President-Elect Trump trades

[Buckeye]

10 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

@rkbagang I, for one am glad you started the thread, for no other reason than reading the various arguments - both for and against, and the rationale behind each.  I do find it a bit perplexing that there would be so many proponents on a value-oriented investment board and have a hard time reconciling being an investor in Berkshire/Fairfax and also an owner of BTC.  The thought process behind owning each is just so different.

[73 Reds]

1 minute ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

 

To the man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. 

 

Having more tools means you can use the appropriate tool for the job. 

 

Valuing BTC is more akin to valuing commodities/currencies and cash flows aren't really part of the equation. Utilizing tools like stock-to-flow and theories around network valuations and growth lends themselves to BTC valuation in a significantly better way than tools intended to analyze as businesses. 

 

And by those valuation metrics, Bitcoin was stupidly undervalued at the start of this year based on modeled growth and the known supply shock. With a longer term perspective, BTC is still probably stupidly cheap when we look back from 5-years, but like all investments it becomes less compelling and more risky the higher the price gets. 

The part I have a problem with is currencies can be valued relative to other currencies and also on the basis of the strength/weakness of their issuing countries.   I honestly have no way of knowing what a fair price, if any would be for BTC. 

[dealraker]

I can see we all agree on this topic.  Sort of like religion...that by the end of the discussion turned conflict every individual has a far different view (than any other person)...enough to fight over.

 

We have a market!

 

Part of the issue with all our "disagreements" is likely because none of us are 100% Tesla.   The teeth grinding can be heard throughout the COBF universe.  

[Buckeye]

28 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Yup, not only do we have recordings and admissions from people within the prosecutors office stating that no one in the country besides Trump would've had these charges brought against them, but you also have concrete evidence, via voting results, that confirm Trump certainly didnt get a fair trials amongst his "peers"...

Greg, I HIGHLY respect your opinion and truly appreciate all of your wonderful contributions to this board.  Thank you very much for taking the time to try to inform people like me.  Can you please help me understand your post, assuming we do "have recordings and admissions from people within the prosecutors office stating that no one in the country besides Trump would've had these charges brought against them." Can we acknowledge that many other people in this country wouldn't have (or have had) these charges brought against them because none of them are (or were) running for President of the United States, while they committed these crimes?  And then you pivot to say that the voting results offer you concrete evidence that Trump did not break the law?   So because people overwhelmingly voted to put Trump back in office is all the evidence we need that he never committed a crime?

 

Edited Monday at 06:20 PM by Buckeye

[Gregmal]

26 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

Greg, I HIGHLY respect your opinion and truly appreciate all of your wonderful contributions to this board.  Thank you very much for taking the time to try to inform people like me.  Can you please help me understand your post, assuming we do "have recordings and admissions from people within the prosecutors office stating that no one in the country besides Trump would've had these charges brought against them." Can we acknowledge that many other people in this country wouldn't have (or have had) these charges brought against them because none of them are (or were) running for President of the United States, while they committed these crimes?  And then you pivot to say that the voting results offer you concrete evidence that Trump did not break the law?   So because people overwhelmingly voted to put Trump back in office is all the evidence we need that he never committed a crime?

 

I 100% agree, that if he werent running, it wouldnt have occurred. So to me...labelling him "convicted" or "a felon" as a result of something clearly politically motivated, eliminates any importance in the label to me as its simply an attempt to manipulate the voter. If Trump were convicted in 1997....that would have impact to me. The second we start letting the puppet masters influence us with such blatant theatrics....we're done. 

 

On the later....no what I mean is you look at NYC, or the most glaring example...the DC voting district, which I didnt even check this election, but say in 2020, DC voted for Biden at like a 91% clip. Manhattan was like 85%+ if not higher for Biden. This is no way shape or form, especially in the light of the political dynamic....represents giving someone a fair trial by a jury of their peers.....its a circus court in a hostile territory occupied by your enemies, look at the populous, look at the elected officials, look at the appointed judges. Heck one of the judges in the Trump case didnt even know, or pretended not to know the difference between an appraisal value of a property and a tax assessed value. It was staggering. If you wanted to relocate the trial, which is a fairly common occurrence in many cases, in order to assure a fair trial....then maybe it has more merit. But conducting sham trials, under these pretenses, and then using the "label" which is the result of such, as an attempt to manipulate people come voting time....GTFOH. 

Edited Monday at 06:45 PM by Gregmal

[rkbabang]

43 minutes ago, dealraker said:

I can see we all agree on this topic.  Sort of like religion...that by the end of the discussion turned conflict every individual has a far different view (than any other person)...enough to fight over.

 

We have a market!

 

Part of the issue with all our "disagreements" is likely because none of us are 100% Tesla.   The teeth grinding can be heard throughout the COBF universe.  

 

 

I'm zero percent TSLA.  I made a huge mistake selling it.  I bought 100 shares in ~2015, so I probably paid $20-30K for it (I'm too lazy to look it up), and said I was going to hold them forever, then ended up selling for about a double.  That would be 1500 shares right now after the 2 splits worth over $500K.

[73 Reds]

10 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I 100% agree, that if he werent running, it wouldnt have occurred. So to me...labelling him "convicted" or "a felon" as a result of something clearly politically motivated, eliminates any importance in the label to me as its simply an attempt to manipulate the voter. If Trump were convicted in 1997....that would have impact to me. The second we start letting the puppet masters influence us with such blatant theatrics....we're done. 

 

On the later....no what I mean is you look at NYC, or the most glaring example...the DC voting district, which I didnt even check this election, but say in 2020, DC voted for Biden at like a 91% clip. Manhattan was like 85%+ if not higher for Biden. This is no way shape or form, especially in the light of the political dynamic....represents giving someone a fair trial by a jury of their peers.....its a circus court in a hostile territory occupied by your enemies, look at the populous, look at the elected officials, look at the appointed judges. Heck one of the judges in the Trump case didnt even know, or pretended not to know the difference between an appraisal value of a property and a tax assessed value. It was staggering. If you wanted to relocate the trial, which is a fairly common occurrence in many cases, in order to assure a fair trial....then maybe it has more merit. But conducting sham trials, under these pretenses, and then using the "label" which is the result of such, as an attempt to manipulate people come voting time....GTFOH. 

+1  Otherwise we are no better than a banana republic.

[Buckeye]

36 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I 100% agree, that if he werent running, it wouldnt have occurred. So to me...labelling him "convicted" or "a felon" as a result of something clearly politically motivated, eliminates any importance in the label to me as its simply an attempt to manipulate the voter. If Trump were convicted in 1997....that would have impact to me. The second we start letting the puppet masters influence us with such blatant theatrics....we're done. 

 

On the later....no what I mean is you look at NYC, or the most glaring example...the DC voting district, which I didnt even check this election, but say in 2020, DC voted for Biden at like a 91% clip. Manhattan was like 85%+ if not higher for Biden. This is no way shape or form, especially in the light of the political dynamic....represents giving someone a fair trial by a jury of their peers.....its a circus court in a hostile territory occupied by your enemies, look at the populous, look at the elected officials, look at the appointed judges. Heck one of the judges in the Trump case didnt even know, or pretended not to know the difference between an appraisal value of a property and a tax assessed value. It was staggering. If you wanted to relocate the trial, which is a fairly common occurrence in many cases, in order to assure a fair trial....then maybe it has more merit. But conducting sham trials, under these pretenses, and then using the "label" which is the result of such, as an attempt to manipulate people come voting time....GTFOH. 

Thank you for your reply Greg.  Your posts are usually so concise that I was surprised by the presence of a little muddying.  

 

I think what it comes down to me is, this party of "law and order" as they like to refer to themsleves, seems to see no grey area when it comes applying that law to Black and Brown people, but when it's an old white dude who may have run afoul of the law, there is a lot or "Yea, but"'s going on. 

 

Do you think if we replaced all of the "Trumps" in this discussion, with "Obamas," that you and any of the other members posting on this topic would feel the same way?  To the point that you would continue to argue for Obama?   

Edited Monday at 07:22 PM by Buckeye

[Buckeye]

7 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

+1  Otherwise we are no better than a banana republic.

Red, do you think Trump follows the law?

[Spekulatius]

Dogecoin is rallying too, if anyone cares.

[Buckeye]

5 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

Dogecoin is rallying too, if anyone cares.

Of course is it, because when Elon takes over the Dept. Of Government Efficiency (DOGE) (wink wink) the Crypto bros will use that as a reason for more people to get in the boat.  It spells DOGE!!  That has to mean something;)  Elon knows!

Edited Monday at 07:11 PM by Buckeye

[gfp]

2 hours ago, james22 said:

 

You'd want to own it as a store of value.

 

 

Jeez, you guy's aren't even wrong.

