CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

The WNBA has been the butt of jokes for decades.  The women's league is a perpetual money pit, with annual losses of around $40 million per year, all subsidized by the men's league.  The level of play is often tedious, the pace is much slower and the athleticism is lacking compared to the men's game. 

It's the reason why the WNBA has far less viewers, makes no profit and why the women athletes are paid far less.  It's not sexism ad many of the players claim, it's just basic math.

One would think that any player that doubles (in some cases triples) the viewership of league games by her mere presence would be widely celebrated by all the people involved including the commission, but sadly, this has not been the case with Caitlin Clark.  Clark's expertise and superior ability on the court has brought new life to a floundering sport; the problem is, she's relatively new to the league and, she's white. 

This combination triggered many of the minority players, leading to public back-biting on sports talk shows and flagrant fouls on the court.  The audience and social media started to take notice.  In fact, one could argue that it was all the clips of jealous WNBA athletes attacking Clark on the court that made her more popular than ever.  Not to mention, it seems as if most of the fouls are committed by black players. 

The latest flagrant foul involved Phoenix Mercury forward Alyssa Thomas, who appeared to knee Clark in the groin area and then press her closed fist into Clark's throat while she was on the ground.  No foul was called. 

??Hold up…A closer look at the dirty play by Alyssa Thomas last night w/ a new angle — Wait for the freeze + zoom on each.

- Knee to the groin
- Pinches her underarm
- Fist to the throat
- Attempt to stomp on her (she moved)

Why do @WNBA players hate Caitlin Clark so much? ?? pic.twitter.com/83JZSChdEu

— HeroOfTheDay (@Hero_OfThe_Day) June 25, 2026

Clark suffered a back injury from the incident and has to sit out multiple games.  This is a regular occurrence with Clark; she stands near the top of the list for most fouls and flagrant fouls in the WNBA.  In many cases involving flagrant fouls, referees do not make the call, leading to anger and social media backlash among fans. 

Some of the dirtiest tricks in basketball are on display regularly in WNBA games, and the attacks on Clark look practiced and organized.

   

It's not always black players that go for the cheap shots, but there is a clear pattern emerging.  It could be envy over Clark's far larger fan following despite being a newer player (female cattiness), but suspicions are hanging in the air that her treatment is largely race motivated.  By far, Clark's most vocal critics in sports media are black.

The WNBA and the NBA are not happy with the political undertones of the Clark controversy.  NBA Commissioner Adam Silver recently called Clark a "political football" in interviews as he attempted to dismiss the WNBA's numerous problems with officiating fouls.  He seems to outright dismiss any concerns about race-based targeting of Clark.

Speaking as part of a panel at an event in New York, Silver said the debates surrounding Clark had become about broader political and cultural issues in the United States rather than basketball alone.  He specifically referenced the foul by Alyssa Thomas that led to Clark's injuries.  

"That particular incident is not about whether a foul should have been called at the time of the game or whether that was ultimately a flagrant non-review....I've come to know Caitlin really well. She's an incredible player and also an incredible person.  "And she wants to focus on being the best player she can. And she's become a bit of a political football in this country, and I think it's incredibly unfair to her."    

Speaking of unfair, Clark was snubbed by the WNBA in a 30th Anniversary commemorative poster (she was strangely absent from the roster), and she was snubbed by the 2024 Olympic "Dream Team" despite being a top star and #1 draft pick. 

Emmanuel Acho, a former NFL player and sports analyst (who is also coincidentally black), asserted on the Speakeasy podcast in June that Clark has "become a distraction" and that the WNBA would be better off without her.  He argued that Clark got audiences to watch the games, and now the WNBA can throw her away. 

????WORST TAKE OF ALL-TIME????

Ex-#NFL LB Emmanuel Acho says the WNBA would be better off without Caitlin Clark because she is a distraction.

“The WNBA would be better without Caitlin Clark, because she is a bigger distraction than she is an additive” pic.twitter.com/MVwHoWRS8u

— MLFootball (@MLFootball) June 29, 2026

They hate Clark and her popularity with a passion, but they like the idea of stealing her audience for themselves.  It's rather pathetic, but we're talking about the WNBA.  They have lived in the gutter for so long they can't imagine climbing out of it.  Of course, Acho is delusional if he thinks all the "eyes" Clark brings to the WNBA won't leave with her if she exits the league.   

