I’ve got this stashed away somewhere.

Jason Calacanis, the Donald Trump of the interwebs, has written an adrenalized chest-thumping column on living near the edge.

I’ve been to the precipice and faced the fall a couple of times. I’ve
learned a couple of things from the experience. I can tell you that
the first time it happens, you’re terrified, because everything you’ve
done–all the effort and dreams–will probably be lost (like tears in
the rain).

The second time it happens, you’re deeply concerned, but know it ain’t
over until you’re splattered on the boulders below.

The third time it happens, you smile and say “let’s get it on!”

Three?

WSJ:Anheuser-Busch registered the Budweiser name with the European Commission in 1996. Budvar successfully challenged the registration, and won the case when AB InBev appealed to a board that oversees decisions of the Office of Harmonization for the Internal Market, the parent body of the trademark office.

The Court of First Instance ruled Wednesday that AB InBev couldn’t register the name because it was already being used by Budvar, which submitted copies of ads in German and Austrian magazines for its Budweiser beer from the mid 1990s.

Under European law, AB InBev will have to pay Budvar’s legal costs. A Budvar spokesman couldn’t be reached for comment.

Budvar began producing Budweiser beer in 1895 in the Czech town of Ceske Budejovice, although the company says the name was used in the region for a long time before that. Eberhard Anheuser and Adolphus Busch created their Budweiser brand in 1875 in St. Louis. The companies have been fighting in courts around the world since the 1950s.

Thank you Will!

Watch this video… if you dare.

Here’s Geithner’s infamous non-defense of the dollar, when asked about Chinese central bank suggestions to reduce reliance on the dollar as a reserve currency:

“As I understand his proposal, it’s a proposal designed to increase the use of the IMF’s special drawing rights. And we’re actually quite open to that suggestion. But you should think of it as rather evolutionary, building on the current architectures, rather than moving us to global monetary union,” Geithner said during an interview in New York with the Council on Foreign Relations.

“It is very important just to underscore that the future evolution of the dollar’s role in the system depends really primarily on how effective we are in the U.S. in getting not just recovery back on track, our financial system repaired, but we get our fiscal position back to the point where people will judge it as sustainable over time,” he said.

Later in the day, Geithner protested that his comments were misinterpreted and stood firm for a strong dollar. (Anyone know where I can find this text?) Strong currencies don’t have to plead their case.

The bad news is that no currency is safe as central banks print money to fill holes left by worthless securities. The Chinese need to get more of their reserves into gold rather than worrying about SDRs.

The Google search bar helpfully tries to autofill when you’re doing a search. Start typing in the letters h and a and it prompts “haute couture” and “Harry Potter.” I assume this based on the frequency of other searchers’ terms.

Start typing in Geithner, and this is what it prompts:

Is that really what Google searchers are most interested in?

Google’s documentation explains: “As you type a search query into the new Toolbar’s search box, you’ll see a list of useful suggestions based on popular Google searches, spelling corrections and your own Toolbar search history and bookmarks.”

Looking at the results for the “Geithner jewish” search, the fifth is to another blogger’s previous observations on the same disturbing trend.

Mashing up two of the fastest growing phenom of our time: http://twitter.com/nationaldebt.

Why would anyone buy low-yield fixed income securities when we know governments around the world are preparing to unload trillions of the things? Bonds are going to be priced like sand at the beach. If you’ve got the bucket — take as much as you want. It looks like UK buyers are starting to rebel as the government starts selling “gilts” as the UK government bonds are called. Bloomberg reports:

U.K. gilts slumped after demand at an auction of bonds fell short of the amount offered, the first time the Treasury failed to attract enough bids at a sale of regular debt in 14 years.

Investors bid for 1.63 billion pounds ($2.4 billion) of the 40-year securities, less than the 1.75 billion pounds of 4.25 percent notes slated for sale, the U.K. Debt Management Office said today in a statement from London.

“Basically it’s the first failed auction,” said John Wraith, head of sterling interest-rate strategy at RBC Capital Markets in London. “They didn’t receive enough to cover it all so the market has obviously sold off extremely heavily.”

The yield on the 10-year gilt jumped 10 basis points to 3.43 percent by 11:45 a.m. in London. The 4.5 percent security due March 2019 slipped 0.84, or 8.4 pounds per 1,000-pound face amount, to 109.02. The yield on the two-year note rose six basis points to 1.30 percent. Yields move inversely to bond prices.

In my thirty years of watching the US treasury market, we’ve never had a failed auction in the US. How long before we see one?