25-30 age group, UK based, low-mid income

My disposable income goes to: 10% salary sacrifice 30% travel + fun budget 40% Interest account with +5% AER (cash to buy a property, not LISA as I'm not sure if I'll buy it in the UK). 20% stock market + crypto

50% - ETFs (S&P500, IUKD for divs, (new) BNKS to make money on the recent fear).

30% Cash (I just sold my MSFT, GOOGL, AMZN again for ~15% profits during the last run, keeping it for the next dip). Usually I keep 5-15% of cash

15% NIO, ATVI, WAF (high risk high reward) 5% BTC

Here's a summary article on rent control by the author of this study which suggests that rent control in SF raised rents relative to other cities due to undersupply of housing caused by rent control.

I spent one minute looking at titles in forthcoming issues of American Economic Review.

Economists are still asking normative questions using theory. Here is one example: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20211437&&from=f

It is important to also do positive research to test the theory and offer refinements.

But to claim economists don't ask normative questions - what should be done - is to ignore the work of modern economic theorists.

My favourite line of normative research is being done by Susan Athey. She writes theory on the normatively-best ways to do adaptive sampling and machine learning.

Then those of us with regular brains go test her theories.

Eh, you should Google it instead of listening to people on Reddit.

It is a periodic filing that companies file, just in case. Many companies file shelf offerings and never make any offerings.

Just recently AerSale Corp filed one on March 7th, so did Banc of California, Citigroup, Green Giant, SunOpta, Vapothrm, Verona Pharm and others.

Tesla filed one last time in 2019, Apple filed one in October 2021, Google filed one on February 2022, Microsoft did on December 2021.

https://preview.redd.it/9aer785oifla1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=8f2e94829ffb314f5302aca2a3161f4d0dbc3c1d

Should I invest in the stock market as a problem gambler?
I know this is only something I can answer myself really, but perhaps there are other people who found themselves in the same situation as me, and can offer some advice.
I was a problem gambler since I was a teenager up until my early 30's. It consumed my entire life. I would spend hours upon hours every single day gambling. I now haven't had a single bet in over 2 years.
Being gambling free, I have now started to build up a decent amount of savings and I want to hedge this against inflation. One solution would be to get into the real estate market but that would be too much of a hassle for me and includes too much bureaucracy. So I'm excluding that as an option.
If I were sensible I could just put into and index fund, however, I have reservations about me being sensible. I believe that any loss would make me take my money and place it on individual stocks/shares to recoup the loss. Any profit will have me thinking why didn't I just pick the stocks/shares I like and gain even more profits. Either way I just don't think I could put it into an index fund and leave it.
I could invest it in single stocks/shares but I know for a fact it would consume my life and I would be essentially gambling again.
Therefore, I'm looking at putting my money into a 2-year fixed rate bond which would return 3.9% AER.
Given my past as a gambler, would this community agree with my decision on the fixed rate bond?
Thanks for taking the time to read and for any advice!

Legend aer

>Having strong priors on where we land on it is, studying the income tax elasticity(which what it basically is) is very serious work that gets published in AER/ECMT/JPE..

Sure, but certainly not in the spirit of Laffer or laymen who like to bring up his theories, they don't

Having strong priors on where we land on it is, studying the income tax elasticity(which what it basically is) is very serious work that gets published in AER/ECMT/JPE..

I have flown in Europe, many times.

They only have a handful of companies, operating under many names.

IAG is the company, their airlines include British Airways, Iberia, British Midland, Iberia Express, Vueling, Aer Lingus, Level, Air Nostrum, Sun Air, and Air Europa.

Lufthansa is the company, the airlines include Air Dolomiti, Austrian Airlines, Brussels Airlines, Eurowings, CityLine, Edelweiss Air, AeroLogic , and SunExpress.

Air France is the same as KLM, and they own stakes in a ton of little regional carriers.

Then you have RyanAir, the airline who's trying to make Spirit like a carrier that only operates business class jets, and EasyJet.

It's not really any different than the US, other than in the US, our airlines operate a SHITLOAD more flights.

If you're in the UK, Barclays blue rainy day saver has 5.12% aer on balances up to £5000.

1. How much data do you want suggesting rent control is hot garbage.
2. Do you have any evidence whatsoever suggesting rent control has ever worked throughout all of human history??

At the moment I am receiving around $25-30 interest per month, Is that one of the highest I can get? (3.75% AER)

I just flew Newark to Dublin round trip for $400. Aer Lingus even fed us a full meal on each trip.

This is the big one. The small bears suck because by the time you try to short them, its already recovered. If anything the small ones aer very dangerous.

I don't know what the status is on Amazon, but renting or leasing aircraft is very common. AerCap owns about 3000 aircraft.

