shufon

I think its pretty clear that the market hates the so called 'stimulus package'.

It sounds like the US is going down the same path as Japan did over a decade ago.

-Increasing interest rates which eventually led to bursting of the housing bubble

-Govt intervening to prevent large banks from going under

-Govt pumping money in to 'stimulate' the economy

http://mises.org/story/1099

Yeah.. the market was indifferent to the "stimulus" package from the get go. We were all focused on Geithner's plans because the stimulus package is obviously shit, and there was hope that Geithner would step up and actually do something meaningful. Instead, we get, "We are willing to expand programs to improve consumer lending up to $2 trillion", "We will take steps to improve housing market conditions", "We will put 14 banks under stress tests to see how they fare." What the fuck does that mean? I mean seriously, this guy came with no details. Our government is just beating around the bush and wasting money, just like Japan did as you pointed out. I am close acquaintances with a former Federal Reserve president, and he and I both agreed in January of 2008 that the coming problems would be something the government cannot really stop, and that we are most likely headed into a Japan-like situation. Like I said a few pages back, it's a natural process that needs to happen and everybody just needs to accept that and let it happen.

in this case it was really just because the stimulus isn't some kind of magical miracle

what were they expecting though

i hope this stupid honeymoon shit is over soon so obama can just be judged by normal standards

We were expecting at least some more details on how Geithner wants to go about implementing his plans. Instead we just get a Paulson-esque concept with no details at all; it seemed like Geithner sat down for an hour this weekend and thought, "Let's see.. these should be the top problems we need to tackle, and this is how much money I think it will take... ok, that should work for the Congressional hearing." The market was expecting something more from this guy since it's his first big hearing, and instead it was a massive failure. They should've stopped him from becoming Treasury Secretary they found out he couldn't even figure out the correct amount of taxes he owed for the past five years.

Shufon, thanks for the correction. Stocks was definitely not the right term, and I'm not even sure why I used it. Probably because I'm at work semi-looking over my shoulder as I type, and because I don't even totally understand what it is that is happening (then again, who actually does?) Wish someone would hire me in finance so it would actually be worthwhile for me to continue learning about it, because I do find all the complexities to be quite interesting. As it is, the only thing I've been getting out of it is angry.

No problem, it's understandable, the majority of the world had no idea what a credit default swap was until the last six months, so it's an easy mistake If you're that interested in it, you should look into financial engineering, you can make good money and you are the one creating the newest complexities of financial markets. Even with the constant negative commentary that derivative instruments have attracted over the past three to four years, they are definitely the future of financial markets and not a bad thing to learn about.

yo jayrock, how do you expect the average chinese consumer to spend more when their economy is tanking right now?

Chinese economy isn't tanking, look at their economic indicators since mid December. Their stimulus actually worked, and they can pump plenty more into their system without borrowing, and they will if needed.

but banks creating derivative products to effectively allow people to write an insurance policy on a stock they don't own is taking it a little far. and that has become the norm. and now, instead of letting the system--which is completely FUCKED--fail, we are bailing out companies like AIG who wrote these policies to effectively pay off people who bought these products for the mortgage bundles that are failing.

Just a small correction... they didn't write policies on stocks, they wrote policies on the debt of companies... credit default swaps pay off when a company defaults on debt. Credit default swaps are very useful hedging instruments for people who have credit risk with the institution the policy is written on, but yes, their use did get out of hand when people were allowed to buy them on companies to which they had no exposure.

Despite the attempted reaming, you have made a strong point against Xavier's argument. I don't think simply buying American is the answer. We live in a global economy now, and I just don't think the world is big enough anymore to go all protectionist successfully.

Free trade > Protectionism. Even if free trade is an idealism, the psuedo-free trade system full of tariffs and governmental currency intervention that we currently have is still better than protectionism.

Jeans pending, bump for the shoes

Bump, price drop to $90 on jeans, $40 for shoes. Open to all kinds of trades, just make an offer!!

while i agree the economy is cyclical to say that we are not in a very unique set of circumstances right now would be naive.

manufactoring in North America has been decimated and all that work has already moved abroad. What we have now is a service economy that wont work unless theres people who can afford/desire those services. The problem here is that people were given a false sense of affluence, everything from houses to stocks were worth more than they should have been. I think the problem is as much material as it is psychological. Peoples confidence in the world economy is pretty shaken imo

I agree with you on this-- I didn't say that we aren't in a very unique circumstance. We definitely are in a unique circumstance. The leveraged growth of our economy (and asset pices as you pointed out) for 20+ years was a unique circumstance, and the deleveraging of it is just as unique. My point was generally that this is not the end of the world for the US, and that growth will resume once this process (a long one that that) is completed. While the deterioration of the economy is severe, and will continue to be, I do not believe we will see any kind of Great Depression, end of the world scenario. Can the US possibly lose its status as the biggest economy in the world? Sure, but it will still remain a superpower. It's just like Japan, as I pointed out in my last post, as well as Britain, as another poster pointed out. They've risen and fallen, but are still superpowers and are still well functioning countries, economically and socially. As for your comment about people's confidence in the world economy being shaken-- of course it is, this is the worst crisis the world has seen since the Great Depression, and this time around globalization has everybody involved. The world isn't ending though, just hectic times.

I normally do not get into conversations like this, but as for the US's current situation, we are just in a natural deleveraging process that is necessary to balance out with the last ~26 years. Alan Greenspan was a smart man, but his policies never allowed the economy to truly bottom, but instead reinflated the economy by pushing more leverage and letting money be cheaper. Look at a long term chart of long bonds (20-30yr treasuries). They have the cleanest uptrend since 1982 of any financial asset in the world. None of this was Greenspan's fault, he thought he was doing the right thing, but now we are seeing the repercussions of his actions by deleveraging everything from the past few decades in a matter of a few years. This still has some time to go, a few more years perhaps, but it's not the end of the world. Look at Japan in the early 90's. Similar situation, housing bubble, tremendous leverage extended to consumers, bubbles burst, stock market crashed, and life continued. They haven't really grown much since but they are still a superpower. As for whoever mentioned the Dow going up 200 points yesterday, the market has been setting up for a bear market rally for a while now, and we're probably going to rally for a couple months, especially if Geithner's plan on Monday is decent at all. Disclosure: I'm a full time options trader.

Bump

Do Y's sneakers use the same sole as CP?

Buuuuuuump. No interest yet, make an offer on the jeans!

that pizza isn't cooked =\

But it's soooo good

Kibbeh nayeh...

Make me an offer!

Bump, taking offers

Got this stuff for Christmas, doesn't really fit my style. I'm new to sufu, but I have refs on ebay as well as one on stylezeitgeist.com if needed.

First up are the RRL's:

RRL Straight Rigid 32x32, tried on once, not slim enough for me. Still have all the tags attached. Retail is $210.

Measurements:

Waist - 16.5"

Inseam - 32"

Rise - 12"

Thigh - 12"

Knee - 8.5"

Leg Opening - 8.5"

sold

Next are the Toms. Doubt anybody is interested in these here but I figured it was worth a shot. They're size 10.5, brown corduroy. They're called the Outstich model I think? They have kind of a gumsole that seems a lot more durable than the normal ones. Worn a couple times, don't really like them. Retail is around $70, I'll take $50->$40->$35 OBO, or trades.

Pics here:

/http://profile.imageshack.us/user/shufon

Yeah I believe it's true that both can't really be utilized at the same time. My plan is to get the CPA so I'll have a secure job in accounting for a few years. Then, move into a more Finance-related career which I want to do all along, but am slightly afraid to in this market..

Just as a heads up, you need 4 years in a finance career (has to deal with securities) to get the CFA designation.

i had a chat with my aunt last night about what ill be doing with my life.

dad and uncle own a slew of profitable car dealerships (volvo, vw, bmw, honda), uncle has two kids, one he never speaks to and another with her own business. dad has me and a younger cocksucking brother.

the question was who/if anyone would take over the family business? and now im dying with anxiety over this..

one hand- i imagine itd be easy, at least in the sense of job security i mean.. i wouldnt be starting from scratch, wouldnt really have any others to compete with for my position (amen for nepotism), the industry is fairly steady in the sense that people always need cars (not really a luxury industry like interior decorator or some shit). itd also give me more than plenty financial security.. dad can afford to do what he wants, when he wants, and thats pretty ballin'

other hand- central florida fucking sucks (when exposed for long periods of time at least) for anyone under the age of 45 in my opinion, its dead, quiet, conservative, hot, and boring, and i DO NOT plan on moving back any time soon, if ever, which obviously interferes. also, owning/running car dealerships, with all the benefits and security it may bring, wasnt exactly what i had pictured for my future when i chose to major in art fag shit at a new york fashion school needless to say.. and the half of me that isnt afraid of failure actually wants to see me find and excel and profit at something totally my own. finally, though ive never been huge on family i have grown closer to dad recently and theres just enough sentimental feelings in my cold heart to think it a shame to see it all go away to someone else completely unrelated.

fuckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

Random, I went through this two years ago. My dad owns a lot of dealerships and his choices were me or my incompetent older brother. I actually planned on doing it for a while, but ultimately changed my mind. Car dealerships can provide financial security for sure, but they take a lot of passion for the business to run for a long time. There are plenty of other places to find financial security, finding it just depends on how hard you want it.

Anybody know if Givenchy high tops run true to size? I wear an 11 in Purcells, should I just stick with an 11 or size up/down?