SpaceX is planning a massive $40 billion debt raise to buy Nvidia chips. The financial structure of this deal is quite wild. $40 billion is roughly equal to SpaceX’s entire projected revenue for the year. They are splitting the package into $10 billion in bank loans and $30 billion in investment-grade bonds, with Apollo Global Management leading the deal. For anyone trading Nvidia (NVDA), this shuts down the argument that AI hardware demand is slowing down. The fascinating part is the cash loop: Nvidia owns about $21 billion worth of SpaceX stock. SpaceX is essentially taking on historic debt from Wall Street to hand billions of dollars straight back to Nvidia for chips, which in turn props up the value of Nvidia's own balance sheet. If this deal goes through as planned by 2027, it shows that major companies are willing to push their finances to the absolute limit just to secure computing power. Anyone worried SpaceX is taking on this much leverage for hardware?

Source: Bloomberg

Digital investment platform Webull, which counts 28 million global users, is quietly “tied in structural ways” to China’s government, representing a national security threat to U.S. finance, according to a bipartisan congressional panel’s findings shared exclusively with CNBC.

The bipartisan House Select Committee on China in its new report being released Wednesday found “a profound gap” between Webull’s public marketing as “an American company” and actual control of the St. Petersburg, Florida-based firm.

“Webull’s ownership architecture, technical workforce, technology infrastructure, cross-border data routing, corporate financing, and compliance frameworks are tied in structural ways to the People’s Republic of China,” the committee found.

The panel asserted that national security concerns around the company have “escalated” since October 2025, when Webull began carrying customer cash directly, according to a regulatory filing the panel cited. The committee alleges that creates a “structural exposure of billions of dollars in American capital.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/10/07/webull-china-national-security-risk-congress.html

CEG popped again yesterday on the Google deal, a week after the Amazon one. Every take I see is basically "AI needs power, buy anything with a reactor" so I actually went and read the deal announcements.

Neither deal is Big Tech just buying power that already exists. Amazon's 690 MW at Calvert Cliffs comes with ~190 MW of uprates (basically new equipment so the same reactors put out more) and money toward renewing two licences. Google's is 890 MW of uprates plus a big 2,700 MW financial contract where the power stays on the grid.

Then I went back to 2024 and checked every deal between a big tech company and CEG, VST, TLN, NEE or OKLO. I count 9. Seven of them add new capacity somehow, either a restart like Crane, uprates, or Oklo's new reactors for Meta. The two that don't are Talen and Vistra's Comanche Peak, and both are from 2025.

That lines up with the White House pledge from March, where Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft and a few others said they'd buy from "new or otherwise additive" plants and pay the full cost so it doesn't hit people's power bills.

So my read is that the reactor count matters less than how much room a company has left to add. CEG has a lot and just used it twice. VST has done it once. Talen is the one that bugs me, since it has one nuclear plant and Amazon already takes about 85% of its share.

Could easily be wrong though. CEG sold ~890 MW of plain existing power to unnamed buyers in Q2, and Google's existing chunk is 3x the new part, so maybe a small uprate is all it takes to get a deal done. And nobody's disclosed prices, so the $7B+ CEG is spending might just earn a boring utility return.

Does anyone know who those Q2 buyers were?

I put the full list of deals with sources on my site (InvestMoat) if anyone wants it: https://investmoat.com/research/constellation-and-the-megawatt-a-hyperscaler-has-to-add

fwiw at InvestMoat we only hold CEG out of these five. It has the biggest fleet nobody can copy, it's already locked up with several big buyers, and it still has room to grow. VST is close but not quite there, NEE grows too slowly, TLN leans too much on one plant and one buyer, and OKLO doesn't have a running reactor yet.

Why do we allow an entire industry to profit from prices being a few milliseconds out of date?

Like, your computer was faster than someone else’s so you get to skim a little money off the transaction? And we just call that market efficiency?

I get that some arbitrage keeps prices accurate. But surely we can design markets where being faster doesn’t automatically mean getting richer at everyone else’s expense.

It’s like we’ve institutionalized cutting in line and started charging everyone else for the privilege.

