I got into this thing looking to make some easy tendies and prevent a couple of greedy hedge funds from destroying a beloved company from my childhood that was struggling during a global pandemic. I have fond memories of reselling my used games for 2% of their value. Also, it was fun and I like the stock.
GameStop’s financials were pretty decent, and the latest console cycle would give them more juice to transform their business model. Then enters Ryan Cohen: a guy whose balls are so big he got the insane idea to recreate Pets.com — a company so terrible it became synonymous with the dot-com bubble — and he fucking outperformed Amazon.
I start learning about this guy and find out he’s pretty smart and bold enough to make it work. Maybe he can hit a second hole in one and turn another “terrible” company, “the blockbuster of video games,” into one that outperforms Amazon too.
I also learn he’s had his struggles recently, and the reason why he sold Chewy.com was because his father was passing away. He sounds like a good person with that crazy/genius quality who deserves a chance, just like GameStop.
So I enter this position, realizing that hedge funds have royally fucked themselves by taking an extremely risky bet while trying to destroy one of the few good things I had to distract myself from the shittiness of the world (before I found this subreddit). Because this trade was not just potentially profitable, but also morally important, I decided to sell the other stocks in my account and even deposited my rent money for the month. I’ll just pay the late fee and tank my credit score, nbd. And like the ~~genius~~ dumb ass I am, I bought right at the top: 14 shares for $4,340.
I knew the hedge funds were going to lose this game. They got caught with their paints down while peeing into the wind. They were checkmated. And what did they do? They went and fucking changed the rules of the game.
Oh hell no. That’s when this shit got real. That’s the moment when everything changed. It wasn’t about money anymore. It wasn’t about profit or loss. It was about principle. No — it was about the soul of the market. You don’t get to write the rules of the game and rewrite those rules when you lose at your own game. They should’ve just taken the L, but they decided to play dirty — real dirty.
Now I start thinking things are getting real fucky. I can 💎 🙌 and keep holding, but I’m going to need to sell at some point... won’t I? Everyone else is going to sell at some point... won’t they? At what point...? Game-theory kicks in and I’m tryna figure out when everyone is going to sell so I can make off with some profit. What’s my exit strategy? What’s everyone else’s exit strategy?
And then those hallowed words of Saint Value came back to me: “What’s an exit strategy?”
Bingo! Exactly! That’s it! There is no exit strategy!
The answer is: there is no answer. The only way to win an unwinnable game is to not play the game.
G A M E — S TO P
Incredible. This is where the game ends. I’ve been thinking too much like a hedge fund manager who puts profit above principle and can only think in terms of entry strategies and exit strategies. This is market logic. But we are no longer playing the game of market logic. The rules of the game have changed. The game is now about the rules of the game itself. This is a fucking meta-game. 4D Chess. And guess what? I’m not playing your game anymore. You’re playing mine.
GameStop shares no longer represent ownership in a company. It’s no longer just something to exchange at market value. The shares represent our values themselves. Will I think in terms of profit and when to sell my shares? Or will I think in terms of my principles? Can I put a price tag on my values? What is a hedge fund willing to pay for my beliefs? And what market price would my values sell for? How much money could I make selling my soul?
It’s true that I don’t have as much skin in the game as others. But I put in whatever I could. And I would never judge someone for needing to feed their family or finally being able to turn their life around and escape this rigged game—this prisoner’s dilemma that we call our economy.
But GameStop shares no longer represent something a price could be put on. GameStop shares now represent something priceless. In fact, they may hold infinite value. They represent the infinite nature of value itself.
The funny thing is, I can live without money. I’ve done it my whole life. But ironically, it’s the hedge fund managers who own all the money in the world that can’t live without it. If that isn’t a better representation of evil, I don’t know what is. Their greed is infinite, and they would break every rule in the world to satisfy that infinite greed.
But I will choose to operate by a different kind of logic. I will play a game of my choosing.
I entered this position because I saw a way to beat the GameMasters at their own game. And they proved to me what I’ve known all long: that the game is, in fact, unwinnable. It is a game designed for me to lose. It’s a casino-prison where only the lucky get to escape.
So, you want my shares? Well, you don’t get my shares. EVER. They’re mine now, and mine forever.
I’m holding onto these shares. Because when this game is all over and the years have passed, and we’ve all forgotten about this amazing moment in history.... every time I open my account I can look back and remember that time I fought the good fight. I can remember the wild, insane, hilarious, anonymous, beautiful, ragtag idiots I had beside me in that shining moment of glory — that moment we had the audacity to try and win an unwinnable game, and almost did.
These shares don’t hold money. They hold sacred memories that will never be taken from me....
Everyone has to make their own choices in life. Everyone must choose which game they will play. But for the first time ever, the game is finally in your hands. What game will you choose? Will you continue to play the game? Or will the game stop?
In my world, the game stops.
I choose to sacrifice my 💎 🙌
Instead, my hands will go galactic 🌌 🙌
After all... YOLO

The salvo of coilgun shells smashes into the complex of bunkers on the opposite riverbank, sending a spray of charred dirt, sandbags, and timber flying into the air. A sloped bastion caves in, burying the rifle pits at its base. One leg of a watchtower is blasted away and the whole thing sways drunkenly before twisting and collapsing across the trenches, the flagpole on its roof somehow landing upright and leaving the enemy's blue-and-gold standard waving in the debris-laden breeze.

The Human artillerymen beside me let out a cheer and jump up and down, slapping each other's outstretched hands.

The army of Humans watching from beyond the battery all jump around and cheer, too, their yells loud even compared to a half-dozen high explosive shells.

And... so do the Human gunners on the hillside across the river, and the army behind them. They all cheer and applaud. Even though they are, in fact, the enemy whose defenses are getting blasted into pieces the size of a poet's paycheck by the aforementioned coilguns. So... I cheer my lovely green head off right along with them, because things are exploding and stuff is burning and apparently the Humans on this planet just generally approve of that sort of thing.

My name is Solontha reValthinna, and I'm the Felra who goes to the places nobody else wants to and learns about them the hard way so you can learn about them the easy way. That's my angle as an author, and that's why I'm the Pretty Idiot.

----

"Solontha, darling, I've got just the destination for your next Pretty Idiot's Guide!"

My business agent only sounds that chirpy when she's found some new way to try to get me killed. I'd like to think it's because the more trouble I get into, the better the resulting books turn out. That, or she still hasn't forgiven me for that topless dance I did at the Publishers' Guild dinner party she took me to. In my defense, they provided the liquor. I just happened to drink a lot of it.

Also in my defense, my topless dancing is godlike.

"Not back to the Tarq Imperium, I hope? They said they'd shoot me if they ever caught me inside their borders again."

My agent clucked at me. "They said no such thing. They just heavily implied it. And that was only because you wrote that they were a bunch of pointlessly brutal totalitarian fuckwads."

I snorted. "That's right. And it was the 'fuckwad' part that they objected to."

"Nobody likes being called a fuckwad, Solontha. Fuckwads least of all. But, no, I'm thinking we send you to write about a Human planet this time."

Humans? Interesting... The few I've known, I've mostly liked. Well, I don't hate them, anyway. And they look kind of like us Felra, at least a little bit. If you took a Felra and eliminated everything behind her forelegs -- and kept her from dying from lack of some important organs, obviously -- you would have something that still doesn't look particularly like a Human. So, dye her green skin an earthier color, replace her beautiful tresses of feathery-branching tvan with coarser, single-stranded hair, remove one pair of breasts, and take a digit from each hand. She still doesn't look quite Human. Make her face a bit rounder and flatter, thicken her bone structure, and Congratulations! You've surgically converted a Felra into something that could possibly maybe pass for a Human in really poor lighting. Also, you're a sick fuck for doing such a thing.

Point being, Humans are sufficiently similar enough to us that they can be cute, in a goofy bipedal sort of way. And immersing yourself in an alien culture can be more rewarding if you can also immerse yourself in some attractive alien nookie along the way. Any aspiring travel writers who are reading this can consider that a pro-tip from the Pretty Idiot.

"So, any particular Human world? Somewhere with casinos, maybe? Or some place run by the Church of Giving Money, Liquor, and Carnal Pleasure to Sexy Alien Visitors?"

That last bit caught my agent off-guard. "Is that an actual religion?"

"If it was, do you think I'd still be working?"

"Of course you would. You love travel, trouble, and remunerated smart-assery too much to just quit." Ah, I'm such a lucky Felra. Most agents charge extra for that kind of quality banter. "The place I've got in mind for you is Rugen, a frontier-level colony world well off the outer fringe of the Arm."

"The tail-tip of nowhere, in other words. And what's the attraction for a Pretty Idiot to play tourist there? Societal collapse? Rampaging Felra-eating predators? Pandemic-level clown outbreak?"

"How about the longest-running ongoing war in the Known Galaxy? Two hundred eighty-seven common years and no end in sight."

Yow. I'm passingly familiar with war, having wandered through five or six of varying size and awfulness while sightseeing -- and writing about said sightseeing -- and three centuries is a lot of war, especially confined to one planet. I could only imagine how that could twist and scar a world and its people. The devastation. The tragedy of wasted lives and resources. The sheer dysfunctionality of societies raised for generation after generation on bitter vengeance and the never-ending march towards victory and a peace they can no longer even properly conceptualize. A world of bloodlust, paranoia, and the threat of sudden brutal death staining every moment of every day. Why, the possibilities for misery were endless.

It sounded perfect for a vacation getaway.

----

I took regular commercial liners as far as Thielbarra, but had to buy passage from there to Rugen on an independent freighter that was slightly more reputable than a spaceport prostitute, just not as hygienic. There were only three other passengers headed to my destination, including a Kreevin botanical researcher who ignored everybody and a not-very-sober Zharg who worked for one of the big interstellar communications providers and who must have fucked up his job just badly enough to get sent to an isolated hole-in-the-void posting, but not quite badly enough to be fired. I ended up sharing a cabin with the only other quadruped, an adorably optimistic Iraitrian missionary who was going to Rugen to set up a temple to the Harmonious Gods and try to get a congregation going.

Being the cynical agnostic wretch that I am, I just had to ask how much demand she thought there would be for a doctrine of cooperative religious pacifism in the middle of a war zone.

"You offer food to the starving, not to those with bellies already full," she told me. "Our beliefs are meant to be applied in the world, not just agreed with in the temple."

And did she expect to end the war all by herself?

"I hope to make a difference to someone. Whether it's by teaching the Way, by being an example, or just by offering a person who needs it a roof, a meal, and a sympathetic ear. If even one person considers their life to be better for having known me, my mission will be worthwhile."

Damn. I had been entertaining myself with the idea of flirting mercilessly with her for the whole trip, but all that earnestness. All that simple, undeniable goodness. Even my cynicism and libido combined couldn't look that in the face.

So I flirted with the ship's captain, instead. Not that there was any real challenge in it, as despite Felra not being four-armed lizard people, Jixavan males are completely enamored of our tails, which are both more voluptuous and generally more exposed than those of their own females. Pro-tip from the Pretty Idiot: if you're a Felra and need to manipulate a Jixavan guy, buy one of those tail-stockings their women wear. Even the biggest ones will be too tight and short for you, so cut a bunch of slashes in it and pull it as far up your tail as it will go. Then wear a skirt short enough to expose the top hem of the tail-stocking and enjoy your newfound powers of persuasion. I ended up getting twenty percent off my fare and three marriage proposals.

Captain Akothin had made a few runs to Rugen before, so I was able to ask him some questions about the place. If you've never read one of my Pretty Idiot's Guides before, part of my schtick, if you will, is lack of prior research regarding the places I go. My self-imposed limitation is that I can only obtain information by seeing for myself or asking someone with firsthand experience. No encyclopedias or hyperweb research. That media stuff is, at best, quarter-truths and agenda-driven grazershit, anyway. By going into a place without 'knowledge' of it, I go with fewer preconceptions. That's the 'Idiot' part of the title. The 'Pretty' part is because I am. And if you have to face life as an idiot, it really does help to be a pretty one.

