Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Ninth Doctor

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ninth Doctor last won the day on August 22 2020

Ninth Doctor had the most liked content!

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Copyright

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Ninth Doctor's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (6/7)



  1. A fairly recent upload. The one I heard about had Hitchens flying solo on the socialist side. Here he has a (weak) colleague, so this is probably not the debate in question. Hitchens is worth listening to, as always. He commits the fallacy of composition (family unit to national). In later years he was later able to speak knowledgeably about Rand, here no. I suspect he studied and upped his game for a later debate. There's a part where a questioner insults Binswanger, leading him to refuse to answer any question from that person (as Rand did in one of her Donahue appearances). For some reason that was the most memorable moment for me.
  2. Thanks for bumping this thread. I put in for 300,000 shares at .0052, which executed on Monday. So last night I put in to sell once it hit .0102. That happened today. I (nearly) doubled my money in one day...again! BTW I've made my share of investing blunders. No genius here. This was luck. By way of payback, a tip: look at EQD.U. It's an SPAC associated with Sam Zell. They haven't announced what they're acquiring, so the stock has been in bed. 3 months, no movement. Sam Zell is a legend in distressed real estate, and COVID lockdowns ought to turn out well for that strategy. I know a lot more about real estate than the value of back pain therapy patents.
  3. It was between .031 and .033 back in late August when you first posted about it. Now it's about one fifth that price. Hope you didn't lose too much on it. In bankruptcy the common shares are typically wiped out, so it's no surprise that the new investors are getting compensated via share dilution. The debtors had to be paid too. Authorized isn't the same thing as issued, BTW. I'm putting in a limit order a bit below the current price with the after tax amount I pocketed in November. I did really well with this one, at least in terms of IRR. And I believe in self-fulfilling prophecies.
  4. Here's a book recommendation: https://www.audible.com/pd/What-I-Learned-Losing-a-Million-Dollars-Audiobook/B00NC8XVVC?qid=1608398808&sr=1-1&ref=a_search_c3_lProduct_1_1&pf_rd_p=83218cca-c308-412f-bfcf-90198b687a2f&pf_rd_r=4WECEZR851PZHMKRRJZY The co-author is a big Rand fan. Nassim Taleb highly recommends this book. Penny stocks are very volatile. This one has had some wild swings. You can make money but only if you have a sell discipline. And not mind paying short term capital gains tax. At year end people sell just to lock in losses to offset gains made elsewhere. The price capitulation you're seeing now might be a buy signal. This company is out of bankruptcy (hence the Q being removed from the ticker), and that's a really good sign. But don't go "all in" on anything, even Amazon (which is my biggest holding). Full disclosure: I put this on my watch list back when you first posted about it. I had a limit order that executed on 11/17, then I immediately put in a sell order that executed on 11/18. Doubled my money in one day. Mind you only about $2K, play money. Turns out this coincided with the announcement that they'd emerged from bankruptcy. Now I see it's at .00635. Glad I got out, but now I feel like I have house money to play with. BTW, I don't see what Objectivist Epistemology has to do with this. This company seems to not be a scam at all, it's just very speculative. If you follow investment discussion forums (I assume that's where you encountered hype around this stock) then you have to be mindful that everyone posting there has an agenda. Some have Options such that they profit if the stock moves (up or down) within a certain timeframe. They have no fiduciary duty to you. They can lie with no consequences. They're anonymous. Trust no one.
  5. One more thing, if he wins, to the extent Trump's Mandate is to roll back the coronavirus lockdowns, I say Amen and Alleluia. This video is a riot:
  6. I'm at a loss for what further reasoning might satisfy you. As for a write-in vs. Jorgensen, if you go for a write-in your vote won't count at all. Some poll worker might get a chuckle out of it, depending on how creative you are. Libertarian vote counts do get reported, and you can look them up going all the way back: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)#Size_and_influence Those numbers aren't broken out by state, so that you're in Washington is irrelevant. If she gets 500,000 instead of 499,999, all the better. If you vote for Trump and he wins, you've added to his claim to a Mandate, and worse, his bragging rights, which he'll certainly exercise to the full.
  7. You wrote: "your vote has symbolic value, but not effective value" and " I was inclined to vote for Jorgensen, since she has a philosophy and while I disagree with some of it, I agree with far more of it than I do with that of Biden or Trump. Jorgensen is the only candidate that I can say anything good about, the others fall into the “at least Y is not X” category)." Putting two and two together I said you're "pretty far along" towards voting for her. Consider yourself encouraged to do so. She's sure to get far fewer votes than Gary Johnson (3.3M), leading the pundits to produce obituaries for consistent principled free market ideology etc. It'll still count as one more vote against Biden. Way more so, to my way of thinking. And you won't feel tainted by having voted for the Orange Man. BTW, I think he's going to win. Trump, that is.
  8. If you're interested in what Peikoff thinks, here it is: Me, I'm voting for Jorgensen, and it looks like you're pretty far along towards doing the same. Since you're not in a swing state it ought to be an easy choice. Alternately:
  9. He (She?) also wrote "So while I’m in, I’m not sure I’m in enough. This may warrant a greater risk. If the company achieves its goal of getting relisted and returns to its pre-bankruptcy prices, I could make 100x." The thread title asks about going "all-in". That's what I was addressing. Common advice, as you say.
  10. Why go "all in"? Throw some play money at it, no more. If it goes up 100X, then you turn $1K into $100K. Not bad at all. Personally, I've never gotten a penny stock tip that turned into anything but a loss.
  11. I have a feeling it was this: When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion–when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing–when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors–when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you–when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice–you may know that your society is doomed. https://www.cato.org/blog/ayn-rand-front-page-ecuadors-major-newspaper
  12. Nope. He worked in South Africa? That's your beat. But it does call to mind a quote from Muhammad Ali: "Champ, what did you think of Africa?" Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!" That won't score any points with the likes of Fraser. Rand's essay "Racism" in The Virtue of Selfishness surely bears reviewing in this context. Though I haven't reread it in years.
  13. If you've never encountered this piece before, I can't recommend it highly enough. Particularly the part about how the UK (and if you'll allow, by extension, capitalism) ended slavery. Which is different from racism...though probably not from Fraser's perspective.
  • Create New...