southsider2k5

I agree with you totally. I have been saying for years the guys on these exchanges need to bury the grudge if they are going to make it through the 21st century. Let's face it the NY futures markets are complete garbage technologically, so really Chicago has no challenge in the US. They are looking at places like London and Tokyo for competition when it comes to futures markets. Like I said before, if they really want to take the next step, they need to pretty much merge all of the Chicago financial centers... The rest of the world couldn't come close to that monster.

Dow opened up over the 12,000 level... lets see if it holds.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 18, 2006 -> 07:47 AM) You are a sick bastard. Sick, but funny. Hey, we need a soxtalk candidate for Congress. Meh, half of you morons wouldn't vote for me anyways

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Oct 17, 2006 -> 09:24 PM) I don't think congressmen deserve any pension on our dime, whichever way their dicks swing. Let them fend for themselves in ss like the rest of us suckers, or spend their own money on an IRA. Excellent post. If we actually looked at running the government a little more effeciently, this would be the kind of stuff going out the window too...

Evidently I am not the only one thinking merger fever isn't over in Chicago... the CBOE sold 7 seats at up to $1.5 million each yesterday alone. To give a little perspective it is a crazy month that sees 7 seats change hands there, plus the million and a half is an all-time record for seat price, topping even the prices during the internet craze.

Luckily for Tex he has two arms and two legs so that while he is kicking orphans, he can drown kittens. Bonus.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Oct 17, 2006 -> 11:25 AM) Don't believe it. Everyone knows Tex is a rampant liar and fabricator. And he kicks orphans. Hard.

CBOT and CBOE were aligned, but it has been an ugly divorce. The CBOE came out of the board and because of that full board seats always contained the option of CBOE trading rights, and that was a big problem when the board wanted to go public.

Now if they were smart they would figure out away to buy the CBOE, CHX, and One Chicago so that they could be the first in the world to offer trading in options, futures, stock, and single stock futures all under one roof. No one could touch it. The Merc and CBOT are the two biggest pieces, the rest would be easy. http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/17/markets/cb...sion=2006101709

300,000,000 yeah!

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Oct 14, 2006 -> 01:58 PM) So am I missing something or does four somehow equal six in MC? Yeah, um the news dispatch isn't exacty famous for being solid.

From todays MC News Dispatch http://www.michigancityin.com/articles/200.../14/news/n2.txt

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 13, 2006 -> 12:55 PM) I dont even think we should be in S. Korea anyway. Their army is over 600,000 strong and is an order of magnitude more well equipped than their northern counterparts. This is not 1950 my friends. Pull the U.S. troops out of there and use massive air strikes to support the South in case of invasion. Also......... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15249383/ Looks like there was no radiation detected from the blast. Methinks they set off a really big conventional bomb. Nevertheless it is time to squeeze these guys with sanctions. They will fold cause they know they have absolutely zero chance of winning a war. There is one reason why I really believe NK would never invade the south, and that is they saw how their southern brothers lived, it would cause a revolution in the north. QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 13, 2006 -> 12:56 PM) I think its a ruse. Classic socialist showmanship of weapons systems that don't really exist. The more I read, the more I agree 100%. I think NK is on the verge of collapse and Il was trying to use this as a ruse to get some concessionss to inject directly into his economy. The biggest mistake we can make right now is letting them have something for this. LMAO! Even better the blow ups of satalite pics from the site show the Nuke techs playing volleyball. I don't know about you, but I think a great place to play volleyball is on top of a place where you just detonated a nuke... This "test" is officially a complete joke right now. http://www.washtimes.com/national/inring.htm

QUOTE(Soxy @ Oct 13, 2006 -> 12:35 PM) World's cutest dog. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS!!!!

I agree 100% and would love to see the women of Chicago take up the same cause!

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 13, 2006 -> 10:18 AM) I gotta say, from what Ive read, Im pretty impressed with Boltons ability to work with other security council members on this issue to develop a sanction plan that might have some effect without further antagonizing the situation. And that is my problem with this whole thing in a nutshell. Kim Jong Il sets off what he calls a nuclear device, and we are the ones who have to do something about it, without further antagonizing the situation. That is just insane. The guy threatens the his neighbors, shoots missles over other countries, and then threatens war when that same country doesn't want to trade with him anymore... Yet we are the ones who have to not make it any worse. Geesh.

^ Nice Blues Brothers work

Poor Il might miss out on Congac, jet skis

This was a cool pic. it is a satilite image of the Koreas at nighttime, showing the amount of electricity that each has on. NK is actually switched off of the power grid each night at 9pm, well except for you know who's place... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1811

Someone want to tell me again how Joe Crede won't get something in the area of 5 years $50 million on the open market?

I told RibbieRhubarb not to go down there and give those plushies ideas...

