# Today's Financial Woes



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

I know this thread may border on political if not outright political. Mods, if you don't like it, do delete and accept my apologies.

I believe that we have at least temporarily avoided what had the potential of being the worst financial downfall in history. For this I'm happy, but at the same time very displease with the way the world economy is going.

Banks made bad decisions, suffered huge losses and as a result our economy started going into a downward spiral that was getting extremely scary. A number of financial firms started going into bankruptcy or got brought out. Things were not looking good.

Last week Bush announced a plan for the federal government to buy out these bad debts. This was needed to stop the spiral, so to a certain extend a good thing. This saved us for the time being and for a long time to come.

Now, for my displeasures:



The firms involved are big. Although on the surface they may seem like American companies, in reality, at this level, there is no such thing as an American company. Their downfall would have effected the economy on a global level.
Stock holders are global
Employees are global
Why is the United States tax payer bailing these companies for bad decisions made by their management. Decisions that were driven by global stock holders?
Some of my thought, what's yours


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> I
> [*]Why is the United States tax payer bailing these companies for bad decisions made by their management. Decisions that were driven by global stock holders?
> [/LIST]
> Some of my thought, what's yours





Simple cynical  answer:    Because  "we" are EASY low hanging fruit --because they CAN !!

 We are  "OWNED"  Ever heard of special interests ( they AIN"T us )

Sorry for the rant -- but iam really angry about this toal fiasco and  have NO faith in these guys at all


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 24, 2008)

....if it goes according to plan and the government is able to sell off the securities as a profit meaning the American public is on the hook for far less than the 700 billion, it's a marginal success.  If it also stabilizes the credit systems such that companies can pursue growth, consumers can acquire credit and these are accomplished through 'real', not funny money, even better.

however,

If it becomes blatant cronyism where by my money is bailing out rich old white guys such that they can make more money, receive the same golden parachutes and continue in their crooked ways screwing american citizens and investors around the world, then the plan can go F itself.

for it or against it, total leap of faith either way.  There is so very little integrity and honesty left in this world, I can't believe either side with any amount of confidence.  

SUCKS 

What I do want is for every crooked son of bitch to go to jail.  From the ones that made bad loans all the way up to the top aholes who sold the debt.  Each and every one of them.  I'll happily contribute 3 grand of my tax money to house those bastards in a dark cell.  

Not in every detail, but I saw this coming.  I was unemployed during the summer of 2004.  For chits and giggles I decided to apply for a job with a mortgage broker...ameriquest to be specific. I was living in Florida and all you read about was the boat loads of money people where making in mortgages and real estate.  They basically told me that 50% of my time would be going door to door soliciting people for loans whom I KNEW did not have the income to pay back the loan.  The company said don't worry about it, build up equity would cover them.  WRONG

Hence the crap we are dealing with today


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 24, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> .  There is so very little integrity and honesty left in this world, I can't believe either side with any amount of confidence.
> 
> SUCKS
> 
> ...


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

Notional value of OTC derivatives is about 450 Trillion dollars. Anyone that thinks this bailout is putting out a fire is seriously mistaken. At best, they are kicking the can down the road to get through the election. 700 billion is just a primer, market psychology masturbation, allowing further failures to go to the backdoor to dump their illiquid (fraudulent unregulated contracts) and stay out of the headlines long enough to get thru this election. They'll be back all wide eyed and shocked and asking for more dough. If they let it burn to the ground and start over, it will be a lot less painless than when it happens the next time. Maybe we should consider the timing of this "crisis". I already voiced my opposition to my "representatives".


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

Warp Daddy said:


> What I do want is for every crooked son of bitch to go to jail.  From the ones that made bad loans all the way up to the top aholes who sold the debt.  Each and every one of them.  I'll happily contribute 3 grand of my tax money to house those bastards in a dark cell.
> 
> Agree on this point with you and yes it DID not take a genius to see this day coming



x2 

Everyone is talking about limiting the compensation of the CEOs of the banks getting help. I think a requirement should be new leadership as well. These guys either knew what was going on and kept going anyway OR were not bright enough to see what was happening. Either way there is no way they are fit to continue to lead these companies.

A bright spot is that the FBI has started to investigate a lot of the companies. And it sounds like congress isn't going to entirely roll-over to the administration and wall street.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> ....if it goes according to plan and the government is able to sell off the securities as a profit meaning the American public is on the hook for far less than the 700 billion, it's a marginal success.  If it also stabilizes the credit systems such that companies can pursue growth, consumers can acquire credit and these are accomplished through 'real', not funny money, even better.



Someone described it like a gambler with $50 on the slots. You start gambling with the fifty you lose some and you win a little and then put your winnings back into the slot machine, lose some, win a little, back into the slots . . . until you have nothing left.

We will see nothing back from the $700 billion.


----------



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> x2
> 
> Everyone is talking about limiting the compensation of the CEOs of the banks getting help. I think a requirement should be new leadership as well. These guys either knew what was going on and kept going anyway OR were not bright enough to see what was happening. Either way there is no way they are fit to continue to lead these companies.
> 
> A bright spot is that the FBI has started to investigate a lot of the companies. And it sounds like congress isn't going to entirely roll-over to the administration and wall street.



I do not believe that, overall, it was illegal activities, just bad choices. Those choices are driven by today's business model which is no longer what is good for the company, but what is good for the stock. Companies no longer worry about their long term future, they are more concerned about short term profits and answer to stock holders. That said, I believe that any CEO that now says, we may take a slight loss today to increase our profits a year or two from now, may as well just type up his resume. Loans were made during a bad situation, because business demands a constant increase in profit.

I previously worked for a retailer, as far as the stock market was concerned, the single most important factor when it came to quarterly and annual reports was same store sales. The fact that the company was healthy, that it was constantly making a profit, was secondary to same store sales. To me, that was unbelievable, how long can same store sales constantly go up?


----------



## snoseek (Sep 24, 2008)

I was under the impression if this is handled correctly then the American taxpayer could actually gain from interest from these ridiculously large loans over time. It would make sense to me to let induvidual homeowners negotiate their debt with companies, give them a chance to pay on these loans or everyone will. I hope they can take politics and greed out of this issue a figure out a sensible approach.


----------



## ERJ-145CA (Sep 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> Someone described it like a gambler with $50 on the slots. You start gambling with the fifty you lose some and you win a little and then put your winnings back into the slot machine, lose some, win a little, back into the slots . . . until you have nothing left.
> 
> We will see nothing back from the $700 billion.



That's how I play slots.  That's not how you're supposed to do it?


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

snoseek said:


> I was under the impression if this is handled correctly then the American taxpayer could actually gain from interest from these ridiculously large loans over time. It would make sense to me to let induvidual homeowners negotiate their debt with companies, give them a chance to pay on these loans or everyone will. I hope they can take politics and greed out of this issue a figure out a sensible approach.



It's not loans it's purchasing the junk securities from the banks to give them liquidity. If the securities are worth more at some point in the future we make some money back, but the odds on that are long.


----------



## ERJ-145CA (Sep 24, 2008)

When my wife and I bought our townhouse in January we decided to buy a place well under our budget so we wouldn't be house poor.  We didn't feel a need to buy a huge place that we really couldn't afford but I guess a lot of people did.  Also a smaller place means smaller gas and electricity bills.  We also made sure we got a fixed rate mortgage at a low interest rate, I didn't want to get sucked into an ARM or option ARM and be screwed in a few years.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> I do not believe that, overall, it was illegal activities, just bad choices. Those choices are driven by today's business model which is no longer what is good for the company, but what is good for the stock. Companies no longer worry about their long term future, they are more concerned about short term profits and answer to stock holders. That said, I believe that any CEO that now says, we may take a slight loss today to increase our profits a year or two from now, may as well just type up his resume. Loans were made during a bad situation, because business demands a constant increase in profit.
> 
> I previously worked for a retailer, as far as the stock market was concerned, the single most important factor when it came to quarterly and annual reports was same store sales. The fact that the company was healthy, that it was constantly making a profit, was secondary to same store sales. To me, that was unbelievable, how long can same store sales constantly go up?



IT wasn't illegal, it was UNREGULATED. That's where the political angle comes into play.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> It's not loans it's purchasing the junk securities from the banks to give them liquidity. If the securities are worth more at some point in the future we make some money back, but the odds on that are long.



If the Fed pays "Hold to Maturity" prices for collapsed OTC derivatives that will never recover, that would represent an outrageous premium to their true value. If the Fed pays what the collapsed OTC derivatives are presently worth, they could do the entire bailout for one dollar, ok, one Euro.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> I know this thread may border on political if not outright political. Mods, if you don't like it, do delete and accept my apologies.
> 
> I believe that we have at least temporarily avoided what had the potential of being the worst financial downfall in history. For this I'm happy, but at the same time very displease with the way the world economy is going.
> 
> ...



Does it really matter that much if you don't have money in the stock market???


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Does it really matter that much if you don't have money in the stock market???



Yes.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> Yes.



Will this turn out to be as bad of a financial burden to the US than the war in Iraq????


----------



## snoseek (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Does it really matter that much if you don't have money in the stock market???



You are lucky to be in a safe biz but when it's 12 bucks for a rack of shitty beer we're both screwed.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 24, 2008)

Steeze :----------- Re -read Moe's thoughts to get a feel for the potential downline effect ------------------


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Will this turn out to be as bad of a financial burden to the US than the war in Iraq????



If banks can't make loans the economy grinds to a halt. No one can get loans to buy houses and cars. Business can't make capital improvements, The folks who build houses and cars and in construction lose jobs, they stop buying stuff, which hurts business' more, more folks lose their jobs . . .

That's the story they're selling anyway.


----------



## snoseek (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Will this turn out to be as bad of a financial burden to the US than the war in Iraq????



I'm no expert but 700 billion and potentially more is a lot of $$$$. Hard to even grasp. 

I'd like to attend these board meetings now that I'm a part owner of these companies:grin:


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

A guy at the bar who works for the local ford dealership said in the past two years they went from selling 180 cars per month to 50 cars per month..that's not a good thing and he is looking for another job..and he's 57 years old which means it's going to be tough for him to get hired..it makes me realize how fortunate I am..


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> A guy at the bar who works for the local ford dealership said in the past two years they went from selling 180 cars per month to 50 cars per month..that's not a good thing and he is looking for another job..and he's 57 years old which means it's going to be tough for him to get hired..it makes me realize how fortunate I am..



This situation is being played out across the country and frankly imho will get worse especially as it relates to discretionery income. My county( historically has employment problems )  has been hard hit, major businesses like  a  50 yrs old + GM plant and several Cheese plants have gone belly up in the  last 3 months while secondary and tertiary levels of suppliers in the area  of those industries are  downsizing , retail is SLOOOOW --folks are hurting 

Change is needed and soon 
'm very concerned that The new reality may be quite stark for some


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

snoseek said:


> I'm no expert but 700 billion and potentially more is a lot of $$$$. Hard to even grasp.
> 
> I'd like to attend these board meetings now that I'm a part owner of these companies:grin:



The war will look like a bargain potentially compared to this fiasco. The total cost of the Iraq war is prolly nearing a trillion when you add up the incidentals. Then you add in disability and medical care for the soldiers, it pays out for another 30-40 years.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

*!!!*



Moe Ghoul said:


> The war will look like a bargain potentially compared to this fiasco. The total cost of the Iraq war is prolly nearing a trillion when you add up the incidentals. Then you add in disability and medical care for the soldiers, it pays out for another 30-40 years.



