce them when they do?
@@RRW359 I live in a country which has multiple public banks and a generally big government 1. Trust me, Government being involved does not make for less corruption. 2. It also makes people unmotivated and lazy to work, since there's a lot of red tape in government work. Hell, my friend has a relative who was hired in government, he went to work like once a few weeks and still got paid because firing him was too hard. Atleast in pvt co lazy/unmotivated people can be fired. Here they mooch off tax money and don't work
@@ameyskulkarni a trillion dollar bailout kind of counts as mooching off tax money, doesn't it? If the money spent on a public bank is more then printing cash and making sure it isn't copyable (not to mention how easy it makes it to tax dodge) then we don't have to make a public bank as long as we make it law that most businesses accept cash, but if the government can't guarantee that people with cash can spend their money or wants to get rid of it we need more options for underbanked individuals.
I’m always a little thrown off when you say “so it’s time to learn how many works” halfway through the video 😂. All that was just the intro? This one was really interesting, thanks!
I love this video, you nailed some interesting points I hadn't considered but if you think online meeting is equivalent to meeting in person you're just wrong. When's the last time you just hungout with your friends online? Oh yeah never. I wonder why. So much of communication is nonverbal. Plus more than 1 person can talk at a time. I love working from home when I can but I can't tell you how many times I've been bottle necked or had things take 3-5 times as long either because every message takes 15-30 minutes for a response or because we need a decent white board space or being able to physically gesture would clear up so much ambiguity.
There is one thing I wanted to ask why not make your own personal bank or weather is there a way to make your own bank with out making into a business?
well, this solution is only a paliative at best. people will find ways to commit fraud. you can't just simply forbid in all ways possible somebody to talk to another person just because this somebody works in a bank
Almost every solution in life is palliative . As the root cause of all our trouble is that we live in a reality that will never conform to our/one's own ideals. In other words we/one can do nothing but short of a lobotomy of the flawed iteration of the human design (adapt the internal to the external) or omniscient manipulation of reality (adapt the external to the internal)will do. But on the bright side a society/culture/human-being is capable of holding a myriad of ideals each often in conflict with another, so at least the choice which to keep and which to break/bend is there (most of the times at least, but easier said than done).
This is the problem with letter law - the more rigidly you define things, the bigger the loopholes and justifications. "It was not expressly mentioned as a fraud, but it was fraud. You remain guilty."
But I worked at call center and even here people stole information for fraud. What would be if such scammers got all this at home. It's weird to ignore why financial information is so sensitive in the first place. All pin codes and so on just here and random people can get access at workers home.
You are easily the coolest RUclipsr, I wonder what if any is the relationship between your chosen topic and you being the best (definition currently withholding but known and concrete)
I'm gonna stop you right there. 10:15 No. There are a lot of reasons to prefer in person interactions ranging from basic human psychology to the inconvenience and interference of remote interactions. Just like self checkout is a miserable fucking experience in a grocery store when you end a zoom meeting and realize you forgot to ask something you can't turn around and rectify it immediately.
Hm, one officer can corrupt a whole department? That sounds a lot like a bad apple spoiling a barrel. Weird how pro-cop people always forget the second half of that expression.
what are the stats of people living at home for their future then say leaving at 35? just wondering as you keep saying your screwed but if your saving 50,000 a year thats way above what experts say you should invest.
10:11 Are you serious? NO reason that in-person would be better than remote except to bend rules? Yeah... okay... I'm sure their competitor got more business solely because they got to re-add the human element of breaking rules. There are good points in here, but segregating everyone because 'one bad apple... influences the bunch' as a simple solution is a dumb solution.
On august 10th 2018 Richard “beebo” Russell stopped being a ground service agent and became one one with the heavens. They say men die two deaths. The first is When they bury you and the second is when the world forgets your name. Rip sky king.
Lol think this is somewhat indicative of police misconduct issues also. Of course they don't want body cams, then they won't get to do misconduct. Ergo, anyone arguing for reduced scrutiny likely knows exactly why and thus is supporting it.
Very clickbaity, this "fraud" problem is one of many, which is not even the biggest one. And your argument does not help anything, because if you do this in person on the office, you can do that aswell in your home with even less control
It's no longer a story that the world is experiencing a global economic downturn, I'm so happy that I've been receiving $64,000 from my $15,000 investment every 14 days.
