When it is easy bull markets, I go heavy on growth stocks. When the market is bear, I go heavy on dividends. Right now though there is a high beta turmoil, so I have a mix of both. My IRA is also set up as more od a “leave this alone” investment. My etrade account has my “fuck around and find out” money. I mention this because it is hard to directly compare the two. So far my dividends have strongly out performed the growth stocks, but only in the last 3 months or so has the gap widened. I credit it to 2 specific ones that are getting me 30%-ish yields with stable prices. They are also new etf’s, so the hedge money is still strong before the stripping gets to its prices. I mentioned in a post lower that that my little under 30k is netting me 800/month. Honestly it is paying a higher yield than renting out my condo is getting me.

It is also called ‘dividend stripping’.

Also yes. The more professional name is ‘dividend capture strategy’. More work, worth the pay off, do all you can to avoid commissions and fees.

Little under 30k in higher risk dividend. Bring in about 800 a month.

I have a mix of large cap, small cap growth stocks, then dividend high risk and low risk. Stock like this (I do not own PETS, I was just using it as an example) would be a high risk due to its price instability. But you mitigate that with stop loss orders.

I have a vanguard/roth for my longs (large cap growths and stable dividends with DRIP) and then use etrade for the small cap or high risk ones. I like their tax documents and easy interface.

People make arguments against dividend stocks, I simply call it a different strategy. Some years it beats out my growths, some years it is about on par. Depends on where I have it at the time and slightly more market dependant.

I have recently gotten into ex-date chasing. While it has increased the returns, it is more work.

Sure. It is still a lower rate than going into dividend stocks.

PETS, sorry, don’t know why my phone cut off the ‘S’.

PETMED EXPRESS INC COM

$10,000 at 4% gives you $400 interest in one year.

Just about any decent dividend stock will outperform that. Look at PET for example. It is sitting at $3.65/share right now and offers a quarterly dividend of $0.30. That puts you at $1.20/share per year. 10k = 2739 shares = $3,286.80 dividend payout in one year.

Banks are the worst place to put investments. Money in bank accounts are only supposed to be there if you need it liquid, like an emergency fund or your checking account.

*PETS

PETMED EXPRESS INC COM

For all the nay sayers downvoting me as if it is impossible to find dividend stocks that outperform their precious SPY or high yield savings rates, here is a great list I found with shit loads. I count 60 different stocks that offer 10% yields or more. 100 in total all offering over 8% -double what some bullshit ‘high yield’ savings offers.

https://www.tradingview.com/markets/stocks-usa/market-movers-high-dividend/

I think they left out the most obvious questions-

Are you super rich?

Can you afford elective heath operations that will potentially prevent life ending illnesses or affliction?

Can you afford expensive lifestyles tailored for your health?

Can you afford to reduce all forms of stress in your life and live with no worries?

Congenital? No. Acquired? Yes. The area of the brain that processes and interprets sound has to develop. Without sound input as a child, that won’t happen.

Current leading theory of tinnitus is called the ‘central gain’ theory. This is where the brain becomes accustomed to seeing signals from the ear at a certain level, and when that neural level is no longer at that level it will add in its own noise to make up the difference. This noise is then perceived as a tone or sometimes a broadband sound, commonly described as either a ringing or a whooshing sound. Sometimes it can also be described as crickets. Depends on the person and cause. Not all hearing loss comes with tinnitus, but most tinnitus comes with hearing loss. In audiology school we had a whole class on tinnitus and covered many interesting aspects exactly like your shower thought here and went over papers on every angle you could think of. It was fun. But in the end, the brain has to at a minimum know what sound is to even perceive sound.

Seriously. We are talking about tire tread compared to weight. Both use multiple sizes of tire depending on the year/model. There are a few that overlap in diameter to get the closest to comparison but they still have a very different width. We are talking about a 235/35R18 vs a 235/75R18. That is a huge difference in wall height/aspect ratio and changes how the tire gives under power. Those numbers massively change depending on model as well. Something like an f150 raptor could have a 315/70R17, almost a foot wide. So comparing just the weight and saying they are close enough is far from a fair comparison.

