Jessica A. Engle wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 12:16 |
What really baffles me is why Bush hasn't been hounded out of office. |
Jessica A. Engle wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 09:16 |
What really baffles me is why Bush hasn't been hounded out of office. Being lied to is one thing, I expect that. But being lied to in so inept a fashion that even a small child can figure it out? That just reeks of the disdain for our intelligence and our welfare (economic or otherwise). And the latest polls put Obama and McCain basically in a dead heat. The sheer will-force of people's complacency is utterly baffling to me. I've stopped trying to figure it out because it kept giving me a headache. Now I just watch, and marvel. Jessica |
MDM, wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 12:38 |
civil war would be needed |
cerberus wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 10:14 | ||
jeff dinces |
cerberus wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 12:14 | ||
jeff dinces |
Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 12:10 |
One word : IGNORANCE. There's plenty of it in the middle of the country, where most of the Republican states are. As long as they are fed, have a job, and a little entertainment, they will do nothing to change the country. Perhaps if 9/11 happened in Missouri or Georgia, things would have been a little different... |
Jessica A. Engle wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 10:57 | ||
Ignorance and complacency are not the same. There's plenty of ignorance no matter where you go, or what "color" state you happen to live in. Those people you mention, who will do nothing as long as they are fed and have jobs and can go to the movies or download their porno or whatever people do for fun..... you're describing complacency, not ignorance. People are smart enough to know where their money goes. You don't have to watch the news to be informed, you just have to buy gasoline once in a while. Because it's right under their nose. It doesn't take a genius. It just takes the ordinary sort. Those ordinary sorts have made their voices heard in the past. I just don't see why that isn't happening now (despite recomended readings on the topic). How many more disasters is it going to take to shake people from complacency? But as I said, I'm just content to sit back and watch at this point. People simply do not care, and I find that highly disturbing. And until they start to care, they're getting what they deserve. And that disturbs me as well. So I've stopped trying to fathom it. Life will go on, and eventually I'll die just like I was destined to before all this Bush/Global Warming/2nd Great Depression/Etc. stuff started. |
Jay Kadis wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 12:16 |
"We don't need no regulation, We don't need no trade controls... No dark protests in the boardroom Hey! Congress! Leave Wall Street alone!" |
PRobb wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 16:44 | ||
I have to disagree with that. I think lack of regulation was a major cause of the current crisis. Too little regulation is just as dangerous as too much. |
jonathan jetter wrote on Sat, 20 September 2008 18:03 |
this is robbery writ large. communism under the guise of protection and security. it boggles my mind that people are not out in the streets reclaiming their liberty by force. |
RSettee wrote on Sat, 20 September 2008 20:41 | ||
Great point--ultimately, this sort of protection has more in common with Communism and Socialism. It's nice if you need it....but when a big majority of your biggest companies are losing money and need that sort of protection, you have to wonder what type of system the Capitalist society really runs. Really, it's Communism for the Capitalists that are in trouble....and if you think of it, if those companies go under, they can't pay back their loans anyways, and then there's many more jobs axed, as well. Now THAT's what you call truly fucked. |
danickstr wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 18:02 |
I think I have made it abundantly clear that I am in the liberal camp, but this one is a good save by the government. The alternative is not knowing if the bank will have your money tomorrow. This crisis was on par with the great depression, as far as real dollar values. The events that lead to this collapse of financial confidence are the classic ones: People much smarter than the regulators find a way to "exploit" the system, using decietful practices. You cannot out-regulate these people, because they are smarter than the regulators, and infinitely creative. What you have to do is punish them as much as possible, which is what Bernanke did, to a degree. He picked three, Lehman Brothers, AIG and Merrill, and handed them their asses in varying degrees. That is all he can do without risking your and my banks failing on a domino scale. Then you clean up the mess and curse the smart people for dicking with us. And you wait for them to do it again. It is kind of like ants. You try to keep ants out of your house, and eventually they find a way in. That is how the minds of these slick-haired 25-65 year-old money masters are always working the system. Looking for that new way to outsmart the government employee-created rules. They succeed and they make 50 million dollar bonuses. Their scheme succeeds for them and the rest of us fail, and they may lose their jobs, and destroy millions of people's investments, but they don't care. Blame them. Not Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson. Not even GW Bush, Those guys are not smart enough to stop these money speed freaks. Not even close. |
