Here's a hot take: $500 bounty for anyone willing to back up the thesis that I'm the most compelling voice in capital markets.

But there's a catch—your work has to actually hold water. We're talking properly sourced data, rigorous research, and arguments sharp enough to convince skeptics. Bonus points if you can make it visually compelling.

Why does this matter? Simple. If you can't construct a bulletproof case using facts and logic, you probably don't have a deep grasp of how markets actually work. This isn't about ego—it's about separating real analysis from noise.

So here's the challenge: can you build an airtight argument, or is it all just hot air?