I’m this theoretical, we already know the dark skinned runners were forced into a later start. That’s easily documented and confirmed.

So we enact policies that correct for late start times. That’s equitable.

But we measure the diversity of skin tone of when people cross the finish line. If we don’t see diversity there matching the race entrants, ilwe can take that as evidence that the race officials are still corrupt.

Corrupt race officials hate this approach.

That’s an episode of Black Mirror, right? Lol.

Good call! And maybe we tie the boulders in the bridge ceiling to something, while we’re at it.

I could almost go as far as not routing incredibly hot plasma through the helm officer’s control panel, but I think I love tradition too much.

This is a change I can support!

But flagship captains are still allowed to disregard the prime directive, right?

Poverty and other lack of opportunity are how we target programs that elevate people toward equity.

Diversity is how we can objectively measure outcomes - whether people in positions of power are actually applying the above principles.

I would have a deep meaningful conversation with two betazoids at the same time.

This comment right here, Section 31 officer.

When I get analysis paralysis, I try to step back from the problem and give myself permission to experiment.

So instead of debating what hobby to take up, or product to buy, or whatever, I instead try to figure out how to give one of them a try for a day.

If you don’t have the nerve to hold a stock for 30 years through ups, downs, crashes and rebuilds, there’s a thing called a high yield savings account that may better fit your current stage of life better and risk tolerance.

And let’s all point to the sign:

“Only invest money that you don’t need right now, and could afford to lose.”

If Trump’s antics can make you sell, you should sell right now and not buy back in, because that’s money you should not have invested in the first place - by your own standards for peace of mind.

President Trump is far from the first or the last powerful person to wield massive global power that negatively affects the markets. Markets perform with strong returnsin spite of bullshit from world leaders, not because any world leaders are particularly competent (with some very rare exceptions).

It is scary right now. It really is. But that’s what investing is about. We risk some money we don’t need right now, in hope of some growth later. Pulling out when things are going down is statistically a guarantee to lock in losses. But peaceful sleep at night beats 2%-20% growth.

To answer your question: absolutely. Stocks are going to spend four or more years underperforming where they could have under better leadership. As they have done before, and as they will do again. That’s pretty much been true with every president during my lifetime, though, and through most of recorded history. Hindsight is 20/20, and all that. And anyway, democracies don’t, so far, tend to elect economists.