AI’s assessment of today’s column should be a hint: “This is good Ure copy with too much freight on one flatbed.”  But it’s the flatbed we have, so we’ll blow by the weigh stations.

Although we had some signs in the market Friday that the downside was maybe about to level out, we also cautioned that Cash was our plan.  Simple reason?  NEVER argue with a free-falling safe.

The problem – explained in the Peoplenomics ChartPack Saturday – is that (in theory) we’re supposed to be investors – not gamblers.

This concept – widely touted by all financial shills – tries to convince the unwary that while there may be some risk in a given position, it is less risky than simple speculation.

Yet, over the course of nearly 60 years, running down loose ends of news off and on, when cornered, few shills can actually give you a hard number where that borderline is.

Out here in the Piney Woods of East Texas, the dividing line between “investment” and a “speculation” is pretty simple: an investment has earnings, cash flow, useful output, or some durable reason to be worth more later.

A speculation mostly depends on somebody else showing up willing to pay more than you did.

Not to kick Bitcoin or the whole crypto-con. BTC overnight managed a bounce off $66,000.  We figure people who are still in crypto aren’t aware that Q-bits (as in quantum computing) are coming. Soon the myth of security will be universal toast.

On the range: One idea (of investing) is buying a milk cow because she calves, gives milk, and throws off value over time. The other is buying a rodeo ticket and hoping your bet on a rider doesn’t get thrown. Nothing wrong with speculation as long as you call it by its right name. Trouble starts when people dress up a wager in a necktie and pretend it’s prudence.  You know, like the financial shills do with some regularity.

The old rule of thumb is easy to remember: If it pays you while you wait, it may be an investment. If you only profit by selling it to the next fellow, it’s probably a speculation. We applied this and diligently missed a fortune in AI graphics makers. Win some, lose some. But we sleep well.

No One’s Safe

Early Dow Futures were down several hundred more points and our Aggregate Index looks like it has jumped off the high dive, leaving the audience to wonder whether there’s a pool — or concrete — at the bottom. See for yourself:

Eyeballing Europe, notice it was down a percent and a half early. So, an S&P down 60-100 may be arriving.  What I can’t tell you is whether the CPI report this week – due Wednesday before the GovDown II shenanigans – will be a “buy the news” event.  Oil prices don’t think so.

Problematic Partisan People

The Second Epistle of Monday is about how to “read the news.”  It’s easy, too.  Once you figure out that there are two kinds of people in the world.  About two-thirds are “dividers” (partisans backing one cause or belief) while the rest are “synthesizers” who see how it all fits into whole cloth. That last third of humanity is where hope for the future lives.

The question came up because a reader, Kevin, was asking in the Comments section if there was a genuinely non-partisan source for news about the Iran War.  Good luck with that.

Obviously, when we parse news from one side — the ‘real estate development group that recently claimed title to Gaza’ side — it runs very pro-war. On the other side, coverage from parts of the antiwar left and from Russian media often treats the war as an outrage and leans more sympathetically toward Tehran.

We were very pleased with this morning’s email from the Institute for the Study of War which summed up late-weekend developments this way:

“Iran’s Assembly of Experts selected former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei, as the next Supreme Leader on March 8. Mojtaba’s selection as the Supreme Leader represents a victory for hardline factions over more pragmatic figures within the regime. Mojtaba is a hardline cleric who will likely pursue similar domestic and foreign policies to those of his father. Mojtaba fought in the Iran-Iraq War and developed important relationships while serving in the Habib Ibn Mazahir Battalion under the 27th Mohammad Rasoul Allah Division.”

The problem is little words (like “hardline”) which sneak into even this intelligent summary.  Hardline could mean “Unwilling to negotiate” or “unwilling to submit” or “surrender.”

Partisanship is Extensible

Although liberals and conservatives each claim to be more holy than the other, partisanship and division make up the bulk of everyday news.  Like this story: Device thrown near NYC Mayor Mamdani home “explosive”: NYPD

Still, in the field of grassroots economics there are “synthesizers” and “unifiers.” Take The Economic Fractalist whose work I deeply respect.  His blog, by the way, is looking for crash devaluations sooner than later thanks to the War.

The difference between us is technique.  He focuses on The Lammert Cycle arising from his study of price fractals over time.  This compares with our Peoplenomics work focused more generally on the socio-economic rhyming process.

Think of it this way: Our Aggregate Index is like snow poles along a mountain pass in the middle of (the present likely transition into economic longwave) Winter. TEF’s work is more “snow suit on, making measurements and putting out flags between snow poles.”

As you can quickly understand, we are not competing – we are simply offering different ways of getting across the same mountain range in adverse weather.  Neither one of us is hard selling any particular belief. We do such work as a sort of “old souls doing community service.”

Markets “Face UPS” This Week

No, not the brown trucks, or the box that keeps the router up when power fails.

We’re talking UGLY POLICY SELLING.

Go back up to the Aggregate chart.  See where the Futures are pointing?  Down to the 200 Day Moving Average. (200 DMA).  Splat warning.

As Peoplenomics readers know, we “hit the silk” and sliced long-side bets once under the 85-day moving average.  Now, those Big Investment Policy Boards will face similar decisions when the 200 DMA smacks – becoming quite possible this week.

Remember our old adage: Crashes don’t happen from TOPS.  But friend, we ain’t at a top so keep the old adage collection open to Monday’s Epistle here.

Meanwhile, Back into Rhymes

Assuming you remember the Guthrie case – when it first popped as our candidate to replay the Lindbergh baby kidnapping of 1932 – we said might stretch out several years – like the Hauptman trial did on the back-end of Lindbergh.

Every so often, we glance at the clock and here’s where we are: Nancy Guthrie disappearance: Day 36 latest updates. Since that came out late last night, we’re now 37-days into it.  And? A Body Found in Phoenix Not Connected to Nancy Guthrie: Sheriff.

Story of the Day?

As the fuse burns on WW III, if you REALLY want one thing to focus on, make it Oil.  As in:

Around the Ranch: Pearls and Woo

Peoplenomics this week has two papers coming on how human memory works.  Actually, though, two versions of the same paper. The short one is my SSRN paper, the other is a 50-odd page monograph.  You will enjoy The Four Track Human very much, I’m sure.

And that’s what leads to the overnight insight into “How Humans Make Pearls.”  As it turns out, we share an interesting (though offset) biological response with our bivalve distant cousins.  Pop one of them open, insert a piece of sand and wait a few years.  Come back and you may have a pearl.

Turns out in the Four Track Memory Model, there’s something similar.  The “sand” is unresolved issues from earlier in life that fester (pearl-like) over time.  If they are “good pearls” they drive us in the direction of learning and higher spiritual growth.  If not?  The “black pearls” (with a nod to Depp, et al) may metastasize in many forms: heart disease, dementias, and cancers.

I won’t bore you with the research or the topology except to say it’s damned interesting and answers a great deal.

Now the Big Woo

Years back, I wrote my first novel, DreamOver, about a secret agent type who had interesting experiences in dream realms.

Ever since writing that, I have been working on ways Elaine and I might be able to “hook up” in dreams. Because it would make the afterlife adventure far more grand – to have someone along with you who was also with you on another level of the simulation (called Life).

Last night – I was asleep – and saw Elaine in a dream.  I asked her a question in the dream. She answered!

Now the weird part:  She didn’t answer in the dream – she woke up with a start and answered in the waking state!

Since I was asleep, her answering woke me up.  “What did you say dear?” as I ripped off my CPAP mask.

“You asked me a question and I was answering you.”

“Yes, but you were answering “over here” AWAKE – not in the dream where I was asking.”

“But I heard you plain as day – you must have asked me in your sleep.”

So I put my CPAP mask back on – the one that had been firmly in place while I was dreaming.

“Can you hear me now?  Can you understand me?”

“What did you say, I can’t understand you with your mask on.”

“I had it on when I was asleep asking you in the dream….”

Now, think about that very carefully.  I’m kinda slow-witted, but to me, that’s breakthrough potential.

The rest of my day? It will be spent on the great ponder. If I was masked and unintelligible in waking audio, yet she still perceived and answered the question I was asking in dream-state, then what exactly carried the signal?

Well, that and taking the trash out because Monday is garbage day.

Write when we all wake up,

[email protected]