The good captain had never actually made planetfall on Rugen, always conducting business from orbit. Sensible. Boring, but sensible. I therefore confined my inquiries to spacers' matters. Like, were we going to have any issues with pirates or paramilitaries on our way in-system?

"No pirates. Not enough shipping in or out for those guys to make a living raiding it and too far from any active lanes to make a useful base. Pirates operating across star systems have to really watch their fuel expenditures." Captain Akothin then proceeded to give a suspiciously well-considered dissertation on how to turn a profit in space piracy, which I will not share here but have filed away for future reference should too many of my books bomb on the market. And as for paramilitary ships affiliated with the warring factions? "I've never seen any."

What about orbital defenses? Would there be minefields to be tensely navigated? Would we be subject to stop-and-search by military patrol craft? "Rugen's a frontier-level system." The captain looked at me like I was a moron, albeit a moron with an incredibly sexy and distracting tail. "There ain't even a transshipment station, just a few cheapo weather and comm satellites. I just put the ship in a parking orbit and they send shuttles up. But it's not like the shipments are ever so big you'd need an orbital dock anyway, and shuttles are fine for passengers. Of course, that also means no orbital repair yard and no fuel depot, but that's not much worry since Rugen is just a long detour off our Thielbarra-to-Rialto route and I always do a refuel and refit at Thielbarra for safety's sake and, um, will you marry me?"

----

The shuttle ride down was as uneventful as such things generally are and afforded a chance to take in the view of Rugen from medium-high orbit. It was not a particularly exciting planet seen from 18,000 miles above its equator -- under the sparse clouds, some smallish seas, broad smears of iron-red in the right places to be deserts, accented by patches and streamers of an odd green that was almost an indecisive blue, and some blink-and-you'd-miss-them polar caps. But the thing is, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference how many planets you've seen out the porthole, or how much of an undifferentiated dirtball the one below you is. There is no such thing as 'ordinary' when it comes to the sight of a whole damn world suspended in space right in front of you. It's a moment of magic, every single time, and anybody who says otherwise is lying, or is a soulless shithead. Or, since those aren't mutually exclusive, they could be both, like a corporate journalist or a Rybathi.

I used the flight time to mentally review what firsthand knowledge of Humans I possessed. Pro-tip-slash-caveat: members of a species often behave very differently in their own polities than they do in foreign or more cosmopolitan settings. Expatriates or visitors to your world are typically trying to get along in your society and tend to adjust their behavior accordingly. Their behavior when they are in the majority and they get to decide what's normal may be radically different. That said, there were a few truths I felt comfortable in ascribing to Humans in general based on experience.

For starters, sexual dimorphism. Humans born biologically male or female remain that sex, unless medically altered. Females are usually smaller and are the ones with slightly inadequate breasts. Males tend to be bigger, stronger, and coarser-looking and, like most mammaloid males, have completely inadequate breasts. This dimorphism leads to the most basic social structures being built around male-female pairings and their offspring -- family -- rather than the looser pack-based structure of Felra. These family structures appear to have a relationship similar to, though vastly more complicated than, the Felra mother-daughter bond. Basically, if you wrong a Human, you may face retribution not just from her, but from her entire bloodline. Except sometimes you won't, because, like I said, complicated.

Second, though many Galactics tend to use the terms 'Human' and 'Terran' as synonyms, Humans emphatically do not. Among Humans, the word 'Terran' refers specifically to an inhabitant of the Terran Commonwealth, the oldest, largest, and apparently most detested Human stellar nation. Humans who are not Commonwealth natives tend to have negative reactions to being called 'Terrans'. In this context, the term 'negative reactions' seems to cover a range from 'cold and profane verbal correction' to 'assault with a power-nailer'. Maybe this trip would offer a chance to find out why that might be? I'd also been told that actual Terrans react poorly to being called 'Human', though I've never met any Commonwealth Terrans and can't say for sure if that's true.

Third, Humans tend to be territorial, and therefore possessive. They have a strong impulse to guard things they have laid claim to. Don't try to make use of anything a Human regards as their own without asking permission first, even if you intend to give it right back. This impulse extends quite strongly to their romantic or sexual partners as well and attempting to bed, or even flirt with, a Human who has been claimed by another will tend to be met with hostility. You could try asking for permission, I guess, but that just seems to lead to socially awkward hostility. And if you don't know why socially awkward hostility is worse than the regular kind, then obviously you've never been in a fistfight with a drunken Dahu who was sporting a clingy wet kilt and a massive erection.

next

****
More Known Galaxy stories

I am autistic, and I am really sick and tired of seeing the word being misused and tossed around here as a joke. I'm finally speaking up. This needs to stop. You are trampling on the true meaning of being Autistic. This is incredibly offensive. Do people here not know that there are just as many people who are autistic who possess above average and genius levels of intelligence as there are people with cognitive deficits? Autistic people want no association with this degenerate casino. The word autistic is not synonymous with gambling or making poor financial decisions. You guys aren't autistic, you're just plain fucking stupid.
Sure you might have one upped big money on this one GME play but in the end all I see are bagholders everywhere who are proud of buying a $5 stock for $300. Do you think they will let this reddit pump and dump strategy continue to win? your unemployment checks are no match for the big boys, and you're out of your fucking minds if you think institutions won't have the last laugh. Like does anyone here know what being "autistic" actually means? I'm not going to waste my time educating you. But I want to say this. Stop.
Out of all the companies out there, you pamped Gamestop. GAMESTOP. A company sure to die out. The stock was cheap for a fucking reason, because the company can't compete and will end up bankrupt.
You guys are too dumb to see that you can't just randomly pick a cheap stock out of a hat and expect to turn the company into a multi trillion dollar behemoth because you bought OTM calls.
Delusions of grandeur on here. Bet most of you will end up losing your GME "tendies" by buying some OTM calls during earnings, at the top of a 10 year bull market. Then come here crying. Because WSB can't fail right? give me a fucking break.
All this tossing around of the word autistic is defamation. And if it doesn't end. I will go to the admins.

What can you do as an MRA?

Can other people with less obvious MRA accounts like me i.e. more normal looking accounts, post stuff (this is a general comment, not just for this thread) post this on more mainstream threads e.g. Finland sub, sociology, etc.... MAKE SURE you are polite, factual, avoid emotive language, avoid talking about feminism, and post high quality stuff
Comment here particular quotes, passages, excerpts that are relevant. Especially since its such a long document, this will be useful for all of us.
You can make these excerpts into separate threads if worthy.
Share this on social media? (set up an anon MRA twitter, Facebook etc... MRA is thriving on social media. It is good as its a lot more activism based)
If you live in Finland, send some emails to journalists (you can search journalists who have already discussed mens issues), and send some to politicians etc. You can easily write one letter and send it to multiple people. Maybe the individual excerpts/issues you find would be better to send (and then you could also add the whole document summary as an addendum for reference for the reader) - Finland is a small country, I dont think many users will be from there here.
NOTE: It is good that these issues are being increasingly recognised, and more people are doing this as projects in academia. This is only growing and snowballing as more people are red pilled. Look up Male Psychology Network, they are doing fantastic work, growing and have presented an ALTERNATIVE to patriarchy conspiracy theory and are working to dismantle the idea in academia. https://youtu.be/LHYRYKCIDxk?t=591

Main Body - Here it is:

This is a chapter-by-chapter summary of Discrimination Against Men: Appearance and Causes in the Context of a Modern Welfare State, a 2009 doctoral dissertation by Pasi Malmi (University of Lapland) that provides an impressively detailed and balanced investigation of discrimination against men in Finland (the theory and results actually give almost as much detail on discrimination against women, although men will be the focus here).
Chapters 5 to 8 are the most important. Chapter 5 explains six biases that cause gender discrimination, chapter 6 delineates the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems of Finnish society, chapter 7 examines the various discourses that justify discrimination against men, and chapter 8 analyzes a database of gender discrimination complaints made to the Finnish gender equality ombudsman, a third of which were made by men.
(Length: 1,800 words.)
Chapters 1 to 4 (introductory/background chapters)
Chapter 1 situates the perspective taken by the dissertation within gender studies. It rejects anti-feminist and anti-women perspectives, and the glorification of traditional masculinity and gender roles (e.g., the mythopoetic men’s movement). But it also rejects the “critical studies of men” paradigm, which sees men as the main causes of men’s and women’s problems, refuses to criticize feminism or women, and does not believe that discrimination against white, heterosexual, middle-class men exists (pp. 20–21).
Chapter 2 defines various relevant concepts, and explains that the findings from Finland are intended to be relevant primarily for the Northern European welfare states, and secondarily for other European and Anglo-American countries (pp. 32–34).
Chapter 3 gives a brief overview of current or traditional viewpoints on what causes direct or indirect discrimination or mistreatment of men: gender roles, hegemonic masculinity, industrial capitalism, feminism (specifically gender feminism and victimization feminism), and exploitative women (pp. 36-44).
Chapter 4 develops a theory of sociocultural evolution, which says that ideas that are simple, exaggerated, and coherent with popular paradigms generally win out over their rivals, regardless of whether they are true or backed up by evidence. This happens due to functional selection (p. 57), unintentional biases (p. 63), and interest group bias (p. 71), among other factors (see summary, p. 115).
Chapter 5: Applying the Theory to Gender Discrimination (p. 118)
This chapter develops a general theory of gender discrimination, centered on a typology of six different biases that cause gender discrimination (p. 127).
The masculine bias and feminine bias are unintentional gender biases caused by the processes that simplify, exaggerate, and mutate people’s mental memes or ideas according to their gender (p. 127). For example, a person’s conception of domestic work or childcare will be centered on their own experiences or contributions, which are partly determined by their gender, and so they will often downplay/exclude the other gender’s contributions (e.g., yardwork vs. housework) (pp. 135–138). As a result of these biases, segregated groups and networks of men or women tend to have a masculine-biased or feminine-biased culture of values, priorities, concepts, words, stories, jokes, stereotypes and beliefs that can lead to practices that discriminate against the other gender (p. 120). For example, a group of female social workers might decide that women are better custodians of children and default to recommending custody to them (pp. 141–142).
The masculist bias and feminist bias come from interest groups, networks, or movements seeking to advance the status of men or women, respectively. Masculism and feminism have sexist and anti-sexist branches (p. 143). The modern sexist branch of feminism includes theories like feminist standpoint epistemology (which gives special status to women’s feelings and intuitions) and the feminist theory of social work (interests of women and children are synonymous, social workers should identify with their female customers). It also includes stereotypes that women are unselfish, peaceful, responsible, loving, hard working, while men are the opposite (pp. 149–152). The anti-sexist branch of feminism by definition is less hostile towards men as people, but it is not necessarily able or willing to accept men’s issues: “[i]n general, the idea of the discrimination of men is perceived as bizarre by feminists” (pp. 155–158). The sexist branch of masculism is discussed primarily in the context of religion (pp. 144–129). The anti-sexist branch of masculism has little power, although it is discussed as sometimes being the source of biased statistics downplaying women’s issues (pp. 152–155).
The alpha male bias and alpha female bias are the biases of high status (wealthy, powerful, attractive, etc.) members of each gender against low status members of their gender. They are particularly apparent in high status men’s bias against male criminals (male judges giving harsher treatment, including sentences, to them compared to women) and high status women’s bias against female prostitutes (pp. 170–173).
A central point of this dissertation is that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations (the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems) are prone to predominantly discriminate against the other gender, but it’s important to clarify that they’re not guaranteed to do so. The masculine and feminine biases (the unintentional “own gender” biases) are just two of the six biases. An organization could be more influenced by the ideological biases (masculist and feminist biases) or the biases against low social status people of each gender (alpha male and alpha female biases).
Chapter 6: Locating the Patriarchal and Matriarchal Subsystems of the Finnish Society (p. 188)
This chapter identifies Finnish society’s patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems by looking at various measures of power, including raw numbers, managerial positions, control of knowledge, and informal positions of power (p. 222).

