73 Reds

I think the most interesting part of the podcast is the story of the financial advisor who can't understand investors who don't feel the need to grow their portfolios. A lot there to unpack.

@Marco Van Basten assessing someone's portfolio as prudent or imprudent is really not fair. What do you tell the entrepreneur or business owner who has 100% or more (with leverage) of their entire net worth tied up in their own business?

@dwy000 thanks. (When I searched this forum for TGT nothing showed up). I'm trying to understand why WMT is eating TGT's lunch; its almost 4X as expensive. Anyone else looking at this?

The beauty of the "system" is when one side tries to take things too far, the opposition fights back by way of votes and common sense. The opposition always claims that the system is in danger when they are the ones fighting back.

I didn't see anyone on the Left crying out for gun control after Kirk's murder. That pretty much sums up the problem: When a tragic incident suits a narrative, you hear all about it; otherwise, crickets. To me, this shows how disingenuous the arguments often are. Same with the issue surrounding Kimmel; its been perfectly fine for the Left to cancel anyone they disagree with but when one of theirs gets cancelled it becomes a constitutional crisis. Those of us who see the irony of it all just shrug and turn away.

Speaking of Target, is there a thread for this company (I couldn't find one but maybe I'm looking in the wrong place). I've been looking at this lately. Seems like replacing the CEO would be a good start.

That's fine but the issues themselves are very divisive. Most of my friends and colleagues have different political views than me but when we are together we can discuss these issues without (much) emotion because we know one another. It is far too easy on an online investment board to write stuff that you really don't mean and that comes across all wrong.

He is complaining about how divisive this Board has become when Trump is in office. If he doesn't like it eliminate politics altogether or don't be involved in the discussions.

Sanjeev is the one complaining about issues and problems. Don't know what you are talking about (?)

Sanjeev, you keep doing the same thing! I give you a lot of credit; you limited these discussions to a single thread - Politics. If you don't like what people have to say in this thread, don't read it or participate in it. Outside of this thread, the dialogue among members seems calm and informative. And if you don't like any discussion of politics eliminate the thread and direct members not to discuss politics at all. Frankly I'd be happy because my comments on this thread are primarily in response to what I believe are erroneous posts by others. Its your Board; do as you wish but don't perpetuate the very problem you're complaining about.

There you go. Who is bringing up Trump, YET AGAIN? If you'd resist commenting and complaining about every word, action, and report relating to Trump, perhaps you'd have the Board you want. There was at least as much to complain about Biden but most of us easily resisted the temptation. Why is it so hard for you?

Amen to that and to your prior post. Had similar experiences. When they stop trying to tell people how to think, what to say and how to act, maybe they'll finally understand. Trump is far from perfect but far superior to what was.

With more time on my hands lately and with some inspiration from @Dealraker and his trading of his own retirement account, I decided to conduct an experiment of sorts with my small retirement account. For many years this account held some of the same stocks I own in taxable accounts, namely Berkshire, MSFT, AAPL along with a few tobacco companies and more recently Fairfax. The account performed well and at the end of last year I bought a couple of new names with dividends that had been accumulating - JOE and SWBI, which I've been gradually adding to. In April I liquidated all but the new names in an attempt to see whether my trading skills had improved at all over what they were decades ago (not good). I decided to pick a volatile stock worth owning on which options could be frequently traded. Along came UNH. I started selling weekly and/or bi-weekly puts on blocks of the stock in April and was assigned shares in May at the price $310. At the time the price had dropped to the mid $200s after the news of various investigations were made public so it didn't look like my skills had improved at all. Yet having stuck with it and selling covered calls at gradually higher prices, the trade looks to have turned out quite profitable. As of this post, I have covered calls outstanding on all my shares at prices ranging from $327.50 to $332.50 which are due to expire today. If all options expire, my profit will be approximately 16% over the course of 4 months. Not earth-shattering by any means yet certainly acceptable - particularly given how poorly the position started out. That said, I draw no conclusions from this "experiment" with respect to my trading skills but will probably repeat the process when another worthy stock looks appealing (or maybe even with UNH) simply because it is kind of fun.

Interesting post. I've often wondered why insurance companies really need brokers. In other industries brokers are becoming less relevant and their profits are diminishing.

Makes no difference to me. But thankfully I do business in an "at will" State where an employee can be terminated for any reason or no reason. For me that is the only issue that matters here - a company should do what is in its best interest - period. (don't know whether ABC is based in an at-will State). The rest is politics and ideology.

In fact, here on COBF many of us read 10Ks. The risk factors included in every 10K border on the ridiculous. Find me any 10K of a US based public company where the "Authoritarian State" or adverse consequences thereof are listed as a risk factor.

But you're talking "good chances", "not likely to stop", etc... Think what you want about this Country but most companies I know don't worry about such issues and are happy to operate here. Maybe ABC learned its lesson from George Stephanopolous.

I think the distinction here is, I don't view it as politics or authoritarian anything. No matter what kind of business you engage in there are always obstacles. Navigating the obstacles is part of the process. Companies that don't like the obstacles or rules of engagement are free to operate elsewhere. In this case I'm sure the company's legal counsel weighed in and the company did what is best for the company.

Perhaps it was the right thing to do. Businesses have to make such decisions all the time.

Since when does ABC or any company buckle to "the State"? Looks like a business decision.

And that's not business? Again, other than viewers, why should anyone care one way or the other? Doubtful that most people commenting on this even watched the show.

Agreed. In fact it is astonishing how many people feel compelled to complain about Kimmel's firing in public. Why? This was a business decision by ABC and if anyone wants to complain, why not voice your complaint to ABC? Yet another sign of folks gone crazy.

Right - you can be friends with someone of vastly different political beliefs as long as you share common morals and values. IIRC Cubs was once a Democrat (apologies if I have him mistaken for another poster). But the present version of the Democratic Party holds no resemblance to the Party of 20 or 30 years ago. So like many former Democrats who drank the same kool aid, here we are. I don't think its is voters who need to come around as much as the Party's leadership and its priorities.

Yeah, you're right. But I do go to sleep earlier now and wake up earlier as well so all the better!

It just isn't funny. I miss the days of Carson, Letterman and Leno.