Based Chad
Was it me?
yes, but bankers prefer to type bigger numbers so its inflation.
it's a magnification of their already unearned power.
I predict that the S&P 500 will be well under 5,000 by September 30th
- Thread starter Walt
- Start date
it's a magnification of their already unearned power.
Bankers finance long term debt with short term debt. So if inflation/interest rates go up they do not get more money, but have to pay more money. It is the other bank killer.
What bankers like is stable, low inflation. If it stays at 2% for decades, they are happy.
Based Chad
Was it me?
maybe they should get real jobs.
2% my truthseeking asshole.
they fucking start their own corporations, buy governments, start wars and try to kill everybody.
No offense, but you post a lot... I am guessing you do not hae a job.
2% does seem to work.
With stable coins, and mortgage brokers, there is some chance that 10 to 20 years banks might disappear, so we may all kill the banks... But not the bankers of course.
There are 2 dead CEOs so far this year.
Based Chad
Was it me?
Are you sure? Unitedhealthcare CEO was killed last year. The only CEO I could find that was targeted this year was a small trucking company's CEO. Could you be talking about the Black Rock executive Wesley LePatner? She was caught in the crossfire of a crazy person coming after the NFL. She had nothing to do with the NFL, so was not targeted.
I suspect there will be a lot of attacks on CEO's next year as trump looks for someone to blame.
Based Chad
Was it me?
There is no such thing as an economy of "total winning." An adult would know that.
My prediction is there will be more losing than winning in 2026, but any adult realizes there will be some winning, and some losing.
Based Chad
Was it me?
not with your attitude.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Well, the S&P 500 is up +117.74 points (+1.88%) for the week
Opening Monday (4 August 2025): 6,271.71 USD
Closing Friday (8 August 2025): 6,389.45 USD
Tariff Revenue for the Week: $6.12 Billion
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Well, it's true that there was never any such thing as a "Total Winning" economy prior to Trump, but now "total winning" is the new normal under Trump's administration. Did you catch Trump's "Historic Peace Deal of the Day" between Armenia and Azerbaijan? Did you catch the S&P 500 riding one record high after another, week after week? "Total Winning" is really the only appropriate name.
An adult would have been paying attention to the Total Winning.
... but then again, we have to consider your track record. Hmmmmm. I think we can all safely conclude that there will be vastly more winning in 2026 than losing.
It's all smoke and mirrors. The S&P is loaded with zombies. A strong economy doesn't add to its debt. Your big numbers are meant to make you feel good but they're only make believe.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
That quip doesn't work when it is in response to hard data.
Sure, if you consider 4% to make something "loaded."
Incorrect. The two are independent. Yours is like saying that a strong, confident woman doesn't wear a blue blouse. Yes, a strong confident woman can wear a blue blouse and a strong economy can add to its debt.
The data is accurate, not make-believe.
We'll get to see how close Walt gets to 5000. The fed may not survive this upcoming bailout. A lot of middle-class workers lost their 401K in 2009. This time Wall Street is coming for pensions.
From the net.
The California pension crisis refers to the growing unfunded liabilities in the state's public employee retirement systems, notably the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) and the California State Teachers' Retirement System (CalSTRS). These systems are considered underfunded because their assets are worth less than the benefits they owe to current and future retirees.
Based Chad
Was it me?
but only banker fucks consider debt to be an unconditional good,
like oligarchs loving how AI can fulfill their two nazi goals of surveiling everyone and killing everyone.
they brainwashed you to repeat that.
Based Chad
Was it me?
NO strong confident woman in a blue blouse would commit usury!
IBDaMann
Well-known member
You impaled your own post by adding that absurd, extreme qualifier. Only Democrat Congressmen consider debt to be an unconditional good.
This deserves a little more explanation. On the surface, one might think you've gone off the deep end.
I have been brainwashed? Interesting. It seems to me that you have been brainwashed into believing that debt is an unconditional evil.
Who did this to you?
Based Chad
Was it me?
some debt is fine, it's true.
but half the time you libertarians are like, "oh the government must collapse now because we're ALL LAZY AND OVERSPENDING...". (zymurgy)
don't lecture me about debt but then keep offering me the heroine.
I know you can see that point.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
I suggest you stick with this wording.
Too little debt and you throttle the economy. Too much debt and you bleed the economy. An optimal, happy medium is juuuuust riiiiiiight.
Some debt is fine, it's true.
When you throw the word "Libertarian" around, you had better qualify it so as to distinguish between
1) foundational Libertarians who inherently distrusted government and who stood uncompromisingly for sound economics and civil liberties
2) modern neo-Libertarians who have been hijacked by the Communist Party and who have become indistinguishable from Marxist Anarchists
I align with the former. I mock the latter. You absolutely need to distinguish.
1. Heroine (with an terminal "e") is the female protagonist of a given story.
2. You probably wanted to say "Don't lecture me about addiction while enticing me with heroin."
If you want to solve America's economic problems, fill Congress with foundational Libertarians. I know you can see that point.