rb

If that's the case, then I agree with you. Better to do something small and inefficient than do something big and dumb. I guess there's no right answer to thins. We should all do what works best for each one individually.

agree as to the 95% of your portfolio. but why not consider a "special situations play account" even if only as for a hedge. I happen to believe that the market goes down if biden wins on election night (or the subsequent night when all of the recounts and litigation ends), and more so if a D sweep. I may want to consider buying some gun stock on anticipation that gun sales will go up if this happens. is this speculation? sure. but if only for the 5% side account, this doesnt sound to me to be unreasonable...especially if it helps you leave the 95% portfolio alone I've heard before and thought about what you've said. It has the advantage of sounding reasonable but it never really made much sense to me. If you have a conviction on something you basically should act on it otherwise leave it alone. For example let's say that you have some gun stocks and whatever other else in this 5% bucket. Let's say that you land on the right side and some in that bucket go up 10% post election (not all will). Then you make what? 50 bps max? It's just not worth the trouble for that.

Pre-civilized humanity was pretty interesting in terms of life expectancy. It was essentially a tri-modal distribution: lots of deaths around birth/infancy, around 25-30 (usually dying of tooth infections), and the remainder actually living into their late years (50s, 60s, 70s). Sources? 8) I'm not gonna dig it up for you, but I know that Sweeden has kept good mortality tables going back a long time. I was really surprised when I first found out. Big surprise, life expectancy isn't really increasing by much and it isn't increasing more than before.

Trigger alert! Doctors hate this trick! I cut my net carbs down to 20 grams/day and all a sudden i lose 40-45lbs in a 16 month period. I didn't even exercise much. My diet is a little heavy on bacon and eggs at the moment. (Eric, to each his/her own. Keto is the way that I keep the weight off. Please play along with this faux meat vs Vegan drama that I am creating.) Going whole foods plant-based would get you the same weight loss while also reversing cardiovascular disease, which you are not getting on the all-meat diet. If weight loss were the only goal I'd rather eat the bacon and eggs like you. But just remember, the arteries that feed your erections are much smaller than the coronary arteries, so guess what's gonna go first. APPLAUSE!!!

We know China didn't tell about the outbreak. It is the very reason why this thread was started exists.

Oatmeal with Bacon. Yum! That's weird. But bacon at breakfast and lunch. I guess Greg loves bacon.

It depends from place to place I guess. Asian market close to my house, you get a mask. There's a more upscale chain that also gives masks and these guys had car sterilization stations in their stores years before Covid came - civilization. Glad New Zeeland got the virus under control quickly so that there won't be a disruption in the NZ lamb supply chain. ;D

Are they marbled like this? I will do a blind taste test vs this beauty and get back to you. Yeah, that Costco one is a little out of my price range Imagine making a truffle cheesesteak sandwich with that? I like how you roll. My man!

Are they marbled like this? Beef quality at Costco in Canada is excellent. If you want better you'd have to go to some super expensive specialized butcher. I've basically stopped buying from anywhere else. I don't see why it would be any different in the US. The only downside is that you have to buy like half a cow or something. But it looks like you're doing that already.

Wow! It is so shocking to see someone with integrity these days. Can you imagine the pressure this guy is under to keep his mouth shut? He DOES NOT GIVE A FUCK!

This is really gonna bite economically in FL and AZ. There's a ton of Canadians that just pack it in in the winter and just go down to FL. My guess is that it's not gonna happen this year. They don't care about Trump/DeSantis political posturing, they would prefer to stay alive, and I don't think any insurance company is gonna sell them a COVID policy. These Canadian also tend to be of the wealthier variety that have a lot of money to spend. The same thing goes triple for AZ. Canadians own so much of that place it may as well be the 11th province.

Now you can call it the New York Virus.

I'm sure you blew past the part that notes Dr Atlas is a scholar in public health. But then again, you're the guy that thinks Martin Luther King is really Al Sharpton. So I shouldn't be surprised. So when you have a heart problem do you go see a cardiologist or a radiologist who's a scholar in public health? In a pandemic I'd rather go with the epidemiologists vs the radiologists. If I ever need an MRI this guy's #1 on my list tho. P.S. How much do you want to bet that this guy's scholarly public health work is about how much universal health care sucks and the holy grail of healthcare is free markets where competition increases choice and lowers cost. I'd start that wager at $1,000.

