Served by Jesse of Le Café Américain
The action in the SP futures market has been particularly heavy handed and blatant since the heads of the money center banks met with the Community-Organizer-in-Chief at the White House. This market is being shoved around like a gaijin granny on the Tokyo subway in rush hour.
To our minds, it is just as likely that we are being set up for a terrific leg down. In our experience the big dogs tend to dominate certain portions of the short side at the apogee of a stock market pump. Our target for a failure point on the SP June futures is about 858-864.
This market is utterly overbought according to the McClellan Summation Index. It can become more overbought, especially considering the huge sums of liquidity added to the market with few productive outlets. Hot money eats beta for breakfast.
Let’s see if they can keep it floating up. This does not look like a sustained ramp however, but the pump that sets up the dump.
At some point the equity market will start moving higher and keep going, to fantastic levels perhaps, if a serious inflation sets in. The stock markets in the Weimar Republic were spectacular, if one ignored the reality behind the appearance. The Fed and Treasury are obviously trying to reflate the economy by printing money and not changing the fundamentals through systemic reforms. Should we be surprised if we obtain yet another dangerous bubble?
We think it is far too early in the game for this, but are keeping an open mind to all possibilities. The market will reveal its intentions, in time.
The best probability based on the data at hand is that we are seeing a pump and dump, in order to provide some income to the beleaguered banks through their proprietary trading desks.
We have not been tracking it, but we wonder if Goldman Sachs has fully placed its large secondary equity offering designed to pay back their TARP funds. The markets often miraculously levitate in sympathetic conjunction with key IPOs and equity tranches.
If they have, then the pump and dump gains in likelihood.
Zero Hedge
SPY Have Become Hard To Borrow
Posted by Tyler Durden at 9:33 AM
Developing story: Traders confirm several locations indicating SPDRs are no longer automatic borrow and have made their way to the Hard To Borrow list: pre-borrow call is needed versus automatic short prior, as not enough underlying inventory.Have fun hedging the market when you can not short. Wholesale market squeeze is being orchestrated.
At times such as these, Le Café Américain uses several indicators to test the nature of a rally. One simple method however is to just watch a parallel market. We like to watch the Nadaq100 futures for confirmations when the SP is being used to manage a market move.
The banks must be restrained, and the financial system must be reformed and markets restored to balanced efficiency, before there can be any sustained economic recovery.
Note: The charts shown were generated earlier this afternoon in the Cafe’s kitchens.
30 comments
Comments are closed.
Re: “gaijin granny” and trading The TARP. Should that read ganja granny and a blintz?
Also see: Goldmember: Would you like a shmoke und a pancake?
Austin Powers: A what?
Goldmember: A shmoke und a pancake. You know, a flapjack und a shigarette? No? Shigar und a waffle? No? Pipe und a crepe? No? Bong und a blintz? No? Well, then there ish no pleashing you.
Austin Powers: That’s not right…
Also see,hear and feel the texture on the trading floor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWktQi9fwW4
What are the charts supposed to illustrate?
I am long equities in Q2, especially energy and solars. Can we go back to retest 750 on the SPX? Sure but it will surge higher from there.
Q3 & Q4 will be challenging for stocks, but so far Q2 looks like it has more room to head higher.
cheers,
Leo
Also…don’t keep your top losses too tight…too much vol out there…look at BAC today!
Leo
tyaresun,
I don’t pretend to understand them. They are terribly meaningful to technicians, and enough traders are technically oriented that having an index break a resistance level or hold a support level is deemed significant even to a fair number of traders who are not technicians (I hear technical patter from all sorts of professional investors who are fundamentally inclined). However, respectable academics regard this sort of thinking as voodoo, as I am sure you know.
Neils Bohr had a horseshoe on the wall of his office. A visitor hectored him, as a man of science, for having a superstitious token displayed prominently. Bohr listened patiently, and said, “I’m told it is effective even if one doesn’t believe in it.”
The world is full of magic and then there is TARP, which is full of poop.
Also see and smell: Nonlocality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlocality
In physics, nonlocality is a direct influence of one object on another distant object, in violation of the principle of locality. In classical physics, nonlocality in the form of action at a distance appeared in corpusculas theories and later disappeared in field theories. Action at a distance is incompatible with relativity. In quantum physics nonlocality re-appeared in the form of entanglement. Physical reality of entanglement has been demonstrated experimentally together with the absence of local hidden variables. Entanglement is compatible with relativity; however, it prompts some of the more philosophically oriented discussions concerning quantum theory. More general nonlocality beyond quantum entanglement, but still compatible with relativity, is an active field of theoretical investigation but has yet to be observed.
Yves,
There are billions of dollars invested in global macro hedge funds and commodity trading advisors (CTAs).
In my experience, global macros like to get in early, using pure fundamental analysis while CTAs wait for price signals to confirm a trend.
When a trend reverses, the global macros will get out before price signals confirm reversal, possibly leaving money on the table (but if they got in early enough, they made some early on).
In trendless markets, it is very difficult for long-term CTAs or global macro funds to make money. they get whipsawed in and out of positions.
Very, very few CTAs are good at short-term trading. Prop traders are good at this, using technical analysis, minute bar charts, etc., but these are not scalable strategies.
Lots of traders place their stops too tight and end up getting killed in these markets.
You need BOTH technical and good fundamental analysis to make money in treacherous markets. And you need lots of luck…never underestimate Lady Luck.
cheers,
Leo
Just noticed this posted by Girl Can Trade:
http://girlcantrade.blogspot.com/2009/04/theres-sucker-born-every-minute.html
2009-04-22
THERE’S A SUCKER BORN EVERY MINUTE….
Or so I’ve been told. Hope you didn’t get suckered into staying long today, because tomorrow should be wicked fun!!!!!
A friend of mine, Makisw, put it this way….
It was an extremely important day for both bulls and bears. SPY finished back testing the bottom support of the broken wedge, and it held as resistance, despite repeated attempts by the bulls to overrun it. In the process, it formed a head and shoulders on the 60-min chart. The weak finish, sets up down-pointing stochastics and TRIX on both the 60-min and daily charts. In fact, on the daily chart, today was the FIRST day since the entire rally began, that daily Stochastics took a dive, and TRIX (15,9) flattened out, ready to roll over. These set us up for a correction to fib 62% at 746. (FAZ 21 and SKF 105 remain rough targets, during this correction). Last time this happened in January 2009, the entire fib 62% correction took only 7 trading days.
http://xs538.xs.to/xs538/09173/0422-spy1…
Posted by girlcantrade at 12:48
We have not been tracking it, but we wonder if Goldman Sachs has priced and sold its large secondary equity offering designed to pay back their TARP funds.Well let’s see, search Google News for “goldman sachs secondary offering” and there it is. Also Bloomberg covered it last week.
Does anybody ever do even minimal research before writing?
Nemo,
That is inapt drafting by Jesse. He and I corresponded. He is well aware that the deal was priced. I even noted the green shoe was not exercised.
His question is whether the syndicate is still holding inventory. Whether the syndicate has ben “broken” to use the term of art, is pretty much never reported. You need to get the info from the firms involved.
There really is not a proper syndicate in the case of Goldman I think as they were the sole underwriter.
I was really asking how the sale had gone. There was an option for additional shares in it. I have not seen anything to follow up on last week’s announcement.
“…it has an option to purchase up to an additional 6,097,561 shares of common stock to the extent that it sells more than 40,650,407 shares. An over-allotment option, for itself.”
And if I say, hey I wonder about this or that, and say explicitly that I have not had time to look it up, doesn’t that beg the question about why I didn’t look it up?
And I was looking for a bit of an excuse to observe that the recent market rally was remarkably coincident with Goldman’s offering, but perhaps I was not obvious enough.
I thought the general consensus was that the markets have become totally unhinged. That they are no longer tracking anything of fundamental or even imagined importance, just random news and emotions and whatever economic report hits the wires. That being the case, the technical people must be having fits trying to glean any signal from the noise. But hey, that’s what they are all about.
I understand the basis for charting. It has a kind of elegance that appeals to the systems analyst (whatever your system might be.) Emergent properties and feedbacks, while poorly understood, are difficult to ignore after a while.
The most scary thing on my mind in this regards is long-wave theory and “Kondratiev Winter”. If the technical guys have any of this stuff right then interesting times lay ahead.
Bohr also used to punctuate certain conversations with the phrase, “Very interesting…”
Bohr’s friends knew that Bohr had previously used the phrase when describing his brief time in Cambridge—only Bohr completed it by saying, “Very interesting…absolutely useless”.
Thus, “Very interesting” was an inside joke that became Bohr’s signature method of politely ending conversations that were rife with dubious hypothesis or fanciful “scientific” speculation.
I wonder what the great physicist would say about the Support and Resistant Charts with fibonacci retracements, Elliot waves…and my personal favorite: The faceless apparition with the slumping right shoulder cautioning traders to “Sell!”…because of an acute dandruff condition in need of Head and Shoulders.
OK, sorry for being so harsh.
It certainly was a little odd how Goldman’s own stock doubled in the six weeks leading up to the offering.
By doing the offering to repay the TARP, Goldman’s management is weakening the company’s capital position and diluting its shareholders for the purpose of allow themselves to take home more ridiculous salaries…
Given that, I really wonder who exactly bought that $5 billion of GS common at $123/share.
As for charting, I am not sure why anybody would trust it at this point. If Goldman (e.g.) is manipulating the market, are they not also going to manipulate all of the indicators you like to follow? Why would they only try to draw in the masses when they can instead draw in all the traders who have “studied” TA?
RE: Niels Bohr
Bohr’s dismissal of Hugh Everett’s “many worlds” interpretation of quantum mechanics resulted in Everett leaving his academic pursuits as well as his doctoral studies. Interestingly the “many worlds” view was later accepted by Richard Feynmann and virtually all other theoretical physicists. Frank Tipler of Tulane even goes so far as to say: “Nevertheless, the laws of terrestrial physics show that there are worlds invisible to us. I refer to the other universes of the multiverse, whose existence is required by quantum mechanics. These other universes are usualy considered to be a consequence of the ‘many-worlds interpretation’ of quantum mechanics, but this phrase is misleading, because it suggests that there may be other interpretations of quantum mechanics. This is not so. There is no other interpretation of quantum mechanics! More precisely, if the other universes and the multiverse do not exist, then quantum mechanics is objectively false.”Everett’s son Mark did a PBS NOVA program Parallel Worlds – Parallel Lives on his father’s work.
“the financial system must be reformed”
That, and the money system, if you don’t mind.
I’m not sure if any of the little people out there really care much about the money system. But they care about what is being allowed to happen in the name of saving private banking, but what is really the private debt-money system of the Federal Reserve.
It ought to be up for discussion.
The fractional-reserve debt-money system contributes to the pro-cyclical nature of the boom and bust cycle. While not the direct cause, debt-money makes the BOOMier and bust-ier.
Simply put, they would be fewer and lesser without the fractional reserve debt-money system.
A move to full-reserve private deposit banking would go a long way to removing a lot of the risk from the money system.
The weakness of the system is laid out for all to see in the well-spoken case of the commentary here.
The money system is broke and in great need of reform.
Separate banking from money-creation.
We need an exit strategy, don’t you think?
No problemo Nemo.
Its actually in markets such as this that I rely on my technical charting more heavily than the fundamentals. I do both.
Stocks are “trading like commodities” which means that they are disconnected from the fundamentals, and are swinging with great volatility on momentum and trader games.
Personally though I have called this a ‘triple black diamond’ market, to use a label from the ski slopes. Unless you are a seasoned trader, stay in cash and out of the day to day push and pull.
If you are a trader, the technicals matter. If you are not, then they don’t.
Arguing the relative merits of fundamental and technical analysis is like discussing which is better, a hammer or a screwdriver.
Both have their appropriate and inappropriate usage.
Active traders need the technical knowledge to pick entry and exit points at a minimum however.
The ‘buy and hold’ crowd needs to way for another long, lazy bull market, so the stock market bulls can be geniuses again.
joebhead – Yes we do need an exit strategy especially since in past history such monetary reform has come only in the wake of violent social upheaval.
Some talk about inflation in this piece and the Weimar Republic. It is the question I ask myself daily. In the short term (next two years) I think deflation will most likely rule the roost. Hoisington just released their latest quarterly letter. Must read for the inflation deflation debate. http://www.hoisingtonmgt.com/pdf/HIM2009Q1NP.pdf
Also debt deflation did a great piece that is a must read. http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/ did an amazing write up.
It is the most important question in all of investing and I don’t know but I lean towards deflation in the short term. I think you will hear more and more chatter about all the money pumped into the system and comparisons being made to 2003. In 2003 leverage was being added. In 2009 world wide leverage is going down. The Pavolovian response is it is 2003.
A wise theoretical physics professor of mine once said, “I am neither old enough, nor young enough, to care about the interpretation of quantum mechanics.”
And in that vein, I never spent much of my time in physics (experimental) studying the interpretation question. There’s a lot to be said for the Everett interpretation, but it’s very much stretching credibility to say it’s the only interpretation, or that it’s required by quantum mechanics. And it’s simply untrue that it’s now accepted “by virtually all theoretical physicists.” Unless by accepted one means, “acknowledged as a possibility”, which I think would be true for virtually all theoretical physicists.
This is an Off-Topic FYI (OTFYI)
The day began with news that David Kellermann, acting chief financial officer at Freddie Mac (FRE), was found dead at his home in an apparent suicide. Investigators from the SEC and Justice Department have been questioning officials of Freddie Mac about possible accounting violations and other matters. Freddie disclosed in the recent SEC filing that in September it received a federal grand jury subpoena from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York seeking documents related to accounting, disclosure and corporate governance matters. That subpoena was later withdrawn, Freddie has disclosed, and the investigation was taken over by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Freddie said the SEC also is investigating and has told the company to preserve documents. Freddie has said it is "cooperating fully in these matters."
>> Federal National Mortgage Association
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/310522/000095013309000487/w72716e10vk.htm#136
As of January 31, 2009, there were 1,091,230,272 shares of common stock of the registrant outstanding.
Investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission
On September 26, 2008, we received notice of an ongoing investigation into Fannie Mae by the SEC regarding certain accounting and disclosure matters. We are cooperating fully with this investigation. On January 8, 2009, the SEC issued a formal order of investigation.
Investigation by the Department of Justice
On September 26, 2008, we received notice of an ongoing federal investigation by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York into certain accounting, disclosure and corporate governance matters. In connection with that investigation, Fannie Mae received a Grand Jury subpoena for documents. That subpoena was subsequently withdrawn. However, we have been informed that the Department of Justice is continuing an investigation. We are cooperating fully with this investigation.
The material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting could result in errors in our reported results or disclosures that are not complete or accurate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.
As described in “Part II—Item 9A—Controls and Procedures,” management has determined that, as of the date of this filing, we have ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and two material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. These weaknesses could result in errors in our reported results or disclosures that are not complete or accurate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.
One of these material weaknesses relates specifically to the impact of the conservatorship on our disclosure controls and procedures. Because we are under the control of FHFA, some of the information that we may need to meet our disclosure obligations may be solely within the knowledge of FHFA. As our conservator, FHFA has the power to take actions without our knowledge that could be material to our shareholders and other stakeholders, and could significantly affect our financial performance or our continued existence as an ongoing business. Because FHFA currently functions as both our regulator and our conservator, there are inherent structural limitations on our ability to design, implement, test or operate effective disclosure controls and procedures relating to information within FHFA’s knowledge. As a result, we have not been able to update our disclosure controls and procedures in a manner that adequately ensures the accumulation and communication to management of information known to FHFA that is needed to meet our disclosure obligations under the federal securities laws, including disclosures affecting our financial statements. Given the structural nature of this material weakness, it is likely that we will not remediate this weakness while we are under conservatorship.
Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures
OVERVIEW
We are required under applicable laws and regulations to maintain controls and procedures, which include disclosure controls and procedures as well as internal control over financial reporting, as further described below.
EVALUATION OF DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Disclosure controls and procedures refer to controls and other procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding our required disclosure. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and management was required to apply its judgment in evaluating and implementing possible controls and procedures.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As required by Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act, management has evaluated, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as in effect as of December 31, 2008, the end of the period covered by this report. As a result of management’s evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective at a reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2008 or as of the date of filing this report.
Our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2008 for three reasons: our Board of Directors and its Audit Committee lacked oversight authority with respect to our disclosure controls and procedures; our disclosure controls and procedures did not adequately ensure the accumulation and communication to management of information known to FHFA that is needed to meet our disclosure obligations under the federal securities laws; and we had a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting relating to the design of our controls over certain inputs to models used in measuring expected cash flows for the other-than-temporary impairment assessment process for private-label mortgage-related securities.
As described below, as of the date of this filing, we have remediated the weakness in our disclosure controls and procedures relating to our lack of a Board of Directors and Audit Committee with oversight authority over our disclosure controls and procedures; however, we have not been able to update our disclosure controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that information known by FHFA on an ongoing basis is communicated from FHFA to Fannie Mae management in a manner that allows for timely decisions regarding our required disclosure, nor have we remediated the material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting relating to our other-than-temporary impairment assessment process for private-label mortgage-related securities. As a result, we were not able to rely upon the disclosure controls and procedures that were in place as of December 31, 2008 or as of the date of this filing, and we continue to have two material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. These material weaknesses are described below under “Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting—Description of Material Weaknesses.”
We intend to design, implement and test new controls to remediate the material weakness in the design of our controls relating to the other-than-temporary impairment assessment process for private-label mortgage-related securities by September 30, 2009. However, given the nature of the weakness in our disclosure controls and procedures relating to information known by FHFA, it is likely that we will not remediate the weakness in our disclosure controls and procedures while we are under conservatorship.
> This stood out: As a result of management’s evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective at a reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2008 or as of the date of filing this report.
… nor have we remediated the material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting relating to our other-than-temporary impairment assessment process for private-label mortgage-related securities.
See: Table 25: Other-than-temporary Impairment Losses on Alt-A and Subprime Private-Label Securities
Although we have recognized other-than-temporary impairment equal to the difference between the cost basis and the fair value of the security, we anticipate at this time, based on the expected cash flows of the securities, that we will recover some of these impairment amounts. For the Alt-A securities classified as available for sale for which we recognized other-than-temporary impairment during 2008, the average credit enhancement was not sufficient to cover projected expected credit losses. The average credit enhancement as of December 31, 2008 was approximately 16% and the expected average collateral loss was approximately 27%, resulting in projected expected credit losses of $2.6 billion. For the available-for-sale subprime securities for which we recognized other-than-temporary impairment during 2008, the average credit enhancement was approximately 26% and the expected average collateral loss was approximately 40%, resulting in projected expected credit losses of $1.2 billion. However, the other-than- temporary impairment we recorded on our Alt-A and subprime securities totaled $4.8 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively, for 2008. We will accrete into interest income the portion of the amounts we expect to recover that exceeds the cost basis of these securities over the remaining life of the securities. The amount accreted into earnings on our Alt-A and subprime securities for which we have recognized other-than-temporary impairment totaled $233 million in 2008.
We will continue to monitor and analyze the performance of these securities to assess the collectability of principal and interest as of each balance sheet date. If there is further deterioration in the housing and mortgage markets and the decline in home prices exceeds our current expectations, we may recognize significant other-than-temporary impairment amounts in the future. See “Part I — Item 1A — Risk Factors” for a discussion of the risks related to potential future write-downs of our investment securities.
Hypothetical Performance Scenarios
… We have disclosed for information purposes the net present value of projected losses (“NPV”) of our securities under four hypothetical scenarios…
Just curious…. any thoughts out there on this??
Also see: Star Trek "Paradise Syndrome
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhCfFR0w0ho&feature=related
I, and I’m sure many other readers “of a certain age” HATE THIS TINY COMMENT BOX !!!
I can’t enlarge the type, or the box, and have to move closer to the computer to read it.
Whose idea was this ? some youngster I guess…….
Please put the comments at the and of post, the way they used to be, or at least, give us the option.
There, now I feel better.
BTW, I read this every day, so I’m not just a casual reader.
Doc, I am curious about something you said – Entanglement is compatible with relativity…My initial reaction to that it is true only if you take the view that it is all pre-ordained. Did you have something else in mind?
I don’t do stocks, but I do do time and societies. My charts are calendars. March and early April was a great window for wings of song. The rest of April and May is a fine time for a fall down a busted ladder. Sez I.
Regarding nonlocality, I believe in it, and any fundamental revision of our present models of the physical universe will incorporate it in a meaningful way. That said, I do not believe that asset prices defy fundamental gravity, in equities or anywhere else.
the market will reveal it’s intentions in time…What tripe. The ‘market’ is an abstraction. And financial capital is just a marker for real things – now totally disconnected via fiat explosion. These analyses may hold water in short term only because 99% of players are people who believe this stuff. In the end it is energy and resources we have to invest, not stocks and bonds. We are going to learn this the hard way.
kack,
Re: "My initial reaction to that it is true only if you take the view that it is all pre-ordained. Did you have something else in mind?"
> Surely people in the future will someday realize that we do not exist now, just as they don't exist for us now, so the point of all things being pre-ordained is somewhat entangled and spooky, I think.
See: "Einstein famously derided entanglement as "spukhafte Fernwirkung" or "spooky action at a distance". It was his belief that future mathematicians would discover that quantum entanglement entailed nothing more or less than an error in their calculations. As he once wrote: "I find the idea quite intolerable that an electron exposed to radiation should choose of its own free will, not only its moment to jump off, but also its direction. In that case, I would rather be a cobbler, or even an employee in a gaming house, than a physicist"."
Isn't there an issue with a cat in a box?
@doc – thanks for the reply.
I see entanglement consistent with reality. I see relativity consistent with reality.
Beyond that, I can’t see.
Andrew Foland:
As an EE – but with much interest in physics – I’m certain you’ve studied the subject in much greater depth than have I. My understanding is that Bohr himself was not so concerned with the implications or “interpretations” of QM but rather that it provided accurate description and prediction of physical processes. It seems that the only alternatve to “many worlds” is the notion of the wave function “collapsing” in connection with an observation. This causes me the same sort of problem which prompted Einstein to ask of the Copenhagen advocates: “Do you really think the moon is not there when you are not looking”
Hmmm – my word verification today “goofips”….probably a misspelled commentary on my comment.
This thread can't die because it is part of the future.
I have a new theory based on the previous Einstein material:
Re: " It was his belief that future mathematicians would discover that quantum entanglement entailed nothing more or less than an error in their calculations. As he once wrote: "I find the idea quite intolerable that an electron exposed to radiation should choose of its own free will, not only its moment to jump off, but also its direction. In that case, I would rather be a cobbler, or even an employee in a gaming house, than a physicist"."
> What if, the financial engineers that brought us to this point of systemic collapse, were mad scientist-like employees of banks that were using the equivalent of quantum physics to "mastermind" supercomputer-like financial models that simply were all based on errors in their calculations? Huh, huh, what about it, maybe the people that brought us to this point simple were not retarded or pirate-like crooks, but maybe, these slobs just had the wrong data that built the wrong models and thus the entire financial system hummed along like a Large Hadron Collider — and then it broke.
I realize that is obvious, but I like that Einstein seems to have a belief in future scientists realizing that this financial entanglement is just a glitch which is now at a macro level and destroying the world like a hungry cancer matrix. Speaking of The LHC, when does that baby fire up again?
Full disclosure: The Author has just had a bowl of chili and now hope to listen to Yeah Yeah Yeahs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDkc40AD_lo&feature=related
Is this too late for the submission deadline?