"AIG shares couldn’t sustain the momentum. AIG shares, fell 61 percent on Monday and fell as low as $1.25 on Tuesday. "

They say that you have to get in when the market is right, is this bail out going to send this stock UP in the next few years?

Ive never dabbled in this stock shit and was wondering if any of you folks know if it would be smart to buy at $1.25?....or if this company will go belly up even with the goverment help?

Seems to me that this gig is so big that the goverment cant afford it to go down and the stock will go back up.

B$, help me out here!

Anyone? :-*

My wife and I work in the financal sector I I guess I still do for a little bit yet). I've dabble in day trading for very small contracts (pennies sometimes) just to get the experience with the thought that maybe it will come in handy at some point.

I've also done some investing. I got in on Visa early and made a ton of money, then I lost a bunch of it back and once it was very stead I got out with 20% gain, which is great. Good thing to with my job going down the tubes as that is what I will need to live on. It will cover a few months of expenses but that is about all.

But I am all the way out now. The economic horizon is the worst in our history, period. The banks and lending insitutions are about to see thier worst nightmares realized.

It is getting so bad and looking to only get worse that I considered taking all of my money out of the bank and putting "under my mattress".

What happened over the last couple days is so huge I do know know if everyone comprehends how much trouble this spells. I myself do not prefess to be an expert but I will not be doing any investing for a long time to come.

People higher up in my wife's company are talking about a permanent shift in the way people live, predicting extended families moving back in together, teenagers helping to pay bills, people not communiting for a job and a huge switch back to unskilled labor positions just to get enough to eat. Yikes.

BUT, I could be wrong, the people I talk to could be wrong, and "the experts" could be wrong and all it takes is for someone to take the risk you are mentioning and become a millionaire in 10 years. I am a big believer in big danger / high risk means huge rewards.

Jonny, I'm no expert, but free advice is tough to get. If you buy on free advice, and the stock goes up, the one that gave you the free advice gets nothing because you expected that advice to pan out. If the stock goes down, the advice-giver gets on your black-list and got nothing in return!

I'm getting hammered in the market. I've thought about selling now and taking the losses, and dumping what little is left into AIG. The US government is now the largest insurer in the world. Thing is, the government is going to change in 4 months and only god knows what the next administration will do with AIG.....

superhawk2300 wrote on Sep 17^th, 2008 at 9:38pm:

BUT, I could be wrong, the people I talk to could be wrong, and "the experts" could be wrong and all it takes is for someone to take the risk you are mentioning and become a millionaire in 10 years. I am a big believer in big danger / high risk means huge rewards.

Thats what im looking at, bro.....that couple few grand I can lay down and reap years later.

Im a huge risk taker and will with ONLY what I think I can. (Im not a fool) :D

That is the big thing I've learned (and the hard way) is always protect your downside first.

If you got the cash, and it wouldn't kill you to lose it, there should be plenty of opportunities coming up.

I think we have a LONG way to go, but if you are going to take such a risk doing it right before the election might not be a bad idea.

The fundamental problem is so big that the outcome is impossible to predict.  The value of homes have dropped significantly.  That is a lot like a stock dropping. The overall value of the homes in America has literally dropped by billions (and billions) of dollars.  With a stock, that's bad news for the company and shareholders.  With home values, the problem is magnified immensely because mortgage backed securities are THE foundation of our economy.  When the value of the properties drop, the capital base of the entire nation shrinks, and these banks and institutions (like AIG) can't meet the debt repayment obligations, so they fail.  You can't simply declare that the homes are not dropping in value, so the problem spirals downward until the Fed starts hiking interest rates, which they are loathe to do.  We are in a meltdown.  The only question is how far down does this go... I think it's going to be at least 18-24 months before we start to see it get better.  This is going to get ugly.  Buying stocks right now is a ballsy, ballsy move my friend.

Well, my money is now, and cwill always be, on land...the old expression, 'BUY DIRT" makes perfect sense to me, in any market!
How bout purchasing a rental house or duplex??
There's a finite amount of land on this here Earth.....just a thought.and prices are down right now!
Makes sense, I'm a realtor........
Cathi

Just an FYI...

About Us


Who We Are
Travel Guard is the nation’s leading provider of travel insurance, assistance, and service plans, covering more than 6 million travelers worldwide each year. Based in Stevens Point, Wisconsin, Travel Guard International is a wholly owned subsidiary of AIG Travel Services, Inc., a member company of American International Group, Inc (AIG). With more than 97,000 employees in 130 countries and jurisdictions, Travel Guard/AIG makes a difference everyday for its customers and the communities it serves.

Why Travel Guard?
Travel Guard’s value-based approach to doing business, combined with its unrivaled customer service, has helped the company attract highly skilled, multilingual employees who enjoy providing high touch customer care solutions for leisure and corporate clients around the world. Each employee is empowered to make decisions and suggestions in the best interest of the customer, and are rewarded for individual performance as well as helping achieve company goals.
Travel Guard offers competitive wages, schedule flexibility, in-depth career and professional growth training, a comprehensive benefits package and more. Benefits include: medical, dental, vision, 401(K), Steven Covey's 7Habits leadership training, an innovative wellness program, and on-site childcare. As a well-rounded, family-friendly company, Travel Guard strives to provide the best work environment for employees to maximize their professional experience. As a result, Travel Guard was named one of the "100 Best Companies for Working Mothers" by Working Mother Magazine.

I with  Cathi. Only so much land.

And makes sense, I'm in title insurance (for now at least).

If you do buy property anywhere in the US I ask that you use Stewart Title for your title insurance needs!

Well..
AIG is being helped by the Feds which means the gov't will have a stake of 79.x % of the company.  It's been a couple of very very stressful days in this industry, and being close to the decision makers, you get to understand exactly how harsh the impact just may be- its like waiting for the wave to crash on your head.. you see it coming, and there's not much you can do. Tuesday felt like Friday around the office, and today was just - worse than Monday and Tuesday.  

At least Lehman Bros. is being cherry-picked by Barclays in an eleventh hour decision of yesterday.  But AIG going under would have had deep-reaching effects, all the way from big business to average joe, so if you want to dabble, it might be better to hold off, or put a lot less than all of your eggs in one basket.  Personally, I'd wait for some steady movement upwards before deciding anything.  

edit: you know, just heard Morgan Stanley is in merger talks with Wachovia, and that now leaves Goldman Sachs amongst the big ones.  Maybe Cathi was right, forget stocks man, I'm just hoping to keep my job alive, even with a pay cut! :-/

thats a tough call.  If you just have money to play with, I would say buy both FNM and FRE.  AIG may be too big for even the government to bail out.  I dont think the $85Billion the government just gave them is going to make it much better.  
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are small enough that the government will want to keep them around to help people buy homes.  Private banks lend the money, Fannie and Freedie just insure it.  It may be years before they write all this crap down, and it will take years until the government is done re-writing all the mortgage lending crap.  I think that if FRE and FNM are still around, they will be worth a hell of a lot more than they are today.  Both stocks have been over $60 a share in the last 12 months, now they are trading for less than $0.50 cents.  Book value for these companies is about that much.  
I would bet if you bought 1000 shares of each it would be worth $20k in the next 10 years.  1000 shares of each would cost about $750.

Or, it could be worth $0.  

You never know.   8-)

I can't think of a better way to raise prices on everything guys like me need, than to print up more money like they're doing now in D.C.

Other than that, I'm so far behind the curve when it comes to money that I forgot what it looks like.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 12:33am:

Other than that, I'm so far behind the curve when it comes to money that I forgot what it looks like. Charlie

maybe gw could bail ya out ::)

Nah, Jonny. Not me. Like it was said in Denver; they will always bail out Smith-Barney, but not Barney Smith.  8-)

Charlie

-johnny- wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 12:52am:

maybe gw could bail ya out ::)

Only if you're "too big to fail".   :-?

Don't know about you all, but I don't think I qualify.

