I’m forever writing speeches in my head.
Here’s a piece of one I’d like to see the President give:
My team wanted me to call what we’re doing Bidenomics. That’s what the Wall Street Journal and some others have been calling it. But you know, folks: it’s not about me, it’s about you. It’s not Biden economics, no matter what the Wall Street Journal says. At the end of the day, it’s KITCHEN TABLE economics. Middle out, bottom up, Democratic KITCHEN TABLE economics.
As contrasted with Republican trickle-down PRIVATE JET economics.
And do you know what history has shown us? KITCHEN TABLE economics — growing the economy with an emphasis on opportunity and a strong middle class — has always worked. But trickle-down, PRIVATE JET economics — with its tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy — has never worked for anybody but those at the very top.
PRIVATE JET trickle-down Republican economics has just increased inequality. The rich have gotten dramatically richer — trillions of dollars richer — while most hard workers have found it tougher and tougher to get by.
Until now. We’re still early days, but with inflation coming down for 12 straight months and unemployment lower than it’s been in 50 years, real wages have begun to rise. Getting a little ahead of the game for a change. That’s the kind of economics — whatever you call it — I want to keep coming.
And it will keep coming as we put people to work at good jobs revitalizing America’s infrastructure. We’re just getting started.
And by the way?
Two things.
One: You know where a majority of those infrastructure dollars are going? To the states of Republicans who voted against our MAKING these investments — but are now taking credit for them. I don’t care: all 50 states matter to me. But imagine that.
Okay, that’s one.
Here’s two: When I talk about PRIVATE JET economics only helping the rich — that’s true. But I want to tell you something. I love the rich. Or at least a lot of them. I’m serious! Some of my strongest supporters are rich, God love ’em. And they’ve worked hard to get rich and done a helluva lot of good along the way.
KITCHEN TABLE economics isn’t about punishing the rich.
It’s not about hurting folks with private jets and 200-foot yachts.
It’s about helping America’s middle class, and those busting their butts to climb INTO the middle class. THAT’s who Democrats are fighting for.
And do you know the best part? When the middle class does well, the economy does well, profits grow, and the ultra-wealthy do great. KITCHEN TABLE economics winds up working well for everybody.
I couldn’t fit it in anywhere, but maybe a line, too, like, “You know, I’m basically an Amtrak guy. All my life. But I get the appeal of private jets. Mine’s called Air Force One. You own it; but for a while, I’m the guy who gets to ride in it. Thank you for that, folks. It makes my job a whole lot easier.”
What do you think?
CHRA / CHRB
Those of us who bought CHRA three months ago — with money we could truly afford to lose — as suggested here, here, and here at around $2.75, $2.20, and $1.40, respectively — got bought out Thursday at $6. And I like to think the game may not be over. The company was arguably worth much more. But for now, at least, we’ll have to settle for a quick double, triple, or quadruple.
Those who bought CHRB instead (or in addition) between $9.50 and $13.50 as suggested here and here saw it close at $16.49 last night, even as we pocketed the first of what should a dozen or so 53-cent quarterly interest payments before being paid $25 at maturity. So that one, too, may be a winner.
RECAF / PRKR / BOREF
To emphasize the “money you can truly afford to lose” part of this game, I would note that those of us who bought these three — among lots of others — have not fared. The game’s not entirely over, to be sure. (What’s another year or five when we’ve been waiting 24 years for BOREF?). But of RECAF, my primary source writes:
I’m at a loss.
They didn’t drill all the wells they said they would. Instead they’ve been gathering more seismic and aero mag data. Unfortunately they’re now running out of money and will need a partnership/farm-in/buyout by a large company to pay for more drilling.
The geology turned out to be different from what they expected to find. But I know a couple of geologists who still like the prospects. And another who’s sold most of his.
Then there are respected folks in the online communities who think the company is nothing but a scam and have sold out entirely. I have to admit that their pessimism makes some sense given all the missed targets and broken promises. I’ve sold half of my holdings at prices between $0.90 and $1.15.
I sure never expected we’d be in this position at this point. I am not in the camp of “it’s a scam,” as buying a rig, shipping it to Africa and drilling three wells seems like a lot of effort just to fleece shareholders. But it’s getting ugly.
You know me well enough to know that — except for shares on which I can take a tax loss — I’m holding on. Not out of any logic. The prospect of losing $1 just hurts me less than the prospect of missing out on making $5 — vanishingly slim though that prospect may be. If I were fully rational, I’d be Star Trek’s Spock, with pointy ears.
Andrew Tobias is the author of The Only Investment Guide You’ll Ever Need.
