cute USB ports

Marketing Condoms?

AMUL Condoms : "The taste of India"
LUX Condoms : "The choice of Indian Film Stars for over 50 years"
PEPSODENT Condoms : "Raat Bhar Dhishum Dhishum"
COLGATE Condoms : "Yeh Hai Hamara Suraksha Chakra"
NOKIA Condoms: "Connecting People"
MRF Condoms: "Extra Rubber - Extra Mileage"
KFC Condoms: "Finger Licking Good"
Moov Condoms: "Aah Se Aahaa Tak"
MIRINDA Condoms: "Zor Ka Jhatka Dhire Se Lage"
MAGGI Condoms: " Sirf Do Minute aur READY"
DABUR {CHAWANPARASH} Condoms: "Immunity & Strength"
GODREJ {Hair Dye} Condoms: "Kaato, Kholo, Lagaao"
SPRITE Condoms: "Bujhaye only Pyaas ... Baaki all Bakwaas"
TATA SKY Condoms: "Isko laga dala to life Jhingalala"
THUMBS UP Condoms: "Taste The Thunder"
COCA COLA Condoms: "Live Condoms, Sleep Condoms, Dream Condoms but Only
Coca Cola Condoms"
ROTOMAC Condoms: "Sabkuch Dikhta Hai"
CADBURY Condoms: "Asli Swad Jindagi Ka"
TAJ Condoms: " Wah Taj, Wah "
MARUTI SUZUKI Condoms: " The people's Condom "
RELIANCE Condoms: "Think bigger " (What??)
NESTLE Condoms: "Everyday"
INDIAN OIL Condoms: "Extra power - extra mileage" &
and the last badmash condom POLO CONDOMS: "The Condom with a HOLE "
AAAHHHAAA ! !! !!! *

YOU MUST BE A POLITICIAN

ONE MORNING A BLIND BUNNY WAS HOPPING ALONG & TRIPPED
OVER A LARGE SNAKE & FELL.
"OH...PLEASE EXCUSE ME," SAID THE BUNNY.
"I DIDN'T MEAN TO TRIP OVER YOU BUT I'M BLIND."
"THAT'S PERFECTLY ALRIGHT," REPLIED THE SNAKE.
"IT'S MY FAULT. I DIDN'T MEAN TO TRIP U, BUT I'M BLIND TOO. BY
THE WAY, WHAT KIND OF ANIMAL ARE YOU?"
"I'M BLIND & I HAVEN'T SEEN MYSELF," SAID THE BUNNY.
"MAYBE YOU CAN EXAMINE & FIND OUT."
SO THE SNAKE FELT THE BUNNY ALL OVER, & HE SAID,"WELL,
YOU SOFT & CUDDLY & YOU'VE LONG SILKY EARS & A FLUFFY
TAIL & A CUTE TWITCHY NOSE. YOU MUST BE A BUNNY RABBIT."
THE BUNNY SAID,"I CAN'T THANK YOU ENOUGH. BY THE WAY, WHAT
KIND OF ANIMAL ARE YOU?"
THE SNAKE REPLIED THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW EITHER & THE BUNNY
AGREED TO EXAMINE HIM & WHEN THE BUNNY WAS FINISHED, THE
SNAKE ASKED,"WELL, WHAT KIND OF ANIMAL AM I?"
THE BUNNY HAD FELT THE SNAKE ALL OVER & HE REPLIED,
*YOU ARE COLD, YOU ARE SLIPPERY & YOU HAVE NO BALLS.
YOU MUST BE A POLITICIAN."

Stock Exchange should crash by June 2012

Stock Exchange should crash by June
               Those into shares should UNLOAD their positions
               before June, the JPM is the starting salvo

The 2 Billion Dollar Loss By JP Morgan Is Just A Preview Of The Coming Collapse Of The Derivatives Market
May 12, 2012
Michael Synder
The Economic Collapse

When news broke of a 2 billion dollar trading loss by JP Morgan, much of the financial world was absolutely stunned.  But the truth is that this is just the beginning.  This is just a very small preview of what is going to happen when we see the collapse of the worldwide derivatives market.  When most Americans think of Wall Street, they think of a bunch of stuffy bankers trading stocks and bonds.  But over
the past couple of decades it has evolved into much more than that.

Today, Wall Street is the biggest casino in the entire world.  When the “too big to fail” banks make good bets, they can make a lot of money.  

