House Price Crash forum: How To 'long Labour' - House Price Crash forum

Jump to content

powered by
  • (4 Pages) +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

How To 'long Labour' Teenager Backed Bonds

#46 User is offline   porca misèria 

  • Porcine Aviation Enterprises
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 13,838
  • Joined: 01-September 08

Posted 13 August 2010 - 08:08 AM

View PostLaura, on 13 August 2010 - 06:38 AM, said:

Hacking off their lower limbs gives guaranteed results

Interesting. Is there a link where I can view your practical demo thereof?

#47 User is offline   Laura 

  • HPC Senior Veteran
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,684
  • Joined: 08-November 07

Posted 13 August 2010 - 12:33 PM

No there isn't PM, sorry. - I'm behaving myself this lifetime
..................................
Ubi bene ibi patria


“…it is difficult enough to convince some people that the economy is in fact not providing the security they desire, but is actually destroying their future completely. To explain to them that this is deliberate, that the economy is designed to self-destruct, that is another prospect altogether…

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard 25/7/2010

#48 User is offline   Saberu 

  • HPC Veteran
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: New Members
  • Posts: 2,104
  • Joined: 14-September 07

Posted 13 August 2010 - 12:34 PM

Scepticus you are once again proving you live in a land of your own, and what pray tell will these trained people end up doing?

Seeing as our government prefers using immigrants for most new job positions which are only a fraction of the jobs our country needed to begin with as most manufacturing has gone to Asia.

Incidentally Asia is a pretty good place for jobs for young people these days, I'm sure they'd rather go there than be your slave.

#49 User is offline   okaycuckoo 

  • I live on HPC!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,995
  • Joined: 24-June 07

Posted 11 April 2012 - 04:25 PM

View PostSaberu, on 13 August 2010 - 12:34 PM, said:

Scepticus you are once again proving you live in a land of your own


Denninger:

Students in California have a proposal. Rather than charging tuition, they'd like public universities in California to take 5% of their salary for the first twenty years following graduation (for incomes between $30,000 and $200,000). Essentially, rather than taking on debt students would like to sell equity in their future earnings. This means students who make more money after graduation will subsidise lower-earning peers.
So there are things to like about this sort of proposal. But there are things to dislike too. One of the dislikes will undoubtedly be that colleges will immediately try to find someone (like, for example, JP Morgan) to securitize up and risk-shift this off the school itself, destroying the direct link between educational outcomes and college funding.

In order for me to support such a scheme the ability to break that link would have to be prohibited in some form or fashion. I doubt very much that any such prohibition would either be put forward or would stick if it were. Instead, what I suspect is that this sort of "wild scheme" would become just another way to try to extend the educational debt ponzi which is showing increasing signs of stress indicative of impending detonation.


http://market-ticker...www?post=204583
The bankers rubbed their palms together, and the economy went up in flames.

"If the government is big enough to give you everything you want, it is big enough to take away everything you have." Gerald Ford.

#50 User is offline   scepticus 

  • I live on HPC!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8,646
  • Joined: 01-October 09

Posted 22 April 2012 - 10:57 PM

View Postokaycuckoo, on 11 April 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:

Denninger:

Students in California have a proposal. Rather than charging tuition, they'd like public universities in California to take 5% of their salary for the first twenty years following graduation (for incomes between $30,000 and $200,000). Essentially, rather than taking on debt students would like to sell equity in their future earnings. This means students who make more money after graduation will subsidise lower-earning peers.
So there are things to like about this sort of proposal. But there are things to dislike too. One of the dislikes will undoubtedly be that colleges will immediately try to find someone (like, for example, JP Morgan) to securitize up and risk-shift this off the school itself, destroying the direct link between educational outcomes and college funding.

In order for me to support such a scheme the ability to break that link would have to be prohibited in some form or fashion. I doubt very much that any such prohibition would either be put forward or would stick if it were. Instead, what I suspect is that this sort of "wild scheme" would become just another way to try to extend the educational debt ponzi which is showing increasing signs of stress indicative of impending detonation.


http://market-ticker...www?post=204583


Thanks matey, good find!

For sure these assets would get securitised.

  • (4 Pages) +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users