OlDawg

Good Luck! You bought at a multiple of 150. Theoretically, it will take you over a century to break even. I like Musk's creativity and marketing. I like his pure drive. I wouldn't bet against him. I just can't see paying that kind of multiple for an unprofitable company. Definitely not what I'd consider 'buying low.' I'll just take the small sliver that will be allocated in some of my funds, and hope it's successful.

Personal belief is that—similar to ALL Administrations—POTUS receives briefing highlights, and no single person can have knowledge of everything. I would bet he’s aware of the general status. But, I doubt he’s aware of what it will take to replenish, and the details.

Why? Updates are good. I saw many stations around here at $3.29 yesterday. I'm just pointing out the bigger picture. We'll pay the price down the road. SPR will have to be refilled with our tax dollars at some point. With payment on our debt now at over $130 Billion/mo. as of May--up from $80 Billion--I'm not sure where all this money is going to come from... No way I see the Fed raising interest rates with that debt payment, which means sticky inflation for a while. We may well be in an era of 4% inflation being 'normal.' Hope not. But, we may be there. Beginning to wonder if it might be a good time to look at I Bonds again. They're already at a decent 4.26% until October. Safe money for 6 months.

The Strategic Oil Reserve is now down to 243 MM barrels. This is the lowest level since 1982. The SPR is supposed to be an insurance policy, It's not meant to be used for price controls, or election politics. For context, the U.S. consumes about 20MM barrels/day. Basically, our 30 day insurance policy is now down to 10. Refilling SPR to capacity at the highest fill rate of 785,000 BBLs/day means it would take until at least 2031 to refill if it were being filled at maximum rates--which is next to impossible given the age and condition of the infrastructure.

Yeah... I don't see much of the summary happening--especially not the withdrawal of troops from the region. Nuclear ambitions weren't even mentioned. Someone's still not on the same page, the propaganda machine is still working overtime, or both.

U.S. National Debt numbers - June 2026: Relative to one year ago, total gross national debt is $2.99 trillion higher; relative to five years ago, it is $10.94 trillion higher. Assuming the average daily rate of growth over the past three years continues, the U.S. will reach $40 trillion by approximately September 23, 2026. At that rate, an increase of another trillion dollars would be reached in approximately 141 days. [Hidden Content] Debt Update.html

I said ‘credible mentions.’ 😝

Where did this become ‘stealing Iranian oil?’ I read where the U.S. had assisted vessels loaded with about 100 MM barrels through the Strait. I read no credible mentions of it being Iranian oil, or ‘stolen.’

Guess I should say, my son—after 13 years as the Nuke power Chief on the USS Ronald Reagan—got his Nuclear Engineering degree. Funny thing is, he actually works for TI in Dallas as one of the technical engineers that build and maintain their ultra pure semiconductor wafer machines. His Navy clean room, real world engineering experience made all the difference. Texas Instruments likes to hire Navy Nuclear Power vets for this position, and they pay them very well. Hopefully, he’s got a pretty solid job future. He’s been there going on 6 years I think, and really seems to like it.

Off of TexasForever’s initial topic. But, good discussion. Grew up on the farm. THAT was work! lol I also initially went to college on a scholly, became disillusioned, and joined the Navy. I’ve spoken about some of that experience. When I got out, I was hired on at a local petrochemical as a ‘B’ operator partly because of being a vet, was encouraged to go back to school while working, and got an AAS in Engineering Design. From there, I got my Mechanical and went to work contract at multiple firms. Got my PMP, and led projects for years. Got tired of working 80’s for straight pay, went back to school for my BSBM, and was asked to join Sales. I finished up as lead Downstream BD for Mustang/Wood Group, Fluor, Jacobs and a couple smaller outfits before calling it quits to take care of family. Better 1/2 was an Aggie ChemE, and son is a Nuclear Engineer.

Lamar is—comparatively—very affordable, close to industry, and has a good track record from my understanding. I assume most of the US grads stay fairly local. There’s a good network for referrals. Baddog and I are discussing a time decades before your attendance. Were there many international students in the Engineering program when you attended? Curious about it since the immigration system has been tightened up. Incidentally, I always liked hiring ET's. I also liked hiring ex-fitters. Both brought more 'common-sense engineering/design' to the table than many other new engineering grads. Maybe, because I was ex-operations before my degrees, and could see more of the value. I just never ran across many--or any--resumes from Lamar. So, I always presumed they stayed more at the direct client level in the Golden Triangle. Glad to hear there are still others who aren't just going for Liberal Arts degrees. We need them, and all crafts, skills, and trades.

I believe that was the situation. I remember hearing LU had a special program for them to do just that. Not sure how it worked with visas and such.

The running joke about Lamar & Engineering degrees back when was they were Pakistani State. I’ve honestly never met anyone with an Engineering degree from Lamar, and I was in the business a loooooong time.

I'm of the opinion that SOME of the politicians start out with good intentions. Then, the political Parties, and other influences get ahold of them, and they lose sight of why they wanted to represent. They get corrupted--so to speak. That's just me though. Term limits would be a wonderful thing. But, it's a pipe dream.

Agree. But, you wrote - "...none of these politicians...don't have the public's best interests at heart." Basically, you're saying they all DO have the public's interest at heart. That's why I said I think you meant the opposite. 🙂

I think what you wrote is exactly the opposite of what you meant. All I know is, I'm getting a little nervous with all the admitted Socialists being elected.

