Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-09-2011, 03:51 PM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-09-2011, 08:32 PM
rcocean rcocean is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,077
Default Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

I thought sex didn't matter. I mean doesn't everyone lie about sex? And Paula Jones was just Bill's private life. Stay out of his private life, that's what I said.
Tim probably disagreed.

So yeah, I guess I don't really care that 15 years ago, Cain may -or may not -- have put his hand up someone's skirt who didn't really care enough to file charges or talk about it UNTIL NOW.

Kinda gives me flashbacks to Anita Hill, who attacked Thomas, not because she was liberal democrat but because... oh, wait, She was a liberal democrat.

But I"m sure none of these ladies, unlike Jennifer Flowers, are lying - its just odd that they waited so long to tell their stories of being propositioned by Mr. Cain - without any witnesses.

Anyhoo, I'm glad Liberals are back to caring about sexual harassment. But I'm sure that will change depending on who's being attacked.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-09-2011, 08:38 PM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
So yeah, I guess I don't really care that 15 years ago, Cain may -or may not -- have put his hand up someone's skirt who didn't really care enough to file charges or talk about it UNTIL NOW.

Kinda gives me flashbacks to Anita Hill, who attacked Thomas, not because she was liberal democrat but because... oh, wait, She was a liberal democrat.

But I"m sure none of these ladies, unlike Jennifer Flowers, are lying - its just odd that they waited so long to tell their stories of being propositioned by Mr. Cain - without any witnesses.
These women didn't wait to make accusations now, they filed suits 15 years ago and settled.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-09-2011, 09:00 PM
rcocean rcocean is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,077
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
These women didn't wait to make accusations now, they filed suits 15 years ago and settled.
And once again Zeek misses the main point and disagrees with minor point number 42. Your standard technique reminds me of Scott's Adams Post on "How to make someone look stupid on the internet":

-"Assume the dumbest interpretation. For example, if someone
says that he can run a mile in 12 minutes, assume he means it
happens underwater and argue that no one can hold his breath
that long".

Which is kinda what you did here. But to continue would be tiresome.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-09-2011, 09:06 PM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
And once again Zeek misses the main point and disagrees with minor point number 42. Your standard technique reminds me of Scott's Adams Post on "How to make someone look stupid on the internet":

-"Assume the dumbest interpretation. For example, if someone
says that he can run a mile in 12 minutes, assume he means it
happens underwater and argue that no one can hold his breath
that long".

Which is kinda what you did here. But to continue would be tiresome.
I am sorry the above is just crazy. You specifically claimed that the women "didn't care enough to file charges or talk about it until now."

Zeko pointing out that they did, in fact, file charges, and talk about it long before now hardly seems the same as demanding that someone run underwater.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-09-2011, 09:27 PM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
And once again Zeek misses the main point and disagrees with minor point number 42. Your standard technique reminds me of Scott's Adams Post on "How to make someone look stupid on the internet":

-"Assume the dumbest interpretation. For example, if someone
says that he can run a mile in 12 minutes, assume he means it
happens underwater and argue that no one can hold his breath
that long".

Which is kinda what you did here. But to continue would be tiresome.
Well I'm sorry if my argumentative style makes is too tiresome for you to spell my name properly. Insofar as you have a point about how I post on this forum, it's because the whole place is drowning in stupid arguments made by people who aren't interested in rational discussion and who, on the basis of long experience, I know to be extremely tiresome and irritating to talk to. Therefore, I economize, picking out obvious misstatements of fact or logical fallacies that I imagine might be corrected without long pointless arguments. That is what's going on here, but as usual my hope that someone might simply admit to a mistake and then move on was foolish.

You built your argument around an obviously untrue factual assertion:


Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
I thought sex didn't matter. I mean doesn't everyone lie about sex? And Paula Jones was just Bill's private life. Stay out of his private life, that's what I said.
Tim probably disagreed.

So yeah, I guess I don't really care that 15 years ago, Cain may -or may not -- have put his hand up someone's skirt who didn't really care enough to file charges or talk about it UNTIL NOW.

Kinda gives me flashbacks to Anita Hill, who attacked Thomas, not because she was liberal democrat but because... oh, wait, She was a liberal democrat.