When I was in, the licensed financial advisors were in an office called the “SFAC” or Servicemember and Family Assistance Center. This is we’re I went to get my credit from 400 to 780. This is we’re I fought out I should use VR&E instead of the GI Bill. This is where I went for my yearly AER Grants and loans when something came up.

And sadly, it’s always empty because most soldiers have never heard of it. Also, they used to give out $50 gas card to any servicemember of any rank, once a week. You just have to sign for it. The scary thing is you can see who else signed for one, and there is hardly anyone under E7 — so the highest paid members are the ones who know and use these benefits.

I'll go through each of the papers you linked.

1. https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.102.7.3111. This paper does not indicate that "minimum wages may not appreciably improve the outcome of workers" as you claimed.
   It indicates that household spending increases and it also indicates that increased spending is mostly a result of "a small number of households" purchasing vehicles. Increased purchasing power is a positive effect of higher wages and one could argue that the increase in vehicle purchases helps demonstrate that.
2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272719300052. This abstract says: "We find that targeted individuals experienced reductions in income growth and economic mobility." and "We emphasize that the context of the Great Recession is central for interpreting our empirical findings" which is a rather large qualifier. Furthermore, the other links you provided actually contradict this one (#4 and #5 for example). I think it's fair to say that this paper does not prove that "minimum wages may not appreciably improve the outcome of the workers" as you claimed.
3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304393217301411. This abstract says: "We find that MPCs from negative income shocks are larger than for positive shocks." This is fairly common sense and does not indicate that "minimum wages may not appreciably improve the outcome of workers" as you claimed.
4. https://www.epi.org/publication/ib341-raising-federal-minimum-wage/. This one is great because it totally contradicts your argument. From the report: "The immediate benefits of a minimum-wage increase are in the boosted earnings of the lowest-paid workers, but its positive effects would far exceed this extra income. Recent research reveals that, despite skeptics’ claims, raising the minimum wage does not cause job loss. In fact, throughout the nation, minimum-wage increases would create jobs. Like unemployment insurance benefits or tax breaks for low- and middle-income workers, raising the minimum wage puts more money in the pockets of working families when they need it most, thereby augmenting their spending power. Economists generally recognize that low-wage workers are more likely than any other income group to spend any extra earnings immediately on previously unaffordable basic needs or services."
5. https://www.congress.gov/116/meeting/house/108844/witnesses/HHRG-116-ED00-Wstate-ReichM-20190207.pdf. Did you actually read this one? From the report: "These state-of-the-art studies find even less evidence that minimum wage policies have had negative effects on employment. Other studies, focused on the high minimum wages already in place in a number of U.S. cities, obtain similar findings." Also from the report: "These results make sense when one considers that minimum wages can offset employer power that suppresses wages, that small price adjustments in a few industries largely shift the costs of minimum wages from employers to affluent consumers who can pay higher prices, and the stimulus effects of increasing purchasing power among groups that spend most or all of their income on consumption goods. High minimum wages might seem to be more of a threat in industries that can relocate to other countries. However, the proportion of low-wage employment in these industries has become quite small. A single national floor for all workers is likely to be much more beneficial than carve-outs for some groups or regional differentials. The advantages of a single national floor are likely to be especially higher in the lowest-wage states and could generate dynamic advantages to the economies of those states. Finally, new research is demonstrating that minimum wages have beneficial effects on the health and well-being of children and adults. These benefits should be included in any assessment of minimum wage policy. They are likely also to have longer-term economics benefits as well.

Here you go.

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.102.7.3111

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272719300052

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304393217301411

Ok. Have you reproduced an AER with newer evidence?

Not really evident in the data.

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.102.7.3111

For those who don't know, AerSale ($ASLE) sells aftermarket commercial jet aircraft engines.

These are the SEC filings for the insider trades:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001754170/000120919122061739/0001209191-22-061739-index.htm

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001754170/000120919122061738/0001209191-22-061738-index.htm

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001754170/000120919122061737/0001209191-22-061737-index.htm

He tweeted in April that no more sales were planned. I guess plans changed. He's sold like $14B in shared since then.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519850299757846530?s=20&t=d00Y7d8AerXDMLc_kmGflw

Started investing in December of 2020. YTD I’m up 31%. Before last year I moved most of my holdings into fertilizer, oil, and $AER. And was able to sell pretty close to the top. Recently I’ve bought into blue chip tech stocks like $msft and $meta $intc. Since they dropped so low. And put the rest into $SCHD and other dividend paying stocks $MO $DG $O $FRT. Still took allot of losses the last year -800$ on doge, -400 on Boeing,- 300 on $T

Housing is one of the most over regulated sectors in the economy, along with healthcare. The empirical research proves it:

https://realestate.wharton.upenn.edu/working-papers/the-impact-of-zoning-on-housing-affordability/

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/hier1948.pdf

https://faculty.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Regulation-and-Housing-Supply-1.pdf

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/mac.20170388

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1154146

https://www.jstor.org/stable/29739015

https://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu/pdf/QR_RegAER0406.pdf

https://www.nber.org/papers/w10124

Want more?

