The Next President is...

[disgruntledemployee]

Or his dad's influence, which is worth about....

[HeloDude]

On 3/17/2025 at 10:02 AM, disgruntledemployee said:

I'm asking how your/BODNers investments are doing (I'm not making an assessment) with the turmoil created by T2, dun dun da dunt.  If you predicted the downturn and shorted everything, congrats.  But I think most Trump voters expected him to make everything great and didn't short the market and when they checked their accts recently, went WTF.

Just wanted to check to see how this post was doing…

Oh, and here’s something else:  We’ll continue to see the market rise and fall, as it always does, regardless of who is President.  But to those who were cheering for it to lose for the whole sake of making Trump look bad, well, I guess your emotions got the better of you.

[disgruntledemployee]

You tell me/us.  That's the original question in my post.  Taking my post as cheering for economic ruin is retarded.  I was pissed at his carelessness with people's life savings.  See the difference?

[brabus]

1 hour ago, disgruntledemployee said:

You tell me/us.  That's the original question in my post.  Taking my post as cheering for economic ruin is retarded.  I was pissed at his carelessness with people's life savings.  See the difference?

Well my super lazy investing (index funds/target retirement IRAs) are up 12% in the last year and 4% since Trump took office. So yeah, only positive impact on my investments from Trump’s economic policies. And I’m sure people who are far more active/educated/“pros” in their investing are doing much better. 

Facts over emotions

[nunya]

1 hour ago, brabus said:

And I’m sure people who are far more active/educated/“pros” in their investing are doing much better. 

Eh, unlikely, at least in large caps. I tried the "active" route the first half of the year. The steep V recovery kicked my ass. I'll stay in my indexing lane from now on.

Edited June 26 by nunya

[brabus]

@nunya I just know some guys who have beat my numbers decisively, but I’m not interested in going down that road personally. To do so, I think you have to be really into it, have a deep understanding, and some luck. I’m definitely 1/3 at best. 

[Biff_T]

Wtf?

 

 

[uhhello]

This just in, politicians are shady.....

[Biff_T]

4 hours ago, uhhello said:

This just in, politicians are shady.....

I think it's comical to have lived her entire life in a suburb while claiming to be from the Bronx  I've been to New York City a few times in my life, doesn’t mean I'm from there.   

Edited July 1 by Biff_T

[BFM this]

Lol; I grew up in a suburb.  I usually lead off with I'm from Chicago, unless they're familiar then we can get more specific.

I sure as heeeeelllll don't say I'm from Englewood.

[arg]

7 hours ago, Biff_T said:

Wtf?

 

 

Not enough booty shots in that vid for me to believe it.

[Biff_T]

14 minutes ago, arg said:

Not enough booty shots in that vid for me to believe it.

She's easy on the eyes but definitely crazy.  

Still a dibs as of today.  

[disgruntledemployee]

@Biff_T

I'm throwing a flag on this play.  You posted AOC in the Next President thread.  That's like drawing a pentagram on the floor, a doorway to let evil in.  Put that shit in WTF or something.  

Anybody got a cleansing spell or holy water to hose the place down?

[bfargin]

the horse face does me in on AOC, I realize with Biff it's boobs and butts. I'm all for those (good ones) as well, but they don't overcome having a face I don't like looking at.

[Biff_T]

10 minutes ago, bfargin said:

the horse face does me in on AOC, I realize with Biff it's boobs and butts. I'm all for those (good ones) as well, but they don't overcome having a face I don't like looking at.

11Hs can't be as selective as the other 11s. 

Edited July 3 by Biff_T

[uhhello]

I for one fully support AOC's Democratic party nomination for President of the United States of America.

[HeloDude]

Looks like the House passed the Senate version of the BBB, and currently the markets seem to approve.

I’m not a huge fan of the bill as it didn’t address spending cuts that I believe are way past due.

[ClearedHot]

24 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

Looks like the House passed the Senate version of the BBB, and currently the markets seem to approve.

I’m not a huge fan of the bill as it didn’t address spending cuts that I believe are way past due.

The bill is a freaking mess and nothing like what is was intended to be.  Yes the tax cuts are extended but as you correctly point out, we need to address the debt.  Look at defense spending, the requested number is actually a cut when you account for inflation.  HOWEVER, they included a one time addition of $113B that pumps to DoD topline to $960B.  Thats Fing crazy.

