@greyenlightenment's banner p

greyenlightenment

investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...

3 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 18:26:17 UTC

blog https://greyenlightenment.com/

Verified Email

				

User ID: 68

greyenlightenment

investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...

3 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 18:26:17 UTC

					
				

				

				

				

				

					

User ID: 68

Verified Email

Elon doesn't have much of a penchant for books either. Most of these billionaires and other successful people in business tend to be unimpressive outside of their craft. They are not erudite or worldly people. If the goal is to maximize wealth, this does not leave much time for other things.

He may well succeed. American negotiating position (as the world's greatest military power) is strong. We may see democratic nations transform into communist dictatorships liquidating their pension funds to fund American war factories, or taking IMF loans to buy Teslas. There is no ceiling to winning here.

it sounds like you are going full Moldbug

I think they got tired of wokeness too. It was not just about cozying up to power.

Iran's leadership is smart enough to avoid provoking the US into action. Saddam Hussein made the mistake of invading neighboring countries, Iran in 1980 and then Kuwait in 1990. 9/11 was a pretext to deal with him for good.

He took out a $45 billion credit line https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/musk-and-tesla-compensation-or-control

In fact, however, to maintain his voting power, Musk seeks to avoid selling his Tesla shares. As an alternative, he borrows money, using shares as collateral. On December 4, 2020, Musk had borrowed $515 million against 265.0 million Tesla shares, which had a market value on that date of $52.9 billion—more than 100 times the amount of the loans on those shares. On April 19, 2024, Musk had 238.4 million shares pledged for loans, equal to $43.5 billion at Tesla’s stock price on June 13, 2024.

There is this popular notion I have seen it a lot on hacker news and Reddit, which purports that billionaires are not actually as wealthy as indicated by their net worth because their liquidity is tied up. This is generally false, especially when said equity is in stock, which is liquid and where all parties can easily agree upon a price. Tesla stock is extremely liquid, and there is a huge market for it. This is how collateral works, in which Elon pledges stock to an investment bank as collateral for a credit line. The bank can hedge this risk and profit from fees. Yeah, artwork or collectibles are different and there may not be enough liquidity to absorb a large sale, but stock and real estate are more liquid and transparent.

I think it's too soon to tell. The market came roaring back and Trump hasn't even done anything, nor any progress from China -US relations. As soon as the stock market goes back up, he will go quiet. he hadn't complained about tariffs until recently, for this reason. It's not so much the tariffs they they dislike, but the market's reaction to it. To wit, excluding April, his last tweet that mentioned tariffs was on November 25th, 2024: https://x.com/BillAckman/status/1861198845574815947

Regarding the economic implications, Ackman and others are justified in complaining. These tariffs are unprecedented in size and scope. It's like "we want trade reform, not a return to the early 20th century"

Man I should have gone into the humanities instead of into the sciences. I am so much more passionate about this stuff than STEM.

I have noticed this a ton on hacker News and related communities ,where there is sort of cross pollination. People who are in technology who seem really enamored by the humanities. I have never experienced this feeling as much.

$100 extra billion is basically a rounding error. elon could fund it

Agree. I think most of this is overblown. That's not to say it isn't bad, but it's not going to lead to crisis as many are predicting. Consider a $5 cup of cofree from Starbucks. The bulk of the price is the advertising. Raw goods are only a small percentage of the final price of a good. The beans, which are imported, are a tiny percentage of the final price, so the math works out to a final inflation tally that is much less than the touted 10%.

Not all goods are imported, raw goods are only a fraction of the cost of a good. So it evens out to much less than 10%. A large percentage is advertising . For a $5 cup of coffee Starbucks, only a tiny percentage of the price is the raw goods.

Stocks have exhibited a long-term tendency to rise, so buying dips has generally been shown to be prudent. Institutions have to meet other criteria, like defined risk tolerance. You don't have to be that knowledgeable to observe this trend, and even the experts who are assumed to be knowledgeable have been shown to be no better than a coin toss e. g. "J. P. Morgan sees 40-60% chance of recession in 2 years" This is what passes for 'expert analysis'.

similar to Covid, the market is pricing in the non-zero possibility of something really bad happening. like a bad recession or hyperinflation. Like Covid, history has generally shown such moves to be an overreaction.

As far as I'm concerned, the collapse is well underway. The only thing Trump did was rip down the curtain.

the market was at close to record highs just 4 weeks ago, and the crash came right as Trump unveiled the tariffs. Your analysis seems to get the causality wrong.

It always takes a few hours for the thread to be populated with topics ,and then the discussions build from there

it's see-sawing. I added to the dip. I think it's an overreaction. It's one of those things where it's not suddenly going to get better as both sides have massive egos invested, but IMHO it's not as bad as the headlines and market reaction would imply.

People getting way poorer from stocks crashing than from tariffs, which aren't even going to be that bad in terms of projected increase in inflation (2-3% overall). Whole thing feels like a huge overreaction. Stock valuations are based on multiples, so a small loss of profits can mean a large decrease in share price.

Trump made tariffs a cornerstone of his campaign, and he's acting on that, so there is nothing to expose. But some ppl got more than they bargained for. voter regret. ppl did not expect such bad tariffs, China to retaliate, or the reaction by stocks to be so negative. I think it's a way overreaction.

The market's huge selloff is a pretty clear indication tariffs are a net-negative. any gains in some small manufacturing are negated by losses elsewhere in the economy.

the obvious play would be to short US equities, and then implement retaliatory tariffs. the windfall from the short would help offset the economic loss from the tariffs . imagine had Chinese officials shorted S&P 500 futures through intermediaries b4 announcing its retaliatory tariffs.

ACA and The Biden-Harris Administration's Student Debt Relief Plan

sure, it's not the same as single payer and free college for all, but it's something

The dems offer a lot: student loan forgiveness, healthcare reform, housing reform, etc. It's just the handouts are not as effective at winning votes.

GW Bush pandered extensively to Hispanics, and now Trump does the opposite and wins them over. Trump has made it abundantly clear, when it's not implied, the distinction between legal, productive immigrants compared to illegal or law-breaking ones. The former know and can infer that Trump is not referring to them.

"if the republican party is to survive" people have been using this line for as far as I can remember, and yet if Trump's win, strong House and Senate showings, the SCOTUS, and the woke-backlash are any indication, the Republican party is doing just fine, even thriving. Both parities operate a lot on vibes. if the vibes are negative , the incumbent may lose, like in 2020,2024. Except for maybe blacks and 'single young urban women' , voting patterns can change at a whim based on vibes.

then how does this explain flying? maybe people choose flying because its faster at the cost of loss of control

An alternative is of course having your groceries delivered, which is still far cheaper than owning a car.

Not always. in the long-run a car is cheaper. You pay a huge premium for delivery.