Best,

George

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

superhawk2300 wrote on Sep 17th, 2008 at 9:38pm: BUT, I could be wrong, the people I talk to could be wrong, and "the experts" could be wrong and all it takes is for someone to take the risk you are mentioning and become a millionaire in 10 years. I am a big believer in big danger / high risk means huge rewards. Thats what im looking at, bro.....that couple few grand I can lay down and reap years later. Im a huge risk taker and will with ONLY what I think I can. (Im not a fool) :D

what about investing in gold?

I don't know what to say Jonny. I guess if you had some money that you really did not sweat loosing you might take a shot.  I got out months ago and wished I would have done so earlier...like last December when I started to get nervous. Good luck.

The complexity of what's happening now is so incomprehensible. I fear the impact on our near future and the future of our children in serious jeopardy.  The Fed just keeps pumping out the cash and the debt to go along with it.  Hyperinflation anyone?

On a lighter note...I was wondering the other day. Since the value of my house has plummeted, will my assessment be lowered resulting in less property taxes?  I don't think so.

Oh yea...Happy birthday to the US Constitution.

Steve G

stevegeebe wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 1:49am:

Since the value of my house has plummeted, will my assessment be lowered resulting in less property taxes?  I don't think so.

Actually, here in California, you can be reassessed and your taxes will go down.  We didn't even request an adjustment, but they sent us a new lower assessment and our tax bill went down quite a bit.  For people who have not been reassessed, they can request it.  Some counties are overwhelmed with requests and not eager to speed up their response, YMMV of course.

This is one of the reasons municipalities are getting in trouble.  The tax base that supports their budgets is literally drying up, but appetites for spending are increasing all the time.

From Reuters:


Quote:

STEVENS POINT, Wis., June 6 /PRNewswire/ -- AIG Travel Guard employees celebrated the official groundbreaking of their new worldwide headquarters this morning and were joined by a number of local Stevens Point and Portage County leaders, as well as executives from AIG's New York headquarters.  The ceremony marked the official start of construction on the new 125,000 square-foot AIG Travel Guard world headquarters building, located in the Northeast corner of Interstate 39 and County Highway HH intersection.    The new building will house over 750 current and future AIG Travel Guard employees from Stevens Point and surrounding areas.  "We are very, very proud to be part of this wonderful organization," said John Noel, CEO of AIG Travel Guard.  "And we are very proud that AIG is investing in our company and our community.  AIG appreciates the quality, professionalism and enthusiasm of the AIG Travel Guard employees we have here.  That's why we are breaking ground for a new headquarters right here in Stevens Point, Wisconsin." Steve Gold, President and Chief Executive Officer, AIG Accident & Health, said that AIG Travel Guard, "has built an impressive reputation for customer service."  He added that the new building, "will support not only the growing business of AIG Travel Guard, but will also provide critical support for other AIG operations throughout the world."    In addition to the traditional groundbreaking with shovels, a time capsule containing historic Travel Guard mementos was presented for the building's cornerstone.    Construction on AIG Travel Guard's world headquarters is scheduled for completion in June 2009.  The building is being designed to be an environmentally responsible and healthy place to work.    "The building will incorporate many sustainable elements designed to minimize environmental impact, and reduce the depletion of resources including energy, water and raw materials," explained Jeff Rutledge, President, AIG Travel, Inc. "We will be good stewards of the environment and follow strict guidelines to ensure that our new building receives LEED certification."  The LEED(R) (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Green Building Rating System is the U.S. Green Building Council's national standard for developing high-performance, sustainable buildings.    TOLD Development, a Midwest firm that developed the Crossroads Commons Retail Center, located at the southeast quadrant of I39 and CTH HH in Plover will construct and own the facility.  Local company, Ellis Stone Construction, will provide design, construction management and general construction services for the project.    AIG Travel Guard is one of America's leading providers of travel insurance plans for more than 6 million travelers each year. Travel insurance plans through AIG Travel Guard are distributed by more than 12,000 travel agents across the United States.    AIG Travel Guard is a wholly owned subsidiary of AIG Travel, Inc., a member company of American International Group, Inc. (AIG). American International Group, Inc. (AIG), a world leader in insurance and financial services, is the leading international insurance organization with operations in more than 130 countries and jurisdictions.  AIG companies serve commercial, institutional and individual customers through the most extensive worldwide property-casualty and life insurance networks of any insurer.  In addition, AIG companies are leading providers of retirement services, financial services and asset management around the world.  AIG's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, as well as the stock exchanges in Paris and Tokyo.

Redd- John Noel sold out to AIG.  I'd talk more about it, but I'd have a biased opinion as I worked there for almost 3 years when Lily was very young.

When the price of Crude Oil is dropping and the price of Gold is soaring it is an indicator that the economy as a whole is in trouble, the world money market is crumbling and other countries don't have the confidence that we will have the money to buy their products in the near future.
      11 of the largest banks in the world set up a $7 billion consortium fund to make funds available to each other in the event one of the 11 needs bailing out, I would say, given that the FDIC only insures up to $100,000.00 and this is the safe guard to keep the country from going into a depression again, Better get your funds secure now while you can still get them at all!
      If you are fortunate enough to have over $100,000.00 in any account, better spread it out into multiple accounts now!
      We are teetering on the verge of a total financial collapse of our banking system in this country.  Some very lean and severely bad times could be just weeks away from reality.
      Or that's my slant on it anyhow, but what do I know, I'm just a disabled Vet and a cluster head!    John

John, my Grandma predicted a couple months ago that we'd end up going into a depression.  I think I'm going to go and talk to her soon about what we should do with our finances!!

I heard that a fund or two or other money ghouls are letting you park your cash with them at zero interest just to show us what regular Joes they are and always willing to help during a crisis by offering a safe haven.

I'd like to calm them down with a few "deposits" in their skulls.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie

I'm with a few others here who say buy land (unfortunately, land values are exorbitant in most places).  My grandaddy always told me that land was the best buy you could make, simply for the fact that ain't nobody making any more.  Plus, even though land values may drop in the short run (although not nearly as much as structural values), it will always go back up.

Quote:

“The credit crunch and foreclosure problems are failures of government policy. In fact, what we see now is a market correction to foolhardy government policy. Congress’ move to bailout lenders and borrowers who made poor decisions will simply create incentives for people to make unwise decisions in the future.” —Walter Williams “[Barack] Obama... blamed the shocking new round of subprime-related bankruptcies on the free-market system, and specifically the ‘trickle-down’ economics of the Bush administration, which he tried to gig opponent John McCain for wanting to extend. But it was the Clinton administration, obsessed with multiculturalism, that dictated where mortgage lenders could lend, and originally helped create the market for the high-risk subprime loans now infecting like a retrovirus the balance sheets of many of Wall Street’s most revered institutions. Tough new regulations forced lenders into high-risk areas where they had no choice but to lower lending standards to make the loans that sound business practices had previously guarded against making. It was either that or face stiff government penalties. The untold story in this whole national crisis is that President Clinton put on steroids the Community Redevelopment Act, a well-intended Carter-era law designed to encourage minority homeownership. And in so doing, he helped create the market for the risky subprime loans that he and Democrats now decry as not only greedy but ‘predatory.’ Yes, the market was fueled by greed and overleveraging in the secondary market for subprimes, vis-a-vis mortgaged-backed securities traded on Wall Street. But the seed was planted in the ‘90s by Clinton and his social engineers.” —Investor’s Business Daily

It will all correct itself and people will live within their means again.

Of course you can always feel good by laying everything on somebody else, like Clinton or others. It's why right wing talk radio screamers do so well. They feed an old human desire: Take away all your responsibility for your troubles by blaming one or two groups for everything that doesn't neatly fit into your own narrow views of the world.

Kids do it all the time.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 10:22am:

Of course you can always feel good by laying everything on somebody else, like Clinton or others. It's why right wing talk radio screamers do so well. They feed an old human desire: Take away all your responsibility for your troubles by blaming one or two groups for everything that doesn't neatly fit into your own narrow views of the world. Kids do it all the time. Charlie

It's all Bush's fault.

wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 10:28am:

Charlie wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:22am: Of course you can always feel good by laying everything on somebody else, like Clinton or others. It's why right wing talk radio screamers do so well. They feed an old human desire: Take away all your responsibility for your troubles by blaming one or two groups for everything that doesn't neatly fit into your own narrow views of the world. Kids do it all the time. Charlie It's all Bush's fault.

well i hope the next guy will be willing to work with congress.

-johnny- wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 10:47am:

wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:28am: Charlie wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:22am: Of course you can always feel good by laying everything on somebody else, like Clinton or others. It's why right wing talk radio screamers do so well. They feed an old human desire: Take away all your responsibility for your troubles by blaming one or two groups for everything that doesn't neatly fit into your own narrow views of the world. Kids do it all the time. Charlie It's all Bush's fault. well i hope the next guy will be willing to work with congress.

and I hope Congress will listen to the people...

Oops.  My bad.  Didn't realize Investor's Business News was a right wing screamer.

It is what it is.  At least mcCain wanted to reel in Mae & Mac 5 years ago.  Too bad the Congress wouldn't go along.  At least they bailed them out so Bama can still get money from them.

-johnny- wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 10:47am:

wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:28am: Charlie wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:22am: Of course you can always feel good by laying everything on somebody else, like Clinton or others. It's why right wing talk radio screamers do so well. They feed an old human desire: Take away all your responsibility for your troubles by blaming one or two groups for everything that doesn't neatly fit into your own narrow views of the world. Kids do it all the time. Charlie It's all Bush's fault. well i hope the next guy will be willing to work with congress.

I gotta get me a sarcasm tag. I found a great deal of irony in Charlie's statement about right wingers picking one or two people on the left on which to blame all of life's woes.

Melissa wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 11:01am:

-johnny- wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:47am: wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:28am: Charlie wrote on Sep 18th, 2008 at 10:22am: Of course you can always feel good by laying everything on somebody else, like Clinton or others. It's why right wing talk radio screamers do so well. They feed an old human desire: Take away all your responsibility for your troubles by blaming one or two groups for everything that doesn't neatly fit into your own narrow views of the world. Kids do it all the time. Charlie It's all Bush's fault. well i hope the next guy will be willing to work with congress. and I hope Congress will listen to the people...

That's gonna happen - right after monkeys fly out of my butt. ;D

My grandma used to say, "You can wish in one hand and shit in the other - see which one fills up first."

I blame the smurfs.  Ever since those little blue commies got on the TV, things have gone downhill.

Nuke the smurfs.

Quote:

WASHINGTON — Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden said Thursday that paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do for wealthier Americans.

Does that mean those who pay less in taxes are less patriotic?


Quote:

“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

Despite the fact that the top 5% of wage earners already pay 60% of the taxes.
Let's tax the sucessful so we can buy a few more 40 ouncers while our kids are out gang bangin'!

In no way can I vote for Obama.  People who make more than $250,000 a year are our country's business owners.  They are the ones who HIRE us.  If they are being taxed more than the rest of the country, how will that affect the average worker when they have to compensate for it?? :-?

conundrums abound...

Bob P wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 1:43pm:

Quote: WASHINGTON — Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden said Thursday that paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do for wealthier Americans. Does that mean those who pay less in taxes are less patriotic? [quote]“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

Despite the fact that the top 5% of wage earners already pay 60% of the taxes.
Let's tax the sucessful so we can buy a few more 40 ouncers while our kids are out gang bangin'![/quote]
I don't remember the exact quote, but someone once said that democracy will work only until more than half of the electorate figures out that they can vote themselves a pay raise.

LMAO, no way are any of these clowns gonna change anything.  Time to pay the piper folks.  I  guess I'd like to see a little more accountability, and having the government step in and give away my tax dollars is not an acceptable option.  We've been cruising around in a dreamland for the last twenty years and the time is coming to pay the piper, the problem is we don't have anything left to pay with.  Our money is worthless, we don't "make" anything of value in this country anymore and the government is spending almost as much as our GNP is on socialist programs and benefits for multinational corporations, while I'm getting screwed out of over half of my paycheck.  Time for them to start taking it out in blood I guess, cause I ain't got nothing left to give anymore.  Sorry for the rant, getting hot under the collar.  And watching these baffoons on TV select my presidential candidates for me isn't making me any happier.

wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 11:26am:

I blame the smurfs.  Ever since those little blue commies got on the TV, things have gone downhill. Nuke the smurfs.

And Barney.  Kill Barney.  

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Best,

George

There are several solid investment companies that offer "precious metals" stock. That's my best predictor for the next couple of years. Research USAA investments. They have been honest with me for 47 years. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation except as a customer with USAA.

Quote:

It's all Bush's fault.

Oh I see irony all right but the difference is that you get to blame the one in charge....especially if he condones torture, lies incessantly about pre-emptive war, shreds the Constitution.... and thinks that we work for him.

Mel: The difference today in making everybody....not just you....pay taxes is that when the tax rates in this country were 80% or more, for those making millions, is that the country was in the most stable and biggest business boom in history. The guy working at GM could buy a little house, a pretty good car and take a week vacation with the kids. He could even send at least one kid to college. Those taxes on the rich were just awful. They don't have to be high, just be something that isn't used for nothing but political reasons.....and yes, such a time did exist when I was young.

Business and the whole the country does just fine when business contributes a little.  Make tons of money but throw us a bone now and then.

Charlie

There only one person that can get us out of this mess....LOL  ;D

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

LMAO Jonny

Melissa wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 8:09am:

Redd- John Noel sold out to AIG.  I'd talk more about it, but I'd have a biased opinion as I worked there for almost 3 years when Lily was very young.

John is still CEO of the division, even though he sold it to AIG.  

250,000 a year hardly qualifies as "rich". I don't think I'd work for a mjor corporation that net earnings were only 250,000 a year.

Like it or not, all of our tax money going to special interest CEO with 5 MILLION dollars golden parachutes who run their companies into the ground is the problem.

When the rich people (and buy rich I mean 1,000,000 a year or more)  get more money, they just save it. Being rich becomes their only purpose in life. They protect themselvs and theirs, all while finding a way to give less (percentage-wise, not total amount) while charactristicly using more (percentage-wise again) than most of the rest of us.

So the US makes mroe money, making it worth less. So the rich try to get more to sit on, and the more they sit on the less the dollar is worth. It is simple economics. 250,000 a year isn't even upper class, it is the upper - middle class sure, but the difference between the top 5% and the top 1% is MILLIONS of dollars sitting around driving the value of the dollar down everytime those millionaires get more tax cuts.

Give tax cuts to the poorer people and middle class as they will actually spend the money because they need to. I do not care if they spend it on 40 ouncers, porn mags, monster truck rims, Buttwhiper, the king of terrible beer, or toilet paper. Keep the economy moving.

This current economy is what happens when all the money goes to the people who don't need it. Be assured that while the rest of us worry about losing our homes, they will still be wasting 250 gallons of gas a day in their yachts, and their military clearance Hummers. I guess I should apply for one of those 7 dollar an hour gas staion jobs or Wal-mar jobs, as those are the entities that get all the tax breaks while they set profit records (and pay terrible wages) while the rest of us wonder where the rent is going to come from.

Since my tax money helped build the Wal-mart up the road do you think that entitles me to move in there when I forclose?

Don't be deceived when they tell you things are better now. Even if there's no poverty to be seen because the poverty's been hidden. Even if you ever got more wages and could afford to buy more of these new and useless goods which industries foist on you and even if it seems to you that you never had so much, that is only the slogan of those who still have much more than you. Don't be taken in when they pat you paternally on the shoulder and say that there's no inequality worth speaking of and no more reason to fight because if you believe them they will be completely in charge in their marble homes and granite banks from which they rob the people of the world under the pretence of bringing them culture. Watch out, for as soon as it pleases them they'll send you out to protect their gold in wars whose weapons, rapidly developed by servile scientists will become more and more deadly until they can with a flick of the finger tear a million of you to pieces.

Yup. The economy works when it's built from the bottom up, not trickling down...on our heads. As I have said before, for a brief time in the 1950s and early 60s, every sector pitched in and created the biggest economic boom in recorded history.

Charlie

Quote:

I blame the smurfs.  Ever since those little blue commies got on the TV, things have gone downhill. Nuke the smurfs.

Hee..eheee.heeheheheeeeee
I hate all politicians equally. Now that Smurfette :o
I cant wait till November, what'll the news flunky's do then.
;)
thebb

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 17^th, 2008 at 11:46pm:

FRE and FNM..........I would bet if you bought 1000 shares of each it would be worth $20k in the next 10 years.  1000 shares of each would cost about $750. Or, it could be worth $0.   You never know.   8-)

Did anyone listen to Daddy?
That $750 investment one week ago is worth over $2,600 today.  

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2008 at 11:09pm:

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 17th, 2008 at 11:46pm: FRE and FNM..........I would bet if you bought 1000 shares of each it would be worth $20k in the next 10 years.  1000 shares of each would cost about $750. Or, it could be worth $0.   You never know.   8-) Did anyone listen to Daddy? That $750 investment one week ago is worth over $2,600 today.

Your kidding, right?  :o :o :o

Either way, it would have been a ballsy move.  I'm not selling or buying anything right now.

Been enjoying these political threads, brings out lots of facts I never knew..... (some what tongue in cheek, did you know 90% of statistics are made up on the spot? he he he) When my two adult kids come to me for advice on how to vote I just tell them beware of one line answers:

This war is only about oil!
Obama will turn the country Muslim
McCain will lead us into world war 3
Obama is an Iraqui plant...(The guy who told me that really believed it!)

The issues are just too complex for the 30 second ads and e-mails most people tend to base their vote on!

Keep the debating hot and heavy, as annoying as it can be it does flesh out the issues. Even if the bottom line tends to be voting for the lesser of two evils every 4 years, the good news is, you get to vote, it is counted, and it does count!

Guiseppis 2 cents worth!

wrote on Sep 24^th, 2008 at 8:09pm:

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 23rd, 2008 at 11:09pm: BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 17th, 2008 at 11:46pm: FRE and FNM..........I would bet if you bought 1000 shares of each it would be worth $20k in the next 10 years.  1000 shares of each would cost about $750. Or, it could be worth $0.   You never know.   8-) Did anyone listen to Daddy? That $750 investment one week ago is worth over $2,600 today.   Your kidding, right?  :o :o :o

Nope.
And today at the close it was worth $3,630.

I’m against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.

Instead, I’m in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to all Americans as a 'Dividend'.

To make the math simple, let’s 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 to a hefty '$425,000.00'

My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a 'Dividend'
Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let’s assume a tax rate of 30%.

Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25.5 Billion 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 fam ily?
Pay off your mortgage, housing crisis solved'
Repay college loans, a great boost to new grads'
Put away money for college, it’ll be there'
Save it 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 parent’s medical insurance, health care improves'

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company

If we’re going to re-distribute wealth let’s really do it..instead of trickling out

If we’re going to do an $85 billion bailout, let’s bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+

As for AIG, liquidate it and Sell off its parts.
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’ we were not invited to the last 10 years of 'party time' bonuses

And remember, The this plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam. Tell me why it won't work.................................

BobG, you ROCK!!!

BobG wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 7:44pm:

I’m against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. Instead, I’m in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to all Americans as a 'Dividend'. To make the math simple, let’s 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 to a hefty '$425,000.00' My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a 'Dividend' Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let’s assume a tax rate of 30%. Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25.5 Billion 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 fam ily? Pay off your mortgage, housing crisis solved' Repay college loans, a great boost to new grads' Put away money for college, it’ll be there' Save it 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 parent’s medical insurance, health care improves' Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company If we’re going to re-distribute wealth let’s really do it..instead of trickling out If we’re going to do an $85 billion bailout, let’s bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+ As for AIG, liquidate it and Sell off its parts. 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’ we were not invited to the last 10 years of 'party time' bonuses And remember, The this plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam. Tell me why it won't work.................................

OMG, now THAT is some funny shit.
I think this kind of math is probably what got us into this mess!!!

"From each according to their ability, to each according to their need."

Is this bail out crap?....are they rushing into this?

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

lol, more like 'to each according to fuzzy math..........


[smiley=crackup.gif]

Thats even better than last week when Stinky got 19/20 correct on her test.........for a score of 90%.

Count me in!  Funny stuff kids.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie

Guiseppi wrote on Sep 24^th, 2008 at 11:46pm:

Been enjoying these political threads, brings out lots of facts I never knew..... (some what tongue in cheek, did you know 90% of statistics are made up on the spot? he he he) When my two adult kids come to me for advice on how to vote I just tell them beware of one line answers: This war is only about oil! Obama will turn the country Muslim McCain will lead us into world war 3 Obama is an Iraqui plant...(The guy who told me that really believed it!) The issues are just too complex for the 30 second ads and e-mails most people tend to base their vote on! Keep the debating hot and heavy, as annoying as it can be it does flesh out the issues. Even if the bottom line tends to be voting for the lesser of two evils every 4 years, the good news is, you get to vote, it is counted, and it does count! Guiseppis 2 cents worth!

joe your such a lovable guy :-* ;D

wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 8:32pm:

Is this bail out crap?....are they rushing into this? START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Well Jonny, here is Congressman Ron Paul's letter to the President (I also sent it in an email, I thought it was pertinent)...