The bottom line is this: Clark puts butts in seats.  No other WNBA player comes close.  Yet, the league and many of its commentators treat her like a pariah because they can't make their crow's nest of minority players behave.  They are the cause of the controversy.  They made Clark into a "political football" by remaining apathetic and dismissive.  

You've likely seen it if you've the nearby Hell's Kitchen entrance to the Lincoln Tunnel...

What began as a growing homeless encampment on Manhattan's West Side has now escalated to alleged utility theft, according to the NY Post.

According to reports, one resident of the sprawling encampment was seen Tuesday tapping into city electrical lines to power a makeshift shelter near West 34th Street between 11th and 12th Avenue. The camp now stretches roughly a dozen blocks, from 34th Street to 46th Street near the Intrepid Museum, and has become an increasingly visible flashpoint for residents, commuters, and tourists.

The NY Post writes that bus drivers and local workers say the encampment has continued to expand over the past several weeks, with tents multiplying and sidewalks becoming increasingly obstructed.

"It's been almost a month now and it gets a little bigger every time I come back," one FlixBus driver told the New York Post. He said garbage piled along the sidewalk forces passengers waiting for buses into the street, while some people living in the encampment have reportedly approached travelers asking for money. He added that complaints to city officials have produced little visible response.

Police officers were seen Tuesday ordering the individual accused of siphoning electricity to disconnect from the utility line. Elsewhere along the encampment, officers reportedly seized extension cords and power strips from another makeshift shelter. Despite those actions, there appears to be little expectation that the enforcement will significantly reduce the camp's size.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani has defended the city's broader approach, saying the priority is moving homeless individuals into shelters and ultimately permanent housing rather than simply dispersing encampments from one neighborhood to another. Asked specifically about the West Side encampment, he said the city would review the situation.

Despite growing attention, reports indicate that no sanitation crews or homeless outreach teams had been seen at the site in the days following news coverage of the encampment.

The camp itself has reportedly continued to grow, with additional tents appearing over the weekend. Reports also claim that the area has attracted people struggling with addiction, along with sex workers, adding to concerns from nearby businesses and residents who say conditions continue to deteriorate.

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

Last weekend we published that the market was sitting on Multiple Inflection Points. We were concerned that many of the inflection points would resolve themselves negatively for the market:

• Iran, which we didn’t even give the full “inflection” point treatment to, has deteriorated. While Brent finished the week at almost $90, up from just above $70, it seemed to be a “side story” at this stage. However, with the news of the U.S. service members killed on Friday in Jordan, the question becomes how this alters the U.S. strategy to pressure Iran to stop its attacks on shipping in the Strait and return to the table to continue negotiations.

• AI Spend was the most important inflection point and that seems to be resolving itself rather negatively with the Philly Semi Index down 10% on the week! More on this later.

• Russia/Ukraine. General (ret.) Spider Marks, Rachel Washburn, and I spent a lot of time talking about this conflict. I continue to be optimistic, maybe even a bit more optimistic than the consensus Geopolitical Intelligence Group view, but that’s my take.

• Japanese Yen. The infamous carry trade did little last week, but strength in the Yen remains a risk for the broader market.

• Crypto and DATCos. With the volatility in other markets last week, the stability in this space was noticeable. The jury is still out on which way this inflection point will resolve itself, but the case that it is forming a solid base is growing.

• Inflation. As one of the last people looking for not just cuts before hikes, but also cuts as early as September, Tuesday’s CPI numbers helped a lot! Some would argue that “Core” remains high, but it is artificially inflated by the “mysterious” way we choose to represent shelter inflation. (Yes, I’m hoping to get some call, out of the blue, to help re-evaluate what data decisions should be based on). Unfortunately, the resumption of increased hostilities in the Middle East and the limited amount of oil left in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve don’t help my take on inflation continuing to decline. Though any material slowing in the AI Spend would push the Fed (on both inflation and jobs) to consider cutting. Last weekend (according to WIRP) the market was pricing in 1.5 hikes by the end of the December meeting. It is now at 1.26 hikes. I think that expectation will continue to come down. Will consider this week a “decent” win as expectations for hikes declined even as oil prices ripped higher.