But I"m sure none of these ladies, unlike Jennifer Flowers, are lying - its just odd that they waited so long to tell their stories of being propositioned by Mr. Cain - without any witnesses.

Anyhoo, I'm glad Liberals are back to caring about sexual harassment. But I'm sure that will change depending on who's being attacked.
Apart from the jab at Bill Clinton, the entire post implies that the accusations against Cain are trumped up and politically motivated. And your only evidence is that, as you claim was the case with Anita Hill, these women sat on claims without taking action until doing so might imperil Cain's political prospects. So when you incorrectly state that these women waited until now to bring their claims, that's both 100% wrong and the only fact underlying your argument.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-09-2011, 09:33 PM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
I am sorry the above is just crazy. You specifically claimed that the women "didn't care enough to file charges or talk about it until now."

Zeko pointing out that they did, in fact, file charges, and talk about it long before now hardly seems the same as demanding that someone run underwater.
It looks like rc is pretending that his mistake about the 15 years was merely a secondary point. His main arguments are:

1.
Quote:
I thought sex didn't matter. I mean doesn't everyone lie about sex? And Paula Jones was just Bill's private life. Stay out of his private life, that's what I said.
According to rc, Dems have a double standard. They say that sex doesn't matter when some Democratic candidate's private sexual life with a consenting adult is brought up. But they do have a problem when a Republican candidate may have sexually harassed or sexually assaulted a non-consenting adult. The key to understanding this is that consensual relationships and harassment/assault are the same in his mind.

2.
Quote:
Kinda gives me flashbacks to Anita Hill, who attacked Thomas, not because she was liberal democrat but because... oh, wait, She was a liberal democrat.
Here the important piece is the political leanings of the accuser/victim. We need to find out what political party these women belonged to. Lesson to be learned: if you're going to be sexually assaulted and expect to be credible, you need to belong to the appropriate political party.

3.
Quote:
But I'm sure none of these ladies, unlike Jennifer Flowers, are lying - its just odd that they waited so long to tell their stories of being propositioned by Mr. Cain - without any witnesses.
I guess here you have to come to some consistent treatment of the topic. Either you believe all women that accuse men of being harassed/assaulted or you believe none. You can't go on a case by case or else you'll be accused (by rc) of being partial.

4.

Quote:
Anyhoo, I'm glad Liberals are back to caring about sexual harassment. But I'm sure that will change depending on who's being attacked.
And lastly, this is the closing argument. Liberals, who have been careless about matters of sexual harassment, are inconsistent and partial, biased, and always victimize conservatives, as shown by the evidence presented... in rc's head.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-09-2011, 09:55 PM
Parallax Parallax is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 219
Default Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

It was so fun to watch Fernholz defend Corzine. Just imagine all of Corzine's Democratic connections were Republican then OWS crowd, Fernholz and other populists and Democratic hacks would go wild on this. Remember the many abuses Paulsen endured just because he was ex-Goldman Sachs and was treasury secretary under Bush? As far as I know none of the extra connections Corzine had with fundraising etc. were true for him.

According to Fernholz MF Global hired Corzine because he was an ex-Goldman Sachs and not because of his political connections? The very fact that creditors would get 1% extra in the event that he accepted a job in the Federal government is enough. Moreover by the same logic all the whining from left about the Wall Street binuses could be dismissed: these are smart capable people we have to keep them. And if we are going to ignore speculation that people make on top of their head then Wall Street is clean except for Madoff.

I have said this before but it bears repeating: this is capitalism and that means Wall Street always comes before Main Street. There is no shared sacrifice or anything of that nature and big banks will always get a bailout. It has nothing to do with bad bad Republicans who circumvented Dodd-Frank a bill written by two politicians both of which have discredited themselves in their dealings with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As late as summer of 2008 Dodd was saying that everything fine with them.

Fernholz is Wrong on Greece Bailout:

I wish they did their homework on this. Out of the entire Greek debt only a quarter is held by international investors. Greek banking system and the Greek pension fund hold about $100 billion worth of Greek debt so if the lenders did accept a haircut it would be actually a lot worse for the Greeks as it would mean even more austerity for them.