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

My Answer to the President September 25th, 2008 by Ron Paul Dear Friends: The financial meltdown the economists of the Austrian School predicted has arrived. We are in this crisis because of an excess of artificially created credit at the hands of the Federal Reserve System. The solution being proposed? More artificial credit by the Federal Reserve. No liquidation of bad debt and malinvestment is to be allowed. By doing more of the same, we will only continue and intensify the distortions in our economy - all the capital misallocation, all the malinvestment - and prevent the market’s attempt to re-establish rational pricing of houses and other assets. Last night the president addressed the nation about the financial crisis. There is no point in going through his remarks line by line, since I’d only be repeating what I’ve been saying over and over - not just for the past several days, but for years and even decades. Still, at least a few observations are necessary. The president assures us that his administration “is working with Congress to address the root cause behind much of the instability in our markets.” Care to take a guess at whether the Federal Reserve and its money creation spree were even mentioned? We are told that “low interest rates” led to excessive borrowing, but we are not told how these low interest rates came about. They were a deliberate policy of the Federal Reserve. As always, artificially low interest rates distort the market. Entrepreneurs engage in malinvestments - investments that do not make sense in light of current resource availability, that occur in more temporally remote stages of the capital structure than the pattern of consumer demand can support, and that would not have been made at all if the interest rate had been permitted to tell the truth instead of being toyed with by the Fed. Not a word about any of that, of course, because Americans might then discover how the great wise men in Washington caused this great debacle. Better to keep scapegoating the mortgage industry or “wildcat capitalism” (as if we actually have a pure free market!). Speaking about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the president said: “Because these companies were chartered by Congress, many believed they were guaranteed by the federal government. This allowed them to borrow enormous sums of money, fuel the market for questionable investments, and put our financial system at risk.” Doesn’t that prove the foolishness of chartering Fannie and Freddie in the first place? Doesn’t that suggest that maybe, just maybe, government may have contributed to this mess? And of course, by bailing out Fannie and Freddie, hasn’t the federal government shown that the “many” who “believed they were guaranteed by the federal government” were in fact correct? Then come the scare tactics. If we don’t give dictatorial powers to the Treasury Secretary “the stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet.” Left unsaid, naturally, is that with the bailout and all the money and credit that must be produced out of thin air to fund it, the value of your retirement account will drop anyway, because the value of the dollar will suffer a precipitous decline. As for home prices, they are obviously much too high, and supply and demand cannot equilibrate if government insists on propping them up. It’s the same destructive strategy that government tried during the Great Depression: prop up prices at all costs. The Depression went on for over a decade. On the other hand, when liquidation was allowed to occur in the equally devastating downturn of 1921, the economy recovered within less than a year. The president also tells us that Senators McCain and Obama will join him at the White House today in order to figure out how to get the bipartisan bailout passed. The two senators would do their country much more good if they stayed on the campaign trail debating who the bigger celebrity is, or whatever it is that occupies their attention these days. F.A. Hayek won the Nobel Prize for showing how central banks’ manipulation of interest rates creates the boom-bust cycle with which we are sadly familiar. In 1932, in the depths of the Great Depression, he described the foolish policies being pursued in his day - and which are being proposed, just as destructively, in our own: Instead of furthering the inevitable liquidation of the maladjustments brought about by the boom during the last three years, all conceivable means have been used to prevent that readjustment from taking place; and one of these means, which has been repeatedly tried though without success, from the earliest to the most recent stages of depression, has been this deliberate policy of credit expansion. To combat the depression by a forced credit expansion is to attempt to cure the evil by the very means which brought it about; because we are suffering from a misdirection of production, we want to create further misdirection - a procedure that can only lead to a much more severe crisis as soon as the credit expansion comes to an end… It is probably to this experiment, together with the attempts to prevent liquidation once the crisis had come, that we owe the exceptional severity and duration of the depression. The only thing we learn from history, I am afraid, is that we do not learn from history. The very people who have spent the past several years assuring us that the economy is fundamentally sound, and who themselves foolishly cheered the extension of all these novel kinds of mortgages, are the ones who now claim to be the experts who will restore prosperity! Just how spectacularly wrong, how utterly without a clue, does someone have to be before his expert status is called into question? Oh, and did you notice that the bailout is now being called a “rescue plan”? I guess “bailout” wasn’t sitting too well with the American people. The very people who with somber faces tell us of their deep concern for the spread of democracy around the world are the ones most insistent on forcing a bill through Congress that the American people overwhelmingly oppose. The very fact that some of you seem to think you’re supposed to have a voice in all this actually seems to annoy them. I continue to urge you to contact your representatives and give them a piece of your mind. I myself am doing everything I can to promote the correct point of view on the crisis. Be sure also to educate yourselves on these subjects - the Campaign for Liberty blog is an excellent place to start. Read the posts, ask questions in the comment section, and learn. H.G. Wells once said that civilization was in a race between education and catastrophe. Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have. In liberty, Ron Paul

After losing my job Wednesday, I am truely frightened about the state of the economy and how this will play out on a very personal level.

I fear the unemployment will not be able to cover the basic bills.  Very very scared.

Pegg, I'm so very sorry you lost your job.

I am trying to prepare as best I can for the possibility of Jesse losing his.

Very scary times.

Bob, that's $425/person not $425,000.

See what happens when your calculator doesn't have enough places...

Bob P wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 9:38am:

Bob, that's $425/person not $425,000.

DING, DING, DING!!!!

I didn't have the heart to come right out and say it.  Whoever wrote that seemed pretty proud of their brilliance.

Melissa wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 8:29am:

wrote on Sep 25th, 2008 at 8:32pm: Is this bail out crap?....are they rushing into this? START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Well Jonny, here is Congressman Ron Paul's letter to the President (I also sent it in an email, I thought it was pertinent)...

if ron paul is running he needs to be in the debates and he needs to be on the ballot. >:(

Wow!!...I'm still reeling over the 30% tax rate. (that's some fuzzy math). Too bad the citizens that vote are counted only by popular vote, not electorate.

-johnny- wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 12:49pm:

Melissa wrote on Sep 26th, 2008 at 8:29am: wrote on Sep 25th, 2008 at 8:32pm: Is this bail out crap?....are they rushing into this? START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Well Jonny, here is Congressman Ron Paul's letter to the President (I also sent it in an email, I thought it was pertinent)... if ron paul is running he needs to be in the debates and he needs to be on the ballot. >:(

He has withdrawn from the race and recently announced he is backing Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party for President.  There are still many who will be writing Ron Paul's name in on the ballot regardless...

i wonder how many people will pencil in pencil in somebodies name instead of voting with the masses.

-johnny- wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 1:47pm:

i wonder how many people will pencil in pencil in somebodies name instead of voting with the masses.

Me thinks it'll be quite a few...

Dems Bailout Proposal Redirects ‘Paulson’s Profits’ To Left-Wing Groups
2008-09-26 at 3:06 am · Filed under 2008, Activism, Conservatism, CounterPulse, Culture, Current Events, Economics, Media, Politics, Vox Populi

-By Warner Todd Huston

Bush told the country that we are in an economic crisis and his Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, came up with an idea that would, it is claimed, end up actually making money for the U.S. Treasury in the long run. That’s all well and good, but the Democrats already have a plan to siphon off any repayment of the people’s money back to the treasury by adding one little line to the agreement that would end up stealing money from any repayments and giving it to left-wing political advocacy groups like ACORN, the National Urban League and the Hispanic group La Raza. Instead of trying to help the economy, the Democrats just want more money for their left-wing political constituents. It’s business as usual for the Democrats, of course, but a bigger question is will the media let them get away with it?

On Thursday, the Senate Democrats shopped around a one page “Agreement in Principle” from the U.S. Senate Banking Committee that laid out their proposal for the bailout of the economy. At first it all seems rather straight forward, but hidden inside this document is one little line that proves that Democrats aren’t as interested in the economy as they are in trying to extort a payday for their favorite political advocacy groups. Yes, even in a bill as important as the bailout the Democrats are trying to stuff it with pork!

Of course, the claim that this bailout will make money is not cut and dried. But the idea is that the bailout will put the Treasury Department in ownership of what could easily later become lucrative investments. And, at that later date, the Treasury Dept. can then begin to sell these investments off at a profit and, thence, pay back the Treasury for the bailout — in essence repaying the American people. But, the Democrats already have a plan to spend “profits” that not only do not exist yet, but may never exist. In the “Agreement in Principle” is the following line:

“Directs a certain percentage of future profits to the Affordable Housing Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund to meet America’s housing needs.”

So, the Senate Democrats want to re-direct profits to the “Affordable Housing Fund” and the “Capital Magnet Fund” instead of keeping these future profits going to pay back the American people for this $700 Billion bailout loan. And what are these special agencies the Senate Dems want to fund? We turn to the Wall Street Journal in a July 2008 piece that reports on what sorts of groups that were to be the recipients of the federal pork from earlier bills the Senate tried to pass.

That tax eventually will channel upwards of $600 million annually in grants for developing and restoring housing, mostly as low-income rentals, available to Acorn and other groups (such as the National Council of La Raza and the National Urban League ). Democrats on Capitol Hill and housing groups say the housing-assistance money is vital to helping Americans hit hardest by what some call the largest drop in home values since the Great Depression. But they acknowledge the perception of political conflict in giving federal funds to an organization that does political work. “We are guarding against it,” said Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank in an interview. He secured the Affordable Housing Trust from his seat as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee…

Many may already know that ACORN ( The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is under investigation in several states for voter fraud. They have been caught turning in hundreds of thousands of fake voter registration cards in an effort to stuff ballot boxes with fake voters and pump up Democrat vote totals. ACORN’s founder also tried to cover up an embezzlement scheme his little brother perpetrated when he stole $1 million dollars of the organization’s money. This has only lately come to light.

Of course, many are also aware of the race oriented Hispanic La Raza group that has been a major player in trying to allow illegal aliens to enter the U.S., vote in our elections, and take freely of schools and social welfare monies.

Naturally, all these organizations exclusively support the Democratic Party.