The crypto market is highly profitable with an expert broker just Letton Deb. I got recommend to her and since then my financial life has been a success
I dislike that you imply that all in-person conversations are disreputable, and potentially fraudulent. Many problems are solved in a fraction of the time via face-to-face discussions, often informal while walking down the hallway. And not all in-person conversations are evil.
I could be wrong but I'm guessing the idea is that the person is investing an additional $1,000 every year and getting cumulative Returns on everything in the account?
09:07 Pretty sure this has been known for decades, but everyone chose to ignore it. They even perversed the old saying: a bad apple ... can spoil the barrel. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_apples?wprov=sfla1
![Cody Johnson - I'm Gonna Love You (with Carrie Underwood) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yy9PuYMU29g/mqdefault.jpg)
Upgrade the way you learn with Brilliant! To get started for FREE go to www.brilliant.org/howmoneyworks
Lesson: bad behavior is contagious
Bodycams for bankers 😂
Ooooh Do one about banks vs credit unions. We've done a few of the solutions at the CU I work at
Why fix something that is immensely profitable? For multi-billion dollar frauds, banks pay multi-million dollar fines. The rest they can keep. 😊
Somehow, we need to be able to put businesses in jail
@@metalcake2288Nah, it's easy.
Put C-levels in jail. That's what their golden parachute should be for. For being the fall guy. See how long people keep signing up to be execs of corrupt companies.
Seems like these fines are too lenient.
I propose two things: a company shutter or exile, and a French haircut for the dealmakers.
@@metalcake2288 The much better answer would be to make a law that stipulates that fines for financial crime must be paid to the amount stipulated by the judge plus the independently assessed profits from the defrauding.
Yep, while working in the office, I could walk over to someone's cubicle and ask them something that I would never put in an email or a MS Teams chat. Bumping into someone in the hallway was even better.
or you simply call them with MS teams (?) and only a call is logged but not the content
Paper trails and transparency are an awesome force for justice.
I have always said that the one application for the blockchain that really makes sense is in creating transparent, easily-audited bank records. So, naturally, that's not on the plan.
@@robertbeisert3315 Considering that fraud and theft occurs openly even on the open blockchain just shows that bad actors will commit crimes even in the daylight... The government can track down and get some of them, but never all of them, and never fast enough to get victims their money back before its spent/sent..
@@robertbeisert3315 You don't need a blockchain to do that. And in some ways blockchains are actually less transparent, as while the chain is public, its users are not. We've already had several infamous blockchain scandals where the stolen money is even known where it is, but without a major fork it can't be returned nor does anyone know who's controlling it. There's a reason why crypto is such a popular payment choice for criminals and extortionists - you can't trace it to them.
Forget a important point: when interactions/negotiations happen in person, theres a peer pressure for you to sign instead of reading the contracts\emails\ToS
"Can you email me the conditions, please?"
If they don't want to, it's not a good deal (for you)
I love the bromance between How Money Works and Patrick Boyle
First Rule of Fraud: Always in cash, never in writing.
And banks have plenty of cash.
You're right on that.
The Answer is..... Just don't do Financial Fraud
Don't do fraud MMKAY?
Hahaha! How else am I going to steal money??? Hahahahhahaaa!
But but but profit!
@@HowMoneyWorksok mom
@@HowMoneyWorks and don’t forget drugs are bad MMKAY?
bankers hate this simple trick
wait…
They love it. Multi-billion dollar frauds, banks pay multi-million dollar fines. The rest they can keep. 😊
Government: We want you to stop doing fraud.
Banks: Then we'll stop processing your payments.
Technically this would be a bad move as Governments can set up their own banks and call it the Federal US Bank. Also banks rely on Government so much for licensing and assurance to customers. I really can't see banks coming out well against a top level government..
Gov: Say goodbye to your license
@@ProfAzimov Visa and Mastercard control basically 100% of financial transactions. What would the government even be able to do.
@@mariokarter13 I think you underestimate the abilities of a government to take what they want. Those payment platforms exist because they are allowed.
Government: then we seize everything and put you on trial for treason.
Military power > financial power.
Isn't another reason why companies dislike work-from-home is that it is harder to pass along institutional knowledge?
If only we had some form of non spoken method of transmitting knowledge and information. Oh well.
Right, WFH limits what education is possible when framed and delayed with a screen. It's especially detrimental to junior workers who are still figuring out all the processes and contacts. There's a reason MOOCs flopped, and remote learning is getting reversed wherever practical.
