[HN Gopher] I need to explain to you just how dire America's Pok...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       I need to explain to you just how dire America's Pokemon card
       crisis is
        
       Author : kgwgk
       Score  : 92 points
       Date   : 2021-05-01 15:03 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.vice.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.vice.com)
        
       | stunt wrote:
       | At this point it doesn't take much capital to pump anything up. I
       | think the vast majority of early NFT adopters were just colluding
       | with one another.
       | 
       | The old product promotion tactics don't work anymore. Creating
       | hype via social network is the new model that works much better.
        
       | cs702 wrote:
       | We're living through our 21st century version of Dutch
       | Tulipmania, it seems.
       | 
       | Like every other asset perceived to be rare, Pokemon cards have
       | shot up in price lately. Some cards are now selling for _more
       | than the median price of a house_. And yes, you read that right:
       | _1 rare Pokemon card > 1 median house_. Naturally, people are
       | raiding their closets hoping to find cards they can cash out, and
       | the companies that grade and certify cards as authentic are
       | overwhelmed with demand.
       | 
       | But holy mackerel, I'm not doing the OP justice:
       | 
       |  _> I had a First Edition Charizard, one of the most sought-after
       | cards of all time, when I was 10. I sold it on eBay when I was
       | 11, for $150. It was a huge sum of money at the time. One of
       | these sold for more than $300,000 a few months ago. Like many
       | other people, I have spent much of the last few months digging
       | through my old cards, identifying which ones are valuable, and
       | selling them on eBay._
       | 
       |  _> Over the last few months, as people have been raiding their
       | closets for their old Pokemon card collections, they've been
       | mailing their cards to get graded at one of the three major
       | companies that does this. The companies are Professional Sports
       | Authenticator (PSA), Certified Guaranty Company (CGC), and
       | Beckett Grading Services (BGS).
       | 
       | _ > Under the weight of the resurgent Pokemon card hobby, each
       | [of the grading companies] has been completely crushed by demand
       | and COVID-related backlogs, to the point that, from the outside,
       | it seems as though they are barely functioning (It's not just
       | Pokemon cards, there has also been a resurgence in sports card,
       | Magic card, and Yu-gi-oh! card collecting).*
       | 
       | Go and read the whole thing.
        
       | carlsborg wrote:
       | I don't know if a headline like this is appropriate when parts of
       | the world are reeling from a genuine dire crisis.
        
         | aphextron wrote:
         | It's a canary in the coalmine for the entire US economy. We're
         | going full Zimbabwe at this rate.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | cung wrote:
       | Anybody else get the feeling that this is just pokemon marketing?
       | 
       | I think the biggest clue is that Youtubers who talk about brands
       | only for money, such as Logan Paul, are suddenly head over heals
       | about Pokemon(tm) trading cards.
        
         | sanqui wrote:
         | The Pokemon Company doesn't make any money from 10, 20 years
         | old Pokemon cards old on Ebay, the kinds the article is talking
         | about. As far as I know trading card game makers even ban older
         | cards from tournaments in order to sell a steady flow of new
         | cards. So they have no stake in their value.
        
           | ansible wrote:
           | Except that a healthy trade in older cards ensures that
           | demand will continue for the presently sold ones. The buyers
           | hope the cards they buy today will appreciate in value.
        
         | itronitron wrote:
         | It's more of a guilty pleasure for some and an easy gift.
         | They're fairly high quality and easy to store so they
         | accumulate over time.
         | 
         | Three years ago, one of my online gamer friends was sorting and
         | organizing their older brother's pokemon card collection and
         | the final count was well over 5,000 cards. They were in the
         | process of building a website to sell them off but I think the
         | brother got back from college and shut it down. Hopefully they
         | are getting them graded.
        
         | ageitgey wrote:
         | It's not a fake craze totally pumped up by marketing, if that's
         | what you mean. Pokemon cards are definitely at a fever pitch
         | right now. Just go to your local Walmart and watch people
         | camping out for them every week.
         | 
         | My theory is that people like Logan Paul are involved with them
         | because they are currently hot and zooming up in price, not the
         | reverse. But I guess them being involved amplifies the hype and
         | keeps the hype train rolling, so who knows where it begins and
         | ends.
        
         | theklub wrote:
         | Could be funded by someone, but really many collectible markets
         | are insane right now, MTG, even basketball cards are going for
         | insane prices.
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | Unless there is a central exchange showing it's a deep,
           | liquid market, I assume this is irrational exuberance for a
           | small number of people which makes for good clickbait.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | vageli wrote:
             | The article mentions that card grading services themselves
             | have stated that demand for their services is
             | unprecedented.
             | 
             | > At the time of this writing, PSA was receiving more cards
             | every five days (over 500,000 per business week) than what
             | we used to receive every three months.
             | 
             | Of course, the number of cards submitted for grading is not
             | an indicator of market depth, but clearly something is
             | going on.
        
               | Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote:
               | I wonder if people are counterfeiting the cards. If they
               | stay away from the high value cards and stick with middle
               | of the road they could probably make a fortune before
               | anyone notices.
        
             | cehrlich wrote:
             | In Europe there is cardmarket.com which exposes a lot of
             | transaction data. However sales of the most high end MtG
             | stuff are usually done elsewhere to save on transaction
             | fees etc.
        
         | dageshi wrote:
         | https://youtu.be/VIgcpbN7xfM?t=4597
         | 
         | I don't think it's marketing. It seems like the people who were
         | scalping sneakers/graphics cards/ps5's have added to the
         | already existing lunatics who are into Pokemon.
        
       | vsskanth wrote:
       | Could somebody link me to a resource that explains the economics
       | behind these collectibles ? (NFTs, trading cards etc. not art or
       | rare items of historical significance)
       | 
       | Whatever I read either concludes scam or a store of value, but
       | doesn't seem to explain the large amounts of money sloshing
       | around in these.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | FOMO is a big thing. They have appreciated so everyone thinks
         | they keep doing that. Nostalgia is factor too and people who
         | were interested in these in childhood now have extra cash.
         | 
         | Now I wonder pull of some of these for current and next
         | generation and how will that affect the prices in long term,
         | probably there won't be enough pressure to keep thing going at
         | some point. I should probably check some graphs of low to
         | medium end classic car pricing by decade... Just to see how
         | future might look like.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | People do think these cards are art and they are of historical
         | interest to them.
        
           | vsskanth wrote:
           | Fair enough
        
       | jointpdf wrote:
       | Being a chronic procrastinator and lazy gift planner, a few years
       | ago I was searching for a last-minute Christmas gift for my
       | nephews. I retrieved my old Pokemon card collection from the
       | closet, wrapped it up, and called it a day.
       | 
       | I felt mildly bad for not being more thoughtful at the time, but
       | now it appears that I gifted them tens of thousands of dollars in
       | value. Many of them were the rare 1st edition / shadowless
       | versions.
       | 
       | Someone please tell me where to pick up my Uncle of the Year
       | award.
        
