At 09:18 AM Wednesday 10/29/2008, Mauro Diotallevi wrote:
>At 06:13 PM Tuesday 10/28/2008, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
>>At 11:12 AM Tuesday 10/28/2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
>> >On Oct 27, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>> >
>> > > Let's adopt complex numbers in finance! Maybe in the next
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Ronn! Blankenship
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Let them eat almond bread"?
M... almond bread... [makes Homer Simpson sound]
--
Mauro Diotallevi
"The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90
degrees and try again."
__
On 28 Oct 2008, at 23:12, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
> At 09:28 AM Tuesday 10/28/2008, Dan M wrote:
>
>> Nope. We've moved only about 3 miles, to an apartment complex in the
>> Woodlands. We've taken a 6 month lease and are waiting on a church
>> to call
>> Teri. Things are going slow in that
At 11:12 AM Tuesday 10/28/2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
>On Oct 27, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>
> > Let's adopt complex numbers in finance! Maybe in the next crisis
> > we will be discussing things like "the banks (or whatever) were
> > negotiating 100 quadrillion i-dollars!"
>
>Ther
At 09:28 AM Tuesday 10/28/2008, Dan M wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 1:08 AM
> > To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> >
Bruce Bostwick wrote:
>
>> Let's adopt complex numbers in finance! Maybe in the next crisis
>> we will be discussing things like "the banks (or whatever) were
>> negotiating 100 quadrillion i-dollars!"
>
> There's got to be a reference to the Mandelbrot set in there
> somewhere .. :)
>
You prob
On Oct 27, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Let's adopt complex numbers in finance! Maybe in the next crisis
> we will be discussing things like "the banks (or whatever) were
> negotiating 100 quadrillion i-dollars!"
There's got to be a reference to the Mandelbrot set in there
somew
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 1:08 AM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: My contribution to the bail-out
>
> Dan M wrote:
>
Dan M wrote:
> After selling my house and resettling, I'm finally back to the point where I
> can finish answers to old posts that the list (sorta) returned too.
So have you left the Houston area?
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-
At 11:38 AM Monday 10/27/2008, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>Dan M wrote:
> >
> > There are 40 _trillion_ of credit default swaps out there.
> >
>Billions, trillions, quadrillions... Who cares? Dr. Evil was
>frozen for 30 years and had to raise the blackmail from
>1 million to 100 billion. Now, 1 trill
Dan M wrote:
>
> There are 40 _trillion_ of credit default swaps out there.
>
Billions, trillions, quadrillions... Who cares? Dr. Evil was
frozen for 30 years and had to raise the blackmail from
1 million to 100 billion. Now, 1 trillion seems like nothing :-)
Let's adopt complex numbers in fin
Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> First, it isn't that simple,
Yes, you do tend to oversimplify.
>the S&L mess (which also came
> after a spell of regulators looking the other way because government
> regulation was bad.another of many coincidences, I suppose).
Actually, a large contributor to t
ber 30, 2008 4:05 PM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: My contribution to the bail-out
>
> Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > As had been mentioned here before, they are both very highly leveraged.
> My
> > memory is that Barclay&#x
Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As had been mentioned here before, they are both very highly leveraged. My
> memory is that Barclay's leveraged 30 to 1 and Deutsche Bank is leveraged
> about
> 50 to 1.
>
> That means a modest run on ether bank will result in them becoming unable to
> give peopl
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Williams
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: My contribution to the bail-out
>
> "We" don&
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, John Williams wrote:
> Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:10 AM, John Williams
>> wrote:
>
>>> Economists frequently disagree.
>>
>> More generally with each other than with themselves.
>
> I have seen a lot of "I am of two minds" statements by
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:10 AM, John Williams
> wrote:
> > Economists frequently disagree.
>
> More generally with each other than with themselves.
I have seen a lot of "I am of two minds" statements by
economists recently.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:10 AM, John Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Well, your view is such a mixture of accepting and rejecting common
> ecconomics,
>
> Economists frequently disagree.
More generally with each other than with themselves.
N
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Well, your view is such a mixture of accepting and rejecting common
> ecconomics,
Economists frequently disagree. Often, economics changes by having a professor
at a prestigious university pump out a bunch of students with the same views.
This
kind o
-- Original message --
From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Dan M
>
> >
> > Once told to me, the reason is obvious: flight to quality during a panic.
> > Do you differ?
>
> Do I disagree that this was once told to you?
>
Well, your view is such a mixture o
Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Once told to me, the reason is obvious: flight to quality during a panic.
> Do you differ?
Do I disagree that this was once told to you?