@@davidpilibosianinstitutional knowledge:
Which crimes to commit, how not to get caught
How to violate someones rights, "legally"
Few examples
Doctors: how to justify giving pills, treatments, tests you don't need
Retail: who to follow around the store, intimidate, make feel uncomfortable
Managers: who not to hire, nepotism, justify hiring your less qualified friends
FascistPigs: "turned as if to shoot" " this a high drug use area"
Yes, this is a legitimate, non-exploitative downside of work-from-home. That's part of what makes the whole WFH conversation tricky, there isn't a definitive "always right" or "always wrong" solution, but rather tradeoffs.
@@TechSY730 thank you for being the only person in the Internet who understands nuance.
I seriously expected the title to be just clickbait, but this makes a lot of sense.
How money works generally doesn't do clickbait. He's one of a few quality underrated youtubers.
"We like people that don't get caught." -- Bank
Is it so hard to just earn money instead of stealing it?
There is a reason the corporate and conservative go to line is "pull yourself up by the bootstraps", it use to mean "To do something impossible."
Yes
Yes.
@@Sk0lzky Also can agree with that as well and considering our times with those Hollywood Strikes and heatwaves along with inflation the situation is only getting worse.
Insider trading information to junior staff are massively exaggerated in this video. It might happen in some institutions but it’s not so common until you get to a senior level. It also depends on the definition of junior which is quite different in different regions and financial institutions.
Great video as always! Could you make a video at some point on what happens if most white collar workers go fully remote? I.e, commercial real estate implications, what the domino effect is on the wider economy and anything we might not anticipate?
Damn, I'd like to see this too
This would be great
Do you have a source for the statement, that fraud is 5 times less likely in homeoffice?
Thanks, great video, as always
In the description: A recent study by the European Journal of Financial Management found that FIVE TIMES less likely to engage in financial misconduct when working from home.
Thank you@@RBzee112
@@RBzee112 Perhaps a link to this... The internet is a wide place and you didn't name the study so far as I know. You know. A source? So fars I can tell it's probably behind a paywall but I mean, if it's for something like that you could mention the study, what page you'll find the pertinent information on. I tried looking myself but I mean, I can't verify this given about 10 minutes of poking around. At which point I mean, it's pretty likely this is true, is sounds correct, but I don't see where you are pulling this information from. Or for that matter any other information that might colour this differently.
While I don't work in banking, I assume that any emails or messages I send to coworkers will be archived so I write those accordingly. Face-to-face conversations, not so much. We're not talking about anything shady, but these conversations are definitely less professional than if every word was recorded.
Nothing shady. Just dat ass of the new accounting intern, I'ma rite?
Fraud is harder at home because doing Fraud in your underwear is hard, just look Patrick has to dress in a suit but little do others know that he is in his boxers below.
You don't want to get caught with your pants down
So return to office for investment banks is essentially to continue shady and unethical business practices without it being recorded. Got it!
The most important factor when considering where to live is PEOPLE! People you know living in the area, and the kind of people in general who live there! For example San Francisco is great for making connections with people in technology, and certain places have different cultures than others. Where would you want to build a family and community?
never in san francisco
You are mixing retail banking with investment banking. Those things are very different roles.
Just spells out who is invested in real estate, whose disinterested in employee efficiency, and whose reliant upon nepotism and/or social skills as opposed to the inverted.
WFH, by recording everything, simply makes it harder to lie or conceal something, and as we know, the likelihood of getting caught has a greater influence than the severity of punishment.
The term 'financial fraud' is a bit misleading in the title. This is all about insider trading, one corner of financial fraud. Most average people are more likely to feel the effects of other forms of financial fraud, from identity theft to romance scams, than any type of outwards ripple from junior analysts making trades. Still a good video but I was expecting a lot more.
Me: "Wait... It's all work from home?"
How Money Works: *cocks gun* "Always has been."
This is why if we do go cashless which it looks like we are slowly doing we need some kind of public bank (a lot of people in the US have proposed postal banking). If you have to use a third party to store all of your money your only options can't be for-profit megacorps. Of course smaller banks and CU's exist but how do you force them to accept everyone and build branches close enough for everyone to use?
What stops public bank employees from doing corruption?
@@ameyskulkarni Isn't the entire point of this video that it's easy for banks to make rules about this stuff but for-profit banks don't see any reason to make them or enforce them when they do?
@@RRW359 I live in a country which has multiple public banks and a generally big government
1. Trust me, Government being involved does not make for less corruption.
2. It also makes people unmotivated and lazy to work, since there's a lot of red tape in government work. Hell, my friend has a relative who was hired in government, he went to work like once a few weeks and still got paid because firing him was too hard.
