Balta1701

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 20, 2008 -> 09:05 AM) You indicated that GM failing would end up making a lot of money for some people I am saying, no, it won't. That money has already been made. It will end up COSTING the financial industry billions on a net basis, and nobody wins. Ok, that sort of makes sense, so the odds of GM going down increasing have already pushed up the prices of those CDS instruments to the point that there's very little money left to be made if they actually go down. Anyway then...doesn't every negative comment or bad day that GM execs have on the hill serve to push up the value of those CDS's even more as GM's failure becomes more likely?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Nov 20, 2008 -> 09:01 AM) With all due respect, you have no idea how this works. And based on the couple trillion we're spending bailing out the banking business...I'd say no one else does either.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 20, 2008 -> 08:57 AM) I'd love to see Congress's reactions if we tried to regulate the government like this. Hell their waste factor is bigger than any other industry in the country, yet they are immune to things like Sarbane's Oxley and all of the other regulations they pass on to businesses. http://www.businessandmedia.org/commentary...1119135110.aspx While yes, Congress probably wastes more money on these sorts of things than anyone...regarding that article defending AIG...if this conference wasn't another luxury gig, if it wasn't another deal paid for on the taxpayer's dime, and if it was so necessary for their business...then why were they so desperate to cover up that it was AIG running it?

QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 20, 2008 -> 05:44 AM) I think he's HOF material, regardless. No Cy Young awards, not getting to 300 wins despite playing for the team spending by far the most money to build a dominant offense over the last decade, only 1 20 win season (this year) on his resume. I think he still misses. It's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 06:47 PM) Yet again, we have someone who knows a little, but not enough, about swaps (the author). People are undoubtedly making money on trade differential on these swaps, as well as cash flow for covering. The problem is, if there are $65B in CDS on GM debt, that means that if GM goes bankrupt and defaults on the debt... the Receiver holder on the swap will get "called" on the swap. Who is on the receiving side? Because those parties will suddenly have to PAY $65B to the Pay side holders. If they can, at the very least, they'll be out a ton of money. If they can't then the Receiver is screwed. Either way, there is going to be $65B worth of screwing going on with some IB or trading firm or whomever. This is why the swaps market needs regulation. The downstream effect of defaults could be staggering. How is that any different from what I and the author there wrote?

I'm going to say in honesty somewhere just below 6000.

Yay.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 04:49 PM) Franken has taken the lead in Minnesota. This link is supposedly real time. http://ww2.startribune.com/news/metro/elec...unt/msenco.html At least for me, nothing at that link shows Franken in the lead.

A key, 1 county scale legal victory for the Franken team. If they can get access to the records of the rejected absentee ballots in 1 county, then by the same legal reasoning, it's probable that they can pull off similar victories in other counties, especially if they do examine the reasons for absentee ballot refusal and find arguments about why some of them are in fact acceptable. Unfortunately, this probably means we're going ballot by ballot state wide in terms of legal challenges, but with an election this close that's probably how it has to be done. If a ballot is to be rejected, there better be a solid legal reason, and so it makes sense to see what those reasons are.

A fascinating point is made here. GM currently has about $38 billion in outstanding debt. The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation reports that on that debt, there are currently about $65 billion in credit default swaps outstanding...meaning that there are a lot of people who stand to gain a lot of money if GM goes down, and potentially a lot more insurance damage, of the sort that brought AIG to its knees, which will hit if GM goes down. Frankly, that's a big point in favor of the bailout. Who wants to bet that AIG probably holds $10 or $20 billion worth of credit default swaps covering GM? In other words, we might well be paying this bailout EVEN IF we let GM et al. fail. And I really wonder if anyone who happens to hold some of those CDS's on GM or the other auto companies might be sending their lobbyists in to casually lobby against the bailout to their representatives.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 03:53 PM) I was wondering before who would act as the back up to Konerko. Hinske might be a good choice for that role plus he can fill in at the corner OF spots, but do you think a minor leaguer from our farm system could fill the back up role and at a cheaper price? Betemit played 36 games at 1b for the Yankees last year, starting there 21 times. For a long term outage he's not a great option there unless both he and Fields explode, but in terms of giving PK an offday if 14 stays reasonably healthy I'll take that.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 12:55 PM) I'm just thankful Crisp won't be on the Sox. He has an .845 career OPS against the Sox. The only team in the AL he's been better against are the LAA. I didn't want him with the Sox, but I didn't want to have to play him either.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 02:08 PM) A spot just opened up for Burnett. Mike Mussina has decided to retire. According to Rosenthal, that is. I wonder if this isn't a Clemens type retirement though. The Yankees have a lot of money.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 02:27 PM) You had Varitek and Pierzynski in the same lineup also. If Hall can play 1b, I'm sure Varitek can handle some 2b.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) So, predict for us good sir... bounce tomorrow, or a big drop to a new resistance level? I'm going to take the "Bounce" on this one. It won't be permanent, but that's my guess. And just FYI, I have no financial interest either wya.

