Liberal Forum

Sure....it's a "buying opportunity", but how much cash will you need to survive Grifty's Golden Age?

Blackvegetable » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

13 minutes ago

Sure....it's a "buying opportunity", but how much cash will you need to survive Grifty's Golden Age?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFALYnEq7Ao

Blackvegetable » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

13 minutes ago

Sure....it's a "buying opportunity", but how much cash will you need to survive Grifty's Golden Age?

Another ominous-sounding OP with all the depth of a bumper sticker and none of the follow-through. “The Trumpocalypse Dilemma”? Cute title. Too bad the content reads like you got tired after typing it and hoped the sarcasm would carry the weight.
 You’re asking how much cash someone would need to survive “Grifty’s Golden Age,” but once again—no definitions, no context, no economics—just vibes and vagueness. So here’s a fair question, not that I expect an answer, because we both know you treat your own threads like abandoned amusement parks:
 

Do you believe this “dilemma” is based on actual projected economic impact, like inflation, unemployment, or dollar devaluation—or is this just another dramatic headline meant to sound deep while saying nothing?

Take your time. Or don’t. It’ll just join the rest of your unanswered question graveyard either way.

ROG62 » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

4 minutes ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFALYnEq7Ao

Eddie Murphy and orange juice future man thatll take ya back

Vegas » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

4 minutes ago

Another ominous-sounding OP with all the depth of a bumper sticker and none of the follow-through. “The Trumpocalypse Dilemma”? Cute title. Too bad the content reads like you got tired after typing it and hoped the sarcasm would carry the weight.
 You’re asking how much cash someone would need to survive “Grifty’s Golden Age,” but once again—no definitions, no context, no economics—just vibes and vagueness. So here’s a fair question, not that I expect an answer, because we both know you treat your own threads like abandoned amusement parks:

Take your time. Or don’t. It’ll just join the rest of your unanswered question graveyard either way.

Learn to spell "intelligent"..

Reapply.

Vegas » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

Another ominous-sounding OP with all the depth of a bumper sticker and none of the follow-through. “The Trumpocalypse Dilemma”? Cute title. Too bad the content reads like you got tired after typing it and hoped the sarcasm would carry the weight.
 You’re asking how much cash someone would need to survive “Grifty’s Golden Age,” but once again—no definitions, no context, no economics—just vibes and vagueness. So here’s a fair question, not that I expect an answer, because we both know you treat your own threads like abandoned amusement parks:

Take your time. Or don’t. It’ll just join the rest of your unanswered question graveyard either way.

Dont people already get it avergage people been in a Recession for decades while assets kept going up up and through the stratosphere.

Notice that politicians rarely mention the High Stock Market anymore because most people dont care doesnt affect them.

Roughly 85/90 percent all outstanding shares are owned by the top wealthiest 10 percent even Trump dont get out there talk about 401ks because he knows too
 

Blackvegetable » 59 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

59 minutes ago

Sure....it's a "buying opportunity", but how much cash will you need to survive Grifty's Golden Age?

How much do you think we need?
 

Fuelman » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

6 minutes ago

How much do you think we need?

You're asking me to tine the market.

I don't do that.

But I am confident that, should Grifty persist, we could take 18 months or more to get back to S&P 6000.




 

Blackvegetable » 22 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

22 minutes ago

You're asking me to tine the market.

I don't do that.

But I am confident that, should Grifty persist, we could take 18 months or more to get back to S&P 6000.

Oh, I thought you were asking about cash on hand outside of the markets.

That time frame is very possible, let's hope it doesn't take quite so long.
 

Fuelman » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

Oh, I thought you were asking about cash on hand outside of the markets.

That time frame is very possible, let's hope it doesn't take quite so long.

I am...

But the answer wouldn't be an amount, it would be a span of time....the number is different for everyone.

That's still short of par...then what?
 

Blackvegetable » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

I am...

But the answer wouldn't be an amount, it would be a span of time....the number is different for everyone.

That's still short of par...then what?

How about you give some **** thought and come up with answers yourself? 

You piece of ****. 

1. More hiding
2. Copy/paste again. 

Vegas » Today, 9:53 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:53 am

Another ominous-sounding OP with all the depth of a bumper sticker and none of the follow-through. “The Trumpocalypse Dilemma”? Cute title. Too bad the content reads like you got tired after typing it and hoped the sarcasm would carry the weight.
 You’re asking how much cash someone would need to survive “Grifty’s Golden Age,” but once again—no definitions, no context, no economics—just vibes and vagueness. So here’s a fair question, not that I expect an answer, because we both know you treat your own threads like abandoned amusement parks:

Take your time. Or don’t. It’ll just join the rest of your unanswered question graveyard either way.

Let me begin by saying that you're a moron.

I know, right?

"Golden Age" is Grifty's promise.

Catch up.

The Trumpocalypse threatens everything..

