Go Woke, Go Broke/Woke Alerts:

This is how things are supposed to work. If voters don’t like what their representatives are doing, vote ‘em out.

I didn’t know this about SC though.

Barring a woman winning a race in November in a district dominated by the other party, there will be only two women in the 46-member South Carolina Senate when the 126th session starts in January. No other state in the country would have fewer women in its upper chamber, according to Center of American Women in Politics. Women make up 55% of the state’s registered voters.

Historically, it’s been worse in the South Carolina Senate for women. There were no women there from 2009 to 2013, when Shealy was first elected.

Yikes! What is going on there?

Reminds me of the time a number of years ago some of the state senators in TN ignored the voters and tried to get an income tax passed.

The tax failed and in the next election ALL those who pushed for it defying the voters back home got voted out.

Sent packing! :grinning:

3 Likes
2 Likes

Not exactly “go broke”, but the principle is the same:

3 Likes

A good start!

2 Likes

The wokism and brokism of open borders:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sanctuary-city-denver-spending-a-whopping-356-million-on-migrants-study/ar-AA1v2KKw?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=b0bf5b34934d4dab8343849b47b28422&ei=15

1 Like

Hey, the people of Colorado voted to keep the administration that brought them there. Who are we to deny them the right to pay for them?

1 Like

Did you notice that this report got released AFTER the elections?

But you’re right. There are too many people in this state who are all-in on libbism. I don’t see that changing any time soon.

1 Like

2 Likes

Not necessarily a “go woke, go BROKE” event here, but I’ve always found haka fascinating.

1 Like
4 Likes

7 Likes

Covid alone told all of us it doesn’t have to make logical sense.

2 Likes

Normally, I’d say this kind of lawsuit will be treated like a political stunt and won’t go anywhere. But Target revenues got kind of steamrolled at the time in question so . . . maybe.

@biggestal99 does not like it when I put arrows on my charts and graphs, so, I’m gonna try to avoid that tis time, just for him.


.
.
.
Oh yeah, their stock price also did not go in the proper direction.

1 Like

now do the $1000 stock COSTCO with the same parameters.

Allan

never owned Target stock.

however i made the following investments in walmart (buy and hold)

april 1, 2020 @117.21

april 2, 2020 @119.01

july 2, 2024 @68.07

july 16, 2024 @69.71

i did okay. lol

I dont invest because of DEI Policies.

i investment in fundamentals.

Allan

1 Like

COSTCO?
They did somewhere in between, pretty close to Walmart though.

why? did they display “Transgender Pride” shirts for 4 year-olds in their kids department and
“tuck-friendly” women’s bathing suits with rainbow flags?

Target did, and they did so right after the Dylan Mulvaney fiasco.
That may or may not explain why their sales and their stock price suffered while the rest of retail did very well.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit certainly think Target’s ill-timed and undisclosed wokeness hurt sales.

gave trump the middle finger and sales (and stock price have not suffered)

Allan

Yeah they are not looking too bad.

P/E is over 60 and that kinda sucks.
(three times higher than historical norms).

But their gross sales are growing steadily

Tangible assets are 1/3rd of gross assets and
3x total debt.
They are not carrying much in the way of ghostly “intangible assets.”

Yeah,
it’s temporarily overpriced, but looks pretty solid longer term.

You are talking about something that happened a week or two ago. That would not be reflected in your history (or those graphs)