This Piece of Shit is Back At It Again

[Gregmal]

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/26/jeremy-grantham-says-this-is-the-most-expensive-market-in-american-history.html

[Spooky]

Doomers gotta doom.

[Parsad]

He'll be right sooner or later!  Although I'm not sure the "piece of shit" comment is warranted.  He's just stating his belief...no different than the bulls or bears...or Blake and Cubs!

 

Cheers!

[Saluki]

He is right about the premise, but maybe not about the conclusion. Okay, the stock market is overpriced. So put your money somewhere else. Where? Gold and Silver are at all time highs. Buy a house? That's expensive everywhere. Park it in bonds? Those yields are really low. 

 

If you really believe the market is overpriced, and that's a big if, you could add up all your long positions and short S&P index futures in the same amount. That way, you avoided the "buy VTSX and Chill" strategy, and if your stocks crash along with the market, you will still do okay if they don't crash as much as the market. It's the equivalent of that old joke about the two guys who see a bear in the woods and one guy says "run". The punchline is that "I can't outrun the bear, but I can outrun you." 

[Jay Rent]

If you listened to him in 2022 or those who quoted him.   The piece of shit commit is warranted.  

[Gregmal]

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

He'll be right sooner or later!  Although I'm not sure the "piece of shit" comment is warranted.  He's just stating his belief...no different than the bulls or bears...or Blake and Cubs!

 

Cheers!

No, but this guy, masquerading around as a professional and as a “successful investor” feeds people this bullshit constantly. His performance is disgraceful, as is the relentless marketing of his “theme scheme”. Anybody who’s taken this guy seriously has likely been harmed financially. 

Edited 13 hours ago by Gregmal

[Parsad]

1 hour ago, Jay Rent said:

If you listened to him in 2022 or those who quoted him.   The piece of shit commit is warranted.  

 

41 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

No, but this guy, masquerading around as a professional and as a “successful investor” feeds people this bullshit constantly. His performance is disgraceful, as is the relentless marketing of his “theme scheme”. Anybody who’s taken this guy seriously has likely been harmed financially. 

 

There's millions of these guys.  The whole industry is built on institutional analysis, sales and service fees.  It's what gives us an advantage over everyone else because of this.

 

My investment partner said something really accurate this morning while we were discussing deal negotiations and how there is a real lack of creativity in deal financing.  He said:

 

"Finance guys always think they are the smartest guy in the room...and they just aren't!" 

 

Cheers! 

 

 

[Gregmal]

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

Finance guys always think they are the smartest guy in the room...and they just aren't!" 

Totally. You can always tell the finance guys by the ones whom make money every which way but from the actual investments working out. Fees, marketing, newsletters. That s what I found ironic about all the Elon Musk hate. These guys who are mainly just leeches are pissed that their button push wasn’t successful so they root against, bemoan, and routinely slander a guy who’s created more on any random Tuesday than they will in their entire lives….

[NnnnotSoSmart]

Grantham is certainly a nut job.  His crazy and glaringly unscientific obsession with "climate change" is evidence of it.  

 

A Grantham quote from an interview in 2022: 

 

"It strikes me as utterly trivial and only producible by economists. [...] The guy who got the Nobel Prize for it [William Nordhaus], for his work on climate change — actually he spelled it out. He said, 'Even if there was 10 degrees centigrade, it would only cost something in the range of 10 percent of GDP.' To which I say, 'Dudes, we will be long gone as a species at 10 degrees centigrade.' It is quite obvious at 1.1 [°C] that we are already having trouble. At 2, we will be struggling and societies will fail here, there, and everywhere. At 3, in a sense, forget about it [...] At 10 degrees . . . You cannot find a serious climate scientist who would bet that society, as we know it on a global basis, will still be around at 5 degrees centigrade. I have met a lot of them, and I ask them this question. Not one thinks we have any material chance of a stable society at 5 degrees centigrade." 

https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/jeremy-grantham/

 

In a 2012 Nature commentary, he urged climate scientists: "Be persuasive. Be brave. Be arrested if necessary. This is not only the crisis of your lives — it is also the crisis of our species' existence." He argued understatement is more dangerous than overstatement for this issue. 
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/11/financier-jeremy-granthams-be-brave-advice-to-climate-scientists/

 

 

 

[Parsad]

2 minutes ago, NnnnotSoSmart said:

Grantham is certainly a nut job.  His crazy and glaringly unscientific obsession with "climate change" is evidence of it.  