Lastly, there is one more aspect of this that proves the Democrats are playing politics with this issue instead of being concerned with the saving the economy. The Senate Democrats and Democratic Speaker of the House Pelosi have been pressuring John McCain to sign onto this deal. If he does and this payoff to left-wing groups like the vote fraud infused ACORN or the racemongering La Raza stays in the bill, McCain will be responsible for giving pork to dangerous hardcore, left-wing organizations. If he doesn’t sign onto this because of this pork laden provision, the Democrats can then turn around and say that McCain is a stumbling block in this important bailout bill. The Democrats have, in other words, slipped a poison pill into the plan.

Once again, the Democratic Party proves that it doesn’t care about capitalism, doesn’t care about the economy, doesn’t care about working for the people, but does want to continue slipping huge amounts of cash to their buddies in anti-American groups as well as using important bills to advance mere political partisanship.

So, lets see if the media siezes on this one line in the Senate Democrat’s “Agreement” and reports it for what it is: a cynical, partisan attempt to play politics during one of the most important crises in years.

Roger F. Gay

Obama Fails to Solve Financial Crisis
2008-09-26 at 6:27 am · Filed under 2008, Analysis, Conservatism, Current Events, OP/ED, Politics, Vox Populi

Leading up to the break in the presidential campaigns, Barack Obama spoke confidently about his ability to lead the economy; quipping ecclesiastically about the poor leadership of the Bush administration. He had, he claimed, been multi-tasking between the campaign and dealing with the economy by phone with his fellow Democrats. Everybody liked his ideas, his plans, and even John McCain was adopting them. Everything was ok in his view and let’s get on with the campaigning.

The myth fell apart in front of a large assembled crowd of national journalists and cameras yesterday as Democrats and Republicans battled furiously over pork-barrel issues. Democrats were more interested in telling the cameras that they didn’t need John McCain around to solve the problem, but it was clear they were a long way from solving it themselves. Elizabeth Dole stepped briefly in front of cameras to remind people that she and John McCain had previously proposed regulation that would have averted the crisis.

Barack Obama made his biggest political mistake by not putting country before personal ambition. I am still of the conviction this was a rookie mistake that will end up amplifying his lack of experience and political maturity. He amplified the problem yesterday by being more concerned with political posturing – who gets the blame and the credit – rather than trying to contribute to a solution.

Barack Obama’s name is not as clearly associated with the Democratic Party’s position on addressing the problem. It might be that in the game of political positioning, it’s not a good idea when others are clearly not admiring his skills and knowledge and happily jumping on-board with his proposals. And it might also be because the Barack Obama fingerprints on proposals are starting to lead to something of a CSI investigation – leading back to his associations with shady, untrustworthy political figures and organizations.

Warner Todd Huston reports on the Democratic Party’s attempt to pork-barrel funds returned in the $700 billion bailout proposal, making them available to groups like ACORN, the National Urban League and the Hispanic group La Raza. Chris Adamo opines that Americans should be gravely concerned about Barack Obama’s relationship with the groups as an outgrowth of his experience as a “community organizer.”

What I'm a bit peeved about now is that the Dems are trying to push through a 2nd, 60 billion dollar economic stimulus package TODAY while this damn 700 billion bill is trying to be worked out. >:(



btw, Harry Reid chaps my azz.

Quote:

btw, Harry Reid chaps my azz.

 Try a little of Ava's Desitin on that Mel.     LMAO!

Linda_Howell wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 3:18pm:

Quote: btw, Harry Reid chaps my azz.  Try a little of Ava's Desitin on that Mel.     LMAO!

Or.....if there is a TSC store close they sell 'Anti-Monkey-Butt' powder.  Blake swears by it........ ;D

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Jackie wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 3:33pm:

Linda_Howell wrote on Sep 26th, 2008 at 3:18pm: Quote: btw, Harry Reid chaps my azz.  Try a little of Ava's Desitin on that Mel.     LMAO! Or.....if there is a TSC store close they sell 'Anti-Monkey-Butt' powder.  Blake swears by it........ ;D START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

rotflmao you two!! ;D

Jackie wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 3:33pm:

Linda_Howell wrote on Sep 26th, 2008 at 3:18pm: Quote: btw, Harry Reid chaps my azz.  Try a little of Ava's Desitin on that Mel.     LMAO! Or.....if there is a TSC store close they sell 'Anti-Monkey-Butt' powder.  Blake swears by it........ ;D START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

...or try this:
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Melissa wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 1:54pm:

-johnny- wrote on Sep 26th, 2008 at 1:47pm: i wonder how many people will pencil in pencil in somebodies name instead of voting with the masses. Me thinks it'll be quite a few...

It'll be less than 1%.

Not saying that's the way I want it, just the way it will be.

I'm penciling in Potters name.

I finally got something useful out of a political thread.

Just ordered a sixpack of anti monkey butt powder!!!

Does it cure swamp ass?

I'll be happy to bring you guys all you want at the next convention. Maybe we will put it up for the auction. Uncle Lee's sells it by the case. :o

-johnny- wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 1:47pm:

i wonder how many people will pencil in pencil in somebodies name instead of voting with the masses.

Not in this state, we vote by touch screen.

Bob P wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 9:38am:

Bob, that's $425/person not $425,000.

Shut up Bob.

I got those numbers from the CEO of WAMU so they have to be correct.   ::)

deltadarlin wrote on Sep 26^th, 2008 at 7:36pm:

-johnny- wrote on Sep 26th, 2008 at 1:47pm: i wonder how many people will pencil in pencil in somebodies name instead of voting with the masses. Not in this state, we vote by touch screen.

so much for the "...by the People" part huh? :-/

Warner Todd Huston. Now there's a real trip over the right edge. Yikes.

Charlie

I see that the CEO of WaMu could get 13.65 million dollars for being on the job 18 days.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

How nice for him.   ::)

Best,

George

Thats nuts George.

I've always said it is nuts to allow CEO's such large golden parachutes. Lots of people say it is communist to prohibit things like this, and I've been accused of being anti-capitalist, but now, with the economy the way it is, some of those people hopefully have changed their minds.

As long as the top 1% has 95% of the nations wealth, we the common people, will be left in the lerch. The more money these people get, the weaker the dollar gets, and the weaker the dollar gets the more dollars these people want. Collecting money is the worlds dirtiest habit. It would be fine if it did not lead to the government bailing out the businesses these guys ruin to pay themselves such outrageous salaries.

I think most people do not understand how rich the top 1$ is. I am not trying to sound elite, and I don't understand fully myself (can anyone really visualize 20 billion dollars in pennies? - Maybe the law should be everyone should be able to hold thier bank account on land they own or something).

Google "Money as Debt".

It's a little movie that simply explains how banks create money out of thin air. It will open your eyes. I promise.

No Debt...No Money.

Steve G

Best-Paid Hedge Fund Managers

John Paulson earned a record $3.7 billion last year to top Alpha's ranking of the 50 most highly paid hedge fund managers. The Paulson & Co. chief surpassed perennial powerhouses George Soros and James Simons, who ranked second and third, at $2.9 billion and $2.8 billion, respectively. The top 25 on the list earned an average $892 million, up from $532 million in 2006.

Paulson rocketed to No. 1 in Alpha's seventh annual survey by shorting the subprime mortgage market. He, Soros, Simons and the others who earned more than $1 billion — Philip Falcone and Kenneth Griffin — led what may well prove to be the greatest display of individual wealth creation in any year in the modern history of finance.

The enormous riches being generated by hedge funds come at a time of extraordinary distress in financial markets, as millions of homeowners face potential foreclosure and the U.S. plunges into recession (see “Market Paranoia”). Undoubtedly, the huge paydays chronicled here are sure to cause a heightened level of envy and resentment toward hedge funds, and will draw additional scrutiny by Washington, which is already weighing whether to increase regulation.


Consider:

• Five of the managers on this year’s list each made more in 2007 than the $1.2 billion that JPMorgan Chase & Co. agreed to pay for the almost failed 85-year-old Bear Stearns Cos.

• When we published our inaugural list, in 2002, Soros led the way with $700 million, a showing that this year would have put him at No. 9. Back then it took $30 million to crack the top 25; this year, $360 million.

• The grand total earned by the top 25 in our 2003 ranking, almost $2.8 billion, was less than what any of the top three managers made this year and less than one fifth of what the top ten made altogether ($16.1 billion).

• Though we doubled the size of our list from 25 to 50 this year, longtime New York–based star managers Mark Kingdon of Kingdon Capital Management and Raj Rajaratnam of Galleon Group both miss the cut, despite each making about $200 million. This year’s minimum: $210 million.


Alpha uses two components to calculate earnings: managers’ share of their firm’s performance and management fees, as well as gains on their own capital. (For multibillionaires like Soros and Simons, the latter can be substantial.) We exclude, however, any proceeds from the sale of a firm or from a public offering, which is more a reflection of managers’ business acumen than of their investment prowess. Still, it’s hard to ignore the enormous wealth being generated by such deals. Daniel Och was worth more than $4.5 billion the day after New York–based Och-Ziff Capital Management Group went public last fall. And GLG Partners co-founders Noam Gottesman and Pierre Lagrange each made more than $1 billion by engineering an IPO of their London firm last summer through a merger.

And WE are bailing them out? >:(

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Need a visual to what billions look like?

Click: START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Awesome post Jonny.

Yeah what a crock. How come when a person defaults and needs help he is a pinko commie welfare lazy layabout loser who should be beaten.

BUT when an airline, or bank, or fund-firm mismanages their company those same people bail them out?

And to make it worse, the people who created the mess still make millions, but all the employees get the can and then become the guy I mentioned in the first paragrpah.

People, quit listening to the top 1% in this country. They have been turning us on our heads having us attack each other while they take what they want, ruin it, get paid to ruin it, and then take more from us to bail them out, in the name of "captialism."

I say, let the market sort this crap out. The problem with that is all the workers who had nothing to do with the problem get the ax, not the a-hole who made the mess.

This country needs an enema, and from the top down.

superhawk2300 wrote on Sep 27^th, 2008 at 4:30pm:

Awesome post Jonny.

Want to know who caused this shit?

Watch: (8 mins, but worth it!)

Who Screwed Up the Housing Market and Caused the World Wide Credit Crunch?

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

This all happened because there were some lovely people in government administration that decided to encourage banks to lower their interest rates so more people could afford homes.  These people should have NEVER gotten those loans!  

I'm not going to say who did it though.  Ya'll need to find out who all it was... :P

Dang, a little slow here, LOL.

Jonny, I sooooooooooooo wish they'd play those clips on CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and MSNBC. :(  It really, truely is a liberal media giant out there!!

Melissa wrote on Sep 27^th, 2008 at 5:18pm:

It really, truely is a liberal media giant out there!!

Yup, bigger goverment and higher taxes while we bail out billionaires.

Go liberal! ::)

Liberal media.

You'll get no argument from me. They love Obama for obvious reasons. He's something new. McCain is well-liked too but there's no comparison. Obama is a cash cow for cable news advertisers too.  McCain had an all too brief experience with this in 2000 when he should have been the nominee.

There is no mystery why the media and Hollywood are like this of course. You can blame the latter on McCarthyism for the most part and sending producers to prison. It's been mostly the right that looks at censorship and howls about Janet Jackson's "shocking" display. You don't fine CBS over this or try to sneak in fake news conferences without a backlash. Those that thrive on status quo don't like people poking around in their little world.

Still, they do love Obama and the media is liberal........fortunatley. Media leans left in every country or it's not free.

Charlie

The media is as liberal as the multi-conglomorate corporations that own the media outlets.

If feel good stories will buy ratings that is what you will see, becasue that is what gets them paid.

Nuff said!  >:(

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

wrote on Sep 27^th, 2008 at 4:14pm:

John Paulson earned a record $3.7 billion last year to top Alpha's ranking of the 50 most highly paid hedge fund managers. The Paulson & Co. chief surpassed perennial powerhouses George Soros and James Simons, who ranked second and third, at $2.9 billion and $2.8 billion, respectively. The top 25 on the list earned an average $892 million, up from $532 million in 2006.

It seems to me that a "hedge fund manager" is expert only in accumulating money which is "earned" elsewhere.  Perhaps I'm mistaken, but unless money is produced out of thin air and represents nothing at all, these financial "wizards" are simply pulling rabbits out of other people's hats.  

I can't remember who said it--but we used to make things in this country.  Now we only pick each others pockets.  After this latest debacle in the financial markets, I'm done paying homage to the scavengers on Wall Street.  Not that I was ever particularly worshipful...   ;)

Best,

George

I emailed Congressman Obey, questioning him about the 62 billion dollar stimulus package he was trying to push through while the rest of congress was trying to help our country out of a pickle.  Here's the spin email I got back in return...


Quote:

Dear Mrs. Filtz:                           Thank you for contacting me about the President’s request for a massive $700 billion bailout of the financial markets. As you might expect, I have heard from many, many people who are unhappy, fearful, and frustrated by what has been going on, and the vast majority are staunchly opposed to the President’s proposal for what is, in effect, a blank check.  I am, too, and let me make it perfectly clear that I have no intention of giving this, or any other President, a blank check to do with as he wishes.  We've seen that before when the President demanded that Congress give him a blank check for Iraq - with disastrous consequences. We are currently paying a huge price for the fact that for over 20 years we’ve had massive deregulation of the financial sector of our economy and, at the same time, economic policies that have favored the top dogs at the expense of everybody else. If you take all of the income growth that has occurred in this country in the last eight years and see who got it, over 95 percent of all of the income growth in the country went to the wealthiest 10 percent of families.  That means 90 percent of American families – 9 out of 10 – were left to struggle to get a piece of just 4.7 percent of the total income growth that’s occurred in the last eight years.   As a result, people who, in real terms, have had their income frozen for nearly a decade have tried to keep their heads above water by borrowing.  In fact, over the last eight years, mortgage debt alone has gone up by $7 trillion, almost seven times as much as the national debt that we hear so much about. And with the umpire off the field because of the relentless drive for less regulation by the Reagan and Bush Administrations, and on occasion the Clinton Administration as well, many on Wall Street who were looking for a way to make a bigger buck than ever have made the problem worse.   I fought that pressure time and time again. For example, I was one of 57 members in the House who opposed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which was enacted during the FDR Administration.  Glass-Steagall was enacted to keep investment banking and community banking separate, because they didn't want the high-flying, risk-taking actions of investment bankers to infect the community banking system.  It stood us in good stead for generations.  During debate on the House Floor during the vote to repeal Glass-Steagall, I said that the bill was:         "consumer fraud masquerading as financial reform.  There is nothing wrong with         modernizing financial institutions.  It is nice to see that my colleagues are going         to try to set up one-stop shopping services for financial services.  But returning         1999 to 1929 is not reform in my book.” At this point, we don’t know what will be negotiated with the White House, but we do know that they have the Congress over a barrel because if we don't do something credit markets are likely to freeze up.  It doesn't just mean that Wall Street is going to be crippled; the people who will be left holding the bag are American families.  The impact on Wall Street will have trickle down consequences for every family in America, and if Main Street business can't get credit, there could be thousands of businesses that go under and we could have the worst economic mess since the Great Depression.  So something has to be done.   As Franklin Roosevelt said in his inaugural address in 1932 when he was facing a similar collapse of the financial sector of the economy, "we need action and now."  We must provide that action at the same time we make every effort to build in assurances that protect American taxpayers.  Middle income families have missed out on the production of wealth in recent years and taxpayers have been ripped off with giveaways to the wealthy and well-connected, paid for by ballooning the deficit and passing the costs onto future generations. We’re looking for a number of changes to the Administration’s proposal to protect the taxpayer’s interest.   First, we are trying to ensure that the taxpayer will get the benefit of any recovery in the value of the assets the government would buy from financial institutions.   Second, we are trying to find a mechanism by which Wall Street can pay a significant share of the tab so taxpayers don't get stuck with the whole load. Third, there needs to be an independent review board looking over the shoulder of the Fed as it makes financial decisions to blow the whistle if problems develop.   Fourth, there certainly should be limitations on compensation to the executives of the companies receiving federal aid and no golden parachutes.   Fifth, there needs to be a reinvigoration of oversight by regulatory agencies to prevent this from happening again. And that’s just scratching the surface.  There are a number of other things that need to be done, too. I also hope we’ll see a change in the bankruptcy law passed, over my objection, by the last Congress, which did not take into account that some people are unable to make their mortgage payments or credit card payments simply because they’d either lost their jobs or had a health problem.  Certainly we ought to be able to provide some sort of relief for people in that kind of situation, so that people on Main Street are getting the same sort of considerations as the big shots on Wall Street. You should also know that, as I write this letter, Congress is considering legislation that I authored to try to help people on Main Street who are suffering because of this crisis.  We're trying to make greater investments in the country's infrastructure by beefing up our sewer and water construction and highway and airport construction in order to create a good number of well paying private sector jobs.  We also want to extend unemployment insurance to help address the fact that 600,000 Americans have lost their jobs this year.  And we are also trying to provide some budget support for states so they do not wind up knocking poor children off health care rolls. Please be assured that, as we move forward to confront this challenge, the needs of taxpayers, homeowners, and working Americans and their families will be uppermost in my mind. Thank you again for taking the time to get in touch. Sincerely, David Obey Your Congressman

