Send this to the new AD, he needs to see this.  We must avoid scheduling:

Big Ten - Shaka has a losing record against them except for Illinois, he beat them twice
SEC - Shaka has a winning record against them but if he loses twice it'll become a losing record and then we'll never be able to beat them
Big XII - Shaka couldn't compete in that conference when it wasn't even as good as it is now
ACC - The NC State loss looms too large, Notre Dame won't even play us anymore
PAC 12 - Doesn't exist
UConn - The gap is simply too large, growing
St Thomas - Still haven't recovered
UWM - Play it safe and continue to dodge the loss
Secret Scrimmages - A single loss will cost 2-3 seed lines minimum

With the Scoop collective intelligence, why do we even need an AD?

If there is negative news coming, as of now I think it is good for the markets. When does negative news become bad news?  I don’t know. The markets want to see unemployment above 4%. That is good news for the markets and for now would be bullish.  The fed won’t get what it wants without breaking the employment market., that’s been my opinion for a while.

Another perspective to consider is from someone in industrial real estate in Dallas and Atlanta. Investor, owner,  developer.  He says the amount of manufacturing capacity and industrial building going on is something he has never seen except to compare it to how China used to be. Literally comparing it to a China boom scenario.  From his perspective and his periscope view into the economy things are booming like he has never seen.  But things can be booming and falling apart at the same time, especially in real estate which often is mistimed, as we know. But it also is a buffer against a big down turn unless financing falls apart like in 2008-9 where projects literally got abandoned that were in process. That seems like less of a risk now; but what we don’t think is a risk can be.  When things are going well there might be more risk, we just are not seeing it. When things are going bad we might see all sorts of risks, when there actually is less risk especially long term. Buffet’s way of investing. He understood some version of negativity bias before anyone even if it didn’t have a name.

I don’t pay much attention to predictors, no one can predict consistently so as we know Buffet is the model to stay long and invest more when things are really ugly, but I like to get Prof Jeremy Siegels perspective. Last I heard Siegel thinks we could be in a bull run for the  rest of the decade due to factors including AI. I think if one invested like Buffet but used index funds, and on the margins followed Prof Siegels signals,  for marginal adjustments, one could have some fun and try to beat the index funds (fools goal I know and I just keep putting dumb money in and ignore it).

Either way, I just keep investing the same as always. I consciously don’t check in too often (negativity bias demands that we don’t check in too often or change our plans or we will underperform and over react to down turns). I learned my lesson in the Great Recession.  I saw it coming, saw the real estate bubble. Got a lot out of the market. Great move. Except that I was too slow getting back in. I learned not to try to time things, because as I know now one has to get it right twice. And that is simply foolish for me to think I can do that not once but twice.

Because of our bias’s I’ve decided  to expect to get slaughtered once in a while and see 40 or 50 percent losses, but don’t let it affect the long term strategy. And anything you don’t need to use in the short term should be invested for the long term. Maybe I’m lucky, as I consider most of what I have invested in the market for future generations, so 80% plus is long term. And if  I greatly outlive life expectancy than I should have invested for the long term anyway.  And I’m one of those that doesn’t hope to live to 100 or God help me longer. Never outlive all of your friends and some of your children - just too sad and painful. 

Have done an enormous amount of travel for business in the US and can't argue with most observations in here about airports. I'm a United Million miler and have had status on United most of my business life. United goes through cycles of quality and el cheapo that just grinds on one after a while. United is in el cheapo mode again now and that makes traveling suck.

That said, here are my nominees for best and worst airports in the land:

Best:

Orlando McCoy -- This one is easy, so long as you have TSA pre-check. Only downside to MCO is the multi-hour wait for security if you don't have TSA pre. Airport is roomy, well laid out and easy to access. A bit of a parking headache at the holidays but otherwise incredibly well done.

LaGuardia -- Since the revamp, this airport is downright nice. Used to be the worst airport in America. Now, it's pleasant. Traffic and waits, both airside and landside, can be a pain, but this is a huge improvement.

O'Hare -- Maybe because it was my home airport for 40+ years, but ORD is easy to get around, connect and has decent amenities. Security isn't too bad either.

Worst:

LAX -- The traffic getting into and out of LAX is preposterous. Best thing that could be done with LAX is to tear it down and start over.

Dulles -- The United hub at Dulles is in a temporary terminal that should have been torn down a century or more ago. Place is a dump, crowded and dirty. United was going to dump Dulles a couple of times, only to find out EWR can't handle the traffic.

MSP -- This airport was laid out in the days when Northwest and North Central both had hubs in the Twin Cities. Connecting in the Twin Cities is a nightmare. It has become better in recent years but the Twin Cities really needs a new airport. 

Thankfully, the "news" outlet that pay $787 million for defaming Dominion voting machines set you straight on the alternative facts.

Not directed at MU82.

