American Politics

[Elvis 2008]

Ah. You're acting dumb. Not a stretch for you, I suppose.

As you know, the voicemail was regarding Hunter's dubious business deals with some Chinese tycoon. That is the context, and is why Sleepy Joe referred to an article on the matter which was about to be published.

The real questions are: why did Biden lie when he said he had no idea at all about any of his son's dubious business deals (despite being referred to as "the big guy", as in "10% for the big guy" and secondly, why does the mainstream (fake news) media show no interest in investigating why a sitting president lied about a potentially criminal matter?

But of course, to ask is to answer.

V showed the dumb Dem method. Attack the source. Dems are so stupid that they think if they say "Oh, Fox News" they have won an argument. If you push them on it, they will attack the credentials of the source. Tucker Carlson said this in a legal case. Only a fool would believe him.

So Mr. Expert V lost all that because it was Biden himself that was talking. He then tries to save himself and does the could game. Biden could have been talking about Jeffrey Epstein. No, Biden was talking about an article written and we know when this was and what the article was about. This had nothing to do with Jeffery Epstein. Epstein was a lie V pulled out of his ass.

The Democrats are the party of liar lawyers, and the joke I make about lawyers is that you know what they say when they shoot you in the leg? "You are lucky. I could have shot you in the head". That is the method of the dumb Dem. They shoot you and then expect you to be grateful.

[Chris P]

Yeah, I never saw anyone die with Covid. Thing is that calculation was based on what was known at the time. These Dem dummies forget their God awful predictions. They spew this crap about Sweden but only compare it to countries with worse numbers. Sweden was in the bottom 25% of cases and deaths in all of Europe. The English and French hailed Sweden's policies as a success story.

The other "success" countries like New Zealand, Australia, South Korea, and Thailand the drive by media was raving about got clobbered by later waves of Covid, but the funny thing was the absolute denial on the horrific effects Covid lockdowns had with depression, opioids, the economy, and children and their education.

So many studies have shown now the lockdowns were not worth the cost, but I knew the dumb Dems would never accept the cost. When do they ever? I was so pissed GW Bush took 9-11 and took us $3 trillion into more debt and crashed the economy, but that was nothing. I think Covid was $6 billion in federal programs and $3 trillion added on the Fed's balance sheet.

Chris, did you see the video where Biden said government spending does not cause inflation? Yeah, it was all Putin.

The latest financial data was the ISM survey sucked and GDPnow run by the Atlanta Fed is projecting a Q2 of -201 percent which means we are in a recession and have been the whole year. https://mishtalk.com/economics/gdpno...learly-started.

The funny thing now is that you know now how the dumb Dems react. This is a projection not a reality. Show some other blowhard "expert" making a case against this, Then there will be acceptance and the finger pointing. So here is my odds on who is to blame for the recession: 60% Putin, 30% Trump, and 10% some other party. I have a feeling the dumb Dems may, may try to drag the Supreme Court in it. Maybe antivaxxers? You never know.

Or maybe, just maybe, the Dems will accept responsibility for the recession and pledge to do better.

He he he. Like that will ever happen.

Last things in the world that caused the recession were the stupid fucking lockdowns and excessive government spending.

Great post. Yes, Sweden is doing just fine. The vax has been an utter failure, as everyone can still get covid after getting it (not to mention heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, bells palsy, and other cases of SADS. Sudden Adult Death Syndrome). They claim that it lessens the symptoms or some such guff, but that is moving the goalposts: when it was being introduced, the claim was that the vax would prevent infection and transmission. Lies upon lies upon lies.

The really fascinating fact is that there were no total excess deaths in 2020. That is to say, the usual number of people died in that year. All the people who died of "covid" actually died of various comorbidities and would have gone anyway. However, since 2021, there has been a spike in total excess deaths. Ie since the mass vaccine rollout.

The economic side alone. Not to mention the suffering, opioid abuse, depression, stunted childhoods, etc. Is horrific. But I tend to see the silver lining, which will be the collapse of the federal government and the evil Washington swamp and its fake news wormtongues. When they can simply no longer pay for their repression operations, freedom-minded Americans will be more likely to break out from under them and restore our liberty and way of life.

