Castanza

Not saying his strategy doesn’t work. Just saying there is a lot of people out there looking to sell you subscriptions for their strategy or “insider knowledge.” Hard to parse through all that noise imo.

There is no shortage of people in a casino that have a fool proof strategy. All it takes is one person successfully employing it to enable the masses. Over on r/wsb there are quite a few people with stupid trading strategies that worked. There was the infamous Chegg guy. Apparently realized while in colllege that everyone was using Chegg to cheat. So he traded in and out of it with full positions. Used options and margins too. Something like buy when it dips 3% and sell when it goes up 5%. Over the course of a few years the dude was a multi millionaire.

Went to Yuengling Brewery in Pottstown a month ago for a tour. The damn CEO Dick Yuengling was there driving a forklift, sweeping floors, and talking to the patrons. Shook my hand and said thanks for coming out. Dude is 80 years old and worth what a cool billion? That's skin in the game. The boycott didn't work out so well for the libs in 2016 <---telling

TSN is on my watchlist for the above reasons. Got some bad press a few months back and picked up a few shares ( half a percent...but still kinda wish I didn't). That and the mediocre/poor results have dragged this down pretty hard.

The biggest danger to family run businesses, is a son with coke or booze addiction.

It is pretty interesting to see how the general city population hasn't changed much over time. What changed? Housing inventory? Housing developed/improved for specific classes? Seems like it's either develop for the rich or let your property go to Hell and rent to the poor.

Question for those who live in NYC: Has the city ever been accommodative to middle class life? I've always been under the impression that cities have always been a breakdown of the following three classes - Poor people who embrace the shit life in the projects. - College kids who are there to party, intern, and network - Rich people who have the means to full Has it ever been accommodative to middle class life? Whenever I see someone complaining about not being able to make it in the city as a middle-class or even upper middle class person I think they weren't realistic with expectations (lifestyle and budget).

Added a slug of MSGE as well. Small add to GENGF as well

Chicago Parking Meters LLC, a venture that includes Wall Street investment house Morgan Stanley, Alliance Capital Partners and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/10/why-does-abu-dhabi-own-all-of-chicago-s-parking-meters/339805/

There will be a ton of second order effects. Out of the gate I bet the US would destroy TSM facilities. I've been trying really hard the past few months to like China by reading non-western sources. I can't bring myself to own anything there. If you're time horizon is 20+ years then it just increases the risk imo. You can't have two massive gorillas in the same room with completely different ideologies but similar ambitions for long. The ownership is an issue with China investments for sure. But I think the perspective is also an issue. China views success in hundreds of years where as in the US we view it in decades. The difference between those timeframe allows a much different appetite or suffrage in the short term. The problem is, China's "short-term" is typically longer than the average investors life. I don't have 50 years to wait out the CCP on turning their perspective on businesses and what they can do positively for shareholders. Would I take a flyer on BABA if it goes into the 60's again? Probably. I just can't see making it or any other Chinese security a significant position; especially with the bargains available here in the US.

Unless you can match the resources of the below there is no point in even messing with TA imo. Any retail investor who has success is just lucky imo. Always seems like smoke and mirrors to me. But what do I know? I’m just some average Ape from Pennsylvania. Renaissance Technologies Founded in 1982 Avg Annual Return: 39% Average tenure of more than 13 years across our 300 employees Intellectually vibrant culture of collaboration, discipline, critical analysis, and intense research 90 PhDs in mathematics, physics, computer science, and related fields A MacArthur Fellow, National Academy of Sciences members, and many authors of widely cited scientific papers 40 years of experience in developing and managing proprietary quantitative trading strategies Uniform data-driven approach applied across all funds A research database that grows by more than 40 terabytes a day 50,000 computer cores with 150 gigabits per second of global connectivity Redundant computational facilities, each fully capable of supporting our trading operations

Well that discussion takes place well above my paygrade. But I do know post China taking over Hong Kong we have moved out pretty much most of our support. Coincidence? Maybe. In general, Malaysia and Chile have been growing tech sectors the last few years as they fit the bill for "follow the sun" support, offer cheaper labor, have good connectivity, and a growing talent pool. Maybe the question to ask is: Why are companies not moving IT, development, engineering etc. to China if they have such a large available talent pool? The reality of the risk (CCP to business) might not matter; but instead the perception of that risk by businesses.

