Comment ...Star Wars wouldn't exist.... (Score 0) 17
Given the sorry state of the property now, I'm 10,000% OKAY WITH THAT!
40-something years of fondom.
Completely reduced to a pile of shit in a few years.
And all i can say now is "Good Riddance".
Given the sorry state of the property now, I'm 10,000% OKAY WITH THAT!
40-something years of fondom.
Completely reduced to a pile of shit in a few years.
And all i can say now is "Good Riddance".
Yeah the US doesn't know how to be hardcore about censorship because you can still get any of that on cable or Netflix, or sometimes later at night on broadcast tv. But Canada does. If they don't like something, they ban it outright. And not like a "oh this library doesn't have that, but Amazon does" kind of ban, I mean they just plain make it illegal:
By the way, I see the real reason why you post anonymously now.
Or, you know, you could look at a financial dictionary since we're talking about finance.
Sure, how about this one?
https://www.investopedia.com/t...
Oh looky here, it even agrees with me!
Other types of hedges can be constructed via other means like diversification. An example could be investing in both cyclical and countercyclical stocks.
There may be figurative uses of hedging, just like there are figurative uses of "codified," but it takes some brainpower to work that out and realize it. (For instance, "codified into baseball" doesn't mean codified is some flexible word that means "added," it's a figurative use communicating "becomes part of the (figurative) laws of baseball."
Come on dude, you're not even good at splitting hairs. Look at the definitions even. Look at their example of its use in a sentence: The author tries to codify important ideas about language.. Is there anything you're good at? Certainly not finance, we've established that...
ure enough, the first google hit for "financial dictionary hedging" says "Hedging is the practice of offsetting potential losses from an investment by taking an opposite position in a related asset. Hedging is an effective risk management strategy, although it typically results in a reduction of potential profits." Which is pretty much what I said, and pretty much not at all what you're taking it to mean. Or was I to interpret your statements as "hedging is part of hiring a wide variety of minorities in your business"? Diversification DOES NOT HEDGE.
tsk tsk tsk
Here's another one:
https://www.financestrategists...
Diversification is an essential aspect of hedging, as it helps to spread risk across various asset classes and investments.
Srsly....
Earth to brick wall: does pre-paying your principal change what happens when you stop paying?
Depends. If I made two regular payments right now, then my next due date isn't for another two months. And you don't have to refer to yourself as a brick wall -- leave that to me.
You're not even using the work "risk" appropriately. "Putting even more into equities represents an increased risk profile" should read "putting even more into equities exceeds my risk profile"
Nope, I used it correctly. I maintain different portfolios with different objectives, and each has its own risk profile. In cybersecurity, we commonly compartmentalize risk. For example, there's what's called a high-side network, which has a much higher risk profile than say a public wifi network. We put mitigations in place for each until they collectively fall within what you're talking about, which is called risk appetite.
But again, I could care less, it's clear you will not allow me to educate you.
That would only make me less educated...I mean if I took your word for the meaning of "codify" or "hedging" and began using them your way, then I'd literally have lost some my existing education. I don't want to do that.
Think carefully about this: if it's about risk, why haven't your excess principal payments bought treasuries for the last two years? Because you have a bond ETF? If that's your answer, it at least explains how you arrived at the mistaken impression someone bought your mortgage for anywhere near par.
You just don't get interest rates and present value, at all. The reason your loan was sold? Not because yours "wasn't terribly important to them" but because the buyer let them get as little as 70% of their money out from under a contract that had them getting killed at, coincidentally, 2.75% less than any conceivable risk-free market rate would be.
No to all of that, though I'm not going to pretend to know what they based their purchasing decision on, because I've seen weirder shit than what I speculated earlier, and I'm not even an accountant. But given the way you've just been making guesses this entire time (seriously, you claim to be an expert in finance and you can't even get the terminology right) I think taking your word for it here isn't a good idea.
Why? What, exactly, is so precious about the business model of the "web?" The whole thing is about 30 years old, and less than that for most people. Is there some reason that we can now tolerate no change here?
There was a world before the "web." It was pretty good too. There were catalogs and magazines and newspapers. I promise you can exist happily if the business model of the web is altered and all the things manifest in some new manner.
I'm not sure that's true for Google and Facebook, et al. What I am sure of is I give absolutely no fucks about how they feel about that. And you shouldn't either.
Speaking of credibility... you seem not to realize
Cheese you're still hell bent on attacking my credibility aren't you? Worse, you even claimed earlier that you didn't engage in ad hominem. Whatever...
they didn't pay anywhere near the current outstanding principal balance for your mortgage.
For that to be true, the previous lender would have to have gone into the refi already knowing that they were going to lose. At this point in time, the rates were already going back up with the general understanding that they'd never be this low again, and they gave me an interest rate that was still below the bond rate. Two months later they sell my loan (servicing AND the loan itself) to another company called Mr. Cooper.
Why would Mr. Cooper buy that loan? Well, I noticed a few things about them:
1) The payment portal is very spammy "Oh look you have a bunch of equity you're not using! You should refinance it all at 5% so you can have that cash right now!"
