Counterparties

By Felix Salmon
October 13, 2010
SSRN

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

Wall Street Doesn’t Get It datapoint of the day — NYO

Quantitative analysis of the difference between straights and gays — OKCupid

Improvisation, not plotting, behind Ecuador’s “coup” — Qorreo

Are hedge funds front-running their own 13F disclosures? Probably not, but they could if they wanted to — All About Alpha

Everything you ever wanted to know about MERS — SSRN

Comments
8 comments so far

Felix, why do you post things you know to be false?

The OKCupid “study” claims that promiscuity levels of gay and straight people are almost the same. If you think that is true, then you must not know very many people that are gay.

The new HIV rate among MSM is 44 times that of heterosexual men.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs  /FastFacts-MSM-FINAL508COMP.pdf

No bashing here, but in a world where HIV is tragically sharply increasing among MSM it helps nobody to disseminate false information.

Posted by DanHess | Report as abusive

You don’t know much about how coups are plotted in S.Am, either, preferring to swallow the always available neat’n'tidy explanations. If it works it’s a coup, if it doesn’t it wasn’t. SameAsItEverWas.

At least link to both sides of an argument when you don’t know what the devil you’re talking about, Salmon.

Posted by ottorock | Report as abusive

Cmon, @Dan Hess, he linked to it because Ok cupid has a huge data base and data collector charts! OOOh charts is to felix as the oooh shiny to you… Felix is all about data.

A)It is a dating site so most of the people there are single. If you knew any gays that are mature,then you would know they would rather be in monogamous relationships, just as mature heterosexuals wish to be…

B) the data is only as correct as the people providing it, and using the site so it can be skewed, of course, unless you really think that Canada consists of only gay and Bi curious singles. I didn’t answer the question as I am not gay and found it irrelevant. The religious right answer it because they will use any opportunity to profess their ungayness and disgust. Gay people answer it to find gay partners.

C)Seriously, you think the boys and young men are not spreading their wild oats heterosexually and are abstaining? PLEASE!!! And they are NOT counting the times they got a BJ either… coz they all know that ain’t sex.

D) The people I know who are gay settle down and have a partner because they can and don’t have to sneak around and hide… isn’t that an amazing thing?

E) The USA would have a higher statistic of bi curious if the ‘homophobes’ who are actually bi curious/gay and use marriage as a screen, travel and spread the virus and then bring it home to the wife, or go on date sites pretending to be single and asking for discreet gay sex, and are among the most vocal of anti gay marriage to complete the fabrication … well,just that stat alone would lower the HIV spread rate considerably.

Geee) It helps no one to NOT TALK about gays and pretend they don’t exist. Did you send that data link to your friends and all those gay people you know? Did you also know that the CDC collects data from known sources for people who pay for and request an HIV test or who are screened in free clinics and when giving blood? Guess who requests screening? Responsible Gay people!!

Did you know even asking your GP for an STD panel will likely not get you tested for HIV, HPV, HSV or HEPC unless you specifically ask for each by name?? Not bashing here but, do you have a certification you are HIV/STD free? Just asking because the general population doesn’t usually find out they have aids until they show symptoms.

@ottorock, I imagine even those who read extensively have little knowledge of what goes on in S Am coups, especially when the plots are CIA/other country SS initiated and backed. Being he linked to it, and put ‘coup’ in a parenthesis, and you didn’t link to the other URL you felt he should have, maybe it is you who doesn’t know what they are talking about.

Posted by hsvkitty | Report as abusive

On “Wall Street Doesn’t Get It”:

This article aims at the heart of the financial crisis. It appears that lenders dropped all pretext of due diligence when making loans, they then screwed up on the securitization process, and now they are getting caught with their shorts around their ankles falsifying documents to avoid the costs of doing foreclosures right.

They are absolutely right that most of these foreclosures can and should proceed. However, they HAVE to proceed according to property laws of each of the states involved – that is the contract that the financial sector signed with the homeowners and the governments. It is also ingrained in the fabric of the country as part of the Constitution.

Foreclosure is a very serious process. It should not be taken lightly and there should be no room for the powerful to simply run roughshod over well-established law unless we have elected to tear up the Constitution so that these people can collect out-sized bonuses. the recent headlines are that the financial sector will have record compensation again this year.

