Political Posts

[Gregmal]

lol yea but then if he gives @changegonnacome his wish and does nothing, my man will then “get Trump” by saying he “chickened out”…literally everything follows the same formula 

Edited June 17, 2025 by Gregmal

[changegonnacome]

@cubsfan @Gregmal - you have remarkable faith in man who has a demonstrated track record of very poor decision making in his personal life, in his business life & in his political career.....this is a guy who just launched a mobile phone network & handset while sitting in the oval office.....need I say more??....having said all that I'm rooting for a positive outcome to whatever he chooses.......but lets not forget when a dirty bomb goes off in lower Manhattan......that Iran having the bomb in the Middle East is not our problem, in reality its an Israel/Gulf problem let them solve it? Isn't that MAGA, America First?.....well America First just became Israel first.

 

Edited June 17, 2025 by changegonnacome

[Gregmal]

11 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

you have remarkable faith in man who has a demonstrated track record of very poor decision making in his personal life, in his business life & in his political career.....this is a guy who just launched a mobile phone network & handset while sitting in the oval office.....need I say more??

No need to say more, we know the general idea of what you’ll say because it all follows the same trajectory. 
 

Trump could try to cure cancer and it would be 

 

It’s a noble attempt by Trump to tackle something that probably isn’t attainable for him

(Half assed opening compliment framed with an undertone of he’s sooo stupid) 

 

But the execution of the project and appointment of cut rate professionals doomed it from the start.

(negatively harp on the execution of the idea, even though what is perceived to be the execution is largely made up of subjectively chosen and consistently anti Trump agenda talking points)

 

In the end this is going to be a massive failure and waste of resources 

(basically make up the outcome again inspired by the same general anti Trump agenda and bash him) 

 

 

And again I’ve already stated my opinion on monetizing public service, but a legit question for some of you, if you could sell presumably $20 phones for $500, or really any sort of product that easily, please with a straight face tell me you wouldn’t lol. You’d be full of shit. So again your comment about demonstrating a “very poor track record” is basically just an opinion, inspired by the same old, same old.

Edited June 17, 2025 by Gregmal

[cubsfan]

14 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

@cubsfan @Gregmal - you have remarkable faith in man who has a demonstrated track record of very poor decision making in his personal life, in his business life & in his political career.....this is a guy who just launched a mobile phone network & handset while sitting in the oval office.....need I say more??....having said all that I'm rooting for a positive outcome to whatever he chooses.......but lets not forget when a dirty bomb goes off in lower Manhattan......that Iran having the bomb in the Middle East is not our problem, in reality its an Israel/Gulf problem let them solve it? Isn't that MAGA, America First?.....well America First just became Israel first.

 

 

@changegonnacome It's the same old bullshit every month now for 10 years.

 

"The walls are closing in on Trump"

 

He'll never recover, blah, blah, blah

[Gregmal]

11 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

@changegonnacome It's the same old bullshit every month now for 10 years.

 

"The walls are closing in on Trump"

 

He'll never recover, blah, blah, blah

Yup. And yeah it’s fun quarreling with our friends on the board, but more generally, this is exactly why nothing these people say matters anymore. They’ve spent nearly a decade obsessing over something that doesn’t really matter and yet despite all the time and attention, have been totally wrong like 85% of the time and honestly haven’t even slightly been able to demonstrate even seeing things in a manner that resembles reality. Their opinions on the subject aren’t just worthless, they’re basically contras.

[cwericb]

5 hours ago, whiskybravo said:

Just to set the record straight.  John Kerry was the swift boat commander in Vietnam.  Romney received five deferrals and when those ran out his draft number was 300.  Never served.  Full respect for John McCain.

 

My bad, I knew better. I meant John Kerry.

[Spekulatius]

Why not continue bombing all the Iranian military installations to smitherines while Israel airforce has free reign? Peace deal can come later. A regime change would be great, but is a tough bet.
 

Trump is just a bystander here and it doesn’t matter what he says.

[changegonnacome]

 

TDS?....or maybe they are just consistent with America First?

[cwericb]

4 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

there used to be economic cycles called "recessions" that occurred every now and then when politicians weren't managing policy and expectations down to the millisecond.  

 

Am I the only one concerned about the fact that it has been a while since we had any sort of real recession. Specifically the rule of thumb, if I remember correctly was "the longer the time between recessions, the worse they are" and it has been a while. We had a brief "covid' recession in 2020, but before that wasn't it during the financial crises? 

