General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Hyperpandas
The Plain Bagel
comments

Comments by "Hyperpandas" (@Hyperpandas) on "The Plain Bagel" channel.

Quick notes for new investors: 1. NEVER use an "advisor" you find in a youtube comment thread (including all the ones you'll find below). 2. If you just walk into a bank to talk to someone about investments, they'll likely be more sales agents than genuine advisors, trying to sell you the bank's (possibly expensive) products. 3. Deep dive The Plain Bagel's videos, and the other channels he sometimes lists (e.g. Ben Felix) to pick up a bunch of great tips, learn how it all works, and things to watch out for and avoid (like your buddy telling you to jump on the latest fad). This can all be confusing, but it doesn't have to be complicated. Good luck!
361
For anyone who's young and feeling like this is too big and too far off to meaningfully plan for, the best thing you can do is make a goal to max out your TFSA (for Canadians) every year. That works out to $500 per month from the age of 18. Don't sweat it if you can't do it, or if you take a few years out when money is tight. But try to stretch to make it, and then leave it alone. You can even set up automatic deductions from your bank account every paycheque, and then automatic investment into something simple and low cost (funds like VEQT or XEQT). Don't chase fads. As you make more money later on, try to increase your saving/investments, whether that's RRSPs, purchasing a home, or something else. Just regular savings and investments from an early age will put you in a good spot when you get closer to retirement and can better imagine what you'll need. If you put that off, you'll have to save more later on to make up for the little you didn't save when you were younger. The longer your money has to grow, the more you'll have when you retire. It's also less risky than trying to save a lot quickly when you're older.
57
There is an interest in you going through a step by step example and maybe diving into the details (1:40). Signed, probably everyone who watches your videos. 😀 PS: Only if you want to. This video is great as it is too.
42
@Jose04537 The place to have that conversation is the budget, not the debt ceiling. By all means, Congress should be having discussions about long term spending and revenues, but threatening the solvency of the government, which is following budgets and obligations already passed by Congress, is foolish.
39
A meaningless statement if ever there was one.
29
As they should. The debt ceiling is about paying debts that have already been incurred, mostly through obligations that have already been approved by Congress. Reducing government spending during economic expansion is a budget conversation.
21
Indeed, excel is life. Having a love for excel is *perfectly natural*, and don't let anyone tell you differently, you magnificent bastard!
16
Bruh, if you divide your time by your 0 assets, you'll create a black hole that results in $1 billion by the time you're 30. Don't forget the chin ups and stay swoll.
14
@We.Evolve My comment is probably far too late, and someone else already said it, but please don't connect with any so-called financial advisors that approach you or refer you in a youtube comment thread. They're everywhere, often magnified by bots providing fake endorsements, and they're always a scam.
12
As an example for proof of concept, especially for those who are holding off from investing for fear of a crash. I purchased an ETF (US small cap value stocks) in March of last year, then I watched as it dropped 30-35% in value (thousands of dollars of loss). I'd mentally prepared for this, and had done my homework on the ETF, so I hung in there. In the past 12 months, it grew 54% so that the investment is now a gain of about 35% above the initial investment. Sure, I would have made more if I'd held off a month or two, but there was no way to know what would happen. Results will vary, but the lesson is to not delay action out of fear, but similarly not to panic if things go south. If you're a long term investor, you'll be fine.
10
Hally Cricket That's a lot of ten dollar words you crammed into your scammy advertisement for a dodgy investment advisor.....
10
You didn't point out a strawman. And I doubt anyone thinks gold's market value is entirely a function of its use value, but at least it has some. Bitcoin doesn't even have that. USD does by its virtue of being an actual currency/medium of exchange. That bitcoin's value is effectively entirely speculative is an important issue that people should come to terms with when deciding whether they want to put any money to it.
10
Wouldn't that basically pull the channel exactly where he doesn't want it to go (I.e. politics)? Might be worth considering if Poillievre offered an interview (maybe, but not necessarily), but actually seeking an interview from him? The only reason to do that would be political.
9
This video is a masterpiece. Well done, sir, well done.
9
Oof, and just to remove confusion, the posts that appear to be from The Plain Bagel aren't. It's a scammer bot, and the real Bagel has even made a video about it.
8
@ryanwalker3509 Having more industrial uses just means a greater share of the price is real. It really has no bearing on the speculative aspects, which is what this video is talking about with respect to gold.
7
@ZotyLisu Isn't someone saying they usually always support tax cuts as silly as someone saying they usually always support tax increases? It's up to a society to decide the role they want government to have in their lives, and then pay accordingly.
6
@FaustsKanaal In Canada, they have options. For example, they could pay themselves salary/dividends at better rates than normal salaried rates and then channel those incomes into tax deferred or tax free accounts like anyone else. They could also put them into taxed accounts, and this change wouldn't affect them unless they realized a gain in a year in excess of something like 300k, which is unlikely. Note, to realize a gain you have to actually sell the asset. Finally, even if they keep things in their corporation, presumably because it's even more tax advantaged than the above, they're still doing fine. Is it more tax than they've been paying? Sure, but it's still at lower rates than most Canadians pay.
6
Douchiness of your question aside, there are options. Free etf purchases on some platforms and free mutual fund purchases on others. To the extent that what's purchased has low management costs, someone with little money to invest can accumulate in those holdings.
5
Lol, I see what you did there....
5
Eh... I think you're wrong, unless I'm missing your point. Obviously, nobody wants to end up with an asset that's worth less than they paid for it, but it's wise to look to more than the speculative value of an asset. Case in point, something like bitcoin is almost solely speculative value with nothing underpinning it if, for example, people move en masse to a different FOTM. By comparison, even if everyone lost confidence in a company, driving the stock price down, it's earnings and assets are real value that are (presumably temporarily) just not reflected in the price, and there can be reasonable expectation that the price could recover to reflect that value. Even your apartment example has actual value beyond its price, such as offset cost (rent otherwise paid for a place to live) or rental income. By not separating speculative and investment value, you may find yourself running much more downside risk or missing upside opportunities.
5
I see it a bit differently, and worse. It really was just a big pump and dump scheme that was dressed up in a "common person vs the billionaires"story. But, both the retail investors flocking to game stop and the hedge funds that (ironically) made the most money off it, were just pushing the price up way beyond the fundamentals, and all but the least knowledgeable had to know they'd have to exit, with everyone left holding the bag. So, not a gamble, but more of a scam.
5
@raaaaaaaaaam496 The wageslave part, as you noted, and the general condescension toward people with limited funds to invest. The math is correct, obviously, though there are ways to avoid the costs as mentioned earlier.
4
@VacouverCanucks I'm giving it a lololol. In other words, the legendary triple kek.
4
@Jackson-nd5fr Don't trust her if you see her promoted in youtube comment threads. It's a scam. Otherwise, I have no idea if she's good. But just know that crypto is more like gambling than investing.
4
@FaustsKanaal While all of that is true, there isn't really a public policy incentive to compensate that risk with lower taxes on your income. On the contrary, your compensation for the risk is presumably the potential to make more money by booking more jobs, growing your company such that other employees make you money, etc.
4
@loganmiat Harsh, but accurate.
4
Unlikely. While it's true that people who just bought may find themselves unable to recoup their costs if they sold in the near future, the number of people in that position who need to sell isn't likely to be high. You won't see a market collapse in any of those markets, and the conditions you described aren't the only factors that led to the 2008 crash and the resulting real estate crash in parts of the US.
3
@alexrodriguez1534 You believe a recession can be ended by slashing government spending? Lol, ok... and I suppose it requires pixie dust too?
3
Gold isn't a good long term bet, and inflation eats at its value also.
3
You're working the wrong side of the problem.
3
So you want people to become financially ruined (the predicate for a crash) to make it easier for other people to... not have to pay as much for housing?
3
@ZotyLisu Considerimg people require the government to do stuff, yeah, it is.
