Does my bum look big in this squat rack?

the drifter

Hanley weve been boned.....accept it...

im pretty sure soon were going to be taxed for the privilage of being able to pay tax..

brianthebard

Hanley wrote: »

I’m not saying that they DESERVE to be saved, but letting the entire countries banking system fail simply isn’t an option, in my opinion!! The real issue for me is whether they’ll aggressively chase the developers and force sales of land and property. If they do it in a controlled manner the prices should gradually correct instead of just plummeting.

If they DON’T chase the developers and guys with the big outstanding loans and let them just sit on the property and land their holding while they hope for a recovery and higher prices again then I will gladly agree that we’ve been boned.

Isn't that the entire purpose of the scheme? I'm with kev and drifter on this one.

the drifter

the drifter wrote: »

Hanley weve been boned.....accept it...

im pretty sure soon were going to be taxed for the privilage of being able to pay tax..

Let alone been penalised for working hard and having a house...

Fu*king conutry....

sorry....angry drifter this morning...

kevpants

Hanley wrote: »

Bit extreme no?? If NAMA hits breakeven then the right call’s probably been made.

That's the crux of the problem, there is 0.000000001% chance of them breaking even. Saying house prices are at the bottom is ridiculous, they'll fall further and stay there for a long time. Remember the "soft landing" Fianna Fail peddled? NAMA is the same thing, there is no evidence that it will work how they say it will and overwhelming evidence that it will fail. No housing bubble in history has had a "soft landing" and no housing bubble has ever reversed at the point we're at now.

What woulda happened if NAMA wasn’t enacted?? House and property prices probably woulda fallen thru the floor alright

They still will.

as a firesale occurred cos the banks were trying to save their asses and clear off as much of the outstanding loans as possible

You can't have a sale with no market, not even a firesale! :pac:

but what are the deeper consequences? The existing loans on the banks balance sheets would have been SERIOUSLY impaired, potentially needing to be written off because they would clearly have become unrecoverable. Reserves get raped… Tier 1 ratio plummets…

Yep, if they're insolvent then you nationalise them, if they can survive as a much weakened entity, you leave them off. At least iif you nationalise you won everything. We just handed them €53bn and we own nothing.

investors bail

You mean investors in the banks or the country? Cos the investors in the banks already bailed and the investors in the country couldn't care less about AIB or BoI, Dell didn't leave because the couldn't get a mortgage from AIB.

… banks end up nationalised and the risk is STILL present, in fact it’s increased a massive amount because instead of just issuing loan notes the government (and tax payer) then become the beneficial owners of the banks and responsible for the potentially open ended liabilities that arise, and it’s probably a lot more likely to cost the tax payer money because the collapse will already be in full swing.

I disagree, I think a nationalised bank is MORE attractive to people on the outside looking in, I think the risk is less and at least you have the option of selling the bank back to private investors for SOME return some day. The NAMA loans are worth next to nothing. I guarantee at least a third of those loans were used to secure another third of the loans. We just bought a stinking pile of horsesh1t.

I’m not saying that they DESERVE to be saved, but letting the entire countries banking system fail simply isn’t an option, in my opinion!! The real issue for me is whether they’ll aggressively chase the developers and force sales of land and property. If they do it in a controlled manner the prices should gradually correct instead of just plummeting.

If they DON’T chase the developers and guys with the big outstanding loans and let them just sit on the property and land their holding while they hope for a recovery and higher prices again then I will gladly agree that we’ve been boned.

See I think letting it fail is the only option. I don't think nationalised banks are a long term solution but I'm afraid capitalism has failed. Private enterprise and the markets have proved the can't regulate themselves and that when they fail they all look for a socialist solution in being bailed out by the government! So the government is supposed to keep it's nose out unless it goes wrong when it has to pay to clean up the mess?

IMO there needs to be an much stronger element of regulation going forward with we the taxpayer never put in this situation again. If banks are so importnant to the economy and to the taxpayer why don't we have a say in running them?

Yours sincerely Kevpants (the red)

PS And they say the fitness forum is just for meatheads!

Hanley

brianthebard wrote: »

Isn't that the entire purpose of the scheme? I'm with kev and drifter on this one.

I thought it was to save the banks....?

So what would you guys do then?? And you can't say "shouldn't have let it get this far".

the drifter

Ill admin there isnt another option on the tables. But will the banks start lending once there bad depts are realeased to NAMA.

kevpants

Hanley wrote: »

I thought it was to save the banks....?

Ya see you got it in one. This is nothing to do with lending to business to drive the economy. It's about keeping the status quo intact.

Hanley wrote: »

So what would you guys do then?? And you can't say "shouldn't have let it get this far".

Let the banks deal with it. Does anyone actually believe this going to make a difference to our economy, dole queues etc? Like I said if a bank goes to the wall it's nationalised. The banks can't have selective socialism, it's not party time for the capitalists when times are good and socialist to the rescue when times are bad. If it's a free market let it be free, let them burn. If it's going to contain a socialist element then let the taxpayer take a slice of the profits from good times too.

the drifter wrote: »

Ill admin there isnt another option on the tables. But will the banks start lending once there bad depts are realeased to NAMA.

That's the point, that money isn't going to be lent, who the hell is going to borrow it? There is no housing market, this won't stop house prices falling. People are still going to lose jobs, so they won't be getting any loans. The banks will use this money to pay of their own international debts to make them look like a better option for investors, thus driving up their share price. We just paid to jack up AIB's share price in a nutshell. Nothing more.

brianthebard

Hanley wrote: »

I thought it was to save the banks....?

So what would you guys do then?? And you can't say "shouldn't have let it get this far".

totally with kev here this is all about helping vested interests and blindly trying to hold onto the highest credit rating possible at the minute with no concern for what state it leaves the country in. Nationalisation ftw, not free money for banks.

PS; interesting article on the different options available- http://www.progressive-economy.ie/2009/09/if-you-want-to-play-solve-irish-banking.html Nama is perceived as the worst option possible.

Al_Fernz

NAMA is just an excuse to throw money down the financial oligarchs gold plated toilets. The pricing mechanism flies in the face of common sense, let alone basic economic theory.

Ba-NAMA republic here we come.

In other news BOI and AIB shares are up this morning, yay!

Hanley

kevpants wrote: »

Ya see you got it in one. This is nothing to do with lending to business to drive the economy. It's about keeping the status quo intact.

Well if the banks collapse there's not going to be any lending either.... I don't know the exact details, but if there isn't some clause (written on un-written) that explicity says the banks need to start lending I'd be very surprised.

Let the banks deal with it. Does anyone actually believe this going to make a difference to our economy, dole queues etc? Like I said if a bank goes to the wall it's nationalised. The banks can't have selective socialism, it's not party time for the capitalists when times are good and socialist to the rescue when times are bad. If it's a free market let it be free, let them burn. If it's going to contain a socialist element then let the taxpayer take a slice of the profits from good times too.

You can't just let all the banks in the country collapse tho. Remember what happened when the fed failed to save Bear Sterns? I know it wasn't a commercial bank, so not exactly a genuine parallel, but it's really what set all of this in motion. Admittedly the underlying issues were always there, but seeing a major invesment bank go pretty much froze the world's credit and the ensuing decline's there for all to see.

Same story with Anglo... you can talk about short sellers etc but as soon as money managers got wind of genuine trouble they dumped their stock and the share price nose dived. Failing to prevent this thru some type of intervention measure for all the major Irish banks would be a total disaster.

That's the point, that money isn't going to be lent, who the hell is going to borrow it? There is no housing market, this won't stop house prices falling. People are still going to lose jobs, so they won't be getting any loans. The banks will use this money to pay of their own international debts to make them look like a better option for investors, thus driving up their share price. We just paid to jack up AIB's share price in a nutshell. Nothing more.

I could argue that there's no market cos there's no money.... I even agree that property values probably have a lot further to decline. I think Japan's only getting back to pre-boom prices adjusted for inflation now, 15 years on!! It's a risk that I genuniely believe the government couldn't afford not to take.

The other issue (this is the accountant talking in me, and not something most people seem to be aware of) is that if they took a larger "haircut" there would be huge impairment charges against all the loans on the banks balance sheet. An impairment charge goes against company profit/reserves, decreasing them, the result? Erosion of capital, a further decline in the Tier 1 ratio and the need for recapitalisation (ie nationalisation). Esentially the government couldn't really afford to force a large enough discount on the loans because doing so would neccessitate MORE capital, which I think they were trying to avoid. That's always been my biggest

The funds have been issued to NAMA by way of a bond afaik and the option to charge any eventual loss against the banks future profits exist as well so I'd be cautiously (sp) optimistic.

The Irish government do have a decent enoguh track record of dealing with disasters like this too. Who remembers the Insurance Corporation of Ireland? That definitely could have brought down AIB 20 odd years ago but the gov helped them get out of it remarkably well, same story with PMPA, tho we won't mention PMPS

Hanley

Al_Fernz wrote: »

NAMA is just an excuse to throw money down the financial oligarchs gold plated toilets. The pricing mechanism flies in the face of common sense, let alone basic economic theory.

Ba-NAMA republic here we come.

In other news BOI and AIB shares are up this morning, yay!

Not directed at you Al, but these are the sort of comments that makes a mockery outta the on going debates around the country. They're just catchy soundbites and emotional responses which don't really outline any possible solutions or other measures that could now be taken.

Kev,
Gotta wait til I'm finished work to reply to the other comment!

Al_Fernz

Hanley wrote: »

Not directed at you Al, but these are the sort of comments that makes a mockery outta the on going debates around the country. They're just catchy soundbites and emotional responses which don't really outline any possible solutions or other measures that could now be taken.

To be fair Hanley, the second comment was taken from a post by Karl Whelan on the irisheconomy blog, who has contributed to this debate more than anybody else IMO.

I accept your point that my post was brief, and perhaps a bit crude. I was too lazy to elaborate. However, the idea that assets can be priced at some kind of 'long-term economic value' is lunacy.

kevpants

Hanley wrote: »

Well if the banks collapse there's not going to be any lending either.... I don't know the exact details, but if there isn't some clause (written on un-written) that explicity says the banks need to start lending I'd be very surprised.

I think all of your points have merit, I just have a BIG problem with socialism cleaning up capitalisms mess then being kicked out when the party starts again.

Lending is important but there's no reason a nationalised bank couldn't be set up to offer incentivised business startup packages. Socialism enabling capitalist enterprise and the taxpayer at least seeing tangible benefits for their buck.

You can't just let all the banks in the country collapse tho. Remember what happened when the fed failed to save Bear Sterns? I know it wasn't a commercial bank, so not exactly a genuine parallel, but it's really what set all of this in motion. Admittedly the underlying issues were always there, but seeing a major invesment bank go pretty much froze the world's credit and the ensuing decline's there for all to see.

But if we can't ever let banks fail how is that a system we should support? Are we living in cloud cuckoo land where banks can bet big on a roll of the dice knowing they can't fail and get to keep their profits if they come up trumps? If they aren't allowed to fail, I'm fine with that, just give me some of that sweet profit when they are on the up.

Same story with Anglo... you can talk about short sellers etc but as soon as money managers got wind of genuine trouble they dumped their stock and the share price nose dived. Failing to prevent this thru some type of intervention measure for all the major Irish banks would be a total disaster.

A disaster for shareholders, and I can give you a time to the nearest second for how long they can suck my balls.

I could argue that there's no market cos there's no money.... I even agree that property values probably have a lot further to decline. I think Japan's only getting back to pre-boom prices adjusted for inflation now, 15 years on!! It's a risk that I genuniely believe the government couldn't afford not to take.

