# \#OccupyWallStreet **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 19, 2011, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851 "2011-09-19T18:27:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 40
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/781 "2011-10-13T17:32:55Z")
Well, it’s been instructive. Now, I know that when speaking with a financial pro, “solvent” can mean “in good shape”, or it could mean a hollowed out corpse looking for a place to lie down and rot. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/782 "2011-10-13T17:42:54Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, it’s been instructive. Now, I know that when speaking with a financial pro, “solvent” can mean “in good shape”, or it could mean a hollowed out corpse looking for a place to lie down and rot. It just means you are able to pay your bills. That’s all. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/783 "2011-10-13T17:44:24Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Scylla’s goit it right, as per usual. “Solvent” just means that expected inflows are enough to meet expected outflows, so a ponzi scheme would be solvent forever as long as it is bringing in money from new subscribers at least as fast as it is paying out money to old subscribers. Procedurally solvent as long as the investors did not make a run. The money was not there. There was enough to create an illusion of solvency but an honest accounting would have shown insolvency. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/784 "2011-10-13T17:57:40Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Procedurally solvent as long as the investors did not make a run. The money was not there. There was enough to create an illusion of solvency but an honest accounting would have shown insolvency. Procedurally solvent? The illusion of solvency? Honest accounting? What bullshit. Every bank in existence is insolvent according to what you said. Solvent has a straight forward meaning, like “green” you colossal ignoramus. There is no “procedurally green,” or “the illusion of green” or “an honest accounting will reveal that green is actually blue.” You are just an idiot, that doesn’t know what he is talking about, who is making up shit, in the vain hope that it will hide his ignorance. You can’t dig up. Put down the shovel. Procedurally solvent. That’s fucking funny. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/785 "2011-10-13T18:16:45Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Come to PA and I’ll buy you a beer. Which in Scylla-speak means, “You bring the beer”. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/786 "2011-10-13T18:19:59Z")
Can’t anyway. Lives in Pennsylvania, and the Amish are out to get me. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/787 "2011-10-13T18:25:46Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Which in Scylla-speak means, “You bring the beer”. Now you go to far. My main virtue is that I’m quick to pick up a tab. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/788 "2011-10-13T19:00:23Z")
In the variant of English you guys speak, does “pick up the tab” mean “pay for it”? ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/789 "2011-10-13T19:24:03Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Procedurally solvent as long as the investors did not make a run. The money was not there. There was enough to create an illusion of solvency but an honest accounting would have shown insolvency. For Mammon’s sake, Madoff was solvent until his bills got too big and his inflows got too small. Then he became insolvent. That’s the definition of the word. Yes, the whole thing was a fraudulent scam. It was sustainable only for as long as he could convince regulators to leave him alone and customers not to withdraw their money. The scheme was corrupt, wicked, deceptive, crappy, whatever. But for the love of God and all that is holy, Madoff was solvent until his outflows got bigger than his inflows. You don’t have to be a ring wing fanatic to see this. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/790 "2011-10-13T19:56:13Z")
Funny how “the reality based community” so bragged of during the Bush years loses any interest in the reality of the definition of a simple word. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/791 "2011-10-13T20:35:06Z")
Solvent Green is tasty. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/792 "2011-10-13T20:43:00Z")
The entire solvency discussion is making me weep for progressivedom, and I’m accusing Scylla of fellating financier wang in the other thread so that thought ain’t coming from right-wing bias. Christ, guys, words have technical meanings. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/793 "2011-10-13T20:43:16Z")
> [@Maeglin](#): > > For Mammon’s sake, Madoff was solvent until his bills got too big and his inflows got too small. Then he became insolvent. That’s the definition of the word. > > Yes, the whole thing was a fraudulent scam. It was sustainable only for as long as he could convince regulators to leave him alone and customers not to withdraw their money. The scheme was corrupt, wicked, deceptive, crappy, whatever. But for the love of God and all that is holy, Madoff was solvent until his outflows got bigger than his inflows. You don’t have to be a ring wing fanatic to see this. His outflows got bigger than his inflows. That means at any time that people could have made a run , he would not have had the money. He spent billions on himself, his family and the charities . The fact that the investors did not do so, or did not know what he was doing ,does not mean he was solvent. He was not, but they did not know it. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/794 "2011-10-13T21:09:01Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > In the variant of English you guys speak, does “pick up the tab” mean “pay for it”? Provided I’m solvent. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/795 "2011-10-13T21:09:16Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Scylla’s goit it right, as per usual. “Solvent” just means that expected inflows are enough to meet expected outflows, so a ponzi scheme would be solvent forever as long as it is bringing in money from new subscribers at least as fast as it is paying out money to old subscribers. Speaking of solvent, could I interest you in joining me as an Amway distributor? I’m getting close to early retirement thanks [del][color=#000000]to all the suckers I’ve recruited[/del][/color] to all of our wonderful products. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/796 "2011-10-13T21:10:02Z")
> [@Maeglin](#): > > For Mammon’s sake, Madoff was solvent until his bills got too big and his inflows got too small. Then he became insolvent. That’s the definition of the word. > > Yes, the whole thing was a fraudulent scam. It was sustainable only for as long as he could convince regulators to leave him alone and customers not to withdraw their money. The scheme was corrupt, wicked, deceptive, crappy, whatever. But for the love of God and all that is holy, Madoff was solvent until his outflows got bigger than his inflows. You don’t have to be a ring wing fanatic to see this. I’m seriously surprised that this is too much for some people to grasp. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/797 "2011-10-13T21:11:41Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > His outflows got bigger than his inflows. That means at any time that people could have made a run , he would not have had the money. He spent billions on himself, his family and the charities . The fact that the investors did not do so, or did not know what he was doing ,does not mean he was solvent. He was not, but they did not know it. You are soooo fucking stupid. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/798 "2011-10-13T21:18:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Funny how “the reality based community” so bragged of during the Bush years loses any interest in the reality of the definition of a simple word. Its a term of art. The “simple word” means pretty much what we say it means, as in not teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. The fact that it has a much more specific meaning within a given professional community, the one inhabited by **Scylla** and **RR** , doesn’t make it the “correct” definition. Were it not for you, I wouldn’t know what “dispositive” meant. Now, I have it handy if I feel a compelling need to be an insufferable snot. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/799 "2011-10-13T21:23:16Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > His outflows got bigger than his inflows. That means at any time that people could have made a run , he would not have had the money. If that were the definition of “solvent,” then no bank in the world is solvent. Here’s an example that might be at about your level: remember the speech Jimmy Stewart gives as George Bailey in _It’s A Wonderful Life_? The townspeople are making a run on the Building & Loan, and George is trying to calm them down. When someone asks to close out his account, George explains: > [@](#): > > No, but you… you… you’re thinking of this place all wrong. > > As if I had the money back in a safe. > > The, the money’s not here. > > Well, your money’s in Joe’s house… that’s right next to yours. > > And in the Kennedy House, and Mrs. Macklin’s house, and, and a hundred others. > > Why, you’re lending them the money to build, and then, they’re going to pay it back to you as best they can. > > Now what are you going to do? Foreclose on them? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/800 "2011-10-13T21:24:49Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Its a term of art. The “simple word” means pretty much what we say it means, as in not teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Unless your real name happens to be Webster or Merriam, I don’t agree that you get to define what a word means by fiat. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851.md?page=39) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851.md?page=41)