The real question is “do you think energy stocks always go up during periods of high inflation” and I think the answer is no. Energy prices go up due to inflation, but in theory, so should the cost to extract/refine.

Don't worry, I sometimes get a carrier pidgeon from my relatives in New Zealand.

My main problem is that sometimes people don't know if they want a graph or a table, so they do things like this, mixing up elements of both. However, graphs and tables are for different purposes and they conflict with each other. The lack of consistency and the fact that the author probably wanted a table and made the graph just for posting made me irk a little bit. A graph isn't a good representation for this kind of data, especially for smaller countries.

Not sure why you're talking about a conspiracy - what is laid out here is entirely factual. If there's anything you see that's not, please feel free to point it out and include a source.

If you/we are to buy index fund shares and keep them in a broker those shares are - unequivocally - not in your own name.

>Stocks held in street name may be loaned to short-sellers and resold to others. So, it is possible for more than one person to own shares held in street name.

^source

>...stocks can be lent repeatedly, allowing three or four owners to cast votes based on holdings of the same shares.

>The Hazlet, New Jersey–based Securities Transfer Association, a trade group for stock transfer agents, reviewed 341 shareholder votes in corporate contests in 2005. It found evidence of overvoting—the submission of too many ballots—in all 341 cases.

^source

... which is problematic, to say the least. :/

Edit: I don't know of any other business that functions like that. You "buy/purchase" something in full, but that thing is not, technically, yours - and furthermore can be "duplicated" numerous times and lent out without your knowledge.

Agreed, it says other search engines so probably a mistake.

What does brown represent? Light blue, etc, like what kind of data is this?

thx buddy, that actually makes sense

Not to be picky but for Belgium you probably mean the news channel HLN instead of the hle that doesn't exist.

I think it would be interesting to see this data for porn sites.

The arithmetic mean is the sum of the numbers divided by the number of numbers The geometric mean is the n root of the product of the numbers. For example, if the numbers you want to find the mean of are: 1 10 11 99 The arithmetic mean is 30.25, while the geometric mean is 10.21. The geometric mean is more accurate when the value are a bit skewed (in the example 99 is an outlier, and it brings the arithmetic mean all the way up to 30, which is not very representative of the 4 numbers, the geometric one is more accurate), while the arithmetic mean is the better one when the data is more uniform and independent of each other (the geometric mean is almost always lower)

At my place I had to telegram it.

Most view *nonporn* sites by country 😅

Ah, the old Cash-In-The-Mattress portfolio management style!

Anyone remember way back in the day when it was VWVortex?

Peru is light blue but it says WhatsApp instead of Twitter

Also excludes p0rn sites.. Fake news!

[removed]

and Argentina and Perù are the same colour, but different websites

You should exclude Baidu then imo - it's effectively just Chinese Google.

Looks like to me that Peru is a mistake - most other colours seem to be consistent.

Although agree that the incomplete labels are ugly af

I am confused about madagascar. Orange, as in the french telecom company?

whats geometric and arithmetric?

I'd recommend buying index funds and ignoring the conspiracy theories, but you do you.

Generally speaking, I'd agree, certainly. Though, there are definitely things to be aware of. The larger Wall Street network over the past few decades has changed a lot and could be said to have truly astounding amounts of concentrated wealth and power - with access to a propaganda machine more acute and voluminous than anything in the history of humankind.

In those terms and with that said, with respect to financial literacy and a broad lack of education / misunderstanding more people really, really, really need to be aware of this: if someone owns stock in a company or has a pension/retirement fund, they - in fact - DO NOT actually own those shares (i.e. they are, unequivocally, not in their own name), contrary to popular and widespread belief. This is tangentially related to the "free trades" you get at brokerages now when buying/selling stocks.

>Cede technically owns substantially all of the publicly issued stock in the United States.[2] Thus, investors do not themselves hold direct property rights in stock, but rather have contractual rights that are part of a chain of contractual rights involving Cede.

Someone can insure shares are in their own name using the Direct Registration System which legally must be processed when requested. If they are held in a broker, they are NOT in your name, but in what's known as "street name," which laces loopholes and dubious legality and illegality all throughout and makes it possible to screw you over in numerous derivative-based ways and otherwise.

>Stocks held in street name may be loaned to short-sellers and resold to others. So, it is possible for more than one person to own shares held in street name.

^source

>In a little-known quirk of Wall Street bookkeeping, when brokerages loan out a customer’s stock to short sellers and those traders sell the stock to someone else, both investors are often able to vote in corporate elections. With the growth of short sales, which involve the resale of borrowed securities, stocks can be lent repeatedly, allowing three or four owners to cast votes based on holdings of the same shares.

>^source

>The Hazlet, New Jersey–based Securities Transfer Association, a trade group for stock transfer agents, reviewed 341 shareholder votes in corporate contests in 2005. It found evidence of overvoting—the submission of too many ballots—in all 341 cases.

Those shares, if not in your own name, are are, very, very, very, very likely, being used against you in convoluted schemes similar to 2008 Housing Derivative Meltdown - same sorta deal, different financial instruments - andor in actual non-delivery (FTDs) made possible through aforementioned Wall Street lobbying and associated loopholes.

Importantly, combine not actually owning shares with something called Payment-for-Order-Flow (see: "How Redditors Exposed the Stock Market" | The Problem with Jon Stewart - timestamped to relevant portion) and, subsequently, with stock lending and a Failure-to-Deliver, it's truly not an exaggeration to say that there's a network of drunk, coked out Wall Street psychopaths skimming off the top billions and billions of dollars that should be going to the middle and lower classes.

>Payment-for-Order-Flow is illegal in Canada, the U.K, Australia, and Europe - because it's exceedingly easy to commit fraud under such a system. Singapore recently announced they'll be banning it, as well, in early 2023.

Big surprise - it's legal in the U.S. Furthermore, almost comically... it was heavily endorsed and made popular by Bernie fucking Madoff.

For a form of defense, this video (~5 minutes) is well worth it - it's done well and summarizes some of the broader issues - and this website provides clear direction and guidance on what you/we can do to hold some of these practices, if not people, accountable.

Edit: spelling

[removed]