The market dissapeared before the money dried up. It was a bubble, it has to be let correct, whatever the bottom is it will be reached one way or another. If AIB offer every young couple in the country a 100% mortgage in the morning it will only reinflate the bubble, not solve anything. This baby is going down one way or the other, if the market is giving a false bottom it is only temporary and we'll eventually have banks with toxic loan books for "NAMA part II: This time it's deflationary"

The other issue (this is the accountant talking in me, and not something most people seem to be aware of) is that if they took a larger "haircut" there would be huge impairment charges against all the loans on the banks balance sheet. An impairment charge goes against company profit/reserves, decreasing them, the result? Erosion of capital, a further decline in the Tier 1 ratio and the need for recapitalisation (ie nationalisation). Esentially the government couldn't really afford to force a large enough discount on the loans because doing so would neccessitate MORE capital, which I think they were trying to avoid. That's always been my biggest

Totally agree. If you're gonna do NAMA it had to be done that way for capital reasons like you said.

The funds have been issued to NAMA by way of a bond afaik and the option to charge any eventual loss against the banks future profits exist as well so I'd be cautiously (sp) optimistic.

Yeah I smell BS on that, doubt it'll be set in stone (could be wrong though). I think if this goes horribly wrong the banks won't go near it. The government will be too scared to damage the banks if they get back on their feet. They're much more comfortable with robbing you and me.

The Irish government do have a decent enoguh track record of dealing with disasters like this too. Who remembers the Insurance Corporation of Ireland? That definitely could have brought down AIB 20 odd years ago but the gov helped them get out of it remarkably well, same story with PMPA, tho we won't mention PMPS

They basically didn't have enough money in their reserves to cover claims right? How the hell did 3 different insurance companies just not get what insurance was? The idiot gene obviously doesn't skip a generation!

kevpants

Mon 14/9/09 Military Press c7w2

80% 65 x 3
85% 70 x 3
90% 75 x 5

Bench 102.5kg
x5
x5
x5

60kg
x10
x8
x6

KRoc Rows:
42.5kg
x22
x16
x12
per side

Shrugs:
160kg
x10
x10
x8
x8


Thursday 17/9/09 c7w2 Deadlift

80% 167.5 x 3
85% 177.5 x 3
90% 190 x 8 eeeeeeasy PR

Defecit SLDL's (with straps)
130kg
x10
x8
x6
x5
x4

STANDING Ab rollouts

Didn't get one full one but I'm not far off. Did some kneeling rollouts and a few holds and whatnot.

Russian twists
7kg bells
3 sets of 10

cardio,shoot me

sick dls. Its actually cool now that im doing economics that i can follow this arguement!

bigstar

what kind of form do you do shrugs with kev, do you use your hips at all or just shoulders. any thoughts on either.

kevpants

bigstar wrote: »

what kind of form do you do shrugs with kev, do you use your hips at all or just shoulders. any thoughts on either.

Just shoulders. No real thoughts on either. I don't do them very often. Don't think they're a be all and end all kind of thing.

Friday 18/09/09 c7w3 Bench

75% 95 x 5
85% 107.5 x 3
95% 120 x 3

90kg Bench
x12
x9
x6
x5
x5

Pushups
x18
x9
x7
x10 (longer rest)
x6

Rope tricep pushdowns:
52.5kg
50 total reps

FLoor DB rolling tri ext's
6kg db's
50 reps

---

Tue 22/09/09 c7w3 Squat

75% 130 x 5
85% 147.5 x 3
95% 165 x 6 (same as pre-215kg squat at 10kg less bodyweight)

Squats
120kg
x10
x10
x7

Leg Press:
180kg
x15
x15
x15

---

Wed 23/09/09 c7w3 Military Press

75% 60 x 5
85% 70 x 3
95% 77.5 x 4

Power Cleans (from the floor)
70kg
5 sets of 10

Seated DB power cleans
10kg db's
50 reps

TF Tricep machine
25kg
100 total reps

Hanley

165 x5 squat... sweet!!

And 10 rep power cleans? What are ya, one of those CrossFit fags??

BossArky

kevpants wrote: »

Tue 22/09/09 c7w3 Squat

75% 130 x 5
85% 147.5 x 3
95% 165 x 6 (same as pre-215kg squat at 10kg less bodyweight)

What are you weighing these days? Sub 100kg?

kevpants

BossArky wrote: »

What are you weighing these days? Sub 100kg?

100kg on the button. 220lbs.

Really happy it has stayed there beause I've really had to take my foot off the pedal cardio and diet wise. But for a great reason, I'm gonna be a daddy. Wifepants had her 12 week scan this week and all is well.

She's been ridiculously sick since week 6 so I've had to prioritise looking after her, I'm talking multiple vomiting sessions per day, fainting, migraines, not sleeping. So it's been tough but, like I said, for a great reason.

I've been deloading this week because training, poor diet, lack of sleep and worrying about Wifepants took it's toll and I picked up a bug so I just needed to do f-all for a week.

Back to it tonight though. Of course the big question is if I can squat and deadlift ok in one of these



I don't see why not. Of course I can't bench in it... unless I want to work on my lockout.

I'm seriously tempted to try something new with my training, just to mix it up a little and am considering doing 10 weeks of Coan Deadlift like Hanley and comparing results. I'd stick to 5/3/1 for bench and squat but my deadlift feels really good right now and it might be a good time to assault a 260+ pull. I would prob just hit min reps on the 5/3/1to let myself recover from pulling.

Hmmmmmm

BossArky

Congratulations!

kevpants

BossArky wrote: »

Congratulations!

Thanks. Starting a cycle of Coan-Phillipi is pretty exciting.

podge57

congratulations to you both!

you're gonna be a busy man...

itsallaboutheL

kevpants wrote: »

Thanks. Starting a cycle of Coan-Phillipi is pretty exciting.

LMFAO:D

Congrats on Kidpants Kevpants.....:)

BossArky

itsallaboutheL wrote: »

LMFAO:D

Congrats on Kidpants Kevpants.....:)

No, it is going to be either littlepants or shortpants :pac:

itsallaboutheL

This calls for celebration... lolcats it is:o

cardio,shoot me

christ kev! congratz! if you do this well this kid could have like a 400kg deadlift at 16

kevpants

Ha. Loving the suggestions. Kidpants and shortpants definitely good but if it's a girl they don't really suit. Ya see the previous generations had it easy, they didn't need to think of internet usernames for their children.

Thanks for the good wishes, my wife's gonna love the cat pic. She's feline-mad.

So here is my plan for Coan-Phillipi

It's to take my pull from 240 to 265. To say it looks impossible is an understatement. On the plus side I think I could actually pull more than 240 right now but still.

Tonight was

Deadlift (75%): 1x2 @ 200 kg
Speed deadlift (60%): 8x3 @ 160 kg (90 sec rest b/w sets)
3 circuits (rest 90sec between exercises, 2-3 minutes between circuits):
Stiff-leg deadlift: 8 reps of 100kg
Bent over row: 8 reps of 50kg
Underhand (reverse) grip lat pulldown: 8 reps 67.5kg (which was a bit heavy)
Full stack pull thru's: 8 reps
Standing ab pulldowns in lat pulldown machine: 52.5kg
x11
x10
x6
x6
x4

Unfortunately I couldn't include the Good Mornings due to some douchebag squatting with sponges on his hands while squatting took my rack. WTF is with the sponges?

It might be hard to reserve 4 pieces of equipment for the circuit. It might be ok if you're Ed Coan but I bet Ed Coan never trained in a Total Fitness.

I'm going to drop Military press from 5/3/1 and do:
Mon: Squat 5/3/1
Wed: Bench 5/3/1
Fri: Pull Coan

for the next 10 weeks. This allows me to do the 10 week program in 10 weeks and means I always deadlift on Fridays. Since Saturday and Sunday would be my best recovery days this will prob work out best.

I'm gonna need to fuel myself well for this. I will not get fat again under any circumstances but I'm going to throw plenty of protein and as much fruit and veg at myself in the next 10 weeks.

This should make for an interesting contrast to Hanley's 10 weeks.

Hail 2 Da Chimp

Congrats on the good news man!

Hanley

MASSIVE congrats again Was delighted to run into wifepants and be able to pass on my congrats to her personally

kevpants wrote: »

Back to it tonight though. Of course the big question is if I can squat and deadlift ok in one of these



I don't see why not. Of course I can't bench in it... unless I want to work on my lockout.

Squats - about 30 seconds in; http://www.icechamber.com/videos/mgcomeback1.html

Board Press - been done already; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdUBLgbbp-M
:D