I think it's great that people think that launching the largest trade war since the Smoot-Hawley tariff will have no significant impact on world equity and bond markets, much less the bank accounts of John and Jane Doe.
It's just not polite to talk about it.

And that’s the purpose of Mutual Fund Observer? To debate the great financial issues of the world? Go at it then.

FD1000 said: "This is a political thread that should be posted in the OFF threads."
“Another wipeout walloped Wall Street Friday,” Stan Choe of the Associated Press wrote today. The S&P 500 had one of its worst days in two years, dropping 2%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 715 points, losing 1.7% of its value. The Nasdaq Composite fell 2.7%. On Tuesday, news dropped that the administration’s blanket firings and wildly shifting tariff policies have dropped consumer confidence to a low it has not hit since January 2021. Today’s stock market tumble started after the Commerce Department released data showing that consumer prices are rising faster than economists expected.
AIG chief international economist James Knightley said: “We are moving in the wrong direction and the concern is that tariffs threaten higher prices, which means the inflation prints are going to remain hot.” Business leaders like lower interest rates, which reduce borrowing costs and make it cheaper to finance business initiatives, but with rising inflation, the Federal Reserve will be less likely to cut interest rates.
@FD1000- Right you are! All of this is political and will have absolutely no impact on the financial arena.
(Note: Above information quoted from Heather Cox Richardson, 3/28/25.)

FD1000 said: "First, this thread is political and should be in OFF forum."
“Another wipeout walloped Wall Street Friday,” Stan Choe of the Associated Press wrote today. The S&P 500 had one of its worst days in two years, dropping 2%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 715 points, losing 1.7% of its value. The Nasdaq Composite fell 2.7%. On Tuesday, news dropped that the administration’s blanket firings and wildly shifting tariff policies have dropped consumer confidence to a low it has not hit since January 2021. Today’s stock market tumble started after the Commerce Department released data showing that consumer prices are rising faster than economists expected.
AIG chief international economist James Knightley said: “We are moving in the wrong direction and the concern is that tariffs threaten higher prices, which means the inflation prints are going to remain hot.” Business leaders like lower interest rates, which reduce borrowing costs and make it cheaper to finance business initiatives, but with rising inflation, the Federal Reserve will be less likely to cut interest rates.
@FD1000- Right you are! All of this is political and will have absolutely no impact on the financial arena.
(Note: Above information quoted from Heather Cox Richardson, 3/28/25.)

@FDSo, just ignore the coup day by day. 1000- Hey there - you think that any of this might impact your financial situation?
Edited for civility. OJ, good sir, please don't let your annoyance take over.

First, this thread is political and should be in OFF forum.
Second, I didn't sell, and I'm doing well, as I have done for years. My portfolio was at its peak at the close last Friday 3/28/2025. If you know my style and goals, you know what I do. I hope your portfolio is doing great, BTW.
The best thing, as usual, is to do nothing and stop reading the scary stories. You should design your portfolio based on your goals with limited trades.
If you are a good trader, watch markets in real time and make adjustments.

So, just ignore the coup. Nothing to see here. Business as usual... If a coup doesn't vitally impact investing decisions, then nothing does.

@FD1000- Hey there - you think that any of this might impact your financial situation?
Edited for civility. OJ, good sir, please don't let your annoyance take over.

First, this thread is political and should be in OFF forum.
Second, I didn't sell, and I'm doing well, as I have done for years. My portfolio was at its peak at the close last Friday 3/28/2025. If you know my style and goals, you know what I do. I hope your portfolio is doing great, BTW.
The best thing, as usual, is to do nothing and stop reading the scary stories. You should design your portfolio based on your goals with limited trades.
If you are a good trader, watch markets in real time and make adjustments.

"The US stock market is by far the best one long term."
I believe US stocks will perform well in the long-term
and most stock investors should have a healthy allocation to the US.
This does not necessarily mean the equity portion of their portfolios should be 100% US equities.
For example, wouldn't it have been beneficial for retirees (presumably withdrawing from portfolios)
to have foreign stocks in addition to an S&P 500 fund during the "Lost Decade"?
"So, it boils down to timing and trading."
No, it really doesn't.
Numerous studies have indicated excessive trading often leads to lower returns.
It boils down to creating a sensible investment plan with an asset allocation
suitable to an investor's risk tolerance/risk capacity,
and then sticking to the plan (making adjustments as needed based on life changes).
Some investors may find it helpful to work with a financial advisor to develop this plan.

