Like Archinect on Facebook.
Sign up to our mailing list.
Made out of $100 bills.
(image via demonocracy.info)
Of course, if the central banks keep printing money...
Does it come in leather?
so is that what a Ripp Momney tax cut looks like??
nah that's BoBama quantitatively easing our future away ..
or more likely Ripp Momney doubling down on trickle down voodoo economies of 15 more naval ships every year, and bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iranyria-Russo-Sino??
or, perhaps how much money we'll save when he fires Big Bird? damn, fat, tall, yellow bird. maybe Ripp can hire Yellowists to erase Ripp's past failures at conservo-moderatism?
come on now folks. i wish this comment was held in higher esteem than it will be, but let's please try to address President Obama and Gov. Romney with a little more respect and not make fun of their names. unless it's actually funny. your shots fall short of funny.
we should also remember that QE is policy set by the federal reserve, so cleverly making fun of Bernanke would make more sense. while chairman bernanke was re-nominated by Pres Obama, he was originally nominated to the position by Pres Bush and was one of Pres Bush's advisers before that.
the policy that led to Mr. Bernanke's couch, and presumably his hired escort seen in the photo, might be a mistake, but it's not a partisan mistake. there is a good chance his QE policy would stop if congress would quit its partisan sabotage and do it's job. if you don't like it, quit voting for partisan hacks that refuse to work with people in the other party.
also, corbu's couch was better.
Although I'm not compelled to offer any respect to either Obama or Romney, curtkram is right; making fun of the names is juvenile and pointless.
It is also important to remember that not only does the Federal Reserve make policy regardless of the partisan politics, but that it is a private bank, privately owned by shareholders and subject to only a minimum of congressional oversight (which is basically a joke because they've already bought off most of the congressmen who might raise any serious objection).
Still, it would be fascinating to see a $46.7 million dollar couch made of $100 bills. Where's Damian Hirst when you really need him?
The other interesting image from those graphics at demonocracy is the one of the headquarters of some of the world's largest banks:
Norman Foster (HSBC's Hong Kong Bank) and Hugh Stubbins (CitiBank's CitiCorp Center) are a couple of the easy ones to ID. Anybody got any guesses on the others?
JP Morgan Chase, CitiBank, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, State Street Financial and Bank of New York Mellon are all likely candidates.
Ralph Walker (Bank of New York Mellon's 1 Wall Street, formerly Irving Trust Building)
(Image via moma.org)
Jung Brannen's (State Street Financial's One Lincoln Street in Boston)
(image via relbanks.com)
Emery Roth & Gwathmey Siegel (Morgan Stanley's Duffy Square HQ)
(image via wirednewyork.com)
Pei Cobb Freed (Goldman Sachs' 200 West Street global headquarters)
(image via wikimedia.org)
Oh, ok, this is a waste of time. Turns out that the demonocracy website already has a page identifying all of the big banks. It also nicely stacks up the dollar bills next to them to allow a sense of just how much money these banks are on the hook for with all their fancy gambling debts (and why they keep needing bailouts).
HCMY!, I think I just threw up a bit in my mouth there.
well done though. i always figured pei was in with a bad crowd.
The important question is, what rendering software did they use?
A mashup of Total 3D Home Design Deluxe and The Sims.
The shape of the lady's rack is really creeping me out.
There's an architectural and planning ramification to the newest round of quantitative easing — the government is buying and supporting shit architecture.
Essentially, the Fed is buying up bulk amounts of bonds in mortgage-backed securities to keep the market liquid. But, while these bonds are amorphous and faceless, the reality is that they represent the worst kind of urbanism and the worst kind of development.
Most people cannot genuinely afford to live in a middle-middle to upper-middle class lifestyle. These mortgages failed initially because housing and transportation costs were far too high in relation to the common wages paid in the U.S.
Why are we continuing to subside this kind of development when financially it clearly did not work and currently does not work?
We, as a country, bitch about the cost of projects in major urban cities— New York's new subway, Boston's Big Dig, Portland's street cars, Los Angeles' Light rail system and BosWash's Acela Express.
But there projects have only costed billions of dollars stretched out over multiple years.
Whereas now, we're dumping $50 billion a month into stabilizing developments where the average jobs offered can barely afford an automobile where as much as 60% of the population receives foods stamps and cash assistance.
Am I the only one outraged by this?
You can build one hell of a god-damned mixed-use, mixed-density city for $50 billion. I mean, at $150 a square foot in construction costs...
We could build 333 million square feet of new development every month for the money we are spending on trying to stabilize a bunch of worthless developments.
You are not the only one. I am outraged too.
OMG! I just had a brilliant idea for how you can get a $46.7 million dollar couch for about one tenth of the cost: just use $10 bills instead of $100 bills (except, of course, for the outside bills that are seen because nobody would know if you substituted the less expensive on the inside).
I'm a genius, yo!