changegonnacome

Curious if could expand on this? Not quite sure what you mean.

Im with you both on the bottom 50% doing better - Bessent is also correct in saying the current development model with all the economic returns accruing to the top 10% is an unstable equilibrium…let them eat cake doesn’t work out well in the end….ask the Queen of France. The grand plan may work in theory but in practice you’ve got some serious potential timing /implementation mismatches….for example….higher prices on imports but the tax cuts don’t work out….or maybe they do….but the retaliatory tariffs from other countries hurt existing exporting US industry before the theoretical tariff protected ones get to be scaled up. Big picture however is quite simple - a tariff is a tax….if you want less of something (production/consumption) you tax it….this plan at its heart is trading productivity growth & efficiency which equates to broad GDP growth for something akin to tariff welfare payments to the bottom 50%. The real implementation issues are huge (1) it takes time for the above, years (2) it only works if you shrink the federal & state budgets to free up the space….the problem with this is that IMO this plan requires a MAGA controlled WH, Senate, House for more than four years to get it fully implemented such that the benefits of re-shoring can be felt by Joe Sixpack….the timing mismatches, the dislocations just don’t allow you to land the airplane in a country with an election cycle & margins like the US….. Joe 401k who starts hurting & Joe Sixpack who doesn’t quite understand why he lost his job at Jim Beam…is going to be voting the MAGA’s out at the mid-terms & then at the next Presidential (& don’t forget so much of this plan relies on the Presidents executive authority re:tariffs) This whole thing will turn out to be a highly disruptive but ultimately failed economic experiment…the US political system just doesn’t allow for something as radical as this to get completed in its entirety such that all the costs and benefits can fully flow through to the underlying voter as the theory suggests it might.

Something old and something new below- "The trouble with tariffs, to be succinct, is that they raise prices, slow economic growth, cut profits, increase unemployment, worsen inequality, diminish productivity and increase global tensions. Other than that, they're fine." David Kelly, JP Morgan Chief Economist, 2025 Ronald Reagan, Former President and GOP Conservative Hero 1987 on tarrifs: Big picture - I'm with Reagan. On the macro - the market is sniffing out trouble.....the re-privatization of the US as Bessent says is inherently rocky....you really are trying to transition a significant portion of the workforce from one sector to another while also chopping off the flow of cheap labor at the bottom of the labor pyramid...the reason it is a pyramid is BECAUSE of immigration....without it , due to demographics it starts looking like an inverted pyramid..a bunch of old people collecting cheques supprted by a smaller and smaller base of workers......if that weren't enough....that they are also embarking on a kind of import substitution strategy via tariff's is quite novel. I can see the grand vision (kind of): - shrinking immigration twinned with import substitution for domestically produced goods should see the bottom quartile or bottom half's bargaining power increase resulting in real wages increases in this segment (big Q is whether real wages can outpace tariff price increases on the basket of goods this group consumers) - tax cuts, Bessent would argue, will see tariff revenue re-distributed to folks feeling the pain of said tariffs related price increases....tax cuts plus increased bargaining power on real wages.....might see "main street' win for the first time in a couple of decades - the re-privatisation of the US will see Government workers off the the Treasury payrolll transferred into this re-industrialization wave that will require more private sector workers...such that the deficit shrinks - Rates - the above will come with economic weakness in the short term perhaps creating the backdrop to allow Powell to cut short term rates.......the fiscal budget deficit shrinking or on a more sustainable path plus changes to bank holding rules - will allow for long term treasuries to fall The plan has merit - i think the issue with it.....is (1) for all the talk of fiscal spending discipline I'll believe it when I see it - this is Pork barrel DC....not too mention medicare & social security (the untouchables) are on a predetermined unstoppable climb (2) all this tariff revenue talk assumes that other countries don't have agency - as Reagan said we are very likely to see very very damaging retaliatory escalations here.....net net you may end up with higher prices & given the puts/takes a static industrialized base.....higher prices, domestic producers protected from competition and so less efficient leading to lower overall aggregate consumption.......this is how this experiment goes wrong. Trump is rolling the dice on a plan which to my mind is quite contrary to free market ideals.......the target of this plan is bottom 50% of Americans......put another way the stock market is a secondary or tertiary measure fo the success of this plan.