Can you find where I said 100% in US stocks?
Any time you switch funds, it is timing, and, as you noted, most are doing it wrong. If you hold static, your portfolio will suffer for many years. (During 2000-10, for 10 years: SPY lost about 9% and QQQ lost over 40%...During 2010-2024 the SPY+QQQ were great.)
The solution is good analysis, knowing funds/ETFs very well, and limited/smart timing. A good example is Charles Lynn Bolin's articles.
A sensible investment plan sounds great; the devil is in the details.
Same with financial advisor, in theory, it's a good idea. In real life, not so much.
Problem 1: Catch 22: If your investment knowledge is below average, you will not know if your FA (financial adviser) is good. If your investment knowledge is above average, you will not need one.
Problem 2: A FA is jack of all trades and a master of none. Anytime you need a real complicated advice, he/she can't answer it. Anything that relates to taxes, you need to see a CPA, anything that relates to trusts, you must see an attorney.
Problem 3: A FA can't promise you any future performance or even risk-adjusted performance.
Problem 4: The highest commission vehicles for a FA are annuities or a guarantee of something. These are usually bad for the clients.
You probably heard a typical FA claim that they are fiduciaries. It is correct that fiduciary is better than not, but it doesn't guarantee much.
In theory, a FA puts their client interests first. In reality, it doesn't work that well.
This is how it should work for a typical person in typical situations. You seek a FA advice, a good FA should collect all your information, analyze it, and come up with exactly what to do in about 2-3 hours. They should charge you maybe $1000-1500. You can implement the plan for years to come, unless you have a major change. This means, you don't need the FA for years to come. In the event you have a major change and need advice, one hour of consultation should be enough; maybe another $300 fee.
Remember, any time your FA wants you to stay with them for years and collect his/her fee as a % of your portfolio, it is a bad choice. You should only pay them by the hour. You can find good fee only FA at www.garrettplanningnetwork.com/
If a FA followed the above, they would starve. This is why it would be very difficult to find a great, reliable, honest, low-fee FA that puts their client's interests first.
The best idea is to learn and get better. You spent at least 12 years in school; why can you not spend just 100 hours learning the basics?
Most people need to handle and manage their money for decades, why not educate yourself? It's not a brain surgery.

Few mid-sized or larger sedans are manufactured by the U.S. makers. Interestingly, Toyota builds the mid-sized Camry sedan in Kentucky - though parts probably come from around the world. But the U.S. makers (Ford,GM) have largely shifted production to pickups and SUVs. From what I’ve read Honda builds sedans in Canada.
Bottom line: I don’t like being pushed / prodded by financial incentives into driving a heavy higher riding truck / SUV over a well built sedan. How does that help the environment, ease overcrowding of highways / infrastructure, keep insurance rates down or conserve energy? To me it seems wasteful to drive a big heavy SUV or truck to the market to grab a loaf of bread, 6-pack of beer or a couple bags of groceries.

"The US stock market is by far the best one long term."
I believe US stocks will perform well in the long-term
and most stock investors should have a healthy allocation to the US.
This does not necessarily mean the equity portion of their portfolios should be 100% US equities.
For example, wouldn't it have been beneficial for retirees (presumably withdrawing from portfolios)
to have foreign stocks in addition to an S&P 500 fund during the "Lost Decade"?
"So, it boils down to timing and trading."
No, it really doesn't.
Numerous studies have indicated excessive trading often leads to lower returns.
It boils down to creating a sensible investment plan with an asset allocation
suitable to an investor's risk tolerance/risk capacity,
and then sticking to the plan (making adjustments as needed based on life changes).
Some investors may find it helpful to work with a financial advisor to develop this plan.

Throughout history ruling classes have done whatever it takes to create an underclass equivalent to financial slavery, to perform labor that is ruinous to health and long life. It is no coincidence that the Trump administration is intent upon choking off any type of support for low-income Americans, which will eventually force them into the farm fields to replace the workers who are now being deported.

If you had made this comment a year ago, I would probably have laughed at you. But nobody here is laughing now.

Throughout history ruling classes have done whatever it takes to create an underclass equivalent to financial slavery, to perform labor that is ruinous to health and long life. It is no coincidence that the Trump administration is intent upon choking off any type of support for low-income Americans, which will eventually force them into the farm fields to replace the workers who are now being deported.
3/28- This, thanks to a lead by @Crash. Edited excerpts from a report by CNN:
Florida debates lifting some child labor laws to fill jobs vacated by undocumented immigrants

Florida has been working for years to crack down on employers that hire undocumented immigrants. But that presented a problem for businesses in the state that are desperate for workers to fill low-wage and often undesirable jobs.
Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and the state legislature have a potential solution: children. The state’s legislature on Tuesday advanced a bill that would loosen child labor laws, allowing children as young as 14 years old to work overnight shifts. If the new law is passed, teenagers would be able to work overnight jobs on school days. They are currently prevented from working earlier than 6:30 am or later than 11 pm per state law.
The bill passed through the Florida Senate’s Commerce and Tourism committee on Tuesday with five votes in favor of the loosened child labor restrictions and four against them. The bill will pass through two other relevant committees before being put to a vote with the full Florida Senate. DeSantis is supportive of the law and has been vocal of cracking down on immigration, echoing President Donald Trump’s rhetoric. However, economists have warned that could backfire, sparking further inflation and labor shortages.
“Why do we say we need to import foreigners, even import them illegally, when you know, teenagers used to work at these resorts, college students should be able to do this stuff,” DeSantis said last week at a panel discussion with border czar Tom Homan, as first reported by the Tampa Bay Times.
The state has been easing up on child labor protections for years. Last year, the legislature passed a law allowing home-schooled 16- and 17-year old teens to work any hour of the day.
The state’s Republican-led legislature on Tuesday will debate the new law, which also includes a number of changes including eliminating working time restrictions on teenagers aged 14 and 15 if they are home-schooled and ending guaranteed meal breaks for 16 and 17 year olds.
The number of child labor violations in Florida has nearly tripled in recent years, according to US Department of Labor statistics.

@WABAC,
If my memory is right, I thought TRP ETFs are semi-transparent. Do you by any chance know if TCAL is fully transparent?
TCAL volume today is 14K. I did not check its launch AUM.
Edit: The newer TRP ETFs are transparent, while the older ones continue to be semi-transparent. You can find the list here (the ones notated with * are semi-transparent) -
https://www.troweprice.com/financial-intermediary/us/en/investment-research-tool.html#investment=Exchange+Traded+Fund&assetClass=u.s.+equity&category=All&shareClass=All&tabname=Performance

Would it be possible that by removing advisory boards it might be easier to cook (even maybe overcook) the government books?
You mean like redefining words to mean what the government wants them to mean (thank you Humpty Dumpty)?
Reuters: US Commerce Secretary wants to remove government spending from GDP

ECONOMISTS ARE WARY
Economists cautioned against changes to the current national accounts structure as it would make GDP very volatile and difficult to get a clear view of the economy's health, creating more uncertainty.
"I don't think the stock market, the financial markets would like that," said Sung Won Sohn, Finance and Economics professor at Loyola Marymount University.
It would also be impossible to compare the U.S. economy's performance against its global peers.
Looking at the private sector alone would not give the full picture on growth, Sohn said.
"Economic growth over time would become a lot more volatile. The reason is, when the economy slows or, when we are in a recession, for example, the government spends a lot of money," he said.
Removing government spending from GDP would distort the figure as government productivity is assumed to be zero whatever the production is in the computation of GDP.
"It's imperative that we keep the current system because, we need to make comparisons, and it's important to know how well we are doing compared to a year ago, five years ago, 10 years ago, and we can learn from our mistakes," Sohn said.

TCAL holding here: https://www.troweprice.com/financial-intermediary/us/en/investments/etfs/capital-appreciation-premium-income-etf.html#primary-holdings
Reads like it will be competing with DIVO. Something to watch.

@FD1000- Hey there - you think that any of this might impact your financial situation?
Edited for civility. OJ, good sir, please don't let your annoyance take over.

"Just trying to make the board a place where persons of all political persuasions feel comfortable sharing and benefitting from investment insights. Why would we discourage 50% of all investors from feeling welcome and participating here? Let’s keep financial content over here and political rants in OT. "
I agree with @hank.
Since this discussion forum focuses on investing, I avoid posting overtly political messages
in the Fund Discussions and Other Investing categories. I'm not always successful in this regard...
I use Off-Topic when I critique the Trump administration or start a thread which can become "hot" politically.
It can be challenging to disentagle politics from financial impact in the current environment.
Just my 2¢...

