Yeah, no argument with you here on that, but I think having an unwavering religious conviction about the ostensibly scripturally-ordained outcomes for other people's money in a manager's portfolio invites an agency problem of biblical proportions. Let's say someone manages $80 billion at a fee of 0.50% of assets. Even if the manager invests her entire net worth in the funds under her purview, she is still collecting $400 million a year in fees off that money. Now let's say the funds fall 50%--still $200 million a year in fees and a massive net worth already invested in the fund cut in half is probably still massive. Meanwhile, ordinary investors can suffer a lot along the way. And I expect in this case and most money managers' cases their entire net worth isn't in their funds. Taking these massive risks with other people's money seems a lot easier than doing it with one's own.

Wall Street firms are again packaging and selling mortgages that the government-backed firms can’t or won’t back
"Lenders also have restarted making loans that don’t conform to the standards Fannie and Freddie require. Some use alternative documentation, such as bank statements instead of pay stubs, to verify borrowers’ income."

That says that Moodys is sticking to its guns, having predicted 4.5% based on last month's data (CPI-W through June). However, unless you expect deflation in the next couple of months (Aug, Sept figures), the Moody's figure is too low.
Assuming no inflation for the months of August and September (and also no deflation), the 3Q average CPI-W for 2021 would be 267.789 (i.e. the July figure), and the 3Q 2020 average is 253.412.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/cpiw.html
That would make the COLA adjustment 5.67% since 267.789/253.412 = 1.0567.
To get a 4.6% COLA, prices in Aug and Sept would have to average 1.5% lower than July prices. For example, prices could drop 1% between July and Aug, and drop another 1% between Aug and Sept (i.e. 2% below July prices). This doesn't pass the laugh test.
It is true that the CPI-W M/M increases are moderating. Prices went up 0.91% from April to May, and 1.06% from May to June, but only 0.52% from June to July. If this deceleration continues, August prices could be the same as July's, and September's could be 0.5% lower. Still not enough of a drop for Moody's projection.
I'm not so interested in SS COLA, as there's nothing one can do about that. Besides, it's a nullity in terms of real dollars. But one has a choice about whether to buy some I-bonds. For this, it would be helpful to get a handle on the upcoming 6 month adjustment.
Even if Moody's is right and inflation, whether CPI-U or CPI-W, is running around "only" 4.6% through Sept, that would mean that I-bonds purchased now would average a 4.6% rate of return for a year. Can't find a better 100% secure place to park cash for a year or more.

Hoping this has not been posted yet (which would be interesting in and of itself) --- multiples inflation vs all else over the last 45y
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1052552/how-much-has-the-market-benefited-from-investor-optimism

4.6%, projects Moody's
https://www.barrons.com/articles/social-security-is-in-line-for-biggest-percentage-bump-for-inflation-in-40-years-51629489389
try this one if blocked
https://apple.news/AAiFOiTAxTNq7J8zKFlEm_Q

A big part of the reason confronting the climate change challenge continues to be so difficult:
A Texas Solution to Global Warming: Use More Air-Conditioning

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/money-managers-race-to-launch-first-u-s-bitcoin-etf-after-sec-signal-11629451802
Money Managers Race to Launch First U.S. Bitcoin ETF After SEC SignalWhile the regulator has indicated being receptive to exchange-traded funds for bitcoin futures, there are risks for individual investors

