In what way do you think HFT messed up the global economy? I bet you can't back that claim up.

What problem are you trying to solve? An HFT company can make an extra fraction of a cent on a trade because they pay for bettet infrastructure? This was true when phones were first introduced. What do you think us worse about using modern computers and modern networks?

A stock's price is affected by many things. A few simple examples: Commodities - many (most?) companies either use them or are affected in some way. Similar or related stocks - suppose something happens to AMD - the price of NVIDIA will be affected. Likewise if the cost of silicon changes. Derivatives - options market makers have to constantly change their positions in underlying stocks. So trading in options affects stock prices. Currencies - many companies have assets priced in other currencies. They may have competition in other countries. They may have suppliers in other countries. Weather - some stocks are affected by the weather either directly or indirectly (e.g. via commodity prices) Etc... So the value of stocks changes on much smaller tinescales than you imagine. Forcing people to hold a stock that may decline in value makes them riskier. Additional risk translates into a higher cost to trading, which results ultimately to lower volumes, less liquidity and a damaged economy. This kind of idea is a bad solution to a nonexistent problem.

Most of the scientific and critical thinkers that I know are more humble about current knowledge than thr religious people I've met. Also, just because you can't explain some of your experiences scientifically doesn't necessarily mean that nobody can.

#8 use of sophistry.

He's playing by the rules and playing to win. What's the problem?

You can guess what happens next...

He fixes the cable?

I am a fisherman. And I can confirm that I did, indeed, hook a 747 once. It got away.

A 14% productivity boost does not necessarily (or even likely) equate to a 14% reduction in starvation.

+1

It's at least disingenuous. Especially when most of B was due to C, D and E.

Supposing that happened to me. Hypothetically, of course. Is there a way to appeal?

Nicely put.

Your argument about speciation is merely your ignorance. Firstly, some closely related species do have an enormous spectrum, as you describe about dogs. It may be worth noting that some breeds of dogs could be classified as different species, since they cannot interbreed anymore. That's an aside. The main point is that your expectations are way off. When a populatiin lives together, they interbreed, and therefore exchange genes, and traits continue within the whole population. A branch occurs when a population is split, and the two populations can no longer interbreed. Then you should expect the populations to diverge, and this is exactly what happens. Note, this has actually been tested.

Nonsense. The only observations you have are your own. When someone tells you something, you're observing it.