There is goes. I have no idea why derivatives reform and the Volcker rule are still being discussed. The Banksters won from what I can see and the best we can hope for is they do not water it down further, which is a pipe dream.
In other words, as warned about, they are going to gut the bill in conference committee, even though it's still currently swiss cheese in the Senate, that's not good enough for the Banksters and they are going to gun for more Swiss cheese, targeting derivatives especially, in conference committee.
If you want to scream, do it now. It's just unbelievable that our government would not enact, immediately major reforms considering what has happened.
That was to clearly define what makes up a trading facility. Paul Volcker came out in support of.....(drum roll please)...the Volcker rule, trying to be introduced by Jeff Merkley (who then voted for cloture, so...).
Bear in mind folks legislation and it's process is like watching table tennis. It moves very quickly and it seems, at least any bill I've tracked on, there are always last minute, no one has read them 1000 page modifications done very quickly at the end which negate the more publicized changes. So, unless someone is a staffer for Chris Dodd or Harry Reid, doing a live blog or twittering their brains out, the news will always lag what's really going on. That's the bill details, ya know, the stuff that matters.
EP is for participation, so I hope people start commenting more. We have some great posts up recently but few are discussing them. Don't forget to rate up, with the arrow next to the post, things you want on the front page.
You won't hear me argue that the Obama administration is keeping the status quo, but on rail, is it economically viable? What valid reason would he say this in other words?
Sure sounds like bad news for public transportation.
President Obama must love stinky environs: please, please, please, someone extricate Obama’s head out of British Petroleum’s ass so that he can see the physical devastation in the Gulf of Mexico; while your at it, take Obama’s head out of Wall Street’s ass so that he can see the severely depressed economy that is now getting worse, and the military-industrial complexes’ ass so that Obama can see the futility of his terrible war in Afghanistan. Maybe the problem with Obama is his head is up his own ass, and he never wants to know the truth about his lying presidency.
While percentages are interesting to discuss, isn't today's percentages more or equaly dangerous today because the population is soooo much bgger today and the skills necessary to make a living wage areharder to come by? Also, we don't see as many stories about homeless or soup lines because people are defaulting their mortgages, living rent free during a 2 year backlog of foreclosures combined with extended unemployment benefits that neither existed during he great drepression?
located here. It's an exercise in "we don't know what this really means" and it's all due to seasonal vs. not seasonal adjustments. The 10.06% is seasonally adjusted. Not seasonally adjusted is 9.38%.
Caution regarding seasonally adjusted numbers
“The issue this quarter is that the seasonally adjusted delinquency rates went up while the unadjusted rates went down. Delinquency rates traditionally peak in the fourth quarter and fall in the first quarter and we saw that first quarter drop in the data. The question is whether the drop represents anything more than a normal seasonal decline or a more fundamental improvement. Most importantly, the normal seasonal drop is coming right at the point where we believe delinquencies could potentially be declining and the problem for the statistical models is determining which is which,” said Jay Brinkmann, MBA’s chief economist.
“The seasonal models say it is not a fundamental improvement and that the seasonal drop should have been larger to represent a true improvement, hence the increase in the seasonally adjusted numbers. Yet there is reason to believe the seasonally adjusted numbers could be too high. Simply put, fundamental market factors may be having a greater influence on the delinquency rates than is normally the case, but mathematical models have difficulty discerning the difference over a short period of time.
“Since discerning what represents a fundamental improvement versus a simply seasonal improvement is probably more of an art than a mathematical science at this point, the seasonally adjusted numbers should be viewed with a degree of caution.
ok....uh, the seasonal models say delinquencies are at an all time high, so now magically the seasonal adjustment models are not accurate? Which is it?
Calculated Risk is really digging and it appears he isn't buying it.
To me, Calculated Risk is the uber housing market stat site, so he graphed out the data and whether you've got a seasonal anomaly or not, this does not look good. Also listed is the shadow inventory.
Well, look, they are and have been dead wrong and that isn't seeing through the numbers, that is the numbers. So, with that, what can I say, all credibility bets are off.
I mean this is kind of old news really. I've said many times I just don't know what happened to NDD but frankly whatever it is, it doesn't have much to do with the EIs, the stats and GDP.
Personally, I'd prefer to stay out of it. I jumped in only when Bonddad launched a major attack on this site itself. That's when I drew the line because we're trying to provide a space for people, who are sticking to the facts, the stats, the events, the data and want to discuss, write about it from the "bottom up" or "working stiff", real life in the trenches implications and viewpoints.
One would think statistics, charts, mathematics would be a black and white, no room for debate situation but I can tell you from geekville, politics trumps facts all of the time. Just look at the use of Copulas in CDSes and CDOs....now there is a no brainer yet there they are, being misused in a host of financial modeling for derivatives prices. Sigh.
So, look, on EP are a host of tools to write your own blog. If you notice I LOVE the St. Louis Fed FRED graphing online system. It just rocks! It's fast graph city and all you have to know is what the graphs really mean, what percent change, compounded annually, compounded continually mean and to watch out for the revision dates and the series being graphed itself.
I'm looking to add more graphing solutions to EP and one can write mathematics on EP, abet it's nasty, ya gotta know LaTex basically, which isn't for the faint of heart.
My suggestion therefore is....to consider writing up a short Instapopulist and consider looking at some of the data/graphs yourself and reach your own conclusions.
You can start by trying it out in a comment. You can post anything in a comment just watch formatting.
Jesus, I think their loans had better terms, the consequences about the same.
I'm glad to see more digging into this story. Statistically, there is no way in hell all of these companies could have "perfect trades" without some serious rigging.
So, now the question is on these losing recommended trades, did GS bet against them and thus win?
GOLDMAN SACHS THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE GOING TO FORECLOSE ON MY PROPERTY AND SECRETLY ASSIGNED AND CREATED A FALSE DEED OF TRUST FOR $118,800. I DO NOT HAVE A 2ND DEED OF TRUST ON MY PROPERTY. THE RECORDED ASSIGNMENT IS SIGNED BY A GOLDMAN SACHS EMPLOYEE, JOHN CRANDALL (CHECK IT OUT: http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/john-crandall-litton-mortgage...
I FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS WHEN I HAD A TITLE COMPANY RUN A TITLE PROPERTY PROFILE LAST MONTH. WHO HAS THE $118,800? GOLDMAN SACHS OF COURSE. THEIR STEALING FROM EVERYONE. IT LOOKS AS THOUGH I AM NOT THE ONLY VICTIM HERE, WHERE THESE LAST MINUTE FALSE ASSIGNMENT SCHEMES ARE DONE RIGHT BEFORE THE FORECLOSURE AUCTION. THIS MUST BE THE NEXT SCAM AFTER THE CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS RUN OUT. THERE WAS A LAWYER THIS MONTH WHO WAS INDICTED BY A STATEWIDE GRAND JURY WHO ALLEGEDLY ATTEMTPTED TO RETRIEVE OVER $1.3 MILLION DOLLARS TO OBTAIN THE PAYOFF FUNDS FROM FORECLOSED HOMES.
(CHECK IT OUT:
http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=cagopressrelease&L=1&L0=Home&sid=Cago&b=pres...
I HAVE BEEN IN LITIGATION WITH THESE CROOKS SINCE FEB 2009.SEE MY BLOG TO GET ALL OF THE DETAILS ON MY MOCK HEARINGS .http://bushnellcomplaint.blogspot.com/
To my surprise, Bonddad not only posted my comment but both he and NDD responded. I, in turn responded to them. It is an interesting tete-a-tete that EP readers may find interesting. Their comments can be read under the above cited posting. I don't know if my second response will be posted so I place a copy below.
////
NDD & Bonddad,
Thank you for your response.
NDD: Let me say, the phrase “Chicken in every pot” is not an ad hominem – i.e. an attack on an individual instead of the argument that the individual presents. It is a metaphor that attempts to capture the general theme that the blog generally projects (how can I say it without resorting to a metaphor) a ‘bright or positive future’; and I’m taking issue with that theme. Understandable in short comments there can be misunderstandings about metaphors. But, a metaphor about a theme is different from insults like “ignorance’ and ‘lack of comprehension.”
Bonddad: I understand what you say about commentators likes of Bill O’Reilly et al. But, there a many serious ‘bloggers’ who don’t take issue with the accuracy of your facts or the predictions that you and NDD have made. However, they and others such as myself are saying that the numbers are not accurately measuring (describing) the extent of the damage to the ‘standard of living’ and ‘quality of life’ (metaphors again) that a very large plurality of the people have incurred. And, they are not accurately projecting the future ‘standard of living’ and ‘quality of life’ of the America people.
It’s not that I take issue per se. You work with the measures that the government gives us. But, the measures are selective and subjectively defined. That’s being kind. I think the labor statistics are absurd. Or consider a recent conference of economist in Washington who agreed that they could not agree on a definition of GDP (sorry I can’t remember the source).
As to blaming people (e.g. Californians) who are suffering for causing their own suffering…well surely one can recognize the obvious ideological subject value judgmental dimensions of those types of arguments. I guess they (e.g. police, firepersons, teachers, factory workers, etc. should have reduced their own standard of living voluntarily before the reduction was (is) imposed on them? Interesting!
It's a lot easier to steal from people when they trust you.
Seven of the investment bank’s nine “recommended top trades for 2010” have been money losers for investors who adopted the New York-based firm’s advice, according to data compiled by Bloomberg from a Goldman Sachs research note sent yesterday. Clients who used the tips lost 14 percent buying the Polish zloty versus the Japanese yen, 9.4 percent buying Chinese stocks in Hong Kong and 9.8 percent trading the British pound against the New Zealand dollar.
...
Cohn told investors at a May 11 conference in New York that the firm lost money on only 11 days in the last 12 months. He said that uncanny streak of success refutes suspicions that the bank depends on proprietary bets with its own money.
“It is implausible that a proprietary-driven business model could be right 96 percent of the time,” Cohn said. Instead, he said the “simple answer” is that the firm makes money by capturing bid-offer spreads when acting as an intermediary for client trades.
There was -- years ago -- an assumption that women didn't need the paycheck as much as the man "with a family to support." The woman, after all, probably had a husband and (maybe children). She would need more time off if her children got sick. Nobody pointed out that men also took time off for emergencies. That all changed, though not without collateral damage (women vs. men competing, resentment of preference for veterans because they were mostly men, and, yes, older men vs. ambitious young women).
Now we have old competing with young for the shrinking pool of good jobs. Older people are seen as inappropriate for some jobs --corporate image, product placement, and, yes, overqualified. Young folks may have better geek skills, while older people wanting junior level jobs may be seen as "just after a paycheck" or perhaps a source of tension when supervised by younger managers. Then the argument "they;ll just work a few years and then retire," while younger workers may make a long-term commitment to the company (who really believes that one?)
Yes, take a few years off your age if you want to -- but you will need a skilful preparation of resume (suggestion: get rid of that "class of 1972" on your degree.)
At 74, I have a decent retirement, but still enjoy working. Over the past 15 years, I found self-employment works best for me, but this takes a certain discipline and tolerance for risk. My advice for professional folks who were laid off is "get some colleagues and start competing with the outfit that fired you." I did this way back in the day. We did this with a borrowed office, business cards, a phone line, and brass cojones. It was not easy, but our contacts were fresh, and with the high (7%) unemployment rate of that day, could find folks with good resumes at 40-plus of Washington who were more than willing to commit on spec to proposals. We did capabilities packages, incorporated, and started making the rounds of clients who knew what we individually could do.
I know it is not as easy as I make it sound, and operating capital is problematic, but my stint as a consultant led to my being offered a job that became a career. After retirement from that place, I hooked up with a university and local corporations and wrote grant applications that worked.
None of this was easy, but it will work for some. It does not address the systemic problem of age-ism, but we have one thing going for us -- an understanding of our respective fields, and perhaps some constructive cynicism. We can't turn back the clock, but we can band together because we respect experience and know the system.
