Wharton is Special.: $TSLA , $ORCL and $BLK and more..

Wharton School earns its nickname as "the school that thinks while others execute" due to its rigorous emphasis on strategic theory, financial modeling, and intellectual frameworks over immediate operational tactics. 

 Origin of the Phrase : The phrase contrasts Wharton's analytical, big-picture approach—honed through case studies in economics and leadership—with more hands-on schools like Harvard Business School or Stanford GSB, which prioritize execution skills.

Google Connection : Elon Musk, a Wharton undergrad (briefly, before transferring), credits its quantitative rigor for shaping his first-principles thinking at Zip2 and PayPal precursors to Google's ecosystem via early web standards.

 Safra Catz : Safra Catz (Wharton BS/JD) as Oracle CEO exemplifies this: she orchestrated 130+ acquisitions totaling $43B+, including PeopleSoft and Sun Microsystems, applying Wharton's M&A frameworks to consolidate enterprise software theoretically before executing flawlessly.

 Stephen Schwarzman : Blackstone co-founder Stephen Schwarzman (Wharton MBA) built a $1T+ asset empire by theorizing leveraged buyouts academically—pioneering models still taught there—while rivals executed smaller deals.

 Elon Musk : Musk's Wharton foundation informed Tesla's ($TSLA) battery economics models and SpaceX's reusable rocket simulations, prioritizing long-term physics-based strategies over short-term production ramps.

A crash is coming

Inspired by: https://engelsbergideas.com/essays/a-crash-is-coming/

Warns of impending economic bubbles fueled by AI investment exuberance, reckless non-bank private credit expansion, soaring sovereign debt, and speculative assets like digital currencies, potentially bursting under pressures like policy shocks or rising interest rates.
These bubbles, larger and more intertwined than past ones (e.g., Dot.com or 2008 housing crisis), penetrate the real economy deeply, risking widespread credit disruption and losses equivalent to major economies' GDPs.
A burst could lead to a severe recession unless met with swift, effective policy responses like rate cuts and stimulus, but poor leadership might exacerbate denial and blame-shifting.
Ultimately, the crisis may end populist policies, reshape alliances, and transform the geopolitical landscape amid eroded US institutions and fiscal damage from current administrations.
Thank for reading.

Greenland: CFA is not a bad option

A goodwill gesture of handing over the territory of Greenland, at a reasonable tag, should not hurt

All this keeping the global bohomie in mind.  The least option could be a CFA - Compact of free association

The United States shoulders about two-thirds of NATO's total military spending—$967 billion out of $1.47 trillion alliance-wide in 2024—while the other 31 members combined mustered just $503 billion, less than what America spends alone. This stark dollar gap persists despite NATO's tiny common budgets of €3.5 billion yearly, where the U.S. pays only 16%, matching Germany's share.[1][2][3][4]

Even relative to GDP, America's 3.4% commitment outpaces most allies' 2% target (now met by 23 nations), but Poland's $31 billion (4.1% GDP) and the UK's $75 billion still pale beside the U.S. juggernaut that funds 68% of NATO's collective might.[5][6]

$USAR, $IPX, $IE, $VZLA, $CMP, $CTGO, $SSRM, $FSM, $NB, $PALAF

Compact of Free Association

Some have suggested a compromise could see Greenland forming something called a Compact of Free Association with the United States.
Professor Rothwell said a Compact of Free Association was one of a number of forms of legal and constitutional arrangements the US had with territories known as "insular areas".
"That's important because it needs to be noted that there are already existing models that could be applied under US law, of which one is the Compact of Free Association," he said.

Under Compacts of Free Association, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), and Republic of Palau all have their own governments but the US has responsibility for their defence and foreign affairs.

Sources
[1] How much is each NATO country spending on its military in 2024? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/11/how-much-does-each-nato-country-spend-in-2024
[2] Global military spending surges amid war, rising tensions https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2024/global-military-spending-surges-amid-war-rising-tensions-and-insecurity
[3] US contributes 16% of NATO annual budget, not two-thirds | Reuters https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-contributes-16-nato-annual-budget-not-two-thirds-2024-05-31/
[4] Funding NATO https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/funding-nato
[5] NATO Spending by Country 2026 - World Population Review https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nato-spending-by-country
[6] NATO defense spending by country 2025 - Statista https://www.statista.com/statistics/584088/defense-expenditures-of-nato-countries/

Goldman Sachs has upgraded its price target for Microsoft stock to $655

 Goldman Sachs has upgraded its price target for Microsoft stock to $655 from $630, maintaining a Buy rating ahead of the company's earnings report on January 28, 2026. 

This new target implies a potential 37% upside from current prices, making it the most bullish among major analysts, surpassing Morgan Stanley's $650 target. 

The optimism stems from Microsoft's long-term potential in AI, particularly through Copilot and AI agents, which are expected to drive growth in Azure and other services. However, conditions include navigating economic uncertainties and tariff impacts, with AI monetization seen as a key transformational opportunity despite short-term risks.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/goldman-sachs-rips-up-its-microsoft-target-price-ahead-of-earnings/ar-AA1UsV3b?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds

GPT can amplify the Dunning–Kruger effect

 GPT can amplify the Dunning–Kruger effect by making both the model and its users more confident than is warranted, especially when neither truly recognizes the limits of their knowledge. The combination of fluent, confident-sounding text and users’ tendency to “offload” thinking onto AI creates a situation where people feel more expert than they actually are after using GPT.[neurosciencenews]​

How GPT itself behaves

• Large language models systematically overestimate the probability that their answers are correct, often by 20–60 percentage points across diverse questions, showing a strong overconfidence pattern analogous to Dunning–Kruger.[arxiv]​

• More capable models (with higher accuracy) often show an even steeper “confidence gradient”: they are extremely confident even when wrong, which resembles the effect’s core idea of miscalibrated self-assessment at the system level.[arxiv]​

How GPT changes user psychology

• Experimental work with ChatGPT shows that when people solve tasks with AI help, they improve their objective performance but become much worse at judging how well they actually did, generally overestimating their performance.[aalto]​

• This applies across skill levels, and AI-literate users sometimes miscalibrate the most, suggesting that familiarity with GPT can breed extra confidence without a matching improvement in metacognitive accuracy.[neurosciencenews]​

Cognitive offloading and “illusion of understanding”

• Users frequently ask GPT a single question per problem and accept the first answer without probing, a pattern described as cognitive offloading, where people outsource reasoning instead of critically evaluating outputs.[futurism]​

• Because GPT’s language is fluent and authoritative, it creates an “illusion of understanding” and “illusion of authority,” making users feel like they understand or have checked something thoroughly when they have mostly just read a plausible narrative.[pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih]​

When GPT strengthens Dunning–Kruger dynamics

• In domains like health, law, or finance, people with limited domain knowledge can rapidly produce sophisticated-sounding text with GPT, which may reinforce a belief that they understand complex topics well enough to act or advise others.[mitchthelawyer.substack]​

• In such settings, model hallucinations—confidently stated but false information—can be accepted as fact, especially where digital literacy is low and traditional misinformation is already common, further inflating misplaced confidence.[blog.biocomm]​

How to reduce the amplification

• Encourage users to treat GPT as a drafting and exploration tool rather than an authority: cross-check with trusted primary sources, especially for high-stakes decisions.[pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih]​

• Interface designs that surface uncertainty, ask users to consider alternative answers, or prompt explicit verification (e.g., “What evidence would confirm this?”) can help restore metacognition and partially counter Dunning–Kruger-like overconfidence.[aalto]​

Democrats and the Economy: Debunking Myths, Examining Priorities, and Business Leaders' Critiques

