Down goes the Dow

danube steak wrote:

Clamour wrote:

He's not a troll. It's understandable that you think that because what he says is so stupid you think he just has to be a troll, but no, he's not. He's just stupid. I mean really stupid.

I don't really think he is really stupid, in fact I think he is pretty smart But I think he has been hijacked by the crap that Hussmann is feeding his minions. If Igy took a step back and saw what crap the Hussman funds and Hussman himself he would realize that it is all junk. Just a load of crap. Igy snap out of it. Hussman is the biggest conman ever. he charges 1.23% on something that is just junk.

You are incorrect if you think 1.23% is a high fee. Furthermore, index funds have low expenses because NO ONE is researching which stocks to buy. Now one can argue that is a good thing, and at times it is. Just not now, when everyone is buying exactly the same thing, with zero discretion applied.

You may not like Hussman’s message, but he is very free with his views, and admits his failures. He is vey liberal if you think my market views are influenced by some Trump related conspiracy thing.

danube steak wrote:

Clamour wrote:

He's not a troll. It's understandable that you think that because what he says is so stupid you think he just has to be a troll, but no, he's not. He's just stupid. I mean really stupid.

I don't really think he is really stupid, in fact I think he is pretty smart But I think he has been hijacked by the crap that Hussmann is feeding his minions. If Igy took a step back and saw what crap the Hussman funds and Hussman himself he would realize that it is all junk. Just a load of crap. Igy snap out of it. Hussman is the biggest conman ever. he charges 1.23% on something that is just junk.

No, it’s stupid and purposely so because he is trolling. Those who have been around here for awhile remember when the Real Igy said goodbye because someone was impersonating him. The Real Igy is gone, but his impersonator is still here.

If you need more convincing, keep in mind that this “Igy” claims to have been a financial advisor. Anyone who has read his “advice” knows that cannot be true. And he has bragged about retiring while owing money on his home on the golf course (he doesn’t golf) and also on his his fancy car which he only used to commute to work. What legitimate financial advisor would recommend such irresponsible behavior? The guy is obviously broke. No wonder he has repeatedly displayed his excitement here about his SS bump.

Don’t feed the troll.

If you need more proof, consider these two gems.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

You are incorrect if you think 1.23% is a high fee.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

How can you argue that when everything going on in the market over the last couple of years benefits 10% of the population to the detriment of the other 90%?

Don’t feed the troll.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

yes yes yes yes wrote:

How much skin does he have in the game as a retiree? To him, it's just academic.

To the rest of us, it's our attempt to make something of our life's savings.

It probably is wrapped up in his political views as much as anything, with a deep rooted mistrust of the meritocracy.

How can you argue that when everything going on in the market over the last couple of years benefits 10% of the population to the detriment of the other 90%?

That is actually a far left argument, and while I am not "far left", it is something that has bothered me just a little bit...not enough to not be involved in the stock market though.

Flagpole wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

How can you argue that when everything going on in the market over the last couple of years benefits 10% of the population to the detriment of the other 90%?

That is actually a far left argument, and while I am not "far left", it is something that has bothered me just a little bit...not enough to not be involved in the stock market though.

Flagpole.

I actually like most of your posts. I am not tethered to either party. I was against the Republican tax cut and expressed that view numerous times here and elsewhere, and sent letters of opposition to my legislators. I think Senator Warren is correct that Jerome Powell is dangerous. I also agree with Democratic proposals to tax stock buy backs. That said, I am against Democrats encouraging more government dependence.

Igy

seattle prattle wrote:

Prof. Racket wrote:

Sorry, but you're a boomer, so boring investments like dividend payouts are pretty much by definition "your thing."

Classic. Just classic.

You've been hanging around LRC too long.

Pigeon-hole the other side into an absolute position in complete disregard to the middle ground.

Just because I haven't embraced options, and truth be told, wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole, I get pigeon-holed as a coupon-cutter type married to dividends.

Well, that isn't the case.

And as the saying goes, "We don't need to be wise beyond our years. All we need is to be wise beyond our fears." I think that applies well to my investment strategy. I mean, given be a boomer and all....

Taking an obvious joke and lighthearted jab way too seriously or personally is also a very boomer thing to do

Dude, I make aging look cool. And pardon me for not reposting all that other dribble with the quote function.

Buy chainlink, and subscribe to our substack about running and the markets.

Latest article

https://rffew.substack.com/p/lsd-or-pot?r=f34ro&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=

See,, told you so ^^^^^^!

It must just be drawn to my aura. Happens all the time.

seattle prattle wrote:

Dude, I make aging look cool. And pardon me for not reposting all that other dribble with the quote function.

Inability to use technology?

Also boomer things.

I'm just messing with you seattle, we're all friends here

Prof. Racket wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

Classic. Just classic.

You've been hanging around LRC too long.

Pigeon-hole the other side into an absolute position in complete disregard to the middle ground.

Just because I haven't embraced options, and truth be told, wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole, I get pigeon-holed as a coupon-cutter type married to dividends.

Well, that isn't the case.

And as the saying goes, "We don't need to be wise beyond our years. All we need is to be wise beyond our fears." I think that applies well to my investment strategy. I mean, given be a boomer and all....

Taking an obvious joke and lighthearted jab way too seriously or personally is also a very boomer thing to do

A+ reply, doc

(no sarcasm)

(except for the doc part)

have to say I'm very happy on many levels that Tesla is back to all time highs.

it's like amazon - a company the valuation hounds said over and over that there is no way the company's growth would ever justify its high valuation.

For amazon they said bezos' never-ending high capex was ruining the company's profitability...but then suddenly that wasn't a problem anymore and the company became insanely profitable.

similar to tesla, when quarter after quarter its expenses ate up the high revenue growth. Looks like that is ending now.

Shows you - paying up for the growers can work very well.

agip wrote:

have to say I'm very happy on many levels that Tesla is back to all time highs.

it's like amazon - a company the valuation hounds said over and over that there is no way the company's growth would ever justify its high valuation.

For amazon they said bezos' never-ending high capex was ruining the company's profitability...but then suddenly that wasn't a problem anymore and the company became insanely profitable.

similar to tesla, when quarter after quarter its expenses ate up the high revenue growth. Looks like that is ending now.

Shows you - paying up for the growers can work very well.

Except Amazon controls a massive share of the market it operates in while TSLA controls, what, 1%? Less?

Prof. Racket wrote:

agip wrote:

have to say I'm very happy on many levels that Tesla is back to all time highs.

it's like amazon - a company the valuation hounds said over and over that there is no way the company's growth would ever justify its high valuation.

For amazon they said bezos' never-ending high capex was ruining the company's profitability...but then suddenly that wasn't a problem anymore and the company became insanely profitable.

similar to tesla, when quarter after quarter its expenses ate up the high revenue growth. Looks like that is ending now.

Shows you - paying up for the growers can work very well.

Except Amazon controls a massive share of the market it operates in while TSLA controls, what, 1%? Less?

just leaves more room for TSLA to grow, right?

How can amazon increase its market share from here?

Or maybe that's your point too. I'm not sure.

agip wrote:

Prof. Racket wrote:

Except Amazon controls a massive share of the market it operates in while TSLA controls, what, 1%? Less?

just leaves more room for TSLA to grow, right?

How can amazon increase its market share from here?

Or maybe that's your point too. I'm not sure.

People figured Amazon would one day be the thing for shopping and it turned out to be true - they control a massive share of the market.

TSLA is currently priced as if they'll one day control like 80% of the market. You think 80% of all cars on the road will be Teslas in 15 years? Fvck no. It's overpriced trash and everyone knows it but we all go along with it anyways because it's obvious no one cares and we can get rich inflating it past levels equivalent US annual GDP.

TSLA market cap $40 trillion by 2025, because why not

Bezos may have lied and cheated on his wife. Since he is not married, Musk just lies and cheats his investors. End justifies the means.

Prof. Racket wrote:

agip wrote:

just leaves more room for TSLA to grow, right?

How can amazon increase its market share from here?

Or maybe that's your point too. I'm not sure.

People figured Amazon would one day be the thing for shopping and it turned out to be true - they control a massive share of the market.

TSLA is currently priced as if they'll one day control like 80% of the market. You think 80% of all cars on the road will be Teslas in 15 years? Fvck no. It's overpriced trash and everyone knows it but we all go along with it anyways because it's obvious no one cares and we can get rich inflating it past levels equivalent US annual GDP.

TSLA market cap $40 trillion by 2025, because why not

It is not even $1 trillion now. So in just a tad over 3 years it will go from less than $1 trillion to $40 trillion?

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Bezos may have lied and cheated on his wife. Since he is not married, Musk just lies and cheats his investors. End justifies the means.

Outside of Buffet and Gates, none of the richest are the least bit generous either.

Prof. Racket wrote:

agip wrote:

just leaves more room for TSLA to grow, right?

How can amazon increase its market share from here?

Or maybe that's your point too. I'm not sure.

People figured Amazon would one day be the thing for shopping and it turned out to be true - they control a massive share of the market.

TSLA is currently priced as if they'll one day control like 80% of the market. You think 80% of all cars on the road will be Teslas in 15 years? Fvck no. It's overpriced trash and everyone knows it but we all go along with it anyways because it's obvious no one cares and we can get rich inflating it past levels equivalent US annual GDP.

TSLA market cap $40 trillion by 2025, because why not

I think people assume tesla will go beyond just making cars and will find new profit centers. Like amazon did with AWS.

the bet, i suspect, is that the electric rollout will open huge business opportunities for Tesla such as batteries and solar.

I just read that tesla has 23% market share of the pure electric car market. Amazing, when the entire world is sprinting toward an electric car future.