41 Comments
User's avatar
Craig Whitfield's avatar

Would you purchase a house from a contractor that used an adjustable ruler to construct it? The U.S. dollar is not money its a currency. Hello, the Federal Reserve has an inflation policy! The Government and its Central Bank wants/needs the ability to arbitrarily change the value of its currency. The normal state of a healthy functioning capitalistic economy is deflation. Deflation is fertilizer for the middle class, and Kryptonite for the Government and its Central Bank. Only Government, Central Bankers, and Economic Degenerates think deflation is a bad thing. Ask yourself this question: "Why does the Government push Keynesian Economics and Modern Monetary Theory while shunning the Austrian School of Economics?" The U.S. Department of Education has done a great job preventing you from correctly answering this question. The Government desperately wants and needs you to remain an Economic Degenerate.

Expand full comment
Bob Gmitter's avatar

Good reminder Bill of how overblown assets are right now. We desperately need a major correction or crash to get stock valuations back to where they should be. People are addicted to these outrageous stock valuations like crack.

Expand full comment
StarboardEdge's avatar

And like crack, it will eventually leave most of them in the gutter - dirty, poor and crying.

Meanwhile, jumping off a Gold diving Board at judicious, informed and strategic angles allows your personal party to grow and grow - in spite of Maximum Safety Mode and only just for now. Trump is obviously a Disrupter - don't miss out on the Big Bull that will be rampaging around for the next few years...

Expand full comment
Mackinac's avatar

Thanks Tom. Love your graphs. Bill, I like this article. What is value in one's life? It's up to each individual to evaluate. I like it since I may not have enough money. What I'm enjoying right now is Trump and our victory over the Marxists and the exposure of their corruption.

Expand full comment
Mackinac's avatar

I'm convinced Trump is a genius on my scale of value, at least so far and that is what matters for a while.

Expand full comment
Abe Porter's avatar

Bill:

I never thought I would say this. But this is a good article. What is impressive is that you didn’t mention Trump or his administration once. Hooray for you.

AP

Expand full comment
working stiff's avatar

Here, Here! Getting back to what we subscribe for!

Expand full comment
Sluggo's avatar

Concur!!! This article is back on track.

Expand full comment
John P Gallien's avatar

I agree, although he did mention Trump coin but not in a derogatory manner.

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

Bill, I have an idea for a really humorous sarcastic piece. Rationalize how its in the best interest of everyday American's to send $84 million of tax receipts to the Clinton Foundation :-) Damn entertaining watching the Pigs squeal when their trough gets busted. This is transparency on steroids!

Expand full comment
StarboardEdge's avatar

I'd love to see Bill twisted into a pretzel trying to justify the millions wasted on ANY leftarded pet project. He won't do it - they's hid buds.

Don't forget - we're only able to verify this criminality because of - DONALD J. TRUMP...

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

The next idiot that lectures me about paying my fair share of taxes deserves a swift punch in the mouth :-)

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

Absolutely! Without Trump there's no DOGE.

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

How does one become a promoter of Transgender Dance Festivals in foreign lands? Looks very lucrative :-)

Expand full comment
Clem Devine's avatar

Haha

Rationalize how its in the best interest of everyday American's to send $84 million of tax receipts to the Clinton Foundation

ChatGPT said:

There’s no clear rationale for why it would be in the best interest of everyday Americans to send $84 million of taxpayer money to the Clinton Foundation—especially since the foundation is a private nonprofit, not a government entity. However, if someone were to argue in favor of such funding, they might claim:

Public Benefit Programs – The Clinton Foundation has historically supported global health initiatives, disaster relief, and economic development programs. If taxpayer money were directed toward specific projects with measurable benefits for American citizens—such as job training, opioid crisis intervention, or public health improvements—it could be argued that it serves the public interest.

Foreign Policy & Humanitarian Efforts – Some might argue that funding the foundation’s work in international development, climate change, or disaster relief indirectly benefits the U.S. by promoting stability, reducing refugee crises, or supporting American diplomatic efforts. However, this is a more indirect and debatable benefit.

Leveraging Private Donations – If government funds were used as matching grants to encourage private donations, proponents might claim this maximizes impact while reducing the burden on taxpayers. However, this would still raise questions about why a single foundation—especially one with political ties—would receive such treatment.

That said, a more skeptical view would argue that government funds should be allocated through transparent, competitive grants rather than being directed to a single private organization with political connections. Additionally, there’s no clear evidence that $84 million in taxpayer money was actually sent to the Clinton Foundation—most references to that figure relate to political fundraising controversies rather than direct public funding. Would you like to explore that aspect further?