Democrats and the Economy: Debunking Myths, Examining Priorities, and Business Leaders' Critiques

The perception that Democrats consistently mishandle the economy, prioritize social issues over fiscal growth, and foster an anti-business environment is a staple of political rhetoric, particularly from conservative circles. This view paints Democrats as idealistic spenders who favor welfare programs, regulations, and progressive social agendas at the expense of prosperity and entrepreneurship. However, a deep dive into historical data, public opinion polls, and economic indicators reveals a more nuanced picture: while Democrats do emphasize social equity, empirical evidence often shows stronger economic performance under their leadership. Yet, lingering perceptions of being "not business friendly" persist, amplified by critiques from figures like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon. In this article, we'll combine data-driven analysis with these perspectives to validate or challenge the narrative, drawing on sources up to early 2026.Historical Economic Performance: Data Challenges the "Dems Get It Wrong" NarrativeContrary to the stereotype, long-term data indicates that the U.S. economy has historically performed better under Democratic presidents across key metrics like GDP growth, job creation, and unemployment reduction. This pattern holds even when accounting for factors like congressional control or global events.

1. GDP Growth: Since 1948, real GDP has grown at an average annual rate of 4.1% under Democratic administrations, compared to 2.7% under Republicans. A broader analysis from 1930 to 2015 by economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson shows an even wider gap: 4.9% under Democrats versus 1.7% under Republicans. Post-WWII data from the Joint Economic Committee reinforces this, with 4.3% growth under Democrats and 2.5% under Republicans. Even from 1947 to 2013, GDP averaged 3.33% overall but surged to 4.33% under Democrats and dipped to 2.54% under Republicans. Updated through 2024, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) reports GDP growth 1.2 percentage points faster under Democrats (3.79% vs. 2.60%).
2. Job Creation and Unemployment: Job growth has averaged 2.6% annually under Democrats since 1948, more than double the 1.2% under Republicans. Since the early 1980s, the U.S. added 50 million jobs under Democratic presidencies versus just 17 million under Republicans. Unemployment rates have declined by about 1.2 percentage points on average during Democratic terms, while rising 0.4 points under Republicans. Four of the five presidents with the strongest job growth records since Truman were Democrats.
3. Recessions and Deficits: The economy has spent nearly 10 times as long in recession under Republican presidents since WWII (49 months vs. 5 months). Fiscal deficits in 2025 totaled $1.8 trillion, down slightly from 2024, but historical trends show Democrats often inheriting and reducing deficits left by Republicans.
4. Stock Market and Broader Indicators: The S&P 500 has returned about 11% annualized under Democrats from 1929 to 2016, versus 2% under Republicans. Recent 2025 data from Saxo Bank highlights market impacts, with Democratic wins often boosting sectors like renewables while Republican policies favor energy and defense.

To illustrate these disparities, here's a comparative chart of average annual GDP and job growth rates under Democratic and Republican presidents (aggregated from post-WWII data via EPI, NBER, and Wikipedia sources):

espite these figures, public sentiment in late 2025 remained gloomy, with 73% of Democrats and 64% of independents reporting the economy "not working well" for them, per the Marist Poll. Gallup noted worsening economic views by year's end, with sharp partisan divides. Pew Research in October 2025 found 44% of Republicans rating the economy positively, up from April, while Democrats' views lagged, highlighting perception gaps.Social Focus: Prioritizing Equity Over Economy?Democrats are often accused of being overly socially focused, channeling resources into programs like healthcare reform, climate action, and social justice rather than pure economic stimulus. Data supports that Democrats do prioritize these areas, but it doesn't necessarily correlate with economic underperformance—in fact, social investments can drive long-term growth.

