[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Israel - kurtster - May 11, 2024 - 2:23pm
 
What can you hear right now? - Red_Dragon - May 11, 2024 - 1:08pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - Red_Dragon - May 11, 2024 - 11:19am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - May 11, 2024 - 10:42am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - miamizsun - May 11, 2024 - 10:37am
 
Trump - haresfur - May 11, 2024 - 9:36am
 
Wordle - daily game - Coaxial - May 11, 2024 - 9:01am
 
Song of the Day - oldviolin - May 11, 2024 - 8:47am
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - oldviolin - May 11, 2024 - 8:43am
 
NY Times Strands - maryte - May 11, 2024 - 8:34am
 
NYTimes Connections - rgio - May 11, 2024 - 8:09am
 
Today in History - black321 - May 11, 2024 - 7:42am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 11, 2024 - 7:29am
 
What Did You See Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 11, 2024 - 7:24am
 
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 11, 2024 - 7:22am
 
2024 Elections! - black321 - May 11, 2024 - 6:35am
 
The All-Things Beatles Forum - Bill_J - May 11, 2024 - 6:17am
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - May 10, 2024 - 10:51pm
 
Joe Biden - R_P - May 10, 2024 - 9:46pm
 
Beer - ScottFromWyoming - May 10, 2024 - 8:58pm
 
It's the economy stupid. - thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 3:21pm
 
What the hell OV? - thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 3:15pm
 
Oh dear god, BEES! - R_P - May 10, 2024 - 3:11pm
 
Tornado! - miamizsun - May 10, 2024 - 2:49pm
 
The 1960s - kcar - May 10, 2024 - 2:49pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - May 10, 2024 - 10:08am
 
Name My Band - GeneP59 - May 10, 2024 - 9:35am
 
Things You Thought Today - GeneP59 - May 10, 2024 - 9:28am
 
Marko Haavisto & Poutahaukat - thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 7:57am
 
Artificial Intelligence - miamizsun - May 10, 2024 - 6:51am
 
Living in America - Proclivities - May 10, 2024 - 6:45am
 
Virginia News - Red_Dragon - May 10, 2024 - 5:42am
 
China - miamizsun - May 10, 2024 - 5:30am
 
Outstanding Covers - Steely_D - May 10, 2024 - 12:56am
 
Democratic Party - R_P - May 9, 2024 - 3:06pm
 
RP on HomePod mini - RPnate1 - May 9, 2024 - 10:52am
 
Interesting Words - Proclivities - May 9, 2024 - 10:22am
 
Surfing! - oldviolin - May 9, 2024 - 9:21am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - islander - May 9, 2024 - 7:21am
 
Breaking News - maryte - May 9, 2024 - 7:17am
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - May 9, 2024 - 6:16am
 
The Obituary Page - Coaxial - May 8, 2024 - 6:46pm
 
Spambags on RP - Steely_D - May 8, 2024 - 2:30pm
 
Suggestion for new RP Channel: Modern / Family - Ruuddie - May 8, 2024 - 11:46am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - rgio - May 8, 2024 - 8:35am
 
Gaming, Shopping, and More? Samsung's Metaverse Plans for... - alexhoxdson - May 8, 2024 - 7:00am
 
SLOVENIA - novitibo - May 8, 2024 - 1:38am
 
Reviews and Pix from your concerts and shows you couldn't... - haresfur - May 7, 2024 - 10:46pm
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - Manbird - May 7, 2024 - 10:18pm
 
Farts! - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 7, 2024 - 9:53pm
 
The RP YouTube (Google) Group - oldviolin - May 7, 2024 - 8:46pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - May 7, 2024 - 8:35pm
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - Manbird - May 7, 2024 - 7:55pm
 
Russia - R_P - May 7, 2024 - 1:59am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 6, 2024 - 8:51pm
 
Politically Uncorrect News - oldviolin - May 6, 2024 - 2:15pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - kurtster - May 6, 2024 - 1:04pm
 
Rock Mix not up to same audio quality as Main and Mellow? - rp567 - May 6, 2024 - 12:06pm
 
