Apropos nothing, that sale by Mrs. S you brought up a few months ago must be looking so sweet. Wonder if the Russian buyer will soon be a forced seller . . .

Wasn’t it just? Mrs. S obviously learned a thing or two from Mr. S. i hope for her sake she got more than a 10% deposit and the settlement date isn’t too far away.

From what’s going around the oligarchs (including Putin of course) aren’t as rich any longer as they’ve been hit by severe margin calls. But I guess the Russian state going out and buying stocks could hold it up enough so the boys can get out.

Yea, I’m looking at it from a trading perspective. You know we used to think 1 billion dollar hole was big and a 5 billion was a monster. I can’t quite conceive what 600 billion looks and feels like

In the bigger picture, I see recapitalisation as an essential tactic in a “retreat under fire’ strategy. If that’s right, the question is how long this counterattack will hold. I surely don’t know and all these interventions are sufficiently bold and creative to keep me more open minded than usual about what’s around the corner.

Apropos nothing, that sale by Mrs. S you brought up a few months ago must be looking so sweet. Wonder if the Russian buyer will soon be a forced seller . . .

Yes, Nicholas, he rarely disappoints.

Some of them apparently were really pissed as a result.

However it doesn’t sound plausible as anyone in their right mind would take such cheap cash.

Some of them did look really unhappy coming out though.

You gotta have a sense of humor.

look it may all work out for the most part if they are able to reflate quickly enough which I think they will as there’s more interest rate cuts coming soon. Importantly this would place the Euro at near enough to 2% which is where Credit Suisse believes is the negative rate in Europe.

Here’s my thesis and why I think it may work.

1. The combined totals in both the US and EU will meet the level needed to recap the banking system according to a few firms estimates….. about $500-600 billion

2. The global monetary expansion has just begun. The EU was tight and will go to negative rates as they have just had the shit scared out of them.

3. China has big room to move both on the interest rate front and releasing more reserves into the banking system seeing they had gone up to 15% approx reserved in the past tightening phase.

4. The interbank market has basically been socialized and credit spreads will begin to move lower as the governments are now insuring market to all intents and purposes.

5. No bank will be allowed to fail and a run on a bank is out of the question.

6. We’re lucky as the problems seem not to be hugely foreign currency denominated where it counts which is the US (dollar as the reserve currency) and the EU (basically a “domestic” problem).

7. Any sign of a problem and they turn on the spigot.

What this means is that it “almost” safe to re-enter the stock market as I honestly think the new bull-market particularly in financials has begun. There may be some selling between now and Xmas as a result of the mutual and hedge fund redemptions. However margin call selling has basically all dried up as they were all blown out of the water last week and those grotesque swamp dwellers (the shorts) have been carried out on stretchers overnight.

The US financials look really really attractive now.

The final result will be very high level of inflation and very unstable growth that will end in tears…. as always.

I suppose there would be encryption but I can’t see that it’s important. Stuffing ballot boxes is a lot of work for little gain unless you are in PNG or somewhere like that. It might be worth it in a marginal seat but those are the very ones where people would be counting the paper votes so electronic stuffing would be a hopless ploy. Compulsory voting mitigates against serious stuffing because turnout is high and the ballot is fairly predictable.

In terms of their contribution to popular writing, I’m not sure that a comparison with Keynes is feasible. Krugman has the benefit of vastly more time and resources for that stuff, as well as a much more codified body of theory to draw upon. On the other hand, Keynes was a dazzling stylist, which Krugman, though a clear expositor and occasionally an entertaining polemicist, is not

One NOT connected to ANY form of network, presumably. Then you take the numbered printout (each PC being given in advance a range of serial numbers to use) to a numbered ballot box, which when full is taken to a nearby room full of professional non-partisan counters, overseen by party scrutineers.

I’m with Jacques basically. Technology which helps avoid accidental informal voting is great, but there’s a lot to love about having many many humans involved (you can’t bribe them all), and a PROPER (i.e. comprehensive) paper trail.

woulfe: Glad you liked it! Your homoerotic intrepretation #3 is as good as any, but I didn’t extract that one either, at least not from the book. I think for Melville, Claggart is just a device to bring random evil into Billy’s life. He devotes a chapter to sketching Claggart’s psychology — something we know we have a coinvenient label for, i.e., psychopath.

