LC

Well naturally our Dear Felon-in-Chief only cares about The Law...to suggest otherwise would be very anti-MAGA! Of course I'm not exactly what illegal immigration has to do with cutting Medicaid, expanding the deficit another 3+trillion, taxing consumer 400B in tariffs, showering more tax breaks on the 1%... But I guess that doesn't really matter...let the poor and working classes pay for Trump's $170B ICE army. The 1% need tax breaks!

The poor and working classes are paying for it, right now. But I wouldn't expect MAGA to care about their fellow Americans, particularly as they're trying to deport them for being the wrong color.

Tariffs paid for ultimately by the American consumer, to fund BBB tax cuts benefiting the American 1%. It's the same story as last time just with different labels. Why is anyone surprised?

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/01/powell-confirms-that-the-fed-would-have-cut-by-now-were-it-not-for-tariffs.html JPow blaming Trump's tariffs for keeping rates higher? How dare he blame the dear leader! Frankly I am upset that foundational economic principles are not re-aligning themselves to comply with Trump's wishes!

Not sure I totally agree. Look what happened with Geico? They needed Todd to save the day. Years of mismanagement let Progressive et al to outperform. I think there is opportunity with Berkshire because they own so many businesses within the umbrella and they have so many reinvestment opportunities, but how do we know that 100s of other subsidiaries are not experiencing what happened to Geico? Will T&T need to devote their lives to fixing mismanaged subsidiaries? I doubt that is what they signed up for. Greg Abel will need to set some firm culture and direction on how he will manage the company going forward.

I don't bemoan old guys missing the shift here. The mid-late 20th century was all about rolling out industrialized goods under big american brands. That was a big economic shift which made a lot of people a lot of money, so I can understand how difficult it would be to change views on that.

Ukraine? Stumped Iran? Stumped Tariffs? Stumped Illegal deportations? Stumped DOGE? Stumped Stumpy taking L's left and right out there...being Potus ain't easy!

Didn't republicans reject a bipartisan border security bill a few years ago? Trump and his cabal of Republicans don't want to solve border issues. They want to leverage border security issues to push forward their own agenda.

Remember the rules: Nothing bad is the fault of POTUS. Everything good comes from POTUS. When you hold POTUS at his word but he flip-flops/lied? Well it's your fault for believing him in the first place. When you second-guess POTUS but he follows through? You better know it's your fault for not believing Dear Leader in the first place. If when the stars align and something works out - even something totally unrelated? That's 100% due to POTUS and you better throw him a cool percentage as a little "thank you" gift!

I don't think this accounts for the compounding-esque returns we get from buybacks, because each incremental share repurchased increases EPS. If Prem buys shares of Berkshire, Berkshire's EPS doesn't go up. When Fairfax buys and retires its own shares, EPS increases. So you get some nice long-term benefits when retiring shares below intrinsic value...in theory the discount to IV closes and EPS permanently increases (all else equal).

There should be a popup disclaimer with these messages when people open/close this thread

MSN picking it up: https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/kamala-harris-won-the-us-elections-bombshell-report-claims-voting-machines-were-tampered-with-before-2024/ar-AA1GnteW

@cwericb You're not the only one. But then again, the economy has become more of the "haves vs have-nots" There's no recession for the middle/upper middle class because this class is shrinking. The economy has become bifurcated, and rather than a recession for all economic participants, instead the effects are spread over time and over the bottom quintiles via things like reduced quality of life, reduced real wages, reduced proportion of overall wealth owned, etc. etc... On the plus - we have a more interconnected global economy which further spreads shocks out. At least that's my armchair explanation.

Now imagine if Biden/Trump weren't asking Ukraine to handicap themselves by not targeting Russian energy infrastructure.

https://substack.com/inbox/post/165658733 Now it's the Dems saying the election was rigged. The nov 5 reasoning behind Trump's win was "Democrats didn't show up" - now they're saying it's because their votes weren't counted.

ok that makes more sense to me - you are looking at much longer time horizons than I was expecting. Essentially confirming the phrase "in the long run, the market is a weighing machine" I was thinking looking at like a 30 day price chart with head and shoulders and trying to figure out whether it will rain money or dandruff. On the topic: I do sometimes pay attention when stocks are making new highs or new lows, what volume is that based on? Specifically whether the volume at those highs or lows are only a few shares or whether it's a standard trading volume. A 52 week low on a few shares could be a buying opportunity. Similarly a 52 week high on only a few shares could be a selling opportunity.

Serious question - Which charts look great, how do you tell? I see different folks looking at the same chart and one person says it looks great, others say it looks terrible...what is the criteria?

That's a good point. I made that comment given how long and how brutal the Israel-Palestine conflict is. I recall two friends in 20 years ago (one Jewish, one Persian) arguing for hours about the exact same topic we are discussing now. It's always the other guy's fault

I don't think Israel wants to live peacefully with its neighbors, but of course it deserves to defend itself. The Middle East is the real life version of "this town ain't big enough for the both of us", and both sides sincerely believe it.

Well said.

You can thank Joe Biden's Future Soldier Prep Course for the recent turnaround: https://www.army.mil/article/263129/future_soldier_preparatory_course_to_expand_based_on_initial_success Although if you are being fair, the post-COVID low recruitment are probably a result of COVID, not a particular political faction.

Well that's the point I've been trying to make: Either hold both sides to task, or hold neither side accountable. But if you hold one side accountable and not the other, that is disingenuous.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/04/politics/muriel-bowser-dc-national-guard-protests/index.html Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller on Monday approved a request from the mayor of Washington to deploy DC National Guard forces to the city to support local authorities during pro-Trump demonstrations scheduled in the city this week, a defense official told CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/06/politics/pence-national-guard/index.html As the chaos unfolded, doubts were raised about whether Trump would order the DC National Guard to respond due to the slowness of the response. Public statements by acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller and other top officials suggested it was Pence who ultimately approved the decision. Miller’s statement Wednesday seems to indicate he did not even speak with Trump, discussing the matter with his deputy instead as sources told CNN the President was reluctant to even denounce the violence being carried out in his name. Jan 6 was a political exhibition for Trump, at the expense of the US government, voting citizens, and the people who died and were injured that day. It took everyone other than Trump to quell the violence. Fast forward to today, Trump is quick to deploy the National Guard and Marines because it suits his personal political motives.

So MPD did not request National Guard assistance. And I guess your implication is that Trump obliged. Didn't Gov Newsom also not request National Guard assistance? In this case Trump ignored him. Goes back to the point - Trump selectively fulfilling his duties based on his own personal preferences, rather than the law.

I agree with that, but I'll go a step further and say if the President only selectively enforces laws, than he has no leg to stand on when others do the same.