Pretty clear that Europe is finally headed for strategic autonomy from the US.......the reality & realpolitik is that this diminishes the US's power and influence on an absolute and relative basis in the global system ......it's an outstanding day in the office for Putin & Xi when your principal opponent so roundly diminishes itself like this. Trump is the first president in my lifetime through his own actions to so irrefutably shrink the USA's power & influence like this. That this is being done under the banner of 'Make America Great Again' is the hilarious part. It should be more like Make America Just Another Country Again (less catchy I know!). Put another way - on China and Russia's foreign policy wishlist each year for the last 80 years would have been trying to figure out methods by which to separate the European's from the American's or vice versa. Such that the USA's power would be diminished. Trump has made their wish come through. When you think about the future likely outcome now based on all the 'peace deal' noises I dont think anyone could not come to the conclusion that the Feb 2022 invasion has turned out to be a very successful mission for Russia/China: - Four oblasts & Crimea likely officially acknowledged, by the US/EU/Ukraine, as being annexed - a demilitarized Ukraine - No NATO expansion into Ukraine - Indeed to go a step further - one might argue that NATO's Article Five is toast which means NATO is toast - a permanent splintering in the post-WWII alliance structure between the USA and Europe - the US's China containment deterrence in Asia IMO is in tatters......who for example in Taiwan, South Korea, Philippines, Japan or Australia feels MORE confident now after the Ukraine debacle that the US has the stomach for fights in far flung places? The answer is nobody - which means China's aspirational journey to regional hegemon in Asia (on the way to global hegemon) has been advanced. All told this is turning out to be a hugely successful military operation for Putin and well worth the price he's paid. I would also say that Xi & China owe him a beer the next time they see him. China is the big winner from the fracturing of the European/US alliance.

@Parsad why not grab the bull by the horns and create a - “Trump Policy Discussion - Trade, Foreign Affairs etc (Political).” thread? It can be like a super massive black hole sucking in all the political energy on the forum.…or like a sink hole where you dump toxic battery waste

Totally agree - Trump is going for it this time.....his grand unifying theory of the world has been consistent and unchanging since at least the mid-1980's and this is his last chance to make it happen. I think it gets lost on people who think he's somehow all over the map on trade and international relations.....far from it. Trump developed an idea of the world in the early 1980's and it hasn't changed an iota since. See Sept, 1987 NY Times Ad below that he took out (it could have been written yesterday. Note that he’s always been a kind fatalist doomsayer around where the US is headed….1987 Donald ex-ante was clearly wrong on America’s economic prospects…perhaps he’s right this time

They want it so badly - they look and smell desperate….when has looking desperate headed into a negotiation ever been the best strategy? Regardless based on the last few weeks relations between the US, EU & Ukraine - impending trade wars, accusations of ungratefulness, press conference melt downs….twinned with Russia’s current undoubted artillery and man power advantage’s on the battlefield….you really do have to ask yourself why would Putin acquiesce to US desires for a peace deal???…..unless it was deeply deeply favorable to the Russian’s….and that type of deal would be so deeply embarrassing to Trump the ‘deal maker’ that I can’t see him signing it. So as I’ve said - why the hell would Putin agree to anything right now….he’s the upper hand on the battlefield and his opponents are fighting amongst themselves like kids on international TV. Think of it from his point of view - at a minimum you put this so called ‘alliance’ through the meat grinder of at least one more spring/summer/fall offensive of defeats on the battlefield, take another 5-10% of Ukraine before you agree to give back anything….in say early 2026 just as the incumbent Republican’s in Congress have to head back to their constituents to explain why the forever wars are still going on for forever and Trump didn’t solve Ukraine on Day One like he said he would.

I'm sorry @cubsfan Trump has defacto capitulated publicly.....he did so re:Ukraine during the campaign as a popular America First political strategy....but I really expected a change in messaging once he was in office to actually HELP bring about his desired outcome of ending the war.....escalate to de-escalate type thing...what we've got is capiltuation which doesn't as I've laid out advance the peace.......this tack he's taking is really counterproductive to his own agenda. Guess you'd say he's crazy like a fox...playing 4D chess......I hope you right....what I've seen so far on both the micro level (Ukraine-Russia) and on the macro level (NATO / EU Canada / Mexico Trade War/ / UN / Israel - Gaza) is simply crazy.....I'm failing to see an overarching plan that optimizes for the US's safety, security, prosperity and economic dominance over the next hundred. I'm seeing a guy roll the dice on whats worked astoundingly well for the USA over the last hundred years (if you go and look at the relative out-performance of this country versus everywhere else on Earth!).