Go back to AER. Needing higher level approval isn’t really a big deal. I used to work for the Navy equivalent of AER and occasionally had to call AERHQ when a soldier would come in and request assistance. Usually it meant a 15 minute conversation with AER after I’d talked to the soldier about the issue and what the long term plan was.

If you’ve already started Repayment on the previous loans, you can also ask them to stop them temporarily. They won’t be able to do anything about your Dec 1 pay, but they might still be able to make adjustments to the mid-December pay.

I won't lie I am because I wanted to translate out of army. I'll lay out all the details for you tho.

In August my husband went on a (very) extended field exercise in which we discovered our family care plan's husband was deploying and therefore was moving back to our home state.

I bought this to my COC who had me move my daughter under my DEERS as primary and filed my BAH paperwork. I was then authorized to move off post (I had been in the barracks and as my husband ETS'd in November) it made sense anyway. At this time we also prepped our house for the market, contracted with our realtors made necessary repairs etc. I received an AER loan for my deposit and first month's rent.

In September my daughter arrived at my duty station, I moved to my off-post house with her and also started her in daycare. The daycare was fine with waiting for BAH which I was told would be around the end of October/mid-November.

Mid October I noted I still hadn't had any BAH and notified my first line who then informed the the paperwork had been kicked out. (No biggie they just refilled) I received another AER loan at that time to pay that month's rent. At this time our house also hit the market but with the market crash we were struggling to break even. We went under contract near the end of October closing mid December (still to come). At that point we then decided that we had to stop paying our mortgage (as the house was sold anyway) and to use my husband's BAH to pay for our apartment at my duty station. And we used his next check to pay back the daycare for September and get a little ahead.

In October my husband also secured a job in Texas and was told to just get in state to start the background check and would start when it cane back (which we learned when he got here was a dull fingerprint FBI check estimated to take 8wk, job offer is still in place). I was then informed by my SL that the reason my BAH was incorrect was because my husband was claiming me as a civilian spouse still even though we filed the paperwork when I entered the service last year.

He then filed the paperwork to get it amended (adjusting from with dependents to without) the army subsequently held his checks and I refilled my paperwork.

He then ETS'd in November, we checked his LES and the BAH has been corrected but mine has not. But I can no longer wait to pay my bills, so while this might be normal filling times, for me it's too late because I've already been waiting. He used his last check to drive here (army has to pay us back) via uhaul (army move was 2/3m wait and we believed he had a job starting that month). Bringing us to now.

They won't give me a grant, only loans. I'm at over $3000 for AER, capping me out of local approval. I also have already used it twice this year. Anything more requires out of state approval which isn't likely to get.

Have you tried AER?
They may be able to provide a low interest loan or a grant.

I've been using AER. I now owe AER over $3000.

My husband only got in state after being released from active duty 1wk ago and we owe fees from when he wasn't available to work. If I withdraw her from daycare it will stop him from starting his job (background check pending) when he can as spots are hard to get.

I know there are some space ETF's around. I never looked into any of those so i dont know if they aer any good.

Housing prices need to decline. If raising interest rates is the way to do it let it be so. The house we were looking at buying for 270k when covid hit is now 400k. 15 years ago the apartment i rented for $470 per month when i was in college is now $1800 per month.

If house prices and rent keep going up like they have been then people will have to live 2-3 families per house. For those of you that own houses and feel like its a good thing your house price went up it is not. The only way you win is if you sell but then where aer you going to live. Oh and if you don't sell you are getting screwed by paying crazy taxes on your over priced house. My state had such a huge surplus they gave back money in 2021 and alot of it had to do with the home prices going up so much.

>Which you can easily remedy by leaving into higher taxes on the wealthy.

Citation needed

>Go for it. We've had a slowdown in growth over the past few decades we also reduced upper tax brackets.

That doesn’t control for confounding variables

But here you go:

https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v49y2021i1p3-40.html

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.20130570

https://www.nber.org/papers/w27058

https://www.nber.org/papers/w13264

I have more if you want

How DARE you threaten our AerBNBs!

Digging into the data in the paper, it looks like their calculations are based on the pre-2017 tax act increase of the standard deduction to $12,000.

Their calculations are also affected by the 15% rate dropping to 12%, the 25% rate dropping to 22%, the 28% rate dropping to 24%, etc.

