WWII

Grouchy_Row_7983

Why isn't the market crashing? Do they not see a global disaster happening of a scale not seen since WWII? This could be the end of America as we know it.

mrginger1987

What happens if Russia and/or China invade Greenland and control a major Artic circle land mass? Do we have another proxy war i.e Ukraine, do we let Denmark and the EU defend their own territory, or do we get dragged into a war like WWII and send our troops to fight to gain back land we have no control over..

Whitworth_73

There’s a good book on this comparing investments in various countries during the lead up to WWII and through to the aftermath called Wealth, War and Wisdom by Barton Biggs who was a Morgan Stanley executive. One thing that stood out was that brokerage accounts were frozen and access to money was sometimes difficult. People who owned industrial businesses did well. Also people who held wealth in productive farmland did well.

Sryzon

The world shows time and time again everyone is ready to move on. Just see WWII.

WildTadpole

Germany has been neutered by Uncle Sam And Izzy since WWII

Chlo-Motion

It's gonna be OK guys, S&P is up 54000% since 1939 (start of WWII)

ding_0_dong

What if he hasn't? What if he is the clearest thinking president you've ever had? What if Greenland had been available to the Germans during WWII? Would America have joined? Even when Japan attacked would they have bothered about the war in Europe?

CrazyGazpacho

You're right. In WWII nobody can accuse the Italians and Germans of being passive bystanders. You've changed my mind. We'll hit them with Schlieffen Zwei and sweep in, down and round from Canada. Zum wohl!

Far_Way_6322

It's like asking what would happen to the stock market if aliens invaded. It's completely rhetorical, and deserves some AI slop: If aliens *actually* invaded, the stock market reaction would likely unfold in **phases**, driven more by human psychology than by any immediate economic fundamentals. 1. Immediate Reaction (Hours–Days): Panic & Trading Halts * **Global sell-off** as uncertainty spikes to unprecedented levels. * Major indices (S&P 500, NASDAQ, FTSE, Nikkei) would likely drop **20–40% or more** very quickly. * **Circuit breakers** would almost certainly trigger; exchanges might **halt trading entirely**. * Liquidity would dry up as market makers pull back. **Why:** Markets hate uncertainty, and an alien invasion would be the ultimate unknown. 2. Sector-by-Sector Chaos # Likely to Crash Hard * **Airlines & travel** – grounded operations. * **Luxury goods & entertainment** – consumer demand collapses. * **Insurance** – impossible-to-price risk. * **Banks** – fear of systemic collapse. # Likely to Hold Up or Rise * **Defense contractors** – massive government spending. * **Cybersecurity & communications** – coordination and defense needs. * **Energy & utilities** – critical infrastructure. * **Food, water, agriculture** – survival essentials. 3. Safe Havens… Until They Aren’t * **Gold**: Initial surge as panic hedge. * **Government bonds**: Short-term spike, assuming governments still function. * **Cash**: High demand, though usefulness depends on continuity of institutions. * **Crypto**: Extremely volatile—some flee to it, others abandon it. If the invasion threatens civilization itself, *traditional safe havens may stop mattering*. 4. Medium Term (Weeks–Months): Adaptation or Collapse # If Humanity Resists & Stabilizes * Markets reopen with **new valuations**. * Wartime-style economy emerges. * Defense, AI, space, and advanced tech dominate indices. * Massive government intervention and debt issuance. # If Humans Are Losing * Equity markets become largely irrelevant. * Capital controls, currency resets, or abandonment of markets altogether. * Focus shifts from wealth to survival. 5. Long-Term Outcomes (Years) * **Human victory or coexistence** → markets eventually recover, but with: * Entirely new industries * Obsolete ones wiped out * **Human subjugation/extinction** → stock market goes to zero, permanently. Historical Parallels (Very Imperfect) * WWII market closures and wartime economies * 9/11 (short-term panic, fast recovery) * COVID crash (speed + global nature, but far smaller existential risk) An alien invasion would dwarf all of these. Bottom Line **Short answer:** The stock market would likely **crash immediately**, trading might stop, and financial markets would only matter again if humans regained a sense of control and continuity.

Clam-Choader

WWII was about governments, WWIII is about resources 

Otterpoopie

#The last time europoors went into debt they started WWII LMAO 🤌

CrazyGazpacho

Do you really think European history is widely understood as peaceful!? We're the dominant culture on the planet. People know all about the Greeks, the Romans, Napoleon, the Spanish Armada, the vikings, braveheart etc. The fact we haven't jad an existential crisis since WWII is an interesting point though, because Italy and Germany are current EU members and they were beaten by Britain, America and Russia - hard to call that an EU victory when they were mostly either knocked out of the war (france), not part of it (ireland), dealing with their own fascism (spain) or the aggressors (Germany, Italy, austria). The EU is militarily weak after decades as free-riders behind American protection of Europe. The best they can do is launch a devastating but ultimately unsuccessful war for Greenland, or "monitoring the situation" - something they do better than almost anyone

Impressive_Trick_573

First, the end of the post WWII world order is not a nothing burger. Second, it may be the trigger, but who’s buying into a market when the US is on the brink of riots, followed by martial law anda postponed elections?

Huge-Maize-6287

Well the US companies also got very big because they used EU as a large new market after WWII, so I think the ecosystem that’s created historically has been beneficial for both. But let’s say the US pulls out now entirely and the EU re-arms over the next years and builds up economically and are free to make any trade with China they want (they’re limited now because of the US). Do you think they’ll keep doing trade as they do now with the US? It will reduce a lot of export possibilities in the long run. Which if the ultimate goal is a pure self-sufficient USA and outside doesn’t matter will work. But like I said, it will reduce the geopolitical power the US has now in the long term. Which you seem to ignore. But either way, like I said, I wasn’t gonna turn it into a heated discussion. We don’t have to agree on it, I mainly wanted to understand your view! Thanks for keeping it civilized, have a good day😁

FuckleUp

Remember the fold Europe did during early WWII? There’s a new Hitler now.

Kashmir79

The correct answer is nobody knows. Usually all trading is halted between warring nations which can cause the value of individual country stocks held by adversaries to drop to zero (happened with Russia a few years ago). Countries can get destroyed and have their markets obliteration to 90-100% losses (Germany, Japan in WWII). Revolutions can send whole country markets to zero (China, Russia). You can only be broadly diversified and hope for the best, with confiscation in your home country being the worst case scenario which has happened before. In that case, the concept of modern retirement is probably off the table anyway

indianadave

Despite being very much pro a (regulated) free market, I’m very much left of center in the US. Which is to say, you think I don’t know this? You think I’m not aware that FDR and his “socialism lite” policies and “anti-feudalism” tax policy was what created the post WWII economy and led the states to the greatest growth in human history? It baffles me the left leaning politicians trade successful populism for conservative consolidation every election cycle.

