How do I into stocks? I don't want to be a wagefag anymore :(

File: pecuniae obediunt omnia.jpg (356KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1280x720px

Read "The Intelligent Investor" by Benjamin Graham, first of all.
Then put 90% of your portfolio into a broad range index fund like a S&P 500 ETF, Buffet suggests Vanguard, and 10% in short-term government bonds.

>>37929716
You will still have to wagecuck, virtually nobody lives off a stock portfolio

>>37929716
Look at investopedia and start just clicking links and learning.

Determine your style and what you want from investing

Diversify your portfolio (like an archive of your investments) ie... Don't invest in just tech in case tech crashes. Invest in tech,food,sports blah blah so that your whole portfolio isn't hit.

Figure out how much time you want to spend.

Don't invest anything you're no comfortable losing..there is always a chance you could lose all your money. It's slim but not impossible.

For a beginner you might try safer stocks that are consistent and less volatile like mutual funds or index (group of stocks and someone managing them for you with your money and other) research the mutual funds though because some.times they spend your money to keep themselves going but they tell you up front.

There are virtual stock markets on investopedia to get startes

Buy ANS, BAY, VERT, BANCOR

Stocks are a scam.

>>37929824
Your moms a scam desu

>>37929824
This mindset isn't good. They are definitely not a no Brainer...but what is your alternative? Leaving money in a saving account will generate consistent revenue but it will get eaten by inflation. If you work for a company that gives you a 401k, most times they build that with stocks.

buy low, sell high

with an original twist

>>37929847
Your posts are a scam.

>>37929984
>Your posts are a scam.

nope :)

>>37929716
>how do i get into stocks
Read up on the subject to an extraordinary depth and degree and maybe use some virtual markets as practice runs.
>I don't want to be a wagie
You'll always be a wagie, especially if you're getting into stocks on a wagie's budget, and stocks won't change this. Almost no one lives purely off their portfolio. All stocks will ever be able to do for you, barring some miracle unrelated, is supplementing your current revenue.

>>37929962
whats the twist ANON!!!

>>37930241
that you'll never be able to buy as low or sell as high as an already established and experienced investor and that people who are uneducated in the field or fresh off the boat, so to speak, will always and forever be fodder for ACTUAL investors barring some minor miracle.

>>37929775
Wrong. Most retirees are living at least partially on a stock portfolio. Some, that's 100% of their wealth

>>37929716
Look at nyt or some other reputable papers stock section
Pick stocks at random

>>37929716
DIVERSIFY NIGGAAA

go to /biz/ newfag

File: 1482097654963.jpg (5KB, 169x250px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 169x250px

>>37929716

You save up some monies, then you read around a little, finance news, pick a company that might interest you and you have a look at how they've performed so far and you try to appreciate whether they have any future potential or not. I bought 250 shares in Visa (V) about 6 months ago, as of today I've made a $4,705.68 profit (albeit it's not a profit until sold technically). I picked this stock mainly because I think card payments are going to increase even more in the future and it's large cap and I figured it doesn't do any super volatile crazy moves so I can have it without nervously watching all the time. We're in a bullish market at the moment so it's fairly easy to pick something that's going up.

>>37929716
I've been playing the simulator on investopedia.

It's fun and easy to learn. You get 10 grand monopoly money and then you use it on the real market.

All of my self found stocks have made a profit, anything I took /biz/ advice for has tanked, one of them lost me 500 dollars, but my own picks have made me 1250 dollars in a week so far.

>>37930490
>retirees
Op wants one to cover his expenses now now 50 years from now.
Its also unrealistic that he'll be able to do that either when he's retired as cost of living goes up.

>>37929716
Wait for the upcoming crash within the next 10 years. That is the perfect opportunity to invest.

>>37930755
Only thing those faggots care about is memecoins.

>>37930838
Irrelevant to your original statement. It is possible to live off stocks.

>>37930780
what website do u use to invest desu

>>37929716
Stocks are for people with high wealth (minimum 6 figures) to consolidate their wealth and give a modest return (< 8%) on their investments

They are not for building wealth

No one starts off with a low amount of money / income and then becomes rich by investing it in stocks

Literally no one.

>>37931513
Attaining 6 figures in savings is pretty easy and making 8% return on $100,000 or $200,000 is enough to switch from full time to part time work at least.

>>37931275
Correction. Its possible to live off decades long established stocks now.*

It will not be in the future or by the time OP is established unless he has a massive amount of starter money now and a windfall which is what OP wants from this.

>>37931568
>in savings
No.
6 figures in income then you have a portfolio to consolidate.
If you have 6 figures but only in savings then you'll only ever see ~8% return of those savings.

Stocks are shit, you missed the boat about 20 years ago. Only people making money on stocks bow are the 1% anyway.

Go cryptomeme currency

t. /biz/

>>37931852
which one tho

doge coin is especially memeish

>>37930490
>fuck context, technicalities are what matter
come on now

>>37929716
>>37929775
If I could make $1,000 a month I'd be satisfied for life.

Move to Hays, Kansas. Rent a studio apartment and play vidya alone forever.

>>37931649
Right I meant 6 figures of capital.
8% annual return on $100,000 is enough to cover rent on a crappy apartment. Not bad. 8% seems optimistic though, it's going to be more around 2-4% isn't it?

>>37931852
>tfw when in 2009 anons were actually giving away bitcoins on 4chan excited that it was the next big thing
>mock them
>lol nobody gives a shit about your weeb play money!
>8 years later........kill me

>>37931886
Don't worry about it. He's an idiot that doesn't understand the difference in profit between investing using a 6 figure income or just a 6 figure savings.
>>37931885
If you honestly can't figure it out after some research i would strongly recommend you don't even try it. You'll just wind up investing in the wrong crypto and lose your money.

>>37931911
Averagely, 6-8% is realistic, that's just trailing the market. But you'll have years where you lose 20%, too.

>>37931901
Move to Lawrence so you can live with me

or we can move to one of the smaller towns around because I'm sure rent is expensive here

>>37931911
1-3% at first until you're established and experienced. 4-8% after that. 8% is the desired goal but more is always nice but not expected.
The deal with how people get rich versus scooting by through stocks is if you're just making a steady 8% off a non-growing base(just $100k) you're only ever making $8k. If you have a $100k as your actual income you now have a dynamic and growing portfolio and your 8% return will also, hopefully, grow.
If OP wants to pay for his apartment with this then thats a good goal.
If OP wants to live off of this then thats not a good goal.

>>37929716
it's all about tax loopholes
roth vs traditional iras, 401ks, muni bonds, only putting reits (most of the money is paid out in dividends) in tax-advantaged accounts

>>37931948
>nobody cares, bro!
fuck you and your high horse

>>37931948


i kick myself everyday. I had a techie friend in 2010 nagging me constantly to buy those things, but i thought he was trying to get me into some multi level marketing scam.

>>37929791
>consistent and less volatile like mutual funds or index (group of stocks and someone managing them for you with your money and other)
The S&P 500 is the go-to in this case. Just dump all your money there and unless there is a global recession again pretty likely soon your money is safe.

--

It is a good idea to have a small part of your portfolio in safe stuff like gold and precious metals. They aren't going to boom anytime soon but they're inflation proof and have always been. In times of crysis or when things are not looking good people tends to increase their percent of their portfolio in "safe" investments like gold and precious metals, often up to 50% of their portfolio or even more.

If you have reasons to think shit is going to hit the fan you shouldn't even trust paper gold or papel metals, should keep it physical. Which is what many, many billionaires have been doing for a few years.

OP,

you're just gonna have to go on investopedia and try and self teach it to yourself, and start reading books on it.

If you are lucky you have a friend or family member already doing it, ask them to teach it to you. But beware of any of the advice on biz, they are actively manipulating crypto coins over there.

The Intelligent Investor. It's a book that many billionaires merit their wealth to.

I ain't gonna spoonfeed you. If you aren't even willing to read a book you neither deserve nor really want to be rich.

>>37932073
KUfag? I was there yesterday at pig event downtown

File: Screenshot_20170624-211319.png (197KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1440x2560px

>>37933153
>safe stuff like gold
I know what you mean, and I'm all for diversification but come on.
Stocks historically fare much better than metals.

i'm still waiting for the market to crash. then i'm going to buy all the important technological/industrial infrastructure stocks that will rebound when the economy recovers.

>>37933144
I didn't even read up on it because I just thought it was money for some obscure nerd game like fake gold coins or something.

Then when I did find out what it was I underestimated how much losers like to do drugs and the lengths they'll go through to buy them.

File: 0077.jpg (39KB, 644x459px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 644x459px

>>37933293
They fare better until they don't. Stocks are very often overvalued due to the monetary supply manipulation of the central banks. They are called safe investments because they aren't as volatile. The more volatile an investment is, the more money you can gain... and lose.

I was about to reply to my post again with this picture to tell you to disregard my advice on the S&P500.

>>37933393
>They are called safe investments because they aren't as volatile
Fuck, by this I meant the precious metals, just in case it wasn't clear.

I feel like real estate is a better bet when it comes to living off income. Renting out to tenants in multi houses would give you a good chunk of money each month provided you are willing to deal with all the hassles that go along with that.

>>37933250
Reading is for losers with no life.

>>37933468

it's not easy to buy real estate, you have to come up with a ton of money to buy them. You have to maintain them and shit. And, then you have to screen the retards you lease to so you dont get some lunatic who thinks it is their right to live in there for free, or cook meth in there, or whatever else crazy shit. I have a friend who was renting his upstairs of his house and then the people decided they werent going to pay rent or leave, and it cost him like 10 grand to get them evicted, and they destroyed his house before the eviction, crazy hoarder squatter druggie type shit up there.

>>37933527
That's true, but only for people who read for the sake of it.

If you aren't willing to research information that will greatly benefit you personally you're a moron.

>>37933543
For sure you'd wanna meet face to face and check credit and have a lawyer. Still if you just want to live off passive income and you save up the money you could put a down payment on a four unit or twelve unit or if you have the money buy one outright and live off the cash flow. You'd wanna have the money for the appartments or homes them sever grand in saving on each for when shit goes wrong.

>>37933604
You're a moron for reading.

>>37933619
This. Fuck nerds

>>37933610
I'd love to meet face to face in real life so I can knock you the fuck out, bitch.

>>37933674
I deserve a good lunch in the face honestly.

>>37933737
you deserve my cum

>>>/biz/

Go with crypto, stocks have minimal profit margins and you cant evade tax

I'm only up 8% from when I started 2 months ago, but lots of people are in the 20-30% range

File: 1377392996453.jpg (99KB, 507x720px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 507x720px

>>37933250
I kinda wanna be a billionaire but I also don't want bullies on /r9k/ to call me a nerd. What do?

>>37933816
>What do?

Become a sissy slave

File: bullbear.jpg (31KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 640x360px

>>37933816
If you are a little girl like the one in your picture join my harem. If not, get a specialized education, get a steady job that pays well and save up everything you can, invest as much as you can and think about starting a business.

Most people SAY that want to be rich but they're too cowards or too lazy to ever think about having their own business. The sole thought of having their own business makes their heads ache, yet they unconsciously acknowledge the fact that YOU CAN'T BECOME RICH BY WORKING FOR OTHERS. Some may reply me with their personal definitions of what rich means or with examples of people who work for others and earn millions (as if being a dependent bitch made you a rich person) or some others will nitpick things in my post and purposely re-interpret it in a way that's wrong, but all that I say is generally true: YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR YOURSELF TO REALLY BE RICH.