The risk that these “inflection points” are at risk of overloading markets remains high!

SPCH SPCF LOFF SPCU SPAL SPCL SPCM

This may set a “new low” in terms of gobbledygook for a heading in the T-Report. I’m hoping you are wondering what the heck triggered such an insane looking heading!

Those are the ticker symbols for 7 ETFs that provide 2X the daily return of SPCX! I’ve listed them in order from largest to smallest. In total they have “only” about $420 million in AUM (it was probably higher before most of these ETFs saw a decline of over 50% since their highs). SPCL tracked a larger “index” pre-IPO but converted to SPCX only with the IPO, presumably to be “first to market” on the SPCX-leveraged IPO. In all fairness, there are at least 4 ETFs allowing investors to short (on a leveraged basis) SPCX.

I’m kind of reminded of some vague saying about rabbits. You start with 2 (presumably male and female) and wind up with a LOT of rabbits very quickly!

Does one IPO really need to inspire at least 10 single stock ETFs?

Apparently (I was too lazy to pull up the tickers) there are already a half dozen or so single stock ETFs that track the newly launched SKHY ADR.

It is already a complex process to price an IPO. That process can be made more difficult when only a portion of the float is sold initially. I have zero clue how any of these single stock ETFs help in terms of allocation of capital, or price discovery! If anything, they tend to amplify moves, as the leverage creates forced end of day buying or selling! That is the opposite of helping price discovery or establishing orderly markets.

I’m assuming any 4 letter combination of CHAT, OPEN, LLM, etc. has been purchased/registered in the “ticker” world. CHTU (Chat Up) or CHTD (Chat Down) seem obvious ones to own, to sell to an ETF manager (though, again, it is likely that they are already taken). Kind of reminiscent of when people were buying up domain names hoping to sell them.

I probably ranted too long to make the point that leveraged ETFs (single stock and index) tend to amplify moves in both directions!

SOXL

We might as well transition from market structure to the AI spend, with SOXL.

3X leverage on the NYSE Semi Index, with $19 billion of AUM, tends to amplify moves.

One “characteristic” of these market-structure impacting ETFs (in my opinion, and one I’m certainly guilty of) is that:

• When a stock or sector that XYZ recommends goes higher, all the credit is attributed to the idea. It is all ixnay on the market structure when the market structure is helping support a move.
• When a stock or sector that XYZ recommends goes lower, XYZ (whoever that may be) is quick to pull out the “technicals” or “market structure” card, as the culprit.

Leveraged ETFs (single stock and index) and Zero-Day to Expiration Options (0DTE and other short-term options) all tend to amplify moves. It is the nature of the beast. If there is potential for stop losses to be triggered, the amplification effect is even more powerful.

Is it time to buy the dip? If the parabolic move higher in the various semi-conductor indices owes some thanks to market structure (and I think it does), that market structure may have shifted from a tailwind to a headwind (or worse, a tailwind in the other direction).

From Cheap Trinkets to Cheap Compute?

I find myself admonishing myself and cautioning clients to put China circa 2005 out of their mind. The argument is basically that yes, China used to make “cheap” trinkets. That much of what they made was of lower quality and fell apart. No one really picked up an item that had a “Made in China” label and thought it was fine engineering!

In general, that just isn’t true in 2026. China makes high-quality components. China makes high-quality products. Intellectual Property ownership has shifted. Through a variety of methods (ranging from companies willingly exposing themselves to Chinese companies to access via less savory means), China has closed the gap on IP. In some areas, China is ahead on IP.

I admit, I checked out a BYD showroom when I was in Munich last week (please try not to judge how I occupy my free time ). The vehicles looked kind of cool and I already had decent expectations, unlike I would have had a few years ago.

Is Cheap Compute the “New” China 2005 Story?

