Stock-Age: Stocks, Options and Dividends oh my!

There are more billionaires out there than just Bill Ackman. There were a lot of donations and contributions to President Trump's campaign from all kinds of rich donors, and not all of them have the same interests. Although I don't quite know how it's all related, what concerns me is a lot of financial ties surrounding Saudi Arabia and whose interests intersect where in the long term effects of these tarrifs on the petrodollar, in the wake of other countries trying to set up their own financial infrastructure to use their currency for energy.

Almost double the billionaires who showed support for a candidate preferred Kamala Harris over Trump.

It seems that the majority of the ultra rich didn't want Trump. The fact that a bunch of them are mad at him right now for tanking their portfolios fits the theme.

There was a running list of endorsements/donation/support done by Forbes up until election day. This was their last tally before the election:

"Our breakdown records 83 billionaires supporting Harris and 52 backing Trump so far (see the lists for both below)."

 
Almost double the billionaires who showed support for a candidate preferred Kamala Harris over Trump.

It seems that the majority of the ultra rich didn't want Trump. The fact that a bunch of them are mad at him right now for tanking their portfolios fits the theme.

There was a running list of endorsements/donation/support done by Forbes up until election day. This was their last tally before the election:

"Our breakdown records 83 billionaires supporting Harris and 52 backing Trump so far (see the lists for both below)."


I had this discussion before, and I don't want to get too sidetracked, but that article doesn't paint the whole story. While there may be more billionaries in number, these are the ones that Forbes could find with easily searchable records. If you look at Open Secrets you'll see that the most of the top donaters gave to Trump, and by a large margin too. Furthermore, you can see that a larger percentage of Harris' individual donaters were small individual donors relative to Trump. What you also can't see is the process of dark money. These expenditures are even harder to track than PACs and Super PACs. Now which party is the one that supports Citizen United, and thus these kinds of campaign shenanigans? While both parties are terrible on this issue, one party is objectively worse. Note that this also doesn't count any untrackable election related financial conflicts of interest that could happen from Trump's business ventures.



 
I had this discussion before, and I don't want to get too sidetracked, but that article doesn't paint the whole story. While there may be more billionaries in number, these are the ones that Forbes could find with easily searchable records. If you look at Open Secrets you'll see that the most of the top donaters gave to Trump, and by a large margin too. Furthermore, you can see that a larger percentage of Harris' individual donaters were small individual donors relative to Trump. What you also can't see is the process of dark money. These expenditures are even harder to track than PACs and Super PACs. Now which party is the one that supports Citizen United, and thus these kinds of campaign shenanigans? While both parties are terrible on this issue, one party is objectively worse. Note that this also doesn't count any untrackable election related financial conflicts of interest that could happen from Trump's business ventures.




Thank you for the nuanced response.

The reality is it's a complex matter and not so black and white as many people would prefer things to be.
 
The stock market is in the largest bubble in history, even higher than the dot com or before 2008 crisis. Even with thses drops, its still over valued above those other bubbles.

I would say that we printed money this decade like no other time in human history. But thats for another topic.
 
Thank you for the nuanced response.

The reality is it's a complex matter and not so black and white as many people would prefer things to be.

It is incredibly complicated and that is by design to obfuscate the source of money and influence. It's incredibly hard to make a judgement call without letting the inherently tribal nature of politics cloud one's thinking, so I find that it's simpler to line up conflicts of interests and see if they make any sense.
 
The US isn't even the fattest country in the world anymore. And Europe is right behind us despite the better food. And it's all down to portion sizes and physical activity. No one needs to get fat in the US or anywhere else. It's a lifestyle choice.

And the pizza? Come on man, I live in NYC and nothing beats the pizza here lol hands down the best
The U.S obesity % is 42% of the population . The closest EU country is Greece with 32%. Germany is 24%, Spain is at 19%. France is 10% That's not right behind lol. It's very far behind for most of Europe.

