Cena TernoaCAPS

Placing caps on student loans is similar to price caps on goods and services. It's poor central planning when the goal should be to support a healthy market. Make it easier for student loans to be discharged via bankruptcy so that lenders do more diligence evaluating the risks.

Wall Street is ditching the profitable tech elites for a wild batch of companies with no earnings and no apologies. The so-called Unprofitable 858, those money-losing names inside the Russell 300, have started driving the market’s latest high-stakes rally. The obsession with profits is gone. Investors are now throwing cash at companies with big risk, no earnings, and serious volatility. Since April 8, the day the market bottomed out, 10 of the 14 stocks that tripled on the index haven’t made a single dollar of profit. That stat came straight from Bespoke Investment Group, and it’s changing the entire conversation. Through late June, this same batch of 858 unprofitable companies delivered 36% average gains, beating profitable peers who actually generate income. Avis Budget Group, Carvana, and Aeva Technologies are three of the biggest names riding this wave. Avis has jumped 188% since April. Carvana has climbed 98%, and Aeva, a maker of lidar sensors for self-driving cars, is up 457%. This is the same type of manic rally that powered the meme-stock craze in 2021, back when cheap money and government stimulus pumped the market to extremes. The signs are everywhere. A Goldman Sachs tracker for retail traders’ favorite stocks just hit a fresh high, the first since November 2021. That’s when speculation peaked before rate hikes started wrecking fragile plays. Steve Sosnick, chief strategist at Interactive Brokers, said the movement isn’t rooted in fundamentals anymore. “We’re not yet seeing a full-fledged ‘flight-to-crap,’ but it is clear that the motivation behind many of these stocks’ activity is something other than disciplined considerations of discounted cash flows,” Steve said. Inside Interactive Brokers’ own trading data, the trend gets even more insane. Traders have been pouring into names like Cyngn, a self-driving vehicle firm with barely any revenue and a valuation under $100 million. Despite that, Cyngn’s stock has almost tripled in three months. It’s still down 90% year-to-date, but that hasn’t stopped the trades. These are names investors would’ve dumped a year ago. Now they’re at the top of trading dashboards. The pandemic-era favorites are back too. Avis, once a meme darling during lockdowns, is leading again. Carvana, the used-car dealer that crashed hard during the downturn, has now nearly doubled since April. Aeva’s 400%+ run shows how far this rally is spreading. It’s not just mega caps or AI names moving the indexes. It’s companies with no earnings and little business stability. Kevin Gordon, senior investment strategist at Charles Schwab, said this bounce in unimpressive names could become a real problem. “If you do see that low-quality, speculative part of the market lead for an extended period, it can be concerning,” Kevin warned. Still, he admitted this is what retail investors have been trained to do. “They’ve been conditioned to buy the dip and not look back, and for the most part that’s been a sound strategy for them.” What’s feeding the beast? A mix of optimism around rate cuts, economic resilience, and political easing under President Trump. The belief that the White House will take a softer stance on trade and inflation has helped bring bullish energy back. June’s jobs report was the latest upside surprise. Payroll growth held steady, and unemployment dropped to 4.1% from 4.2%, even though Wall Street Journal economists had expected an increase. Those numbers gave traders more confidence that the second half of 2025 could deliver strong growth without spiking inflation. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq both closed at record highs just before the holiday break. That momentum has killed the fear that dominated just three months ago, when retail sentiment hit its lowest level since 2009. Now, traders are only scared of missing the next pop. The “YOLO trade” is alive and foaming at the mouth. Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B. Riley Wealth Management, said the second-quarter attitude shift was loud. “When the attitude shifted to risk-on in the second quarter, it seems like the traditional players moved back into the Apples and Amazons and Microsofts of the world,” Art said. “And now you’ve got the cohort of the ultra-risky, ‘you only live once’ gang rushing back into their selection of equities.” That risk-heavy crowd is also fueling leveraged ETFs. Invesco’s ProShares UltraPro QQQ, which tries to triple the daily return of the Nasdaq-100, saw record inflows in early April. It’s now up more than 100% since April 8. That kind of result is only possible when retail traders ignore warnings and throw size at momentum. Still, the risk of collapse is real. Josh Jamner, senior analyst at ClearBridge Investments, said the long-term reality hasn’t changed. “While some of this speculative stuff can go on huge runs, in the long run, the vast majority of stock returns come back to earnings,” Josh said. “Investors need to keep that in mind.” KEY Difference Wire helps crypto brands break through and dominate headlines fast

Think about it - if the volume on bonk's pad keeps beating pump fun volume, it’s gonna catch the eyes of many whales. Unlike the average trencher, the really big whales don’t really care about low caps - there’s just not enough liquidity for them to make real money. The interesting part? Unlike pump, Bonk ecosystem actually has its own official token - $BONK. It’s tradable everywhere, with massive volume and deep liquidity. A paradise for whales. And probably an easy long, as long as the launch pad hype keeps rolling.

