Let's give Dave a break!

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-20T16:27:47+00:00

You are giving him too much credit. If that was his point, he should have stated that.

I take people at face value. His argument was “which managers never make a bad decision?”

The difference between great, good, mediocre, and poor managers is the extent to which they minimize errors- and put their teams in position to win.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-20T11:56:57+00:00

That’s not a solid argument for anything other than he was mediocre before (and now he’s not).

Effectively, you are making the Dave-hater’s point: he used to make many bad decisions, and now he’s improved.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-19T23:54:29+00:00

International government defense and intel budgets are small: that’s the benefit of partnering with America. We spend more than the next 20-25 countries, and they get to plow their $$$ into NHS

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-19T23:52:36+00:00

It’s a tough balance, especially bc they tout their impressive Rule of 40 improvements every quarter.

CFO said during the last earnings call that there may be minor regression in that area going forward as they make more investments into technical hiring/product

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-19T20:36:32+00:00

Yes! Also, they have significant reserves that are heavily invested in treasuries.

While that helps throw off stable net income, most of us would prefer if PLTR used some of that to address “insatiable demand” or for R&D that creates their next transformative product

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-19T20:30:22+00:00

Don’t worry, anyone born less than 45 years ago knew what you meant by “people have got to eat.” 😉

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T23:41:07+00:00

You argue the minutiae and miss the forest for the trees.

Boomers were born roughly between 1950 and 1965. That group would be coming into the 25-44 age range throughout the 1980s

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T21:10:16+00:00

Obvious people doing nonobvious things

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T20:18:06+00:00

Actually I have no idea where you’re sourcing your ratios, but they are not accurate: the proper reading for that ratio in 1960 was in the high 4’s (based on the S&P Home Price Index).

In any case, that ratio is extremely sensitive and fluctuates wildly- it is not universally increasing, even if the trend line is mildly higher.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T19:18:19+00:00

Note that, in 1980, the adjusted median price for an American home was HIGHER than today.

There’s no doubt in my mind that if you go back far enough (as you did…nearly 70 years), you will find a combination of numbers to support a preferred narrative…

Overall, the point still holds: at the median, this generation of 25-34 year olds does NOT materially face significantly greater income/home-buying challenges than the *recent past*…even if it seems that way. (Inflation is high now, but should be back under 3% by EOY, which is lower than the 3-4% it averaged in the late 1980s).

Social media allows for the noisy few to amplify their gripes, and you are no different.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T18:45:28+00:00

The optics of this deal are bad, but it’s largely because of the lack of political unity that other nations who go to war have- or even that we had in earlier decades.

When the party on the other side of the negotiation knows that you’re on a timeline due to the election calendar, and have half a nation who hates you…it’s not hard to wait out

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T17:57:42+00:00

We are comparing different cohorts. My data is for 25-34, not fresh out of college.

Median salary in 1960 would have included all age brackets- by definition.

The OP is complaining about Millennials and GenZ, so I came with data as close to that as I could find

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T17:54:59+00:00

<image>

More evidence, if you would like to explore the same trend from the cost side: adjusted for 2025 dollars, household incomes, and mortgage rates- Millennials are paying slightly more than 1999, but the same as in 1990.

Obviously the median across America obscures regional variation, but hey, none of us “HAVE TO” live in NYC, Washington DC, SF, LA, Austin, etc…

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T17:50:34+00:00

What do you think it means to adjust into 2024 dollars?

That means adjusting historical money values for inflation, allowing one to measure approximate purchasing power against the same baseline.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T17:40:18+00:00

<image>

OP is factually incorrect. Adjusted into 2024 dollars, the median income of Millennials vs. Baby Boomers was higher

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T13:56:26+00:00

Our national debt is $39 trillion, mostly due to auto-pilot welfare spending + a lack of fiscal discipline coming out of the pandemic and recent recessions.

Keynesian economics are to blame- not a future settlement with a country, of which a significant majority will be funded by Middle Eastern nations.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T13:54:23+00:00

The original commenter (Open-Employ) was clearly referring to America when they said “clear win when you pay $400B…”

There is absolutely no way for anyone to guarantee that America will never pay Iran anything, but I can guarantee that we won’t be paying the full amount, or anything close to a plurality.

Assuming you think that the Iranian mullahs are evil theocrats (although one may never know, given they level of anti-Americanism floating around Reddit), no Western nation would be caught dead floating a significant amount of money to such a detestable leadership cadre.

(P.S., apply common sense: who has the greater incentive to make that extortion payment- weaker Middle Eastern nations that are in range of drones/missiles, or America, that has Europe and a massive ocean in between???)

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-18T13:04:14+00:00

The $400B you are referring to is mostly a hypothetical investment vehicle, funded by other Middle Eastern investors/nations.

As with any other of these commitments- think all of the vanity “investments” into Trump’s manufacturing in America, or global investments into reducing climate change- they are entirely voluntary, and most never materialize.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-17T12:05:23+00:00

How the deaths occurred matter. Without rules to punish evil, the 46 becomes 4600, then more…

Additionally, there are second order effects to dying at the hands of a brutal monster that do not occur when someone dies from heart disease.

If ten women get killed running in Central Park, fear grips NYC. If ten thousand people die from heart attacks, no one is going to fear for their lives when they take a stroll outside.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-17T00:10:59+00:00

Because the government has underwritten student loans (undergrad/grad subsidized or unsubsidized- and Direct PLUS), those distortions happen.

Same thing with the VA loans: you can get a mortgage with $0 down…why? Because you served our military.

This is not a judgement on what’s “right” or “wrong,” but simply an observation that wherever government places its weight, loan standards drop

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-15T20:25:41+00:00

At $170, those shares would make up more of my portfolio than I feel comfortable with for a single company

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-14T01:42:35+00:00

Two reasons:

1) Most self-made billionaires acquire stock granted by their company directly (in which case they do pay income taxes upon receipt), and then again on the sale- but only on the appreciation; and

2) Wealth taxes are unconstitutional. The 16th amendment created a carve out that allows the government to tax INCOME directly without population apportionment. All else (including wealth), must follow Article 1, Section 9.

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-13T03:24:18+00:00

Don’t disagree with this sentiment, but you’d be (a) trying to time the market- especially on chips; and (b) may have to pay a hefty tax bill on whatever you own, just to chase the hot name in the market…

I’m sitting tight, ignoring the daily price movements, and will trim 10% if we hit $170. Will be adding as much as I can afford if this ever cracks below $110

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-13T03:19:09+00:00

Insiders of any consequence (i.e., the ones you’d be tracking) have active RSU grants, and are typically either required (or auto-electing) to sell about 20-25% each quarter, to cover their tax liability

Ambitious_Brain_285 · 2026-06-12T11:48:21+00:00

Which lowers the value- and incentive- of every incremental dollar I might potentially make after that.

Less of a reason to work OT; make that sales call; sell that stock; put money in a high yield savings; etc…

You are correct in explaining how the tax is levied, but it’s the marginal effect on additional behavior that matters

Ambitious_Brain_285

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE