You would be wrong to believe homosexuality is something unique. The Pride movement is more about degrading traditional values.
The husband character (Leif Erickson) appeared more latent homosexual, hanging out with the boys, no desire to touch the wife (Deborah Kerr). As the wife says the boy (John Kerr) is more of a man, willing to be kind. Something you could learn from.
Never said anything about homosexuality being unique. Interesting that you think the coach appeared to be homosexual.
I Googled “coach as homosexual in Tea and Sympathy,” and this was part one reviewers piece:
“Leif Erickson, too, was perfection in the part. I always saw this character as a latent homosexual. The brutish straight guy who has a need to be around men or boys all the time and who makes fun of people not like him has always been highly suspect to me. Don't get me started on the towel-snapping and ass-patting. Erickson always handled brutishness well. I have no doubt why they thought of the actor for the role.”
That was my impression, and next to Tom’s father, the most unlikeable character.
Are you making an investment on this thesis? I hope you are wrong, since it would negate any valuation measurements for the near term. And encourage more speculation, which is not good for society.
Are you making an investment on this thesis? I hope you are wrong, since it would negate any valuation measurements for the near term. And encourage more speculation, which is not good for society.
Igy
Nope. While I think it’s correct, I also think it’s too risky for me at my stage of life. We are comfortably retired with enough to finance our retirement plans, provided we are smart with our nest egg. We are in the process of taking a good long hard look at our portfolio with a view to making sure we cross the finish line in 40 years or so not destitute. We’ve got ambitious spending plans that won’t come true if we wager too much on double-zero. I would like to structure our portfolio such that we should see 6-7% return per year at near guarantee. We could aim higher, but with the attendant risk of seeing periods of a year or more with negative returns. Trading off the longer term gains against the short term emotional turmoil is an important consideration for us. We will have some US tech, but not in large amounts and not on singular, risky bets. I tend to favour something like QQEW at 5-10% of our portfolio over something riskier that should give bigger short and medium term gains.
I Googled “coach as homosexual in Tea and Sympathy,” and this was part one reviewers piece:
“Leif Erickson, too, was perfection in the part. I always saw this character as a latent homosexual. The brutish straight guy who has a need to be around men or boys all the time and who makes fun of people not like him has always been highly suspect to me. Don't get me started on the towel-snapping and ass-patting. Erickson always handled brutishness well. I have no doubt why they thought of the actor for the role.”
That was my impression, and next to Tom’s father, the most unlikeable character.
And now you’re quoting a review from a blog dedicated to gay-themed films. You really have come a long way. Good for you!
I Googled “coach as homosexual in Tea and Sympathy,” and this was part one reviewers piece:
“Leif Erickson, too, was perfection in the part. I always saw this character as a latent homosexual. The brutish straight guy who has a need to be around men or boys all the time and who makes fun of people not like him has always been highly suspect to me. Don't get me started on the towel-snapping and ass-patting. Erickson always handled brutishness well. I have no doubt why they thought of the actor for the role.”
That was my impression, and next to Tom’s father, the most unlikeable character.
And now you’re quoting a review from a blog dedicated to gay-themed films. You really have come a long way. Good for you!
I came to my own conclusion, and only pointed out another agreed with me. That reviewer’s gayness has more relevance for you than to me.
I Googled “coach as homosexual in Tea and Sympathy,” and this was part one reviewers piece:
“Leif Erickson, too, was perfection in the part. I always saw this character as a latent homosexual. The brutish straight guy who has a need to be around men or boys all the time and who makes fun of people not like him has always been highly suspect to me. Don't get me started on the towel-snapping and ass-patting. Erickson always handled brutishness well. I have no doubt why they thought of the actor for the role.”
That was my impression, and next to Tom’s father, the most unlikeable character.
And now you’re quoting a review from a blog dedicated to gay-themed films. You really have come a long way. Good for you!
I came to my own conclusion, and only pointed out another agreed with me. That reviewer’s gayness has more relevance for you than to me.
Are you making an investment on this thesis? I hope you are wrong, since it would negate any valuation measurements for the near term. And encourage more speculation, which is not good for society.
Igy
Nope. While I think it’s correct, I also think it’s too risky for me at my stage of life. We are comfortably retired with enough to finance our retirement plans, provided we are smart with our nest egg. We are in the process of taking a good long hard look at our portfolio with a view to making sure we cross the finish line in 40 years or so not destitute. We’ve got ambitious spending plans that won’t come true if we wager too much on double-zero. I would like to structure our portfolio such that we should see 6-7% return per year at near guarantee. We could aim higher, but with the attendant risk of seeing periods of a year or more with negative returns. Trading off the longer term gains against the short term emotional turmoil is an important consideration for us. We will have some US tech, but not in large amounts and not on singular, risky bets. I tend to favour something like QQEW at 5-10% of our portfolio over something riskier that should give bigger short and medium term gains.
Retiree,
Sounds like you are considering the possible pitfalls. A long time in retirement is a risk. Mosev Milevsky (sp?) also writes of sequence of return risk. That is, starting at high valuations and going thru an extended period of poor asset returns during early stage of distributions. From a stock and bond valuation standpoint, nothing more, 01/01/2022 had to be about the worst times to take distributions in quite a while, perhaps ever. Insurance and pension managers have the same risk. One reason annuity businesses are challenged.
My experience as a financial adviser was good savers spend less than average. Perhaps the habit of saving. Also, for most, spending in retirement is front end loaded. So then comes what is the plan for ones death.
Five years ago I wanted to live just another three years. Thought I could make it, but 20% with my disease don’t. Two years ago my wife had an 18 day hospital stay. Neither of us, seemingly healthy at the time, ever expected this. Fortunately we are still here, seem to have survived serious health challenges, and hopefully we’ll make it to ninety. We will celebrate our 49 anniversary next month. About a decade ago we spent the money to prepare for our passing.
This poster with 100,000 viewers said the bulls were trapped. Hah. Trapped into huge profits I suppose. SP500 up 9% since then.
Michael J. Kramer @MichaelMOTTCM Bulls are trapped, with 4,200 being the level of the greatest call gamma for $SPX. CTAs are almost finished, VIXperation day today. Liquidity is draining, QE fantasy is over, odds of more rate hikes are building, and real yields swing higher.
Bulls are trapped, with 4,200 being the level of the greatest call gamma for $SPX. CTAs are almost finished, VIXperation day today. Liquidity is draining, QE fantasy is over, odds of more rate hikes are building, and real yields swing higher. pic.twitter.com/JSPhYmWpG4
Article from a year ago talking about how individual investors were playing the role of contrarian and buying stocks, while institutions were selling. Not really fair because individual investors always buy, but still fun when we realize stocks rose mightily from a year ago. SP500 +21%. The individuals made back a lot of their 2022 losses. As long as they didn't panic sell in october 2022 when the market hit new lows. Big losses in the market don't signify the bottom...but they do signify a longer term buying opportunity. They sure did in 2022.
From 2022:
In March, individual investors bought $28 billion of U.S.-listed stocks and exchange-traded funds on a net basis—the largest monthly sum ever recorded by Vanda Research since it started tracking data in 2014. Between April and June, that slipped to about $25 billion a month on average, though that is still much higher than prepandemic levels. In April through June of 2019, for example, that number averaged $3 billion a month. This trend seems particularly contrarian when institutional investors are doing the opposite. JPMorgan Chase & Co. estimates that institutional investors have taken $258 billion out of the stock market this year, according to an analysis of public order flow data through July 5.
For some amateur investors, a plunging market is a chance to buy shares on the cheap. Many of these risk-tolerant investors have something in common: They don’t need the money soon.
Jeremy Grantham - April 2023 - ‘The best we can hope for is that this market bottoms at about 3,000 … and the worst we should fear is more like 2,000.’
The ‘January effect’ and a crucial moment in the presidential cycle have interrupted the deflation of the stock market bubble. But investors should not get complacent. More declines are on the way, says Jeremy Grantham.
Nope. While I think it’s correct, I also think it’s too risky for me at my stage of life. We are comfortably retired with enough to finance our retirement plans, provided we are smart with our nest egg. We are in the process of taking a good long hard look at our portfolio with a view to making sure we cross the finish line in 40 years or so not destitute. We’ve got ambitious spending plans that won’t come true if we wager too much on double-zero. I would like to structure our portfolio such that we should see 6-7% return per year at near guarantee. We could aim higher, but with the attendant risk of seeing periods of a year or more with negative returns. Trading off the longer term gains against the short term emotional turmoil is an important consideration for us. We will have some US tech, but not in large amounts and not on singular, risky bets. I tend to favour something like QQEW at 5-10% of our portfolio over something riskier that should give bigger short and medium term gains.
