Writing 📍

📽️ Videos

Targeted advertising feeds my anxiety 🤖 🙉

|

Few things I find more creepy is targeted advertising. It attempts to “target” based on machine learning, which looks at interactions on social media, webpages browsed and search terms to find what is most marketable for the user, not what is most relevant to the user.

The amount of data that feeds into targeted advertising is quite creepy. And often it makes judgements about a person that are quite wrong, as it’s only looking at population averages with a similar profile, and trying to make an educated guess at what products can be sold to that person. Yet, one isn’t defined by what advertisers think they can sell to you, and you shouldn’t take too seriously what people are paid to put in front of you.

Every time I mention my anxiety, I am fed a steady diet of advertisement for Better Help online mental health services, and the free-to-call 988 anti-suicide hotline. Targeted mental health advertising is downright creepy! When I was concerned about my excess peeing and pooping — from all the water and fiber in food — I was fed a steady diets about prostate and stomach cancers. Maybe because of my google searches, but long after my doctor visit and tests confirmed I was mostly clean, it was still creeply messaging to me. And then since I’ve gotten interested in healthy eating, I see constant advertising for services for people with anorexia, and granola bars and other highly-processed “health foods”. Not foods that are actually healthy, but come with good mark-up for the food processors.

Since I’ve mentioned my issues with new landlord and my search for rural property, I’ve now been getting fed a steady diet of advertising about landlord tenant management software and speculative real estate investments. Then there has been a steady batch of advertising I’ve been consuming about moving services, and extended stay places, as if soon I am to become homeless. I don’t think my current living accommodations are sustainable forever, but I really don’t think I’m in immediate risk of homelessness, despite the bit of a game my new landlord played over the rent check. Ironically, no advertising for land or property, despite all the time I spend on Zillow and studying the property tax rolls.

Then there are conflicting advertisements I keep seeing between investing for high-net worth individuals and services directed to the poorest of poorest people, such as those on welfare and section 8 housing. I’m not neither — I don’t have a million in investable assets as much are locked up in retirement accounts, nor do I get welfare benefits. I’m closer to the prior then the later but not there, yet — and I’ll probably blow it on land and livestock. Some of it’s my personal interest in ways of being frugal and a responsible investing, but it’s fascinating to see the conflict. Discount cellphone providers like Mint Mobile still really want my business, and so do discount internet providers for low-income persons. But the real reason I choose not to have internet at home isn’t poverty, but it’s for the sanity of not having all that commercial crap in my apartment and to save a bit of money.

I know I’m not defined by commercial advertising, which exists solely to sell products to me but it creeps me out how much it knows about me and how it tries to sell me things based on things I have searched or explored on the internet.

Map: Mountain House Trail and North Mountain
Thematic Map: Albany Art

Large Cap Stocks and Market Concentration

|

In recent years, value stock investors have been quick to point out the risks of index funds that use market-cap weighting (like those tracking the S&P 500) allocate money based on company size. While large caps (especially mega-cap tech) dominant market performance, smaller companies have historically provided higher long-term returns to compensate investors for taking on higher volatility and risk—a concept known in finance as the size premium.

When a few massive tech giants outperform the rest of the market, as is case currently, they consume a massive percentage of the index. In these times, a so-called “diversified” fund becomes heavily reliant on just a handful of stocks. With the current market, SP 500 based indexes mean 30%+ of your money is in just 10 companies. This means the fund will swing wildly based on the performance of a few mega-cap stocks. 

Alternatives to indexing based on S&P 500

  • Equal-Weight Funds: Invest in versions of the index where every company gets the same exact dollar allocation. This heavily biases you towards small caps.
  • Factor Investing: Allocate a portion of your money to value or small-cap funds to balance the mega-cap growth exposure. This gives you some additional small caps without over weighting to small caps.
  • International Diversification: Add foreign stock indexes, which typically have less mega-cap tech concentration. 

But are large cap stocks dominating the S&P 500 index necessarily a bad thing?

  • Large-Caps (e.g., S&P 500): These are mature, stable businesses with global operations and massive balance sheets. They excel during economic slowdowns, periods of high interest rates, or when specific sectors like mega-cap technology experience exponential, monopolistic growth.
  • Mid-Caps (e.g., S&P MidCap 400): Often called the “sweet spot” of investing, mid-caps offer a blend of financial stability and room to grow. Historically, they have frequently outperformed both large and small caps over rolling 20-year periods by avoiding the bureaucracy of giant corporations and the high failure rates of tiny ones.
  • Small-Caps (e.g., Russell 2000): These are younger, nimble companies with high growth potential. They are highly sensitive to the domestic economy and tend to massively outperform during the early stages of an economic recovery or bull market, fueled by low interest rates and easier access to capital.
FactorLarge-CapsMid-CapsSmall-Caps
Long-Term Growth PotentialModerateHighVery High
Volatility & Risk ProfileLowestModerateHighest
Economic SensitivityGlobal trendsBalancedHighly sensitive to domestic economy
Historical “Size Premium” WinnerUnderperforms over multi-decade cyclesStructurally strong risk-adjusted returnsOutperforms over long historical cycles

