Board of Trade has a message for Occupy Chicago

Hmmm... which President has received more Wall Street contributions than any other in history?

A hint: He's the Liberals' Messiah and he'll be out of a job in 2013.

Sooooooo... What's your point? That he's too liberal? Or not liberal enough? Or that you're just the same kind of petty, childish moron as the people you think you're ripping on?

Can we get them some sling shots?

Why aren't the occupiers protesting President Goldman Sachs, who lives in Wall Street's pocket?

Wait, who? I thought they were called the Littles and lived in the walls. The Goldman Sachs that live in a pocket seems kind of derivative.

warren buffett is a jackass.  he touts paying his fair share while berkshire hathaway owes 9 figures in back taxes.  

our attitude is that we made a lifestyle choice to work hard and get rewarded for it.  the tax man is coming from all directions.  The EPa is coming after electricity and oil costs.  medical costs, surcharges and fees are going to target the working half of the country.  screw it.   we cut to one income, buy less, go smaller, sell the vacation house and fund a lower level of the US welfare state.

Oooooooh, well please save us, Mr. Captain of Industry, Mr. Titan of Commerce! Please! Because clearly you have it all figured out!

I don't know what line of business you're in, but I hope you're one of my competitors. Idiot.

You don't know what hard work is.  Head down to your local foundry, if it still exists.  Head out to US farmlands and spend a day in the fields.  You are deluding yourself into thinking that by sitting behind a desk 14 hours a day toiling on software, spreadsheets and strategy you are doing more than those who are less privileged. You aren't.

And don't think I'm saying that we should all be payed equally or some other bit of communist bullshit.  But your attitude is a huge part of what's wrong with this country.  Plenty of hard working (really hard working) people are struggling to make ends meet because they don't have the opportunity, education or intelligence that you do.  That just isn't right.

Willingness to work is only part of the equation.  Without opportunity, it is worth nothing.  Opportunity is in short supply in this country right now, especially if you aren't in the right demographic.

you don't even know what i do.  my attitude is that since i put myself engineering school and work my butt off, that i get compensated appropriately for it.  there will always be ditch diggers and foundry workers in society.  should everyone be paid the same?  no.  is my attitude what is wrong with this country?  no.  It is my attitude and the attitude of millions like me that makes the US the best place in the world to live. why don't you and your OWS supporters go to the whitehouse and camp outside demanding that the EPA stop destroying jobs, that obamacare get repealed before it completely destroys small business.  that the government  cease the massive rollout of new regulations.  businesses would actually hire people if they felt that they were free to do so without another massive tax or regulation coming  down the pike.  the bank fee case this week is the perfect examle, albeit small, of how the govt does not understand business.  just imaging what each and every small business owner in the country is thinking when they decide if they can add an employee right now.  obamacare and overall medical costs are crushing expenses.  the democrats want to increase taxes.  depending on the industry, there are thousands of new cost increasing regulations being created.  the EPA and current )hopefully outgoing) energy secretary  has a stated goal of doubling the cost of electricity  and gasoline.  would you increase the size of your business in that environment?

This has got to be the longest regurgitation of fox news talking points I have ever seen.

You're right that I don't know what you do. But I still know you're just as much of a half-literate idiot as the people shitting in port-a-potties down at LaSalle and Jackson.

Grow up.

You clearly didn't read what I posted.  You did, however, do a great job regurgitating the GOP talking points.  Listening to Rush everyday has a tendency to beat those phrases and idea into your mind, I know, but you sound like a parrot. 

For the record, I am not a OWS supporter and consider them nearly as out of touch and unrealistic as you are.  Amazing as it may seem, not everyone falls into the categories "soak the rich" and "no taxes ever."  Shocking, I know.  Some of us actually want balanced, reasonable policy.

BTW, the old "EPA is the enemy of jobs" line is pretty tired.  Only the hardcore are buying it.

Strange. I don't think I've ever agreed with Tafter so much. I spent a summer doing elevator construction in college. My worst days in the office, including all nighters with crappy food and too much coffee rule compared to coming home covered in grease and dog tired every day for 2 1/2 months. Office work can be stressful and unhealthy, but the sore back you get from sitting in a bad desk chair is not the same as the one you get from busting your hump.

Ha.  Part of it is likely that people are saying so many stupid things on this thread.  Its easy to agree when you are facing this type of craziness.

I've worked quite a few low paying, "real" hard work jobs in my life.  And I'm really glad (and feel really lucky) that I don't have to do them anymore. I still have a lot of family working those types of jobs.  It sucks, it's stressful and the pay doesn't leave you with a lot at the end of the month to save, invest or enjoy.

Well, you showed them. I'll give you $1 for the vacation house. Let me know. I'm always willing to upgrade.