And on "Bail In" in US, TARP and Mortgage Relief:

1. The US government did not continue the banking part of TARP, it ended quite a while ago and the total cost to the taxpayer was only $25 billion. The gigantic cost and its continuation is due to taking over Fannie and Freddie.

2. The fact that the banks are making crazy profits was by design: instead of nationalizing the banks, the treasury provided capital by getting equity and the banks would become solvent again by earning their way out. Another reason for crazy profits is the fact that banks borrow short and lend long. A 30 year constant maturity mortgage is 4% or higher while the banks can borrow for no interest in the short term.

3. Finally principal mortgage relief is cute but then the political problem is what to do with people who actually paid their mortgage. People forget but the tea party's starting point was Rick Santelli who on live TV said he will not pay for some loser's mortgage.

PS: I come here for actual dialog if it is going to be a pissing match and defending your team please stay away from here.

PPS: I forgot to mention that Obama administration has a terrible record of interfering with financial markets and regulation for their people. See First Chicago Bank going bust or the way Chrysler creditor were treated.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-09-2011, 10:22 PM
rcocean rcocean is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,077
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Well I'm sorry if my argumentative style makes is too tiresome for you to spell my name properly. Insofar as you have a point about how I post on this forum, it's because the whole place is drowning in stupid arguments made by people who aren't interested in rational discussion and who, on the basis of long experience, I know to be extremely tiresome and irritating to talk to. Therefore, I economize, picking out obvious misstatements of fact or logical fallacies that I imagine might be corrected without long pointless arguments. That is what's going on here, but as usual my hope that someone might simply admit to a mistake and then move on was foolish.
Really? Well guess what. Your constant focus on minor points and "logical fallacies" is one small step above pointing out spelling errors and being a grammar Nazi. If I make Assertion x, with supporting points 1,2, 3 and 4 - your pointing out that supporting point no. 4 is 'incorrect' is boring. It diverts the discussion into "is minor point no. 4 correct or incorrect?"- yawn - since whatever conclusion we reach on Minor point 4 has no real impact on assertion X.

This is even worse when I use obvious (I assume) hyperbole, exaggeration, sarcasm or irony and someone (like you) decides to take it literally. In this case, you seem to think "Filing charges" is different from what I think it is. So where do we go from here? A big long discussion in which we argue about what "filing charges" means? Or I'm supposed to care that these things happened 10 years ago, or 14.5 or 16.5 years ago, instead on "15 years ago"?

Too often you're like some boring defense attorney. "The prosecution claims
my client was found with a bloody knife and was wearing a white bloodstained shirt the night of the murder - but my client was innocent! He was wearing a blue bloodstained shirt that night!"

Last edited by rcocean; 11-09-2011 at 10:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-09-2011, 10:55 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Watching Tim squirm and whitewash Corzine's failure due to a misplaced belief that governments can continue to bail out over-extended public entitlements is too funny. The man destroyed New Jersey's economy and Obama still considered him able to be treasury secretary. Now he's destroyed MF Global thinking taxpayers would cover the bill. And the Day Of Rage/Occupy tards, where are they on this? lol.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-10-2011, 12:47 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
These women didn't wait to make accusations now, they filed suits 15 years ago and settled.
Not really. The accusations filed 15 years ago, you know nothing about. You just know that there are "accusations". The one real claim we can evaluate was made by someone who sat on it until it got her on camera.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-10-2011, 01:06 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
Not really. The accusations filed 15 years ago, you know nothing about. You just know that there are "accusations". The one real claim we can evaluate was made by someone who sat on it until it got her on camera.
Did I say that I did? Again, RC asserted that Cain's accusers waited until how to make these claims about his behavior. I pointed out that they didn't, they complained about his behavior at the time. As a result, they reached agreements with the NRA in which they were paid a settlement and signed non-disclosure agreements. The story made it into the news when Politico got wind of the existence of those settlements through unnamed sources.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-10-2011, 07:57 AM
conncarroll conncarroll is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 105
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Carney killed Fernholz on MF Global.
Fernholz' ideological blinders on the Wall Street-Washington nexus is frightening.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-10-2011, 09:26 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallax View Post
I
3. Finally principal mortgage relief is cute but then the political problem is what to do with people who actually paid their mortgage. People forget but the tea party's starting point was Rick Santelli who on live TV said he will not pay for some loser's mortgage.
Exactly...what to do with those people? Hey, you pay...you lose. No moral hazard there.

Rick Santelli.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-10-2011, 09:41 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by conncarroll View Post
Fernholz' ideological blinders on the Wall Street-Washington nexus is frightening.
Those are his glasses!
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-10-2011, 11:41 AM
Romanized Romanized is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 75
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Tim's tribal reactions are getting old. The next he gets righteously whiny about the insidious influence of money in politics he should get laughed out of the room.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-10-2011, 12:30 PM
thouartgob thouartgob is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Default Well-behaved women seldom make history

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post

Kinda gives me flashbacks to Anita Hill, who attacked Thomas, not because she was liberal democrat but because... oh, wait, She was a liberal democrat.
Has it occurred to the Reactionary Right League of Rhetorically Gentlemen that at least some of the women are coming forward because they are republicans and don't want their nominee to be saddled with this baggage in the general election ?

Nah !!
__________________
Newt Gingrich:“People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz.”
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-10-2011, 12:37 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Well-behaved women seldom make history

Quote:
Originally Posted by thouartgob View Post
Has it occurred to the Reactionary Right League of Rhetorically Gentlemen that at least some of the women are coming forward because they are republicans and don't want their nominee to be saddled with this baggage in the general election ?
It does make a lot more sense with the timing than the insistence that the whole thing is the plot of mean Dems. You really have to have the blinders on to buy into that.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-10-2011, 12:56 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Gee Tim F., Remember Bill Clinton

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcocean View Post
I thought sex didn't matter. I mean doesn't everyone lie about sex?
Neither Tim nor Timothy seemed to be saying that infidelity matters, although I think Michael yesterday suggested that that might be one of the problems with this from the perspective of the social cons. After all, we are told it does matter. (Gingrich supporters seem to think it doesn't, as long as it's in the past, however. On the other hand, Romney seems to be suggesting that fidelity to one woman is evidence that one's flip-flops on issues are unimportant. Lucky for you, the Republican primary voters get to weigh in on this.)

Quote:
And Paula Jones was just Bill's private life. Stay out of his private life, that's what I said.

Tim probably disagreed.
Who knows. Was he old enough to have a position? Timothy probably would have disagreed, I'm sure, and both of them seemed to be taking the side of Clinton's accusers vs. Clinton in this diavlog.

Of course, based on much of the current Republican reaction, I'm sure no one would support Paula Jones. Oh, right...

Quote:
So yeah, I guess I don't really care that 15 years ago, Cain may -or may not -- have put his hand up someone's skirt who didn't really care enough to file charges or talk about it UNTIL NOW.
Of course, as DZ pointed out, that's not the extent of the accusations. Two settlements were paid. But I don't think the absence of public accusations or a lawsuit is any reason to think the allegations are untrue. I assume people will weigh the credibility of the relevant parties differently.

If I had any interest in Cain as a candidate or thought he had had a chance in hell of winning prior to this, it might be interesting. As it is, it's a car wreck.

I disagree with your take on Anita Hill, but don't think this has anything to do with that so see no reason to revisit '92.

Quote:
But I"m sure none of these ladies, unlike Jennifer Flowers, are lying
Whoever said Gennifer Flowers was lying? Not Tim or Timothy. Clinton basically admitted the affair.

Quote:
its just odd that they waited so long to tell their stories of being propositioned by Mr. Cain - without any witnesses.
This isn't odd at all. I suppose it gives you a basis to not believe it if you don't want to, and if there weren't so many I might too (although I agree with the comments that it's hardly a fun thing to do, to put yourself through what the accuser will). But the idea that not saying anything when one is sexually harassed is odd is, frankly, really odd. There are tons of reasons why women usually don't..

Quote:
But I'm sure that will change depending on who's being attacked.
As discussed re BHL's reaction to the DSK accusation, what one previously thinks of the accused seems to color how credible people find accusations. What a shock. Clearly this means that liberals are evil and conservatives beyond reproach. (I wonder why Timothy comes in for no criticism, despite him and Tim being unable to come up with any disagreement.)

