Friday, August 15, 2025

How To Make Money Betting On The NFL, Preseaon And Regular Season. Plus More.

 If you are a regular reader here, this post will mostly be stuff we've covered before. I've been working on my Aliens post for a while now but it has been a little more challenging than I anticipated. There are just so many different avenues to go down and things to explore. I don't even know if anyone is really looking forward to it or anything but I will have it out at some point in the near future. I might even make it a multi-post kind of thing but we'll see. I've been skimming some of my old alien books and will probably make it part book review.

But with the NFL preseason underway, I thought it would be a good idea to touch on some +EV strategies for betting on the NFL in 2025. Also, some things that work specifically in the preseason. This will be a bit of a basic bitch post, but if you're relatively new to +EV sports betting, you'll find some nuggets in here. And if you are a grizzled veteran and a regular reader here, this might be a good post to link to to get noobs on board. If you're like me and truly believe in things like Bitcoin, free markets, the evils of central banking, inflation, and The Fed, the evils of our ruling class barely hiding the fact that they're bug-eyed lizard people who fuck children and openly despise us, then getting this blog out there is a good thing. It costs nothing, no ads, no 'premium membership' to unlock full posts, no substack asking for money...nothing but thoughts, uncensored and for free. Old school internet. So maybe use this post to link to and send out. The more people on our side, the better. Here is my X account @poogsBLOG that I only use for when I have a new post for a reminder.

Ok. So. The 2025/2026 NFL season is upon us. As you may or may not know, I was a pro sports bettor for a while a little bit ago and still do bet for profit, just not professionally anymore. I still get high six figures in volume down a year, I have never had a losing year betting sports in my life and NFL has typically been my best overall sport. So I think I still very much have some insight to offer in this space. Let us start with some basics, delve into the preseason specifically and go from there.

The best and surest way to make money in the NFL and in any sport, really, is to attack the smaller markets, especially if you're starting out on your +EV journey. The smaller the limits, the better. If your typical bet/unit size is in or under the $300-$500 range, you will be much better off betting in markets where that is a max bet or close to it. Most people I know bet something like a hundred bucks a play in markets where one could get down $50k if they wanted. That isn't a great strategy. If a market is big, mature, and efficient enough to take a $50k bet, almost by definition, you are not going to beat it if your unit size is less than four or five hundred bucks. That doesn't mean it's impossible, but if you don't know exactly what your edge is, how to calculate it and why you have said edge, you don't have one. 

You generally want to be close to the limits for your bet size. So if you usually bet one or two hundred bucks max, you should be looking at bets and markets where that is considered a big bet. What markets fall into that category? Props and derivatives, of course. A derivative is any market that is based on, or derived from the main spread and total. Things like half time lines, team totals, live bets (although live betting is its own animal entirely), game props like sacks or total field goals, or any kind of exotic bet. The reason these lower limit bets/markets are more attractive is that because they have such small limits, the guys at the upper end of the food chain don't even bother with them. And because the high limit sharps don't bet them, they can be wildly off from their true probabilities, all the way until game time. You are not going to know something about an NFL matchup that the guys who bet and re-bet $50k a pop don't know. You might, however, be able to find an edge on a team total or a game or player prop in a market where the big boys don't even bother to look. 

Let's look at some of those markets. First, you have props. They came in two basic forms; player props and game props. I made a living for nearly a decade betting in these kinds of markets so I would consider myself pretty close to an expert in the field. With DFS being in the mainstream now, some might say the party is over in the player prop markets. From like 2010 to about 2018, most people had no idea what a player prop even was. They were soft as baby poop. They have gotten considerably sharper since DFS came about, but there are also a lot more options these days. Things like prop builder, live props, the ability to parlay props and the fact that a lot of books will put up lines on just about every player for every stat you can think of, are all new-ish things that offer plenty of low limit +EV. So it's a bit of a double edged sword. 

Player props are growing in popularity but due to their low limits, they will probably always be fairly soft. But one thing the DFS crowd has largely overlooked is game props. How many sacks will each team get, how many field goals, total first downs, total rushing/passing yards, the longest or shortest field goal, the total TD's in the game, etc. The more obscure, the lower the limit, the more likely it is to be ignored by bettors with large bankrolls, and therefore more likely to be +EV. And don't worry about not being able to get enough money down. That isn't something you need to worry about until it happens, and when/if it does happen, with a little bit of hustle, accounts will find you. With two sports books you basically double your limit right there. I was bashing these teeny markets for the better part of a decade and not being able to get enough money down wasn't even on my top 10 list of problems. Well, not in the top 5 anyway for sure. Don't forget, for each game you have literally hundreds of prop/derivative options. So the limits on each bet might be small but overall you can get plenty of money down. So, again, look for the absolute smallest, most obscure markets and work your way up from there. 

Another two derivatives to always look at are team totals and alt-lines. These are purely based on the main spread and total and if you try, you can easily find books that mis-price these and/or are slow to move them when the main spread and total move. With access to at least a few accounts, you can often find juicy middles on team totals, full game and first half (and even quarter team total lines can be found these days). These are great because it takes no handicapping at all and you can fly through them. Look for key numbers in the NFL like 17, 21, 24, 28 for full game to middle, and 7, 10, 13, 14 and 17 for first half. One of the very first team total middles I ever hit was on a college football game of over 13.5 -110 and under 14.5 -110, maxed out on both sides which was a big bet for me at the time. It landed on 14 and for whatever reason, I'll always remember it. Hitting clean middles is one of the best feelings in betting. A great thing about middles is that since you can't possibly lose both, you can max bet them and give yourself a nice chunky payout. Don't be afraid of half middles too, something like over 9.5 -110 and under 10 -110 for first half team totals would be profitable. It's hard to know exactly where to draw that line though. For instance, would over 9.5 -130 and under 10 -120 be profitable? Probably not but it's close. You don't want to be drowning in juice but you also only need to hit these a small percentage of the time to be +EV. If you can work some kind of odds boost or percentage off losses into the equation, then you're really cooking.

Now, for the preseason in particular, there are some specific things to keep in mind and be on the lookout for. First, let's discuss the nature of the preseason. How is it different than the regular season? For one, the betting limits are a lot smaller. Why? There is more uncertainty about who will play and for how long, as well as how much each team/coach even cares about winning, so with some work, you can find edges that way. You'd be surprised at how much value you can find in certain coaches interviews leading up to a preseason game. 

Another major difference between pre and regular season NFL is the lower totals. Totals in preseason are generally a good ten or so points less than the regular season, or roughly 20% lower. That's a big difference. With less points being scored, that means each point is worth a little bit more. How can we take advantage of that? Through teasers, mostly. With teasers, you're paying to move the spread and capture the points in between the regular spread and what you get for the teaser. For example, if you do a 6 point Wong teaser from +1.5 to +7.5, you're capturing the 2 through 7. Since there will be less points scored overall, the value of capturing those 2-7 points should be higher than normal. The same logic applies to buying and selling points, but only do that if you know what a push rate chart is. If not, give it a google. (An important point regarding teasers I have mentioned on here probably 3 times already but I consider it that important: understand the odds you're getting with teasers. With two team, 6 point teasers, never pay more than -120. You really shouldn't pay more than -110 but those are actually kind of hard to find these days. I mean, not really, but if you're a true noob with no PPH access, you might have to settle for -120. +180 for three team, 6 point teasers is great. +170 is ok and anything less than that I would not bet unless the line is way off. If you are going to bet teasers for any kind of money, it's worth it to find a book that offers at least -110 for two teamers and/or +170 for three teamers). Lots of books now offer all kinds of different teasers, like 10 or 7 pointers. These are sometimes worth playing if the juice isn't bad and you can capture a key point, usually with the main spread being a little bit off. You can get all kinds of creative with teasers, hedges, middles and alt-spreads but I've discussed this before.

There are a few upcoming preseason games that look great for teasers right now. New Orleans is +1 -115 on Pinnacle right now with a total of 40. If you can find a +1.5, that would be a great leg of a 6 point teaser. Same with Chicago at +1 -111 and a total of 40. Dallas at +1 -103 with a total of 37 is great too. In general, these kinds of spots are about as good as you can do with Wong teasers. Something where the market has a team at +1 with a total in the low 40's or lower. You find a +1.5 and tease it up to 7.5. Same thing the other way, if you can find a team where the market is -9 or -9.5, look for a -8.5 and tease it down to -2.5. Now, one important caveat here, especially in the preseason; be on the lookout for teams that like to go for two. Going for two is kind of a new school, analytics type move that is gaining a little bit of traction in the NFL. This makes key numbers a little bit less key and is obviously bad for Wong teasers. There's this new thing now in the NFL where when a team is down by exactly 14 points and score a TD, they'll go for two instead of kicking the extra point. I remember the Lions did that last year in the playoffs. That's pretty devastating for Wong's so something to keep in mind.

With a new NFL season upcoming and with the NFL being the most popular sport to bet on, now would be a good time to make some sort of sheet or system to keep track of your results if you don't already. I've always said that keeping track of at least your money won/lost every week is a must if you're at all trying to make money betting. Now is also a good time to look for and get more accounts. Either regular, legal books like Draft Kings and Fanduel, or offshore books, or PPH's. Ideally, all three. Don't be afraid to e-mail books and ask for deposit bonuses or anything else. Worst they can say is no. (Digression time: back in the day when I was playing on Full Tilt Poker, they announced they were giving rakeback deals to new customers only. I sent them an e-mail saying that I was a loyal customer for years and I didn't think it was fair that a new customer should get a rakeback deal and not me. And they gave me rakeback! Forever. My poker playing friends couldn't believe it. Don't be afraid to send e-mails like that).

If you do get a new PPH account in the next couple weeks, a good strategy would be to do a bunch of Wong teasers and any other breakeven or slight +EV, noob looking bets. If you win, great, you made some money. If you lose, pay your guy in full with no problems and ask for a rebate. Something like 10-20% off of weekly losses. You might need a bad two or three week run to get it, but any kind of rebate like that is a goldmine that you can lock into for the whole NFL season, or at least as long as he keeps you. 

Lastly, changing gears a little bit, I have read two new sports betting books recently. 'Beyond the Odds: Efficient Market Theory and Tools of Warfare for the Modern Sports Bettor' by, Elihu Feustel (Justin7 who we've talked about before) and 'But How Much Did You Lose; How To Win More At Sports Betting By Losing Less' by Dan Abrams. (By the way, is that not the single worst title of a sports betting book you have ever seen?? I actually hid this book while I was reading it I thought it was so embarrassing). And boy were they both duds. Two of the least interesting books on betting I've ever read. Maybe it's me but the last three books on betting I've read have been absolute slogs. The one by Elihu has some kind of online worksheet 'answer key' thing attached which is the same thing that the last book I read had. The one by Andrew Mack that I threw on the ground while reading. And can I just say right now to sports betting book authors; please stop doing that. I don't want an online companion to a book. I have no idea if I'm in the minority here with this opinion, but I can't stand it. I just finished it and I honestly cannot tell you one single nugget or idea I got from the book. And the 'how much did you lose book' was basically one idea, over and over. That hedging is actually good and EG is more important than EV. Something I agree with and have understood for a while so it's not like I didn't like the book because I disagree with it. Lots of mind numbing, multi-page math formulas to show exactly how much you should hedge given your bankroll, edge, and the size of the original bet. Just the same thing, over and over again. He actually says in it 'the most important aspect in betting is figuring out how much to bet.' It is?? I always thought finding and maintaining edges/new accounts was far more important. And just to show I'm not being a sourpuss, here is a positive review of the book by OG +EV bettor/author Joseph Buchdahl, the author of "Fixed Odds Sportsbetting", another book I got nothing out of.

That's it for today. Probably some more sports betting posts coming up with the NFL starting and the Aliens post will be up soon. Talk soon, bye for now!


BTC price: $117k

BTC marketcap: $2.33T

BTC dominance (including stables): 59%

Total crypto marketcap: $3.95T

Total cryptos on coinmarketcap: 19.55M









Sunday, July 20, 2025

Crypto, Stocks, Politics, Books And More

Been a while since we really checked in on the Bitcoin/crypto world, and with BTC at the quietest all time high in its existence, I thought now would be a good time. I also want to do a rundown of the stocks I own and trade as well as my general strategy and outlook on stocks in general. A little bit of politics with the whole Epstein case back in the news. Finally, a look at a few books I've been reading plus some other things I've been meaning to talk about on here but aren't worthy of their own post. Also, I have officially begun writing my Alien Post in my head, so be on the lookout for that in the next week or so. But today, let's do a big look around, shall we?

First off: crypto. Bitcoin just ever so casually sitting at about $120k with a beefy $2.35T market cap, flirting with new all time highs. I know I've said it before but it's interesting how every cycle has it own little narrative. This cycle has largely been the alt-coin reckoning, BTC dominance and BTC ETF show. But another interesting aspect of this cycle that I haven't seen talked about too much is the utter lack of retail. Not like it's simply more quiet than other cycles, but it's more like retail just is literally not there at all. My favorite crypto youtube guy, Ben Cowen, has all kinds of charts and videos on the subject which you should check out, but it's pretty obvious even without any kinds of charts. I see Bitcoin mentioned in financial news and media all the time but that's really it. Remember how insane things were in the 2020 cycle? You would see or hear some kind of Bitcoin reference every single day, outside of the finance world. Now? Barely a peep. I can't remember the last time I personally talked to anyone about it. It feels like the adoption phase is fully behind us now. You're either on board or you're not. I feel like a lot of people seem to think they missed the boat but that really isn't the case at all. As I will try to show, I think Bitcoin still has a long, long way to go before it begins to level off somewhat. 

Personally, I've pretty much stopped talking about it with friends and the like. I was quite the BTC proselytizer in the first few years I got involved, but looking back, I really can't say it did a whole lot. I got my wife and and I guess a couple close friends into it, kind of, but most people either get it or don't. The vast majority don't, and a good chunk pretend to, I think. But I can really only think of like one or two people who actually bought it. And I really don't give a shit anymore. I always think back to that great Michael Saylor quote: 'everyone will buy bitcoin at the price they deserve.' It has been by far the best performing asset since its inception, it is super easy to purchase and hold, and it has just quietly and systematically mowed down every instance of FUD in its path. Every silly argument against it, batted down one by one like flies. I will never forget the sentiment in late 2022 during the last bear market. The cringe inducing 'r/buttcoin' subreddit with tens of thousands of people cheering and celebrating every leg down. The smarmy, fake-smart, insufferable and always wrong economists and 'academics' taking victory laps as bitcoin plunged under $20k. Even people in my own friend group, some of who helped me get into crypto in the first place, calling it an 'interesting experiment that failed' and making fun of people who held it. Truthfully, it shocked me to my core seeing how fickle people are. Now where are these people? Probably pretending they supported it the whole time. (Honestly, now that we're well past it, how fucking insane was the 2020 'covid era'? So many people, famous and not, just completely abandoning any pretense of integrity or idealogical consistency. I had no idea how many people are just completely blowing in the wind, adopting and abandoning 'principles' just as fast. I truly am a different man having lived through all that. I will never see people the same again). I remember telling a few friends that I was buying when BTC was at the bottom of the bear market and I'll never forget their reactions. It was like I told them I was investing in literal shit and piss. I can still picture their faces. They couldn't believe I would be buying bitcoin during a bear market! Hello! That's the goal, people. Buy low, sell high. One of the biggest shocks I have received since I got into investing was how many people get this completely backwards. They FOMO into shit at tippy tops and then panic sell at the bottom. I genuinely did not know that that was the general noob investor trend before I got into it all myself. The urge to be one of the herd is more powerful than I realized (he said from his throne, hair blowing in the wind. I realize how pretentious this all sounds but it is true).

Even with BTC being at an all time high, the technicals are still showing we're nowhere near over heated. Ben Cowen's logarithmic regression band actually has the total crypto marketcap as under fair value right now! The BTC regression band is still calmly in the green accumulation zone. I'm going to do something I rarely do here and give out a price prediction, whatever it's worth. I think BTC hits $200k this cycle quite easily, and I think $300k is in play. The very bottom of the red bubble zone in Cowens model is $300k in December of 2025, and the top of the band is $450k. If you believe in diminishing returns, as I do, that might be a bit too high. But I think we see $200k this cycle and somewhere around $250k for a top sometime in the winter, and I think that is being conservative.

It is also starting to feel like alt-coin season might be here soon. We've seen a big move from ETH and other related alts the past month or so. ETH/BTC has bounced hard off of .018 and is now at about .028. Alt season typically brings retail back in, as noobs FOMO into stuff like BoobAndDickcoin. THAT is who I plan on selling a good chunk of my alts to. Personally, I know I will be using this upcoming alt season to convert most of what I have into solely bitcoin. I'll always keep some exposure to ETH and my little Chainlink and LTC sidepieces, but I want it closer to like 75% BTC, 25% everything else. I will for sure be dumping my Matic when/if the price rebounds this cycle. I'll be looking for BTC/ETH to hit around .07, .08 to start unwining a good chunk of my ETH holdings and turning them into BTC.

