glunn

I agree that this seems complex. I view this in the context of my sense that the Cold War was terrible for most people on both sides. The Russians and Americans spent trillions of dollars on "defense" that could have been spent on education, infrastructure and quality of life. This was very profitable for a small number of people -- mainly arms manufacturers, politicians and generals. In this context, Castro seems like an incidental beneficiary. Without the Soviet presence, I think that we would have crushed Castro and replaced him with our own guy. And without the threat of the United States, I think that Castro would have had less control over his people. At the beginning I think that Castro was pursuing a noble cause in overthrowing Batista, who was a fascist dictator and who was screwing over the Cuban people. After taking power, Castro had good reason to fear the United States, and the Bay of Pigs debacle confirmed this. So it made sense to ally himself with the Soviets and go all in with a Communist system. I wish that we could get a do-over on this one, but from the perspective of the Cuban people I can see why they would prefer Castro over a Batista clone. I also think that Harry Truman inflicted immense misery on hundreds of millions of people around the world by buying into the Cold War, and Castro was an incidental beneficiary.

I think that we are all fortunate to have TD as part of our lives and I am grateful to the owners, the members and my fellow moderators for providing a place that is interesting and fun.

In 2008 I was pressured to go to a fundraiser at Rob Reiner's house for Hillary. I agreed to do it with a promise that I could probably meet with her for 2 or 3 minutes. My plan was to try to persuade her that many voters would love it if she would propose a credible plan for reducing waste and inefficiency. It turned out that I got to meet Hillary for purposes of a quick photo, but that was all. I was prepared for this, and gave her aide a letter setting forth a strategy for saving more than $100 billion per year. I never got any response from Hillary (despite the fact that I paid a LOT to go to the dinner and there were very few female movie stars present to worship), and I voted for Obama in the primary. I agree that the Democrats need a platform that addresses all important issues and I think that Bernie covered a lot of them. Items that I would add include: 1. Making the government efficient so that more good can be done with fewer dollars. 2. Seeking an agreement among the top 10 or 15 military powers to reduce their defense budgets by 2% per year for 20 years, and aggressively seeking peaceful resolution of the underlying conflicts around the world. 3. Guaranteeing employment for anyone who is willing to work hard, and at a wage that will allow a decent lower middle class lifestyle. Anyone who is willing to work hard should be able to afford decent, safe housing, nutritious food and reasonable access to health care. We could achieve this by saving $100 billion per year in government waste, gradually cutting our defense budget while making the world safer and by putting people to work on stuff that will improve our overall economy, such as infrastructure, teaching, job training, child care, community policing, social work. People who work hard should not need welfare or food stamps, and it pisses me off that I work 60 hours or more per week while unemployed people could be out there working at least 40 hours doing the types of productive things that I listed above. When I ran for local office, I had a ten point platform. I found that voters liked ideas that made sense. I think that the Democrats would benefit greatly from a detailed platform that makes intuitive sense to all groups. Finally, with respect to the EC, my sense is that it minimizes participation. When I ran for office, I felt that I would do very well in the south central part of town and the southeast, which were the less affluent areas. If there were an EC, I would have focused my efforts on the other areas, knowing that I would win my home base. But there was no EC for school board and a vote from the south was just as important as a vote from the north so I campaigned everywhere. My sense is that absent the EC, both candidates would campaign in all states, because a red vote in California would be just as valuable as a blue vote in Utah, and vice versa. As things stand now, there is no incentive for either party to campaign in the 40 or so states that are solidly red or blue and this seems to me to be about the worst possible system that could be devised that does not involve animal entrails.

The price to earnings ratio of the S&P. http://www.multpl.com/ https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2016/11/01/is-the-stock-market-cheap

These are the reasons that I am apprehensive about a recession, especially the fact that it seems overdue. I would add that the fundamentals seem weak to me and there is huge political uncertainty in the United States and Europe.

I am going through every item in my portfolio and selling/trimming with the expectation of a potential recession.

I use etrade and Schwab, and prefer etrade.

Lots of great posts in this thread. I appreciate that TD is a place where we can discuss all of this with mutual respect. Personally, I am not happy with the outcome and I fear that Trump will be a disaster. However, fate is unpredictable and sometimes what seems bad at the time turns out to be good over the long run. What bothers me the most is the electoral college. Because I have always lived in a state that was overwhelmingly biased in favor of one party, my vote for President has always seemed irrelevant to the outcome. I would like to see candidates campaign in all 50 states, not just swing states, and I would like everyone's vote to have a direct impact on the outcome. It seems to me that this would increase turnout and accountability. Obviously, the Republicans will fight to the death to preserve the electoral college. But it seems to me that this battle is worth fighting and that even conservative voters in deep red states might see some benefit from a system where everyone's vote counts equally in every election. If i were chair of the DNC, I would try to build consensus for a constitutional amendment that could be introduced in every state legislature and I would fight for this in every possible way. My more realistic side tells me that such an effort is doomed to fail in the short run, but some things that are worthwhile can eventually materialize if people fight hard for them for decades.

