The theory of evolution is a fraud. It isn't proven. The only way to figure out the value of your house is to sell it. Thus, value is manipulative and illusory.
I'm homeless and I'm way for financially stable than when I was a renter. Once people realize how easy it is to be homeless and shelter at work or wherever without being noticed (showering at the gym), we'll see a lot more of it. My generation will never afford a house while renting -- maybe if they get multi-generational mortgages. I'm making bank by simply not paying rent.
It's a pretty extreme solution but you are probably right, it's an extreme solution that more people are going to need to take. (even if they aren't quiet as upbeat about it as you are)
@HowMoneyWorks Without changing fundamental requirements for necessary beraucratic policies, this will never be a solution. Without an address, it is impossible to acquire a driver's license, a bank account, a fishing/hunting license, etc. Currently, most homeless people are relying on family or friends to provide a faux address to acquire these things. However, this is only working now because there are those people to go to for this kind of help; it will only take one or two more generations to create a much more massive number of homeless society, and that temporary solution of a faux address will dry up. Laws and policies will have to change to no longer require a physical address for necessities.
If bureaucrats would relax zoning laws, we wouldn’t have a crisis. But nooo. You can’t build a $50,000 home in this neighborhood because that would ruin the property values of your neighborssss 🙄.
There *are* inexpensive houses out there, few, and either fixer uppers or in areas that people would tend to avoid. Fixing up a house while living in it probably isn't fun. And depending on how many bathrooms might not be doable. (As well as other issues like electricity/heat/water etc.) Part of it is timing. A little over a decade ago houses were way less expensive because people over bought and lost them. And the Millenials have grown-up and are now looking for "normal" family sized houses. Which I'll admit most builders would rather just pop in a McMansion. Maybe the supply vs demand will balance out a bit better ~2029 🤷♂️
Ok, so let's look at this. I live in a small country, where if people move at all it is to the capital or three biggest cities apart from the capital. But at the same time, from 1990-2024 we have gone from almost 11 million to 6.5 million population(and that's counting people abroad), while we have built 3-4x more homes in every major city. Yet in the 90s the median home was 2-3x median yearly salaries and was 71-74m^2, while since 2021 the median home has been 9-12x median salaries and 48-51m^2. All of our major cities are half or less the population they were 30-35 years ago, except the capital, which is 100 000 fewer people than 10 years ago. Again tons of apartment building a being built, tons of houses, they are almost all next to empty, 0 interior, gray empty boxes. What happens is corporations and rich people buy them out or straight up build them and then use an algorithm, with data about the area's income, to technically price fix the rents/prices to where they cost what is on the edge of affordable for 2x median salaries to get a mortgage or rent, in the age where people are most alone. And it's legal, because they are using algorithms for it and not technically colluding. Also we don't build houses from cardboard, it's all steel reinforced concrete and brick that last no less than 100 years.
Sure sure, after you build your 50k house, a meat plant will be able to install shop next to you without air mitigation and a lovely establishment called Ladies of Venus will open where the kids park was located. It needs to provide services to the bike shop where some lovely gentleman are doing business.
We need land value taxes. So long as the land is allowed to be held by the few away from use by the many without just compensation, rent to the privileged owners will continue to rise as a proportion of production leading to enviably increasing poverty. We need Georgism!
We pay enough tax, the problem is a mismanagement of money from the top down. Corruption and greed filter money away onto defunct projects or simply to line pockets
You guys are right, we do pay too much in taxes. We need to cut income and sales taxes in favor of a Land Value Tax. Land value is actively a good thing to tax and such a tax creates positive societal effects, in opposition to income and sales taxes which cause substantial dead weight loss. I know it seems strange, but "socializing" land value through a tax is the best thing we could do for our societal financial freedom.
@@Jay_Johnson Exactly. Landlordship is not capitalist, but because most capitalists are also landlords and we keep calling rent "profit", people don't understand the difference.
It is actually impressive if not sad how many recessions were caused by the real estate market. Several times, and yet we still don't learn the lesson.
