Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ukraine War... How much will S&P drop this week?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by PhotonsRGR8 View Post
    I am probably throwing money away but after I bought an s-ton of OGZPY and RSX I was not allowed to buy more a few days ago nor convert USD to RUB on xe.com. Go figure?
    You are probably making a joke, but you can look into FOREX.

    Originally posted by PhotonsRGR8 View Post
    I am now looking at non Taiwanese semiconductors and fertilizer companies. I believe I'm too late to the party.
    Look into ASMIY.

    They would be in a tough place if there were ever sanctions against China/Taiwan (since those are their main consumers/synergists), but they are a well-run business. I own a bit (not a lot, since I'll freely admit I don't know the industry and international singles are hard to get news on in general). Between that and my large NVO holdings, maybe I like the Dane/Dutch stuff too much... but they would be the very last to enter WW3 type stuff

    ...Zapod said it well: bonds are sunk, stocks and indexes will be a crap shoot due to volatility (but probably smart to buy the dips of good ones), and commodities or commodity-related companies are probably the surest best with inflation upcoming.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Zaphod View Post

      ...until we're forced into a recession (the most likely outcome that chills inflation).
      Good point. Main question for me will be when a recession might occur and when to lighten up on the resource and risk exposure. The current bias of most CB's may be to be to keep interest rates low and let the supply issues iron themselves out. So it's hard to know how far commodity prices could run, maybe to $200 oil before there is sufficient demand destruction.

      Comment


      • At this point I am simply heartbroken by what I am seeing. Families ripped apart with children not knowing if they will ever see their fathers again. To me, what happens in the short term financially doesn't matter. I'm much more concerned about what happens to the people of Ukraine during that time. I've sent moneys to Save the Children and UNICEF specifically earmarked for the Ukrainian people. I hope many of you will contribute in some fashion to those so sadly affected.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Dont_know_mind View Post
          , maybe to $200 oil before there is sufficient demand destruction.
          I heard that same interview.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by pit.alumni View Post
            At this point I am simply heartbroken by what I am seeing. Families ripped apart with children not knowing if they will ever see their fathers again. To me, what happens in the short term financially doesn't matter. I'm much more concerned about what happens to the people of Ukraine during that time. I've sent moneys to Save the Children and UNICEF specifically earmarked for the Ukrainian people. I hope many of you will contribute in some fashion to those so sadly affected.
            I agree with you, and have sent money as well.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by PhotonsRGR8 View Post
              I am now looking at non Taiwanese semiconductors and fertilizer companies. I believe I'm too late to the party.
              You never know, i thought that during covid and watched things 3x.

              Bought a ag company this week too

              Comment


              • Originally posted by auggie1983 View Post
                You think tech overpriced like ARKK tech or QQQ or all of the above?
                Both but arkk certainly more. It was my consensus short last year for a contest, and ive been short it several times via sark.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by pit.alumni View Post
                  At this point I am simply heartbroken by what I am seeing. Families ripped apart with children not knowing if they will ever see their fathers again. To me, what happens in the short term financially doesn't matter. I'm much more concerned about what happens to the people of Ukraine during that time. I've sent moneys to Save the Children and UNICEF specifically earmarked for the Ukrainian people. I hope many of you will contribute in some fashion to those so sadly affected.
                  It is sad, but there are many countries, most NATO members, who are accepting refugees which millions of smart Ukranians have taken refuge in or are waiting to take refuge in... and which others still can. Again, there is no pit of flames or spikes or lava on the other sides of the Ukraine borders. The smart people in disaster situations are the ones who GET OUT.

                  There is such as thing as strong will and nationalism, and then there is simply pig-headedness. Zelensky basically advocates suicide and shames those who don't want to fight a tank or a chain gun or a missile with a kitchen knife or golf club...
                  "Ukrainians! In all of our cities, where the enemy invaded, go on the offensive. Go out on the streets. We need to fight every time we have an opportunity."
                  "When you don't have a firearm but they respond with gunshots and you don't run … This is the reason why occupation is temporary. Our people -- Ukrainians -- don't back down!"

                  "...it is forbidden for men aged 18-60, Ukraine citizens, to leave the borders of Ukraine"
                  ...and he is also willing to risk WW3 to save the Ukraine ppl who refuse to evacuate with pressing for no-fly zone, more and more and more sanctions, more free ammo and free everything. At this point, between the Ukraine ban of non-elderly men leaving Ukraine, issuing weapons to untrained civilians, suggestions non-trained civilians avoid evacuation to instead fight military forces, and now the daily demands he voices from NATO and the rest of the world, I would be as happy with Zelensky getting killed as Putin. "It is also a victory to know when to retreat."

                  ...Oh, and in more pertinent news, the IMF has said, "The ongoing war and associated sanctions will also have a severe impact on the global economy." In other news, the sun will rise tomorrow. I am fully aware that I can't do anything to help or hurt Ukraine or Russia, so I'm just fine trying to make some money from the unavoidable effects of the crisis instead of spouting pleasantries on social media. I would be glad to harbor Leanna Bartlett if she fled to USA, but I just don't think that's happening. So, I picked up a few gold coins today and have a buy market order for a couple contracts of DBC for Monday.
                  Last edited by Max Power; 03-05-2022, 08:07 PM.

                  Comment


                  • We can do something, that is to ask our politicians to articulate a clear position. It costs nothing and it may avert further escalation. It is too late to call Putins bluff.
                    This is a great analysis:

                    "let’s consider the current confrontation as a heads-up poker game...

                    In our instance, the West has vastly more chips than Putin but is less adept at internal coordination (which could be modeled as multi-move look-ahead, like a chess player who can see several moves ahead), eschews brinkmanship (which could be conceived as engaging in our own bluffing or compensation to opponent’s tendencies) and loves negotiations (which are perceived as weakness).

                    If we look at Putin as trying to play a weak hand with a minimal stack of chips to best effect, certain dynamics of the current crisis come into focus. Let us consider the recent chain of events from this perspective.

                    ...Given all of what Putin knows about our tendencies, he perceived the Afghan withdrawal as a sign of weakness and poor coordination among NATO allies, so he waited for European demand for Russian gas to peak during the cold winter months and sought to raise the stakes by massing troops on the Ukrainian border.
                    Putin may have calculated that despite Biden’s personal resolve and deep commitment to European security, he simply lacks the ability to call Putin’s re-raise because domestic discord and the fractured global system no longer afforded him a sufficient amount of discretionary “chips.” The very nature of a game like poker or backgammon is that you never know if the opponent is calling or taking until you raise or double them. No amount of pre-game chatter commits one to action until the chips are actually down. So, it is true that trial balloons were launched about kicking Putin off the SWIFT system if he re-invaded Ukraine in 2022. But we had previously said we would uphold the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 committing the U.S. and the U.K. to defend Ukrainian territorial integrity but then didn’t do anything when Crimea was annexed in 2014. So Putin had every reason to believe that Western statements leading up to the invasion were in fact hot air.

                    Now let’s finally drill down yet further and consider the events of the past few months as a single hand of poker...

                    The pre-flop action saw Putin making a less-than-pot-sized raise and despite having the nuts, we limped. Now to the post-flop action, we look at the board and are distracted by our mobile phone (a text from our NATO allies complaining about something) and we don’t realize that we are still holding the nuts. So, we check. This is how I would model the fact that Olaf Scholz and Biden didn’t hold a joint press conference three weeks ago in which they could have said, for example, that if you so much as invade any part of Ukraine, we will kick all of Russia off the SWIFT code system, sanction the Central Bank and send tons of arms to Ukraine, and Germany will permanently cancel Nordstream II and double its defense budget. We had the nuts.

                    We could have staged this big joint presser and showed Putin that we had the nuts. Moreover, we could have even counter-bluffed by holding a conference with Sweden and Finland saying that they would join NATO if invaded, even if they weren’t actually committed to doing so. But we didn’t do any of this, so although we stated during the side action over the table that we had a strong hand and that Putin better be careful, the way we merely intimated dire consequences instead of spelling them out seemed to Putin to indicate that we were bluffing.

                    Why did we fail to get our message across to Putin? It seems that our leaders had the wrong model of diplomacy to hand. They weren’t viewing it as poker but rather that Putin was a chess player who when confronted by the correct moves on our side would be content with maximizing his interests by accepting a draw especially as he was playing black. Fundamentally, Scholz and Macron thought they could engage in negotiation rather than deterrence. But a hotheaded narcissistic sociopath who loves giving pushy raises understands only deterrence and threats of force. Flying to Moscow for talks was clearly perceived as a sign of weakness, not as the face-saving off-ramp from the crisis it was intended to be.

                    Given our lack of post-flop aggression, and Putin’s misreading of the meaning of the negotiation strategy, he made the biggest raise in the history of our iterative heads-up action. Like a veteran hustler finally ready to pounce, he did so nonchalantly and abruptly. He was banking incredibly hard that, given our previous tendencies and his read on our current hand, we would insta-fold.

                    The opposite happened. The West has collectively called Putin’s bluff; he is flabbergasted and tilted. Now the turn card has come and it is giving us both the top pair along with outside straight and flush draws (in Omaha it is possible to have both simultaneously), while all Putin has is an under pair and a gut shot at a non-nut straight draw. To conceal this weakness, he is tempted to raise yet further with comments about readying the nuclear arsenal and leveling Ukrainian cities. Possibly he is hoping that both the Ukrainians and their Western allies will gradually back down once they see that his brutal aggression will not be deterred by sanctions. Certainly he wishes for an outcome that would turn his earlier misread into some form of genius.

                    As soon as we think of the current crises in these poker terms, the risk for even further miscalculation becomes manifest. We may have inadvertently “tilted” Putin, through our bizarre behavior of not raising post-flop even though we had the nuts, but then calling Putin’s bluff mega-raise. Furthermore, it may now actually be the optimal strategy for Putin to jam in his remaining chips, out of an attempt to defend his earlier unwise raise.

                    This is the issue of pot odds. When one has already placed a very high percentage of one’s stack in the pot, it makes little sense to fold, even if one intuits an adversary’s call to indicate that one is a significant underdog. As such, Putin seems to find himself in a situation in which it is highly rational for him to seek to escalate matters in Ukraine striving to win at all costs even though he has a very slim chance of doing so. Withdrawing now or negotiating a settlement perceived as bad for Russia would crater his domestic legitimacy, broadcast his weakness internationally, and expose his earlier bluff as a complete blunder. Also due to Putin’s sunk costs, it may be worth risking a complete defeat, even if the odds of victory remain quite slim.

                    ...I see Putin as benefiting from a disordered world system. As such he does not seek to impose a coherent alternative non-Western order on Ukraine, but similarly with other strategic theaters like Syria, Libya, Venezuela and Iran is happy for these theaters to remain disordered basket cases. He may feel that even if the Russian economy implodes and Ukraine is reduced to rubble this is a win for his vision of the world. It is certainly not a win for the West or for the Ukrainian people.

                    A wise strategy for the West would have been in the early post-flop action to have either aggressively bluffed ourselves or to have made very clear exactly what we would do if Putin escalated. We could have threatened offensive cyber-attacks or limited nuclear strikes as a way to deter the Putin post-flop raise. However, it seems that European leaders were genuinely only willing to engage in negotiations rather than deterrence. Negotiations were however a completely inappropriate strategy as they only work when the adversary has legitimate grievances which can be solved via some sort of optimal compromise. This assumption clearly never applied to a sociopathic bully like Putin. Because we adopted this suboptimal negotiation ploy which was perceived as indicating a lack of resolve and poor coordination within the Western bloc, this engendered a further suboptimal play from Putin, the highly aggressive post-flop raise, when he was facing an opponent actually holding the nuts.

                    The mathematics of the pot odds have now made both sides existentially committed to this hand going all the way to the River. It is this fact that makes it manifest that the West is truly at War with Russia in a way that we never were in the solely proxy wars over Syria, Georgia, Libya or the Donbas.

                    Given that we are at war, if our goal is to genuinely help our Ukrainian allies, avoid future bloodshed and avert the war going nuclear, we should do a lot more than publicly share intelligence on Putin’s actions and arm the Ukrainians with stingers. One approach would be a massive bluff ultimatum threatening extreme measures, both financial, cyber, or nuclear, if our conditions are not met by a certain time. Although this might work, it is unlikely to be adopted unanimously by the Western bloc leaders and could lead to Putin either calling our bluff or pre-emptively escalating himself... (cont)...

                    Comment


                    • ...
                      Another approach better suited to the temperament of the West’s leaders and the expectations of our populaces is resolute deterrence. Major Western leaders should hold a joint news conference spelling out their exact redlines, laying out all the financial, cyber, and nuclear retaliation that we have in store. It is normal poker etiquette when both sides are all in to flip over their hole cards before the final board cards are dealt. If the Western aim is to bleed Putin dry over many years through a protracted insurgency in Ukraine, I believe they should say so. If a single cyberattack on a NATO member will trigger a nuclear World War III, I believe they should say so. If a certain amount of killing of Ukrainian civilians will lead to a complete blanket boycott on Russian hydrocarbon exports no matter the pain this will cause to European consumers, this redline should be explicitly stated.

                      Yes, it could have saved tens or hundreds of thousands of lives if we had made these declarations a few weeks ago. But it may still avert a future catastrophic miscalculation by letting everyone know now exactly where we stand."

                      https://newlinesmag.com/argument/why...ker-not-chess/

                      Comment


                      • You are on to something about disclosure and talks saving lives, but war is not about telegraphing exact moves and showing true strengths. It never has been... and cannot be.

                        Rommel drove plywood dummy tanks atop Volkswagens to fool the Brits... and it worked. They used inflatables to fool him also.
                        USA dropped some pamphlets for Japan and gave radio warnings less than a week before Hiroshima. We say those were clear message to feel ok, but I think 100k dead people would say otherwise.


                        Putin knows how the game's played. He simply said, "Now a few important, very important words for those who may be tempted to intervene in ongoing events from the outside... Whoever tries to interfere with us, and even more so to create threats to our country, to our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never experienced in your history."
                        ...does that mean if US gives Poland planes so Poland can give theirs to Ukraine that US and Poland get nuked? Who knows.
                        ...does that mean that if NATO did the no-fly in Ukraine that they get invaded in Romania or Poland? Reply hazy, try again.
                        ...what would it take to get China to awake and 'she will shake the world'? Anybody's guess.
                        ...what will happen when one of the many US commandos, drones, etc already in Ukraine gets captured or discovered? Not sure.
                        ...do Russian offerings to Ukraine cities to surrender insure wellbeing of the city's men? The govt men? Soldiers? Concentrate and ask again.
                        ...do civilian and humanitarian corridors out of Ukraine cities promptly end if the Ukraine forces take advantage and attack Russian troops near one of them? It seems so.

                        There is always an element of interpretation. Any army has weapons, assets, secret alliances, strengths that they've never openly used. It is a game of cheat to win. Say one thing and usually do another. "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Max Power View Post
                          Putin knows how the game's played. He simply said, "Now a few important, very important words for those who may be tempted to intervene in ongoing events from the outside... Whoever tries to interfere with us, and even more so to create threats to our country, to our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never experienced in your history."
                          To me that was probing NATO about their line, which they didn't draw.
                          In a game theory sense, it's the "crazy negotiator" strategy. You and your opponent have a gun and they say they could go crazy and kill everyone if you try to stop them from doing the current nasty thing they're doing. They are committed to a hard aggressive stance, unless you call their bluff.
                          Calling his bluff on Ukraine seems not acceptable to the west.
                          He is probably not crazy though. And if he is, it still results in nuclear war.
                          Arguably, the optimal choice is to call his bluff earlier in the game whether or not he is crazy.
                          If he is rational, not calling his bluff results in him continuing the game as it benefits him.

                          Calling his bluff is completely unacceptable to US voters at this point in time though, so probably the next best thing to do is ignore it, which is what the West seems to be doing.

                          I still cannot believe that they cornered him with mega-sanctions without calling his bluff first.

                          Comment


                          • As shocking as it seems, I think the most probable outcome is that the West gives him Ukraine and weakens the sanctions over time.
                            Anyway, at least they know to call his bluff next time.

                            Comment


                            • Lot of Monday morning quarterbacking. Agree he had reasons to believe, following Grozny and Crimea and Syria and western discord that we wouldn't punish him nearly this bad. But separate from our own enabling, he also seems to have been pretty delusional about the Ukrainians rolling out the red carpet. So maybe he would have pulled a Crazy Ivan no matter what.

                              I read we have a pretty large disadvantage in tactical nukes, in numbers, in deployment versatility, and probably in terms of willingness to use them.

                              We need to be thinking about off ramps that take that into account.

                              Comment


                              • "The ongoing war and associated sanctions will also have a severe impact on the global economy." In other news, the sun will rise tomorrow. I am fully aware that I can't do anything to help or hurt Ukraine or Russia, so I'm just fine trying to make some money from the unavoidable effects of the crisis instead of spouting pleasantries on social media. I would be glad to harbor Leanna Bartlett if she fled to USA, but I just don't think that's happening. So, I picked up a few gold coins today and have a buy market order for a couple contracts of DBC for Monday.[/QUOTE]

                                Really??? Don’t know you, but from your posts you seem like you are making bank. Maybe now is a time to let that go for a minute and donate a little to those that are suffering beyond what I can imagine.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X