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Williams
> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 3:27 PM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: My contribution to the bail-out
>
> John Williams wrote
John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Alberto Monteiro
> > Now suppose that some smart guy _knows_ that there's a 50% chance
> > that tomorrow's price will raise by 100% and there's a 50% chance
> > that tomorrow's price will get back to 0%, and that whenever he
> > puts money in that, the g*vern
Rceeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yes it is.
I wish I lived in your world, then.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 9/28/2008 7:14:14 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Goodbye. I
> won't waste my time with Trolls.
>
> Unfortunately, that is NOT typical of those who think they
> know better how to spend other people's
> money.
Yes i
Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Goodbye. I won't waste my time with Trolls.
Unfortunately, that is NOT typical of those who think they
know better how to spend other people's money.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/l
John Williams wrote:
>
>> I am making it simple. There ain't no options. Just buy or (short) sell.
>
> Oversimplifying, and missing obvious ways to make money. Typical of
> people who think they know better how to spend other people's money.
>
Goodbye. I won't waste my time with Trolls.
Alberto Mo
Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I am making it simple. There ain't no options. Just buy or (short) sell.
Oversimplifying, and missing obvious ways to make money. Typical of
people who think they know better how to spend other people's money.
__
John Williams wrote:
>
>> Imagine that you, me, and a few other stupid guys believe that
>> some stock prices will go up tomorrow by 10%. What should we do?
>
> Not enough information. What probability will they go up by 10%. What
> are other possible outcomes and probabilities? How much money do
>
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I used the "r" word to see if you'd go along with it. Not gonna let that
> sneak by, are you?
Heh, I just re-read my post and I wrote "facilitate", not "encourage". But
yeah, I have little tolerance for most government regulation.
Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Imagine that you, me, and a few other stupid guys believe that
> some stock prices will go up tomorrow by 10%. What should we do?
Not enough information. What probability will they go up by 10%. What
are other possible outcomes and probabilities? How much m
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:37 PM, John Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > That sounds like a good idea -- government regulation that yields market
> > information.
>
> Thanks, but I didn't mean government regulation. I was being as precise as
> I could when
John Williams wrote:
>
> Look, this is getting silly. If you understand the market so well,
> and can consistently outguess millions of people risking their own
> money, then why not prove it?
>
Maybe because His Superior Wisdom dictates that it's impossible
to net-gain money from the market :
Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For the same reason that, although I know that playing the roulette wheel is
> a losing proposition, I cannot predict who will go to Vegas.
Bad analogy. Better analogy would be for you to invest in a casino, which
expects to make money on roulette, provided they don't
> Look, this is getting silly. If you understand the market so well, and can
> consistently outguess millions of people risking their own money,
> then why not prove it? Put your money where your mouth is.
For the same reason that, although I know that playing the roulette wheel is
a losing propo
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> That sounds like a good idea -- government regulation that yields market
> information.
Thanks, but I didn't mean government regulation. I was being as precise as
I could when I wrote "encourage". If you are familiar with the LTCM "bailout",
I mean something alo
Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Because I thought I covered that with the cascade effect.
A big part of the recent volatility is due to excessive leverage. That means
excessive lending. If you have 30 to 1 leverage, then the debt far exceeds
the equity. Aren't you the one that likes to look at large
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:12 AM, John Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
> Credit default swaps (CDS) appear to be an important proximate cause of
> the recent market volatility. As I mentioned in another post, there is no
> centralized
> clearing organization for CDS, in contrast to other der
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Williams
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 2:27 PM
> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
> Subject: Re: My contribution to the bail-out
>
>
>
>
> Why
Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hmm, how is this happening. Let's say I took a stupid risk (I didn't, but
> let's say I did) and bought AIG one year ago. I would have bought it for
> just under $70. Today's value is $3.00. I would have lost over 95% of my
> investment.
> I'll tend to agree wit
> I think the government is making a huge mistake by bailing
> out companies, due to the moral hazard that is being created. If investors
> were more concerned about going broke by investing in such risky
> companies, then it is quite likely that the companies would take fewer
> risks. Instead,
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yes, to the latter. I'm not talking about solving the current problem, but
> what could be done in the future to help prevent such a problem. It seems
> to me that the freedom to create extremely complex financial instruments
> enabled the present mess to happe
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:19 AM, John Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > For those among us who oppose government regulation, does this include
> > opposition to regulation whose purpose is to limit complexity? (Which
> I'm
> > thinking would also help avoid chaotic -- in the mathematical
Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> How could we have known what we apparently "should" have known about
> valuations?
I looked at price to rental and price to income ratios, as well as the
deteriorating
loan standards (my parents needed to put 20% down, but so many loans in the
past ten years pu
Nick Arnett wrote:
>
> How could we have known what we apparently "should" have known about
> valuations? How much research should a non-real estate professional
> be expected to figure out when buying a house? If financial professionals
> can't make sense of the value of sub-prime paper, how
45 matches
Mail list logo
