logoalt Hacker News

tomtomtom777today at 1:40 AM3 repliesview on HN

Wow. I am not sure how to respond to this as you seem to have a completely different mindset. You mean to say it is "proven" not to be a solid strategy as in not maximizing profit?

Surely, you acknowledge that funding something is a rather direct way of actively supporting it. It is your money and your choice of what you choose to invest it in, and thus how you choose to shape the future. If you buy OIL to make money, you are still responsible for the additional investment made in oil, and are still shaping the future, whether you like it or not.


Replies

DwnVoteHoneyPottoday at 4:30 AM

No, you're wrong. Oil producers produce oil... Consumers consume oil. In between the producers and the consumers, it doesn't matter whether or not trader A sells a barrel of oil to B, then B sells to C, and C sells it someone else. All of the A to B to C is net zero.

All of the money comes from consumers. The money may change hands 100 times in between, but the money from consumers goes to producers.

If you purchase any products which included petroleum in your life, whether it's a house, car (EV or not), or stretchy clothes, that is what funds the oil producers. That where the money goes into the system, including to investors as return.

nodesockettoday at 2:35 AM

> It is your money and your choice of what you choose to invest it in, and thus how you choose to shape the future.

Absolutely, but I believe you are conflating investing vs donating. The literal definition of investing is:

> Allocating money (or capital) with the expectation of generating a return or profit over time.

show 1 reply
Invictus0today at 2:29 AM

The ticker is USO, not OIL, and it's abundantly clear that you have no idea how it works.

show 1 reply