When they make bad bets, they can lose a lot of money, and
that is exactly what just happened to JP Morgan.  Their Chief
Investment Office made a series of trades which turned out horribly,and it resulted in a loss of over 2 billion dollars over the past 40 days.  But 2 billion dollars is small potatoes compared to the vast size of the global derivatives market.  It has been estimated that the the notional value of all the derivatives in the world is somewhere between 600 trillion dollars and 1.5 quadrillion dollars.Nobody really knows the real amount, but when this derivatives bubble finally bursts there is not going to be nearly enough money on the entire planet to fix things.

Sadly, a lot of mainstream news reports are not even using the word “derivatives” when they discuss what just happened at JP Morgan.  This morning I listened carefully as one reporter described the 2 billion dollar loss as simply a “bad bet”.

And perhaps that is easier for the American people to understand.  JP Morgan made a series of really bad bets and during a conference call last night CEO Jamie Dimon admitted that the strategy was “flawed, complex, poorly reviewed, poorly executed and poorly monitored”.

The funny thing is that JP Morgan is considered to be much more “risk averse” than most other major Wall Street financial institutions are.

So if this kind of stuff is happening at JP Morgan, then what in the world is going on at some of these other places?

That is a really good question.

For those interested in the technical details of the 2 billion dollar loss, an article posted on CNBC described exactly how this loss happened….

The failed hedge likely involved a bet on the flattening of a credit derivative curve, part of the CDX family of investment grade credit indices, said two sources with knowledge of the industry, but not directly involved in the matter. JPMorgan was then caught by sharp moves at the long end of the bet, they said. The CDX index gives traders exposure to credit risk across a range of assets, and gets its value from a basket of individual credit derivatives.

In essence, JP Morgan made a series of bets which turned out very,very badly.  This loss was so huge that it even caused members of Congress to take note.  The following is from a statement that U.S.Senator Carl Levin issued a few hours after this news first broke….

“The enormous loss JPMorgan announced today is just the latest evidence that what banks call ‘hedges’ are often risky bets that so-called ‘too big to fail’ banks have no business making.”

Unfortunately, the losses from this trade may not be over yet.  In fact, if things go very, very badly the losses could end up being much larger as a recent Zero Hedge article detailed….

Simple: because it knew with 100% certainty that if things turn out very, very badly, that the taxpayer, via the Fed, would come to its rescue. Luckily, things turned out only 80% bad. Although it is not over yet: if credit spreads soar, assuming at $200 million DV01, and a 100 bps move, JPM could suffer a $20 billion loss when all is said and done. But hey: at least “net” is not “gross” and we know, just know, that the SEC will get involved and make sure something like this never happens again.

And yes, the SEC has announced an “investigation” into this 2 billion dollar loss.  But we all know that the SEC is basically useless.  In recent years SEC employees have become known more for watching pornography in their Washington D.C. offices than for regulating Wall Street.

But what has become abundantly clear is that Wall Street is completely incapable of policing itself.  This point was underscored in a recent commentary by Henry Blodget of Business Insider….

Wall Street can’t be trusted to manage—or even correctly assess—its own risks.

This is in part because, time and again, Wall Street has demonstrated
that it doesn’t even KNOW what risks it is taking.

In short, Wall Street bankers are just a bunch of kids playing with dynamite.

There are two reasons for this, neither of which boil down to “stupidity.”

The first reason is that the gambling instruments the banks now use are mind-bogglingly complicated. Warren Buffett once described derivatives as “weapons of mass destruction.” And those weapons have gotten a lot more complex in the past few years.

The second reason is that Wall Street’s incentive structure is
fundamentally flawed:Bankers get all of the upside for winning bets, and someone else—the government or shareholders—covers the downside.

The second reason is particularly insidious. The worst thing that can happen to a trader who blows a huge bet and demolishes his firm—literally the worst thing—is that he will get fired. Then he will immediately go get a job at a hedge fund and make more than he was making before he blew up the firm.

We never learned one of the basic lessons that we should have learned from the financial crisis of 2008.

Wall Street bankers take huge risks because the risk/reward ratio is all messed up.

If the bankers make huge bets and they win, then they win big.

If the bankers make huge bets and they lose, then the federal
government uses taxpayer money to clean up the mess.

Under those kind of conditions, why not bet the farm?

Sadly, most Americans do not even know what derivatives are.