Speaking of alt season, however, if you look at a BTC/ETH chart, you'll notice that in June of every year for the past 4 years, ETH has pumped against BTC only to get whacked back down again. This time may be different with the halving being about a year behind us and a rate cut or two in the pocket of the Fed, but I would not be shocked to see ETH fall off a cliff again.

Like I've said a millon times before though, there really isn't a whole lot more to say about crypto. If you're not on board by now, you probably never will be. The only advice I have to give is to buy as much Bitcoin as you possibly can and hold onto it, preferably in cold storage. Other than that, I don't know what else to say to convince anyone, nor do I really care to anymore either.

Switching gears somewhat, one thing I've never really got into on here was Stocks. Stonks. I barely know what the fuck I'm doing with them so it never felt right to discuss as I am far from an expert. But you know what? Neither is anyone else. And now with a good 5 years under my belt and an ROI in just stocks approaching 100%, I think I have at least something to offer. Before I get into specifics though, let me just give you the single best advice about stocks I can possibly think of. Something I wish someone had told me 20 years ago, which is this: start. Just start. It isn't nearly as complicated as it seems, you can get it going from scratch in a matter of days, and you can start with as little money as you want. You can start with 20 bucks! (This is another thing that real n00bs get wrong that I didn't understand until I saw it firsthand. A lot of people, apparently, don't realize you don't have to buy full shares of companies. If a stock is, say, $1200 a share, you don't have to have $1200 to invest in it. You can invest literally one dollar in anything on Robinhood. I know this is noob city stuff, but two people I've talked to about stocks and crypto didn't know that. One of my college friends who is no dummy thought you had to buy a full Bitcoin if you wanted to invest at all, and another was bitching about being priced out of the stock market. He didn't know you could buy partial shares of stocks!) So again, my biggest piece of advice in stocks and crypto and investing in general is just start doing it. You honestly have to try to lose money in the stock market. It just goes up! (All it's really doing is tracking real inflation anyway). Sure there's volatility but have some balls. Start slow and small, learn and add as you go, don't use leverage or options or anything like that, certainly not at the beginning. Buy stock in companies you understand and/or use, don't panic sell, and in a few years you're almost guaranteed profit. Oh and also, keep track. This is something I carried over from my heavy sports betting days. Keeping really good records in excel or google sheets is a must. I could share my sheet if anyone is interested, but it's pretty simple. For each stock I own, I have a section in my sheet where I put in each buy and sell with a date. They all add up so you know your exact position. The things I have it calculate are total shares, net money spent, total current value, average price, and net money up or down and ROI. I have a line for 'market price' that I update every time I check it and then a section at the top that adds everything together. So I know how much I've invested, how much I'm up, what everything is worth currently and the total ROI of everything. It's very simple but effective. Without it, everything would be a blur.

I've noticed something of a mental block for most people when it comes to stocks and investing. It's like they view it as something that is just out of reach for them. But like I said before, it honestly isn't nearly as complicated as it seems. Seriously, if there is one general thing I could do over in my life, it would probably be to get into investing way earlier. (Fun aside: when I was a kid, something like 14 or so, I called a Charles Schwab office on the phone trying to get money invested. My parents owned some stocks, I think, but they weren't exactly the type to like, teach me stuff, which may be the subject of a post down the line. That boomer-parent, millennial-child weird relationship where no one explained anything or told us a fucking thing that as I get older I find more and more bizarre. Anyway, stocks and investing always sort of had a spot in my brain but I didn't know the very first thing about it. So I somehow called a Charles Schwab office and left message. I remember panicking a few days later when they called back and I saw their name on my parents caller ID. It felt like I was doing something wrong for some reason. My grandmother was there watching me and my brother (so I must have been really young actually now that I think about it) and some guy told her that the minimum to get started was something like $20k. I pretended I had no idea what she was talking about. I don't even know why I'm even telling this story except for the fact that that is how investing felt to me and I assume other people my age too. Like a big secret, not for people like me and something wrong that I could get in trouble for even broaching. That's strange, isn't it?)

My general strategy for stocks has been to own something like a dozen or so at a time and buy and sell them accordingly. My biggest mistake at the start was way too much selling. The sports bettor/trader in me always wants to buy something, sell it for a profit, then buy it back again for cheaper. When that works you feel like a genius but looking back, I would have been better off had I not made so many sells. You get whacked with a tax bill every year too which is something I have to learn more about.

So for whatever it's worth, here is my stock portfolio and a little info on each one.

In order of my biggest holdings to smallest:

Amazon. Average price $95 per share, currently about $225 per share. You know why I started buying this stock in 2022? I was once on a ski trip in the middle of the woods and rented a movie from Amazon on my kindle. I had really bad service where we were but the movie played fine until the end. It started to freeze and play shitty and I think I gave up on trying to watch it. I figured I was lucky to watch it at all with the spotty service, it was something like 3 bucks and I didn't really care about the movie so I just forgot about it. The next day, I got an unsolicited e-mail from Amazon saying that they noticed I had trouble finishing my rented movie and they refunded the purchase. I thought, if they have this attention to detail with a three dollar movie rental in a hundred billion dollar company, they must really know what they're doing. Again, I didn't even email them about it. So I started buying small when it was around $100/share and made some really good sells when it shot straight up and did a good job buying it back when it went down. I've also seen many interviews with Jeff Bezos and even though he's a cringey, bug-eyed lizard person with the worst taste I've ever seen, he certainly knows business. And now we all know how good they are at delivery and I like having exposure to big companies fucking around with AI. My ROI is 135% in Amazon so far and I just add a little bit anytime it drops. This is one of the stocks I own in a company I truly believe it and plan on having forever.

Tesla: Average price $156/share, currently $330. One of the first stocks I bought in 2021 for around $270/share. I have done a really good job trading this stock with my average buys being $220 and average sells being $268. Not much I can tell you about Tesla that you don't already know. The knock on them has always been that they're over valued but I think the old school way of valuing stocks doesn't really work anymore. I think Elon is a bonafide genius and a modern day Henry Ford. Similar with Amazon, one thing I like to do in stocks is bet on the man. The way I see it, as long as Elon is in charge, Tesla stock will generally go up. I also like the volatility. Make some small sells when it shoots straight up and scoop it back up when it goes down. Like Amazon, I plan on holding exposure to Tesla for a very long time, at least until Elon leaves. My ROI is just over 100%.

Eli Lilly: Average price $595/share, currently $775. I heard about them in early 2023 when I was on a plane and read an article about them in the Economist. That was the first time I heard about how they were basically solving weight loss. My first buy was for $350/share and I'll always regret not being more aggressive with it. I've added slowly to my position and have made some nice sells at around $780 in mid 2024 and around $900 in February this year. This is another one I really believe in and plan on holding and adding to basically forever. My ROI is only 30% which isn't great, but their next thing is attacking alzhymers disease and as more people get used to the GLP 1's, I think it has plenty of room to run. They also pay a little dividend which is nice.

Netflix: Average price $60/share (!), currently $1200. This is one of my best performing stocks ROI wise, but I own less than a full share. I will always be kicking myself for how I handled this stock. I first starting buying in early 2022 when their stock fell off a cliff and went from $690 to $200 after one bad earnings report. Everyone I knew not only had Netflix but were kind of addicted to it. I knew Netflix wasn't going anywhere. But I couldn't help myself and made a bunch of sells as it rebounded into the $500 range. I wasn't really able to get back in and I stopped selling when it crossed $600. My Netflix experience was a really good learning curve. You don't have to sell something just because it's way up. I'll be looking to buy back in if they ever have a dip but this is one I just like to hold. My ROI is 1888%

Robinhood: Average price $10.4 share, currently $110. I started buying this mid 2024 around $18/share and really timed it nicely. I made one sell mid 2025 for $64/share so that's how my average price is so low. Robinhood took a massive hit, rightfully so, with the GME debacle. But other than that, I have to say, they have one of the most user friendly apps I have ever used. Everything is very simple and intuitive. They basically game-ified investing. When I'm out and about, I see random people on their phones checking their RH accounts all the time. They have a young user base who will only grow and get more money as time goes on. This is another one that I kick myself for not being more aggressive with. ROI: 960%.

