Why KH is shilling for QE3

[Ben Kenobi]

IOW, I can't come up with a cogent argument so I'm going to handwave it away.

[SlowwHand]

I bank at BOA. This is an unpaid endorsement.

[KrazyHorse]

IOW, I can't come up with a cogent argument so I'm going to handwave it away.

My argument was very cogent, ******. Your number is a measure of the ratio of non-hedged transaction risks to hedged transaction risks. That is not a measure of credit risk, you unbelievable idiot.

Most especially, it is not a measure of downside risk to long credit. Based on the numbers presented in that document, any of the banks named are just as likely to profit from credit deterioration as lose by it.

[Ben Kenobi]

My argument was very cogent, ******. Your number is a measure of the ratio of non-hedged transaction risks to hedged transaction risks. That is not a measure of credit risk, you unbelievable idiot.

Uh, no, it measures assets to overall credit risks. Sure some of them are going to be profitable but 8 to 1 is vastly over leveraged.

Based on the numbers presented in that document, any of the banks named are just as likely to profit from credit deterioration as lose by it.

Terrible argument. You are arguing that the percentage that is not hedged are equally likely to pan out as to bust out.

This would only be the case with 100 percent hedging. Hedging 50 percent in the event of all of it going bust, means you keep half of what you originally had.

[KrazyHorse]

Unsurprisingly, you ****ing mental slug, you understood neither of those points.

[MikeH]

Even I know more economics than Ben. Wow.

[Ben Kenobi]

Unsurprisingly, you ****ing mental slug, you understood neither of those points.

If they were immune to market losses, they would also be immune to market gains. Your argument is flawed. Yes, they will suffer from market loss, all banks would do so, and all banks would profit from the gain.

The issue is the leverage. If they are leveraged 8 to 1, then losses would hit them much harder then if they were at 3 or 2 to one. This is why it is imprudent that they are at an 8 to 1 ratio.

And rather then simply sneering and arguing, "you know nothing", you still have not addressed my question. Why is it unreasonable for Goldman to reduce their leverage as HSBC has?

[RGBVideo]

[Dinner]

Is it funny enough to view his post?

[RGBVideo]

well, you won't be surprised if you do, so i wouldn't view in your place, no.

the usual retardation, probably motivated by an urgenct need of pretending to be an expert on a subject that all the "cool guys in apolyton" are experts on.

really, why do people in general have to pretend to be experts on fields they're not experts on?

[dannubis]

Is it funny enough to view his post?

I caved in and clicked. It was funny as hell.

[giblets]

well, you won't be surprised if you do, so i wouldn't view in your place, no.

the usual retardation, probably motivated by an urgenct need of pretending to be an expert on a subject that all the "cool guys in apolyton" are experts on.

really, why do people in general have to pretend to be experts on fields they're not experts on?

I think Ben tries to pass himself off as an expert on everything, regardless of whether the "cool guys on apolyton" care about the subject.

[MikeH]

Cool guys on Apolyton is an oxymoron.

[Elok]

I would just like to say that I have no idea what either of them is talking about.

[dannubis]

Damn straight !