Political Posts

[Ulti]

Back to tariffs 

https://ritholtz.com/2025/04/what-are-the-best-worst-case-tariff-scenarios/

 

Gaming out odds of different scenarios… who knows?

[mattee2264]

Waller of the Fed has quite a nice scenario analysis.

 

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/waller20250414a.htm

 

 

[Parsad]

4 hours ago, james22 said:

 

Ever run a business, Luke?

 

Held an elected leadership role?

 

Negotiated for anything of value?

 

You must at least be in management, surely?

 

I have/am...what's your point?  Cheers!

[Parsad]

3 hours ago, james22 said:

 

Only someone without leadership experience could question why it's a prerequisite to judging leadership.

 

 

 

That's bullshit.  Explain Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, etc.  Often, there is a collegial relationship between business leaders/politicians and they become oblivious to their failures...speaking both from experience and a non-business perspective!  Cheers!

[Parsad]

3 hours ago, Ulti said:

I respectfully have to disagree….1) I respect all opinions on this board even yours G’s and Cubsfan as well as many others…2) a lot of what’s been posted since the election is opinion and , to paraphrase Howard Marks, we don’t know what is going to happen. 3) reading the various opinions has helped me navigate the current investing environment… I am essentially flat for the year with 40% cash.. I could be very wrong but I am confident.

Hopefully all will continue to post their opinions with respect ..

 

To paraphrase the Macy’s expert.. Cheers

 

+1!  And cheers!

[Parsad]

3 hours ago, Luke said:

I have replied i cant take you serious on this reply: "Absolutely worthless, emotional raging and whining mixed with derangement inspired doom and gloom".

 

I appreciate the discussion culture on this board but i have put energy and effort into my posts for @Gregmal to come to his PC to write my reply was absolutely worthless, emotional raging and whining mixed with derangement inspired doom and gloom. I appreciate the reply but frankly thats quite insulting and i dont think worth my effort. I guess those kind of replies are what makes a quality poster, thank you @Gregmal, everyones forum darling and high quality poster.

 

Learn to ignore people if they annoy you.  They don't have the monopoly on being right...in fact, they are often wrong.  But so are you, myself and every other member.  Part of life is being able to deal with morons...from both sides of any argument!  And all of us have the ability to contribute or be moronic.  Cheers!

[Parsad]

2 hours ago, james22 said:

 

LOL

 

That's exactly what it was:

 

Trump should be some sort of philosopher with deep knowledge of philosophy, politics, economics, psychology etc and have shown over his biography that he is a reliant, diligent and hard working citizen that can bring his country and humanity forward.

 

"Should" is childish.

 

James, are you saying the ability to get things done means you have to be an asshole?  If so, have you been in any leadership positions?  

 

You can be an asshole as a leader, but that doesn't mean shit gets done, because you've alienated half the workforce, including the most capable of your employees.  The saying 20% of the people do 80% of the work is true...so you alienate many of the best workers.

 

Sometimes you do have to be a bit of a dick...but it is well-placed...not like Trump who literally serves shit to his entire team every day, not to mention half the country!  Cheers!

[Jaygo]

10 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

Learn to ignore people if they annoy you.  They don't have the monopoly on being right...in fact, they are often wrong.  But so are you, myself and every other member.  Part of life is being able to deal with morons...from both sides of any argument!  And all of us have the ability to contribute or be moronic.  Cheers!

 

This should be a billboard, posted in the house of commons and at the door to every establishment. Very Very well said. 

 

Often times we are wrong twice, once when were wrong and second when we refuse to see we may be wrong. That said, how people let complete stranger's to get under their skin is bewildering. Now back to the mud wrestlin ! 

[cwericb]

Unfortunately it usually seems to be the ones on the Right that are so aggressive and are the first to jump on other posters with unnecessary personal attacks. It seems they are just following the example their leader has set. 

 

If you don't have substance to back up your points, flail around, shoot the messenger and try and shift the focus.

[Blugolds]

2 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

 

You can be an asshole as a leader, but that doesn't mean shit gets done, because you've alienated half the workforce, including the most capable of your employees.  The saying 20% of the people do 80% of the work is true...so you alienate many of the best workers.

 

Sometimes you do have to be a bit of a dick...but it is well-placed...not like Trump who literally serves shit to his entire team every day, not to mention half the country!  Cheers!

Reminds me of a book I read about Vince Lombardi, if I remember correctly he was instructed/raised by Jesuits, all his players loved him. His management/leadership style was to taylor it to the individual. He said that some guys, you only got their best with negative reinforcement, they wouldn’t give you everything unless you challenged them, ie. “that guy is kicking your ass out there! I can’t believe you were a first round pick, my kids play better than that!” And that would make them rise to the challenge to prove you wrong..but other players needed the positive reinforcement to get the best out of them..ie. “I’ve seen you play and you’re 10x better than that DB, you have the ability to be in the hall of fame, now go out there and show him how unlucky he is to have to guard you” etc.

 

The quality of a great leader IMO is the ability to read the room, and individually Taylor the needs of each team member and figure out what motivates them to get the best out of them. Lombardi was a master at this, he knew what motivated every single player on the team and the coaching staff. 
 

They all said he was tough but fair and they lived him for it, because they didn’t know it at the time but he was pulling the trigger on every one of them in their own unique need/way. 
 

He also said if you take a blanket approach it will only work for half. If you’re the hardest, some will benefit but the others will shutdown, and if you’re gentle, some will respond and some will shutdown, so the only logical answer is to individualize your style to each player if you want the very best they have to give…but that takes times, effort, knowledge and understanding, you’ve got to know yourself as well as others, and it’s difficult. There also was a thread of empathy that ran through his style, he genuinely wanted the player to be at their best.

[james22]

2 hours ago, Parsad said:

I have/am...what's your point?  Cheers!

 

That those without aren't in a position to criticize.

 

It's like questioning a coach's call when you've never played organized ball.

 

I couldn't disagree with you more on your Trump position, but you've earned the right to it.

 

2 hours ago, Parsad said:

Explain Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, etc. 

 

What? They were no more capable of criticizing leadership before they had experience than anyone else.

 

And ineffective leaders shouldn't criticize either.

 

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

James, are you saying the ability to get things done means you have to be an asshole?

 

No, I'm saying in this world, it doesn't matter what leaders should be.

 

Look at the characteristics of effective leaders instead. They don't overlap much with Luke's standard.

 

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

If so, have you been in any leadership positions?  

 

I have, and learned the higher the level, the more difficult the decisions and the more invested the supporters.

 

When your job is decision-making, it's very difficult not to anger those you decide against.

 

(With the exception of tariffs, Trump's just lucky enough to keep getting to decide on the 80/20 side.)

[Parsad]

12 minutes ago, Blugolds said:

Reminds me of a book I read about Vince Lombardi, if I remember correctly he was instructed/raised by Jesuits, all his players loved him. His management/leadership style was to taylor it to the individual. He said that some guys, you only got their best with negative reinforcement, they wouldn’t give you everything unless you challenged them, ie. “that guy is kicking your ass out there! I can’t believe you were a first round pick, my kids play better than that!” And that would make them rise to the challenge to prove you wrong..but other players needed the positive reinforcement to get the best out of them..ie. “I’ve seen you play and you’re 10x better than that DB, you have the ability to be in the hall of fame, now go out there and show him how unlucky he is to have to guard you” etc.

 

The quality of a great leader IMO is the ability to read the room, and individually Taylor the needs of each team member and figure out what motivates them to get the best out of them. Lombardi was a master at this, he knew what motivated every single player on the team and the coaching staff. 
 

They all said he was tough but fair and they lived him for it, because they didn’t know it at the time but he was pulling the trigger on every one of them in their own unique need/way. 
 

He also said if you take a blanket approach it will only work for half. If you’re the hardest, some will benefit but the others will shutdown, and if you’re gentle, some will respond and some will shutdown, so the only logical answer is to individualize your style to each player if you want the very best they have to give…but that takes times, effort, knowledge and understanding, you’ve got to know yourself as well as others, and it’s difficult. There also was a thread of empathy that ran through his style, he genuinely wanted the player to be at their best.

 

Greg Popovich and Steve Kerr are a couple of coaches that can do this like Lombardi.  Phil Jackson, Andy Reid and a bunch of others...great at leadership and coaching.  Cheers!

[Parsad]

10 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

That those without aren't in a position to criticize.

 

It's like questioning a coach's call when you've never played organized ball.

 

I couldn't disagree with you more on your Trump position, but you've earned the right to it.

 

I think most voters would disagree with you.  They as citizens have a right to criticize and vote leaders in or out.

 

10 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

 

What? They were no more capable of criticizing leadership before they had experience than anyone else.

 

And ineffective leaders shouldn't criticize either.

 

They did things that other leaders couldn't or wouldn't do...I think they had every right to criticize, because they changed the way people do business and how tech companies (as well as other businessses) are run.  

 

10 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

No, I'm saying in this world, it doesn't matter what leaders should be.

 

Look at the characteristics of effective leaders instead. They don't overlap much with Luke's standard.

 

Not true at all.  You have many successful companies out there, with differing styles of management.  Same with sports.  Different coaching styles.

 

Cheers!

[james22]

2 minutes ago, Parsad said:

They did things that other leaders couldn't or wouldn't do...I think they had every right to criticize, because they changed the way people do business and how tech companies (as well as other businessses) are run.  

 

You have many successful companies out there, with differing styles of management.  Same with sports.  Different coaching styles.

 

Wait, are you talking about Trump?

[Parsad]

2 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

Wait, are you talking about Trump?

 

Nope.  I'm talking about leaders who were in leadership positions before they were officially recognized as leaders...like Gates, Buffett, Zuckerberg, Dell, etc.  They did things differently and had every right to criticize.  This was related to you questioning Luke's qualifications to criticize Trump just because he wasn't a CEO, VP, or had some level of corporate leadership experience.  Trump was criticizing Obama, Biden and every other leader before he ever won the 1st election!  But then again, he had the experience of 5 bankruptcies before that so he was well qualified I suppose! 

 

Cheers!

[Gregmal]

It's not necessarily about experience, but it often does help. What has gotten old, is the same low level, highly predictable, TDS inspired routing of logic through the funnel of:

 

1. I hate Trump

2. I am overly invested emotionally in seeing and painting everything related to him in a bad way

3. Because of 1 inspiring 2, 2 leads me to regularly forecasting dramatic and sensationalized doom as a way to scratch some weird "gotcha Trump" itch

which often results in:

4. Generally sucking at having predictions or evaluation models and inputs with any relevance to anything useful in an actionable investment sense. 

 

So yea. That's it. 

[james22]

17 minutes ago, Parsad said:

Nope.  I'm talking about leaders who were in leadership positions before they were officially recognized as leaders...like Gates, Buffett, Zuckerberg, Dell, etc.  They did things differently and had every right to criticize.  This was related to you questioning Luke's qualifications to criticize Trump just because he wasn't a CEO, VP, or had some level of corporate leadership experience. 

 

I thought maybe you recognized Trump as the change agent he is.

 

But you're making the exception is the rule argument?

 

Luke is a change agent on par with Gates, Buffett, Zuckerberg, Dell?

 

Sure.

[Blake Hampton]

Trump is a loser. A stupid, arrogant loser.

[cubsfan]

Just now, Blake Hampton said:

Trump is a loser. A stupid, arrogant loser.

 

Not really, but he did replace a loser - a corrupt and senile one at that. And you couldn't even find a candidate.

How lame.

 

Trump is the change agent, as @james22 said.  So far, so good. Just the man to force changes to a corrupt government. 

[Blake Hampton]

And anyone who supported this guy simply got fooled.

 

I said it prior to the election, and I'll say it here again: people who vote(d) for Trump are either ignorant or greedy. It's possible to be both, but you can't be neither.

[Blake Hampton]

Imagine being given everything in life, being a complete failure in business, and then thinking that you have the right to radically change the economic landscape of the entire world by yourself. It is ignorance on a grand scale.

 

And some of you really support this—on a Berkshire forum, of all places.

 

Edited April 15, 2025 by Blake Hampton

[Spekulatius]

I bet the $150B in claimed savings don’t pass an audit either and at are probably closer to $50B. After all Elon claimed $1B in savings (later revised to $830M) for a survey that nobody knows anything about.

[cubsfan]

25 minutes ago, Blake Hampton said:

And anyone who supported this guy simply got fooled.

 

I said it prior to the election, and I'll say it here again: people who vote(d) for Trump are either ignorant or greedy. It's possible to be both, but you can't be neither.

 

And of course, that is idiotic.  Those of us that voted for Trump are deeply patriotic. I've very happy with my vote.

 

The country was absolutely going off the rails.  Unfortunately for you @Blake Hampton you couldn't find a warm body with a brain to beat Trump.  Amazing what a disaster the opposition party is - isn't it?

 

 

Edited April 15, 2025 by cubsfan

[dwy000]

40 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

It's not necessarily about experience, but it often does help. What has gotten old, is the same low level, highly predictable, TDS inspired routing of logic through the funnel of:

 

1. I hate Trump

2. I am overly invested emotionally in seeing and painting everything related to him in a bad way

3. Because of 1 inspiring 2, 2 leads me to regularly forecasting dramatic and sensationalized doom as a way to scratch some weird "gotcha Trump" itch

which often results in:

4. Generally sucking at having predictions or evaluation models and inputs with any relevance to anything useful in an actionable investment sense. 

 

So yea. That's it. 

I see it as this reversed.  Because there is no plan, no competence, terrible communications, changes done by the hour, etc there is no ability to predict or model or make projections. 

 

That leads to forecasting that includes doom scenarios because nobody wants to take a permanent loss of capital.

 

That leads to hating Trump because he is the originator of all this uncertainty. 

[dwy000]

6 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

I bet the $150B in claimed savings don’t pass an audit either and at are probably closer to $50B. After all Elon claimed $1B in savings (later revised to $830M) for a survey that nobody knows anything about.

And the "savings" will be like the synergy savings companies claim when making acquisitions.  No evidence, no receipts, things that were already in progress and then a total number that appears out of midair