It will be tough and messy, but things have to get worse before they can get better.

[Elvis 2008]

If Elvis went short on the market every time an incoming Dem

Hey, Gramps, I did not go short the market with every incoming Dem. I already said that. I also said I went short in April of this year after April 15. Do you know what it is when one of you Dems repeats the lies of another? It is not popular; it is a duo of dumb Dems. Both you and V have showed me you are morons who do not know how to invest and are way, way down to me. If you are 25% down in the market and I am 50% up, you have to double your money to catch me. Good luck with that Gramps.

[Chris P]

Would it help if I gave you a conservative source? Ever hear of the Heritage Foundation?

Haha! The Heritage Foundation a "conservative source"! Good one. You'll be telling us Mitt Romney is a rock-ribbed right-winger next.

In reality, of course, the likes of the Heritage Foundation and Romney are RINOs. They are a worse and more devious enemy of the heritage American people than the democrats and fake news, because the latter are at least sometimes honest about where they stand (pro-child trannies; anti-white; open borders; going to make you live in a pod and eat bugs because the world is going to end in 10 years because of "climate change": we all know the drill).

Oh BTW about Poland, the "Human Rights Watch" pro-EU leftists did all they could to prevent mail-in voting for Poland's election during covid. That's because the ruling right-wing Law and Justice Party were in charge of it. The leftists know perfectly well how unsecure and corrupt it is. And they want to make sure that only they can benefit from it, as with the Biden fraud. LOL.

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2...racy-warns-hrw

It is simple common sense, backed up by plentiful evidence such as this UK government review which uncovered massive mail-in voting fraud among "British" Pakistanis voting in UK elections - https://www.business-standard.com/ar...1201637_1.html - that the only way to have a secure election is in-person voting, on election day, with photo ID verification, on paper ballots which are counted and signed off by members of either side.

There is no way of knowing where mail-in ballots went; who filled them out; or indeed whether they are even genuine. Fraudsters are ingenious and flexible, particularly when they have the backing of the entire mainstream media as in the 2020 US election.

The result is that half the country have lost faith in the electoral process. Do you think that that. Along with the open border, rocketing inflation and economic dislocation, etc. Will improve the situation in the country? Of course not. So why not simply have a secure election? What do you have to lose? Oh, the White House.

All bringing the inevitable breakup closer. You can have your child trannies, climate hysteria, anti-white hate, mass turd word immigration; we'll have our American people and values; and we'll all be much happier apart. But no, sorry, you can't claim refugee status when your government takes your house, job and daughter for reparations.

[Villainy]

Yeah, and the clients can leave, declare bankruptcy, and if land is cheap enough, go out and build on their own building and real estate is going to get cheaper when the Fed is selling MBS not buying them. That is where you are fighting the fed. You think home MBS and commercial ones do not compete with each other? Why would you think that?

Oooh here comes Elvis the legal expert! You can't declare bankruptcy to break a lease because it has become inconvenient. If you really are insolvent, I bet you would have a hard time finding a bank that would lend you the money to buy another property much less construct / improve a building on it. Yes Elvis, commercial real estate is a completely different entity than home mortgages. Interest rates are different, terms are different, loan to values are different.

.......one should not hold REITs which have a fixed yield. The REIT will go down in value due to multiple contraction which you still do not get....

They why is it that 4 of the 5 REITs I own shares in have gone up nicely and only 1 is down and just about 1 or 2 percent. The reason Elvis is that most of the tenants have investment grade ratings and 4 of the 5 REITs are Net-Lease REITs which is important. Property expenses go up. But the tenant pays those, rents go up too based on annual CPI adjustments.

And the 0% rates and free cash is what prompted the Biden rally. And not only that, it was impossible to calculate fair value.

You mean it was impossible for you to calculate fair value.

Secondly, Mr. Real Estate, there are ARM mortgages. Maybe you have heard of them? With an adjustable rate mortgage, people pay more to those who hold the mortgages when mortgage rates go up. There are funds called note funds which hold a pile of said mortgages. And when interest rates go up, the yield on said funds go up and the value of the fund goes up as well.

Wow! Apparently you haven't been doing your homework or paying attention. It was ARM mortgages that almost brought down the financial system in 2008-2010. Why? When the teaser rates expired people found out they couldn't afford the higher monthly rates. When the market cooled and the couldn't resell at a profit (they were forced to abandon the properties) and all those MBS (mortgage backed securities) started failing. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who guaranteed those loans went into receivership. You like quotes?? Apparently you do. Who said:

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. "?

So why do you not own any note funds but REITs when the fed is raising rates? Because you are a moron.

I know better. But please show me I'm wrong and buy as much as you can.

So what happens to value stocks, growth stocks, and REITs in a high inflation / rising interest rate climate? They all go down in value, and your portfolio HAS gone down in value.

Growth stocks will mostly go down and depending on many factors. Value stocks might or might not go down. They were value stocks because they were pretty low to begin with. That is what defines a value stock. REITs will do all sorts of things. There are 20 different categories (more or less). Net-Lease REITs with rent escalators and solid dividends do very well in inflationary periods. I'm sorry. I know you don't want that to be true. But it is. Warren Buffet (through Berkshire Hathaway) owns some REITs. I guess he must be a moron too. Afterall I'm sure you think you know more than he does.

What goes up in value? Inverse ETFs that short the market, note funds, and commodities in high demand and low supply that can be raised in price over the inflation rate. At this time, that would be oil.

Inverse ETFs (especially the leveraged ones 2 X or 3 X) are not investments Elvis those are speculation vehicles. They go up fast and you think you're a genius but they also go down fast (usually even faster than they went up) If you had 1/2 a brain AND you actually bought those and have a profit, I would tell you to cash in your chips while you still have chips. The only reason I tell you this is so that later I can say I told you so. Note funds are paying sizeable dividends. Why is that? Because they are hyper-risky. The high interest rate tells you that. Interest rates go up, ARMs reset at higher rates and then people start defaulting. But I think you should buy a ton more of them because you know more than everyone else. Commodities? Sure if you can figure out which commodities are going to go up before everyone else you can do well. But supply and demand always return to equilibrium so don't be late.

So you are not diversified. You just think you are. If you accuse me of not being diversified, I am guilty as charged but unlike you I know what I am doing. For me, diversification is diworseifaction. So stockbrokers say do not keep all your eggs in one basket. Someone else said, " "Keep all your eggs in one basket, but watch that basket closely. " Who was that? And who wrote a book on diworseification?

You are clueless. Oh and your quote is from Warren Buffett but he also said that people who don't spend inordinate amounts of time reading financial statements and studying the market should invest their money in index funds (like Vanguard's S&P 500 fund) because they have negligible fees and they should make consistent periodic investments into the fund and not bother to look at the balances. The balance will go up and it will go down but over several decades you will have a fortune. A classic do as I say, not as I do comment. But, of course, he knows what he is talking about.

Another significant date was April 15 when people have to fund their retirement accounts. That is the basis of the slogan, "Sell in May and go away" and why invested shortly after that date. That is investing on fact not market timing. There are huge cash inflows into the market before April 15.

Even more evidence of complete ignorance. You can only contribute 6,000 to your regular IRA (7,000 if you are over 50) the majority of the retirement funding goes on through out the year. People make contributions to their 401 K or 457 B plan per pay-check. Most of the inflow into the market in March and April comes from tax refunds. I know, I know you want to believe that if you are getting a refund you would have filed the first week of February (after you receive all the 1099 documents) but most just don't do it. Some of those regular IRA fundings happen right around tax-time. But people with solid higher incomes who also have a 401 K or other plan are severely limited to what they can throw into an IRA (if anything).

So what is fair value on the S&P with mortgages paying 6.5%? Fair value IMO is at least 8% or a PE value of 12.5. So fair valuation on the S&P is 2500 if earnings come in at $200. To justify a $4000 valuation, S&P earnings would have to come in at $320 which is insane. And that is why I am short. The market is pricing the S&P based on history instead of comparable asset classes, and earnings projections IMO are in fantasy land.

THAT is fundamental analysis dumb ass and what you have shown is you do not have a fucking clue what that is, moron.