We have seen this in our company as well. But instead of the Philippines, Cyberjaya Malaysia.

And the underlying causes that drive people to partake in these risky/demented behaviors? Depression, anxiety, insomnia, mental disorders, prescription drug use, social media, cyber bullying resulting in self-esteem issues, etc. Todays kids always have the pressure on them. Whether performance in school or sports there is no break. Whether it's bullying, or relationships there is no break as social media exists. It used to be you would go home from school and you could "get away" to some degree. Life had silos and you could containerize things. Kid's these days are exposed to so much stuff 24/7. There is no break and they have to adapt on the fly constantly. It's very easy to feel overwhelmed and feel left behind or left out etc. It's no wonder teens are beginning to crack. Figure out how to address that and I think the situation gets better. A good friend of mine is a teenage counselor here where I live. She said the majority of kids she talks with who have issues that partially can be traced back to social media. Especially in teenage girls. She said there is an alarming number of young girls who feel pressured into trying to create OF accounts and overly sexual social media material due to the constant sexualization of content out there. I can't even use SNAP or Instagram anymore because 99% of the content on there is just clickbait sexualized content of girls who look like they are barely 18. I mean the top influencers right now are people like Livvy Dunn and other college athletes who basically sexualize themselves for money. This is what we are promoting now as successful? Don't get me wrong, I like hot women just as much as the next guy. But damn this stuff is getting out of hand with being pushed on the younger kids. I have nephews that are 11 and 13 who use SNAP and Instagram. I know damn well they see this stuff. When I was their age girls were getting yelled at for wearing tank tops and skirts being too short. We'd find a friends older brothers Playboy or some kid would Google "Boobs" in the school library and you'd see a 240p image of Pamela Anderson lmao. Completely different world for kids today. Girls instead of getting yelled at for wearing spaghetti strap tank tops or rolling their skirts up like when I went to school are encouraged to wear booty shorts and sports bras to the gym. Guys have basically unlimited access to content and whatever else they want in their pocket. Christ I sound old fashion and I'm only 30.....stuff changes fast.

Added to OXY

Where has Russia expanded in the last 30 years? It’s been the exact opposite. I mean Ukraine was a part of Russia not long ago. A lot of you guys act like Ukraine has been a sovereign nation for a 100 years. If California or Texas decided to succeed from the US would you support that? Because I bet my life’s worth that US troops would be taking over whichever state chose to leave in 24hrs. Who would you support there? People are Hell bent on turning a land dispute civil war into WWIII by constantly comparing it to WWII. Putin is a shit bag as I’ve said. Clearly his troops or Wagner had committed war crimes against Ukrainian civilians. But let me remind you the US is responsible for over 1m innocent deaths in the Middle East. Roughly 2m+ from Vietnam. Putin currently is not even close to being in the same league as Stalin or Lenin….at this time it’s a bad comparison. Also what evidence is there to say Putin wants to push beyond Ukraine? Could he? Yeah maybe, but then he is in actual NATO territory and that would be the end of it. I think you’re jumping the gun when people say he’s trying to take over Europe or rebuild the empire. I think it’s simpler than that. The evidence suggest he is either: 1. Going to leave Ukraine in ruins so that NATO cannot effectively utilize the country as a threat to Russia 2 Take over Ukraine so that they have a much better geographically defensible position. Solzhenitsyn and Dostoyevsky both have a lot of good things to say. Like the quote but are we really there yet? What does the evidence actually show? Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems like a lot of people aren’t being honest with what caused this or influenced this conflict and what the desired outcome is. Still nobody has answered. What is the outcome of this? If Ukraine expels Russia or if Russia takes Ukraine? Russia is a failing empire which can barely sustain itself. But they’ve also never stopped a conflict until they’ve had near a million deaths. So if that holds true then there is a long way to go. Is it worth it to keep up the bloodshed? Or is it better to push for negotiations?