Patriarchal subsystem: technology, commerce, state finances, defense, agriculture, transportation, trade, corporative labor and employer organizations.
Matriarchal subsystem: healthcare, social services, social policy, equality policy, hotels, restaurants, and some cultural services.

Not all areas of Finnish society fall into one of these subsystems.
Chapter 7: An Empirical Examination of the Memeplexes, Discourses and Coalitions that Induce Discrimination against Men (p. 224)
This chapter analyzes the discourses that justify discrimination against men, coming from sources that include sexism and feminism.
Sexism: The development of the modern misandric versions of sexism is examined, including 19th century views of men as “barbarians whose urges had to be leashed in by the forces of decency—meaning women—if civilization were to survive” (p. 233), which it attributes to the joint interests of women and upper class men. Notions of chivalry and macho masculinity also lead to institutionalized belief systems where men’s comfort, health, and even lives are considered less important than women’s (p. 238). Macho masculinity, with its aversion to men “complaining”, tends to oppose talking about men’s issues or seeing them as relevant for gender equality (p. 306).
Feminism: Certain influential varieties of feminism see women as the disadvantaged and discriminated gender (p. 247). Thus the sole purpose of equality policy is women’s advancement (p. 256) and men are largely reduced to the role of defendant (p. 270). When faced with cases requiring a choice between promotion of equality and empowerment of women, many feminists reacted by rejecting equality as outdated or as a smokescreen for promoting men’s interests over women. Under these discourses, “the empowerment of women is more important than the advancement of gender equality in all contexts, including the matriarchal subsystem of the society” (pp. 259–260). That would apply even to women’s advantage in family courts and criminal courts (p. 305).
Also mentioned is a combination (and mutation) of difference feminism and equality feminism which says that “women are superior to men in many ways, but men are not superior to women in any ways” (p. 296)—which means that when men are ahead it’s because of sexism, but when women are ahead it is legitimate and natural.
The groups and alliances that justify misandry and discrimination against men (p. 334):
📷
Chapter 8: Gender Discrimination, According to the Complaints Sent to the Finnish Equality Ombudsman (p. 346)
Complaints: This chapter analyzes 800 complaints of gender discrimination made between 1997 and 2004 and sent to the Finnish equality ombudsman (p. 348). Men were 33% of victims, according to the author’s suggestion for the best measure of actual discrimination in these cases (outcome types 3–5, p. 356). Labour market discrimination, the largest category, primarily involved women (76%), while the second largest category, discrimination against customers, primarily involved men (~60%).
Another category, discriminative legislation, primarily involved men (77%). Few complaints were made, but due to active conscription policies (lasting 5-12 months), almost all men in Finland are affected by discriminative legislation. The author classifies these complaints as discrimination, although the equality ombudsman does not, “as the Finnish equality law is not applicable to men’s obligatory military service” (p. 354).
Bias: Per chapter 6, equality policy itself is in the matriarchal subsystem of equality (e.g., 90% of employees in the equality ombudsman office are female, p. 354). The ombudsman has a policy not to comment on complaints involving custody and divorce, purportedly to not interfere with the court system, but the author suggests that it stems from a bias against men, perhaps due to prioritizing women’s status over equality or wanting to avoid a flood of complaints from men (p. 354). This is made more explicit by another comment from the ombudsman’s office saying that it is not taking action on certain cases of discrimination against men because “the main purpose of the equality law is to improve women’s status especially in the labor market”, suggesting that the law should be applied more strictly to cases of discrimination against women (p. 381).
Patriarchal & matriarchal subsystems: 57% of discrimination cases in the matriarchal subsystem of society (as defined in chapter 6) were against men, compared to 31% in neutral domains, and 17% in the patriarchal subsystem of society (p. 358).
Discrimination examples: Many cases of discrimination against women (e.g., a workplace that only required women to do extra cleaning tasks on top of their regular duties) are recounted on the same pages but we’ll look at men here.

In the labour market: At a mental hospital, only men were appointed to night shifts (p. 374). At a school, preference was given to hiring female teachers even though men are the “underrepresented” gender (p. 376). Many traditionally feminine jobs excluded men in their recruitment material (p. 377). A workplace allowed women to wear more casual and comfortable clothing than men (p. 377).
As customers: Favourable pricing for women in boat cruises, discotheques & dancing places, dating services, gymnastics, a theatre, restaurants, horse races, and car insurance (pp. 380–382). Also more strict clothing standards for men at a casino, higher minimum ages for men to enter restaurants, and an apartment that only allowed women (pp. 382–383).
Government administration: Subsidy for women’s osteoporosis medicines but not men’s (from pension fund), free public screening for breast cancer but not prostate cancer, higher retirement age for men (which has been changed) (pp. 387–389).
Legislation: Men’s complaints were all about the obligatory military or civil service of six to thirteen months (those who refuse get six months in prison, p. 390).

Likely motives: Two alternative rating methods (tables 52 and 53) find that either (certain) feminist ideas are the most common motivators of discrimination against men, or sexism and the feminine bias are the most common motivators (feminine bias meaning unintentional gender bias of groups of women, counterpart to masculine bias of groups of men). Financial motives were also frequent (pp. 401-402).
SOURCE: https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/comprehensive-research-on-discrimination-against-men-in-finland/

Hey everyone, I am a former Wall Street trader and quant researcher. When I was preparing for my own interviews, I have noticed the lack of accurate information and so I will be providing my own perspectives. One common pattern I see is people building their own algorithm by blindly fitting statistical methods such as moving averages onto data.
I have published this elsewhere, but have copy pasted it entirely below for you to read to keep it in the spirit of the sub rules. Edit: Removed link.

What it was like trading on Wall Street

Right out of college, I began my trading career at an electronic hedge fund on Wall Street. Several friends pitched trading to me as being a more disciplined version of wallstreetbets that actually made money. After flopping several initial interviews, I was fortunate to land a job at a top-tier firm of the likes of Jane Street, SIG, Optiver and IMC.
On my first day, I was instantly hooked.
My primary role there was to be a market maker. To explain this, imagine that you are a merchant. Suppose you wanted to purchase a commodity such as an apple. You would need to locate an apple seller and agree on a fair price. Market makers are the middle-men that cuts out this interaction by being always willing to buy or sell at a given price.
In finance lingo, this is called providing liquidity to financial exchanges. At any given moment, you should be confident to liquidate your position for cash. To give a sense of scale, tens of trillions in dollars are processed through these firms every year.
My time trading has been one of the most transformative periods of my life. It not only taught me a lot of technical knowledge, but it also moulded me to be a self-starter, independent thinker, and hard worker. I strongly recommend anyone that loves problem solving to give trading a shot. You do not need a mathematics or finance background to get in.
The trading culture is analogous to professional sports. It is a zero sum game where there is a clear defined winner and loser — you either make or lose money. This means that both your compensation and job security is highly dependent on your performance. For those that are curious, the rough distribution of a trader’s compensation based on performance is a tenth of the annual NBA salary.
There is a mystique about trading in popular media due to the abstraction of complicated quantitative models. I will shed light on some of the fundamental principles rooted in all trading strategies, and how they might apply to you.

Arbitrage

One way traders make money is through an arbitrage or a risk free trade. Suppose you could buy an apple from Sam for $1, and then sell an apple to Megan at $3. A rational person would orchestrate both legs of these trades to gain $2 risk free.
Arbitrages are not only found in financial markets. The popular e-commerce strategy of drop-shipping is a form of arbitrage. Suppose you find a tripod selling on AliExpress at $10. You could list the same tripod on Amazon for $20. If someone buys from you, then you could simply purchase the tripod off AliExpress and take home a neat $10 profit.
The same could be applied to garage sales. If you find a baseball card for $2 that has a last sold price on EBay for $100, you have the potential to make $98. Of course this is not a perfect arbitrage as you face the risk of finding a buyer, but the upside makes this worthwhile.

Positive expected value bets

Another way traders make money is similar to the way a casino stacks the odds in their favour. Imagine you flip a fair coin. If it lands on heads you win $3, and if it lands on tails you lose $1. If you flip the coin only once, you may be unlucky and lose the dollar. However in the long run, you are expected to make a positive profit of $1 per coin flip. This is referred to as a positive expected value bet. Over the span of millions of transactions, you are almost guaranteed to make a profit.
This exact principle is why you should never gamble in casino games such as roulette. These games are all negative expected value bets, which guarantees you to lose money over the long run. Of course there are exceptions to this, such as poker or card counting in black jack.
The next time you walk into a casino, make a mental note to observe the ways it is designed to keep you there for as long as possible. Note the lack of windows and the maze like configurations. Even the free drinks and the cheap accommodation are all a farce to keep you there.

Relative Pricing

Relative pricing is a great strategy to use when there are two products that have clear causal relationships. Let us consider an apple and a carton of apple juice. Suppose there have a causal relationship where the carton is always $9 more expensive than the apple. The apple and the carton is currently trading at $1 and $10 respectively.
If the price of the apple goes up to $2, the price is not immediately reflected on the carton. There will always be a time lag. It is also important to note that there is no way we can determine if the apple is trading at fair value or if its overpriced. So how do we take advantage of this situation?
If we buy the carton for $10 and sell the apple for $2, we have essentially bought the ‘spread’ for $8. The spread is fairly valued at $9 due to the causal relationship, meaning we have made $1. The reason high frequency trading firms focus so much on latency in the nanoseconds is to be the first to scoop up these relative mispricing.
This is the backbone for delta one strategies. Common pairs that are traded against each other includes ETFs and their inverse counterpart, a particular stock against an ETF that contains the stock, or synthetic option structures.

Correlations

Correlations are mutual connections between two things. When they trend in the same direction they are said to have a positive correlation, and the vice versa is true for negative correlations. A popular example of positive correlation is the number of shark attacks with the number of ice-cream sales. It is important to note that shark attacks do not cause ice-cream sales.
Often times there are no intuitive reason for certain correlations, but they still work. The legendary Renaissance Technologies sifted through petabytes of historical data to find profitable signals. For instance, good morning weather in a city tended to predict an upward movement in its stock exchange. One could theoretically buy stock on the opening and sell at noon to make a profit.
One important piece of advice is to disregard any retail trader selling a course to you, claiming that they have a system. These are all scams. At best, these are bottom of the mill signals that are hardly profitable after transaction costs. It is also unlikely that you have the system latency, trading experience or research capabilities to do this on your own. It is possible, but very difficult.

Mean reversions

Another common strategy traders rely on is mean reversion trends. In the options world the primary focus is purchasing volatility when it is cheap compared to historical values, and vice versa. Buying options is essentially synonymous with buying volatility. Of course, it is not as simple as this so don’t go punting your savings on Robinhood using this strategy.
For most people, the most applicable mean reversion trend is interest rates. These tend to fluctuate up and down depending on if the central banks want to stimulate saving or spending. As global interest rates are next to zero or negative, it may be a good idea to lock in this low rate for your mortgages. Again, consult with a financial advisor before you do anything.

I've done one of these before, but I wanted to look at it in greater detail than I did last time, movie by movie. For this, I'll be using the movies that we got as a framework.
Firstly, I think that the story beats are pretty solid for the trilogy, but it has three major problems: The character arcs, the factions, and a lack of planning.
Movie 1: The Force Awakens This movie works for the most part. My biggest problem is the factions. The First Order is just the Empire by a different name, and the resistance is synonymous with the rebellion. TO me, it makes the end of the original trilogy seem inconsequential, as we're right back where we were. I think you could change that with a simple faction rebranding:
-The First Order: Give them the red armor we see in The Rise of Skywalker and redesign some of their vehicles. This would differentiate them from the Empire while still establishing a connection. -The Resistance: Make them the Army of the Republic. There's no reason for them to be a ragtag group of Rebels again. They should be a more organized military equal to the First Order. You can still make them an underdog by having Starkiller destroy their main military base, leaving only a small fragment of their forces alive.
The last change I would make is to combine Captain Phasma and General Hux into one character, having a rivalry with Kylo Ren as well as the dynamic with Finn. Whether you keep the actor and name of Hux or Phasma is irrelevant, but for the sake of this post I'll call them Huxma moving forward.
One last change, replace Maz with Lando. This is more than just fan service, as it gives Han and Lando a chance to interact before Han's death, which will become important later.
Movie 2: The Last Jedi
First change, cut the casino arc. Instead, have Finn and Rose infiltrate the star destroyer disguised as stormtroopers using Finn's knowledge. As in the movie, they're found out and Finn confronts Huxma. For this, we'll use the deleted scene of Finn inspiring doubt about Huxma in the stormtroopers. At the end, Finn accidentally uses force powers to defeat Huxma. The other stormtroopers let Finn go. As in the movie, Huxma's fate is a little ambiguous. Until, that is, Huxma wakes Kylo after the explosion. During the assault on Crait, like Hux in the original, Huxma seems uneasy about Kylo's leadership.
The rest of this movie plays out largely the same, with the only major difference being a few hints dropped as to Rey's true identity, so that it's less out-of-nowhere in the next one.
Finally, at the end, we see Exegol and hear Palpatine's laugh (maybe we even see him?). This will help ease the audience in to Palpatine's return. More on that in the next movie.
Movie 3: The Rise of Skywalker Here is where the changes get more complicated, so bear with me.
Firstly, have a slightly larger time jump. Leia has trained Rey already, and passed away just prior to the start of the movie. Rey has constructed her own lightsaber after the destruction of Anakin/Luke's in the previous film, the yellow saber from the end. She is training Finn as her own apprentice. With Leia gone, the resistance is without anyone to lead it. Most of this information can be presented in the title crawl or the first few minutes of the film.
During Palpatine's conversation with Kylo Ren, we find out that Snoke was a secret apprentice he was training to challenge Vader, and he was carrying out instructions in the event of Palpatine's death. This gives Snoke more of a backstory than "I created him", while establishing that Palpatine was behind everything.
We also find out that Luke's death was the catalyst for Palpatine's return, as now there is more dark than light through Kylo and the doubt within Rey. This does a few important things: 1) It establishes why now is the time that Palpatine returned 2) It sets up that this was the First Order's goal all along, as they have been looking for Luke since The Force Awakens. 3) It establishes why Palpatine can't return again if they kill him this time, giving his death at the end a sense of finality.
Kylo Ren accepts Palpatine's offer of a new fleet, as the First Order is suffering due to a stormtrooper rebellion that has broken out.
Moving on to Poe. This time, he doesn't go with Rey and FInn. Instead, he reluctantly assumes leadership of the Resistance, unsure after his lessons in the last movie if he's up to it. Throughout the movie, we see him step into his role as leader and rally the forces from the end of the film, completing his character arc from the last film. Lando is there as an advisor, as he has become active in the resistance after Han's death to avenge his friend.
Kylo's internal conflict is shown throughout the movie. He continually hears the Emperor's voice and instructions throughout the movie, but he is also haunted by Luke's force ghost (Following Luke's line about being with him forever). Through these interactions, Kylo's turn to the light is built towards.
While on Kylo's star destroyer, we found out Huxma is the spy. They are fueled not only by a dislike of Kylo Ren, but they were inspired by Finn, as Finn had done what huxma never had the courage to. Huxma has been secretly leading the ongoing stormtrooper rebellion.
The Death Star remains are on Endor, not Kef Bir. Rey and Finn take Kylo together. After the battle, which ends the same way, Kylo is lead by Luke's force ghost to the site that Vader was burned, where he is visited by Anakin's force ghost, who finalizes his turn to the light.
In the final confrontation with Palpatine, Rey uses the force to reflect Palpatine's lightning back at him, rather than the two lightsabers. With Kylo back on the light side, and Rey's doubts extinguished, there is no longer enough dark side to strengthen Palpatine, which is why he is defeated easily.

I’m not gonna waste your time with an introduction. I’m making a list of possible cosmetics for the PAYDAY series, here we go.
We’ll start with the easy stuff. There would definitely be a pack of the 4 main Heisters as skins. Dallas, Chains, Houston (with a Hoxton edit style), and Wolf. They would all appear in their classic suits with their classic masks.
There would be 2 backblings. The first being the Medic Bag. Fans of Payday will know this meme-errific item. And of course items description would be “I NEEEED A MEDIC BAG!”. The second and more interesting Backbling, would be the Kataru Coffer. The Kataru Coffer would look exactly like they do in Payday 2, and would react to your eliminations, slowly opening and assembling the artifact from The Secret.
The Glider would be Bile’s Chopper, the Payday Gang’s go to escape vehicle for loud heists.
As for a pickaxe, there are many options, but if we’re going for iconic Payday, the best option would be the Thermal Drill. These drills are synonymous with Payday, and could have a neat little Easter egg where it could play the drill jamming sound effect occasionally when hitting objects.
Now, that’s just the absolute bare bones of what a Paydya crossover could have, but if the crossover went big, here are some other items I could see making it in.
A pack featuring the special enemies from Payday, the Cloaker, Bulldozer, Taser and Medics, or potentially even Captain Winters himself. The Cloaker would have a built in emote “Difficulty Tweak” featuring the iconic Cloaker screech. While Captain Winters could have his Shield as a Backbling.
A music pack, though unlikely, would be incredible. Payday’s soundtrack is full of absolutely perfect tracks for Fortnite such as Break The Rules, The Gauntlet, Mayhem Dressed In A Suit, Master Plan and more.
On the most extreme end of the spectrum, there could be a customizable Heister skin or skins, with unique options for suits, Armor, masks and more. Though this is very unlikely.
——
Breaking away from cosmetics and talking about other things, I’ll go into some potential POIs and gameplay features that could exist with a Payday crossover.
For POIs, there are quite a lot of possible options. The Golden Grin casino, the Safehouse, Murky Station or the Shadow Raid complex. They could even go small and have some of the banks from Bank heists.
If some or all of these locations were added, I could see a safe cracking mechanic being implemented, and just like in Payday, you would have to hold position and defend the vault while you break in.
If any mythic items were introduced, there are quite a few options available. I could easily see a “Dallas’ Medic Bag” as a slightly faster infinite use medkit, or even some iconic payday weapons like the Bootleg Rifle.
A unique version of the Getaway could be added as an LTM, featuring more Payday aesthetics and music.
And finally, onto legacy achievements. There’s quite a few I could see being added.
“Mayhem Dressed in a Suit”: Play a match as a member of the Payday Gang
“In a Pickle”: Take storm damage as Chains
“The Greatest Heist of All”: Win a match as a member of the Payday Gang
“I need a Medic Bag!”: Use a medkit as Dallas
“This Drill is a joke!”: Repair a broken drill while cracking a vault
“We call this a difficulty tweak”: Eliminate an opponent with your pickaxe while playing as a Cloaker
“Bobblehead Bob”: Get eliminated via fall damage during the Payday event
“It’s Payday”: Win a match of the Payday LTM
“Hoxton’s Revenge”: Eliminate a player your squad mate damaged while playing as Houston vs Hoxton.
What do you think? Have any other ideas? Please comment below for any feedback or ideas!

No discussion of Upper Class Billionaires would be complete without the Rothschilds.
A family dynasty synonymous with wealth.
But what is the true extent of this wealth?
Just how powerful is this relatively secretive family?
With various theories circulating on the Internet, can we reach a rational consensus?
Part 1/6 - The Architect?
Mayer Amschel is often cited as the founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
In 1770, he married Guttle Schnapper. This boosted Mayer's wealth, as he received a generous dowry of 2,400 gulden from her father (who worked as a court agent).
Mayer wouldn't forget this and, in his will, outlined strict, controversial provisions regarding Rothschild marriages.
Mayer was concerned that the family's fortune would be diluted as it grew through marriages. As such, his will "barred female descendants from any direct inheritance" and, in effect, provided incentives for intermarriages. Four of his granddaughters married grandsons (first cousins), while one married her uncle.
Now, is this really a tale of Started from the Bottom?
Or, much like Drake, is there a rich Uncle involved?
To answer that, we need to ask: who came before Mayer Amschel?
Well, his father, Amschel Moses had a business in goods-trading and currency exchange.
He was a personal supplier of collectable coins to the Prince of Hesse.
We'll come back to that shortly...
We know little about Mayer Amschel's grandparents and more remote ancestors.
The family did previously use the name "Bauer" - in fact the name Rothschild didn't really stick until Mayer Amschel's generation came along.
Benjamin Franklin once observed that in life only death and taxes are inevitable; they are also virtually the only things about which records survive for the earliest Rothschilds.
The most we can say about the early Rothschilds is that they were relatively successful small businessmen dealing in, among other things, cloth.
Five years before his death in 1585, Isak zum roten Schild had a taxable income of 2,700 gulden.
A century later his great-grandson Kalman, a moneychanger who also dealt in wool and silk, had a taxable income more than twice as large.
It seems that his son (Mayer Amschel's grandfather Moses) successfully developed his father's business, continuing the process of steady social ascent by marrying, successively, the daughters of a tax collector and of a doctor.
With the help of relatives, Mayer Amschel secured an apprenticeship under Jacob Wolf Oppenheimer, at the banking firm of Simon Wolf Oppenheimer in Hanover, in 1757, where he acquired useful knowledge in foreign trade and currency exchange, before returning to his brothers' business in Frankfurt in 1763.
He became a dealer in rare coins and, just as his father had done previously, won the patronage of the Prince of Hesse.
His coin business grew to include a number of princely patrons, and then expanded through the provision of financial services to the Prince of Hesse.
In 1769, Mayer Amschel gained the title of "Court Agent", managing the finances of the immensely wealthy Prince of Hesse who in 1785 became William IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel, and inherited one of the largest fortunes in Europe at the time.

Part 2/6 - The Five Arrows
The Rothschild coat-of-arms includes a fist clutching five arrows, a reference to Mayer's five sons.
At the turn of the nineteenth century, Mayer sent his sons to establish banks in Frankfurt, Naples, Vienna, France, and London.
The release of the "Five Arrows" symbolises strength through unity, and marks the beginning of the Rothschild's global banking dynasty.

Part 3/6 - Nathan Mayer
Napoleon was on the march through Europe, and William gave his fortune to Mayer Amschel to protect it from being seized by Napoleon.
Mayer was able to hide the money by sending it to his son Nathan in London.
The London Rothschild office had to spend it somewhere, and loaned it to the British Crown, in order to finance the British armies fighting Napoleon in Spain and Portugal in the Peninsular War.
These savvy investments of William's money paid off handsomely, netting sufficient interest that their own wealth eventually exceeded that of their original nest-egg client (the nest-egg client who had inherited the largest fortune in Europe remember).
This marked the birth of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
Historian Niall Ferguson outlines the sheer scale of the Rothschild family's operations:
"For most of the nineteenth century, N M Rothschild was part of the biggest bank in the world which dominated the international bond market. For a contemporary equivalent, one has to imagine a merger between Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, J P Morgan and probably Goldman Sachs too — as well, perhaps, as the International Monetary Fund, given the nineteen-century Rothschild's role in stabilizing the finances of numerous governments."
Nathan pioneered the ingenious strategy of lending to governments during wartime.
This tactic, used when Nathan funded Wellington's army in 1814, is the primary cause of the explosion in the family's wealth during what proved to be 150 years of nearly chronic warfare.
Of course, the Rothschilds played no role in instigating said conflicts...
Continual war in Europe created excellent opportunities to profit from smuggling scarce consumer goods past military blockades. Since the Rothschilds often financed both sides in a conflict and were known to have great political influence, the mere sight of the red shield on a leather pouch, a carriage, or a ship's flag was sufficient to insure that the messenger or his cargo could pass through check points in either direction. This immunity allowed them to deal in a thriving black market for cotton goods, yarn, tobacco, coffee, sugar, and indigo; and they moved freely through the borders of Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, Spain, England, and France.
This government protection was one of those indirect benefits that generated commercial profits - of course they were also getting interest on the underlying government loans.
Even the friendliest of biographers admit that, for more than two centuries, the House of Rothschild profited handsomely from wars and economic collapses, the very occasions on which others sustained the greatest losses.

