If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Show)   John Oliver, who is getting scarily good at this Daily Show hosting thing, destroys CNBC hosts on their facile dismissal of Sen. Franken's ratings agencies amendment   (thedailyshow.com) divider line 140
    More: Amusing, Al Franken, CNBC, amendments, reseller hosting, Maggie Gyllenhaal  
•       •       •

10440 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 25 Jun 2013 at 12:38 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



140 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-25 01:37:04 PM

mooseyfate: propasaurus: John Oliver reminds me of a young Eric Idle.

With this one post, a Monty Python reboot was just greenlit.


I'm not sure whether to kiss you or stick a knife in your belly for suggesting such a thing.

We don't really need a re- boot. Sadly, most of the social commentary remains fresh.
However, put a bunch of Brits together and let them go sounds like a very good idea.
 
2013-06-25 01:43:15 PM

Hydra: Wow, really? You must've missed him when he was on Bill Maher with Michael Moore.


Yeah, really. He did say Greenwald should be arrested. Well, "almost arrested" or something like that.
And I don't watch Maher. It's farking terrible.

//Bernake is a Republican and originally a Bush appointee
//if shilling for Bernake is your idea of "liberal" balance.. well... ok there, Roger
 
2013-06-25 01:43:26 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: What's a better alternative? If the issuer pays, they inherently want a higher rating. If the investor pays, he wants a higher rating if he owns it and a lower rating if he wants to buy it. Still a conflict.


They could pay for it themselves and sell it to investors on an open market, instead of owing allegiance to any one investor.
 
2013-06-25 01:43:27 PM

Father_Jack: OtherLittleGuy: I must admit, against all better judgement, I like this Daily Show host.

What you did there. I see it. With my blue within blue eyes.

Bless the maker and his water. bless the coming and going of him. may his passage cleanse the world.


I see whut yer dune.

/glad I wasn't the only one.
 
2013-06-25 01:44:59 PM
Bloomberg. Financial news with a lot less DERP.
 
2013-06-25 01:47:41 PM

eventhelosers: What's the difference between jam and jelly?


I can't jelly my....
 
2013-06-25 01:48:55 PM
Considering the scam Al Franken pulled just to get in the Senate, something with his name on it that begins Restore Integrity is a farking joke.

Hey, we found some uncounted votes in a car trunk in Carver County. What? Not enough? We hear there might be some more uncounted votes found in Jackson County or somewhere. Give us some time to, uh, find them.
 
2013-06-25 01:50:36 PM
Oh, I should add, Sorkin made his comment about Greenwald on Squawk Box. Not that Sorkin himself doesn't lean left generally, just that liberal political comments aren't really his "schtick" on air... he's not a foil to Kernen, or if he's supposed to be, he's a lousy one.
Not that it would make the show better if he were.

Oh well. At least CNBC's still got Mad Money! *gag*
 
2013-06-25 01:51:37 PM

Arkanaut: Debeo Summa Credo: What's a better alternative? If the issuer pays, they inherently want a higher rating. If the investor pays, he wants a higher rating if he owns it and a lower rating if he wants to buy it. Still a conflict.

They could pay for it themselves and sell it to investors on an open market, instead of owing allegiance to any one investor.


Or the government could step in and do the rating themselves in the best interest of all parties involved.
 
2013-06-25 01:52:03 PM
Can I just say, that the last clip, with the girl introducing the story and the guy going off into a "Bill Murray Clause" tangent, was one of the most boring 20-second clips I have ever seen? She looks dead behind the eyes and is just reading her news lines like a robot, why the hell do the producers of the show think she's host worthy?

And I don't believe it's 90% writers and 10% host, partly because I would assume the host has some responsibility in writing, and not everyone can deliver the comedic shock and awe performance. John Oliver is great, ever since he started as a side reporter with the show.
 
2013-06-25 01:52:31 PM

tallguywithglasseson: Yeah, really. He did say Greenwald should be arrested. Well, "almost arrested" or something like that.


So he was toeing the Obama talking points. Surprise surprise?
 
2013-06-25 01:52:54 PM

Reginald Maudling: enry: propasaurus: John Oliver reminds me of a young Eric Idle.

Yeah.  He needs to do his own things though.  He's going a lot of Stewart's gags and he just doesn't pull them off quite well (BOOM!)

It's not the same  BOOM! though. Oliver's BOOM! is something he does a lot on The Bugle, I'd say there's enough difference in how they use it.

But yeah, maybe the writers don't quite know how to use it yet. Eventually they'll figure out how to write in Oliver's voice. But comparing to The Bugle, so far, Oliver sounds a lot like himself.



Boom belongs to no one.
 
2013-06-25 01:53:48 PM

Richard Sauce: Good. Stewart shoulda hung it up years ago.


Are you trolling bro?
Stewart is coming back @ the end of summer.

Oliver is awkward with all the guests... except the few Brits / really easy going type.

He is a good comedian and does a fantastic job delivering jokes with the Queens tongue... but he's no American from Jersey like Stewart.
 
2013-06-25 01:54:19 PM

Lost Thought 00: Or the government could step in and do the rating themselves in the best interest of all parties involved.


That would only make the situation WORSE. Nationalizing the credit rating agencies might be the worst suggestion to "fix" the problem.

/the government NEVER has "the best interest of all parties involved" in ANYTHING
 
2013-06-25 01:55:47 PM

Arkanaut: Debeo Summa Credo: What's a better alternative? If the issuer pays, they inherently want a higher rating. If the investor pays, he wants a higher rating if he owns it and a lower rating if he wants to buy it. Still a conflict.

They could pay for it themselves and sell it to investors on an open market, instead of owing allegiance to any one investor.


Huh? Pay for it themselves? You mean the rating agencies?

How would that work? You mean they do it for free and then sell it individually to investors, but tell them not to tell any other investors who didn't pay for it? Not sure how you keep that secret considering the investors would likely want to disclose the rating if they want to sell the investment or buy the investment from others.

Even of that were workable and viable then what's to stop people from not paying attention to what te rating agencies say now? The public wouldn't get to see any ratings in your business model, and would have to pay to see ratings or make their own investment decisions, ignoring the rating agencies. The public (and govt and institutional investors and regulators) are free to ignore ratings today.
 
2013-06-25 01:56:51 PM
Wow, he played a Fox News clip. I hope all of you, "SWEET JESUS, NOT FOX NEWS! RETCH! BLARGH! GET ME EYE- AND EAR-BLEACH" Farkers can recover from your post-traumatic stress disorder after having been exposed to that.
 
2013-06-25 01:57:36 PM

Hydra: So he was toeing the Obama talking points. Surprise surprise?


Oh weird, you took a shot at Obama.
 
2013-06-25 01:58:33 PM

cameroncrazy1984: FlashHarry: the fact that these agencies are still paid by the companies they rate is an appalling conflict of interest.

Yep, and of course it will never change.


As long as the legislature is sponsored by corporations, nope. That can be changed, though.

I nominate chancellor Palpatine, and suggest he be given special, emergency powers to singlehandedly remake the financial system!
 
2013-06-25 02:00:30 PM

Hydra: Lost Thought 00: Or the government could step in and do the rating themselves in the best interest of all parties involved.

That would only make the situation WORSE. Nationalizing the credit rating agencies might be the worst suggestion to "fix" the problem.

/the government NEVER has "the best interest of all parties involved" in ANYTHING


That's a bit extreme there... with the use of the words 'never' and 'anything',
How do you feel about a simple example like water filtration by cities - would this in your mind be a grave injustice to the free market vs instead of clean drinking water available from your faucet?

The rating agencies need to be decoupled from the companies they rate.  This can be done by having the government oversee them at least.  The rating agencies have been at the center of every crash, cheering the bubble to grow bigger and bigger.  They are the one's who are giving a false sense of security, because they are bought and paid for by the companies they rate.  This can be fixed by being overseen / audited by the government and exist as a non-for-profit, so they have less of an incentive to lie to Main street to get kickbacks from Wallstreet.
 
2013-06-25 02:00:59 PM
Is this in every single tab?
 
2013-06-25 02:03:49 PM

syzygy whizz: eventhelosers: What's the difference between jam and jelly?

Seriously?

Jelly is made from just the juice of the fruit while jam uses the entire fruit (including seeds with stuff like strawberries and raspberries).

I'm probably missing the point here...


The Brits call jello/gelatin jelly.
 
2013-06-25 02:05:47 PM

bdub77: enry: propasaurus: John Oliver reminds me of a young Eric Idle.

Yeah.  He needs to do his own things though.  He's going a lot of Stewart's gags and he just doesn't pull them off quite well (BOOM!)

My guess is that John and the writers are trying to work out what works best for John, and John doesn't completely know what his thing will be. Stewart and Oliver have different delivery styles, once Oliver figures that out he'll be fine, he's very quick on his feet.


Well, it's still Stewart's show and Stewart's writers.
 
2013-06-25 02:06:24 PM

Lost Thought 00: Arkanaut: Debeo Summa Credo: What's a better alternative? If the issuer pays, they inherently want a higher rating. If the investor pays, he wants a higher rating if he owns it and a lower rating if he wants to buy it. Still a conflict.

They could pay for it themselves and sell it to investors on an open market, instead of owing allegiance to any one investor.

Or the government could step in and do the rating themselves in the best interest of all parties involved.


Sure, they can go nuts. If the taxpayer is willing to pay for the govt to set up an internal agency to rate bonds and companies, and investors buy that the govt rating agency is legit and unbiased enough to produce worthwhile ratings, they can do that.

The existing rating agencies will likely compete under their current model, but if the govt rating agency gets buy in from investors, they'll go out of business.

If investors think that a govt agency is too politically influenced to be unbiased, the rating agencies will continue to have a demand for their product.
 
2013-06-25 02:09:47 PM
You mean people still think CNBC has any credibility on anything?   The network that tried to tell me Lenny Dyskstra was a financial guru?
 
2013-06-25 02:11:12 PM

squidgod2000: The usual host may be gone, but the writers are still the same


And the graphics package, and the name of the show, and the set. Oliver would have done better sooner if they'd customized the production ever-so-slightly so it didn't seem like he was wearing the show like an ill-fitting suit from Stewart's closet. He's going to be doing this for months, for crying out loud.


/union shop?
 
2013-06-25 02:12:59 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: If investors think that a govt agency is too politically influenced to be unbiased, the rating agencies will continue to have a demand for their product.


A product which, apparently, is propaganda.
 
2013-06-25 02:13:31 PM

jjorsett: Wow, he played a Fox News clip. I hope all of you, "SWEET JESUS, NOT FOX NEWS! RETCH! BLARGH! GET ME EYE- AND EAR-BLEACH" Farkers can recover from your post-traumatic stress disorder after having been exposed to that.


Well, you certainly kicked that strawman's ass.
 
2013-06-25 02:14:27 PM

Triple Oak: Can I just say, that the last clip, with the girl introducing the story and the guy going off into a "Bill Murray Clause" tangent, was one of the most boring 20-second clips I have ever seen? She looks dead behind the eyes and is just reading her news lines like a robot, why the hell do the producers of the show think she's host worthy?


Just ask any CNBC executive, and they'll tell you, "DERRRRR, CUD SHE PWIDDY!!!"
 
2013-06-25 02:17:52 PM

jjorsett: Wow, he played a Fox News clip. I hope all of you, "SWEET JESUS, NOT FOX NEWS! RETCH! BLARGH! GET ME EYE- AND EAR-BLEACH" Farkers can recover from your post-traumatic stress disorder after having been exposed to that.


Translation: "I got nuthin"
 
2013-06-25 02:24:48 PM

saintstryfe: bdub77: enry: propasaurus: John Oliver reminds me of a young Eric Idle.

Yeah.  He needs to do his own things though.  He's going a lot of Stewart's gags and he just doesn't pull them off quite well (BOOM!)

My guess is that John and the writers are trying to work out what works best for John, and John doesn't completely know what his thing will be. Stewart and Oliver have different delivery styles, once Oliver figures that out he'll be fine, he's very quick on his feet.

If you listen to his podcast with Andy Zaltzman, The Bugle, he has a very well defined comic voice. But it's probably a bit more than TV does usually, so he's probably better off with doing Stewart's gags.


The Bugle podcast is hilarious.
 
2013-06-25 02:29:06 PM

OtherLittleGuy: I must admit, against all better judgement, I like this Daily Show host.


The snark must flow.
 
2013-06-25 02:37:00 PM

enry: Arkanaut: I keep getting CNBC and MSNBC confused.  It's weird how one network managed to position themselves on both ends of the ideological spectrum.

Different audiences.


Yeah as long as the money is green they dont care.
 
2013-06-25 02:38:56 PM
I'm finding Oliver getting better and better as the weeks go by. Kind of a refreshing change for a while.

/ I will be happy when Stewart returns, though
 
2013-06-25 02:46:50 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Arkanaut: Debeo Summa Credo: What's a better alternative? If the issuer pays, they inherently want a higher rating. If the investor pays, he wants a higher rating if he owns it and a lower rating if he wants to buy it. Still a conflict.

They could pay for it themselves and sell it to investors on an open market, instead of owing allegiance to any one investor.

Huh? Pay for it themselves? You mean the rating agencies?

How would that work? You mean they do it for free and then sell it individually to investors, but tell them not to tell any other investors who didn't pay for it? Not sure how you keep that secret considering the investors would likely want to disclose the rating if they want to sell the investment or buy the investment from others.

Even of that were workable and viable then what's to stop people from not paying attention to what te rating agencies say now? The public wouldn't get to see any ratings in your business model, and would have to pay to see ratings or make their own investment decisions, ignoring the rating agencies. The public (and govt and institutional investors and regulators) are free to ignore ratings today.


There's a few factors at play here --
1) Some of the instruments that the ratings agencies are being asked to rate are relatively illiquid or obscure, so if you're an investor trying to find out whether someone already has a copy of the rating you're looking for, you might not find it, and you're better off going straight to the source.
2) For the more liquid instruments, a lot of the trades will be carried out by trading algorithms, which often seek to make trade decisions in microseconds.  In this situation it would be far more advantageous to have a direct line to the source of the rating rather than wait for a free copy to make its way into the marketplace.
3) You were suggesting earlier that the investor might have an interest in artificially lowering the rating of certain instruments; while this may be true, a lot of big institutional investors (mutual funds, insurance companies and the like) are mandated by their charters to only invest in instruments rated above a certain level, and sometimes with mandates for specific allocations.  The preference tends to be for safer instruments.  If you're required to only buy AAA rated bonds (which is where most of the money is), there's no incentive to tinker with it.
4) From what I hear from my friends in finance and law, a lot of ethical standards are focused on protecting the interests of the investor, so by that standard having the credit ratings agency be on the side of the investor would be more ethical.
5) Wouldn't it help to be a bit more risk-conscious, given the state of our economy?

And as for your argument to just ignore the credit ratings, I'd refer you to argument 3 -- for historical and legal reasons, we've been tied to the ratings by S&P, Moody's, and Fitch.  While it's probably a good suggestion -- a lot of big investment houses have their own "credit research" teams anyway -- there are funds that have people's money tied up for 30 years that can't just up and change everything they're doing without upsetting their investors.
 
2013-06-25 02:53:07 PM

the opposite of charity is justice: Where is our resident Apple fanboi going on and on about the iphone's battery life?  Just isn't an Apple thread without him.


Google Maps must have sent you to this thread.
 
2013-06-25 02:54:12 PM

NostroZ: Richard Sauce: Good. Stewart shoulda hung it up years ago.

Are you trolling bro?
Stewart is coming back @ the end of summer.

Oliver is awkward with all the guests... except the few Brits / really easy going type.

He is a good comedian and does a fantastic job delivering jokes with the Queens tongue... but he's no American from Jersey like Stewart.


My favorite part is when Stewart does his Jersey voices.
 
2013-06-25 02:58:29 PM

Hydra: That would only make the situation WORSE. Nationalizing the credit rating agencies might be the worst suggestion to "fix" the problem.

/the government NEVER has "the best interest of all parties involved" in ANYTHING



Prior to the AIG bailout the holding company controlling AIG contacted the Insurance Commissioners for New York and Pennsylvania and requested that they allow the AIG insurers domiciled in those states to swap out the collateral in their insurance reserves (cash, high quality bonds, and other instruments) with the collateral in the Holding Company's accounts.  The theory was that the value of the securities in the Holding Company account was being driven down to artificially low levels by market sentiment and that they would ultimately rebound to the value reflected in their rating and purchase price.  Since the insurance reserves are intended to guarantee that injured policyholders will be indemnified both Commissioners were not receptive to AIG's argument since they believed those securities were extremely toxic and there was a high likelihood that they'd ultimately be worthless.

The insurance regulators were right and because of that policyholders that looked to AIG insurers for indemnity were paid what they were owed.

This is why you should not use words like "never" since it makes you look like an ignorant asshole.
 