And yes, EEOC complaints help systemically. After all, we used to say "She'll just work a few years, get pregnant, and quit." That changed. "Experienced" can't just be a code word for "old." Maybe we'll just work a few years and die, but I knew executives who died at 40. We need to work with what we've got, and that includes the law.
I'll try to write up a post soon, digging out some statistics. In the interim, officially they cannot ask you your age in an interview and remove dates from your graduation from college (if you have higher degrees and so on) and remove dates from experience and shorten up the resume.
It's ridiculous. If age discrimination was practiced in Congress politicians might get on this for almost all of them would no longer have a job. That includes Obama for at his age, he would be discriminated against in the private sector on age.
I just read that post and shake head. What possesses someone to devote an entire blog piece to ridicule and insult one comment which isn't even off the mark?
There is goes. I have no idea why derivatives reform and the Volcker rule are still being discussed. The Banksters won from what I can see and the best we can hope for is they do not water it down further, which is a pipe dream.
In other words, as warned about, they are going to gut the bill in conference committee, even though it's still currently swiss cheese in the Senate, that's not good enough for the Banksters and they are going to gun for more Swiss cheese, targeting derivatives especially, in conference committee.
If you want to scream, do it now. It's just unbelievable that our government would not enact, immediately major reforms considering what has happened.
here.
I'll update this post and eventually, when the dust settles, try to overview what the final sausage is.
That was to clearly define what makes up a trading facility. Paul Volcker came out in support of.....(drum roll please)...the Volcker rule, trying to be introduced by Jeff Merkley (who then voted for cloture, so...).
Bear in mind folks legislation and it's process is like watching table tennis. It moves very quickly and it seems, at least any bill I've tracked on, there are always last minute, no one has read them 1000 page modifications done very quickly at the end which negate the more publicized changes. So, unless someone is a staffer for Chris Dodd or Harry Reid, doing a live blog or twittering their brains out, the news will always lag what's really going on. That's the bill details, ya know, the stuff that matters.
EP is for participation, so I hope people start commenting more. We have some great posts up recently but few are discussing them. Don't forget to rate up, with the arrow next to the post, things you want on the front page.
You won't hear me argue that the Obama administration is keeping the status quo, but on rail, is it economically viable? What valid reason would he say this in other words?
Sure sounds like bad news for public transportation.
President Obama must love stinky environs: please, please, please, someone extricate Obama’s head out of British Petroleum’s ass so that he can see the physical devastation in the Gulf of Mexico; while your at it, take Obama’s head out of Wall Street’s ass so that he can see the severely depressed economy that is now getting worse, and the military-industrial complexes’ ass so that Obama can see the futility of his terrible war in Afghanistan. Maybe the problem with Obama is his head is up his own ass, and he never wants to know the truth about his lying presidency.
While percentages are interesting to discuss, isn't today's percentages more or equaly dangerous today because the population is soooo much bgger today and the skills necessary to make a living wage areharder to come by? Also, we don't see as many stories about homeless or soup lines because people are defaulting their mortgages, living rent free during a 2 year backlog of foreclosures combined with extended unemployment benefits that neither existed during he great drepression?
Here comes reality. (from HuffPo)
It's extremely good messaging, and I think we should repurpose it.
The Zuckerman piece? Yeah, I read it. Violent rage best describes my reaction. It's the same b.s cherrypicking we see all the time.
located here. It's an exercise in "we don't know what this really means" and it's all due to seasonal vs. not seasonal adjustments. The 10.06% is seasonally adjusted. Not seasonally adjusted is 9.38%.
ok....uh, the seasonal models say delinquencies are at an all time high, so now magically the seasonal adjustment models are not accurate? Which is it?
Calculated Risk is really digging and it appears he isn't buying it.
To me, Calculated Risk is the uber housing market stat site, so he graphed out the data and whether you've got a seasonal anomaly or not, this does not look good. Also listed is the shadow inventory.
Well, look, they are and have been dead wrong and that isn't seeing through the numbers, that is the numbers. So, with that, what can I say, all credibility bets are off.
I mean this is kind of old news really. I've said many times I just don't know what happened to NDD but frankly whatever it is, it doesn't have much to do with the EIs, the stats and GDP.