2

QUOTE (bschmaranz @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 12:08 PM) Wouldn't he essentially be our new Mackowiak? Maybe a little better of a stick I suppose. For God's sake, don't tell me we're making Eric Hinske our everyday CF.

I think I presented what strikes me as the best argument in favor of the auto bailout a few days ago...that right now the companies simply can't get normal bankruptcy financing because of the banks, and so they have no other lender other than the government. I think this example is probably the best counter-point that you could give to that. They understand the importance of the bailout for their companies, they understand their books, they even understand symbolism well enough to have the head of Ford show up in a Fusion hybrid yesterday...and yet they can't seem to understand how it's a bad idea to fly your company's private jets to D.C. for the hearings. After all, executive perks are really free, aren't they?

QUOTE (Texsox @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 12:03 PM) military or civilian trials? Are they really soldiers to be tried in a military court? Are they really civilians and can we try them for crimes that are alleged to have happened overseas? Neither solution is perfect, but we should have picked one years ago. Frankly, I think military court is the better option...because I'm more than willing to accept an appropriate level of secrecy afforded to these hearings and I think that a military court can do that more effectively than a civilian court. But, I keep stressing this, there are a couple key points required by everything from the Magna Carta through the Constitution through the Bill of Rights that the current leadership has refused to do in order to try to rig the trials in their way. U.S. military courts have a couple key requirements they need to meet; they need to be subservient to the Supreme Court and as such have their decisions reviewable on appeal to that body, and they need to be Created and approved by Congress (i.e. Military Appeals court judges are positions that are approved by the Senate). The reason we have "Refused" to pick one is because the Bush Administration refuses to meet those standards. It's not that they don't think there's a better option, it's that they want to be able to get around the law and imprison people for life without a fair and impartial trial, solely on the word of the executive branch. Essentially, they have a problem with the Magna Carta, and that's the reason we haven't picked an option yet.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 12:06 PM) Nah, no offense taken. You’re absolutely correct. Wait and see has been the Royals mentality pretty much since Brett left and it seems to of lulled them into complacency. I really do think, however, that they can really make something of their developing offensive core. In the past, they’ve really mangled this, but I think their new Gm Moore, while not a genius does seem to have a decent idea of what he’s doing. What that idea is exactly I don’t know, but he does seem awfully possessive of some of these young kids. With a team like the Royals, that's exactly what they need to do. They need to be willing to trade their veterans about 2 years or so before they hit FA, so that they don't lose people for draft picks and can save money on those last 2 arb years, and they need to be ridiculously possessive of their kids, until they reach a point where they are literally 1 player away. That's the only way they're going to get out of the basement with those type of salary constraints. Even if their young guys disappoint, until they start hitting arbitration, they're cheap and you have to play them.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 11:53 AM) The one question I have is which country would even allow these people into their borders at this point? Even if we take the extreme viewpoint and say they are all innocent, no country wants the stigma now attached to them within their borders in my opinion. If even one single person God forbid goes back to terrorism and helps execute an attack in your country, how would you like to be the leadership that decided to let him in? I am not against removing these guys from Gitmo, but they are going to be like nomads IMO. No one wants them. We picked up a bunch of Uygher people, who are natives of China but who sort of have been expelled from that country due to their unhappiness with that government and its oppression of that people (Something we typically encourage here in this country). They've been repeatedly found innocent of any and all charges and ordered released by the court system. They are still being held at Gitmo, because no country will take them.

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 11:43 AM) Throw in Ben Gordon lol? and a draft pick. Ben Gordon right now would have to waive some version of his Bird rights I think in order to be traded, so I think he does have the first veto right now.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 11:41 AM) Hinrich for Morrow in a perfect world. Then Gordon would be expendable. Unfortunately, you have that whole contract mess thing getting in the way...so you wind up needing someone like Harrington in there to match Hinrich's contract, then the Warriors want more, and on and on.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 11:32 AM) Funny how Harrington's in the doghouse and they're already looking to move Maggette. All that team needs is a decent enough PG, and they could actually do something considering the glut of talented swingmen they have and Biedrins dominating in the post. Hinrich would be a reasonably good fit/upgrade for them.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 19, 2008 -> 09:11 AM) I can respect that, but still all those plastic bottles that end up in the landfills are petroleum based products in themselves. Which is why I'd recommend a Brita water filter with now recyclable filters! Yay!