I am shocked. Truly shocked at the Jan 6 alternate reality. Sad sad day for America. The most distressing thing for American politics in my lifetime. Nothing comes close.

So, what if everyone ignored all the propaganda stations and instead studied bias and why we are illogical and so easily nudged and influenced into an alternate reality. And apply this knowledge to the self. This can apply to both extremes both parties. We all can do better and shut off the crazy and be careful who has sway (and for some control of) our minds, over what we think.

And for perspective, I am a former card carrying republican who has attended conventions as a delegate. I am no longer a republican. Not trumps new republican party. Jan 6th was a horror show. Nothing less. To deny it is, well I’ll stop there. The psychology on why people need to deny and over identification with a party or tribe is fascinating. Let’s leave it there.

I continue to be surprised by the general thoughts on perceived ev issues. It is a valued learning experience coming here for me. I’m not on any other social media so it’s good to get others views, accurate or not. EV’s are not really a topic of discussion in my life except for here. I work 6 or 7 days a week and have a family life, so little off the cuff interaction with others that is not work related.

I never think about ev range or how many miles of range I have on my ev, unless it is one of the 6 to 10 times a year I’m taking a long trip. Or, when I’ll be on a medium sized trip and it is really cold all day - very cold weather is still a place for battery improvement.  Early on with an ev I would check range constantly. But, one adapts and I don’t even pay attention on daily use - 350 days out of the year I have no clue what the range is, not an issue.

On trips, the car tells me when and where to stop to charge (and sometimes I modify my charge stop to a different location depending on lunch or bathroom breaks).
When I drive my wife’s hybrid I have to remind myself to check  the gas level. I’m so used to just driving an ev not paying attention to charge level.

 Plus, with an ev you literally have no expenses that you’d have with an engine. None. No belt changes, oil, failed engine parts, radiators, the list goes on etc etc., ev’s have such a lower cost of ownership. At least with a Tesla it’s just a new cabin filter every two years, add window washer fluid, tires. Brake pads and breaks rarely get used, so replacement of pads will likely be because of age after 10 years or well over 150k. Similar to good hybrids but even less brake usage and the regen is more powerful. I never had to replace break pads on hybrid Toyotas under 125k miles.

 I’m also surprised by the fear of hybrid battery failure. Again this tech has come a long way and for Toyota at least a non issue.

The thought of an ev (at least Tesla) battery failure short of 250k miles is not a concern at all. Not with 3 or Y teslas. 2013 or so model S had some issues with high mileage but those were fixed long ago.  For me should be well over 300k+ long after the car has little value. Yes, something can go wrong but no different than a  gas guzzler I had that needed a new engine tear down a rebuild at under 100k. At least the ev has a battery engine warranty of, I think 8 years 120k.  I’d think this is also true for Hyundai and Kia. I’d be afraid of other manufacturers at this point. Nissan had bad battery tech and software in the past for a company in the game so long. I suspect they have improved both, but I haven’t researched it.

Three, I’m surprised by the gas crowd who are anti ev. One would logically think they’d like other people driving non-gas cars to keep gas prices down. More hybrids and ev’s on the road have to help keep pressure off gas prices and help prevent opec from deciding to drive up prices for oil as it would convert more drivers to ev’s and hybrids. And once you go ev, I doubt many go back. I know I won’t. Maybe I’m an outlier but the driving experience is so much better.

Finallly, and I’ve never thought this before, Tesla is close on full self drive. The new AI trained software is actually amazing. A high jump from even 6 months ago. I actually can see them pulling this off within the next 2 years, unless they have peaked and the final 10% is too hard to close on. I’ve always thought it is way, way off. No longer.  It appears to me it is going to be here soon.  Faster than I expected by many years; a decade plus. I thought chip tech on board cars was way off and cloud tech chips would have to be in the car.  Apparently that’s not the case. People just can’t freak out nationally and globally when there are self drive accidents, logic and safety should logically be the guide comparing it versus human driver error and accidents. Logic should rule the mind, but… we know it will get challenged and one computer driving car death probably will get more attention than 10,000 plus humans killing others. Can people be logical?  I think so, but maybe knowing people are not logical beings, I hope to much.  I’ll be looking at accident rates and serious accident rates and deaths per million miles driven by computers versus humans. It will data driven not emotional.

Goo-

It’s become a political issue.  Your points are smart, simple and logical.  I’ve been following the technology closely for a long time for investment purposes.  It boggles the mind we still have some who will be a slave to ICE for simply political reasons.

The self-drive vehicles are much closer than we think.  We’ve been trending this way for close to a decade.  It’ll be a political fight as well. 

Automakers are well-aware of the future as well.  Future generations will be driving EV’s or being driven by EV’s.  The road to progress is often blocked by special interests and politics but on this, automakers and smart people know the future and it isn’t ICE