ryskey

There's a strong national identity that will keep Argentina more or less functional in the midst of any political instability. They expect it and shrug it better than they probably should. Just bring US dollars. There's property crime but no worse than most major American cities. Violent crime also similar to US average.

I think this is the power of labels. At the beginning of that Davos speech, his description of libertarianism sounds almost identical to the Federalist Papers. I think a lot of disgust with Libertarians in the US (including from me) is the propensity to hide behind Hamiltonian descriptions of society while they're trying to justify their right to marry a 7 year old. Or other vile shit. Then there are the MAGA folks who use a Libertarian wrapper to help their twitter following by making them seem edgelord-y, like oooohhh you're such an independent thinker, when in reality it's just an expedient ideology to hide sociopathic selfishness. Anyway, maybe you're right and Millei devolves into that. We'll see.

He's more articulate and consistent (at least so far in these very early days) than other right wing leaders, whether that comparison is made to the present day or the last century in South America. The wave of privatization and de-regulation is the opposite direction of authoritarianism, unless there's a Putin-esque quid pro quo with the aristocracy/oligarchy. If he ramps of the nationalist populism and liberal use of the military, then maybe the comparisons to Pinochet won't be inaccurate. Argentina is racially and ethnically homogenous, with a very small indigenous minority, and Afro-Argentine descendants of slaves are also a tiny minority. So the left/right divide is seen less along racial lines, which makes this less of a social experiment and more of an economic one, at least as much as those can be disentangled. In other words, the oppressed/oppressor dichotomy is much more difficult to define and frame as a political movement in Argentina. No one can even agree whether Peronism, the dominant faction in Argentine politics for the last 80 years, is left or right wing, and I think that's what makes it kind of confusing for people observing Argentina right now. Either way, it was time to move on from the Peronistas. That had become an incoherent mishmash of left/right populism, corporatism, and corruption. Argentina has needed a political enema for decades. I don't know if this is going to work, or if they're going to end up worse off than before, but something needed to be shaken loose. That's going to come with a lot near-term volatility as markets evolve. But I am interested to see what happens with this experiment.

Quinn + Arch on the field at the same time. 10 yards minimum

I would also like to commiserate with $30 million.

lol

So painful watching Arnold drop back over and over again and hop around in a perfect pocket for 8 seconds then scramble and throw an incomplete pass accompanied by a hold.

stfu carpetbagger. Huskies aren't even indigenous to the east coast

Like we would even care about the opinion of someone who went to school in our nation's capital

Their average score of 10 conference games was 13.1-13.5, and yet they went 7-3 in those games. Dead last in offensive yards per game, and 2nd worst is a full 30 yards per game better. Big 10 had the 6 of the bottom 15 offenses in the country. MAC had 3 of the bottom 5 and 4 of the bottom 15 offenses in the country. Combined, the Big 10 and MAC had 2/3rds of the bottom 15 offenses in the country. What is wrong with the Midwest? What is happening? Why is this is so morbidly fascinating? I couldn't watch more than 15 minutes of Michigan-Iowa because it was like I was in a Stanley Kubrick movie.

I don't know, there's lots of complaining and gnashing of teeth when then NCAA basketball tourney bracket is released. Nothing's perfect, and much prefer that method to determining a champion. You get a tough matchup in the first round and lose, tough, you weren't going to win it anyway. If there were ever a year for 12 teams though, this is it. Byes Michigan, Washington, UT, Alabama First round matchups: 5 vs 12: FSU vs Liberty, the "throw FSU a bone" bowl 6 vs 11: UGA vs Penn St, committee probably adjusts one or the other to prevent conference opponents from facing each other 7 vs 10: Ohio St vs Ole Miss, see above 8 vs 9: Oregon vs Mizzou OU bumped by Liberty lol. Though FSU vs OU would be entertaining. Then you get 2nd round games of (assuming higher seeds win): Michigan vs Oregon Washington vs Ohio St Texas vs Georgia Alabama vs FSU Did I get that right? If so, this would be badass. That's a month of awesomeness right there.

Weird First 8 minutes and last 11 minutes UT 53 - Tx St 12 Middle 21 minutes Tx St 46 - UT 24

Good question. Who was our last FB-ish player to get meaningful snaps? Will Matthews? The king of fullback dives on 2nd and 1.

Ah yes, 32 personnel with 3 running backs lined up in the wishbone, a nightmare to defend, unless it's by the innovative 5-3-5 defense. Unstoppable force meets immovable object.

Hell ya, that's "give me north" in spanish, sort of. I don't know what that means except maybe that OU sucks.

I did. That's why I said this: Do you know? Because all of the analysis I saw that happened earlier this year suggested there were enough long-dated maturities for some impairment to collateral coverage, and terms are generous, but there's no systemic risk. Was that analysis wrong? Maybe it was. I wouldn't want to loan against a basket of treasuries at that valuation, and neither would any normal credit underwriter, but this isn't anything we didn't know 8 months ago. This is exactly what the lender of last resort is supposed to be doing. Confirmed the BTFP is loaned at prevailing rates (so the Fed, err... we are not losing money on the rate spread), and assets are marked to market. So the impairment in coverage or loan to value only matters in 2 situations: 1. The Fed sells the debt - this isn't going to happen 2. A significant number of banks can't service or refinance the debt. If that happens, equity of the banks go to zero, and assets are liquidated to pay back lenders. Regarding the recent uptick in BTFP loans, if I were at a bank and I could borrow money at above-market terms, I would. Ok, so let's see how regional banks are doing. This issue is known and quantifiable, so it should be priced into regional bank stocks. This is an ETF for regional banks, supposedly the most at-risk. Correction back in March during the first of the bank runs, and flat since. Looks like permanent re-rate of the group due to higher risk, which is probably fair. But still plenty of equity value sitting behind the debt.

Doesn't the BTFP loan at prevailing rates? So I don't think the Fed is losing money on the rate spread, depends on the accounting and if the collateral value is marked to market. Maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, the whole thing was intended to mitigate panic and bank runs by injecting liquidity in the midst of unrealized paper MTM losses. Every month that goes by, those paper losses fall as maturity approaches. Banks with a bunch of 2% coupon treasuries with long-dated maturities are still in some trouble, but I'm not sure how prevalent those are. Or the treasuries reach maturity, which is a liquidity event - either buy more treasuries at prevailing rates with those proceeds, pay back BTFP, or keep as cash on the balance sheet.

Yes, and his QBR, which includes rushing stats, is even more consistent (he went off against LSU). Using ESPN's Defensive Efficiency Rankings, Milroe's QBR against: Top quartile defenses (UT, TAMU, Auburn, Tenn, Ole Miss) = 72.5, which is very good considering the level of competition, and only 2 points lower than Ewers' total QBR on the season. Milroe's worst QBR of 65.5 came against Texas, which not coincidentally has the best defense he's faced all season. 65.5 is solid. Defenses ranked 25th thru 50th percentiles (Kentucky, Miss St, Ark) = 85.5 Bottom half (MTSU, LSU, Chattanooga) = 93.0 To put that in context, in the game MIlroe was benched, Alabama QBs combined for QBR around 13, which is horrendous. USF has the 118th ranked defensive efficiency per ESPN. He's a good QB who was slightly less good against the best defenses he faced.

2023 Iowa has to be statistically one of the weirdest things ever seen in college football. This is so hideous and bizarre and I can't look away. First, let's just stand in awe of how shitty the Big 10 west is. In the 21 games between the east and west, the east outscored the west by 221, which is more than any individual team in the west actually scored all year in Big 10 competition. And that's with Michigan State (worst P5 offense in the country) diluting the east. The BEST big 10 west offense was Illinois at 24 ppg. Good defenses or bad offenses? We would normally have our question answered in bowl season with some out of conference games, but only 3 teams are bowl eligible. Ok, on to Iowa. Their average score in Big 10 competition this year was 14.6-12.1. Further, their total points scored in Big 10 competition this year would have been by far the best defensive effort (outside Iowa) in the Big 10 west. Put another way, their offense was so terrible, its output would have been the #5 best defense in the country, just behind.... Iowa's actual defense. And somehow they went 10-2. All of this breaks my brain. I don't know how to start calculating how ridiculously unlikely all this is. Maybe someone had a season like this before the forward pass?

There's a very strong narrative that MIlroe was terrible in the beginning of the season, and is now a very good / borderline elite quarterback. And that doesn't make any sense at all. Against Texas, he made some mistakes, but showed amazing athleticism and made several good throws. Yesterday against Auburn, he made some mistakes, but showed amazing athleticism and made several good throws. Narrative should be that he's been good all season, and his performance is a function of the quality of the defense he's facing. Benching him against USF didn't make any sense. He had a solid game against a very good UT defense the previous week. I don't know what they were expecting. Milroe's QBR against ESPN Defensive Efficiency Rank: Top 25% (UT, TAMU, Auburn, Tenn, Ole Miss) = 72.5, which is very good considering the level of competition, and only 2 points lower than Ewers' total QBR on the season. Next 25% (Kentucky, Miss St, Ark) = 85.5 Bottom 50% (MTSU, LSU, Chattanooga) = 93.0 To put that in context, in the game MIlroe was benched, Alabama QBs combined for QBR around 13, which is horrendous. TUSF has the 118th ranked defensive efficiency per ESPN. A very good QB is slightly worse against good defenses. News at 11.

lol Bert leading the country in scoring

Having Sweat anywhere on someone's Heisman list this late in the season would have been a Surly sock material 3 months ago. Don't want to derail this, but it's refreshing to see Daniels #1 after being ignored for most of the season. Video game numbers, probably going to finish the regular season with almost 4,000 passing, over 1,100 rushing rushing, and 50 total TDs. Lamar Jackson numbers. Also up there with Murray and Burrow in terms of total offense and total TDs. But probably going to Nix because Daniels is going to get knocked for 3 losses, which would be 6-7 without him.

Texas 69 Tech 0 420 passing yards

Holy shit. This is unconscionable. UT, whether implied by tradition or some express bylaw or something (do you know?), keeps these separate in part because it's borderline fraudulent. If something like this was done by a normal corporation or legal entity, its audit would come back dirty AF. Like a 501(c)3 founded to help low income kids funding the CEO's hookers and blow. If UT did anything like this (hopefully we never have?), faculty/staff would freak out and protest, and I would probably join them. So they're creating a financial instrument for this buyout and hiring the next staff with collateral from a fund with an express purpose for academic-related capital projects. So this is waaaaaaaaay more than the sticker price we're all looking at. It's an artificially low cost of capital by design for academic stuff and I don't know what kind of mental gymnastics they're going to use to justify this. The "right" way to do this (if that's even possible) would be for the athletic department to pay a higher cost of capital than a normal AUF bond, tracked by some capital account, thereby giving a nice little rate spread to the academic side and allowing them to save a little face and retain the plausible deniability of remaining as an academic institution. But I highly doubt they're going to do that. Is there some payout schedule or is this all at once? Either way, I guess it has to be financed. Bought a Ferrari on credit, wrecked it, now stuck with the note.

Ok, where is the idea coming from that this buyout is going to come directly or indirectly from the AUF? There are strict requirements on uses, or maybe I'm confusing UT's requirements and oversight for PUF/AUF funds and projecting that on A&M's governance. So maybe I just answered my own question. Money is fungible and and people can rationalize all kinds of crazy things, but holy shit I can't imagine even A&M doing this.