don alejandro robaina

[Warren]

Warren, when I allow myself to really think about this fact, and all associated with it, the air is sucked from my lungs.

But I always try to keep in mind that there are those who are "doing it tougher" than I might feel I am.

Amen to that brother.

[Chaki]

... I don't know if it is because of the industry I work in, or the type of people in the industry I am in, but for more than a year now, a surprisingly large number of hedge fund managers, portfolio managers and analysts that I meet with on a regular basis have been buying gold bullion...not GLDs, but the actual metal that they are socking away. We aren't talking a little, we are talking huge amounts, and they want physical delivery. I think this is a testament to the lack of faith in our government and the direction it has been taking. On top of this, they have been buying up: pistols, shotguns, assault rifles, ammunition, freeze dried food, etc. Let's just say they aren't planning on going hunting. These aren't religious zealots, or some other type of psycho (at least not to the best of my knowledge). These people are the byproducts of many of the best schools in this country. Most would consider them to be highly educated. On top of that, we're looking at individuals that fall on both side of the political spectrum, conservatives and liberals...Republicans and Democrats. As much as we hate, or don't even bother to think about it...no government, no matter how strong, lasts forever. And when the **** hits the fan (God forbid) and the protection of your family and home is the only thing that matters, do you want to be the person holding the gun, or the person staring down the barrel? Bleak? Yes...but there are quite a few well educated people thinking along those lines in NYC, arguably a city which is a bastion for liberalism in the U.S.

I am not so sure about that.

Education? Consider that LTCM (the hedge fund that went bust) had a bunch of PhDs in physics, finance, economics working there, not to mention 2 Nobel prize winners in economics.

Should you draw some conclusions about your own life based on the judgement of fund managers, analysts or bankers? Maybe. Maybe not. In fact I can find 250 billion reasons not to. Just remember that their judgement caused the most severe financial crisis since 1930s. These financiers had to be bailed out: US$250b out of the US$700b TARP went into bank recapitalizations. So if these guys are heading for the hills with guns, gold and dried foods, maybe the rest of us might be fine. After all, there is some wisdom in the crowd (to paraphrase the excellent book of James Surowicki). And what is the crowd doing? Rolling up their sleeves, getting back to work, paying down their debt, improving their skills through education (that is when they have time after gun practice, just kidding ). In fact, if the financiers type are so pessimistic -just on a contrarian view, there might be light at the end od the tunnel

[bunburyist]

...

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how Government is conducting business today…

'cept for one difference - that Gentlemen at the bar charges interest on that $100, and is saddling the next generation (at least) with hitherto unseen levels of debt.

Anyway, regarding the gun issue I'd like to throw a couple cents in. I'd always thought the US is pro-gun not so much because of circular arguments like the need to protect yourself from gun-wielding criminals, but rather because of cultural identity. Now my American history is patchy, but wasn't it when a bunch of guys decided to fight for their freedom and liberty (or dodge tax, depending on perspective) that the US as a nation and a culture was really born.

So, I think the right to bear arms is as much an expression of identity and patriotism as it is being worried about some punk pulling a piece on you when you're washing your car. As such, I fully understand and respect that choice in so far as the view of a foreigner even matters.

For me, therein lies the issue of why this argument gets so heated. Of course free access to guns makes a place more dangerous. But that's not the point. Two groups arguing about the same title, but effectively completely different content.

Just my view, and probably a simplistic one, but the US is unique. Just like every other nation, and the same justifications aren't always applicable.

[thechenman]

I am not so sure about that.

Education? Consider that LTCM (the hedge fund that went bust) had a bunch of PhDs in physics, finance, economics working there, not to mention 2 Nobel prize winners in economics.

Should you draw some conclusions about your own life based on the judgement of fund managers, analysts or bankers? Maybe. Maybe not. In fact I can find 250 billion reasons not to. Just remember that their judgement caused the most severe financial crisis since 1930s. These financiers had to be bailed out: US$250b out of the US$700b TARP went into bank recapitalizations. So if these guys are heading for the hills with guns, gold and dried foods, maybe the rest of us might be fine. After all, there is some wisdom in the crowd (to paraphrase the excellent book of James Surowicki). And what is the crowd doing? Rolling up their sleeves, getting back to work, paying down their debt, improving their skills through education (that is when they have time after gun practice, just kidding ). In fact, if the financiers type are so pessimistic -just on a contrarian view, there might be light at the end od the tunnel

Chaki...

I don't want to get into specifics over LTCM or TARP. I know guys who were at LTCM...and I am so familiar with TARP that it gives me nightmares about the incompetency of our government. What I can say is that I think it if fairly irrefutable that education creates a more well rounded and intelligent person. Whether you are a graduate of Yale, Podunk Community College, or someone with a GED. Education helps. However, the educated and the intelligent are not without flaws and do make mistakes. That does not mean they aren't intelligent, it just means they made mistakes. The financial markets are not a science, you can beat it much of the time, but you won't beat it everytime, and when you are wrong it will hurt. Just like any other business...no body is perfect, and if everyone could beat the markets every time, hell...I would have the largest Habanos collection in the world, purchased exclusively from our friends at Czar...and you can hold me to that.

[PigFish]

guys, we might never agree on much of this and as much fun as it is to debate, though it would be far more fun in person - armed only with good cigars and top notch rum - i have learnt one thing from all this...

i am NEVER again going to post a photo of a nice old man.

... typical 'liberal' solution to a problem!!! -LOL

Can you hook me up with one of those hats Ken?

[gammon]

guys, we might never agree on much of this and as much fun as it is to debate, though it would be far more fun in person - armed only with good cigars and top notch rum - i have learnt one thing from all this...

i am NEVER again going to post a photo of a nice old man.

I will have to take yours words with a grain of salt. With the cigar in one hand, a bullet on the other....

sipping a top notch rum.. It is a cry of help, with a suicide note packed in the shirt pocket..

what would people wonder...... is stuck between your legs with a hair trigger????

[MontrealRon]

Gentlemen, I love all the posts on this thread;

so well thought-out, so much passion.

However, this whole "left-wing, right-wing" business is a false dichotemy.

Instead of visualising political/social positions as a straight line,

with supposed "moderates" in the center, and "extremists" on the far edges,

imagine it as a circle, where every point is a relative center,

and where every extreme, when pushed far enough,

ends up meeting its supposed opposite.

As an anarchist, I disown all government;

yet as a philosophical buddhist,

I believe that compassion for others is central to our human nature.

As far as I am concerned, there are only two types of people -

givers and takers.

Unfortunately, in a world system based on money and power,

it is the takers that are in control.

Psychopaths, with no morality or empathy to hold them back,

tend to occupy positions of power, whether in business, government, or religion.

The only way to escape this oppression is to disolve the very concept

that one person has the right to control another.

People of good will, the 95% of humanity that are the "givers",

can and would volontarily associate,

to produce and develop whatever is necessary for the common good,

as well as for individual needs and desires.

This position, as you can see, combines the supposed "right-wing" focus on individual autonomy,

with the so called "left-wing" focus on the greatest good for the greatest number.

I can well understand those who feel that guns afford at least some small measure of protection

against the psychos in government that want to control every aspect of life,

and I also understand the feeling of those who see guns as an extention,

and enabler, of psychotic behavior.

Eliminate the need for protection by eliminating the control of the psychopaths,

and the whole question becomes moot.

[Buch0]

Gentlemen, I love all the posts on this thread;

so well thought-out, so much passion.

However, this whole "left-wing, right-wing" business is a false dichotemy.

Instead of visualising political/social positions as a straight line,

with supposed "moderates" in the center, and "extremists" on the far edges,

imagine it as a circle, where every point is a relative center,

and where every extreme, when pushed far enough,

ends up meeting its supposed opposite.

As an anarchist, I disown all government;

yet as a philosophical buddhist,

I believe that compassion for others is central to our human nature.

As far as I am concerned, there are only two types of people -

givers and takers.

Unfortunately, in a world system based on money and power,

it is the takers that are in control.

Psychopaths, with no morality or empathy to hold them back,

tend to occupy positions of power, whether in business, government, or religion.

The only way to escape this oppression is to disolve the very concept

that one person has the right to control another.

People of good will, the 95% of humanity that are the "givers",

can and would volontarily associate,

to produce and develop whatever is necessary for the common good,

as well as for individual needs and desires.

This position, as you can see, combines the supposed "right-wing" focus on individual autonomy,

with the so called "left-wing" focus on the greatest good for the greatest number.

I can well understand those who feel that guns afford at least some small measure of protection

against the psychos in government that want to control every aspect of life,

and I also understand the feeling of those who see guns as an extention,

and enabler, of psychotic behavior.

Eliminate the need for protection by eliminating the control of the psychopaths,

and the whole question becomes moot.

Mate, love it. One of the great posts in recent times and I agree with everyone word you said. In the big picture, the takers are going to only take more and more to continually 'better' themselves as morality gradually fades into oblivion, the givers will 'give' more to try and maintain the peace which in course will end up with a world I don't want to contemplate right now..

[Chaki]

Chaki...

I don't want to get into specifics over LTCM or TARP. I know guys who were at LTCM...and I am so familiar with TARP that it gives me nightmares about the incompetency of our government. What I can say is that I think it if fairly irrefutable that education creates a more well rounded and intelligent person. Whether you are a graduate of Yale, Podunk Community College, or someone with a GED. Education helps. However, the educated and the intelligent are not without flaws and do make mistakes. That does not mean they aren't intelligent, it just means they made mistakes. The financial markets are not a science, you can beat it much of the time, but you won't beat it everytime, and when you are wrong it will hurt. Just like any other business...no body is perfect, and if everyone could beat the markets every time, hell...I would have the largest Habanos collection in the world, purchased exclusively from our friends at Czar...and you can hold me to that.

Chenman,

Agreed- I'll give you that much. It's better to have education than not. I say that much in my initial post ("improving skills through education"). But good judgement is even more crucial. Granted, we all make mistakes. My point was just that the fund managers and bankers you mentioned have not shown that their judgement is any better than yours.

As for the government incompetency, I can share the pain. The Fed was too complacent and the regulators were asleep at the wheel. The government was just incompetent (I am talking about the past administrations, the current one, I don't know yet).

But the bankers who got us into this mess by designing, trading, investing in exotic financial products they did not even understand but got paid huge bonuses in the process, either 1) did not know what they were doing and they were incompetent as well, or, 2) they knew what they were doing but did it anyway and that makes them thieves or at least morally bankrupt

As for your Habanos collection-large or small, I am looking forward to sharing some with you. I have a few from Czar as well

[PigFish]

Chenman,

Agreed- I'll give you that much. It's better to have education than not. I say that much in my initial post ("improving skills through education"). But good judgement is even more crucial. Granted, we all make mistakes. My point was just that the fund managers and bankers you mentioned have not shown that their judgement is any better than yours.

As for the government incompetency, I can share the pain. The Fed was too complacent and the regulators were asleep at the wheel. The government was just incompetent (I am talking about the past administrations, the current one, I don't know yet).

But the bankers who got us into this mess by designing, trading, investing in exotic financial products they did not even understand but got paid huge bonuses in the process, either 1) did not know what they were doing and they were incompetent as well, or, 2) they knew what they were doing but did it anyway and that makes them thieves or at least morally bankrupt

As for your Habanos collection-large or small, I am looking forward to sharing some with you. I have a few from Czar as well

Having "gone my own way," I have not really followed this, another tangential topic. While what bankers do to plan for the "end of days" is of little concern to me, not that I disagree with it, but allowing them to take the blame for the current situation is not really correct (IMHO).

Financial oversight is a self proclaimed roll of congress, well according to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank it is anyway. Social justice by mandating lending guidelines for the sake of "fairness" is how we got here. "Engineering" lending 'fairness' though the secondary market, government, sticking its nose in the private sector for the sake of gathering power, got us here and many saw it coming. Offering to pay silk hat prices for sows' ear loans was done through the secondary market and was further allowed to be passed on to the rest of the market via derivatives. All done in plain sight and in the open with the blessing of and encouragement of Congress. When asked, and you can find the videos on UTube, you can see Barney Frank, Maxine Watters(sp?) and others defending the roles and the financial stability of both Fannie and Freddie as they paid out 4 and 5 point premium yield spreads to anyone who would fund the loans!!! I was there, watched it coming, saw it killing the market and took a career path change in the mid 2000's as a result.

Why was AIG to big to fail. They were the derivative tool. Still in existence and still doing the same things I am sure. How about Fannie and Freddie? Now owned by the Feds they will continue with an open credit line from the US taxpayer to accept societal engineered loans to keep the bus running!

Have you ever wondered why there was a need to collect ethnic information on the bottom of a 1003? For those not familiar with the term, a 1003 is a uniform residential mortgage application in the States. May I then ask what the **** does your race have to do with paying back a loan? The answer to your concerns about government oversight and societal engineering is written right on the bottom of the 1003.

The current financial crisis and mortgage meltdown is not because certain watchdogs were not doing their jobs! The watchdogs were ignored. The overseers were the problem! It was because certain political groups, not the bankers were pulling the strings of 'economic justice' once more and interfering with the free market. Just call it "cash for clunkers" on a global economic scale!!! Just look who brought us "cash for clunkers" and point your finger that way! Paying the consumer $4000 plus dollars for a piece of **** car only makes sense when the government owns car companies. Paying huge premium yields for worthless paper only makes sense when the government wants to own mortgage companies. -Piggy

[Mr. Japan]

Don Alejandro is a great man if you watch him from the left or from the right, thanks for sharing this nice photo.

[Chaki]

Having "gone my own way," I have not really followed this, another tangential topic. While what bankers do to plan for the "end of days" is of little concern to me, not that I disagree with it, but allowing them to take the blame for the current situation is not really correct (IMHO).

Financial oversight is a self proclaimed roll of congress, well according to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank it is anyway. Social justice by mandating lending guidelines for the sake of "fairness" is how we got here. "Engineering" lending 'fairness' though the secondary market, government, sticking its nose in the private sector for the sake of gathering power, got us here and many saw it coming. Offering to pay silk hat prices for sows' ear loans was done through the secondary market and was further allowed to be passed on to the rest of the market via derivatives. All done in plain sight and in the open with the blessing of and encouragement of Congress. When asked, and you can find the videos on UTube, you can see Barney Frank, Maxine Watters(sp?) and others defending the roles and the financial stability of both Fannie and Freddie as they paid out 4 and 5 point premium yield spreads to anyone who would fund the loans!!! I was there, watched it coming, saw it killing the market and took a career path change in the mid 2000's as a result.

Why was AIG to big to fail. They were the derivative tool. Still in existence and still doing the same things I am sure. How about Fannie and Freddie? Now owned by the Feds they will continue with an open credit line from the US taxpayer to accept societal engineered loans to keep the bus running!

Have you ever wondered why there was a need to collect ethnic information on the bottom of a 1003? For those not familiar with the term, a 1003 is a uniform residential mortgage application in the States. May I then ask what the **** does your race have to do with paying back a loan? The answer to your concerns about government oversight and societal engineering is written right on the bottom of the 1003.

The current financial crisis and mortgage meltdown is not because certain watchdogs were not doing their jobs! The watchdogs were ignored. The overseers were the problem! It was because certain political groups, not the bankers were pulling the strings of 'economic justice' once more and interfering with the free market. Just call it "cash for clunkers" on a global economic scale!!! Just look who brought us "cash for clunkers" and point your finger that way! Paying the consumer $4000 plus dollars for a piece of **** car only makes sense when the government owns car companies. Paying huge premium yields for worthless paper only makes sense when the government wants to own mortgage companies. -Piggy

Sorry to relaunch this tangential topic. With the Easter break, I could not respond.

I can see you don't trust Congress, and "certain political groups", but the US Government wishing to control the auto industry? Seriously? You could have mentioned Microsoft and the software in 70% of PCs in the US, I would have found that sort of conspiracy theory amusing at least.

As for the cause of the crisis and who is to blame, the overseers do have some responsibility, I agreed to that, but so do the bankers in at least the same amount. They pushed for the Glass-Steagall Act to be repelled, they paid lobbyists to explain and ensure Congress would pass friendly legislation etc... Many congressmen are lawyers by training, they would not know a call from a swap. But the bankers knew very well how to game the system, creating special purpose vehicles in exotic locations to avoid capital constraints for instance. Lending money to people with no income or assets (knowing full well they could never repay) just so they could securitize the said loans and pass it on at "silk hat prices for sows' ear" with AAA rating and get huge bonuses in the process, might have been legal but is morally wrong in my view.

Freddie and Fannie were already effectively controlled by the Government ("Government-Sponsored Enterprise"). And what about them and their subsidized loans anyway? You seem to imply that "societal engineering" is inherently wrong. I believe that in some cases it is justified. For instance, Africans being captured and forcibly sent to America as slaves. Talk about societal engineering. That another piece of societal engineering tries to somewhat atone for it is not objectionable for me. I was lucky my parents helped me buy my first flat. For those of us not as fortunate, I cannot find any problem with the Government trying to help low-income households become owners through subsidized mortgage rates. It has to be within limits, of course, and maybe Fannie, Freddie etc went too far, but I don't find their role objectionable in principle. I call that solidarity. Even cowboys with the right to bear arms and all that knew that, when under attack by indians, it was better to circle the wagons and fight as a group than do so individually.

As regards form 1003, I am not familiar with it but I assume you mean the Government for some dark purposes need to know the race of a loan applicant. Again, I don't find that necessarily threatening. Many years ago, I studied in the US and had to state my race when applying for a social security number. On the form there was no "Asian" box so I ticked "Pacific Islander", close enough I thought. Nothing happened. No black helicopters appeared. That the US Government might want to know the racial make-up of some parts the population does not worry me in itself.

So what/who caused the current financial crisis and mortgage meltdown? Maybe societal engineering gone too far and overseers did. But surely bankers, greed and skewed incentives in the banking industry played their part too.