         | goldenkey wrote:
         | You don't become Uncle of the Year until you send the article
         | to your nephews.../withholds award
        
       | egypturnash wrote:
       | Lately I have been feeling like the economy just _broke_ on a
       | fundamental level over the past year. The vast amount of money
       | sloshing around NFTs are a symptom. And this? This is another
       | symptom.
       | 
       | The niche industry of "grading trading cards for collectible
       | value" is _completely overflowing_. Prices for this service are
       | skyrocketing because the demand far outstrips the availability.
       | 
       | Meanwhile we _still_ don 't have a minimum wage that is anything
       | like livable. $15/h was proposed as a sensible raise _ten years
       | ago_ from the current federal minimum of $7 and inflation has not
       | stopped in the intervening time - online inflation calculators
       | say the modern number would be $18.22.
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | > Lately I have been feeling like the economy just broke on a
         | fundamental level over the past year.
         | 
         | There is something seriously broken for _years_ now:
         | unsustainably low interest rates drive a _lot_ of money in
         | desperate search for the most minuscule interest rates.
         | 
         | Venture capital in institutional form beyond former founders
         | who got rich and want to return the favor would not exist -
         | certainly not millions of dollars for a company called Yo. Real
         | estate prices both for buy and rent worldwide are only
         | affordable for those who are mega-rich as investors are the
         | only ones who can put up the cash, and it's beginning to go the
         | same way in agricultural land. Stock prices, despite a
         | disastrous raging pandemic, are at all-time highs.
         | 
         | It's madness.
        
         | clairity wrote:
         | minimum wage is a crutch to keep the system largely the way it
         | is and trickle some crumbs down to the lower classes to stay a
         | revolt. instead, we need to realign incentives so that labor is
         | on equal footing with capital (e.g., enforce transparency on
         | the labor market). in addition, the tax and regulatory system
         | should be overhauled to actively promote a broader distribution
         | of capital to encourage creativity, wider risk-taking,
         | resiliency, robustness, and fairness.
         | 
         | we need to stop looking at simplistic crutches like the minimum
         | wage (ubi too) as wins, as they further entrench systemic
         | biases rather than alleviate them. don't let moneyed interests
         | buy us off in favor of these biases for pennies on the dollar.
        
         | opo wrote:
         | >...$15/h was proposed as a sensible raise ten years ago
         | 
         | Sensible? Different states and different parts of states have
         | vastly different costs of living. The average wage in San
         | Francisco is going to be different than rural Alabama. The non
         | partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the
         | proposed 2021 increase to $15 would have caused a loss of 1.4
         | million jobs. (And obviously would have been even a bigger
         | effect 10 years ago.)
         | 
         | >...online inflation calculators say the modern number would be
         | $18.22.
         | 
         | No, that is wrong.
         | 
         | The minimum wage started at .25 in 1938. If it had followed
         | inflation it would be at $4.70.
         | 
         | The last time it was adjusted was 2009. If it had been adjusted
         | for inflation since then, it would be about $8.95.
        
           | opheliate wrote:
           | > No, that is wrong. [...] The last time it was adjusted was
           | 2009. If it had been adjusted for inflation since then, it
           | would be about $8.95.
           | 
           | I think you've misunderstood egypturnash's comment here.
           | They're saying that if the $15 dollar minimum wage proposed
           | in 2010 had been adjusted for inflation since then, it would
           | now be equivalent to $18.22. If you check an inflation
           | calculator, $15 in 2010 is equivalent in purchasing power to
           | $18.22 in 2021. The argument is not that the actual minimum
           | wage of 2010 would now be equivalent to $18.22 today.
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | This conversation about what minimum wage should be always
           | devolves into useless bickering about location and which
           | inflation statistic to use.
           | 
           | A more productive conversation would be to define the minimum
           | quality of life that one should have, then calculate the cost
           | of it, then divide by how many hours one "should" work to
           | achieve that quality of life.
           | 
           | Should a person be able to own land in a tier 1/2/3
           | urban/suburban area? Should a person be entitled to
           | healthcare with a certain out of pocket
           | maximums(gold/silver/bronze)? Should someone be able to
           | afford daycare for infants? How much should one have saved up
           | by retirement date (which brings up its own cost calculation
           | for expenses during retirement)?
        
             | djbebs wrote:
             | >A more productive conversation would be to define the
             | minimum quality of life that one should have, then
             | calculate the cost of it, then divide by how many hours one
             | "should" work to achieve that quality of life.
             | 
             | That's not productive at all for the simple fact that you
             | cannot legislate people into wealth.
             | 
             | The real minimum wage is and will always be zero, because
             | that is how much workers who are less productive than the
             | legal minimum will get.
             | 
             | Let's be clear as to what a minimum wage actually is, it's
             | simply and exclusively making employing unproductive people
             | illegal.
             | 
             | It does not, and can not ever help low value added workers
             | for the simple reason that all it does is prohibit them
             | from working.
        
               | enragedcacti wrote:
               | > Let's be clear as to what a minimum wage actually is,
               | it's simply and exclusively making employing unproductive
               | people illegal.
               | 
               | It also gives raises to those whose productivity exceeds
               | their negotiating power.
        
               | djbebs wrote:
               | At the expense of equal losses of employment from people
               | competing for those jobs.
        
               | enragedcacti wrote:
               | I don't understand what you mean, can you elaborate?
        
         | faitswulff wrote:
         | Eh. Were you around for the Beanie Baby craze? Or Tickle Me
         | Elmo? These things come and go.
        
           | echelon wrote:
           | Pokemon cards have been around since the 90's, and rare
           | Pokemon cards have always had appeal and commanded high
           | value.
           | 
           | This is less like Beanie Babies and more like the rare Magic
           | the Gathering card economy. (Which is also a thing.)
           | 
           | The demographics are different too. Beanie Babies was mostly
           | a suburban mom thing that came and went, whereas Pokemon
           | cards appeal to computer nerds - many of whom have high
           | paying engineer salaries.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > Meanwhile we still don't have a minimum wage that is anything
         | like livable.
         | 
         | Why should the minimum wage be livable on its own? The minimum
         | _income_ obviously should, but why should people who can't
         | currently provide labor worth a "livable" wage in the market be
         | excluded from productive engagement in the economy?
         | 
         | The minimum wage is a crude hack to prevent economic coercion
         | of low-negotiating-power labor by capital, but a UBI funded by
         | progressive income taxes which treat capital income similarly
         | to other income, would serve that purpose more effectively.
        