 

I'm just picturing James engaging in this argument, pausing for a second to check is brokerage account, up 7 figures on the day, OK, back to the debate...

[73 Reds]

9 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

Red, do you think Trump follows the law?

Irrelevant question, but my answer would be the same for any big-name politician.

[Buckeye]

9 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

Irrelevant question, but my answer would be the same for any big-name politician.

So what's your answer?

[rkbabang]

3 hours ago, Buckeye said:

How am I completely delusional RKBA?  Can you please expound on that comment? 

 

I am not saying in any way that you are wrong for owning Bitcoin or for posting about it.  You understand that, correct?  And that is great to hear that you have made a lot of money for yourself with Bitcoin.  My original question/point was...what makes the price of Bitcoin to go up?  Is is solely from getting more people of adopt the use of Crypto?  If so, then you (and any other forum member who owns Bitcoin) have a vested interest in getting more people in the boat.  Ans sure, ok maybe you're not doing that here, right now, but in the end all roads lead to getting more people into the boat.    

 

 

My point was that even in 2017 the thought that I could move the price of Bitcoin by posting here was too ridiculous to be taken seriously, and today it is beyond absurd to think anyone here has anything to gain by writing posts on the internet here or elsewhere about Bitcoin.   If/when bitcoin succeeds it will be because billions of people, millions of institutions, and hundreds of governments all want to own it.  It will not be because of CoBF posts. The very notion is delusional.

 

[Junior R]

now with crypto flying someone on Donald Trumps team will try to figure out a way to bring it back down as this would cause more people to believe in Crypto VS Fiat....He has already got the votes so time will tell

 

btw bitcoin just touch 86 k usd lol

[73 Reds]

7 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

So what's your answer?

Doesn't matter.  The issue is selective, politically-motivated prosecution.  

[rkbabang]

3 hours ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

Bitcoin isn't a Trump trade. It has done this every 4 years. It did it last when Biden was elected. And last when Trump was elected. And before that? When Obama got his second term. 

 

It doesn't matter who is in the White House - sound money wins over unsound money. 

 

+1.  Bitcoin would have rallied in the next 12 months regardless of who won this election.  So I disagree with the very premise of this discussion in this thread that it is a "Trump Trade".

 

[Gregmal]

1 hour ago, Buckeye said:

Do you think if we replaced all of the "Trumps" in this discussion, with "Obamas," that you and any of the other members posting on this topic would feel the same way?  To the point that you would continue to argue for Obama? 

I would feel the same if the timeline was the same. Trump had no issues when he was friends with the Clintons and high society NY Democrats. Go back to Comedy Centrals Roast of Donald Trump...the whole audience is his liberal friends, even big time haters like Chrissy Teigen and John Legend. 

 

I feel the same is true with Hunter Biden. He was protected because he was part of the elite...and then when he became expendable...around the time the party started souring on Joe, the mad rush to prosecute and convict him was almost entirely politically driven. Law and order is important, but most of this resembles the crap we detest in Iran and Russia. 

[Vish_ram]

I think @Buckeye brings a great point that I never gave much credit before. 

 

The vigor, vitality and cultishness of BTC owners. Their steady influence over others and bringing more and more evangelists into the fold. This is like religion. Now in the end, even the skeptics will end up inadvertently owning it when it becomes part of indices. 

 

The greatest ponzi ever. In fact everything that involves human is a ponzi. You need more folks to join to make it work. Costco is a ponzi, the valuation inherently assumes that the kid born today will shop there after 25 years. So is soc sec, medicare, all corp etc.

[73 Reds]

6 minutes ago, Vish_ram said:

I think @Buckeye brings a great point that I never gave much credit before. 

 

The vigor, vitality and cultishness of BTC owners. Their steady influence over others and bringing more and more evangelists into the fold. This is like religion. Now in the end, even the skeptics will end up inadvertently owning it when it becomes part of indices. 

 

The greatest ponzi ever. In fact everything that involves human is a ponzi. You need more folks to join to make it work. Costco is a ponzi, the valuation inherently assumes that the kid born today will shop there after 25 years. So is soc sec, medicare, all corp etc.

But everything is not a ponzi scheme.  When you purchase an asset and don't care about the subsequent price, but rather the return you get in the form of distributions and/or tangible/liquidation value, how is that a ponzi?

[dealraker]

What I don't get......