Small caps are not necessarily better …

  1. The “Size Premium” Volatility: While small caps can generate higher geometric returns over 30+ years, they can go through brutal decade-long stretches of underperformance where large caps dominate completely.
  2. Interest Rate Sensitivity: Small and mid-cap companies typically rely more on floating-rate debt. When central banks raise interest rates, their borrowing costs skyrocket, allowing cash-rich large caps to easily outperform them.
  3. Survivorship Bias: Small-cap indexes suffer from higher churn. When a small company becomes wildly successful, it graduates out of the small-cap index and moves into mid or large-cap territory, leaving the small-cap index to continually cycle through unproven businesses.
Thematic Map: US 9 Suffixes
Thematic Map: Eastern Continental Divide in New York State

You Might Be Fueling Inflation Just By Reading This Story

|

You Might Be Fueling Inflation Just By Reading This Story

Economists at Oxford Economics in an analysis released Wednesday said the Iran war is pushing prices for energy and other things more than it otherwise would if people weren't paying so much attention to it. The analysis shows how inflation can be a psychological phenomenon as well as a physical one—notable at a time when real-world factors including tariffs and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz?are also stoking inflation.

Treasury Bonds Surge – What it means for the economy

|

The 30-year U.S. Treasury bond rate has surged to 5.12%, marking its highest level since June 2007. This milestone represents a dramatic shift in global financial conditions, driven by a combination of persistent domestic inflation, escalating geopolitical tensions, and shifting expectations for Federal Reserve policy.

Why 30-Year Treasury Rates Are at a 20-Year High

Long-term government bond yields move inversely to bond prices. Investors are selling off long-term U.S. debt—forcing yields upward—due to four primary catalysts:

  1. Resurgent and Sticky Inflation: U.S. Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation recently accelerated to 3.8%, driven heavily by an energy price shock stemming from the U.S.-Iran war. Concurrently, wholesale prices (PPI) jumped to 6% annually, signaling deep-seated inflationary pressures.
  2. Hawkish Fed Pivot Under New Leadership: Newly confirmed Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh is navigating an increasingly complicated inflation picture. Because inflation is ticking higher, the market has rapidly priced out expected interest rate cuts for 2026. Investors are instead bracing for rates to stay “higher for longer,” with growing expectations of a potential rate hike.
  3. Massive Treasury Supply and Deficits: The U.S. government continues to run large structural deficits, requiring the Treasury to auction off vast volumes of new long-dated bonds.
  4. Waning Foreign Demand: Japan, the largest foreign creditor to the U.S., is facing its own domestic inflation shock (producer prices surged to 4.9%), driving Japanese government bond yields to multi-decade highs. As a result, domestic Japanese institutions are keeping capital at home rather than purchasing U.S. Treasuries, reducing the global pool of buyers and forcing the U.S. to offer higher yields to attract lenders.

What This Means for the Economy

Because U.S. Treasury bonds represent the ultimate “risk-free” floor for lending, an increase in their yields ripples across the entire financial system: 

  • Tighter Financial Conditions: Higher long-term yields increase the cost of capital for corporations. Companies face steeper bills to issue debt, which compresses profit margins and slows down business expansion and hiring.
  • Stock Market Volatility: High-yielding, guaranteed government bonds create a steep opportunity cost for investors. Capital is being pulled out of riskier assets, causing major stock indices like the S&P 500 to fall as investors favor the guaranteed 5%+ returns of government debt.
  • Surging Government Debt Costs: As the yields on newly issued 30-year bonds cross the 5% threshold, the U.S. government must allocate an increasingly massive share of federal revenue simply to pay interest on the national debt, threatening to crowd out other public spending. 

The Impact on Borrowers

For everyday consumers, higher Treasury yields translate directly to more expensive debt, reducing consumer purchasing power. 

Potential Homeowners

  • Locking in Higher Mortgage Rates: The 30-year fixed mortgage rate is structurally tied to long-term government bond yields. With Treasury yields breaking past 5.1%, average 30-year fixed mortgage rates have quickly marched upward to 6.41%.
  • Severe Affordability Compression: A buyer purchasing a $400,000 home with a 20% down payment ($320,000 loan amount) at today’s 6.41% rate faces a monthly principal-and-interest payment of roughly $2,003. For perspective, when mortgage rates hovered near 3% a few years ago, that same monthly payment was approximately $1,349—a difference of over $650 per month for the exact same house. 

Car Buyers

  • Stricter Lending Standards: Auto lenders routinely price their loans based on commercial benchmark rates, which scale alongside Treasuries. As banks experience higher funding pressures, they pass these costs onto consumers.
  • Elevated Auto Loan Rates: Borrowers looking to finance a new or used vehicle will face significantly higher Annual Percentage Rates (APRs). Even consumers with excellent credit scores are seeing auto loan rates cross into the 7% to 9% range, while subprime borrowers face double-digit interest rates.
  • Increased Total Cost of Ownership: Financing a standard $35,000 vehicle over 60 months at an 8% APR adds over $7,600 in lifetime interest payments alone, forcing consumers to settle for cheaper vehicles or absorb much higher monthly financial stress.
Map: Big Buck State Forest And White Pond
Map: G Lake
SVGZ Graphic: Central NY Population Density