Part 4/6 - Nat
The Rothschilds tend to keep tend to keep out of the limelight.
One of the family’s grande dames said you should only appear in the newspapers on three occasions: hatch (aka birth), match (aka marriage) and dispatch (aka death).
Therefore, this makes the odd flamboyant Rothschild stand out even more.
One that springs to mind is Nat Rothschild (Jacob Rothschild's son) and ex Bullingdon Club member who in 2016 married former Page 3 model Loretta Basey.
According to Forbes, Nat's net worth was $1 billion in 2012, but he lost his official billionaire status the next year.
However, according to an article in the Observer in 2000, Nat's actual inheritance is hidden in a series of trusts in Switzerland and rumoured to be worth £40BN (i.e. $60 billion.)

Part 5/6 - Ghislaine Maxwell?
Alan Dershoiwtz, who once defended Jeffrey Epstein in court, writes:
"My wife and I were introduced to Ghislaine Maxwell by Sir Evelyn and Lady Lynne de Rothschild..."
Evelyn de Rothschild and his wife Lynn were introduced by none other than Henry Kissinger at the 1998 Bilderberg Group conference in Scotland. They married two years later, and were invited to spend their honeymoon at the White House by the Clintons.
I have an idea!
Let's type Rothschild into the WikiLeaks Hilary Clinton Email Archive.
Nice. 69 results. Let's check out the intercourse between Hilary and Lynn.
How about this one - Info For You on the 25th of September 2010?
In that email chain, we have the following message from Hilary to Lynne.
"Lynn,
I was trying to reach you to tell you and Teddy that I asked Tony Blair to go to Israel as part of our full court press on keeping the Middle East negotiations going. He told me that he had a commitment in Aspen with you two and the conference, but after we talked, he decided to go and asked me to tell you. He is very sorry, obviously, but I'm grateful that he accepted my request. I hope you all understand and give him a raincheck...Let me know what penance I owe you. And please explain to Teddy. As ever, H"

Part 6/6 - True Extent
We come to the kicker: what is true extent of the Rothschild's wealth?
Of course, it is impossible to pin down an exact number because of the level of diversification of their wealth and the secrecy with which the offshore infrastructure operates.
After all, we know what happens to those that try to expose this shady world.
Worryingly, Panama is only one of more than 90 financial secrecy jurisdictions around the world today, compared with just a dozen or so in the early 1970s.
Together, as of 2015, they hold at least $24 trillion to $36 trillion in anonymous private financial wealth, most of which belong to the top 0.1 percent of the planet’s wealthiest.
Of course, none of this offshore wealth belongs to the Rothschilds...
In 2003, the Sunday Times identified Jacob Rothschild as the secret holder of the large stake in Yukos that was previously controlled by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil company's chairman.
The size of this stake? £8 billion.
In 2003, the pound dollar exchange rate was 1.63 - therefore the dollar value of the stake was around $13 billion.
In 2017, Jacob's net worth was pegged at under one billion dollars.
No comment...
According to the Forbes List, the richest individual Rothschild is Benjamin de Rothschild, from the French branch of the family, with a net worth of $1.5BN.
This is despite the fact that Benjamin presides over the Edmond de Rothschild Group, which manages over $175 billion in assets. In August 2019, de Rothschild's family bought out the group's public shareholders.
But yes, of course Benjamin, supposedly the richest Rothschild, is worth 2/3 of Donald Trump.
Speaking of Donald Trump...
Trump at one time owned a quarter of Atlantic City’s casino market.
However, Trump was heavily in debt, and he started missing bond payments on his — and Atlantic City’s — largest casino, the Taj Mahal, in 1990.
Wilbur Ross, then an investment banker working for...you guessed it, Rothschild Inc., helped bondholders negotiate with Trump, whose finances were unraveling. The final deal reduced Trump’s ownership stake in the Taj but left him in charge, and bondholders were unhappy when Ross presented the plan.
“Why did we make a deal with him?” one bondholder asked.
Ross insisted that Trump was worth saving.
“The Trump name is still very much an asset,” he said.
In 2017, Ross became Secretary of Commerce.
Remember folks: Presidents are selected... not elected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wbIGFgxJd0

https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/comprehensive-research-on-discrimination-against-men-in-finland/
This is a chapter-by-chapter summary of Discrimination Against Men: Appearance and Causes in the Context of a Modern Welfare State, a 2009 doctoral dissertation by Pasi Malmi (University of Lapland) that provides an impressively detailed and balanced investigation of discrimination against men in Finland (the theory and results actually give almost as much detail on discrimination against women, although men will be the focus here).
Chapters 5 to 8 are the most important. Chapter 5 explains six biases that cause gender discrimination, chapter 6 delineates the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems of Finnish society, chapter 7 examines the various discourses that justify discrimination against men, and chapter 8 analyzes a database of gender discrimination complaints made to the Finnish gender equality ombudsman, a third of which were made by men.
(Length: 1,800 words.)
Chapters 1 to 4 (introductory/background chapters)
Chapter 1 situates the perspective taken by the dissertation within gender studies. It rejects anti-feminist and anti-women perspectives, and the glorification of traditional masculinity and gender roles (e.g., the mythopoetic men’s movement). But it also rejects the “critical studies of men” paradigm, which sees men as the main causes of men’s and women’s problems, refuses to criticize feminism or women, and does not believe that discrimination against white, heterosexual, middle-class men exists (pp. 20–21).
Chapter 2 defines various relevant concepts, and explains that the findings from Finland are intended to be relevant primarily for the Northern European welfare states, and secondarily for other European and Anglo-American countries (pp. 32–34).
Chapter 3 gives a brief overview of current or traditional viewpoints on what causes direct or indirect discrimination or mistreatment of men: gender roles, hegemonic masculinity, industrial capitalism, feminism (specifically gender feminism and victimization feminism), and exploitative women (pp. 36-44).
Chapter 4 develops a theory of sociocultural evolution, which says that ideas that are simple, exaggerated, and coherent with popular paradigms generally win out over their rivals, regardless of whether they are true or backed up by evidence. This happens due to functional selection (p. 57), unintentional biases (p. 63), and interest group bias (p. 71), among other factors (see summary, p. 115).
Chapter 5: Applying the Theory to Gender Discrimination (p. 118)
This chapter develops a general theory of gender discrimination, centered on a typology of six different biases that cause gender discrimination (p. 127).
The masculine bias and feminine bias are unintentional gender biases caused by the processes that simplify, exaggerate, and mutate people’s mental memes or ideas according to their gender (p. 127). For example, a person’s conception of domestic work or childcare will be centered on their own experiences or contributions, which are partly determined by their gender, and so they will often downplay/exclude the other gender’s contributions (e.g., yardwork vs. housework) (pp. 135–138). As a result of these biases, segregated groups and networks of men or women tend to have a masculine-biased or feminine-biased culture of values, priorities, concepts, words, stories, jokes, stereotypes and beliefs that can lead to practices that discriminate against the other gender (p. 120). For example, a group of female social workers might decide that women are better custodians of children and default to recommending custody to them (pp. 141–142).
The masculist bias and feminist bias come from interest groups, networks, or movements seeking to advance the status of men or women, respectively. Masculism and feminism have sexist and anti-sexist branches (p. 143). The modern sexist branch of feminism includes theories like feminist standpoint epistemology (which gives special status to women’s feelings and intuitions) and the feminist theory of social work (interests of women and children are synonymous, social workers should identify with their female customers). It also includes stereotypes that women are unselfish, peaceful, responsible, loving, hard working, while men are the opposite (pp. 149–152). The anti-sexist branch of feminism by definition is less hostile towards men as people, but it is not necessarily able or willing to accept men’s issues: “[i]n general, the idea of the discrimination of men is perceived as bizarre by feminists” (pp. 155–158). The sexist branch of masculism is discussed primarily in the context of religion (pp. 144–129). The anti-sexist branch of masculism has little power, although it is discussed as sometimes being the source of biased statistics downplaying women’s issues (pp. 152–155).
The alpha male bias and alpha female bias are the biases of high status (wealthy, powerful, attractive, etc.) members of each gender against low status members of their gender. They are particularly apparent in high status men’s bias against male criminals (male judges giving harsher treatment, including sentences, to them compared to women) and high status women’s bias against female prostitutes (pp. 170–173).
A central point of this dissertation is that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations (the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems) are prone to predominantly discriminate against the other gender, but it’s important to clarify that they’re not guaranteed to do so. The masculine and feminine biases (the unintentional “own gender” biases) are just two of the six biases. An organization could be more influenced by the ideological biases (masculist and feminist biases) or the biases against low social status people of each gender (alpha male and alpha female biases).
Chapter 6: Locating the Patriarchal and Matriarchal Subsystems of the Finnish Society (p. 188)
This chapter identifies Finnish society’s patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems by looking at various measures of power, including raw numbers, managerial positions, control of knowledge, and informal positions of power (p. 222).

Patriarchal subsystem: technology, commerce, state finances, defense, agriculture, transportation, trade, corporative labor and employer organizations.
Matriarchal subsystem: healthcare, social services, social policy, equality policy, hotels, restaurants, and some cultural services.

Not all areas of Finnish society fall into one of these subsystems.
Chapter 7: An Empirical Examination of the Memeplexes, Discourses and Coalitions that Induce Discrimination against Men (p. 224)
This chapter analyzes the discourses that justify discrimination against men, coming from sources that include sexism and feminism.
Sexism: The development of the modern misandric versions of sexism is examined, including 19th century views of men as “barbarians whose urges had to be leashed in by the forces of decency—meaning women—if civilization were to survive” (p. 233), which it attributes to the joint interests of women and upper class men. Notions of chivalry and macho masculinity also lead to institutionalized belief systems where men’s comfort, health, and even lives are considered less important than women’s (p. 238). Macho masculinity, with its aversion to men “complaining”, tends to oppose talking about men’s issues or seeing them as relevant for gender equality (p. 306).
Feminism: Certain influential varieties of feminism see women as the disadvantaged and discriminated gender (p. 247). Thus the sole purpose of equality policy is women’s advancement (p. 256) and men are largely reduced to the role of defendant (p. 270). When faced with cases requiring a choice between promotion of equality and empowerment of women, many feminists reacted by rejecting equality as outdated or as a smokescreen for promoting men’s interests over women. Under these discourses, “the empowerment of women is more important than the advancement of gender equality in all contexts, including the matriarchal subsystem of the society” (pp. 259–260). That would apply even to women’s advantage in family courts and criminal courts (p. 305).
Also mentioned is a combination (and mutation) of difference feminism and equality feminism which says that “women are superior to men in many ways, but men are not superior to women in any ways” (p. 296)—which means that when men are ahead it’s because of sexism, but when women are ahead it is legitimate and natural.
The groups and alliances that justify misandry and discrimination against men (p. 334):
📷
Chapter 8: Gender Discrimination, According to the Complaints Sent to the Finnish Equality Ombudsman (p. 346)
Complaints: This chapter analyzes 800 complaints of gender discrimination made between 1997 and 2004 and sent to the Finnish equality ombudsman (p. 348). Men were 33% of victims, according to the author’s suggestion for the best measure of actual discrimination in these cases (outcome types 3–5, p. 356). Labour market discrimination, the largest category, primarily involved women (76%), while the second largest category, discrimination against customers, primarily involved men (~60%).
Another category, discriminative legislation, primarily involved men (77%). Few complaints were made, but due to active conscription policies (lasting 5-12 months), almost all men in Finland are affected by discriminative legislation. The author classifies these complaints as discrimination, although the equality ombudsman does not, “as the Finnish equality law is not applicable to men’s obligatory military service” (p. 354).
Bias: Per chapter 6, equality policy itself is in the matriarchal subsystem of equality (e.g., 90% of employees in the equality ombudsman office are female, p. 354). The ombudsman has a policy not to comment on complaints involving custody and divorce, purportedly to not interfere with the court system, but the author suggests that it stems from a bias against men, perhaps due to prioritizing women’s status over equality or wanting to avoid a flood of complaints from men (p. 354). This is made more explicit by another comment from the ombudsman’s office saying that it is not taking action on certain cases of discrimination against men because “the main purpose of the equality law is to improve women’s status especially in the labor market”, suggesting that the law should be applied more strictly to cases of discrimination against women (p. 381).
Patriarchal & matriarchal subsystems: 57% of discrimination cases in the matriarchal subsystem of society (as defined in chapter 6) were against men, compared to 31% in neutral domains, and 17% in the patriarchal subsystem of society (p. 358).
Discrimination examples: Many cases of discrimination against women (e.g., a workplace that only required women to do extra cleaning tasks on top of their regular duties) are recounted on the same pages but we’ll look at men here.

