Yes. Eleventy is 110.
Isn’t it 220?
Eleventy is a combination of eleven, and twenty, right? Eleven times 20 is 220.
Or else we are adding and eleventy would then be 31 would be less than 90.
By what rationale do you come up with 110?
Bilbo Baggins’s going-away party. Eleventy-one is 111, so eleventy is 110.
Wrong.
Further the CDS were backed by thin air, and you know it.
Zeriel needs to jump through a bunch of hoops to get a $200,000 loan, proving solid asset backing. Where as financial intuitions can trade IOUs not worth the paper they’re scribbled on.
Urban dictionary says:
"Eleventy is an infinite string of ones.
Eleventy is not infinity as it is quantifiable. Like pi, eleventy is calculable to an infinite place. By knowing how to calculate eleventy, it makes it a uniquely simple infinite number sequence. The main difference between infinity and eleventy is that we know exactly how to begin and end writing eleventy. Eleventy, in similarity to pi, is quantifiable.
The number eleventy is divisible to a whole number by every single number that exists in any numerical place in the string, which makes it unique from many other numbers.
eleventy to ten places = …1111111111
To begin calculating eleventy, you start with one and add the exponential of ten to the power of 0. From there on, you add the exponential of ten (starting with one), never using the same exponential of ten.
1+(10^0)+(10^1)+(10^2)+(10^3)+(10^4)…
(or)
1+10+100+1000+10000+100000…
You repeat these steps until time ends. That is eleventy."
Oh this is easy.
twenty = 2 * 10
thirty = 3 * 10
forty = 4 * 10
…
eleventy = 11 * 10
See the pattern?
As helpful as the urban dictionary may be when it comes to learning the meanings of horrifying words like “felch,” and “squick,” I find myself inclined to defer to Professor Tolkien on the matter of “how much is eleventy?”
No. You don’t get it. You should simply ask, and I’ll tell. You don’t have to spew shit for me to correct.
As usual it comes down to defining terms. “Backed” usually means that their is property of tangible value set aside specifically to pay off a debt instrument, hence “asset-backed” securities. Another term is “collateralized.”
Something that is not backed in this sense does not mean that it is worthless, or even necessarily worth less than something that is backed in the sense of being collateralized. For example, a Treasury is not backed by any tangible asset, or anything else but “thin air” as you describe it.
In the case of a treasury that “thin air” is the full faith and credit of the united states, which is considered pretty safe.
Something that is backed in the sense of being collateralized isn’t always so hot, as you’ll notice that lots of people are underwater on mortgages because the house is no longer worth the mortgage that was taken to purchase it. Houses can burn down, collateral can be damaged, lost, or stolen.
So, this whole “backed” thing isn’t necessarily the best kind of credit.
If Goldman Sach offers a CDS, that isn’t collaterallized by anything. Instead, Like a Treasury it is backed by the full faith and credit of the issuing organization, in this case GS. That too, is a very strong credit. Goldman Sachs has to default and go bankrupt if it doesn’t make good on the CDS. Before you buy it, you should probably take a look and see how much debt GS, has, what Seniority the particular debt you are purchasing has, and any other terms and conditions that may affect the quality of the credit.
But that is not “thin air.”
To use your IOU example, and IOU written out signed and witnessed by Bill Gates, is probably a pretty good credit.
One written by a homeless guy, probably not so much.
There is caveat emptor in here somewhere. If you are going to buy a CDS or take an IOU, it is your responsiblity to evaluate the credit.
A large part of what happened in 08 was because this wasn’t happening. Those that failed to do so share blame.
Yeah, but it stops at a 10 *10 and breaks the pattern.
I fold.
Bank at Schwab instead. Free ATM use at any ATM-- even the tiny one at Joe’s Corner Liquors that charges $5 per transaction.
You’re a half-wit for fixating on that and dismissing the actual point of the post.
And we’re downgrading you to a quarter-wit (just part of the business cycle, technical adjustment, long overdue, bound to happen) for thinking that’s somehow worse than “bosses-fellating insider” which is what you’re admitted to being.
Technically, you’re *losing *a debate to a C-level officer (CIO on the prospectus, to be precise, but I usually go by “IT Director” since I like people to know I work for a living) at a rather profitable small business. Oh, and before you make any snide remarks, I’ve been here since before the last crash, which we pretty handily weathered thanks to having an actual plan for what happens if things go wrong that didn’t involve “beg the government for cash” (unlike, say, every financier who invested in CDS/CDO securities).
But that’s okay. Keep slobbing their knobs, I’m sure you’ll eventually get promoted to the millionaire ranks.
Aaaaany day now.
Not a 13 year old, just acts like one. Got it
And now i see we’re adding fellatio to the cactus buttfucking.
Quite the mature and insightful debating style you got there.
Free translation: “I’m Scylla, and I’ve got nothing, so I’m going to grind that ad hominem like a financier trying to invent new securities that aren’t backed by anything.”
Yep. You want mature, go to GD–I’m there frequently as well. This is the pit, and those “maturity” zings really just prove you’re incapable of recognizing which forum you’re in.
All due respect, Zeriel, but puerile behavior isn’t actually compulsory in the Pit.
Neither is getting all defensive about them.
If I ignore it, or ridicule it the cactus buttfucking or fellating or other tasteful descriptions than I am accused of “failing to engage the substance of the argument.”
However, if I respond, I am being “defensive.”
You can’t have it both ways you cactus buttfucking financier fellating mook, you.
I know, but the reason I personally post in the pit it to be puerile and vulgar, because I enjoy it. In any case, complaining about it is silly when GD is two clicks that way points.
That and “donkey punch.”
Scylla has some significant logic issues.
Is thirty a “combination” of three and twenty? Or is something else going on? Forty? Fifty? Sixty? I don’t know about you, but I’m not seeing a pattern here explainable by multiples of twenty. Maybe some other number. Hmmm.
Edit: The Urban Dictionary is full of shit. Bilbo Baggins knew what he was on about.