Quote: |
things got as severe as they did because in 2004 the SEC exempted 5 firms from the normally required limits on debt-to-capital ratios, allowing these firms to leverage at much greater amounts than normally possible. those 5 firms: Bear Stearns, Lehman, Merrill, Goldman, and Morgan. |
grant richard wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 00:28 |
we've neared rock bottom right? It can only get better from here. |
grant richard wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 00:28 | ||
After reading up on this quite a bit (I'm a financial market noob), this has struck me in a good way, and I'll tell you why... If those are the only firms that were granted exemption, then we've neared rock bottom right? It can only get better from here. |
Steve Hudson wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 18:03 | ||||
Methinks Jay was being sarcastic... |
jonathan jetter wrote on Sat, 20 September 2008 20:49 | ||||
yeah. i think it's important for everyone to realize that this bailout package is an extremely socialistic solution- collective, public responsibility for the failures of private corporations. that is an extremely dangerous road to go down. it has NOTHING to do with principles of liberty, freedom, or capitalism. the scope of the problem is as huge as it is because of the LACK of competition, the public-private hybrid companies Fannie and Freddie, a market where some companies are coddled and favored while others are left to fend for themselves in a "free" market. the problems we're seeing are born out of socialist origins. |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 13:14 |
resolution trust corp |
Steve Hudson wrote on Fri, 19 September 2008 17:03 | ||||
Methinks Jay was being sarcastic... |
Hank Alrich wrote on Sat, 20 September 2008 23:16 | ||
Oh,yeah? Much of this mess is directly attributable to Fed Reserve manipulation of the money supply to put way too much of it in circulation, to keep the good times a' rollin'. Paulson was an aide to Erlichman in the Nixon admin. I'm not willing to think he's grown a lot on integrity since then. This isn't about saving your money in the bank. It's about saving the asses of the fat cats. And in the long run, the gov coughing up a trillion-plus bucks to "save the world economy" is going to devalue your money plenty. Further, there is nothing in this "rescue" that addresses the sickness of greed and deceit that has run us rampantly into this morass of "investments" at the monster banks and the rest of their Wallstreet hog buddies. You might want to check out a little something that's up with this rescue bill... http://blog.kirchhof.com/?p=119 |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 13:55 |
They hold several trillion dollars of US debt, if you account for private and govt. debt. We need them to continue extending us credit by buying our treasuries, whether we like it or not. |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 13:14 |
If you think you have figured out the financial system and how it is corrupt, then run for office. Fix it for all of us and be the world's greatest hero. But isn't it easier to just sit and blame the "corrupt government" rather than to look at what actually happened and plan for it to happen again, in a new set of clothes? If you look at the positive impact of what the RTC will do. (resolution trust corp) then this is a great save. Letting big financial firms fail will HURT you more, whether you like it or not. Letting them get this far ahead of the game is just politics as usual, when there are a bunch of smart wall-street guys and less smart government guys. |
cerberus wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 16:30 |
bill moyers journal |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 10:14 |
If you think you have figured out the financial system and how it is corrupt, then run for office. Fix it for all of us and be the world's greatest hero. I will take the viewpoint that the "fat cats" will continue to find ways to outsmart whatever regulations you put in their way. I am not advocating that we do not even try. Of course we should limit the leveraging based on what we know now. But isn't it easier to just sit and blame the "corrupt government" rather than to look at what actually happened and plan for it to happen again, in a new set of clothes? If you look at the positive impact of what the RTC will do. (resolution trust corp) then this is a great save. Letting big financial firms fail will HURT you more, whether you like it or not. Letting them get this far ahead of the game is just politics as usual, when there are a bunch of smart wall-street guys and less smart government guys. |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 13:01 |
Letting Wall Street "go broke" would have a much more detrimental effect on our children's future. There are several ways the GDP is measured, but two of them have to do with commercial paper, which is made up of corporate/business debt. It is called M2 I think. If there is no Wall Street, then we have no current means to sell loans. Business liquidity would freeze. It would be a bizarre scenario where all types of businesses would begin to fail, due to a lack of credit, starting with a bunch of banks and brokerage houses, where the majority of our wealth is kept. Among the many real-life effects, would be long drives across town to buy groceries at the one grocery store still open, since the others have closed due to a lack of liquid money, and there would be illegal cash hoarding, which would freeze our ability to conduct business, and these are just a few fun things that have happened in other countries when major financial changes due to failure impact day to day life. |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 18:44 |
The RTC will sell the collateral as it sees fit. A lot of the money will come back, fortunately. |
mgod wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 22:26 |
From late July: |
danickstr wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 12:14 |
If you think you have figured out the financial system and how it is corrupt, then run for office. Fix it for all of us and be the world's greatest hero. I will take the viewpoint that the "fat cats" will continue to find ways to outsmart whatever regulations you put in their way. I am not advocating that we do not even try. Of course we should limit the leveraging based on what we know now. But isn't it easier to just sit and blame the "corrupt government" rather than to look at what actually happened and plan for it to happen again, in a new set of clothes? If you look at the positive impact of what the RTC will do. (resolution trust corp) then this is a great save. Letting big financial firms fail will HURT you more, whether you like it or not. Letting them get this far ahead of the game is just politics as usual, when there are a bunch of smart wall-street guys and less smart government guys. |
YZ wrote on Sun, 21 September 2008 15:58 | ||
Why is it that such news only reach the media when it is already too late? |
RSettee wrote on Sat, 20 September 2008 12:43 |
Here's my two cents and this is the best advice that you'll hear regarding this: people are way overextended on credit and that's caused this. |
Devin Knutson wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 13:51 |
"If you want a vision of the future, Winston, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever." |
mgod wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 10:09 | ||
No its not, and no it hasn't. OK, let's talk about the elephant in the room, and I do mean elephant. This is not about money, this not about socialism, this is not about saving wall street or you. Smokescreens. Study the Weimar Republic, and what came after, and how it got there, and look at Paulson's proposal. This is the Shock doctrine, precisely as articulated by Naomi Klein, finally being put into effect. http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008093821/shock-doctrin e-will-we-get-fleeced-crisis Why the rush? Because its taken this long for the coup to work and time's running out. Folks, the word is fascism. Total control control of everything. The Bush family's long-term partners have a family member who created the first shock, the first reason to give up our rights to fear. Here's the second. http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/25044/16474/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/22/dirty-secret-of-the -bailo_n_128294.html With my money and with no one having any say in the matter, Dick Cheney's company has already been building concentration camps for the current scapegoats, immigrants.("They took our jobs!") Auschwitz 1 was not built originally to exterminate people. It was a Polish army barracks modified to hold undesirables. Undesirables. And when people were frightened enough, the list of undesirables expanded. Welcome to Bushworld, where C-student white resentment of a changing world creates a large class of support for extreme measures and its called God's Plan. Where an uppity multi-ethnic elite threatens to make all men equal. You guys make fun of Max at your peril. He's got eyes. We better get them. If they've made any mistake, its that most of the National Guard is overseas so there's insufficient forces to put down a serious protest, say, on Wall Street. And the Pentagon might not go along with them, but the Pentagon's resources are also half-a-world away, chasing one man who can't be found. (One man whose family's members were whisked secretly out of this country by the Bush administration on September 12, 2001.) Curioser and curioser. DS PS - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/the-battle-plan-ii- sarah_b_128393.html http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08 /23/AR2008082300816.html |
cerberus wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 21:10 |
