Alternate perspective is that US would do just fine and US stock market returns are going to be similar to international returns going forward even with higher starting valuations.

Valuation which necessarily must incorporate future growth rates, required returns, changes to profit margins, etc. cannot just be based on the past.

It is like using the average of the last 500 years of human life expectancy to estimate future life expectancy. We know there are advancements in health care and why it is increasing. So it does not make sense to just base it off past.

Same applies to valuations. We used to have businesses that were highly cyclical, and profit margins used to mean revert, in addition business cycles were better managed today (QE to infinity!) which makes overall consumption less cyclical which means less cyclicality in business earnings.

What Jim has missed in the past is not just valuations, but missed the entirety of the changes happening in Tech. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, etc have helped S&P 500 grow earnings at a rate that made mockery of "best case 1.7% real growth in EPS over next decade".

So the question is what gives anyone the confidence to predict going forward, when every single factor that was estimated ended up being wildly inaccurate?

It seems politics is influencing the investment decisions. I don't think it's a good idea.

No, I am not MAGA and voted for Harris holding my nose.