           | lumost wrote:
           | Minimum wages also provide a price floor on labor. If I make
           | 21 an hour managing a Starbucks, then I make 3x the minimum
           | wage.
           | 
           | I'd suspect that the owner values labor in multiples of the
           | minimum, if the minimum wage were cut in half I'd expect the
           | managers rate to similarly fall.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > I'd suspect that the owner values labor in multiples of
             | the minimum
             | 
             | For low-bargaining power labor, having a progression from
             | the minimum is probably a factor; OTOH, UBI eliminates the
             | economic coercion that is a major contributor to low end
             | labor having low bargaining power.
             | 
             | For labor what the combination of oversupply and economic
             | coercion doesn't overwhelm normal market factors,
             | competition among purchasers should result in wages @ the
             | marginal value to the employer added.
        
         | habosa wrote:
         | 100%, something about supply and demand fundamentally broke
         | during this pandemic and may never return to normal.
        
         | jandrewrogers wrote:
         | $18.22 per hour would exceed the _median_ wage in the
         | _majority_ of States. I think it is safe to assert that what
         | constitutes a  "livable wage" is much lower than this number
         | _ipso facto_. Not everyone lives on the west coast. There is a
         | lot of evidence that the locale-adjusted livable wage is much
         | lower than the numbers often thrown around.
         | 
         | Per the US government, which tracks what people in different
         | deciles _actually_ spend on various things in surprising
         | detail, the median US household has ~$1,000 in cash left over
         | every month after all ordinary expenditures.
         | 
         | People consistently overestimate the cost of living in large
         | parts of the US because they only visit the very expensive
         | parts and imagine everyone spends money like they do. I have a
         | long-time friend, a single mother with no outside financial
         | support, who was able to buy a condo in a decent school
         | district in a major midwestern metro on ~$15/hr with prudent
         | planning. It took her a long time and it isn't in a suburb
         | where bougie tech people would want to live but she seems
         | pretty pleased with herself. I will admit to being surprised
         | when she told me but she'd actually figured it all out within
         | her constraints and was able to successfully work toward that
         | goal on that wage. The way most people talk about it, this
         | should be literally impossible.
        
           | rjzzleep wrote:
           | > People consistently overestimate the cost of living in
           | large parts of the US
           | 
           | I'm sure there are parts of the US you can get by with less
           | than $3 wage. I think out of the 600000 homeless people a
           | fair share manages to do that without dying either. Doesn't
           | mean you should.
           | 
           | > who was able to buy a condo in a decent school district in
           | a major midwestern metro on ~$15/hr with prudent planning.
           | 
           | ok, sure but a lot of context is missing.
           | 
           | > It took her a long time
           | 
           | Is it paid off? How long will it take her to pay it off? If
           | it is how did that happen? How much was the Condo. If not,
           | what happens if she misses one payment?
        
             | JamesBarney wrote:
             | My wife sold a nice condo for 50k a couple years ago. It
             | was to a single woman who'd never made more than $10 an
             | hour.
        
               | cptskippy wrote:
               | Which is about right according to the 3x your salary
               | equation.
               | 
               | Not sure what market that's in but my partner paid $150k
               | in 2004 for a condo just ITP of Atlanta behind a run down
               | shopping center in a gentrified neighborhood, the
               | neighborhood still ain't great but the condo today it's
               | worth around $250k which would require you to make around
               | $40 an hour.
        
               | JamesBarney wrote:
               | It was in Houston. It was in a suburb that wasn't great
               | but wasn't crime ridden either.
        
           | Judgmentality wrote:
           | > Per the US government, which tracks what people in
           | different deciles actually spend on various things in
           | surprising detail, the median US household has ~$1,000 in
           | cash left over every month after all ordinary expenditures.
           | 
           | I'm really not trying to be the "citation needed" dick, but I
           | would genuinely love to look at the source for this. What I
           | found from googling was a hodgepodge of unreliable
           | information, or studies that are decades old.
           | 
           | EDIT - just went straight to the source, since articles
           | linking the source couldn't find it.
           | 
           | https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-
           | share...
           | 
           | It roughly lines up, although it seems to be trending down
           | recently.
        
             | jandrewrogers wrote:
             | It is a standard extract from the US Bureau of Labor &
             | Statistics. Among other things, they collect statistics on
             | how much each income decile actually spends on different
             | things in surprisingly granular detail.
        
             | JamesBarney wrote:
             | https://www.fool.com/amp/investing/general/2015/10/18/the-
             | av...
             | 
             | These aren't those exact numbers but they're close enough
             | to make the $1,000 number seem realistic.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | Others wrote:
           | I think this comment implicitly assumes that just because
           | people survive on less than 18, it's livable
           | 
           | That's not necessarily true, since many people around or
           | below the poverty line rely on government assistance to
           | survive.
           | 
           | Also, the federal minimum is so low and our social safety net
           | is so weak (virtually non existent), many people would be
           | instantly screwed by any sort of drastic/expensive event.
           | (Like unexpected illness or the loss of a job or a car
           | accident.) Is a wage livable if you can't live through times
           | of trouble?
        
           | nonameiguess wrote:
           | How are you calculating the left over income? Going to the
           | BLS tables that Judgmentality linked to, specifically this
           | one (https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-
           | share...) showing income and spending by decile from 2019, it
           | isn't until 6th decile that after-tax income for the mean
           | household is greater than expenditures. Everyone in the lower
           | half of American income spends more than they earn. It isn't
           | until 8th decile that after-tax income exceeds expenditures
           | by more than $1,000 a month. Those numbers are $93,571 and
           | $75,945 annually, for $1,468 excess. In 7th decile, they're
           | $74,234 and $66,435, for $649 monthly leftover.
        
             | jandrewrogers wrote:
             | That BLS table contains _all_ expenditure categories they
             | track, including expenses which are not  "ordinary" in BLS
             | parlance, which is incorrect for these purposes. An
             | expenditure is "ordinary" if the vast majority of Americans
             | spend part of their income on it, regardless of how or how
             | much people spend -- a lot of objectively luxury spending
             | is classified as ordinary. In practice, ordinary
             | expenditures captures every kind of reasonable living
             | expense most people think of as typical for living in
             | America, with no frugality implied.
             | 
             | The BLS calculates discretionary income by subtracting all
             | _ordinary_ expenditures from income in a given decile.
             | Which is ~$1,000 /month for the median household. Some of
             | that leftover money may be spent on non-ordinary
             | expenditures, like the odd expensive hobby or lifestyle
             | flex, which is _also_ captured in this table but is not
             | included in the cost of living an ordinary life. I find
             | this to be an eminently reasonable approach to inductively
             | measuring the cost of an ordinary life without making a
             | judgement if some spending is excessive or luxury. Spending
             | money on a car is an ordinary expense, the BLS doesn 't
             | care if it is a Honda or a Ferrari, both are included.
             | 
             | This explains another apparent anomaly as well: ~35% of
             | households have no meaningful discretionary income, yet
             | only about ~15% (per Federal Reserve studies) have
             | difficulty paying their bills. Because there is a
             | substantial amount of luxury spending padding the ordinary
             | costs of living, households in the 15-35% range have
             | significant elasticity in how much they spend in some of
             | these categories.
        
