A deal came across my desk this week
Largest revenue-collecting enterprise in America:
> 71M customers
> 185M people funding it
> Mandatory participation
> No competitors
> No churn
On paper it's the best business model I've ever seen, so I ran diligence
It's Social Security
Put my analyst on the financials:
> He came back in 4 hours
> He did not look well
Started with the revenue model:
> 12.4% of every dollar you earn
> 6.2% withheld from your paycheck
> 6.2% paid by your employer, which is your money taking a longer route
> Applied to the first $184,500 of income, then it stops
That's the collection engine
Then I traced where the money goes
First finding:
> Nothing was set aside
> The money comes in from workers and goes out to retirees the same month
> The surplus got spent the moment it arrived
> The "trust fund" everyone talks about is $2.56T of the government holding IOUs from itself
> It has paid out more than it took in every year since 2021
> Last year the shortfall hit $160B
> I asked him where the actual money was
> He said "it already left, sir"
Second finding:
> The model only works if the people paying in can cover the people cashing out
> In 1960 there were more than 5 workers for every person collecting a check
> Today there are fewer than 3
> In 20 years there will be fewer than 2.5
> And 4.1M Americans are turning 65 every year right now
> The largest wave of retirements in the country's history
> My son was at the table
> He looked at the chart
> He said "so fewer and fewer people are paying for more and more people, and at some point it stops working?"
> I said "that's the structure, yes"
> He went back to his cereal
> My analyst looked up from his laptop
> He said "sir, with respect, this looks like a pyramid scheme"
> I corrected him
> A pyramid scheme is illegal
> This one is mandatory
Third finding:
> The headline says the money runs out in 2034
> Then my analyst found the footnote
> It is not one fund
> The old-age and survivors fund and a separate disability fund, kept apart by law
> The 2034 number blends them
> Un-blend them and the retirement side, the one almost everyone is counting on, goes first
> Not someday. Not a generation from now
> The fourth quarter of 2032
> After that the math only allows it to pay 78 cents on every dollar it promised
> A 22% cut. Automatic. No vote required.
What it would take to close the gap:
> Raise the 12.4% payroll tax to roughly 16.8%
> Cut every benefit by more than 20%, immediately and permanently
> Or some combination of the two
A remediation plan that's actually passed: none.
Pulled the cap table:
> The first person ever to collect a monthly check was a woman named Ida May Fuller
> She paid in $24.75
> Her employer paid another $24.75, which was also her money
> She collected $22,888.92
> More than 460 times what went in
The model front-loaded its winners
My wife read it over my shoulder
She did not argue with any of it
She never does
She just looked at me, then looked at the ceiling, and said nothing
She thinks I take things too far
She also thinks I'm right
Here's my diligence conclusion:
> Took your money for 40 years
> Spent it the month it arrived
> Set nothing aside
> Built a model that runs on demographics it no longer has
> Left a 22% cut to trigger in 2032
> Has no fix that ever passed
In any other deal we'd have a word for this
In this one we call it your retirement
I'm not saying anything
The economic model is saying it
Make common sense common again
Plz fix. Thx.
Sent from my iPhone
Let me make sure I understand this correctly
To buy a beer: ID
To board a plane: ID
To pick up my kid from school: ID
To get a fishing license: ID
To enter my own office building: ID
To buy cold medicine: ID
To open a bank account: ID
To rent a car: ID
To check into a hotel: ID
To prove to my bank that I'm human: 14 minutes and a CAPTCHA
To vote for the leader of the free world: nothing
If A = B and B = C then A = C
That's the transitive property
I learned it in 7th grade
Apparently not everyone did
My analyst could build a better system in an afternoon
And he's not even that good
Make common sense common again
Plz fix. Thx.
Sent from my iPhone
If I’m Boone/Cashman/any coach I’m instantly developing a “head in the game” training program.
It consists of tips and tricks that will help with
• remembering how many outs there are
• knowing what base to throw too
• not making a fool of yourself
• general understanding of where you are, what you are and what you’re doing
By the way, an oculoplastics specialist does eyeball residency followed by 1-2 years of facial plastics. If an ophthalmologist examines your breasts, please call the police. I’m so glad she is documenting the absolute farce that is peer to peer review.
Are the Yankees’ annual summer downturns a “normal part of the game”, or are they unique?