Can't we just rule the whole world already???????????:lol::grin::-D:flag::flag::flag: I sort of feel like all the greed from the past generation is going to bite us all in the ass..but seriously..as it relates to skiing..I imagine some more ski areas are going to hit the lost ski areas lists in the coming years due to the economy..which is a sad thing..I know the Xanadu complex might have a tough time among this economy..yes it's in one of the Wealthiest counties..Bergan..in the US but alot of those wealthy people are not wondering whether their Christmas bonus is 6 figures..or 7 figures but whether there will be a job for them in 2009.....It's doomsday..we should all go out and get drunk!!!


----------



## chase (Sep 24, 2008)

Well I don't know $hit about finances and macroeconomics but people have been saying that the sky is falling forever and were still here...


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Can't we just rule the whole world already???????????:lol::grin::-D:flag::flag::flag: I sort of feel like all the greed from the past generation is going to bite us all in the ass..but seriously..as it relates to skiing..I imagine some more ski areas are going to hit the lost ski areas lists in the coming years due to the economy..which is a sad thing..I know the Xanadu complex might have a tough time among this economy..yes it's in one of the Wealthiest counties..Bergan..in the US but alot of those wealthy people are not wondering whether their Christmas bonus is 6 figures..or 7 figures but whether there will be a job for them in 2009.....It's doomsday..we should all go out and get drunk!!!



HELL YEAHHHH!!  I'll hook my dogs up to a sled and mush up to Blue Mtn if I can't pay the gas, lol. Here's an interesting tidbit that you won't hear on Faux Noise Channel or corporate media.

*Army Unit to Deploy in October for Domestic Operations*
Beginning in October, the Army plans to station an active unit inside the United States for the first time to serve as an on-call federal response in times of emergency. The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent thirty-five of the last sixty months in Iraq, but now the unit is training for domestic operations. The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control. The soldiers are learning to use so-called nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

chase said:


> Well I don't know $hit about finances and macroeconomics but people have been saying that the sky is falling forever and were still here...



Macroeconomics..you must be a freshman???  I got a B+ in that..and I was pissed off..lol..


----------



## chase (Sep 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Macroeconomics..you must be a freshman???  I got a B+ in that..and I was pissed off..lol..



yep...I have micro now...maybe macro next semester. And first year econ courses at penn state are a joke.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> *Army Unit to Deploy in October for Domestic Operations*
> Beginning in October, the Army plans to station an active unit inside the United States for the first time to serve as an on-call federal response in times of emergency. The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent thirty-five of the last sixty months in Iraq, but now the unit is training for domestic operations. The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control. The soldiers are learning to use so-called nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.



Wow, what the hell is all that about? Nothing like setting a bunch of jittery war vets on a bunch of protesters. I thought that kind of use of the Army was against the law. Not a good sign.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 24, 2008)

H'mmm mber the Manchurian Candidate Flick ??


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> Wow, what the hell is all that about? Nothing like setting a bunch of jittery war vets on a bunch of protesters. I thought that kind of use of the Army was against the law. Not a good sign.



Posse Comitatus. They're throwing away the rulebook. Look into FEMA powers. Like suspending constitutional rights and a littany of other goodies. But that gets political again.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 24, 2008)

ERJ-145CA said:


> When my wife and I bought our townhouse in January we decided to buy a place well under our budget so we wouldn't be house poor.  We didn't feel a need to buy a huge place that we really couldn't afford but I guess a lot of people did.  Also a smaller place means smaller gas and electricity bills.  We also made sure we got a fixed rate mortgage at a low interest rate, I didn't want to get sucked into an ARM or option ARM and be screwed in a few years.



we did the same thing....bought well under our means.  Fiscal responsibility resulted in a .5% higher interest rate.   

what we chose and you chose should be encouraged, not penalized.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> Posse Comitatus. They're throwing away the rulebook. Look into FEMA powers. Like suspending constitutional rights and a littany of other goodies. But that gets political again.



If it's true they either think this economic situation is going to really get bad or some hijinx are planned for the election. Do you have a link to the article? I couldn't find it on the Army Times.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

chase said:


> yep...I have micro now...maybe macro next semester. And first year econ courses at penn state are a joke.



My Macroeconomics class was like 300 students..and my Microeconomics class was almost as large....then I had Economics of business in a class with like 150..followed by some mad steezy finance courses..and I still don't know who or what to believe with all the various news...all we can do is stay out of the stock market and squirrel our money away...


----------



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

I happy to see this thread is getting a lot of response and I'm looking at the number of views. Noticed a funny thing, it keeps on getting responses, yet the view count doesn't go past 175.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> I happy to see this thread is getting a lot of response and I'm looking at the number of views. Noticed a funny thing, it keeps on getting responses, yet the view count doesn't go past 175.




I always notice that...I would PM Greg..he's pretty good with computers..


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

Here's another tidbit that was slipped into the budget bill a few years ago while everyone was snoozing.

This is the text from the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate), H.R. 5122.


SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES. 


(a) Use of the Armed Forces Authorized-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 333 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`Sec. 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

`(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies- (1) *The President *may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--

`(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--

`(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

`(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

`(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

`(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--

`(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

`(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

`(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

`(b) Notice to Congress- The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.'.

(2) PROCLAMATION TO DISPERSE- Section 334 of such title is amended by inserting `or those obstructing the enforcement of the laws' after `insurgents'.

(3) HEADING AMENDMENT- The heading of chapter 15 of such title is amended to read as follows:

`CHAPTER 15--ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS TO RESTORE PUBLIC ORDER'.

(4) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS- (A) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle A of title 10, United States Code, and at the beginning of part I of such subtitle, are each amended by striking the item relating to chapter 15 and inserting the following new item:
331'. 


(B) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 15 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to sections 333 and inserting the following new item:

`333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law.'.


----------



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

I wonder if the number of responses will surpass the number of views.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> If it's true they either think this economic situation is going to really get bad or some hijinx are planned for the election. Do you have a link to the article? I couldn't find it on the Army Times.



http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/



Thanks! Reading the whole thing it doesn't sound too nefarious. If they'd let the National Guard troops come back, we wouldn't need an active duty until for this.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> I wonder if the number of responses will surpass the number of views.



I honestly don't know how I feel about this thread.  I love it in that it's a great sounding board for things in the world that bother me.  I love it because there are number of people in here who's opinions I respect and who's commentary I can learn from.

I hate it because Azone is kind of an oasis for me.  A place to hang and talk about one of the things that brings me the greatest joy in life.....skiing.

This has been an interesting thread to read, BUT ......I hope it's not a trend.  WE get bombarded in every direction regarding the shaky grounds we live in now.....at the pump, in the heating bill, in the grocery line, all over the news.  It comes from so many angles that it can drive me nuts, you're essentially forced to think about the nation's problems every waking moment.

Not sure how much I wish to keep that dialogue going here.  I say that, yet I'm often the first to respond to political / economy type threads.  I guess what I'm saying is that I have deep concern and feelings about what's going on in the world, I am quick to share my thoughts.....but I can't wait for the day when such things become trivial again in my life.

....snow needs to fly.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 24, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> ....snow needs to fly.



Amen! (ah crap, now I'm bringing religion into it ;-))


----------



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> ....snow needs to fly.



Amen..... But til then, the freakin kids are still collecting money on the street corners and the damn store checkers are still a pita!


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 24, 2008)

Agree we NEED to Lighten up ----- Quick  a Bad Joke , an off color remark -- anything    hurry !!!


----------



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

Why did the republican cross the road?


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 24, 2008)

I dunno, but I hope there's a lot of hi speed traffic


----------



## andyzee (Sep 24, 2008)

Moe Ghoul said:


> I dunno, but I hope there's a lot of hi speed traffic




:lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## ccskier (Sep 24, 2008)

andyzee said:


> Why did the republican cross the road?



To get to my neighbors house.:flag:


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 25, 2008)

"At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow?

Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.


At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we will live through all time, or die by suicide."

Abraham Lincoln January 27, 1838


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 25, 2008)

It's gonna get crowded if they all head for the exits at once.

