Political Posts

[SharperDingaan]

Way to go Orange Boy  1,100 points, the 'bots haven't begun selling set, and that toilet flush is the gold reserves and proceeds from maturing T-Bills fleeing the US. Get your money out now boys, while you still can ....

 

Collectively put a run on the US Fed .... at the same time it is being hit with counterveiling tarrifs from the entire world. Soros ran the BoE, successfully run the US Fed ... and you'll be immortal!

 

SD

 

 

[Gregmal]

Wasn’t Bitcoin supposed to be the safe haven? Only thing I see green is Diageo and treasuries 

[KJP]

Government by AI?

 

https://x.com/krishnanrohit/status/1907587352157106292

[lnofeisone]

1 hour ago, changegonnacome said:

I laughed so hard at this. Thank you!

[lnofeisone]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

I very much agree.

I am also in this camp. While I don't always share @Dinar's political leanings, I find his stock commentary thoughtful and insightful. And we are both ex-USSRians so there is that. 

[coc]

12 hours ago, Dinar said:

No Parsad, I did not endorse genocide.  I responded to a post that claimed that West cannot win wars anymore.  All I said that if we were willing to wage war the way it has been fought since time immemorial (very brutally), then we would have won the war in Afghanistan.  

As for my contributions being nothing: well, I pitched Tel-Aviv Stock exchange that returned 150%+ in two years, Heidelberg Materials up 50% in three months, Coca Cola Consolidated that returned 50% in less than a year, Airbus that returned 40% in less than a year.  

Don't worry, I won't be posting.  I haven't posted since I was banned, and I would not have posted, but I wanted the record straight. I don't support genocide and never did.  

 

Your words: "it should have been killing 10,000 Afghans a day until Taliban handed over Bin Laden & Co! Similarly in Gaza/Judea and Samaria (West Bank technically includes Israel pre-1967 borders)/Lebanon, just transfer the populations to Syria, and end the problem. "

 

Now: "I don't support genocide and never did."

 

In a few sentences you supported both genocide AND ethnic cleansing. Congrats. These are the "Western Values" that you all want to "return" to? 

 

Parsad should have banned you permanently (and some other overt genocide supporters here hiding under various rhetorical tricks e.g. "Western Civilization" and other BS).

[Ghost]

The Americans elected a left wing socialist nut case as your President. 

 

Exhibit 1:  Peace not War.  That is some serious 70s hippie stuff..wanting to make peace with the Russians.  He even has Elon looking at ways to cut spending in the military. 

 

Exhibit 2:  He just raised taxes (also known as Tariffs for the layman) by I am guessing more than 10%.  

 

Exhibit 3:  The employer class (CEOs, and business leaders) are screaming at Trump, tariff wars are a bad idea.

 

Exhibit 4:  The stock market, just took a dump. 

 

 

[Dinar]

1 minute ago, coc said:

 

Your words: "it should have been killing 10,000 Afghans a day until Taliban handed over Bin Laden & Co! Similarly in Gaza/Judea and Samaria (West Bank technically includes Israel pre-1967 borders)/Lebanon, just transfer the populations to Syria, and end the problem. "

 

Now: "I don't support genocide and never did."

 

In a few sentences you supported both genocide AND ethnic cleansing. Congrats. These are the "Western Values" that you all want to "return" to? 

 

Parsad should have banned you permanently (and some other overt genocide supporters here hiding under various rhetorical tricks e.g. "Western Civilization" and other BS).

That is how every war has been fought since time immemorial.  Otherwise you have continued bloodshed, which is what we are seeing in the Middle East today.  

Look what the US did to Japan in World War II - Tokyo firebombing and Hiroshima/Hagasaki. Look at what Japan did to the Chinese.  The bombing of Dresden in World War II.  Look at the use of chemical weapons in Iran/Iraq war and the bombing of cities in that war.  Look at what Sunnis did to Yazidis in Iraq.  I am not even talking about the Mongols, Tamerlane, the Peasant Revolt In Germany, etc...  