You say recession like it's a bad thing to those currently winning the game. A recession/depression for the workers is life derailing/life ending A recession/depression for the financiers is a fire sale of all the fools who thought they could rise out of the rank and file. It's class warfare.
It’s only a asset if someone is willing to buy off you. Too expensive, nobody buys it. If it is too cheap, just means that it’s not a good area or the housing market is just too diluted. Supply and demand.
You can resolve the issue of people buying property and not renting it out by the use of an annual land tax, which I think England does not possess. To avoid impacting existing home owners some countries only charge this on a 2nd home, or a home being rented. While leaving property vacant causes a bad issue to become worse, its not the key driver. The price of a home is affected by good old fashion supply and demand, increase demand and prices go up, increase supply prices go down. I suspect there are people who like keeping prices high and make little effort in addressing this issue.
Between property taxes, property insurance, and capital expenses, owners already pay a cost for leaving their homes vacant. If that doesn't dissuade them, then i'm not sure what will.
What you said about China was incorrect. It's a tradition in most Asian countries that land belongs to the people and passes down by family, not "firmly in the hands of government." You have to look back to 1948 when they did 土改 land reform. IMO, it was the most destructive thing the Communist did, but no one is complaining because almost every Chinese alive benefited from it. They took land from the rich and redistributed them to everyone else. And Taiwanese can't use this information against China because there was a similar (even worse) land reform in Taiwan in 1949. The West might not have heard about it because it doesn't fit the American narrative about China vs. Taiwan. Shocking, KMT was actually communist too. Come on. If the government owned everything up until 1990s as you believed, there wouldn't be so many 釘子戶 holdouts. The small house between the highways is voted the strongest holdout in China. Google the photo, it's amazing. What has changed in China is that land has a maximum of 70 years lease, they do have a chance to be renewed. The West made it sound so sinister, but it is actually a Climate Change policy. In Canada, our government pays people to move away from risky areas. Provinces like Nova Scotia is facing more problems with climate change, but a lot of holdouts refuse to move. They would give them a few years of warning, that emergency services will no longer cover this area. Yet when the storm hits, they still have to go out to get them. The program is extremely expensive and time-consuming to relocate entire towns. China's new policy is so that it would be easier to relocate people due to climate change, toxic environment and unsafe construction. I'm not pro-China or anti-China. I'm just pro-facts. The first 70-year leases are expected to expire in 2030. We shall see what happens. Don't jump into conclusions. The West is always making these "bad hombre" countries sound crazy. You should read more neutral sources like Al Jazeera. I think your misunderstanding might have to do with your Western concept of citizenship. Would you do a history of citizenship? Rule of the land vs. Rule of the blood.
0:05 The homeless guy has zero debt because he has no income or available credit. Lack of debt doesn’t equal “financial stability”. Someone with a mortgage is more financially stable than someone who panhandles for drug money.
I'm fairly certain that Bilbo's Hobbit Hole wasn't *just* some hole in the ground. Iirc it was well appointed and had numerous rooms & food stuffs. It was no starter hole. 😉
What I plan to do is to buy some piece of s**t shack to live in, then save money for a real house and lose as little money to the bank as humanly possible.
While, I know *not* everyone can do so (for a verity of reasons) why don't people live with the parents for a few extra years while they save up for a decent down payment on a suitable house? It might crimp your lifestyle for a bit, but maybe you could turn it into a nice time with family learning family recipes 🧑🍳 & hanging out. 🤷♂️ I know this doesn't work if the young folk have to move to the *Big* city/cross country, etc. but *not* everyone does that.
@@larrysmith2655 I don't think they meant build as in hire a bunch of contractors to build it for me. But build as in using my own blood, sweat, and tears with the materials available on the land or that can be scavenged from around it.
Just watched the intro and feels si defeatist, how did uk going from slums to having affordable houses and then back to slums is possible, lack of oversight it, it can be done
the UK built horrible housing in the 70s to achieve that and then they started crumbling sooner than expected and nobody wants a crumbling home, on top of that they still take space.
