Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Vosilla who wrote (35207)	7/12/2005 4:01:16 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

RE:"All this after taxes were raised and many RE tax breaks had already been reversed." Yes but the tax breaks were different and more easily reversed. Try reversing Clintons 1997 tax RE act.

To: John Vosilla who wrote (35207)	7/12/2005 6:03:18 PM
From: NOW	Respond to of 306849

Not that role: i meant his testimony when he wrote to California bank regulators, testifying that Lincoln had "transformed itself into a financially strong institution that presents no foreseeable risk to the government." Oops, sorry. It seems that Lincoln did represent one heck of a risk to all of us taxpayers. By the summer of '89, Keating's assets had soared to $5.8 billion but only 2% were in home mortgages. The eventual cost of closing Lincoln down was well over $1 billion.