           | marcusverus wrote:
           | I assume the gp is referring to https://livingwage.mit.edu/.
           | The fact that it is A) hosted on a .edu domain and B) is
           | associated with MIT, is enough for most folks to blindly
           | accept its outputs as some kind scientific truth. Folks love
           | a good appeal to authority.
           | 
           | The calculator is pretty strange, though. A quick glance
           | under the hood reveals that the calculator goes well out of
           | its way to inflate the cost of living which is used to
           | calculate the 'living wage' in a given area. They consider a
           | mobile phone as a basic need, which makes sense. But when
           | they calculated the cost of a mobile phone, they included the
           | price of a new $200 phone every 2 years, and a plan that
           | includes 10GB of mobile data per month! As a result, the
           | expected monthly cost of a phone was ~3x what I pay. When
           | pricing broadband internet, they said $60/mo was the lowest
           | they could find in my area, which again was ~3x my own
           | monthly expense. The transportation allowance was so high as
           | to be roughly equivalent to the payment+insurance on a 1-2
           | year old Toyota Corolla. For the food allowance, they
           | arbitrarily chose the 'second cheapest' FDA approved balanced
           | meal plan price scheme, which added $60/mo in expenses for no
           | reason whatsoever. That's where I quit investigating, but I
           | would be surprised if those are the only living expenses
           | which were so inflated.
        
             | DubiousPusher wrote:
             | I'm sorry but I looked a bit too and I findi your
             | criticisms a bit unconvincing. The mobile plan may be a bit
             | much but $60/mo is literally the cheapest broadband plan
             | available where I live. In fact it's almost literally the
             | only plan available unless you want to spend more.
             | 
             | I looked up both my low cost birth county in Montana and my
             | current high cost home county in Washington. Both had a
             | budget of about $5,000 a year for transportation. Which,
             | ignoring all maintenance, fuel and registration costs would
             | leave you with about $300 per month after meeting most
             | state minimum insurance requirements and full coverage.
             | That's the payment on about a $15,000 car financed over 60
             | months, if you have good credit. Not a beater by any means
             | but honestly that's pretty much the value sweet spot in
             | terms of getting a reliable used car. You could get more
             | car by ditching full coverage but as Dave Ramsey says, "you
             | insure the things you cannot afford to replace." Your sole
             | mode of getting to work seems like a thing you probably
             | can't afford to replace on minimum wage. Again, you can
             | play with the numbers but I already threw your argument the
             | bone of ignoring, fuel, maintenance and licensing costs. A
             | nontrivial sum.
             | 
             | Regardless, I'm not sure why your argument takes as it's
             | premise that a living wage should represent the minimum a
             | person needs to get by in our modern world. Why is that the
             | default standard?
             | 
             | Edit: When I think about it more, isn't that kind of the
             | whole point of a proposing a living wage over a minimum
             | wage? People proposing it believe that we shouldn't peg
             | wages to the minimum a person needs but rather to some
             | fulfilling standard of living?
        
             | pseudo0 wrote:
             | The housing estimate seems quite high for my area as well,
             | particularly for the single adult category. It was using a
             | figure that I'd expect for a nice 1br in a trendy area.
             | Someone under financial pressure would probably be renting
             | with a roommate in a less nice area instead, likely paying
             | a third to half the figure the calculator cites. I also
             | agree on the transportation cost being way out of whack.
             | For the adult plus one child cost they cite for my area, I
             | could finance a new $40k car plus pay for insurance and
             | gas.
        
         | almost_usual wrote:
         | Here's my interpretation.
         | 
         | Workers that lived off the "trickle down" effect of the economy
         | lost their jobs. The govt injected money and created policy to
         | help keep those workers with food and shelter rather than let
         | everything crash a year ago.
         | 
         | If you were a high skilled worker you never lost your job and
         | you no longer had the same outlets to spend your money. You
         | probably saved money and now have a surplus of cash. So a year
         | later everything is frothy and real asset prices are on the
         | rise. The Fed still doesn't think we're back to 'normal' yet so
         | low interest rates and cash injection will continue.
        
           | walshemj wrote:
           | Not so sure the average high skilled worker had that much of
           | a portfolio to get to the point that they would need to put
           | investments into fringe investments.
           | 
           | And if you did things like proper art collectables or vintage
           | rolex's. I did vaguely think about watches even looked at
           | actual antique katanas or wood block print auctions.
        
         | vmception wrote:
         | Just wait till Millenials are appointing themselves to the
         | Federal Reserve and Treasury, instead of Baby Boomers
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | skluug wrote:
         | Fyi, $15/hr in 2011 dollars would have been significantly
         | higher than the minimum wage has ever been. The highest ever US
         | minimum wage adjusted for inflation was $1.60 in 1968 which is
         | $10.34 in 2011, $12.18 in 2021.
         | 
         | https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2015/07/23/misconceptions-rai...
        
           | patentatt wrote:
           | This contradicts everything I've ever read on the topic, is
           | there a good reason I should trust this source over others?
        
             | CapitalistCartr wrote:
             | This CNN article seems to support that.
             | 
             | https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/21/politics/minimum-wage-
             | inflati...
        
             | coryrc wrote:
             | Certain political bents like to mix "inflation" and
             | "productivity growth" to juice the numbers. OTOH not sure I
             | really trust inflation is balanced properly and accurately
             | captures the cost of a certain standard of living.
             | 
             | https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/21/politics/minimum-wage-
             | inflati...
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | You don't just adjust for inflation, you adjust for
           | productivity growth. That being said, $15 is meant to be
           | high. It's meant to give you the ability to pay for housing.
           | 
           | For amusement value: the median house price in Jan 1968 was
           | $163K in 2020 dollars. The median house price in 2020 was
           | $300K. So really, minimum wage should be $24 an hour to bring
           | you into Property Purchasing Power Parity(tm) with 1968.
        
             | almost_usual wrote:
             | Housing costs for inflation isn't the cost of home
             | ownership, it's rent (shelter). Buying a home is considered
             | an investment not a consumable good.
             | 
             | https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-rent-
             | an...
             | 
             | "Why doesn't the CPI include the cost of buying and
             | financing houses as well as property taxes and home
             | maintenance and improvement?
             | 
             | Houses and other residential structures are not consumption
             | items and, therefore, should not be CPI items. All
             | buildings and structures are capital goods, which are items
             | that provide a service. In the case of houses and other
             | residential structures, that service is shelter.
             | 
             | Buildings and structures are also investment items, things
             | that are bought and resold in organized markets with a
             | potential for gain. House prices frequently appreciate; in
             | this respect they differ from consumer durables such as
             | vehicles."
        