Retiree,
Sounds like you are considering the possible pitfalls. A long time in retirement is a risk. Mosev Milevsky (sp?) also writes of sequence of return risk. That is, starting at high valuations and going thru an extended period of poor asset returns during early stage of distributions. From a stock and bond valuation standpoint, nothing more, 01/01/2022 had to be about the worst times to take distributions in quite a while, perhaps ever. Insurance and pension managers have the same risk. One reason annuity businesses are challenged.
My experience as a financial adviser was good savers spend less than average. Perhaps the habit of saving. Also, for most, spending in retirement is front end loaded. So then comes what is the plan for ones death.
Igy
Igy,
we’ve never been particularly good savers, but through a combination of education, hard work and (mostly) luck we earned a lot more than we were spending in the last few working years, which allowed us to build a comfortable retirement. While we have a good handle on our spending habits, we are not particularly thrifty, just thoughtful about spending on things we value. Not cars, for example. We have a used 2015 small car. But a very nice (for us) home in a very nice location, and we travel a lot.
When I look very closely at our situation, our ability to spend like drunken sailors until we walk off the plank depends most strongly on inflation over time and return on our investments. Maybe that sounds obvious, but there are a lot of other considerations that might have been more important and could be such for others in retirement.
We do, of course, expect higher lifestyle spending when we are younger, but at some point health care costs will grow, so I’m not convinced our retirement costs are necessarily front end loaded.
I will say that people should think hard about when to retire. We wanted to do it before we got too old to enjoy it and I’m glad we did. When I told colleagues my plans last year, one told me her father just retired at 72, then soon after learned he had terminal liver cancer. Another colleague, two months younger than me, died in a sporting accident just before I retired, so he never got to enjoy his own. Other friends a few years older than us retired a couple of years ago with big plans to travel, but one of them had a stroke, completely changing the trajectory of their plans.
Accepting that you learn best from your mistakes, I learned an awful lot about money over the years. I wish that learning had been front end loaded. 🙂
Predictions are fragile things. It's best not to make them in public, because the chance of them coming true is very low. That said, I could see the current bull run steaming past 6500 over that time period. Problem is, is might just as well swing down to 2500.
If you dig up 100 different predictions covering that range, one of them will turn out to be the best guess. After the fact. Which won't make it a better prediction, per se, just a luckier guess.
Financial markets love to humiliate experts and their "predictions."
And now you’re quoting a review from a blog dedicated to gay-themed films. You really have come a long way. Good for you!
I came to my own conclusion, and only pointed out another agreed with me. That reviewer’s gayness has more relevance for you than to me.
Is the reviewer gay? That just adds to the plot in that you detected the character’s gayness just as a gay man did. You share a special insight with at least one member of the gay community. This is a good thing, especially for you.
Predictions are fragile things. It's best not to make them in public, because the chance of them coming true is very low. That said, I could see the current bull run steaming past 6500 over that time period. Problem is, is might just as well swing down to 2500.
If you dig up 100 different predictions covering that range, one of them will turn out to be the best guess. After the fact. Which won't make it a better prediction, per se, just a luckier guess.
Financial markets love to humiliate experts and their "predictions."
Many of the "experts" who make many of these predictions are Permabears (shout-out to Flagpole) who lose nothing when their predictions don't come to fruition but are lauded as geniuses when one of their annual predictions come true. Jeremy Grantham is credited with predicting the dot-com bubble burst in 2000-2001 but he makes dire predictions every year. Of course he is going to be right once in a while. But will anyone will remember when he predicted a 2000 S & P on April 2023? No, of course not. That will be long-forgotten. People will only remember his 2000 prediction. John Husman predicts a market collapse every year. Why would anyone listen to this clown. His mutual funds are among the worst anywhere.
4/ The problem is that market cap is not "wealth." The wealth is in the cash flows. Extreme valuation only allows one holder to obtain a wealth transfer from some buyer who will hold the bag. Deferring risk does not eliminate risk. Here's what over a decade of ZIRP has created. pic.twitter.com/JXYftA5lhz
I came to my own conclusion, and only pointed out another agreed with me. That reviewer’s gayness has more relevance for you than to me.
Is the reviewer gay? That just adds to the plot in that you detected the character’s gayness just as a gay man did. You share a special insight with at least one member of the gay community. This is a good thing, especially for you.
That is the good thing about art. One can make a point without shoving it down everyones’ throat, and then wondering why they all gag.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
