Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
11Wooooow. Any idiot with a social studies class under their belt could have seen this coming. Good job at being the toolbox of this forum.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
12That's not a contradiction by any stretch. There is a difference between chances and absolutes. The context that you omitted was that rich people are, by cause and effect, completely insulated. I stated that they are not. No contradiction...but thanks for the time you spent cobbling that red herring together.Rick Reuben wrote:bigc wrote: Any idiot with a social studies class under their belt could have seen this coming.
Why would I even argue with an accountant?big c wrote:I am an accountant, and I run payroll.
Accountants are like the janitors of the financial world. They clean up. Thankfully, simple computer software lets small firms do their own accounting now, or they turn over the bulk of it to some data entry person sent by Accountemps.
Bigc: zero posts on the recession or the economy. Many many posts on baseball.
The mind of bigc:steve wrote:The rich are safe from failure, safe from the law, safe from need, and safe from repercussions from anything they might do in life.bigc wrote:That's just a ridiculous thing to say. People do not fit that description by virtue of being rich alone.
I grew up in a wealthy household, and had to get a job when I was 16, and never had many of the trappings that most people associate with wealth. I failed at things, had runins with the cops that were in no way affected by how much money my parents made. Yes, I was safe from needing clothes, shelter and food, but can also assure you that I have never been 'safe from repercussions of anything I may do in life'. That's laughable.
It says a lot about the prejudiced bullshit notions that some people on this board have about wealth that you could somehow assert that it negates the fact of cause and effect.
Do people have a much better chance of being insulated and 'off' if they are rich? Of course.
Steve argues that the rich are insulated from common realities. bigc blurts out, "That's ridiculous"- and then ends his post with a complete contradiction: "Do people have a much better chance of being insulated and 'off' if they are rich? Of course."
Well done.
Thanks for the tangent.
What does my number of posts have to do with anything, other than to indicate that I don't feel like posting about the economy? Nothing.
Your prediction merely indicates to me that you're not retarded with regards to simple economic machinations. The rest of your gobbled output also shows me that you have never met a fallacy you didn't love.
Carry on. Be the conscience we all know you to be.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
13And so you know, accountants produce the numbers you distort.Rick Reuben wrote:bigc wrote: Any idiot with a social studies class under their belt could have seen this coming.
Why would I even argue with an accountant?big c wrote:I am an accountant, and I run payroll.
Accountants are like the janitors of the financial world. They clean up. Thankfully, simple computer software lets small firms do their own accounting now, or they turn over the bulk of it to some data entry person sent by Accountemps.
Bigc: zero posts on the recession or the economy. Many many posts on baseball.
The mind of bigc:steve wrote:The rich are safe from failure, safe from the law, safe from need, and safe from repercussions from anything they might do in life.bigc wrote:That's just a ridiculous thing to say. People do not fit that description by virtue of being rich alone.
I grew up in a wealthy household, and had to get a job when I was 16, and never had many of the trappings that most people associate with wealth. I failed at things, had runins with the cops that were in no way affected by how much money my parents made. Yes, I was safe from needing clothes, shelter and food, but can also assure you that I have never been 'safe from repercussions of anything I may do in life'. That's laughable.
It says a lot about the prejudiced bullshit notions that some people on this board have about wealth that you could somehow assert that it negates the fact of cause and effect.
Do people have a much better chance of being insulated and 'off' if they are rich? Of course.
Steve argues that the rich are insulated from common realities. bigc blurts out, "That's ridiculous"- and then ends his post with a complete contradiction: "Do people have a much better chance of being insulated and 'off' if they are rich? Of course."
Well done.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
14Let's just say I am. Will you submit to us many posts with many fallacies and insults then? Or do I have to keep playing along if I want to see how desperate you are for attention?Rick Reuben wrote:I dare you to enter a discussion of economics, Calculator With Two Legs.bigc wrote:And so you know, accountants produce the numbers you distort.deluded globalist Andrew L, April, 2006 wrote:Capitalism is a system. It is a relation between people mediated by my money, commodities, images, culture, institutions, and so on. It is also a set of rituals. Rituals of thought, behavior and action.
Precisely because capitalism is such an exploitative and violent system however--because misery, havoc and uneven development are its life-blood--it has always required a lot of State violence and terror to persist. Because people organize and resist.
Attempting to locate the Gordian knot or Achilles' heel of such a system in the sinister machinations of a discrete network of suits is, to be as charitable as possible, fundamentally misguided.
