|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| jaykimf wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The Lazarus-like recovery of the nation�s big banks did not benefit just the bankers � it also created huge paydays for hedge fund managers, including a record $4 billion gain in 2009 for one bold investor who bet big on the financial sector. The manager, David Tepper, wagered that the government would not let the big banks fail, even as other investors fled financial shares amid fears that banks would collapse or be nationalized. �We bet on the country�s revival,� Mr. Tepper, who describes his trading technique as a mix of deep analysis and common sense, said Wednesday in an interview. �Those who keep their heads while others are panicking usually do well.� |
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/business/01hedge.html?hp |
What a joke. The only thing "Lazarus-like" about it is that it's a figment of your imagination. There has been no recovery whatsoever, not even ostensibly. Unemployment continues to rise, along with debt, inflation, and taxes. The real economy is in a full on depression with worse yet to come (as the spin doctors are putting it, "a double dip recession"). And that's not even bringing the imminent, rapacious squeeze of Obama-care into it...
Of course when the Fed prints trillions and trillions of dollars and hands it over to the banks, it causes the stock markets to "go up" for awhile. This is obvious. It's all bogus money, backed by nothing. And the only people getting this money are the banks and hedge funds, and it's still all speculation, without any substance. It's a raw deal for everyone else.
The notion that we're in a "recovery" would be laughable if the fact that it's a blatant lie to fool (and stall) the public weren't so appalling serious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The Lazarus-like recovery of the nation�s big banks did not benefit just the bankers � it also created huge paydays for hedge fund managers, including a record $4 billion gain in 2009 for one bold investor who bet big on the financial sector. The manager, David Tepper, wagered that the government would not let the big banks fail, even as other investors fled financial shares amid fears that banks would collapse or be nationalized. �We bet on the country�s revival,� Mr. Tepper, who describes his trading technique as a mix of deep analysis and common sense, said Wednesday in an interview. �Those who keep their heads while others are panicking usually do well.� |
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/business/01hedge.html?hp |
The country's revival? What country? Can't be the US he's talking about. |
And yet his analysis made him 4 billion dollars last year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The Lazarus-like recovery of the nation�s big banks did not benefit just the bankers � it also created huge paydays for hedge fund managers, including a record $4 billion gain in 2009 for one bold investor who bet big on the financial sector. The manager, David Tepper, wagered that the government would not let the big banks fail, even as other investors fled financial shares amid fears that banks would collapse or be nationalized. �We bet on the country�s revival,� Mr. Tepper, who describes his trading technique as a mix of deep analysis and common sense, said Wednesday in an interview. �Those who keep their heads while others are panicking usually do well.� |
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/business/01hedge.html?hp |
What a joke. The only thing "Lazarus-like" about it is that it's a figment of your imagination. There has been no recovery whatsoever, not even ostensibly. Unemployment continues to rise, along with debt, inflation, and taxes. The real economy is in a full on depression with worse yet to come (as the spin doctors are putting it, "a double dip recession"). And that's not even bringing the imminent, rapacious squeeze of Obama-care into it...
Of course when the Fed prints trillions and trillions of dollars and hands it over to the banks, it causes the stock markets to "go up" for awhile. This is obvious. It's all bogus money, backed by nothing. And the only people getting this money are the banks and hedge funds, and it's still all speculation, without any substance. It's a raw deal for everyone else.
The notion that we're in a "recovery" would be laughable if the fact that it's a blatant lie to fool (and stall) the public weren't so appalling serious. |
I'd rather have the 4 billion in bogus money backed by nothing than not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jaykimf wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The Lazarus-like recovery of the nation�s big banks did not benefit just the bankers � it also created huge paydays for hedge fund managers, including a record $4 billion gain in 2009 for one bold investor who bet big on the financial sector. The manager, David Tepper, wagered that the government would not let the big banks fail, even as other investors fled financial shares amid fears that banks would collapse or be nationalized. �We bet on the country�s revival,� Mr. Tepper, who describes his trading technique as a mix of deep analysis and common sense, said Wednesday in an interview. �Those who keep their heads while others are panicking usually do well.� |
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/business/01hedge.html?hp |
The country's revival? What country? Can't be the US he's talking about. |
And yet his analysis made him 4 billion dollars last year. |
He's a goddam hedge fund manager! He manages billions of dollars of investment capital, and almost certainly has insider knowledge (they all do at that level). His so-called "gains" ultimately derived from trillions of dollars in fictitious money printed by the Fed, nothing more. This sort of thing is completely and utterly worthless for the common public, who are getting raped by unemployment and higher taxes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Oh, and David Tepper even used to work for Goldman-Sachs, where he was a head trader for 8 years. With connections like that he was "somehow" able to "read" the market... What a shock. I'd like to see anyone who hasn't worked for Goldman try that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jaykimf wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The Lazarus-like recovery of the nation�s big banks did not benefit just the bankers � it also created huge paydays for hedge fund managers, including a record $4 billion gain in 2009 for one bold investor who bet big on the financial sector. The manager, David Tepper, wagered that the government would not let the big banks fail, even as other investors fled financial shares amid fears that banks would collapse or be nationalized. �We bet on the country�s revival,� Mr. Tepper, who describes his trading technique as a mix of deep analysis and common sense, said Wednesday in an interview. �Those who keep their heads while others are panicking usually do well.� |
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/business/01hedge.html?hp |
The country's revival? What country? Can't be the US he's talking about. |
And yet his analysis made him 4 billion dollars last year. |
I agree with visitorq to some extent. Pretty hard NOT to make that kind of money in that type of position. Now if he had made that money during the crash (or even, say, 1/4 of that), THEN I'd be impressed. And yes, a number of people made that kind of cash during the crash.
Not to say the man isn't incredibly smart and knows what he's doing.... I'm just saying I'd hardly credit his awesome analysis skills for making 4 billion dollars.
And I think it is your point of view that delays fiscal policy. People like Obama are like, "well crap, the financial system is back making money, so everything must be great!" Well hell, Bernie Maddoff got by for a long time did he not? People get impressed by these profits, when these profits have a lot to do with knowledge (which is VERY different from analysis).
Point being, yes, he made a killing, but I doubt he really belives that the US economy has recovered. And if he does, then he is going to be losing some of that 4 billion in the next year or two. And also, the question is: how much did he lose in 2007-08? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now these I'd be more impressed by personally:
| Quote: |
| Three managers among the top 10 � Mr. Soros (No. 2), James Simons (No. 3) and John Paulson (No. 4) � were back-to-back winners, having profited during the lean times of 2008 as well as in the booming market of 2009. |
And Mr. Tepper can thank the US gov't:
| Quote: |
| Mr. Tepper, who manages about $12 billion for investors, also benefited from a successful investment in bonds of American International Group, the giant insurance company that was also rescued by the government. |
No gov't bailout, no huge profit for Mr. Tepper. So where is this recovery??
Oh, and to answer my previous question:
| Quote: |
| Half of the top 10 managers in 2009 lost money the year before, including Mr. Tepper, whose flagship fund, Appaloosa Investment Fund I, dropped 27 percent in 2008. |
Sounds pretty average to me.
So, in short, Tepper did about as well as the market in 2008, wagered the gov't would back up some shitty banks, and profited from that wager. So basically Jay, he did what you did, except with more money.
Now if George Soros said what Mr. Tepper did, THEN I'd start to think I was missing something here, and I'd start to wonder... And I don't believe he has. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Now these I'd be more impressed by personally:
| Quote: |
| Three managers among the top 10 � Mr. Soros (No. 2), James Simons (No. 3) and John Paulson (No. 4) � were back-to-back winners, having profited during the lean times of 2008 as well as in the booming market of 2009. |
And Mr. Tepper can thank the US gov't:
| Quote: |
| Mr. Tepper, who manages about $12 billion for investors, also benefited from a successful investment in bonds of American International Group, the giant insurance company that was also rescued by the government. |
No gov't bailout, no huge profit for Mr. Tepper. So where is this recovery??
Oh, and to answer my previous question:
| Quote: |
| Half of the top 10 managers in 2009 lost money the year before, including Mr. Tepper, whose flagship fund, Appaloosa Investment Fund I, dropped 27 percent in 2008. |
Sounds pretty average to me.
So, in short, Tepper did about as well as the market in 2008, wagered the gov't would back up some shitty banks, and profited from that wager. So basically Jay, he did what you did, except with more money.
Now if George Soros said what Mr. Tepper did, THEN I'd start to think I was missing something here, and I'd start to wonder... And I don't believe he has. |
You're right . There's nothing particularly impressive about his loading up on the financials . Considering the circumstances it was pretty much a no-brainer. The difference between him and I is that I was managing my own investments while he was managing other peoples money. Even if he had been wrong, it would have been other people's money that was lost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The financial crisis is not over. Years and years left.
But it warms my heart that some very well connected hedge fund guys made a fortune on their knowledge the the US government has thrown capitalism in the can in favour of a socialism for the rich economic polity.
Citi has tens of billions in bad loans on their books. Still. To this day. The firm is entirely insolvent.
I do appreciate Jay's holding me to the fire. I really do. Keep it up. I'm a big fan of adversarial discourse on these topics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Socialism for the rich".
I think the word you may be looking for is Dirigisme, or Dirigiste policies pursued in favour of the rich?
Socialism is a specific political/social philosophy which seeks to utilise state economic power to meet particular goals/values.
As such, my understanding is this-
All socialism employs state economic activity.
But-
Not all state economic activity is socialist.
I don't think the current policies are especially socialst. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chellovek wrote: |
Not all state economic activity is socialist.
I don't think the current policies are especially socialst. |
How is the state intervening in the economy, bailing out banks, taking over the health care sector, and spending (thereby debasing the currency) in excess of the entire GDP not socialist? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I refer you back to my remarks about socialism being a specific political and social philosophy. It seeks to use the state to redistribute wealth to the working-class, more equitable distribution of wealth through state ownership etc.
Perhaps I miss something, but the current policies don't appear do that.
Health care, has some tinges of socialism, but I was talking with regard to mises remarks about the banks more than anything, and his comment about socialism for the rich.
What I am driving at is that state activity is not automatically socialist just because it is done by the state. If it is couched in the socialist values/worldview as touched on above, then it would be socialist. If it isn't, that makes it Dirigiste rather than socialist. (I'm leaving aside the question as to whether such policies are beneficial or damaging, that's another tale).
Need to get away from this simple-minded view all state activity = socialist = Evil Empire/bad/dictatorship/gulag, it muddies the water needlessly I think. The Cold War is over man, we don't need to sling mud or engage in over-emotional simplifications anymore about socialism/capitalism etc 
Hell, I'm not even remotely socialist, but I couldn't continue to let it slide. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chellovek wrote: |
| I refer you back to my remarks about socialism being a specific political and social philosophy. It seeks to use the state to redistribute wealth to the working-class, more equitable distribution of wealth through state ownership etc. |
That's not the official definition of socialism. In fact there is no 'official' definition (it's a broad category). It encompasses more than just the economy (and is certainly not limited to the working classes), but regarding economics the overarching theme would be any degree of government control or influence over property and/or resources and the means of production (including the central banking/monetary system which fuels it). Any state intervention in the economy can be considered socialist, which most people simply consider to be the opposite of free market capitalism ('pure' free market capitalism has basically never existed in history, though it came pretty close in the US before the Federal Reserve came into being).
| Quote: |
Perhaps I miss something, but the current policies don't appear do that.
Health care, has some tinges of socialism, but I was talking with regard to mises remarks about the banks more than anything, and his comment about socialism for the rich.
What I am driving at is that state activity is not automatically socialist just because it is done by the state. If it is couched in the socialist values/worldview as touched on above, then it would be socialist. If it isn't, that makes it Dirigiste rather than socialist. (I'm leaving aside the question as to whether such policies are beneficial or damaging, that's another tale). |
I think most people would put dirigisme (which is specifically French) under the umbrella of socialism, as just a milder form of it (compared to command and control economies in the communist bloc etc). If we are discussing state intervention in the economy, then I disagree with your comment that state activity is not automatically socialist (surely it is). The US is now a very socialist country, and becoming more so over time (to our detriment).
Fascism (or corporatism if you prefer) and communism can also both be considered types of socialism (in fact they are nearly identical).
| Quote: |
Need to get away from this simple-minded view all state activity = socialist = Evil Empire/bad/dictatorship/gulag, it muddies the water needlessly I think. The Cold War is over man, we don't need to sling mud or engage in over-emotional simplifications anymore about socialism/capitalism etc
Hell, I'm not even remotely socialist, but I couldn't continue to let it slide. |
Fine, that's your opinion. However, this is not about the Cold War; the issue goes back long before then, and is still just as relevant as today. More than being an economic issue, it's above all an issue of liberty. Simply put, the more government control you have over a country (economically and otherwise) the less freedom there will be for the individual. This is always the case, throughout history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah I'm getting what you're saying, but I don't quite agree with you.
I've got a raging hangover just now so if I remember I'll get back to you later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
