BAC Triggers Avalanche Of $7.00 Stop Loss Sell Orders

Tyler Durden's picture

Is that H2SO4 that Warren is pouring for his next deeply introspective bath? Or will he double down and throw good money after bad money that was good as recently as 2 weeks ago (and according to Cramer was supposed to trigger a "massive short covering squeeze in the XLF.")

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
TruthInSunshine's picture

Warren 'Thanks for the 17 Billion USD Bailout, Uncle Sam' Buffett just brainstormed which toxic catastrophe of a ticker symbol to buy next while having his Depends changed.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Put enough Mr. Bubble in the bath water and even Warren can hide a Greek default. Until, that is, someone pulls the plug.

Mr. Bubble

GeneMarchbanks's picture

That's beautiful. I gave that first greenlight ;)

TruthInSunshine's picture

Warren Buffet & Charlie Munger both shit where they bathe, which makes bath time no fun for the help.

BaBaBouy's picture

Maybe The old codger is swimming around in his own Jiz ...

Almost Solvent's picture

More like Jizunk (jizz covered junk)

TruthInSunshine's picture

Warren Buffett places a buy order for 1 million shares of New Century Financial, while having his bottom treated with A&D ointment and then powdered, only to learn the subprime mortgage company filed for bankruptcy and was dissolved in 2008.

Atomizer's picture

Good one CD.

Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked.
-Warren Buffett

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

And it all goes down the drain!  LOL

Check out the latest from the Capital Research Institute "BiMetallic Standard, FAQ":

http://www.capitalresearchinstitute.org

"Here at the CRI we have been calling for a return to ‘sound money’. What does that mean? What does it entail? What does CRI think this would accomplish, exactly?

First, it is crucial to understand, as more and more people are everyday, that our current money system is dishonest and crooked. We are talking about the fiat fractional reserve system, whereby new money comes into existence when banks extend credit (out of thin air). Fiat can only be exchanged for more fiat (unbacked).
The major differences, then, under a sound money system would be in terms of where NEW money comes from. Currently private banks get to decide when new money should be created, and hence, business conditions for THOSE private banks will determine the money environment FOR EVERYBODY. This is the current situation, where banks are so illiquid and insolvent that they plainly refuse to extend credit on reasonable terms. This results in a feedback loop such as the world experienced in 2008 (when credit dried up) as well as what we are experiencing currently.

Under a gold/silver BiMetallic Standard the price of gold and silver would both be fixed..."

Helix6's picture

Gold and silver have been tried numerous times as the basis of monetary systems, and both have failed repeatedly.  The reasons are well-understood:  By virtue of scarcity they do not have the flexibility to expand (and contract) in proportion to economic activity.  Also due to scarcity, they can be, and almost invariably have been, concentrated into a few hands, who then manipulate the money system to their own benefit -- and to the detriment of all others.

Having said that, I agree that "our current money system is dishonest and crooked."  A debt-based money system gives rise to a money supply whose hidden purpose is to transfer the wealth generated by economic activity to those authorized to create the money.  Thus the very heart of the money system is corrupt.  It also creates impossible math.  Because principal is created but interest is not, it means that the economy must grow exponentially to generate the wealth needed to pay the interest.  In a finite world, exponential growth is impossible over the long term.  Furthermore, even a brief economic downturn means that there must be debts that cannot be serviced.  By mathematical necessity, someone is going to get skewered.  Not because they are lazy or are unworthy, but because the mechanics of the money system demands its pound of flesh.  This is a terrible price to pay for a debt-based money system.  I submit that this is one of the underlying causes of the viciousness and anxiety that characterizes American society.  One can forestall the day of reckoning by creating more debt to service the existing debt, perhaps at a lower interest rate.  But this final manoeuver will also fail at the point of debt saturation: the point at which borrowers are unwilling or unable to take on any additional debt.  I believe we have now reached that point.

Debt always creates a master/servant relationship and sets up a rich-get-richer-and-poor-get-poorer dynamic.  This is not to say that lending is always bad.  Sometimes it is the best way to provide the capital needed to set up a productive enterprise.  But an entire monetary system based on debt must inevitably fail, with results that are unpleasant to contemplate.

Take a look around at the economic landscape.  Are you happy with what you see?  This is the inevitable result of a debt-based monetary system.  We must tear it down, or suffer its consequences.

Lets_Eat_Ben's picture

@ Helix6

OK so if the money can not be debt and it can not be backed by gold and silver, then what the fuck is the answer?

samslaught's picture

Fofoa has a good theory called freegold.  I'd check that out for one possible solution.  The problem lies in the fact that people want to borrow money the depreciates in value and save money that maintains its value.  is it possible to do both at the same time:

http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2009/11/freegold.html

Some might say you can do that right now.  Borrow money from the bank and they give you currency (which goes down in value over time) and then if I keep all of my savings in gold (which retains its value over time) I've accomplished this.  The only problem is the price of gold is heavily manipulated.  Once its actual market value is revealed through market forces then we can have a freegold system

 

Helix6's picture

The answers are always tough due to the foibles of man.  The fact that civilizations always seem to follow birth-growth-maturity-decline-oblivion courses speaks to the enduring nature of those foibles.

Nonetheless, it seems to me that fiat currencies are here to stay.  So the question is how to best manage them.  Clearly, allowing bankers to control the supply gives them a death grip on the economies of nations, life-and-death control over their governments, and a subtle means with which to inexhorably siphon off the fruits of the nations' labor for themselves.  This, to me, is a fatal flaw.  The only other alternative that I see is for governments themselves to control the money supply.  Such a system is also fraught with peril as it creates the risk of governments manipulating the money supply to implement tyrannical powers over the people, or toward the advancement of the careers of government officials, rather than supporting the nation's economy.

In the end, we seem to be in a situation where we are forced to choose our poison.  The money system will never be better than the motivations of the people in charge of its management.  And so I see the functioning of that system as much an ethical issue as a financial one.  But one thing I am sure of: Having a money system under the control of people whose sole motive is profiting from it might just be the worst poison of the lot.

lemonobrien's picture

so what you're saying is that, golds and silvers doesn't allow bankers to make money to "Expand" and "Contract" at will? Or, their is only so much gold and silvers, so we have to add copper, and nickel? Or, yous have to pardon me, cause I'm southern with a drawl, that mankind perfers the slave/master relationship cause back in dixies land beaten slaves was good times? OR, sorry, you know I'm southern, we puts out paper with fancy writtens, cause it's like sea shells, and back in dem times, when sea shells was money; peoples was happy?

Helix6's picture

Not exactly.  What I'm saying is that the scarcity of gold and silver are both an advantage and a disadvantage.  The advantage is that they cannot be created out of thin air, so there is an innate control of the supply there.  The disadvantage is that, in combination with a system that allows loans at interest, the existing stock winds up concentrated in a small number of hands.  Human nature being what it is, the possibilities arising from this concentration are not pretty. 

A second (and to my mind a more important) disadvantage is that a precious-metals-based money supply is dictated not by economic activity but by the labor and expense needed to add to that supply.  In the case of precious metals, the cost is steep.  This means that gold and silver may not, and historically have not, been able to keep pace with economic activity.  For example, economic activity has increased dramatically in the last two centuries due to population growth and to advances in technology.  Population alone has nearly quintupled since 1900.  And while technological advances are harder to quantify, I think most people will agree that they have been little short of spectacular, literally lifting billions of people out of a subsistence existence and into a cash economy.  The stock of gold, on the other hand, has barely kept pace just with population growth, and production has been in general decline now for over a decade. 

So because of the potential for manipulation and the strangulation effect an insufficient money supply has on economic activity, I don't think precious metals will fit the bill.  On the other hand, because of their scarcity and their appeal to humans, they are an excellent store of wealth.

lemonobrien's picture

What I get from your arguments is that you're a liberal and are scared the world will be too conservative if money is back by precious metals; cause people will have to be smarter and just can't spend... 

My argument is, if we was more conservative about how we use our resources, we wouldn't be in this mess.

 

Let me put my dick in your mouth for a little bit, I'm southern...

"For example, economic activity has increased dramatically in the last two centuries due to population growth and to advances in technology.  Population alone has nearly quintupled since 1900.  And while technological advances are harder to quantify, I think most people will agree that they have been little short of spectacular, literally lifting billions of people out of a subsistence existence and into a cash economy."

I think the only people who've really benefitted is the Americans; we are the consumers of the world; and if you don't like it, we'll just bomb the shit out ya... now here, buy these T-Bills. BTW, the population of America is like 300 million; the rest of the world; billions.

"The stock of gold, on the other hand, has barely kept pace just with population growth, and production has been in general decline now for over a decade."