In the labour market: At a mental hospital, only men were appointed to night shifts (p. 374). At a school, preference was given to hiring female teachers even though men are the “underrepresented” gender (p. 376). Many traditionally feminine jobs excluded men in their recruitment material (p. 377). A workplace allowed women to wear more casual and comfortable clothing than men (p. 377).
As customers: Favourable pricing for women in boat cruises, discotheques & dancing places, dating services, gymnastics, a theatre, restaurants, horse races, and car insurance (pp. 380–382). Also more strict clothing standards for men at a casino, higher minimum ages for men to enter restaurants, and an apartment that only allowed women (pp. 382–383).
Government administration: Subsidy for women’s osteoporosis medicines but not men’s (from pension fund), free public screening for breast cancer but not prostate cancer, higher retirement age for men (which has been changed) (pp. 387–389).
Legislation: Men’s complaints were all about the obligatory military or civil service of six to thirteen months (those who refuse get six months in prison, p. 390).

Likely motives: Two alternative rating methods (tables 52 and 53) find that either (certain) feminist ideas are the most common motivators of discrimination against men, or sexism and the feminine bias are the most common motivators (feminine bias meaning unintentional gender bias of groups of women, counterpart to masculine bias of groups of men). Financial motives were also frequent (pp. 401-402).

No discussion of Upper Class Billionaires would be complete without the Rothschilds.
A family dynasty synonymous with wealth.
But what is the true extent of this wealth?
Just how powerful is this relatively secretive family?
With various theories circulating on the Internet, can we reach a rational consensus?
Part 1/6 - The Architect?
Mayer Amschel is often cited as the founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
In 1770, he married Guttle Schnapper. This boosted Mayer's wealth, as he received a generous dowry of 2,400 gulden from her father (who worked as a court agent).
Mayer wouldn't forget this and, in his will, outlined strict, controversial provisions regarding Rothschild marriages.
Mayer was concerned that the family's fortune would be diluted as it grew through marriages. As such, his will "barred female descendants from any direct inheritance" and, in effect, provided incentives for intermarriages. Four of his granddaughters married grandsons (first cousins), while one married her uncle.
Now, is this really a tale of Started from the Bottom?
Or, much like Drake, is there a rich Uncle involved?
To answer that, we need to ask: who came before Mayer Amschel?
Well, his father, Amschel Moses had a business in goods-trading and currency exchange.
He was a personal supplier of collectable coins to the Prince of Hesse.
We'll come back to that shortly...
We know little about Mayer Amschel's grandparents and more remote ancestors.
The family did previously use the name "Bauer" - in fact the name Rothschild didn't really stick until Mayer Amschel's generation came along.
Benjamin Franklin once observed that in life only death and taxes are inevitable; they are also virtually the only things about which records survive for the earliest Rothschilds.
The most we can say about the early Rothschilds is that they were relatively successful small businessmen dealing in, among other things, cloth.
Five years before his death in 1585, Isak zum roten Schild had a taxable income of 2,700 gulden.
A century later his great-grandson Kalman, a moneychanger who also dealt in wool and silk, had a taxable income more than twice as large.
It seems that his son (Mayer Amschel's grandfather Moses) successfully developed his father's business, continuing the process of steady social ascent by marrying, successively, the daughters of a tax collector and of a doctor.
With the help of relatives, Mayer Amschel secured an apprenticeship under Jacob Wolf Oppenheimer, at the banking firm of Simon Wolf Oppenheimer in Hanover, in 1757, where he acquired useful knowledge in foreign trade and currency exchange, before returning to his brothers' business in Frankfurt in 1763.
He became a dealer in rare coins and, just as his father had done previously, won the patronage of the Prince of Hesse.
His coin business grew to include a number of princely patrons, and then expanded through the provision of financial services to the Prince of Hesse.
In 1769, Mayer Amschel gained the title of "Court Agent", managing the finances of the immensely wealthy Prince of Hesse who in 1785 became William IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel, and inherited one of the largest fortunes in Europe at the time.

Part 2/6 - The Five Arrows
The Rothschild coat-of-arms includes a fist clutching five arrows, a reference to Mayer's five sons.
At the turn of the nineteenth century, Mayer sent his sons to establish banks in Frankfurt, Naples, Vienna, France, and London.
The release of the "Five Arrows" symbolises strength through unity, and marks the beginning of the Rothschild's global banking dynasty.

Part 3/6 - Nathan Mayer
Napoleon was on the march through Europe, and William gave his fortune to Mayer Amschel to protect it from being seized by Napoleon.
Mayer was able to hide the money by sending it to his son Nathan in London.
The London Rothschild office had to spend it somewhere, and loaned it to the British Crown, in order to finance the British armies fighting Napoleon in Spain and Portugal in the Peninsular War.
These savvy investments of William's money paid off handsomely, netting sufficient interest that their own wealth eventually exceeded that of their original nest-egg client (the nest-egg client who had inherited the largest fortune in Europe remember).
This marked the birth of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
Historian Niall Ferguson outlines the sheer scale of the Rothschild family's operations:
"For most of the nineteenth century, N M Rothschild was part of the biggest bank in the world which dominated the international bond market. For a contemporary equivalent, one has to imagine a merger between Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, J P Morgan and probably Goldman Sachs too — as well, perhaps, as the International Monetary Fund, given the nineteen-century Rothschild's role in stabilizing the finances of numerous governments."
Nathan pioneered the ingenious strategy of lending to governments during wartime.
This tactic, used when Nathan funded Wellington's army in 1814, is the primary cause of the explosion in the family's wealth during what proved to be 150 years of nearly chronic warfare.
Of course, the Rothschilds played no role in instigating said conflicts...
Continual war in Europe created excellent opportunities to profit from smuggling scarce consumer goods past military blockades. Since the Rothschilds often financed both sides in a conflict and were known to have great political influence, the mere sight of the red shield on a leather pouch, a carriage, or a ship's flag was sufficient to insure that the messenger or his cargo could pass through check points in either direction. This immunity allowed them to deal in a thriving black market for cotton goods, yarn, tobacco, coffee, sugar, and indigo; and they moved freely through the borders of Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, Spain, England, and France.
This government protection was one of those indirect benefits that generated commercial profits - of course they were also getting interest on the underlying government loans.
Even the friendliest of biographers admit that, for more than two centuries, the House of Rothschild profited handsomely from wars and economic collapses, the very occasions on which others sustained the greatest losses.

Part 4/6 - Nat
The Rothschilds tend to keep tend to keep out of the limelight.
One of the family’s grande dames said you should only appear in the newspapers on three occasions: hatch (aka birth), match (aka marriage) and dispatch (aka death).
Therefore, this makes the odd flamboyant Rothschild stand out even more.
One that springs to mind is Nat Rothschild (Jacob Rothschild's son) and ex Bullingdon Club member who in 2016 married former Page 3 model Loretta Basey.
According to Forbes, Nat's net worth was $1 billion in 2012, but he lost his official billionaire status the next year.
However, according to an article in the Observer in 2000, Nat's actual inheritance is hidden in a series of trusts in Switzerland and rumoured to be worth £40BN (i.e. $60 billion.)

Part 5/6 - Ghislaine Maxwell?
Alan Dershoiwtz, who once defended Jeffrey Epstein in court, writes:
"My wife and I were introduced to Ghislaine Maxwell by Sir Evelyn and Lady Lynne de Rothschild..."
Evelyn de Rothschild and his wife Lynn were introduced by none other than Henry Kissinger at the 1998 Bilderberg Group conference in Scotland. They married two years later, and were invited to spend their honeymoon at the White House by the Clintons.
I have an idea!
Let's type Rothschild into the WikiLeaks Hilary Clinton Email Archive.
Nice. 69 results. Let's check out the intercourse between Hilary and Lynn.
How about this one - Info For You on the 25th of September 2010?
In that email chain, we have the following message from Hilary to Lynne.
"Lynn,
I was trying to reach you to tell you and Teddy that I asked Tony Blair to go to Israel as part of our full court press on keeping the Middle East negotiations going. He told me that he had a commitment in Aspen with you two and the conference, but after we talked, he decided to go and asked me to tell you. He is very sorry, obviously, but I'm grateful that he accepted my request. I hope you all understand and give him a raincheck...Let me know what penance I owe you. And please explain to Teddy. As ever, H"

Part 6/6 - True Extent
We come to the kicker: what is true extent of the Rothschild's wealth?
Of course, it is impossible to pin down an exact number because of the level of diversification of their wealth and the secrecy with which the offshore infrastructure operates.
After all, we know what happens to those that try to expose this shady world.
Worryingly, Panama is only one of more than 90 financial secrecy jurisdictions around the world today, compared with just a dozen or so in the early 1970s.
Together, as of 2015, they hold at least $24 trillion to $36 trillion in anonymous private financial wealth, most of which belong to the top 0.1 percent of the planet’s wealthiest.
Of course, none of this offshore wealth belongs to the Rothschilds...
In 2003, the Sunday Times identified Jacob Rothschild as the secret holder of the large stake in Yukos that was previously controlled by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil company's chairman.
The size of this stake? £8 billion.
In 2003, the pound dollar exchange rate was 1.63 - therefore the dollar value of the stake was around $13 billion.
In 2017, Jacob's net worth was pegged at under one billion dollars.
No comment...
According to the Forbes List, the richest individual Rothschild is Benjamin de Rothschild, from the French branch of the family, with a net worth of $1.5BN.
This is despite the fact that Benjamin presides over the Edmond de Rothschild Group, which manages over $175 billion in assets. In August 2019, de Rothschild's family bought out the group's public shareholders.
But yes, of course Benjamin, supposedly the richest Rothschild, is worth 2/3 of Donald Trump.
Speaking of Donald Trump...
Trump at one time owned a quarter of Atlantic City’s casino market.
However, Trump was heavily in debt, and he started missing bond payments on his — and Atlantic City’s — largest casino, the Taj Mahal, in 1990.
Wilbur Ross, then an investment banker working for...you guessed it, Rothschild Inc., helped bondholders negotiate with Trump, whose finances were unraveling. The final deal reduced Trump’s ownership stake in the Taj but left him in charge, and bondholders were unhappy when Ross presented the plan.
“Why did we make a deal with him?” one bondholder asked.
Ross insisted that Trump was worth saving.
“The Trump name is still very much an asset,” he said.
In 2017, Ross became Secretary of Commerce.
Remember folks: Presidents are selected... not elected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wbIGFgxJd0

I am a former Wall Street quantitative trader and researcher in NYC. I have often seen people aspiring to be quants build projects themselves, but fall into the trap of blindly fitting statistical models to the data. I have written an article to give people a better insight into strategies deployed on the Street.

Arbitrage

One way traders make money is through an arbitrage or a risk free trade. Suppose you could buy an apple from Sam for $1, and then sell an apple to Megan at $3. A rational person would orchestrate both legs of these trades to gain $2 risk free.
Arbitrages are not only found in financial markets. The popular e-commerce strategy of drop-shipping is a form of arbitrage. Suppose you find a tripod selling on AliExpress at $10. You could list the same tripod on Amazon for $20. If someone buys from you, then you could simply purchase the tripod off AliExpress and take home a neat $10 profit.
The same could be applied to garage sales. If you find a baseball card for $2 that has a last sold price on EBay for $100, you have the potential to make $98. Of course this is not a perfect arbitrage as you face the risk of finding a buyer, but the upside makes this worthwhile.

Positive expected value bets

Another way traders make money is similar to the way a casino stacks the odds in their favour. Imagine you flip a fair coin. If it lands on heads you win $3, and if it lands on tails you lose $1. If you flip the coin only once, you may be unlucky and lose the dollar. However in the long run, you are expected to make a positive profit of $1 per coin flip. This is referred to as a positive expected value bet. Over the span of millions of transactions, you are almost guaranteed to make a profit.
This exact principle is why you should never gamble in casino games such as roulette. These games are all negative expected value bets, which guarantees you to lose money over the long run. Of course there are exceptions to this, such as poker or card counting in black jack.
The next time you walk into a casino, make a mental note to observe the ways it is designed to keep you there for as long as possible. Note the lack of windows and the maze like configurations. Even the free drinks and the cheap accommodation are all a farce to keep you there.

Relative Pricing

Relative pricing is a great strategy to use when there are two products that have clear causal relationships. Let us consider an apple and a carton of apple juice. Suppose there have a causal relationship where the carton is always $9 more expensive than the apple. The apple and the carton is currently trading at $1 and $10 respectively.
If the price of the apple goes up to $2, the price is not immediately reflected on the carton. There will always be a time lag. It is also important to note that there is no way we can determine if the apple is trading at fair value or if its overpriced. So how do we take advantage of this situation?
If we buy the carton for $10 and sell the apple for $2, we have essentially bought the ‘spread’ for $8. The spread is fairly valued at $9 due to the causal relationship, meaning we have made $1. The reason high frequency trading firms focus so much on latency in the nanoseconds is to be the first to scoop up these relative mispricing.
This is the backbone for delta one strategies. Common pairs that are traded against each other includes ETFs and their inverse counterpart, a particular stock against an ETF that contains the stock, or synthetic option structures.

Correlations

Correlations are mutual connections between two things. When they trend in the same direction they are said to have a positive correlation, and the vice versa is true for negative correlations. A popular example of positive correlation is the number of shark attacks with the number of ice-cream sales. It is important to note that shark attacks do not cause ice-cream sales.
Often times there are no intuitive reason for certain correlations, but they still work. The legendary Renaissance Technologies sifted through petabytes of historical data to find profitable signals. For instance, good morning weather in a city tended to predict an upward movement in its stock exchange. One could theoretically buy stock on the opening and sell at noon to make a profit.
One important piece of advice is to disregard any retail trader selling a course to you, claiming that they have a system. These are all scams. At best, these are bottom of the mill signals that are hardly profitable after transaction costs. It is also unlikely that you have the system latency, trading experience or research capabilities to do this on your own. It is possible, but very difficult.

Mean reversions

Another common strategy traders rely on is mean reversion trends. In the options world the primary focus is purchasing volatility when it is cheap compared to historical values, and vice versa. Buying options is essentially synonymous with buying volatility. Of course, it is not as simple as this so don’t go punting your savings on Robinhood using this strategy.
For most people, the most applicable mean reversion trend is interest rates. These tend to fluctuate up and down depending on if the central banks want to stimulate saving or spending. As global interest rates are next to zero or negative, it may be a good idea to lock in this low rate for your mortgages. Again, consult with a financial advisor before you do anything.

https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/comprehensive-research-on-discrimination-against-men-in-finland/
This is a chapter-by-chapter summary of Discrimination Against Men: Appearance and Causes in the Context of a Modern Welfare State, a 2009 doctoral dissertation by Pasi Malmi (University of Lapland) that provides an impressively detailed and balanced investigation of discrimination against men in Finland (the theory and results actually give almost as much detail on discrimination against women, although men will be the focus here).
Chapters 5 to 8 are the most important. Chapter 5 explains six biases that cause gender discrimination, chapter 6 delineates the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems of Finnish society, chapter 7 examines the various discourses that justify discrimination against men, and chapter 8 analyzes a database of gender discrimination complaints made to the Finnish gender equality ombudsman, a third of which were made by men.
(Length: 1,800 words.)
Chapters 1 to 4 (introductory/background chapters)
Chapter 1 situates the perspective taken by the dissertation within gender studies. It rejects anti-feminist and anti-women perspectives, and the glorification of traditional masculinity and gender roles (e.g., the mythopoetic men’s movement). But it also rejects the “critical studies of men” paradigm, which sees men as the main causes of men’s and women’s problems, refuses to criticize feminism or women, and does not believe that discrimination against white, heterosexual, middle-class men exists (pp. 20–21).
Chapter 2 defines various relevant concepts, and explains that the findings from Finland are intended to be relevant primarily for the Northern European welfare states, and secondarily for other European and Anglo-American countries (pp. 32–34).
Chapter 3 gives a brief overview of current or traditional viewpoints on what causes direct or indirect discrimination or mistreatment of men: gender roles, hegemonic masculinity, industrial capitalism, feminism (specifically gender feminism and victimization feminism), and exploitative women (pp. 36-44).
Chapter 4 develops a theory of sociocultural evolution, which says that ideas that are simple, exaggerated, and coherent with popular paradigms generally win out over their rivals, regardless of whether they are true or backed up by evidence. This happens due to functional selection (p. 57), unintentional biases (p. 63), and interest group bias (p. 71), among other factors (see summary, p. 115).
Chapter 5: Applying the Theory to Gender Discrimination (p. 118)
This chapter develops a general theory of gender discrimination, centered on a typology of six different biases that cause gender discrimination (p. 127).
The masculine bias and feminine bias are unintentional gender biases caused by the processes that simplify, exaggerate, and mutate people’s mental memes or ideas according to their gender (p. 127). For example, a person’s conception of domestic work or childcare will be centered on their own experiences or contributions, which are partly determined by their gender, and so they will often downplay/exclude the other gender’s contributions (e.g., yardwork vs. housework) (pp. 135–138). As a result of these biases, segregated groups and networks of men or women tend to have a masculine-biased or feminine-biased culture of values, priorities, concepts, words, stories, jokes, stereotypes and beliefs that can lead to practices that discriminate against the other gender (p. 120). For example, a group of female social workers might decide that women are better custodians of children and default to recommending custody to them (pp. 141–142).
The masculist bias and feminist bias come from interest groups, networks, or movements seeking to advance the status of men or women, respectively. Masculism and feminism have sexist and anti-sexist branches (p. 143). The modern sexist branch of feminism includes theories like feminist standpoint epistemology (which gives special status to women’s feelings and intuitions) and the feminist theory of social work (interests of women and children are synonymous, social workers should identify with their female customers). It also includes stereotypes that women are unselfish, peaceful, responsible, loving, hard working, while men are the opposite (pp. 149–152). The anti-sexist branch of feminism by definition is less hostile towards men as people, but it is not necessarily able or willing to accept men’s issues: “[i]n general, the idea of the discrimination of men is perceived as bizarre by feminists” (pp. 155–158). The sexist branch of masculism is discussed primarily in the context of religion (pp. 144–129). The anti-sexist branch of masculism has little power, although it is discussed as sometimes being the source of biased statistics downplaying women’s issues (pp. 152–155).
The alpha male bias and alpha female bias are the biases of high status (wealthy, powerful, attractive, etc.) members of each gender against low status members of their gender. They are particularly apparent in high status men’s bias against male criminals (male judges giving harsher treatment, including sentences, to them compared to women) and high status women’s bias against female prostitutes (pp. 170–173).
A central point of this dissertation is that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations (the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems) are prone to predominantly discriminate against the other gender, but it’s important to clarify that they’re not guaranteed to do so. The masculine and feminine biases (the unintentional “own gender” biases) are just two of the six biases. An organization could be more influenced by the ideological biases (masculist and feminist biases) or the biases against low social status people of each gender (alpha male and alpha female biases).
Chapter 6: Locating the Patriarchal and Matriarchal Subsystems of the Finnish Society (p. 188)
This chapter identifies Finnish society’s patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems by looking at various measures of power, including raw numbers, managerial positions, control of knowledge, and informal positions of power (p. 222).

Patriarchal subsystem: technology, commerce, state finances, defense, agriculture, transportation, trade, corporative labor and employer organizations.
Matriarchal subsystem: healthcare, social services, social policy, equality policy, hotels, restaurants, and some cultural services.

Not all areas of Finnish society fall into one of these subsystems.
Chapter 7: An Empirical Examination of the Memeplexes, Discourses and Coalitions that Induce Discrimination against Men (p. 224)
This chapter analyzes the discourses that justify discrimination against men, coming from sources that include sexism and feminism.
Sexism: The development of the modern misandric versions of sexism is examined, including 19th century views of men as “barbarians whose urges had to be leashed in by the forces of decency—meaning women—if civilization were to survive” (p. 233), which it attributes to the joint interests of women and upper class men. Notions of chivalry and macho masculinity also lead to institutionalized belief systems where men’s comfort, health, and even lives are considered less important than women’s (p. 238). Macho masculinity, with its aversion to men “complaining”, tends to oppose talking about men’s issues or seeing them as relevant for gender equality (p. 306).
Feminism: Certain influential varieties of feminism see women as the disadvantaged and discriminated gender (p. 247). Thus the sole purpose of equality policy is women’s advancement (p. 256) and men are largely reduced to the role of defendant (p. 270). When faced with cases requiring a choice between promotion of equality and empowerment of women, many feminists reacted by rejecting equality as outdated or as a smokescreen for promoting men’s interests over women. Under these discourses, “the empowerment of women is more important than the advancement of gender equality in all contexts, including the matriarchal subsystem of the society” (pp. 259–260). That would apply even to women’s advantage in family courts and criminal courts (p. 305).
Also mentioned is a combination (and mutation) of difference feminism and equality feminism which says that “women are superior to men in many ways, but men are not superior to women in any ways” (p. 296)—which means that when men are ahead it’s because of sexism, but when women are ahead it is legitimate and natural.
The groups and alliances that justify misandry and discrimination against men (p. 334):
📷
Chapter 8: Gender Discrimination, According to the Complaints Sent to the Finnish Equality Ombudsman (p. 346)
Complaints: This chapter analyzes 800 complaints of gender discrimination made between 1997 and 2004 and sent to the Finnish equality ombudsman (p. 348). Men were 33% of victims, according to the author’s suggestion for the best measure of actual discrimination in these cases (outcome types 3–5, p. 356). Labour market discrimination, the largest category, primarily involved women (76%), while the second largest category, discrimination against customers, primarily involved men (~60%).
Another category, discriminative legislation, primarily involved men (77%). Few complaints were made, but due to active conscription policies (lasting 5-12 months), almost all men in Finland are affected by discriminative legislation. The author classifies these complaints as discrimination, although the equality ombudsman does not, “as the Finnish equality law is not applicable to men’s obligatory military service” (p. 354).
Bias: Per chapter 6, equality policy itself is in the matriarchal subsystem of equality (e.g., 90% of employees in the equality ombudsman office are female, p. 354). The ombudsman has a policy not to comment on complaints involving custody and divorce, purportedly to not interfere with the court system, but the author suggests that it stems from a bias against men, perhaps due to prioritizing women’s status over equality or wanting to avoid a flood of complaints from men (p. 354). This is made more explicit by another comment from the ombudsman’s office saying that it is not taking action on certain cases of discrimination against men because “the main purpose of the equality law is to improve women’s status especially in the labor market”, suggesting that the law should be applied more strictly to cases of discrimination against women (p. 381).
Patriarchal & matriarchal subsystems: 57% of discrimination cases in the matriarchal subsystem of society (as defined in chapter 6) were against men, compared to 31% in neutral domains, and 17% in the patriarchal subsystem of society (p. 358).
Discrimination examples: Many cases of discrimination against women (e.g., a workplace that only required women to do extra cleaning tasks on top of their regular duties) are recounted on the same pages but we’ll look at men here.