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSPEK16693720080925


----------



## 2knees (Sep 25, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> ....if it goes according to plan




ok i read no further.

and i'm editing my political rant.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 26, 2008)

The Fed likes to seize banks on Friday after closing hours, but they made an exception this time to try and add urgency to the extortion plan held up in DC. WaMu bites the dust. The FDIC is already in line with hat in hand for more money for future failures. Maybe our reps are listening to the overwhelming opposition to the bail out. Let the chips fall, Mr. Market will sort them out. If they want to help the economy, shore up the FDIC, SIPC, raise the insurance limits, fund the SBA, there's plenty of ways to help. This bailout is BULLSHIT.


----------



## ed-drum (Sep 26, 2008)

I HOPE all of you are scared. Yes, troops are going to be deployed on our streets on Oct. 1st. in anticipation of civil unrest. What civil unrest? Yes it is completely illegal. It is a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus act of 1878. This financial crises is no accident. The crash of 1929 was no accident either. Joe Kennedy (JFK'S father) knew it was coming and pulled all of his money out of the market and didn't lose a dime. The "Federal Reserve" is NOT part of the U.S. government. Deceptive name, isn't it? It is a PRIVATE bank.This is NOT "politics", it is current events.  They are setting up  portable prisons in the states as we speak . If the American people don't wake up soon, they will be in Camp Fema. Don't believe me? Google "Camp Fema." Of course the "Army Times" doesn't sound too nefarious. The "Stars and Stripes " military paper completely lied about the attack I was involved in. I guess I'm a "conspiracy theorist".


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 26, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> I HOPE all of you are scared. Yes, troops are going to be deployed on our streets on Oct. 1st. in anticipation of civil unrest. What civil unrest? Yes it is completely illegal. It is a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus act of 1878. This financial crises is no accident. The crash of 1929 was no accident either. Joe Kennedy (JFK'S father) knew it was coming and pulled all of his money out of the market and didn't lose a dime. The "Federal Reserve" is NOT part of the U.S. government. Deceptive name, isn't it? It is a PRIVATE bank.This is NOT "politics", it is current events.  They are setting up  portable prisons in the states as we speak . If the American people don't wake up soon, they will be in Camp Fema. Don't believe me? Google "Camp Fema." Of course the "Army Times" doesn't sound too nefarious. The "Stars and Stripes " military paper completely lied about the attack I was involved in. I guess I'm a "conspiracy theorist".



I hope they at least wait until October 3rd.....I get paid on that day :lol:


----------



## ed-drum (Sep 26, 2008)

"It's not worthwhile to strain one's self to tell the truth to people who habitually discount everything you tell them, whether it's true or not." Mark Twain.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 26, 2008)

Quoted from some blog that's not at all political ;-):



> And that's where we get that math problem. 1% of all mortgages -- the amount now in default -- comes out to $111 billion. Triple that, and you've got $333 billion. Let's round that up to $350 billion. So even if we reach the point where three percent of all mortgages are in foreclosure, the total dollars to flat out buy all those mortgages would be half of what the Bush-Paulson-McCain plan calls for.
> 
> Then we need to factor in that a purchased mortgage isn't worth zero. After all, these documents come with property attached. Even with home prices falling and some of the homes lying around unsold, it's safe to assume that some portion of these values could be recovered. In the S&L crisis, about 70% of asset value was recovered, but let's say we don't do that well. Let's say we hit 50%. Then the real outlay for taxpayers would be around $175 billion.
> 
> Which, frankly, is a number that Wall Street should be able to handle without our help. After all, the top firms on Wall Steet payed out $120 billion in bonuses alone between 2000 and 2006. If they've got that kind of mad money, why do they need us to step in now? And why do they need twice as much as all the mortgages that are even likely to implode?


