Re: More on the meltdown

On 9/29/2008 10:43:07 AM, Nick Arnett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 9:22 PM, xponentrob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/09/kron-4-5-pm-sun.html > > > > Former brinneller Brad speaks up. > > > One should not assume that just because someb

Re: More on the meltdown

On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 9:22 PM, xponentrob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/09/kron-4-5-pm-sun.html > > Former brinneller Brad speaks up. One should not assume that just because somebody hasn't posted in a while, he is no longer a subscriber. One should also assu

Re: More on the meltdown

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/09/kron-4-5-pm-sun.html Former brinneller Brad speaks up. xponent In The News Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

More on the meltdown

If you haven't seen this one yet, here is a report from Elizabeth Warren: At a Harvard panel discussion yesterday, economics professor Ken Rogoff made an interesting point: The liquidi

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message - From: "Dave Land" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion" Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: Meltdown > On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:10 AM, Rceeberger wrote: > >> >> On 9/24/2008

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message - From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion" Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 9:00 AM Subject: Re: Meltdown > > > On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, John Williams wrote: > >> xponentrob

Wall St. and the Meltdown

> It's just how it is. In general, people on this List > are very well > read and know a lot. But we don't all know the same > stuff. Which it's > why it's great to see people try to back up their > opinions, and in the > best discussions, see a mind changed here and there. > Charlie. that h

Meltdown

> Eh, if you do, I'll cover it. It'll give me an > excuse to see the guy if I > insist on delivering it in person. :) > Julia Let us know what you find out; I'll reimburse you if he actually takes you up on it!~) Jon ___ http://www.mcc

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:10 AM, Rceeberger wrote: > > On 9/24/2008 11:17:26 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: >> xponentrob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> >>> >> There's lots about this list and the people on it you know nothing >> about. >>> A lot of history here in over a decade. >> >>

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

On 25/09/2008, at 11:45 PM, Richard Baker wrote: > Charlie said: > >> Which is why, to take a completely random example, I weigh Dan's and >> Rich's opinions on physics or the oil industry far higher than I do >> Dan's on biology or economics, or Rich's on modern warfare (say...) > > I'm pretty s

Re: Appropriate metaphors (was Re: Meltdown)

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Dave Land wrote: > On Sep 24, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>> There is, of course, a remedy: find another list to dog. >> >> My dogs are offended by this. >> >> Let's stick to offend

Re: Meltdown

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, John Williams wrote: > xponentrob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> There's lots about this list and the people on it you know nothing about. >> A lot of history here in over a decade. > > So I don't owe you 10 bucks? Eh, if you do, I'll cover it. It'll give me an excuse to see

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

Charlie said: > Which is why, to take a completely random example, I weigh Dan's and > Rich's opinions on physics or the oil industry far higher than I do > Dan's on biology or economics, or Rich's on modern warfare (say...) I'm pretty sure that I know much more about modern warfare than I do a

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

On 25/09/2008, at 10:31 PM, Bruce Bostwick wrote: > On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:37 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Requiring qualifications to express an opinion is demanding the >> acceptance of argument from authority, a poor place to situate >> foundations. > > Especially for those of us with enou

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 24, 2008, at 6:53 PM, John Williams wrote: > Rceeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> You are Eric Reuter and I demand my 10 bucks. > > Huh? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobby_Lud "I think we invested time and money teaching her how to fly a warplane which, it turns out, she does very well,

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:37 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Requiring qualifications to express an opinion is demanding the > acceptance of argument from authority, a poor place to situate > foundations. Especially for those of us with enough understanding to form opinions of our own. The fact t

Re: Meltdown

On 9/24/2008 11:17:26 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > xponentrob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > There's lots about this list and the people on it you know nothing about. > > A lot of history here in over a decade. > > So I don't > owe you 10 bucks? > No There is a lot about pop

Re: Appropriate metaphors (was Re: Meltdown)

On Sep 24, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> There is, of course, a remedy: find another list to dog. > > My dogs are offended by this. > > Let's stick to offending trolls. My trolls are offended by this. Are yo

Re: Meltdown

rob wrote: > > > You are Eric Reuter and I demand my 10 bucks. > I wondered when that comparison was going to surface... I actually miss Eric, and JDG and other contrarians. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Meltdown

Just my opinion, but while I find J.W.s sarcasm a bit sophomoric, nothing that he's said or done comes close to what I would consider cause for moderation. I wish he'd tone it down a bit and address the argument rather than the individual making it; I think he's got an interesting and informed poi

Re: Meltdown

xponentrob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > There's lots about this list and the people on it you know nothing about. > A lot of history here in over a decade. So I don't owe you 10 bucks? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message - From: "John Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 6:53 PM Subject: Re: Meltdown > Rceeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> You are Eric Reuter

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message - From: "David Hobby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion" Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:15 PM Subject: Re: Meltdown > Rceeberger wrote: >> On 9/24/2008 1:36:39 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PRO

Re: Meltdown

Rceeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > You are Eric Reuter and I demand my 10 bucks. Huh? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Meltdown

> You appear to place a lot of emphasis on superficial > language. > I think it is more important not to force one's ideal > on others than > to insert a few polite words into a sentence when > communicating. isn't that what you are doing, john? > If you want to get terribly upset because I wri

Meltdown

> This is perversely entertaining. > Nick My sentiments, exactly!~) Jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Meltdown

Rceeberger wrote: > On 9/24/2008 1:36:39 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> I'm already at the >>> stage where I delete many of your posts >>> unread. >> I hope you continue to do so, if that is what you think >> is best. I will continue to write

Re: Meltdown

On 9/24/2008 1:36:39 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I'm already at the > > stage where I delete many of your posts > > unread. > > I hope you continue to do so, if that is what you think > is best. I will continue to write as I think best. >

Re: Meltdown

On 9/24/2008 12:17:53 PM, Dave Land ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sep 24, 2008, at 7:50 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: > > > On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Dave Land wrote: > > > >> On Sep 24, 2008, at 6:41 AM, Charlie Bell wrote: > >> > >>> Killfile Plus One Maru. > >> > >> Not here, for two reasons: > >> >

Meltdown

> Since you remind me that I am an admin, allow me to state > that I am > coming very near to asking the other admins to place a > certain member on moderation. > Dave don't do that dave; he will come around eventually, or he will lave voluntarily when people stop reacting to his provocations.

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

> Screw argument from authority. > > Me: Can I assume then that the next time you have a funny pain in your chest > you won't be looking for someone with an MD degree to talk it over with? When I have required medical aid I was looking for advice and expertise, not argument. These are differen

Meltdown - Dr. Phil to the rescue!~)

> > The viewpoint you are > > expressing here makes > Milton Friedman look like Karl Marx. > Hmmm, if you actually knew what you were talking about, I > might take that as a compliment. > > I'm sure you'd call it coincidence...or other > factors in play, but panics > > and bubbles are inherent

Re: Whaaa! Meltdown and others...

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Jo Anne wrote: > Just few thoughts from one of the long-timers. > > Yeah, Charlie, we've been around for about 12 or 13 years. Julia will know > better than I, she was already here when I joined in 1996, I think it was. April 1996, it began. So, 12 years and change now.

Whaaa! Meltdown and others...

Just few thoughts from one of the long-timers. Yeah, Charlie, we've been around for about 12 or 13 years. Julia will know better than I, she was already here when I joined in 1996, I think it was. My point is, we've had to first tolerate, then educate, and finally adopt a lot of people who don't

Meltdown

> Instead of telling other people what you think they should > do, > why don't YOU explain whatever you believe needs > explaining? does that meant you don't have an explanation, john? do you think this could have been less of a disaster if there had been more government intervention and regul

Meltdown

> Right, blame "the market" for adjusting > values to where they should be, not > the government for being largely responsible >for putting values out of whack. > That's the ticket. who do you blame, john? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/l

Re: Meltdown

David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm already at the > stage where I delete many of your posts > unread. I hope you continue to do so, if that is what you think is best. I will continue to write as I think best. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/ma

Re: Meltdown

David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm already at the > stage where I delete many of your posts > unread. I hope you continue to do so, if that is what you think is best. I will continue to write as I think best. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/ma

Re: Meltdown

Dave Land wrote: > On Sep 24, 2008, at 7:05 AM, John Williams wrote: ... > We don't condone ad hominem attacks on this list. This is the second > time you've resorted to it. > > Stop it. Now. > > Yes: I told you what to do, and we ALL know how much you hate that. > > There is, of course, a rem

Appropriate metaphors (was Re: Meltdown)

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is, of course, a remedy: find another list to dog. My dogs are offended by this. Let's stick to offending trolls. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Agreed: There are yet people who have not disagreed with you, at least > not on-list. You are welcome to disagree with me. I have zero problem with that. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

On Sep 24, 2008, at 10:16 AM, John Williams wrote: > Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> You're certainly not going to accomplish anything of value by coming >> in here and kicking everybody in the teeth. > > No, not everyone. Agreed: There are yet people who have not disagreed with you, at least

Re: Meltdown

Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Stop it. Now. No. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 24, 2008, at 7:50 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: > On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Dave Land wrote: > >> On Sep 24, 2008, at 6:41 AM, Charlie Bell wrote: >> >>> Killfile Plus One Maru. >> >> Not here, for two reasons: >> >> 1) It doesn't work -- I can block one person, but I can't block all >> the swirling

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 24, 2008, at 7:05 AM, John Williams wrote: > Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> Wow... just asking the question "forces" you to go? > > Ummm, no? Try again. > >> This is perversely entertaining. > > So I guess I have something to look forward to when I get old > and senile? We don't co

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > You're certainly not going to accomplish anything of value by coming > in here and kicking everybody in the teeth. No, not everyone. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Meltdown

Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Your answer, as I take it, is the meltdown of big financial corporations and > the flight from corporate bonds and the fact that commercial paper from > corporations far removed from this meltdown became much harder to sell a > week ago, is prob

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

On Sep 24, 2008, at 7:09 AM, John Williams wrote: > From: Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Yah. Anyway. I can't be bothered with trolls, so I've solved the >> problem. Actually, Charlie, you haven't, entirely. The _list_, and not just your inbox is infected with this particularly pernicio

Re: Meltdown

Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > OK, let me get this straight. GE is not a financial company, Actually, GE is a financial company. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Meltdown

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John Williams > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:53 PM > To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion > Subject: Re: Meltdown > > Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > &g

Re: Meltdown

Richard Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I don't suppose he cares one way or the other what I think as long as > I don't force him to agree with me, On the contrary, I am interested in what you think (and others here as well). But being interested does not mean that I will refrain from sarcastic re

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message From: Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 8:19:12 AM Subject: Re: Meltdown On 24/09/2008, at 2:34 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: > > Me: > Ah yes, because I'm definitel

Re: Meltdown

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Dave Land wrote: > On Sep 24, 2008, at 6:41 AM, Charlie Bell wrote: > >> Killfile Plus One Maru. > > Not here, for two reasons: > > 1) It doesn't work -- I can block one person, but I can't block all > the swirling eddies of replies and counter-replies that the obstacle > ge

Re: Meltdown

Dave said: > 2) This, too, shall pass -- Either the tantrum will play itself out or > others will learn not to try to engage someone whose only interest > seems to be contradiction and sniping. I don't suppose he cares one way or the other what I think as long as I don't force him to agree with

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

> 6. Most people who have never studied physics would be unlikely to > pontificate on the subject. Most people who have never studied economics > not only will pontificate on the subject, but will explain to you in > terms that suggest you are an idiot, why they are right and you are > wrong. T

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 24, 2008, at 6:41 AM, Charlie Bell wrote: > Killfile Plus One Maru. Not here, for two reasons: 1) It doesn't work -- I can block one person, but I can't block all the swirling eddies of replies and counter-replies that the obstacle generates. 2) This, too, shall pass -- Either the ta

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

From: Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Yah. Anyway. I can't be bothered with trolls, so I've solved the > problem. Which, of course, was his prerogative. If only I could so easily avoid having my money taken by people who think they can spend it better. Alas, there is no killfile for wasteful

Re: Meltdown

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Wow... just asking the question "forces" you to go? Ummm, no? Try again. > This is perversely entertaining. So I guess I have something to look forward to when I get old and senile? ___ http://www.mccmedia.

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

On 24/09/2008, at 11:55 PM, Nick Arnett wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 6:45 AM, John Williams > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >> >> If I do not want to do something that someone >> forces me to do, that is by definition NOT my prerogative. > > > Show of hands -- who else found themselves instant

Re: Meltdown

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 6:56 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Why aren't you living on some island somewhere, where nobody will impose > > their ideals on you? It seems like such a move would be a net gain for > > everybody. > > That would be fo

Re: Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ah, when the Wonder Years give way to the Sociopath Years. And then to the senile years, apparently. No doubt you will want the young ones to spend lots of money to take care of you, too. ___ http://www.mccme

Re: Meltdown

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Why aren't you living on some island somewhere, where nobody will impose > their ideals on you? It seems like such a move would be a net gain for > everybody. That would be forcing me to go somewhere I don't want to go, and which doesn't actually exist, anyway.

Wahh! (was Re: Meltdown)

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 6:45 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > If I do not want to do something that someone > forces me to do, that is by definition NOT my prerogative. Show of hands -- who else found themselves instantly thinking "teenager" when they read this sentence? The phr

Re: Meltdown

Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But I'm done trying to persuade you. Thank you! That certainly deserves a polite response! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Meltdown

Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Yeah. Discussions can get heated, and occasionally blow up, with > people you've been talking to for a long time, but to be consistently > rude to people you don't know at all is a different thing entirely. You appear to place a lot of emphasis on superfici

Re: Meltdown

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 6:20 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > If what I'm missing is being told what to do, I hope I miss it. > Unfortunately, > there is a good chance this $700B government bailout is going > to pass and I'll be forced to pay thousands of dollars. That is > a clea

Re: Meltdown

On 24/09/2008, at 11:20 PM, John Williams wrote: > Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> No, they disagree, so they're "imposing their views on >> others". >> >> *shrug* It's your loss. The sad thing is, you'll never know what >> you're actually missing. > > If what I'm missing is being told what

Re: Meltdown

Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > There is such a thing (provably) as an Evolutionarily Stable Strategy > that can lead to extinction, and I reckon the completely unregulated > market is one of them. 1) Why are you talking about a completely unregulated market? Is it because it is easier to

Re: Meltdown

Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > No, they disagree, so they're "imposing their views on > others". > > *shrug* It's your loss. The sad thing is, you'll never know what > you're actually missing. If what I'm missing is being told what to do, I hope I miss it. Unfortunately, there is a good

RE: Meltdown

At 06:09 AM Wednesday 9/24/2008, Alberto Monteiro wrote: >Dan M wrote: > > > > "Oh, the irrationality." Why would people be reluctant to by one > > day notes from GE. Does any sane person think GE will go belly up > > _tomorrow?_ That's what the interest rate measures...the > > willingness of f

Re: Meltdown

On 24/09/2008, at 2:34 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: > > Me: > Ah yes, because I'm definitely running for office right now. Come > on, this is just tiresome. At least try to have a simple discussion > without accusing everyone of bad faith. Yeah. Discussions can get heated, and occasionally blo

Re: Meltdown

On 24/09/2008, at 1:16 PM, John Williams wrote: Sorry, I have much less confidence in > politicians and people like you than I do in the collective self- > interest and creativity > of a large group of talented people to solve problems competitively. Tragedy of the Commons. Murray/Darling River

Re: Meltdown

On 24/09/2008, at 8:36 AM, John Williams wrote: > Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> Instead of mocking, why don't you try EXPLAINING. > > Instead of telling other people what you think they should do, > why don't YOU explain whatever you believe needs explaining? Because I'm not the one mo

RE: Meltdown

Dan M wrote: > > "Oh, the irrationality." Why would people be reluctant to by one > day notes from GE. Does any sane person think GE will go belly up > _tomorrow?_ That's what the interest rate measures...the > willingness of folks to buy GE notes. All of a sudden, buyers dried > up. That

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

> 5. People who have never read Adam Smith are probably not qualified to > discuss what he said. And almost nobody has ever read Adam Smith. Even > most economists have never gotten around to it. They especially never seem to read the bits about the neccesity of regulation. > 6. Most people wh

Re: Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

Kevin said: > 6. Most people who have never studied physics would be unlikely to > pontificate on the subject. Most people who have never studied > economics > not only will pontificate on the subject, but will explain to you in > terms that suggest you are an idiot, why they are right and you a

Re: Meltdown

Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Again, you know nothing about me, Ah, so you are saying everything you have written today is nonsense. Not much point in me replying to your nonsense anymore. This will be the last email, then. > It's not my job to educate you. Heh, good one. I have data,

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 12:15:33 AM Subject: Re: Meltdown Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Well, I say I'd go to astronomers, and astrophysi

Re: Meltdown

Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Well, I say I'd go to astronomers, and astrophysicists, and aerospace > engineers. And I'd find the best ones in the world. Why haven't you? > OK, your argument, just to be clear, is that you don't know anything about > finance. It is? > You have no e

Re: Meltdown

So I have two simple questions for you. What do you think the odds of such a collapse occurring are? 1% 5%? Whatever number you pick - what do you think should be done to lessen that risk? Nothing? If so, do you not buy health insurance? Best, Gautam I hate replying to m own post, but I

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 11:16:58 PM Subject: Re: Meltdown Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But > such a stampede could cause lots of otherwise fi