Missing_Logic

Did the stock market reach all time high pre WWII in Nazi Germany?

Rin-Tohsaka-is-hot

We've sort of found ourselves in a deja vu moment here due to Global Warming and China's Polar Silk Road. After WWII, we tried to buy Greenland in 1946. Denmark said no, but we behind the scenes threatened to invade Greenland in 1955. We didn't end up doing it, and instead negotiated the rights to put as many military bases and personel as we want on the island (and still can today, there is no defined limit in our defense agreement to the number of US troops we can send there like there is with other NATO countries). The reason we wanted it was due to its strategic importance for protecting the US from Soviet missiles. If we wanted to intercept ICBMS, it was the opportune spot at roughly the midpoint of the flight path when the missile would be at its apex and lowest speed. Easiest place to intercept. We also wanted to put our own nuclear weapons there since in the early 50s putting them in Europe seemed too provocative, although we did do this eventually. Also part of the scramble for the Arctic Circle, but mostly Cold War stuff. Today, Greenland is suddenly a hot topic again after decades of irrelevance. It's due to Global Warming. In the summertime, there are maritime shipping routes open among the thawed ice that were previously closed. Now it's possible to send a ship from Europe to the West Coast US without having to go all the way down and around through Panama. Everyone wants a piece of this. China and Russia both have ramped up military presence in the region, China even in 2018 declared itself a "near-Arctic power" and publicly declared its intentions to build a Polar Silk Road. Greenland is at the center of that as well, they would want to establish Chinese ports. This is the thing the US is most worried about. Russia less-so, there isn't really any world where Denmark allows them to open up shop in Greenland any time soon. TLDR: In the past we tried to take Greenland to hedge Russia. Now we want it to hedge China.

Endogamy

US got rich off post WWII order, the US doesn’t do anything out of charity and nobody owes them anything.

SukottoHyu

My guess would be, Russia has some extremely sophisticated spies planted in Europe and the US, and Putin is using them to help dismantle the Western nations and NATO. It is in Putin's best interest for NATO to collapse and for American trade deals to crumble. Perhaps a lot of the advice Trump gets in the White House is being adulterated through Russian spies. Who knows... A lot of this stuff happens across the world without the public knowing about it, and in many cases we don't find out don't until many years later. For example, in the WWII, the fact that the British decrypted the German enigma was not public knowledge until 1974. And also, the Cambridge Five, only just declassified last year. There is also an ongoing process by former Soviet nations declassifying KGB intelligence files from the Cold War. It makes you wonder what sort of espionage we have going on now that wont become public knowledge for another 70 odd years.

j_la

>If Denmark and the rest of UK/Europe do not believe it is crucial to defend properly, nor have the means to do so, it’s easy to exploit as a wedge between allies as it is a source of ambiguity in our relationship in the event of conflict, and also a structural weakness. What an awful take. NATO has the ability to defend it because NATO nations defend each other. This includes the US…nobody thought NATO allies would need to defend themselves *from* the US. You know the only nation to invoke article 5? The US. And Denmark responded to that call and sent troops to Afghanistan. You have to be the lowest of the low to turn your back on an ally this way. There’s gotta be a circle of hell in Dante’s inferno for this kind of rat-fuckery. >The reality is that it’s strategic value is of equal or greater importance for the US, and even if Denmark or Europe were to defend it properly, that defense would be for the benefit of Denmark and Europe, not the US. Our capabilities far outweigh those of Denmark, and our deterrence is far more of a factor in preventing conflict than Europe’s… So the US should take whatever it likes? Again, what a shitty worldview. The US has by far been the greatest beneficiary of post-WWII stability and yet it’s never enough for MAGA morons. The idea that anyone else benefits as well is just the *worst* isn’t it? Also, way to undercut Trump’s apparent causus belli. If our deterrence is already protecting the island, there’s no national security problem. >If you replaced Poland with a large and defended US state, do you think Ukraine would have happened? If my mother had wheels, she’d be a bike. What’s your point? >To provide that defense the US should be able to generate additional revenue to fund it. At the moment Denmark is able to lay claim to the territory only because of its proximity to the US and involvement in NATO. It’s an example of a partner nation taking advantage of its relationship to the US. They’re taking advantage of the US by controlling their own territory? What a shallow, self-centered point of view. This kind of illogic is going to run our nation into the ground. I’m ashamed for the school you graduated from. Also, bravo for going full mask off. Naked exploitative extraction is the name of the game. Next, you’ll tell me that the US needs the *lebensraum*…

RRicken

Who would have thought that 80 years after WWII, there would be a US president naming such threats. We've seen this story before. We know where it leads and what is the price to pay. Hope we haven't forgotten.

sargrvb

To add to this, main character syndrome is getting more and more people in trouble. Just stick to what works and understand the mechanics of what the S and P represents. It will help alleviate your anxiety long term. Don't overcomplicate your life and overthink the simple stuff. Good advice 👍 As others in this thread have said, Buffet lived through WWII, the cold war, covid, etc.etc. and he still stayed focused. Don't let people scare you out of a good decision.

jrex035

So like, do people not realize both how creepy our statements about Greenland are (sounds like they're coming from a rapist, which tracks honestly) or how dangerous they are? Denmark has been one of our closest military allies since the end of WWII. They sent troops to both Afghanistan (for 20 years) AND Iraq (most NATO countries didn't), they've been a pro-American voice in the alliance since joining, and they've consistently spent above the 2% GDP target, and yet we're literally threatening them with invasion if they don't hand over territory, territory that very much doesn't want to part of the US. And the worst part? We *already have military bases in Greenland*. In fact, we've closed dozens of those bases over the years. We're threatening to destroy the most powerful military alliance in human history to obtain something we already have effectively unlimited access to.

JeffB1517

(part 2) > That's not the best we can do now or the best that any democratic country has managed to do since WWII. I would agree. We have a lot more case studies. I don't object to more knowledge. But I do think the rural vs. urban divide issue is essentially timeless even if the specifics are not. Certainly we aren't going through Christianization for example. But the pressures that Christianization unleashed are not structurally different from the pressues unleashed by other dramatic changes like: no fault divorce, successful easily available birth control, g*y rights... changing procreative and coupling (avoiding the s-word) mores.

