YouTube comment on how Bruce Lee paved the way for Eileen Gu

This feels like a Bruce Lee breakout moment, where he was once asked in an interview in 1971, are you going to stay in Hong Kong or go to the US to be famous, he replies “I am going to do both because you see I’ve already made up my mind that in the United States I think something about the oriental – I mean the true oriental – should be shown… It is a false choice to be forced to choose between cultures or heritages if by birth or immigration status, you can be of both worlds and embrace both and identity as both and create something entirely new from this dual/multi-heritage interaction, Bruce Lee already showed the way, we just need to soak up his wisdom and follow.

~ YouTube comment, alias "Norrin Jonzz," "Is Eileen Gu a Traitor to America? | American Expat Shares the Truth," Cyrus Janssen YouTube video, February 10, 2022

Cathaleen Chen on national identity and the false dichotomy of the U.S. or China

Identity isn’t a matter of foreign policy.  It’s a matter of the heart.  For immigrants like me and first-generation Americans like [Eileen] Gu, the “China or America?” ultimatum poses a false dichotomy.  This reaffirms the notion that expressing love for one’s Chinese culture is akin to signing a blood oath to the CCP, a logical fallacy perpetuated by mainstream media that stokes a vicious cycle of anti-Asian bias and racism, however inadvertent.  Gu is not a pawn in some grand geopolitical strife.  She’s a young woman who grew up straddling two worlds, a feat that I’ll bet is even more complicated than the gravity-defying flips she’ll be performing this week.

~ Cathaleen Chen, "I Used to Feel Guilty Rooting for China. Eileen Gu Vindicated Me.," Cosmopolitan, February 7, 2022

Bill Miller on how he's adapted his management style to the existence of black swans

We've always had a very robust set of strategies for dealing with all kinds of different kinds of markets, but I think the big mistake that we made, or that I made, was effectively to say, "We need a strategy to deal with anything that's happened in the post-war period." So, inverted yield curves, inflation, a crash like in '87, all different kinds of panics.

But I explicitly ruled out a return, in essence, to depressionary conditons, just like I ruled out a new Civil War, for example. Well, the answer, I think, is you can't rule out anything. Anything. I think you have to look at anything that can hit aggregate demand or aggregate supply. And that's the thing I think we're well prepared for now.

And also, understanding that there are two types of financial crises: one of them, which we've navigated in very well, like the crash of '87, which are liquidity-driven crises. The strategy in a liquidity-driven crisis is pretty simple, which is, when massive liquidity is injected, you buy what the center of the crisis is; in an asset-based crisis, like we had in 2008, that strategy is very bad, as we found out to our chagrin. The proper strategy there, in an asset-based crisis is, you don't do anything until the authorities move to stabilize asset values and preserve them. That was TARP. Everything the Fed had done or the government had done, the Treasury had done up until TARP destroyed equity value. So, wipe equity holders out at Bear Stearns and wiped them out, and even creditors, at Lehman Brothers.

Once they decided to preserve equity values with TARP, that was the beginning of the end of the crisis. That was the time you go in and buy. So, I think we're covered on both kinds of crisis in the future.

~Bill Miller, chairman and CIO, Legg Mason Capital Management, CNBC's Squawk Box, April 6, 2011