Re: Meltdown

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >I'm all for reducing the size and market interference... of > greed. I'm not sure how to do that other than via some sort of political > process. You want to impose your ideals on the rest of us and destroy one of the main drivers of innovation and growth? You'

Re: Meltdown

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > Now, you have these fund managers. All of them are worried. They've just > seen several things happen that they've never seen before. They know that > there are still securities on a lot of balance sheets that have

Re: Meltdown

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:52 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > Sure, the government was largely responsible for creating a huge home price > bubble and encouraging a bunch of bad loans to con-artists and people who > had no business getting the loans, but that is not the problem. T

Re: Meltdown

Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But > such a stampede could cause lots of otherwise fine companies to go under, > which > would cause still more companies to go under, and so on, > It's hard to imagine _anything_ worth the risk of going > through that when interventions can prevent it.

Some random thoughts on Wall St. and the meltdown

1. Something definitely happened, but I doubt anyone knows exactly what, as yet. 2. It is almost certainly not as dire as Paulson and Bernanke are trying to make it sound. The world won't come to an end if we take the time to think things through. 3. Anyone who trusts what this administration

Re: Meltdown

- Original Message From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 8:48:12 PM Subject: Re: Meltdown Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: John Williams > Gee, really? It couldn't po

Re: Meltdown

Kevin B. O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Now, most decent spreadsheet programs will not let you get away with > this circular reference, but an unregulated market can. Essentially, it > all came down to a shell game where everyone was insuring each others > risks, and then convincing themselves

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 23, 2008, at 8:00 PM, Kevin B. O'Brien wrote: > Now, most decent spreadsheet programs will not let you get away with > this circular reference, but an unregulated market can. Essentially, > it > all came down to a shell game where everyone was insuring each others > risks, and then convin

Re: Meltdown

Dan M wrote: > "Oh, the irrationality." Why would people be reluctant to by one day notes > from GE. Does any sane person think GE will go belly up _tomorrow?_ That's > what the interest rate measures...the willingness of folks to buy GE notes. > All of a sudden, buyers dried up. That's a measu

Re: Meltdown

On Sep 23, 2008, at 8:00 PM, Kevin B. O'Brien wrote: > Dan M wrote: >> The problem was that no-one (including the board of directors of >> AIG knew >> that AIG was insolvent until the day the government intervened. >> Bubbles and >> panics are part of the nature of the market. You can repeat

Re: Meltdown

Dan M wrote: > The problem was that no-one (including the board of directors of AIG knew > that AIG was insolvent until the day the government intervened. Bubbles and > panics are part of the nature of the market. You can repeat your mantra of > free markets are perfect until you are blue in the

Re: Meltdown

Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: John Williams > Gee, really? It couldn't possibly be just a little more complicated than that? > > Me: > There are more factors, Yes, that is what I was referring to. > but in the short-term money market, not that many, really. Surely the laws of

Re: Meltdown

At 03:40 PM Tuesday 9/23/2008, John Williams wrote: >Just a thought, but you might inspire a bit more confidence in your marks >if you spent a little time learning about how markets and regulation actually >work and a little less repeating cliched-jokes that were corny when my >grandfather was you

Re: Meltdown

Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com - Original Message From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:52:33 PM Subject: Re: Meltdown Dan M &

Re: Meltdown

Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But, my understanding is that the bundling has become so > layered and convoluted that folks really didn't understand what was > happening in real time. With the amount of leverage that exists, a > perfectly reasonable looking position can fall apart quickly. Yes, a

RE: Meltdown

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Charlie Bell > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:28 PM > To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion > Subject: Re: Meltdown > > > On 24/09/2008, at 6:21 AM, Dan M wro

Re: Meltdown

Euan Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > It amazes me (was this AIG or Fanny and Freddie, I forget) that they > went to ask for some 30 Billion but on a couple of days investigation it > turned out to be more like 70 Billion was needed to meet their obligations. > > The management of the relevant c

Re: Meltdown

> The problem was that no-one (including the board of directors of AIG knew > that AIG was insolvent until the day the government intervened. Bubbles and > panics are part of the nature of the market. You can repeat your mantra of > free markets are perfect until you are blue in the face, but AI

Re: Meltdown

Dan M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > That's > what the interest rate measures...the willingness of folks to buy GE notes. Gee, really? It couldn't possibly be just a little more complicated than that? > A rational > market wouldn't change GE's interest rate that quickly Again, really? Either you are s

  1   2   >