I'm sorry, but this statement doesn't make any sense in the digital era. I can download closing prices for nearly every traded US stock over its entire existence in spreadsheet format from Yahoo for free. I downloaded binaries for an entire operating system to run the computer that I'm typing this reply on for free. "Page limit" is not a reasonable excuse for a scientist whose work is funded by the public. I have no doubt that a researcher who was willing to make data available in a digital format that is compatible with commonly used tools such as R would be able to find an outlet willing to host this data for public consumption. In fact, I would almost see this step as a requirement in today's technological environment. How many extra pages would be needed to cite a URL from which further details could be retrieved?
If someone with an honest intention asks about the methods or the data
This statement makes even less sense than the last one. The scientific soundness of data or method is unrelated to the intention of the analyzer. Publishing full details of the analysis can only strengthen confidence in the conclusion that has been reached. Only someone with reservations about the conclusion would seek to obscure the steps in the process by which it was reached.
To expand on this a bit more for the uninitiated, preferred shares are a more sophisticated version of what he's talking about. They basically work like debt that doesn't blow up the company if you can't make your payments. They tend to be junior to debt and senior to common stock if there is a liquidation, there is a secondary market on public exchanges, and there are many variants such as preferred shares that pay higher dividends in years with good earnings or that can be converted into common shares on terms similar to convertible bonds. This is already a well solved problem, but the solution isn't very sexy, so it's not as well known as debt and common stock.
Yeah, that's a good idea, let's penalize capital formation even more while we're trying to recover from an economic downturn. If you want to level the playing field between debt and equity financing for business, maybe you should make dividend payments deductible so that mature businesses will have more of an incentive to return cash to shareholders.
Back in my student days long ago, a friend of mine who was working on a very difficult assignment hatched a plan to include a SIGSEGV handler that would print "NFS server not responding, still trying..." for use on the day when we had to demo the results to the TAs. The NFS system was pretty flaky and his hope was that the TA would move on to the next demo and get back to him, giving him time to fix whatever problem was happening. Not sure if he actually put it in though.
Exactly what evidence do you use to characterize the loan as predatory? The other story I've read on this (in the Times as well if I recall correctly) characterized Leibovitz as being bad at managing her finances. If you pledge property as collateral for a loan and you don't pay the loan back according to the terms that you agreed to, then the creditor has the right to foreclose on the property and sell it, what's predatory about that?
One of the comments on the article suggests applying for a patent on the "patent troll" business model and then suing these guys. Fans of recursion will notice that you could then apply for a patent on the "patent on the 'patent troll'" business model, and then we're really off to the races.
The U.S. would never allow this to happen because then U.S. citizens would be able to invest in equities in someplace like Hong Kong and pay much lower taxes. It would be very nice if this happened.
I can't answer for the author of the parent, but for my part I combine my own personal experiences dealing directly with employees of government agencies with the stories I hear from a friend of mine who works for a consulting firm and often deals with government employees, including a very long assignment working for FEMA as part of the Hurricane Katrina cleanup. A particularly interesting data point for me was the experience of registering a car at the Connecticut DMV vs. registering in Pennsylvania where the process is privatized.
Has anyone ever seen any scientific evidence comparing productivity of private sector vs. public sector employees?
I kind of ran out of steam on the paragraph where he claims that Niederhoffer's strategy is better than Taleb's while failing to mention that Niederhoffer has blown up two separate funds during periods of market instability (1997 and 2007). I find that Niederhoffer's experience reinforces rather than debunks Taleb's arguments.
Yeah, but the problem is that the rest of the world is not currently blown to smithereens and in need of American labor and capital to rebuild it the way it was in 1945 (not to mention deeply indebted to the United States as well). The trough of that graph is about the point where Western Europe and Japan managed to rebuild their economies to the point where they could actually compete effectively. The United States has no such competitive advantage at this point.
Much of the information in this video is incorrect and makes the same mistakes that the general media makes when trying to explain high frequency trading. In particular, it fails to mention the fact that pre-routing exposure to local exchange members is an optional feature of orders (i.e. when you send an order, you can choose whether it is a flash order) and thus cannot disadvantage the sender, it incorrectly explains what an automated market maker is, fails to correctly explain the rules of NMS routing, and misstates the role of liquidity rebate in high frequency trading.
I think he meant that they can't afford to sell them. The financial condition of an issuer dictates the yield (i.e. interest rate) that investors will require to buy the bonds. California's condition is so poor that the required yield would be very high, so they have decided to force feed this debt to people who are already their creditors (in short term payable/receivable sense) but were expecting to be paid in currency.
There might be certain areas of the economy where this is the case but I haven't seen anything like that since I've been here. I work for a startup financial firm and we have no "local" partners I'm aware of. The regulatory requirements are similar to operating a financial business in the US or UK. The legal system here is based on common law, I'm able to read and understand contracts as well as I can in the states, and I've personally met people who received legal training in the UK and practice in Hong Kong. Frankly, I think the market here is appreciably freer than that in the US given that the taxes are much lower and the infrastructure is on par.
I've been working in Hong Kong for almost 6 months, and there definitely seems to be opportunity here. There is a lot more optimism than I've been seeing in the states when I go back, and software is perceived as an area in which the skill levels that you can find among the local Hong Kong population are lower than you would expect from westerners because there is such an emphasis on finance here.
I'm sorry, but this statement doesn't make any sense in the digital era. I can download closing prices for nearly every traded US stock over its entire existence in spreadsheet format from Yahoo for free. I downloaded binaries for an entire operating system to run the computer that I'm typing this reply on for free. "Page limit" is not a reasonable excuse for a scientist whose work is funded by the public. I have no doubt that a researcher who was willing to make data available in a digital format that is compatible with commonly used tools such as R would be able to find an outlet willing to host this data for public consumption. In fact, I would almost see this step as a requirement in today's technological environment. How many extra pages would be needed to cite a URL from which further details could be retrieved?
If someone with an honest intention asks about the methods or the data
This statement makes even less sense than the last one. The scientific soundness of data or method is unrelated to the intention of the analyzer. Publishing full details of the analysis can only strengthen confidence in the conclusion that has been reached. Only someone with reservations about the conclusion would seek to obscure the steps in the process by which it was reached.