Today it may make sense to buy stock in companies that have billions of dollars overseas that the Republicans will allow them to repatriate at a low tax cost.

Let's hope that this all works out for the best. The following parable gives me some comfort. One day in late summer, an old farmer was working in his field with his old sick horse. The farmer felt compassion for the horse and desired to lift its burden. So he left his horse loose to go the mountains and live out the rest of its life. Soon after, neighbors from the nearby village visited, offering their condolences and said, "What a shame. Now your only horse is gone. How unfortunate you are!. You must be very sad. How will you live, work the land, and prosper?" The farmer replied: "Who knows? We shall see". Two days later the old horse came back now rejuvenated after meandering in the mountainsides while eating the wild grasses. He came back with twelve new younger and healthy horses which followed the old horse into the corral. Word got out in the village of the old farmer's good fortune and it wasn't long before people stopped by to congratulate the farmer on his good luck. "How fortunate you are!" they exclaimed. You must be very happy!" Again, the farmer softly said, "Who knows? We shall see." At daybreak on the next morning, the farmer's only son set off to attempt to train the new wild horses, but the farmer's son was thrown to the ground and broke his leg. One by one villagers arrived during the day to bemoan the farmer's latest misfortune. "Oh, what a tragedy! Your son won't be able to help you farm with a broken leg. You'll have to do all the work yourself, How will you survive? You must be very sad". they said. Calmly going about his usual business the farmer answered, "Who knows? We shall see" Several days later a war broke out. The Emperor's men arrived in the village demanding that young men come with them to be conscripted into the Emperor's army. As it happened the farmer's son was deemed unfit because of his broken leg. "What very good fortune you have!!" the villagers exclaimed as their own young sons were marched away. "You must be very happy." "Who knows? We shall see!", replied the old farmer as he headed off to work his field alone. As time went on the broken leg healed but the son was left with a slight limp. Again the neighbors came to pay their condolences. "Oh what bad luck. Too bad for you"! But the old farmer simply replied; "Who knows? We shall see." As it turned out the other young village boys had died in the war and the old farmer and his son were the only able bodied men capable of working the village lands. The old farmer became wealthy and was very generous to the villagers. They said: "Oh how fortunate we are, you must be very happy", to which the old farmer replied, "Who knows? We shall see!"

Ginsburg should have resigned when she was asked to.

Maybe we need to hit bottom before we can get better over the long run.

I think that polls showed that Bernie had a better chance against Trump. There are a lot of people who are fed up with the establishment, and I think that Bernie would have done better with them.

Please be careful with that. If Trump wins then real estate could drop like a stone.

I am expecting a huge drop if Trump wins and a significant (but short-lived) pop if Clinton wins. Overall, I am bearish and holding about 50% in cash, waiting for the next 2008 level crash. I am also wary of any company that is paying a dividend less than 2% and that is not both profitable and growing. Over the long run, I believe that the best investment will likely be apartment buildings, but real estate values go in cycles and we are at an all-time high. I invest through syndications, because I don't want the management burdens, and my overall returns have exceeded 15% per year. However, I have passed on these opportunities for the past two years or so, because I think that a major pullback is likely. That said, I have a buy order on APTS on the theory that it should do well over the long run.

Moderator note -- the bickering in this thread needs to stop.

Moderator warning -- I just deleted about 5 recent posts in this thread. Please refrain from bickering or we will start awarding infraction points, TD is a place for respectful discussion, and bickering between two or three posters ruins threads for the rest of us.

This seems encouraging to me. I like his philosophy.

Great article!

Great interview. He seems like a solid young man. I wonder how people are evaluating his upside.

It is still at least theoretically possible for the Twins to make the postseason, but only in the event of some cataclysm on the order of 11 plane crashes of other teams' airplanes and a willingness of MLB to continue the postseason after such an unthinkable loss.

I have a haircut appointment followed by errands, but will be with you in spirit. Thanks for making this season more bearable.

I like how Sano is trying to calm Berrios.

I am hoping that Berrios can end the season on a high note.

Sale looks flustered throwing behind Kepler.