LC

Yes but I think a lot is driven by interest rates. But we all play to the tune of interest rates. The 5-year treasury yields 1.2%. What should the blue-chip compounding companies (CPGs, Microsoft, etc.) yield in this type of environment? 3.5%? 4%? 5%? I think the bigger question is should interest rates be this low, and for how long? Is there a legitimate, economic reason that rates should be low for a long period of time in the US? If you think the answer is yes, then I think you can invest with an intellectually-clean conscience at these prices. For example, my portfolio is in my signature. There's some companies in there trading at some high (>20x) earnings ratios. But I have argued for a while now on this board that the real cost of capital has been steadily decreasing due to improvements in global education, global travel/transportation, physical resource allocation, the internet/service economy, and other reasons. Take a look at the economics behind real estate: it is cheaper, faster, and easier to build a home today than ever before. Parts and people are readily available. All the major aspects have become standardized (plumbing, electrics, etc.) where it's practically "plug-and-play". The point is, the human, intellectual, and physical capital required have become much easier to manage. So in this case, the risk underlying this asset has been greatly decreased, and so should the associated interest rate. Most other businesses I've looked at or worked in have illustrated the same general theme. Therefore, I think you can at least make the argument for the case of long-term low interest rates.

no hubris there

I have to say, i disagree. I thought he was completely off his game. He appeared nervous. Hillary seemed composed.

This is ridiculous

MMM started in 2011 and was most popular I presume through 2014. This was the recovery period from the recession. And here we are at the end of 2016 with the market at such heights, and we're criticizing frugality versus richness of life :/

Well, I mean these phenomenons have been common to humans since, like, ever, right? Maybe our societies evolved this way because these phenomenons drive us to improve our lives. Like, if everyone was happy sending letters via post, would we ever have email? Looks like you're making an evolutionary argument, but there is not necessarily any overlap between phenomena that improve evolutionary fitness and those that "improve our lives." OK - whether its evolutionary or not, how about the argument that there are good sides to the general sense of "chasing materialism" or whatever you want to call it. It drives people to improve.

Well, I mean these phenomenons have been common to humans since, like, ever, right? Maybe our societies evolved this way because these phenomenons drive us to improve our lives. Like, if everyone was happy sending letters via post, would we ever have email?

::)

Of course it's suspicious. The difference between Clinton and Trump is with Trump you have actual evidence, or words directly from his own mouth, of the bullshit he's done. With the Clintons, all you have is suspicion. This is what I mean when I say they both fail the smell test but Trump fails every other test as well.

If we're talking about the smell test, you can say Hillary's actions smell fishy- OK fine. Trump's actions on the other hand definitely ARE fishy, but are we ignoring that? Because everyone seems to equate the two. My stance is both don't pass the smell test, but Trump doesn't pass the ears mouth and eyes test either.

I know, I'm just trying not to come off as pandering to one side. My position is that Hillary is definitely flawed but Trump is what happens when your character hits rock bottom and you keep digging.

This is probably also old: http://imgur.com/AmgZa6V

Basically it comes down to the risk and reward. I liked his stand on immigration and some component of foreign policy but then I realized he will either backpedal or completely screw up the implementation.He fights fire with fire and some of these issues will bring his worst. Do you think Democrats will not try to stir up racial angst if the reward is the Presidency? And Trump will be their best messenger. The guy has no filter between his brain and the mouth.That is a big risk. No Sir, I am content with a tactful corrupt Hillary and the status quo. Well put, I pretty much agree with your conclusion. Not like Hillary is much better. A nice Times piece today linked the Clintons to Putin's grab of uranium assets. Real great for national security.

That's a big IF considering this representative will be the face of the national internally and externally. Additionally, I'm OK with the democratic platform. Life's been pretty good over the last 8 years. I don't foresee a change to the republican platform being that large of a shift.

I've lived in NYC for 25 years and have witnessed firsthand the slimeball that is Donald Trump. I linked 15-20 sketchy things that Trump has done which I am pretty sure you or I would never do or say. To me, the Trump apologists are the blind ones here. But you can do the same for Hillary. He may suck but the other option is that much worse. Just vote Gary Johnson :) At the end of the day I'm thinking Hillary has the cleaner conscience (still dirty, for sure). My take is she's the better of the two. At the very least I think she's a better representative. But I have no gripe with those who disagree, provided they see the landscape clearly.

I've lived in NYC for 25 years and have witnessed firsthand the slimeball that is Donald Trump. I linked 15-20 sketchy things that Trump has done which I am pretty sure you or I would never do or say. To me, the Trump apologists are the blind ones here.

Here's a bit more regarding Donald's "integrity": http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/ Just a word for anyone thinking of providing services to Donald: Demand payment up-front, and in-full.

I see. I guess I was focused on tangible, measureable problems, such as income inequality. I'm sure Donald screwing over small contractors has nothing to do with that. And Donald the landlord cutting off heat/hot water in the winter has nothing to do with that. They were just entitled! Instead, let me focus on this "entitlement" problem, which Donald Trump definitely does not suffer from by the way!

I'm going to change my write-in of Bernie Sanders to a vote for the Clinton political machine. It's really a vote against Donald, though. And I just moved to Colorado where a vote actually counts. Another election, another vote for the "best of the worst".

signature. relatively equal weights.

It's not the Trump supporters who are violent. Plenty of violence from Trump supporters as well: http://tucson.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/tucson-police-man-arrested-in-connection-with-punch-at-donald/article_d614bc6e-ee2d-11e5-9486-835bb82d934f.html Fact of the matter is this race is more emotional than logical and those emotions are causing violence from both sides.

Not providing heat/hot water is 100% illegal as a landlord in NYC Here's a few more since you bring up getting away with repeated criminal activity: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/donald-trump-scandals/474726/ http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-hotel-accused-of-using-illegal-hispanic-construction-workers/ http://www.pajiba.com/politics/a-complete-list-of-all-the-times-donald-trump-has-broken-the-law.php http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donald-trump-conducted-illegal-business-communist-cuba-report-article-1.2810972

I agree with rkbang.

I'm no Hillary fan, but I'm trying to draw a comparison here. So are you saying these things are worse than subjecting your tenants to trash, rats, freezing cold, etc? Seems like the insider trading scandal didn't stop there. There's the little thing about hiring someone from the DNC after they were outed as an inside 'traitor'. :-)

On the scale of using insider information to profit in the cattle futures market, or engaging in slumlord tactics by shutting off heat/hot water in the NYC winters, I'll go with the insider trader.