I hope the right do flock to Cain in reaction to this, though. Yes, it's DEFINITELY the liberals trying to tear him down. We really, really want Romney to sew it up now and to be able to start positioning himself against Obama and moving toward the center, rather than dealing with attacks on Romneycare and basically being lost in all the silliness of this campaign. Another brilliant Dem electoral strategy this is.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-10-2011, 01:05 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallax View Post
It was so fun to watch Fernholz defend Corzine.
He wasn't.

Quote:
Remember the many abuses Paulsen endured just because he was ex-Goldman Sachs and was treasury secretary under Bush?
You mean re Lehman? But no, I'd like to see what Tim supposedly said. The mainstream Dems didn't attack Paulsen much and certainly seem to have taken his reaction in '08 seriously.

Quote:
According to Fernholz MF Global hired Corzine because he was an ex-Goldman Sachs and not because of his political connections? The very fact that creditors would get 1% extra in the event that he accepted a job in the Federal government is enough.
All this means is that MF Global saw that Corzine would be beneficial to them based on the reaction of creditors for whatever reason. Goldman has a reputation, obviously, and people were clearly willing to buy into the notion that MF Global should transform itself into a mini-Goldman, so the idea that the Goldman connection was important is hardly odd. Then again, that his political connections could be useful is hardly odd either, and that wasn't what Tim was arguing against. He was arguing against the idea that the political connections gave MF Global an improper advantage (such as a bailout or insider information), and the events support Tim.

Timothy's point seemed to be that creditors might have assumed that MF Global would have pull/knowledge it didn't turn out to have, so somehow that was an sign that political pull was misused. That's bizarre. If the creditors assumed that, they bet wrong (and deserved the results), which is a risk of doing business.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-10-2011, 01:10 PM
thouartgob thouartgob is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Default Re: Well-behaved women seldom make history

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanie View Post
It does make a lot more sense with the timing than the insistence that the whole thing is the plot of mean Dems. You really have to have the blinders on to buy into that.
Along with the idea that Dems are behind it because Cain was gonna be such a threat to Obama ( wonder why they thought black ... I mean that ? ). It's almost as if the average american conservative just doesn't feel the need to connect the dots and decides in advance what the figure is going to be.
__________________
Newt Gingrich:“People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz.”
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-10-2011, 01:43 PM
DWAnderson DWAnderson is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 64
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by conncarroll View Post
Carney killed Fernholz on MF Global.
Fernholz' ideological blinders on the Wall Street-Washington nexus is frightening.
Agreed. I can't understand how anyone who calls them self a "business editor" can fail to understand that large companies get to borrow at cheaper rates because they are more likely to be bailed out.

The more controversial claim (but not idle speculation by any means) is that political influence affects or will affect what firms get bailed out and what firms do not.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-10-2011, 02:28 PM
Cincinnatus Cincinnatus is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 31
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Only a few minutes in, but it seems in Tim Fernholz's last couple diavlogs, or since he got completely manhandled by Kevin Williamson, he's been overly abrasive. It's pretty obnoxious.

Besides, being a dick just doesn't suit the purple glasses.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-10-2011, 03:49 PM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cincinnatus View Post
Only a few minutes in, but it seems in Tim Fernholz's last couple diavlogs, or since he got completely manhandled by Kevin Williamson, he's been overly abrasive. It's pretty obnoxious.

Besides, being a dick just doesn't suit the purple glasses.
What an odd set of working definitions you have.

You see "manhandled" and I see "subjected to pretty annoying levels of condecension"

You see "abrasive" and I see "good-natured and civil"

Aside; I disagree pretty fundamentally with Timothy Carney about many things, but Kevin Williamson could take some lessons from him in terms of debate, discussion, and personal demeanor.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-10-2011, 04:08 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
Aside; I disagree pretty fundamentally with Timothy Carney about many things, but Kevin Williamson could take some lessons from him in terms of debate, discussion, and personal demeanor.
I agree.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-10-2011, 04:29 PM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Incidentally, the horse vs. zebra distinction, as I understand it, is a reference to a bit of medical folkore that is condensed into a common saying that a lot of physicians get drilled into their heads as part of their training:

"When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses, not zebras"

The point is kind of related to parsimony, but it's more that one is drawn to complicated, rare, and sexy (??) diagnoses, rather than the more common (and thus more likely) diagnoses.

it's a call to look for simple and likely explanations, rather than being drawn by needless complexity in understanding what is going on.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-10-2011, 05:58 PM
ledocs ledocs is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: France, Earth
Posts: 1,165
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

I want to be fair, or do I? This reminded me of a bull session in a college dorm at 3AM.

"I just wrote a column about MS Global. It's not that a big a firm, is it?" Like, how long does it take to find out how big a firm it is, maybe five minutes? And why would one need to know this before writing a column on the demise of the firm?

I wish Fernholz had just tried to answer the question of why Corzine might be worth 100 basis points to creditors. But he can't answer that, he has no idea. Was it market knowledge, political connections, both, just another colossal mistake in market pricing? Personally, I think he dismissed the political connections angle far too blithely, this seems the likeliest explanation to me. But this does not exclude the possibility that creditors mispriced his insider status -- as would appear to be the case. They did not even mention that this was essentially a commodities trading firm prior to Corzine's arrival.
__________________
ledocs
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-10-2011, 06:22 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ledocs View Post
"I just wrote a column about MS Global. It's not that a big a firm, is it?"
Yeah, the general discussion about MF Global by both was idiotic and demonstrated a lack of understanding of even the basics.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-10-2011, 07:45 PM
chiwhisoxx chiwhisoxx is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,490
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ledocs View Post
I want to be fair, or do I? This reminded me of a bull session in a college dorm at 3AM.

"I just wrote a column about MS Global. It's not that a big a firm, is it?" Like, how long does it take to find out how big a firm it is, maybe five minutes? And why would one need to know this before writing a column on the demise of the firm?

I wish Fernholz had just tried to answer the question of why Corzine might be worth 100 basis points to creditors. But he can't answer that, he has no idea. Was it market knowledge, political connections, both, just another colossal mistake in market pricing? Personally, I think he dismissed the political connections angle far too blithely, this seems the likeliest explanation to me. But this does not exclude the possibility that creditors mispriced his insider status -- as would appear to be the case. They did not even mention that this was essentially a commodities trading firm prior to Corzine's arrival.
Couldn't agree more, good post.
__________________
She said the theme of this party's the Industrial Age, and you came in dressed like a train wreck.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-10-2011, 08:42 PM
Parallax Parallax is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 219
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanie View Post
He wasn't.
Fernholz was not defending Corzine? We can't start a discussion without first agreeing what is real and what is not. Go back and look at it again. If you still insist he was not doing any such thing I can produce the transcript here.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-10-2011, 10:25 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallax View Post
Fernholz was not defending Corzine?
No, he wasn't. Nor was Carney really attacking Corzine, much as he might like to. Obviously, there are things for which Corzine can be attacked, beginning with the management of the firm and including the trading strategy, but they didn't actually discuss that and it seemed obvious from the bit they touched on that they would likely have agreed. So, just so we can see if we listened to different diavlogs or what, let's consider what was said:

To start, after a brief intro that demonstrated (not for the only time) that Timothy in particular didn't bother learning anything about the firm and neither seemed to know much (as ledocs noted), Timothy brings up the key man provision, which he says is unusual. I'm not sure how unusual they are -- I've seen similar provisions and doubt I necessarily would have if they were all that unusual, but this doesn't matter as Tim didn't challenge the claim.

Timothy then goes on to say that the existence of this provision means that MF Global had credit available more cheaply because of Corzine, and this must mean that they assumed his connections would be valuable to them, perhaps because of a potential bailout. Tim poo-poo'd this and said Timothy has no idea why, it's just as likely that he was see as valuable due to his experience/Goldman background, etc. -- it had been discussed that Corzine had plans to turn the firm into a mini-Goldman, etc.

I'm guessing that exchange is what you are interpreting as Tim defending Corzine, but if so I think that's totally off. Saying that Corzine's presence gave MF Global an advantage with creditors because they assumed things about his influence/connections is not a slam on Corzine. It does not accuse him of doing anything wrong. Thus, when Tim expressed doubts and said you don't know why the creditors had that provision, he was similarly not defending Corzine. If anything he was defending the creditors for being wrong/stupid in one way and accusing them of being wrong/stupid in another way.