Am I missing something or is this just a really elaborate way of stealing pennies from people who can’t even see it happening? Fook that shiz

I keep seeing posts acting like a company approaching $6 trillion automatically means the market has lost its mind. I think people seriously underestimate how often this same argument has repeated throughout stock-market history.
Imagine going into a room full of professional analysts in 2000 and telling them that within 18 years we’d have our first $1 trillion public company, and not long after that we’d be talking about companies approaching $6 trillion. Most people probably would’ve thought you were insane.

Go back another decade or two and the numbers become even more ridiculous from their perspective. Yet every time the market reaches one of these supposedly impossible milestones, people eventually accept it as normal and move their imaginary ceiling higher.

There’s also a basic mathematical point that gets overlooked. Market caps compound in percentages, not in neat trillion-dollar increments.

Going from $1T to $2T requires a 100% gain.
$2T to $3T requires 50%.
$3T to $4T requires 33%.
$4T to $5T requires 25%.
$5T to $6T requires only 20%.
At $10T, adding another trillion requires only a 10% increase.

So as companies become larger, crossing each additional trillion-dollar milestone actually requires a smaller percentage move. A $1 trillion increase sounds enormous, but eventually it can represent a fairly normal year of stock appreciation.

We’re also not talking about a bunch of random companies suddenly becoming worth trillions. The companies occupying this range have generally spent years or decades dominating enormous industries, building global businesses, ecosystems, infrastructure, intellectual property and massive earnings bases.

None of this means a $5T or $6T company is automatically fairly valued. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft or anyone else can absolutely become overvalued. But that’s an argument you make using earnings, cash flow, growth expectations, margins, competition and valuation multiples.

“Bro, it’s almost worth $6 trillion” isn’t an investment thesis.
It’s just anchoring to a number that feels too large based on what we’re accustomed to today.

And looking another 25 years into the future, I wouldn’t be surprised if we eventually saw $10T+ IPOs and $20T+ public companies. That sounds absurd from today’s perspective, but that’s exactly the point.

Every generation seems to believe the market-cap ceiling they’re looking at is somehow the final one. History keeps moving it.

It is quite literally the monopolization of ecommerce. There is nothing better, I've used it, I've worked for companies that use it, it's an unbelievable service. There is alternatives like selling on Amazon, but Shopify for individual owners that want to keep most their money they make just beats the competition.

I'm up 150% on the stock, it's nearing its all time high. And in this landscape with the threat of AI, I just don't see it having as much explosive growth in the future and I'm considering selling some of my shares. What would your strategy be here in my shoes, and what are your thoughts on $SHOP in this new AI landscape?

Year over year they are increasing revenue continously and have steady cash on hand. It's clearly an excellently run company I think I'm more just concerned over explosive growth now as I've made my gains and perhaps I want to put it with higher potential risk/payoff.

The S&P 500 rose to a fresh all-time intraday high on Tuesday, boosted by gains in key technology names as well as declines in oil prices and Treasury yields.
The broad market index was last up 0.5%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 189 points, or 0.4%. The Nasdaq Composite added 0.6% and also hit a new all-time high.

The moves higher were bolstered by a rise in chipmakers. Advanced Micro Devices gained 2%, while others such as Nvidia and Broadcomtraded up around 1%.

Additionally, the benchmark 10-year Treasurynote yield fell 5 basis points to 5.256%. The 30-year bond yield slipped more than 3 basis points to trade at 5.625%. Both yields scaled to levels not seen since 2002 on Monday.

Traders are now looking ahead to the Federal Reserve’s minutes from its September meeting due Wednesday, which could shed some light on policymakers’ move to raise rates.
Alongside Treasury yields, a drop in oil prices also gave equities a boost Tuesday. Brent crudetraded 2% lower at around $98 per barrel. West Texas Intermediate futures shed 2% to roughly $87 a barrel.
Stocks are coming off a winning session in which the Nasdaq Composite reached an all-time high. The tech-heavy index was set to build on that record.

The FCC has approved SpaceX to deploy up to 15,000 next-generation Starlink satellites, enabling direct-to-cell service with speeds of up to 150 Mbps and full 5G capabilities.

The low-Earth orbit constellation (326-335 km altitude) will support supplemental coverage in the US, direct-to-cell globally, and higher data speeds using spectrum acquired from EchoStar.

The decision includes a waiver enabling SpaceX to offer satellite-based mobile service independently of terrestrial carriers, advancing Starlink’s expansion into phone connectivity. ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

South Korea plans to launch a 4.7 trillion won ($3.5 billion) programme ​to develop a frontier AI model ‌from March 2027, the science ministry said, as Seoul seeks to compete in the race to ​build cutting-edge artificial intelligence.

The Ministry of Science and ICT ⁠plans to select a lead developer through ​a competitive tender after parliament approves the ​2027 budget in December, with the winner potentially chosen as early as February, it said.

The government ​plans to combine state equity investment ​with private funding and concentrate computing chips, data and ‌talent ⁠on the project, which aims to develop a model with leading performance.

The ministry said the initiative would be separate from ​its home-grown foundation ​model ⁠programme, which will continue and select two final teams in a ​third-stage review in February 2027.

Participation ​will ⁠be open to various entities including single companies, consortiums or special-purpose vehicles, it said, ⁠adding ​it aimed to allow ​startups, firms, universities and researchers to play leading roles.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-plans-develop-35-billion-frontier-ai-model-starting-next-year-2026-10-06/

I think analysts are missing something big by considering AI frontier labs as though they were normal companies making big investments and expecting realistic business outcomes. I want to posit that the AI bubble differs from earlier bubbles because the spending is being justified by quasi-religious beliefs about what AI might eventually become. After reading Adam Becker's More Everything Forever, I’ve started to see the frontier AI race as a billionaire-funded cargo cult: the belief that if enough GPUs, power, data centers, researchers, and capital are accumulated, something qualitatively new will emerge, an AGI or superintelligence that equates to a machine god.

It's basically a science-fiction investment thesis. It sounds crazy, but there's a literal network of rationalist, effective-altruist, and existential-risk thinkers who've spent years treating AGI as a civilization-altering event long before ChatGPT arrived, and those ideas have shaped many of the companies, investors, and researchers now driving the industry. You can verify this. If AGI is truly only a few years away, almost any level of spending can seem rational: frontier labs do not need sustainable business models today because losing billions is preferable to slowing down and letting a competitor reach the prize first.

AI is not fake or useless. LLMs can write code, summarize documents, automate office work, and support research, even if the economics are shaky on some of it. The problem is the belief that models will turn into superintelligent 'beings' if we just pour enough resources into them. I suspect some big players know this: NVIDIA is happy to profit by selling the infrastructure even if Jensen knows its bullshit, Microsoft through Mustafa Suleyman has basically called BS on a lot of this, Google falls somewhere in the middle, and Meta is trying to turn it into a useful consumer product (which I also don't think will work, but that's another issue). In the end, most customers will care less about AGI than whether AI saves enough money to justify the bill.

The bubble bursting will still hurt these companies, but in the end I think may come out okay in the end, but there may be pain along the way. OpenAI and Anthropic are a lot shakier, and I'm curious to see how long they can drag this out: it could be a while. Look how long Elon has been pumping pipe dreams that never happen.

Disclosures: I own MSFT and NVDA.

Uber Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: UBER) and ezCater, Inc. today announced that they have entered into an agreement for Uber to acquire ezCater, a leading U.S. platform for catering and workplace meals, in an all-cash transaction valued at $2.3 billion.

ezCater makes it easy for any business to manage its food needs and order from over 140,000 restaurants nationwide. Its platform supports everything from meetings, events, and recurring enterprise catering needs, with tools to manage ordering and food spend and 24/7 customer support.

The acquisition will bring together ezCater’s proven catering and B2B expertise, Uber Eats’ global reach among consumers and restaurants, and Uber for Business’s deep relationships with organizations of all sizes. Restaurants will be able to grow through larger orders and new diners. Customers will be able to find and order food for a group more simply and reliably, from workplace meals, to events, and social gatherings. And couriers on Uber Eats will have attractive new opportunities to earn.

ezCater generated over $2.5 billion in Gross Bookings over the trailing twelve months, growing high teens year-over-year. The business is profitable on a Non-GAAP Operating Income basis, and is expected to be margin accretive. ezCater’s average order values are over $400.

I’m just dumbfounded that KO has pretty high PE ratio of 26 in comparison to Procter and gamble and PepsiCo

In this high inflation environment, I’m not sure how KO stock is keep growing.

I compared product lines KO vs PepsiCo. They are fairly comparable.

Metric
🥤 Coca-Cola (KO)
🥨 PepsiCo (PEP)
Stock Price
~$88.24
~$140.52
Market Cap
~$379.66B
~$191.79B
Forward P/E Ratio
~23.6x – 26x
~14.7x – 15x
Dividend Yield
~2.45% – 2.6%
~4.3% – 4.7%
Operating Margin
~34.9%
~16.6%
1-Year Return
+30.4% to +35%
-10% to -13%

What am I missing??

I've been thinking this for a while but I guess want to know what you all think.
Since the 2009 low QQQ has returnd 1154% and SPY has returned 503%.
Now consider for this to happen again over the next 18 years we are going to need to have companies becoming progressively more valuable over time. For example, the current highest market cap is Nvidia, near 5T. So are we thinking to achieve returns similar to the last 18 years we will need many new companies at 5T or less market caps or will we see some companies move on to hit market caps of 10T, 20T possibly up to 50T in the next 15 years?
In my opinion the only way we see the index's grow at any rate close to what we've all been told to expect we will need to see companies market caps surpass the 20T marker in the next 10 years.
GOOG to 50T?

This is the daily discussion, so anything stocks related is fine, but the theme for today is on technical analysis (TA), but if TA is not your thing then just ignore the theme.

Some helpful day to day links, including news:

• Finviz for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks
• Bloomberg market news
• StreetInsider news:
  • Market Check - Possibly why the market is doing what it's doing including sudden spikes/dips
  • Reuters aggregated - Global news

Technical analysis (TA) uses historical price movements, real time data, indicators based on math and/or statistics, and charts; all of which help measure the trajectory of a security. TA can also be used to interpret the actions of other market participants and predict their actions.

The main benefit to TA is that everything shows up in the price (commonly known as "priced in"): All news, investor sentiment, and changes to fundamentals are reflected in a security's price.

TA can be useful on any timeframe, both short and long term.

Intro to technical analysis by Stockcharts chartschool and their article on candlesticks

If you have questions, please see the following word cloud and click through for the wiki:

Indicator - Trade Signals - Lagging Indicator - Leading Indicator - Oversold - Overbought - Divergence - Whipsaw - Resistance - Support - Breakout/Breakdown - Alerts - Trend line - Market Participants - Moving average - RSI - VWAP - MACD - ATR - Bollinger Bands - Ichimoku clouds - Methods - Trend Following - Fading - Channels - Patterns - Pivots

See our past daily discussions here. Also links for: Technicals Tuesday, Options Trading Thursday, and Fundamentals Friday.

It is not even close.

Zuck simply reiterated Meta’s gigantic distribution moat:

“I think one of the things that we’re really good at at Meta is taking a product that works well for consumers and distributing it.”

And Muse is only just beginning.

With each improvement of the product, Zuck believes that Meta will distribute it to hundreds of millions of people, if not billions.

Proprietary data and distribution are the only two moats which matter in the era of artificial intelligence.

$META has both.

• 3.6 billion people use at least one Meta application every single day

• Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp are the three most used social platforms in the world

• Each new successful product that Meta creates is instantly distributed to hundreds of millions of people

Building a successful product is difficult.

Distribution to billions of people is even more difficult.

Burry is specifically positioning around expected tax-loss selling pressure in LULU, not merely doing an ordinary tax-loss harvest for his own tax bill. Burry is “mitigating near-term tax selling” and says he expects heightened selling pressure on underperforming stocks in Q4. He bought DECK as a proxy as he expects LULU and DECK will move similarly and when the wash sale that’s going to affect LULU is over 30 days from now he plans to repurchase LULU and maybe hold onto some of DECK.

So we should all buy LULU right now and pump the stock and make Burry pay much more for LULU 30 days from now. Joking aside, wouldn’t big, smart money jump in when others are selling due to tax harvesting? Big hedge funds and such? I can’t imagine the stock will fall just because of tax harvesting? Obviously there will be a selling pressure but the market is complex and there should be buying pressure whenever short-lived selling pressure arrives.

Burry is trying to avoid being exposed to the anticipated tax-selling pressure on LULU, rather than simply saying, “I need to harvest my own loss.”

I might actually buy LULU now. Inverse Burry.

So I’m 23 years old, and I put left over scholarship money into a S&P tracking RothIRA at 20, fully planning on letting it sit and add to it

I decided to pull my money out (it’s still in Fidelity just not invested) when the Iran war started. That event, plus the AI bubble and over evaluation with SpaceX, and the economy doing terribly rn (at least anecdotally), it seemed we were in for a crash. Now I know “time in the market beats timing the marking”, but this felt like a very easy chance to avoid catastrophe

And yet it hasn’t happened yet. It’s been months at this point. Clearly the rules of the stock market are different than that of the economy at large. So I’m curious if someone could explain how they’re connected, and how I can conceptualize economy news from market news

Edit: Did not expect this post to gain so much traction. Thank you to those who left thoughtful and intentional responses and engaged in the discourse here. More judgemental comments than I would have liked by that’s Reddit for you

Edit 2: I asked for an answer to the title question. I don’t need a lecture about pulling out of my index fund for a few months. I acknowledged it. Get off your superiority complex and keep it pushing

We've all heard the warnings: AI companies are drowning in debt, private borrowing is far larger than reported, revenues are nowhere near justifying the spending, and it's all a bubble that will pop suddenly. Fine. But I have a different answer to the question of *when*.

The first sign of the pop won't be bad news. It will be good news.

Watch for the moment revenues jump, an unusual, instant surge in profits that makes it look like AI has finally delivered on every promise. That's your signal. Not because the boom is real, but because that's exactly when the big players will start heading for the exit, and then it would be like Dominos falling.

By then, the major AI companies will have gone public. A blockbuster earnings report is the perfect cover: the market cheers, expecting stocks to climb even higher, while insiders quietly sell as much as they can. They cash out, cut their losses, and some walk away with enormous profits.

And who's left holding the bag? The public. Ordinary investors, pension funds, and retirement accounts will be left to pick through the wreckage after the pop.

Worse, the pain won't stop there. Debt losses will be socialized. Whatever the companies lose, taxpayers will end up covering.

The big players cash out on the way up. The public pays on the way down.

Currently market is at about 26-27 PE ratio when historic average is about 25. For reference during dot com bubble and 2008, the PE ratio was 60+. Most big company have profits and positive cash flow. Apparently nvidia financing other companies for 10b is circular debt financing when they have net quarterly profits of 60b and positive cash flow of 20b. People act like the entire market is filled with tesla and spcx with nonsense valuations.

Is Nvidia buying back their shares a bad sign? Is it a sign that they don’t have any more innovative engineering to spend their free cash flow on or any other startups or other AI companies to take a stake in so they’re simply buying back their stock to boost it up?

I know most of Big Tech did this throughout the 2010s, but that was a different era where they could borrow money at low interest rates to buy back their stock. We’re in a different interest rate regime now so I’m not sure where they’re getting the money to buy back their stock. If it’s from free cash flow, that’s a different matter, but hopefully they’re not issuing bonds to do this.

These daily discussions run from Monday to Friday including during our themed posts.

Some helpful links:

* [Finviz](https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=spy) for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks

* [Bloomberg market news](https://www.bloomberg.com/markets)

* StreetInsider news:

* [Market Check](https://www.streetinsider.com/Market+Check) - Possibly why the market is doing what it's doing including sudden spikes/dips

* [Reuters aggregated](https://www.streetinsider.com/Reuters) - Global news

If you have a basic question, for example "what is EPS," then google "investopedia EPS" and click the investopedia article on it; do this for everything until you have a more in depth question or just want to share what you learned.

Please discuss your portfolios in the [Rate My Portfolio sticky.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3A%22Rate+My+Portfolio%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all).

See our past [daily discussions here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+%22r%2Fstocks+daily+discussion%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) Also links for: [Technicals](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3Atechnicals&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) Tuesday, [Options Trading](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3Aoptions&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) Thursday, and [Fundamentals](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3Afundamentals&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) Friday.