Most Americans have no idea that we are rapidly approaching a horrific
derivatives crisis that is going to make 2008 look like a Sunday
picnic.

According to the Comptroller of the Currency, the “too big to fail”
banks have exposure to derivatives that is absolutely mind blowing.
Just check out the following numbers from an official U.S. government
report….

JPMorgan Chase – $70.1 Trillion

Citibank – $52.1 Trillion

Bank of America – $50.1 Trillion

Goldman Sachs – $44.2 Trillion

So a 2 billion dollar loss for JP Morgan is nothing compared to their total exposure of over 70 trillion dollars.

Overall, the 9 largest U.S. banks have a total of more than 200
trillion dollars of exposure to derivatives.  That is approximately 3 times the size of the entire global economy.

It is hard for the average person on the street to begin to comprehend
how immense this derivatives bubble is.

So let’s not make too much out of this 2 billion dollar loss by JP Morgan.

This is just chicken feed.

This is just a preview of coming attractions.

Soon enough the real problems with derivatives will begin, and when that happens it will shake the entire global financial system to the core.

You might also like:
JP Morgan Suffers ‘Massive’ Losses: $4.2 Billion Probable; May Spread to Entire Sector  Corzine Ordered $200M Moved to JP Morgan Days Before MF Global Collapse 

The Crazy Things That One Whistleblower Says Are Happening At JP Morgan Will Blow Your Mind

Career of electrical engineer

Career of electrical engineer

My presentation to my BOSS

We should all start to live before we get too old.

We should all start to live before we get too old. Fear is stupid. So are regrets. - Marilyn Monroe

Laugh of the day

They’ve Taken Emotional Intelligence Too Far

They’ve Taken Emotional Intelligence Too Far
The author of Emotional Intelligence explains how this popular concept has been overused
By Daniel Goleman

Have you heard? They say that your EQ counts more than IQ for success. In fact, they say, EQ accounts for 80% of success. As the person who wrote Emotional Intelligence, the book that put the concept on the map, I can tell you that they are dead wrong.

(MORE: The 25 Most Influential Business Management Books)

This and other myths about emotional intelligence constantly float around the blogosphere and get spouted by management consultants. The misinterpretation started nearly the moment TIME put the question, “What’s Your EQ?” on its cover when my book Emotional Intelligence was published in 1995. And by now we are long past the time when it should be put to rest for good.

Here are the facts. There’s no question IQ is by far the better determinant of career success, in the sense of predicting what kind of job you will be able to hold. It typically takes an IQ about 115 or above to be able to handle the cognitive complexity facing an accountant, a physician or a top executive. But here’s the paradox: once you’re in a high-IQ position, intellect loses its power to determine who will emerge as a productive employee or an effective leader. For that, how you handle yourself and your relationships — in other words, the emotional intelligence skill set — matters more than your IQ. In a high-IQ job pool, soft skills like discipline, drive and empathy mark those who emerge as outstanding.

(MORE: The IQ Gene?)

Companies know this. Corporate surveys find that more than two-thirds of major businesses apply some aspect of emotional intelligence in their recruiting, in promotions, and particularly in leadership development. But that emphasis has created a mini-boom in emotional intelligence consultants who too often ignore what the data tells us to make unfounded claims that will sell their services.

One of these fanciful claims is the often-repeated mantra that such personal skills “account for 80%” of business success. This particular myth may stem from a misreading of the studies I’ve written about in my books that look at how much of career success is accounted for by a person’s IQ alone. Most researchers conclude that IQ accounts for between 10 to 20 percent. That, as I’ve pointed out, leaves room for a wide range of other factors — everything from the family or social status you’re born into, to luck, to emotional intelligence, to name but a few. But people seem to jump to the conclusion that EQ alone makes up that 80% gap — and it does not.

The wish to believe EQ offers a magical alternative to IQ no doubt has multiple drivers. For some, it may be a consolation for poor school grades; for others a code for humanizing the workplace. Still others see EQ as an argument for more women in leadership. All those reasons may, one day, find hard data to support them — but we are not there yet. To be sure, we are seeing a slow aggregation of data supporting the added value of EQ, particularly for leaders, but these are typically small studies. The slow march of research lags far behind the hype of EQ marketers.
Goleman is a psychologist and author of 12 books including Leadership: The Power of Emotional Intelligence. The views expressed are solely his own.

Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/01/theyve-taken-emotional-intelligence-too-far/#ixzz1ob1iB700