u/OneTwoThreePooAndPee

It seems like a lot of people haven't put this together quite yet so this is the whole situation spelled out:

1. Iran has not been trying to make a nuclear weapon basically ever. From what we can tell, they have been trying to exert independent sovereignty by having the capability to enrich nuclear materials, explicitly using them for power generation. But ultimately it seems their goal is to stay within reach of a nuclear weapon, but never actually build a nuclear weapon, for the deterrent effect that being near it could offer, without having to cross that line and become part of the proliferation issue.

2. Netanyahu almost certainly knows this, but has been using this as a stick to try to get any US president involved with an Iran war for the last two decades or more.

3. Everybody has always known that taking the strait of Hormuz is a theoretical possibility for Iran, but if Iran were to do that in peacetime or when not under direct threat from another country, the entire globe would have a great reason to turn on them and they would not get the leeway for doing it that they are being allowed now because they did it under the threat of American attack. As a result, Iran now owns the strait of Hormuz under a legitimate claim circumstance.

4. This possession of the strait of Hormuz gives Iran direct control over 20% of the world's oil market which gives them a superpower unlike nearly any other country on the planet. Saudi Arabia and the oil generating countries in the Middle East now sit behind a gate that Iran controls before they can sell a huge portion of what makes their entire economy run and gives them a future in the world. If another country has its fist around your core income stream, they control you. There is simply no way that these other countries would ever allow this, it's an existential threat. But we ARE reaching the point where they may well start making deals so they'll have SOME reassurance of order, and SOME claim to force down the road if Iran tries to reneg on those deals.

The only point of real negotiation happening right now is whether or not Iran will continue to control the strait of Hormuz and there is no reason to believe that the United States has any leverage that can be used to force them to let go of it. If anything, Iran has nearly all the leverage in this conflict, unless the United States can somehow manage to turn enough of the rest of the world directly against them in a kinetic conflict that would force them to give up control.

None of the rest of the world wants to get into that fight because as soon as the war starts Iran is going to start bombing oil infrastructure across the Middle East and make things significantly worse than they already are.

Anytime you hear Trump or the Trump administration mention nuclear material as part of their negotiations with Iran, the only thing they're doing is trying to redirect conversation away from the strait of Hormuz because that is the only issue that matters in these negotiations and they don't want the public to realize HOW BADLY they've fucked up.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Prezzy OTTPAP

Eat it Cassidy, you fair weather fascist.

State Street's 11 sector ETFs are built to be an exact map to SPY at these weights:

ETF | Sector | Weight

-----|-------------------------|-------

XLK | Technology | 31%

XLF | Financials | 14%

XLV | Health Care | 11%

XLY | Consumer Discretionary | 10%

XLC | Communication Services | 9%

XLI | Industrials | 9%

XLP | Consumer Staples | 6%

XLE | Energy | 4%

XLU | Utilities | 3%

XLRE | Real Estate | 2%

XLB | Materials | 2%

That 11-ETF port at those weights is SPY, exactly, 1:1. SpaceX is likely to land in either XLC or XLI, depending. When it's announced, there will undoubtedly be an XLC or XLI ex-SpaceX created, and it will simply be a matter of swapping that particular sector ETF to the appropriate ex ETF. But failing that:

If it's XLI: Drop it, split the weight across XTN (transportation) + a machinery/construction ETF.

If it's XLC: Alphabet and Meta dominate XLC so SpaceX's contamination is smaller, but still real. Best move is probably holding the big XLC names directly (GOOGL, META, NFLX, DIS, CMCSA) and skipping the ETF entirely for that 9%.

Happy investing, everybody!

1. Dems take Senate in '26, and use the Garland rule to hold any seats until '28, and win Congress + President.

2. Democrats clean up the justice department, reinstate an effective (and fucking HUNGRY) workforce of ex government attorneys, and put Jack Motherfuckin' Smith in as AG.

3. J.M.F. Smith undertakes a corruption sweep of the entire government, and actually starts to take all the laws on the books seriously. And that includes the supreme court justices.

This might have to be done under a bill from Congress directly ordering it done. And there is an honest accounting of corruption in our government, on both sides. And that will include Thomas and Alito. THIS is the truth and reconciliation commission. This will be a second Epstein-level event.

And they can either retire, or be part of that experience. Hey Alito, remember when you leaked the Dobbs decision? Hey Thomas, you know all those gifts you took? You can retire now, or you can recuse yourself from all cases until the trials are completed. And you have a trial in front of the supreme court of 7 justices, 3 liberal, 3 conservatives, and 1 John Roberts with an opportunity to save the good will of the people toward the justice system.

And maybe the bipartisan solution is the Supreme Court now has 7 members who operate under a congresionally-passed morality law, and have term limits. This could be part of a huge bipartisan pure anti-corription rules package that takes force over the entire government, every single employee, that has clear enforcement mechanisms and untouchable report-directly-to-congress IG's among all the branches.

🌈The End🏳️‍🌈✨

I mean... Can anyone provide me a reason Trump wouldn't think that's a win for him?

If you're not familiar with Caolan, Tim interviewed him once, he's an Irish independent journalist who has been on the Russians and covering the Ukrainian war like a dog with a bone. His own direct reporting has gotten him to a point of being a nationally recognized anti-Russian journalist in Russia.

I've seen a lot of confusion around why there's been a lot more backlash at Scott recently vs. previously. As a (small-p) progressive, I thought I could offer some insight.

I have always found finance and economics interesting, which is what brought him on my radar. I don't agree with all his views on our economy, but that's fine, we can have respectful disagreements about it, but he's a clear anti-Trump liberal which signals deep down we have the same core beliefs about human dignity.

I am a man who, while having very progressive views, understands very easily how I could have ended up being a much more angry, resentful person if I hadn't had good people around me for support at the right times in life. I also don't agree with a lot of his specific suggestions, but again, I know it takes different voices to reach different people and that's part of finding consensus in society, so I stay out of the way.

But Iran is different. I am Jewish myself; I have blood relatives who live in Israel, I have blood relatives who died in WWII camps, and I have a blood relatives who fought for the US in WWII. I say this only to make clear, I am no anti-semite, I love my heritage and Judaism itself, and I want Israel to survive and thrive as a peaceful country.

Without going into detail on specific areas of agreement or disagreement, this war is different because it is being done by a lawless president, without any attempt to get the buy in of the American people, and is creating mass causality events of civilians in other countries in our name, using our money.

Whether Iran should be attacked, whether Bibi talked Trump into it, whether Trump is too senile to make intelligent decisions so he didn't see through Bibi's bullshit, or at least see the foolishness of the approach... Inconsequential. The war was started without consent, continues without consent, and Trump treats the American people like children to be shoved aside while he does whatever he wants.

A war prosecuted under those conditions, against a country that had not directly attacked us to start it, is unjust and should not warrant consideration for acceptance by a civil population, period, full stop. That's a hard red line that a lot of people are feeling I think, not JUST the progressives who have shown up in the last year. We just tend to be whiny bitches.

Anyway, I hope this at least gives some perspective on a segment of the upset population. I still very much appreciate everything else in the same ways, but this is just... We're talking about war here man, the destruction of civilization, the death of innocents. The "what if, what if" moral calculus that works spectacularly well in economics breaks down when the existential question is involved.

They seem like they have a sense of humor, maybe they'd be into it.

Because honestly... I bet it would be a weird, weird party and I'm here for it.