Marxist theory can give you insights on how to play the capitalist game. If you read it like a psychopath.
I joke that Capitalists would get the most value (figuratively and literally) from Marx, but are ideologically allergic to the reading.
I've seen quite a few statements from big Wall St. people who have clearly read Marx
I think a lot more capitalists understand Marxist theory than most would think
In principle I agree, but in many ways Wall Street types are Capital's greatest slaves. Since they are dealing with other's money, they also must meet their client's literal unwitting demands. All the analysis in the world won't placate the client screaming "AI! AI! BUY AI!"
Big money managers (large hedge funds and asset management firms like Citadel and Blackrock) make their own decisions/strategies and clients rarely if ever have any input. It's only the small local bank branch types that listen to their clients
The loud ones (Elon, Trump) are the morons who lucked their way into everything. A lot of quiet ones are really good at intentful exploitation
Smart vampires do read and understand marxist theory. They apply it to become more powerful ghouls.
Absolutely agree, but they aren't making the waves they ride. They are still subsumed in the general thoughtlessness of market forces.
EDIT: When I think of a class that is conscious of Marx, I unironically think of modern China's CCP. When they say they are still transitioning to socialism I believe them. From my standpoint (take with huge grains of salt) is that their program is capturing Capitalism in a kind of Nuclear Reactor. Just enough class antagonisms (capitalist success, hires more workers, worker wages going up incentivize productivity investment, rinse repeat) to increase productivity while using their placement on company boards as a kind of Control Rod to prevent those antagonisms from spiraling into class conflict/warfare.
Hillary Clinton gave a speech talking about how we need to seize the means of production back from China.
She also said we need to Pokémon Go to the polls, doesn't mean she knows what a Pikachu is.
I can't remember where, but I've seen Peter Thiel give business advice that's very clearly Evil Marxism.
Maximal fossil fuel yeah 
Matt Bruenig has a great and short tutorial on personal finance and investing, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efr2UORgO2w
the graphic at 17:30 summarizes the hierarchy of savings (1. Emergency fund 2. employer-matched retirement 3. high-interest debt 4. other tax-advantage accounts 5. low-interest debt 6. taxable brokerage account) - he notes that he and most others will never make it to 6.
The graphic at 31:00 summarizes common pitfalls to avoid, unless you have a deep passion. 1. individual stocks 2. crypto 3. house flipping/renting (don't be landlord ... for financial reasons!) 4. expensive homes 5. private k-12 education
I unironically love federation
Your post is clearly in good faith so I won't shit post or try to dunk, just so you know this instance is full of tankies and anarchists, investing is antithetical to our beliefs and any post about investing you see from this community is mocking the whole concept
investing is antithetical to our beliefs
I don't believe the Proletariat having a 401k and/or a Roth IRA in order to survive retirement is antithetical to leftist belief, but I am willing to be convinced otherwise. Even Marx speculated in the stock market. Ultimately, Leftists refusing to invest will do nothing at all to further expedite the end of Imperialism and eventually Capitalism, all it will create is homeless leftist seniors (if America lasts that long).
It's not about doing it or not doing it as an individual, it's about the very concept being ridiculous. It's almost like a magick ritual to people that buy into all the market bullshit.
Marx sometimes envisioned Capital as a Real God, in the sense that its will is served regardless of the beliefs or individual actions of those in Capitalism, and in that manner sustains "itself" and ensures "its" existence.
Of course, this was based in Materialism, it was always a metaphor.
For me the difference is between survival and personal gain, those funds are a forced compromise
So then, where is the barrier? Is this an argument based in Moralism, or Materialism? The Proletariat can and must do whatever it can to improve its own conditions, and in the absence of a state that provides for it, this must be done via the Market.
I agree that Workers, especially Marxists, should try to reduce their harmful footprints as much as possible. Boycott union busters and supporters of genocide. However, when it comes to retirement savings, there exist no ethical ways to move forward, except to live entirely off the grid and refuse to use banking systems.
Unfortunately, this can lead to reactionary behavior, a turning back of the clock to an earlier stage of Capitalism. That's why homesteading has a huge fascism problem.