I’m not sure why I say “2005,” but I do (I hope it gets the point across that we are talking about what China was like a couple of decades ago, when they really started to dominate global trade).

My take is:

• China wedged their foot in the door by making some things at cheaper prices than anyone else could.
• China was willing to accept things, like pollution and horrible labor conditions, to do that.

We ceded more and more manufacturing to China, and they got better and better at it.

• China Inc. ensured that the Chinese government and Chinese corporations were in “sync,” making it easier to coordinate their push into global markets.
  • Unfair advantages at home, flooding markets to lower prices abroad, etc., were tools in their arsenal to dominate global manufacturing.

Over time, they made the shift from Made in China to Made by China:

• Selling your brands makes more money for your country and companies than just making someone else’s brands.

Globally, companies now compete with China on a much more equal footing, in terms of product quality, while China has the ability to work as China Inc. (typically an advantage).

That has played a role in our construction of the ProSec theme, which we provided a mid-year update on.

Increasingly, I’m concerned that we may be at a “2005” moment in compute?

General (ret.) Groen discussed this and much more with me on a call this week. I will paraphrase much of what was discussed:

• Are Chinese LLMs (and AI in general) as good as U.S. versions?
  • In general, no. Yes, it made big news on Friday, when a Chinese model did very well on some specific benchmark tests. For all we know, it was created/trained specifically for some benchmarks, which means it will do very well on those tests, but not necessarily perform well in the “wild.”
    • There are allegations and questions about how Chinese models attempt to train themselves on U.S. models, greatly reducing the cost and timing of training. Bad if true, but can it be stopped?
    • I’m told the politically correct term for this sort of “training” is to “distill” their models.
• Is China selling compute cheaper than U.S. compute is being sold for?
  • Yes, potentially 5 to 10 times cheaper. This is where I keep circling back to my “2005” date. Were dinky cars made in China as good as elsewhere? Ummm, I guess if you take out lead paint concerns and other things, sure, but the reality was we all kind of “knew” that there were issues with them. But you could buy a pack of 5 for the price of 1 made elsewhere, and the decision got more complex (apologies to Spider, who wanted me to use snow globes, but I decided to stick with dinky cars).
  • I do NOT have TikTok installed. I’ve only been on TEMU twice in my life. I haven’t even been tempted to try one of the Chinese models (and those of you who know me know I’m easily tempted). Yet, kind of like the dinky cars, you can see the appeal.
• The Half-Life of AI model domination seems to be shrinking. Probably an overly complicated (on my part) way of saying that AI is advancing rapidly. Every time you look at the benchmarks, there are models that have risen to the top of the charts that I barely knew existed (and I’m paying some attention).
  • Is AI able to generate new iterations of AI even faster? If you were, say, 3 generations behind, can you get to 1 generation behind extremely quickly? Seems plausible, especially if you are willing (or able) to “cut corners” on training?
• Electricity. Does the U.S. have the electricity generation capacity to feed the demand for AI (and the general public)? Do we have the ability to get that power from where it is generated to where it needs to be (the grid)? How do we compare to China on that front?
  • While I don’t have the details, it seems on the surface that China has more capability for “plug and play” on the AI front than the U.S. does. Electricity, energy production, and transfer are near the TOP OF THE ProSec list for a reason.
• NIMBY. We have discussed the AI Revolution as much as anyone (I think). We have been arguing that Data Center and AI construction (and electricity and to a lesser extent water) would be a major political issue in 2028 or sooner! No idea that it would be an issue that is defining some primaries already! New York State seems to be imposing a 1-year moratorium. I haven’t checked how that will work, but the fact that it is a talking point tells us something.
  • The AI industry needs to do better on community outreach. On top of everything else, there are National Security concerns at play. I’m not sure how the industry, or the national security apparatus, changes the direction in the U.S., but they need to increase their efforts.
    • There are plenty of areas building and pitching for more data centers and AI, so we are a long way from being out of the game, but we need to do a lot to not only protect the lead but also add to the lead (maybe the English coach could have applied that logic to the last 30 minutes as well).
  • I’m pretty sure that there is no equivalent of NIMBY in China. There are some things that one culture has that another culture doesn’t have, but at least there is some understanding of why you have that thing, or think that way. I’d be willing to bet the vast majority of people in China would just stare at you blankly, bemused by the concept of NIMBY getting in the way.