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1444822/000119312521252724/d210667d497.htm
497 1 d210667d497.htm AQR RISK PARITY II MV FUND
AQR FUNDS
Supplement dated August 20, 2021 (“Supplement”)
to the Class I Shares, Class N Shares and Class R6 Shares
Summary Prospectus, Prospectus
and Statement of Additional Information, each dated May 1, 2021, as amended, of the AQR Risk Parity II MV Fund (the “Fund”)
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information. Please review this important information carefully. You may obtain copies of the Fund’s Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information free of charge, upon request, by calling (866) 290-2688, or by writing to AQR Funds, P.O. Box 2248, Denver, CO 80201-2248.
At a meeting held on August 19-20, 2021, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of AQR Funds (the “Trust”) approved a proposal to liquidate the Fund. Among other things, the Fund was not viable on an ongoing basis. Accordingly, effective 4:00 P.M. (Eastern time) on October 13, 2021, the Fund will no longer accept orders from new investors or existing shareholders to purchase Fund shares.
On or about October 13, 2021, AQR Capital Management, LLC, the Fund’s investment adviser, intends to begin liquidating the Fund’s assets in an orderly manner in advance of the Liquidation Date (as defined below), with the Fund’s commodities exposure potentially being liquidated in advance of this general liquidation. Proceeds from the liquidation of the Fund’s assets will be held in cash and similar instruments pending distribution to shareholders. As a result, the Fund may deviate from its investment strategies and policies and cease to pursue its investment objective. The Fund may incur transaction costs from liquidating portfolio holdings and performance may be adversely affected from holding cash and similar instruments.
The Fund has declared two dividends to occur prior to the Liquidation Date (as defined below), a special distribution to all holders of record as of August 30, 2021 and a second distribution to all holders of record as of November 1, 2021, collectively consisting of any undistributed income and capital gains (net of available capital loss carryovers). On or about November 5, 2021 (the “Liquidation Date”), the Fund will make a liquidating distribution of its remaining assets proportionately to any shareholders holding shares on the Liquidation Date. The Fund will then be terminated as series of the Trust. Shareholders may redeem their Fund shares or exchange their shares into shares of another series of AQR Funds, subject to any restrictions in the Fund’s Prospectus, at any time prior to the Liquidation Date.
The liquidation of the Fund is expected to have tax consequences for a taxable shareholder. Any final capital gain dividend will be treated as long-term capital gain, and any final income dividend will be taxable as ordinary income, or as qualified dividend income to the extent of the Fund’s income that so qualifies (which is taxed at the same preferential tax rate as long-term capital gain). The Fund’s final liquidating distribution will result in capital gain or loss to the receiving shareholder. Shareholders should consult their tax advisors concerning their tax situation and the impact of the liquidation and/or exchanging to a different fund has on their tax situation.
We appreciate your investment in the AQR Funds. For more information, please contact the Trust at (866) 290-2688.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE

It makes sense to me to focus more on methane emissions.
Here is a little more on a big picture problem created by the disconnect between the lack of widespread understanding and concern and the potential for long-term global necessity.:

It’s precisely these costs of major planetary tipping points that I set out to calculate with three stellar colleagues....We find that the impact of these tipping points is itself highly uncertain....For example, we estimate a 10% chance that tipping points more than double the social cost of carbon.
Our paper is clearly not the final word on this question, but it is the kind of enumeration that helps make the case for why it is precisely the risks, the uncertainties, the tail events, and, yes, the planetary-scale tipping points that should really drive climate action now.

The Costs of Climate Tipping Points Add Up
Also, here is a short discussion about another recent climate change event and why it matters.
It Just Rained on Greenland's Summit For The First Time in Recorded History

The investment surge by both new and established automakers in the electric vehicle market is a bonanza for factory equipment manufacturers that supply the highly automated picks and shovels for the prospectors in the EV gold rush. The good times for the makers of robots and other factory equipment reflect the broader recovery in U.S. manufacturing.
Automakers will invest over $37 billion in North American plants from 2019 to 2025, with 15 of 17 new plants in the United States, according to LMC Automotive. Over 77% of that spending will be directed at SUV or EV projects.

electric-vehicle-boom-is-pay-dirt-factory-machinery-makers

Here's SSAs summary of ways to make social security solvent. 22 out of the 33 pages are tables with bullet items and brief descriptions of different changes that could be made.
https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions/summary.pdf
For the gory detail, see https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions/index.html
One of the changes caught my eye because by itself it would reduce the long range actuarial balance shortfall by 86%. (For limitations in using the actuarial balance as a single magic number, see here, under A Range of Financial Measures.)
People are likely familiar with the fact that one's primary insurance amount (PIA), i.e. what one receives at full retirement age (FRA), is calculated based on one's 35 highest years of earnings. But earnings 35 years ago have to be adjusted; $1K in wages in 1986 was worth a whole lot more than $1K in wages today.
Have you ever thought about how that adjustment is made? I suspect that most people who have given it any thought believe that one's earnings are adjusted for inflation, just as SS payments have a COLA adjustment.
The proposed change, item B1.1 in the summary, is to calculate PIA precisely this way. This change would take care of most of the shortfall because in reality the current system is much more generous than merely adjusting past wages for inflation.

When we compute an insured worker's benefit, we first adjust or "index" his or her earnings to reflect the change in general wage levels that occurred during the worker's years of employment. Such indexation ensures that a worker's future benefits reflect the general rise in the standard of living that occurred during his or her working lifetime.

Emphasis added.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/Benefits.html
While there are reasons I don't like this particular change, it would nevertheless be nearly invisible (as described) and come close to making SS solvent over the next 75 years (the planning horizon).

I do.
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html
I am not clear what your second sentence means. Govs have headshaking inefficiencies, but many things are notably efficiently run (SS, MC, Darpa ...). Then again, I've had several public-sector jobs over the years.

And now, THIS:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/crypto-is-95-fraud-hype-noise-and-confusion-says-feds-neel-kashkari-11629236416?mod=home-page

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1081400/000108140021001053/divequitysupp.htm
SUPPLEMENT TO THE PROSPECTUSES, SUMMARY PROSPECTUSES AND
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
OF WELLS FARGO U.S. EQUITY FUNDS
For the Wells Fargo Diversified Equity Fund (the “Fund”)
The previously announced merger of Wells Fargo Diversified Equity Fund into Wells Fargo Spectrum Aggressive Growth Fund, if all conditions to closing are satisfied, is now expected to occur on or about October 22, 2021.
August 17, 2021
EGAM081/P903S2

Here is a Summary of a recently released Global Commons Survey. The Survey measures the level of responder awareness regarding changes deemed crucial by members of the scientific community to limit climate change. And it looks at barriers to taking rapid action regarding those changes (pages 15 - 16 of the Survey are one place to look). It appears there is only limited agreement it is necessary to take substantial and widespread rapid action involving the recommended changes. One comment from the Summary:

...although 59 percent of people surveyed said they believed in the need for a rapid transition away from fossil fuels, just eight percent acknowledged the need for large-scale economic shifts this decade.

Not really dropped off the face of the earth: https://cnbc.com/2021/06/15/billionaire-alibaba-founder-jack-ma-spending-his-time-painting.html

I'm interested in this strategy, does anyone have any inside info on timing of potential mutual fund. The strategy currently appears only on institutional (separate managed account) side of Artisan.

The strategy is targeting 15% in private investments, so it's a poor fit for a mutual fund.

IMHO the headline is clickbait.
The column that is the source of these findings includes the paragraph:

And not just impulsive, but sometimes inebriated: 32% of investors admit they’ve traded stocks while drunk. ... younger investors admit to falling into this trap much more frequently than older traders, with 59% of Gen Zers admitting to drinking and trading, versus just 9% of baby boomers.

I lean more toward teetotaling myself, but I thought there was a distinction between taking a sip of an apéritif to whet one's appetite for a share of BRK.B and getting sloshed before sinking one's life savings into bitcoin. Drinking and getting drunk are not the same.
I find the results (what little is presented) suspect. Generally, a question along the lines of "have you ever ..." should have more positive responses from older people than younger ones, because the older one is the more opportunity one has had to do whatever. Even trading with an app (which goes all the way back to Schwab's Equalizer on DOS). Even trading over a nice chardonnay. Yet on every question, the percentage of respondents who have ever done x declines with age.
The MagnifyMoney column reads like a commercial for its financial adviser referral program. It's got this big bar chart showing how people who invest with advisors are less likely to feel regret, make emotional investments, lose sleep over the market. And it concludes: "Sometimes the smartest move to take control of your finances is to let an experienced professional guide you."

I read about this when it was announced. Morningstar did an article about this a while back and after reading that, it made sense to me.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1026626/what-t-rowe-prices-split-means-for-fund-investors
I have about 25% of my investments with TRP PRWCX, RPMGX and TRSGX .
The change makes sense to me. I don't see any downside. There could be some portfolio improvements. The analysts will change which could make some differences, but the managers will stay the same.

Thank you! Didn't see that article

Strongly considering throwing a few dollars into Fido's 5 star China Fund - FHKCX.
Don't really want to buy education stocks (TAL, EDU, etc), but at current prices.....tempting. The Chinese gubmint is even more devious than our gubmint - they turned 800 lb gorilla BABA into a 400 lb. gorilla.
And at least it will never be boring.

That's for sure. Maybe you'll have to go over there to do your own due diligence...