Obama does seem to have a powerful concern with acting well and healing wounds rather than ripping them open. Maybe, as TIOW says, it’s all pure strategy, but I’m far from convinced. It’s also possible he is what he appears to be.

In any case, even if it is calculated, someone who understands these matters well enough to carry off the act strikes me as preferable to the tone deaf, aggressive and often bumbling alternative.

There is no need for the stark choice. A few random, scrutinised checks on the computer’s answers would satisfy most people. In electorates where the result was close the paper count would settle the matter. It would be nice if the outfit in charge is trustworthy - as our AEC is.

The paper would be the legally deciding figure but if the paper was printed by the computer it is hard to see how it could differ.

I don’t understand why the matter is made so complicated with specialised machines and touch screens. To my mind, a voting booth could simply consist of an ordinary PC with a small printer attached. You use the mouse to vote on the screen and then click the green submit button.

The computer would warn you if it is an invalid vote and offer the chance to fix it but then accept it if you insist. Then it prints your vote and you fold it and slip it into the ballot box in the usual way. If you had second thoughts and didn’t like the paper print out you’d have to speak to an official about cancelling it.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. After two or three elections, people would see it as normal. I don’t see any advantage in making the software public.

There is supposed to be a homoerotic interpretation of the whole thing, but being an innocent in these matters, I could never quite figure out what it was. Does Claggart destroy Billy because he’s jealous of the captain’s affection for him?

I think Britten’s Claggart can be understood as the archetypal repressed homosexual, who, hating his own desire for Billy, seeks to destroy him. It’s thirty years since I read Billy Budd, so I can’t comment if that might have been Melville’s intention.

It would be easy and tempting, I guess, to overplay all the maleness on stage, but apart from the obligatory revealing of Tahu Rhodes’ pecs, the production stayed well clear of gratuitous homoeroticism.

Judgement, and its meaning and consequences, are what I think underpin Billy Budd, and Peter Grimes (an outsider is judged as bad and driven to suicide by a fishing village lynch mob) and much of Britten’s work. Hardly surprising.

For me the essence is that Billy (goodness) forgives, not pardons or patronises, but forgives in the truest sense, he understands (even if we or Vere don’t). He sees only goodness. This is the Christian and crucifixion analogy, as much as the sacrifice of innocence. Worth noting are Vere’s final words: “But he (Billy) saved me, and blessed me, and the love that passeth understanding has come to me”.

The homoerotic element, certainly ambiguous, as in much of Britten, gives a possible explanation in this production for Claggart’s nature. Namely, that he so despises himself for his (repressed) sexuality, hating his attraction to Billy (the sniffing of Billy’s kerchief), projecting his hate, to be destroyed at all costs. How many gay bashings are by young males uncertain about their own sexuality or masculinity?

James, Armfield is producing a new Peter Grimes next year.

I’ve posted on this elsewhere, referencing a worthwhile musical analysis, and an
ABC video interview with Teddy Tahu Rhodes explaining the work is a disarmingly simple way, plus some production footage.

Making a few smart comments about Palin and what her daughter’s pregnancy might say about Palin may have made a few democrat insiders feel good - but in the bigger picture would not have been a winner. It would have played badly with every parent who is concerned about what their children might do, it would have gone down poorly with the teenage mother constituency, and it would have been seen as bad taste with the middle ground. Quite simply it had downsides and no upsides at all.

If you can then slip in something from your own situation to show how genuine you are well so much the better - and if it does help cover your arse that is an added bonus. (On the other hand I don’t think you can make much of an issue about a person on the basis of the age that their mother was when they gave birth - there really are some things in life you cannot control!)

Patrick: Thanks for that. I’ve never heard of the film. I’ll take your caution on board, but it would be interesting to see how the music is used.

“The man who has one watch knows what time it is. The man with two watches is never sure”.

And which is worse: two weeks of uncertainty or six years of mistrust?

Printing paper ballots does not quite negate the purpose. The complex counting for the PR-STV upper houses takes weeks. A computer would do it instantly.

Of course it would do the lower houses instantly too which would ruin the Don’s Party event.