Bottom Line

Many of the “inflection” points have demonstrated a clear direction to which way they are headed, but with everything going on, expect more downside for the markets. DeepSeek was a moment. Treating cheap compute like manufacturing was treated circa 2005 is NOT a “moment.” I’m trying to avoid getting “sucked into the hype of the moment,” and wish I’d written the section on cheap compute Wednesday morning, before the recent news hit (we’d look a bit more proactive, rather than reactive), but I didn’t. The AI spend is at risk on multiple fronts, and while I expect earnings to be important, it now seems clear that even strong earnings, with very visible, very strong guidance for years to come, might not be enough! Last weekend, my perception was that earnings could propel sectors, especially the “compute” sector, higher, but I’m less convinced of that now. The story on “compute credit” seems to have deteriorated, even though we think it is overdone. It does seem like we might need a “debt diet” moment, where some company takes steps to make creditors happy, and finds that their stock responds positively to that action. While the Middle East is not helpful for lower inflation, any slowdown in the AI spend would be (though it would be awful for the economy). While I’m loath to end with a chart, today we are going to end with a chart.

While the Nasdaq 100 has been in a range for the past few weeks and has started moving lower, the S&P 500 equal weight index has been grinding higher and is extremely close to its all-time highs. In some ways it seems “crazy” to think that the S&P 500 equal weight and the Nasdaq 100 should have similar returns (we saw the post-Liberation Day rally in the Nasdaq 100), but finally the two indices closed the gap (noticeably the separation closed when both indices were moving lower).

Who knows, by Monday, the President may have sent something on Truth Social to change all of this (he controls the Iran narrative, and he did push back on the New York data center moratorium). If he does, we should find out at the same time as everyone else, because I don’t think “fast access” on Truth Social has been implemented yet (Trump Media Subscription Plan).

This should be an interesting week. Buy the dip, or get bearish? Of all the things listed, the concept of “cheap” compute from China concerns me the most!

The National Hurricane Center has raised the probability of tropical development for Invest 91L to 80% over the next two to seven days.

The broad area of low pressure off Florida's west coast in the Gulf of America should be tracked into the new week, as early Sunday model guidance suggests it could eventually threaten offshore oil and gas rigs and coastal refineries.

NHC's latest Invest 91L update:  

A area of low pressure located over the northeastern Gulf of America continues to become better defined and the associated shower and thunderstorm activity is gradually increasing.

Continued gradual development is expected, and a tropical depression is likely to form later today or on Monday as the system moves slowly northward or northwestward.

Interests along the northern Gulf coast from Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana should monitor the progress of this system, as tropical storm watches or warnings could be required for portions of the area later today.

In addition, this system is expected to bring heavy rains to portions of the northern Gulf coast during the next several days. An Air Force Reserve reconnaissance aircraft is scheduled to investigate the low pressure area later today.

Formation odds:

• Formation chance through 48 hours...high...80 percent.
• Formation chance through 7 days...high...80 percent.

Model Track:

Refinery Map:

Regardless of Invest 91L's development, the broad area of low pressure will traverse northwest, away from Southwest Florida and towards the New Orleans area.

The Atlantic Hurricane season is beginning to move into an active phase.

Notably, El Niño generally suppresses Atlantic hurricane activity by increasing upper-level westerly winds and vertical wind shear across the Caribbean and tropics, which disrupt tropical systems before they organize or intensify.

More on developing El Niño here.

Authored by Troy Myers via The Epoch Times,

U.S. lettuce supplier Taylor Farms expanded on July 17 its voluntary recall of iceberg lettuce from central Mexico due to concerns over its link to a cyclospora outbreak affecting Americans across the country.

Lettuce products that were possibly contaminated with the diarrhea-causing parasite were sent to 27 states, according to the company. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said July 18 the outbreak was linked to iceberg lettuce across five states and more than 1,000 people in the United States have been sickened by it.

