[JPMorgan Chairman and CEO] "Iraq war one factor to blame for economic meltdown"

Significant or not is subjective but would just like to take this time to point out how foolish it is to say claiming subprime loans only hurt us by 400B is so dumb it isn't even funny. In fact it is sad because you used to come with honest facts.

 

Dude, YOU are the one who made the comparison, which is completely embarrassing for YOU, which is why i guess you are trying to dig it deeper.

By this post, I take it you are going to take the total subprime debt (1.3 trillion), take the default rate, and multiply it by its corresponding total financial loss in the securities markets after they took these turds and packaged them.....according to YOUR logic, totally innocently and unsuspectingly.

OK cool, CaseyH, let's play it that way.

You're right--- Poor people are f-king sharks. My god, these Detroit crackheads and Marin County house flippin heroin hookers trick-boned Bear Stearns into issuing CDO's....and then all of a sudden, AIGFP was writing Super-Senior Secured CDS on them and it was all on. They just saw that flashy velvet purple pimp hat and the whole damned muthaf-ka was ON like DONKEY MOTHA F-KIN KONG BEYATCH

You're out of your depth, so quit while your ahead. And by "ahead" -- I mean not as much behind.

Tell me CaseyH - what do you do by which a trillion dollars is a mere pittance? Are you a Central Banker for a G20 economy?

 

Hmm... possibly. What year is the Corvette?

 

Last time I heard you were an unemployed lawyer and I am an employed financial risk analyst so I am not sure who you think is out of their depth.

What is this fictitious trillion supposed to represent?

By my post I was disappointed by you saying the Iraq war cost more than it really did according to any number I can find, and the subprime you posted is much lower than the numbers I have seen. So I think you are skewing the numbers when your argument could be just as valid without it.

 

LOL - not like I care but where did you hear that, my unemployment checks are about to run out so I just neeed to figure it out, so that I can get more....but just wondering who are you talking to with respect to this?

Ho hum, enough about me...where are you a financial analyst? I would like to know that....JT Marlin maybe? I know you fancy yourself a badass, so let's hear the credentials- is you going drop the CFA card? Please do....


Anyway, as for my "fictitious trillion" - you are right, it is fictitious - fictitious in that I was being very, very, very forgiving - total costs actually range to up to 3 trillion according to Joseph Stiglitz . Granted, he is not some cold-calling level 1 CFA from H-town, but he may being a Nobel Prize winner, know a bit.

Regardless of that inconvenience, let's take it on your terms.


Let's assume that everything I say is wrong, and let's assume you are right - in what universe is $650 billion very little, in fact, in your estimation, insignificant, comapred to $400 bb in defaulted subprime debt?

I asked you this the first time, you declined to respond.

Please respond.

 

Sam, it looks like you are frustrated that your superior at work has a CFA(?). Or perhaps you were passed over for promotion because of your lack of financial credentials?

 

sorry, here in the unemployment line I chortle at CFA's all day long while I swill Mad Dog from a paper bag......

 

you are so hilarious man! I know it's all an elaborate ruse...after i saw that blog of yours i wasn't sure, but man, you are playing these guys, admit it!

 

OK if we are getting serious lets see what I actually said compared to what you are claiming I said.

In response to MC "the mixmaster" mark.

If you could quote where I said anything else before you busted in with you huge ego trying to make the argument about what you want it to be instead of what it is that would be great.

If you are going to blame Iraq then just be honest and blame the 11 trillion in debt we have. By any measure, Iraq was not a major factor.

 

So - having an extra trillion on hand to spend would not have been significant vis a vis the trillion we had to spend recently?

Well, by the measure I use - one called "numbers" - that is significant.

 

You don't think it would have been beneficial to have had the $700B TARP or $700B stimulus package for free? That's what you could have had without the Iraq war.

 

Exactly. Either the TARP and stimulus packages aren't significant because they are 700B, AND the Iraq war isn't significant.

But one can't be a significant drain on the economy, and the other not be. OF course one of those expenditures is designed to go right back in the economy, while the Iraq war doesn't.

 

And you know this downturn was caused by a BIG credit bubble that goes beyond subprime. Iraq war might have contributed to it, but its hardly one of the main reasons.

 

I thought the thread was about what caused economic meltdown, not the cost of fixing it.

 

ROFL!!! this is pretty comical from dimon....did the onion write this? hey dimon did you happen to forget about financials being levered out of their fking minds? and short selling....loloolololloolololollolol oh man i love it! when you are at fault what is the best thing to do? Blame someone else!

hey dimon what about the belief that we had entered the "Great Moderation" where risk was lower since we could spread it out thru the flawed idea of securitization? what about that? what about the belief that home prices would go up forever? what about the insane increase in the size of the derivatives market? hey dimon quit blaming other crap and start blaming your own risk and lending controls. nah it couldn't have been that...it had to have been energy prices, short sellers, and the iraq war that caused risk controls to implode.

 

serious question....do you or does anyone know what the stimulus of having the war was for the economy? clearly this money wasn't all thrown into an incinerator. i have never seen an analysis of it so i was wondering if anyone else had.

 

I imagine a lot of it went abroad, and I'm willing to bet a huge chunk of it was paying for fuel. So obviously the chunks that local firms like Bechtel, Blackwater etc took down had a stimulus effect - but then they subcontract out too.

 

The only cash that helped us was contruction of equipment used over there and jobs that were created.

The number of jobs created was low for the $$$ because they paid so much and the entire operation built schools and roads etc. over there instead of here so you get a much lower return.

 

yeah i would be curious to see how much fuel costs were for the iraq. obviously that data has to be somewhere....wait wait google is good. it's funny when i typed in fuel cost for iraq war i found the answer.

http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/mar/10/00006/

from the american conservative

 

Also remember that you have to net-out the lost stimulus effect domestically (people deployed abroad, reserve call ups, casualties etc)