The cost of doing foreclosures right will be a reminder to all of these people that they should be careful loaning money and creating securities in the future. The cost and time required to do the foreclosures may also bring them to the realization that more modifications should be done.

The big problem with the 2009 part of the bail-out was that the financial sector does not believe that it needs to worry about being incompetent, immoral, or illegal. The federal government will not do anything to punish them for any of these attributes. my suspicion is that this dirty work will be executed by state AGs.

The banks need to get their legal ducks in order, make sure that their securities are tight, execute the foreclosures legally, modify marginal loans, and watch some of their folks go to jail for fraud and perjury.

Posted by ErnieD | Report as abusive

@hvskitty –

Given the 4400% higher relative incidence of HIV among MSM, it is self-evident that the OKCupid claims of similar promiscuity levels by different orientations are wrong, and wrong by a great deal.

You ask, with an inquisitiveness that speaks to your station, about my personal HIV status. Since my wife and I are faithful to each other the odds of our having HIV is nil.

The spread of HIV obviously requires promiscuity and very high rates of HIV in certain groups indicate high promiscuity. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) under Obama is trying to help, not bash, MSM.

AIDs and HIV are tragic. If they are to be addressed, adult-like honesty is needed.

What I gather from the OKCupid data is that certain groups are understating their promiscuity, as compared with what CDC data (and many other studies) are indicating. This makes sense. Would a MSM tell of a high number of partners on a dating site when this is a clear marker for higher HIV risk?

Posted by DanHess | Report as abusive

Asking about getting an HIV test, from one who is proclaiming that the data is wrong, when in fact it is data from a date site, compiled by a date site algorythym from hundreds of thousands of people and their dating info (may well be more influential then the CDC data because of the information aforementioned in last comment) is not such a horrible question.

You may well be horrified because of your fear, but that isn’t my problem. If you mean my station is one which is lower then yourself, then please, stay put and demean me from above. I don’t profess to walk amongst the elite upper class who feel I am the lesser.

But to come back to HIV, which is the precursor to Aids …If you have never been tested for it, you may well have been exposed and contracted it from even heterosexual behavior. The nature of HIV is it may not show any/many symptoms for many years, being some people’s immunity can handle the viral load and keep it in remission.

I do not wish to scare people, but it is important to know that incubation time from exposure to exhibit symptoms can be years. (thus far 20)

So … unless you have had an HIV test 6 months after each sexual encounter (to allow antibodies to build for testing) or it was the first for both of you, you will not be able to say with certainty that you do not have HIV. Sorry. But your chances of having contracted it are certainly less then the gay community.

Asking for a full STD panel, ensuring it contains HIV, HSV, HPV (not available for men yet) and HEP C before marrying should be a gift to give one another, not a horrible request.

While you may know many gay men bragging they are very promiscuous, and you are certain they are gay, have you actually asked for their stats? If you have, ask the same number of heterosexuals in that demographic. Exaggeration is quite common for men. (females usually say less)

Asking me whether they are lying is quite irrelevant being the question is not mandatory and I am not gay and do not know their motives. SO I will stand by my original statement that there are heterosexual and homosexual men who are in denial and do not get tested, but more so heterosexuals. And, you are correct, promiscuity is the problem and education is key.

Teens learn this stuff in sex ed, so we may just need some adult sexual education.

Posted by hsvkitty | Report as abusive

Dan Hess clearly hasn’t considered that the rates of HIV transmission between heterosexual pairings are miniscule vs. homosexual ones.

Higher infection rate must equal more sex! There is no other explanation!!!!

Posted by MujiSamovar | Report as abusive

Muji –

No I completely agree with you that homosexual pairings can have a substantially higher rate of HIV transmission, as well as numerous other diseases. But a 4000% higher relative incidence of HIV must definitionally include promiscuity as well.

Here are survey results as published by The Advocate, a gay-oriented publication.

http://web.archive.org/web/2006083003222 1/www.advocate.com/2006_sex_survey_resul ts_02.asp

See question 9. About 30% report having had more than 50 lifetime partners, 20% have had more than 100 and 10% report more than 300.

These extraordinary figures relative to what is seen in the heterosexual community. Yet these figures comport with similar studies in this field.

For those who think AIDS is a bad thing and hope to see a future with much less of it, a little factual accuracy is in order.

Posted by DanHess | Report as abusive
Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/