What the Czechs/Poles did to Germans post WWII - expelled people who lived there for centuries, if not millennia.   Now Armenians after being massacred by Turks are being expelled from areas where they lived for two millennia by Azerbajan.  

Am I happy that hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians were killed in firebombing of Tokyo or Nagasaki/Hiroshima?  Of course not, however it probably saved millions of Japanese lives and US lives, since it prevented the invasion of Japan by the US.   War is brutal, and people who use civilized methods don't win.

However this is an investment board, so what ideas have you contributed?  You have been a member for 14 years, I don't recall a single one of your ideas.  

[Paarslaars]

1 hour ago, Gregmal said:

Wasn’t Bitcoin supposed to be the safe haven? Only thing I see green is Diageo and treasuries 

Against inflation yes, against market fears no... On the contrary, it is a more volatile asset (at least at this stage of the adoption curve).

 

Edit: Saab & Rheinmetal doing well today...

Edited April 3, 2025 by Paarslaars

[Saluki]

https://www.yardeniquicktakes.com/reprint-the-protectionist-road-to-depression-deja-vu-all-over-again/

 

Interesting and with lots of graphs, which are better than arguments. 

[dwy000]

1 hour ago, Gregmal said:

Wasn’t Bitcoin supposed to be the safe haven? Only thing I see green is Diageo and treasuries 

Telecom and health care doing well. 

[nsx5200]

As much as Trump wants Greenland, I don't believe he will get it, and he won't(I hope) start a war to acquire it.  At least there should still be enough checks and balances in the U.S. government to prevent it, as well as the lack of political will to do it.  This is especially true within Trump's base that probably can't even locate Greenland on a map, never mind understanding the logic in acquiring Greenland.  I certainly don't, when existing framework like NATO covers any 'security concerns' for acquiring Greenland.  IMHO, acquiring Greenland is simple case of vanity, just like acquisition of Ukraine by Russia is, IMHO, a simple case of vanity.

 

The lost of interest in Ukraine by the administration, IMHO, a pivot away from Europe/Russia to China.  Trump/Project 2025 is correct in that in order really take on China in the future, Europe will need to be able to defend itself against Russian aggression with less help from the U.S.  It's was poorly communicated to the European allies, but it did get them going.  It's unfortunate that more cooperation to coordinate the build-up of arms amongst the US and its allies wasn't done, but it is what it is.

 

If somebody can make a valid case for U.S. to acquire Greenland, I'd like to hear it.  TIA

[Mephistopheles]

 

[Pelagic]

Have to appreciate how convoluted the tariffs are as they apply to France. As part of the EU reciprocal tariffs are set at 20%. French Guiana though gets 10%, but somehow Reunion Island gets hit with a 37% rate, Saint Pierre and Miquelon get 50%, Martinique and Guadeloupe - 10%. Who says having a vast overseas empire isn't useful in today's political climate? Certainly some opportunity to shuffle sales around for clever French firms if they think tariffs will persist.

 

 

 

[Parsad]

42 minutes ago, coc said:

 

Your words: "it should have been killing 10,000 Afghans a day until Taliban handed over Bin Laden & Co! Similarly in Gaza/Judea and Samaria (West Bank technically includes Israel pre-1967 borders)/Lebanon, just transfer the populations to Syria, and end the problem. "

 

Now: "I don't support genocide and never did."

 

In a few sentences you supported both genocide AND ethnic cleansing. Congrats. These are the "Western Values" that you all want to "return" to? 

 

Parsad should have banned you permanently (and some other overt genocide supporters here hiding under various rhetorical tricks e.g. "Western Civilization" and other BS).

 

Thanks coc for finding the post!  Some on here like to rewrite what was said and make me look like the bad guy.  If you watch what you fucking say, I don't have to be the bad guy and nobody complains.  Cheers!

[Parsad]

34 minutes ago, Dinar said:

 

However this is an investment board, so what ideas have you contributed?  You have been a member for 14 years, I don't recall a single one of your ideas.  