See page 253. https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20141751

I didn't read the whole paper, so maybe they accounted for this...but it also seems like using the single rate rather than the married filing jointly rate isn't necessarily the most accurate approach, as the majority of homes are owned by married couples.

Here is the math: https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20141751

The idea that a repeal of the MID would result in a 4% decline in home prices comes from this American Economic Review paper: https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20141751

The key table is table 6, on page 21/38. The baseline house prices measure is 3.052, while the experimental value in a model without MID is 2.925, or 4.2% lower than the baseline value. As the author explains:

> As the table illustrates, when the mortgage interest deduction is eliminated (column 2), house prices fall by 4.2 percent because, ceteris paribus, the cost of ownership has risen. At the same time, rent increases slightly, and the equilibrium house price-to-rent ratio decreases. Since house prices are now lower and ownership is now cheaper relative to renting, the homeownership rate rises from 65 percent to 70 percent.

Not really, you don't need to read the math to understand the takeaways. Follow #econtwitter and you'll eventually see people talking about papers. Or look at papers in the top journals (AER, QJE etc.)

Points were transferred to United from Chase, but I also earn a lot of United miles from work travel. 77k per business class ticket via United for Aer Lingus flights. 30k for saver economy flights on United on the return.

they aer fucc for sure

Corporate income tax hurts workers and consumers the most: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20130570

https://www.nber.org/papers/w27058

https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/5293/the-direct-incidence-of-corporate-income-tax-on-wages

https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedkrr/rrwp07-01.html

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00036846.2014.995367

Learn economics before spreading your ignorance. There’s no evidence to suggest that corporate taxes increase growth. They reduce investment and wages while increasing prices.

User Report| | | | :--|:--|:--|:-- Total Submissions|4|First Seen In WSB|3 years ago Total Comments|85|Previous DD| Account Age|3 years|[^scan ^comment ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_comment&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20comment%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20comment%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)|[^scan ^submission ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_submission&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20submission%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20submission%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.) Vote Spam|Click to Vote|Vote Approve|Click to Vote

I’m starting a small position against the VIXY. Puts your hands in the a’er!

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/publications/aer/aer_1983_bernanke_nonmonetary_effects.pdf?utm_source=direct_download

I read the 1983 piece that won him the prize. It's a classic case of 'whats persuasive isnt original and whats original isn't persuasive'. He explains the correlation between financial crises and wider economic recessions/depressions by bringing up the works of various economists, whose conclusions he later ignores with almost no explanation.

Without mentioning him he brings up Keynes' view that refusal on the part of lenders to make loans and refusal on the part of borrowers to take on debt is to do with uncertainty, and can, via the paradox of thrift, lead to banks hoarding cash and an absence of demand.

He cites Fisher's debt deflation hypothesis for the strong correlation (as bank assets decline in value, their liabilities remain fixed, and the effect is to force banks to liquidate their loan portfolio - causing further bankruptcies, further liquidations and further declines in debt quality.

He cites loanable funds theory by arguing that as depositors go broke or withdraw their funds in panic, the banks which hold them must deleverage. According to this view it is the shortage of deposits that causes a lack of funds to be available for loans, not the economic misgivings leading to a shortage of lending and subsequently deposits. In today's America this theory would make little sense, since banks do not lend out deposits. They don't require deposits to make loans and a shortage of deposits would only be a concern if it meant a large enough shortage of reserves that cash would become unavailable at ATMs. In a modern crisis this would never be allowed to happen because CBs make all the reserves necessary to keep banks liquid available to them. A bank with a shortage of reserves can just borrow at the discount window.

He discusses the fact that in a crisis with high levels of private debt of more and more dubious quality (NPLs increase), collateral becomes crucially important, but all except the best collateral loses its value in a crisis. The combination of worsening debt quality with a demand for superior collateral means that banks will stop lending to all but the most creditworthy institutions. The refusal to finance mortgages then causes a housing price crash and that means a wave of defaults and reposessions, and the elongated period of time that it can take for that housing stock to be sold and the housing market to recover.

He mentions the liquiidity problem of banks having to pay back deposits by liquidating their loan portfolios at fire-sale prices, which can turn a panic into a bank run,

He mentions Friedman and Schwartz's conclusions that the depression was caused by the fed's failure to expand the money supply, causing deflation.

Without going into detail he cites Minsky, who discussed the financial sector's tendency towards looser collateral, higher leverage, lower standards and increasing instability. Minsky explained the depression as the aftermath of the 'ponzi' stage of a financially driven business cycle. In the prior period, debt had been issued without proper underwriting, and even the interest on most of the debt would never be paid off. The effect of deleveraging was then supposedly to magnify the negative effects onto the wider economy.

There's nothing wrong with summarising the work of other economists, but it's almost the entirety of his paper, and the part that's his creation is extremely uncompelling.