Atleast in pvt co lazy/unmotivated people can be fired. Here they mooch off tax money and don't work
@@ameyskulkarni a trillion dollar bailout kind of counts as mooching off tax money, doesn't it? If the money spent on a public bank is more then printing cash and making sure it isn't copyable (not to mention how easy it makes it to tax dodge) then we don't have to make a public bank as long as we make it law that most businesses accept cash, but if the government can't guarantee that people with cash can spend their money or wants to get rid of it we need more options for underbanked individuals.
I’m always a little thrown off when you say “so it’s time to learn how many works” halfway through the video 😂. All that was just the intro?
This one was really interesting, thanks!
and the first answer is the sponsor .
This is what I love about $? Straight to the point.
9:25 "POOOPOPOULE" 😔
So criminality is so high they can't have accountability. I hate them.
I love this video, you nailed some interesting points I hadn't considered but if you think online meeting is equivalent to meeting in person you're just wrong. When's the last time you just hungout with your friends online? Oh yeah never. I wonder why. So much of communication is nonverbal. Plus more than 1 person can talk at a time. I love working from home when I can but I can't tell you how many times I've been bottle necked or had things take 3-5 times as long either because every message takes 15-30 minutes for a response or because we need a decent white board space or being able to physically gesture would clear up so much ambiguity.
I love how this is murica again. Banks in Belgium don't use sales pressure. They just cut jobs :D
There is one thing I wanted to ask why not make your own personal bank or weather is there a way to make your own bank with out making into a business?
God I love me a good midrole title scene.
well, this solution is only a paliative at best. people will find ways to commit fraud. you can't just simply forbid in all ways possible somebody to talk to another person just because this somebody works in a bank
Now sub in murder and rape. You made an ineffective argument.
Almost every solution in life is palliative . As the root cause of all our trouble is that we live in a reality that will never conform to our/one's own ideals. In other words we/one can do nothing but short of a lobotomy of the flawed iteration of the human design (adapt the internal to the external) or omniscient manipulation of reality (adapt the external to the internal)will do.
But on the bright side a society/culture/human-being is capable of holding a myriad of ideals each often in conflict with another, so at least the choice which to keep and which to break/bend is there (most of the times at least, but easier said than done).
@@luciferpyro4057 such a great pov
This is the problem with letter law - the more rigidly you define things, the bigger the loopholes and justifications.
"It was not expressly mentioned as a fraud, but it was fraud. You remain guilty."
But I worked at call center and even here people stole information for fraud. What would be if such scammers got all this at home. It's weird to ignore why financial information is so sensitive in the first place. All pin codes and so on just here and random people can get access at workers home.
Very interesting perspective, thank you I learned something!
Omg another Let It Happen edit!
Great video as always!
Answer at 1:00
Me: thanks, I’ll be leaving now
You are easily the coolest RUclipsr, I wonder what if any is the relationship between your chosen topic and you being the best (definition currently withholding but known and concrete)
Great 👏 leap 👏 forward 👏
Yep.
You're my favorite youtuber!!!
Strange. I’m fully remote and if I want to have an off the record conversation I just use the phone.
Banks can/do/have to record such internal calls
@@eruben2Banks can not record such conversations, but a telecom can.
I'm gonna stop you right there. 10:15
No. There are a lot of reasons to prefer in person interactions ranging from basic human psychology to the inconvenience and interference of remote interactions.
Just like self checkout is a miserable fucking experience in a grocery store when you end a zoom meeting and realize you forgot to ask something you can't turn around and rectify it immediately.
Nice to see Patrick!
If only all financial transactions could be recorded forever in a public, immutable ledger of some sort. 🤔
Hm, one officer can corrupt a whole department? That sounds a lot like a bad apple spoiling a barrel. Weird how pro-cop people always forget the second half of that expression.
Great video!
here is daily financial advice:
invest in big strawborrys 🍓⸜(˃ ᵕ ˂ )⸝
Thank you for this.
Participative finance
But yeah mostly offices made to harassment, not for productivity
Its always fun to guess when he will say 'Its time to learn how money works'.
interesting but mostly speculation My company is in the financial area and they doubled down dumped their real estate holdings and let us stay home
Explain why you moved your catch phrase from the beginning of your video to closer to the end? I'm just curious.
I think it's probs to improve engagement for the algo
Any junior associate, that gets caught up for insider trading is just incompetent and probably didn’t deserve that job in the first place
This was fun to watch
1:31 who else checked their phone?