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 07:30 PM) I'm sorry Kap, but John McCain said that Bill Clinton had a completely failed policy. Clinton was a few days away from going to WAR with North Korea. Al Gore didn't blame George Bush for the Embassy Bombings in 1998 when he was on the campaign trail. John McCain blamed Bill Clinton for North Korea going nuclear in 2006. This column is a response to those comments. And the truth is that Clinton did something real - and in the end pretty successful, and some people just don't want to admit it. A little perspective on this... John McCain didn't give this speech in a vaccuum. This speech was a response to another speech by Hillary Clinton that she gave on the campaign trail only taking W to task for NK. I think McCain's response wasn't to say that W didn't do anything wrong, so much as remind Hillary that Bill's record on NK wasn't exactly flawless either. QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 09:23 PM) He wouldn't - anymore than Clinton did. This is both the key difference and the reason for my previous post. Its true that Bush and Clinton took different tacks on the situation - and neither were successful. Also, neither were individually responsible for the situation at hand. If I had to say which was more to blame between those two... I'd go with Clinton. If someone asked. But instead of asking, you immediately labeled the article Bush-bashing and made it sound like everyone here was blaming Bush for this mess. No one here did such a thing. The article simply tried to refute McCain's insinuation that it was Clinton's fault. That was the reason for my post. I really hope that one of the candidates or President in 2008 has the courage to stand up and do something OTHER than take one gutter or the other on the Iraq debate. Blindly supporting the failed policies under Bush is as mindless as screaming "we must leave now!" in the face of all logic. Yeah, the U.S. screwed the pooch royally in Iraq. No, we cannot leave, unless we want utter chaos in the Middle East. We're in it now for the long haul. That last paragraph is solid. As somewhat of an idealist, I would love to hear that happen, but I know better. Any major canditate is going to toe the line.

I think the whole independantly wealthy thing would be my first choice, because I don't know that I would want to always do the samething... I have a million different things I want to try. I love working on the trading floors, so I think it would be incredible to try trading, but I am loving being involved in politics so far, so I think being a high level politician would be incredible... Heck I miss sportscasting a lot, and it would be a dream to sit in the White Sox booth, or front office, or on the bench, or anything in a capacity with the team. I also value all of the work I get to do with kids, and it would be awesome to work in some capacity with children and or teens. I guess I have a lot of dreams

QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 02:48 PM) SS2K - you've spent a large portion of this post discussing the time bomb of ARM's. If there has been a housing bubble in the past few years, how would that have affected tax revenue? Presume that many people took equity out of their homes by refinancing while rates were low. Also presume that many sellers made a lot of money on their homes during the price run-up. I think a logical thinking supply-sider would say that tax revenues increased because overall wealth increased as a result of the housing boom. I believe tax cuts help a little... But the gains in tax revenue and better economic performance is a function of low interest rates. I think too much is made of how taxes affect the economy.... Why would you think that? Reduction of taxes is the most pure injection of cash into the economy possible. At a 100% ratio, all of that money reaches the tax payers. When you start looking at the housing market, only those who have sold a house, or took out a home equity loan feel the effects. If you look at the equity boom of the 90's, only those who owned stocks got to participate in that. If you look at government spending, only the people who either have new government jobs, or are in those particular programs feel the effect, and in the case of government spending, any spending has an element of loss equal to the amount of government ineffeciency related to that particular program. Low interest rates only affect those who have the ability to get a loan. Tax cuts are the only completely fool proof method to put money directly into the pockets of people.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 12, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) Ummm, in this case - failure of US aims absolutely are the President's fault. His foreign policy led us to this moment in time. He has had six years to try to correct the situation in North Korea and has done nothing. I was in Europe in the summer of 1994 and when Jimmy Carter went to North Korea, there was a palpable sense that we were days away from war on the Korean peninsula if North Korea crossed the red line. He didn't and we didn't go to war. The Bush administration didn't act on North Korea in 2002 when they tried the same gambit. The Bush administration rejected the same offer they made to Iran a few months ago when it was presented to them as a Clinton-era agreement in 2001. Of course, I'm sure you'd love to blame Clinton or the media for this too - because their your bogeymen of choice. And that's fine. But a North Korean nuke test is not in our best interest. And our policy to prevent it sure didn't work. So that would be a failure. And there's only been one President's watch since the Agreed Framework was declared dead. And he's the one who declared it dead. So you be the judge about who's fault it is. If you want to say that the NK test is a failure on Bush's part, that is fine. John McCain is saying there is plenty of history to go around, along with plenty of blame. If you are going to blame the Bush administration for that, I guess you are willing to call Clinton's policies a failure because both Pakistan and India managed to go nuclear on his watch, right? No a nuclear NK isn't in our, nor anyone elses, interests. But neither is propping up a murderous regime, which you can damned well bet that Bush would get blamed for if he built them a light water reactor, that was converted under the next President's administration and used to go nuclear at that time instead. It would be his fault for appeasement is exactly what we would hear. I happen to believe this history in NK of not negotiating in good faith is a pretty damned good thing to remember when people are wanting us to give them stuff in exchange for not blowing up the world. I truely believe even if we had bribed them, they would have still found a reason to go nuclear. They have a history of trying to join the nuclear club, why would we believe them now, or ever, when they say otherwise?