SI
SI
discoversearch

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 Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)2/10/2006 2:48:02 AM
From: Thomas M.  Respond to of 110194
 
Who will stop them from getting you?

Since Al Qaeda doesn't attack non-meddling countries, it's obvious that they will stop attacking us if we stop attacking them.

Tom



To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)2/10/2006 2:49:46 AM
From: shades  Respond to of 110194
 
DJ Head Of Beleagured Getty Trust Resigns

More crony capitalism

LOS ANGELES (AP)--The chief executive of the multibillion-dollar J. Paul Getty Trust resigned Thursday in the wake of reports of purported lavish spending.

Barry Munitz, who was president and CEO for eight years, will pay the trust $250,000 "without admitting any wrongdoing," Getty spokesman Ron Hartwig said in a statement.

The payment would "resolve any continuing disputes" between Munitz and the trust, it said. Hartwig declined to comment further to The Associated Press.

Munitz, whose $1.2 million annual salary made him one of the nation's highest-paid nonprofit leaders, told his staff in a letter that he felt his work was complete.

"I will always be proud of my association with the Getty," he said. "I'm taking this action, after lengthy consideration, so both the institution and I can move forward."

Munitz's departure comes during a turbulent time at the $7 billion trust, which oversees the J. Paul Getty Museum and divisions of art conservation, research and philanthropy. Its former antiquities curator, Marion True, is on trial in Rome, accused of trafficking in looted artifacts.

In June 2005, the nation's leading group of foundations and charitable organizations began an inquiry into the trust's financial practices, following a Los Angeles Times report that detailed alleged extravagant spending by Munitz, including a Porsche SUV for his use.

The Council on Foundations placed the trust on a 60-day probation in December for failing to provide adequate documentation for the review.

Getty officials said they responded as soon as they could but said they also had to compile documents for the state attorney general, who is investigating the trust's use of tax-exempt funds.

Before joining the Getty, Munitz was chancellor of the California State University system. He said he plans to pursue new opportunities in education, Hartwig said in the statement.

Deborah Marrow, director of the Getty Foundation, has been asked to serve as the trust's interim president and chief executive, Hartwig said.


(END) Dow Jones Newswires

February 09, 2006 23:36 ET (04:36 GMT)



To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)2/10/2006 2:54:38 AM
From: mishedlo  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
You must be the stupidest asshole on the planet, next to Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld.

Exactly how do you propose we get "them"?
For every innocent person we kill there are 10 new terrorists with a grudge against the US.

What about that do you not understand?
Are you proposing WWIII to wipe every Moslem off the face of the earth?

Are you the next Hitler?

I propose that if we mind our own business we have little to fear from "them" whoever "them" is.
You are asking how to stop "them" from getting us.
You don't even know who "them" is.
Well "them" keeps getting bigger and bigger as we keep killing innocent people by mistake hoping to get "them".

Bush took a minor problem and made it worse.

The only thing you got right is how minor Bin Laden is (or was), being the head of nothing. But morons like you have caused people to make him their idol. People now want to emulate Bin Laden. The more innocent people we kill the more of "them" there will be.

"grasping at straws"? You are stupider than I thought. Pakistan was behind the US after 911. Polls show it. Do a search now and see what those polls now say: Bin Laden is now a hero in Pakistan.

Like the total complete asshole moron you are, you ignore the source of the problem. Bin Laden even told us what it was: US troops on sacred Arab soil. So in all of your stupidity you propose we solve the problem by sending more troops in the region.

Please get your head out of your ass. How the hell can you breathe with it stuffed so far up it?

Mish



To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)2/10/2006 3:00:34 AM
From: shades  Respond to of 110194
 
Who will stop them from getting you?

The beatles said all you need is love - who stopped john lennon from taking a bullet in the head by a fan? Where was john wayne and captain kirk when he needed them to save his life? Who protected kennedy? Could he be protected - you are so silly!

You can blow up billions and the hate will still keep coming for you if you don't change the underlying reasons why - the billions keep suicide bombing you. Why does a man who just had 24 family members blowed up by a US drone air strike want to blame YOU ahahaha? You didn't blowed him up did you? It was the US drone airplane that blowed him up right?

If the CIA thought mr zarqawi was in your house and sent a drone plane strike attack in and blowed off your arm and 24 of your relatives - would that be OK - you do say Applying force is necessary. Don't apply it and they will apply it against you. Was that 17 year old student who got blowed up by the drone plane going to BOMB you? I dont think so. Well not before anyways, maybe now he will - hate begets hate - violence begets violence.

After they missed zarqawi and your leg was blowed off you would be a good US boy and say well they THOUGHT he was there - and I can't question that - because we gotta SHOOT FIRST and ask questions later - you know I tried to think maybe with your velocity of money introspection and the sillyness of fed changing definitions you had some sense - and maybe in that area you are a pretty smart guy - but you dont seem so smart to me in a lot of other macro issues - you need to go watch more star wars and less john wayne.

You need to quit being such a backstabbing hypocritical prick like you did to me recently and try to be rise above your cowardice - you never did give me a good answer why you snaked an attack on me on your board and did not reply to me directly on the real estate thread you pathetic pussy. Go run and give grace more moral support you commie in disguise - she needs big brother to protect her - Ayn is no self made man. :(

You had to ban me from your thread because that is your way, you do like Bush - close your ears and plug your eyes and go LALALALALLALALALAL - pathetic. New ideas or thoughts that challenge your bullshit scare the hell out of you coward.

You are the type that ruin the careers of scientists because they tell the public that politics silly policies destroying our world and nation.

Luckily some bush freak that tried to silence NASA scientists just got his LIES and his ASS exposed.

Message 22145423

Bush Appointee Resigns NASA Post Amid Controversy (UPDATED)

by Joe Gandelman

First, there was the controversy over him insisting the word "theory" be put at every mention of The Big Bang (which refers to the universe and not the Oval Office in the Clinton administration).

Then the controversy over his resume..

And now his exit from his job:

George C. Deutsch, the young presidential appointee at NASA who told public affairs workers to limit reporters' access to a top climate scientist and told a Web designer to add the word "theory" at every mention of the Big Bang, resigned yesterday, agency officials said.

Mr. Deutsch's resignation came on the same day that officials at Texas A&M University confirmed that he did not graduate from there, as his résumé on file at the agency asserted.



To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)2/10/2006 1:37:04 PM
From: NOW  Respond to of 110194
 
i really enjoy seeing how shrill you are becoming as things start to unravel for this incredibly corrupt, incompetant and evil group of neocons in the three ring circus...you have completely lost your polished tone which is a good start at least towards redemption



To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)2/10/2006 5:31:04 PM
From: NOW  Respond to of 110194
 
"Rational foreign policy? Like hide in a hole like an ostrich and ignore the lessons of history? The US did that with Japan. We won't do it again."
We did it with Korea too. and then Vietnam. Cambodia. Oh, and what about Cuba, Central America, oh and dont forget Iran....



To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)6/23/2006 4:12:08 AM
From: shades  Respond to of 110194
 
Rational foreign policy? Like hide in a hole like an ostrich and ignore the lessons of history? The US did that with Japan. We won't do it again.

So now that n. korea and iran want a piece of us - what do you think the proper response should be? A little bit of shock and awe? Why aren't the CIA jackals taking care of these problems before they get into the popular media? I have to turn on the news and hear upsetting things - they are failing in thier job of sugarcoating my rosy colored world for me. Why even let them test the missile? Why isn't Rambo or Norris over there taking out the site before missile launch? I thought you said we won't do it again?

S Korea Warns North: Missile Test Won't Change US Policy

SEOUL (AP)--South Korea's top official on dealings with the North cautioned the communist nation Friday that it won't be able to force a change in U.S. policy by firing a long-range missile, while American officials said Pyongyang will face repercussions for a launch.