Andrew L. sees many relations, but no conspiracies. I bet you're one of those types, too, BigC.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
15The argument against which I was responding was: if you had a wealthy upbringing, you are an asshole. When I responded against that statement, many people rushed to defend it. form that, I inferred that they believed it. Silly me.Rick Reuben wrote:The word 'absolutely' does not appear in Steve's quote. Steve was arguing that the odds are abundantly in favor of the rich. Because you have a slipshod mind, you misinterpeted his words initially, and then scrambled backwards in retreat at the end of your reply. Nice juggling act, Contradictor.bigc wrote: There is a difference between chances and absolutes.
We're all reading your posts, Rick. I'm so engaged right now, so challenged by you. Please predict more economic eventualities for us so we can all continue to pay attention to you.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
16Rick Bob wrote:Morgan Stanley Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
Go fuck yourself?
That isn't going to help them get my business.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
17So many of the "new instruments" are simply new versions of margin buys that were made illegle in the 30's certainly Hedge funds are just a way to do things that would otherwise be considered illegal.
If Bernake does another half a basis point cut and the congress passes this reecovery package, (they don't want unemployment extension cause the numbers would get a lot worse as the unemployment number is only those who qualify and recieve unemployment. Though this is seen as the best way to quickly distribute some stimulus).
If this doesn't work and the plungers keeping the up in the market don't effect some optimism. The problem will be much worse, cause esentially the fed and goverment will be seen as having blown it's wad with no substancial reaction.
If Bernake does another half a basis point cut and the congress passes this reecovery package, (they don't want unemployment extension cause the numbers would get a lot worse as the unemployment number is only those who qualify and recieve unemployment. Though this is seen as the best way to quickly distribute some stimulus).
If this doesn't work and the plungers keeping the up in the market don't effect some optimism. The problem will be much worse, cause esentially the fed and goverment will be seen as having blown it's wad with no substancial reaction.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
18Rick Reuben wrote:Wow. Boston Globe comes through with an excellent financial article in their Sunday edition:
the black box economyTHE PAST YEAR has been a harrowing one for the world's financial markets, shaken by subprime crises, credit crunches, and other ills. Things have only gotten stranger in the past week, with stock prices swinging wildly in every major market - drastically down, then back up.
Last week the Federal Reserve announced the biggest cut in overnight lending rates in more than two decades. Congress, not to be outdone, is slapping together a massive deficit spending package aimed at giving the economy an emergency booster shot.
Despite the anxiety, nobody is stockpiling canned goods just yet. The prevailing assumption in today's economy is that recessions and bear markets come and go, and that things will work out in the end, much as they have since the Great Depression. That's because there's a collective confidence that the market is strong enough to correct itself, and that experts in charge of the financial system will understand how to mount a vigorous defense.
Should we be so confident this time? A handful of financial theorists and thinkers are now saying we shouldn't. The drumbeat of bad news over the past year, they say, is only a symptom of something new and unsettling - a deeper change in the financial system that may leave regulators, and even Congress, powerless when they try to wield their usual tools.
That something is the immense shadow economy of novel and poorly understood financial instruments created by hedge funds and investment banks over the past decade - a web of extraordinarily complex securities and wagers that has made the world's financial system so opaque and entangled that even many experts confess that they no longer understand how it works.
Here's a helpful image that shows how much risk and leverage is parked on top of the 'real world' economy.
Here we go again:Asian markets took a tumble Monday in the wake of a pre-weekend slide on Wall Street and on concerns the Federal Reserve may not cut interest rates as aggressively as previously expected.
The Nikkei 225 Average fell 2.6% to 13,274.93 by the end of the morning trading session, while the broader Topix index lost 2.7% at 1,308.36.
In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng Index shed 3.6% to 24,220.93 and the Hang Seng China Enterprises Index lost 4.4% at 13,393.88.
Could Helicopter Ben drop another 50 basis points this soon on the heels of his 75 pt handout to the insiders? Looks like anything less will cause new convulsions.
Oh, yeah. Freedom requires that the Fed knock off at least 50 basis points at this week's Fed meeting. Anything less would be a victory for the cut-and-run "bears," who have given up on 'Merica.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
19
covert photo of Rick Reuben/Clocker Bob coping with the failure of the economy.
Jeez, you two are like the guy who came to my school to tell us how sex ruins relationships and such. He told us a story about a girl who wrote him a letter saying that she and her boyfriend have sex AND love each other. Three years later, after he found out that she broke up with him and he beat her to a pulp, he came to her school, found her, and said: "Remember, three years ago when you said he loved you? Did he really? Was I right?" What a fucking dick.
Wall St. Journal Tells You What Clocker Bob Told You In 2006
20The only way I'm ever taking Bob's bit seriously is if he can predict(give or take a month) when Chinese Democracy is actually going to come out. Until then, he's just another fool in need of a yapendectomy.