How much have you lost?

i’ll start 30k!

I haven’t sold, so I haven’t lost.

1 Like

Losing? Bro, Trump is president. Ain’t lost ■■■■.

1 Like

25k so far but I think it’ll be a lot more before the year’s over. I’m going to keep on putting money into broad index etfs every month no matter what the market looks like.


Well yeah. Me neither then. Not planning on selling any holdings.

1 Like

Zero for those of us in the CSI300, it hit an all new high, RMB strengthening too.

1 Like

i mean technically from china’s peak from 2015, china is down like 40%


I like the approach!! :+1:

Jerome Powell won’t let me lose anything, not on his watch.

Approximately 3 Porsches.


lol circuit breakers. let the bodies hit the floor.

Market rejecting Trump’s “just ignore, let people die at home, if we don’t report it, it didn’t happen” master plan. Markets don’t like black boxes.

Meanwhile China put the people first, massive coordinated response and transparency. Plus they started from a place of undervaluation. That’s why CSI300 has performed best in the world.

The world sees which system works, MSM wetting themselves—narrative fail.

The thing with systems like China is that they’re excellent as long as people are happy and things are going their way. But history shows that such centrally-led, fragile systems will fail, and fail spectacurlarly, when the tipping point is reached. It has always ended in a blood bath and always will. It’s just a question of time.

i mean china has been the most powerful coutnry for the majority of the last 2000 years. and during that time period. they had an emperor. democratic systems are actually the ones with the least amount of history. so its tough to say that it is the superior type of government.


Pretty much all countries for the past 2000 years have had an emperor/tsar/king. The point I’m trying to make is that centrally-led systems are very fragile. Changeovers of power in centrally-led systems tend to be bloody and chaotic.
Democratic systems are new and have the least amount of history but at the same time democratic systems have lifted the average person’s standard of living to a level that would have been unfathomable to previous generations.

haha good point. but technically the more you go into the future the better your standard of living is. i think the only time they dipped was the end of hte bronze age and when rome started to fracture and we entered the dark ages.


The advances that were made were incredible small and took a long time. If you look at the standard of living of an average joe 10,000 years ago when agriculture first started and compare it to the average standard of living in the 1500s, their life expectancy, health and general quality of life were very similar. In general, life really sucked. It’s only in the past 150-200 years when standard of living has improved dramatically. I’m not saying it just because of the rise of democracy but democracy definitely had something to do with it.

tough to say. anyways i just bought TPL due to Russia Saud price war for oil. should be interesting. my stock portfolio is down 14% vs spy at 18.1%. so i got creamed too.

Not sure any of this is correct.

China is the longest lasting empire, but it was rarely the strongest during those 2,000 years. The Mongols would like a word with you. When they weren’t getting conquered by the Khans, they endlessly fought each other draining resources, population, and overall productivity. Compare that to Roman rule (or Mongol) and China was an inefficient mess most of the time.

Also, Japan kicked their ass, Russia made them their bitch, the Brits just gave back Hong Kong, and even the French beat up on China during the Indochina (Vietnam) wars.

They’ve stuck together. Have to hand them that. But, otherwise, they really aren’t all that high on the all-time power rankings.

1 Like