Building an apartment or house is expensive and the costs may often rise during the project, while assets and barracks to store people when they are not working are cheap and try to keep costs under control. The current rules of the market economy recommend and encourage choosing the most cost-effective solution because it saves money, cuts corners and it allows the most optimal gain. The solution would be to correct and fix the rules, but at the same time we should still try to keep housing profitable for people and avoid skyrocketing prices.
I am of the idea we are going back to the Feudal economy with companies being the new land. Everything is company sized today, having houses being assets before homes is just an extension of that, labor laws will be next thing to go. The focus has already shifted away from community, we are not seeing because boomers are still alive but the new generations are not used to feel the place where they live as their own.
Small correction: the US politicians passed a law FORCING banks to give out bad loans. It was illegal to say no. Most banks went along and enjoyed the ride. A few chose to get out of mortgages all together.
Every American should be guaranteed a home. The need for everyone to have their own property is more important than someone's supposed right to own multiple properties.
I don't think the federal government should be able to hold land in the public trust while there are those in the public that are destitute and homeless. Give the homeless federal land, ffs. IDC if that means some crazy person is gonna be handed the redwoods, that's a hypothetical problem that a rational functioning society would be able to avoid, and if we couldn't and it did devolve to that, than we-the-people don't deserve that beauty anyways
Simple solution: tax landlords out of the market. Anyone who owns more than one flat/home gets to pay land taxt that rises exponentialy based on how much they own. This would give this God-forsaken West a breath of much needed air, because the fucking greed strangles us all.
The problem is that property owners are better organized, and funded which means they'll have the ear of the same politicians that tenants and borrowers need. If the people being hurt by this could organize referendums they might stand a chance.
Doesn't work though because the parasites just offload their increased taxes onto tenants along with every other expense. Vacancy taxes can work though - tax them so high they can't just sit on vacant properties, i.e. artificially restricting supply and creating more demand for what's left so they can jack up the rents. Better yet just ban anyone from owning more than 2 properties, and create penalties with teeth to deter the violators. Not just financial or even expropriation, but prison time.
I can't believe you guys are sliding left like this, i guess it kinda just proves how crazy irrational housing as an asset rather than a human right is
I know I don’t. Those cheap homes are either on land I have to pay rent for (which defeats the purpose of buying), or in dangerous neighborhoods (would rather rent and be safe), or are in such disrepair it’ll cost just as much to fix as it does to buy something better (and many repairs would need to be done before becoming habitable). It’s bullshit. I don’t want an investment. I want a place to live in until I die.
Let me tell you what nobody is going to tell you. Building wealth has never been a one person’s job especially if you are just starting. One of the best choices you can make for your life at this point is to be able to get someone who believes in your growth and will be willing to help you grow. Big thanks to Larysa Caba. I will always be grateful for everything you did.
I feel one Of the greatest challenges that we first timers face in the ma rket is that we end up losing all we have,making it difficult to find ourselves back to our feet. My biggest advice is to always seek the services of a professional just like I did when I ventured into it for the first time. Big thanks to Larysa Caba. I now make huge profits by weekly through her services while still learning to stand on my own.
I think she trades for everyone I meet. I met her twice at a meeting in Germany and after her lectures from Ella I had to personally ask her to be my financial advisor. she is definitely good.
I have never seen a trader as open and transparent as Larysa Caba with her clients. The way she decides to make a profit for her clients. she allows you to express your fears and she still rests your fears and that is my respect. I don't normally comment on videos, but this word should be included. she is really cool.
Shelter being an economic asset to competed for with money is a far better prospect than the majority of human history where shelter was attained through bloody fights and wars. However I do think the amount of hording by real estate pros is out of control now. Literally, acre after acre across the world of land being unused for shelter, and just held as some private property stock that goes up in price over time
!!!I just switched up my Roth IRA to 50% SCHD, 25% SCHX, 25% SCHG, and my Roth 401k is 70% vanguard S&P 500 index, 20% vanguard growth index, and 10% vanguard international index. Seeking best possible ways to grow $350k into $2m+ before retirement
Without a doubt! Ruth Ann Tsakonas is a trader who goes above and beyond. she has an exceptional skill for analyzing market movements and spotting profitable opportunities. Her strategies are meticulously crafted based on thorough research and years of practical experience.
how would you recommend i enter the crypto market? I am also looking at studying some traders and copying their strategy rather than investing myself and losing money emotionally. What's your take on this approach? and How can i reach her, if you don't mind me asking?
The key to successful investing is to play the long game and realize that winning simply means staying in the game. The video You Suck at Investing on How Money Works explains this pretty well. Time in the Market almost always beats Timing the Market and most actively managed funds fail to beat the market over 90% of the time. You're probably better to just put your money in an index fund and forget about paying fees to a fund manager who will most likely fail you. Remember, anyone who promises to make you rich quickly can make you go broke just as fast.
Go to surfshark.com/historyworks for 4 extra months of Surfshark.
The footnotes of the video are missing.
The theory of evolution is a fraud. It isn't proven.
The only way to figure out the value of your house is to sell it. Thus, value is manipulative and illusory.
Delete the scam posts in your comments.
I'm homeless and I'm way for financially stable than when I was a renter. Once people realize how easy it is to be homeless and shelter at work or wherever without being noticed (showering at the gym), we'll see a lot more of it. My generation will never afford a house while renting -- maybe if they get multi-generational mortgages. I'm making bank by simply not paying rent.
Ditto brother, ditto
It's a pretty extreme solution but you are probably right, it's an extreme solution that more people are going to need to take.
(even if they aren't quiet as upbeat about it as you are)
@HowMoneyWorks Without changing fundamental requirements for necessary beraucratic policies, this will never be a solution. Without an address, it is impossible to acquire a driver's license, a bank account, a fishing/hunting license, etc. Currently, most homeless people are relying on family or friends to provide a faux address to acquire these things. However, this is only working now because there are those people to go to for this kind of help; it will only take one or two more generations to create a much more massive number of homeless society, and that temporary solution of a faux address will dry up. Laws and policies will have to change to no longer require a physical address for necessities.
What a large collection of quitters, this video has brought together
Being homeless is not a flex
If bureaucrats would relax zoning laws, we wouldn’t have a crisis. But nooo. You can’t build a $50,000 home in this neighborhood because that would ruin the property values of your neighborssss 🙄.
There *are* inexpensive houses out there, few, and either fixer uppers or in areas that people would tend to avoid.
Fixing up a house while living in it probably isn't fun. And depending on how many bathrooms might not be doable. (As well as other issues like electricity/heat/water etc.)
Part of it is timing. A little over a decade ago houses were way less expensive because people over bought and lost them. And the Millenials have grown-up and are now looking for "normal" family sized houses. Which I'll admit most builders would rather just pop in a McMansion.
Maybe the supply vs demand will balance out a bit better ~2029 🤷♂️
Ok, so let's look at this. I live in a small country, where if people move at all it is to the capital or three biggest cities apart from the capital.
But at the same time, from 1990-2024 we have gone from almost 11 million to 6.5 million population(and that's counting people abroad), while we have built 3-4x more homes in every major city.
Yet in the 90s the median home was 2-3x median yearly salaries and was 71-74m^2, while since 2021 the median home has been 9-12x median salaries and 48-51m^2.
All of our major cities are half or less the population they were 30-35 years ago, except the capital, which is 100 000 fewer people than 10 years ago.
Again tons of apartment building a being built, tons of houses, they are almost all next to empty, 0 interior, gray empty boxes.
What happens is corporations and rich people buy them out or straight up build them and then use an algorithm, with data about the area's income, to technically price fix the rents/prices to where they cost what is on the edge of affordable for 2x median salaries to get a mortgage or rent, in the age where people are most alone. And it's legal, because they are using algorithms for it and not technically colluding.
Also we don't build houses from cardboard, it's all steel reinforced concrete and brick that last no less than 100 years.
@@владимиир12345 just to the east of Serbia (Bulgaria).
Sure sure, after you build your 50k house, a meat plant will be able to install shop next to you without air mitigation and a lovely establishment called Ladies of Venus will open where the kids park was located. It needs to provide services to the bike shop where some lovely gentleman are doing business.
NIMBYs wants bureaucrats to maintain the status quo too
We truly live in an economy
An economy of all time.
It would be a fun experiment to try to live in a society with no economy. Somehow I doubt it would even be possible.
Who said caves weren't assets
The idea that humans lived in caves has been disproven. Most archaeology sites are found in open-air settings (near important resources).
where's our narrator what did you do to him
We need land value taxes. So long as the land is allowed to be held by the few away from use by the many without just compensation, rent to the privileged owners will continue to rise as a proportion of production leading to enviably increasing poverty. We need Georgism!
All you need is progressive ad valorem tax which prevents big players from hoarding up all the houses. It's just that simple.
We pay enough tax, the problem is a mismanagement of money from the top down. Corruption and greed filter money away onto defunct projects or simply to line pockets
@@Jakramsawe pay enough taxes. Maybe too much even. The investor class however barely pays any
You guys are right, we do pay too much in taxes. We need to cut income and sales taxes in favor of a Land Value Tax. Land value is actively a good thing to tax and such a tax creates positive societal effects, in opposition to income and sales taxes which cause substantial dead weight loss. I know it seems strange, but "socializing" land value through a tax is the best thing we could do for our societal financial freedom.
Socialism = (Capital + Land) vs. Labor
Georgism = (Capital + Labor) vs. Land
Georgism IS capitalism. We just haven't fully gotten rid of feudalism yet.
@@Jay_Johnson Exactly. Landlordship is not capitalist, but because most capitalists are also landlords and we keep calling rent "profit", people don't understand the difference.
@@TheSpecialJ11 - Oh they know the difference. The truth is, they don’t care.
I think Georgism is more like: Land + Labor = Wealth (including Capital)
@@Ely-zf4yt Georgist Policies often see Land (Natural Resources) as Common (Public) Property.
It is actually impressive if not sad how many recessions were caused by the real estate market. Several times, and yet we still don't learn the lesson.
Yep, land speculation is probably one of the greatest causes of recession.
You say recession like it's a bad thing to those currently winning the game.
A recession/depression for the workers is life derailing/life ending
A recession/depression for the financiers is a fire sale of all the fools who thought they could rise out of the rank and file.
It's class warfare.
It’s only a asset if someone is willing to buy off you. Too expensive, nobody buys it. If it is too cheap, just means that it’s not a good area or the housing market is just too diluted. Supply and demand.
You can resolve the issue of people buying property and not renting it out by the use of an annual land tax, which I think England does not possess. To avoid impacting existing home owners some countries only charge this on a 2nd home, or a home being rented. While leaving property vacant causes a bad issue to become worse, its not the key driver. The price of a home is affected by good old fashion supply and demand, increase demand and prices go up, increase supply prices go down. I suspect there are people who like keeping prices high and make little effort in addressing this issue.
Between property taxes, property insurance, and capital expenses, owners already pay a cost for leaving their homes vacant. If that doesn't dissuade them, then i'm not sure what will.
What you said about China was incorrect.
It's a tradition in most Asian countries that land belongs to the people and passes down by family, not "firmly in the hands of government."
You have to look back to 1948 when they did 土改 land reform. IMO, it was the most destructive thing the Communist did, but no one is complaining because almost every Chinese alive benefited from it. They took land from the rich and redistributed them to everyone else. And Taiwanese can't use this information against China because there was a similar (even worse) land reform in Taiwan in 1949. The West might not have heard about it because it doesn't fit the American narrative about China vs. Taiwan. Shocking, KMT was actually communist too.
Come on. If the government owned everything up until 1990s as you believed, there wouldn't be so many 釘子戶 holdouts. The small house between the highways is voted the strongest holdout in China. Google the photo, it's amazing.
What has changed in China is that land has a maximum of 70 years lease, they do have a chance to be renewed. The West made it sound so sinister, but it is actually a Climate Change policy.
