this is cool --- the UK's 1850 levels

Yes. That is encouraging. The image doesn't show up on my computer....just the word "image". But going to the link I sleuthed when previewing this reply provides the image. Weird....
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8052euWYAIRShO?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
A brief explanation of their recent progress:

The electricity sector is where the large majority of UK emissions cuts have occurred over the past decade, during which the country’s power supplies have been transformed.

‘net-zero emissions’ target is one source for more details.

this is cool --- the UK's 1850 levels

We have had the discussion on Baillie Gifford awhile back. @msf provided a detailed analysis on Baillie Gifford investment approaches. For retail investors, there are two vehicles available:
Vanguard International Growth, VWILX. Baillie Gifford managed by BG 2/3 of the fund and Schroeder manages the other 1/3. BG side uses a concentrated approach sizable exposure to emerging market, particularly China. Plus side is low expense ratio. This fund is available as a transaction fee fund with Fidelity.
Harbor International Growth, HAIGX, more diversified approach with a different set of BG fund managers. Institutional share, $50K min and transaction fee required.

Can carbon capture become part of the solution? (Can the saying "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" be usefully applied to adoption of this technology by people with a variety of perspectives about the extent of the underlying problem?)

Skyrocketing carbon prices and a “code red” warning about the threat posed by climate change are giving fresh momentum to a technology that captures and removes greenhouse gas emissions so they can be buried.

Bury Carbon
The potential for obtaining broad based support in the United States is a point in its favor:

Amid Extreme Weather, a Shift Among Republicans on Climate Change

This fund has an average p-e ratio of 45 according to Morningstar. I would be very curious to see how it performs in a rising interest rate environment.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nixon-reshaped-the-world-economy-50-years-ago-is-crypto-on-the-brink-of-doing-the-same-now-11628893012?siteid=yhoof2
Crypto is reshaping the world economy, 50 years after Nixon ended the dollar’s peg to gold. Here’s how some are playing itLast Updated: Aug. 14, 2021 at 10:52 a.m. ETFirst Published: Aug. 14, 2021 at 8:00 a.m. ET
Mark DeCambre
 
A Bretton Woods for the digital-currency era? Will we see more global coordination on digital assets?
Cryptos to the moon?

A year that has rewarded those who have simply enjoyed the ride.....

The gains are smaller, befitting a less hysterical year. When the S&P 500 Index has risen in 2021, the daily increase has been half what it was in 2020. But in terms of persistent, day-after-day gains, these seven months in the U.S. stock market have few historical precedents.
Over the last century, there has been just one other year when the benchmark set more high-water marks by this point in the summer -- in 1964.

Slow Slog
Plus, an optimistic view going forward:

What’s keeping stocks aloft? As usual, the answer is corporate America’s earnings machine.
...the equity market is not the economy. If you compare the two, the equity market has massive technology in it, a lot less small-caps. Those earnings are super defensive to a no-GDP-growth scenario.”
In the eyes of analysts who follow individual companies, profit growth is set to slow, but at roughly 10% in each of the next two years, that would still top the historic rate of 6% annually.
Profit margins, which just reached a record high, are expected to increase over the next years, analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg Intelligence show.
To Paulsen, chief investment strategist at Leuthold, this boom cycle is just starting.

S&P 500 Snubbing Dire View

50 years ago, on August 15, 1971, President Richard Nixon shocked the financial world by ending the convertibility of the dollar to gold, upending the monetary and currency exchange system that had been in place since 1944. This week Nick Sargen, author of Global Shocks, joins us for a WEALTHTRACK podcast to explain the consequences of that momentous decision which are still being felt today.

Yes, it's just supposed to keep us even-steven. But I can choose NOT to spend that 6.2% and INVEST it! Yaba daba doo.