2) I did a bit of research into this company, and it looks like they're trying to pull a Wells-Fargo, only without the whole shitcanning tons of employees for not making their ridiculous numbers.
3) Apparently they have a keen interest in offering mortgages to people with so-so credit and a high interest rate.
All of the above considered, my hunch is they're trying to pull a Wells-Fargo, but in their mind without ending up like Wells-Fargo, or worse, to quote an annoying politician, "Fannie and Fweddy". So they're going around buying up a lot of mortgages, and I think they want to be diversified within the mortgage market itself. Mine would be useful as a data point within that low reward, even lower risk category, in their disclosure statements in order to give their investors the warm and fuzzies. Or something to that effect. I've seen bigger companies do dumber things, but from a perspective of hedging, i.e. reducing risk, it makes sense at the very least for giving the appearance of it. After all, a lot of financial types generally just get hung up on one thing, (kind of like what you've done a few times, so maybe you are a financier after all...) and strangely they don't seem to question it very much. Exactly how Wells-Fargo became a Wall Street darling just for having a high number of accounts even though there was no real revenue being driven from them and they had to break many laws just for the sake of claiming that they had it. Strangely, Wall Street didn't notice until that stupid number had nowhere else to grow and it blew up.
Speak of which, one thing I did get from accounting was how to find red flags. Our class had this project to study the 10K of a company called Gerber (not the baby food) in the sign business. All of the other students in the class gave them a favorable review, except me. The problem my very novice mind noticed was that they kept shuffling their credit around from lender to lender for years, which looked to me like they were just pretending to pay off their loans in such a way that the lenders wouldn't ding their rating. That can be used to show good revenue numbers to somebody just skimming over it, with debits and interest expenses lined separately. As I said, I was the only one who said they were a bad investment. Two years later I looked them up, and sure as shit their stock had tanked.
I feel similar bad mojo from people who invest student loan money into the stock market.
The lender that previously had my loan, by the way, is a loan servicer that mostly specializes in Fannie Mae owned VA and FHA loans, and all that goes with them. Although I'm eligible for a VA loan (it wouldn't do me any favors at the time,) mine is neither of those, and I'm betting they want to keep those as part of their overall strategy, but mine wasn't terribly important to them.
Yes, you are confusing them. To be hedged is to take a non-independent position to lower the risk of a first position. You don't hedge your bets at the track by buying a CD. You've made a bet, and you've bought a CD: you've diversified. Yes, what you're doing reduces your liability and "earns" you the interest savings, but you have no corresponding investment in the contrary. You are fufilling the terms of the contract, you are not adopting any kind of position that carries a directly related risk that will pay you if you don't.
Definitely not. Consult your trusty dictionary:
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
Diversification is typically a form of hedging, but not necessarily -- in fact it can even do the opposite. Say I had everything in an S&P 500 ETF in the hope that it grows over 10 years, but suddenly I decided to push 25% of it into an aggressive large growth fund. While that is diversification, it is not hedging, in fact it is the opposite because it only increases the risk profile by not only adding to capital investments, but skewing towards more risky ones. For a really simple example of hedging equity risk, suppose I did 25% S&P 500 ETF, 25% bond ETF, 25% international mixed cap blend ETF, and 25% income (dividend, mind you) ETF. That's classic hedging by diversifying.
In my case it's basically a choice of putting more money into my mortgage, or putting more into equities. Diversifying would be adding yet a third investment. Putting even more into equities represents an increased risk profile, exactly the opposite of hedging considering my equity investments are already greatly exceeding what I've already paid into the loan.
But you know what? Even if we took your definition, I'd still be correct, as the tradeoff I'd be making under your reasoning is two different means of securing retirement.
And it's not any payment at any time throughout the life of the loan. How do I know? Because that would make it a non-conforming mortgage, and your rate belies that. You will have a payment due every month until your balance is zero. That's what your mortgage says, and how I know you're only actually addressing the risk that you fail to make your final payment, which has of course moved forward in time as you've continued to pre-pay.
Umm...soo...if I were to stop making my payments right now, what do you think happens?
Are you really such a turkey you think I was suggesting that you find opportunities to make less than 2.75%?
Well I did have to explain to you the difference between hedging and diversifying just now...
Treasuries will indeed return more, so to some extent I wonder what your possible justification could be to do worse. Not the risk (if US Treasuries), not the liquidity, and not because you anticipate being unable to make an intervening payment in the future. What could it possibly be if not ill-consideration or debt aversion?
Well this goes back into that whole diversification vs hedging thing. Given your statements so far, particularly with your suggestion of using a student loan to invest into the stock market, I think you really don't understand why people commonly do a split blend (e.g. 80/20, 60/40, etc) of bonds and stocks in their portfolio or why that might even be a good idea.
You're a terrorist. Off to Gitmo for you.
Since I'm a nice guy, here's what I'm gonna do: I'll let you go there in my place so you can enjoy all the multi-cultural penis you can "consume." LOL. Or, based upon your username, do you require something more "canine" to do it for you?
(You liberals always keep me laughing!)
"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy." -- Louisiana governor Edwin Edwards
