• 46 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
Cake day: July 17th, 2026
  • Albercik@szmer.infoOPtoFinance@beehaw.org•Copper prices could reach $22,050 per ton by mid-2027
    1·
    1 month ago

    If your best response is an ad hominem, I see no reason to explain my position. $5,000 was obviously hyperbole. Buy as many copper futures as you like, and enjoy feeling superior.

    Your bio says you ‘read news so we don’t have to.’ This exchange perfectly proves why just reading headlines isn’t the same as understanding structural macroeconomics.

    When asked to back up a massive $5,000 copper call, you tucked your tail, called it a ‘hyperbole,’ and hid behind ‘ad hominem’ defense. In commodity markets, millions are moved by capex cycles, supply deficits, and balance sheets—not by freelance opinions and passive-aggressive exits. Don’t blame the audience for holding a journalist to professional standards.

    To the readers: when a commentator dismisses global structural changes as a ‘coin flip’ and cannot defend their own math, they aren’t giving you an educated critique. They are just proving that reading the news doesn’t mean you know how to analyze it.

  • Albercik@szmer.infoOPtoFinance@beehaw.org•Copper prices could reach $22,050 per ton by mid-2027
    1·
    1 month ago

    We could have any number of things in 2027. I dislike heds like this, especially in the context of investing. It could also be $50,000 or $5,000. Commodities are gambling, not investing, unless you have insider data.

    For someone carrying a ‘freelance journalist’ tag, dismissing macroeconomics as mere ‘gambling’ is an embarrassingly lazy take. You don’t need ‘insider data’ when global economic blueprints, multi-decade green transition policies, and nuclear power projects consuming millions of tons of copper are literally public record. This is publicly accessible data every housewife can analyze if she possesses basic arithmetic skills. Failing to analyze basic supply deficits and capex cycles isn’t a market problem—it’s a journalism problem. You threw out a wild $5,000 figure yet failed to provide even a single fundamental scenario in which it actually falls that low, proving you’d rather hunt for cheap clickbait than read a balance sheet. Calling a structural commodity market change which is driven by supply/demand mechanisms a coin flip is just a classic coping mechanism when you mistake your laziness for having an educated opinion.

  • Albercik@szmer.infotoEurope@feddit.org•‘The obsession with endless growth can only end in tears’: your questions on extreme weather this summer answeredEnglish
    4·
    3 months ago

    Meanwhile deep value stocks with 50+ percent margins barely attract any money. Just look at mining sector - we supposedly want so called green transformation but investors behave like mining is about to get bankrupt. My question is - where are we going to get all metal needed for these turbines, panels and EV? Not to mention replacing stockpiles of ammo sent to Ukrainians. And there is electrification of large portions of Africa and Asia. Yes, still about 1 billion of people have no access to electricity and about 2 live in energy poverty. Recycling is not going to cover needs for metal.

    Ask yourself are elites buying mining stocks while retails sleeps invested in overpriced AI and tech stocks? Who is going to be their exit liquidity?