You are on a nuke loving platform and people are going to downvote anything that isn’t hard pro nuke. But you are correct. I have had this exact same discussion before. The numbers you are looking for are called the LCOE, or the ‘levelized cost of electricity’ where the lifetime of the technology cost if factored in. Offshore wind is currently the lowest followed by solar. Nuke is clost to 10x the cost. There is even an international nuke consortium that has several reports agreeing with exactly what you are saying and basically sum it up as: if you invested in nuke early, then it is cost efficient to just keep upgrading. If you didn’t invest in it early, then the cost to implement it so high that you are better off going wind/solar. Even if you add in the cost of battery systems, it is still cheaper than building a new nuke plant. And more than that, with these new nuke plants you have to upgrade all your infrastructure because your old wires can’t handle the output loads. If you look at the 30+ billion Georgia spent on this plant, they could have simply given out a micro generation grant to everyone to add solar to their roofs, not needed to upgrade the lines, and been far better off. But hey, just like reddit, if you are commenting on lemmy you better be pro nuke only and ignore the other numbers.

My personal saying has always been: Democrats rule with incompetence. Republicans rule with spite and malice.

I had a CPT like that during my second deployment. He was out in 60 seconds and in the funniest positions. The team made an entire photo album of him sleeping. MK19 range included.

No one in real-estate is doubting it being a bubble. The issue is how it will resolve. Not all bubbles burst. The question is if this one is going to simply “cool down” until the market rate catches up (lol, pipedream) or if the propping up will simply plateau it and it will level off for some years for the market rate the then catch up (almost the same thing, still a fucking joke when they try to justify this). Or there is the option of the bubble popping, it then it is the question of how deep the market cut will go, how fast it will rebound, how far up it will rebound, and if it is still worth it to buy now (what some are saying is that it is still worth doing the current fuckery and still profitable even with a bubble burst).

It’s all milky fun and games with a side of creamy fat until someone gets a case of brucellosis.

Have you considered that not everyone’s transportation needs, financial situation, and living arraignment are the same?aybe people live different lives with different needs because they need to. Some might live different lives because they want to.

I think it is great that this person is in a position in their life that when they needed a car, most likely 5 years ago, they were able to buy an ev, and pay it off. Good for them on the small victories in life.

Looking passed the absolutely insane answer here, no one has even brought up the whole issue of AC vs DC. Batteries are DC, while your fridge that plugs into your wall running on AC. I know they make DC ones, but it isn’t like they are interchangeable.

Thanks for the reply, I was hoping to generate more discussion. It looks like you were the only one…

Hot take here and I would love discussion- but this is a small reason why I am against a full UBI in cash, but want UBI in voucher form with only a small portion in cash. Vouchers limit potential inflation spill over from sectors and you can now control how much people are getting depending on factors to better and more fairly suit their situations. This is also why I am a huge fan of “food stamps” or food welfare programs. This is essentialy what they are doing already, just make it universal. Then we look at things like housing vouchers, another great program that we can now just scale up and make universal as well. Then you only need to give a smaller cash handout for incidental spending. You know people are going to have to spend money on housing and food, so make those the priorities for funding vouchers and you can put rules in place to minimize inflation within those industries. Then if you have people who are well of enough to not need the full voucher, let them convert the voucher over to cash at a penalty rate, say 2 to 1 for cash, or some progressive scale for remaining money. They don’t need the money as much, but you also don’t want them to be completely left out unfairly and have them resentful of the system. This could even expand into other industries or normal costs. Transportation, cable/internet, cell service, even some insurance (like car, rental, umbrella- assuming that if you are at a level of providing UBI, you are already providing universal health care). Now for each voucher you can make it needs and situation based and evaluate a fair amount for each person through an automated system depending on some quick metrics of their life. Each voucher system is also industry specific with its own oversight and regulations and inflation reductions built into it. I think it would be a better system and am open to others thoughts.

I agree with you as a realist on the situation. We will never stop manufacturing them, at least for the foreseeable future. But we forget that something like recycling is the last stage of the 3R’s to follow. We must first look to reduce consumption. We need to find alternatives where possible, and switch away from these forever chemicals anywhere we can. Next, while “reusing” is not the best term here, but we need to find ways to extend the life of the products that we are forced to use and try to use them up in every way we can. Then lastly we need to be recycling it as best as possible before we send it to an incinerator, or more realistically a developing nation landfill.

Reduce -> Reuse -> Recycle is listed that way for a reason. Everyone always just jumps to the final stage then argue about how bad the recycling is while not even considering ways to reduce or reuse throughout the entire process.