• Policy Priorities: A 2025 Pew Research poll shows the economy as the top concern for 73% of Americans, but Democrats rank issues like climate change (59% priority), abortion (55%), and racial equity higher than Republicans (climate: 18%, abortion: 32%). The AP-NORC 2026 priorities poll lists economic issues first (e.g., inflation, jobs), but Democrats emphasize healthcare (45% top issue) and education (38%) more than Republicans.
• Voter Perceptions: Gallup's "Most Important Problem" trends show the economy dominating (35% in 2025), with Democrats trusted more on social issues like abortion and LGBTQ rights (per NYT/Ipsos poll, where Americans believe these concern Democrats more than the economy). Working-class voters view Democrats as "woke" and "weak," per Politico research, prioritizing cultural issues over economic pragmatism. Young Democrats (under 35) prioritize economic issues but lean progressive on social matters, per Navigator Research.
• Impact on Economy: Critics argue social spending inflates deficits, but EPI data links Democratic social policies (e.g., ACA, infrastructure) to sustained growth. Third Way's 2022 memo (still relevant in 2025 polls) notes an "economic trust gap" for Democrats, with voters trusting Republicans more on business and inflation despite data. A 2025 Elliott Morris analysis shows voters now trusting Democrats more on the economy post-2024, threatening Republicans in 2026 midterms. 

The "Not Business Friendly" Perception: Validated by Data and Sentiment

The idea that Democrats are anti-business stems from policies like higher corporate taxes, stricter regulations, and labor protections. While data shows mixed trust levels, perceptions lean negative among business owners.

• Business Owner Leanings: Stanford research in 2025 found small business owners—a key economic driver—leaning Republican, viewing Democrats as regulatory-heavy. The Axios Harris Poll 100 shows more companies perceived as "liberal" in 2024-2025, with Democrats trusting business more than Republicans for the first time (per Edelman Trust Barometer).
• Public and Corporate Views: A 2024 PPSI poll (echoed in 2025) found consumers supporting business action on democracy, but Gallup shows Americans wanting businesses to stay quiet on policy (60% in 2024-2025). Progressive Economics poll in 2025 reveals nearly 2/3 of Democrats wanting bolder anti-corporate measures, widening the "populist" divide. PAC.org data questions if Democrats are more pro-business on social issues, but overall perception favors Republicans on free enterprise.
• Trust Metrics: Pew's 2019 trust study (updated in CloudResearch/Siena 2025) shows low overall confidence in institutions, with Democrats more skeptical of big business (45% distrust in 2025).

Jamie Dimon's Critique: A Business Icon's Take on DemocratsJamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase's CEO and a former Democrat supporter (donating mainly to Democrats from 1989-2009), exemplifies the business community's frustration. In July 2025, at a Dublin event, Dimon called many Democrats "idiots" with "big hearts and little brains," arguing they "do not understand how the real world works" and that "almost every single policy rolled out failed." He criticized the party's overemphasis on DEI, saying Democrats "overdid DEI" and should "stop it" to be "more practical" instead of "very ideological." Dimon targeted progressive policies like rent freezes and city-run grocery stores as "ideological mush," and labeled NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani "more of a Marxist than a socialist." He lamented the Biden administration's lack of business advisors, noting "not one business person" and a "lack of knowledge." Earlier in 2024, Dimon urged Democrats to respect "MAGA" supporters and avoid demonizing them. Describing himself as "barely a Democrat" with a "Democratic heart but Republican brain," Dimon's comments in 2025 (no major updates by early 2026) underscore the perception that Democrats have shifted toward anti-business populism. Conclusion: Perception vs. RealityWhile data overwhelmingly shows superior economic outcomes under Democrats, the party's social focus and regulatory stance fuel perceptions of being out-of-touch with business realities. Dimon's blunt critiques highlight this tension, resonating with those who see ideology trumping pragmatism. As of early 2026, with economic pessimism persisting (per Gallup and Marist), Democrats face a challenge: bridging data-driven successes with voter and business sentiments to dispel the myth. Ultimately, the narrative is validated in perception but often refuted by numbers—proving economics is as much about optics.