Liberty

Part 3: https://peterattiamd.com/matthewwalker3/

Good interview with the founder of Cruise (who also co-founded Twitch): https://overcast.fm/+OcVfXZr6o

Video by one of the authors:

Falcon Heavy launched! First time all three boosters landed:

Area under the curve much higher, and people under-estimate the size of the change. Oh, just 20 extra years? What have you been doing in the past 20 years personally? Healthspan matters a lot too. Living long and healthy is the goal.

Cherry-picking members of the aristocracy, eh? I doubt you'd love going back to a period before antibiotics and anesthesia and vaccines and insulin and heart stents and pacemakers and epipens and EKGs and MRIs and Xrays and modern dentistry and optometry and cataract operations and chemotherapy/immunotherapy/radiation treatments and such...

Don't worry, nobody will force you to get the rejuvenation procedures. Human lifespans have already been increasing rapidly since the industrial revolution, and I'll stay that's been a very good thing and few people are in favor of going back (or those that do because of romantic ideas probably wouldn't like that reality if they could actually live it).

New interview of Michael Lewis by Barry Ritholtz: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/audio/2019-04-05/michael-lewis-discusses-the-culture-of-finance-podcast

Nygren's Q1 commentary: https://www.oakmark.com/Commentary/Commentary-Archives/Bill-Nygren-Market-Commentary-1Q19.htm

Part 2 of Attia's interview: https://peterattiamd.com/matthewwalker2/

Steven Pinker op ed on nuclear power: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/opinion/sunday/climate-change-nuclear-power.html

https://medium.com/@arielf/finally-rejuvenation-is-a-thing-910d48aa6c6e

I don't think that's what they're doing. Did you read the articles?

Part 3: https://intrinsicinvesting.com/2019/04/04/the-risk-of-low-growth-stocks-part-3-heighten-risk-to-the-best-companies/

Good interview with Michael Mauboussin: http://investorfieldguide.com/mmauboussin/ Previous two from the same podcast: http://investorfieldguide.com/mauboussin/ http://investorfieldguide.com/michael/

This should be good. Part one of three: https://peterattiamd.com/matthewwalker1/ Update: I've had a chance to listen to it and it's great. Highly recommended. Can't wait for part 2 and 3.

Maybe "people" like Hussman did, but in 2011 the market valuation was not that extreme. Now it is, look for yourself: https://www.gurufocus.com/shiller-PE.php. The market valuation wasn't extreme because people were bearish. It's a complex adaptive system, reflexivity and all that. The market valuation was also so low in the early 80s because people were so bearish and expected the 70s SNAFU to continue. At the time people found all kinds of other excuses not to invest and why it was better to be "defensive", and then later including the CAPE. Lots of disciples of Prem Watsa saw his hedging and deflation bets as his next great trade at the time, etc.

“Leftism begins as compassion for the unfortunate, but ends as contempt for the fortunate. Rightism begins as pride in the past, but ends as fury at the present. Both grow to abhor each other’s values more than they prize their own. Politics devours love, and digests it into hate.”

As a general saving tool over a very long period of time i think that index investing is great, because you will buy more if the index is cheap and less if it is expensive. But when you want to invest a lump sum you should think about the "index" as an investment and have realistic expectations of its return. Right now based on CAPE, market cap/GDP or https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=qis there were only 3 times the market was in a similar position to now. 1929, 1968 and 1999/2000. On all three occasions the market return over the next 10 years was awful. Is this time different? Maybe, but i doubt it. In 2011 the market was in line with historical averages. CAPE? You'd have been sitting on cash for many many of the past years if you relied on that. It doesn't take into account changes in the composition of the index over time. Hindsight bias is real. In 2011, people were expecting a second gfc and predicting low returns.

But are they? People have been saying "new normal of low returns" since about 2011... If it was that easy to predict market returns, everybody would be a successful macro trader. The market goes up about 2/3rd of the time, not always when it seems to make sense that it does and vice versa. Owning a slice of the economy while you learn isn't a bad idea. This isn't market timing either way, just a general idea.

At this point focus on keeping your expenses low and saving as much as possible (that'll make a huge difference when you get compound growth going), and learning as much as possible without feeling the need to act on much yet. Just follow your curiosity and remember the Dunning-Kruger effect; even when you start feeling like you know something, you don't know much yet, just keep going, it takes a while. You can put your money in index funds or Berkshire while you learn about various industries, companies, etc. On the expenses/saving site, read this in chronological order (first few posts aren't quite as good, but he finds his voice quickly): https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/all-the-posts-since-the-beginning-of-time/ One thing I did years ago is I read pretty much all the archives of this forum thread by thread. A lot you can just skim, but there's a lot of good dicsussions to be found and things (links to articles, interviews, talks, etc) to build on too. I also suggest focusing on learning about how to think and how the mind works. Cognitive biases, etc. Some places to start: -Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman -Influence by Cialdini -Rationality: From AI to Zombies by Eliezer Yudkowsky -Stumbling on Happiness by Dan Gilbert -Munger's speech on The Psychology of Human Misjudgement and The Art of Stockpicking

Good presentation by Paul Lountzis at the Ben Graham Centre for Value Investing at IVBS (2019): h/t @bluegrasscap

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/22/majority-of-bitcoin-trading-is-a-hoax-new-study-finds.html https://www.wsj.com/articles/most-bitcoin-trading-faked-by-unregulated-exchanges-study-finds-11553259600

That doesn't say what you said. It only says that under 120k household income you have access to the gov't taking a 5 or 10% equity stake in your house. Doesn't say anything about getting "118K (25%) of a 480K house, at 0% financing" like you wrote. Excuse me, .... you need to learn how to read. It was very clearly disclosed. 118K (25%) of a 480K house, at 0% financing - 70K (35K each x 2) of interest free financing from their RRSP - 48K (10% partiicipation loan) of interest free financing from CMHC Have a good day. SD Yeah, that doesn't make any more sense to me than it did before. Update: Ah, I see what you meant. Your writing is so abstruse that it missed what you were trying to say until now. I still don't think your assumptions make much sense for first time home buyers, and I wouldn't call using RSP money "0% financing" since there's possibly a bigger opportunity cost than whatever you'd pay for a mortgage if they are invested in equities that compound tax-free inside the vehicle, and the gov't equity stake isn't either, since on sale your forgo any price appreciation on that equity slice, which can potentially also turn out to have had a higher cost than a regular mortgage (who knows, depends on the period, location, etc), but whatever.

That doesn't say what you said. It only says that under 120k household income you have access to the gov't taking a 5 or 10% equity stake in your house. Doesn't say anything about getting "118K (25%) of a 480K house, at 0% financing" like you wrote.