patrick.net

"Obama added 9 trillion of debt"

Federal Debt Held By The Public (ex-Fed) shows the national debt was $6.8T after 3Q09 and was $12T after 4Q16, a gain of $5.2T, not $9T.

At any rate, Congress makes the spending bills, not the President.

"blessed by an extreme market bull cycle with a correlated increase in tax revenue."

real gov't spending, receipts, 2009 dollars

I don't know what planet you live on, but the reality here is certainly different. the problem with posting here is that there's about a dozen people just pulling their alt-facts out of their alt-asses.

They've been doing it continuously for years, so few people have the beginning of an honest argument or accurate worldview.

It's bullshit all the way down with them, and it takes 20X the time & effort to correct their lies vs. their investment in making them in the first place.

You have to hand it to T-Lips and CBOE, they definitely know what they want to believe.

They more or less say, "That's what I believe, and don't think that facts or logic are going to change my mind."

The amazing thing is that these are not stupid people. Humanity is fucking doomed.

Bellingham Bill says

"blessed by an extreme market bull cycle with a correlated increase in tax revenue."

real gov't spending, receipts, 2009 dollars

I don't know what planet you live on, but the reality here is certainly different. the problem with posting here is that there's about a dozen people just pulling their alt-facts out of their alt-asses.

Thanks goodness Trump is going to lower taxes on the wealthy and corporations. HE's probably going to postpone doing that long enough, that the resulting explosion of the deficit can be pinned on the democrat that follows him. Maybe a good plan would be to be selling the tax cuts extra hard in the 2018 election year, have them go in to effect in mid 2019 or so, and the deficit can be exploding in 2020 - 2022, the fault of the democrat that takes his place. Not only will it be the new guys fault, but his hands will be tied on undoing any of the cuts to social services that Trump initiated.

IT's so fucked up, and so easy to predict.

Bellingham Bill says

At any rate, Congress makes the spending bills, not the President.

But the President submits the budget, and can veto spending bills.

Is this really Bob?

There should be a list of who is banning who. I'm reserving the ban for completely infantile posters. So far, the count is one.

It's pretty lame to have a blog where you can keep others from communicating with each other. I think this will seriously hurt the site. Why visit a site where you can't debate. I think this is the death knell.

I'm sure if you look at who is doing the banning, it's mostly liberals.

Booger says

doing the banning, it's mostly liberals.

What does that say about the people who were banned? Is it that they present such well reasoned arguments that they broke the liberal's ego powered wall of denial? Are there any other fantasies that you would like to share with the group this morning?

Hater says

They want an echo chamber safe space.

Anyone who likes echos should love debating GW with you and ironman. You just scroll down and the same argument(1) keeps coming onto the screen like a visual echo. Ironman adds pictures for added mind numbing effect.

(1) I'm using the term argument loosely

YesYNot says

What does that say about the people who were banned?

It says a lot about the people who are doing the banning.

Alternative to banning:
Thread owners get to substitute avatars for posters in their threads.
The substitute avatar would only be active in that thread.
Patrick could generate some income as a site alternative to national geographic...

Booger says

YesYNot says

What does that say about the people who were banned?

It says a lot about the people who are doing the banning.

What do you think it says?

There are some people on the site who post well thought out arguments about different topics, and there are others that attempt to derail discussion and post the same inane nonsense, over and over and over. There are some people that answer questions when asked, to further the discussion, and others that run from questions like the plague.

errc says

What do you think it says?

In general, I think it says that the people who are banned are the ones running from questions like the plague. They are banned for having nothing original or interesting to add to the conversation.

OTOH, I find bob's comments interesting, so I'm surprised if dan banned him.

FP says

yep! patience is one of the few edges individual investors have

Very true. To add to that, 1 of the all time most valuable "edges" is the ability to admit when
they are wrong and take appropriate action.

YesYNot says

OTOH, I find bob's comments interesting, so I'm surprised if dan banned him.

I'm not. I don't let dan get away with posting ego stoking nonsense. He is extremely immature for someone who is supposed to be a professional person. He has a teen age girl hissy fit if he is proven wrong about something or his massive ego is challenged. Mature people with real accomplishments don't need to constantly tell you how great they are. Let the skis do the talking.

Just started the thread to let people know who is banning and what kind of people they are. Any other bans out there? I'm not going to ban or adhom or dislike or use whatever other cop outs patrick builds in. If I can't stand up for myself I shouldn't be here.

Six people going now!

And to the point--the deficit shrunk by 2/3 under Obama. He REDUCED spending.

CBOEtrader says

What're your thoughts on the technology to wildly increase silver demand theory?

Silver and gold are safe-haven's driven by lack of confidence in fiat systems. While there could certainly be short term gains from such new uses, the long-term trend won't be affected.

RealEstateIsBetterThanStocks says

gold is 100% speculation.

What form? If you are thinking of anything but physical coins, and to a lesser extent bars, that you take physical possession of, then absolutely. But why is that, because you aren't investing in gold at that point, but paper. And now cue...

RealEstateIsBetterThanStocks says

paper is 100% speculation.

Don't diss ZeroHedge.

Sometimes they point at the right thing. You just have to do the opposite.

So you don't have any solid reasons to buy gold, I didn't think so.

Same day you made your call to buy gold.

The first chart breaks historical options data into 30-day atm vol bins. From the historical vols, i calculated an implied one day move, then compared that implied move to the average market performance of the underlying. You can see that with vix lower than 17, vol very seriously under-performs its implied one-day move. Over 29 vol, the market tends to OVERPERFORM its implied one-day move.

Most investors understand the inverse relationship between the stock market and the vix... however in the second chart I am suggesting that the IV is a function of % drawdown from previous market high rather than absolute level of the market.

In the 3rd chart I track IV per day after a market high. Market volatility simply DOES NOT happen until after 6 weeks from the last market high.

Historically high vol environments starts around 100 days after a market high, after a greater than 15% decline from he previous high AND with an IV starting point of over 29... Thats when you buy vix calls.

Within 60 days or 8% of a market high, with IV less than 17%... this is a very strong risk/reward vol selling environment.

Geez.It looks like climate change is starting to show what it can do

Damages are a lot lower when you sexually assault men rather than women. Republicans are thrifty that way.

Hillary Clinton, so qualified to run a government that the basics of classified material handling is too confusing. That's the optimistic interpretation.

Be thankful the witch lost

CBOEtrader says

Within 60 days or 8% of a market high, with IV less than 17%... this is a very strong risk/reward vol selling environment.

Usually, yes, I agree. However, recently there were some opportunities for long volatility trades with excellent risk/reward. They don't come often and don't last long.

FP says

Usually, yes, I agree. However, recently there were some opportunities for long volatility trades with excellent risk/reward. They don't come often and don't last long.

Yes, within a low vol environment, i have rules for staying flat... and breakout points wherein i flip and go long vol. As you said, its rare during these times. Given how recently we've made new market highs, a legit long vol environment is most likely at least 4 months out.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/03/business/dealbook/puerto-rico-debt.html

Puerto Rico Declares a Form of Bankruptcy

With its creditors at its heels and its coffers depleted, Puerto Rico sought what is essentially bankruptcy relief in federal court on Wednesday, the first time in history that an American state or territory had taken the extraordinary measure.

The action sent Puerto Rico, whose approximately $123 billion in debt and pension obligations far exceeds the $18 billion bankruptcy filed by Detroit in 2013, to uncharted ground.

While the court proceedings could eventually make the island solvent for the first time in decades, the more immediate repercussions will likely be grim: Government workers will forgo pension money, public health and infrastructure projects will go wanting.

The total includes about $74 billion in bond debt and $49 billion in unfunded pension obligations.

While many of Puerto Rico’s circumstances are unique, its case is also a warning sign for many American states and municipalities — such as Illinois and Philadelphia — that are facing some of the same strains, including rising pension costs, crumbling infrastructure, departing taxpayers and credit downgrades that make it more expensive to raise money. Historically, Puerto Rico was barred from declaring bankruptcy. In the end, however, financial reality trumped the statutes, and Congress enacted a law last year allowing bankruptcy-like proceedings.

The island’s many creditors — whose lawsuits filed against Puerto Rico on Tuesday prompted the island’s request for court relief on Wednesday — are likely to receive far less of their money back than they want. Their predicament may turn out to be a cautionary tale for bond holders of other troubled states and cities. Puerto Rico’s case could show public workers and retirees that seemingly inviolate pension systems can be changed, too.

The next step is for the Supreme Court — specifically, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. — to designate a bankruptcy judge to handle the case.

The island’s lawyers may view some bankruptcy courts as more likely to be favorable to them than others. Some creditors fear Puerto Rico will seek to have the case handled in the Southern District of New York.

Puerto Rico’s case will be the first ever heard under a federal law for insolvent territories, called Promesa, which was enacted last summer; the Obama administration had warned that a “humanitarian crisis” would ensue if Puerto Rico were not given extraordinary powers to abrogate debt. There is no existing body of court precedent for Promesa, but the island’s creditors — who range from hedge fund managers to mom-and-pop investors — are bracing for a titanic battle.

zzyzzx says

Puerto Rico Declares a Form of Bankruptcy

With its creditors at its heels and its coffers depleted, Puerto Rico sought what is essentially bankruptcy relief in federal court on Wednesday, the first time in history that an American state or territory had taken the extraordinary measure.

Let them go BK. Who cares?

Comey Huma Abedin Weiner. What exactly is the message?

My favorite is guys saying why should I have to pay for someone else's pre-existing condition. Uh, where do you think the Federal Government's $8 billion is coming from?

Ironman says

Does EVERY American have pre-existing conditions?

According to Kaiser, only 1 in four do, so each of them will get $100. While not necessarily enough to pay for a 10 minute conversation with a doctor, it will cover enough beer to drown their sorrows for a couple of weeks if they exercise moderation.

Ironman says

So, it took the Repub majority House a little over 3 months to pass a Obamacare Bill under Trump's leadership (with 20 Repubs voting NO)

I'll give it to them. I didn't think that they had the balls. Part of the reason for the speed is that they knew it wouldn't pass if they waited for people to figure out what was in it.

The first time I heard a Republican say that they wanted to 'save preexisting conditions', I thought it was a mistake. But they keep talking about protecting preexisting conditions instead of protecting people with preexisting conditions. I hope Republicans enjoy the celebration, because it's going to get ugly.

Ironman says

WASHINGTON (CBS/AP) — The House of Representatives passed the latest Republican-revised health care bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Obamacare was failing. Something had to be done.

"Obamacare was failing. Something had to be done."

And the cure will be worse than the disease in this case. But, it will make for some interesting mid-term elections, that's for sure.

She wouldn't have two black eyes if you hadn't had to tell her twice.
Black eyes aren't pre-existing,they heal without a medical record.
It's the broken orbital sockets that are the problem.
STFU! Ragged bitch!

People are getting fucking rich left and right by being booted off the planes! Need to book a flight to somewhere, anywhere. Pronto. Don't want to miss out on this boondoggle.

Watching Nancy Pelosi losing her mind never gets old.