Thanks @gman57. I owe you one! All of us occassionally mix political and financial content together - self included. It’s a challenge not to. Let’s try the best we can to keep those separate to the degree possible.
Why?
- Both sides of the political spectrum invest and know a lot about investing. It is not in our best interest to discourage input from either side. The more contributions and perspectives on investing, the better for all of us.
- MFO is funded by donations. Why discourage members of “the other side” from contributing? We all lose in that case,
- The Off Topic board has long been utilized for moaning, groaning and political venting. And I can’t ever recall any MFO participant complaining about that. I for one feel fortunate that Off-Topic exists as a place to share things like books, films, travel, songs and - yes, the often unseemly going-ons in our nation’s capital.
Thanks again.
@gmam57 Re: Shorting TSLA - Yes that would be an appropriate investing topic. In fact, @rono has started such a thread.
Shorting is fraught with risk. Losses can be infinite if the stock keeps rising. Even if you know you are right, at some point the costs of “covering” your shorts could drive you out of the market. I like to play the long-short game through funds. Even the experts find it a challenge (lackluster returns). But you won’t lose your house playing with them. In the L/S realm I own CPLSX and CPZ. Together they comprise near 20% of my portfolio. Both of those funds run by Calamos have indeed been shorting TSLA. Another one I used to own is NLSAX. Also a decent fund. Why Shorting Stocks is Risky
@gman57 - Here is the portion of your previous post (later deleted by you) which I objected to: ”Yes, I'm going to a takedown Tesla event 3/29. Sooner or later we each are going to have to stand up. I'm going to do it before it gets so bad it's no longer effective. Are you going to wait until we attack Greenland?”

@gman57
Your post belongs in Off Topic. I don’t think political action planning belongs in the investing section. Of course you are free to travel to whatever events you want and to voice those opinions.
@Old_Joe’s linked article and comments relate to TSLA from a financial standpoint. It’s been an incredibly strong performer for many years. As I noted above, if you own any growth funds or the S&P 500 you almost certainly own TSLA stock yourself.
Not trying to be the “cop on the beat”. Just trying to make the board a place where persons of all political persuasions feel comfortable sharing and benefitting from investment insights. Why would we discourage 50% of all investors from feeling welcome and participating here? Let’s keep financial content over here and political rants in OT. Thank you.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250325773694/en/World-Liberty-Financial-Plans-to-Launch-USD1-the-Institutional-Ready-Stablecoin
"WLFI’s USD1 will be 100% backed by short-term US government treasuries, US dollar deposits, and other cash equivalents. Initially, USD1 tokens will be minted on the Ethereum (ETH) and Binance Smart Chain (BSC) blockchains, with plans to expand to other protocols in the future. Each token is intended to maintain a value of $1 USD, fully backed by a reserve portfolio audited regularly by a third-party accounting firm...USD1 reserves will be custodied by BitGo"

March 22nd Episode:

Trump tariffs are upending financial markets, causing influential economist and strategist Ed Yardeni to turn from bullish to cautious.

https://youtu.be/9QLvhdYJ9-Y

Per BBG:
Fidelity Investments and Charles Schwab Corp. are prohibiting clients from investing in money-market ETFs on their trading platforms, an unusual move for the financial powerhouses who typically permit easy access to funds that already trade on an exchange.
The two firms are blocking purchases of three exchange-traded funds offered by BlackRock Inc. and Texas Capital, the first to track money—market securities such as Treasury bills and other government-backed debt in an ETF structure.
The new funds serve as a direct challenge to mutual-fund providers, who have long been big, established players in money-market products. Fidelity and Schwab alone manage trillions of dollars in money-market assets, and this month, Schwab filed plans to launch its own government money-market ETF.
A Schwab spokesperson said its decision is consistent with the firm’s “long-standing approach” of only making available Schwab affiliate money-market mutual funds, while a Fidelity spokesperson said this is an extension of the company’s policy to “generally restrict” third-party money-market mutual funds.
Yet, the move stands out because trading platforms like Schwab and Fidelity typically don’t restrict exchange-traded funds, even if those funds are in competition with existing in-house offerings.
In Schwab's case, they need to drive folks into their MMFs because even there they profit from customers' stored cash with those more expensive MMFs. Fido's rationale, I can't tell -- I thought they had more customer-friendly cash management policies/offerings.
I'll stick with SGOV or equivalents at Schwab.