In Canada, our government pays people to move away from risky areas. Provinces like Nova Scotia is facing more problems with climate change, but a lot of holdouts refuse to move. They would give them a few years of warning, that emergency services will no longer cover this area. Yet when the storm hits, they still have to go out to get them. The program is extremely expensive and time-consuming to relocate entire towns. China's new policy is so that it would be easier to relocate people due to climate change, toxic environment and unsafe construction. I'm not pro-China or anti-China. I'm just pro-facts. The first 70-year leases are expected to expire in 2030. We shall see what happens. Don't jump into conclusions. The West is always making these "bad hombre" countries sound crazy. You should read more neutral sources like Al Jazeera.
I think your misunderstanding might have to do with your Western concept of citizenship.
Would you do a history of citizenship?
Rule of the land vs. Rule of the blood.
This could the lack of land ownership could be one of the reasons for the lack of patriotism today.
0:05
The homeless guy has zero debt because he has no income or available credit. Lack of debt doesn’t equal “financial stability”. Someone with a mortgage is more financially stable than someone who panhandles for drug money.
Meanwhile, how many of us would rather live in Bilbo’s hobbit hole
Something
I'm fairly certain that Bilbo's Hobbit Hole wasn't *just* some hole in the ground. Iirc it was well appointed and had numerous rooms & food stuffs.
It was no starter hole. 😉
I would admit to thinking it would be a nice home.
Ask Peter Jackson how much it cost to build the place, he should know.
Bilbo was the richest Hobbit alive and his home was a mansion by Hobbit standards
f@ck renting and buying a house. I'm gonna buy the cheapest land I can find and then build my house.
Building a home can be just as expensive unfortunately
What I plan to do is to buy some piece of s**t shack to live in, then save money for a real house and lose as little money to the bank as humanly possible.
While, I know *not* everyone can do so (for a verity of reasons) why don't people live with the parents for a few extra years while they save up for a decent down payment on a suitable house?
It might crimp your lifestyle for a bit, but maybe you could turn it into a nice time with family learning family recipes 🧑🍳 & hanging out. 🤷♂️
I know this doesn't work if the young folk have to move to the *Big* city/cross country, etc. but *not* everyone does that.
@@larrysmith2655 I don't think they meant build as in hire a bunch of contractors to build it for me. But build as in using my own blood, sweat, and tears with the materials available on the land or that can be scavenged from around it.
YES!
Just watched the intro and feels si defeatist, how did uk going from slums to having affordable houses and then back to slums is possible, lack of oversight it, it can be done
the UK built horrible housing in the 70s to achieve that and then they started crumbling sooner than expected and nobody wants a crumbling home, on top of that they still take space.
Building an apartment or house is expensive and the costs may often rise during the project, while assets and barracks to store people when they are not working are cheap and try to keep costs under control. The current rules of the market economy recommend and encourage choosing the most cost-effective solution because it saves money, cuts corners and it allows the most optimal gain. The solution would be to correct and fix the rules, but at the same time we should still try to keep housing profitable for people and avoid skyrocketing prices.
I am of the idea we are going back to the Feudal economy with companies being the new land. Everything is company sized today, having houses being assets before homes is just an extension of that, labor laws will be next thing to go. The focus has already shifted away from community, we are not seeing because boomers are still alive but the new generations are not used to feel the place where they live as their own.
Small correction: the US politicians passed a law FORCING banks to give out bad loans. It was illegal to say no. Most banks went along and enjoyed the ride. A few chose to get out of mortgages all together.
Every American should be guaranteed a home. The need for everyone to have their own property is more important than someone's supposed right to own multiple properties.
I don't think the federal government should be able to hold land in the public trust while there are those in the public that are destitute and homeless. Give the homeless federal land, ffs. IDC if that means some crazy person is gonna be handed the redwoods, that's a hypothetical problem that a rational functioning society would be able to avoid, and if we couldn't and it did devolve to that, than we-the-people don't deserve that beauty anyways
good vid
Simple solution: tax landlords out of the market. Anyone who owns more than one flat/home gets to pay land taxt that rises exponentialy based on how much they own. This would give this God-forsaken West a breath of much needed air, because the fucking greed strangles us all.