In the labour market: At a mental hospital, only men were appointed to night shifts (p. 374). At a school, preference was given to hiring female teachers even though men are the “underrepresented” gender (p. 376). Many traditionally feminine jobs excluded men in their recruitment material (p. 377). A workplace allowed women to wear more casual and comfortable clothing than men (p. 377).
As customers: Favourable pricing for women in boat cruises, discotheques & dancing places, dating services, gymnastics, a theatre, restaurants, horse races, and car insurance (pp. 380–382). Also more strict clothing standards for men at a casino, higher minimum ages for men to enter restaurants, and an apartment that only allowed women (pp. 382–383).
Government administration: Subsidy for women’s osteoporosis medicines but not men’s (from pension fund), free public screening for breast cancer but not prostate cancer, higher retirement age for men (which has been changed) (pp. 387–389).
Legislation: Men’s complaints were all about the obligatory military or civil service of six to thirteen months (those who refuse get six months in prison, p. 390).

Likely motives: Two alternative rating methods (tables 52 and 53) find that either (certain) feminist ideas are the most common motivators of discrimination against men, or sexism and the feminine bias are the most common motivators (feminine bias meaning unintentional gender bias of groups of women, counterpart to masculine bias of groups of men). Financial motives were also frequent (pp. 401-402).

No discussion of Upper Class Billionaires would be complete without the Rothschilds.
A family dynasty synonymous with wealth.
But what is the true extent of this wealth?
Just how powerful is this relatively secretive family?
With various theories circulating on the Internet, can we reach a rational consensus?
Part 1/6 - The Architect?
Mayer Amschel is often cited as the founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
In 1770, he married Guttle Schnapper. This boosted Mayer's wealth, as he received a generous dowry of 2,400 gulden from her father (who worked as a court agent).
Mayer wouldn't forget this and, in his will, outlined strict, controversial provisions regarding Rothschild marriages.
Mayer was concerned that the family's fortune would be diluted as it grew through marriages. As such, his will "barred female descendants from any direct inheritance" and, in effect, provided incentives for intermarriages. Four of his granddaughters married grandsons (first cousins), while one married her uncle.
Now, is this really a tale of Started from the Bottom?
Or, much like Drake, is there a rich Uncle involved?
To answer that, we need to ask: who came before Mayer Amschel?
Well, his father, Amschel Moses had a business in goods-trading and currency exchange.
He was a personal supplier of collectable coins to the Prince of Hesse.
We'll come back to that shortly...
We know little about Mayer Amschel's grandparents and more remote ancestors.
The family did previously use the name "Bauer" - in fact the name Rothschild didn't really stick until Mayer Amschel's generation came along.
Benjamin Franklin once observed that in life only death and taxes are inevitable; they are also virtually the only things about which records survive for the earliest Rothschilds.
The most we can say about the early Rothschilds is that they were relatively successful small businessmen dealing in, among other things, cloth.
Five years before his death in 1585, Isak zum roten Schild had a taxable income of 2,700 gulden.
A century later his great-grandson Kalman, a moneychanger who also dealt in wool and silk, had a taxable income more than twice as large.
It seems that his son (Mayer Amschel's grandfather Moses) successfully developed his father's business, continuing the process of steady social ascent by marrying, successively, the daughters of a tax collector and of a doctor.
With the help of relatives, Mayer Amschel secured an apprenticeship under Jacob Wolf Oppenheimer, at the banking firm of Simon Wolf Oppenheimer in Hanover, in 1757, where he acquired useful knowledge in foreign trade and currency exchange, before returning to his brothers' business in Frankfurt in 1763.
He became a dealer in rare coins and, just as his father had done previously, won the patronage of the Prince of Hesse.
His coin business grew to include a number of princely patrons, and then expanded through the provision of financial services to the Prince of Hesse.
In 1769, Mayer Amschel gained the title of "Court Agent", managing the finances of the immensely wealthy Prince of Hesse who in 1785 became William IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel, and inherited one of the largest fortunes in Europe at the time.

Part 2/6 - The Five Arrows
The Rothschild coat-of-arms includes a fist clutching five arrows, a reference to Mayer's five sons.
At the turn of the nineteenth century, Mayer sent his sons to establish banks in Frankfurt, Naples, Vienna, France, and London.
The release of the "Five Arrows" symbolises strength through unity, and marks the beginning of the Rothschild's global banking dynasty.

Part 3/6 - Nathan Mayer
Napoleon was on the march through Europe, and William gave his fortune to Mayer Amschel to protect it from being seized by Napoleon.
Mayer was able to hide the money by sending it to his son Nathan in London.
The London Rothschild office had to spend it somewhere, and loaned it to the British Crown, in order to finance the British armies fighting Napoleon in Spain and Portugal in the Peninsular War.
These savvy investments of William's money paid off handsomely, netting sufficient interest that their own wealth eventually exceeded that of their original nest-egg client (the nest-egg client who had inherited the largest fortune in Europe remember).
This marked the birth of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
Historian Niall Ferguson outlines the sheer scale of the Rothschild family's operations:
"For most of the nineteenth century, N M Rothschild was part of the biggest bank in the world which dominated the international bond market. For a contemporary equivalent, one has to imagine a merger between Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, J P Morgan and probably Goldman Sachs too — as well, perhaps, as the International Monetary Fund, given the nineteen-century Rothschild's role in stabilizing the finances of numerous governments."
Nathan pioneered the ingenious strategy of lending to governments during wartime.
This tactic, used when Nathan funded Wellington's army in 1814, is the primary cause of the explosion in the family's wealth during what proved to be 150 years of nearly chronic warfare.
Of course, the Rothschilds played no role in instigating said conflicts...
Continual war in Europe created excellent opportunities to profit from smuggling scarce consumer goods past military blockades. Since the Rothschilds often financed both sides in a conflict and were known to have great political influence, the mere sight of the red shield on a leather pouch, a carriage, or a ship's flag was sufficient to insure that the messenger or his cargo could pass through check points in either direction. This immunity allowed them to deal in a thriving black market for cotton goods, yarn, tobacco, coffee, sugar, and indigo; and they moved freely through the borders of Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, Spain, England, and France.
This government protection was one of those indirect benefits that generated commercial profits - of course they were also getting interest on the underlying government loans.
Even the friendliest of biographers admit that, for more than two centuries, the House of Rothschild profited handsomely from wars and economic collapses, the very occasions on which others sustained the greatest losses.

Part 4/6 - Nat
The Rothschilds tend to keep tend to keep out of the limelight.
One of the family’s grande dames said you should only appear in the newspapers on three occasions: hatch (aka birth), match (aka marriage) and dispatch (aka death).
Therefore, this makes the odd flamboyant Rothschild stand out even more.
One that springs to mind is Nat Rothschild (Jacob Rothschild's son) and ex Bullingdon Club member who in 2016 married former Page 3 model Loretta Basey.
According to Forbes, Nat's net worth was $1 billion in 2012, but he lost his official billionaire status the next year.
However, according to an article in the Observer in 2000, Nat's actual inheritance is hidden in a series of trusts in Switzerland and rumoured to be worth £40BN (i.e. $60 billion.)

Part 5/6 - Ghislaine Maxwell?
Alan Dershoiwtz, who once defended Jeffrey Epstein in court, writes:
"My wife and I were introduced to Ghislaine Maxwell by Sir Evelyn and Lady Lynne de Rothschild..."
Evelyn de Rothschild and his wife Lynn were introduced by none other than Henry Kissinger at the 1998 Bilderberg Group conference in Scotland. They married two years later, and were invited to spend their honeymoon at the White House by the Clintons.
I have an idea!
Let's type Rothschild into the WikiLeaks Hilary Clinton Email Archive.
Nice. 69 results. Let's check out the intercourse between Hilary and Lynn.
How about this one - Info For You on the 25th of September 2010?
In that email chain, we have the following message from Hilary to Lynne.
"Lynn,
I was trying to reach you to tell you and Teddy that I asked Tony Blair to go to Israel as part of our full court press on keeping the Middle East negotiations going. He told me that he had a commitment in Aspen with you two and the conference, but after we talked, he decided to go and asked me to tell you. He is very sorry, obviously, but I'm grateful that he accepted my request. I hope you all understand and give him a raincheck...Let me know what penance I owe you. And please explain to Teddy. As ever, H"

Part 6/6 - True Extent
We come to the kicker: what is true extent of the Rothschild's wealth?
Of course, it is impossible to pin down an exact number because of the level of diversification of their wealth and the secrecy with which the offshore infrastructure operates.
After all, we know what happens to those that try to expose this shady world.
Worryingly, Panama is only one of more than 90 financial secrecy jurisdictions around the world today, compared with just a dozen or so in the early 1970s.
Together, as of 2015, they hold at least $24 trillion to $36 trillion in anonymous private financial wealth, most of which belong to the top 0.1 percent of the planet’s wealthiest.
Of course, none of this offshore wealth belongs to the Rothschilds...
In 2003, the Sunday Times identified Jacob Rothschild as the secret holder of the large stake in Yukos that was previously controlled by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oil company's chairman.
The size of this stake? £8 billion.
In 2003, the pound dollar exchange rate was 1.63 - therefore the dollar value of the stake was around $13 billion.
In 2017, Jacob's net worth was pegged at under one billion dollars.
No comment...
According to the Forbes List, the richest individual Rothschild is Benjamin de Rothschild, from the French branch of the family, with a net worth of $1.5BN.
This is despite the fact that Benjamin presides over the Edmond de Rothschild Group, which manages over $175 billion in assets. In August 2019, de Rothschild's family bought out the group's public shareholders.
But yes, of course Benjamin, supposedly the richest Rothschild, is worth 2/3 of Donald Trump.
Speaking of Donald Trump...
Trump at one time owned a quarter of Atlantic City’s casino market.
However, Trump was heavily in debt, and he started missing bond payments on his — and Atlantic City’s — largest casino, the Taj Mahal, in 1990.
Wilbur Ross, then an investment banker working for...you guessed it, Rothschild Inc., helped bondholders negotiate with Trump, whose finances were unraveling. The final deal reduced Trump’s ownership stake in the Taj but left him in charge, and bondholders were unhappy when Ross presented the plan.
“Why did we make a deal with him?” one bondholder asked.
Ross insisted that Trump was worth saving.
“The Trump name is still very much an asset,” he said.
In 2017, Ross became Secretary of Commerce.
Remember folks: Presidents are selected... not elected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wbIGFgxJd0

CASINO Synonym-Lexikothek • ein anderes Wort für Casino

casino synonym

casino synonym - win

Brand New Asian Men Hairstyles. american orgy Search SVERIGE APOTEK LIFE Enchanted Oz Slot Machine, chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number is a unique identifier for a chemical and its synonyms. The relative lack of tribal casinos in Canada reduces this potential bias, and same logic ...

Romantic Heroes approved by Bicycle 🍀 synonymous with beauty, quality, durability, handling Soon on Kickstarter https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gunplatop/romantic-heroes. #card #player #playing #casino #kiss #love

Fuck it. This isn’t about money anymore. It’s about principle. I’m holding until I die.

The Pretty Idiot's Guide to Human Space: Rugen (part 1)

Please, Please ban use of the words autist, autistic and autism on here. It's not funny, it's highly offensive and disrespectful.

Chapter by Chapter Summary of Comprehensive Research on Discrimination Against Men in Finland (PhD Thesis)

What can you do as an MRA?

Main Body - Here it is:

5 Strategies in Quant Trading Algorithms

What it was like trading on Wall Street

Arbitrage

Positive expected value bets

Relative Pricing

Correlations

Mean reversions

Star Wars Sequel Trilogy (I know this has been done before, but I have been thinking about this a lot lately)

Designing a Crossover: PAYDAY

The Rothschilds - A Rational Overview

An Excellent comprehensive PHD Research on Discrimination Against Men in Finland (applicable elsewhere of course). See This post for summary

The Rothschilds - A Rational Overview

Basic Quant Trading Strategies

Arbitrage

Positive expected value bets

Relative Pricing

Correlations

Mean reversions

An Excellent comprehensive PHD Research on Discrimination Against Men in Finland (applicable elsewhere of course). See This post for summary

The Rothschilds - A Rational Overview

What you are looking for is..... (Link in the Desc.)2

casino synonym video

casino synonym top

LE MEILLEUR JEU - YouTube