Since the 80s, about 40 years, wars didn't influence the markets short-mid term, why would it happen now?
The period of 2000-10 SPY lost close to 10% in 10 years, nothing to do with war.
Several institutions suggest the next 10 year about 5-6% for stocks and 4-5% for bonds, that's great for my style of mostly unique bond funds. I will take 6% for the next 10 years.

Just to set the record straight here there was a nearly 20% decline in 1990 during the Gulf War. Regardless I am still in the bull camp based on what occurred on April 9.

Due to limitations of the board’s software I’ll just note that the #1 2025 CEF pick from a U.S. News story is BIT which is 35% leveraged. And the article’s #2 “best” pick is even more leveraged at 37%.
: https://money.usnews.com/investing/articles/best-paying-closed-end-funds
On Baker’s point - She thinks rising inflation and persistently higher rates at the long end of the bond curve will prevent the Fed form “riding to the rescue” next time leverage surfaces as an issue. She also sees valuations as very elevated. And other investments like real estate and commodities enter into the equation. I can’t adequately summarize the 50-minute long interview (which is linked to the OP), but it’s worth a listen if interested in the topic. If you’ve listened, the first thing you learned that is she was a close associate of Scott Bassett, Treasury Secretary, where he worked prior to joining the Administration.
I have no idea if Baker’s right or wrong. Reason I titled the thread “The Unkowable Question.” Past skeptics of this sort (Grantham notably) have been roundly dismissed here and elsewhere. Her argument is not a widely accepted or popular one. If I want to hear the “bull” case I’ll read Lynch or listen to Bloomberg / CNBC on days when the market is rising - might also listen to Trump on the matter. … I would not advise anyone to make portfolio changes based on this or a few dire predictions. I haven’t.

Since the 80s, about 40 years, wars didn't influence the markets short-mid term, why would it happen now?
The period of 2000-10 SPY lost close to 10% in 10 years, nothing to do with war.
Several institutions suggest the next 10 year about 5-6% for stocks and 4-5% for bonds, that's great for my style of mostly unique bond funds. I will take 6% for the next 10 years.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 6/18/25
BEARISH became the top sentiment (41.4%, high) & neutral remained the bottom sentiment (25.4%, below average); bullish became the middle sentiment (33.2%, below average); Bull-Bear Spread was -8.2% (below average). Investor concerns: Tariffs, budget, jobs, inflation, recession, Fed, debt, dollar, geopolitical, Russia-Ukraine (173+ weeks), Israel-Hamas (67+12 weeks). For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks down, bonds up, oil up, gold up, dollar up. NYSE %Above 50-dMA 67.38% (positive). Fed held rates. G-7 was a dud. Oil rose on Israel-Iran skirmishes with missiles & drones. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
Sentiments are CONTRARIAN indicators.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/2049/thread

Not sure how to read that. Our mmkt & fixed income is paying between 4 and 5% per annum. DrVenture is saying that he's at about 4% YTD, which would translate to about 8% per annum, assuming continuity of circumstances.

We're in our mid-80s, and pretty much in the same position financially. The allocation varies, but using Schwab the lineup right now is 59% SUTXX mmkt and 41% fixed income. The fixed ladder is 56% Treasury out to 1/28, and 44% CDs, out to 6/27.

It took me a bit to figure out what the purported stats were about. They took the first 5 months (a cherry-picked slice or time) of each President going back to Nixon, the subtracted inflation from nominal wage growth to get "real" wage growth. The. numbers are "enhanced" by the recent drop in inflation, while wage growth itself was nothing particularly out of the ordinary.
For instance, if nominal wage growth were 4% monthly on average, but inflation went from 3% to 2.3%, the real wage growth would go from 1% to 1.7%. A function of inflation. To conclude that this is Trump's work is laughable, as we were already experiencing wage competition in blue collar industries, and inflation has been trending downward for more than a year.
No way that Trump brought down inflation in only 5 months with "America First" policies. No causal connection at all, in fact. And the wage growth in nominal terms was already being driven upward and is actually lower than Biden's last year. Hourly wages at 4.1% growth vs 5.5% peak in early 2024.
What we have here is statistically tomfoolery. P T Barnum level stuff.
Play with this for a more revealing picture:
https://www.atlantafed.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker#Tab1

Back to the OP about inflation - "Fed sees its preferred inflation gauge topping 3% this year, higher than previous forecast"
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/18/federal-reserve-dot-plot-and-economic-projection-june-2025.html
"Federal Open Market Committee participants said at their June meeting that they expect the core personal consumption expenditures price index, which excludes food and energy, to increase at a 3.1% rate in 2025, higher than their prior forecast of 2.8% in March."

