Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

this guy has my proxy (hi Ty!)!

every day I pray to the holy Jesus and thank him that John Kerry was not president.

Hi! For us non-subscribers, what does he say?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I actually think you will find the exact opposite. These guys new what was going on, but were bending over backwards to NOT disclose it to the markets (or to dress it up neatly for public consumption).

They kept an aweful lot of crap on their own books to have not been drinking the cool aid at least a bit.

And, of course, the premise of books like The Big Short is that it was only a small handful of folks who weren't drinking the cool aid pretty much up until the burst.

But it's a fair bet that there will be individuals within each bank who saw the sky falling. With hindsight, I'm sure there will be many opportunities to portray those folks as the keepers of the bank's true knowledge and belief.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Hi! For us non-subscribers, what does he say?

It's the WSJ. It probably says "libruls are bad" and "sure, the rich windsurfer set only cares when it's their tea sipping diplomatic buddies who are mildly embarassed" and "where were they when it was soldier's whose secrets were being outed?".

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

They kept an aweful lot of crap on their own books to have not been drinking the cool aid at least a bit.

And, of course, the premise of books like The Big Short is that it was only a small handful of folks who weren't drinking the cool aid pretty much up until the burst.

But it's a fair bet that there will be individuals within each bank who saw the sky falling. With hindsight, I'm sure there will be many opportunities to portray those folks as the keepers of the bank's true knowledge and belief.

I think part of the reality of the situation is that even if you aren't drinking the Kool-Ade and think that there's a bubble, you can get killed betting against it if you don't get the timing right, because the market keeps going up as long as enough people keep betting on it.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think part of the reality of the situation is that even if you aren't drinking the Kool-Ade and think that there's a bubble, you can get killed betting against it if you don't get the timing right, because the market keeps going up as long as enough people keep betting on it.

Absolutely. But that still isn't really "knowing exactly what is going on." People tend to use hindsight to say "bubble" and cluck disapprovingly at the participants who didn't somehow act to stop it.

But absent someone outside the market acting to put the breaks on (where were you Mr. Bernanke?), those within the market have little choice but to keep riding the waive, even if they think it is going to end someday.

[cheval de frise]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think part of the reality of the situation is that even if you aren't drinking the Kool-Ade and think that there's a bubble, you can get killed betting against it if you don't get the timing right, because the market keeps going up as long as enough people keep betting on it.

Third time's the charm: Kool-Aid. Weren't you kids in the '70's?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kool-Aid_Man

CDF

[Adder]

Originally Posted by cheval de frise

Third time's the charm: Kool-Aid. Weren't you kids in the '70's?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kool-Aid_Man

CDF

Yes, but I couldn't spell then either.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

It's the WSJ. It probably says "libruls are bad" and "sure, the rich windsurfer set only cares when it's their tea sipping diplomatic buddies who are mildly embarassed" and "where were they when it was soldier's whose secrets were being outed?".

willful ignorance is how the Dems lost their asses earlier this month.you and Ty are corner office now, you need to take steps to educate yourselves.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

willful ignorance is how the Dems lost their asses earlier this month.you and Ty are corner office now, you need to take steps to educate yourselves.

Ty asked you what it says. Sounds like a step to me.

Perhaps he forgot to send the retainer check, which explains why you didn't answer?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Maybe one of you smart people can help me. Level 3, which provides web services to companies like Netflix, complains that Comcast demanded a fee to transmit content to Comcast customers. Comcast says that Level 3 was going to send a lot more content than it received, so this is only fair. Assume this is so. (Given Comcast's user base, isn't that going to be the case for almost anyone who wants to transmit content to Comcast customers?) Comcast charges more to customers who want to download more content, and less to those who don't. Why doesn't this solve any problem (as a question of appropriate incentives, as opposed to corporate greed)?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

willful ignorance is how the Dems lost their asses earlier this month.you and Ty are corner office now, you need to take steps to educate yourselves.

Speaking of ignorance, I'd still like to know what your WSJ dude said about the Wikileaks thing, which seems to me to be getting much more attention than it merits.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

They kept an aweful lot of crap on their own books to have not been drinking the cool aid at least a bit.

And, of course, the premise of books like The Big Short is that it was only a small handful of folks who weren't drinking the cool aid pretty much up until the burst.

But it's a fair bet that there will be individuals within each bank who saw the sky falling. With hindsight, I'm sure there will be many opportunities to portray those folks as the keepers of the bank's true knowledge and belief.

There's a doctrine of managerial science (can't recall the name right now) holding the closer people get to the top of a big organization, the less they understand about what the organization actually does. I think that's what happened with the big banks. Lewis is wrong. Everybody knew housing was a bubble. The only assholes who didn't were the high-on-hubris and utterly clueless fucks near the top, who relied on broad empirical data that masked the problem, and the assumption securitzation shielded them even though, as Adder noted, they held a bunch of shit mortgage paper on their own books.*

We all know more people in finance than we need to. And most have the same blind faith in data. They're usually right. But when they're wrong, it's a fucking mess because they're all in. Herds, etc... This happens when the only places you spend your time at are golf courses, high end restaurants, the office and vacations, and the only people you spend your time with are people exactly like, or socially even more isolated, than you.

I have friends in finance who've told me for months that we've absorbed unemployment and it doesn't mean shit - that domestic consumption will rise enough without the unemployed. They don't realize, probably because they don't give a fuck to do so, that the unemployed are only half the problem. The American two child family with $50-70k in income is fucked. They aren't spending shit and won't be doing so because persistent slow but insidious inflation in the cost of necessities (fuel, communication, rent, etc...) is fucking them. The data doesn't explain this. The data's broad and the headline's "Deflation!" Ten months from now, when we're wondering why 2011 was economically flat as Death Valley, they'll say the same thing they say every time they're wrong: "This is contrary to the projections and data."

*If you read enough about how self-isolated and dogmatic Stan O"Neal was on the subject, you could reach the conclusion the man suffered from a form of early onset dementia. Stunningly stupid barely describes his double down then double down again approach.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Speaking of ignorance, I'd still like to know what your WSJ dude said about the Wikileaks thing, which seems to me to be getting much more attention than it merits.

1 I'm not a subscriber but I can read it, and you should be a subscriber.

2 you haven't read it but feel too many people are paying attention to it? do your work underlings give you funny looks a lot?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Lewis is wrong. Everybody knew housing was a bubble.

That's only half the problem, though. I think what people didn't know is when it would end.

The only assholes who didn't were the high-on-hubris and utterly clueless fucks near the top

And the ratings agencies.

They aren't spending shit and won't be doing so because persistent slow but insidious inflation in the cost of necessities (fuel, communication, rent, etc...) is fucking them.

Perhaps tomorrow I will find you some data, but this is a myth. Or rather, the existence of the inflation is a myth. The perception of the inflation isn't a myth, and is itself enough to support your point.

The data's broad and the headline's "Deflation!"

More specific data is available.