Warren Buffett may be a jackass, but he's got a shit pot of moolah, even with taxes.

all the 1% fault?  wasn't the fault of dumbass home buyers that were told when they signed on the dotten line that their Alt-A mortgage payments would skyrocket in 2 years?  not the fault of the middle class mortgage salesman for duping those stupid enough to not understand the fine print?  Not the fault of Barney frank, Maxine waters, etc that forced the banks to lend to subprime buyers and claiming that home ownership was a right?  not the fault of the Federal reserve for facilitating cheap money to spur home ownership and record low mortgages?  not the fault of the SEC for facilitating the entire mess?  not the fault of the corrupt ratings agencies for slapping AAA ratings on bags of garbage?  there is a lot of blame to go around.  My wife anf I both work 60 plus hours a week to provide a lifestyle for my daughter that neither of us had.  we are the best at what we do because we put that effort in.  what our current president is doing is dis-incentivizing us and millions like us to work as hard as we do. As a group, we will downsize, provide less to the economy and lead to less employment in the US.  We will work just enough to avoid the extra subsidies to all of you that have decided that it is the governments responsibility to provide food, shelter and a safety net.

I don't disagree that home buyers were a part of the problem in the RE downturn.  The "american dream" of home ownership has caused a lot of people to buy houses that they could barely (or not at all) afford over the years.  This is one area I tend to break hard with the lefties on:  why should everyone own a home?  Some people just can't afford it and encouraging them to buy is downright irresponsible. We need to stop portraying renters as suckers throwing out their money.  For a lot of people, it makes a ton of sense for a variety of reasons.  RENT!

At the same time, there were clearly abuses in the financial system that allowed huge amounts of bad debt to be issued by major institutions then sold, repackaged and resold.  The aggregation and shuffling of that debt hid huge problems and allowed the institutions profiting on transaction costs to pass off their bad underwriting.  Those institutions shouldn't have been allowed to pull this crap in the first place and the fact that the US bailed them out is just insane.  They made bad investments and have so far avoided paying for it.  That isn't how capitalism works.

And the 1%?  Well, I'm not a OWS supporter, so I personally don't believe they are all the evil geniuses they are made out to be.  But at the same time, many members of that 1% profited off of the abuses and controlled the institutions that played a primary role in getting us in this mess.  Many of them were the execs that got huge bonuses after being bailed out by the taxpayers.

So we actually agree on a lot.  Where we part ways is on regulations and taxes.  How do we prevent pyramids of bad debt without regulation?  How do fund regulators without taxes?

Takes two to tango. Here's my thing:

People who want more home (or loan for any purpose) than they can afford have existed since time immemorial. Been around for forever. But for most of the time, loan officers were smart enough to not give people those loans. But recently (along with a couple other instances in history... can anybody name them?) something changed... People saying, "Hey, I gross $65,000/yr. Give me a $750,000 mortgage with zero down" showed up -- just like they always, always had -- and suddenly started actually getting loans. And shock of all shocks, things got fucked.

I've said this before: I look at it from the perspective of someone who owns a stake in a small bank. If you write bad loans with my money it's on you, as far as I'm concerned. It's your job to be smarter than the people who think they can afford a lot more debt than they really can. But every time some Smartest Guy In The Room shows up selling you some "no-lose" way to capitalize on your loan writing, suddenly simple math gets divorced from the process and... here we are.

Bottom line: You don't let investment bankers fuck around with commercial banking money. You just don't. It never works. Never.

You would be an idiot to work less because the government takes a relatively larger portion of your pay. That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. If the tax rate were zero would you be Warren Buffett?

Signage they may regret when the building is on fire.

Anarchists don't have a sense of humor? Huh.

We'll find out in due course.

I can barely read it. Why don't they take their message down to the street so everybody can hear about it?

Wow. Time for meta-analysis, and what it might mean for the climate out there.

It's been a while since we've had one of these three-digit comment threads, a fact I've blamed on a couple of factors: 1.) I suspect a lot of people are shifting to a high-Twitter lifestyle that's beyond me, and 2.) matilda went away, and ChicagoD and Navin have, evidently, found better things to do with most of their time. (I haven't but I find arguing with myself only marginally entertaining.)

This second factor illustrates the difference with this thread, though. Usually, whenever we have one of these, it's three or four people going at each other, and about half the comments descend into repetitive personal sniping (which don't get me wrong, I enjoy.) This one's different. Here, if I counted right, we've had 28 individual commenters. (I omitted people like me or Chuck who were only making jokes, and a couple of people who made no sense.) In an era when people don't comment here, we've had 28 people comment here.

So, what can I extrapolate from this? I think it reflects a growing dynamic in the nation at large and here in particular. People are getting mad and are lashing out more than they have in the past in places they haven't directed their anger. This thread is just one very small example. I've gotten a growing kind of powder keg feeling about this city. I think we're headed for something. I think all it needs is a trigger. An unfortunate breakdown in relations between the Occupy folk and the CPD could fit that role. If that doesn't happen, we just have to keep waiting for the G8.

Meh. The saddest flash mob got more comments and for a lot of the same reasons. If you get the sweet spot of media-savvy group (and Aaron Cynic has been stroking this group pretty hard) and a few in opposition you get these massive explosions of comments. Get a guy like Mark up above and the comments could go into the millions.

I would have a stronger sense that we were heading for something significant if I saw more (any) minorities in the Occupy crowd. This city is 1/3 black, 1/3 white, 1/3 Hispanic and it doesn't seem as if 2/3 that are black and Hispanic (plus apparently 1% of the other 1/3) give a shit about this protest. The NATO/G8 is going to be something, but that will be full of professionals and ringers.

At the end of the day, I predict that the Occupy groups and Tea Party sign a non-aggression pact and jointly invade Poland.

Pretty predictable thread. You have the "I'm a semi-literate moron, who covers up my dimwittedness by pretending that filling somebody else's softs orders is a hard and impressive job" role filled by Mr. Polowy, your Ideology Regurgitron 5000 being operated by Navin, and a bunch of posts in the vein of "It's rich people's fault that so many people are unemployed!" vs. "It's the unemployed people's fault that they're unemployed!"

The Tea Party, the Occupy people, and most of those I mention above all have two things in common: First, when it comes to the economy, their ignorance about it is outstripped only by their anger at it. Second, they're such fucking idiots that if anyone could adequately demonstrate to them the complexities of the real world, their near-empty heads would explode. Just straight-up assplode.

Reverend, a virtual economist on his center-right ship. Confused, disoriented, angry.

He nailed you.  And the rest of them.  Own it, Angry Phrase Bot 3000.

The fact of the matter is that the situation is for more complicated than your friends marching around downtown would care to admit.  Or the various traders who are posting here, for that matter.  Stringing up the top 1% or telling people to lift themselves up by their bootstraps isn't going to help.

We don't make things here anymore.  Our hard labor in the US, by and large, is done by migrant workers.  The NYT did a story last weekend about how farmers who try to hire Americans to work the fields end up getting burnt because Americans don't want those jobs.  The jobs that once sustained a huge percentage of Americans are gone or undesirable.  That's a huge part of this problem and corporations are only partly to blame.

Fixing this type of thing will take more than chanting and signs.

I'd love to keep talking here, but I have to go create some value for the US economy.

Country   CEO compensation as a multiple of average employee compensation



U.S.A.   531

Brazil          57

Venezuela   54

South Africa 51

Argentina   48

Malaysia   47

Mexico   45

Hong Kong   38

Singapore   37

Britain   25

Thailand   23

Australia   22

Netherlands 22

Canada   21

China (Shanghai) 21

Belgium   19

Italy          19

Spain   18

New Zealand 16

France   16

Taiwan   15

Sweden   14

Germany   11

South Korea 11

Switzerland 11

Japan   10

LET THESE GUYS LEARN ABOUT HISTORY THE HARD WAY... GO AHEAD EAT SOME CAKE!

From ajacksonian over at Hot Air:You might be a Trustafarian if you are part of the OWS crowd and…- Have any electronic device starting with an “i-”- Have a pair of sneakers costing over $100- Have a shirt, pair of pants or jacket with a logo emblazoned on it- Have an ‘art’ shirt that cost more than $50- Have a netbook/notebook/laptop/tablet computer- Have more rings festooning your body than a packed bar has glasses on the bar- Have a bandana/headband/keffiyah with a designer tag on it- Have a pair of shoes that has individual toes as a feature- Have any piece of clothing other than a belt made out of leather- Have more pieces of artwork tattoo’d to your body than a SOHO artgallery has- Have a pre-printed sign because you can’t figure out how to use a magic marker- Have an item with the mass murdere Che on it- Spout off about how a system you can’t even understand needing to go because your parents have paid your way through school- Have a law degree- Have any degree in any set of studies involving a hyphen or ethnic or gender in its title- Have more gold jewelry on your body than a pawn shop has in its inventory- Can say Media Matters with a straight face and think it means somethingYes these are leading indicators of being a Trustafarian.Any Trustafarian needs to run, not walk, saunter, or just, you know, go more or less in the direction of, the nearest mental health clinic and report yourself with permanent detachment from reality syndrome… they will spend a decade ‘treating’ you and making you poor so you will then have something to complain about.And if you think you paid too much for your college education then ASK FOR YOUR MONEY BACK as it has done you NO GOOD AT ALL TO GO THERE.

The underlying issues - the point to talking about "the 1%" - aren't difficult to grasp.  The underlying numbers are pretty straightforward.  I'll get into some numbers below, but here's the simple headline:

“of every dollar of real income growth that was generated between 1976 and 2007, 58 cents went to the top 1 per cent of households”.

Adjusted for inflation, the US GDP in 1970 was $6.2 trillion.  In 2010, it was $15.2 trillion.  That's 145% growth in those 40 years.  Another way to put that is that from 1970 to 2010, we as a nation produce 2.45 times more value each year.  I don't feel like slogging through the math, but that's slightly under 3% per year for that period, on average.
Where does all that value go?  Part of it goes overseas, in trade imbalance.  But what about the rest?  Who is getting all these trillions of dollars that our hard work creates?Using non-controversial, Census numbers, adjusted for inflation:  The 60th percentile household (the top edge of "average") went from making about $53,000 per year in 1970 to making about $75,000 per year in 2007 (remember, that's adjusted for inflation to 2007 dollars).  So, over those 40 years, this slightly better off than average household saw its income grow by about 40%.  When you back out "compound interest" that's less than 1% a year.  Compare that with the roughly 3% per year that the economy grew during that period...

Ah, but what about "rich folks" - did they see a similar anemic rate of growth in their income for that period?  Adjusted for 2007 dollars, in 1970, a household at the 95th percentile (this is "the 5%" not even "the 1%") had a household income of about $115,000, and by 2007 that had grown to about $197,000, or about 71%.  So that's a bit better than 1% per year, but still well short of the almost 3% that the overall economy grew.  Where has all the value created by our decades of hard work been going?

I'm having a hard time finding equivalent, non-funny numbers for just the top 1%, but here's an illustrative stat: From 1979 to 2004, after-tax income for the top 1% grew 176%, adjusted for inflation.  It's an apples to pears comparison, but 176% after-tax income growth for "the 1%" for a shorter period versus 40% growth in pre-tax income for a "typical" household over a longer period.  And there's a lot of evidence that during the "bubble" from 2004 to 2007, almost all the income growth for that period went to, again, "the 1%".

So, that's where the trillions of dollars went.

The vast middle of the American workforce has driven trillions of dollars of GDP growth by going to work every day for the last 4 decades, but they have very little to show for it.  The top 1% of income earners, some of whom work very hard and create value, some of whom don't, have been accumulating the majority of that increased output from our economy for those decades.

I don't think the term "class warfare" is useful from any side in this discussion.  But when we talk about "wealth redistribution" that clearly has been happening.  The wealth has been re-distributed from the middle class to "the 1%".  Personally, I think that there should be reward for hard work and risk taking, but it should be proportional to the value created, and that clearly isn't what's happening.

Thank you, Tom, for such an excellent comment. Wish the rest here were on the same thoughtful and constructive level.

The question is not whether income inequality exists, but rather why.  If a fortune was accumulated because of illegal activity (including fraud, theft, illegal monopolies, etc), then yes, it is ill-gotten and should be relinquished. 

But it's difficult to say that someone doesn't *deserve* to keep what they've earned when that income came from the legal and free exchange of goods and services for money. 

For example, if the Chicago Bulls were willing to pay Michael Jordan $35 million a year to play basketball, why shouldn't he take that salary? No one was forcing the Bulls to pay him that much money - the only reason they did so is because they made the calculation that they would actually benefit more than $35 million by having him play for their team.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have paid him that much, right? The Chicago Bulls are not in the business of losing money.  So, did he *deserve* to make that much money?  Well, according to the only people involved in the transaction, the answer is yes.

First of all, hedge funders make what Jordan makes in a hour just by moving money around. Second of all, yes, what they do and did is mostly illegal or, at the least, severely morally suspect. Third, the 1% doesn't exchange goods, nor services. They put together investment portfolios made of toxic mortgage funds, sold them as grade-AAA when they were pure crap to investors, and then used the billions of dollars they made in the deal to buy off all the Congress critters. When they weren't hiring the guys tasked with policing them from the gutless SEC, that is.

So, no, the 1% -- the vast majority of which is rich by breaking the law or luck of birth -- hasn't done anything to deserve such disgusting wealth, especially off our backs. They don't work harder, they don't create more products or jobs. They don't follow the law more, and they don't do more charity. They are the grifter class, gaming the system for generations to transfer money from the 99% to their trust funds. They bought $80K rugs for their offices while their firms went under (see Citigroup).

You have no idea what you are talking about.

The Occupiers aren't anti-capitalist. Your precious 1% is. If the Magic Hand of the market exists, they want nothing more than to maim and shackle it to their whims. The way they accumulate wealth is through the strangulation of free market enterprise and innovation, an unholy marriage of corporate and government corruption.

They don't play by our rules. Let's get rid of the myth that they ever did. Why make thousands slowly by virtue if you can make billions in a week by vice?

Please back up your statements with facts:

1) "What they [Hedge Funds] do and did is mostly illegal or, at the least, severely morally suspect. " Which is it? Illegal or immoral? Whose moral code are you using?  

2) "Third, the 1% doesn't exchange goods, nor services. " Really? So they just reach into peoples' pockets and take money out of their wallets? 

3) "They don't follow the law more, and they don't do more charity. "  Actually, you're wrong on that one.  2/3s of charitable giving in this country come from high net worth individuals (people earning more than $200K or with a net worth of $1mil or more)

1. Illegal, see things like the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Or read up how Commodity Futures Trading is only semi-legal and drives up the price of basically every necessity to make some rich dude a couple more billion. I'm not doing your homework for you. I read the legal jargon, the complex machinations of a corrupt financial machine that the news media is too lazy to tell you about. You want to pretend that you know what you're talking about on the internet? Get your nose out of your navel and do some honest research. I'd also like to know under what moral code it's perfectly cool to make billions moving decimal places for an hour or two a week but after a life-time of back-breaking work doesn't even deserve a pension to help you pay for something other than cat food to eat. Because that moral code? It's obviously crap.

2. Oh god, you have no idea how the financial sector works. When I drop acronyms like the SEC or talk about commodity futures trading or interest rate swaps, you should know what those things mean. No, they don't mean that poor people are lazy.

3. Poor people spend a greater amount of their time and their money on charity than rich people. It's a fact, look it up. I'm not talking about totals, but averages. It's not exactly hard to give more than poor people when you make a million times more than them.

To respond to your statements:

1) "Commodity Futures Trading is only semi-legal ..."

Futures trading has been taking place in the United States on organized exchanges for over a hundred years, yet apparently during all of that time, no one has brought your unique legal theory to the Supreme Court and had futures trading outlawed. Why is that? How is something "semi-legal" anyway?  

2) "I'd also like to know under what moral code it's perfectly cool to make billions moving decimal places for an hour or two a week ..."

The reason that traders can "make billions moving decimal places for an hour or two a week," is because they are taking the risk, and just as easily as they could "make a billion," they could also lose a billion. 

I personally watched a trader lose several millions dollars OF HIS OWN MONEY in a single day.  That's why he can make a million dollars in a day too - because he is willing to take the risk. 

Also, the idea that traders, especially the really good ones, work "an hour or two a week" is laughable. The successful traders I know work 12+ hours a day and on weekends.

3) "... but after a life-time of back-breaking work doesn't even deserve a pension to help you pay for something other than cat food to eat. Because that moral code? It's obviously crap."

As for your hypothetical regarding back-breaking work and no pension, please give specifics about someone's situation and we can talk about that. Contrary to your assumption, I do believe there should be some basic social safety net.

4) "Poor people spend a greater amount of their time and their money on charity than rich people." My original statement was in response to your claim that "Rich people don't do more charity" when, in fact, they do contribute more to charity than "the rest of us." Nothing you've said changes that fact.

This last one is my favorite:

5) "Oh god, you have no idea how the financial sector works. When I drop acronyms like the SEC or talk about commodity futures trading or interest rate swaps, you should know what those things mean."

If you want to make this personal, we can.  

When I claim to "know how the financial sector works", these are the reasons why:

* I have spent my entire 17 year professional career in the "financial sector," specifically in the financial markets;

* I've worked on the ag trading floor at the Chicago Board of Trade;

* I've worked at a commodity trading advisor;

* I've worked at a hedge fund;

* I am now self-employed as a futures trader.  No salary, no 401(k) plan, no paid vacations, no sick days, no company health plan, no assistance.  It's the best job in the world.

* I have two graduate degrees in business, including one from the University of Chicago, where I graduated near the top of my classs; and

* ... and I worked at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), where I was awarded the highest non-attorney award the Commission bestows on employees.

Yeah, so I don't know how the financial sector works.

What are your credentials?

1. It's "semi-legal" precisely because it WAS banned for many years, because it drives up the price of essentials. Nobody bets on the price of wheat or oil going down, afterall. But, of course, recently there's been loopholes written and exploited in that ban, so that basically the entire reason we pay more than $3 a gallon at the pump is because of commodity futures trading. Yeah, and there's more to law than the SCotUS, you know. And my critiques are hardly "unique"... just freaking Google commodity futures trading and you get dozens of academic and financial articles on the shady legality and/or moral implications of it. But that might require to you actually do work. Perish the thought.

2. They don't take the risk, that's the point. They manufacture schemes so that there is no risk, or if things go belly-up, they have to be bailed out. And your sole example doesn't contradict the truth of a trend -- traders at big, lawless firms like Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley get paid handsomely even as their firms are testifying in Congress on their bad behaviors. Furthermore, it's manifestly absurd that someone manufacturing wealth out of thin air can make a million times what someone who does back-breaking work for his entire life can make. There is no way anyone can justify how Carl can make 30K an hour moving money while John makes 14K a year assembling tires. There's something seriously rigged in how the value of different kinds of work are determined in this economy. If you don't see it, I don't think I can help you.

3. Why give specifics? Is my point only valid if my Grandmother is starving? Elderly people make up a significant part of those living in poverty in this country, as do so such 'lazy' people as single mothers, children, and the mentally or physically disabled. This isn't a controversial statement, it's a proven fact. Look it up.

4. That's honestly terrifying that you can be an insider on the financial sector and buy their bullcrap about the American Dream and Bootstraps and that the rich are honest, hard-working paragons of virtue. If anything, your credentials prove my point -- why would anyone so heavily invested in that charade condemn it? It's some mind-boggling cognitive dissonance, but I understand the WHY of it, but not the HOW. If my past is such an interest to you, I mostly completed a full ride scholarship in Economics at a larger public state university, only to quit when I became increasingly disenchanted with the shear amount of pure crap that came out of the program, and my thrall with Randian mass-psychosis faded when I matured from a self-involved teenager into a more empathetic adult. I now work in a community-building low profit independent business, and do community building and revitalization work in a non-profit on the side. So I'm very intimately knowledgeable of large corporate corruption and its unholy marriage with big government, thank you, because it's what I battle every day. But I don't suppose that's at all noteworthy to you, since my firm membership and involvement with the hoi polloi makes me one of those undesirable lazy peasants.

Jenn, as someone who claims to have studied economics knows, producers of commodities will always seek 1) the highest possible selling price, and 2) future assurance of the ability to sell the product. Commodity trading is a natural outgrowth of these two economic realities.  So it's either going to happen on the black market or its going to happen in public.    You're swimming against the current on this.

To date, it's never happened in the volume it presently does. Today's rampant speculation is the product of calculated steps to deregulate commodity trading which, in moderation, is a legitimate and perfectly sound economic transaction.

No wonder you were so testy about the fraud talk.....

Like I said look up "rentier class" or "parasite" if it suits you better.

"* ... and I worked at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), where I was awarded the highest non-attorney award the Commission bestows on employees."

HAHAAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!

At least you didn't work for a ratings agency!!!!!

OHMIGOD, thanks so much for this post!!

At least respond to his points, you twit.  Why should he even bother if you are just going to cherry pick and LOL?  Waste of fucking time...

If America produced something before the bust it was a shitload of worthless MBA PRICKS.

builders? no. start ups? no.
small businesses? no? Traders? Asset shifters? Yes!!!

Look up "rentier class"

Jordan actually earned his pay with fantastic results.  Bankers failed, sunk the economy and then got rewarded with bonuses.  They also got paid much more than Jordan for that matter....

This is a good point, because I have always believed that athletes and entertainers are THE ONLY people who deserve multi-million dollar salaries. This is because they are the only people who can plainly show that their personal and unique skill set created value commensurate with that salary. The profits generated by the Chicago Bulls back when Jordan played for them vastly exceeded his $35 million salary, and it should be obvious that he brought a unique skill set to the Bulls that justified that salary. I fail to see, OTOH, what value the president of, say, HP or VIACOM or Wal-Mart could possibly bring to their companies that would justify their salaries.

You want corporate executives to be punished for your ignorance and lack of imagination?

when the ceo brings value to the share holders HE becomes VALUABLE just like MJ.
when WALMART does great..the PEOPLE that own walmart stock are COMPENSATED and gain wealth.when a ceo is able to steer a company to profitability he becomes an asset worth paying for..he CREATES wealth for the share holders..oh man what the hell do they teach in public school today

Seriously?  You're intentionally pursuing the CEO compensation issue?  There's no way I can look at the case of Nardelli's "golden parachute" from Home Depot and not see that as evidence that the free market is failing miserably at determining value, at least in the US.  Somehow, for years, European companies did well paying their top people in the range of 200x what a typical worker was paid, not 2000x or 20,000x.  (What drove the odd-ball Daimler-Chrysler merger?  If you were top brass at Daimler, wouldn't you want US executive pay, too?  And how well did that work out?)

There really are a few ultra-valuable CEOs (e.g. Steve Jobs), but for most CEOs you'd get just as good performance paying someone $1mil.  a year rather than offering tens of millions a year.  How shareholders are tolerating these deals is beyond me, and makes me suspect that the system is broken.

who are you to say WHAT people are worth?If a ceo can get compensated well for making shareholders money who are you to say what the shareholders pay him,,and if you DONT like it dont buy the stock..how shareholders tolerate this that and this and that..LOL..you are PATHETIC man..get some common sense

"Personally, I think that there should be reward for hard work and risk
taking, but it should be proportional to the value created, and that
clearly isn't what's happening."

I'm doing a story for my grad j-school class about Occupy Chicago, and your perspective and facts are sorely needed in this discussion. If you feel like helpin' a Chicagoisto out, and going on the record in a more formal capacity, hit me up. It's my handle @gmail. If not, thanks for reading and commenting all the same, and have a good one.

who are you to say VALUE CREATED?..please..a guy gets up to go to work spends money in gas parking takes a chance and you want to put a price tag on value created..leave people alone..let money become the MOTIVATOR that it is.he wants to talk about value?  like the 80 dollar an hour union plumber?..and you wonder whats wrong with the world.

Complete deregulation leads to what we have today:  vast inequities in income and wealth.  That isn't good for anyone.  I'm not going to put a price tag on individual roles or functions, but talking about a union plumber misses the bigger picture.  The VAST majority of Americans have barely moved a notch up the chain in the last 30 years while the very top earners have skyrocketed.  That effects everyone.  The tax base has shrunk.  People can't afford the goods and services that help drive out economy.

This is coming from a person who doesn't necessarily agree with the Occupy Chicago people at all.  They are a disorganized, anarchy-focused, hot mess and I want nothing to do with them.  But watch out:  their anger is a harbinger.  You can't allow such large inequalities in quality of life to exist without suffering severe reprecussions, even if you are in the privileged class.  Crime goes up.  Societal tension increases.  Voters turn to more radical politicians who will start coming after you.

If folks like you had an ounce of sense in your bodies, you'd be looking for ways to reduce these inequalities in a gradual, less painful way.  Incite all you want, but it'll only make the situation worse.  For everyone.

What's wrong with the world is that too many people like your have more respect for a guy who gets paid millions just to push paper around simply because he wears an expensive suit than you do for the guy who ensures that your bathroom doesn't flood and gets paid a measly $80/hour to get covered in your shit!

Correct me if I'm wrong -- I've been working at home creating my own value in a multitude of paid and unpaid roles, but that's neither here nor there -- but weren't you the guy broadly characterizing the "value" of the protesters, or lackthereof?

And now you're the guy harping on tomdarch for his notions of value created?

Are you sure you're Mark Polowy, and not "Kettle"?

I have no comment on the value of the protestors,,thats their individual call.the word value is a joke..if they want to sit on the sidewalk and rail against people like their parents thats there gain or loss.maybe if they filled out a few job app's they may have some value to the people that rely on them..lol..

"I have no comment on the value of the protestors,,thats their individual call."

Which is fine. Live and let live, basically. But then, there's this:

"maybe if they filled out a few job app's they may have some value to the people that rely on them"

If you don't want to cast values on people, then don't.

Your first statement I quoted doesn't--that's good.


Your second statement I quoted here *does*--that's not good.

You say that the world value is a joke. I happen to agree.

My value as whatever-it-is I become after I finish school is different than yours as an at-home trader (I assume, since you said you're self-employed) which is different than my brother's, who trades on the floor.

We all have roles to play, and comparing and contrasting their inherent values and work ethics is futile.

My brother, the on-floor trader, recognizes this. On Facebook, he wrote this to me:

"Let them play in their drum
circles, I'll walk in and trade, and if we wanna have an econ debate
over coffee, great, let's all disagree with some civility."

The drum circle part is a reduction, sure, but everything is else is consistent and truly laissez-faire. Everyone plays their role, and everyone has points which can be debated with reason. (And also Java).

If you see your values as consistent with my brother's, Mark, then you aren't showing it on this board.

Apologies for the long reply.

Plumbing is not a simple job, it's actually quite difficult and requires a not insignificant amount of training and practice.  And if you want to talk about value, a plumber has great value, since without their skills, things like cooking, cleaning (one's home and self), and disposing of human waste all become either vastly more difficult, more expensive, or more unpleasant.

Actually, "disposing of human waste" improperly isn't just a nuisance, it can be fatal.  A big part of why Mr. Polowy can get up each morning and go gamble is because he's relatively healthy. He'd be accumulating a lot less wealth if he had repeated bouts of dysentery and cholera caused by bad plumbing.

If a plumber was able to scam Mr. Polowy for a day and a half (12 hours) at $80/hr to do noting but unclog a toilet, then good for that plumber!  That would be the free market in action, my friend - a fool and his money are soon parted.  And people say that traders are morons - obviously not true!

dont try to blow bs by me pal..when the average person has to spend a day and a half pay to have a plumber un clog his toilet something is wrong..again you arent sharp enough to get the freaking point..the point is who is to say what value is BUT the open mkt..let me guess,,you are a flaming liberal..

I'm willing to bet that you get your income from the Koch brothers, or some other right wing, oligarchic neo-fuedalist nut-jobs.

Either that, or you're just really really dim.

gee bruce can you provide some details instead of comming back with the typical left wing bullcrap? the koch brothers is this IDIOTS reply..man you are living proof of the stupid that elected this con man president

I think I've figured out your problem, Marky. You're a house slave who thinks he's better than all the field slaves just because the master occasionally lets you eat the left-overs and table scraps after he throws an expensive dinner party for all the other plantation owners. Frankly, I suspect you're bitter over the fact that plumbers provide far more value to society than you do. They'll also still have steady work even after somebody figures out how to do your job more cheaply and efficiently with some combination of a computer program and a call center in Bangalore.

oh a "house" slave..hmmm you must be  great in a debate..plantation owners dinner parties all rubbish..and plumbers do provide a great service when your stuff leaks..Glad to know the great debater can figure out my worth to a plumber..the point is you MORON..who's to say what worth is BUT the free mkt..you twit..house slave,,now thats brilliant..lol

"Open Market", yeah where us citizens pay for the financial elite's gambling mistakes.

its were people become rich if they are willing to step off first base..of course you'll never know that..keep your foot on the base and check your mailbox for results..nice and safe loser!

It's a job that you don't know how to do, and wouldn't do if you did know how.  Don't like paying $80 an hour for a plumber? Find another plumber, they don't all cost that much, or figure out how to do it yourself.

EXACTLY JERRY..find ANOTHER plumber..you just might be savable afterall..dont like what your bank charges GO SOMEWHER else..dont like what the ceo makes? dont invest in his company ..good job jerry..lol..proud of you

Back off on the snark, Polowy. You wouldn't speak to me that way if you were sitting across a table from me.

good luck fitting that on a bumper sticker.

go phillies!

Tired of those who claim someone did them wrong and their complaining.  Shut up and pick yourself up and go out and succeed.  Enough of the mopey 'woe is me" already.  Be a self starter.

Know what? There are a whole lot of people who did do a lot of us wrong, and they walked. Zero accountability, zero remorse.

I started at the cbot 30 years ago..i had a phone and a phone book.I didnt even have a sidewalk to sit on..lol.all i can say is
Open the window i have to pee.

Historically, when wealth keeps trickling up to a tiny sliver of the population, things have not turned out well for that tiny sliver.  Something you may think about.  May want to take off your trader jacket when you leave the building too.....

Nice.  Making veiled threats now, eh?

You are disgusting and delusional.

I saw a documentary about the Paris sewer system.  It set the stage by describing pre-Revolutionary France: The bulk of the population slaving away paying taxes, and the tiny aristocratic elite free from tax burden, accumulating all the wealth being created.  How did that end?  I can't seem to remember?  Something about cake, and heads, perhaps?

You're probably the type of asshole who treats bartenders and waiters like jerks, just because you can and just because it makes you feel good.

I've got something for you, Polowy, but you'll have to come over here to get it.

I treat everyone like a jerk..im equal opportunity jerry,,a card laid is a card played sweety.

You sound very proud of yourself.

you are an idiot jerry..the point is I came here with ZERO and made a place for myself and supported a family.yeah I have 2 gas guzzlers and the white picket fence..BUT I MADE IT JERRY..I'm not sitting on a sidewalk  trying to demonize the people that try and succeed..save it jerry you bore me.

Really? You started with ZERO?!? You worked your way of from being a homeless, naked orphan to being the shining exemplar of capitalism you are do today? You never took advantage of public education, subsidized student loans, or any of the other benefits of growing up American that were paid for by the tax dollars of those who came before you? I believe you said you started in business back in 1977, which means that you grew up in an era of massive infrastructure investment paid for by a top marginal tax rate ranging as high as 91%. But you never benefited from any of that public investment at all? Really?

yeah I started with ZERO..no money in the bank living at home..a phone and a phone book..lol..then he claims I take advantage of the public school systems..the moron doesnt know that 4k out of my 8k tax bill goes to those PUBLIC schools,,and hell man I have been living there for 20 years..do the math NITWIT and tell me who got taken advantage of..then the twit wants to talk about school loans..I dont have kids i cant afford..so I put money away for college,,did the RIGHT thing and BECAUSE of that I pay more than the shmuck that DID NOT SAVE..so the liberal system PUNISHES the saver BUT reward the non saver with low interest loans..the GOVT should not be in the education business..they produce idiots like yourself..try again moron

Ooohhh.. Starting with "zero" and "making it."  Mark, when you reveal yourself to be a visibly disfigured black woman from a background of multiple generations of poverty, then I'll be impressed.  But if you're a white male from a blue-collar/middle class background like me, then meh.  Is playing poker well "succeeding"?  If you take away the money, what substance is there to this supposed "success"?

Does Mark "create value" in our economy?  Maybe a little, but not much. Credit markets and commodity markets do have SOME value to the overall economy.  They're like the oil in a car - they keep things moving smoothly and let the real "engine" work more efficiently.  But part of our current problem is that we allocate more reward to these markets than the value these efficiencies they actually create.

If someone tried to sell you an $5000 used Kia with a $30,000 pimped-out oil system bolted onto it, would you buy it?  We need to keep the "lubrication system" of our economy working (and do a better job of filtering out the crud), but it isn't the actual engine that drives anything.

Preach.

now making a living is compared to a POKER game..and the WORTH of the card players to craete VALUE for the kitty..heres a thought you twit..go out get a job spend some money ,hire someone and CREATE value yourself..another BIG thinking LIBERAL who sits on his ass and deciphers what business or individual has value..did solyandra have value JERRY? people like you THOUGHT they did..and NOW look jerry...now value..wow..wake up or dont freaking vote

Know what? I used to have all that too. Things changed. Nobody's asking you for a handout, nobody's asking you for anything, least of all me. Be careful who you call an idiot, though, Polowy.  Your words are likely to come around and bite you on the ass someday.

jerry you know where im at mr value guy

And you've probably created very little value. Remember when the job of bankers was to efficiently match capital with opportunity?  No, you started after Reagan ruined capitalism, so you wouldn't.

ok matthew heres one for ya? what "value" have you created?..lol..heres a hint,,,a tax write off for your parents..hey at least your out of the house now.

They're very good at pushing imaginary dollars around.  In other words, completely worthless to society.

You have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

Read up on the role of commodity futures and options in stabilizing the price of grain, meat and other items that most Americans live off of.  Read up on the role of liquidity in allow you to buy and sell stocks to help grow your retirement fund.

Not to say that the industry couldn't use more regulation or that there arent some really bad people who made really bad, selfish decisions that fucked a ton of people over.  But to pretend the industry has no value is to ignore reality.

Which, incidentally, is something you are very good at doing.

read up on the role of commodities..now is that beautiful...and now read up on liquidity and retirement funds..ok and JUST what will I find?  talk about a zero post

You moron, he's on your side. He was talking to someone else. Idiot.

Originally, that WAS the reason for the commodities markets. But now that the markets are open to anyone with a computer and an account, people with no interest at all in the underlying commodity are busy trying to push the market around and extract value from it. Look at the chart for oil over the last ten years. Pure price manipulation that had nothing to do with actual supply and demand. Just accounts with huge lines of credit creating and then popping a huge bubble. To pretend that that was anything but extraction rather than investment is to ignore reality.

Which, incidentally, is something you are very, very good at doing.

the field is LEVEL..everybody can access the market the same way,via computer..heres an old saying IDIOT..he who sells  what isnt hisnt buys it back or goes to prison.huge lines of credit that BUY 1000 contracts MUST also SELL 1000 contracts..thats the REALITY of it pal..you can buy and buy and push it up..lol..sure you can..but you have to sell and sell and push it down TOO..ask the hunts about their outcome.

I'm not saying that no price manipulation happens.  But you are lying or misinformed if you think that price manipulation is the reason for instability in the price of oil over the last few decades.  Weather, refinery production, supply constraints at wells, etc. are still the major drivers of oil prices.

Same with commodities.  Commodity traders still read weather predictions, they still get hog and grain reports and pour over them looking for indicators of where prices are going to go.

Most uninterested parties with a computer making markets in these products aren't even holding positions at all, which would preclude them from taking advantage of price movements made through manipulation.  They are simply taking advantage of providing liquidity at high speeds to scalp small amounts of money on every transaction.

FWIW, price manipulation is illegal and fines are high if traders or non-traders are caught doing it.  It can lead to jail time.  One suggestion I have for regulators is to get better and throw more resources at policing trading activity.  Getting rid of such activity is in the best interest of most participants in these markets, from farmers all the way up.

Nice word play though.  You really turned that around on me.  Sizzled!