Post-FOMC Notes
Rates: Fed funds held at 4.25-4.50%, bank reserves rate at 4.40% (generous), discount rate at 4.50%. Treasury QT continued -$5 billion/mo, MBS QT at -$35 billion/mo.
Inflation-expectations remain high now but should be headed down longer term. Rate increases cannot be ruled out, but they have very low probability for the next few years. Prospects of tariff-inflation are unclear. GDP growth has been distorted by abnormal imports/exports ahead of tariffs. Oil & gasoline prices have move up on Israel-Iran skirmishes, but those hikes may not stick (or, may). The US is almost self-sufficient in oil & gas, so it's less vulnerable to external disturbances.
Labor market is solid. Wage growth is moderate. The unemployment rate of 4.2% is still near full employment. Both labor supply & demand have deteriorated, but they remain in balance. This may explain why tougher immigration hasn't affected the labor data yet. However, it's harder to find new jobs or replacement jobs.
Housing has additional complexity in that its short- and long- term outlooks are different.
Uncertainties have diminished but remain elevated due to tariffs, trade, immigration & geopolitics. These have caused wider dispersions in the SEPs. However, pay more attention to short-term projections.
Effects of AI may be positive (general prosperity) or negative (deflationary). AI may augment the labor or replace it. But changes would be transformational.
Fed is data dependent but also forward-looking, so he couldn't be tied down to what the past data showed.
Economic data collection is important because good data benefits all - public, businesses, government. It's an investment in the future.
US fiscal policies & big global economic changes aren't within the purview of the Fed, so it will wait & react to those as they come.
New SEPs (summaries of economic projections) were released.
5-yr review of the Fed about policies & communications is almost complete. These reviews have been done since 2012 - they were done annually at one time, but now every 5 yrs. It's not affected by changes in Fed leadership. Fed staffing level has been reduced as the government shrinks overall. Powell declined comment on whether he will stay on as Fed Governor after his term as Chair expires (that may determine whether the new Fed Chair after 05/2026 may be internal or external); he also declined to address President Trump's comments about him in the media.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/2048/thread

FOMC Statement, 6/18/25
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20250618a.htm

50th G-7, June 15-17, was in Canada (rotating presidency, 2025). Besides the G-7 members (including the EU), invited as guests were the leaders of India, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Ukraine, Australia, Indonesia & S Korea, plus NATO, UN & World Bank.
President Trump left the G-7 meeting late-Monday, 6/16/25 (after the 1st formal day of G-7), to attend to important matters, but the US delegation remained. The remaining G-6 & guests were left scrambling on the issues of trade, geopolitics, energy transitions & new technologies. Instead of a joint G-7 communique, there were several broad statements & Chair's (Canada) Summary. The G-7 rotating presidency moves to France in 2026.
https://g7.canada.ca/en/news-and-media/news/

Eddy Elfenbein runs this website which is home to his self managed ETF, CWS.
His buy list link mirrors his ETF holdings and provide insight as to his price goals as well as his reasons for holding the security.
https://crossingwallstreet.com/buylist
Periodically he provides his commentary on the Market.
Here's his most recent post regarding the markets:
cws-market-review-june-17-2025.html

Eddy Elfenbein runs this website which is home to his self managed ETF, CWS.
Periodically he provides his commentary on the Market.
Here's his most recent post regarding the markets:
cws-market-review-june-17-2025.html

Yogi’s right. The interest from borrowing for leverage adds to the cost and is reflected in the fees. But fees tend to be on the high side anyway. Completely different animals than what most of us are used to. I now have 10 in a basket at Fido (down from 16 at one time). As noted earlier, I off-loaded the best performers (equity heavy) out of age related risk considerations. BTW GDL (not part of the basket) has bounced nicely since my OP. Up 0.85% today. Crazy.

If I remember correctly the joke on the internet was he was leaving his estate to his cat

That's interesting if true. While states generally don't allow assets to be bequeathed to pets, there is a whole body of law, varying state by state, that enables testators to provide for their pets upon their death. It's anything but simple.
From the NYC Bar Association: https://www.nycbar.org/providing-for-your-pets-in-the-event-of-your-death-or-hospitalization/
This is actually relevant to investors generally. One of the issues mentioned is how to provide for the pet between time of the master's death and the time that the will is probated.