3
Not sure I follow your argument here. If a small business owner has invested a million dollars and realizes a capital gain of 5% each year, then 1/3 of that gain is still tax free and the other 2/3 is subject to your normal corporate tax. The only change is to the inclusion rate, which was 1/2. Not sure that most small businesses even have capital gains unless or until they are sold or have to dispose of some property. In the case of the former, they still get preferential treatment than any salaried worker receives by accumulating wealth through their labor. Finally, I don't believe dividend rates are affected by this at all. So small business owners can still pay themselves a small salary and dividends each year, once again resulting in lower taxes than salaried workers with equivalent gross incomes.
3
@kazmodan82 I mean, everyone has an opinion, but I disagree with yours here. PMO asked for an interview, Poillievre hasn't. Current government sets policy, opposition doesn't. Interview focussed on details and rationale behind initiatives in a budget, not campaign promises. The conversation didn't get especially partisan either. For the record, if a similar situation came along when Harper was PM or if Poillievre becomes PM, the only rationale to invite Trudeau (assuming he was the opposition) to do an interview would be political. I don't personally see an issue with how this interview went. The content provided useful information as it relates to future investment decisions (capital gains, housing, investment attraction, etc)? Which is what this channel is about.
3
@mic4902 Even though there wasn't a "20-30% correction" in Canada in 2008? You're making some pretty huge and unjustified assumptions here.
2
@mic4902 Am I? The person who started this thread and my response are about the Canadian economy, so I don't see how that has me making assumptions about the American public.
2
Meaning the stock price of the company? It increases it.
2
They're effectively the same in all respects covered in the video.
2
@sciencetube4574 Lol, in this case I'm talking about a financial advisor, not general advice.
2
@davidmichlin6777 I assumed the former, but my point is that sort of fiscal planning occurs in relation to budgets not debt limits. Frankly, the debt limit is a bizarre concept that doesn't exist in other countries and for good reason. If Congress wants to reduce spending, it should pass smaller budgets.
2
The initial downsides you mentioned are exactly why I've limited exposure to emerging markets. I get why they have wonderful growth potential, but the risk of political shenanigans adds too much risk, imo. That being said, I do have maybe 70% exposure to international markets... just not much in the emerging ones.
2
@mic4902 The stock market isn't a good indicator for this. You're talking about people having to choose between feeding their families or paying their mortgage, so you should be looking at the number of people exposed to those rate hikes (on variable mortgages or up for renewal), calculate the monthly difference to their payments (if any), and then understand that only a subset of them will be overstretched. Remember as well that new mortgage holders had to pass a financial stress test assuming rates a couple percentage points above current just to get their mortgage. The person who started this thread raised another issue, which had to do with situations in which people owed more than their homes were worth, which could prompt them to sell, driving prices lower and causing a chain reaction like what occurred in parts of the US in 2008. Here too, you need to look at the right things. 2008 was driven by a whole lot more market uncertainty, balloon rates that don't exist here, people not just financially stretched but holding multiple properties, massive job losses, etc. Again, there's no indication those drivers are in play here. So we're likely looking at normal churn, an undetermined effect on prices, and maybe some companies having to sell stock because they're overleveraged. Someone who's just bought a home but has no reason to move really has no reason to sell, especially if they plan to live and work in the area for at least a few more years. This is normal market stuff.
1
@mic4902 OK, so you're committed to living in imagination land and I don't live there. If you'd like to take a run at substantiating some of your premises, great, if not, I think we're done here.
1
Step 1: Collect all the underpants. Step 2: ??? Step 3: PROFIT!!! Thats basically the architecture of all these silly get rich quick/easy money scams, and always has been.
1
@michaelsmith4904 He's referring to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The bit you quoted is, frankly, irrelevant to the topic. He said section 2, but he meant section 4: "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void." The argument is the US can't default on its debt because the Constitution supercedes the authority of any other laws, statues, etc, including the debt ceiling.
1
"Meme stocks" are all distributed pump and dump schemes. No idea why people who flock to them would be mad about BBBY since it's what they do anyway.