Which means that the value of the remaining portion of your SS check, i.e. what you're spending, is 6.2% less than last year.
(Technically 1 - 1/(1.062) = 5.8% less, but that's a distraction.)
If inflation were 0%, you could do the same thing: spend 6.2% less and invest that 6.2%.
If inflation were 10%, you could do the same thing: spend 6.2% less and invest that 6.2%.
The nominal increase is objectively meaningless, with some exceptions such as its interplay with the SS hold harmless provision.
https://blog.ssa.gov/how-the-hold-harmless-provision-protects-your-benefits/

Here's the relevant data presented in the opinion column:
"consumer prices rose a lot less in July than they did in June."
At least that's two data points (July and June inflation figures) as opposed to the single data point that the Senior Citizens League seems to have used. Though hard numbers, even just those two, would have been informative.
In addition, since COLA is calculated using the consumer price "shadows", it really doesn't matter for the purpose of projecting COLA what the shadows represent. All that matters is how the shadows are flickering along the wall.
For a 3% COLA, the consumer price shadows (CPI-W) observed in August and September will have to average 3.8% lower than in July. That is, the CPI-W figure for July is 267.789, and the August and September values will have to average 257.628 (3.8% lower).
It's a simple calculation:
Avg CPI-W = (Aug 2021 + Sept 2021)/2 = [(July 2020 + Aug 2020 + Sept 2020) x 1.03 - July 2021]/2
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/cpiw.html

Not to be too much of a wet blanket here, but the point of the COLA adjustment is for SS payments to keep pace with inflation, not to put recipients in a better position. Large adjustment, small adjustment, doesn't matter; the adjustment in real dollars is supposed to be virtually zero.
Higher COLA comes from higher inflation. That makes the real yield on fixed income securities even more negative. IMHO this is not a good thing.
[The Fed seems to be looking more at the economy (including delta strain) than inflation in determining when to begin reducing (tapering) the $120B/mo in bonds it is buying (QE).]
Regarding the 6.2% COLA estimate, consider the source. The Senior Citizens League. Last month, its estimate was at the high end of projections.

Estimates for the 2022 COLA range[d] from 4.5 percent from Moody's Analytics to 6.1 percent from The Senior Citizens League. Economist Bill McBride, who writes the finance and economics blog Calculated Risk, estimate[d] the 2022 COLA at 5.5 percent.

https://states.aarp.org/west-virginia/2022-social-security-cost-of-living-adjustment-could-be-5-percent
It looks like the SCL made the most naive estimate possible: it seems to have assumed that the M/M percentage increase in CPI-W for July to Aug, and from Aug to Sept, would be the same as the M/M percentage increase from June to July. It extrapolated from this single data point, not caring at all about trends in the data let alone trends in the economy.
[I came up with 6.22%, which is rounded to 6.2%, when calculating COLA this way.]
Consider CNN's recent headline: "Inflation moderated in July but prices are still rising in America". This is enough to suggest that SCL overestimated what COLA will be.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/11/economy/july-consumer-price-inflation/index.html

