Everyone knows that our banks are going to rule the world, at least per capita in the next 100 years and now this… “Canada is set to split with the United States over its response to the financial crisis and reject a move to let banks duck losses by inflating the value of troubled assets, according to people familiar with the matter. The country’s top accounting watchdog reached the decision during a closed-door board meeting on Monday, giving a thumbs-down for now to a U.S. move to loosen accounting standards.” Good for us! Tell the US when something is stupid and say its wrong and unproductive. Bam Washington!
real news agencies are saying it’s still TBD http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090407.waccounting0408/BNStory/Business/home
you have WillyR, what more do you need?!
supersharpshooter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > real news agencies are saying it’s still TBD > > http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/ > RTGAM.20090407.waccounting0408/BNStory/Business/ho > me let me guess. the star, sun and globe are your favourites and you’ve voted liberal your entire life because your parents did and because for some reason you think that harper has a ‘secret agenda’ and that all conservatives are into global demise.
I think he meant that your news wasn’t “real” because you did not site a source and could’ve pulled it out of thin air, or worse, yahoo finance boards.
haha. i didn’t even notice… i guess i attributed the Segway URL post to this post in my head. yeah, its the financial post. sorry sss. nonetheless, we’re like maids the way we clean up!
“nonetheless, we’re like maids the way we clean up!” Matt, I can tell you got into the industry for all the right reasons.
MattLikesAnalysis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > supersharpshooter Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > real news agencies are saying it’s still TBD > > > > > http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/ > > > > RTGAM.20090407.waccounting0408/BNStory/Business/ho > > > me > > > let me guess. the star, sun and globe are your > favourites and you’ve voted liberal your entire > life because your parents did and because for some > reason you think that harper has a ‘secret agenda’ > and that all conservatives are into global demise. sup douche i moved to canada a couple of years ago and my parents have never voted - but i just received my canadian citizenship and if you lick my balls really nice i’ll tell you who i voted for 
your submission is complete bs. no real news pointing one way or another has come out on the issue - when you read unsubstantiated crap like “the person said” it’s probably a good time to apply your critical thinking skills
either way. the delay itself tells you that they’re skeptical of removing the M2M. if we’re headed towards international standards, its stupid to make things more complicated than they have to be so that analysts have to judge whether a company’s method of calculating the value is justified or not. all it does is make it impossible for someone outside of the industry to have any idea about whats going on with any of these companies. for us, yes we know what we’re doing, we’ve been trained to pick apart BSs. removing M2M will keep sell side research alive. good for us as analysts, bad for the productivity of the world.
you’re not getting it matt. i’m not arguing the merits of m2m - i’m arguing against you and your article matter-of-factly promulgating an outcome that has not yet been determined. http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jQpVi6CNmLWnCfMljW2gY2s4ru0w how about that ball licking btw?
MattLikesAnalysis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Everyone knows that our banks are going to rule > the world, at least per capita in the next 100 > years and now this… > > > “Canada is set to split with the United States > over its response to the financial crisis and > reject a move to let banks duck losses by > inflating the value of troubled assets, according > to people familiar with the matter. > > The country’s top accounting watchdog reached the > decision during a closed-door board meeting on > Monday, giving a thumbs-down for now to a U.S. > move to loosen accounting standards.” > > > Good for us! Tell the US when something is stupid > and say its wrong and unproductive. Bam > Washington! hmmmm, has IFRS changed along with US GAAP? Since we’re moving to IFRS in 2011 its really not a big deal. Also that switch probably has more to do with this decision then the liquidity of our banks.
supersharpshooter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you’re not getting it matt. i’m not arguing the > merits of m2m - i’m arguing against you and your > article matter-of-factly promulgating an outcome > that has not yet been determined. > > http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/art > icle/ALeqM5jQpVi6CNmLWnCfMljW2gY2s4ru0w > > how about that ball licking btw? what more do you need than “either way. the delay itself tells you that they’re skeptical of removing the M2M.” and i didn’t make up those lines. they were on the front page of the financial post. are you telling me you go through your entire life without trying to read between the lines. must be a great time in those shoes. i love the hate you bring to this forum, its great. is this what you use to prevent beating your husband?
hey bud you’re the one who started talking shi t about me (and my parents for some reason) as soon as i called you out on posting factual inaccuracies, and now you’re whining about it? lol…
sublimity Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you have WillyR, what more do you need?! +1
Time out, go to your corners! -1 Matt for introducing parental units into the convo -1 supersharp for greeting “sup douche” -3 supersharp for introducing “ball licking” into an econ convo
+5 to me for being a thug gangsta
haha agree with the above
kblade Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think he meant that your news wasn’t “real” > because you did not site a source and could’ve > pulled it out of thin air, or worse, yahoo finance > boards. or even worse these days, analystforum