Draftkings: Average price $23/share, currently $43. I've talked about them numerous times on here but this is one of those companies that just has a license to print money. Seriously, think about the amount of people you know that use DK. Despite what they say, nearly 100% of them will be lifetime losers and will be happy to keep re-depositing. Their app is really good too and I also saw an interview with their head trader once and he impressed me. This isn't a stock that I'm married to but I'll definitely be looking if it dips at all. ROI: 85%.

McDonalds: Average price $234/share, currently $300. Little bit of a diversification play. I know I don't need to sell you on McDonalds. Just a behemoth of a company. Also, super predictive macro looking chart. Seriously, look at their chart. From 2015 on, it's basically a perfectly diagonal line up to the right. Pretty easy to trade and they also pay a nice little 2.32% dividend. ROI is only 28% but this is a super long term play.

Nividia: Average price $43/share, currently $170. Another once I'll be kicking myself over forever. I remember reading about them all the time on reddit back in 2020 when they were like $10/share. All the gamers knew about chips and how important they were going to be. I started buying early 2024 at about $60/share and have been adding on slowly since. I made a little sell at $105/share and bought back in at $96, and made a sell at $140 a couple months ago which is how my average price is so low. This is another one I would have been better off not selling at all though obviously. This stock is valued pretty high now and everyone knows about it so I don't plan on adding much. It pays a tiny .02% dividend which is strange. ROI: 294%.

Carvana: Average price less than $0/share, currently $340. This is my best performing stock ROI wise as I have sold more of it than I invested, so I'm completely free rolling. I only own 1 share exactly so it hasn't been a huge raw return, but I'm up more than double the share price. I actually started buying this stock early 2023 when my wife told me this story: Her friend was shopping for a car which we all know is such a brutal process. The slimy salesman got her number from the paperwork and texted her to ask her out! She was beyond grossed out. I just thought, this whole industry is like something from the past, like watching a bear ride a bike or something. It's ripe for an overhaul. In late 2023 it absolutely crashed all the way to $4/share and I scooped up another 5 shares for like 20 bucks. I've made a ton of sells and a few buys for less on its way up. I don't give a shit about the company and everything I read about it sounds like a complete sham. Yet all it does is go up. It bounces around a lot so it's easy to scoop up dips and sell tops and I am not even remotely married to this stock, but it has been quite the performer for me. ROI: technically infinity.

Compass: Average price $8.5/share, currently $4.3. They can't all be winners. This is one of three of my 'mushroom stocks.' I started buying this early 2022 at around $15/share and added more on its way down. My thesis for these mushroom stocks is that I know from personal experience that there is absolutely something there with psilocybin (magic) mushrooms. I think they may have the power to actually treat stuff like depression and anxiety, and the current medicine for that is woefully ineffective and possibly even harmful. I wanted exposure to companies fucking around with mushrooms and I still think it's a good long term play, but this stock has been a dud so far. It's also a foreign company which costs a small amount of money every month to hold in Robinhood. I think these plays will pay off sometime down the line, and I do keep up with their research trials, but it's iffy at best. There are many hurdles. ROI: -54%.

Cybin: Average price $24.75/share, currently $8.4. Basically the same exact thing as above, only a little worse. ROI: -66%.

Mind Medicine: Average price $4.15/share, currently $9 and pumping. Another mushroom play but this has gone a bit better. I started buying this late 2022 when it was over $40/share. I kept buying as it went down and then for basically this entire year, I've sold a little every time it went to $7.75 and higher, and bought back in when it went under $7 and even $6. I also hit the bottom nicely early 2024, picking up about 20 shares at $3.6/share. This has been one of my favorite stocks to trade. For this whole year, it basically oscillated between $8 and $6, very predictably. From January to June, I was able to net 10 shares for less than 10 bucks with a bunch of small buys and sells. A couple more sells and I'll be free-rolling on this one just like with Carvana. The only real risk I'm taking with selling when it hits $8 and $9/share is missing out on a big, real run back up to something like $40. But with no news and the ability to see the order book with Robinhood Gold, I feel pretty confident that isn't about to happen. I also now never sell all of a stock. With it being above $9 now, I'll keep making small sells and then start buying back in when/if it goes sub about $7.5 share. ROI: 117%.

Ally: Average price $22/share, currently $40. I started buying this mid 2023 when Warren Buffet announced he bought a big stake in it. I don't really know or care much about this stock and I have made two nice sells at $40/share in the past couple years and bought back in lower. Small exposure, really more of a diversification play and it does pay a nice little 3% dividend. I'll probably just sit on this forever. ROI: 74%.

Google: Average price $147, currently $184. Another one I will be kicking myself over for a long time. I have a very clear memory of almost buying this stock in February 2023. Remember when they released their AI bot thing named Bard and it made a mistake during its demo? Here's the story if you don't. I clearly remember that day and thinking it was a perfect time to buy Google stock. I put in a limit order to buy at $80 share and it fucking bottomed at $85! It's been basically straight up since then. That was a good lesson. Sometimes you just have to pounce, period. I bought the latest dip in March this year for $147 and have just held steady since. I would like more exposure here as they're investing heavily in AI but it feels like I missed the boat. ROI: 25%.

So that's everything I own, but for completeness sake, there have been a good amount of stocks that I owned at one point and sold all of. I'm down a small amount total on all of these. Real quick:

SOL, PYCO, TIL, TSP: I don't even remember most of these. I think they were European power supply companies I bought when the Russia/Ukraine war started that never really panned out.

GameStop: Fucking disaster. This was actually the very first stock I ever bought and was the initial reason for getting Robinhood in the first place. I was a little late to the party though and eventually capitulated a year or so later, down a couple hundred bucks after an absurd roller coaster of a ride and lots of a buys and sells.

AMC: Same thing but even worse. I had to learn this shit the hard way.

ROKU: Bought a little bit when Cathie Wood announced they bought it. Exited with a small profit. I've never met anyone who actually uses Roku.

Penn: One of the very first stocks I bought from a recommendation from a friend who apparently only bought it because Dave Portnoy did. Again, this is how I learn. Trial and error. That friend, by the way, is one of a couple who I use as top signals. When he tells me to buy a stock I know it might be a good idea to start selling.

DJT: I bought this during the debate with Biden as I was watching Biden melt in real time. I thought it was a good proxy for Trump exposure which was a good idea in hindsight, just not great execution. I didn't have any way to bet on him winning the election at that time though. I exited completely a couple months later basically breaking even.

So that's my entire history with stocks. Altogether I've basically doubled my money since early 2021. I started out super small and my stock exposure is like 20% of my crypto exposure, but it has been worth it. One thing you might have noticed is that I never mentioned anything about P/E ratios or market caps or any kind of technicals. I do look at that stuff, but my general thesis is that all of that information is embedded in the price already. I really don't think there's anything in earning reports or technical analysis that I'm going to uncover that JP Morgan or any of the other hundreds of thousands of hedge fund guys don't. I like betting on the man like with Amazon and Tesla, anything with a big company tinkering with AI is attractive to me. I also look for dips with established companies like with Netflix and Google. I like to keep up with the big boys like Warren Buffet and Ark Invest and dabble when they do. Similar to chasing steam in sports betting. But I generally like to keep it to roughly the same companies and buy and sell accordingly, sometimes adding in a new one or selling all of something. After a while with a stock, you start to get a feel for different levels of support and resistance and the way it moves. I think Robinhood Gold is worth paying for too, just for the access to the order book.

Another positive aspect of trading stocks is that it really forces you to stay in tune with the news and world events. It's always on my mind, when I see a big story I think about how the market might react. It's interesting to think about that, too. What is the market, exactly? You're kind of betting on not only what you think your neighbor thinks, but it's more like what you think your neighbor thinks about his neighbor. Maybe I'm not explaining it correctly but just like with sports betting and even poker to a lesser extent, investing is predicting the future. You have to know people to be able to do it on your own, and that is something I've always been decent at. Long term profitability in the stock market without using any leverage or options or any kind of technical analysis or knowledge is evidence of that, in my opinion anyway. One last thing, I have another personal top signal that is kind of a joke but actually works. Whenever I have the urge to show my wife my Robinhood account, I start thinking about selling a little bit. That has historically been a sign for local tops for me.

On another note, the disgusting Epstein story marches on, now with Trump and his administration getting their hands dirty in it. The way they have handled everything so far has been breathtaking in its stupidity. From Pam Bondi releasing 'Phase 1' of the client list, only to back track and say there never was a client list in the first place, is truly astounding. And then for them to release that jail cell video with a minute missing, AND for it to have been edited multiple times in Adobe Pro! And now it looks like that may have not even been Epsteins' cell? Just truly unbelievable that they thought that was a good idea. Like we'd all watch that and just be like 'oh ok, case closed then!' 

I can't tell you anything about Epstein you haven't seen before and I'm not going to do a deep dive on the whole story, but this is the best article I've ever seen on it. It has a ton of links in it that you can follow for basically as long as you want. It is as confusing, bizarre, shady, disgusting and shocking as it is depressing. Just a cesspool of rape, coercion, murder, lies, 'suicides', CIA, the fucking Mossad, pedophilia, billions of dollars out of nowhere. It's like every possible evil word in the English dictionary all in one place. 

Tim Dillon had a great line this week: "You have to choose the pedophile you agree with. Which pedophile has a pro business attitude? You cannot ask that they don't fuck kids. That's a bridge too far." It really is fucking insane, isn't it? They aren't even hiding it anymore. I mean, do we really just have to accept the ruling class in America are literal pedophiles, barely even attempting to hide it? Is that really where we are right now? We are so over due for a true reckoning in this country. It's like the end days of Rome. I'm sure Trump will weather this like he has every other thing in the past, but he sure does make it hard to be even a tepid supporter of his. Him calling the whole thing a "Democrat hoax" is beyond a slap in the face. Imagine being one of those girls and hearing him say that? To think that of the entire Epstein saga, the only person in prison being a woman is again one of those things people will read 200 years from now and think it can't possibly be true. 

Lastly, (shifting gears so hard the drive train falls out) I want to touch on a book I just finished. Well, a couple books, and they were actually comic books, or 'graphic novels.' I've never been a comic book/graphic novel guy in my life. Anytime I've seen a couple pages of them my eyes just glaze over. However, a couple months ago my family and I were on a walk and we came across a weird laundry basket full of books. It was in front of a house that I'm pretty sure was going through a divorce. Every week it seemed like a new bag or basket full of a mans things were outside to be taken or as trash. This time it was a whole bunch of books. So I stopped to check it out and I ended up taking like 6 or 7 of them. Among them were two comic books, V for Vendetta and The Watchmen. They sat in my room for months and months before I decided to give V for Vendetta a try and I was more than pleasantly surprised. Having never read one before, I was surprsied at how easy it was to read. I could almost feel something like a new pathway opening in my brain as I took in this new-to-me art form. V for Vendetta was awesome, really cool read. Once I finished I wanted more, so I started The Watchmen. And let me know tell you something. Having finished it now, The Watchmen was one of the very best books I have ever read. Top three, easily. If you've never read it and don't consider yourself a comic book guy, I heavily suggest you give it a try. It's amazing the amount of information and detail that can be conveyed through that medium. The combination of words, dialogue and pictures sets such a good, moody tone, and the story itself is so rich, so deep, it's hard to really describe. I can't wait to read it again. I get why they tried to make a movie and TV show out of it, and I get why neither of them were all that successful (though I will say, the HBO show was decent). Neither of them come remotely close to touching the greatness of the book though. I honestly can't stress enough how fucking good this thing was. Do yourself a favor and order a copy right now and thank me later. If anyone out there reading this has read it, I would love some recommendations on more graphic novels similar to The Watchmen, and if you do read it based on my recommendation, I'd love for you to comment and let me know how you liked it.

So that's about it for today, be on the lookout for my big alien post coming soon. Thanks for reading!

BTC price: $118k

BTC marketcap: $2.36T

BTC dominance: 60.2%

Total cryptos on coin marketcap: 18.7M



Wednesday, July 9, 2025

Grabbing The Third Rail

Before I dive in today, I suppose it would be a little suspect if I didn't at least mention that the Stanley Cup and NHL season ended with of course Florida winning it all. From a betting perspective, I made about 3 units total on NHL props for the year spread across something like 8 weeks. So it's in the neighborhood of around $5 an hour which is an eye opening stat to see. Blocks I did good on, SOG bad, and game/other props I did ok. I will probably attack NHL Blocks again next season, I actually do think that model is profitable and have some ideas to improve it, plus the fact that I have to literally be one of the only people on the planet betting on it. And when NFL starts and the PPH's start flowing again I'll get back into betting, but for now I'm taking a prolonged hiatus of sorts.

{There is going to be a lot of links in this post. Each one opens a new window so you can click on any of them and save them for later reading if you want.}

Today I want to talk about something else. One of the biggest taboo, 'not allowed to discuss' topics in the Western world today. Race, IQ, immigration, and how we got where we are. With the ongoing ICE arrests and protests going on, the Muslim Rape Gang scandal in Britain (what an absurd sentence. Imagine explaining something called The Muslim Rape Gang story to an Englishman from the 1800's. He'd assume you lost a war) finally, kind of, making its way into the mainstream news, immigration is top of mind for a lot of people. I say 'immigration' but that isn't actually exactly right, is it? It isn't just that people are simply moving. It's subsidized and encouraged immigration by a pretty specific group of people into exclusively White/European/Western countries. 'Non-Western' people moving, en masse, to places like America, Canada, Ireland, Britain, Portugal, Scotland, Australia, etc. And predictably, changing the places they move to. So what is that all about, really? Immigration and to a larger extent race are such third rail topics so you rarely see any real, honest discussions about it (although that is changing), but why is that, exactly? Why is it seemingly so difficult and uncomfortable for White people to talk at all about race or immigration? And what is this debt that we tacitly, apparently, agree that we owe? How much, for how long, and to whom, exactly? How much have we paid so far and is it making a difference? Get a snack, sit back, and come along this journey with me. This will be long and quite different from the normal programming around here, but if we can't speak freely and openly on semi anonymous, ad-free blogs on the internet, where can we?

So let's dive in. Why not.

To understand a big piece of the genesis of what's going on today and what shaped Americas (and by extension, the worlds) general attitude towards race, you have to know about a famous book from 1944 called 'An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy' by a Swedish economist named Gunnar Myrdal. The book is massive, 1500 pages, sold over 100k copies and went through 25 printings before going into its second edition in 1965. A new, two volume edition was published in 1966 with an introduction from Myrdals' daughter, who doubled down on her fathers commitment to 'changing human behavior by improving social institutions/welfare' (aka forcing people, at gun point, to give their money to people who's only qualification is that they do not work). The book and its ideas spread like wildfire throughout the kind of people who read books like that and then make decisions for all of us that last 80 years and counting.


From wiki: "The book was enormously influential in how racial issues were viewed in the United States, and it was cited in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case "in general". The book was generally positive in its outlook on the future of race relations in America, taking the view that democracy would triumph over racism. In many ways, it laid the groundwork for future policies of racial integration and affirmative action.

Myrdal believed he saw a vicious cycle in which Whites oppressed Blacks, leading to poor standards of education, health, morality, etc. among Blacks that was then used as justification for prejudice and discrimination. The way out of this cycle, he argued, was to either reduce White prejudice, which would improve the circumstances of Blacks, or to improve the circumstances of Blacks, which would then reduce the reasons for White prejudice. Myrdal called this process the "principle of cumulation"."

'The principle of cumulation.' Always a dopey sounding little quip or acronym or sound-byte to distill the nonsense for the masses.


Here's a good summary:

"In Black-White Relations: The American Dilemma, economist Junfu Zhang gives this description of Myrdal's work:

According to Myrdal, the American dilemma of his time referred to the co-existence of the American liberal ideals and the miserable situation of blacks. On the one hand, enshrined in the American creed is the belief that people are created equal and have human rights; on the other hand, blacks, as one tenth of the population, were treated as an inferior race and were denied numerous civil and political rights. Myrdal's encyclopedic study covers every aspect of black-white relations in the United States up to his time. He frankly concluded that the "Negro problem" is a "white man's problem". That is, whites as a collective were responsible for the disadvantageous situation in which blacks were trapped.

Myrdal, writing before the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, alleged that Northern Whites were generally ignorant of the situation facing Black citizens, and noted that "to get publicity is of the highest strategic importance to the Negro people". Given the press's pivotal role in the movement, this proved to be strikingly prescient".