JeffB1517

> Minority rule leading to a home-grown authoritarian state is a much more likely scenario and so the priority needs to be to guard against that. Some would argue we already live in the beginnings of one. I'd agree we are seeing a disaffected minority which no longer believes the democracy intends to deliver for them and thus is more amendable to authoritarianism. My concern though, is your proposal is to further entrench the rule by the urban elite, making the democracy even less able to deliver. That's not going to diminish their affection for authoritarianism, it is going to increase it. Their disaffection IMHO is not combing from Russia/North Korea/China it is coming from deliberate economic and social policy: 1. An undermining of good quality factory jobs for non-college educated men 2. A reduction in agricultural wages induced by aggressive imported labor under harsh conditions 3. A drop off in small business and medium business success 4. A concentration of professional class jobs: finance, IT... in larger cities not midsized and small cities. etc... > That's not the best we can do now or the best that any democratic country has managed to do since WWII. I would agree. We have a lot more case studies. I don't object to more knowledge. But I do think the rural vs. urban divide issue is essentially timeless even if the specifics are not. Certainly we aren't going through Christianization for example. But the pressures that Christianization unleashed are not structurally different from the pressues unleashed by other dramatic changes like: no fault divorce, successful easily available birth control, gay rights... changing sexual mores.

urania_argus

>you would need to address how you propose to avoid the not uncommon situation of a rural population which despises the urban population's governance. In particular prevent it from degenerating into the rural population allying themselves with foreign enemies of the state to escape to help overthrow what to them is little different from a foreign dictatorship. That is an interesting question, but a vanishingly small probability in the US due to its geographic location and dominance in this part of the world. That wasn't the case with Iran and Afghanistan. Minority rule leading to a home-grown authoritarian state is a much more likely scenario and so the priority needs to be to guard against that. Some would argue we already live in the beginnings of one. >They looked at the history of the Roman Republic. They also looked at Middle Age democratic institutions and the fall of democracies in Greek City States. They had case studies. And all those case studies were even more removed from the Founders in time and general knowledge about the world and human behavior than the Founders are removed from us. They did the best they could but it was to a significant degree educated guessing and winging it because there were no contemporary examples and experiences of democracy and how it can go wrong. That's not the best we can do now or the best that any democratic country has managed to do since WWII.

SerpentRoyalty

The only reason the US stock marker has been superior since WWII, is global trust in the Fed's independence. All of these EU retirement funds will pull out when that trust erodes. It won't happen overnight either. Moving that kind of capiral takes time so you'd normally see those effects within a year.

Sudden_Publics

There is no good war. Our intervention in the European front during WWII is the exception that proves the rule, and even then, it was not “good,” just morally justified.

CEOofBeanz

I think the big bois are waiting to see if the US absolutely cucks the world with this move on Iran WWII style or if it leads to a broader conflict

mugsoh

WWII started on Sep 1,1939

ybl84f1

"*you’re a boomer who had it extremely easy*". I mean really - how lame are you? Everyone but you has it *extremely easy?* And you - because you're somehow special - are the only one that has it hard? Seriously are you listening to yourself? Dude grow a spine and quit blaming everyone else and take some responsibility for your life. There are more opportunities now than I ever had, but because you're lazy and want sympathy you come here to complain. If you can't afford a house where you live then move! If you want more money quit sitting on your ass and get a second job. My grandparents - like many other immigrants during WWII, had everything taken from them by the Germans, were literally bombed while fleeing Europe and landed on Ellis Island with exactly $0 and barely speaking English - and then managed to put 2 kids through college because they worked their ass off. Sheeesh and you're crying about how hard things are, and then instead turn to gambling with options instead of smartly investing what monies you did have. Pull the stick out of your ass, work hard and stop blaming others.

Rutherford-B-Chillin

Worlds always been crazy. Except now the craziness is mainlined from your fingertips to your brain in realtime. Imagine if we had phones in the Great Depression, Vietnam or WWII…that would be mind blowing. Add some positivity to your feed, it helps.

kelsos666

|**Benner Prediction**|**Actual S&P 500 Event**|**Result**| |:-|:-|:-| |**1929** (Panic)|Great Depression Crash|**Hit**| |**1945** (Panic)|Post-WWII Repercussions|**Hit**| |**1965** (Panic)|1966 "Credit Crunch"|**Hit** (Off by 1 yr)| |**1987** (Panic)|Black Monday Crash|**Hit**| |**1999** (Panic)|Dot-com Bubble Burst|**Hit**| |**2007** (Boom/Sell)|Pre-GFC Market Peak|**Hit**| |**2019** (Panic)|COVID-19 Crash (early 2020)|**Hit** (Off by months)| |**2023** (Bust/Buy)|2023 Recovery/Bull Run|**Hit**|

newbrevity

So this is like Germany's buildup prior to WWII. The crazy fuck is leading us into all out war. Oh btw you're not getting a bonus from all that money DOGE was supposed to save. The whole world is in danger right now.

limplettuce_

Post-WWII up until the GFC

jaajaajaa6

If that happens, whole businesses will shut down without access to chips. Don’t kid yourself, there is no other option. Would China keep letting them send out chips? Only if there is something in it for them that they can trade for. And that may be a price no one is willing to pay. Don’t forget that China still has a major grievance with Japan from how they were treated during WWII. This possibility is the only reason I own any treasuries.

fallingdowndizzyvr

> History since WWII is filled with violations of the “rules based order”, from coups across the globe to the Iraq war to the Russian war in Ukraine. No. It hasn't. The Iraq war was distinctly different from the Ukraine war. The Iraq war came about with UN resolutions. That's international law. The Ukraine war did not. > What do you imagine has changed? Because now we are like Russia. At least we tried to be different by getting UN resolutions and allies. We don't anymore. We are exactly like Russia. That's how. And our allies have noticed. Now our *closest* allies consider us the bad guys. If not in the majority in the plurality. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/23/us-allies-trump-trust-poll-00702908

thewimsey

If you think this is the end of the rules based order, you don’t know anything about recent history. History since WWII is filled with violations of the “rules based order”, from coups across the globe to the Iraq war to the Russian war in Ukraine. What do you imagine has changed?

fallingdowndizzyvr

The significance is not about oil. It's about the end of the rules based order we've had since the end of WWII. The rules based order that has been the bedrock on which the market has flourished. That's the significance.

OrdinaryWeekly7468

What happened with Venezuela is something that hasn't happened since the end of WWII. Before, there were aggressive imperialist actions done to decapitate smaller states but there was an attempt to build a coalition or consensus through the UN or other quasi-international partnerships. That might not seem like much, but that model was keeping at bay the idea that superpowers could build their own super states disconnected from the international community. It's why China is skirting around Taiwan instead of going in directly. It's why Russia hasn't launched an all out assault, up to and including using nukes in Ukraine in order to assert power over them. Trump demonstrated that the new order is simply might over diplomacy, and being direct in aims like resource taking. It sets the stage for the US to actually make good, militarily, on the threats toward Greenland, Cuba, Mexico and whoever else neighbors us. This is how empires were run in the mercantilist age. What makes now distinct and has shifted us into uncharted territories are the technological development that have happened in weaponry, which can be world ending in a way that cannons and bayonets were not.

fallingdowndizzyvr

The biggest thing at play was the end of the "rule of law". The US is now solidly a rogue nation. While we never really believed in international law. At least we we somewhat discreet about it. Now we openly flaunt our disregard for it. The only laws that matter to the US are US laws. And we apply those globally. That has not been lost on our adversaries *and* allies. The golden age we've had since the end of WWII is dead. That is by far the largest consequence.

AttentionFormer4098

Even if stocks went up in WWII, that doesn’t mean you want a war, right? Tell people in Hiroshima and Pearl Harbor, that stocks went up in WW2.

SealEmployee

Yes, it would - but stocks went up in WWII.

Visible_Sentence_399

If this goes like Japan did after WWII after we took over Time to invest in Venezuela

Waste_Inspector95

I dunno. The US fully embracing the open-faced fascist imperialism it kept trying to hide behind a mask since the end of WWII seems like a really bad idea. Russia, China, etc. will massively gain global credibility and goodwill over this while the only countries that will still collaborate with the US from.this point forward will be shitholes who don't have any other choice and will seek to liberate themselves from American terrorism as soon as possible. The US and Israel are already the most hated countries on earth. The situation is increasingly unstable for them. The very moment they lost control everything will fall apart and people will instantly switch to less evil and more trustworthy countries, particularly China. So... maybe calls for a short time after the US truly has taken illegal control over Venezuelan resources and starts stealing them. Long term, I will bet against the US except they genuinely find some magical way to maintain control in the face of an ever strengthening and outperforming China. Considering that anyone supporting the US is either a complete idiot or a slave who has no other choice... I doubt they will succeed. The only way is AI but even there China is advancing more rapidly AND open source (thereby ruining the US ability to monetize).

JoseLunaArts

In WWII Japan messed with the industrial power of the world, which was USA. Pearl Harbor was meant to intimidate USA. Japan invaded the weak Indonesia for its oil. Today China is the industrial power of the world. USA invaded weak Venezuela for its oil. It only takes an act to intimidate China to revisit WWII but with modern weapons.

Accomplished_Pin_747

WWII

etaoin314

Listen, US military doctrine calls for readiness to fight wars in two theaters simultaneously since at least WWII. That is the least of our problems, it is taiwans proximity to the mainland and the sheer size of the forces that coma can dedicate to such an endeavor.

Gandalftron

I don't think they are nearly as far apart as you believe.  Just a few years ago the world could not have dreamed of Russia starting the largest land invasion since WWII, yet here we are. 

nextnode

Since the formation of modern china and WWII, they are #3 or #4 in the most invasions eg notably the annexation of Tibet and parts of India. The last 50 years have been better - you only have the invasion of Vietnam 1979, and occupied islands which they did not have international rights to - Paracel, Spartly, Scarborough. Hong Kong is a legit example of a territory that was taken over with military means against agreements and China has made it very clear that they do not consider the agreement applying.

derprondo

An attack of the likes not seen since WWII, when their military just stood down and did absolutely nothing? LMAO this fucking clown show jesus christ. They win, I'm as apathetic as I could possibly be now. Wake me up when we get the next liar in office.

wtfredditacct

Shit was already pretty battered at that point from the great depression... which WWII arguably pulled us out of.

Lopsided-Ticket3813

Basically international norms etc and the threat of US intervention kept China at Bay. The international order was held after WWII because the US wanted it that way. If we install a government in Venezuela and there is no longer an international order or at least not one the US is committed too you are free to do as you please. The Chinese military is a lot stronger now, trump will not intervene. Xi's new year speech said unification with Taiwan was inevitable.

lostkarma4anonymity

Right, it worked out so well for Nicaragua, Guatemala, Chile, Yemen, Iraq, Honduras, Haiti, Afghanistan.  Yall aren’t pink enough to get the post WWII treatment we gave Germany. 

G0RD0N_CLARK

The U.S. hasn’t declared war since WWII. Plenty of other presidents would and have done similar things. How do you think Iraq & Vietnam happened?

VapeMasterino

US hasn’t won a war since WWII

EntrepreneurOld7858

A WWII shooter me and my buddies played while waiting for Battlefield to come out. Pretty solid game overall.

hungover247365

QQQ and SPY straight up drilling to the earths core. Kamikaze dive bombers, giving me WWII flashbacks.

Candid_Highlight_116

WWI was smaller than WWII, The Dotcom II would be like the latter fun fact teflon frying pan literally came from Project Manhattan, they needed to handle super corrosive dangerous acids and depositing that forever chemicals inside tubings and containers solved that problem. turns out it's great for withstanding eggs and bacon too or that the downfall of Sun came when people realized Linux on PC was okay, and by okay it didn't mean Ubuntu is on par with Windows today

the_Q_spice

The answer is that a lot of the electronics market is *really* good at recycling materials. Same thing happened after WWII; the war shortages caused a massive *need* for recycling critical materials like copper (telegraph wires and electronics at that time), aluminum, and steel. The copper industry completely collapsed post war and hasn’t recovered since. There are entire ghost towns now in Northern Michigan and Minnesota that used to be insanely rich boom towns with literally the richest copper mines in the world. Recycling is cheaper, more efficient, and more predictable than mining.

AngelEduSS

USA stole everything he could after the WWII, so everyone steals.

Austin_Destroyer

Seveneves is a lot of hard science, which I really liked. The basic premise: the moon starts breaking apart; drama ensues. Cryptonomicon is a lot of WWII code breaking, early special operations, and intergenerational storytelling. There's a sort of Catch-22 tone to it at times. You can't go wrong with either. As far as rowing goes, watch a YouTube video on proper form and just accept that you're going to suck for a couple weeks. Keep at it, you'll get rhythm and speed. Even while your form is bad, you'll still be getting a solid workout.

Hero-Firefighter-24

States run elections, not the federal government, so it’s 100% impossible to cancel them, and war does not cancel elections as shown by the civil war and WWII. Also for a third term to happen, you need to repeal the 22nd amendment with 2/3 of Congress and 38 states (and no the math definitely does not add up).

Zap-Attacks

So WWII was because of what Israel is doing now? Braindead take.

MixtureSpecial8951

Not just this administration, but turn away from the garbage that got us here. Decades of complacency and mistakes. It is kinda like the Great War. I propose that WWI and WWII were simply parts one and two of essentially the same conflict. Everyone thought that the Great War ended it, but 20 years later, back at it. Some of the alliances and players were different but it was part of a broader arc. I think that part one of the Cold War has happened and part two is upon us now.

Rabble_Runt

Check out the Bonus Army. Veterans were getting fucked on promised benefits after WWII and organized. They marched on the capital and set up and encampment. The president used the military to force them out with tanks and guns. Several people died.

Batcraft10

It’s gonna be the greatest. They called the last one great, but this is gonna be greater. The “Greatest Depression” for the “Greatest nation.” WWII bailed us out of the last one, so just a heads up that we will need WWIII to bail us out of this one.

Brawmethius

America has not declared war since WWII in 1942. We are like the "Im not touching you" of invading your country.

GeneralRaspberry8102

Yep if only the Germans told their socialist democratic dictator he was in power illegally we could have completely avoided WWII.

Various_Couple_764

Generally in a crash dividend loose about 2%. There were however two exceptions that were worse. 1945 when the covernment canceled WWII contracts. And 2008 when all banks and mortgage companies took a big hit. But utilities health care, enegy companes, and food companes continued to pay dividends.

GRF999999999

What happens to the massive Venezuelan migrant population that's currently in the U.S.? NPR just ran a piece about how they rounded up all the Japanese people and put them in camps during WWII, 2/3 of them being American citizens.

Cruian

>but because it is one of the most business friendly countries This should be something that is able to either be fully or largely priced in, if true. Not a cause for indefinite over performance. >So mathematically, of course most years it will outperform the rest of the world. What makes these factors not able to ever be probably priced in? >but VXUS isn't single countries, it's the rest of the world, so the countries that perform terribly will drag down the overall average. There's many times where the US has ended up on the lower side of the global weighted average. Even after multiple decade periods. >I'm not putting 40% of my portfolio in a fund that will likely underperform, except for 10 year stretches hear and there. Fidelity expects ex-US to beat the US for the next 20 (see Morningstar link). We've seen a roughly 60 year period where the end winner was international, not the US (roughly 1950-1960). Every full decade (as in xxx0-xxx9) between 1950 and 1989 (that's 4 in a row) ended up favoring international over the US (see PWL link). >Look at any 30 year period as far back as the late 1800s and the American market outperformed the Ex-US market. Not true. As pointed out, 1950-1979 or 1960-1989 would be 2 30 year periods where international ended up on top of the US. Any earlier than that and we get major influence from the World Wars that largely spared the US, Canada, and a few others, but not Europe or, in the case of WWII, Japan. >I'll trust american greed over European regulation and aging The US may also be facing an aging problem, though more slowly. Without better acceptance of immigration, the problem in the US will likely worsen. >I've been investing since 2004, and besides a few years pre 2010, my 20% foreign allocation has been a drag on my portfolio. We've been in an unusually kind to the US period since around 2010. Citations: * https://twitter.com/mebfaber/status/1090662885573853184?lang=en with this reply: https://twitter.com/MorningstarES/status/1091081407504498688. Extended version: https://mebfaber.com/2019/02/06/episode-141-radio-show-34-of-40-countries-have-negative-52-week-momentumbig-tax-bills-for-mutual-fund-investorsand-listener-qa/ or here’s compared to EAFE 1970-2015, note that the black US line only jumps above the green ex-US line for the "final time" around 2010: https://donsnotes.com/financial/images/sp-msci-42yr.png (courtesy of https://www.reddit.com/r/Bogleheads/comments/143018v/comment/jn9yiub/) or here’s another back to 1970 view: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bogleheads/comments/199zs0s/us_exus_equity_and_bonds_dating_back_to_1970_not/ * https://www.morningstar.com/portfolios/experts-forecast-stock-bond-returns-2025-edition * PWL using Morningstar Data for decades back to 1950: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GGJxJPsWsAAxy9c?format=png * https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/03/graying-america.html

panna__cotta

When who stops buying? You don’t have to believe the US is a good bet. You just have to believe it’s a better bet than anywhere else. And as the reserve currency, it is. I’m sure that will change some day. But today is not that day. There is literally no viable competition at the moment. The world fumbled hard when they made America the economic and military “daddy” after WWII. Everyone got way too comfortable and now everyone is too far behind to reasonably catch up in our lifetime. America will be bailed out endlessly because everyone wants to be on daddy’s good side. There is way too much shit to unwind beyond the yen carry trade to really hurt America.

AppropriateGoat7039

War isn’t necessarily bad for markets…look at history. WWII - Huge drop early (1939 to early 1942) then one of the strongest multi-year bull runs ever once it became clear the Allies would win. Korean War - Short drop at the start, then the market climbed. Vietnam War - Market did well early and mid war. Later declines were mostly due to inflation and monetary policy, not the fighting itself. Gulf War (1991) Market surged once the rapid outcome became clear. Iraq War (2003) Stocks rallied strongly once the invasion began and uncertainty lifted.

Fitzcablammo

After WWII, Football was seen as a preferable national pastime because of its inherent violence and similarities to battlefield warfare. Compared to the slow and relatively pacifist sport of Baseball, Football would keep young American boys and men better prepared for a future war with Russia.

mdutton27

This is ChatGPT but still interesting if you’re truly concerned. Below is a clear, historical trend description of how layoffs, unemployment, and under-employment would look if you graphed them from the Great Depression (1930s) to today. (Exact month-by-month numbers don’t exist for all three metrics back to 1930, but the patterns are very well established.) ⸻ 📉 1. Unemployment (U-3) — We have this consistently since the 1930s What the graph looks like: • 1933 peak: ~25% during the Great Depression — the highest ever recorded. • WWII: Falls sharply to ~1–3% due to wartime production & conscription. • 1950s–1960s: Mostly low and stable, ~4–6%. • 1970s–early 1980s: Two major spikes (oil crises, stagflation) up to 10–11%. • 1990 recession: ~7.5% peak. • Dot-com crash (2001): ~6.3% peak. • Great Recession (2008–2009): Spikes to 10%. • COVID-19 (2020): Unprecedented modern spike to 14.7% (the highest since the 1930s). • 2021–2024: Falls back to ~3.5–4%. • 2025: Drifts up to ~4.4% with cooling labour markets. Shape of the graph: • A massive tower in the 1930s → WWII collapse → moderate waves → big spikes in 1982, 2009, and 2020. ⸻ 🧳 2. Layoffs — Long-term data is available only from the late 20th century (BLS JOLTS layoff/discharge data starts in 2000; earlier periods rely on historical reconstructions.) Approximate historical trend: • Great Depression (1930s): Massive layoffs in 1929–1933, corresponding to 25% unemployment. • Post-WWII: Layoffs drop sharply; economy normalises. • 1970s–1980s: Cyclical layoffs during recessions, but lower than the 1930s. • 2001 (dot-com): Noticeable spike. • 2008–2009: Very large spike; permanent job losses in manufacturing and housing-related sectors. • 2020 (COVID): Vertical spike — the highest single-month layoffs in U.S. history. • 2023–2025: Elevated layoffs in tech, finance, and media; 2025 saw over 1.1 million announced job cuts. Shape of the graph: • A quiet baseline with recession-driven spikes → a massive single spike in 2020. ⸻ 📊 3. Under-employment (U-6) — Measured only since 1994 Trend since 1994: • 1990s recovery: ~8–10%. • Dot-com crash: Rises to ~10%. • Great Recession: Peaks at 17.1% (the highest in U-6 history). • Post-2010: Gradual decline to ~8%. • 2020 COVID: Explodes to ~22% — the highest ever recorded. • 2021–2024: Falls back to ~7–8%. • 2025: Slightly elevated at ~8%. Shape of the graph: • Moderate oscillations → huge mountain in 2009 → even steeper COVID mountain → flattening to mid-single digits. ⸻ 📈 Putting All Three Metrics Together (Qualitatively) If you graphed unemployment, layoffs, and under-employment on a single timeline from the 1930s to today: 1930s: • Unemployment: 🚀 25% • Layoffs: extreme, multi-year • Under-employment: no data, but believed to be extremely high 1940s–1960s: • All measures extremely low after WWII • The line stays near the bottom 1970s–1980s (stagflation + Volcker recession): • Unemployment: spikes to 10–11% • Layoffs: elevated • Under-employment: not yet measured The 1982 recession would show a large hump. 2001: • Small bump across all measures 2008–2009 (Great Recession): • Unemployment: 10% • Layoffs: spike • Under-employment (U-6): 17% This creates a broad mountain. 2020 (COVID crash): • Unemployment: 14.7% • Layoffs: record-breaking spike (tens of millions temporarily laid off) • Under-employment: ~22% This is the second-largest labour market shock after the Great Depression in terms of speed and scale. 2021–2025: • Recovery → low unemployment • But 2025: • layoffs trending higher • unemployment drifting to ~4.4% • under-employment around 8% ⸻ 📌 If you want, I can generate: ✅ A combined line graph (U-3, U-6, layoffs) ✅ A timeline infographic ✅ A Great Depression vs. COVID comparison chart ✅ A simplified graphic showing the peaks only (1933, 1982, 2009, 2020, 2025) Which version would you like?

Garbage-Disposal-938

I recently heard that, in the run up to WWII, the military industrial complex in Japan wanted low interest rates. but the chair of the BoJ wanted sound money and didn't want to lower interest rates. so they killed him.

JoseLunaArts

In 1979 American globalists thought they could make easy bucks using cheap labor from China. And they did. But China along its history had a long tradition of being traders in their DNA. Globalists thought manufacturing was complicated because it requires to handle many things in the physical world. Their dream was to have passive income, and having services was more passive than spending all day with the complexities of manufacturing. Let the Chinese deal with that. Lazy vision. During WWII USa was the industrial superpower. Japan made the mistake of getting in the way. Now China is the industrial superpoower. And that was caused by the globalists. Remember those days when American unions did not want globalization? Why is it so hard to find a job in USA? Because American globalists sent them to China.

Able-Breadfruit-5981

Historians will likely look back at December 2025 as the specific month where the post-WWII order either survived or finally snapped. It depends on whether republicans will sign a discharge petition to aid Ukraine before it is too late. I'm buying out of money calls and puts. Implied volatility is actually cheap given the stakes.

I_am_Nerman

Imagine the greatest generation typing something like this when the US entered WWII

PartTime_Crusader

The US used silver to mint nickels during WWII when the other metals were needed for the war effort. So if you really wanted to min-max the value of your nickel collection, you'd have to search each one of those coin rolls to pull out the war nickels (and other collector coins of interest)

sweeetscience

1 and 3. You’re talking about politics, which is a different animal than ideas, which is what I’m talking about. It’s extremely difficult to get cosponsors for radical ideas, and that’s exactly what we need. I argued the same point with a republican friend of mine at the time - he lost. But the political machine _spent so much money to make sure he lost._ I really, really don’t want to get into the politics of 2016 because it really and truly doesn’t fucking matter. He’s allowed to be slightly bitter after the fact because he lost. He doesn’t talk about it unless he’s asked today. 2. You being slightly disingenuous or are miseries about what a demagogue is. If a specific group (billionaires/oligarchs) are committing specific acts (lobbying, campaign financing, etc) to affect a specific outcome (increased influence, lower taxes, monopolistic control, etc), and there’s well documented evidence for it, then calling out that group of people is not demagoguery, it’s an elected representative holding the system accountable. Something I put extremely high on my value list. 4. Again, radical ideas require radical mobilization, and congress isn’t there. Yet. But that doesn’t mean you have to give up believing in a good idea for the sake of pragmatism. Pragmatism is what got us to where we are today during the fallout of WWII. Bernie has cosponsored plenty of bills and lobbied in favor of plenty more that have done and/or would have done a lot of good for the average person. He voted for the ACA, despite having so many reservations about the insurance system and the siphoning of money out of the health care system by greedy middlemen. It was the _pragmatic_ vote, because it would have (and did for a time) have so many positive effects on the average person. It wasn’t perfect, and obstructionism and lobbying have made it even worse, which, for the record, is exactly what he warned about. Our problem is that we’re focusing too much on politics and not enough on the utility and ethical validity of ideas. The one thing you can’t argue about Bernie is that he literally wants everyone to succeed. Everyone. Even billionaires. Yes, as absurd as that sounds even billionaires should exist and succeed in our society, BUT, they have an moral responsibility to invest in the continuation and success of the structures that provided them the means to capture that wealth.

Impressive_Trick_573

No, no you stupid bull. The Japanese need their money back. The whole post WWII paradigm is over. Thanks for coming.

FearLeadsToAnger

> completely ignores the role that the US has played - for better or worse - in the world since WWII. A lot of what the US has done abroad since WWII hasn’t exactly been admirable (I was only going to mention 3 but then got carried away with all the middle-eastern stuff): Vietnam was about containing communism and showing commitment to Cold War allies. The price paid by Vietnam was mass civilian death, destroyed farmland, displacement and long term chemical contamination. Iran in 1953 was about keeping control of oil and blocking perceived Soviet influence. The side effect was removing an elected leader and propping up a dictatorship that eventually collapsed into a revolution that still shapes the region today. And we really have enjoyed fucking with the middle east in general, the US supported Mujahideen fighters against the Soviet occupation, funnelling money and weapons into groups that framed the conflict in religious terms. After the Soviets left and the country collapsed into civil war, the Taliban emerged from those same networks. The original motive was Cold War strategy, but the long term result was a highly conservative religious government. From that perspective, we setup september the 11th against ourselves. Libya too. During the late 60s and early 70s, the US and UK supported the monarchy because it kept oil stable and Western aligned. That government had almost no legitimacy at home and fell in 1969 in a coup led by Gaddafi, who positioned himself as an anti Western nationalist. He ran a weak government that left room for Islamist groups to gain influence simply because they had the networks and cohesion that the dismantled state no longer had and once again, US involvement turns a country into a conservative religious terror factory. Iraq was sold as disarming weapons of mass destruction and reshaping the Middle East. Reesult: state collapse, sectarian bloodshed, mass civilian casualties and the rise of groups like ISIS. Drone strike campaigns were about hitting terrorist targets without risking US soldiers. In practice they often killed civilians, stoked fear and resentment and *fed* extremist recruitment. Chile in 1973 was about stopping a socialist government from aligning with the USSR and keeping a market friendly system in place. The outcome was a military dictatorship that carried out torture, executions and extreme repression for years. US foreign policy fucing *sucks* historically, it's all focused on idiotic short term thinking and manipulation for financial gain, scaling that shit back can only be a good thing.

sweeetscience

Withdrawal from the US use of soft power globally. There are a lot of bad actors in the world, and some of the values enshrined in certain founding documents are important ideas that should be spread for the benefit of disadvantaged peoples around the world. We _could_ do a lot of objective good in the world if we wielded soft power in a way improved their lives in such a way that they believed in building community that represents the ideals that we care about. Instead we’ve abused our soft power position to enrich those that are already enriched and abused those that are the most vulnerable, both here and at home. Bernie wants to focus on the US, which is good, but he, IMO, completely ignores the role that the US has played - for better or worse - in the world since WWII. I don’t disagree with virtually any domestic policy of his, it’s the withdrawal of US global primacy that I have a serious issue with.

xanfiles

The world doesn't have enough compute. Current compute supply is only supply only meets about 0.0001% demand. Energy bottleneck is over-rated. When there is financial incentives or national importance, US removes all the roadblocks to make it happen (WWII or Warp Speed). Are there loser communities that mainstream media loves to highlight so that they can push their anti-AI agenda to gullible idiots? Of course. Reality is multiple firms are accelerating power supplies and there are state governments that are business friendly. Also, Thank God, Trump is in the Whitehouse, who can withhold funds for regions that are not AI-friendly and not Ron Klein (the pseudo-president from 2021-2025) who was mostly beholden to progressive anti-tech activists.

Intelligent_Way7240

Unfortunately it’s been like that since WWII

Royal_Carpet_1263

You’re right. This is a *multi asset* bubble easily twice the size of the subprime relative to the economy, with governments carrying (thanks to the pandemic) WWII levels of debt. How many ‘r’s’ in ‘remember’?

13jfncjai31

I mean, everything is valuable based on what we perceive it to be, that’s just what value is. It’s not a tangible, real thing that’s kind of the definition, but the value of some assets are tied to more “real” things than others. The USD is entirely fiat, it is backed by nothing but the vibes of the US as an entity, the US could print a gazillion dollars if it wanted to there’s nothing stopping it from doing that, but gold is inherently unprintable. Only so much exists, and its value comes from being a store of wealth. Bitcoin technically does the same but it’s historically acted basically like a more volatile equivalent of the stock market so although I think its worth it to have a little, I don’t think it’s on the same level as gold for serving the purpose as a hedge. As far as Japan goes, it is technically worse in total nominal % but its debt is structured differently so I don’t think it’s really comparable. Japan is a closed loop, 90% of the debt is insulated within itself, as well as the fact that Japan is the world’s biggest net creditor. Japan is like a very rich person who has a lot of credit card debt but they have so many assets as collateral that it’s not a huge deal. The USA is an open system, other countries own lots of its debt. It’s like a very rich person who is taking out bank loans to pay for the luxury cars and lavish vacations it can’t afford, as long as the banks think the US will pay it back they’re willing to let the charade continue but if anything bad happens and trust is lost things go bad very very quickly. The US debt is not productive since we won’t really get any returns from it like we did with our WWII debt, so unless we get infinite growth from AI( I find it unlikely but maybe), then we’re going to have problems real soon. Japan is also not the world reserve currency, the world financial system relies basically entirely on the USD remaining stable.

mauriciocap

If you search more historical documents you can call it the "1933 playbook" and include the fordism=nazism social control "investment" and WWII in the playbook. We already got Europe "in war", NATO rearming, etc The problem for oligarchs is **not** debt, is "too much hungry people with idle hands". As being productive increased these people bargaining power, war id the best option. Dumbing everybody down with AI had been a dream since before the 20th century, e.g. the movie Metropolis.

Skittler_On_The_Roof

You're entirely ignoring politics and context.  1946 we were paying for WWII.  It was essentially a non-recurring cost nobody had seen before. 2026 we continually run a deficit because our 2 major political parties switch between being unwilling to tax at sustainable (higher) levels or cut spending in meaningful (high) amounts. Neither side has a plan to reverse this trend, or even stop the bleed. Our debt is increasing faster than the 1.5% "fix" you propose.  

