Castanza

"Einhorn isn’t suggesting that optimistic valuations are hiding darker secrets at St. Joe Company" LOL short reports hit different in hindsight. Sounds diabolical! Nothing more sinister than "overvaluing" some of the best beach adjacent property in the US around what 5k/acre at the time of this article

Thx for the perspective

One thing I’ve noticed about myself over the past five years is this. The more cash I hold the more likely I am to enter trading positions. The less cash I have the more likely I am to add to long term positions. I’ve performed better with less cash on hand. Not sure what the underlying psychology is but it seems similar to burning a hole in your pocket. Assuming some others are similar on here and I would also assume that overtime this changes as you mature from an investment mindset.

Sitting at 7% cash but have about 30% tied up in MANU, AIV, VTS, GENGF which are more of trading positions to me. Hoping some of these get some action the next two quarters

Nothing wrong with that view if you’re primarily interested in battlefield analysis.

Cleanuo is a long road no matter how you look at it. Ukraine is going to need a lot of help on this front (already are in many cases). The Wagner development is definitely a big deal. I’m sure the CIA is in the trenching looking for ways to exploit this further. ——————— To the others on this thread. I am 100% behind Ukraine and I do think the US has a responsibility to support through supply. However I think NATO is a primary cause of this war. I don’t think Putins actions are justified, but when I put myself in the shoes of the Russians I do understand it. Looking here at home there are plenty of people who would do desperate things to preserve the Republic. You can feel that in the air with the previous election. But often people are misaligned with the wrong person or take the wrong path. Frankly I get very tired of hearing people say “so and so would t do that.” Or “it doesn’t make sense for Russia to do that”. Nothing about war makes sense, and history is primarily filled with illogical and irrational individuals. There has been a lot of luck involved in very high stakes situations over the past 80 years. At some point the die is going to hit.

I think all of the things mentioned are factors. But for anyone to say NATO using Ukraine as a launch site against Russia is not a factor is simply ignorant. US wouldn’t stand for missiles in Cuba or Canada pointed at us. “Just keeping the peace though”. Putin has been saying for over a decade this was a concern. I think there is credibility to Ukraine being a geographical point of defense. Zeihan has pointed this out as well. Does Putin want the USSR back? Probably so. I mean he grew up there and saw a country that in his eyes was great and United and strong end up in ruins. He’s wrong, but his sentiment or nostalgia is understandable. A lot of people seem to miss the fact that Putin also understands the degrading demographics of Russia. So this being a last ditch effort to maintain the Motherland is understandable through his actions (although not justifiable). People will probably say that I’m crazy for saying that as well, but it’s well documented. And in my opinion if people can’t understand that point of view the. 1.) You haven’t walked in another’s shoes 2.) They don’t understand humans, political sociology, or nation states and likely think geopolitics is nothing more than a black and white game of risk. Putin is not a rational actor. He sees this as a last ditch effort and that he is backed into a corner. This is primarily why I think deescalation at all costs should be forefront on the Wests minds. Not matching escalation with weapons that are basically used for war crimes. This is the closest we’ve been to a nuke clacking off in a long time and too many people see this situation as simple and in black and white terms whit it is far far from that. As Bertrand Russell said….You can only expect a man to walk a tightrope so long before he falls….. sometime some day someone will clack one off and everyone if they survive will lol back at how foolish they were in their thinking. It’s short sighted by the west. We came close enough with Cuba…

Lol ok well most credible historians would disagree with that. This has been rehashed so many times it’s nauseating how blind some are to the reality of cause and effect. Cuban missile crisis ring a bell? Lucky we had Kennedy or we’d have 50m people dead….

Just like the Afghans, Iraqis, Vietnamese, huh? You make war out to be black and white. Nothing about war is ever black and white. Including the powers at play. Handcuffed? That’s putting the cart before the horse with a deep and long history of how we got here. War can last longer? There is a sure solution out of this war. It’s called a peace deal, negotiations, etc. There is an in unbearable amount of times throughout history where peace deals could have been struck, but short sighted bureaucrats with little skin in the game decide otherwise. This war is following almost to a T the same playbook we used back in the 70’s when we got the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan. If Berlinsky were still alive I’m sure he would be licking his chops at this proxy war and the ability to cripple another nation at the expense of others citizens. And I am not saying the NATO expansion was the only driver of this war. Putin and Russian leadership also had their motives, but it damn sure was a pillar of what we see. —————————- At the end of the day there is a HELL OF A LOT of people who love to pound the table on war that have absolutely ZERO skin in the game. There is no shortage of boogiemen in the world to justify war with someone.

Idk about that…it’s our weaponry and our money. If Ukraine asks for a nuke should we give it to them? Zelensky has no shortage of requests at others expense. Because 15 years from now when some farmer or kids gets their leg blown off while plowing a field they aren’t going to say “Damn that Zelensky!”….no they’re going to look at the shell shrapnel and see printed in the side U.S.A. Escalating with a weapons system that was in the process of being phased out because of the lasting devastation it leaves the local populace with is a precursor to other weapon system escalations. Ukraine is already going to have a hard time dealing with all the land mines. Throw in some cluster munitions and you have billion and billion and billions of dollars sunk in cleanup efforts before the war is even close to being over. Realistically what’s next? What do we give them next and where does it end? How long till we put boots on the ground ourselves as we realize this war is going to last for a long time? The move seems a bit shortsighted to me.

Mmmm idk, go back to the Cuban missile crisis and pretty much everyone but Kennedy wanted to start a nuclear war. Every general and advisor was pounding the table to attack Cuba. One of the few times in history where a single man had such an important decision with hindsight outcome. Ignorance and miscalculations are just at common at the highest level of governments and their military leadership. Not saying it’s not the right move. But a match in escalation could also be the start of a new path which in the end could be the wrong move. Time will tell. DPICMs are what’s being shipped. They are guided cluster bombs that have various submunitions like incendiary, armor piercing, or just regular anti personnel shrapnel type explosive. They absolutely are cluster bombs. Obama was trying to retire them in 06 (which Biden was in favor of) over his term. Trump got rid of that program and not Biden is utilizing them. Pretty ironic tbh.

Podcast by Ryan Graves with Commander David Fravor being interviewed. Seems like the most credible guys currently. Good discussion between them that goes into the technical difficulty of what they saw, their credentials and why they are qualified to speak on what they observed. I do like that he is quick to point out the bullshit people want to tack onto this incident. He’s not speculating about aliens but simply pointing out that something is there and can do things well beyond what we are capable of. The Grusch stuff seems to have very little credibility at this point. However these two guys seem to have a pretty solid case with first hand evidence of something out there. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/merged/id1664932431?i=1000619687921

Sherry Turkle has been doing some interesting work in this area. Haven’t had a chance to read any of her books yet but might have to. I think she’s done some recent work on office space and the younger generations.

Anyone think tech has changed the social dynamics of cities? I mean wasn’t part of the draw always the energy of people being around and interacting? People going out to clubs or bars and actually talking or trying to pick up chicks? Just seems like with the advent of the cell phone/social media this dynamic has changed a lot (probably permanently). Specifically for the younger generations this is noticeable. They value online interaction over in person. Throw in other dynamics like wfh, crime, increased drug addictions etc and I can’t help but think cities as “social centers” has taken some kind of permanent impairment. If those things are no longer forefront then what’s the point of living there? Just spitballing too, could be completely off on this. Cities certainly could adapt I guess?

Functional Calisthenics is going to be your best bet with that timeframe. Isolated weight work will be a waste of time with 20-30min Just repeat the below for 30min straight. You can combine some of the things like burpees into a pull-up instead of a jump. Go heavy on the kettlebell. Kettlebell swings P ushups Dips Pull-ups Burpees your choice of sit-ups (v-ups my suggestion) maybe add in flutter kicks or good mornings.

Lol my favorite argument is when people bring up per capita stats to make it seem like LA or SF is actually better on this than small cities or large towns. Newsom tried to do this in a recent interview. When the reality is the 40 homeless people and 6-8 homicides a year in a city of 80k people has hardly any affect on the general populace and public amenities or living conditions. Yeah, might be higher per capita, but there aren’t entire blocks or city sections full of trash and tents. Parks are generally clean and well maintained and you don’t have to worry about some dude bathing in the town center fountain. In general I think problems are just easier to manage in mid to small sized cities. Easier to understand the scope of the problem and make changes to address the issues. Certainly problems everywhere, but big cities have a truly unique aspect that almost incentivizes the bad aspects. Such a complex issue. But LA has what 100k homeless give it take a few? They spent 1.3B on combatting this lol….so you spend 130k per homeless person per year? Unless I’m not understanding the yearly budget….. I mean…..

LOL yes, yes it does

https://www.reuters.com/technology/sec-says-spot-bitcoin-etf-filings-are-inadequate-wsj-2023-06-30/ The saga continues

There is a Netflix (maybe Hulu?) doc on it that is pretty comical.

lol Again pretty much same thing I did. Ran ethernet to both floors and have 4 access points (2 on each floor). Don't have a lot of hardwire ports though. A little more plaster than I wanted to get into at the time. But I get pretty much full bar wifi on my property and at my neighbors houses. No wire no cables no fuss. One rack in the basement with the equipment.

Or the guy who games the Pepsi points thing to technically win an F-16

I use a very similar setup but I use a Synology NAS. Works great with my Ubiquity equipment.

Would you want Wagner with the nuke codes? Somehow that’s even worse than Putin having that control. Made a point to revisit Dan Carlin this week: His episode on nuclear proliferation has a lot of very insightful information. Not short by any means, but we’ll worth a listen. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dan-carlins-hardcore-history/id173001861?i=1000380386551

I'm not sure people are ready to admit that things could look very different in the financial world 20,30 or 40 years from now. A lot of people seem to think that Buffett's world of Rolodex's and finding undervalued companies in the Congressional Library are still in vogue. AI is coming, and getting more efficient. The world is continuing to globalize. Multiple western powers are deep into CBDC and controlling the money supply. The topic of getting rid of cash has been main stream in the US for over a decade. The powers at be want more control and oversight. World Economic Forum says "You will own nothing." UK said their digital currency will help prevent certain people from purchasing certain things (eg. alcoholic certain times of the day etc.). Well naturally cracking down on exchanges will be part of that process. That doesn't mean the underlying asset class wont have value. It certainly will. Plenty of big institutions and governments out there buying some as well. I've been a skeptic in the past, and I am certainly not some BTC max bull; but the world is changing faster than what people want to admit. Just like owning bonds, or paying off debt, I think owning some BTC simply makes sense. Progress is tied to changing of the guard from a generational standpoint. When I look at Congress and the world leaders I see a lot of people in their late 70's +. The most radical ones who want big changes are young....well put two and two together....

Or one died and one survived