"It seems clear that even if North Korea fires a missile, the United States would not make a compromise," Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok told a parliamentary committee.

A top Pentagon official said Thursday in Washington that a missile launch would be "a provocation and a dangerous action" that would spur the United States to take unspecified action in response.

"If such a launch takes place we would seek to impose some cost on North Korea," Peter Rodman, assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, told a House Armed Services Committee hearing. "That is the minimum response that you would expect of us."

There have been conflicting reports about whether the missile is being fueled, a possible sign that a launch is nearing. Intelligence reports say fuel tanks have been seen around the missile at the North's launch site on its northeastern coast, but officials say it is difficult to determine if a rocket is actually being fueled by looking at satellite photos.

"We still hope that they recognize that launching that missile would only isolate them further, and that they will make the right decision and not launch the missile," U.S. Ambassador to South Korean Alexander Vershbow said Friday in Seoul.

The concerns over a potential launch have prompted China and Russia - Pyongyang's last two major allies - to issue warnings against the North in the toughest pressure yet against a launch.

The Russian Foreign Ministry summoned North Korean Ambassador Pak Ui Chun on Thursday and expressed its opposition to any steps that would affect regional stability.

"In particular, the undesirability was stressed of any actions which could negatively affect regional stability and complicate the search for a settlement to the Korean Peninsula's nuclear problem," a ministry statement said.

Lee said Friday in Seoul that a "series of activities by North Korea is based on a premise of its missile launch" and pressed the North to return to six-nation talks on its nuclear program.

"North Korea should immediately halt signs of its missile launch," he said.

China also urged the North on Thursday to return to the nuclear talks, which Pyongyang has boycotted since November in anger over U.S. moves to restrict its alleged illegal financial activity.

"We hope all parties can do more in the interest of regional peace and stability," Jiang Yu, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, said at a regular briefing.

On Thursday, the Bush administration spurned a suggestion by former U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry that the United States launch a pre-emptive strike against the North Korean missile in an opinion article published Thursday in The Washington Post.

"We think diplomacy is the right answer and that is what we are pursuing," U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said. "The way out of this is for North Korea to decide not to test this missile."

The U.S. military on Thursday said it had successfully tested a missile defense system in a test against a medium-range missile in a previously scheduled exercise.

Hadley said the U.S. missile defense system had "limited operational capability" to protect against weapons such as the long-range missile the North is possibly moving to launch.

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

June 23, 2006 01:11 ET (05:11 GMT)




To: ahhaha who wrote (53342)6/25/2006 4:39:57 AM
From: shades  Respond to of 110194
 
Mogambo - interest rates to da moon!



321gold.com

This is oddly in keeping with Puru Saxena, of the Money Matters newsletter, who writes "In 1971, the non-gold reserves of all countries were worth US$100 billion and today these have grown to roughly $4.3 trillion - an alarming 43-fold increase in 35 years! Rampant monetary inflation fuelled by the growth of credit turned the capital markets into one giant casino as punters worldwide (often loaded with credit) searched for the next opportunity to make a fortune."

And I notice with a grim Mogambo frown (GMF) on my stupid face that Required Reserves in the banks actually went down to the bottom of its range for the last zillion years or so. Hell, picking a date in random, say, in May 1995, which was eleven long years ago, total deposits in the banks ("savings") were only around $110 billion, and total Loans and Leases on the books of the banks logged in at only $204 billion. And against that, the banks were saddled with $57 billion in Required Reserves.

Now, I notice how my blood has run chilly, and how everything is dark and gloomy. Gaunt buzzards have gathered in the trees to sit and lick their chops as they glare into the deep, dark, dangerous depths of my soul. I realize, in a sudden cold sweat, that the dollar and the banks (as we professional Mogambo economists (PME) say) "are freaking doomed!"