LurkerFailsLurking

Well no. Like I've been saying for months, but redditors like you and the parent comment seem to have a hard time with, is that for an analysis of market behavior to not be total crap, it has to include a coherent evaluation of the real world factors that the market behavior is just one small slice of. In particular, since the 1990s, we have lived in a unipolar world where there was exactly one global superpower that was the political, economic, and military center of the world. In his first Administration and then even more so in his first few month back in office, Trump has dramatically undermined the US' ability to remain the economic center of the world. While it's pretty clear for a while that American hegemony had never been sustainable and that the best they could manage was some kind of "controlled landing", Trump's erratic here-and-gone-and-here-again-maybe-then-maybe-gone-again trade wars that primarily targeted the US' own allies turned that controlled landing into a crash. We've seen the world moving away from the dollar as the international medium of settlement ([source](https://www.ebc.com/forex/what-countries-dropped-the-us-dollar-full-list-and-amp-reasons), [source](https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/11/de-dollarization-in-asia-is-picking-up-speed.html), [source](https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/global-research/currencies/de-dollarization), [source](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/jul/16/trust-in-the-us-is-eroding-the-question-isnt-if-the-dollar-will-lose-supremacy-its-when)). We've seen US market growth outpaced by literally every other region for the first time in decades. We've seen major multilateral trade deals happening without US involvement for the first time in over a decade - like the first expansion of ASEAN in 15 years ([source](https://thediplomat.com/2025/10/asean-china-upgrade-free-trade-agreement/)). These aren't bumps in the road and they're not easily undone. These are massive shifts in the global economic landscape that will take years to complete but represents the start of an entirely new era for the world's economy. It's like comparing the US' role in the global economy before and after WWII, or before and after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Hugely important factors have changed.

Butter_Ball22

The genesis of fake internet shit coins was the MPC Series 481 paper notes used exclusively at US military bases post WWII LMAO🤌🤌🤌

seanpuppy

Post WWII Jobs, manufacturing, and domestic investment were aplenty. Foreign countries needed to buy shit from us cause all their factories got blown up. All the US workers bought shit because we were all making so much money. Inflation went up because money was flowing and people were spending. GDP growth from 1946 to \~1960 was around 5% per year. Right now the entire source of our whopping 1.8% GDP growth is tech companies passing around the same bag of money around to buy GPUs that generate AI tits and shitposts like this. Nowadays, the majority of people can barely afford chipotle without an installment plan. If AI keeps removing jobs, people will stop having money to spend. You know what GDP measures? How much money is spent

et_tu_bro

Great read, but the historical comparison misses a key detail. In 1946, foreign countries held less than 1% of US debt, so the government was effectively just taxing its own citizens via inflation to pay it off. Today, foreigners hold about 30% of that debt. If the US tries to inflate it away now, it becomes a direct tax on other sovereign nations. Since global investors have more alternatives today than they did post-WWII, this strategy would likely backfire and accelerate de-dollarization rather than quietly fixing the problem.

Illustrious_Serve507

We need to be prepared for a meltdown. If it happens, you should look to see if you can say something positive, like Harvard discovering a new physics that outdoes Newton, or anti-gravity, or something like that. Maybe you should ask Harvard physics if they have anything that could provide something positive to say if say things get bad. But trying to dilute the debt with low interest rates may not work, since central banks are already dumping U.S. Treasuries. $40T is a big number. You’d have to do a Star Wars–level change in physics to pay for that. Using Bitcoin as the primary monetary system would be dangerously negligent, and we were doing just fine until the tariffs came into play. Plus, if things do go south, people might start pulling the “Superman” move from tall buildings—only it’ll be a messy fall. But in the end, it’s just the wrong side of a gamble's greed that they chose to embrace. Now is the time to batten down the hatches and stock up on food and water. And make sure your batteries are still good since there are to many negative factors. Smart money would run and hide. You can always fight another day, if you have some capital. Might be able to buy a house with a couple ounces of gold but if it get real bad gold would just be a shinny rock that you cannot eat and you could pay an ounce for a loave of bread, if your children are starving. IF the US allows Israel too starve children, then what are we? And what do we deserve which is the reason that we would not allow these things to occur in the past (after WWII) since good Karma is a protection but now the US has cut USAID. Do you believe in Karma? The fiscal situation in the U.S. is so dire that a 60% drop in the Dow could potentially wipe out the country due to its massive debt and inflation. This could also trigger a global depression but the US could have done things in the 2000 when the debt was $5.6T. That money difference is in the pockets of the rich and now they are trying to do the same with bitcoin. As U.S. citizens, we need to take some decisive actions. First, we must implement measures to encourage healthier lifestyles in order to reduce healthcare costs. This could include setting health requirements, like maintaining a healthy weight and blood pressure, similar to a car warranty. If individuals don't comply, their premiums should increase, and no more drug and fast food advertisement on TV. Second, we need to tax the wealthy more to help address the growing debt. Third, significant cuts to defense spending are essential, at least a 50% reduction, and across the board, we should enforce a 15% cut in spending for all government programs and require a law to balance budget which to me is just plain conmen sense.

Big-Dragonfruit-2119

Like it or not government & international policies all intimately impact and sway the stock market. Look at any crash over the last 125 yrs. Loss of confidence which is often caused by political/world events can cause crashes or recessions. Just as confidence in world events/politics can encourage growth/gains. Look at the Panic of 1907, or the Hawley Smoot tariff worsening the Great Depression 1929. On the flip side there was post WWII growth, fueled by many government policies, including the creation of the GI bill and increased globalization due to removing GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade).

NewLeafBahr

NVIDIA alone illustrates the irrationality of current valuations, P/E above 65 and market value exceeding $3 trillion (more than the entire stock market of Germany, the worlds 4th largest economy). That's vibes trading fueled by AI hype. The Mag 7 are solid companies that won't pop exactly like the dot com nobodies did, but their correction when the euphoria fades *will* be significant. Real estate is more overvalued than 2008, in November 2025 home prices are approximately 50% above their long-term historical trend relative to income and rent (peak of 2008 bubble saw 35% above same trends, though subprime lending was the trigger that popped it and we don't see as much of that now). Residential real estate is only part of the story, commercial real estate is in freefall, office buildings across America sit 45% vacant due to shrinking workforce (through a mix or role-compression, jobs moved overseas, remote work, and now AI). These commercial office spaces were financed with mortgages when interest rates were 3%, now are coming due and need to be refinanced at 7-9%. Buildings aren't worth enough to support the new debt service at triple the interest, which means defaults, realized losses at the bank, and so forth. Bonds are supposed to be the safe asset you hold when stocks crash, and were even in 1929 and 2008. But now they're shaky because the US government has issued so much debt that the bond market can't absorb it anymore. Debt is approximately 125% of GDP, same ratio as at the end of WWII, but back then America was the only major economy not destroyed by war. Today the US is competing with countries with lower debt and stronger fundamentals. Annual interest on this debt exceeds $1.2 trillion per year and constitutes the single largest line item in the federal budget. When interest on debt gets this big, there's really only three choices. Cut spending drastically and cause a recession. Raise taxes drastically and cause a recession. Or print money to pay the debt and cause inflation. All three lead to crisis. That's what happens when the interest on your debt alone exceeds the GPD of Mexico.