Global Macro Trading Journal
- Thread starter Daal
- Start date
In an evil way, this guy is the ultimate example of why you should never quit. Not even a Supreme Court order removing him from his post, the threat of his arrest, a government official trying to notify him of the order got him to think he lost. He manuvered politically, broke the law and won
Last edited:
I watched the session (our Supreme Court decisions are televised live, I know, sounds crazy right) and the arguments, it pains me to say it, actually make sense.
They weren't judging the merits of the case but rather, if the urgency of the order was justified. They judged that it was not justified because it was not an imminent threat that he was going to become President of the country. In case the Presidency was vacated, the President of the lower house is ranked above him for that. Furthermore his term is set to end shortly anyway. If they were judging the merits maybe the result would be different. All they decided was the in case the President post is vacated twice, he is not allowed to be the President. This is far less controversial given its explicit in the Constitution that criminal defendands cant be in that post. All in all, it doesnt look wrong to me. Yet, the guy broke and law and tried to influence the court in his favor. The impression that you get is the he is ranked above the Executive, the Legislative, and Judiciary. He is the 4rth power
And thats why he is Kayzer Soze
They weren't judging the merits of the case but rather, if the urgency of the order was justified. They judged that it was not justified because it was not an imminent threat that he was going to become President of the country. In case the Presidency was vacated, the President of the lower house is ranked above him for that. Furthermore his term is set to end shortly anyway. If they were judging the merits maybe the result would be different. All they decided was the in case the President post is vacated twice, he is not allowed to be the President. This is far less controversial given its explicit in the Constitution that criminal defendands cant be in that post. All in all, it doesnt look wrong to me. Yet, the guy broke and law and tried to influence the court in his favor. The impression that you get is the he is ranked above the Executive, the Legislative, and Judiciary. He is the 4rth power
And thats why he is Kayzer Soze
They judged the urgency and not the merits because you havent given both sides the ample time they need to build their case/defend themselves. Its part of due process to give people the time that they need to defend themselves, not rush them into a decision where they havent had almost any time to prepare. Plus the judges havent had the time to research everything completely. It sounds logical, yet the impression that it leaves to the country and to investors is terrible
"Discount from NAV Pershing Square Holdings’ discount from NAV has increased substantially over the last eight months and was more than 20% as of November 30, 2016. As an investor’s return is a function both of underlying NAV performance and price versus NAV, we find the current discount unacceptable. We believe the discount is attributable to a number of factors which include our below-expectation performance, and recent capital flows out of the hedge fund industry. We are exploring potential steps to narrow the discount to NAV and expect to report back to investors as soon as we have decided our intended approach." - PSH letter to stockholders
If Supreme Court ruled something unconstitutional, Congress would have to pass an amendement to the Constitution which then needs to be ratified by the states individually. All over the presidential veto.
"
They project the U.S. budget deficit, as a share of GDP, may rise from a Bloomberg median estimate of 3.2 percent in 2016 to just 3.5 percent in the first few years of a Trump administration, representing an annual revenue loss of a modest $100 billion.
"What we can say is that the proposed tax cuts may not have as large of an impact on the government's finances as some analysts project," U.S. economists at the German bank, led by Joseph LaVorgna, wrote in a report on Tuesday.
Their projections focus on the short-term costs of Trump's tax plan — a reduction in marginal rates on capital gains, as well as personal and corporate income — without factoring in significant net increases in defense or infrastructure spending. (The finalized budget will be subject to horse-trading between the executive and legislature, with House Speaker Paul Ryan seen as a fiscal conservative.)"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...p-s-fiscal-plans-might-not-blow-up-the-budget
They project the U.S. budget deficit, as a share of GDP, may rise from a Bloomberg median estimate of 3.2 percent in 2016 to just 3.5 percent in the first few years of a Trump administration, representing an annual revenue loss of a modest $100 billion.
"What we can say is that the proposed tax cuts may not have as large of an impact on the government's finances as some analysts project," U.S. economists at the German bank, led by Joseph LaVorgna, wrote in a report on Tuesday.
Their projections focus on the short-term costs of Trump's tax plan — a reduction in marginal rates on capital gains, as well as personal and corporate income — without factoring in significant net increases in defense or infrastructure spending. (The finalized budget will be subject to horse-trading between the executive and legislature, with House Speaker Paul Ryan seen as a fiscal conservative.)"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...p-s-fiscal-plans-might-not-blow-up-the-budget