“Consumers who have purchased the recalled iceberg lettuce should discard it immediately and not consume it,” California-based Taylor Farms said in a statement.

“Full refunds are also available at the location of purchase.”

States that were sent potentially contaminated lettuce products include Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

The company added that it is actively removing affected products and ceased sourcing lettuce from the implicated lot in central Mexico. Taylor Farms reiterated that it is continuing to cooperate with the Food and Drug Administration, the CDC, and other authorities.

Taylor Farms released a full list of its potentially affected products, including various shredded lettuce and salad mixes, accompanied with their lot codes and use-by dates.

According to an earlier statement July 17, the company said it was voluntarily removing from U.S. markets all iceberg lettuce sourced from central Mexico. That decision was based on information the FDA provided to Taylor Farms regarding its products, the statement said.

“As a family owned and operated company, we are deeply concerned for those who became ill, their families, and the many Americans whose trust in the safety of their fresh produce has been shaken,” Taylor Farms said.

“That trust is something we’ve worked for decades to earn, and we are committed to doing everything in our power to restore that confidence.”

U.S. health officials earlier this week announced it had traced “a single supplier of iceberg lettuce from Mexico used by Taco Bell locations where sick people ate before becoming ill.”

The popular fast-food chain addressed the issue in a statement on X, writing that it had removed all Taylor Farm products from its locations.

“We want you to hear it from us,” the company said. “So go ahead and enjoy your Taco Bell today.”

U.S. food distributor Sysco had also pulled all its Taylor Farms iceberg lettuce sourced from central Mexico.

Cyclosporiasis is caused by the microscopic parasite cyclospora that stems from produce and water contaminated with human feces.

As of the latest update available from the CDC, the outbreak has resulted in 1,644 cases and 94 hospitalizations.

The agency noted that the true number of cases could be much higher, as many people are able to recover without medical care and are not tested for cyclospora.

 Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance

If there’s one thing the market has become spectacularly good at, it’s extrapolating today’s political environment out to infinity…and “pricing in” things (like the end of the Iran War, Trump Tax cuts, future rate cuts, etc.) over and over again until one day of bad news turns into a year of “market optimism” about things getting better, prompting the S&P to rally to new all-time highs 17 days in a row despite the fact that nothing has changed on the ground.

And today, the market is acting as though Washington’s current regulatory philosophy, which appears to be pardon everyone who has ever committed obvious white collar fraud and take a “hands off” approach to new enforcement is simply...permanent. But it isn’t.

I think one of the biggest risks investors aren’t even remotely considering is what happens if Democrats take back the House this fall, or even more importantly, win the White House in 2028?

There’s a real chance this could lead to a wholesale repricing of the excesses that have flourished under an administration that has made it abundantly clear it would rather participate in markets than police them.

I still think Trump is a better option than anyone on the left side of the aisle when it comes to the Presidency. But ironically, Trump may have handed Democrats the perfect campaign issue. Forget whatever slogan focus groups come up with next. The message practically writes itself: corruption, self-dealing, insider enrichment, pardons for politically connected allies, regulatory capture, and a government that looked the other way while fortunes have been minted in increasingly questionable ways.

Republicans, including myself, cried wolf over Nancy Pelosi’s trading, Hunter Biden’s take from Burisma and President Biden’s dealings with China. But this administration’s cash grab, flanking all areas of the market from crypto to hi-speed algorithmic trading, puts Biden to shame.

If Democrats regain power, I think there is virtually no chance they don’t campaign on restoring “accountability” to Wall Street, crypto and corporate America. Sadly, they will point to the effects of monetary policy widening the wealth gap that their party also supports as an impetus for change. And unlike every election where politicians promise to lower drug prices by seventeen cents, accountability on Wall Street is actually something they can begin doing on Day One simply by changing who’s running the agencies.

Markets aren’t remotely priced for that. Today’s investors have become accustomed to a free-for-all style environment where enforcement often feels optional and the line between financial innovation and outright promotional nonsense has become increasingly difficult to distinguish. Insider trading on prediction markets, one crypto scam after the next, trillion dollar IPOs for companies that aren’t profitable, NBA players rigging games, members of congress insider trading. It’s the wild fucking west out there. That’s part of the reason I’m curtailing being an active trader. It’s all rigged.

Crypto has been one of the biggest beneficiaries. The industry has spent years fighting regulators, only to find itself operating in perhaps the friendliest environment it has ever enjoyed. That can change astonishingly fast. A Democratic administration would almost certainly take a much harder look at exchanges, stablecoins, token offerings, disclosures, anti-money laundering rules, and whether many digital assets belong under securities laws. (Read: The Crypto Risk No One Is Discussing)

The important part isn’t whether every proposal succeeds. Markets don’t wait for legislation. They price expectations.

Somewhere along the way, Wall Street seems to have decided that “vision” is a perfectly acceptable substitute for profits, promotional CEOs deserve celebrity status, retail investors exist primarily as liquidity providers, and every wildly optimistic forecast deserves a trillion-dollar valuation until proven otherwise.

Questionable accounting? Bullish. Aggressive projections? Bullish. Financial engineering? Bullish. Serial dilution? Bullish. It’s become difficult to tell whether we’re allocating capital or handing out participation trophies for coming up with nonsense stories. Every new S-1 reads like sci-fi pulp fiction L. Ron Hubbard wrote for a penny a page back in 1964.

---

?? 50% OFF FOR LIFE: Using this coupon entitles you to 50% off an annual subscription to Fringe Finance for life: Get 50% off forever

---

And a Democratic administration doesn’t need to outlaw any of this. It simply needs regulators that remember their job description.

Suddenly the SEC starts asking questions again. The DOJ develops an interest in corporate misconduct. Congressional hearings reappear. Enforcement actions increase. Companies spend more time paying lawyers and less time posting rocket emojis. That alone changes behavior. Speculative markets don’t like adults entering the room.

Could Democrats also push for higher corporate taxes, tougher antitrust enforcement, tighter rules around buybacks or capital gains changes? Of course. Maybe half those ideas never become law, but the possibility alone forces investors to rethink the multiples they’re willing to pay for companies whose business models seem to depend on regulators never opening the filing cabinet.

What’s remarkable is how few people seem prepared for any of this. The consensus appears to be that today’s regulatory climate is simply the new normal forever. That’s usually how markets get blindsided.

Nobody spends years saying, “Careful, the political pendulum might swing.” Instead, everyone gets caught leaning the same direction until suddenly they’re not. The ole’ “when the music stops” adage comes to mind…

And listen, quite frankly, I don’t think Democrats know much about finance. They’ve historically shown they’re more than capable of misunderstanding markets, overregulating industries and proposing policies that create plenty of unintended consequences.

But I’ll also admit something that probably won’t make me popular: it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world if a few very obvious frauds were actually held accountable again.

If we truly lived in a pure free market where everyone understood the risks, did their own homework, and accepted the consequences of losing money, I’d be perfectly happy letting buyers beware and pulling all regulation. But that’s not the market we have. We have companies that wind up inside passive index funds. Retirement accounts own them automatically. Pension funds own them automatically. Millions of ordinary investors buy them without ever making an active decision because they’re simply embedded inside ETFs and benchmark indexes.

When obvious promotional garbage gets institutionalized like that, it stops being just another speculative bet between consenting adults…people are getting screwed without even realizing they’re participating.

That’s the part that has me, somewhat reluctantly, yearning for just a little more regulation than we’ve got today.

--

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions.

As of May 20, 2026 I am attempting to no longer actively trade (read my story here). My investing/saving is mostly done by recurring contributions mostly to sector ETFs and a few select equities, trusted third parties who oversee my accounts, and advisors. Such advisors or funds, through individual equities, options, index funds, mutual funds, ETFs, or other securities, may have positions in, exposure to, or holdings of names mentioned herein that I know nothing about. Basically, via index funds, ETFs and individual equities it is possible I could own, have exposure to, or not own anything at any point. As of the same date, May 20, 2026, in an attempt to lead a healthier lifestyle, I’ve also excluded myself from fantasy sports, sports betting, online and in-person casinos and prediction markets.

And all positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.