Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The war hasn't even started. What you have seen is the amuse-bouche. What you would see, if there was a real war going on, is the end of the iranian civilization.

This little school yard fight was just Trump trying to get a peace prize. He miscalculated, so as soon as things are back to normal, he will declare victory, ignore all facts to the contrary and go home.

As always I thank Trump for the amazing investment opportunities he is always creating! =)



> What you would see, if there was a real war going on, is the end of the iranian civilization.

While the US is capable of levelling all settlements, let alone cities, in Iran, it would be an extremely Pyrrhic victory. Like, oil would rise to $200 as a baseline, with occasional spikes at $300, US general inflation would gain 3-7% over baseline (food in particular 25% or so), and piss off all other trading partners worldwide, which amongst other things will make European nations transition even faster to renewables and nuclear using stuff they buy from China and make locally rather than from the US because they actually export useful hardware while the US mostly exports end user licence agreements and what little hardware it exports is itself heavily dependent on China and we can cut out the destabilising middle-man.

Given how many European nations rejected US requests for base/airspace use even with this conflict, a total war against Iran would probably have the US asked to vacate all existing bases in Europe. Even if the US doesn't leave NATO it will become a redundant organisation due to all other members making a new club without inviting the US.

And that's even if the US military obey illegal orders rather than their oaths, given the end of the Iranian civilisation would necessarily involve war crimes.


> As always I thank Trump for the amazing investment opportunities he is always creating! =)

Disgusting.


Not at all... what is disgusting is the loss of life. I have not killed anyone, and contrarians earning based on other peoples irrationality is actually beneficial. It generates tax revenue, it stabilizes stock prices and the global markets, thus helping to maintain a system that provides jobs, more tax revenue, and indirectly, charity, for billions and billions of people.

I think you need to examine your head, and try to understand how stock markets work, before jumping up on your high horses.

Contrarians have probably together, helped more people on the planet, than you sitting at home hating on "capitalists" online.


Pretty obvious sarcasm.


How so?


cause a lot of lives have been lost! they even thoroughly blew up a school. it's generally considered to be in somewhat poor taste to celebrate your personal gain in situations like that. it's like openly celebrating a massive passenger airliner crash because you happen to hold stock in their biggest competitor.


I understand the ethical viewpoint, but does it generalize, and where are the lines of moral good/neutral/bad when you ”buy the dip”?

Bombing civilians is despicable, so obviously bad to buy.

Bombing legitimate targets is accepted warfare, but there are always civilian casualties in war, so war in general must be bad to buy.

Other causes for dips?

Insane tariff policy drives small companies to the ground and leaves low income families struggling, must be bad to buy.

Global recession hits due to a pandemic which claims innumerable civilian lives, must be bad to buy.

Global recession hits due to some other factor, lots of civilians die from depression or violence, must be bad to buy.

A huge market dip hits and causes millions of leveraged investors to lose most of their principal to margin calls, companies go bankrupt, people lose their jobs, lots of civilians die from depression or violence, must be bad to buy.

Is there a scenario where ”buy the dip” is not immoral by these standards?

A defect in a series of automobiles causes hundreds of deaths, causing the manufacturer’s stock price to plummet. Is it bad to buy?

Thousands of people die in car crashes every day and it barely registers.

Civilians die and are killed in horrible ways every day.

Is it genuinely always bad to buy the dip?


I think there's an important distinction in making money off of a tragedy your investment had no part in causing and happily announcing you did so.

To use a slightly hyperbolic example: A company that makes body bags is always going to be making cash when a massive amount of people die in a tragedy. That's fine, without that we wouldn't have body bags which is a thing we need. But they're not gonna do a press release on September 12th 2001 about how their sales volumes have spiked and are expected to continue to rise as victims are being pulled from the rubble. I would hope their execs are not watching CNN and rubbing their hands in eager anticipation when they see the second plane hitting the towers.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: