Rise and Fall of FTX - Jon Stewart/David Dayem

[Mike Honcho 4,009]

Great discussion if you have 40 minutes to spare.

 

[Strike 3,947]

Why?  Do they know something I don't? 

[Mike Honcho 4,009]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

Why?  Do they know something I don't? 

From years of reading your posts Strike, I'm pretty sure nobody knows anything that you don't already know.   

[Strike 3,947]

1 minute ago, Mike Honcho said:

From years of reading your posts Strike, I'm pretty sure nobody knows anything that you don't already know.   

Someone does.  I'm just not sure Jon Stewart does.  So I asked why is this so good?  What is the target audience, people who haven't been following it or those of us who have?  I get that youre pretty ignorant most of the time but some of us are not.

[Mike Honcho 4,009]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

Someone does.  I'm just not sure Jon Stewart does.  So I asked why is this so good?  What is the target audience, people who haven't been following it or those of us who have?  I get that youre pretty ignorant most of the time but some of us are not.

David Dayen, Executive Editor of The American Prospect, joins us to talk through the spectacular rise and fall of crypto exchange FTX and its disgraced leader, Sam Bankman-Fried. We dive into how this collapse mirrors the worst failures of our more mainstream markets, how SBF was so easily able to use effective altruism as So

Strike, the other day you were complaining about the level of debate/discussion here...you want to raise that level, instead of "Do they know something I don't know"(how would I know what you don't know?)...start with "why is this so good?",  Your first response was a bit antagonistic and so I responded in kind, had you responded like you did the 2nd way, I would have responded with a forthright answer.  

So until next time...

[wiffleball 4,631]

Did you know dogs can be autistic?

[iam90sbaby 2,120]

Never trust a rich person who has millions but lives a overly modest lifestyle and says they just want to help people. They're full of sh!t 1000% of the time.

[wiffleball 4,631]

6 minutes ago, iam90sbaby said:

Never trust a rich person who has millions but lives a overly modest lifestyle and says they just want to help people. They're full of sh!t 1000% of the time.

Warren Buffett?

[Strike 3,947]

4 hours ago, iam90sbaby said:

Never trust a rich person who has millions but lives a overly modest lifestyle and says they just want to help people. They're full of sh!t 1000% of the time.

Who are you talking about?  SBF lived in an exclusive community that also was a vacation community for many very wealthy people like Tiger Woods.

[Strike 3,947]

6 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

David Dayen, Executive Editor of The American Prospect, joins us to talk through the spectacular rise and fall of crypto exchange FTX and its disgraced leader, Sam Bankman-Fried. We dive into how this collapse mirrors the worst failures of our more mainstream markets, how SBF was so easily able to use effective altruism as So

Strike, the other day you were complaining about the level of debate/discussion here...you want to raise that level, instead of "Do they know something I don't know"(how would I know what you don't know?)...start with "why is this so good?",  Your first response was a bit antagonistic and so I responded in kind, had you responded like you did the 2nd way, I would have responded with a forthright answer.  

So until next time...

I disagree with your characterization of my first post.  I was on my phone sitting in the lobby of a restaurant, so it was brief and to the point.  If you took it as antagonistic that's on you.  You still haven't told me why this particular discussion "is so good" to use your words.  A discussion between a comedian and a progressive political pundit doesn't seem like it's going to be the most informed discussion.  What in their discussion is more enlightening than actual news reports and other sources?  And, lest you think I haven't done any research in to this, I read this guy's editorial about this case:

https://prospect.org/power/ftx-bankman-fried-easiest-criminal-indictment-ever/

This guy sounds extremely biased against the financial and corporate sectors.   And it seems all his sources are simply other articles about FTX/SBF.  Doesn't seem like he's done any of his actual own journalism to be able to offer any additional insight beyond what is easily obtained elsewhere but without a progressive and biased slant.

[iam90sbaby 2,120]

On 12/17/2022 at 6:30 PM, Strike said:

Who are you talking about?  SBF lived in an exclusive community that also was a vacation community for many very wealthy people like Tiger Woods.

 

[TimHauck 1,795]

On 12/17/2022 at 8:09 PM, Strike said:

I disagree with your characterization of my first post.  I was on my phone sitting in the lobby of a restaurant, so it was brief and to the point.  If you took it as antagonistic that's on you.  You still haven't told me why this particular discussion "is so good" to use your words.  A discussion between a comedian and a progressive political pundit doesn't seem like it's going to be the most informed discussion.  What in their discussion is more enlightening than actual news reports and other sources?  And, lest you think I haven't done any research in to this, I read this guy's editorial about this case:

https://prospect.org/power/ftx-bankman-fried-easiest-criminal-indictment-ever/

This guy sounds extremely biased against the financial and corporate sectors.   And it seems all his sources are simply other articles about FTX/SBF.  Doesn't seem like he's done any of his actual own journalism to be able to offer any additional insight beyond what is easily obtained elsewhere but without a progressive and biased slant.

I would agree with you that Stewart doesn't seem to know all that much about this.  But I think the other dude did, albeit yes he did seem a bit biased against Republicans.  He called out what I had about Salame donating $20+ million to Republicans, but did note that was common among corporations to donate to both sides.  One interesting thing that not many people may know which he called out is the hypocrisy of Tom Emmer, who has blamed Gary Gensler for FTX, meanwhile he previously sucked off SBF as "doing a lot to make sure there is no fraud" and getting $2.75 million in donations.  There was some additional research I thought in the article linked in the first tweet below.

But overall yes I agree, this conversation didn't give much that most people that have been somewhat following it didn't already know.

For those that haven't followed it and don't want to spend much time catching up, I recommend this vid (but was made before he was arrested):

 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

The donations to democrats way outweigh the trivial ones to republicans.  It’s not even close. The democrats are neck deep in this. 

[Reality 2,710]

On 12/19/2022 at 11:46 PM, Hardcore troubadour said:

The donations to democrats way outweigh the trivial ones to republicans.  It’s not even close. The democrats are neck deep in this. 

Understatement of the century.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

1 minute ago, Reality said:

Understatement of the century.

All F'n Democrats - of course.

[TimHauck 1,795]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

All F'n Democrats - of course.

Lol wut?  Two of the top four were to republicans. That’s a pretty significant amount. And that’s not even counting how SBF claimed to have donated additional dark money to Republicans.  

The most interesting thing about that tweet in my opinion is them asking for the money back. I wonder how much of them actually will. I did think it was odd when a lot of the recipients said they donated it to charity. You had to know something like this might happen

[Thornton Melon 542]

On 12/17/2022 at 1:59 PM, wiffleball said:

Did you know dogs can be autistic?

I'm pretty sure my dog is

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

23 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Lol wut?  Two of the top four were to republicans. That’s a pretty significant amount. And that’s not even counting how SBF claimed to have donated additional dark money to Republicans.  

The most interesting thing about that tweet in my opinion is them asking for the money back. I wonder how much of them actually will. I did think it was odd when a lot of the recipients said they donated it to charity. You had to know something like this might happen

You are correct, I was wrong. 

However, it is OVERWHELMINGLY Democrats.  They hold the top #2 spots alone.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

Murkowski and Collins are never Trumpers. You can discount them as republicans.  

[TimHauck 1,795]

3 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

You are correct, I was wrong. 

However, it is OVERWHELMINGLY Democrats.  They hold the top #2 spots alone.

Depends on your definition of "overwhelmingly" I guess. The top 2 alone are probably roughly ~20% of the total, that's about what I had estimated previously.

[nobody 2,031]

29 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Lol wut?  Two of the top four were to republicans. That’s a pretty significant amount. And that’s not even counting how SBF claimed to have donated additional dark money to Republicans.  

The most interesting thing about that tweet in my opinion is them asking for the money back. I wonder how much of them actually will. I did think it was odd when a lot of the recipients said they donated it to charity. You had to know something like this might happen

Classic centrist perspective.  About $200k of the $2M or so on that chart is red, but because "two of the top four" were republican it supposedly evens out.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

14 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Depends on your definition of "overwhelmingly" I guess. The top 2 alone are probably roughly ~20% of the total, that's about what I had estimated previously.

Dude - the list is almost ENTIRELY blue.   Only 9 out of 79 that is visible on that list are Republican.  In math, that's 11% Republican to 89% Democrat.   If that is not OVERWHELMING, then WTF is?

I mean, Joe Bide won with 52% of the total votes cast (155,507,476) and you liberals called that OVERWHELMING and screamed it to the heavens.  GTFO.

[TimHauck 1,795]

10 minutes ago, nobody said:

Classic centrist perspective.  About $200k of the $2M or so on that chart is red, but because "two of the top four" were republican it supposedly evens out.

Like you said in the other thread, it looks like there's a lot missing from the list, even official amounts and not counting what SBF claimed to have donated dark.   At first glance that seems to includie much of what co-CEO Ryan Salame gave which was mostly to Republicans.

I didn't say it was "even," but there was a significant amount that went to Republicans as well.   My centrist take is that this isn't a partisan issue (and frankly I'd doubt that ANY politician knew about their scam), FTX was simply donating to people that they thought could help their business.

[nobody 2,031]

15 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

My centrist take is that this isn't a partisan issue (and frankly I'd doubt that ANY politician knew about their scam), FTX was simply donating to people that they thought could help their business.

Agreed.  Politicians aren't sophisticated enough to understand crypto much less understand how SBF was manipulating the markets.