Basically, an 'economist' from one of the Whitest, most racially homogeneous nations on Earth, pulled a "Hey, you made the rules!" on America. His entire argument was that our 'creed' was that all men are created equal, yet we don't treat everyone as equal in America. 'Ah, but sir, *lowers fedora* there is a flaw in your logic'. And really, that point about all men being created equal was all it took. This book got accepted as 'proof' that race was meaningless, somehow, was cited in the Supreme Court in Brown vs Board of Education, and had its ideas accepted and spread across the intelligentsia, virtually 'officially-in-the-mainstream' unchecked for a good 50 plus years. I guess you could say until 1994 with The Bell Curve by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein. (The Bell Curve is so damaging to them, by the way, because it's completely un-refutable. That was the real reason for the hysterical reaction to Charles Murrays lectures, in my opinion. It's two grade-A, Harvard (when it meant something) scientists, completely respected and accepted by the mainstream before the book, just painstakingly, meticulously, and as thoroughly as possible providing fact after fact after study after study, all proving without a shadow of a doubt, that race is real, IQ is real and genetic/at least partially heritable and quantifiable and massively important in todays world, that American society is efficient in finding and rewarding people with high IQs, and that the common denominator of the underclass of America is low intelligence, not 'racial disadvantage'. I've been slowly reading The Bell Curve for a couple years now {it isn't the kind of book you tear through and it is gigantic}, but my favorite point in it so far is that modern American society is generally very good at finding and rewarding high-IQ/productive people. Our economic output is evidence of that. So the idea of these would be-geniuses held back only by some murky, racist system is just nonsensical. Different people are different. Also, the lefts absolutely over-the-top reaction to this book and Charles Murray is the only reason I and many others, I presume, even heard about The Bell Curve. This whole incident kind of got memory holed, but at one of Charles Murrays lectures at Middlebury College, amidst an angry mob of students who had just got the lecture shut down and mobbed Murrays car, a female professor who was simply walking with Murray got physically attacked and had her hair yanked so hard she had to go to the hospital and was diagnosed with a concussion. She's had ongoing issues with her neck ever since. Do you know how hard you have to pull someones hair to have their brain hit their skull? Imagine a mob of over a hundred masked, right wing students physically attacking a 'left-wing' speaker at a college and sending a female colleague of his to the hospital with permanent injuries. You think that would have been a big story?)

Also interesting about this Gunnar Myrdal guy; his ideas on the economy were exactly what you'd expect. He was a Keynes guy before Keynes. He wanted big government and a 'welfare world.' From his wiki: "Myrdal suggested that we need to evolve from the welfare state to the welfare world, which would enable the redistribution of income and wealth not only within a country but also on a global scale. During the Cold War era, in Beyond the Welfare State, he proposed the idea of the welfare world to overcome the limitations of the welfare state in the West."

He was a shit-lib before shit-libs existed.

So you've got this OG shit-lib and his shit-lib daughter telling the world that race is a social construct and the only reason for poor outcomes for Blacks and Hispanics in America was prejudice from Whites. Everyone just says 'okay!' This leads to all kinds of massive changes in social policy here, including the entire Civil Rights movement, the Hart-Cellar act (which 'reformed U.S. immigration law by abolishing the national origins quota system that favored certain European immigrants. It established a preference system based on family relationships and skills, significantly changing the demographics of immigration to the U.S.' This act probably changed the very fabric of America more than any other one law or program), 'disparate impact laws', affirmative action, all of which gave way to every goofy, CRT, DEI inspired law or program or officially-unofficial-race based hiring practice going on in 2025. The machine grinds on and on.

Did you know that since 1960, the United States taxpayer has given African countries something like $1-2 trillion in aid? (It's impossible to find a remotely concrete figure for that total number which tells you something right there. Various sources/studies give wildly different numbers that differ from each other by a factor of more than ten. It's at least $600 billion from 1960-2005, and about $10 billion a year since then. So the very lower bound of the estimate is $800B, just in official aid. When you throw in charities and NGO's and other voluntary expenditures, I think it's fair to say $1 trillion and quite possibly a lot more). That is about the equivalent of Ten Marshall plans, adjusted for inflation (which, by the way, is another hidden cost of diversity. The inflation that is a result of government spending). {The Marshall Plan came out to about $14B in 1948 dollars which translates roughly into about $187B of todays money (just casual thirteen hundred percent inflation). Ten of those equals $1.87 Trillion}.

And I mean, just think about that for a minute. The total amount of money (stored energy) that went into successfully rebuilding all of Europe after WWII, the location of the biggest, most destructive world war the planet has ever seen...TEN OF THOSE. And that's just U.S. aid to Africa!  Can you imagine what we could have done here with the equivalent of TEN Marshall Plans? Almost anything the left pretends to want, yet you never hear a peep from them on this. In their defense, I really haven't heard much of a peep about this from anyone though I suppose. Isn't that unbelievable? Nearly 2 Trillion dollars spent with basically nothing to show for it. I mean, maybe literally nothing to show for it. And again, this is just money going from America to Africa. Never mind the money that goes to other non-Western countries, or the money that also flows out of Europe. Altogether, since Gunnar wrote that book, probably something in the neighborhood of 10 trillion dollars has gone from America and Europe to Africa and other non-Western countries. 

How's the ROI on that money? Did anyone think to remotely check in on that? Has it made a fucking dent? And at what point do we admit failure, stop throwing good money after bad, and go back to the drawing board? Or throw the drawing board in the trash? I mean, there has to be a time frame and a dollar amount here. If not, then you're quite literally advocating for slavery. If your argument is that I owe nameless, faceless strangers in a foreign country an infinite amount of money for an infinite amount of time, you're going to have to have some 'uncomfortable conversations'.

We've had about 65 years of racial discrimination being (very) illegal in America and massive increases in social spending and other forms of welfare. Disparate impact laws which ban 'unintentional discrimination', or anything even resembling discrimination. Read this story if you feel like being outraged today. The city of NY paid 129 MILLION dollars to Black and Hispanic applicants of the FDNY who said they were discriminated against because the fire department had all applicants take two written tests, and Blacks and Hispanics did worse than average on them. This, according to law of the land which was heavily influenced by Gunnar Myrdal, is apparently evidence of discrimination. $129 Million! 

I'll reserve any comment on that, but suffice to say, we've done our part here. You really can't argue otherwise. The amount of money that flows (largely involuntarily) from White people to Black people in the form of foreign aid, welfare, Section 8 housing, SNAP/EBT, fraud, subsidies, taxes, higher insurance rates, 'discrimination' lawsuits, employment, commerce, voluntary charity etc. is staggering. Think of what the NGO's spend alone. Not only have we thrown a truly jaw dropping amount of money at the problem, we also put our ballot box where our mouth is. We've elected literally countless Black and Brown people into various positions of power, all the way up to the President. Minorities in America today are given preferential treatment in schools, housing and hiring across almost all industries. White kids today lie on their college admissions that they ARE Black in order to get in, not the other way around! (And Ibram X. Kendi (real name Henry Rogers) tweeted that fact out thinking it helped his cause! Think about that for a minute. A leading 'race activist/author and professor' named Henry Rogers, who The New York Times called "one of the country's most in-demand commentators on racism" and was also included in Time's 100 Most Influential People of 2020, changes his name to Ibram X. Kendi. He becomes a celebrated multi-millionaire quasi celebrity for his books and views on race, is given a $55 million endowment by Boston University {where he has since been fired from after producing quite literally nothing at the 'Center for Antiracist Research'} and tweets out the fact that White kids are pretending to be Black to get into colleges as if that helps his cause. It's the combination of shameless race grifting and utter, laughable incompetence that always gets me).

So imagine if in 1945, a year after his book came out, you told Gunnar Myrdal that between 1960 and 2022, the equivalent of ten Marshal plans in aid would be sent from America to Africa; that in 2025, something like a half-trillion dollars a year was flowing from White people/countries to Black people/countries; that in 2008 we would elect a Black president, twice; that in 2020, the President of the United States would say proudly and openly to virtually no pushback that the ONLY qualification he was looking for in his VP pick was that it be a 'black woman.' That the White population of America would go from 80% in 1980 to 58% in 2020, and in 2021, among those ages 18 to 29, around three-in-ten (29%) White people say the fact that White people are declining as a share of the U.S. population is good for society. I think it's safe to say Myrdal and his ilk would agree that that is enough to remedy the problem he wrote about. (If not, what would be? Twenty Marshal Plans? Two trillion dollars a year? Three? Four terms for a Black President? I mean, there has to be a number.) 

Imagine this debate in 1945: Gunnar argues that White people owe Black people for the sin of slavery and for their prejudice ever since. We say 'okay Gunnar, we'll agree, how much money do you think they're owed?' Do you think Gunnar would have said no to 'over the next eighty years and counting, about two Trillion dollars in 2025 dollars'? The median wage in 1945 was about $2 thousand a year! In other words, we've paid something in the neighborhood of one billion times the average yearly wage the book was written, in todays dollars. If we used that same math and say $100k is the average salary today, that would be like agreeing, today, to spending roughly one hundred trillion dollars over the next 80 years. And we don't even talk about any of this! (For context, the total market cap of the entire S&P 500 is about $50 Trillion. So if every single stockholder of every single stock of every single company in the S&P all liquidated 100% of their stocks, that would be HALF the amount of money we'd be agreeing to send to African countries we don't even know exist over the next 80 years.)