 

I came here to get some umph in my investing (which honestly I've gotten a boat load of but still..) and yet not a one of you brow beat this old codger, not one of you got in my face screaming at me that not only was Trump gunna win but that Tesla was the most under-valued stock market cap wise on the planet.  I just had to watch Dan Ives on CNBC tell me that Trump would "unlock" another trillion in market cap for Tesla  -------- and billions almost trillions ago not one of you punched ole deal in the face 'bout buyin' the damn stock.

 

Yea...not one of you!  I swear to God I'm never gunna forgive you guys!  And it was me, little ole foggy brained stumbling in the sand (you guys did see the Biden video...right?) ancient man me--- like the ex pres --- that had to do the BEAT DOWN work for you on Dollar General.  My God dudes....why was I having to do that when you younguns should have been hollerin' TESLA.

 

Yawl liked DOLLAR and not TESLA?   What the hell?????????

 

Come on guys stop arguing about Teflon Trump, ain't nothin' takin' him down (by the way Greg I think Trump is the mainstream/establishment now, the old game is history) and Elon was by far.....by leaps and bounds....running circles around ALL of us while we debated..........DOLLAR GENERAL!?!?    Oh my God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

Edited Monday at 08:55 PM by dealraker

[Buckeye]

39 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I would feel the same if the timeline was the same. Trump had no issues when he was friends with the Clintons and high society NY Democrats. Go back to Comedy Centrals Roast of Donald Trump...the whole audience is his liberal friends, even big time haters like Chrissy Teigen and John Legend. 

 

I feel the same is true with Hunter Biden. He was protected because he was part of the elite...and then when he became expendable...around the time the party started souring on Joe, the mad rush to prosecute and convict him was almost entirely politically driven. Law and order is important, but most of this resembles the crap we detest in Iran and Russia. 

Thank you for your reply.  I understand your point, it just seems that once Trump ran for president, the bar needs to be set a little higher.  Maybe that is just my values speaking.  

 

I'll try a metaphor here that may land or not, but it's almost like pro baseball players (sorry to drag them into this:).  It seems pretty clear that most of them (maybe all?) are using steroids or some type of performance enhancing drug.  And while illegal, most aren't punished for it.  But when Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and Barry Bonds (was that the three?) are about to break the great Hank Aaron's home run record, people were right to be more scrupulous about their behvoirs.

 

When Donald Trump was a slum lord/landlord getting roasted on Comedy Central, no one cared about what he did or was doing.  Because why should they?  But as soon as he throws hit hat in the ring to lead the free world, the level of scrutiny increases.  Should it not?   

[Junior R]

5 minutes ago, dealraker said:

What I don't get......

 

I came here to get some umph in my investing (which honestly I've gotten a boat load of but still..) and yet not a one of you brow beat this old codger, not one of you got in my face screaming at me that not only was Trump gunna win but that Tesla was the most under-valued stock market cap wise on the planet.  I just had to watch Dan Ives on CNBC tell me that Trump would "unlock" another trillion in market cap for Tesla  -------- and billions almost trillions ago not one of you punched ole deal in the face 'bout buyin' the damn stock.

 

Yea...not one of you!  I swear to God I'm never gunna forgive you guys!  And it was me, little ole foggy brained stumbling in the sand (you guys did see the Biden video...right?) ancient man me--- like the ex pres --- that had to do the BEAT DOWN work for you on Dollar General.  My God dudes....why was I having to do that when you younguns should have been hollerin' TESLA.

 

Yawl liked DOLLAR and not TESLA?   What the hell?????????

 

Come on guys stop arguing about Teflon Trump, ain't nothin' takin' him down (by the way Greg I think Trump is the mainstream/establishment now, the old game is history) and Elon was by far.....by leaps and bounds....running circles around ALL of us while we debated..........DOLLAR GENERAL!?!?    Oh my God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

lol Dan Ives gives any tech stock a high valuation...Anyone old enough to know if he gave similar valuations during 2000?

[james22]

1 hour ago, gfp said:

I'm just picturing James engaging in this argument, pausing for a second to check is brokerage account, up 7 figures on the day, OK, back to the debate...

 

*checks*

 

+$1,227,383

 

OK, anyone want to answer:

 

3 hours ago, james22 said:

If given the choice of what money to accept, people will accept the money they believe to be of highest long-term value, and not accept what they believe to be of low long-term value. If not given the choice and required to accept all money, good and bad, they will tend to keep the money of greater perceived value in their own possession and pass the bad money to others.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_law

 

Where's the payment?

 

Bitcoin adoption will happen.

 

And it won't be because of any table pounding of mine.