2013-06-25 03:00:36 PM

Hydra: tallguywithglasseson: I used to DVR the Squawk Box. Might get some good financial analysis most weeks. But it's like 3 hours long, every day. So lots and lots filler, and plenty of right wing political banter.
I didn't mind the political banter that much, Kernen's not a complete asshole. Compared to the social conservatism and downright idiocy that congressional Republicans put out these days, the old-school country club stuff was... almost of refreshing, in a way.
Just didn't feel like I was getting enough out of it for the amount of time spent. Maybe if I was more serious about investing or worked in the financial sector.

You're forgetting about a few folks:

[s.marketwatch.com image 183x275]

[cnbcadsalesmarketingblog.typepad.com image 240x250]

/more than balance out any of Kernan's banter to which you might be referring


I guess anyone who doesn't blame hurricanes on gay people is a liberal.
 
2013-06-25 03:03:58 PM

jjorsett: Wow, he played a Fox News clip. I hope all of you, "SWEET JESUS, NOT FOX NEWS! RETCH! BLARGH! GET ME EYE- AND EAR-BLEACH" Farkers can recover from your post-traumatic stress disorder after having been exposed to that.


I'd say at least a third of clips shown on the Daily Show are from Fox News, and I'd suggest it's because Fox offers angles that are both easily understood in a brief clip and terribly, terribly funny to watch.
 
2013-06-25 03:08:16 PM

theurge14: NostroZ: Richard Sauce: Good. Stewart shoulda hung it up years ago.

Are you trolling bro?
Stewart is coming back @ the end of summer.

Oliver is awkward with all the guests... except the few Brits / really easy going type.

He is a good comedian and does a fantastic job delivering jokes with the Queens tongue... but he's no American from Jersey like Stewart.

My favorite part is when Stewart does his Jersey voices.


But Oliver has been having fun with the Southern accents.
 
2013-06-25 03:11:48 PM
One big improvement I've noticed right off the bat; now everybody on the Internet spells the host's first name correctly.
 
2013-06-25 03:19:45 PM

Lost Thought 00: Or the government could step in and do the rating themselves in the best interest of all parties involved.


That was my first thought, but how long until that agency gets captured by the people it's supposed to be overseeing?  It seems to happen in every agency, and I would imagine that it would happen even faster with whatever body is tasked with ratings due to the banks' enormous interest in it.
 
2013-06-25 03:21:02 PM
The Bill Murray Amendment would of been an awesome amendment.
 
2013-06-25 03:22:14 PM

gingerjet: The Bill Murray Amendment would of been an awesome amendment.


It would never pass. Nobody would ever believe it.
 
2013-06-25 03:47:46 PM

clkeagle: jjorsett: Wow, he played a Fox News clip. I hope all of you, "SWEET JESUS, NOT FOX NEWS! RETCH! BLARGH! GET ME EYE- AND EAR-BLEACH" Farkers can recover from your post-traumatic stress disorder after having been exposed to that.

Well, you certainly kicked that strawman's ass.


And then had very scratchy sex with it.
 
2013-06-25 03:50:24 PM
John Oliver is awesome.

I love Stewart, but to be honest, hadn't been watching The Daily Show for several months by the time Oliver took over.

I'm almost kind of hoping Stewart won't really come back, and Oliver will remain the host.
 
2013-06-25 03:52:22 PM

bdub77: Wow. He doesn't pull punches. That was pretty f*cking awesome. The follow up piece on Canada and the US is pretty awesome too.


Good, but they got some things wrong. Greed is not the problem. greed that is not restrained by Ethics and the Law is a problem.
 
2013-06-25 03:57:10 PM

doczoidberg: John Oliver is awesome.

I love Stewart, but to be honest, hadn't been watching The Daily Show for several months by the time Oliver took over.

I'm almost kind of hoping Stewart won't really come back, and Oliver will remain the host.


Stewart will come back, but he plans to retire in the not too distant future (on the order of a few years). Expect more extended breaks like this which will serve as potential tryouts for new hosts. I would expect Oliver to get picked up with another show of some sort well before he'd get a chance to take over full-time
 
2013-06-25 04:08:54 PM
I need someone to tell me how good someone else is.
It doesn't matter if they've been paid by that person.

I need someone to tell me how good I am.
Here's something to make it a bit better when you tell me or another.

Conflict of interest, what's that??
That doesn't count in DC and other places.
 
2013-06-25 04:11:54 PM
He's good but he's either trying too hard to imitate Jon Stewart or the writing just makes it seem that way.
 
Displayed 50 of 140 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report