By implication he sets aside all those other ideas, clear as they may be, and emphasizes a very fuzzy alternative idea (CCI): banks choose to make loans in a simple 'pay me back by X' manner or in a flexible way. They prefer the former but only when good collateral is available. if it isn't they'd rather have a specially organized loan issued to ensure he makes all his payments. However in a depression, the 'flexible/catered' method becomes much more costly: one must filter the good borrowers from bad. Since neither form of loan is feasible in this environment, there is a shortage of credit even to firms in a position to repay.

His evidence for his theory consists of a regression based on very sccant data (the inter-war years) where he concedes to using a host of dummy variables.

Then he tells us we should attach the most weight to his theory (CCI) because it's the only one that's somewhat in keeping with the rational actor, market-constrained approach. Not only does nobody believe in the rational utilty maximiser hypothesis (especially not during a bank run), but he rejects it as unrealistic himself (and says we ought to base our policy on it regardless). I could understand his mentioning the assumption it in '83, but to win a Nobel Prize today on the basis of a theory whose assumptions are universally held to be wrong?

Last of all, rather than address the bizarre claim that banks withhold credit during a panic because it suddenly becomes very expensive to evaluate the creditworthiness of the borrower (rather than because there are far fewer creditworthy borrowers in a major recession), the Nobel Committee Assessment becomes a bit ridiculous, by addressing his character as though it were an achievement and as though there were no contention about how the GFC was dealt with...

>Currently, Chairman Bernanke has a higher approval rating in America then the American President, particularly with women. Chairman Bernanke has an alluring combination of strength with gentleness. His sensuous image projects his love for life, the embodiment of grace while facing adversity. It is evident that he loves his country, his people and his job.
Although his job may seem like in the words of writer, Elizabeth Gilbert on genius, “ trying to swallow the sun.” This is a whole lot to deal with for one mere mortal… Chairman Bernanke’s obvious reverence for women, children and animals, and his ability with sports is intoxicating to American women.

The Fed won't listen to Europe cause this has already played out. In 1927 the European central banks lobbied the Fed to lower rates because of their debt crisis and that caused the bubble in 1929 that didn't end well.

You can read it for yourself from the Fed from 1935:

"It has been stated that mistakes committed by the federal reserve system from 1927 to 1929 were due to the Federal Reserve Board. The 1927 easy money policy was initiated by the New York reserve bank to encourage domestic business and strengthen European exchanges."

"The policy above outlined was originated by the New York Federal Reserve Bank, or more particularly by its distinguished governor, the late Benjamin Strong. ... His ideas began to develop in the spring of 1927, but his program was not shaped until after conferences with representatives of the three great European central banks, who visited the United States in the summer of that year."

And boomers think the younger generation aer lazy. They are just completely disinfranchised when they are poorer than their parents buy more educated etc

With the value of the pound going down, investing in some Irish companies may be wise. AER & RYAAR are companies I’m watching.

I’m not sure what the cut off for ultra rich is and I would not necessarily jump at 90%. Especially when it’s not clear if that is 90% on income, property, capital gains, property, or some combination?

Either way, whatever we do is going to have a negative impact on growth. It would seem that maybe a combination of raising taxes and cutting government spending would be in order. As you are generally suggesting. My presumption is Congress doesn’t really want to do that because they want something other than Congress to be to blame for inflation when in reality it is almost entirely their fault. Even the energy prices could have been mitigated had Congress made better decisions on energy laws relative to Executive energy policy.

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.100.3.763

>We've now had more admissions for Covid in the UK in the first nine months of 2022 than we had in the whole of 2021 or 2020, and, again, NOBODY KNOWS.

https://twitter.com/1goodtern/status/1572111394929098752?t=tRwlUjwbQzdKyHsAErKIaw&s=19

Many times I tell you that you're in a cover up

Spy 110

I drove to California!! From Tampa

https://imgur.com/a/AerKAp6/

Ok, but when you say 'Hold physical" isn't that the same as me saying "buying spot?" Am i using wrong terminology? I did simulated trade and it shows USD/Yen in my account of the amount I bought. It shows a slight drop since I bought it an hour ago but that doesn't matter to me, I assume, since if I had sold a futures contract the price movements on my spot don't matter, if I hold to contract expiration, correct?

Here is the screen I would buy on on IBKR.

https://i.imgur.com/4AER3xK.png

Yeah that’s just proving aer7’s point tho. Living on 20K is extremely difficult and this maxing out a 401K on a 60K salary is also extremely difficult

Imagine thinking nerd is an insult on a gambling subreddit. Since you can't be bothered to google something as simple as how your confetti casino app works, or you're too retarded to pick up a book, here's a Jon Stewart video even a normie could sit through.

If you can't afford Apple TV cause your entire $4,000 portfolio is caught up in SPY FDs, no worries retard. It is 7 days free trial so you don't have to beg your mommy for her credit card.

Ok, I figured it was some stupid shit like that.

James Poterba is a titan of economic research. Possibly the finest alive today. He's been published in AER more than 30 times, has a triple digit H-index, and has more brain power in his left nutsack than you and your fifty closest relatives combined, though admittedly this last isn't saying much because brain power clearly does not run in your family.

There is no reason to cast aspersions on him, nor are you qualified to do so. He is an academic of the highest caliber, and the implication he's not going to call a recession because it would be inconvenient for Biden is founded on nothing other than your deranged fever dreams.

E: looks like the reply was removed, but this dumb fuck literally compared Jim Fucking Poterba to...Kevin Hassett? Who?

Let's just ask Blaine Gabbard for a correction to something Tom Brady said while we're at it.

>*Boeing Nears 787 Dreamliner Order -- Sources Say -- WSJ >*Boeing Deal With AerCap Could Be Announced as Soon as Tuesday -- Sources Say -- WSJ >*Boeing 787 Dreamliner Deal Comes Amid Farnborough Air Show -- WSJ $BA

^*Walter ^Bloomberg ^@DeItaone ^at ^2022-07-19 ^06:27:30 ^EDT-0400

I know UK and Ireland gave up on clot shot requirements.

South America too.

Aer Cunniligus might have some deals to Ireland...

Philly to Zurich for $522 / $642 after tax

https://www.theflightdeal.com/2022/07/03/aer-lingus-philadelphia-zurich-switzerland-522-basic-economy-642-regular-economy-roundtrip-including-all-taxes/

I live far from Philly but that’s a sexy deal. Switzerland so nice. Zurich expensive but if you’re not a brokey like me enjoy

Assuming Putin's war and inflation end fairly soon, like before November, all of these stocks aer great buys, but my favorite mis always AAPL, followed my own deep value picks selling at less than half their true value: PARA, WBD and SWKS.

Assuming Putin's war and inflation end fairly soon, like before November, all of these stocks aer great buys, but my favorite mis always AAPL, followed my own deep value picks selling at less than half their true value: PARA, WBD and SWKS.

Agreed on the most value being from points transfer to travel partners - but have to disagree on using them only for business or first class. You can use points to maximize where and how often to travel.

I find being strategic in which point system and which airline to transfer to pays off the most. Ex. AMEX gives a 1.6 to 1 ratio for AeroMexico (60% boost), or Chase currently has promo 1.3 to 1 for British Airlines, which also shares the point system with Iberia and Aer Lingus, altogether covering flights through most of Europe.

Some airlines (like Iberia above) also price rewards flights based on distance vs real time ticket value. Navigating these systems, you can go on multiple international trips for minimal cost just from using points you earn from normal spending.

AER

WRONG, inflation is global not a US thing, we are much better off that europe and some other places, but the big problem is PUTIN PUTIN PUTIN nothing to do with the US government or Biden. THis is also an election year when the GOP desperately wants to blame Biden for inflation, so they and their donors in big oil and Big Ag and food processing are happy to max the gouging and block any windfall profits tax bill to punish gas gougers.

The moment Putin announces peace talks and really means it, oil will drop by 30% fast and within weeks inflation could be gone. So we should both rally behind Ukraine and also be willing to compromise on a partial victory for Putin in Dombass. At that point, grain and fertlizer shipments can continue.

As for cryptos, that was always a fake bubble and should have collapsed a long time ago. I do not see cryptos as related to anything but itself, and they aer definitely n ot "the future" or "here to stay", that was all hype. Once Terra collapsed then the Vinklevoss's started getting out everyone should have followed. Jim Cramer just celebrated getting his money out of ETH. Just the fact that would celebrate that means the whole crypto system is on the verge of complete collapse and many wont be able to get their money out.

Oh wow I upset someone so much I’m living in their head rent free.

Let me guess, it’s not Trump’s fault at all? 🤡

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20140913

>Abstract
>
>The US economy has performed better when the president of the United States is a Democrat rather than a Republican, almost regardless of how one measures performance. For many measures, including real GDP growth (our focus), the performance gap is large and significant. This paper asks why. The answer is not found in technical time series matters nor in systematically more expansionary monetary or fiscal policy under Democrats. Rather, it appears that the Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior total factor productivity (TFP) performance, a more favorable international environment, and perhaps more optimistic consumer expectations about the near-term future. (JEL D72, E23, E32, E65, N12, N42)

See, look and read what words you can you fucking mongoloid.

And you don't have to be a republican to be ignorant.

Your claim:

>And at least republicans had a growing economy, improving trade deficit, and no supply shortages.

The evidence to the contrary:

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20140913

>Abstract
>
>The US economy has performed better when the president of the United States is a Democrat rather than a Republican, almost regardless of how one measures performance. For many measures, including real GDP growth (our focus), the performance gap is large and significant. This paper asks why. The answer is not found in technical time series matters nor in systematically more expansionary monetary or fiscal policy under Democrats. Rather, it appears that the Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior total factor productivity (TFP) performance, a more favorable international environment, and perhaps more optimistic consumer expectations about the near-term future. (JEL D72, E23, E32, E65, N12, N42)

So, obviously not.

​

>All supply shortages can be traced to some stupid regulation and none of them have come from Republicans.

Really? US Policy is what drives raw material shortages in the EU, Taiwan, and China? I'd love to hear the logic behind how we wrote laws that directly influence the manufacturing of products on the other side of the fucking planet.

The only reason Trump had a "growing econmy" was because it was still seeing the effects of recovery from the Obama administration. Every republican president for the last 40 years has left office with an economic situation that is worse than when they went into office.

Ponzienomics? Is that like reaganomics and de-regulating the economy so we just buy all our shit from China?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/23/investing/stock-market-election-trump-biden/index.html

>That’s partially because many economic expansions have died during Republican administrations. Ten of the last 11 recessions, going back to the 1950s, started during a GOP-run White House. The only exception was President Jimmy Carter, who presided over a period of weak growth and high inflation driven in large part by high oil prices.

​

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20140913

>Abstract
>
>The US economy has performed better when the president of the United States is a Democrat rather than a Republican, almost regardless of how one measures performance. For many measures, including real GDP growth (our focus), the performance gap is large and significant. This paper asks why. The answer is not found in technical time series matters nor in systematically more expansionary monetary or fiscal policy under Democrats. Rather, it appears that the Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior total factor productivity (TFP) performance, a more favorable international environment, and perhaps more optimistic consumer expectations about the near-term future. (JEL D72, E23, E32, E65, N12, N42)

AER

AerCap Holdings (AER)

Aircraft Leasing Company

June 16 2023 47.5/50 Strangle ($14 or less)

$3.1B worth of planes are currently in Russia. Russia has no intent to return those planes and are now rumored to be cannibalizing planes for parts to keep other planes running.

AER filed an insurance claim for those planes. If the claim goes through, we're back in the 68-72 range, if the claim is denied and all the subsequent lawsuits finalized, back down to 28-32 range.

What the play on AER

Aircraft Rental Ticker: AER

AER

AER

But there are only really two manufactures. Boeing and airbus.
They just received a big order today from

British Airways owner IAG to order 50 Boeing 737 MAX jets.

KEY POINTS British Airways owner IAG said on Thursday it has agreed to order 50 Boeing 737 MAX jets for delivery between 2023 and 2027. The order is worth $6.25 billion at list prices, though the company said it had negotiated a substantial discount, as is typical in the industry. The order from a top-tier customer is an important signal to the market at a time when Boeing faces an increasingly high-stakes battle to win certification of the largest MAX variant.

IAG, which owns Ireland's Aer Lingus and Spain's Iberia and Vueling in addition to British Airways, also has a further 100 purchase options as part of the deal

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/05/19/british-airways-owner-iag-to-order-50-boeing-737-max-jets.html

I don't want to be ruled as "off Topic" by engaging in the rich paying their part, but if you ask many economists, including Obama's chief economic advisor Christina Romer, professor at UC Berkeley (obviously not a righty), if we raise the tax rate, we will get less in tax revenue. Here is her paper published in a peer-reviewed journal: https://eml.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/RomerandRomerAERJune2010.pdf . Right now, the federal government has the highest corporate tax revenue in history, more than was estimated if we kept the old rates. When we lower personal income tax rates, we have increased revenues, so if revenue is the goal, we should leave tax rates where they are at. Romer finds a "strong negative relationship between tax changes and investment" and that "a tax increase of 1% of GDP lowers GDP by about 3%", meaning less jobs, lower pay and lower revenue to tax.

Earnings today!

Pre-market: $WMT $HD $JD $SE $AER $ON $IHS $JBI

After hours: $KEYS $DLO $DOCS

I bought AER calls right before EOD and I have never heard of them before in my life.

Earnings this week.

$NU $TME $TTWO $TSEM $DNA $WIX $YOU $WMT $HD $JD $SE $KEYS $AER $ONON $DOCS $CSCO $LOW $TGT $SNPS $ZIM $CINT $VFC $PANW $GRAB $BJ $WMS $DCK $KSS $FLO $VIPS $DE $BAH $RLX $FL

Earnings next week.

$NU $TME $TTWO $TSEM $DNA $WIX $YOU $WMT $HD $JD $SE $KEYS $AER $ONON $DOCS $CSCO $LOW $TGT $SNPS $ZIM $CINT $VFC $PANW $GRAB $BJ $WMS $DCK $KSS $FLO $VIPS $DE $BAH $RLX $FL

It was actually ineffective and ended up harming many minorities by mismatching them with academic institutions they otherwise would not have been qualified to attend.

California banned AA in their university system, and saw improvements in minority STEM field attrition and graduation. Many minority university students would be better off attending a less rigorous institution but still graduating with a lucrative STEM degree. Instead they are dropping out or changing majors to less competitive liberal arts degrees at a greater rate.

Source: https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20130626

The U.S. economy performs better under Democrats

The U.S. economy performs better, statistically, under Democrats.

I will be messaging you in 6 hours on 2022-05-04 19:20:27 UTC to remind you of this link

CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.

^(Parent commenter can ) ^(delete this message to hide from others.)

|^(Info)|^(Custom)|^(Your Reminders)|^(Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|

Nah it definitely says AER!

> Hi, I just opened a savings account and dumped some money in it for next year - it's showing as having a 0.1% AER

Why is there AER in a bank account? AER is the annual expense ratio of a mutual fund or ETF investment fund.

Do you mean APR?

The extra smooth brains aer out tonight

Yea they're making commissions off those links

Have you read their top values for points?

• Book Delta flights to Europe and ANA first class through Virgin Atlantic
• many routes from the East Coast of the U.S. to Dublin on Aer Lingus
• Fly round-trip to Madrid on Iberia
• New York-JFK – Casablanca (CMN) in Royal Air Maroc business class
• You can fly the newer first class suites on the A380 for 85,000 Membership Rewards if you book Singapore (SIN) to Sydney (SYD)

https://thepointsguy.com/guide/redeeming-american-express-membership-rewards-maximum-value/

Seems to me if you really want that 2 cent value you have to spend hours shopping around and not be set on going to any particular destination.

AER - company which lost 100 plains in Russia ! Stocks down …. Watching for purchase

Don't even need to do that, Chase pays 1.5% AER in the UK.

​

I'm bullish on cash, believe it or not. Has worked very well for me so far this year.

Al and aer are both large aircraft leasing companies

AER

Disagree. Sovereign seizures are not covered by any of them. So they are fine. AerCap stands on its own.

Is your AER play related to this post?

AER

It already dropped once to $43 in the last two weeks. But all the Russian airlines do have time to return the aircrafts until 28th of march i think. If you want to find out which leasing company has the highest exposure, you should get the serial number of each plane and get the location and the owner.

Otherwise you can gamble by buying puts on e.g. AER if you really think they won't return it. Side note: Russian bond holders have been paid back 100%, even though the market expected them to default, so at some point it seems the Russians are still respecting business contracts. I mean they haven't even turned off the gas pipeline to Europe, even though their stocks got delisted everywhere. I would love to buy Gazprom at that price tbh, easily 10x in 10 years .

Imagine being so limited in intelligence that you gloss over every single other factor and form of greed for political purposes. Try cracking open an economics textbook or an issue of the AER for once. You might learn something.

AER but i assume you are way too late for that parry

AerCap $2.4B 152 aircrafts

SMBC Aviation $1.3B 34 aircrafts

Avolon €320 14 aircrafts

Or AER

BUILDING A PREEMINENT NICKEL EXPLORATIO​N COMPANY

SPC Nickel Corp. is a new Canadian public corporation focused on exploring for Ni-Cu-PGMs within the world class Sudbury Mining Camp. The Company is currently exploring its key 100% owned exploration projects Aer-Kidd and Lockerby East both located in the heart of the historic Sudbury Mining Camp and holds an option to acquire a 100% interest in the Janes project located approximately 50 km NE of Sudbury. Recently, the Company acquired a large land package covering more than 43,000 hectares (430 km2) on the highly-prospective Muskox Intrusion, located in Nunavut. The Muskox Intrusion is one of the last undeveloped camp-scale Nickel-Copper-Platinum Group Metals (PGM) prospects in the world. The Company is focused on advancing its assets with a vision of growing to a pre-eminent North American nickel exploration company.

$spc nickel corp

Add this to your question too! Fidelity and other brokers have the ability to lend out shares without permission

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-347/115806/20190913171623872_AER%20Advisors%20Inc%20et%20al%20v%20Fidelity%20Brokerage%20Services%20LLC%20-%20Petition%20for%20Writ.pdf

NOT GONNA LIE.. THIS IS deja vu FOR MOST BOOMERS" COLD WAR MEMORIES>
THEY AER ALSO THE RICHEST GENERATION OF AMERICA