Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
34f3f3f
ParticipantGood post. I think your questions is: Is the FDIC to blame for the shadow inventory because they are broke? If “broke” means, insufficient funds to cover potential liabilities, new accounting rules notwithstanding, then the answer would most likely be an unequivocal “Yes!” But I’m not sure that collusion is as evident –given they are on record as having the treasuries backing– so much as expediency. I suppose the logic is that if pretending helps, then why not, but as you suggest it is a gamble, and nobody understands the odds or stakes. It just seems to me, in my limited understanding of these affairs, that willingness to print money has as yet to embrace the concept of finite.
ParticipantGood post. I think your questions is: Is the FDIC to blame for the shadow inventory because they are broke? If “broke” means, insufficient funds to cover potential liabilities, new accounting rules notwithstanding, then the answer would most likely be an unequivocal “Yes!” But I’m not sure that collusion is as evident –given they are on record as having the treasuries backing– so much as expediency. I suppose the logic is that if pretending helps, then why not, but as you suggest it is a gamble, and nobody understands the odds or stakes. It just seems to me, in my limited understanding of these affairs, that willingness to print money has as yet to embrace the concept of finite.
ParticipantGood post. I think your questions is: Is the FDIC to blame for the shadow inventory because they are broke? If “broke” means, insufficient funds to cover potential liabilities, new accounting rules notwithstanding, then the answer would most likely be an unequivocal “Yes!” But I’m not sure that collusion is as evident –given they are on record as having the treasuries backing– so much as expediency. I suppose the logic is that if pretending helps, then why not, but as you suggest it is a gamble, and nobody understands the odds or stakes. It just seems to me, in my limited understanding of these affairs, that willingness to print money has as yet to embrace the concept of finite.
ParticipantGood post. I think your questions is: Is the FDIC to blame for the shadow inventory because they are broke? If “broke” means, insufficient funds to cover potential liabilities, new accounting rules notwithstanding, then the answer would most likely be an unequivocal “Yes!” But I’m not sure that collusion is as evident –given they are on record as having the treasuries backing– so much as expediency. I suppose the logic is that if pretending helps, then why not, but as you suggest it is a gamble, and nobody understands the odds or stakes. It just seems to me, in my limited understanding of these affairs, that willingness to print money has as yet to embrace the concept of finite.
Participantdeleted
Participantdeleted
Participantdeleted
Participantdeleted
Participantdeleted
July 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM in reply to: OT: Ok, someone please explain to me the fascination behind Myspace, Facebook, Twitter,etc…. #438931ParticipantIt’s totally beyond me. You have to log on, type a message, to receive an email reply that you then have to log on again to reply to. Why not just send an email in the first place. Myspace was good for musicians who needed a web presence, Youtube was a powerful visual sharing tool, but the fad wears off, and then some kids dream up another crazy way of saying “Hi!” electronically. They will die out.
July 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM in reply to: OT: Ok, someone please explain to me the fascination behind Myspace, Facebook, Twitter,etc…. #439132ParticipantIt’s totally beyond me. You have to log on, type a message, to receive an email reply that you then have to log on again to reply to. Why not just send an email in the first place. Myspace was good for musicians who needed a web presence, Youtube was a powerful visual sharing tool, but the fad wears off, and then some kids dream up another crazy way of saying “Hi!” electronically. They will die out.
July 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM in reply to: OT: Ok, someone please explain to me the fascination behind Myspace, Facebook, Twitter,etc…. #439458ParticipantIt’s totally beyond me. You have to log on, type a message, to receive an email reply that you then have to log on again to reply to. Why not just send an email in the first place. Myspace was good for musicians who needed a web presence, Youtube was a powerful visual sharing tool, but the fad wears off, and then some kids dream up another crazy way of saying “Hi!” electronically. They will die out.
July 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM in reply to: OT: Ok, someone please explain to me the fascination behind Myspace, Facebook, Twitter,etc…. #439529ParticipantIt’s totally beyond me. You have to log on, type a message, to receive an email reply that you then have to log on again to reply to. Why not just send an email in the first place. Myspace was good for musicians who needed a web presence, Youtube was a powerful visual sharing tool, but the fad wears off, and then some kids dream up another crazy way of saying “Hi!” electronically. They will die out.
July 30, 2009 at 2:27 AM in reply to: OT: Ok, someone please explain to me the fascination behind Myspace, Facebook, Twitter,etc…. #439700ParticipantIt’s totally beyond me. You have to log on, type a message, to receive an email reply that you then have to log on again to reply to. Why not just send an email in the first place. Myspace was good for musicians who needed a web presence, Youtube was a powerful visual sharing tool, but the fad wears off, and then some kids dream up another crazy way of saying “Hi!” electronically. They will die out.
-
AuthorPosts