(As an aside, Tim was right -- we don't have enough evidence from what was said in the diavlog to justify Timothy's speculation. It wouldn't at all surprise me if the creditors thought the connections were significant -- that's the kind of thing people do tend to see as significant IME -- but it's also likely that they may have been swayed by the "making it into a mini Goldman" thing, as that also is. Most likely it was some combination of things. But none of this is important to the issue under discussion, since either way there was no accusation that Corzine did anything wrong in connection with the provision or defense of Corzine.)

Anyway, Tim went on to say that even if the creditors did assume the influence or some assumed expertise of Corzine would be worth more, it clearly didn't pay off. He wasn't a good risk manager, clearly didn't have helpful insider knowledge, didn't get bailed out. Timothy agreed with this (so again it wouldn't be right to see Tim as defending Corzine vs. some accusation that Timothy made), but said this was good -- basically trying to suggest that something wrong happened with respect to his person topic of choice (use of insider information/bailouts) while admitting it did not. This was just weird in context -- it did justify Tim's reaction which was basically "why are you trying to imply something that you admit didn't happen based on what the creditors might have hoped would happen if something bad (that they of course assumed would not happen) happened."

Timothy then went into a digression about someone else who might have been trying to use influence but did so badly. Again -- seems to me that the implicit point was about the creditors, who are the ones he was claiming were doing this, not Corzine. Tim responded by saying that that person didn't seem to have had actual insider information and -- back to MF Global -- MF Global clearly didn't benefit from insider information. Again, hard to read that as a defense of Corzine when Timothy agreed and said that wasn't what he was saying. He said he was merely saying that based on the creditors' assumptions MF Global (like various large banks) had access to more privileged terms. Again, that's not an attack on Corzine, it's an attack on the creditors for betting they'd get some benefit they didn't.

And, again, while I don't think the idea that they'd think connections would help them is hard to believe or surprising -- although Timothy presented nothing more than my speculation and I hardly think that's sufficient for me to go on a diavlog and blather on -- the problem with Timothy's assumptions as presented here is that it's far-fetched to think the creditors would be cool with a bankruptcy if only they had a chance to get bailed out. That's an idiotic thing for the creditors to have assumed, if they did, with a firm the size of MF Global in the present environment. Plus, I think creditors are more likely to have been convinced that the financial picture was much more rosy and do think there's a greater institutional issue about risk totally apart from ideas about the gov't stepping in. Indeed, MF Global would have most likely been acquired and avoided bk if not for the problem with the missing money. (We are getting into things where criticism would have been more valid, but they didn't discuss this, so Tim clearly was not defending Corzine about it.)

The rest was more of the same.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-11-2011, 08:18 AM
Romanized Romanized is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 75
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanie View Post
Then again, that his political connections could be useful is hardly odd either, and that wasn't what Tim was arguing against.
Sure he was. And he looked rather silly doing it. Yeah he kept trying to change the subject, but he ultimately came down on the side of MF'ing cronyism.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-11-2011, 09:42 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Well-behaved women seldom make history

Quote:
Originally Posted by thouartgob View Post
Along with the idea that Dems are behind it because Cain was gonna be such a threat to Obama ( wonder why they thought black ... I mean that ? ). It's almost as if the average american conservative just doesn't feel the need to connect the dots and decides in advance what the figure is going to be.
Gob explains it all to us.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-11-2011, 10:39 AM
thouartgob thouartgob is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Default Re: Well-behaved women seldom make history

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
Gob explains it all to us.
As Ann Coulter says "Our blacks are better then their blacks". Many conservatives, pundits as well as real people, say that they're liking Cain means they are not racist. I will admit that Cain has way more traction in polls than Alan Keyes but these are also different times aren't they.