One good thing about this, even if the thought of having your own business makes your head ache or feels like too much responsibility or too much risk, it really isn't. Having several working businesses is a more reliable source of income than having wage job in which you could be sacked at any moment will ever be.

Of course if you care about a bunch of losers calling you a nerd for looking up ways to be rich you don't really want nor deserve to be, you are just doing an exercise of wishful thinking.

The Master Formula of Attainment is as follows:

(1) Definite Ideals;
(2) Insistend desire;
(3) Confident expectation;
(4) Persistent Determination;
(5) Balanced Compensation.

Reduced to popular terms, it is as follows:

You may have anything you want, provided that you

(1) Know exactly what you want;
(2) Want it hard enough;
(3) Confidently expect to obtain it;
(4) Persistently determine to obtain it;
(5) You are willing to pay the price for its attainment.

You aint even at step one bro.

>>37931473

Sorry anon, was off for a bit. I'm using a native online brokerage, Avanza. It's just like etrade, scottrade and all the others.

>>37934053
>You aint even at step one bro.

You're not even educated or intelligent.

>>37934132
N-I-T-P-I-C-K-I-N-G.

Here's the thing about stocks:

The entire system is rigged to push stock prices up higher.

Every publicly-traded corporation has a charter that mandates that their *only* goal is to maximize profit for the investors. That's backed up by law -- so for example, if the executives do something that doesn't reasonably satisfy the goal of maximizing profit, then the company becomes liable to shareholder lawsuits. In addition, corporations use lobbyists to purchase the services of Congress to make sure that the laws are as friendly as possible to the goal of increasing shareholder value.

Then, if that wasn't enough, every rich person (without exception) has a majority of their wealth in stocks. Therefore, all the richest and most powerful people in the world have a personal stake in making goddamn sure that the stock market goes higher, and they will do everything in their power to make that happen.

So if you're in stocks, you have every corporation, every member of Congress, and every rich and powerful person on your team. That's a pretty fucking good team to be on.

Now let's look at bonds, and bond-backed products like CDs. There is no powerful entity that wants higher interest rates. They all love low interest rates, because that makes borrowing money cheaper. (Remember, they get all their growth from stocks anyway, so they couldn't give a shit if CDs are only paying 1% interest. They only care about the cost of borrowing.) The only people who want high interest rates are individuals who want a safe place to put their retirement savings, and maybe some pension funds that are forbidden from taking on stock market risk. If you're in bonds or CDs, you have nobody important on your team. You just hold out your measly little cash to the guys in power and ask: "c..c..can you p..p..please give me a good interest rate for this?"

>>37934296
I agree with the thing about stocks but with some objections.

Stock prices are artificially inflated because of course you're on the best team and daddy government will do anything that's on its hand to make their price grow, but despite of their constantly growing price they are prone to regular collapses as the picture from >>37933393 shows. One thing to have in mind is the government is not an all powerful entity beyond any laws, the only thing the government can do is confiscate (tax) and devaluate money through printing and give the resulting wealth to corps via corporate welfare. Of course it is silly to short the S&P unless you know for sure a crash is happening tomorrow, because the government will inject trillions as soon as possible to make sure the prices go up again soon.

>>37931513
>They are not for building wealth
>No one starts off with a low amount of money / income and then becomes rich by investing it in stocks

That couldn't be more false. That is by far the worst advice in this thread.

The web is full of charts that show how just putting $100 every month into stocks can easily give you a 6-figure portfolio over the years:

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/100615/investing-100-month-stocks-30-years.asp

This is exactly how I did it. When I was 20, I had a net worth under $2000. Once I started working, I've been putting an average of about $250 into the market every month (less when I started, more now), -- and I already have $200K. If it keeps compounding at that rate, I'll definitely be rich by the time I'm 65.

You won't get rich when you're young. You have to put in a full 40 years of continuous new investments in the stock market -- and if you keep going that long, it's actually rather likely that you'll be rich by the time you're old.