Trade War, Recession, Inflation ALL put everything you have in peril - your employment, your business if you own one, your financial and other assets, your health insurance and social safety net.

If you are an investor, you have to choose a balance between your hope (your portfolio) and your despair (your cash). Commit too much, or too early, you'll have to hold a yard sale to eat.

In most cases, you rarely go wrong if you give it a year...but in this case the damage is structural, and the remediation will be delayed until they politically cripple the idiot at the wheel.

Nod.


Now show me your math, forthwith.
    

Blackvegetable » 42 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

42 minutes ago

You're asking me to tine the market.

I don't do that.

But I am confident that, should Grifty persist, we could take 18 months or more to get back to S&P 6000.

Its Federal Reserve Policy print more easy money.

It pisses me off too most people blame the president and government policy not even fully "Understanding" The Federal Reserve Bank and the Treasury "Monetizing" has more effect upon your life and prices than Wash D/C your State Local governments ever could have.

Yet when I try explain that to people their "Feeble Minds" go back gas was two bucks a gallon and bumper sticker talking points.

Learn & educate yourself The Federal Resreve Bank policy and Treasury thats who really controls the $$$ "Un-Elected" officials as well they are "Appointees"
 

Vegas » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

17 minutes ago

How about you give some **** thought and come up with answers yourself? 

You piece of ****. 

1. More hiding
2. Copy/paste again.

You're up.

Blackvegetable » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

Let me begin by saying that you're a moron.

I know, right?

"Golden Age" is Grifty's promise.

Catch up.

The Trumpocalypse threatens everything..

Trade War, Recession, Inflation ALL put everything you have in peril - your employment, your business if you own one, your financial and other assets, your health insurance and social safety net.

If you are an investor, you have to choose a balance between your hope (your portfolio) and your despair (your cash). Commit too much, or too early, you'll have to hold a yard sale to eat.

In most cases, you rarely go wrong if you give it a year...but in this case the damage is structural, and the remediation will be delayed until they politically cripple the idiot at the wheel.

Nod.

Now show me your math, forthwith.

Wow, Veghead—you finally managed to post more than three sentences before demanding someone else do your homework. Progress.
You ranted about trade wars, recessions, inflation, and “Grifty’s Golden Age” like you were reading from a political horror novel, but let’s be honest—you didn’t actually answer the question. You expanded the title into a paragraph of hand-wringing. That’s not analysis, it’s editorial panic.

 And no, I won’t be “showing my math forthwith,” because you made the claim. This is your thread, remember? Your “dilemma.” I’m not here to balance your imaginary despair-to-portfolio ratio while you sit on the sidelines demanding answers like an overcaffeinated substitute teacher.

 If you want to talk numbers, start with your own. Otherwise, enjoy yelling into the forum void about “peril” like a man whose thesaurus is working harder than his logic.

1. continue to turn his thread onto me, as always. God damn coward. This mother **** coward. 
 

Blackvegetable » 23 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

23 minutes ago

I am...

But the answer wouldn't be an amount, it would be a span of time....the number is different for everyone.

That's still short of par...then what?

We are safe, I suck at a lot of things but saving money wasn't one of them.
 

Fuelman » 2 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

2 minutes ago

We are safe, I suck at a lot of things but saving money wasn't one of them.

Good for you...keep it liquid.

Vegas » 8 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

8 minutes ago

Wow, Veghead—you finally managed to post more than three sentences before demanding someone else do your homework. Progress.
You ranted about trade wars, recessions, inflation, and “Grifty’s Golden Age” like you were reading from a political horror novel, but let’s be honest—you didn’t actually answer the question. You expanded the title into a paragraph of hand-wringing. That’s not analysis, it’s editorial panic.

 And no, I won’t be “showing my math forthwith,” because you made the claim. This is your thread, remember? Your “dilemma.” I’m not here to balance your imaginary despair-to-portfolio ratio while you sit on the sidelines demanding answers like an overcaffeinated substitute teacher.

 If you want to talk numbers, start with your own. Otherwise, enjoy yelling into the forum void about “peril” like a man whose thesaurus is working harder than his logic.

1. continue to turn his thread onto me, as always. God damn coward. This mother **** coward.

And no, I won’t be “showing my math forthwith,” because you made the claim. This is your thread,

ZeroRecall,

No one gives a **** about your feelings.

Get over to your **** thread and showcase your *******.

Blackvegetable » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

ZeroRecall,

No one gives a **** about your feelings.

Get over to your **** thread and showcase your *******.

Look at this coward trying to escape. He uses the usual tacti - demanding I go on the defensive, so he doesn't have to answer anything. 


1. 'Whom are you addressing?"       

Vegas » 1 minute ago » wrote: ↑

1 minute ago

Look at this coward trying to escape. He uses the usual tacti - demanding I go on the defensive, so he doesn't have to answer anything. 

1. 'Whom are you addressing?"     

When are you going to answer?