Personally, I'd prefer to stay out of it. I jumped in only when Bonddad launched a major attack on this site itself. That's when I drew the line because we're trying to provide a space for people, who are sticking to the facts, the stats, the events, the data and want to discuss, write about it from the "bottom up" or "working stiff", real life in the trenches implications and viewpoints.
One would think statistics, charts, mathematics would be a black and white, no room for debate situation but I can tell you from geekville, politics trumps facts all of the time. Just look at the use of Copulas in CDSes and CDOs....now there is a no brainer yet there they are, being misused in a host of financial modeling for derivatives prices. Sigh.
So, look, on EP are a host of tools to write your own blog. If you notice I LOVE the St. Louis Fed FRED graphing online system. It just rocks! It's fast graph city and all you have to know is what the graphs really mean, what percent change, compounded annually, compounded continually mean and to watch out for the revision dates and the series being graphed itself.
I'm looking to add more graphing solutions to EP and one can write mathematics on EP, abet it's nasty, ya gotta know LaTex basically, which isn't for the faint of heart.
My suggestion therefore is....to consider writing up a short Instapopulist and consider looking at some of the data/graphs yourself and reach your own conclusions.
You can start by trying it out in a comment. You can post anything in a comment just watch formatting.
Jesus, I think their loans had better terms, the consequences about the same.
I'm glad to see more digging into this story. Statistically, there is no way in hell all of these companies could have "perfect trades" without some serious rigging.
So, now the question is on these losing recommended trades, did GS bet against them and thus win?
BREAKING NEWS:
GOLDMAN SACHS CAUGHT RED-HANDED!!!!!!!!!
GOLDMAN SACHS THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE GOING TO FORECLOSE ON MY PROPERTY AND SECRETLY ASSIGNED AND CREATED A FALSE DEED OF TRUST FOR $118,800. I DO NOT HAVE A 2ND DEED OF TRUST ON MY PROPERTY. THE RECORDED ASSIGNMENT IS SIGNED BY A GOLDMAN SACHS EMPLOYEE, JOHN CRANDALL (CHECK IT OUT: http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/john-crandall-litton-mortgage...
I FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS WHEN I HAD A TITLE COMPANY RUN A TITLE PROPERTY PROFILE LAST MONTH. WHO HAS THE $118,800? GOLDMAN SACHS OF COURSE. THEIR STEALING FROM EVERYONE. IT LOOKS AS THOUGH I AM NOT THE ONLY VICTIM HERE, WHERE THESE LAST MINUTE FALSE ASSIGNMENT SCHEMES ARE DONE RIGHT BEFORE THE FORECLOSURE AUCTION. THIS MUST BE THE NEXT SCAM AFTER THE CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS RUN OUT. THERE WAS A LAWYER THIS MONTH WHO WAS INDICTED BY A STATEWIDE GRAND JURY WHO ALLEGEDLY ATTEMTPTED TO RETRIEVE OVER $1.3 MILLION DOLLARS TO OBTAIN THE PAYOFF FUNDS FROM FORECLOSED HOMES.
(CHECK IT OUT:
http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=cagopressrelease&L=1&L0=Home&sid=Cago&b=pres...
I HAVE BEEN IN LITIGATION WITH THESE CROOKS SINCE FEB 2009.SEE MY BLOG TO GET ALL OF THE DETAILS ON MY MOCK HEARINGS .http://bushnellcomplaint.blogspot.com/
To my surprise, Bonddad not only posted my comment but both he and NDD responded. I, in turn responded to them. It is an interesting tete-a-tete that EP readers may find interesting. Their comments can be read under the above cited posting. I don't know if my second response will be posted so I place a copy below.
////
NDD & Bonddad,
Thank you for your response.
NDD: Let me say, the phrase “Chicken in every pot” is not an ad hominem – i.e. an attack on an individual instead of the argument that the individual presents. It is a metaphor that attempts to capture the general theme that the blog generally projects (how can I say it without resorting to a metaphor) a ‘bright or positive future’; and I’m taking issue with that theme. Understandable in short comments there can be misunderstandings about metaphors. But, a metaphor about a theme is different from insults like “ignorance’ and ‘lack of comprehension.”
Bonddad: I understand what you say about commentators likes of Bill O’Reilly et al. But, there a many serious ‘bloggers’ who don’t take issue with the accuracy of your facts or the predictions that you and NDD have made. However, they and others such as myself are saying that the numbers are not accurately measuring (describing) the extent of the damage to the ‘standard of living’ and ‘quality of life’ (metaphors again) that a very large plurality of the people have incurred. And, they are not accurately projecting the future ‘standard of living’ and ‘quality of life’ of the America people.
It’s not that I take issue per se. You work with the measures that the government gives us. But, the measures are selective and subjectively defined. That’s being kind. I think the labor statistics are absurd. Or consider a recent conference of economist in Washington who agreed that they could not agree on a definition of GDP (sorry I can’t remember the source).
As to blaming people (e.g. Californians) who are suffering for causing their own suffering…well surely one can recognize the obvious ideological subject value judgmental dimensions of those types of arguments. I guess they (e.g. police, firepersons, teachers, factory workers, etc. should have reduced their own standard of living voluntarily before the reduction was (is) imposed on them? Interesting!
Tom
It's a lot easier to steal from people when they trust you.
There was -- years ago -- an assumption that women didn't need the paycheck as much as the man "with a family to support." The woman, after all, probably had a husband and (maybe children). She would need more time off if her children got sick. Nobody pointed out that men also took time off for emergencies. That all changed, though not without collateral damage (women vs. men competing, resentment of preference for veterans because they were mostly men, and, yes, older men vs. ambitious young women).
Now we have old competing with young for the shrinking pool of good jobs. Older people are seen as inappropriate for some jobs --corporate image, product placement, and, yes, overqualified. Young folks may have better geek skills, while older people wanting junior level jobs may be seen as "just after a paycheck" or perhaps a source of tension when supervised by younger managers. Then the argument "they;ll just work a few years and then retire," while younger workers may make a long-term commitment to the company (who really believes that one?)
Yes, take a few years off your age if you want to -- but you will need a skilful preparation of resume (suggestion: get rid of that "class of 1972" on your degree.)
At 74, I have a decent retirement, but still enjoy working. Over the past 15 years, I found self-employment works best for me, but this takes a certain discipline and tolerance for risk. My advice for professional folks who were laid off is "get some colleagues and start competing with the outfit that fired you." I did this way back in the day. We did this with a borrowed office, business cards, a phone line, and brass cojones. It was not easy, but our contacts were fresh, and with the high (7%) unemployment rate of that day, could find folks with good resumes at 40-plus of Washington who were more than willing to commit on spec to proposals. We did capabilities packages, incorporated, and started making the rounds of clients who knew what we individually could do.
I know it is not as easy as I make it sound, and operating capital is problematic, but my stint as a consultant led to my being offered a job that became a career. After retirement from that place, I hooked up with a university and local corporations and wrote grant applications that worked.
None of this was easy, but it will work for some. It does not address the systemic problem of age-ism, but we have one thing going for us -- an understanding of our respective fields, and perhaps some constructive cynicism. We can't turn back the clock, but we can band together because we respect experience and know the system.
And yes, EEOC complaints help systemically. After all, we used to say "She'll just work a few years, get pregnant, and quit." That changed. "Experienced" can't just be a code word for "old." Maybe we'll just work a few years and die, but I knew executives who died at 40. We need to work with what we've got, and that includes the law.
So I would expect CPI to drop next month.
I'll try to write up a post soon, digging out some statistics. In the interim, officially they cannot ask you your age in an interview and remove dates from your graduation from college (if you have higher degrees and so on) and remove dates from experience and shorten up the resume.
It's ridiculous. If age discrimination was practiced in Congress politicians might get on this for almost all of them would no longer have a job. That includes Obama for at his age, he would be discriminated against in the private sector on age.
I just read that post and shake head. What possesses someone to devote an entire blog piece to ridicule and insult one comment which isn't even off the mark?
Pages