Jump to content

merkhet

Member
  • Posts

    3,070
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by merkhet

  1. The quantian theory makes a lot of sense to me, but it also might just be curve fitting.
  2. Loved hearing her on a podcast recently. Great idea to put numbers on things to discriminate between what one person thinks "probably" means and what another person thinks "probably" means. Will "probably" (:P) pick up the book soon.
  3. This. All of this. The problem with a lot of the "solutions" proposed to end the student loan issue is that people are only thinking about the first bounce of the ball. Sanders' and (to a slightly lesser extent) Warren's solution of loan forgiveness is only going to further incentivize loan taking (i.e. the second bounce of the ball). It's an unpopular opinion, but the idea that you have government subsidized loans for education is one of the big reasons that we have tuition inflation! If you then subsidize loan repayment on the backend, that's effectively putting another layer of subsidization on the issue. What do people think is going to happen when you subsidize demand and supply doesn't increase at the same levels? And I get it. I really do. It's hard to tell people that the solution to the problem is to reduce the financial accessibility of college, but increasing demand is... not the way to go. The Dems are dead wrong on this issue, and I say that as a Dem. Moreover, that last paragraph is a huge part of the problem. When you churn out too many college educated students, but the actual jobs that legit require a college degree don't increase at the same pace, you get situations where people say "well, you don't need a college degree to do this job, but there's so many college graduates out there, why wouldn't I use this as a checkbox?" And slowly you get job requirement inflation. A receptionist doesn't need a college degree. Come on, folks.
  4. Finally, someone else who saw the same thing I did!
  5. I think it wants the One Ring back.
  6. The politics board exists because otherwise that crap spills over to the main board. Think of it like a quarantine area. Also, as Liberty pointed out, it makes it easier to ignore. Literally.
  7. Thought this was an interesting read re nuclear https://www.knowablemagazine.org/article/technology/2019/nuclear-goes-retro-much-greener-outlook
  8. Someone already DID! The article indicates their parents paid off their credit card debt a few years ago, and, yet, here they are again... ridiculous!
  9. I mean, the better explanation is likely that the Chinese numeric system is easier than the Arabic numeric system. The problem with the other stuff in this thread, of course, is that it is very difficult to do a solid double-blind experiment with proper control and experimental groups for this kind of stuff...
  10. The Collins argument was a few months ago, so I no longer recall. As for Saxton, my thoughts are simlar to yours. Benton thought CedarMinn was Ps best argument. Stras thought FHFA acting under direction from Treasury was Ps best argument. But, my former disclaimer remains — I have been (repeatedly) wrong before.
  11. +1 and you anticipated what saxton (and collins) counsel had to say to saxton court by way of supplementary authority: https://www.dropbox.com/s/oe38a58a4pef1yu/saxton%20supp%20auth%20from%20collins.pdf?dl=0 From re-listening to the Saxton oral argument, it seems like Judge Benton & Judge Kelly both seem convinced by CedarMinn, and Judge Kelly's line of questioning was directed at the question of "well, even if we agree that conservators must 'preserve and conserve' the assets," are we allowed to review the actions they take? Like, what if they're intending to preserve and conserve, but they're just real incompetent. (Suspend disbelief for a second and assume that the government approached this "innocently" -- which most of us don't believe.) Judge Kelly seems to be suggesting that even though she might be sympathetic to the argument following from CedarMinn (that conservators must "preserve and conserve" and that this action is not doing either) she is worried about how to go about providing guidance on when it's okay to second guess the FHFA's "business judgment" on various decisions. I also found it to be interesting that Judge Stras continually harped on whether this was a de facto nationalization -- not so much for the nationalization itself -- as Judge Stras might just as well agree with the Treasury counsel that nationalization requires monetary relief best addressed through the Takings Clause, but that Judge Stras might be convinced by Judge Benton & Judge Kelly that CedarMinn should be followed and that regardless of how Judge Kelly might feel about providing guidance, a de facto nationalization cannot be squared with the idea that FHFA must "preserve and conserve." Cooper did a good job in his rebuttal. Of course, take that for what you will because most of the courts have disagreed with the legal analysis that I've listed out in this thread. EDIT: As a side note, I'd say we also lucked out to have two judges on this panel that have MBAs in addition to their JDs (Benton & Stras).
  12. I don't know, but that's an incredible story. I think they should let him keep some of it.
  13. You are right. Was that his 50 bill purchase price plan backed by investors? Yup, that's the one. Not really. I just meant that Berkowitz's plan accounts for multiple competitors, which seems to fit in with the report.
  14. Removing charters, shrinking size, full privatization and conversion to monoline insurers reminds me of the original Jim Millstein's plan. Don't forget Berkowitz's plan from way back as well...
  15. Bloomberg needs to fill the coffers for 2020 :P
  16. Wait, Netflix is still running its DVD service? I had no idea!
  17. He came and guest lectured in my distressed investing class in grad school, and then he took the entire class out for pizza afterwards. He was sharp as a tack. Very sad to learn of his passing.
  18. I highly doubt that Democrats want to hand shareholders a win.
  19. Sure. hardincap listed a few scenarios. There are probably others. Even if I find them to be low-probability events, I still wouldn't advise going all-in here, and this is coming from someone who has a pretty decent allocation. I may not believe in excessive diversification, but I surely believe in some diversification.
  20. I think you've identified the main risk being that what seems "fair" to us (par or close to it) may not be what's "fair" to others (CW, Mnuchin, etc.). In general, despite my sense that we are likely due for a favorable result in the near future (post-CW bill failure & Mnuchin taking action), I would be hesitant to push in all my chips here.
  21. M&T Bank under Bob Wilmers is a fantastic source of shareholder letters
  22. The article reads like the solution will take aspects from Berkowitz' plan, Millstein's plan, and Moelis' plan. As I have expressed to others privately, I want to see the damned language already!
  23. Good find. But Cohn says that the administration has $200B that they can "lever into well over $1T", and I don't see how the warrant can be "levered." The Moelis plan involves $100B from sale of shares obtained with the warrant and that is over the course of several years. What he's describing is a sort of public & private partnership where the government puts in $1 for every $4 that the private sector puts in. The details on it have been very vague, but we'll probably get more clarity in the next few weeks. Also, my back of the envelope math says that the $100 billion would be around $125 billion post-tax reform.
  24. I continue to think that monetizing the warrants will be one of the ways that they pay for the infrastructure plan. how many are there roughly? How many shares? Treasury has the option to own 80% of the outstanding shares at whatever time they decide to execute the warrants.
×
×
  • Create New...