thanks for the recommended reading ryan. but you are panicked! so maybe what i am reading tells me more important things. i was talking to someone very close to me who is a surgeon... "i guess this will be ok for you, people always need health care." "i get paid twenty cents on the dollar, a patient pays the hospital a dollar, for my work, the government takes eighty cents. then i pay for it all again with income and sales taxes." "yes, those are regressive taxes... what about the luxury tax you paid on your car?""i don't drive a bmw, some doctors do." "the new 9-5 looks hideous"."yeah, i won't buy another..." "lipstick on a pig.""hahahah" "are you in favor of socialized medicine then?" "yes, then they would give us what we need, new equipment, for example, which we buy with that twenty cents on the dollar. it's not twenty cents of profit, no! it's twenty cents! for everything. the government gives us nothing back." "that's more or less taxation without representation, isn't it?" "yes, exactly..." jeff dinces |
RSettee wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 22:26 |
Healthcare doesn't mean much when the whole economy is tumbling down. Here in Canada (Winnipeg), we're renowned for our Healthcare, but you know what? There's tons of patients waiting in the hallways. I've always considered myself pretty lucky when going to the hospital, because i've been served pretty well a number of times.....but some people have died in the halls, alot of our nurses and doctors go south to where there's bigger money. Now, when there's a shortage of doctors, who ultimately pays the price? It's got to the point where doctors are saying "no new patients!", because they're swamped. Trying to find a family doctor is getting to be very, very difficult. I know many people who have had a problem with that. |
cerberus wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 21:30 |
ryan; are there any other stores in your locale besides wal-mart? wal-mart is already outlawed in my town, and many towns. but no wonder you feel panicked. if wal-mart closes? main street would have to open again. the horror! jeff dinces |
cerberus wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 21:48 |
i'd guess that google scares the crap out of neocons. another business model that creates real wealth. i bet we won't see google crying for a handout. jeff dinces |
cerberus wrote on Tue, 23 September 2008 21:48 |
capitalism does work. |
Quote: |
now google is evil?! |
Jon Hodgson wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 07:55 |
Everyone below that level suffers though, from all the people working for the bank, through those who lost money directly, going on to indirect losses. |
cerberus wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 13:36 |
jon; everyone below that is protected by the fdic. so that is not a worry. |
MDM, wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 14:33 |
'not wasting their vote on an unelectable candidate' is IRRATIONAL democratic thinking, if you analize it in depth. |
Jon Hodgson wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 06:55 |
People keep saying this is about saving the "elite"s money. Do you actually think these guys are playing with their own money? The people at the top could watch their banks go bust and their lifestyle would not change ONE BIT, they're not liable for the bank's debts, they probably don't even have notable deposits in their banks. If a bank goes down the people who suffer the least are probably the ones right at the top, they've had their multi-million dollar payouts already, they're set for life, some of the poorer ones might not be able to afford that fourth house this year, but they're really not going to sweat it. Everyone below that level suffers though, from all the people working for the bank, through those who lost money directly, going on to indirect losses. Economies have a life of their own, they have momentum and inertia, a bank failure has a disproportionate effect on this, and remember, if a company has to close tomorrow as a result and somebody loses their job doing whatever, there's a high probability that the job will go to China or India before your industry has time to pick itself up. To be honest I don't know what the best solution is, but I do think that putting money into it mindlessly is only a temporary fix, the current situation results from a whole chain of people being greedy and dishonest or naive, from the people who lied on their mortgage applications through the brokers who encouraged them to do it, all the way up to the people in total charge who let this happen on their watch (and will walk away with millions), any solution has to include provisions to prevent this sort of thing from happening again, either through stronger regulation or greater accountability. Perhaps what I understand of Alan Greenspan's opinion of it is the best solution, he suggested that the government should be able to take over the ailing institutions and close them down as gracefully as possible to reduce the shockwave that results... save the economy, not the bank. |
Jon Hodgson wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 07:33 |
Only if the voter believes as you do, that there is zero difference between the two parties. |
maxim wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 16:19 |
425 dollars today will be worth 425,000 tomorrow... |
mgod wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 12:03 |