               | edmundsauto wrote:
               | Don't houses depreciate while the land is what
               | appreciates? IANE, but I thought some people in the
               | states had a depreciation deduction on the building.
        
             | coryrc wrote:
             | Why? Because someone invents a more efficient process, we
             | should increase the wages of ditch diggers?
             | 
             | I believe we should focus on relieving the burden of the
             | massive regulatory state on the poor. I.e. relax zoning and
             | lower regressive taxes.
        
               | Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote:
               | People digging ditches is a requirement for a functional
               | modern society. When a general strike happens the ditch
               | diggers and their friends will be the ones wielding the
               | power they forgot they had all along. I strongly
               | recommend not looking down upon people who work with
               | their hands. It's very bad decorum, and their shovels are
               | sharp.
        
               | coryrc wrote:
               | If you think that's going to happen again in the USA, you
               | haven't been paying attention.
               | 
               | Signed, child and grandchild of union workers from
               | Michigan
        
               | mythrwy wrote:
               | The problem there is they can make cars in Korea.
               | 
               | But they can't dig ditches in Korea and export them to
               | the U.S.
        
               | oivey wrote:
               | The ditch diggers dug the trenches to run internet to
               | your home. Your internet connection has only went up in
               | value/utility, yet the people who dig those trenches now
               | don't make any more than they did before.
               | 
               | The idea that employees are paid according to their value
               | is entirely wrong. Employees are paid according to the
               | labor market. The price of labor on the market is
               | significantly controlled by supply, not the value to the
               | employer of employing someone. Besides that, employers
               | have much more power in the employment relationship. This
               | is true even in tech. For example, the FAANGs got caught
               | colluding with one another to suppress salaries via
               | secret anti-poaching agreements a few years back.
        
               | coryrc wrote:
               | They learned to use modern power equipment and make more
               | than minimum wage. We shouldn't be forced to pay more to
               | people who won't switch from using a hand shovel or
               | whatever the modern equivalent is - cash register
               | attendant? When people were "clerks" it paid an okay
               | amount, but should it be paying more than an "okay"
               | amount? Why should their buying power increase? Why
               | should it track the salaries of people who made computers
               | orders of magnitude cheaper and better? The people whose
               | technology made mRNA vaccines possible for everyone to
               | have?
        
             | pmorici wrote:
             | Maybe we just need to increase the supply of houses to
             | drive that cost down. Raising the minimum wage doesn't help
             | if everyone is competing for the same limited supply.
        
               | bluedino wrote:
               | Wouldn't help now. Building supply costs are so high and
               | labor is short as well
        
               | almost_usual wrote:
               | Housing inflation is based on rent prices not the price
               | of home units. Purchasing a home unit is an investment
               | and not a consumable good.
               | 
               | Edit:
               | 
               | Downvoted for stating facts. From above:
               | 
               | https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-
               | rent-an...
               | 
               | "Why doesn't the CPI include the cost of buying and
               | financing houses as well as property taxes and home
               | maintenance and improvement?
               | 
               | Houses and other residential structures are not
               | consumption items and, therefore, should not be CPI
               | items. All buildings and structures are capital goods,
               | which are items that provide a service. In the case of
               | houses and other residential structures, that service is
               | shelter.
               | 
               | Buildings and structures are also investment items,
               | things that are bought and resold in organized markets
               | with a potential for gain. House prices frequently
               | appreciate; in this respect they differ from consumer
               | durables such as vehicles."
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | _Downvoted for stating facts._
               | 
               | This isn't so much a "fact" as it is a "position." In
               | other words, the fact that the BLS uses this position in
               | its definition does not make that definition the best
               | possible definition, nor does it mean people have to
               | accept that definition when they use the word "inflation"
               | in a conversation.
               | 
               | There are loads of reasons why one might argue that house
               | prices should be considered necessary expenses rather
               | than investments. A particular area may have only houses
               | for sale and very few rentals. Ownership provides things
               | that cannot be achieved by renting. The appreciated value
               | of a house is largely meaningless or even detrimental for
               | people who just want to keep living where they live when
               | their wages are not increasing. Etc.
               | 
               | Also, generally, quoting definitions unprompted isn't
               | well received in most conversations :).
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | pmorici wrote:
               | Whether it is rented or purchased is irrelevant.
               | Increasing the supply will drive the cost down. If you
               | have more renters than rentals prices will go up and a
               | minimum wage is just a handout to wealthy landlords
               | because you have the same people competing for the same
               | housing just with more money.
        
         | lastofthemojito wrote:
         | > Lately I have been feeling like the economy just broke on a
         | fundamental level over the past year.
         | 
         | I've been thinking that recently too, although it's possible
         | that I'm only now paying attention because I've finally become
         | someone who has enough money to ask "what do I do with my
         | surplus money?". That's not something I had to concern myself
         | with 10 or 20 years ago.
         | 
         | Some folks will rightly point out that there have always been
         | fads, but things feel quite outlandish these days with
         | GME/Wallstreetbets, Bitcoin, NFTs, SPACs. The stock market as a
         | whole has done well over the past year, but it's been outpaced
         | by stuff that feels like people counting on a greater fool. But
         | then here I am on the sidelines, avoiding the riskiest stuff,
         | and of course a bit envious of their returns, so who's really
         | the fool? _Shrug_
        
           | smlss_sftwr wrote:
           | Something I wonder about is whether the inflow of money into
           | all these "assets" is indeed driven by people with buckets of
           | excess capital, or actually from people who could use the
           | cash in hand the most. Anecdotally I know individuals crushed
           | by student loans/HCOL who immediately threw their stimulus
           | checks into crypto and meme stocks with the rationale that if
           | they lose it all, a few thousand dollars would've made no
           | difference on their debt anyways whereas getting on the next
           | rocketship trend early could become a life-changing sum of
           | money. I agree something is fundamentally broken if we've
           | reached the point where we live in a casino economy, I don't
           | know how long it can last and the long-term potential
           | consequences are quite concerning
        
             | vmception wrote:
             | This has never bothered me.
             | 
             | Those same people could always go to an actual casino with
             | only negative expected value games so why spend any thought
             | on it? It seems so incongruent to suddenly care when
             | someone decides to play a _positive_ expected value game.
             | 
             | The only consequence is that people still dont want to give
             | random entrepreneurs their money if they dont have a
             | certain pedigree. Thats the best way for money to circulate
             | in the economy and people dont have the confidence in that
             | to do it. So expect greater market distortions while the
             | government still attempts to get people to do the one thing
             | they dont want to do. People will rather buy bonds at lower
             | and negative yields for capital preservation, or they will
             | rather buy collectibles and crypto for capital growth. The
             | macro trend is clear.
        
           | jnsie wrote:
           | You should articulated my thoughts/situation with an eerie
           | level of precision.
        
         | fullshark wrote:
         | The past year made me realize if you are selling your time for
         | money that means you are a part of the underclass. Full stop.
         | Having lots of assets that appreciate in value and you can
         | comfortably exchange them for money when you need to, that's
         | where you should be trying to get to.
         | 
         | This story is a sign that I'm not the only one I guess that
         | feels that way. The r/wallstreetbets story another example.
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | This is commonly known as "making money while you sleep".
        
             | xwdv wrote:
             | A far better alternative to "making money while you sheep".
             | 
             | As returns on capital and assets start to vastly outperform
             | returns on labor, you should be focusing not on what work
             | you can do, but rather on what assets you can acquire and
             | capitalize on.
        
               | abstractbarista wrote:
               | This is why I've been buying equities as fast as I can
               | since I started working. Only been a few years but I'm
               | loving it so far.
        
           | lumost wrote:
           | An economy based on speculation in assets is unlikely to
           | survive long. At some point the the majority of dollars will
           | just represent speculation of one kind or another.
        
           | akiselev wrote:
           | _> Having lots of assets that appreciate in value and you can
           | comfortably exchange them for money when you need to, that 's
           | where you should be trying to get to._
           | 
           | I think it's still middle class at best if the assets have to
           | be sold to realize the gains. Full upperclass (IMO) means the
           | ability to leverage assets to acquire even more assets
           | (especially in down markets) without risk of catastrophic
           | loss while funding a lavish lifestyle.
           | 
           | It's an important distinction because short of total economic
           | or societal collapse, productive assets held as collateral
           | continue to generate capital. One can raise large amounts of
           | capital almost on demand with extremely favorable terms using
           | those assets, essentially multiplying the wealth that the
           | upperclass has at its disposal. Once they hit a certain
           | scale, it's almost trivially easy to make modest but
           | consistent returns on borrowed capital because investing is a
           | lot like farming: being a farmer and owning a single farm is
           | really risky due to unpredictable stuff like droughts, but
           | being Tyson and owning farms all over the world is really low
           | risk unless the entire planet is hit by a drought
           | simultaneously, in which case everyone will get bailed out.
           | 
           | Imagine you own a hundred million dollars worth of
           | Blockbuster franchises free and clear that generates a
           | "paltry" $2 mil a year in profit. What do you do when your
           | investment is threatened and Netflix IPOs at around a dollar
           | in 2002? You go to the bank and get a $25 million loan to buy
           | Netflix stock. Then in 2008 when it's at $5/share and the
           | stores are barely generating enough money to cover the loan
           | payments, you firesale the remaining Blockbuster assets to
           | pay off the rest of the loan and laugh yourself to the bank
           | after selling $125 million worth of Netflix stock for an
           | annualized return of around 3% in a recession. That's a very
           | contrived example but it illustrates the point: with
           | productive assets, you can use the proceeds to pay the cost
           | of hedging those assets. When you do that across a large,
           | diverse portfolio, you have to try not to make money.
        
             | dbish wrote:
             | I think of that as independently wealthy, since I
             | personally have a hard time telling someone that if you're
             | an engineering exec making > $1mm/yr, that you're middle
             | class because you get paid for your time. That seems pretty
             | upper class even if it isn't the properly wealthy, no need
             | to work, upper class.
        
               | akiselev wrote:
               | I'd say the exec is upper middle class because if their
               | employer went bankrupt and they had to pay for a bad
               | string of unexpected medical expenses or got sued for
               | some liability they weren't insured for, it could easily
               | send them deep into the middle class. It's like having
               | exactly a million dollars in net worth - are you really a
               | millionaire if all it takes is a little depreciation to
               | drop you back to six figures? However, entering the upper
               | class with executive salary like that takes a lot less
               | luck - they don't need to start a billion dollar unicorn,
               | they just need a little bit of luck and a few decades of
               | steady investment.
               | 
               | The way I see it: the underclass has to work hard to move
               | upwards, the middle class has to work hard to stay where
               | they are, and the upper class has to work hard to move
               | downwards.
        
               | BlueTemplar wrote:
               | The difference between "upper class" and "old money" ?
        
         | JamesBarney wrote:
         | People just started saving a lot more money because they
         | weren't doing anything. These savings sloshed around and are
         | finding their way into assets.
        
         | banbanbang wrote:
         | I think we are in a transition period where a new underlying
         | economic system will be underwritten (and with it our politics
         | system). We simply cannot continue this way.
        
           | sdenton4 wrote:
           | You're right. Overwhelmed card grading services cannot be the
           | defining feature of the American experience; we must rise
           | together to meet this challenge. Nine month waiting times to
           | get a Charizard graded? What is this, Soviet Russia?
        
             | infoseek12 wrote:
             | In Soviet Russia Charizard grades you.
        
               | goldenkey wrote:
               | Why was my exam paper returned as ash?
        
             | banbanbang wrote:
             | Wow. I was just replying to the thread. You don't need to
             | be an a$$hole.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | Natsu wrote:
         | A ton of money flooded into the economy via stimulus, the
         | brighter folks realize that inflation is inevitable and rush
         | out to every random scarce good in the hopes it will retain
         | value.
         | 
         | When this many people feel that NFTs or Pokemon cards might be
         | a better store of value than, say, the USD, it probably
         | _should_ be giving us some kind of shock, no?
         | 
         | And at this rate, we'll probably get that $15/hr wage soon
         | enough. As you pointed out, the real question will be whether
         | it actually buys more than the existing minimum wage once did.
        
         | imtringued wrote:
         | There has been a savings glut for the last 20 years and it just
         | got really bad this year.
         | 
         | Excess savings are simply dollars that are sitting around doing
         | nothing, employing no one, investing into nothing. There are
         | lots of sources of excess savings. Right now one of the fastest
         | growing source is the house hold savings rate but for the last
         | 20 years it was mostly foreign exchange reserves and corporate
         | savings.
         | 
         | These excess savings are almost equivalent to a contraction of
         | the monetary supply with the caveat that in theory they could
         | come back at any time and nobody knows when, however it's been
         | 20 years and no sign of stopping. The Fed is conservative and
         | only increases the money supply in a mostly reversible way
         | either by issuing debt or buying assets which are then put on
         | its balance sheet. Debt must be paid back, eventually the money
         | that was issued via debt disappears and only the interest
         | payments is freshly minted, QE (buying assets) works under the
         | assumption that inflation will cause asset prices to go up and
         | therefore if the Fed sells assets it will end up with a profit
         | and the returned money is then destroyed to contract the money
         | supply.
         | 
         | However, interest rates aren't powerful enough to steer the
         | economy. At some point they will hit the 0% lower bound. At 0%
         | people will switch to cash and cash equivalents (usually
         | treasury bonds) and therefore it becomes impossible to charge
         | negative interest.
         | 
         | If 0% interest rates are not enough to force people to invest
         | their money themselves then there must be a barrier that is
         | impeding investments to be made. The total investment rate and
         | the total savings rate are just convenient numbers that
         | summarize an entire economy. Surely there must be a crucial
         | piece of information missing that explains the discrepancy.
         | E.g. the type of savings that is currently in abundance is
         | incompatible with the type of investments that are possible and
         | profitable.
         | 
         | As with all things in life this is merely something I am
         | figuring out as I go.
         | 
         | My first clue is venture capital and the Softbank Vision fund.
         | VCs are chasing unicorns simply because their huge scale of
         | capital requires a huge scale of investments. Softbank doesn't
         | even bother with anything less than $100 million. Surely there
         | are startups out there that need $10 million in funding to get
         | started and can double their money in 10 years but have no
         | growth potential beyond say $30 million revenue per year. These
         | companies would do productive work and employ people along the
         | way and everything would be fine but they simply don't fit into
         | the VC model. The most famous case of a over funded company I
         | know is Juicero. I'm sure there would have been a way to keep
         | it running even if it takes a dozen revisions to the original
         | juicer, but at $120 million you knew it was going to shut down
         | before it made any money.
        
