| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/20/2008 9:34:46 PM |
From an investing stand point there is nothing like floating a loan to a company on the brink of bankruptcy.
Considering our money isn't backed by anything I think you meant "floating another IOU"
We were bankrupt years ago. Just fell for an illusion while we taxpayers were getting swindled out of the real assets. The Federal Reserve needs to be abolished and we need to be on a sound money system.
Try going to your bank and when they ask you how you want your money back - tell them in gold and silver ... see where that gets you. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 6:30:15 AM | I think it is simply hilarious that it has finally dawned on some geniuses that this bail out is socialism.
Apparently it was not enough money to make conservatives in the government figure it out when we were bailing out AIG and taking over 80%.
LOL, reminds me of that joke that ends with something like we have determined what you are, now we are working out the price.
It's a little late to decide they don't want to have the citizens own the money end.
Not that I think it is a great idea. LOL, we don't even know if it is going to help. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 8:33:17 AM |
I think it is simply hilarious that it has finally dawned on some geniuses that this bail out is socialism.
Not really. The means of production (...make money....) will not belong to the Government.
Mussolini said that fascism should more properly be called "corporatism" since it was, under Mussolini, a blending of state and corporate power. Mussolini ought to know; he was the first fascist leader.
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com/Politics/fascism.htm
The Grover Norquist followers are rejoicing .....
Increase the Debt another TRILLION...
increased the limit almost 2 TRILLION dollars the past 90 days........
Whats the interest on TWO Trillion?
ALL government spending will now be committed......Get rid of all those pesky social programs.
End... Government Health Care ... Education .... SS ... Get back to Pre FDR... | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 12:59:49 PM | | As usual the taxpayer is on the hook again. When people got somewhat behind on their mortagages and could only come up with a partial payment, the banks didn't want to hear it. And when people needed help stopping the foreclosure process, because they got their hands on some money to make the payments, the banks didn't want to hear it.They had their rules and regs and none were going to change them. Now we're supposed to bail them out?They should be in jail. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 1:26:26 PM | all those Republicans clamoring for deregulation and allowing the "free market" to hold sway (Like John McCain, Phil Gramm).
Where are they now?
Now they have no problem accepting Socialism, meaning, a welfare bailout by the taxpayers while the CEOs land with hundreds of millions in golden parachutes.
As usual, it's Socialsm for the rich, Free Market for the poor.
Bill Moyers puts it nicely:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/09/21/bill-moyers-journal-moguls-steal-home-while-companies-strike-out/ | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 1:31:28 PM | We haven't had to have dollars in the treasury up to this point to support social programs.
Why would we need it now? | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 3:42:26 PM | If your implication is that social programs are draining the budget that is simply not true.
We spend less on Welfare (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) in one year than we spend in 2 months in Iraq.
My point is, it's not social programs that are bankrupting our Federal Government. It's the war, the bailouts, the record earmarks, the cutting of corporate taxes and taxes for the rich, it's the Military budget which is greater than tje next six top military spenders combined.
However, Republicans will make the case that the way to close this hole is by cutting Social Security benefits or nixing it altogether, cutting budgets for agencies that protect us like OSHA, FDA, Natl Labor Relations Board, Education, etc etc..
Why do you think they built up this deficit to begin with? To create a crisis state where it's difficult to counter their calls for massive budget cuts.
This is the same party that created this massive deficit under Reagan, Bush I & Bush II. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 3:52:17 PM |
Why do you think they built up this deficit to begin with? To create a crisis state where it's difficult to counter their calls for massive budget cuts.
This is the same party that created this massive deficit under Reagan, Bush I & Bush II.
Surely, you don't really think that you can blame the deficit on one party, do you? | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 4:31:51 PM | .
>>>>>>>>>>Grover G. Norquist
This is what many have suggested for many years. Destroy effective Government and create a HUGE deficit. The budgets for the US are set for many years. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 4:52:56 PM | Certainly washington is about compromise.
Consider this simple fact.
It is the responsibility of the president to submit a budget to congress.
Reagan and bush submitted escalating deficit increases.
Clinton submitted budgets with cosistently reduced deficits to almost balanced.
Reagan and bush submitted to demcratic congresses. Clinton to republican congresses.
With bush II, there was an overwhelming republican majority in congress. The result? The largest deficits ever seen.
Yes both parties are responsible, but the philosophical difference obvious.
Now then, how do you explain it? | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 5:23:35 PM |
The worst global financial crisis since the Great Depression forced the Federal Reserve and central banks in other countries to pump billions of dollars into the world's banking system
has anybody really considered what this means?
they aren't cranking up the printing presses, because investment banks do not deal in federal reserve notes.
therefore the only thing it can mean is that they are extending credit, which is nothing but a deferred payment with an interest rate attached to it, which means that there are no real dollars being pumped in anywhere and certainly no real wealth being created, which ultimately means nothing but more debt and more failures. it's inevitable. it's a house of cards and the wind is blowing, and the only way they can possibly keep it afloat is to keep the whole smoke & mirrors bullsh*t going that convinces people a dollar is actually worth something, and to keep working for it.
the bottom line is that your labor is the only collateral behind these so-called billions of dollars being pumped into the system, but even that game can only be played so far and we just might be at the end of its useful life.
 | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/21/2008 7:08:10 PM | "Surely, you don't really think that you can blame the deficit on one party, do you?"
Absolutely. Republican party platform, principals and ownership by Major corporations and war mongers..... deregulation and billions upon billions poured into Iraq.
What boggles my mind is that the average income Republican continues to buy their lies ... continues to ignore their actions and the impact of their actions.
Continues to believe their false charges against SSN. sigh. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 7:51:07 AM | eriksfbay, you talk all about budgets submitted, as if that was the beginning and end of the process.
In case you have forgotten, CONGRESS spends the money and levies taxes, quite often in ways that have little to do with the budget submitted by a president. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 9:59:26 AM | "CONGRESS spends the money and levies taxes, quite often in ways that have little to do with the budget submitted by a president."
Too simplistically stated. It is part of the checks and balances that the plan goes back and forth between the 3 (Senate, House, Presidency) and is negotiated by the dominant forces. For the last 8 years, even during the time when there was a slightly more Dem congrss, but not enough more to make a difference, the Republican policies and platform has been the driving force.
This also applies to the Republican driven de-regulations that have had the greatest impact of all. It also applies to the fact that with troops already in Iraq based upon a lie from the Bush administration (which they did know they were lieing) it isn't easy to turn the tap of money off .... you have to get the troops out. You can't just stop paying them while they are there. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 10:17:48 AM |
eriksfbay, you talk all about budgets submitted, as if that was the beginning and end of the process.
In case you have forgotten, CONGRESS spends the money and levies taxes, quite often in ways that have little to do with the budget submitted by a president.
Tall, if Reagan, Bush I & II submitted outlandish Deficit Budgets to Congress, this is indicative of their philosophy.
If Clinton submitted Budgets with succeedingly reduced deficits and then surpluses...then this is indicative of his priorities.
This displays their intent prior to the Congress ever getting their hands on it. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 10:19:09 AM |
Absolutely. Republican party platform, principals and ownership by Major corporations and war mongers..... deregulation and billions upon billions poured into Iraq.
What boggles my mind is that the average income Republican continues to buy their lies ... continues to ignore their actions and the impact of their actions.
Must be sad to see the Democrats be as powerless as you appear to believe them to be.
Continues to believe their false charges against SSN. sigh.
Huh? False charges against whom? | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 10:53:51 AM |
Must be sad to see the Democrats be as powerless as you appear to believe them to be.
The Democrats are powerless. In case you're not aware, it takes 60 votes in the Senate to end debate on legislation and go to a vote (cloture). The Democrats don't have 60 votes. They have a simple majority of 51 votes.
The result is that the Republicans have been blocking legislation to the extent that they have tripled the filibuster rate in the Senate. If legislation can't get passed in both houses, it doesn't become law.
So yes, the Democrats have been powerless to stop the Republican Blockade of Congress. I guess you haven't been reading the news.
And yes it is sad.
Sad that the Republicans are blocking action when the economy and country is disintegrating around us.
Sad that the Republicans used to insist on an up or down vote on everything and now they are blocking up or down votes at triple the Democratic rate.
Sad that the Republicans are pointing their finger at the Democrats for doing nothing while they block progress.
Sad that you take great pride in being uninformed about this. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 11:19:57 AM | Did anyone watch 60 minutes last night. Obama's response to this financial meltdown was dead on
Kroft: Should the government be bailing out all of these banks and insurance companies? We're talking about hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars.
Obama: I think that our basic principle has to be that you don't bail out shareholders. You don't bail out CEOs who are getting golden parachutes and $100 million bonuses. That you are doing everything you can to protect taxpayers, making sure that people are able to stay in their homes, and that their mortgages don't go overboard because of bad decisions that other people make.
