Wrestleknownothing

So, why are they ducking Iowa?

Have you read Robert Caro's biographies of LBJ? In "Means of Ascent" he tells an amazing story of Johnson having his first election stolen from him (by Lone Star beer of all entities) and then using what he learned there to successfully steal his next election. He put in just enough fake votes to win earning him the sarcastic nickname Landslide Lyndon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_13_scandal

Market manipulation, as a matter of law, requires a trade to have occured. Marking an private security to market is not a trade. And even if a trade were to occur, there are exceptions to most situations when both parties are accredited investors (all Twitter owners are accredited). Accredited investors are deemed able to fend for themselves. Though there was a fascinating ruling this week in the Ripple cryptocurrency case that essentially turns the concept on its head. It will certainly be appealled.

Can't manipulate something that doesn't have a market.

No, writing it down is not taxable. These are unrealized losses. There is not taxable event until they sell. And they are part of customer assets, not their own. As for selling, doubtful. Kathy Wood says she wants to buy more. Seems like there is a trade there. Fideilty thinks it is 35 cents in the dollar and Wood says she is a buyer at 53 cents on the dollar. Why not buy Fidelity's stake? Fidelity must not want to sell either.

No, Sir. But I have always been involved in finance in a variety of capacities.

My first boss out of college did the NY Times puzzle every day. He was pretty proud of how easy it was for him. He also use to say about dumb guys, "he couldn't spell cat if you spotted him the c and the a. So one day I am doing a crossword puzzle and one of the answers is cat. I finish the puzzle except for the t which I leave blank. I take the puzzle in his office and tell him I am struggling with the last word and need his help. He looks pretty self satisfied until he looks at the puzzle, gives me a disgusted look, and throws it at me.

Kathy Wood said the other day that her firm has written down their Twitter stake 47%, but would buy more at these valuations as she still believes in the long term potential. Previously, Fidelity had written down their stake by ~65%. And Musk said that Twitter is cash flow negative because advertising revenue is down 50% (though he didn't say from where, other estimates had it down 89% from pre-deal levels earlier this year) and the debt load is heavy. Current interest rates on the three debt tranches range from 9.8% to 15.1%. So why not go public? As a private company the only thing that matters is cash flow. But as a public company no one is better at creating a meme stock than Elon Musk. There are hoards of loyal Musk followers who would gladly subscribe to the IPO. The stock would surely trade higher in public markets than private. The con argument is that no private company likes to do a down round, but it sure seems like it is better to issue stock and pay off the high interest rate debt at this point.

But you can rely on Chicago voter rolls to establish someone is dead

BS. Tupac's not dead.

Peacefully and patriotically? No.

None of the other 44 attempt to interfere with the peaceful transition of power. Perhaps those facts are related.

You are right. I was needlessly harsh there. Prior to 1878 and the building of the first successful oil tanker, this was a true statement. Today? Not so much. Did you mean prior to 1878?

I heard you got DQ'd because you wouldn't put the pen down.

This is really dumb.

Homeless guys on drugs are notoriously reliable narrators.

Again. Never said it, never implied it. You are so married to this idea that anyone who tells you you are wrong must be them.

Indeed, maybe you were not (you were not). But that study does not support or refute your claim. But you were just joking, so what difference does it make?

The primary problem in two words.

You ascribe things to me I never said nor implied. Of course Biden's policies (and Trump's before him) with regard to aggressively expanding the money supply while stopping production directly led to inflation. And now cutting back on the money supply while raising interest rates has begun to reverse the effect (though we are still on a knife's edge where we could tilt toward recession). But to blame Biden's attempted ban on new drilling permits on public lands, which would have been a rounding error on a pimple (and he was not even able to implement for more than a few months), is wrong. It also ignores that oil production has expanded continually under Biden, though it is still below the pre-pandemic peak.

If I told you you were wrong about what caused inflation would it matter?

You have excellent taste.

That is the lamest technique of all time. "Is the Pope Jewish? I am not saying he is. I am just asking a question."

I just informed my wife I have grabbing her ass in public blindness. I will let you know how that works out.