As with many things, this is actually highly misleading. The SP500 is weighted, and the Top 10 stocks are all high tech Googles, Apples, Nvidia's and the like. They currently make up about 40% of the SP500 to reflect their power over the economy. This skews every other sector. They didn't have this sort of clout until fairly recently with the take-off of AI.

Data checks out according to Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting on May 16, 2026.

I actually think this Administration is using it as one way of promoting their ‘America First’ agenda by making it more expensive for other countries to dump product, and it makes U.S. produced goods more competitive. It’s also helping control interest on the debt. I agree inflation is a tax, and a weaker dollar contributes to inflation. That’s the tightrope the Fed is walking right now. For about 2 decades, we had a ridiculous monetary policy of almost 0%. It was going to come back around in all areas from interest, to investments, to goods—which passes down to services. One way to attempt to help inflation is to pay down our debt. Again, the weaker dollar helps. But—for it to really help—spending must also be cut. Your Friedman links are exactly correct. Inflation will never be tamed until we lower our debt, and inflation is a hidden tax.

Double-edged sword. A weaker dollar helps our GDP, tax revenues, debt repayment, social safety net programs, exports & trade deficit. A weaker dollar also helps us fight currency manipulation from China and others as they try to flood our markets with cheap goods. But, it makes us pay more for those imported goods. Two schools of thought on the dollar valuation. Various Administrations view the strength or weakness of the dollar differently. If people buy more U.S. goods, a weaker dollar is actually a good thing. Otherwise, it hurts U.S. consumers...especially with tariffs added. If the dollar weakens too much, it can create a global recession as the U.S. consumer could draw back on purchases that companies/countries dump into our markets. We are the catch-all for the global economy. WE cause global recessions. Not the other way around. It will stay that way unless/until the dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency.

I’d love to be wrong.

If true, there went the ‘moderates’. All that would be left are the radical Islamic zealots and the IRGC leadership.

He can’t. He won’t. But, right now, he’s lost the support of those who didn’t want him to start in the first place, and he’s losing the support of those who realize the need, but want him to finish the job all the way to regime change because they know it’s the only way.

I’ve posted my thoughts a couple posts previous. Bury—or take out—their shoreline tunnel/fortification systems. Without them, their control of the Strait via threats is negligible at worst, and nonexistent at best. Any launcher in country that shows its face, obliterate. Drones should be flying 24/7. Any boat on the water…sink it. Yes, you can do a lot more damage before taking out dual use facilities. Iran has a lot of open, unpatrolled territory. Use it. Make sure Starlink is being used to inform the people, or use some money to provide free service via AT&T, Verizon, or any and all to bypass Iran’s regulation of the internet. Get them info on how to access. Get information to the people of Iran. If you’re going to use money, use it to get people on your side—the original wish.

I have no idea about any supposed $300 Million, or any of that. I don't think anyone knows yet. People are just spitballing. What I do know is the U.S. has more than enough munitions to take care of the Iran situation with no limitations. Some people are concerned because it would leave us short--if needed--to defend Taiwan in the 2 or 3 years or less timeframe. I can guarantee the U.S. is already looking at cheaper, new tech based on the Iran conflict that can be brought to bear in a shorter timeframe. The U.S. military industrial complex learns from every conflict. That--in a reverse good way--is why our tech always leads the way. The latest Defense Dept. budget request included $54 Billion for autonomous warfare programs. The U.S. will have AI in great use for military actions before anyone else is close. Somewhat scary. But, as long as humans are still making final decisions, it's the future of warfare. We need to lead. Not lag. Newsflash reiteration: We weren't going to wholeheartedly defend Taiwan anyway. It's too close in proximity to mainland China, and their assets. It would basically be undefendable if China wanted to go full bore invasion. Iran could have been pretty much over without a 6 week ceasefire. The next large scale conflict will be about energy and food resources. The Greenies have been acknowledged (even by the UN scientists) to have been full of horse manure. Many countries have been ruined, and economies have been crushed. Billions have been wasted while a few profited. Trump has done well in securing the Western Hemisphere. We have plenty of oil between Venezuela, Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. The Americas are energy rich. We are good on Nat gas. As far as agriculture, the Americas also offer a bounty that makes much of the world envious. Trump has also done well in attempting to onshore our needs in critical minerals and semiconductor fab shops. We are good on aluminum and steel. All-in-all, This Administration has us on a net positive for the next big conflict as long as the semiconductor and rare earth mineral investments get cranking fairly soon, and actually begin producing benefits. But, Iran is a rock around our proverbial necks. The prolonged conflict is hurting the everyday American, and no one should even attempt to deny. POTUS--and the public--need to understand, and be told the truth that some young men and women will lose their lives to secure all of our long-term safety. The fantastic folks who serve us all know what they are asked when they enlist. This is why they (the 1-2% that serve) are special. They all deserve our gratitude and support. They also deserve full backing, and the ability to perform their jobs while being led by competent leadership. I'm not as concerned about the competency of our military leadership. But, regardless of Administrations, I've been concerned about our political leadership's convictions and actual willingness to win for a long time. It's not a new problem. If you're sending our folks into harm's way, send them under true reasons, back them 110%, and then get out of the way except to supply them with everything they need. Give them clear mission objectives, and then act like you want to win. I am NOT a warmonger. As someone who has experienced combat, I'm actually almost opposite. But, preparation and having the 'bigger stick' is still the best way to avoid major conflicts. Once you're in one, stop half arsing it.