Today I got told that I am the...

[KrazyHorse]

If you add up their IQs the 500 third world workers would kick KH's arse. Much more intelligent than him.

Strange metric...

[Provost Harrison]

Self-promotion is how you get places, son.

Everything in moderation, son...

[Tupac Shakur]

Moderation is for virgins.

[curtis290]

Since KH thinks he and his ideological bedfellows are the only ones with a well-informed point of view, I'm giving him some recommended reading material. It's pretty embarassing that he thinks there is no serious scholarship critical of the Fed and of the monetarists within economics, and certainly a testament to how well-informed he actually is.

James K. Galbraith, "The collapse of monetarism and the irrelevance of the new monetary consense," Levy Institute Policy Note 2008/1, May 2008

Axel Leijonhufvud, "Central banking doctrine in light of the crisis," VoxEU [blog], 13 May 2008

Richard Alford, "Fed independence: A very selective overview, 1951-present," Directional Macro [blog], 18 June 2008

John B. Taylor, "Economic policy and the financial crisis: An empirical analysis of what went wrong," Critical Review 21 (2009), 341-364

Jamie Morgan, "The limits of central bank policy: Economic crisis and the challenge of effective solution," Cambridge Journal of Economics 33 (2009), 581-608

Axel Leijonhufvud, "Out of the corridor: Keynes and the crisis," Cambridge Journal of Economics 33 (2009), 741-757

As far as the bailouts go or the crisis of regulation within the financial sector, I'm not even going to go there, there's so much criticism by scholars and journalists that you should be able to find that stuff yourself.

But I take it that you think all of these guys, despite being infinitely more qualifed and respected as you, are a bunch of "ignoramuses."

[Flubber]

THis thread and the Krazyhorse persona remind me of a guy on another site who every day writes something like "Today I made 5600". Could Krazyhorse be THAT guy too ?

[Dinner]

Moderation is for virgins.

MikeH is a virgin? Somebody tell his wife.

[Asher]

Why else would she marry him unless a guarantee of no sex was on the table?

[KrazyHorse]

THis thread and the Krazyhorse persona remind me of a guy on another site who every day writes something like "Today I made 5600". Could Krazyhorse be THAT guy too ?

I don't make that much per day.

[MikeH]

Why else would she marry him unless a guarantee of no sex was on the table?

[DanS]

I don't make that much per day.

Neither does the guy on the other site.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Why not hire 5 people with 48 hour work weeks instead of 3 with 80 hour ones? It would be the same amount of hours but with much higher productivity, since the employees would be able to more effectively focus for shorter periods of time, not to mention it employs more people

That would work, because you wouldn't need more HR support, more training, more management etc. And as there's never any need to have them in the office at the same time, you wouldn't need larger offices. And scientists have proved that it's much easier to communicate round large groups than small ones.

I don't know why anyone's never had this brilliant idea before.

[Dinner]

It wouldn't cost more if you motivate people the right way. Hire five people then shoot the two lowest performers than hire two more and repeat. The only cost would be the bullet since you could probably get someone to volunteer to do the shooting free of charge and best of all you don't have to pay them much to get them to perform. It's all about proper motivation.

[curtis290]

That would work, because you wouldn't need more HR support, more training, more management etc. And as there's never any need to have them in the office at the same time, you wouldn't need larger offices. And scientists have proved that it's much easier to communicate round large groups than small ones.

I don't know why anyone's never had this brilliant idea before.

Already answered this in my last post. There's no reason Wall Street should function by different rules than other businesses. There's no reason to have your employees do 80 hour work weeks. You should just hire more people. It probably would be cheaper anyway, because you would probably have to pay them less by the hour...no one is going to work 80 hours unless the money (by the hour) is damn good. I doubt you get paid overtime for this type of work but I'm sure it's reflected in the salary. Kind of a pointless argument though. If they want to spend their entire lives on the job, making a bunch of money they won't be able to enjoy, let them.

[MikeH]

What about sweat shop labour where the pay is so low they have to work 80 hours to get by?

[curtis290]

What about sweat shop labour where the pay is so low they have to work 80 hours to get by?

It's not like that in America anymore. We'll see how long that lasts though...