Too often this period is not considered. Although a Will can make provisions for the care of the pet, no action can be taken by the Executor to carry out these provisions until the Will has been admitted to probate and the Executor has received the authority to proceed by the issuance of letters testamentary The time between death and the authority of the Executor to act can vary between several weeks and several months. Plans must be made to ensure care for the pet during this interim period.

Likewise, investors should make plans for any assets that pass through a will. Of course things like "transfer on death", joint tenants with right of survivorship, IRA beneficiaries and the like help reduce the size of assets that the will deals with.
Until an executor/administrator is authorized, those assets are effectively on autopilot. A well balanced portfolio should be able to survive several weeks if not months with no intervention. A 50% gold allocation would not. It is more prudent to invest with one's demise in mind than to invest with concerns of Armageddon on the horizon.

Wonder if he requires another birthday parade next year after nobody showed to this one. Seems like $45M wasted, plus one slightly deflated ego. A big yawn.
And no, he isn't getting any Nobel peace prizes. Iran is just the next diversion for Dump.

After a one-year hiatus, Morningstar brings back the Exemplary Stewardship Award.
Eligibile firms must have an Above Average or High Parent Pillar rating and previous winners are not considered.
This year's winner will be announced in early July.
Exemplary Stewardship Nominees
Dimensional
Fidelity
MFS
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/morningstar-awards-investing-excellence-exemplary-stewardship-nominees-5

relatedly:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/17/business/stock-market-sp-500-record.html

One of my favorite documents to share with young investors that Wiiliam Bernstein published:
https://etf.com/docs/IfYouCan.pdf

I was the old guy in our department (early 40's) and a few of the younger 20 somethings asked me one time if i went to the 401k meeting and i said no and they said it confused them beyond belief. I told them if they were my kids, I would recommend they put 100% of tehir money in VTSAX (it was available and the rest of the options were meh) and keep piling money into it. Eventually there will be a time to MAYBE do something different but right now in early 20's keep it as simple as possible. I also gave the 2 of them this pdf.
Well at a work function where we all get together (90% remote) i'm sitting with a bunch of the 20 somethings and they are talking about the pdf and someone was like "yeah just use total stock market from vanguard" i'm like oooo boy hopefully I dont' get in trouble.
Last year I looked at our work 401k info on Form5500 website. in 2021 prior to this conversation I had wiht the first person, VTSAX represented 3% of all money invested in the 401k. (me). by the end of 2023 it was 11%. I have no idea if that's as a result of a singular conversation but I kind of feel like it was.

One article on the question
A late night listen prompted me to consider the possibility. Guest was Whitney Baker (audio linked at end). Among the concerns she noted is the amount of leverage (borrowed money) in the system. I’m playing that game myself on small scale by (1) carrying a recent home upgrade on a (interest-free for 18 months) credit card so the money can stay invested in a Roth as long as possible. And I carry a small 3% mortgage on my home preferring to risk the money in the markets rather than pay off the loan. Suspect I’m not alone here in that thinking. Of course these are minuscule amounts of “leverage” compared to what hedge funds or CEFs engage in.
Alan Greenspan famously said in the 90s that you can’t recognize a bubble until it has burst. He’s been laughed at for the remark. I get it. But he’s not a dumb person. I won’t list them, but several “authorities” believe there is a market bubble (and they have been scorned in recent years). Bill Fleckenstein is one. Fleck cites passive inflows into retirement savings plans along with index investing. Don’t laugh too loud. He’s certainly been right for several years on gold which has more than doubled over only 2 or 3 years. And highly respected James Stack has his investors at 57% invested and 43% in cash or T-bills. That’s very conservative for him.
Of course, you can cite even more “authorities” who insist there is no bubble. Honestly, I’m not making the case either way. But the question is one worth considering. In a real market crash it’s very hard to “log-in” and sell your plummeting investments and virtually impossible to speak to your friendly fund rep. It gets very crazy. We had a small sneak-preview in late March.
I’ve looked up the P/E (one measure of relative value) on M* for some funds of interest. They all seem tame to me - not signifying a bubble. I have no idea how M* calculates these.
PRWCX: 21.91
DODBX: 13.65
LCORX: 14.08
PRFDX: 14.73
OAKBX: 13.04
Link to Meb Faber May 2025 interview with Whitney Baker