Music Requests - black321 - May 6, 2024 - 11:57am
 
NASA & other news from space - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 6, 2024 - 11:37am
 
Global Warming - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 6, 2024 - 9:29am
 
Tales from the RAFT - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 6, 2024 - 9:19am
 
Food - DaveInSaoMiguel - May 6, 2024 - 4:17am
 
The Abortion Wars - thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 3:27pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - May 5, 2024 - 3:12pm
 
Ukraine - thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 12:33pm
 
volcano! - geoff_morphini - May 5, 2024 - 9:55am
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - miamizsun - May 5, 2024 - 6:16am
 
Favorite Quotes - Isabeau - May 4, 2024 - 5:21pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - May 4, 2024 - 3:24pm
 
Iran - Red_Dragon - May 4, 2024 - 12:03pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - May 4, 2024 - 11:18am
 
SCOTUS - Steely_D - May 4, 2024 - 8:04am
 
The Dragons' Roost - GeneP59 - May 3, 2024 - 3:53pm
 
RightWingNutZ - islander - May 3, 2024 - 11:55am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Meltdown Monday? Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 41, 42, 43, 44, 45  Next
Post to this Topic
kimyo

kimyo Avatar

Location: new rochelle, ny


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 11:03am

 p4jkafla wrote:
Thats where you and I differ.

Manias are emotional responses of investors, not rational ones, and we've seen it time and time again. Wall Street has ALWAYS hidden bad stuff in the shell game.

I would argue that if you're heading towards retirement, you'll need to have an investment strategy that gives your income stream the ability to respond to inflation over the course of your retirement, and the only investment that makes that happen is equities. Parking your assets in bonds virtually LOCKS your income stream into todays purchasing power, with NO chance of keeping pace with inflation. 

this isn't about panic, or calm, or manias, or buying high and low.

this is not business as usual.  it is certainly not a 'buying opportunity'.

this is about recognizing that the plane is on fire, and that the 'pilots' are beyond clueless.

banks runs are starting today at wamu in portland, oregon.  (anyone out there able to provide details?)

the fdic cannot cover losses beyond wamu without a massive cash infusion.  so, if your bank is next, you won't get cash, you'll get an iou. 

the royal bank of scotland (one of europe's 10 largest banks) has issued a 'global stock and credit crash alert'.

we're sitting in 29b, looking out the window, we can see for ourselves that the engines are on fire.

the voices of the 'pilots' come over the pa system:
"Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson delivered an upbeat assessment of the economy, saying growth was healthy and the housing market was nearing a turnaround. 'All the signs I look at' show 'the housing market is at or near the bottom,' Paulson said in a speech to a business group in New York. The U.S. economy is 'very healthy' and 'robust,' Paulson said. (CBS Marketwatch 4/20/07) 

“At this juncture, the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime market seems likely to be contained.”  (Ben Bernanke during Congressional Testimony 3/2007)

"We will follow developments in the subprime market closely.  However, fundamental factors—including solid growth in incomes and relatively low mortgage rates—should ultimately support the demand for housing, and at this point, the troubles in the subprime sector seem unlikely to seriously spill over to the broader economy or the financial system."  (Ben Bernanke 6/5/07)

“We’ve got strong financial institutions…Our markets are the envy of the world. They’re resilient, they’re…innovative, they’re flexible. I think we move very quickly to address situations in this country, and, as I said, our financial institutions are strong.”
  (Henry Paulson 3/16/08)     

please scan this: 1927 - 1933 chart of pompous prognosticators  (too large to post here), the similarities are eerie.


earthbased

earthbased Avatar

Location: By a Big Lake
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 10:59am

 shampa1n wrote:
With Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsing, and Merrill Lynch & Co. surrendering, and all hell breaking loose in the financial markets, Bloomberg News sent reporters out to gather some impressions from ordinary non- financial Americans.

Many had no idea what any of it meant but few were happy about it. They sensed they'd just been handed the role of the little fat kid in the game of crack the whip, who, at the start of the game, feels nothing at all but then suddenly finds himself launched headfirst into the neighbor's bushes.

They hadn't suffered yet but were preparing to, and they were perplexed by their inability to figure out who had the idea for this game.

``If I knew more I could find someone to blame,'' said Linda Burke, a 57-year-old service consultant at AT&T in Atlanta, speaking, no doubt, for the American people.

She'll probably never get her hands on the real villains of this piece. They're obscure; their crimes are hard to understand. Who inside Wall Street dreamed up the first subprime-mortgage- backed mezzanine CDO and allowed BBB credit to be laundered through the credit-rating companies and come out the other end as AAA? Who inside the credit-rating companies made the decision to rubber stamp the paper? Who inside Lehman Brothers—and at all the other Wall Street firms—fought to get into the business over the objections of saner traders?

This is a pleasant side-effect of Wall Street's complexity. Not only does it enable the firms to hide the risks they run; it allows the people who make fortunes, while at the same time helping destroy vast amounts of capital, to remain essentially unknown to the wider public.

Even if they were to be somehow dragged out into the square for a shaming, no one would understand what they did. It's impossible to publicly humiliate a derivative.

There are, however, two culprits whose crimes are easy to grasp. I offer them up to Ms. Burke, so she can get to work on her feelings about them.

1) Christopher Cox. He's the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and so has the job of regulating these companies that helped make it possible for every poor American to get a mortgage and are now, as a result, falling apart.

That, in itself, is no reason to blame him. He inherited a broken operation: the SEC has been morally bankrupt for some time now. The people who work for the place—especially the ones who call the shots—have for years had a disconcerting habit of leaving their low-paying government jobs regulating Wall Street firms for high-paying ones at those same Wall Street firms.

They are meant to guard against systemic corruption when they are themselves systematically corrupt. It's hard for people who are paid $85,000 a year to police people who are paid $15 million.

Happily, you can still blame Cox for something. He went as far out of his way as he could to enable the brokerage firms by harassing the small group of informed financial people who have been trying to tell the truth to the markets: the short sellers. They bet against the stock price of a company and so have always had a bad reputation with the public. But in this case, they are the closest thing we have to heroes.

A man named David Einhorn is a case study. He runs a hedge fund called Greenlight Capital, which sells short some stocks and buys others. That is, he doesn't just bet against companies but for them, too.

Still, for some time now, he's been standing up in front of large audiences, announcing that he was short Lehman Brothers stock, and then explaining in great detail its dubious accounting practices. The SEC responded by demanding to see his firm's e- mail, hinting darkly that he was part of some conspiracy to drive Lehman Brothers out of business, and generally making him feel that he'd pay a price for telling the truth.

Christopher Cox is probably a nice man who has no real idea what just happened. But for the way he treated people with the nerve to speak the truth to power you should feel free to blame him anyway.

2) The Wall Street CEO. Stan O'Neal was the chief executive officer of Merrill Lynch, Dick Fuld was the CEO of Lehman Brothers, James Cayne was the CEO of Bear Stearns Cos. Each took home tens of millions of dollars in pay for making the decisions that destroyed his firm.

Of the lot, O'Neal deserves perhaps the greatest scorn as he took a business that wasn't well designed to take huge trading risks and wagered it all on a single bet.

He screwed up the lives of more innocent people than the others. But interestingly, if any of these men had behaved well and resisted the pressures and temptations of the moment, his firm would have, for several years, dramatically underperformed the competition. Probably he would have lost his job.

Even O'Neal can probably look back on his performance and say to himself, "There's nothing I'd do different, given what I knew at the time.''

That's what they all say—right before they're beheaded.



 
Einhorn was hardly using a megaphone.  He originally gave his view on Lehmans at a children's cancer foundation meeting that he manages the funds for.  He then gave a talk to a private investment group.   There is nothing wrong with short-selling a stock as that keeps creative accounting at bay (too bad we can't short the US government directly).  Naked shorting (selling stocks that you don't actually posses) is a problem, but one created by brokerage houses to increase their fee income.  Einhorn did no naked shorting.  I haven't heard Mr. Mack blame Einhorn yet but I am sure he will instead of looking in the mirror.


rickhoran

rickhoran Avatar

Location: Harmony, NJ
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 10:58am

 hippiechick wrote:

What about all of us baby boomers who don't have a dime, and believe me, there are millions of us. Job losses, bad economy in the 80s, inflation...this stuff has killed us. No savings, no IRA or 401k, we are gonna be a big bunch of poor people.
 
actually isn't the period you are talking about considered the longest period of growth for the the USA and many parts of the world (84-1999)?
so if you couldn't make it then, then maybe its the decisions that were made individually for not having a dime? I realize bad luck occurs,  i  have been with 3 startups (individual decisions on my part) and lost on 2, but I am reading you are talking about a bad economy that happened at least 24 years ago for not having a dime now? that seems like a stretch.

hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 10:51am

 p4jkafla wrote:


Thats where you and I differ.

Manias are emotional responses of investors, not rational ones, and we've seen it time and time again. Wall Street has ALWAYS hidden bad stuff in the shell game.

I would argue that if you're heading towards retirement, you'll need to have an investment strategy that gives your income stream the ability to respond to inflation over the course of your retirement, and the only investment that makes that happen is equities. Parking your assets in bonds virtually LOCKS your income stream into todays purchasing power, with NO chance of keeping pace with inflation.
 
What about all of us baby boomers who don't have a dime, and believe me, there are millions of us. Job losses, bad economy in the 80s, inflation...this stuff has killed us. No savings, no IRA or 401k, we are gonna be a big bunch of poor people.

p4jkafla

p4jkafla Avatar

Location: New England, USA
Gender: Female


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 10:36am

 earthbased wrote:

We have never been in this situation before.  All you can say is expect nothing based on how other manias happened.  Wall Street is still hiding bad stuff in the balance sheet via the shell game crap.  So if you are at least 30 years from retirement, stay aggressive in your retirement account (index stock funds).  But if your are nearing retirement, you should be very conservative (i.e. most in cash now and index fund of corporate bonds of industrial and consumer products sector) .  I was pretty positive on investing in the near term until the government and their cohorts on Wall Street laid this sh&t at our door.
 

Thats where you and I differ.

Manias are emotional responses of investors, not rational ones, and we've seen it time and time again. Wall Street has ALWAYS hidden bad stuff in the shell game.

I would argue that if you're heading towards retirement, you'll need to have an investment strategy that gives your income stream the ability to respond to inflation over the course of your retirement, and the only investment that makes that happen is equities. Parking your assets in bonds virtually LOCKS your income stream into todays purchasing power, with NO chance of keeping pace with inflation.

Painted_Turtle

Painted_Turtle Avatar

Location: Land of Laughing Waters
Gender: Female


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 10:34am

 Alt-Ctrl-Tom wrote:
Phil Graham

 
Maybe McCain will put him in charge of dismantling Social Security.....privatize the whole thing in Wall Street Stocks

..now there's a thought that should scare Seniors & Seniors To-Be


Alt-Ctrl-Tom

Alt-Ctrl-Tom Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 10:20am

Phil Graham
shampa1n

shampa1n Avatar

Location: Solent
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 9:24am

With Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsing, and Merrill Lynch & Co. surrendering, and all hell breaking loose in the financial markets, Bloomberg News sent reporters out to gather some impressions from ordinary non- financial Americans.

Many had no idea what any of it meant but few were happy about it. They sensed they'd just been handed the role of the little fat kid in the game of crack the whip, who, at the start of the game, feels nothing at all but then suddenly finds himself launched headfirst into the neighbor's bushes.

They hadn't suffered yet but were preparing to, and they were perplexed by their inability to figure out who had the idea for this game.

``If I knew more I could find someone to blame,'' said Linda Burke, a 57-year-old service consultant at AT&T in Atlanta, speaking, no doubt, for the American people.

She'll probably never get her hands on the real villains of this piece. They're obscure; their crimes are hard to understand. Who inside Wall Street dreamed up the first subprime-mortgage- backed mezzanine CDO and allowed BBB credit to be laundered through the credit-rating companies and come out the other end as AAA? Who inside the credit-rating companies made the decision to rubber stamp the paper? Who inside Lehman Brothers—and at all the other Wall Street firms—fought to get into the business over the objections of saner traders?

This is a pleasant side-effect of Wall Street's complexity. Not only does it enable the firms to hide the risks they run; it allows the people who make fortunes, while at the same time helping destroy vast amounts of capital, to remain essentially unknown to the wider public.

Even if they were to be somehow dragged out into the square for a shaming, no one would understand what they did. It's impossible to publicly humiliate a derivative.

There are, however, two culprits whose crimes are easy to grasp. I offer them up to Ms. Burke, so she can get to work on her feelings about them.

1) Christopher Cox. He's the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and so has the job of regulating these companies that helped make it possible for every poor American to get a mortgage and are now, as a result, falling apart.

That, in itself, is no reason to blame him. He inherited a broken operation: the SEC has been morally bankrupt for some time now. The people who work for the place—especially the ones who call the shots—have for years had a disconcerting habit of leaving their low-paying government jobs regulating Wall Street firms for high-paying ones at those same Wall Street firms.

They are meant to guard against systemic corruption when they are themselves systematically corrupt. It's hard for people who are paid $85,000 a year to police people who are paid $15 million.

Happily, you can still blame Cox for something. He went as far out of his way as he could to enable the brokerage firms by harassing the small group of informed financial people who have been trying to tell the truth to the markets: the short sellers. They bet against the stock price of a company and so have always had a bad reputation with the public. But in this case, they are the closest thing we have to heroes.

A man named David Einhorn is a case study. He runs a hedge fund called Greenlight Capital, which sells short some stocks and buys others. That is, he doesn't just bet against companies but for them, too.

Still, for some time now, he's been standing up in front of large audiences, announcing that he was short Lehman Brothers stock, and then explaining in great detail its dubious accounting practices. The SEC responded by demanding to see his firm's e- mail, hinting darkly that he was part of some conspiracy to drive Lehman Brothers out of business, and generally making him feel that he'd pay a price for telling the truth.

Christopher Cox is probably a nice man who has no real idea what just happened. But for the way he treated people with the nerve to speak the truth to power you should feel free to blame him anyway.

2) The Wall Street CEO. Stan O'Neal was the chief executive officer of Merrill Lynch, Dick Fuld was the CEO of Lehman Brothers, James Cayne was the CEO of Bear Stearns Cos. Each took home tens of millions of dollars in pay for making the decisions that destroyed his firm.

Of the lot, O'Neal deserves perhaps the greatest scorn as he took a business that wasn't well designed to take huge trading risks and wagered it all on a single bet.

He screwed up the lives of more innocent people than the others. But interestingly, if any of these men had behaved well and resisted the pressures and temptations of the moment, his firm would have, for several years, dramatically underperformed the competition. Probably he would have lost his job.

Even O'Neal can probably look back on his performance and say to himself, "There's nothing I'd do different, given what I knew at the time.''

That's what they all say—right before they're beheaded.




nuggler

nuggler Avatar

Location: RU Sirius ?
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 9:23am


http://market-ticker.denninger.net/

The Beginning of the End

You'd think that with the ample proof that lying just leads to people shunning your debt and equity issues that global financial institutions would choose to come clean and tell the truth.

You'd be wrong.  Grievously wrong.

Now there is a proposal out there that threatens to make a mockery of the foolishness already in the market and multiply it a few times over:

"The action by the four banking agencies provides more favorable accounting treatment of so-called good will, an intangible asset that reflects the difference between the market value and selling price of a bank. The move is similar to a step taken in the midst of the savings-and-loan crisis that helped many institutions in the short run.

Over the longer term, that decision increased the overall costs of the bailout after the government took away the good will benefits. Under the proposal issued this week, the regulators would permit buyers of banks and thrifts to count some of the good will toward meeting their regulatory capital requirements."

Let me decode this for you.

If I buy a bank for $30 billion but the "net" value is only $20 billion, then there is $10 billion of "Good will" on the balance sheet.  That's the difference between what I paid and what "fair value" is for that particular transaction.

What this proposal - which will be adopted after only 30 days of comment - will do, is encourage banks to overpay for other banks in deals, because they will be able to count this "phantom" value toward regulatory capital requirements!

This is blatant, out-and-out fiction - another word for it would be "fraud".

Nor does it stop there.  Unable to control the FedFunds trading rate or LIBOR, Ben Bernanke has now taken to literally showering the world with dollars - $180 billion worth last night. 

In theory these sorts of swaps are inflation-neutral.  In reality what often happens is that the "other end" plays "blatant print" to cover their end of the swap, which looks neutral to their economy (since the money immediately goes over to The United States) and effectively is exported here!

I doubt this will do anything of value and it may be tremendously destructive.  LIBOR continued to move higher this morning even after this swap line increase was announced, saying quite clearly that the market isn't buying the effectiveness of this move.  The danger here is that if The Fed fails to get LIBOR and the EFF under control then they will have truly lost the capability to manage anything in this environment.  Add to that a rather explicit threat by China to put together a pan-Asian "new reserve currency" paradigm, plus the fact that agency spreads have blown out again and now are above where they were before Fannie and Freddie were nationalized, and you have all the ingredients for a true market panic.

Never mind that it appears that some "market participants" may be intentionally quoting false bids and asks on Agencies.

No, what you saw Monday and Wednesday was not a panic - that was the fat lady clearing her throat.

Watch the credit markets.  They're where the real "tell" is.

I suspect you're going to see a few day bounce here - the selloff yesterday was totally unexpected by me, as I expected the AIG bailout would get thunderous applause and what it got instead was recognition that the house of cards had the Big Bad Wolf breathe on it. 

That was a first during this credit crunch - the "short bus" (equity) traders figured it out fast that this wasn't "good news" at all.

But as the credit noose continues to tighten the upward fuel will wane, and we are very likely to see a "no bid" situation develop in some issues. 

It if develops in the overnight lending markets or worse, in the Treasury market generally, the game is over.

Don't think it can't. 

It can, and if the response to market conditions is to allow the lying to ratchet up instead of to force firms to face the truth it is simply a matter of time before it does.


hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 8:46am

Don't let them tell you this economic meltdown is a complicated mess. It's not. Our national financial crisis is readily understood by anyone who has seen greed and hypocrisy. But we are now witnessing them on a profound, monumental scale.

Conservative Republicans always want the government to stay out of business and avoid regulation as long as they are making lots of money. When their greed, however, gets them into a fix, they are the first to cry out for rules and laws and taxpayer money to bail out their businesses. Obviously, Republicans are socialists. The Bush administration has decided to socialize the debt of the big Wall Street Firms. Taxpayers didn't get to enjoy any of the big money profits on the phony financial instruments like derivatives or bundled sub-prime paper, but we get the privilege of paying for their debt and failures.

Let's just consider the money. The public bailout of insurance giant (becoming a dwarf) AIG is estimated at $85 billion. According to one report, that's more than the Bush administration spent on Aid to Families with Dependent Children during his entire time in office. That amount of money would also pay for health care for every man, woman, and child in America for at least six months.

How did we get here?

That's pretty easy to answer, too. His name is Phil Gramm. A few days after the Supreme Court made George W. Bush president in 2000, Gramm stuck something called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act into the budget bill. Nobody knew that the Texas senator was slipping America a 262 page poison pill. The Gramm Guts America Act was designed to keep regulators from controlling new financial tools described as credit "swaps." These are instruments like sub-prime mortgages bundled up and sold as securities. Under the Gramm law, neither the SEC nor the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) were able to examine financial institutions like hedge funds or investment banks to guarantee they had the assets necessary to cover losses they were guaranteeing.

This isn't small beer we are talking about here. The market for these fancy financial instruments they don't expect us little people to understand is estimated at $60 trillion annually, which amounts to almost four times the entire US stock market.

And Senator Phil Gramm wanted it completely unregulated. So did Alan Greenspan, who supported the legislation and is now running around to the talk shows jabbering about the horror of it all. Before the highly paid lobbyists were done slinging their gold card guts about the halls of congress, every one from hedge funds to banks were playing with fire for fun and profit.

Gramm didn't just make a fairy tale world for Wall Street, though. He included in his bill a provision that prevented the regulation of energy trading markets, which led us to the Enron collapse. There was no collapse of the house of Gramm, however, because his wife Wendy, who once headed up the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, took a job on the Enron board that provided almost $2 million to their household kitty. And why not? Wendy got a CFTC rule passed that kept the federal government from regulating energy futures contracts at Enron.

If John McCain gets elected and chooses Phil Gramm as his Treasury Secretary, which many politico types see as likely, they will be able to talk about the good old days when Gramm was in congress and McCain was in the senate and they were in the midst of the Savings and Loan crisis.

The S and L scandal, which may look precious when compared to our present cascade of problems, isn't hard to understand, either. But it is impossible to take John McCain seriously on our current financial Armageddon since he was dabbling in the historic collapse of 747 S&Ls that occurred during Ronald Reagan's era. In the early 80s under the Republican president, congress deregulated the savings and loan industry in much the same way that Gramm made sure there were no laws hindering our current financial malefactors on Wall Street. S&Ls simply lobbied until they had less regulation and then began making rampant, unsound investments.

The guy who was going the wildest with financial freedom was Charles Keating, who headed up Lincoln Savings and Loan of California. Because the S&L industry had managed to get congress to increase FDIC insurance from $40,000 to $100,000 on deposits, the irresponsible investing of people like Keating began to put taxpayer insurance funds at great risk of loss. Keating placed money in junk bonds and questionable real estate projects and because so many other S&Ls started acting the same way the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) began to push for a regulation that limited these dangerous speculative "direct" investments to 10% of an S&L's assets.

And Keating didn't like it; he called on a private economist named Alan Greenspan, who promptly produced a study saying that there was no danger in "direct" investments.
But that didn't convince the FHLBB and as further scrutiny showed Lincoln Savings and Loan was making even more historically bad investment decisions, a federal investigation was launched.

So Keating called his home state senator John McCain.

McCain and four other US senators (known to history as the Keating Five) met with Edwin Gray, then chairman of the FHLBB. McCain had been hesitant to attend but had reportedly been called a "wimp" behind his back by Keating. The message to the FHLBB and Gray from the Keating Five was to lay off Lincoln and cool the investigation. Gray and the FHLBB did not relent but Lincoln stayed in business until 1989 when it collapsed with the rest of the S&L industry. The life savings of more than 20,000 elderly investors disappeared with the failure of Lincoln. Keating went to prison for five years.

Charles Keating was John McCain's pal. They met in 1981 and Keating dumped $112,000 in the McCain campaign bank accounts between '82 and '87. A year before McCain met with the FHLBB regulators, his wife Cindy and her father, according to newspaper reports at the time, invested about $360,000 in one of Keating's shopping centers. The Arizona Republic reported McCain and his wife and their babysitter took nine trips on Keating's private jet to the Bahamas to stay at the S&L liar's decadent Cat Cay resort. The senator didn't pay Keating back for the plane rides until years later when he was under investigation.

McCain wasn't found guilty of anything but bad judgment, which is an historic understatement. Republicans, who led deregulation of the S&L industry, delayed the bailout until after the 1988 election to make sure George H. W. won the White House. The cost to taxpayers for helping these 747 bad actors in the S&L industry was finally estimated at $1.4 trillion. If the bailout had begun in 1986 instead of after the presidential election, the cost would have been contained at $20 billion.

And now the Republicans who engineered our present crisis and got us into the S&L debacle of the 80s are before us saying the markets need regulation. No, actually, they don't need regulation. Why don't you Republican capitalists who believe in the free markets get out of the damned way and let them work and allow these various financial nuthouses be crushed by the weight of their own stupidity? When it is all over, we'll have sane and sober people create laws to make sure it doesn't happen again, assuming we survive this chaos.

Also, while you are handing out our tax money to idiots on Wall Street, save a little of the long green for the unemployed auto and construction workers and all of the other people who have lost their jobs because you were too stupid to notice what Phil Gramm was doing and you were convinced everything was going to be just fine because the markets work.

These, then, are the people — the Republicans — who want to run our government for four more years. John McCain isn't just one of them. He rides their jets. He takes their campaign donations. He makes them his campaign advisors. And he tells us to trust him.

He must think we are a nation of village idiots.

Hell, maybe we are.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-moore/a-nation-of-village-idiot_b_127340.html


earthbased

earthbased Avatar

Location: By a Big Lake
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 8:41am

 Curry wrote:
Re: Fannie/Freddy. Yeah I know it's on the taxpayer's tab but someone - Congress, President - has to come up with a plan to walk thru the mess. It's a U.S. asset now but something has to be done with it
 
If history is any guide, the government usually makes these situations worse (government insiders volleying for position).

earthbased

earthbased Avatar

Location: By a Big Lake
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 8:40am

 phineas wrote:

Maybe because the money kept coming to them?
 
Bingo!

Curry

Curry Avatar

Location: Home
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 8:00am

Re: Fannie/Freddy. Yeah I know it's on the taxpayer's tab but someone - Congress, President - has to come up with a plan to walk thru the mess. It's a U.S. asset now but something has to be done with it

phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:59am

 earthbased wrote:

The problem with Glass Stegal being phased out in 1999 (many leftists claim this happened under GWB rewritting history) is that the regulation laws did not adapt.  So you had old banking regulation laws overseeing a new entity and the tools were inadequate.  You will have to ask Congress why they didn't revise the financial regulations or follow the money.


 
Maybe because the money kept coming to them?

earthbased

earthbased Avatar

Location: By a Big Lake
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:58am

 shampa1n wrote:
thank goodness for the Socalist Republic of America, then again the abandoning of the glass stegal act in 99 allowed this meltdown to happen along with the totally irresponsible lending in the property market. it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. certainly in the S.R.A. as it is almost totally bankrupt. Regulation is required (it always is) not less, deregulation does not create wealth  it creates anarchy. it s a great shame that the S.R.A. is now exporting financial turbulance (as opposed to the usual inflation) to the rest of the world. let's hope we ll get through this with our jobs, and that the grapes of wrath don't come back to haunt us again( soft commodities look stable)

to check the markets;    http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/Favorites.CServlet?obj=ID1399335

 
The problem with Glass Stegal being phased out in 1999 (many leftists claim this happened under GWB rewritting history) is that the regulation laws did not adapt.  So you had old banking regulation laws overseeing a new entity and the tools were inadequate.  You will have to ask Congress why they didn't revise the financial regulations or follow the money.

phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:58am

 cc_rider wrote:

Um, that's US. You and me, baby. We're gonna pay for this in spades. While the criminals retire to their mansions.

But I'm not bitter.
 
Nah, more sweet 'n sour....  

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:57am

 Curry wrote:
I don't think it matters so much who created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as it does who is going to clean it up.
 
Um, that's US. You and me, baby. We're gonna pay for this in spades. While the criminals retire to their mansions.

But I'm not bitter.

phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:57am

 Curry wrote:
I don't think it matters so much who created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as it does who is going to clean it up.

 
That would be the US taxpayer....

earthbased

earthbased Avatar

Location: By a Big Lake
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:53am

 p4jkafla wrote:

And then consign yourself to losing real purchasing power. Inflation for August was 5.37%. Once you've locked up your CD money for two years, and received at best 4% for that period, you'll still have to pay taxes on that income. Assuming a 15% marginal rate (and not including state income taxes), you would be left with a real income of 3.4% to spend. In other words, inflation is outpacing the ability of your CD:s to provide for you.

So... once you've gotten sick of watching your purchasing power fail to keep up with inflation, you decide to get back into the stock market. You do this precisely because you've seen the stock prices go up, and you want to get in on it.

Just as you finally decide to get in, the stock market declines. You sell out because you've watched your investment lose value and you can't stand the up and down movement.

See any pattern here? Yo yo investing.

Not advice I would give anyone
 
The short-term treasury yield went negative yesterday so apparently a lot of people just don't want to lose much money, only a little.

Curry

Curry Avatar

Location: Home
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 18, 2008 - 7:53am

I don't think it matters so much who created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as it does who is going to clean it up.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 41, 42, 43, 44, 45  Next