I think that people need help in these times, but the shareholders (save me the we are the shareholders with our IRA and 401k comments) and the CEO's, CFO's and all the way down the line, SHOULD NOT BE BAILED OUT.
Did you read that the same companies that screwed up and got us in this mess, the government is looking at giving them business to help us out of this mess. Whose brilliant idea is that! | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/22/2008 11:44:49 AM | surprise surprise sargeant carter!
New York Times:
Senator John McCain’s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/us/politics/22mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=politics&pagewanted=print
Kudos to Naomi Klein, if we're going to Nationalize businesses, why can't they be profitable ones like Exxon? At least when Hugo Chavez nationalizes assets, he doesn't burden taxpayers with the debt! | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/23/2008 3:43:45 AM | Obama's oversight over this inspires anything but confidence:
Obama Stumbles On Fannie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F-PMY72luY
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/23/2008 5:57:54 AM | Unfortunatelly Mr Philly. NONE of the candidates has ANY idea what to do... All of the ECONOMIST has no clue as to how to fix the problem. Probably Mr Obama has been told that that is why he has said nothing. In the case of Mr. Mc.Cain, what he says he would do it doesn't make any sense either. And could lead to a WORSE situation. In other words.. WHOEVER LANDS IN THE PRESIDENCY.. better start to dust those economics 101 books. Because the existing RULES will have to be rewriten. But as I said, NO ONE KNOWS HOW....YET. MEANWHILE WE, THE PEOPLE, HAS TO PAY THE PRICE.... !!
 | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/23/2008 11:32:29 AM | | I think also that any bailout package needs to build in regulatory practices from the outset. A number of economists believe the bailed out firms will continue questionable practices now that the burden is being lifted off them. Whether that's the reality or not, the safeguards against it should begin from the start. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/23/2008 4:53:52 PM |
Obama's oversight over this inspires anything but confidence:
Obama Stumbles On Fannie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F-PMY72luY
PhillyFellow
McCain has receive more money from Freddie and Fannie than Obama.
Corporations cannot give to candidates, so the center's list adds up contributions from Fannie and Freddie employees and their families. Obama has received a lot of money during his presidential campaign, though, and Fannie and Freddie don't make his list of top 20 companies. (The top three companies with employees donating to Obama are Goldman Sachs, University of California, and Citigroup, according to the center.)
The New York Times looked at contributions from Fannie and Freddie's boards of directors and lobbyists, who are technically not employees. That analysis found Fannie and Freddie-related contributors gave $169,000 to John McCain and his related committees, compared with $16,000 to Obama and his related committees.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/727/ | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/23/2008 7:30:12 PM |
McCain has receive(d) more money from Freddie and Fannie than Obama.
Are you sure about that?
From the Congressional Record:
FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATOR REFORM
ACT OF 2005The United States Senate, May 25, 2006
Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.
For Years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs— and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the
report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
These efforts were blocked by Congressional Democrats. Obama never lifted a finger to help any Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac reform effort. Perhaps that’s why Obama received $105,849, Nancy Pelosi $47,000 and Harry Reid $60,500 from Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac lobbyists and John McCain got none.
According to about 15 websites Obama is the Number 2 recipient of "golden eggs" from the Fannie Mae/Mac collective. Google it.
And from about 30 different websites (again google it, it'll fill your browser) :
Obama has these connections with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Jim Johnson and former Fannie Mae chairman and CEO Franklin Raines are part of Obama’s advisors. Franklin Raines stepped down after a $6.3 billion accounting scandal, which Obama’s calls on for advice on mortgage and housing policy matters. Jim Johnson was on Obama’s VP search and made millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job. | |
|
| Full Scale Financial Meltdown
Posted: 9/23/2008 7:53:11 PM |
McCain has receive more money from Freddie and Fannie than Obama.
Corporations cannot give to candidates, so the center's list adds up contributions from Fannie and Freddie employees and their families. Obama has received a lot of money during his presidential campaign, though, and Fannie and Freddie don't make his list of top 20 companies. (The top three companies with employees donating to Obama are Goldman Sachs, University of California, and Citigroup, according to the center.)
The New York Times looked at contributions from Fannie and Freddie's boards of directors and lobbyists, who are technically not employees. That analysis found Fannie and Freddie-related contributors gave $169,000 to John McCain and his related committees, compared with $16,000 to Obama and his related committees.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/727/
Glad to see that someone else had figured this out. I had gone through the math and had come to the same conclusion and posted it in another thread here:
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts10906599.aspx | |
|
Home
login 
