I'm reading "Baby-faced Goldman Sachs bankers could be fired over ‘unauthorized’ magazine photo shoots: sources" (NY Post).
"Unauthorized" is in quotes because, as the last line of the article says, "It is unclear whether Johnson and Doherty obtained approval to be interviewed by the magazine." I'll bet they were authorized and that Goldman Sachs likes getting inane publicity in this form. It's Interview magazine, and the guys are good looking — and they have vests!!! and quarter zips!!!
As for the type of painting that is "simply a bunch of lines." I looked:
Ha ha. Everything turns back on itself these days. In the early days of image searching, I think I'd have turned up something more like Cy Twombly.
Anyway, here's the original Interview article, formatted nicely, with all the "Finest Boys in Finance" answering the same small set of questions, including"What’s the most you’ve spent on something stupid?"
Posts
29 comments:
Sure, I'm worth millions, hundreds of millions. Who manages my wealth? Why, this mature young man over there, the one with the fancy shirt cuffs.
What was the tag the other day, with the self-obsessed pretty young man, the pear-shaped one with the perfect facial dimensions?
'Vineyard Vines quarter zip'. I had to look it up, ha ha I thought it was a coin purse.
I paid thousands of dollars this year to fund "Learing centers."
I spent several hundred dollars a month for "Health Care."
Wrong Ann.
Goldman, Morgan Stanley, the big private equity firms are extremely protective of their image, and don't want individual employees swanning in the mainstream press. Too many editors are gunning to damage the brand, and if you let one employee preen, it is much harder to discipline another employee who made a dicier outlet choice.
"What’s the most you’ve spent on something stupid?"
Hundreds of thousands of dollars on the woman that lives in my house.
About 11 years ago I dropped $7000 on PaiGow in Macau in the span of about an hour and half. It remains the last time I've ever gambled.
I think modern art is a money laundering scheme
Yes a big chunk of annual household income goes to Federal, state and local governments…about as stupid as it gets
My first wife and I invested $15,000 in her cousin's scheme to conquer the world of computers and computer language in the mid-80s.
A hard lesson learned.
"Goldman, Morgan Stanley, the big private equity firms are extremely protective of their image, and don't want individual employees swanning in the mainstream press...."
I'm betting on the side that says that these men are powered by a desire to be seen as highly sexually desirable, and that's what this Interview article is promoting.
Why does Trump keep talking about "good looking men"?
What’s the most you’ve spent on something stupid?
I gave my stepdaughter's boyfriend a job...well, I tried to.
This made me think of Sherman McCoy and Patrick Bateman. I guess I'm culturally conditioned to feel negatively about guys like this, but I bet they're having a blast.
Most I've spent on something stupid? Turns out, tuition for my kids to get degrees in fields that were highly promising twelve years ago, but that the H1B visa scam and now AI have rendered effectively worthless.
I'm betting on the side that says that these men are powered by a desire to be seen as highly sexually desirable
I’m betting these men are seen as highly sexually desirable by many women seen as highly sexually desirable.
I’m glad I don’t know the names of swanky Manhattan spots anymore…
"'know your risk tolerance and have a well-diversified portfolio.'"
That's how Wall Street people say "Good Morning".
If you're a banker and make a lot of money , you've got to recognize the fact that most people hate you. It is advisable to keep a low profile........I recently read Dante's Inferno. He considers usury a worse crimes than murder. I think that's most people's most basic reaction to the business of making money of making money.
"What’s the most you’ve spent on something stupid?
Wow, I got a few fighting for the top spot, but most involve 3 categories:
1) Loaning people money, that never came back.
2) Investing based on "expert" advice from financial advisors.
3) Giving thieves a job.
I guess that's really just one category: trusting people.
Oh, look! It's that one percent of men all the 'high-quality women' insist on as 'bare minimum.' AT Least six feet tall... Pull down six-to-seven figures a year. Go to the gym five times a week. Full head of hair. Handsome and hung. 'Emotionally available.' There are like 277 of them in the U.S. and Canada combined, of all ages and marital status.
Eight of them are gay.
"He considers usury a worse crimes than murder."
I doubt he'd rather be murdered than get a loan.
Actually, there are 278 of us, and we're spectacular.
rehajm said: "...by many women seen as highly sexually desirable." By themselves, anyway.
Sol Lewitt prints are likely in the budget ballpark for a young Goldman guy…
A 1984 Ford Bronco II. Utterly crap engine (both generally and specifically) that failed after 1.5 months.
What a bunch of tossers.
A BA degree from the University of Wisconsin, then four years participating in the Cold War.
I've never heard of a "quarter zip" OR "Vineyard Vines" before today. Looked them up and it looks like what I might find at Lands' End or LL Bean, but twice the price. What on earth is so special about either of them?
Loaning people money, that never came back.
Does it ever? I've lent serious money, like over $1000, to friends and family who were down on their luck exactly 4 times in my life, and have received not a penny in repayment from any of them.
My deadbeat cousin has posted pix of his trip to Mexico, a new gun that costs more than I lent him, and a "new" car, although at least it it was a used car two or three years old. The only sensible financial decision the guy ever made. I'm tempted to ask him for the gun.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.