The war needs to exited....on this you and I agree...... it was foolish to walk away from whatever settlement was available in Istanbul in 2022.....and more foolish still to not attempt a peace settlement in the early innings of the ramped up Ukraine offensive that saw their early victories in Kherson & Kharkiv. The upperhand (artillery/manpower) is so clearly with the Russian's now that its not even funny. When you negotiate with an enemy that has the upperhand such as the Russian's do - you must attempt to show them a version of the future that amounts to HELL for them...they need to understand how things can get so much worse for them. What Trump did today was create a disincentive for peace because what he really showed Putin is a version of the future where things can get so much better for the Russian side......a version of the future where the relationship between Zelensky and Trump becomes so toxic that the US simply cuts off aid to Ukraine. I mean he has the upperhand on the battlefield..........and his enemies....the US-EU-Ukraine....are literally at each other's throats on TV...and about to go into a trade war in a month or so........why the hell would he stop the offensive now? We'll see.....Trump didn't advance the end to the Ukrainian war today...he precipitated its continuation....it's been a massive own goal for the West & Trump's stated aim of ending this....and I sincerely hope I get proved wrong on that front. Short version - after today you'd really have to ask yourself @cubsfan - why the hell would Putin negotiate now when his enemies are at each other's throats in about every way it's possible to be?

Alliances are funny things.......they work both ways - might be time for say ASML to start shipping the leading edge EUV machines to China again???.....I mean.....Europe went along with American leadership on containing China and hobbled ASML with export controls as per the Trump administrations wishes in 2019.....but I mean in an age of America being an unreliable partner........what exactly is Europe doing trying to contain China on the US's behalf anyway?.....Europe isn't a global hegemon worried about the rise of a rival global hegemon...its the US's existentual mid-life crisis this China-phobia. As we've discussed many time before @cubsfan what lots of the current administration supporters miss the whole time with this little 'wins' is the BIG BIG picture........the old world order (1994 - 2024) was a pretty shitty system, except for all the other systems there could be......what folks forget and its a very traditionally conservative outlook......as shitty as it was.......things can ALWAYS be a whole lot worse......as Trump rips away at the load bearing walls of the global system I dont see a single sign that he has something in mind for what will replace......the international system/order has bias towards anarchy, the post WWII system of alliances was an imperfect balance of power structure but it served us well.....its getting slowly dismantled with nothing coming up behind it.....history suggests that folks only come to appreciate global institutions & alliances again ( however imperfect) after finding out the anarchy that exists without them....we are on the early stages of the path towards learning that brutal lesson again......I hope I have no need to come back to this post again in a number of years to say I told you so.

Not going to re-litigate any of the underlying historical issues re:Ukraine/US/Europe. What happened today was shit show - deeply incompetent and unserious statecraft shown by this US administration. The core incompetence here comes from even having a press conference and Q&A after their WH meeting - Zelensky should have refused to be involved in one and the WH chief of staff/president should have never allowed for it to happen. We are at a critical juncture in the conflict/negotiations. The US/EU/Ukraine are literally at the negotiating table right now with Putin. The correct, professional posture after this meeting was prepared remarks that showed not an inch of blue sky between Ukraine and new administration (however untrue that might be). This meeting was a lost opportunity to message how much worse things could get for Russia if they didn't concede on various issues to negiote a peace. Instead we got a story about how Trump & Putin have been through tough times together in past. You almost can't make it up: "“Let me tell you, Putin went through a hell of a lot with me,” Trump explained" I can imagine Putin smiling and laughing his ass off at this. It is not a good thing to make your enemy smile and laugh at you.

Shades, gold chain, black trench coat, glassy bloodshot ketamine eyes, baby mama can't get in touch with him for days - speaking at the CONSERVATIVE! Political Action Conference. Very conservative indeed- this might be one of the finest political comedies ever written....if it weren't reality. All I'll say is I can't wait for the documentaries on all this & god bless whoever has to tidy up the mess being created right now.

Not saying the US is/was an angel - far from it but this is a relative game......but when one thinks about this problem (let's call it global stability, prosperity & existentialism in the nuclear age) it's almost like a currency pair.....one should think about the status quo relative to the possible alternative.......perhaps the alternative is all pizza and fairytales......I tend to think we might look fondly back at the unipolar moment and the historically benign hegemon that was the United States Empire......you dont miss your water till the well runs dry......and I suspect we wont miss the rules based order with all its deep deep flaws, imbalances and exploitations till its gone and replaced by a system which inherently will be anarchistic. Time to bust out the 4th Turning to see what happens next.......but If I remember correctly......it seems like a bunch of people are going to have re-learn how important overarching institutions are......which can only be learned it seems by experiencing a touch of anarchy for a while.....if my mental cliff notes are right from that book!

Absolutely - Ukraine would not be in the situation its in today if it did not foolishly believe the USA and UK's assurances around security guarantees giving up its 1200 nukesor whatever it was and signing the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in exchange for verbal vibe assurances around its borders. Deeply deeply foolish move by the Urkanian leadership at the time. The post-WWII ideal of nuclear non-proliferation was completely correct and again back to my point about the short sightedness of these Trump/Hegseth moves......you dismantle the global security architecture (however imperfect/costly) at your peril .....in the nuclear age the concept of national security for a superpower via isolationism is quaint & naive......a concept from a time when the world didn't have ICBM's and 100 megaton bombs ...the US withdrawing into itself and away from Kissinger-esque stable equilibriums or balances of power which manifest themselves in supra-national organizaitons.....really does not enhance the safety of Americans, it makes them less safe over the long pull...in a world without rules with no cop on the beat so to speak.....nuclear proliferation is now the logical default position for any sovereign nation.....that looks at the rules based system (NATO, UN, WTO etc.) being sidelined or completely deconstructed by Trump. I admire what Trump is doing in terms regulation, the deficit and backing us philosophically out of this crazy woke cul-de-sac we were in I actually applaud him on these polcies.... but as it relates to foreign policy (tarriffs on allies, UN/WTO/NATO) I must say I dont see a President optimizing for America's interests over the long pull.....I see a guy smashing away at a load bearing wall with no plan for what's going to hold up the roof up after he's done with the wall.

Yes that's the obvious answer...Europe should load up on weapons......the issue with re-arming Europe is like the person who buys a gun to protect his family from somebody breaking into their home.....not realizing that by bringing a lethal weapon into his house he's made his family statistically less safe, not more safe. See the other, somewhat unarticulated, purpose of NATO for many years.......was to create a security umbrella under which European players but mainly France & Germany had no need to build up a military defensive capabilities. This type of re-arming is exactly how the continent has been wrecked twice in the last hundred years or so. European history is the story of nations—especially France and Germany—expanding their military capabilities in the name of defense.....the issue here however is that external parties defensive military investments are kind of indistinguishable from offensive investments because its impossible to know the full intent of another countries leadership or more impossible still it's impossible to know the intent of future political leaders whom may come to power in those countries. This is important as say for example the far right in Germany seems to be gaining political traction. Security competitions but lets call it defense spending, as I've described, has a way of breaking out into full blown military conflicts because as at a certain point one party reasons that the best defense is a good offense and so they should strike first to gain a desceive military advantage over their competitor. Perhaps Europe can build a military capability that is abstracted away from a France or Germany and sits at a supra-national level - and if that's possible it should desperately try to build out this European Defense Force - the only issue remains that the EU construct is quite a weak foundation I think.....when push comes to shove....old habits die hard and I dont see in Europe a European nationalism like I do in the US.......I see 27 distinct nations....who've pooled some sovereignty for economic upside but I see very very little pooling of national identity into an overarching European one.....no child in Europe goes to school in the morning and pledges their allegiance to the United States of Europe....this is a big problem if individual nations in Europe go on a spending spree in the name of national defense..........nations & persistent nationalism are forged in the fire....perhaps a United States of Europe will be created when Putin & Xi's armies pour across the borders of Belarus into Poland and beyond but at this point I dont see it.......Europe at this point IMO is more likely to fragment than to come together to create a European Defense Force......I see little Brexit's everywhere I look in Europe right now