Oh great we have a radiologist from a conservative think tank telling us about viruses and pandemics. What's next? A dermatologist? A podiatrist maybe?

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts. Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown. To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs. So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list. A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs". If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet. Just to let you know, all those things you mentioned regarding S. Korea help, but the most effective measure that S. Korea was able to take was put those infected in a hospital and won't release you until you test negative. Yes, you heard that right. They don't just ask you to self-quarantine at home for two weeks. Now they are debating whether they should not hospitalize those who test positive but show only mild symptoms. In China, I believe that they do something similar, or put you in a house arrest. With this kind of measure in place, you can let people go to work, dine at restaurants, go to schools, etc. and manage the transmission... Now you can ask, why can't the US do this? Well, I'd say two main things are: 1) their health care system is not designed for that kind of measure (fewer hospital beds, cost/insurance issues), and 2) many people will not abide by that kind of "hard" quarantine measures. Some people might not even get tested because they don't want to get locked in a hospital. What could Trump have done to fix these things? (I don't want to defend him, but just being realistic here) So my feeling is... No matter what the US politicians could have done, you wouldn't have been able to stop this virus. Especially given its size, connections with the rest of the world, and the two points above, etc.. There are inherent reasons why the spread could not be stopped. You could wish and vent all you want how the US admin. could have prevented this crisis, but in reality, I don't think it was possible. You are right, this virus doesn't give a fuck, and you might just have to see it run its course. So basically almost every developed country and most developing countries were able to get their outbreak under some sort of control but the almighty US can't do anything? As I've said. you get soft lockdown or hard lockdown. There is no option C. You don't like or can't fathom option A, well then... option B it is.

I'll give you a +1 and fist pump. As you can probably know I can get as partisan as the next guy. But trying to make a political thing out of a deadly virus is about the same as useful as having a political argument with gravity and will have the same result. The most baffling thing for me is masks. Why did wearing or not wearing a mask has become a political statement. Sure there's a lot of commentary whether they work or not. But pretty cheap, at worst they provide no protection and at best they provide a lot of protection. From a risk management that's like buying really, really cheap insurance from a maybe dodgy insurance company. Let me put it another way: I'm willing to sell you put options on SPY for 0.01, you don't know my credit rating. Do you buy them? Those are masks.

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts. Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown. To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs. So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list. A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs". If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet.

US at 33k with TX, CA and a few others still unreported for many counties. Good chance at 50k+ today. Perhaps 100k+ days coming soon given what you know will be rowdiness for 4th of July as well. Oh yea, and OK still hasn't reported the 6000 Trump attendees who undoubtedly have it. Should make for some trading opportunities. I added big time to my general market short into the close. There is almost no way the market opens green Monday, if past patterns are any indication and news flow is as expected. I'm afraid you may be right. Though I'm not too worried about OK. There was plenty of room there to social distance. I'm more curious about the efficacy Jesus air filtration machine at the church in Arizona. ;D

Did Florida just print 9000 cases?

Vinod, instead of worrying about what the float will earn why don't you look at the float as a liability? Then you can go about valuing the insurance business this way: Investments + capitalized underwriting profits - PV of float liability - Goodwill.

Who gives a shit about the Catalyst? When you're getting something cheap, you're getting something cheap.

If you would get a V why would the Fed be accommodating? In fact if we get a V you should expect the Fed to slam the breaks like it's 1980.

That while ago I think was 12 years ago. Maybe we can agree they were wrong. Yes, spigots can be turned on fairly easily. There's a lot of supply out there. If you're not talking about a massive increase in demand oil is gonna suck.

Get this man an agent, make him write a book, and ... , profit! Pretty sure nobody would buy that book and an agent would laugh at me. Now... If i'd be able to incorporate vampires, wizards, and dragons that might be something. But sadly I'm not that good a writer, sorry.

Well the economy is not gonna do a V. There are lots of reasons for that. I'm not gonna go into them cause then I'm gonna write a book. But stocks looked pretty expensive at the end of 2019. That was with rosy expectations. Right now we're roughly back at that level. Bu companies are more expensive already because their EVs have gone up because they've levered up. The story is that it's ok because it's gonna be a V. Now you're saying if a V actually happens then stocks will shoot up higher. Let's say you're right. At that point equities will be way overvalued. So the question becomes: Do you want to buy into a bubble?