As for conservatives connecting dots ... just randomly picking out something... when republicans vote against unemployment insurance, because it will make the unemployed lazy and stop them from working WHILE they are complaining that there are no jobs because Obama killed them all, it's like adding 2 and 2 and getting 22 instead of 4. Logic goes out the door. So if logic has little place in the public discourse of the republican party as it stands today why bother with dots or math ( CUE the Heritage Foundations economic model used by Paul Ryan that says unemployment will be 2% in < 10 years under his plan )
__________________
Newt Gingrich:“People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz.”
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-11-2011, 10:45 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Well-behaved women seldom make history

Quote:
Originally Posted by thouartgob View Post
As for conservatives connecting dots ... just randomly picking out something... when republicans vote against unemployment insurance, because it will make the unemployed lazy and stop them from working WHILE they are complaining that there are no jobs because Obama killed them all, it's like adding 2 and 2 and getting 22 instead of 4.
Typical mis-characterization of the situation. You guys do that habitually. The Republicans didn't vote against unemployment insurance.

I'll help you out. The republicans are skeptical of adding extensions to unemployment benefits. You know beyond 99 weeks...almost two years! (52+52 is pretty close to 99 right? I want to make sure to ask because I'm a conservative.) Maybe we just can't afford it...there's no flipping money! never mind, just tax the rich.

how's that greek thing working, by the way?
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith

Last edited by badhatharry; 11-11-2011 at 10:55 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-11-2011, 11:08 AM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanized View Post
Sure he was.
See my post above. In particular, Tim was pointing out that there was no link between what happened to MF Global and cronyism. He most certainly was not defending cronyism. Neither was saying that MF Global should have been bailed out or treated differently than it's been so far and neither was saying that MF Global was bailed out or given insider information.

The only "cronyism" at issue is the speculative assertion by Timothy that the creditors assumed that cronyism would help the firm if Corzine was there, and thus were willing to agree to more beneficial terms than it otherwise would have. Tim didn't claim this was wrong; he claimed -- correctly -- that it was speculative and that there are simpler explanations, especially as it turned out to be so wrong. But that's not really the point wrt your completely false claim that Tim was defending "cronyism." Tim was saying that no evidence of cronyism wrt to the situation was shown, so what happened -- creditors getting burned from allegedly betting on it -- is just what we all think should happen and the kind of thing likely to prevent such bets in the future, if indeed it was motivated by an assumption that the firm would get special treatment. Timothy agreed with this -- he said it was good.

Last edited by stephanie; 11-11-2011 at 11:24 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-11-2011, 11:09 AM
rcocean rcocean is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,077
Default Thanks Ocean

At least you understood the points being made and made an intelligent response.

I'd expand, but don't have time, real life intrudes.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-11-2011, 12:56 PM
Cincinnatus Cincinnatus is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 31
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
What an odd set of working definitions you have.

You see "manhandled" and I see "subjected to pretty annoying levels of condecension"

You see "abrasive" and I see "good-natured and civil"
You're kidding, right?

You saw "good-natured and civil", when Fernholz was snickering like a little girl, interrupting Carney every few words uttered, and borderline calling Carney crazy because he didn't see matters the same way.

Willamson came off as condescending, yes; but that doesn't change the fact Fernholz was not in any way able to formulate a cogent rebuttal to any point that Williamson made, and ultimately Fernholz had to result in changing the subject away from any point of contention. In other words, he was manhandled.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-11-2011, 02:11 PM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Horse and Zebra Edition (Tim Fernholz & Timothy Carney)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cincinnatus View Post
You're kidding, right?

You saw "good-natured and civil", when Fernholz was snickering like a little girl, interrupting Carney every few words uttered, and borderline calling Carney crazy because he didn't see matters the same way.
I went back and rewatched it. let's just say we see things very differently.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-11-2011, 03:58 PM
Parallax Parallax is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 219
Default Re: Fernholz: Hack, Carney: Clueless

Here is what Carney said:

Quote:
Carney: What make Corzine worth 1 percentage point of your money? Is it that he is some genius? Or is that he is the kind of guy who close enough to Obama that he could be even considered for being treasury secretary? And so what does this mean about the world of finance? Is that what the game is now? Figure out who's connections?
When I said Fernholz was defending Corzine I meant that he desperately tried to refute the possibility of Corzine not being a genius. I think everyone on this thread understood that, you on the other hand took things too literally as a way to avoid the intended meaning of the phrase. And this might work in a court of law but it fails miserably in the court of public opinion when you want to actually convince someone.
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.