The problem is that property owners are better organized, and funded which means they'll have the ear of the same politicians that tenants and borrowers need. If the people being hurt by this could organize referendums they might stand a chance.
Doesn't work though because the parasites just offload their increased taxes onto tenants along with every other expense. Vacancy taxes can work though - tax them so high they can't just sit on vacant properties, i.e. artificially restricting supply and creating more demand for what's left so they can jack up the rents. Better yet just ban anyone from owning more than 2 properties, and create penalties with teeth to deter the violators. Not just financial or even expropriation, but prison time.
I can't believe you guys are sliding left like this, i guess it kinda just proves how crazy irrational housing as an asset rather than a human right is
there is cheap real estate in the country but people dont want to live there, even with stable jobs
I know I don’t. Those cheap homes are either on land I have to pay rent for (which defeats the purpose of buying), or in dangerous neighborhoods (would rather rent and be safe), or are in such disrepair it’ll cost just as much to fix as it does to buy something better (and many repairs would need to be done before becoming habitable). It’s bullshit. I don’t want an investment. I want a place to live in until I die.
Let me tell you what nobody is going to tell you. Building wealth has never been a one person’s job especially if you are just starting. One of the best choices you can make for your life at this point is to be able to get someone who believes in your growth and will be willing to help you grow. Big thanks to Larysa Caba. I will always be grateful for everything you did.
I feel one Of the greatest challenges that we first timers face in the ma rket is that we end up losing all we have,making it difficult to find ourselves back to our feet. My biggest advice is to always seek the services of a professional just like I did when I ventured into it for the first time. Big thanks to Larysa Caba. I now make huge profits by weekly through her services while still learning to stand on my own.
I think she trades for everyone I meet. I met her twice at a meeting in Germany and after her lectures from Ella I had to personally ask her to be my financial advisor. she is definitely good.
I have never seen a trader as open and transparent as Larysa Caba with her clients. The way she decides to make a profit for her clients. she allows you to express your fears and she still rests your fears and that is my respect. I don't normally comment on videos, but this word should be included. she is really cool.
I just looked up her name online. she is licensed with credible certificates and has an amazing track record. Thank you for the message.
I will like to knw mre
Shelter being an economic asset to competed for with money is a far better prospect than the majority of human history where shelter was attained through bloody fights and wars. However I do think the amount of hording by real estate pros is out of control now. Literally, acre after acre across the world of land being unused for shelter, and just held as some private property stock that goes up in price over time
❤❤❤❤❤❤
ai video
!!!I just switched up my Roth IRA to 50% SCHD, 25% SCHX, 25% SCHG, and my Roth 401k is 70% vanguard S&P 500 index, 20% vanguard growth index, and 10% vanguard international index. Seeking best possible ways to grow $350k into $2m+ before retirement
Without a doubt! Ruth Ann Tsakonas is a trader who goes above and beyond. she has an exceptional skill for analyzing market movements and spotting profitable opportunities. Her strategies are meticulously crafted based on thorough research and years of practical experience.
how would you recommend i enter the crypto market? I am also looking at studying some traders and copying their strategy rather than investing myself and losing money emotionally. What's your take on this approach? and How can i reach her, if you don't mind me asking?
look up her name on the web for her website.
I've just looked up her full name on my browser and found her webpage without sweat, very much appreciate this.
The key to successful investing is to play the long game and realize that winning simply means staying in the game. The video You Suck at Investing on How Money Works explains this pretty well. Time in the Market almost always beats Timing the Market and most actively managed funds fail to beat the market over 90% of the time. You're probably better to just put your money in an index fund and forget about paying fees to a fund manager who will most likely fail you. Remember, anyone who promises to make you rich quickly can make you go broke just as fast.
Algorithm comment
blame unions. they need jobs for their workers. forcing housing into assets
What are you talking about?
What are you smoking?
Construction and associated industries like concrete always look like prime grounds for cartels.
Came for the history, left for the socialism