         | ed312 wrote:
         | The reality is basic unskilled labor is worth about as much as
         | it has been. At the same time, multiple new industries have
         | sprung up and computer/ai-aided workers are vastly more
         | productive than ever. I think a higher minimum wage could be a
         | good "forcing function" to eliminate more low-skill jobs. The
         | problem is, the general population is always going to have some
         | proportion of people who can not or will not do higher skilled
         | work. Also, normalizing WFH/remote work might help to let folks
         | diffuse to lower cost of living areas.
        
           | Robotbeat wrote:
           | On the contrary, what this means is the same "unskilled"
           | labor is now actually worth more because it is resistant to
           | automation. People doing automation resistant work get to
           | share in the productivity improvements of other sectors, and
           | that is perfectly fair.
           | 
           | But what's odd about your argument is that the federal
           | minimum wage ought to be $12-13/hour if it had simply been
           | adjusted for inflation since the late 1960s. So by that
           | measure, we value "unskilled" labor even LESS than we did
           | half a century ago.
           | 
           | If we had adjusted minimum wage for productivity growth, it'd
           | be about $21/hour right now.
           | 
           | So I think we ought to have a nationwide federal minimum wage
           | minimum of $12.50-15/hour, adjust it for inflation
           | continually, but also adjust for local cost of living so that
           | the nationwide average (average of regions) minimum wage is
           | around $21/hour, continually adjusted each year for cost of
           | living.
           | 
           | And I am not worried about automation increasing unemployment
           | over the long term. We should have targeted efforts to
           | increase employment rate if there are periods of
           | disemployment from disruptive automation, but we have more
           | jobs now than we did a century or two ago in spite of two
           | centuries of increased automation and mechanization.
        
             | nitrogen wrote:
             | _continually adjusted each year for cost of living._
             | 
             | One big risk here, or with any cyclically referenced
             | benchmark, is runaway positive feedback. This can be
             | exponential growth, oscillation, or exponentially growing
             | oscillation.
             | 
             | If wages are referenced to CoL, but CoL is affected by
             | wages, you have this risk.
             | 
             | A real example I have encountered: years ago, before an
             | area I was living in experienced hyper demand, rent prices
             | were fairly stable. I was able to get decent places just
             | under $1k. My landlord was pretty chill, but said that they
             | had to raise the rent eventually because they couldn't
             | write off expenses (or maybe it was losses) if they were
             | charging below the area median rent. So every year,
             | landlords would have to increase the rent to the median,
             | which would almost certainly raise the median (unless
             | literally the bottom 50% of prices were exactly the same),
             | and then they have to raise again, etc.
        
               | Robotbeat wrote:
               | I don't buy it. Civil servant salaries are adjusted for
               | cost of living, and this isn't just the lower levels but
               | ALL levels.
               | 
               | Again, this is just excuse.
               | 
               | You can't fix a lack of housing issue by keeping wages
               | low.
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | _I don't buy it._
               | 
               | It's math. If f(x)=K * g(x-1), and g(x)=L * f(x-1), you
               | need to be very careful about choosing values for K and
               | L.
        
               | Robotbeat wrote:
               | It's not math, it's a hypothetical, somewhat absurd
               | model.
               | 
               | There's actual empirical research on minimum wage, and it
               | doesn't support these claims of exponential cost
               | increase:
               | https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/why-15-minimum-wage-is-
               | pre...
        
               | akiselev wrote:
               | That's because minimum wage isn't actively pegged to a
               | cost of living measurement, it's manually adjusted from
               | time to time (ostensibly to be inline with cost of
               | living). That manual adjustment is slow and decoupled
               | enough that there's no runaway feedback loop.
               | 
               | If you legally define the minimum wage as a formula
               | instead of an absolute number, and that formula includes
               | cost of living, you can create a runaway situation.
        
               | Judgmentality wrote:
               | > One big risk here, or with any cyclically referenced
               | benchmark, is runaway positive feedback. This can be
               | exponential growth, oscillation, or exponentially growing
               | oscillation.
               | 
               | Have we ever witnessed an exponentially growing
               | oscillation in a large scale economic feedback loop like
               | this before? I'd never really considered that concept for
               | macroeconomics.
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | I'm sort of extrapolating from the very little I know of
               | control theory and feedback systems. I've seen others
               | mention that economics and control theory could benefit
               | from collaboration.
               | 
               | Maybe the boom/bust business cycle, coupled with
               | inflation, is exactly this phenomenon? Maybe social media
               | frenzy is also a feedback phenomenon.
        
               | Robotbeat wrote:
               | It's not really a big risk, here. It's hypothetical. A
               | scare tactic to argue against increasing the minimum wage
               | to even moderately adjust for for inflation and overall
               | productivity growth (and cost of living growth).
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | It is very frustrating to have any kind of productive
               | discussion when the slightest hint of anything unexpected
               | is negatively labeled and associated with the entirety of
               | some diametrically opposed position that was never
               | actually raised.
        
               | Robotbeat wrote:
               | I apologize. But it's frustrating when people express
               | opposition to even a minimum wage level from the 1960s
               | with sort of outlandish hypotheticals. There's a bunch of
               | pretty good empirical research out there on the effects
               | of minimum wage increases, and none of them suggest this
               | sort of "exponential" increasing effect.
               | https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/why-15-minimum-wage-is-
               | pre...
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | The thing is, you assumed what I believe. I'm actually in
               | favor of higher minimum wages and indexing to costs. But
               | the feedback-loop nature of the economic system, or any
               | feedback system (where future output numbers of the
               | system depend on previous outputs), must be acknowledged
               | and accounted for, or else you will, mathematically, get
               | exponential growth and/or oscillation.
               | 
               | I also have a lot of family who currently live just fine
               | making less than $15/hr. Their employers (small
               | businesses) would have to raise prices (or go out of
               | business, or both), which would raise costs, which would
               | raise the CoL index, which would raise future minimum
               | wages in a feedback cycle, if there is not some
               | compensating factor in how wages and prices are set.
        
