17 Comments
User's avatar
Dave J's avatar

Bill, while you're at it with RFK, Jr., ask him for his position on "climate change". His answer should make you a lot less bullish on his candidacy. You're offering pearls to swine.

Expand full comment
MURREYVONMISES's avatar

Ok, he's a complete lunatic about climate. Completely idiotic and I am willing to donate a couple of books by real scientist about how corrupt the whole idea is. Otherwise he's a great deal better than anything the Democrats can come up with. Note the this country was supposed to be a republic and not a democracy so the party that's called the Democratic was a bad idea when it was created.

Expand full comment
RetiredCWO's avatar

Super troll level with the bud-light joke............

Expand full comment
Gordon's avatar

Now that the Fiscal Responsibility Act (don't you love these names?) has been signed into law, the debt ceiling is suspended until January of 2025. Before it passed, the Federal debt was capped at $31.4 trillion, but now there is no monetary limit - they can spend as much as they want until after the presidential elections.

Should we start a pool to guess how high the debt will be when we hit that date? I'm guessing $36.4 trillion, but it will probably be higher.

Expand full comment
Tom Finn's avatar

It doesn’t really matter what the debt limit is or if there even is a debt limit. The debt depends on the appropriations bills passed by the Congress and they never take the debt limit into account when they appropriate spending.

Expand full comment
Gordon's avatar

Tom, I understand and agree. I am simply speculating as to how much the debt will grow by the time we see this kabuki performance again.

Expand full comment
JayCee's avatar

Para phrasing the final paragraph .....

‘When you have a toothache (or have financial problems), you go to the dentist (or to your credit provider for a loan). You know it’s not going to be pleasant (greater repayment obligations). But if you don’t undergo the necessary remediation (debt financing provision to survive) the rot will deepen (the rot now has set in unless you are more productive by using the said borrowings !)

Productivity and Improvement are the big factors, not being talked about, that have made most 21 century advancing civilizations and nations.

When P&I stops happening and there in no incremental hard work for compensation received ?

When everyone is focussed on free handouts and someone else’s earned wealth, becomes others entitlements, to have a chomp of ... NOW there is a downward spiraling problem.

Expand full comment
StarboardEdge's avatar

Hi Mr. Cee -

So true. Now add in what appears to be a near epidemic of ignorance, apathy and immorality among the western "governments" and "leadership --

Look out below and Katy get to barrin'...

Expand full comment
Donald Withrow's avatar

I am reminded of the old cliche. The definition of an Expert is a man with a briefcase who lives 50 miles away.

Expand full comment
Bill's avatar

Or a "former drip."

Expand full comment
StarboardEdge's avatar

Ha Mr. Withrow! Never heard that one. Thanks - I'ma be stealin' it...

Expand full comment
Faith and Works Institute's avatar

How should we think about stock splits for $NVDA based on the below ... say I invested $10,000 friday 01 Jan 1999 in $NVDA... based on the stock split history below I would be holding a lot of shares, no? starting with 10,225 shares, one would have 490,847 shares today... is this math right?

NVIDIA (NVDA) has 5 splits in our NVIDIA stock split history database. The first split for NVDA took place on June 27, 2000. This was a 2 for 1 split, meaning for each share of NVDA owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 2 shares. For example, a 1000 share position pre-split, became a 2000 share position following the split. NVDA's second split took place on September 17, 2001. This was a 2 for 1 split, meaning for each share of NVDA owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 2 shares. For example, a 2000 share position pre-split, became a 4000 share position following the split. NVDA's third split took place on April 07, 2006. This was a 2 for 1 split, meaning for each share of NVDA owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 2 shares. For example, a 4000 share position pre-split, became a 8000 share position following the split. NVDA's 4th split took place on September 11, 2007. This was a 3 for 2 split, meaning for each 2 shares of NVDA owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 3 shares. For example, a 8000 share position pre-split, became a 12000 share position following the split. NVDA's 5th split took place on July 20, 2021. This was a 4 for 1 split, meaning for each share of NVDA owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 4 shares. For example, a 12000 share position pre-split, became a 48000 share position following the split.

Expand full comment
A.L.'s avatar

The effect of stock splitting in evaluating the p/e outlook sounds like an important consideration.

Expand full comment
Dow Hurst's avatar

The $40T alluded to be the increase in worldwide GDP has to be mostly a lessening of worth of fiat currencies, correct? Can GDP really rise that fast, only 24 years? What is it priced in gold, then and now? But, that strikes to the heart of the argument, that it is the P that can’t be sustained and must readjust. Also, the prediction should be worsened by pricing P and E in gold, since E should drop as well due to deflationary pressure, I think.

Expand full comment
Tom Finn's avatar

Inflate or die reminds me of my favorite Far Side cartoon: 2 doors, one says “Damned if you do”. The other says: “Damned if you don’t”. The devil is standing there with a soul saying: “C’mon, C’mon, it’s either one or the other!.

Expand full comment
kenneth dame's avatar

I may have missed it but what percentage of Nvidia's computer chips (if any) are manufactured in Taiwan? Obviously, when China takes Taiwan, that alone could devestate Nvidia's share price.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jun 7, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Alex's avatar

I'm pretty sure Mr. Bonner takes his own advice. What he is showing people is how to safely invest while keeping risk as low as possible. Maybe that's not for you?

Expand full comment