I guess what I am trying to say is that I don't think it's productive to say investing is antithetical to leftism, considering the context. That would be like saying purchasing video games is antithetical to leftism, as they are for personal enjoyment yet support Capitalists. I try to think in terms of Dialectics and what materially benefits the proletariat, and ultimately if it becomes a matter of purity testing I believe we lose sight of the goals of Communism.
I dunno, this became a bit of a ramble. I'll end this with a fun quote:
“The moment anyone started to talk to Marx about morality, he would roar with laughter.”
i really do not understand how you're making that distinction. is it "anything specifically earmarked for retirement" is okay and all other investments beyond that aren't okay? what about college funds for children?
another point: it's perfectly conceivable to invest for the future outside a retirement account and still use those proceeds for survival. What if you need expensive medical treatment in your old age and that's the only way you're able to pay for it?
You're welcome to dunk, I don't mind.
Assuming you engage in wage labor (despite it being antithetical to all of our beliefs) and your employer offers you a greater portion of the fruits of your labor via a matched savings account, is it wrong to accept it? I think it's not wrong at all, and workers should accept and make the most of their 401k.
Bruenig's video is a framework for understanding personal finance from a leftist perspective, or the "personal welfare state" as he calls it. These are things the state should handle, but instead has created a mess of rules we have to decipher.
spoiler
some people here absolutely invest, you see it come up occasionally, always goes along the lines of "well you should at least do index funds for retirement/etc. or you're just losing your money to inflation".
I've always felt a bit reticent about those style posts. Also the person you're replying to probably thinks of themselves as on the left, given the citing Matt Bruenig. Shame that bruenig actually really sucks (iirc?)
In an ideal world I wouldn't have to mess around with weird abstract passive income in general since the concept and the means mostly just irritate me, but I do already have a 401k as a job perk and I may need supplementary income.
Living in the imperial core it's almost impossible to avoid being involved in investments, be it pension or social security funds
It's the age old question of ethical consumption under capitalism, personally I draw the line between surviving with the cards you were dealt and trying to gain advantage
We live in a capitalist economy, at this point it is absolutely dominated by finance and speculation rather than real growth and production, and it is pretty hard to survive long term without investing, particularly if you ever want to buy a house. House prices tend to rise faster than inflation, so you're losing on both inflation and appreciation. I don't think this should be the way it is, but it is the way it is. House prices and the rental market are linked by future cash flows so there's no escaping it unless you are homeless.
I'm ready to get dunked on but here we go
spoiler
I'm engaging in speculative trading (meaning: buying and holding stocks for 3-5 years) and betting on the rise of a multipolar world. In practice this mean for me: I pick a stock in the Chinese market that I think will eventually outperform a western company (e.g. EV, semiconductor, fusion, renewables, etc. - actually I picked a company that's on the US blacklist) and buy an amount where I'm ready to lose the money (I'm aware of the privilege) and just hold it. I follow the news mega so I get a good dose of financial press to keep up.
to contributing to the fall of the US hegemony and the rise of a multipolar world
Check out this person over here, thinking they can be a communist like this. Everyone knows communists need to forsake all wealth and worldly possessions to achieve enlightenment!
Invest into land with water rights cause 😬
Kinda? The Proletariat in western countries is forced to invest to retire, unless you can get pensions or a large safety net. The stock market has already been "solved," the answer is broad market-cap weighted globak funds with low expense ratio. Anything else is mysticism and gambling.
Yep, invest in index funds. If the entire market crashes, then either a) you have much bigger more immediate problems or b) we just did communism.
Eventually, Marx's Real God of Capital will be slain.
well, 
I'm skeptical that one could, but intrigued one may.
Tbhbbq if it generates income, which can be spent on Good™️ stuff, and doesn’t hurt anyone in the process, I don’t have a problem with it—like that brief moment in time I had $4,000 and I spent close to $1K just giving money to my other homeless friends, including helping my junkie friends stay well here and there.
dialectical synthesis tells us there are SOME books that SHOULD be burned
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip
