Dbeasy

But it’s not fair to believe that. You aren’t in practice. None of us are. None of us really know anything.

Texas 20 Aggie 16 passong yards 299

I called for Arch during the game solely because Ewers was clearly injured and couldn’t move in the pocket. Up until that injury he was playing really well. I felt Arch would drive the bus more effectively with lower risk to a win. It would also give Arch some snaps before the A&M game in the event Ewers couldn’t go, or is still hobbled. However, those generally asking for Arch over Ewers regardless of injury have no idea what Sark is seeing in practice from Arch. For all we know he’s really not ready. Maybe that’s why he didn’t put in Arch.

What if they bring their O face? Will that suffice?

Before he got hurt he actually was playing very well.

This team is better than last year’s team.

Blues career re-instated as a result of Gibson fumbling on his first carry.

For the love of god someone patch me into Sark’s headset so I can verbally berate him for leaving Ewers in.

The only thing I can come up with is that manning is the worst practice player in history. There is no other explanation for sticking with Ewers.

Blue’s Texas career is over.

https://amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/11/22/business/home-buying-interest-rates?amp_js_v=0.1&amp_gsa=1#webview=1&cap=swipe nar believes rates will stay high for two years.

What a weird game. They got abused on the boards in the first half. Joe had tons of layups and dunks. I’m not sure Texas ever really looked good until the last few minutes. Weird.

I’m right there with you. They have some talent too. Their shooting is terrible. That’s what’s killing them.

It just dawned on me why you are so adamant about the rate direction: you have clients that need to make a decision about buying or not now. I don’t think your scenarios are unreasonable, but more importantly if I were a homebuyer I definitely would not sit on the sidelines today, unless the current interest rates strained the finances so badly that it made life unworkable. Why? Because if inflation does run a little hot, it’s far better to own a house than rent one. It’s one of the better inflation hedges you can have.

I'm not a lawyer. I used to run an AI tech company until I sold it and early retired. I don't disagree with you that AI could be very deflationary. I've just been pointing out the other possible future scenario. Given that the discussion has veered back and forth across a very wide road without a lot of definition to what we are really discussing, a big part of the arguing here could be over people thinking of two different problems. Here is my framing of the discussion: 1. Time frame - In this whole discussion, I've been thinking about a time frame of 5-10 years and no longer, with a particular emphasis on potential inflation acceleration in the next 12-36 months. 2. Why this 5-10 year time frame - because we are running huge deficits currently that will have an impact on longer term rates for the next several years. The supply of Treasuries will be higher than historically, unless you go back to WW2, where we last ran deficits as high as a percentage of GDP. Coupled with that is a potentially increasing reluctance of other countries to buy as much Treasuries as historically. It will take 5-10 years of government action to get the debt as a percent of GDP under control. Out past 5-10 years, all bets are off because government actions, AI, and all sorts of other influences come into play. 3. What happens in this 5-10 year time frame - the government will pretty much have to let inflation run a little hot because they will need to get spending as a percentage of GDP down and WW2 is the perfect example of what the US did the last time. Now Trump and Elon are talking about massive spending cuts and I do believe they will do something meaningful, and that will help interest rates and slow down the economy, but the spending problem is so large letting inflation run a little hot must also be part of the tool kit, in concert with spending cuts and growth initiatives. Now letting inflation run hot means NOT hiking rates up as high, because you want to let it run a little hot. But the challenge is the risk I keep pointing to below, the 12-36 month inflation risk. By the way, running hot is letting inflation run at ~2.5-3.5%, not 5%, for example. 4. The 12-36 month risk - juggling spending cuts, the current momentum around wage increases, still relatively low unemployment, interest rates, etc. is a tough balancing act. We all learned in the 1970's and 2020's that if you cut rates too much too fast (or not raise them fast enough) that inflation can re-ignite, and then someone has to come in with draconian measures, ala 20% interest rates, to stop the inflation freight train. I put the odds on this scenario pretty low but not 0%. Conversely, cutting rates too slowly and spending too quickly can put the economy in the ditch, which creates a whole other set of problems that might or might not fuel inflation even more due to even higher deficits. The good news here is that employment is ALWAYS the last to go when you enter a recession, so the current relatively good unemployment numbers really mean nothing. We could be in a recession right now, for all we know, or just a soft landing growth scenario. I do think you bring up a good point about AI. It won't suddenly produce a massive spike in unemployment. It will be a steady rise over the next 30 years in reducing resource requirements. So that definitely helps offset the potential inflation issue, and raises the odds of lower rates. I'm sure there are other factors that could slow inflation. Again, I'll just re-iterate what I've now said at least five times. I'm not saying inflation is definitely going to take off again and rates will remain high. I'm saying that betting all your chips on a big rate drop in the near-term is a really bad bet, especially with an inverted yield curve still. In poker terms, your expected return doesn't justify an all-in bet. I personally own some 10 year bonds because I don't believe inflation will spike, but I only put a portion of fixed income into 10 year, and I'm still not much in longer term bonds. Most financial advisors today are also preaching caution on long term bonds.

It’s not dooming in any way whatsoever. I’ve said multiple times that I personally believe we will likely have some level of rate reduction in the future, but that there is a chance of another scenario. Every reasonable economist or financial prognosticator on the planet has the similar viewpoint that we do not have a guaranteed near future of rate reductions, that there is still some uncertainty and risk. Conversely, your adamant insistence that there is a 100% guarantee of near future lower rates is not only polyannaish , it’s foolish. No one can guarantee that, and if they could then rates would have already immediately dropped. Your viewpoint is truly ridiculous.

No of course not. But that 10% also impacts the rest of the wage world to some extent. When someone is evaluating union vs non-union jobs, there is no question there is a linkage, so increases in union wages ripple through the economy to non-union jobs as well. As to the impact of tariffs, 2/3 of the economy is services, 1/3 is goods. The tariffs will be mostly on goods (of course made with overseas lower wages). US wages are the real critical inflation factor.

The only way rates stay high or go higher is if inflation re-ignites, or if the election of Trump causes international treasury bond buyers to stop buying, because he is broadly hated and distrusted by many international trade partners. On inflation, imo the biggest threat is union bargaining for higher wages. There is also the immigration and tariff policies of Trump, but I think those will have lesser effects. The Republican controlled government could do some things to blunt union power. That would be key. I’ve watched the recent pay concessions to unions and they are scary high. Of course, the government spending cuts could also plunge the economy into a recession and rates will drop, but then the question will be whether there is much real estate demand. It depends on the depth of the recession. A lot of moving parts.

Here is yet another article explaining why the environment we are in may have different characteristics than the last 20 years. Again, doesn’t mean rates won’t drop, just that an inversion of the yield curve must happen at some point. And that can be done in two ways, with very different results for mortgage rates. I personally think it will be fine, but there’s no way I would bet a lot of money on it. Banks are sitting on billions of losses because they bet on long term bonds. https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/americas-7-trillion-cash-stash-isnt-going-anywhere-mcgeever-2024-11-21/

There is some talent on this team, but you can just see they don’t understand how to attack on offense, or play good defense, switching off. They rely pretty much on hero ball. It’s so frustrating to watch.

Ya I said that earlier. But he still hs a ton of money to waste.

No, my only point is that everyone is laughing about lsu. And it is funny. And I love it. But tomorrow Knight or Portney could decide to aim their dollars this direction and poach Texas players and it wouldn’t be so funny. Of course, if a Texas billionaire or two wanted to step up, then obviously that would be great. But right now I’m going to limit my joy over lsu’s misfortune because it wouldn’t be very fun watching bidding wars between a couple of rich billionaire assholes. Basically I hate Portnoy.

That’s my exact point. See above.

No, it’s the potential for Portnoy to pull a Phil Knight (with obviously far less money, but still enough) and throw tons of money into NIL. A single very rich dude can have a very big impact on Texas recruiting success.

I wouldn’t even have made it to the funeral.