[LC]

@cwericb You're not the only one. But then again, the economy has become more of the "haves vs have-nots"

 

There's no recession for the middle/upper middle class because this class is shrinking. The economy has become bifurcated, and rather than a recession for all economic participants, instead the effects are spread over time and over the bottom quintiles via things like reduced quality of life, reduced real wages, reduced proportion of overall wealth owned, etc. etc...

 

On the plus - we have a more interconnected global economy which further spreads shocks out. 

 

At least that's my armchair explanation. 

Edited June 17, 2025 by LC

[Spekulatius]

5 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

@Blake some of us don't have to imagine what would happen to our economy if long term rates got up to 7%.  We lived through it.  Yawn.

To be fair- we lived going from 10% to 7% , which is different than going from 4.5% to 7%. Path dependence matters in finance.

 

On the other hand many people predicted that going from 2% to 5% would collapse the financial system but that clearly didn’t happen.

@Blake Hampton likely will see a ~50% decline in equity markets at least once in his investing carrier.

 

I have seen two and I survived the  87 crash, the 90’s crash, 98 Asian crisis and others I don’t even recall. The first one I had little money in the game but enough that it hurt (1990 specifically). So I think Blake I’ll survive a ~50% crash as well. It’s part of the game just like bull markets.

 

Edited June 17, 2025 by Spekulatius

[73 Reds]

6 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

To be fair- we lived going from 10% to 7% , which is different than going from 4.5% to 7%. Path dependence matters in finance.

 

On the other hand many people predicted that going from 2% to 5% would collapse the financial system but that clearly didn’t happen.

@Blake Hampton likely will see a ~50% decline in equity markets at least once in his investing carrier.

 

I have seen two and I survived the  87 crash, the 90’s crash, 98 Asian crisis and others I don’t even recall. The first one I had little money in the game but enough that it hurt (1990 specifically). So I think Blake I’ll survive a ~50% crash as well. It’s part of the game just like bull markets.

 

Rates were a lot higher than 10% in my investment lifetime:  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/data/WGS30YR

 

 

[dwy000]

3 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

Rates were a lot higher than 10% in my investment lifetime:  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/data/WGS30YR

 

 

I think the big "this time is different" argument is that last time rates were double digits the Debt/GDP ratio was under 50%.  Its now 125%.  So the impact of higher interest costs is 2.5x (relative to GDP).  

[73 Reds]

2 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

I think the big "this time is different" argument is that last time rates were double digits the Debt/GDP ratio was under 50%.  Its now 125%.  So the impact of higher interest costs is 2.5x (relative to GDP).  

I mean you can parse statistics and individual metrics all day long just like the argument that the poor are falling further and further behind, but the operative question is what qualifies as poor and whether today's poor are in many cases better off than yesterday's middle class.  Today's GDP is far more monumental and generative than the GDP of 30 or 40 years ago and arguably can support a much higher debt load.

[dwy000]

26 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

I mean you can parse statistics and individual metrics all day long just like the argument that the poor are falling further and further behind, but the operative question is what qualifies as poor and whether today's poor are in many cases better off than yesterday's middle class.  Today's GDP is far more monumental and generative than the GDP of 30 or 40 years ago and arguably can support a much higher debt load.

The point i was trying to say was that a 1% increase in interest rates will now have 2.5x the impact on budgets than it would a couple of decades ago.  I agree a 2% deficit is less meaningful now than with a lower and less diverse GDP.  But now, a relatively small change in interest rates can have a huge impact on budgets and deficits (and therefore spending on everything else). 

[Blake Hampton]

Average American POV:

 

[Red Lion]

1 hour ago, cwericb said:

 

Am I the only one concerned about the fact that it has been a while since we had any sort of real recession. Specifically the rule of thumb, if I remember correctly was "the longer the time between recessions, the worse they are" and it has been a while. We had a brief "covid' recession in 2020, but before that wasn't it during the financial crises? 

 

I've been feeling like this for a few years actually, although I'm not sure it's a rational viewpoint or just an extension of the gambler's fallacy. I have acted on this by putting a large percentage of my assets into stable real estate assets with relatively low (50-60%) LTV and a couple unencumbered. If (when) we have a deep GFC type event I'll definitely get taken to the woodshed, but hopefully won't have to capitulate and sell low. 

 

As @Spekulatius mentions we are bound to see another 50% drawdown in equity markets SOMETIME in an investing career, probably another 30%+ drawdown in residential real estate markets sometime as well. And probably long term bond markets too for that matter.

 

Short of market timing based on macro/headline following analysis, it seems like the best way to create wealth for the long run is to make sure you're invested in businesses that earn a high return on their own capital and have a competitive moat, while being mindful of asset/liability imbalances (e.g. margin calls, balloon debt payments, insufficient working capital/liquidity). And probably one of the better ways to preserve wealth for the long run too, along with investment real estate.

[John Hjorth]

2 hours ago, cwericb said:

Am I the only one concerned about the fact that it has been a while since we had any sort of real recession. Specifically the rule of thumb, if I remember correctly was "the longer the time between recessions, the worse they are" and it has been a while. We had a brief "covid' recession in 2020, but before that wasn't it during the financial crises? 

 

The macro conditions varies materially, maybe even wildly, dependent on where [which geographical place] you look, Eric [ @cwericb ].

 

My personal experience here on CofB&F is that North American investors in general [not all][and for some good reasons, I may say] focus on North America, while there may also be green grass somewhere else.

Edited June 17, 2025 by John Hjorth

[Red Lion]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

Why not continue bombing all the Iranian military installations to smitherines while Israel airforce has free reign? Peace deal can come later. A regime change would be great, but is a tough bet.
 

Trump is just a bystander here and it doesn’t matter what he says.

+1

[John Hjorth]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

Why not continue bombing all the Iranian military installations to smitherines while Israel airforce has free reign? Peace deal can come later. A regime change would be great, but is a tough bet.
 

Trump is just a bystander here and it doesn’t matter what he says.

 

1 minute ago, Red Lion said:

+1

 

Parts of the Iranian Nuclear Program is going on deep down under the surface of the Earth. Only USA has the military means to take these installations out, certainly not Israel by now.

 

And knowhow is very difficult to remove from the surface of the Earth by the use of bombs.

[Gregmal]

Nah. Hasn’t Australia gone like 40 years without one? The way every aspect of the economy seems caressed and micro managed from private sector to public, think it just entails being in a new era.

 

Either way, most Americans wake up each morning and look to better their situation. That force, in and of itself I believe is quite powerful and underrated by many.

Edited June 17, 2025 by Gregmal

[73 Reds]

3 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

 

Parts of the Iranian Nuclear Program is going on deep down under the surface of the Earth. Only USA has the military means to take these installations out, certainly not Israel by now.

 

And knowhow is very difficult to remove from the surface of the Earth by the use of bombs.

John, I think that is the prevailing assumption for destroying these installations by air.  But can they be taken out on (under) the ground in other ways?

[John Hjorth]

6 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

John, I think that is the prevailing assumption for destroying these installations by air.  But can they be taken out on (under) the ground in other ways?

 

I don't know, @73 Reds,

 

I speculate a sting operation into tunnels in mountains performed by highly skilled soldiers would likely be close to a suicide mission, even for a very competent team involved.

 

Low probability for highly skilled and esteemed soldiers to come home again to their respective families from such mission.

 

And to me, personally, that's actually a facet of Mr. Trump I appreciate dearly and deeply, that he in such cases and situations weigh in the risk of loss of lives, including the loss of lives of civilians, very consciously.

 

In fact, in that respect, I really admire him for it. I can't recall when and what, but he called for a strike in the area at some time in point last time he was POTUS, and his gut feeling caused him to call it off again, after having initiated it, by giving the order, planes already in the air and all that.

 

That really calls for respect.

[Sweet]

On a different note.  Today, the UK parliament voted to decriminalise abortions up until birth.
 

This change does not mean medical professional can abort a baby after 24 weeks, the legal limit remains the same, but it does mean if someone decides to do a ‘back street’ abortion on a 40 week baby they won’t be prosecuted.

 

One of our MPs said of women who kill their baby after 24 weeks of pregnancy that “these women need care and support, and not criminalisation".

 

It’s another example of the politics of denigrating the rights of one group of people so as spare the feelings, or shield from consequence, people of another group.  I don’t know how anyone can think this is right.  I am ashamed to call myself a British person tonight, our country is a disgrace, as are all those who voted for this - fuck them.

 

Edited June 17, 2025 by Sweet

[John Hjorth]

3 minutes ago, Sweet said:

On a different note.  Today, the UK parliament voted to decriminalise abortions up until birth.
 

This change does not mean medical professional can abort a baby after 24 weeks, the legal limit remains the same, but it does mean if someone decides to do a ‘back street’ abortion on 40 week baby they won’t be prosecuted.

 

One of our MPs said of women who kill their baby after 24 weeks of pregnancy that “these women need care and support, and not criminalisation".

 

It’s another example of the politics of feeling.  I don’t know how anyone can think this is right.  I am ashamed to call myself a British person tonight, our country is a disgrace, as are all those who voted for this.

 

I think I understand your post, @Sweet,

 

But the whole British situation in that regard simply roots much deeper. Why do some British women get into such situation? The answer to that question is where to begin.