Yes and no. Is there any evidence to support an aggressive Russia post Cold War without countries directly on their border discussing NATO membership 90's onward? I mean you can follow the map and timeline alongside the comments from both Russian leadership and American leadership. @cubsfan I think our difference is the framework with which we view geopolitics. I think aggression should be a last resort and I think a proper classification of aggression is required. A lot of people out there try to exclude certain things from "aggression". Building an alliance with contracts and then parking weapons on someone's border is aggression. We wouldn't tolerate it here. Sanctions, financial attacks, and trade disputes can also be seen as aggression. But your view seems to be more of be as strong as possible and always make sure you have the pressure on. I don't think you need to prod borders and keep the pressure on to maintain peace. Geographically speaking it makes sense for Russia to want Ukraine as a defensive position. So between NATO pushing up against Russia and Ukraine basically becoming a NATO nation by proxy it kind of forced Russia's hand. Their demographics are shit. Their border "defendabiliy" is shit and they see their "enemies" banning together along all of their borders. Imagine if instead of excluding Russia from NATO post WWII we found a way to integrate them. What would Europe look like today? America needs to come to terms with the idea that not every world leader has to fit our values to a T. You can have some bad actors out there and live and let live. We've done it with China for along time now and to our great benefit. I still see no clear way for this conflict to end. Do you?

Me? I make a reasonable post detailing the failures of NATO since the 90s. List dozens of conflicts that occurred in EU since NATO started. Show two examples specifically involving Russia and NATO discussions. Show multiple former Defense Secretaries under multiple administrations and the architect of the Cold War policy who disagree with NATO expansion and warned that it would lead to the exact conflict we are in now. You and Mike insult me and say I can’t have an opinion? Gtfoh. Mike who I agree with in a lot of things is a bit of a neocon on this topic. That’s fine, but at least present another argument or be willing to see where your own argument falls short. I didn’t say NATO was a total failure. But since the 90s it has been. It has not prevented conflicts with the exact power it was supposed to prevent them with. Russia did exactly what they said they would do multiple times. John respectfully I haven’t seen you make a single post on this forum that isn’t bitching and moaning about someone else’s post or thread because it’s not the “exact” content you want to see. You bitch about macro stuff, threads that are too specific, threads that are about a topic you simply don’t like. Don’t read it; or at least don’t come into the topic and say “I don’t typically comment” then leave a single line of text with no real meaning and walk away from the conversation. You literally entered this conversation with “I haven’t been paying attention”….then end with “You don’t get to have an opinion on a war you’re primarily funding because you’re not an elected official in the US.” “Don’t comment unless it has merit” even though what I said was almost verbatim the opinion of multiple Generals and former US defense secretaries that basically predicted this conflict with a crystal ball. So if you want to discuss “merit” of opinions take it up with them. You seem like a guy who would have a lot of interesting opinions and I would like to hear them. Here is an idea….why don’t you give me your synopsis on the War in Ukraine. Why did it start, what’s the solution, how does it end? I like hearing the opinion of Ukraine from all side of this. It has changed my opinion on the war and what America/NATO should be doing now, and in the future. I said before I’m not opposed to supporting Ukraine as I believe this problem was primarily created by us. @Xerxes @Spekulatius @no_free_lunch @changegonnacome and others all make very good points from often opposing sides.

I’m heart broken….an entitled European with his hand out won’t read my posts anymore. I’ll send you my tax bill. Lord knows I’m paying more than you for this war.

Mike, NATO is like the kid who sticks a finger in your face and says “I’m not touching you!” Since the 90’s. The fact that you can’t admit the blunder over the last 30 years regarding NATO is sad. You’ve got to be able to see the pros and cons, wins, losses and mistakes. Gow do you reconcile your views with your boy Trump? He says he wants to end the war in “24hrs.” What exactly is your view in NATO long term? Have everyone join? Continue to pay billions to foreign countries with their hands out while ignoring stuff back here?

