Monday, March 2, 2009

Mandatory post - new month.

Otherwise the page looks blank, as if I was trying to post porn and didn't do it properly.

Anyway, nothing new. Oh, maybe a new catch phrase: 30-30 at the next bottom.

For the next 30 yrs it will be up and down 30%? LOL.


reddweb said...

mtgspy..u might as well post some porn as well :)

D said...

I nominate Allison Stokke as the official Golden Bear of the hideout

UC Berkeley Pole-Vault

MTGSPY said...

D said...

RE: 30-30

It would be amazing if we could have 30 years of that kind of volatility...I can dream right?

MTGSPY said...

Say what????!!!

I am NOT surprised. Look at this post from October where I have decided that this is the course of history to unfold. LOL.

ARAK said...

Mr Spy,

How about posting a long overdue item that has been waiting for you to get back from dining at the Y. The S&P earnings.

MTGSPY said...

I'll be back on that in a week or so ;)

Greenie said...

Am I doing this calculation right?

Let's say California pension fund promises to pay a retiree 100K/year from 2015 onward until he dies. The pension fund makes this implied assumption that its money grows at 8% per year.

So, the fund needs

100K *(1+1.08^(-1)+1.08^(-2)+1.08^(-3)+.......)
in 2015 for that retiree.

The sum of the series is 1.35M.

If that sum was growing for the retiree since 1995 at 8% (implied assumption) , it was worth 1.35M/1.08^20=290K in 1995.

Or in other word, if the pension fund had 290K in 1995, it was ready to say that it would be able to support a retiree at 100K from 2015 by growing the money for next 20 years based on in implied assumption.

We know that money did not grow since 1995, and it won't for another 15 years.

So the pension fund will have 290K to support the retiree, or in other words, the retiree will have to support himself with 21K instead of 100K during his retirement.

qadi said...

Mtgspy, is this you?

MTGSPY said...

uh, no. I am no economist, renegade or otherwise. Yes, i am that snotty. :)

Vin said...


The pension program that I'm familiar with also take contributions from employee paychecks. It's a veritable ponzi scheme that probably did not expect most people to live well into their 80s and beyond.

Greenie said...

Yes, but most companies are now adopting 401K model to cut cost. That will reduce the stream of new money. Also, there are more boomers than workers.

D said...

The 401k model is being adopted to reduce litigation exposure by having a self-directed plan.

MTGSPY said...

start covering here.
a group of a very angry bull are appearing, whatever logic they employ u may not like it.

MTGSPY said...

If CDS is not outlawed by this weekend I'd say it's been a pleasure knowing y'all. :)

qadi said...

Mtgspy, I've heard NOTHING about CDS' getting banned yet from the people i know.

Maybe they don't know anything, but they were on top of TARP/TALF/M2M ruse/etc, and so I'm curious why you say this?

Anyway, I bought crash puts today on STT for mar. Let's hope they expire worthless.

MTGSPY said...

Let me tell you what I think as honestly as a fatalistic bear can tell you:

at this point, I do see values and logic dictates you buy them and hold. Where you see values maybe different place from where I see mine. That doesn't change the fact that there is value.

Now what happened is this market is under a severe attack, not very different from currencies attack of years past. You already know the type of weapon used by now.

If this is not stopped, many many things, including the crash puts, would be hard to "realize". :)