1
This was addressed in the video, but you're only focusing on the one side of the equation (and a very anecdotal part). Sure, more people coming in increases demand for limited supply, which can push up prices. But more people coming in has positive implications for economic growth, which in turn increases peoples' financial capacity. It's a bit more complicated than looking at the people moving into the buildings your company is developing.
1
@edwardhoward4708 They are secured. Edit: Also, annual net migration is only about 0.6% and it's shoring up very low population growth.
1
@ajitkirpekar4251 First, it's not clear how fiscal policy belongs in a thread about monetary policy. Second, I've no idea why you're taking to me about the New Deal and FDR actions generally. Third, buddy clearly said that slashing spending can end a recession.
1
One additional issue with delaying investing is that risk increases. This is because investments will have less time to recover should a downturn occur. So if millennials aren't investing for fear of market loss, they're actually exposing themselves more to the very thing they're afraid of through their inaction.
1
@FaustsKanaal While it's true large multinationals have more tools to avoid or reduce taxes of all types, it's a separate issue. Your rationale for moving away from salaried work actually confirms the rationale of the government making this move. Some Canadians get better rates than others, solely because they have more control over their incomes. Is tax too high? Maybe, maybe not. But the issue here is, is it right that some Canadians pay different rates than others when they have the same incomes? As for dividends, I don't think they're impacted by this. Dividends aren't considered capital gains in Canada, and when they come from Canadian corporations, the tax is reduced to account for corporate taxes that were already applied on the profit.
1
He's Canadian, so may not know the specifics about Roth IRA's or answer because of that. That said, he's knowledgeable and responsive, so who knows? :) That said, Roth IRAs are a lot like Canadian TFSAs and, for those, it makes no difference whether you hold a mutual fund or etf in it, all things being equal. That being said, look to the fees (both trading and management) you'd incur if you're looking at an etf and mutual fund that otherwise hold the same things. No idea if there's a Roth IRA specific issue beyond that though.
1
@tonycrabtree3416 It's (nominally) less work, but your approach costs you a premium. If you sold shares in hypothetically equally performing companies that just didn't pay dividends, you would likely pay less tax and still get your income. Depends on tax jurisdiction, but it's the case for the US and Canada.
1
@tonycrabtree3416 That are worth more than they would have been had the company paid dividends. That's the math part... if Company A pays dividends and identical Company B doesn't, Company B's shares have higher intrinsic value in the exact amount of Company A's dividends. Someone investing solely in Company B, but selling shares to achieve personal cash flow to match an identical Company A investor would have fewer shares, but every share would be worth more than a Company A share. But the cash from selling Comoany B shares would have had better tax treatment, the Company B investor has more control to pull cash when it's needed and leave it when it's not, and can take advantage of loss harvesting opportunities.
1
That all being said, is there any reason to think the platforms that charge fees (subscription, on trades, etc.) don't also charge these less obvious fees? The video is as helpful and informative as always, but I'm not sure the content can be used to guide which platform to use.
1
@HelderVPires I disagree for the aforementioned reasons. Gl though.
1
There's no real advantage to it, it's just less bad than in unregistered accounts compared to low dividend stocks. Which then leads to why pursue them at all?
1
@buyerclub2 The hedge funds who came in later wanted more people to come in for sure, both because it helped pump up the price and they needed someone to buy when those funds exited. But the scam was also perpetrated by the organized retail investors, whether all of them knew it or not. Encouraging everyone to buy the stock with the sole purpose of propping it up is identical to a large fund doing the same, because the end game is to exit at the inflated price leaving everyone else holding the bag. It doesnt matter that some of them told themselves they were just sticking in to the (original) hedge funds with ridiculous short positions, it could only end in tears for whoever couldnt get out when it inevitably collapsed. That's what a pump and dump scam is. I think we're actually seeing the same thing (based on your latest comment), I just see it as more nefarious than you do. Which is fair, its just a matter of perspective and opinion.
1