[brabus]

There’s what we want to happen in a “perfect world” and then there’s reality. Reality is nobody anywhere on the political spectrum, in large enough numbers, is serious about significantly cutting entitlements. That’s the only rational way we’re going to see meaningful debt reduction and avoid the “fiscal cliff.” Everything else like DOGE-driven savings, reasonable DoD cuts, etc. will not appreciably move the needle. I suppose the other option is massive cuts in areas that completely gut our country and turn it into Venezuela, but I’m not considering that a rational option.

So, the BBB is like every federal bill since the “beginning of time:” full of pork and spending too much. If you’re a realist, you understand this and can at least see there’s some good stuff in there (in spite of the stuff you don’t like). If you’re an idealist who doesn’t live in reality and likes to cast stones from your utopian view of what things should be like, without offering actual solutions that are attainable in the real world, well then by all means have fun sport bitching with your buddy Massie.

[Negatory]

1 hour ago, brabus said:

There’s what we want to happen in a “perfect world” and then there’s reality. Reality is nobody anywhere on the political spectrum, in large enough numbers, is serious about significantly cutting entitlements. That’s the only rational way we’re going to see meaningful debt reduction and avoid the “fiscal cliff.” Everything else like DOGE-driven savings, reasonable DoD cuts, etc. will not appreciably move the needle. I suppose the other option is massive cuts in areas that completely gut our country and turn it into Venezuela, but I’m not considering that a rational option.

So, the BBB is like every federal bill since the “beginning of time:” full of pork and spending too much. If you’re a realist, you understand this and can at least see there’s some good stuff in there (in spite of the stuff you don’t like). If you’re an idealist who doesn’t live in reality and likes to cast stones from your utopian view of what things should be like, without offering actual solutions that are attainable in the real world, well then by all means have fun sport bitching with your buddy Massie.

If you’re a realist you don’t ignore the $4T added to the deficit. A realist asks why taxes are being cut and not sustained or increased. Welcome back to reality.

[Lord Ratner]

7 minutes ago, Negatory said:

If you’re a realist you don’t ignore the $4T added to the deficit. A realist asks why taxes are being cut and not sustained or increased. Welcome back to reality.

Because an increase on business taxes will devastate the stock market, and the boomers didn't build normal retirements like responsible adults, they have everything in the market and are relying on it to go up forever. And everyone in Congress makes their millions in the markets, and all the biggest lobbyists are directly tied to the markets, and now the pension funds are all over invested in the market and (even worse) private equity, and... you get the idea. 

 

We've decided that "the market" = "the economy" when that's not remotely true, and because of it we now make devastating fiscal decisions (and monetary decisions soon) that are excused because, hey the S&P is at an all time high so it must be pretty good, right? 

 

We will cut spending and entitlements only when we have no choice, and not a moment sooner. Most likely it will be while tens of thousands of our kids are dying overseas fighting the Chinese, or Russians, or who the hell knows who it will be. When mothers see a car with a white top drive by, and breathe a guilty sigh of relief when it stops at their neighbor's house instead of their own, or when the local radio stations list the names of the newest forever heroes as we drive to work, then suddenly there will be a renewed desire to funnel our tax dollars away from able-bodied deadbeats and wannabe-immortal senior citizens... 

[tac airlifter]

24 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

We will cut spending and entitlements only when we have no choice, and not a moment sooner. 

If we substantially cut entitlements, there will be a civil war.
 

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

If you’re a realist you don’t ignore the $4T added to the deficit. A realist asks why taxes are being cut and not sustained or increased. Welcome back to reality.

$4 Trillion added to the deficit!?  So next FY year we’ll see a $6 Trillion deficit!?  Damn.

[Boomer6]

3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

If we substantially cut entitlements, there will be a civil war.
 

Well it's a good thing the ppl ratner references are too fat, lazy, old, or liberal to take up arms...

[Lord Ratner]

4 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

If we substantially cut entitlements, there will be a civil war.
 

Civil war is not an issue, because "we" (we the people) are not going to cut entitlements, like I said. The "we" that wants to cut the budget to something sustainable is such a small demographic that we have no path to electoral victory. As such, there will be no cuts, as we see with this bill. 

When my prophesized Great War happens, there will also be no civil war because suddenly "we the people" will be entirely interested in cuts as the government bombards us day in and day out with propaganda imploring us to buy war bonds and pinch every penny possible to protect our fighting boys and girls overseas. 

I'm not disagreeing with you per se; if somehow there was a way to pry the entitlements away from the entitled, there would certainly be violent social unrest. But the mechanism to take those entitlements away is the exact same mechanism that is protecting the entitlements in the first place. People voted for the politicians who ran on campaigns of leaving entitlements untouched.