It's an ETF, you can buy as much or as little as you want. My understanding is that they take their money and sell options (covered calls) with at-the-money strike prices on NASDAQ. Each month, they pay out dividends, something like 1% per month (bit over 12% on a yearly basis). So if you park 100$, you get like a free dollar per month, or 12 per year.
It's not hugely popular because you pay short term gains taxes on the dividends, a lot of tech does better than 12%, the shares can decrease in value if NASDAQ goes down, and if you wanted to (and had the startup cash), you could do the exact same thing without paying the ETF fees - buy 100 shares of QQQ for 62k, then sell a covered call for a month out, rinse repeat
If you parked a million dollars in QYLD, you'd get about $120k per year (pretax) in exchange for your contribution to society of "having a spare million dollars"
The problem with selling your soul for something, as I'm hoping all these fucks find out, is that one day you wake up with neither your soul nor the thing you sold it for
George Conway had an interesting "fix" that gets around the constitutional obstacles where older justices are relegated to something like emeritus positions and new justices are appointed to the main bench to take their place
From what I could see, nurses were pushed to work in hazardous conditions as "heroes" and "essential". A cohort left because the risk/reward was bad in a situation where supply/demand was low, some then got huge pay bumps to be travel nurses.
In short: capital interests exploited nurses willing to work for non-monetary compensation (e.g. clapping, their own sense of compassion, etc). The nurses willing to demand more pay generally got it
That's the seat Kat Abughazaleh (sp?) is running for. And she Definitely doesn't take aipac money. In this environment, I think Dems are going to pay more attention to primaries this time around
I was going to send a DM to cowbee, but it may be worth knowng for others. I'm a bit older and may be a "normie" leftist with moderate anti-cap views and have unexamined prejudices about the USSR. I liked what I read from Lenin/Marx (one work each, i know!) but don't like the reality of what I know of Stalin so don't want that association. After reading some more, I'll reexamine the USSR prejudices. So thanks to cowbee and folks who didn't assume malice
Civil and Fair, so thanks. I'll also pay more attention to the instance in the future if only to not be so baffled. Even if folks consider the Soviets progressive for the time, my 2 cents is that tying modern anticapitalism to the realities of USSR, especially Stalinism, does a disservice to progressive movements and even Marxism. But as you say, it's a minority opinion, so I'll accept my downvotes. Thanks again
Because the Soviets were assholes. I didn't realize that would be controversial. I wish folks wouldn't restrict the concept of anti-capitalism to the ussr. Raised fist? Red and black?
It's true that some landlords would jack up rent rather than sell - especially as some people are stuck renting in a tighter market. Ideally you could separate corporate landlords from onesie-twosie landlords? A big issue is that landlords and banks are happy to artificially tighten the market with vacant housing. I think Vancouver Canada had a law that levied taxes on unoccupied housing - I should look into how that went
I've seen the idea floated that we jack up property taxes, exempting owner-occupied homes. I don't think it's that bad for seniors to downsize and increase housing liquidity and let people who want to get more out of local communities for their tax burden. We're facing a lot of resistance to taxes and our schools are getting disrupted by budget shortfalls. I'm happy to pay more because I have kids who use the parks, sidewalks, schools, library, etc. a lot of seniors use less and don't want to pay more.
So maybe low-but-nonzero property tax for owner-occupied, and high tax for landlords like me!
As other two have said. The carrying costs for banks is just too low to incentivize liquidity in housing supply. Put them on the market and watch home prices and rent fall
It's an ETF, you can buy as much or as little as you want. My understanding is that they take their money and sell options (covered calls) with at-the-money strike prices on NASDAQ. Each month, they pay out dividends, something like 1% per month (bit over 12% on a yearly basis). So if you park 100$, you get like a free dollar per month, or 12 per year.
It's not hugely popular because you pay short term gains taxes on the dividends, a lot of tech does better than 12%, the shares can decrease in value if NASDAQ goes down, and if you wanted to (and had the startup cash), you could do the exact same thing without paying the ETF fees - buy 100 shares of QQQ for 62k, then sell a covered call for a month out, rinse repeat