           | usrusr wrote:
           | How many people would Google actually _need_ to supply
           | humanity with targeted ads?
           | 
           | I suspect that ultimately, most are just there to out-
           | innovate would be upstarts that might, perhaps, take some of
           | their pie. But this doesn't have to go on forever, there
           | already is the precedent of Google not dying at all from
           | utterly failing with their Facebook counter. And that's just
           | one example. I believe that the "productivity crisis" is
           | actually much deeper than it seems because so many parts are
           | glossed over by zero sum games taking up some of the
           | overcapacity.
        
             | lumost wrote:
             | If double click/search is a true monopoly google may not
             | _need_ any further work to sustain itself and could push
             | new costs to their customers.
             | 
             | I won't venture a head count figure for google without R&D
             | but it's probably a tiny fraction of current head count.
        
         | aphextron wrote:
         | >"Meanwhile we still don't have a minimum wage that is anything
         | like livable. "
         | 
         | This is because the Fed, as well as the entire US legislature,
         | knows deep down that wages are the final "finger in the dyke"
         | of the whole system collapsing. For wages to truly begin rising
         | would send inflation spiraling out of control. It's only under
         | check now because the asset owning class is reaping the
         | benefits; not the vast majority of wage earning lower/middle
         | class which is keeping consumer prices in check. Our entire
         | monetary policy is now pinned on the fact that wages will lag
         | gains of productivity and inflation, so that the almighty CPI
         | rate can be held up as evidence for low inflation and the free
         | money gravy train keeps rolling for the monied elite.
        
       | NanoWar wrote:
       | An overview of most valuable cards would have been nice, but
       | apparently you can't get a rating anyways. How do Pokemon cards
       | compare to other card games, like e. g. Magic or Yigioh?
        
       | setgree wrote:
       | I gave all my Pokemon and Magic the Gathering cards to my little
       | cousins a few years ago. BRB just sending this article to their
       | parents on the off-chance that there is real money sitting
       | there...
       | 
       | And for what it's worth, when people wonder what inflation looks
       | like in 2021, as far as I'm concerned, it's this.
        
       | drivers99 wrote:
       | When I read about the grading companies, it makes me wonder about
       | processes that could be improved and how I would go about it. It
       | says they hired efficiency experts ; it would be interesting to
       | hear from them.
       | 
       | I'm more into buying comics (for reading, not profit) but there
       | is a book coming out called Overstreet Guide to Grading Comics
       | that sounds interesting. (Overstreet also publishes a famous
       | annual price guide for comics.)
       | 
       | The craze for buying new cards makes me think of a cautionary
       | tale. In the 90s certain old, rare issues were going for tens of
       | thousands (current day, a few can go for millions). People
       | started buying new comics thinking those would be worth something
       | someday too. Customers, comics, stores, all expanded greatly
       | before collapsing. Because the companies were printing and
       | selling millions of copies they were not rare at all!
       | https://comicbooked.com/comic-book/
       | 
       | So the important thing is, are they printing more and more cards
       | to meet demand? (I actually don't know; do any of you know?) If
       | so, there's going to be a collapse.
       | 
       | Actually the article pointed out how massively the production of
       | _graded_ cards is increasing, so there you have it. If those are
       | new cards getting graded, I guess that will collapse at least.
        
         | patentatt wrote:
         | It does seem like something a high resolution camera and some
         | neural nets could do, right? Or conversely just put
         | standardized images up on a website and have the public sort
         | them (like hot or not). I'd bet it would become a fun thing for
         | card aficionados to do even.
        
       | 88 wrote:
       | Presumably the main reason to get a card graded is if you intend
       | to sell it?
       | 
       | Does that not mean there's an almighty supply shock coming to
       | these markets?
        
         | dehrmann wrote:
         | My guess is only on for high grades. For good, but not great
         | grades, I'd expect you can get a good enough idea from a high-
         | resolution photo, and you're better off rolling the dice,
         | knowing you're not getting a gem mint, anyway.
         | 
         | The other reason to get it graded is it marks that it might be
         | valuable for when you die and family is going through your
         | stuff.
         | 
         | I'd also expect CGC-graded cards to be worth less. I sold all
         | my MTG cards except one (unfortunately, I sold the Beta Chaos
         | Orb), but when I saw the price ($200-ish) of the one I kept,
         | figured I'd get it graded in case I want to sell it. There were
         | two grading companies, BGS and PSA that have been around
         | forever, and I went with the cheapest for grading one card. I
         | didn't recognize the name CGC. The article says they've only
         | been grading cards for a year, and I wouldn't be surprised if
         | people value BGS and PSA-graded cards more.
        
       | eightysixfour wrote:
       | This feels like a very machine learnable problem, has anyone
       | tried grading cards/coins via ML?
        
       | mschuster91 wrote:
       | > A collector I know has begun to simply buy Top Loaders from
       | Chinese wholesale websites and sell those on eBay rather than
       | deal with Pokemon cards at all.
       | 
       | Just like in every gold rush, the ones who will end up with the
       | most profit are the ones selling the shovels.
        
         | cinntaile wrote:
         | This is commonly claimed but is there any data to support this
         | thesis?
        
           | edoceo wrote:
           | Levi Strauss did this in a literal gold rush - and used the
           | capital to pivot to pants
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_Strauss
        
           | JamisonM wrote:
           | Joseph Francis Ladue founded Dawson City and became a very
           | rich man by expoiting the gold rush that way instead of
           | mining (he ended up making some money directly from mining
           | stakes as well in the end though). I believe his reputation
           | and life story are certainly one of the foundations of that
           | popular idea.
           | 
           | I don't know of any empirical studies of commerce in the
           | Yukon gold rush that demonstrated that the merchants were the
           | fattest of the fat cats in the the whole scenario though.
           | Lots of stories of scammer and schemers making big bucks too,
           | but again, who really knows?
           | 
           | Very few legitimately struck it rich on gold, that's for
           | sure.
        
           | 55555 wrote:
           | Your intuition is correct. Look up the market cap of gold and
           | then look up the market cap of shovels.
        
       | dehrmann wrote:
       | This trend in trading card prices is the same trend that's
       | driving bitcoin right now: people who are bored and have some
       | extra cash to spend on something that seems to be appreciating.
        
       | everyone wrote:
       | Just out of curiosity what about 'Magic the gathering' cards? I
       | found a load of them from when I was a kid. They are in good
       | condition, I have unopened booster packs too.
       | 
       | Would now be a good time to sell them? Also could I just sell the
       | lot for a reasonable price and not have to go through them all?
       | Thanks!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-01 23:01 UTC)