Not sure if ChatGPT does sarcasm.

I'm busy this morning, maybe someone here has some time. We could write Bill's next column haha

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

That's funny :-) Fake news says the perpetrators (Clinton Foundation)! No need to wonder how this government racked up $36 trillion in debt.

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

"Values are relative, not absolute. When everyone gets absolutely richer, no one really gets relatively richer." Bill, this is such an important point and one that an Economic Degenerate can't comprehend. If everyone's given a billion $'s then no one is rich :-) You'll still need to produce to survive. Here's the rub; if you were dumb, lazy, miserable, and unemployable before the cash infusion, you'll be the same afterwards. You have to be an Economic Degenerate to consistently conflate a Want with a Right and still hold a straight face :-)

Expand full comment
Steve L's avatar

Yes Bill, all of your loyal followers here at BPR have been patiently waiting for many years now for the great collapse of our financial world, while all of the “Greater Fools” have been getting rich. Only 14 years ago, many of the “Greater Fools” invested in a new form of anti-currency called Bitcoin for $1 which today is Valued around $100,000. These same “Greater Fools” are now worth millions and even billions of our fake fiat dollars. Please explain to our dear fellow readers who the “Greater Fools” are 🤔

Expand full comment
Sluggo's avatar

Yup. It’s been REALLY hard not to feel like a “greater fool” lately when my financial dude (and my brother’s) started saying I was missing the boat by following the “advice” here. My bro started listening to his guy - and ditched this newsletter - about two years ago and has done quite well. I must say, the Avoid The Big Loss™️ and “you win by not losing” has become a very minuscule consolation.

Expand full comment
Steve L's avatar

Like I said in the past, even a broken clock is right twice a day….

Expand full comment
John P Gallien's avatar

Steve,

You obviously know what you are talking about when it comes to Bitcoin. Not too long ago (2 or 3 years back, I believe), it was selling for around $10K and I thought about buying some, but didn't know how at the time. I suppose I could have looked around and put money into the wrong investment like Sam Bankman-Fried's (spelling?) company and lost it all.

In any event, what I think Bonner is saying as well as others which reflect my own thoughts, is that we are physical beings with physical needs. Companies that provide services that fulfill and/or satisfy those physical needs are required for us to continue to live and flourish. Bitcoin is out there in cyberspace somewhere and only has value because people think it does and are willing to buy it. Gold and silver, on the other hand, are real and have value for many reasons, and are especially suitable to be used as money. Also, neither can just be printed into existence. And yes, I know Bitcoin can't either, but other than that, it has no other utility for physical beings other than the fact that some want to own it. So, I'm a little skeptical about its long-term value while also acknowledging that a lot of money can be made in the short-term from Bitcoin as well as other investments, many of which have little or no fundamental value. So, do you invest in things or services (and the companies that provide them) that enhance our life as physical beings, or do you invest in things that don't with the hope that some others will feel the same way? Obviously, this is just a quick thought. Much more can be written on this.

Expand full comment
Steve L's avatar

Much agreement John, and most of us have invested heavily in precious metals and real estate over the years. Sometimes regretting what we missed out on but sleep better holding real assets over the imaginary coins, which is very similar to our imaginary dollars. I still believe that Bitcoin will be worth a million dollars 15 years from today, and our dollar will still be as worthless as it is today 🤔

Expand full comment
John P Gallien's avatar

Couldn't agree more on the US dollar. As far as Bitcoin, I guess we'll have to wait and see, although at my age, I would be very fortunate to be around in 15 years.

Expand full comment
Conic Tonic's avatar

Good points. Bitcoin is also man-made so it is ultimately corruptible in more ways than one. Gold is not man-made, incorruptible and the only thing accepted as money from the begging of time.

Expand full comment
Don Hrehirchek's avatar

Today, Yes they are wealthy in bitcoin. But what does tomorrow bring? It is just not gold and bit coin. We do not know what lies ahead with the money game. Seeing that most countries of this world are in a financial disaster. I guess it does not matter cause we can not take this wealth with us in our last breath on this earth.

Expand full comment
Steve L's avatar

Yes brother Don, nothing is promised tomorrow, but today we live and like life, it’s better to have then not:)

Expand full comment
Don Hrehirchek's avatar

Yes correct, today We live, tomorrow We die.

Expand full comment
Petra Kehr's avatar

@Tom

This graph seems to be self explanatory and entirely clear.

Still I like to suggest to redesign it with the 493 stocks other than the magic 7.

There weight and their performance is so off the charts that I feel it's too simplistic to draw conclusions just from that.

Quite sure the 493 combined don't look this overbought by far.

What do you think?

Expand full comment
Brien's avatar

The question in my mind is that if we go back to 1925, was there a better investment strategy than “buy and hold”(over the entire 100 year period) for stocks, and if stocks went up 366 times, was there a better investment than stocks? As a young man I was taught that market timing is a fools errand. Most would agree with that advice. Your chart in today’s post proves that point I believe. If you try to time the market you have to be right twice. Very few people can do that and if successful it amounts to luck and cannot be sustained over the long run. So there is a follow-on question. If buy-and-hold was the best strategy for the past 100 years, is it the best strategy for the next 100, or the next 10? There are many ancillary questions and issues that arise, for instance what about the topic of periodic(annual) rebalancing of portfolios to lower risk and boost returns. Is this just a nuanced form of market timing? What about the issue of age? Should the 25 year old investor and the 75 year old investor ever have the same investment strategy? The conventional wisdom has been No. There are many other questions, such as ‘Since no one can predict the markets, has prolonged sitting on the sidelines ever paid off?’ Just some thoughts

Expand full comment
Paul Murray's avatar

I am more cynical than you. The reason we are taught that "you can't time the markets" is that is precisely what the insiders do, and they don't want company. Best always. PM

Expand full comment
Brien's avatar

That is surely a factor in the business strategy of the investing institutions. As for their behavior, they mostly try and front-run the market on a daily basis with powerful computing and the latest fiber optic technology, trying to best each other by a fraction of a micro-second to the trade. The instititional houses, mutual funds and ETFs stay fully invested as to their retail facing positions while trying to make money with arbitrage and super-fast trades on 24 hour cycles. The retail and wholesale(institutional) sides are completely different worlds. And retail orders from individuals are a tiny fraction of the daily trading volume, and have been for a long time. We don’t really move their needle on a given day.

Expand full comment
Egypt Solomon's avatar

The School of Hard knocks once ruled by the Pharisee is ruled by the Libs today.

The Son of Fred, The American Savior has been given the power to rebuild Israel by God Himself.

Gaza will once again become the fruit of aviation.

President Trump can command at will the destruction of Evil Empires that oppose the will of the Almighty.

Heavens Gate is open for business.

The Golden Trumpet synchronizes the rams horn. Fear not tomorrow, for today Lord Trump has arrived.

Expand full comment
David Embry's avatar

“Have the markets gone bananas?” Yep! Perfect Bill.

Expand full comment
Craig Whitfield's avatar

Samantha Power, former head of USAID, saw her net worth explode to $30 million despite an annual salary under $250,000. Nothing to see here. Make sure to pay your fair share says the establishment. Isn't it fun being a modern day Medieval Serf? On the bright side, you could be a slave :-)

Expand full comment
Howard E Bouchard's avatar

I just read an article making the case for valuing stocks based on free cash flow. They indicated that would lead to less asset-heavy companies like tech, AI, and DEFI. Who knows? Perhaps we should ask "What can be, unburdened by what has been", and how that worked out for Kamala?

Expand full comment
Will Kraft's avatar

Bill, you are way too critical of trump. We all have faults but I like stopping wars and even trade no tariffs should be objective. You have ignored progress in eliminating waste which democrats are opposing. Wow!!

Expand full comment
Sluggo's avatar

“Market Note, by Tom Dyson

The major US stock market averages are as overbought as they’ve ever been. Here’s the bull/bear indicator from Goldman Sachs showing all previous times the market reached these extremes, bear markets followed soon after.”

Hopefully, Tom, that when this bubble pops, you’ll be ready with recommendations to take advantage of the sell-off. It will be nice to FINALLY get to take advantage of The Big Loss™️ that for a few years now we’ve been promised here IS coming, just wait! (and wait…and wait…and wait…) Gotta be blunt, Tom: missing out on The Big Gain of the last 2 1/2 years has sucked a fat man’s ass.

Expand full comment
Stephen Wolf's avatar

Hindsight is pretty clear, so what to do now?

Expand full comment
Conic Tonic's avatar

How could the advertiser’s (Google, Facebook, etc.) of the makers of stuff be worth 100+ more than the makers themselves? That is the real crazy question.

I think the answer (up until now at least) is the undeniable goodwill & dependence on the $US by the rest of the world. But the goodwill will be exhausted and the dependence weaned sooner than we expect. And, then gold will prevail as money once again and all ‘assets’ will again be denominated by it. If Gold is not an INVESTMENT but simply a store of value … under these circumstances I for one will be extremely surprised.

Expand full comment