This is a crazy video but it explains the structure of iran and i hadnt heard that yet…

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/14huiVp24pY/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Here is a clip from his senate confirmation hearing. It starts at the three minute mark.



For those that don't wanna watch, lol...

Yes white so you pick a crypto. I chose bitcoin. Its been around and is at a low. XRP i have and is sonehow tied to ripple. I dont understand it all.

Warsh didnt just hold some crypto. He lead research at Stanford about it but thats me trusting google again

So what donyou think yote? That yahoo article is dated july 9 right? Am i missing something?

Well....look at the committee he is on. Productivity and Jobs. Crypto exists. People use/own it. Latest records I could find is that 8% of Americans have it in their portfolios, and 3% have used it to buy/sell things or services. I do think at some point that number will grow. When or with what currency there isn't much telling. Most major banks have some crypto exposure, whether it is through holding it for institutional clients or offering it as an investment option.

So to me.....when you're forming a committee to deal with productivity and job creation of the future, it makes sense you would want at least one person on that committee that understands things like blockchain, digital currency, tokens, etc.

Acknowledging retail crypto usage is a far cry from promoting central bank involvement with it.

I am not just saving at the bank. I invest to match an arbitrary asselt allocation, with arbitrary percentages allocated large/small/micro growth/value, reits, foreign developed (large/small growth/value), EM, EM small, etc. The specific percantages don't matter much, the purpose is to have a specific level of exposure to wide variety of asset classes with varying levels of corelation, but all having a positive real expected return (long term). In each asset class I use index funds as much as practical.

Every year a few asset classes do better than their norm and a few do noteably worse. It makes no difference to me which is which, and there is no need to predict the winners and losers ahead of time. Every few months or so I update balances in a spread sheet I made over 20 years ago to compute the overall asset allocation across all the acounts. If they're out of balance, I buy/sell as necessary to get back close the target allocation.

I googled for a recent historical asset class return chart and found this one.

I think the "responsibly' part of the title is what got me too because there's not very much responsible about this. You acknowledge that you're likely to lose money and are ok with that.

But if you feel that urging people to divest from ETFs like QQQ or VOO to invest that money in PMs and crypto is "responsible" investing, we certainly disagree!

Crypto at least, at this point, is pure speculation. Speculation is okay... but it's not what I'd call responsible investing.

Most people, if they are able to ride out a 3-5 year bear market without needing the invested funds, would be much better off keeping the money in QQQ or VOO..... at least from a risk standpoint.

If they are older and expect to need that money in the short-term, and are uninterested in active management of their own accounts, then they would be better off sticking that money in treasuries if they feel a correction is imminent.

If a person fears a correction, derivatives are also a possibility if they don't mind active account management, as they can earn in a bear market just as they can in a bull market. But, they too are higher risk, IMO.

Ok

Oh don't get huffy about it, lol.

You've said multiple times that what you're doing is "not for everyone" and I agree. It is not for the average investor, and therefore in my opinion not "responsible" for the average investor!

But neither is what I do! The vast majority of my investments at any given time are in the options market! And that is certainly not for everyone and certainly not even for "most".

The only difference (imo) is that I realize that and so I would never even consider telling random people to divest the stocks/ETFs/funds they are long to invest in options! Because unless they spend considerable time beyond some internet searches learning about the topic, they're most likely gonna lose their arse just like they will if they take your advice. That said... if someone had a genuine interest in learning options trading I would tell them the miniscule amount that I understand about it, and try to direct them to better resources on the topic.

I know that I am eons away from knowing all I need to know about the options market. I know enough to get by in it......barely. But judging from your posts on here I think I may know a tad bit more about the options market than you do about the crypto market....... not much.....mind you. And surely not enough to recommend people sell their shares to take my financial advice and take up trading derivatives!

Do I think that in a bear market people can make more money from options than from being long shares/ETFs/etc. ??? Well of course! Do I think anyone should sell all their long shares to put that money into the options market knowing nothing more than what they have learned on WallStreetBets or Youtube because they fear a bear market is coming?? Of course NOT!

If a person wants to invest 5% of their portfolio in crypto......and 5% in PMs.....go for it. I'd be curious to know the results of that a year from now, vs the SPY and QQQ returns.

Hey Troy. You said you like Russian Roulette, right?

Wanna gamble????

Can you separate your returns from PMs and crypto from your other equity/etc accounts??

If so I would like to propose a duel.

I have several accounts I trade in.... but I will choose the one I intend to be most active in this coming year.... which is ALSO the one I intend to be most risky in. My Roth account. I own zero shares in that account so it'll be 100% options trading. Why it's important you can seperate PMs and crypto from other securities.... this must be 100% crypto/pm vs options or there is no bet.

If you can do that...... I will bet you $100 that my 100% options account will beat your crypto/pm earnings.....1 yr return....effective date 7/15/2026-7/15/2027..........percentage wise....not dollars....I suspect you have more of those than I do lol.

If you accept we'll work out the details beforehand.

Wanna play??

Ohio boy. Not understanding why having a savings account is loosing money??

My money market savings account currently sits at 5.25 percent?? And it is safe.

Diversity is the key. Long term is the fact.

I appreciate you wanting to get people started in investing. Noble thought for sure. People have to assume there tolerances for risk.

I am enjoying this thread though !!!!!!!

IMO its like playing poker with better odds. Never bet more than you can comfortably afford to lose.

Money in a savings account at 5.25% is losing money due to currency debasement/montary inflation

IMHO you need at least 8% to break even


For the folks that are going to fact check this statement using AI,,

The data that the government uses to calculate inflation is highly manipulated,,, in the government/banks favor

Real inflation is much higher

Supply chain bottlenecks, higher production costs, and labor shortages and also one huge factor is higher minimum wages increases in the last year. Economy is out out spending buy more products then can be made which then is a supply and demand issue. People are buy and spending money in an ATH fashion area.

Copy paste

The interest rate is not the price of money. It is the price of time.

This distinction wrecks most of what you learned in your macro class. The mainstream tells a story where the interest rate emerges from a market for "loanable funds," a pool that grows when people save and shrinks when they borrow, with banks acting as neutral middlemen matching one to the other. Tidy. And wrong at its foundation, because it treats the rate as a monetary phenomenon rather than what it actually reflects: the ratio at which human beings value present goods over future goods. Economists call this time preference. You call it the reason you'd rather have a steak dinner tonight than the same steak dinner promised next December.

Here is where the story gets dangerous. Under sound money, savings and investment stay tethered. You defer consumption, real resources free up, the rate falls to reflect that people are willing to wait, and entrepreneurs stretch production into longer, more roundabout processes. The rate is a signal telling producers how far into the future the public actually wants them to reach. Now hand a central bank the power to conjure credit from nothing. Ben Bernanke's Fed dropped the funds rate to near zero in December 2008 and pinned it there for seven years. No new savings appeared. No one deferred a single dinner. The signal was simply falsified.

That falsification is the whole ballgame. When the rate drops because the Fed printed reserves rather than because you saved, entrepreneurs read a message the public never sent. They break ground on projects that require real capital which does not exist. The boom feels marvelous. It is a mirage built on a corrupted price.

Mises worked this out in 1912. Hayek refined it into the theory that won him the Nobel in 1974. Neither got a serious hearing from the people who set rates, which tells you something about what central banking is for. The loanable funds model survives not because it explains the world; it survives because it allows certain men to print money.