Do u travel internationally a lot? You'll see way more fat people here than anywhere. It's not even close. Unless it's a tourist area with Americans lol. And the average obeese person here weighs a lot more, I imagine.

Physical activity and portion size matters a lot, but so do ingredients. Some ingredients used in the U.S will make you more hungry, which will lead to larger portion sizes.

Something can taste great but still be more unhealthy or bad for u
 
Last edited:
The U.S obesity % is 42% of the population . The closest EU country is Greece with 32%. Germany is 24%, Spain is at 19%. France is 10% That's not right behind lol. It's very far behind.

Do u travel internationally a lot? You'll see way more fat people here than anywhere. It's not even close. Unless it's a tourist area with Americans lol.

Physical activity and portion size matters a lot, but so do ingredients. Some ingredients used in the U.S will make you more hungry, which will lead to larger portion sizes.

Something can taste the best but still be more unhealthy.

I've been to Canada, Aruba, Peru, France, and Greece like 20 times over my life since I still have over half my family there.

There is definitely tons of obese people here in the USA. But check out these maps.

Overweight population (BMI >25):

gHrWn06.png



Obese population (BMI >30):

xJqYjJ9.png


Not exactly an exemplary image of health lol
 
China told America to go pound sand and will fight till the end. Not surprising really.

 
Worth a read:

Hamish McRae

The crash is not as bad as it seems

  • 8 April 2025, 6:36am
    GettyImages-2209069522-VSCO_2333e3.jpg
It's that moment of supreme uncertainty. We do however know the question. Is this a regular sell-off, with the S&P500 nudging into bear market territory, but then steadying in the next few months before a gradual recovery? Or is this a true crash, akin to those of October 1929, October 1987, October 2008, or most recently March 2020, in which case we are less than halfway down the peak?

The strategists have of course been crawling over the data of previous crashes, but the analogies never really fit. There has not been a trade war akin to what may be developing now since the 1930s, when the world economy was both less integrated and more fragile. The confident predictions of a couple of weeks ago that US equities would end up this year now look rather silly. Being clever doesn't help.
We can however say two things. One is that sudden vicious crashes are rare. Longview Economics, a London-based consultancy, calculates that those four noted above are the only ones on that scale in the past 100 years. The other is that bear markets are totally normal. There are lots of them, 27 on the S&P500 index and its predecessors since 1923, with an average decline of 35 per cent. Unlike those sudden crashes, a classic bear market decline typically takes between nine and ten months, and they come through on average every three-and-a-half years. Hartford Funds has a handy tally here. If you accept that what's happening is normal – that Donald Trump's tariffs have simply triggered a decline that would probably have happened anyway – then figuring out what might happen becomes a little easier.
We also learnt something new yesterday about this current plunge. It was that any sort of softening of Donald Trump's tariffs would check the crash, though not necessary stop a longer bear market decline. The sniff of a delay in the implementation of the tariffs was enough to push up prices for a few minutes, then when it became clear it was simply a rumour, markets duly flopped back.
There are four reasons why what we're seeing in the market is not as bad as it seems:
  1. Whatever happens in the next few days, the overwhelming probability is that this will turn out to be a classic bear market lasting several months, with equities falling by at least another 10 per cent. The reason: the market was over-priced and it was simply a question of what would trigger the fall.
  2. The tariff war will have an outcome, in the sense that it won't rumble on for years. We are talking a few months before an accommodation with the US's major trading partners is secured.
  3. There are a couple of helpful analogies. One is the dot-com bubble. The overvaluation of high-tech America now is not as serious as in 2000. The other is the banking crash of 2008. This is, or at least may develop into, a trade crash. But trade disruption is easier to fix than banking disruption. Commerce is more resilient than finance.
  4. If those three points are more or less right, then while the next few months will be difficult, the overall loss of global output will be less serious than the recessions what followed the dot-com bubble and the banking crash. There may or may not be a US or European recession, but they won't be serious ones unless there is some further negative event. We are looking at a mid-cycle pause in global growth, not the end of the expansion period.
We are looking at a mid-cycle pause in global growth, not the end of the expansion period
There is, however, one overarching concern. It's the financial fragility of the US – the size of the fiscal deficit and the reliance on the rest of the world to be prepared to hold yet more US treasury debt to fund it. The destruction of wealth that has taken place over the past few days is huge. A month ago three of the 'magnificent seven' – Apple, Microsoft and Nvidia – were all worth more than $3 trillion. Now, none of them are.
Also, until yesterday the yield on US treasury notes was falling, with 10-year Treasury notes trading below 4 per cent overnight. Then during the course of the day yields climbed to 4.2 per cent. That's still way down from 4.8 per cent in mid-January, when Treasuries were helped by expectations of further cuts in interest rates by the Federal Reserve, but Monday was a nasty time for bond holders. So while the broad picture is that international investors have been prepared to carry on financing the US deficit, despite their countries being attacked by tariffs, you have to ask whether they will continue to do so.
Final thought. We are seeing a well-known market phenomenon unfold. Everything takes longer to happen than anyone expects, then when it does come, it always does so more violently. Remember the interchange in Ernest Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises?
'How did you go bankrupt?' Bill asked.
'Two ways,' Mike said. 'Gradually and then suddenly.'