What's wrong with that? you got copper, nickel, tin (see japanese 1 yen coin); why does everyone have to have gold. if you have gold at $2,000 an ounce and print more paper, and it goes up to $2,500 an ounce, it just means you need more tin coins to buy gold cause theirs more tin. Think of gold like your $1,000 bill. rare, harder to find, and cost more than a $1,000... but used by bankers, the wealthy, and the elite. You my friend, just don't like being poor, and don't want the realization of how poor you are, to come to light.

"So because of the potential for manipulation and the strangulation effect an insufficient money supply has on economic activity" 

I can see you went to school to learn something... but what you're saying is you don't want people to be wise with their money so they make wise investments; you want them to piss it away, and be able to keep pissing; even though, it means nothing. except destroying the earth.


"I don't think precious metals will fit the bill.  On the other hand, because of their scarcity and their appeal to humans, they are an excellent store of wealth."

oxymoron.

 

The greatest invention by man, to keep his ass alive, is toilet paper.


 

Helix6's picture

Re: "What I get from your arguments is that you're a liberal and are scared the world will be too conservative if money is back by precious metals; cause people will have to be smarter and just can't spend..."

Well, noooo.  My argument is that if we have a money supply that has just kept pace with population growth since 1900 but not the increased economic activity resulting from technological advance since then, we would have about the same level of economic activity today as we did in 1900, before the advent of cars, telephones, airplanes, refrigerators, personal computers, MRIs, indoor plumbing, and household electricity.

If this makes me a liberal, then I guess Ben Franklin was a liberal, too.  He mentions in his autobiography that Philadelphia was in dire straights due to insufficient money supply in the 1720s.  The assembly voted to increase the (fiat) money supply in 1729 and again in 1739, which proved to be a great boon to Philadelphia, which was growing in population and industry at the time.

"My argument is, if we was more conservative about how we use our resources, we wouldn't be in this mess."

Undoubtedly true, but only one of several underlying causes of our problems.  In my opinion, the most pernicious is the constant bleeding of our fiscal system due to debt-based currency.

"Let me put my dick in your mouth for a little bit, I'm southern..."

I take it back.  The most pernicious is the arrogance that arises from your belief that only you know the True Path, and the resulting intolerance and contempt that you feel entitled to heap on those who do not agree with your views.  It's insulting and forecloses further meaningful discussion, which was perhaps your intent.

Therefore... 

lemonobrien's picture

well, let me put it this way... if we lived the same way today as we did in 1900, that would probably be real progress. What's wrong with suffering, or non progress. Which life style is better? The plains indian, or the modern american slave? I'd take the american indian any day.. and who gives a shit about progress... that's nothing more than ego retardation. man is doomed; the earth will be consumed and we will most likely die with it unless we can morph ourselves into multi-dimensional being. Nearest star being 5 light years away... nearest earth like planet? So, your whole way of thinking that we must progress... is actually your slave mentality. We don't need nothing except what we've already been given.

Helix6's picture

I guess I should conclude from this post that you're living in a house without electricity and an outhouse out back, don't own a car, telephone, or personal computer...

Oh, wait...

lemonobrien's picture

actually i don't own a car or a phone; i create software. and i plan on buying land in the middle of nowhere to do absolutely nothing on. to live like a human being.

Tompooz's picture

 You will still need to band together with like-minded individuals. Human beings still need a society. And any society still needs to solve the problems that Helix grapples with.

lemonobrien's picture

why do you think people want to be around other people? your young and don't have kids yet? and Helix is doing nothing but mental masturbation; he wants to do central planning of the money suplly...which as we can see; doesn't work. The real reason it don't work is because we live in a finite world; finite resources, finite human beings, finite things to do. this is why we are collapsing; cause debt has hit the imit of our capacity/want to consume. The math is wrong.

Tater Salad's picture

Lemon, if buying land in the middle of nowhere and doing nothing on it is human, I want to be the anthisis of human...wait...you buying property in Manhattan?

 

lemonobrien's picture

I've lived in Tokyo, London, NYC; all shithole in the end; why do you think rich people have country estates; and live on the tops of hills; to get away from the riff-raff.

TN2000's picture

Missing from your analyis, is that in order to provide that 'great boon' to Philadelphia, a transfer of wealth effectively had to take place (by means of that act of currency manipulation) from somewhere else in the country. I.e. in order for Philadelphia to develop more, somewhere else (where that money might have been better spent than Philly) had to develop less. For each factory built in Philly they had to transfer the productive resources from somewhere else and a factory somewhere else was NOT built.