 

There is no mandatory requirement for ideas on this board.  It is a community. 

• If you have an idea and want to share, great! 
• If you want to be part of the community, great!
• If you want to stay in the back of the crowd and listen/read...wonderful!
• But if you want to offend the community or members in it...not so much!

Cheers!

[Hektor]

2 minutes ago, Parsad said:

• If you have an idea and want to share, great! 
• If you want to be part of the community, great!
• If you want to stay in the back of the crowd and listen/read...wonderful!
• But if you want to offend the community or members in it...not so much!

+1

[dwy000]

So "reciprocal" tariffs on countries where the US has a trade surplus.  Is there anyone competent anywhere near the levers here?  

[coc]

39 minutes ago, Dinar said:

However this is an investment board, so what ideas have you contributed?  You have been a member for 14 years, I don't recall a single one of your ideas.  

 

How about I'll feel free to post whatever the f*** I want under Parsad's rules and you stick me on ignore, and in return, we keep this a genocide-free investment board? Hop on Twitter and promote your ethnic cleansing fantasies if you need an outlet. 

[Cigarbutt]

For perspective and in the spirit of the first post of this thread, Mr. Pettis had this to say in 2019:

https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2019/10/why-trade-wars-are-inevitable?lang=en

It's an interesting perspective and (opinion) a useful base for constructive conversations.

The idea of a tax on capital from excess-saving countries is interesting.

The saving-investment angle is also useful.

One of his basic points (relevant to most here?) is that capital owners have largely benefited from increasing global trade over the last few decades and reversing this trend may be disadvantageous (several antonyms available but the mildest sounding one used) to capital owners.

[no_free_lunch]

23 hours ago, Sweet said:

it’s just lie after lie.  Europeans will get all their money back - lie.  350 bn - lie.

They will not get their money back.  Why would we expect otherwise.  What precedent is there for such.  The win was containing russia.

[flesh]

2 hours ago, Cigarbutt said:

For perspective and in the spirit of the first post of this thread, Mr. Pettis had this to say in 2019:

https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2019/10/why-trade-wars-are-inevitable?lang=en

It's an interesting perspective and (opinion) a useful base for constructive conversations.

The idea of a tax on capital from excess-saving countries is interesting.

The saving-investment angle is also useful.

One of his basic points (relevant to most here?) is that capital owners have largely benefited from increasing global trade over the last few decades and reversing this trend may be disadvantageous (several antonyms available but the mildest sounding one used) to capital owners.

Thanks. 
 

I think we’ll see immediate negotiations (there have been for a month). Countries will bend some and not retaliate out of fomo. Best market in the world who doesn’t want in? If you retaliate and others don’t, your goods get replaced with theirs eventually. You can’t replace selling to the USA. Countries will agree to buy more from the USA, if the imbalance is small enough and the distortions are small enough the permanent tariff/tariff like level will fall around 10% on most countries. Strategic tariffs like steel will be higher. Some politicians will claim being tough for their constituents meanwhile they’ll negotiate and the USA will be the winner on balance. Many countries around the world are trying to figure out how to be the winner from the chaos right now, the ones who act tough with a bad hand will lose the most. Those that simply comply the fastest rationally will win. USA will be better off and will sell more goods/services and with lower tariffs and tariff like distortional costs from other countries inclusive of the benefit of tariff revenue. 
 

Just a prediction, not an ethical discourse. 

Edited April 3, 2025 by flesh

[nsx5200]

It's a bit sad to me that the tribal aspect discussions have gotten in the way of actual discussion.  In the scale of Paul Graham's hierarchy of disagreements, those would be lower three tiers.  IMHO those low-level type of discussions adds a significant amount of noise to the little value it would add(the value of essentially polling of opinions).  This is especially true when the same low-value arguments are injected as rapid response in spam-like fashion.