Quote:

WASHINGTON, Sept 27 (Reuters) - Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are pushing for a new Wall Street tax that would cover the potential costs of a $700 billion bailout being negotiated by Congress and the Bush administration. U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, speaking to reporters after a meeting with fellow Democrats, said the fee could be assessed after five years if the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office determined taxpayers had lost money in the bailout. "If after five years ... the CBO decides that the American taxpayer has lost money in this, then there would be a fee on financial institutions," Pelosi said, adding that she hoped the provision could be part of a final bailout deal. Pelosi said that the Secretary of the Treasury could determine how to assess the fee. (Reporting by Richard Cowan)

Don't the idiots know the investment companies just pass these taxes/fees along to the investors?  They want to tax us to pay back the tax money they gave away.  Or, are they thinking only the wealthy invest so it's a hidden tax on them?

from Obey's letter:


Quote:

I was one of 57 members in the House who opposed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which was enacted during the FDR Administration.  Glass-Steagall was enacted to keep investment banking and community banking separate,...

If only 57 opposed, then investment and community banking become one: Bank of America has Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs conversely become community banks.



from Pelosi's statement:


Quote:

...there would be a fee on financial institutions,"...

which are now banks apparently.  The fee would somehow be incorporated into bank service fees.




Bob P wrote on Sep 28^th, 2008 at 8:34am:

They want to tax us to pay back the tax money they gave away.

Hard to argue with, Bob.

Melissa wrote on Sep 27^th, 2008 at 5:05pm:

I'm not going to say who did it though.  Ya'll need to find out who all it was... :P

Why, Melissa, I believe that this started with the Carter administration with the enactment of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.  The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law that requires banks and savings and loan associations to offer credit throughout their entire market area and prohibits them from targeting only wealthier neighborhoods with their services, a practice known as "redlining." The purpose of the CRA is to provide credit, including home ownership opportunities to under-served populations and commercial loans to small businesses. It has been subjected to important regulatory revisions.

The Clinton Administration furthered this fiasco by revising the CRA with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995 were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans..

So, do we continue to give home loans to people who most likely will not repay them, just to have someone *feel good*?  Or, do we tighten the qualifications for home loans and get rid of this idea of giving anyone who breathes a loan because they are *poor and downtrodden*?

No matter the original intent of these crappy loans, let's not forget that a great many that were generated in recent years went to individuals and consortiums who were speculating in the market during the recent hootenanny-- and not to poor, naive, and uncreditworthy first-time buyers.  

Low interest, interest only, and no-money-down to purchase a property (or to develop a subdivision of zillion dollar homes on spec that someone--surely--would buy...right?) Why not?  No downside--things go bad, you just walk away.  

Now the market's full of half-completed McMansions that no one will ever buy, and empty ghost-town subdivisions abandoned to the weeds.  Not to mention monstrances like this one where Credit Suisse ended up holding the bag:

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Just a local example, but it nicely illustrates what happens when easy money follows a speculative business plan that depends upon a real-estate market that spirals ever-larger into the stratosphere.  Sure--it was obviously insane, but that didn't keep some big players from heaving wads of cash at it.

My point is simply this:  I doubt that it's the folks at the bottom who account for the biggest portion of these dodgy, bundled loans--it's the players at the top who gambled with other people's money, and lost.

All the best,

George

There's that constant mantra of "personal responsibility" as the answer to everything. You and I are told that it's up to us to take care of our health care since business has been shifting away from it, 401Ks rather than pensions, credit cards....even sex education. We are on our own and are not to even think about bothering the powers that be with such nonsense. This kind of thing seems to stop at the market's edge though. They can't handle it and need us to let them avoid exercising any form of responsibility.

Some time ago Warren Buffett called these institutions that we are suppposed to bail out: "Financial weapons of mass destruction." Works for me.

The rant for less regulation started with Reagan and continues today. Along with that, they promised to shrink government. Reagan expanded it, Bush the First, Clinton, and Bush the Second to a degree not thought possible. Just keep out of the way and let the market fly. OK. here we are.

Woe is us. Nobody wants to sign on to this thing. They already are hated by the electorate.

Charlie

deltadarlin wrote on Sep 28^th, 2008 at 11:16am:

Melissa wrote on Sep 27th, 2008 at 5:05pm: I'm not going to say who did it though.  Ya'll need to find out who all it was... :P Why, Melissa, I believe that this started with the Carter administration with the enactment of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.  The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law that requires banks and savings and loan associations to offer credit throughout their entire market area and prohibits them from targeting only wealthier neighborhoods with their services, a practice known as "redlining." The purpose of the CRA is to provide credit, including home ownership opportunities to under-served populations and commercial loans to small businesses. It has been subjected to important regulatory revisions. The Clinton Administration furthered this fiasco by revising the CRA with an effective starting date of January 31, 1995 were credited with substantially increasing the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans..

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!!!

Wiki link: START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE


Quote:

So, do we continue to give home loans to people who most likely will not repay them, just to have someone *feel good*?  Or, do we tighten the qualifications for home loans and get rid of this idea of giving anyone who breathes a loan because they are *poor and downtrodden*?

Well, I've been watching the current interest rates at a banking institution here and have noticed the rate has gone up .5% last week. NOT a good sign, but we'll see what happens this week. :-/

What Mel's talking about:

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Mel,

back in the 80s we went thru about this same thing and bailed out S&Ls to the tune of about 500 billion and things straightened up for a while. At that time interest rates were soaring at around 17-20% and we had overbuilt and people were filing bankruptcy at a really high rate. A lot of people went under and a lot of people got rich.

The oil business went to hell in a handbasket, but it all came back and we DEregulated everything so we had a false sense of security until now and wham! we got hit again.

We can blame everyone and no one... Depends on which spin you want to put on things, but it happens ever so many years and has since we've been here. History shows that.

I grew up hearing everything blamed on the repubs and lately all I've heard is the dems are to blame. What I've decided is BOTH are to blame or rather CONGRESS is to blame ALL OF THEM! They're all trying so damn hard to get reelected they FORGET what they're up there to do -- represent US. Until we get down to some good old fashioned GRASS ROOT politics - we're going to keep on being MISrepresented.

That's my 2 cents on the matter. I think this bailout is just a bandaide on a gapping wound and until we get to the Problem it's just going to come up again and again....

Hugs BD