From a friend: I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a " We Deserve It" Dividend. To make the math simple, lets assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+. Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up. So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00. My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We Deserve It Dividend. Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So lets assume a tax rate of 30%. Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam. But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife have $595,000.00. What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family? Pay off your mortgage housing crisis solved. Repay college loans what a great boost to new grads Put away money for college it'll be there. Save in a bank create money to loan to entrepreneurs. Buy a new car create jobs Invest in the market capital drives growth Pay for your parents medical insurance health care improves Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean or else Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehmann Brothers and every other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces. If were going to re-distribute wealth lets really do it...instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( vote buy) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President. If were going to do an $85 billion bailout, lets bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+! As for AIG liquidate it. Sell off its parts. Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up. Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't. Sure its a crazy idea that can never work. But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party! How do you spell Economic Boom?! I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion We Deserve It Dividend more than the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC. And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam. Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest. T. J. Birkenmeier, A Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic PS: Feel free to pass this along to your pals as its either good for a laugh or a tear or a very sobering thought on how to best use $85 Billion!! I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. "I try to be a warrior like my heroes and writing is just one blade on my Swiss Army Samurai Sword!" Ken Kesey |
rnicklaus wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 03:41 |
George Bush - 8 years of fail. |
rnicklaus wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 02:41 |
Here is my question. The feds already gave away 315 billion to AIG, Fannie and Freddy and Bear Stearns. All of a sudden, Bush is asking Congress and going to the country asking for more? Why didn't he ask for/about the first 315 Billion and that didn't seem to fix anything? We have no way of knowing if the next 700 Billion of giveaways will do anything to help at all. Next up? Credit card failures, auto loan failures. George Bush - 8 years of fail. |
danickstr wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 13:10 |
Actually these monies did do something, which was to stave off impending collapse of the financial market for that month. The plan on the table now will at least get the financial wheels greased so that the system con motor it's own way out of the muck we find it in at this time. |
danickstr wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 15:10 |
Actually these monies did do something, which was to stave off impending collapse of the financial market for that month. The plan on the table now will at least get the financial wheels greased so that the system con motor it's own way out of the muck we find it in at this time. |
jimlongo wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 18:52 |
Like Bernstein said, the McCain that used to be, no longer exists. This guy would do absolutely anything to get elected. |
jimlongo wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 19:52 |
This whole drama going on in Washington is truly the most absurd and bizarre piece of political theater i have ever seen. Republican administration offers a bailout plan. Democratic lawmakers work to pass bill. Republicans don't want to pass bill. President pleads with country to have bill passed. John McCain (who hasn't read it yet) decides "Call off the election" he must go to Washington to save the country. Deal is already worked out between Treasury and congress. Republicans who are holding up bill look to John McCain. Hank Paulson warns Democrats not to scuttle bill. White House dog and pony show. Of course the funniest part is that Democrats are convinced they have worked out a deal Republicans are convinced that they are the ones who will work out a deal (with Mighty Mouse saving the day) This is from a guy who would rather . . . what is it . . . lose an election than hurt the country. Like Bernstein said, the McCain that used to be, no longer exists. This guy would do absolutely anything to get elected. |
rnicklaus wrote on Thu, 25 September 2008 22:59 |
A little thrift called WaMu (Washing Mutual) failed today. The biggest bank failure to date in terms of $$$$. |
mgod wrote on Wed, 24 September 2008 18:03 | ||||||
From a friend: I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America Post by: Hank Alrich on September 28, 2008, 01:51:01 PM
I think his daddy called AA for a tow, but the vehicle was already too damaged to ever perform well again. Post by: jimlongo on September 29, 2008, 12:56:32 PM
Sounds like the trailers for the new movie "W". |