TPS

I'm sure some of this can be attributed to "draft games." If marrone/hackett really want him, and they know all there is to know about him, best to sow the seeds of confusion... Personally, Nassib seems to be more a 2nd round talent, and I'd hate to see us "waste" our 1st on him.

An argument from one of your own why hyperinflation most likely won't happen. http://www.cnbc.com/id/42978843/The_Errors_of_Inflation_Hawks_Part_III

I know, I know...guns don't shoot dicks, dicks do. Or something like that....

Or maybe it's population control? http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/#!/entry/trinidad-and-tobago-security-guard-accidentally-shoots-off-his-penis,50fec520d7fc7b5670fddd40

Bush bad.

Good CNN/SI article on the front page with some insight on Marrone and STs. Apparently Marrone coordinated ST last year at Syracuse. He stated that he is going to be involved in all phases of the game, acting more like CEO. He obviously wants people he is comfortable with. It's a lot easier to tell someone you want changes if you know them and are comfortable with them.

I'm not privvy to any numbers, so I'm only going on what was said by Whalen and Ritholtz, who I don't think have an agenda. They argue that the derivatives trade is what is propping up the big 4. If you have numbers to counter that, I'm all ears. I'm also surprised that you would not believe that the fact that BofA is backstopped by the FDIC, including their d-trade, does not lead to a moral hazzard problem...?

As Tasker pointed out, this is an issue going forward. There is now an explicit backing of the derivatives trade for these TBTF firms. What do you think that will do for their risk-taking behaviour?

I thought it was a pretty good discussion. I think they also point out that question I asked about, the counterparty risk. It's pretty clear that the big 4 have carte blanche to gamble (as defined by Whalen I believe) without worrying about a default by one of them, as they are now effectively guaranteed by the FDIC as Tasker said. I believe the saying is, "privatized profits and socialized losses."

I looked at the piece as his "welcome to Buffalo" article. Also, you must be familiar with Sullivan's golf game, since you use the term Mulligan. I'm surprised you only used it once though....

You are correct sir. You can try to pin the past on Brandon, but he takes all formal responsibility starting this year.

Your first derivative is negative. PPPlllfffftttt!!!

There was a discussion on the trillions dollar derivative markets in another post; here is a great discussion on the markets and Wall Street's big 4. Deserves its own thread. http://dailybail.com/home/chris-whalen-barry-ritholtz-the-derivatives-timebomb.html

More like a black hole...http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Military-waste-under-fire-1-trillion-missing-2616120.php

Today's BLS PPI report shows that government continues to lie about the impact of QE; the PPI is down 0.2% for December...

Again, the problem with this logic is that the Bush tax cuts were also "temporary." Enacted starting in 2001 and set to expire in 2010. They were extended along with a temporary payroll tax cut in 2010. Obama CHOSE to extend the Bush income tax cuts for everyone but the those making over $400K, and he also CHOSE to end the payroll tax cut. If he wanted, he could've pushed to maintain the lower payroll tax rate. Of course, that would've given the Reps more ammunition for cutting benefits.... Btw, I believe the income tax extensions for income under $400K are for 5 years, then they "expire again.".

Audits of DOD routinely can't trace hundreds of billions of dollars. Defense contracts are simply corporate welfare. Somehow this seems to be tolerable for the right.

Does Marv know Dick?

And you should get your g-e-d dopey.I was addressing Azalin's question, so blow.

Man, that's one loaded question... To sort of answer, the medical corridor is one of the truly dynamic (for buffalo) growth areas, and it was a combination of state and local resources that helped create a foundation that has attracted 50 private companies to that area. Another important state initiative is the historic tax credit which has helped developers restore some of Buffalo's fantastic architecture. If you haven't seen it, the next time you are back in town, stay at the Lafayette Hotel--you will be floored if you saw how decrepit it used to be. The water front is moving forward rapidly, which is a tribute to the community's input and stopping the idiotic Bass pro development. The city awarded Pegula and the Sabres the development of the Webster block (next to the arena) and they are building a complex that will include a hotel and several ice rinks. The old state Donavan Building next door is being refurbished into a hotel and retail space. In two years, downtown will be radically different in a very good way. As a native Californian, I'm actually very happy fate brought me to WNY. http://www.bnmc.org/innovation/private-companies-on-the-bnmc/ http://thehotellafayette.com/ http://www.buffalorising.com/2012/05/donovan-makeover-plans-get-city-ok.html http://www.buffalorising.com/2012/06/just-three-proposals-for-prime-canal-side-site.html http://www.buffalorising.com/2012/10/construction-watch-inner-harbor.html

November 21, 1963

No, I think that's a character in Harry Potter!

Check the video interview on the bills' website. When jr was coaching HS, he went 0-5 against the old man.

I responded to some of them in the other thread. Though, me responding to Schift's arguments would be no differnet than posting Krugman's views for you (which is why I did in the other thread) as I know exactly how you would respond to that as well.Yes, we all have our own biases.

While I've harped on the commodity speculation, I've never said it's the only impact. I'm simply saying it has been an impact at least two major times since 2008. As i think you and even TAsker have to agree, several trillion dollars are simply sitting as reserves at banks (not really at banks, but electronic accounts at the Fed). The other impacts have been on the dollar, as we agree a couple years ago. Your criticism here is unwarranted. On bonds, see the discussion GG and I had on low rates and the huge refinancings. On portfolios, that is my main argument! Historically, the three main transmission mechanisms for monetary policy are asset prices, interest rates, and the value of the dollar. I suppose you misconstrue and assume I live in a vacuum because I've focused on a new mechanism, the ability of investors to buy commodity products. The others are well known. QE is supposed to drive up asset prices; lower interest rates are supposed to increase borrowing and improve cash flows through refinancing; and it should cause the dollar to fall. Yes, that's all basic economics. Yes, we agree here. Maybe bubble is too strong for you, but I would say that the 2008 run up was a bubble as well as the 11/10-5/10 run up which was mainly driven by QE. I agree with your description going forward, it will depend on economic recovery, the difference is that i argue big banks/investors (starting with the CFMA) have a greater impact on commodity prices NOW; they are more volatile because the markets have flipped. The reason futures markets had position limits was to ensure that investors were not the primary influence on prices, but that commercials were the primary influence. That's no longer the case in the short run. The big banks are the major players now, and they play both sides--physical and investing. They make money on the volatility. Why do you think commodity trading went from insignificant to generating > 20% of revenues for the likes of JPMorgan et al over the past 10 years? As we agreed over two years ago, QE caused the dollar to fall as part of the so-called currency wars.Buying (investing in) commodities when the Fed is expanding the money supply is a rational response under normal conditions, but not with a depressed economy. Those higher prices can't be sustained without an increase in the REAL underlying demand by users of commodities; which is exactly what happened several times since the crisis. The argument is not that difficult. With the developments in commodity futures markets since 2000, it's allowed investors to play all commodities as if they are like gold, the difference is that gold has very little "commercial" demand, so its price will rise and fall and remain thre based on investors' beliefs--however, almost all other commodities suffer from the gravity of real demand! Most professionals aren't, but there are many retail investors who are easily swayed by bad theory, and have been/will be convinced to buy things that they don't understand; especially when returns are so low on everythign else. We all get tired of the same arguments.As I tell my students, there is no truth, especially in macro. It's up to them to decide what theories are best at predicting. Cheers...