nope, sorry, but you are the one who got it wrong, i didnt include the derivate market.Originally Posted by balistic void
nope, sorry, but you are the one who got it wrong, i didnt include the derivate market.
retarded [r??t??d?d]
adj; underdeveloped, esp mentally and esp having an IQ of 70 to 85 See also ESN, mental handicap, subnormal
Seriously you are just talking shit/nope, sorry, but you are the one who got it wrong, i didnt include the derivate market.
"Global financial markets" does include derivatives. Lots of stuff counts as derivatives, including futures and other types of options.
For the derivates mentioned in this glorious bbc article you end up with " 10 times the total production of goods on the planet over its entire history". Note the difference.
Last edited by Miep; May 1 2012 at 10:45:37 AM.
retarded [r??t??d?d]
adj; underdeveloped, esp mentally and esp having an IQ of 70 to 85 See also ESN, mental handicap, subnormal
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_(finance)
Notice how pretty much everything is a derivative.
How much is the value of all the derivatives in the world then? (srs question)
That's the hard part, putting numbers on complex options is difficult. This is why they hire lots of maths people, and their magic formulas then need to be calibrated and have inputs for volatility etc etc. In the BBC article the guy that invented the magic formula (Scholes) blames naive use of the maths, incorrectly calibrating risk etc. LTCM is another famous example of doingitwrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Te...tal_Management If I was him I would probably try to blame someone else too tho
srs answer: At what point in time? Some derivatives are traded privately, so there is no central record of the transaction. Other totals are computed by the various clearing houses. Figures talking about Quadrillions are thrown around. Remember, a derivative basically means a deal for some kind of trade between 2 parties!
So still in range of 10-15× of the worlds production per year? A bit high tbh.
Maybe it is, someone should tell the whole world to stop trading with each other.
this just in, total amount traded greater than total amount produced in any given year, stop the fucking presses
to keep it simple: yes. But that wouldnt be a problem if the rate in which trade grows wouldnt be exponentially larger then the increase in production.
retarded [r??t??d?d]
adj; underdeveloped, esp mentally and esp having an IQ of 70 to 85 See also ESN, mental handicap, subnormal
you know when you say things like "exponentially larger" all you do is make yourself look really stupid
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/r...rt-immigrationAs the former Labour communications chief Alastair Campbell tweeted: "If this is what Heathrow T5 border queue is like on an average Thursday Olympic athletes should think about coming soon #sortitout."
"Sorting it out" is the one of several things that the home secretary, Theresa May, of course, would like to do. But when it comes to the issue of passport checks she is somewhere between a rock and a hard place.
"It all goes back to Brodie Clark [the former head of the UK Border Force ousted amid claims that he relaxed border checks without ministerial authority] and the insistence of having full passport checks which everyone has to go through," said a Whitehall source.
"This is unsustainable. You simply can't do it. Once you say that everybody must have full passport checks, as the home secretary has done, then it becomes very difficult politically to row back from that."
The home secretary's political attachment to full 100% passport checks stems directly from her desire to burnish her reputation as tough on immigration following the forced departure of the last UK Border Force head, Clark, and his policy that the queues could only be managed by a "risk-based approach" to passport checks. The problem is that the system cannot cope – especially when Border Agency staffing numbers have to be cut by 18% or 5,000 fewer staff by 2015.
Has T5 been in the news for anything other than being a massive ball ache?
*sigh*
I have a Stock A, A is valued at $100 a share, I have 1000 shares, valuing $100,000 at present.
I don't think A is going anywhere so I create an Call Option, $105 Strike Price for $2.50 a share. I create 1,000 derivatives (options are sold in blocks of 100) for a "value" of $2500, with a total "strike" of $105,000 representing (at present) $100,000 worth of assets.
I didn't create any money, and nothing really magical happened. All I did was give somebody the option to buy the shares I owe sometime in the future for a certain price in exchange for some cash right now. But putting a valuation on what I did is tricky. One could say that $2,500 is the "value" of what I just created (assuming somebody purchases my options). Alternatively you could argue that $100,000 is the value, or maybe $105,000, or maybe $205,000. Or maybe if A rises to $205 tomorrow then it's $100,000 - $2,500.
It's complicated to price, and this example given is the most trivial example of what an derivative is. At no point in the lifecycle of my option would more then $2,500 change hands between me and the purchaser.
I never said you make money out of thin air.
Making money out of thin air is the only way baby boomers are going to 'retire'
I don't think that line of argument is going to go well for you.
Last edited by Sykes; May 2 2012 at 06:36:38 AM. Reason: toned down drunk post, unnecessarily harsh.
things working properly doesn't make good news
I've been through T5 twice at peak summer times and never had a problem vOv
dumbfuck, wenn the derivation of trade grow is like x² its growing exponentially larger then the increase of the gdp which derivation is more like a linear function.
retarded [r??t??d?d]
adj; underdeveloped, esp mentally and esp having an IQ of 70 to 85 See also ESN, mental handicap, subnormal
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks