Riddle Me This

Posted by Bess Levin, Mar 14, 2008, 1:00pm

How is JPMorgan bringing collateral to Bear Stearns but not being held liable for any defaults on that going to restore whatever confidence people supposedly once had in the firm? Doesn't JPMorgan's little agreement with the NYFED sort of undermine the whole thing? Pretend I'm someone who actually gives a shit about this-- JPMorgan doesn't have the confidence to loan Bear outright, but I'm supposed to be like, "You know what? I'm not convinced anyone at BSC would know not to stick their dick in a pencil sharpener, let alone run a profitable company but JPMorgan, who's not even a little exposed, is telling me everything's cool, so I'm sold"? On a related note, damn Bear Stearns/JPMorgan for sucking me into this whole story. Earlier this morning I was turning the volume down on CNBC to write about Jacko and actually thought to myself, but what if I miss something important? Sickening. Anyway, here's a "music video" of Spitzer's hooker. I'm going to watch as many times as it takes to get my dignity back. I suggest you do the same.

2Recommend this! 23Comments

Comments

1

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:06PM

just watched the vid. no fucking way 'kristen' is 105 lbs.

2

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:08PM

held "liable"

3

Posted by BottomFellOut , Mar 14, 2008 1:13PM

I just dont know why they arent investigating Silda's first 29 day marriage

4

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:15PM

The point of this whole transaction is to enable direct Fed assistance to BSC, something which is currently available to commercial banks but not to investment banks (but which will become available to investment banks later this month). JPM is simply a tool for the Fed's special exception for BSC.

- anon4life

5

Posted by BottomFellOut , Mar 14, 2008 1:20PM

The Greenspan put becomes more and more devalued.

Keep the presses going for another couple of years and we will be having the $10 slice of pizza.

The CPI numbers are a complete fraud.

6

Posted by mbaer , Mar 14, 2008 1:22PM

damn..so much anger on a Friday is not healthy!

7

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:23PM

kristen put on a little weight

8

Posted by Anal_yst , Mar 14, 2008 1:31PM

Remind me again why they report GDP, etc sans food and energy...

9

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:41PM

when was the pic in the white bathing suit taken vs when was the music video taken??

if the white bathing suit body goes for $1000/hr, then i'd say the music video body is abt $400/hr...

and are there any arrangements that the girls go for less if they gain weight?? like, did spitzer maybe a bulk package at a fixed rate?? how do these "arrangements" work?

who needs britney and lohan when we have kristen and bsc ?

10

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:42PM

Food and energy are not "core" needs.....

uh...sure

11

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:42PM

Bernanke Press Conference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLsDvGlIDh0

12

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 1:53PM

maybe her "core" weight is 105.

13

Posted by Lowly Assistant , Mar 14, 2008 1:58PM

Spitzer fucked J Lo circa In Living Color era?

-totally out of the loop

14

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 2:05PM

"kristen" isn't even that hot. Yes it would be tough to say no for free, but pay for her? I guess Spitz was paying for discretion and we know how that worked out.

-Nom me

15

Posted by To The Hilt , Mar 14, 2008 2:10PM

food and energy are less of a monetaryy phenomenon. that's why they're not core.

16

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 2:42PM

Dignity?
We're bankers not freakin Mother Theresa

17

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 2:49PM

According to a former fed vp (in an op-ed published monday in the journal): "The original rationale to exclude food was that the Fed should not try to offset weather-induced supply shocks. Energy prices were also excluded because the Fed decided it should not try to offset OPEC-induced supply shocks. The Fed wanted an inflation measure that excluded temporary changes and focused on persistent movements."

18

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 2:52PM

riddle me that

19

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 2:54PM

Maybe the inflation will spawn crowds of vegans who will go on to spread love and harmony in the universe

20

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 3:34PM

Yay for sexy vegan hipsters who save money by recycling their clothes and their kitschy toys.

21

Posted by Anal_yst , Mar 14, 2008 3:34PM

@ 2:49

If I remember correctly, the next paragraph of that same Op-ed piece went on to mention that the price of energy and food now in a global economy are not the direct (at least primary) result of OPEC- or Weather-induced shocks, and hence energy and food should de facto be included. (and on a personal note, if not highlighted, you know, that whole, basic needs concept...)

22

Posted by guest , Mar 14, 2008 3:50PM

save money by not eating meat

23

Posted by guest , Mar 15, 2008 2:10AM

Are the pro-vegan commenters the new Ron Paul menace?

Post Your Comment