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 26, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> I HOPE all of you are scared. Yes, troops are going to be deployed on our streets on Oct. 1st. in anticipation of civil unrest. What civil unrest? Yes it is completely illegal. It is a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus act of 1878. This financial crises is no accident. The crash of 1929 was no accident either. Joe Kennedy (JFK'S father) knew it was coming and pulled all of his money out of the market and didn't lose a dime. The "Federal Reserve" is NOT part of the U.S. government. Deceptive name, isn't it? It is a PRIVATE bank.This is NOT "politics", it is current events.  They are setting up  portable prisons in the states as we speak . If the American people don't wake up soon, they will be in Camp Fema. Don't believe me? Google "Camp Fema." Of course the "Army Times" doesn't sound too nefarious. The "Stars and Stripes " military paper completely lied about the attack I was involved in. I guess I'm a "conspiracy theorist".



Hysteria and fear never solved anything. Read the above postings, Posse Comitatus is dead. Ron Paul is right about monetary policy, within a coupla years a new consolidated currency will be backed by gold certificates, probably some kind of ratio that the CB's will agree to in a global agreement. The current system is terminal.


----------



## bigbog (Sep 26, 2008)

*...another displeasure...*

Back from my AM paddle...gets the blood circulating!;-)..Was listening last night...talk show had the usual Republican vs Democrat thing..going..what really irked me was this Republican representative...that was ranting and raving about how fiduciary controls will destroy the free market economy....made me wanna purge..;-).   Would really like to see not just a few individuals canned..but thrown in prison or stood up to a firing squad.   Jeez, been a long time since the good old cold war firing squad utilized..;-)
_Have a great weekend everyone_....

..just my $.01...


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 26, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> Quoted from some blog that's not at all political ;-):



It's not the underlying mortgages that are a problem. its the UNREGULATED OTC derivatives which repackaged mortgages into unmarketable specific performance contracts that are imploding and leveraged up the balance sheets to historic highs. The down turn in the mortgage market was the match that lit the fuse.


----------



## ed-drum (Sep 26, 2008)

Posse Comitatus is NOT dead. The President re-wrote it in 2006 but it was re-instated in it's entirety in 2008. The politicians are the ones creating the fear. Ron Paul is absolutely correct. Maybe people should review the evidence before dismissing it. I have told people things in the past and they didn't believe me, but checked the facts and came back and apologized for yelling at me.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 26, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Posse Comitatus is NOT dead. The President re-wrote it in 2006 but it was re-instated in it's entirety in 2008. The politicians are the ones creating the fear. Ron Paul is absolutely correct. Maybe people should review the evidence before dismissing it. I have told people things in the past and they didn't believe me, but checked the facts and came back and apologized for yelling at me.



Let's hope it is never put to the test, arguing the merits in front of the Supremes will be too late. FEMA powers are frighteningly sweeping. Having a constitutional showdown amidst a future crisis is pretty bad timing.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Sep 26, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> Posse Comitatus is NOT dead. The President re-wrote it in 2006 but it was re-instated in it's entirety in 2008. The politicians are the ones creating the fear. Ron Paul is absolutely correct. Maybe people should review the evidence before dismissing it. I have told people things in the past and they didn't believe me, but checked the facts and came back and apologized for yelling at me.



In late 2006, Congress revised the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act to make it far easier for a president to declare martial law. Those changes were repealed at the end of this January as part of Public Law 110-181 (HR 4986), the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (signed into law by President Bush on January 28, 2008).

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt), who championed the opposition to the original law, was also the hero of the repeal.  It helped that all the nation’s governors opposed the 2006 law.

Wow, I missed that, thanks for the heads up.


----------



## ed-drum (Sep 26, 2008)

Thank you, Moe. I was at the anti Viet Nam protests in Washington and I saw the cops come and beat the crap out of people who were PEACEFULLY exercising their constitutional rights. I got out of there when the tear gas drifted in our direction. I wasn't in the crowd, just watching from across the street. This has been going on for a long time. The television just doesn't tell the truth sometimes. Viet Nam wasn't fought because of the "Communist" threat, it was over the control of the Heroin. I had a lot of friends that were there who came back addicted. I never understood how Hitler got control of the people until I lived in Germany, and hung with the locals. They manipulated the economy, had it crash and blamed it in the Jews. I repeat, this is NOT politics it is about current events. Belleayre is about politics.


----------