This is the unseen effect on the other side of your currency manipulation equation.

Look at Philadelphia today, it remains a less than optimal economic area, and has seen ongoing contraction of economic activity and population for a decades - so maybe there are underlying reasons why it is not the best place for that economic activity, maybe it should not have been artificially propped up in the first place.

Your argument is comparable to welfare. If Joe is out of work, I take money from Bob and give it to Joe (using currency dilution or any other method of wealth tansfer), then you can point at Joe's nice new car and say 'look how it helped, it was a good thing'. The other side of the equation is that Bob, who is a much harder worker, is now struggling to make ends meet.

RockyRacoon's picture

Copper served for a long, long time.   And nickel is still doing yeoman's duty in the coinage.  Your thinking is limited.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/09/your-gold-teeth/?utm_source=feedbur...

Helix6's picture

Well, I'm the first to admit that my thinking is limited, despite my best efforts to expand it as much as possible.  I also have no problem using base metals or whatever other medium of exchange is agreed upon by the participants in the economy, so long as its supply is not based on debt and its quantity is not constrained in such a way that it has a strangling effect on economic activity.

And to this I should add that no other inordinate advantage is given to the issuing authority, a tricky proposition at best.

CompassionateFascist's picture

Gave you a red and a green...damn, that didn't work...

DaveyJones's picture

mr bubble or farts to help an old one

TruthInSunshine's picture

It's only when the bubble bath plug has been removed that the water drains and one can see that Buffett shat in the tub.

Ruffcut's picture

Geez CD, your love affair with mr bubba.

Next you'll singin in the bath, "my ding a ling".

Belarus's picture

No doubt, bubba. Look at his coveted warrants on Goldman and GE. Both were struck with strike prices of 122 and 22 respectively. Both far below them after the Buffett spike erodes and reality takes over. Of course, the old geaser will insist that Congress will do the "right" thing and bail out BAC--yet again, and GS, and WFC and GE while we're at it--and all equity and preferred holdings at the same time. This guy has become an American Baffoon. 

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

 

 

This guy has become an American Baffoon.

I would say an American Vampire is more apt.

unununium's picture

Cmon, Buffett exercised the 7.14 warrants already when the stock was at 8.50.  It was a stealth secondary.

ToNYC's picture

 

Berkshire can live off (selling to) the dogs that gather to sniff its rear.

Dingleberry's picture

Maybe Warren saw a floating turd in the tub and then thought "Bank of America!"

AccreditedEYE's picture

Suck it up Charlie! Suck it up Warren! LOL This will be the trade that tarnished your "perfect record".

writingsonthewall's picture

Don't worry - Buffet has already got his PR dept working hard on making this loss a gain.

 

People with good PR always win!

 

...just like all blog investors - I made $30 Billion today alone - and I'm 10ft tall - and my cock is sooooooo big your wife would love it ;)

Temporalist's picture

The Fed has a PR firm now.  Do you think it's been successful too?

ToNYC's picture

 

had your wife  at the $30 Billion.

Ruffcut's picture

What if buffy is buying time for transfer some good stuff from his wells fucko to lighten his shit pile?

Fanny and fucky did it. Then let the bond and stock holders take it in the ass. New IPO in 12 months and no worse for wear.

A.W.E.S.O.M.-O 4000's picture

Dude, I'm missing 3 fingers on my left hand from trying to catch falling knives.

 

Fuck that shit.

Oh regional Indian's picture

Butt it isn't even his money really. Never was. nwo it might never be.

War On Buffet.

V

Signs of America's Collapse

spiral_eyes's picture

For far too long bad decisions, bad management and dangerous corporate behaviour has been rewarded with taxpayer bailouts, crony capitalism, and subsidies. And quite simply, until those practices are rewarded with utter abject failure we are totally fucked.

 http://azizonomics.com/2011/09/09/is-greece-about-to-default/

ToNYC's picture

 

If it manages to be there for just a minute, or by appointment, it's like it never was and in a flash it were gone...a forgotten crime, perfectly done.

dracos_ghost's picture

Except both ossified old coots will be around when BAC recovers $9 -- in 3011.

sun tzu's picture

The taxpayers will loan $5 billion to BofA and Berkshire will be name as the senior creditor

writingsonthewall's picture

All you can eat Buffet Bitchezzzzzz

Instant Wealth's picture

The Debacle of Omaha.