In other other words, the results are in. This debate is settled. Gunnar and his OG shit-lib crew got their wish and then some. We spent more money than even ol' Gunnar ever could have possibly imagined. WAY more, in fact. Has it helped? How are Black majority countries doing, on average? Has the achievement gap between Whites and Blacks in America closed? How are their communities doing? Driven by any "Martin Luther King JR. Streets" lately? How are their schools? Arrest records? Income earned? Test scores? How about the home life? Did you know that as of 2023, 73% of African American children are born out of wedlock? Blacks make up less than 13% of the US population yet commit over half of all solved murders. That is an over representation of nearly 400%! Since 1976, Blacks have committed 88% of all (solved) inter-racial rape-and-murders, and 98% of (solved) inter-racial rape-and-murders of women aged 65 or older (one of the most depraved violent crimes one can commit). That's all with a ton of cities not reporting the racial make up of their criminals, AND a huge amount of Hispanic and even Black criminals being classified as White. It never goes the other way around. You'll see stuff like this all the time:



I'm not going to throw a ton of stats at you. You don't even need statistics. You went to school, you go to work, you've been out and about, you see the news. You have eyes and a brain. 

The left concedes the point that non-Western minorities underachieve still. You really can't argue that. The debate, still, is what causes that underachievement. Since race isn't really real, they say, it can't possibly be the root cause of anything. (Funny how that never works for something like sports. No one would ever seriously argue that the NBA or NFL discriminates against Whites. Apparently, according to them, evolution stopped at the neck.) Their argument is that poor life outcomes for Blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics is somehow still due to mistreatment from Whites. 

Now, that argument may have held water 80 years ago. Not really, but maybe. Before two terms of Barak Obama, before the Civil Rights act, before affirmative action, before disparate impact laws, before DEI, and over one to 10 trillion dollars ago. But now? How can anyone still make that claim with a straight face? Again, what amount would be sufficient?

*takes a gigantic breath*

Modern day America is probably the most racially diverse, least racist country that ever existed. If you disagree, name which country beats it in those areas. It's easy to call yourself 'tolerant' when there's nothing to tolerate and you can't compare America to a fictional utopia. Only country you could possibly say is maybe modern day Great Britain, but they're having these same problems and conversations that we are, plus a population one fifth that of America. Every single race of people in the world practiced slavery at some point (some still do to this day. Like, a lot of people still do). White people were the first and largely only people that stopped ourselves from doing it. Actually fought one of the deadliest wars of all time (still) to put an end to it, against ourselves. 

Now before I continue, let me remind everyone one thing. The left specifically asked for this.

'White Fragility' author Robin DiAngelo says we need to be willing to be uncomfortable in order to discuss race.

 'We Need To Talk About Race'

'Yes, We Really Do Need To Talk About Race'

Holder: U.S. 'a nation of cowards' on race

How to Have That Tough Conversation About Race, Racism and Racial Identity

I could go on and on with links like that. Yes it's uncomfortable to talk about, but you know what else is uncomfortable? The way the entire world talks about White people. Openly celebrating our dwindling population numbers. Professors gleefully talking about killing us. Politicians and activists literally calling for abolishing the White Race. 'Psychiatrists' at Yale giving lectures about dreaming about shooting White people in the head

"A psychiatrist who in an April lecture for the Yale School of Medicine said she “had fantasies” about killing white people defended her remarks this week, arguing that they were meant to be a hyperbole and “metaphor to evoke emotion.”

The April 6 livestream talk, audio of which was leaked online over the weekend, was titled “Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind” and was initially advertised by the school as a way to engage in conversations on race in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and the murder of George Floyd, which sparked months of civil unrest across the country. 

During the event, Aruna Khilanani was scheduled to discuss the “Karen” and “right not to wear masks” videos that have circulated online in the past year, according to The Washington Post. 

During the address, Khilanani reportedly said she “had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any White person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step.”

Can you imagine someone saying that at Yale about ANY other race? Picture this headline: "A White Yale psychiatrist gave a lecture titled The Psychopathic Problem of the Black Mind. During the address, the speaker said 'I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any Black person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step.'" It's pretty shocking when you see it written out like that. Notice the very end of that sentence, too. 'Guiltless with a bounce in my step' after fantasizing about murdering someone in cold bold, solely because of the color of their skin. And this is a public lecture at Yale college! And the speaker wasn't even punished! Am I the only person seeing this stuff? That is legitimately terrifying.

This was Yales response, by the way: 'The school said it had also added a disclaimer to the video warning audiences that it “contains profanity and imagery of violence” and, “Yale School of Medicine expects the members of our community to speak respectfully to one another and to avoid the use of profanity as a matter of professionalism and acknowledgment of our common humanity." They put a disclaimer about the use of profanity! This is the kind of stuff that when you tell people about it, they think you're making it up.

People would be ashamed to talk about endangered animals the way they talk about White people. 

Here is Bloomberg celebrating employers being racist. Again, imagine this headline about any other race of people. 'People of color' quite literally means everyone except White people.



I need someone to explain to me like I'm five years old why saying "we have a right to exist" is racist:





Same thing happening in the UK. Funny, no one is clamoring for China or India or Japan or Vietnam or Nigeria or any other non-Western country to take in third world immigrants at the express expense of their native populations:







The Hart Cellar Act in action:





This is just one year:




Another headline that people would assume you are making up:


"Psychiatrist Nahlah Saimeh, who appeared before the court as an expert witness, said in a controversial interview with Spiegel that the gang rape may have been a way to vent “frustration” due to “migration experiences and sociocultural homelessness".



Even World War Two veterans aren't safe from this madness. American veterans of WWII inarguably saved the planet from an actual racist, fascist takeover of the entire world. And here is how a college in Rhode Island treats the memory of them. This is just one headline but there's stories like this all over:





 

Either we're a colorblind meritocracy or we're not. You don't get to have it both ways. If you're going to declare things like 'all White people are born racist' and demand that we have honest conversations about race, you don't also get to decide which parts of the conversation are off limits.

If pulling down World War II murals specifically because 'they show too many [W]hite people' is ok, then so is citing factual crime stats. 

If Ilhan Omar can be a proud ethno-nationalist and declare that her Number one job is to look out for Somalia, I can say that I don't like the idea of being ethnically replaced in my home country. 

If '1,288 public health professionals, infectious diseases professionals, and community stakeholders' can sign a letter in 2020 condemning anti-lockdown protests as 'white supremacy' while also demanding that protests against 'systemic racism' be supported, I can talk about the changing demographics in America and throughout the Western world. (Seriously, read that letter. It's easy to forget how insane things got in 2020. Their argument was that protesting the lockdowns was an 'act of white supremacy' and anyone congregating, even outside, was literally killing innocent people. But at the same time, protests about 'systemic racism' should be allowed and even encouraged. They aren't even putting up the guise of being ideologically consistent anymore. Also, notice how far out of their way the authors go to not capitalize the W in White and do the opposite with the B in Black. And that's not a random tweet or some obscure article. Nearly 1,300 'professionals' signed that letter. Just the signatures alone took up 13 of the 15 pages.)

If the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York can say, to virtually no pushback, that he wants to “Shift the tax burden to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods,” I can talk about the trillions of dollars that have already been sent from White people to Black people.

If a Black teenager can stab a White teenager to death in cold blood, raise over half a million dollars, be allowed to post bail and graduate high school, I can post graphs from the FBI. Oh and also have the father of the teen victim get his house SWATTED five times.


To head off the most common counter argument to all of this, and because we're barreling down this road anyway, poverty is not the primary factor for racial crime differences. Have a look at this:





And these: (source)





Those graphs are truly astounding if you think about 'em for a minute. You don't really hear the Meadow Soprano 'it's a function of poverty!' line of defense anymore, do you?. 

I haven't even mentioned the absolute con that Black Lives Matter was. The fact that nearly all of the money that BLM raised either disappeared or ended up in the hands of one woman who used it to buy multiple houses in White, gated communities is one of those stories that seem too on the nose to be real. This sentence from this (pro-BLM) article is a doozy too: "BuzzFeed News reported in 2020 that Apple, Google, Microsoft, and other corporations nearly donated $4 million to an entity called the Black Lives Matter Foundation before realizing it had no connection to the group started by Cullors." Mostly White People were throwing millions of dollars at any sort of charity or group with the word 'Black' in its name.

