patrick.net

Regulations will actually work in my favor, because regulations will always have to take care of the the group in larger number, at least in a democratic society. Until I have amassed so much fortune that I start to become one of the 1% controlling 70% of the US wealth, I think regulation will work in my favor. By then, I will donate heavily to politicians through lobbyists for NO regulations whatsoever.

People "up there" never prefer a true free market. True free market does not exist in this world, get that into your head. People "up there" only want free market to their own advantage, which is exactly what we are seeing today. You can't argue that the mortgage market was not truly a free market in the last 5 years, it was as free as it gets. Is that what you want for everything?

A democracy will never be put in real practice until we have self-serving citizens. Everyone thinking thoroughly through about what he wants, what he needs, what other people want and need and try to find a balance in between.

Democracy was obviously in hibernation in this country for the last 8 years since everyone was scared sh*tless because of 911.

People “up there” only want free market to their own advantage, which is exactly what we are seeing today.

So you can be assured that any new regulation will also be an implementation of their version of Free Market. ;)

You can’t argue that the mortgage market was not truly a free market in the last 5 years, it was as free as it gets. Is that what you want for everything?

It was not free because people were not allowed to fail.

My guess. Peter P simply makes a wild one-liner remark to pick an argument. There is always some intellectual basis to it, but ...

The argument is quite relevant, don't you think? I thought the thread was about policy makers trying to decide what is good for the people. ;)

Look, I don't have to peddle Free Market. I can go back to sushi talks...

I only know one thing: I, and people in my financial position are not the biggest beneficiary of the current "free market" or whatever market you want to call it. So I want a change. To be more precise, I want a change that will redistribute the X millions or billions that people "up there" make to the rest of us, even if I don't get the biggest stake in the redistribution of wealth.

Why do I want such a change? Because I don't think the people "up there" deserve their millions. I have no problems with Warren Buffet, Steve Jobs or even Bill Gates making whatever they made, I have lots of problems with Wall Street making what they make.

I have no problems with Warren Buffet, Steve Jobs or even Bill Gates making whatever they made, I have lots of problems with Wall Street making what they make.

Who are you to judge? ;)

My moto:

Nobody deserves to have anything. Everybody deserves to get anything.

Peter P

I want to say in advance that I'm not trying to be offensive - I only jest.

But every time you get on your free market "high horse" followed by nihilism, when challenged, I have an almost uncontrollable urge to quote Inigo Montoya:

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means"

Peter P,

I don't comment frequently (but read every thread). I value your contributions and don't want to seem like I'm piling on but I need ask (and sincerely ask) do you really believe the comments you make? Do you really believe that:

Pay packages are determined by the market.

or

They (Shareholders) can fire the board who approves the pay.

Tell me the truth, Peter P, you don't really believe these, do you? You're really just a fun loving Randian/Libertarian who enjoys throwing out baiting comments for grins, right?

Right?

Well... I will leave you guessing. ;)

Maybe the 2nd Amendment exists for the purpose of culling the income outliers.

Hey to heck with sushi. Local corn (from greenhouses here) is on the market. Fresh corn and BBQ pork tonight! :)

Fresh corn and BBQ pork tonight!

What marinade?

To capitalize on the rising Chinese renmimbi, try
www.everbank.com They carry the renmimbi (yuan) as a currency play. The transaction is expensive .75% to buy and another .75% to sell but it may be worth it if one holds it for a while. The bank is FDIC insured.

Honestly I would not touch Everbank's Yuan deposit.

Yuan is NOT a freely convertible currency. I wonder how Everbank achieves that, legally that is. All exchange in and out of country is strictly controlled by the Foreign Exchange Bureau, which doesn't allow individuals to exchange more than ~$2500 worth a day pp for investment purposes.

Also, the upside of Yuan is very much capped. I predict the most it will go is around 6.5, there is already massive factory bankruptcy in southern China (so far more than 5000 factories went under, median size employing several hundred workers each).

So buying Yuan may make you a patriotic American because you are pushing up Yuan and driving down USD so as to slow down outsourcing, but that may not make you a happy investor in a year or two.

Peter,

Tonight I'm just experimenting by brushing on Otafuku Yakisoba sauce. Regular grocery store BBQ sauces have too much sugar in them and all they do is burn. I'm offset flame slow-BBQ cooking so-called country-style ribs (sliced pork shoulder).

Yakisoba is a good sauce. For corn, just a touch of light soy sauce is good too. :)

I wonder how Everbank achieves that, legally that is.

I don't know. Perhaps they are using cash-settled futures contracts?

http://chicagomercantileexchange.org/files/renminbi_factcard.pdf
http://quotes.ino.com/chart/?s=CME_RMB.K08.E

Good corn needs nothing. Europeans claim the American's habit of eating corn-on-the-cob as proof that we are barbarians who eat animal feed. Obviously they are confused.

The key is, if Yuan tanks, it is very hard to redeem.

If I expect a worldwide recession / depression, I won't want to put my money in a politically unstable, resource-stricken (per capita) country.

Europeans claim the American’s habit of eating corn-on-the-cob as proof that we are barbarians who eat animal feed.

Only barbarians eat raw meat (fish). :)

The Japanese are Americans???? :confused:

OO, brokerages are failing left and right in Australia. How about Channel Islands and Isle of Man?

At least Australian government is letting the weaker hands fail, isn't that the free market you want :-)

I wouldn't call it failing left and right because the two that failed are not part of the big consortiums like Macquarie, which the Aussie government banks with. I have no sympathy for those who parked their money with the small guys, that is the risk they should be prepared to take.

At least Australian government is letting the weaker hands fail, isn’t that the free market you want

True. ;)

Speaking of cheap US oil reserves.....

www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

The US may be the Saudi Arabia of both food and oil.

DennisN

are you able to put that number of billions of barrels of oil in context? Do you know how much Saudi Arabia has for example? I read that part where it says the estimate is now 25 times what it was in 1995, and was reminded of one of the main arguments against "peak oil".

OO,

Four or five amens (and maybe an Ave Maria thrown in) for the "free market". I think I'm going to start quoting that pesky expression ALWAYS.

>>Europeans claim the American’s habit of eating corn-on-the-cob as proof that we are barbarians who eat animal feed.

I think this is quite far from being a general european sentiment. Not that it was meant in seriousness??

I have respect for all cuisines. I am even nice to vegetarians. ;)

are you able to put that number of billions of barrels of oil in context?
Mean estimate for technically recoverable oil is 3.65 billion barrels in the Bakken Formation. The United States uses around 20 million barrels per day, so this is around half a years supply. Hurray, we're saved! Peak oil has been put off by half a year in the US; my kids are jumping for joy -- well, I will admit, every little bit does help.

OO says: I only know one thing: I, and people in my financial position are not the biggest beneficiary of the current “free market” or whatever market you want to call it. So I want a change.

I think the present system is a pretty good one. I'm not baiting an argument, either. My grandparents were factory workers. In the space of two generations since then, we've become entirely white collar through education and hard work, pushing well past the median American income.

Who gives a shit what CEOs make? Really. It's a superficially interesting but ultimately irrelevant factoid like the distance to the moon measured in stacked pennies. My family's standard of living has increased tremendously in the last many years, and disproportionately to the opportunities in other countries via means that are widely available to everyone in America. Thanks to the opportunities provided by our culture, our welfare has increased tremendously even compared to our prior peers. In fact, the welfare of my family is influenced by CEO pay about the same as it's influenced by the price of wheat on Mars.

You can get as inflamed as you like about CEO pay, but it's a fact of doing business in a world of multibillion dollar companies. As obscene as their compensation might seem, it is a drop in the bucket of our vast economy. We non-CEOs should be concerned about fundamental issues like broad health insurance and high quality education. Dashing up to peer through the gilded gates is an exercise in pure jealous futility.

Be happy with what you have in an absolute sense. If you make it relative to the top 1%, then nobody is ever going to be happy (and maybe that's already happening in our New Gilded Age culture).

Brand,

If CEO compensation is just a drop in the bucket (and I do not think it is), then please arrange for a few drops being sent my way. I would not mind at all.

I'm squarely in agreement with OO on this one.

If CEO compensation is just a drop in the bucket (and I do not think it is), then please arrange for a few drops being sent my way. I would not mind at all.

Yeah, that few drops will be shared by thousands of minions like you. Enjoy! :)

If you think CEOs are too highly paid, perhaps you should try to become one. If you can't, perhaps they are not too highly paid after all.

Peter P,

Proves my point exactly. It is *not* just a "drop in the bucket" if everyone gets a fair share.

If I were you, I would be more worried about my peers getting more than myself.

I much rather have an advantage over my resource competitors. I don't care what happens "up there in the food chain."

The failure of your competitors is as good as your own success.

It is *not* just a “drop in the bucket” if everyone gets a fair share.

No, it is not "drop in the bucket" because everyone gets a tiny fraction of a drop in order for it to be "fair."

justme, perhaps you could clarify. To me, it seems that if a CEO over 1000 people gets a $1M bonus, then if that were divided among his people that would be $1000/person. Hardly an impressive number.

From a corporation's perspective, a CEO's compensation is a very small amount of revenue and profit (or should be, otherwise the Board should be summarily voted out). The primary value of a CEO is as a figurehead and example. From the hundreds or thousands of managers in a company, only a tiny few will become CEOs. But the mere existence of that pile of gold at the end of the rainbow inspires tremendous hard work from the middle echelons. Hence I would argue that the corporation's ROI is actually quite strong by providing a generous pay package to their CEO.

I am far more offended by CEOs taking home any bonus in a year where their investors got hammered or their workforce was heavily slashed. A corporation exists as a money-making enterprise (from the capitalist perspective) and as an employer (from the social perspective). If it fails in either or both of those responsibilities, then its leaders deserve no gestures of gratitude from the people generating the revenue or footing the bill.

Brand,

>>But the mere existence of that pile of gold at the end of the rainbow inspires tremendous hard work from the middle echelons.

It does not inspire as much "hard work" as it inspires tremendous amounts of unproductive jockey-ing with the goal of giving the appearance that one is the most qualified for the next step up the ladder.

I would argue that high CEO pay just as often (if not always) is more unproductive because it values appearance over substantial contribution. All the "competition" among the middle management and lower echelons comes at a tremendous cost to the company.

Tell me the logic of why these CEOs are entitled to $50M, 200M golden parachute when they were FIRED? Has anyone heard of any average Joe employee getting a fat paycheck for being fired for screwing up?

How about those CEOs who are paid $100M+ even if the stock price was trashed? Why is everyone in the company tied to performance except for these "star" CEOs? For example, Fiorina, shouldn't she be sued for the enterprise value that she destroyed? Why did she get to parachute out with $40M after such a grand f*ck up?

Doctors are sued for malpractice. Where is CEO's responsibility when they screw up? I am all for paying CEO a billion if we stockholders can sue their ass and confiscate all their personal and family wealth if they were proven to have screwed up during their tenure any time in the lifetime of the company.

High pay comes with stringent obligations. CEOs have high pay, where is the obligation part going?

EBGuy
thanks for the data re:oil