>Literally no one.

That was a very quick and convincing proof that you're a complete fucking idiot.

i would be very leery of thinking you will just start a business and have it magically succeed, the just start a business and get rich thing is a meme, mostly. 90% of businesses fail in the first 2 years. There are ways to minimize the risk, ie having a Strong background in the sector you want to go into, and stealing and bringing clients with you when you go, but even then. And, a failed business will if you are lucky only cripple you financially, if you are really unlucky you could lose major assets, like your House, you put up to take out loans and shit. On Top of all the hassles of dealing with employees, and fuck head customers all day.

Perfect example, i knew a really successful guy about 5 years ago who wanted to start what he called 'A New Kind of Grocery Store'. Now this guy is successful in other things, he got way too used to the idea of thinking everything he touched turns into gold. I told him, the world doesnt need a new kind of grocery store. The writing is on the wall, the new kind of grocery store will be one that delivers your groceries with drones and self driving vans within an hour after you place an order on line. He told me what i was suggesting sounded like the Jetsons. This guy must have blown 20 million dollars, easily, trying to set this grocery store up, it took a year of construction, this was going to be the first in a planned chain, and it failed completely after 2 months. I just sort of chuckled as it shuttered, and now Bezos is rolling out all the ideas i suggested to that guy 5 years ago.

Anyhow are stocks risky sure, but it is a lot less headaches.

>>37931901
anything special about/in Hays, ks

>>37934487
>they are prone to regular collapses

You bet they are.

And that's why you should only look at the very longest-term averages for stock market growth -- so that the averages will take into consideration the periodic collapses (like 2000, 2008, etc.)

And when you look at the very longest-term averages, stock growth is about 7% per year.

When you own stock, you actually *deserve* to make bigger gains than people who own things like bonds and CDs. That's because you have to put up with the periodic bullshit collapses. Those collapses are a royal fucking pain in the ass to endure -- but enduring them is exactly what you're getting paid for.

Unexpected collapses are the *exact* *reason* that the market allows you to earn as much as you do in the stock market. The market is absolutely not going to allow you to make 7% a year for many decades by holding something safe like a CD. You have to earn the right to that kind of return, and putting up with collapses is how you earn it.

A lot of people act like collapses are something that are "not supposed" to happen to stocks, and that collapses are a sign of a broken system, or something.

That's just not the right way to look at it. Market collapses are actually very likely to occur in any market system that's sufficiently free enough -- and I think that can actually be demonstrated using game theory, or chaos theory, or something like that.

Your post was pretty much all technically correct -- yes: government is limited, and price inflation is artificial, and the government confiscates and devalues money, and so on. But your attitude was all wrong. You're whining about the ups and downs of the market and the fact that the future can't be predicted. But, just as "there's no crying in baseball" -- there's also "no whining in the stock market". The stock market's volatility is to be celebrated and cheered. Because without that volatility, nobody is going to allow you to make any serious money from it.

>>37935196
I think they will pay you to live there.

Low rent, Lawrence is way too expensive.

File: stock market.png (809KB, 991x550px) Image search: [Google]

809KB, 991x550px

>>37929716
>How do I into stocks? I don't want to be a wagefag anymore :(

Take a time machine and go back to the year 2008. That's when the federal reserve decided to give your tax dollars to the likes of Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZ5vqnrjzl4

>>37934788
>Anyhow are stocks risky sure, but it is a lot less headaches.

Well, the big advantage of stocks is the potential for diversification.

Of course, it's great if you can own your own business -- but the problem is that all your worth gets tied up in just one business, which has a certain probability of failing.

With stocks, you can own something like a S&P 500 mutual fund and spread the risk around to 500 different companies. The probability of all 500 companies failing is very low. (And if they do, then almost every rich and powerful person in the world will become poor along with you -- and when all of the world's most powerful people share the same goal as you do, things have a way of breaking in your favor, eventually.)