Last night, Aaron Judge had this to say of the Yankees’ current 6-13 spell:
"We’re going to go through two of these a year, every good team does. …”
As a quick spot-check, I looked up recent data on the Los Angeles Dodgers to see if they had endured any 6-13 (or worse) stretches. Turned out they hadn’t in four seasons.
But I wanted to go a little deeper, and review the whole league. There are a lot of ways to dig into this question, but here’s how I went about it:
1. I’m defining a “good team” as any team to finish a season with 90 wins (or the W/L% equivalent in a short season).
2. Going back 5 seasons (2020-2024), I took NYY’s worst stretch within each season, and checked to see if any other (90-win) team had a stretch as bad or worse in that same season.
Between 2020-2024, there were 41 (non-NYY) teams to win 90 games.
Here’s the breakdown of what I found:
2020:
• Yankees worst stretch: 4-15
• Number of (.556 W/L%) teams with an equivalent or worse stretch: 0
2021:
• Yankees worst stretch: 10-22
• Number of 90-win teams with an equivalent or worse stretch: 0
2022:
• Yankees worst stretch: 10-17
• Number of 90-win teams with an equivalent or worse stretch: 3
2023:
• Yankees worst stretch: 12-21
• Number of 90-win teams with an equivalent or worse stretch: 2
2024:
Yankees worst stretch: 12-24
Number of 90-win teams with an equivalent or worse stretch: 0
In total for the 5-year period, only 5 out of 41 teams to win 90 (or equivalent W/L%) games matched the Yankees’ worst stretch within a season. Even more notably out of this list of 5, there were no repeating teams. They were: TOR, CLE, & SEA in ’22, and TBR & TEX in ’23. In other words, these were one-off events in every case... except in the case of the Yankees. The Yankees have produced unusually extended poor stretches in 5 consecutive seasons, and are now possibly mired in their 6th.
The Yankees have also produced several largely unmatched positive stretches in recent seasons, most notably, their 61-23 start to 2022, and their 49-21 start to 2024. While their negative stretches were very substantial, these positive spans were far greater, leading to strong overall records in the respective seasons.
There have been instances of other “good” teams showing high volatility within seasons. One clear example that comes to mind is LAD’s 56-11 stretch of 2017, which was immediately followed by a 1-16 downturn. Still, this was a one-off event for LAD— not a pattern they continued to exhibit consistently in subsequent seasons.
The Yankees’ ongoing pattern of volatility is astonishing in its uniqueness among contenders, not just for its reoccurrence over 6 consecutive seasons, but for its placement within the same set of months (June-August) within all 6 seasons.
What exactly accounts for this pattern of volatility is complex and requires a separate analysis. But one thing is abundantly clear: this is not your average division winner’s 4-9 stretch, or 5-game losing streak. This is also not the same as "that one good team that had that one weird season". This is every year, at the same time of year, for unusually extended periods.
A season-wide pattern tends to follow:
1. Scorching, unbeatable
2. Common slump
3. Extended slump
4. Extraordinarily extended slump, threatens status of season
5. Stabilized, but somewhat broken
6. Stable/somewhat broken team enters October, does their best
Here in 2025, we’re at stage 3, veering into stage 4 (particularly given the July schedule).
It shouldn't have to be inevitable. Let’s hope the course changes.
I accept Simone's apology for the personal attacks including the ones where she body-shamed me. I know she knows what this feels like. She's still the greatest female gymnast of all time.
A couple of things. Sports ARE inclusive by nature. Anyone can and everyone SHOULD play sports. Competition, on the other hand and by definition, is exclusive. So the idea of "competitive equity" is nonsensical.
Secondly, the boys are publicly humiliating the girls. To suggest that women and girls must be silent or ignore a boy who is PUBLICLY hurting or humiliating them is wrong. You can't have any empathy and compassion for the girls if you're ignoring when young men are harming or abusing them. I am not ashamed to be a voice for the voiceless.
Lastly, I agree with you that the blame is on the lawmakers and leaders at the top. Precisely why I'm suing the NCAA and support candidates who vow to stand with women. That's why I joined @realDonaldTrump at the signing of his Executive Order. I didn't see you there or championing this effort with your platform.
Women's sports can't be used as an excuse for girl's to center the feelings and validation of men and boys.
I welcome you to the fight to support fair sports and a future for female athletes. Little girls deserve the same shot to achieve that you had.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: "Borders are not racist, speech is not violence, America is good, terrorists are bad, men can never become women, police are not criminals, and criminals are not victims."