Sorry Elvis, what you have regurgitated is what someone else wrote. You liked it because that author knows more than you do, which isn't exactly a high bar. For the S&P500 to drop to 2,500 would be more than a 33% additional sell-off. Not impossible but you would need something on the order of a financial collapse similar to 2008-2010 and most companies are still very healthy.

Analysts are predicting a recession in late 2023 of mild proportions. Do you know better than them? Not a chance. But hey, if you're dead set on proving how smart you are, you can go all in on your leveraged reverse ETF. You may be begging for scraps like that guy mentioned in the Medellin forum.

[MarquisdeSade1]

Now the wacko left is comparing the effects of the covid flu to "a Russian missile striking and blowing them up".

Insert Yakkety Sax music here.

https://babylonbee.com/news/screamin...american-flags

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LI4UEHUvtM

[DramaFree11]

Yeah, I never saw anyone die with Covid. Thing is that calculation was based on what was known at the time. These Dem dummies forget their God awful predictions. They spew this crap about Sweden but only compare it to countries with worse numbers. Sweden was in the bottom 25% of cases and deaths in all of Europe. The English and French hailed Sweden's policies as a success story.

The other "success" countries like New Zealand, Australia, South Korea, and Thailand the drive by media was raving about got clobbered by later waves of Covid, but the funny thing was the absolute denial on the horrific effects Covid lockdowns had with depression, opioids, the economy, and children and their education.

So many studies have shown now the lockdowns were not worth the cost, but I knew the dumb Dems would never accept the cost. When do they ever? I was so pissed GW Bush took 9-11 and took us $3 trillion into more debt and crashed the economy, but that was nothing. I think Covid was $6 billion in federal programs and $3 trillion added on the Fed's balance sheet.

Yep, as much I wanted us to be wrong, but we both said there would be a financial crisis as a result of the lockdowns. Now we are in recession, maybe worse. This is what happens after prolonged lockdowns, extremely poor leadership, cut back / restrictions on oil production and sponsoring a needless war. This is worse case scenario.

[Elvis 2008]

No, the deaths *with* covid, plus other co-morbidities which actually caused the death, topped a million. Deaths from covid and no other co-morbidities are well under 80,000.

Yeah, I never saw anyone die with Covid. Thing is that calculation was based on what was known at the time. These Dem dummies forget their God awful predictions. They spew this crap about Sweden but only compare it to countries with worse numbers. Sweden was in the bottom 25% of cases and deaths in all of Europe. The English and French hailed Sweden's policies as a success story.

The other "success" countries like New Zealand, Australia, South Korea, and Thailand the drive by media was raving about got clobbered by later waves of Covid, but the funny thing was the absolute denial on the horrific effects Covid lockdowns had with depression, opioids, the economy, and children and their education.

So many studies have shown now the lockdowns were not worth the cost, but I knew the dumb Dems would never accept the cost. When do they ever? I was so pissed GW Bush took 9-11 and took us $3 trillion into more debt and crashed the economy, but that was nothing. I think Covid was $6 billion in federal programs and $3 trillion added on the Fed's balance sheet.

Chris, did you see the video where Biden said government spending does not cause inflation? Yeah, it was all Putin.

The latest financial data was the ISM survey sucked and GDPnow run by the Atlanta Fed is projecting a Q2 of -201 percent which means we are in a recession and have been the whole year. https://mishtalk.com/economics/gdpno...learly-started.

The funny thing now is that you know now how the dumb Dems react. This is a projection not a reality. Show some other blowhard "expert" making a case against this, Then there will be acceptance and the finger pointing. So here is my odds on who is to blame for the recession: 60% Putin, 30% Trump, and 10% some other party. I have a feeling the dumb Dems may, may try to drag the Supreme Court in it. Maybe antivaxxers? You never know.

Or maybe, just maybe, the Dems will accept responsibility for the recession and pledge to do better.

He he he. Like that will ever happen.

Last things in the world that caused the recession were the stupid fucking lockdowns and excessive government spending.

[EihTooms]

You don't even know what diversification is. Or you don't understand it. Being diversified doesn't mean you can't be down in a down year.