Interesting times - and have many thoughts on this.... Strategically the US to seemingly save a few lousy bucks......with this defacto withdrawal from NATO/Europe is being 'penny wise pound foolish' move IMO - making monkeys out of the European's to supposedly 'pivot' to Asia is simply short sighted and makes a kind of mockery of the pivot to Asia strategy itself......hitting Europe with tariffs would be doubly so....dont really want to get into the politcs of this....but its consistent with my view that Trump/Hegseth have a very limited framework for how they think about the complexity of international security....which one would expect from a Manhattan real estate developer turned TV personality turned US president...and a foot soldier turned Fox TV personality turned United States Secretary of Defense. See Europe's lack of military capability is/was a feature not a bug of NATO.....Europe's lack of strategic autonomy i.e. their complete dependence on the US from a military/security umbrella standpoint - is what makes them such beautiful subservient partners to overarching global dominance of US foreign policy.....Europe for the longest time has had an overwhelming incentive to go along with whatever hair brained scheme the American's came up with whether that's economic (sanctions, tariffs on China or withholding technology from China (ASML)) or military (Iraq, Afghanistan etc.).......pivoting to Asia.....which is a containment strategy around China not moving out beyond the first island chain is enhanced by the US having effective strategic (military & trade) oversight over the world's wealthiest aggregate economic block of consumers.....the US has 331 million wealthy buyers of Chinese goods which is great leverage......but the EU (with the UK) has ~540m first world wealthy consumers......the combined leverage against mercantilist China is simply immense.....a fracturing of the US/EU coalition in anyway is a good day for Beijing.....China's aim is to maximize its relative power within the global system.....the European's peeling away from the Americans which one can envisage on foot of this Ukraine pivot with potential tariffs to follow.....increases China's relative power in the system while diminishing the US's.....this is not how you run a railroad folks! Now in regards to the Ukraine: The reality for those paying attention is that in a very real sense the Western coalition lost the war in the Ukraine perhaps 18 months ago.......there's no doubt that Russia now and for many months now has had the upper hand on the battlefield and most importantly has the will and the capacity to continue the offensive indefinitely. The same can not be said for Ukraine....most importantly they are running out of men......next they are running out of artillery (as the Russian artillery absolute advantage grows)....and most importantly they are running out of 'partners' who are willing to bankroll the whole thing. This was all depressingly predictable. For all our hot air in the 'West' about "Adolf Putin" - Russia proved that it cared more about the conflict than we did..how could they not care more?...many pages back in this thread I pointed this out...Ukraine is/was a side project for the EU/USA......a kind of liberal democratic nation building project that liberals are so enamoured with but fail at time and time again........nobody in the core EU ever seriously considered the threat inflation of the Biden rhetoric of Russia marching on Warsaw, then Berlin to be anything other than good old threat inflation. For Russia - the Ukraine is and always will be existential.......perseverance which is measure of how much one cares about something......remains the most under-appreciated factor in most military conflicts......and the most consistent mistake in international security and conflict frameworks is the complete over-estimation of military power to effect strategic goals......ask the American's in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam etc. or the British in its various colonies...or the Israeli's in Gaza/West Bank/Lebanon.......I'm not sure how many times folks need to be taught this lesson.....but in the era of nationalism there are profound limitations to hard power. The reality in the war in Ukraine is that Russia expanded their military industrial base commensurate to how much they cared about their strategic objectives..........and we in the West with our 'We Stand with Ukraine' flags & all the puffery from European and US leaders never truly matched our rhetoric with concrete military industrial actions. For example by late 2024, many analysts noted that Russia was manufacturing more ammunition than all NATO countries combined – reportedly about 7× the West’s monthly output. Importantly the asymmetry in terms of artillery capability occured after the invasion of March 2022 and not before it.....the West wasn't blindsided by some secret Russian build up of artillery capability....it happened in plain sight with Ukraine's military reporting privately and publicly to its partners the growing asymmetry on the battlefield. The reality as evidenced by the hard reality of artillery production capability is that we simply didn't care enough about what happened to Ukraine on the battlefield. Its depressing but true - as I said many pages back and to mangle the Buffet adage - you shouldn't get involved in a war for twenty seconds that you wouldn't be happy to be involved in for twenty years.