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/912036/000119312521245986/d214700d497k.htm
497K 1 d214700d497k.htm AMG FUNDS IV
Filed pursuant to 497(k)
File Nos. 033-68666 and 811-08004
AMG FUNDS IV
AMG River Road Long-Short Fund
Supplement dated August 13, 2021 to the Summary Prospectus, dated February 1, 2021
The following information supplements and supersedes any information to the contrary relating to AMG River Road Long-Short Fund (the “Fund”), a series of AMG Funds IV (the “Trust”), contained in the Fund’s Summary Prospectus (the “Summary Prospectus”), dated as noted above.
At a special meeting held on August 12, 2021, shareholders of the Fund approved: (i) a change to the Fund’s fundamental investment objective; (ii) the redesignation of the Fund’s fundamental investment objective as non-fundamental; (iii) the amendment of the Fund’s fundamental investment restriction with respect to borrowing; and (iv) a modified “manager-of-managers” structure for the Fund.
Effective as of August 16, 2021 (the “Implementation Date”): (i) the Fund will change its name from AMG River Road Long-Short Fund to AMG River Road International Value Equity Fund; (ii) the Fund will change its principal investment strategies, resulting in changes to its principal risks; and (iii) the Fund will replace its primary benchmark index with the MSCI EAFE Index and replace its secondary benchmark index with the MSCI EAFE Value Index.
Also effective as of the Implementation Date, the following fee changes for the Fund will take effect and will result in the overall reduction of the Fund’s net expenses ratios as compared with the Fund’s current fee structure: (i) the management fee for the Fund will be reduced from 0.85% to 0.53%; (ii) the Fund’s existing contractual expense limitation agreement with AMG Funds LLC (“AMGF”) will be replaced with a new contractual expense limitation agreement with AMGF pursuant to which AMGF will agree, through at least March 1, 2023, to limit total annual operating expenses (exclusive of taxes, interest (including interest incurred in connection with bank and custody overdrafts and in connection with securities sold short), shareholder servicing fees, distribution and service (12b-1) fees, brokerage commissions and other transaction costs, dividends payable with respect to securities sold short, acquired fund fees and expenses, and extraordinary expenses) of the Fund to the annual rate of 0.73% of the Fund’s average daily net assets, subject to later reimbursement by the Fund in certain circumstances; and (iii) the shareholder servicing fee waivers in place for Class N and Class I shares will be eliminated and the amount of shareholder servicing fees each of Class I and Class N shares of the Fund are authorized to pay to financial intermediaries will be decreased from 0.15% to 0.05%. AMGF pays a portion of the management fee to the Fund’s subadviser for its services.
The disposition of Fund securities in connection with the transition of the Fund’s investment objective and strategies is expected to cause the Fund to realize taxable income for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The Fund intends to make a special distribution to shareholders of all or a portion of such income and any other undistributed income for the current taxable year. This distribution will be taxable to shareholders who hold their shares in a taxable account. See “Certain Federal Income Tax Information” in the Fund’s Prospectus for further information...

One manager's idea for what currently makes sense. (I have been overweight reits since at least early last year but DEA is the only significant addition to that sector I recall making this year.)

The chief investment officer of First American Trust has been piling on exposure to real estate investment trusts and technology and offloading financials, which should theoretically be weighed down by a flattening yield curve.

Another manager's idea:

Such a stagflationary environment should benefit sectors with the highest degree of pricing power -- “energy, materials, even some consumer durables, if they can pass on higher costs to consumers, which they’re trying to,” Boockvar said.

Stagflation Portfolio

M* warns of a couple funds that might have biggies...
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1052941/4-funds-to-watch-at-tax-time?utm_source=eloqua&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_fundspy&utm_content=31014
Disclaimer: With 96% of our nest egg in tax-deferred a/c's, CGs are NOT an issue for us.

Unfortunately, Grantham has been wrong for over 10 years. But he is not alone, Arnott (PAUIX) and Hussman were too.
See one source(link)
He was so off on US LC(SP500) and EM stocks.

yeah I still like listening to him. He is a great story teller. But yeah, he hasn't been correct for awhile.

Miscellaneous Securities ‡ 1,642,719,101
Total Investments in Securities 19,036,241,115
- or about 8.63 %

Mackenzie Scott's "384 Ways to Help," posted December 2020 on her Twitter account:
https://mackenzie-scott.medium.com/384-ways-to-help-45d0b9ac6ad8

Knowing how to make money is different than knowing how to spend money.

Small changes true but electric generation will swing slightly towards coal this year:
“ We expect coal consumption for electricity generation to grow by 75 MMst (17%) in 2021 as a result of relatively high natural gas prices that make coal more competitive for dispatch in the electric power sector. Forecast electric power sector demand for coal then falls by 47 MMst (9%) in 2022. We expect demand for coal for other uses to rise by 5 MMst (13%) in 2021 and by 3 MMst (7%) in 2022. This increase is mostly for coking coal, which is used in steelmaking.”
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/

Per TRP (link below), it doesn't look like the PM wants the public to know about these "Misc Securities". Perhaps some kind of derivatives?
Miscellaneous Securities ‡ 1,642,719,101
Total Investments in Securities 19,036,241,115
‡ At the discretion of the advisor, the identity of certain securities has been
concealed to protect the fund's interests.
https://individual.troweprice.com/staticFiles/gcFiles/pdf/phhsfq2.pdf