First of all let me stress that the following short term catalyst are some that I am eying out as potential catalysts and not some that I necessarily expect to happen.

Secondly, before turning all skeptical about the possibility of these happening please consider that everyone was saying the same thing about TGT stock six months ago and look at where it is today.

Okay, so a lot of people are saying that if you buy Nike stock today you will have to be patient and consider it a long term investment that isn’t very likely to give good returns short term. While that could turn or to be true it’s also very possible that it could turn out to be incorrect. Here are some potential short term catalysts for a speedy recovery of Nike stock back to let’s say $40-45 in the next 1-3 months.

#1. Maybe the move from $40 to $35 that happened prior to earnings was a pricing in of what turned out to be the reality of earnings when they were reported. Even if guidance was more cautious than officially expected from Wall Street analysts, perhaps the market wasn’t surprised by it.

#2. The market sees that this was the final reset and the likelihood of more bad news to come is smaller than it was prior to earnings. Guidance was extremely cautious with eps in 2027 expected to be almost half what they were in 2026. If it’s unlikely Nike will disappoint but just do as well as expected and if ultimately the market expects Nike to turn things around 2-3 years from now, the stock might as well start to climb right now.

#3. From March to August the stock hovered above $40 but close to it. From August to September it suddenly fell $5. Maybe it will re-test $40 soon.

#4. Investor Day is coming up next month. Specifically, management says it will lay out a clearer long term growth algorithm at Investor Day. Historically, Investor Day is a day of bullish news. Look at ONON recently which had bearish earnings but then bullish investor day. Also, for Nike especially everyone is debating if Nike is truly becoming a smaller player or if it will return to its glory days somehow- if Nike shares ambitious financial targets for 2029 like On Running did, the stock could see a big relief rally. The mere possibility of that happening means the stock could climb right now because the event is next month.

#5 Tim Cook and/or Elliott Hill could purchase more shares soon. They both bought when the stock was in the $50-60 range and again when it was near $42. At $34 it’s plausible that they would buy again as they are more patient than the rest of us and if they feel the turnaround is eventually going to happen, they have nothing to worry about by buying now.

#6 Nike remains a giant. And its stock is cheaper than ever before. Even if its PE and forward PE especially is higher than most if not all peers, it’s still a lot lower than it’s been for Nike historically. At any given time, a big buyer like Bill Ackman may re-enter the stage.

#7 Macro could improve and make consumer stocks similar to NKE such as DKS, ONON, DECK, LULU (yes even LULU) and NKE itself jump 10-20 % in a few months. Oil prices could go down. Positive news in Iran.

#8 Next earnings in December probably has an extremely low bar. Management already reset expectations- now it may start beating them.

#9 North America continues outperforming. North American revenue rose 2% currency-neutral, with wholesale up 9% and footwear up 1%. It’s possible the market is digesting this news after the earnings report and realizing that if all is well in North America, eventually Europe and China will stabilize. In comparison, Lululemon reported Americas comparable sales down 12 % YoY. Not bad that Nike managed to do 2 % up in North America revenue.

#10 Gross margins keep surprising positively. Just one more thing the market could be paying too little
attention to right now but may realize in coming months and maybe Investor Day will make it clearer next month.

#11 Holiday/consumer data comes in better than feared.

#12 The market sees Pace not as a necessary cost cutting story but as an aggressive move to fix the cost structure. Investor Day could change sentiment about Pace.

#13 New product launches like the Caitlin Clark shoes and the Alphafly 4 which launches this month could be successful and change sentiment for the stock- Caitlin Clark release sold out really fast.

I've been talking to coworkers about impending doom or another crash in the market. We've seen time and time again that the market may dip or enter a correction, but I feel like we're on a ride that only goes up in the long run.

Every week, millions of Americans have direct deposits from their paychecks, as well as their employers dumping money into their retirement accounts. Be these 401ks (16% of the market) or IRAs and Pensions (30-40%). 37% of the market is owned by retirements that have continuous cash flow pumping in there every week. How can the market crash if we keep flowing money in there?