Pretending it needs to be fixed rather than working as intended
Most people try to do the right thing, but most people also try to do the wrong thing. Think about that for a minute. 🤨
what are the stats of people living at home for their future then say leaving at 35? just wondering as you keep saying your screwed but if your saving 50,000 a year thats way above what experts say you should invest.
well, there is this something called private phone number...
Wow, channel name dropped over halfway through the video.
I Like the Idea of creating an online bank (though only theoretically possible), that Sounds interesting
There are many online only credit unions.
There are a few online-only banks in the UK
10:11 Are you serious? NO reason that in-person would be better than remote except to bend rules? Yeah... okay... I'm sure their competitor got more business solely because they got to re-add the human element of breaking rules.
There are good points in here, but segregating everyone because 'one bad apple... influences the bunch' as a simple solution is a dumb solution.
Is insider not much more likely remote working?
Why would it be?
Anyone offering some insights, I'm down to make something happen 👀
I am teachable!!
"Big Brother is watching you"
Banks : it's fine.
Simple fix. Pass a law that would allow the NSA to record all financial conversations.
Of course, there's no way that could end catastrophically and apocalyptically poorly...
Including in-person conversations? How exactly?
Ah yes and that would never expand
8:45 ACAB
One of the most smartest channels on youtube
On august 10th 2018 Richard “beebo” Russell stopped being a ground service agent and became one one with the heavens. They say men die two deaths. The first is When they bury you and the second is when the world forgets your name. Rip sky king.
The math is horribly wrong at 3:30
Indeed. it's more like 17 years
No, not if it's per year
@fanban2926 it's more like 15 years actually. If you start from 1000 x (1.5)^15, then work down from 15, you'll see that it works
Nice
Lol think this is somewhat indicative of police misconduct issues also. Of course they don't want body cams, then they won't get to do misconduct. Ergo, anyone arguing for reduced scrutiny likely knows exactly why and thus is supporting it.
I thought crypto was the only problem we had…
every time you say the answer at the start of the video you get a like
1.7k likes and 0 dislikes wtf???
(2hafter release)
This video makes wanna become an investment banker so I can commit financial fraud
Bitcoin will keep banks accountable
Good luck on your house hunting. You should mow your grass every once in a while, Mr. Fancy.
How Money Works how is it in Dubai? 😉
Poop conversation is where the real fraud happens. Doing number 4 with your boss 😍
Greedy bankers, this is old news
Very clickbaity, this "fraud" problem is one of many, which is not even the biggest one. And your argument does not help anything, because if you do this in person on the office, you can do that aswell in your home with even less control
Authority check Bank joke 🤣🤣🤣
Ll
Guillotines…
Quickkk
It's no longer a story that the world is experiencing a global economic downturn, I'm so happy that I've been receiving $64,000 from my $15,000 investment every 14 days.
The crypto market is highly profitable with an expert broker just Letton Deb. I got recommend to her and since then my financial life has been a success
It was a very awesome transformation, No greater joy than seeing my progress in an initial decision
@@michal_pavlikYou can easily get to her on
Facebook
⬇️⬇️
pooopopoule
I dislike that you imply that all in-person conversations are disreputable, and potentially fraudulent. Many problems are solved in a fraction of the time via face-to-face discussions, often informal while walking down the hallway. And not all in-person conversations are evil.
He didn't do that at all
Second
3:31 $1,000 earning 50% returns per year for 12 years wont be $1,000,000, its closer to $130k
He probably means $1000 *per year* for 12 years. That'll get you around a million with a 50% return.
@@Croz89 prob 15 years for that. But close enough.
@@shaochiavang Depends on when the $1000 is invested, at the start of the year or end.
@@Croz89 he said 50% for 12 years. Even at $1000 per year for 12 years at 50% average, it won't be $1M
I could be wrong but I'm guessing the idea is that the person is investing an additional $1,000 every year and getting cumulative Returns on everything in the account?
Don’t worry the market always fixes everything in American capitalism
09:07 Pretty sure this has been known for decades, but everyone chose to ignore it. They even perversed the old saying: a bad apple ... can spoil the barrel.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_apples?wprov=sfla1
Wait....WFH as a bigger benefit not only for the employees but also for customers/consumers? Big businesses c suite clutch their pearls!
It's bad for the company's commercial real estate holdings
@@stevencooper4422 They could try turning those empty office buildings into other stuff, like apartments