Alot of folks seem confused about what's happening here....let me help Trump is introducing a defacto US federal sales tax levied on imported goods.......its just being hidden such that it wont show up on your Amazon/Walmart receipt or when you buy that new car from the dealer. It's a tax revenue raising measure, masquerading as nationalism.....I must say this nationalism vehicle for stealth tax rises seems to be working a treat as evidenced by a bunch of posters here who've seem to have bought the spin hook, line and sinker. Sure the Republican spin points have a sliver of truth to them (like all good talking points): - some of the 'taxes/tariffs' will get eaten by foreign producers taking a margin hit, they will pay some of this new federal sales tax - some import substitution might occur which will be good for American manufacturing - and some currency appreciation might take a little bit of the sting out of it at the point of sale But all these minor spin points are just there to muddy the water on the big big picture reality.."Donald Trump just raised taxes" ...the US federal government , under Trump, just got bigger and is going to be taking more money out of American pockets and sending it to D.C. to prop up busted entitlement programs and various tax breaks like carried interest. He's sucking those tax tariff dollars up into the Federal budget swamp to help plug the 7% deficit...while pretending that without touching entitlements DOGE is going to meaningfully shrink the deficit.......that folks believe this nonsense he sellings just tells you what a brilliant salesmen he is.

Well the beauty of momentum/herding from a traditional asset managers perspective......is that you get hosed at the exact time everybody else is i.e. all your competitors are getting hosed too........much easier conversation with a pension fund or endowment when every other manager they have on their books is having a bad year too. Being up when other are down.......and down when others are up........is a terrible business model for a money management firm......its an invitation to get your head chopped off by your clients.......I'm sympathetic to institutional allocators....what I just described could be a manager giving true alpha (across the cycle)....or it could be a manager giving you beta minus 10%....the problem is it'll take about 8-10yrs to be absolutely certain which one it is.

@Vish_ram I think that's right - the US indices have become so service and software heavy (capital light writ large) that the old models are going say its expensive no matter where we are in the cycle versus the past....the average SPY company is now simply a better business than the average SPY company from 20,40, 60yrs ago.....margins, ROIC, global TAM's feeding into global growth avenues all requiring little incremental capital to do so etc. You can and should pay up more for this versus the past.........within limits of course.....so a model rooted in the capital heavy past would of course flash red as Hussman's has forever basically.

Centene investor day has now gone virtual....previously it was to be held in person at NYSE on Dec 12th..... https://investors.centene.com/2024-12-05-CENTENE-CORPORATION-TO-HOST-VIRTUAL-INVESTOR-DAY-ON-DECEMBER-12,-2024 Very sad state of affairs that this is where we are now.

Hate to break it to folks.....but the premise of Breaking Bad no longer really stacks up..........Walter White at the next ACA open enrollment period could have signed up for a top tier coverage plan.....with no pre-existing condition exclusions and no waiting period for coverage to start!

This does not exist anymore - the individual mandate at a Federal level is gone....only California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia retained their own state level mandate.

Southpark is on point as always! No healthcare system is perfect........but what I've seen hybrid private-public healthcare systems I've encountered globally are probably the best........a single payer system with blanket universal access......creating a base layer of care and cutting off the tails of medical bankruptcy.........but where private hospitals & private insurers......compete for incremental healthcare spend because they are providing incremental outcomes, speedier turnarounds, better service over the basic public option. Not perfect - but as @Castanza has pointed out - too many talented people are shackled in the US by the employer health insurance chain.........it has undoubtedly suppressed entrepreneurship over the last couple of decades.

Totally agree - disconnecting the patient from the price of service via the HMO cut-out then abstracting the cost of the overall insurance even further by embedding it as a group benefit paid for by your employer (but then ultimately paid by everyone that purchases goods or services from that employer)....is one of the many ways that the US healthcare 'vampire squid' financial shakedown has increasingly got out of control.......its a kind of zombie bloated bureaucracy where no individual provider or worker in it could ever be accused of the shakedown.... but rather the shakedown is the labyrinth system itself for which there are thousands of little innocent cogs that dont need to be there..... The American healthcare system represents a kafkaesque nightmare......as most know on this forum being involved in the finance world....when you encounter something that is needlessly complex......well......where there's mystery, there's margin'......

You know your in trouble when Jeremy Siegel is calling for S&P in 2025 to return 0 to 10% If Tom Lee or Dan Ives....comes out and says anything less than 20% return for SPY in 2025.....I'm selling everything