So, again, the left asked for this. Explicitly. They have made race and the very concept of racial identity a massively important topic and a major part of their platform for a long time now. It's probably their number one thing, really, aside from opposing Trump which is really just a symptom of the disease I'm discussing. Demanding we discuss it nonstop while also heavily policing who is allowed to say what. Even the Nobel Prize winning scientist who discovered DNA, the worlds most leading expert on DNA and genetics, isn't allowed to state facts:

James Watson, now 92 years old, is an acclaimed Nobel Prize winning scientist who basically discovered DNA. Dubbed the 'father of DNA', he and the team he led were the first to discover the double helix structure of DNA, which was one of the biggest scientific breakthroughs of all time. His accomplishments helped usher in a whole new era of knowledge in biology and genetics and his career arc is one of the most glorious arcs in 20th century science. He made some remarks about DNA and genetics, which, again, he basically discovered in a PBS documentary. He said: "There's a difference on the average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. I would say the difference is, it's genetic." In 2007, 'Watson created a furore after he was quoted as saying he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really." 

These statements are, basically, facts. If they're not facts, they're about as close you can possibly come without being one. I mean, they're statements supported by all kinds of different, credible, robust data. Those are generally called 'facts.' There really isn't anything factually controversial about what he said. At all. So how did the scientific community, his peers, his family and the world react? Relieved of all duties at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL) - the pioneering research lab he led for decades and, by the way, also saved from going under. "In 1968, Watson became the director of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. At the time, the institution was struggling financially, but Watson proved to be very good at raising funds for research. Under Watson’s leadership, Cold Spring became one of the world’s leading institutions for research in molecular biology." He was stripped of all honorary titles, forced to publicly apologize multiple times, and even was the first person EVER to sell his Nobel Prize in an attempt to further apologize (the guy who bought it graciously gave it back to Watson). He also needed the money because he was so broke after being ostracized. (How depressing is that?) Even his own son, Rufus, got in on the action, telling the Associated Press that his father's views 'just represent a rather narrow interpretation of genetic destiny.' 

Look at this statement from CSHL, stalwart defenders of liberty, dripping with contempt and disrespect for the man who not only saved them from being turned into a Pizza Hut, but put them on the map. "It is not news when a ninety-year-old man who has lost cognitive inhibition, and has drifted that way for decades as he aged, speaks from his present mind," CSHL Michael Wigler told The New York Times. "It is not a moment for reflection. It is merely a peek into a corner of this nation's subconscious, and a strong whiff of its not-well-shrouded past secrets."

"Celebrate science when it is great, and scientists when they deserve it," geneticist Adam Rutherford wrote. "And when they turn out to be awful bigots, let's be honest about that too. It turns out that just like DNA, people are messy, complex and sometimes full of hideous errors."

'Awful bigot.' 'Full of hideous errors.' Again, this guy discovered DNA. Whatever 'errors' these people think that Watson made could only have been discovered through research that was made possible by Watson in the first place. That lab, these people, an entire field of research, the whole community would not exist in their present form without this guy. And he was practically socially assassinated for his statements, which, again, no one can disprove! And that is to say nothing of the fact that if the literal father of DNA has reached some conclusions about DNA and genetics and IQ after a lifetime of studying it at the very tippy top of his field, maybe we should, I don't know, listen? Maybe it's a bit presumptuous to automatically assume he suddenly doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about and has been talking about for a while now? I mean, if the Nobel Prize winning scientist and 'father of DNA' isn't allowed to make factual statements about DNA and genetics, do we all really have to pretend that this is an honest conversation?

This isn't all just a theoretical issue for stick armed nerds in stuffy classrooms to debate over, either. The United States is now a country that produces these headlines, taken only from 2006-2009 (I have a source for each one if anyone is interested and not just completely fucking bewildered as to what you're reading right now. It's a lot, I know I said it before but it is a lot.) Headlines:

Baby Dies in Bucket of Moms Vomit

99 Year Old Woman Among Rapists Victims

Mom Allegedly Microwaves Baby

Town Stunned As 8-Year-Old Charged In Two Killings

Woman Accused Of Using Infant As Down Payment For Car

LA Police Say Killing of 3 Year Old in Gang Attack Was Intentional

Mother, Daughter, Grandmother Teamed Up For Attack

Boston Police Say 7 Year Old Shot 8 Year Old Dead


The people in these stories are about evenly split between Blacks and Hispanics. 

So look, I'm not trying to go all Storm Front on everyone. This stuff was never remotely on my radar until around 2020 when the idea of race was shoved down everyones throats, non-stop. (It's somehow both a meaningless social construct but also the single most important fact about everyone). It's not even something that interested me all that much, nor is it something I really want to be concerned with. And I should mention that group differences don't mean anything when dealing with individual people, and the average Black or Brown person is not a criminal. Also, IQ isn't everything and Whites don't even have the highest IQs. Azkani Jews, on average, have the highest IQ's in the world, followed by East Asians. Some subsets of Indians test higher than Whites. We barely make the top 3. 

I also think that the typical leftist views on race are actually racist. They seem to view minorities as helpless entities incapable of surviving without our help. They have the same exact abilities and capabilities as Whites, we're all just blank slates, yet Whites also owe them trillions of dollars, in perpetuity. In their view, Whites are the cause and solution to every problem that minorities have. They're an inch away from saying 'they don't know better.' This is considered the 'moral' position. 

And I have barely even scratched the surface of immigration yet. A changing population will change everything in America. A country is its' people. The United States could easily come to resemble a developing world and in some places, it already does. We cannot have the same America with different people as different populations build different societies. The principle of European derived societies; freedom of speech, the rule of law, respect for women, representative government, low levels of corruption, do not simply take root like magic everywhere. They were born out of centuries of struggle, false starts, wars, civil wars and massive setbacks. They cannot be taken for granted. A poorer, dirtier, more desperate America, rife with racial rivalries and increasingly populated with people who come from non-Western traditions and societies could easily turn its back against those principles. Can you imagine emigrating to Saudi Arabia or Ghana or Cambodia and assimilating perfectly? Of course not. Yet everyone on the planet is thought to be a 'potential American.' Even if there is only a small chance that non-Western people will dominate our country and establish their own unsettling practices, why take the risk? So Wal-Mart can make its shitty widgets for 10% less? So Kelly Osburne can have her toilets cleaned for a little bit cheaper than it would normally cost? So stateless, faceless corporations can save a percentage point on their cheap labor byline while outsourcing the societal cost on everyone else?* (some of that paragraph taken from Jared Taylor's 'White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century').

Also, even if we take the argument of the Myrdals-of-the-world at face value, even if we assume that White prejudice is still the cause of underachievement for Blacks and new immigrants, it still would not justify immigration. If Whites really are such vicious oppressors that high rates of crime, disease, school failure, obesity, illegitimacy, etc. are our fault, why would you want to bring in more non-Whites? Why would Blacks want to live around Whites? It's an absurd proposition. It would only create more victims and bring out the worst in Whites. Unless the purpose of immigration is something other than improving the host country. If that is the case, then what is the purpose, exactly? 

America is the greatest, most prosperous country on the planet. It should be next to impossible to immigrate here. Anyone trying to come to America should have to prove why they would be an asset to us, not the other way around. We should be flexing and exploiting our competitive advantage in every single deal we make with foreign countries, to the benefit of the people of America. Instead, what do we do? Let middle men profit off of Americas wealth and reputation for their own personal gain? Why? Something is seriously off here with the whole equation and it has been for a while. 

20 years ago I would have argued against myself here. 10 years ago it wasn't on my radar. 5 years ago I would have been too chickenshit to say anything. But now? I mean, what's the plan here? Just shrivel into oblivion? Die forever because we were too polite to say anything to people who gleefully and publicly celebrate dozens of White children being killed?

I'm not okay with sitting on my hands, watching quietly and meekly as my culture gets mocked, destroyed and erased, as statues of my countries founding fathers are ripped down, as WWII murals of men who literally gave their lives to save the world are removed. I don't agree that I owe nameless, faceless strangers in foreign countries an infinite amount of money for an infinite amount of time. Like John Galt, I am free of pain and guilt. I'm not on board with handing over the keys to America to invaders who openly despise me because of the color of my skin. I'm not more afraid of saying 'no' than I am of dying. I'm not looking to be a hated minority in my own country and I'm not ok with disappearing, forever. Are you?