I spend tax dollars on it and it's not my business? Someone launches a nuke and I get drafted yet it's none of my business? Respectfully, your comment doesn't even make sense. If it's none of our business to have an opinion on the matter then why is it any of Europe's business to accept our money and weapons? I guess by your standards I should never hear a European on here mention American politics then? Lastly, we are a Constitutional Republic with representative democracy. Opinions of the citizens are expected. This isn't "democracy" in the pure sense.

Georgia was attacked immediately upon trying to join NATO. Russia literally said that. Ukraine was attacked in 2014 by being NATO is everything but name. Russia also said that.

Mike, You said NATO has brought peace to Europe for 70 years. I just listed dozens of conflicts many of which involved NATO countries. Rest your case from what? Tell me how NATO has brought peace to Europe.... You're the one claiming it has been a raging success when the evidence points to the contrary. Your claim is dismantled by a 2 second internet search. Ukraine is being attacked. They are a proxy NATO country. The US has been supporting them since the mid 2000's with both trainings and defense. They are everything NATO except in title. I don't think there has been a more telegraphed conflict in the history of humanity than this Ukrainian crisis. American and Western hubris brought this on. Every credible Cold War expert said NATO expansion was a bad idea. from the 90's on NATO went from being primarily defensive to offensive. That is the problem.

Yet NATO has lead to this exact conflict.....probably the greatest threat of nuclear war the world has come to. 70 years is not a long time in the context of history to judge something as a success or failure. But the fact remains that people have been shouting about this exact outcome since the end of the Cold War and here we are, right on schedule. What exactly do you consider a success? Plenty of conflicts in Europe. Many of the worse ones are directly related to NATO expansion. Too many people cannot think about conflicts with an unbiased opinion. Park some long range missiles backed by Russia in Vancouver pointed at Seattle, Portland, and Denver and what would the US response be? We would turn Vancouver to glass in 24hrs. 1944–1956 Guerrilla war in the Baltic states 1945–1949 Greek Civil War 1946–1948 Corfu Channel incident 1947–1962 Romanian anti-communist resistance movement 1953 Uprising in East Germany 1955-1959 Cyprus Emergency 1956 Uprising in Poznań 1956 Hungarian Revolution 1956–1962 Operation Harvest 1958 First Cod War 1959–2011 Basque conflict 1967 Greek coup d'état 1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia 1968–1998 The Troubles 1970–1984 Unrest in Italy 1972–1973 Second Cod War 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus 1974 Carnation Revolution 1975 Coup of 25 November 1975 1975–1976 Third Cod War 1976–2016 Corsican conflict 1981 Spanish coup d'état attempt 1986 Evros River incident 1988-1994 First Nagorno-Karabakh War 1989 Romanian Revolution 1990–1991 Soviet attacks on Lithuanian border posts 1990 Transnistria conflict 1990–1992 Transnistria War 1991 January Events 1991 The Barricades 1990 Log Revolution 1991–2001 Yugoslav Wars 1991 Ten-Day War 1991–1995 Croatian War of Independence 1992–1995 Bosnian War 1992–1994 Croat–Bosniak War 1998–1999 Kosovo War 1999–2001 Insurgency in the Preševo Valley 2001 2001 insurgency in Macedonia 1991–1992 Georgian war against Russo-Ossetian alliance 1991–1993 Georgian Civil War 1992 East Prigorodny Conflict 1992–1993 War in Abkhazia 1993 1993 Cherbourg incident 1993 1993 Russian constitutional crisis 1995–1996 Imia/Kardak military crisis 1997–1998 Cyprus Missile Crisis 1997 Albanian civil war of 1997 1997–present Dissident Irish Republican campaign 1998 Six-Day War of Abkhazia 2001 Georgia, Kodori crisis 2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia 2004–2013 Unrest in Kosovo 2004 2004 unrest in Kosovo 2008 2008 unrest in Kosovo 2011–2013 North Kosovo crisis 2004 Georgia, Adjara crisis 2004 Georgia, South Ossetia clashes 2006 Georgia, Kodori crisis 2008 Russo-Georgian war 2014–present Russo-Ukrainian War (outline) 2014 Pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine 2014–present Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation 2014–present Russo-Ukrainian War 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis 2022–present Russian invasion of Ukraine 2020 Second Nagorno-Karabakh war

