This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
When "Financial Innovation" Trumps Math
Is it any wonder we are where we are when no lesser esteemed group than The American Bankers Association Education Foundation offers this sound advice for 'divvying up a dollar'...
»
- 18102 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
That's 120% champ, you can't looze!!!
Fed will print additional 2 dollars to 10=)
OK but notice, math aside, the bankers say we should spend 30% on staying alive, 10% on keeping poor people alive, and 60% to bankers.
Good point :)
Only 20% leverage? Basel III really has caused them to dial back on risk.
I think this means that they have calculated the inflation to be at 20%. Quite accurate, I would say.
I incorrectly read the title of the article as...
When "Financial Intervention" Trumps Math.
Then I realized...
Yep, that too!
50-0-50 - it's closer to reallity
True, but only if you limit yourself to saving and investing in paper assets instead of physical.
Generous ain't that.
That's why you need to cut up all your dollar bill before you spend them.
Or even better, you tear off the serial numbers of the bills, spend the bills and go to a bank with the pieces that have the serial numbers. They'll give you a new bill in return for it.
Bur who takes a bill that has a corner torn off it?
Well, that's the part you can fake.
And when the bill is put under a UV lamp, it will test as real.
Common core banking fraud
Oy veyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
When Obama created, amongst others, the banking world, he instigated the finger counting system....
This was probably done on purpose. Then the bankers can charge overdraft fees and interest. Probably an additional 30%... "See? Now we're all rich!"
I didn't even double take...it instantly made cents to me
I guess we need to pay the Banksters more if we expect to get the really bright ones......
When you get used to recieving bonus plans for breathing, you don't get the bright one in any industry
Isn't it legal to declare at least 3x the amount that you actually give to charity?
It works for me.
Allocate 100% to aspirational consumer items.
Why?
Because the rich get richer and those who act rich can sometimes fool poor people into believing they are rich
But math is science. And we at ZH know exactly how deceitful those pesky scientists are. So, as we believe in Fox News for certain scientific issues, can't see the problem with trusting bankstas here.
They've give Nobel prizes in economics for dumber shit than this
WHAT? No taxes?
That's how my reverse mortgage works.
Seriously!? LMAO!
Ahh I see what they did there. They used the imperial version of the cent instead of the metric.
FUCK ALL MOTHER FUCKING BANKERS and their fucking advice...
DEATH TO THE MONEYCHANGERS.
That 30 cent charity.... They mean taxes right?
Yep, same thing really though - except that is the one portion that is not voluntary - you pay them at the end of a gun.
Banker math.
.
x+y = 0
(x+y) / (x+y) = 0 / (x+y)
20 * (x+y) / (x+y) = 20 * 0 / (x+y)
100 + 20*(x+y)/(x+y) = 100 + 20*0/(x+y)
100 + 20 = 100 + 0
4*30 = 100.
Holy shit that is ingenious! My engineering school never taught me this, damn those elite banker school got some smartass.
I know this is stating the obvious, but you are dividing by 0 in the second statement.
I only post this for the benefit of TopGear, who might quote things out of context.
My bad. I should have started with x+y+1 = 1.
But X+Y is still 0.
No...You can change the definitions anytime that you want. It is accepted practice as the Bureau of Labor Statistics and other US Government agencies do that as well.
X + Y can equal anything that the Bankers want.
For instance...Haven't you heard that Newton's Laws of Motion were repealed and declared null and void by the US Government retroactive to 9-10-2001?
Man are you behind the times...Get with the program.
You don't say.
I think he's still upset that Ayn Rand used the National Review to housebreak her puppy.
According to common core, this would be acceptable if you could explain how $1.20=$1. Shit, we're talking about economists here! Who else could claim that every dollar spent in unemployment benefits is actually $3 because of the "multiplier" effect?
New Math doesn't need to add up.
i think if you look at how thwe note is cut up it shows 30% x 3 and a smaller, umm say 10% slice, i think they meant to says %10 to charity
That is what you get for thinking. You are to do as your told. Didn't your school learn you any better?
(I KNOW THAT IT IS A FUCKING TYPO BY THE FUCKING NEWSPAPER. WE ARE NOT AS FUCKING LAME...AS YOU.)
That dollar shows the future inflation value.
With that fractional reserve banking shit, the bankers lost track of basic math a long time ago.
And do all of that making $ 7.50 an hour.
This is for the .oo1% that can save and invest 60% then claim 30% deduction for charity which was actually 10%
Actually and investing is really charity to the bankers and wall street to steal.
"The American Bankers Association Education Foundation"
"Esteemed"?! LOL
Should be the "Rothschild Banksters Syndicate and Propaganda Foundation."
"I'm starting the 'Head Trimming Foundation'."
Just print the last 20%
Fractionalized dollar, where no one knows who is on the short end of that 20%.
It's a prank that was published 90 days late.
An interesting book that I picked up at a garage sale years ago gives an eye opening tour through the twist and turns of math abuse and innumeracy, this is before we even begin to look at outright fraud. The book "200% of nothing" by A. K. Dewney goes into how percentage pumping and irrational ratios can be used to make and reinforce a point that has little validity.
Sadly this practice has become far to common in modern society. Aided by super fast modern methods of communication facts are seldom checked, "if you saw it on the internet" it has to be true. The article below delves into how figures are manipulated and how the truth can quickly be buried by those who choose to mislead us.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/09/200-of-nothing.html
Prank or not, it's a clever visual.