 

A Grantham quote from an interview in 2022: 

 

"It strikes me as utterly trivial and only producible by economists. [...] The guy who got the Nobel Prize for it [William Nordhaus], for his work on climate change — actually he spelled it out. He said, 'Even if there was 10 degrees centigrade, it would only cost something in the range of 10 percent of GDP.' To which I say, 'Dudes, we will be long gone as a species at 10 degrees centigrade.' It is quite obvious at 1.1 [°C] that we are already having trouble. At 2, we will be struggling and societies will fail here, there, and everywhere. At 3, in a sense, forget about it [...] At 10 degrees . . . You cannot find a serious climate scientist who would bet that society, as we know it on a global basis, will still be around at 5 degrees centigrade. I have met a lot of them, and I ask them this question. Not one thinks we have any material chance of a stable society at 5 degrees centigrade." 

https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/jeremy-grantham/

 

In a 2012 Nature commentary, he urged climate scientists: "Be persuasive. Be brave. Be arrested if necessary. This is not only the crisis of your lives — it is also the crisis of our species' existence." He argued understatement is more dangerous than overstatement for this issue. 
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2012/11/financier-jeremy-granthams-be-brave-advice-to-climate-scientists/

 

 

 

 

He's not entirely wrong.  If we can't even protect the environment ideally suited for us because we are essentially parasites, what makes us think travelling deca-millions of miles to Mars is a good idea?  Unlike our favorite sci-fi films, It's likely society will be wiped out before we form even a proper base colony on any planet with long-term potential for the survival of the human species!  AI/robotics will be humanity's legacy in terms of remembering that the human species even existed and the more likely colonizer of other worlds!  Cheers!

[LC]

I was so excited to see who would be the subject of this thread title, I was not disappointed!

[NnnnotSoSmart]

41 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

He's not entirely wrong.  If we can't even protect the environment ideally suited for us because we are essentially parasites, what makes us think travelling deca-millions of miles to Mars is a good idea?  Unlike our favorite sci-fi films, It's likely society will be wiped out before we form even a proper base colony on any planet with long-term potential for the survival of the human species!  AI/robotics will be humanity's legacy in terms of remembering that the human species even existed and the more likely colonizer of other worlds!  Cheers!

OK, so humans can ultimately live on Mars, but they can't live on an earth that is 5-10 deg C warmer?  Me thinks you're underestimating humans.

But you're right, the robots would likely help us survive...if they chose to keep us around.  

 

Grok:

 

An Earth that is 10∘C (18∘F) hotter than pre-industrial levels represents an extreme climate shift, akin to the Early Eocene period 50 million years ago. At this temperature, the equatorial and tropical zones would experience frequent, lethal "wet-bulb" temperatures (where heat and humidity make it physically impossible for the human body to cool itself through sweat), rendering the mid-latitudes largely uninhabitable for unprotected mammals.

 

Furthermore, the complete melting of global ice sheets would raise sea levels by over 200 feet, entirely reshaping the continents.

For humans to survive in significant numbers, civilization would have to structurally adapt. Here are three realistic scientific scenarios for how humanity could live on such an Earth:

Scenario 1: The Polar Exodus (The Circumpolar Civilization)

In this scenario, humanity undergoes a massive geographical migration, abandoning the tropics, subtropics, and traditional mid-latitudes (like the US, Southern Europe, and Central China) to aggregate entirely around the Arctic and Antarctic circles.

• The Environment: The poles, once icy wastes, transform into the planet's new temperate zones, with average annual temperatures resembling modern-day France or New England (10∘C to 15∘C). The Arctic Ocean becomes a ice-free, bustling Mediterranean-like sea.

• Human Life: Humanity builds high-density, highly urbanized megacities across northern Canada, Siberia, Scandinavia, Greenland, and the newly exposed bedrock of Antarctica.

• Agriculture & Economy: Because standard topsoil takes millennia to form, agriculture relies heavily on indoor vertical farming and massive hydroponic facilities. Outdoor farming is limited to specialized, fast-growing crops that can survive the intense, 24-hour sunlight of polar summers. The global economy centers around maritime trade across the open Arctic and the extraction of resources long buried under ice sheets.

Scenario 2: The Subterranean & Nocturnal Shift (The Sub-Surface Niches)

In regions closer to the equator where geopolitical or structural reasons prevent migration, humans adapt by moving underground, shifting the entire rhythm of human life away from the blisteringly hot surface.

• The Environment: Surface temperatures regularly exceed 50∘C (122∘F), with hyper-humid coastal zones triggering fatal wet-bulb events during the day. The surface becomes a hostile desert or an ultra-dense, chaotic jungle populated only by specialized, heat-tolerant reptiles, insects, and flora.

• Human Life: Civilizations carve out massive, interconnected underground subterranean cities, leveraging the earth's natural thermal insulation to maintain manageable baseload temperatures. Surface travel, heavy industry, and automated maintenance are conducted almost exclusively at night, when temperatures drop to survivable—though still oppressive—levels.

• Infrastructure: Humans become an indoor, technologically insulated species. Power is generated heavily via surface solar arrays (which thrive in cloudless desert belts) and routed downward to drive massive cooling, water-desalination, and air-filtration networks.

Scenario 3: The Automated "Ecomodernist" Enclaves (The Controlled Biospheres)

Rather than moving underground or migrating to the poles, humanity uses hyper-advanced engineering to isolate itself from the environment, constructing closed-loop, climate-controlled hyper-cities.

• The Environment: The planet's climate is unstable, characterized by hyper-canes (extreme category-5+ hurricanes fueled by ultra-warm oceans), massive dust storms, and unpredictable weather systems that destroy traditional infrastructure.

• Human Life: Humans live inside heavily fortified, dome-covered megastructures or sealed architectural enclaves. These cities operate like permanent space colonies on Earth, dynamically regulating internal temperature, humidity, and atmospheric composition.

• The Technological Lifecycle: Human survival depends entirely on automated AI systems, advanced robotics, and nuclear or fusion power to maintain the colossal energy grids required for life support. Raw materials are gathered from the harsh outside world via automated drone fleets, and food production is entirely synthesized in industrial lab facilities (cellular agriculture, bioreactors, and synthetic protein generation), severing humanity's reliance on the outdoor biosphere.

[John Hjorth]

8 hours ago, Parsad said:

He'll be right sooner or later!  Although I'm not sure the "piece of shit" comment is warranted.  He's just stating his belief...no different than the bulls or bears...or Blake and Cubs!

 

Cheers!

 

1 hour ago, LC said:

I was so excited to see who would be the subject of this thread title, I was not disappointed!

 

 - Clickbait by Greg [ @Gregmal ] 

[Spekulatius]

He is wrong because not everything is overpriced . Lot’s of cheap stocks are around and I would  argue now more than ever. it should be his job to find them and benefit from them rather then bemoaning the fact that the fact that SPCX trades at 100x earnings. He could have even benefitted from SPCX by getting an IPO allocation and selling them to a sucker (almost a no brainer trade if you follow the social media landscape). Even some of the Mag 7 aren’t expensive any more and trade at fair prices.

 

He does this because he had branded himself as a “value investor” so he gets his TV appearances and other people’s money despite his return sucking. He can make a nice living off that, better then most of us, I give him that.

[thowed]

Irony is that the GMO Quality Fund (& ETF) is actually one of the better mutual funds out there - has pretty consistently outperformed S&P500 which few funds do.

 

And is basically a tracker but with some bad stuff taken out.

[73 Reds]

13 hours ago, Saluki said:

He is right about the premise, but maybe not about the conclusion. Okay, the stock market is overpriced. So put your money somewhere else. Where? Gold and Silver are at all time highs. Buy a house? That's expensive everywhere. Park it in bonds? Those yields are really low. 

 

If you really believe the market is overpriced, and that's a big if, you could add up all your long positions and short S&P index futures in the same amount. That way, you avoided the "buy VTSX and Chill" strategy, and if your stocks crash along with the market, you will still do okay if they don't crash as much as the market. It's the equivalent of that old joke about the two guys who see a bear in the woods and one guy says "run". The punchline is that "I can't outrun the bear, but I can outrun you." 

Isn't the market overpriced most of the time?  So what?  Can't ever remember the overall market valuation ever affecting even one personal investment decision.