Elvis you don't know anything about investing. You don't know the difference between investing and speculating. You don't know the difference between fundamental analysis and technical analysis. You don't know the difference between alpha and beta risk. Stick to telling us about the perfect 10 you've been bedding. At least that fantasy can't be disproved.

I don't think you have ever taken a basic macro economics course.

Now that is a tough question. Why did Apple go down. That would involve the interplay of many things.

1. Apple ran up over 25% in the 4th quarter of 2021. It has retreated back to about that same level this year.

2. Apple is a growth stock which is in all the index funds. As the market started dipping the fund managers sold off their largest gainers to lock in their profits.

As a result a lot of the biggest gainers (tech stocks) sold off substantially.

3. Apple is experiencing supply chain problems. You might know (I'm never sure with you) that Apple assembles a large percentage of their products in China.

When China started locking down due to Covid in 2022 (yes this year) their supply chain disruption has been causing many analysts to doubt Apple can get.

Their products to stores in sufficient quantity to meet analyst projections.

4. At least a dozen other reasons.

OH and I didn't invest when Biden took office. I started investing when Ford was in office.

Sorry Elvis, your ignorance is showing. REITs can't raise their rents willy-nilly, they have a lease agreement. Net Lease REITs have annual escalators that increase rent based on the change in the CPI. So, inflation is higher, lease anniversary comes up, rent is recalculated based on increase in CPI (Consumer Price Index). It's really pretty basic, I'm surprised that someone who claims to be so knowledgeable about everything didn't know that.

You're talking about unwinding Quantitative Easing. That means the Fed (Federal Reserve) is selling off some of the securities that they purchased. Those are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds which are backed by home mortgages. Those MBS (Mortgage Backed Securities) are supported by home loans not commercial loans. The majority of REITs own commercial properties. (Yes their are some housing REITs too). So how would I be fighting the Fed exactly? I would love to hear how you try to explain that one.

If Elvis went short on the market every time an incoming Dem had to massively deficit spend in order to pull us out of the horrific decline combined with stone cold empty coffers the outgoing Repub left behind and simply do it at some point when the tactic showed signs of working and was no longer needed then that was a pretty damn easy pattern to follow without all this constant daily if not hourly study, research and due diligence on irrelevant factors he appears to devote himself to for the cause.

Problem is not every one of those previous Dem rescues and recoveries of the Repub crash and decline coincidentally had the global supply-chain collapse, Ukrainian grain and Russian oil supply disruptions extending and exacerbating the inevitable recovery-related inflation issue this one has going against it.

So if he had followed his repeated "reasoning" for going short this time in those previous times he would not have produced a gain worth the risk of getting out of the market.

In fact, if he had sold out of the market those previous times for the same "reason" he boasts about having gotten out this time that means he stood by on the sidelines and missed out on some of the greatest and longest uninterrupted Bull Market runs in history.

[Villainy]

After wading through your usual torrent of verbal diarrhea there is still no answer for why no serious countries have mass mail-in voting.

Does Google not work where you live?

https://www.idea.int/news-media/news...bile-and-proxy

IDEA = The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) is an intergovernmental organization that supports sustainable democracy worldwide.

Here some of the "not so serious countries" that have mail-in voting: (Note the list only covers European countries).

Germany.

Poland.

Switzerland.

United Kingdom.

Iceland.

Luxembourg.

And then there are a number of countries that allow mail-in voting for some of their voters.

Spain.

Slovenia.

Lithuania.

Austria.

People from this group may vote by mail if they don't think they can make it to the polls (without proving a specific reason). In other words they have to apply.

That is of course because it is obviously unsecure, as we saw with the pallets of hundreds of thousands of ballots, 98% for Biden, which magically materialized in democrat city counting centers, after the GOP observers had been forced out, windows boarded up, and counting stopped for several hours so they could figure out how many Biden votes they needed to come up with.

All of that is BS. Why did the Attorney General (William Barr a Trump appointee who was going to lose his job if Biden was elected) tell Trump that the DOJ (Department of Justice) investigated all these claims of voter fraud and found nothing that would have changed the election. Trump refused to believe it, of course, and neither do his minions to this day.

Simple common sense, as used in democracies throughout the world, is that a secure election must be held with in-person votes, verified with photo ID, on paper ballots on the day of the election. These ballots must be counted and signed off by members of both parties.