 

I've never really understood why people would be so emotional about rooting for their favorite teams, but I can see that same dynamic when it comes to their favorite political party, favorite religion, and sometimes even their favorite investment assets.  It really goes downward fast when disparaging comments are made, and natural human reciprocity kicks in.  I understand the instant gratification of making those disparaging comments to arguments made on the other side, as I have dished them out myself in the days of BBS.  But have since learned that listening to different opinions actually speed up the learning process, as hard as that may be.  Being respectful will, most of the time, yield the same reciprocity, at least in terms of tone and in appearance.  That leads to less emotion/anger involved, and invite for more valuable logical counter-arguments in the future.  So when given the choice of making a quick disparaging comment vs taking a longer time to actual think about the validity of the other side's position, hopefully I choose the latter.

 

With that, I have found many of @Dinar's arguments to be on-point and worthy of consideration even though we may be, at the end, standing on different sides of the aisle on many issues.  I hope Dinar continues to participate in this forum, as that expands the potential valid view points.  For others that don't make similar cuts, there's always the "ignore" button available to me.  I invite others to hit that "ignore" button on me if they feel like my post's signal-to-noise ratio is too low as well.

 

"When three people walk together, one of them must be my teacher"

- Confucius

Edited April 3, 2025 by nsx5200
add quote

[flesh]

3 hours ago, Dinar said:

That is how every war has been fought since time immemorial.  Otherwise you have continued bloodshed, which is what we are seeing in the Middle East today.  

Look what the US did to Japan in World War II - Tokyo firebombing and Hiroshima/Hagasaki. Look at what Japan did to the Chinese.  The bombing of Dresden in World War II.  Look at the use of chemical weapons in Iran/Iraq war and the bombing of cities in that war.  Look at what Sunnis did to Yazidis in Iraq.  I am not even talking about the Mongols, Tamerlane, the Peasant Revolt In Germany, etc...  

What the Czechs/Poles did to Germans post WWII - expelled people who lived there for centuries, if not millennia.   Now Armenians after being massacred by Turks are being expelled from areas where they lived for two millennia by Azerbajan.  

Am I happy that hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians were killed in firebombing of Tokyo or Nagasaki/Hiroshima?  Of course not, however it probably saved millions of Japanese lives and US lives, since it prevented the invasion of Japan by the US.   War is brutal, and people who use civilized methods don't win.

However this is an investment board, so what ideas have you contributed?  You have been a member for 14 years, I don't recall a single one of your ideas.  

I haven’t read dinar as I’ve recently come back to the forum. I don’t read what he’s quoted as saying in this thread as a war monger etc. He sounds like an informed realist to me. 
 

OTOH I understand that being direct isn’t appreciated by most. 

[dwy000]

56 minutes ago, flesh said:

Thanks. 
 

 

I think we’ll see immediate negotiations (there have been for a month). Countries will bend some and not retaliate out of fomo. Best market in the world who doesn’t want in? If you retaliate and others don’t, your goods get replaced with theirs eventually. You can’t replace selling to the USA. Countries will agree to buy more from the USA, if the imbalance is small enough and the distortions are small enough the permanent tariff/tariff like level will fall around 10% on most countries. Strategic tariffs like steel will be higher. Some politicians will claim being tough for their constituents meanwhile they’ll negotiate and the USA will be the winner on balance. Many countries around the world are trying to figure out how to be the winner from the chaos right now, the ones who act tough with a bad hand will lose the most. Those that simply comply the fastest rationally will win. USA will be better off and will sell more goods/services and with lower tariffs and tariff like distortional costs from other countries inclusive of the benefit of tariff revenue. 
 

Just a prediction, not an ethical discourse. 

This would make sense if there was a rational logic to the amounts and rates.  But a lot of these countries have no tariffs on the US or they are restricted to a limited number of products.  What exactly is Malaysia and Bangladesh supposed to "negotiate"?  They don't buy American good because they don't have the capital and we don't make goods they want or need.  So we are punishing American consumers for wanting to buy cheap clothing.  What exactly do you "negotiate" on that?