21M Bitcoins, When Mined, What Happens Next? As we all know, Bitcoin’s design caps the total supply at 21M coins. So, Again, After The Last Bitcoin Block, Can the System Still Hold? Read up, bros 👇 Bitcoin halves the new-coin subsidy roughly every four years. Once the final subsidy is paid, likely around the year 2140, the only revenue left for miners will be transaction fees. The concern is clear. If fees remain too low, miners may shut down their machines, reducing the hash rate and the cost required to attack the network. What can the system do about this? --- 1. Where Miner Income Stands Today Since the April 2024 halving, the block subsidy fell to 3.125 BTC. Fees briefly spiked during the Ordinals and Runes craze in early 2024 and covered more than the subsidy for a few days. Right now, fees are back to about 7% of miner revenue, the lowest share since the last bear market bottom. Energy alone for an average block still costs $90K at $0.05kw/h. So the fee component would have to rise 4X to keep the lights on at current prices. --- 2. The Runway To 2140 The subsidy does not disappear overnight. Even after the next halving in 2028, about 90% of miner revenue is still projected to come from new coins. The security budget therefore declines slowly, giving almost a century to find stable fee sources. That runway matters. It allows both protocol innovation and organic economic growth to close the gap. --- 3. Security Budget And Attack Cost The security budget is the total value miners earn per block. A fall in that budget is not automatically catastrophic because the difficulty adjustment reduces the hash rate until the marginal miner is again profitable. The risk is that the dollar cost to cause a majority attack could fall faster than the network’s economic throughput, inviting well-funded adversaries. --- 4. How A Sustainable Fee Market Could Emerge A. Fee pressure from finite block space: Even without new features, Bitcoin’s base layer can settle only a few hundred thousand transactions per day. If global demand for final settlement rises while block space stays scarce, users will bid up fees and miners will capture that scarcity premium. A functioning fee market already exists but remains thin because global demand is still modest. B. Event-driven surges signal latent demand: The Ordinals inscription boom showed that novel uses of the block space can push fee revenue above the subsidy, at least temporarily. Although the surge faded, it illustrated the willingness of users to pay when they perceive unique value in Bitcoin’s immutability. C. Layer two settlement: Lightning, Fedimint, ₿apps, rollups proposed with opcodes such as OP_CAT or BitVM, and drivechains are all designed to batch many off-chain transfers into a single on-chain settlement transaction. If these ecosystems grow, a rising fraction of global value could settle back to the base layer and pay higher aggregate fees, even while individual retail transfers remain cheap. D. High-value transaction categories still untapped: Large corporate treasuries, sovereign wealth funds, tokenized real assets, and advanced covenant-based applications could each inject blocks with transactions whose absolute fee in dollars is far higher than today’s median. Studies show that specialized activity clusters drive heavy tails in the fee distribution. --- 5. Protocol Level Responses → Incremental soft forks: Features that raise the economic density of each byte, such as covenants, enhanced scripting, or native rollup factors, can lift the upper bound on fee revenue without changing the supply schedule. → Tail emission proposals: Communities advocate adding a 0.1% annual inflation subsidy to guarantee a minimum security budget. This breaks the fixed supply credo and requires social consensus. → Reclaiming dormant coins: Others suggest recycling inactive coins, but that challenges the standing norms about property rights on-chain. --- 6. Miner Adaptation and Diversification Publicly listed miners such as @RiotPlatforms and @MARA began combining bitcoin production with data-center hosting, AI inference, and renewable energy balancing to cushion revenue volatility. This would subsidise continued hash power even during low-fee eras. It does not solve the security budget problem on its own, but it buys additional resilience. --- 7. Scenario Analysis → Optimistic path: Global adoption of Bitcoin as a neutral settlement rail, plus successful L2 ecosystems, drives persistent block space competition. Fees rise to several hundred thousand dollars per block, replacing the vanishing subsidy and keeping the hash rate high. → Stagnant store of value path: If on-chain demand plateaus and Bitcoin functions mainly as cold storage, fees stay low. The hash rate declines until only the cheapest renewable sites remain profitable. Security might still suffice for static savings but would be vulnerable to state-level attacks during periods of price weakness. --- Bottom line Bitcoin has roughly 115 years before the subsidy disappears entirely, but the incentives are already shifting. Either fees must rise through genuine economic demand for scarce settlement slots, or the rules must change, or security will adjust downward. Each outcome is possible. The coming decades will test these, but what will not work is a static model that ignores economics. Bitcoin stays secure only as long as someone is willing to pay for that security. Thanks for reading!

RT @JackoMooon: $gib and $jail two best looking low caps on bonk, both a couple months old already and look primed