Read that list of countries that allow mail-in voting without restrictions again. You are still living in the 19th century.

Anyone who disagrees with this wants unsecure, rigged elections, which is of course the aim of the democrats and the media.

Would it help if I gave you a conservative source? Ever hear of the Heritage Foundation? Here is how they describe themselves: Heritage's mission is to formulate and promote public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

They did an ongoing study of voter fraud. Here is what they have listed over the last 30 years. Approximately 1,300 cases of documented voter fraud. The proven fraud cases went about equally both ways, some for Democrats and some for Republicans.

Instead of believing every conservative talk show host that wants ratings, do your homework.

[Elvis 2008]

Sorry Elvis, your ignorance is showing. REITs can't raise their rents willy-nilly, they have a lease agreement. Net Lease REITs have annual escalators that increase rent based on the change in the CPI. So, inflation is higher, lease anniversary comes up, rent is recalculated based on increase in CPI (Consumer Price Index). It's really pretty basic, I'm surprised that someone who claims to be so knowledgeable about everything didn't know that.

Yeah, and the clients can leave, declare bankruptcy, and if land is cheap enough, go out and build on their own building and real estate is going to get cheaper when the Fed is selling MBS not buying them. That is where you are fighting the fed. You think home MBS and commercial ones do not compete with each other? Why would you think that?

As for diversification, one should not hold REITs which have a fixed yield. The REIT will go down in value due to multiple contraction which you still do not get (and that is why Apple stock went down not the bullshit reasons you mentioned).

Maybe you can figure out who said this "Interest rates are like gravity in valuations. If interest rates are nothing, values can be almost infinite. If interest rates are extremely high, that's a huge gravitational pull on values. ".

And the 0% rates and free cash is what prompted the Biden rally. And not only that, it was impossible to calculate fair value.

So asset values go down when interest rates go up, fool. Talk about lacking your basic knowledge of economics.

Secondly, Mr. Real Estate, there are ARM mortgages. Maybe you have heard of them? With an adjustable rate mortgage, people pay more to those who hold the mortgages when mortgage rates go up. There are funds called note funds which hold a pile of said mortgages. And when interest rates go up, the yield on said funds go up and the value of the fund goes up as well.

So why do you not own any note funds but REITs when the fed is raising rates? Because you are a moron.

So what happens to value stocks, growth stocks, and REITs in a high inflation / rising interest rate climate? They all go down in value, and your portfolio HAS gone down in value.

What goes up in value? Inverse ETFs that short the market, note funds, and commodities in high demand and low supply that can be raised in price over the inflation rate. At this time, that would be oil.

So you are not diversified. You just think you are. If you accuse me of not being diversified, I am guilty as charged but unlike you I know what I am doing. For me, diversification is diworseifaction. So stockbrokers say do not keep all your eggs in one basket. Someone else said, " "Keep all your eggs in one basket, but watch that basket closely. " Who was that? And who wrote a book on diworseification?

You don't know the difference between investing and speculating. You don't know the difference between fundamental analysis and technical analysis. You don't know the difference between alpha and beta risk. Stick to telling us about the perfect 10 you've been bedding. At least that fantasy can't be disproved.

LOL. And this is why you are a fucking loser V. You are a dumbshit Dem who sees the world as you want it to be not how it is. Why make the accusation on analysis instead of asking? You are the moron who said commercial real estate and residential do not compete. Where did you come up with that Mr. Reality?

All asset classes compete with one another, and that is how you determine valuation. To compare yields with stocks and other instruments, you use the PE ratio. A PE of 20 is a yield of 5%. A PE of 33 is a yield of 3%. Stocks are riskier than most bonds so they command a higher yield to compensate for that risk. People can buy a 30 year fixed mortgage now yielding 6. 5%. Which is an asset secured by real estate where it is impossible said value goes to zero. Stocks go to zero all the time.

When the S&P 500 was at 4000, the PE was about 20 and the yield was about 5%. Why is the market priced the way it is? Because historically the market is priced at a PE of 15 to 17. That is a 5.8 to 6.7% yield. In addition, S&P earnings are projected to go up to a $225 to $240 from $200 or so. Despite all the issues with supply chains and rising input costs, analysts have not taken projected earnings down. Earnings reports start coming in on July 21. That is a significant date.