Honestly this seems like another mistake imo. This further escalates tensions that initially caused this whole conflict to begin with. NATO expansion in the 90's was unchecked because for the first time the US was the lone Superpower. Much like a government needs internal checks and balances, so to do governments at the geopolitical level. It has led to 750 military bases in 80+ counties. Wars that had no justification. See Wesley Clark interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Knt3rKTqCk ). Our last 5 Presidents are war criminals going by their own standards of foreign leaders. Imagine if the War on Drugs was fought in the same way Obama and Bush took out targets in the Middle East. Example: The meth dealer who is a suspected killer is located in this house. Let us send in a drone strike and blow up the whole block killing a few dozen innocent individuals. But hey! One less dealer! There were MANY smart people in the government who disagreed with the expansion of NATO. Three defense secretaries: Robert McNamara, Robert Gates (under Bush & Obama), William Perry (under Clinton) were all vehemently opposed to NATO Expansion. Even George Kennon the guy who invented the Containment Strategy and won the Cold War said NATO expansion post-Cold War was a massive mistake. Here is a 1998 interview he did where hey lays out exactly what would happen with Russia and NATO expansion: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html NOBODY wanted to listen to the smart people in the room. And the World/Ukraine is paying for it now. NATO expansion and the potential negative effects of it were being discussed many times. If you look up "Nyet means Nyet" you can read a leaked document between Burns and Condoleezza Rice. Three months later Georgia and Russia go to war after NATO includes them against their own warnings. There are people in the business of making war; and making war is what they do. NATO has been anything but a defensive alliance since the 90's. It's been led by countries which have started 7 wars and decimated multiple countries caused millions of deaths all in 30 years. Look at Libya. Removing Ghaddafi has led to open air slave markets there today. You think those people are better off now? Can anyone point me to a good example of the US or the "West" removing leadership in a foreign country which then lead to better leadership? Yeah, WWII with Hitler but that was a different type of event (contrary to what some on here might say). Ultimately Hitler, Lenin and Stalin were all products of regime changes from WWI. Look at the countless countries int he Middle East and South America we have fucked with. Take out Putin and there is NO guarantee that a worse leader does not take his place. Then what? Do we want a country like Russia turning into a Libya? Where it’s run by the strongest war lord? Sounds like a recipe for Russian Terrorism which I guarantee you will be far worse than Al Qaeda. America screwed up when it decided to adopt the idea that world leaders need to meet our expectations of acceptable governance. Putin is a shitbag but he is also not the worst there has been in Russia. Americans are so far removed from war I don’t think most people can think about it in terms that make it feel real. The West is desensitized to it. They just go out, buy their latte, go to the ball game, continue to book their yearly vacations thinking nothing bad will ever happen to the US. It's mind boggling to me that Americans have their own heads so far up their own asses that they think nothing bad will or could ever happen to us. They go on vacations to Rome, Egypt, Peru and see these once great empires and it never dawns on them that one day people could be going on vacation and looking at the former White House and Monuments in D.C. in all their glory. America has become a nation of decadence and laziness over the last 40 years. There is something that prevents people from viewing the time they live in against that of history. It’s a mental block that most people have and I think it leads to poor decision making. It is ironic that the majority of people against the war in Ukraine are the ones who actually went and fought in a mostly useless war. They have seen the futility and outcome of these crusades. We've been the benefactor of having the best military and technology to maintain that superpower position. But we are playing with fire right now in this Ukrainian conflict. If this war is so important to Americas long term strategic situation/freedom then why are we not on the ground? Because it isn't and because that would push the needle of nuclear war a little too far into the red. But hey, lets see how far we can push that needle without putting boots on the ground. Ukrainians are pawns in an unnecessary proxy was that was avoidable. We don't give a shit about them.