Written by

Hamish McRae
Hamish McRae is an economics commentator, and a columnist for the i newspaper.
 
Last edited:
But remember this isn't a tax on wealth, it's just a tax on annual income above a certain threshhold. Most ultra wealthy don't earn an income. It's almost all from capital gains.
Then tax capital gains.

And also close this stupid loophole of being able to secure business loans using stocks as collateral. Realise the gains, pay tax and then use the cash from that. This has the double benefit of not incentivising CEOs and major stockholders pumping stocks to increase their networth and allow them to secure more tax-free loans.
 
guys, post your portfolios!

Outside of ETF holdings for coal and tech.. I have;

$NVDA
$NET
$CDNS
$PLTR
$ISRG
$HUM
$ILMN
$HCC
$ESTC
$PANW
$SPOT
Eutelsat
$CAVA
 
Last edited:
Looks like Elon is going after Navarro - let them fight!

Also its a joke that a career long politician like Navarro, a man who somehow got a Phd from Harvard by never creating/adding anything of value, the literal poster boy for 'drain the swamp', is in charge of U.S. trade policies.
 
Last edited:
Well well well. Sure is quiet round these parts.
There's a big deadline tomorrow for more tariffs.

Today's rally is hoping deals are made and people buying the dip, but Trump hasn't really signaled that's going to take.

I fucking hope some deals are made but China being the biggest one seems incredibly unlikely.
 
Well well well. Sure is quiet round these parts.

We're kinda in the eye of the storm right now. Tomorrow April 9th, is the day Trump says he will increase China's tariffs to 50%. The bump in the markets is due to hopium that Trump is either going to fold or some deals with come through. So if no deals are made and Trump digs his heels in to keep the Tariffs in place, it is going to get pretty ugly.

Edit: NEVERMIND! LOL!
 
Last edited:
Yeah as I said 20 minutes before that news the hopium was ill advised. Every single thing actually said by Trump indicated he was going to double down not back off.

I still reserve a sliver of hope somehow tomorrow morning this gets rolled back and some deal will be made but China absolutely does not seem like they will back down whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
Yeah as I said 20 minutes before that news the hopium was ill advised. Every single thing actually said by Trump indicated he was going to double down not back off.

I still reserve a sliver of hope somehow tomorrow morning this gets rolled back and some deal will be made but China absolutely does not seem like they will back down whatsoever.

No deal will be made with China, they don't give a fuck. The US (and the rest of the world) gave away all of their techniques and secrets in exchange for cheap labour, especially so on the tech side.

They are now in a position where they don't need the US anymore.
 
Max levels of copium at the White House:

China has to make a deal with the US, White House says

Donald Trump believes that China has to make a deal with the United States concerning additional tariffs that are set to go into effect on Wednesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told a news briefing.

"The Chinese want to make a deal. They just don't know how to do it," Leavitt said on Tuesday. "He believes China has to make a deal with the United States."

If China reaches out, she added, Trump would be "incredibly gracious, but he's going to do what's best for the American people".

 
Is the administration expecting the public to revolt in communist china? As mentioned above, chinese people really care about optics/honor - moreso than they do about stocks/consumerism

Best case scenario now - China and America make a 'deal' for what effectively is already in place before Navarro scam. Orange claims the win, FAGA can have their 5 min victory lap, and then back to business
 
Last edited:
If this report from UNCTAD is correct, that sounds like a truly shitty idea, goddamn :messenger_grimmacing_

yhyq6ET.png

Yeah that guy is just a CEO of some shipping related company, not a pundit or anything.

I mean he could be making shit up, but if you read the thread he says many prominent shippers have said they'll just not deliver to most cities in the US. So basically MOST ports outside of 2-3 are going to just stop having a huge percentage of their business, and instead the major ports will just be over-loaded. I believe typically a ship might unload part of it's load in LA for instance, then go up the coast towards Seattle, and they'll skip the Seattle part as it's not feasible to dock at those prices for a portion of their load.

He says many shippers just will stop coming to the US altogether.

The cascading effect will suddenly cause a lot more products to need to be shipped via trains and trucks.

So completely fuck a bunch of cities as it pertains to jobs at ports and surrounding areas + yet another increase of the price of goods to those areas. Not to mention another sudden need for more truckers.

We could see supply chain issues a lot worse than COVID potentially, and without any real reason for it other than trade war dipship.

All of this shit happening all at once is just madness. It's one thing to slowly implement changes based on a difference in economic ideologies, observing the effects as you go along and adjusting from there..., it's something else just to throw tantrums and majorly change the cost of so many things all at once.
 
Last edited:
All of this shit happening all at once is just madness. It's one thing to slowly implement changes based on a difference in economic ideologies, observing the effects as you go along and adjusting from there..., it's something else just to throw tantrums and majorly change the cost of so many things all at once.
Command economies are a disaster, who knew!
 
The White House is brain dead.

White House Trade Advisor Peter Navarro criticized BMW's business model in Spartanburg, South Carolina, stating it is detrimental to the U.S. economy and national security.

"This business model where BMW and Mercedes come in to Spartanburg, South Carolina, and have us assemble German engines and Austrian transmissions. That doesn't work for America. It's bad for our economics. It's bad for our national security. We want them to come here," Navarro said.

In response, a spokesperson for BMW's manufacturing plant in Spartanburg highlighted the facility's significant contributions.

"Plant Spartanburg is an eight million-square-foot facility with three body shops, two paint shops, two assembly halls, a metal stamping facility for body panels, an investment of more than fourteen point eight billion dollars," the spokesperson said. "And eleven thousand highly skilled associates making fifteen hundred vehicles daily—four hundred thousand a year—with parts from hundreds of suppliers across the United States."

The spokesperson added, "We export more vehicles from the United States than we import into the country. Plant Spartanburg generates a total economic impact of twenty six point seven billion dollars for our state, supporting nearly forty three thousand jobs and $3.1 billion dollars in wages and salaries."


Like, wtf do they even want?
 
Last edited:
They should increase tarrifs on China to 200%

Some of you almost giddy that China won't back down yet is kind of weird.

They sell all their trash to us, no one can fill that vaccuum in sales if the US doesn't buy it. They will be destroyed.

Anyone see that Pelosi video on tariffs from 1996 talking about China and tariffs? Basically Trump in a wig.
 
Top Bottom