Another significant date was April 15 when people have to fund their retirement accounts. That is the basis of the slogan, "Sell in May and go away" and why invested shortly after that date. That is investing on fact not market timing. There are huge cash inflows into the market before April 15.

So what is fair value on the S&P with mortgages paying 6.5%? Fair value IMO is at least 8% or a PE value of 12.5. So fair valuation on the S&P is 2500 if earnings come in at $200. To justify a $4000 valuation, S&P earnings would have to come in at $320 which is insane. And that is why I am short. The market is pricing the S&P based on history instead of comparable asset classes, and earnings projections IMO are in fantasy land.

THAT is fundamental analysis dumb ass and what you have shown is you do not have a fucking clue what that is, moron.

[Villainy]

No, the deaths *with* covid, plus other co-morbidities which actually caused the death, topped a million. Deaths from covid and no other co-morbidities are well under 80,000.

Of course that's what he's saying because he's poorly educated. Poorly educated people do not know better than let others do their thinking for them. Therefore whatever affirmation comes out in a Tucker Carlson rant is accepted as the full truth then it's repeated online when they try to debate. But if someone is sleeping in their bed with high blood pressure and obesity when a Russian missile strikes and blows them up, then it's the missile that killed them, duh. Now the arrogant ass might say "well they would have died soon anyway," but they don't know that. People can live a long time with obesity and high blood pressure, especially in the modern age with effective treatments for the latter.

This line of "reasoning" has long been used by RethugliKKKans who claim that virtually nobody has died from anything resembling COVID. This line of "reasoning" makes perfect sense to anyone who feels that since those folks were going to die anyway because of their pre-existing conditions, their deaths don't count.

This line of "reasoning" makes perfect sense to the folks who believe that windmills cause cancer, that the Army took over the airports during the Revolutionary War, that Italian satellites changed votes and a host of other batshit crazy things.

Yes, the "logic" is absurd. Imagine the following hypothetical news story on Breitbart or Faux:

Major earthquake hit Indonesia today. 456 people are dead, but we're only counting 102 of them because the others had co-morbidities and would have died at some point anyway.

[Chris P]

I told you why but you still didn't listenBLABLABLA....

And you continue with one of your signature long, turgid, unreadable rants which have nothing to do with the question at hand.

Why do no other democracies allow mass mail-in voting? That would be much easier than making people show up in person with photo ID on election day to cast a paper ballot. So why bother doing the latter?

It's almost as if every other democracy in the world has a reason for not wanting to spam out tens of millions of ballots to whoever, wherever, to be collected by whoever, whenever (and printed / filled out in whatever number required to overturn a lead). Whatever could that be?

[Chris P]

Of course that's what he's saying because he's poorly educated. Poorly educated people do not know better than let others do their thinking for them. Therefore whatever affirmation comes out in a Tucker Carlson rant is accepted as the full truth then it's repeated online when they try to debate. But if someone is sleeping in their bed with high blood pressure and obesity when a Russian missile strikes and blows them up, then it's the missile that killed them, duh. Now the arrogant ass might say "well they would have died soon anyway," but they don't know that. People can live a long time with obesity and high blood pressure, especially in the modern age with effective treatments for the latter.

Now the wacko left is comparing the effects of the covid flu to "a Russian missile striking and blowing them up".

Insert Yakkety Sax music here.

[Chris P]

So you're saying: They died from Co-vid but they had something else wrong with them so they don't count?

Not merely "something else wrong with them" like an ingrown toenail or papercut, but another reason entirely for why they died.

We know that the average age of death with covid is already higher than the average life expectancy; and the overwhelming majority had comorbidities that would have killed them anyway. Hospitals were incentive to add covid to death certs; notoriously there were cases of people dying in auto accidents whose corpses were tested for covid.

It's really morbidly fascinating how the wacko left likes to pretend that we were all immortal before the great scamdemic. Another example of the utter detachment from reality of the party that brought you pregnant men, child trannies, and "the world is going to end in ten years".