The scene is now perfectly set to reveal the ugly fact that Total Deposits at the banks are up to $5.2 trillion, which is 47 times bigger than it was in 1995. That's a growth rate of 42% a year, compounded! And total Loans and Leases is now $5.7 trillion, which is 27 times bigger than in 1995, which works out to an annual growth rate of 35% a year! Big, BIG increases!

Yet against that monstrous, cancerous rise in both assets and liabilities, the Required Reserves went DOWN from $57 billion in 1995 to only $42 billion today in 2006! Hahahaha! Surprise! Down! Required Reserves went DOWN! Hahahaha! To keep the same 0.518 ratio of Required Reserves against total deposits in the banking system in 1995, the banks would have to have, right now, in Required Reserves, $2.693 trillion! Instead, they have only $42 billion, 1.6% as much! Hahahaha!

In short, more than ALL of the money and credit created in the banking system since 1995 have been literally created without any underlying cash deposits of any kind! None! Zero money! This is an infinite multiplication of deposits! Fractional-reserve banking at its insane, suicidal extreme!

But the latest stupid shenanigans of us Americans and our precious little Federal Reserve are getting to be almost insignificant. Bloomberg.com reports that China's Shanghai Securities News revealed that, for May, "the Chinese M2 money supply growth rose 19.5% higher than the level last year."

Anyway, Foreign Holdings in custody of the Fed went up by a hefty $6.8 billion last week, which is, I guess, how foreigners are trying to help us "manage" the planned decline in the dollar.

And you wonder why it is that I am always screaming that you buy gold and silver? Hahaha! Wonder no more!

...From Dr. Steve Sjuggerud at DailyWealth.com, we find him taking a page from Marc Faber's book Tomorrow's Gold, which he calls his "cheat sheet for the next ten years." From the book he lists the things that gained the most in the 1974-1980 period, which is highly reminiscent of today.

Back then, oil topped the list, rising 1,866% in price in that period of time. The next biggest winner was gold, up 1,458% in price, followed by U.S coins (1,053%), silver (739%), Chinese ceramics (607%), diamonds, farm land, art, followed by housing (164%), stocks (81%), bonds (89%), all of which sounds pretty good until you note that Mr. Sjuggerud includes the fact that inflation (as measured by the CPI) was up 110% in those six years.

Brian Hunt, also at DailyWealth.com, has an interesting technical indicator. He reports that all three times in the last 110 years that the stock market went three years without a correction, "it always precedes a plunge in the S&P 500." This seemingly-infallible indicator has now ominously again occurred on March 15, 2006.

....He goes on to quote an "unattributed article on Unknown Country's web site entitled "Dollar on the Edge" which notes that "A 'run' on the dollar, caused by panicking foreign holders attempting to sell into non-existent buying, could cause the dollar to collapse very suddenly, even over a matter of days."

To prevent that and to prove that we Americans are now as corrupt as any other dirtbag nation on the earth, the article continues "There is evidence that the US is attempting to manage the decline by purchasing its own debt. As Asian purchasing of US paper declined last month, the slack was taken up by Caribbean and UK banks that would not normally have the liquidity to make such purchases. Therefore, they are acting for a third party, and the only party that would buy dollars when a loss in value is inevitable is the US Treasury."

Why are we so intent on proving that we have no morals or ethics? "By doing this," the article concludes, "the US is hoping to prevent a sudden collapse of the dollar and the subsequent unwinding of the US and world economies in a fiscal disaster so profound that it will eclipse the Great Depression."

Mr. Steele's summation was "In other words, boys and girls, the dollar is doomed."

.....Martin Weiss of the Safe Money Report takes a trip down memory lane when he recalls that his dad said, in 1970, "In past cycles, for each $100 billion in new debts added to the economy, the level of short-term interest rates went up by one full percentage point before the cycle was over."

Instantly my ears pricked up! $100 billion in new debt equals one percentage point higher interest rates? Wow! Hell, the federal government alone amasses that much new debt every two months!

Mr. Weiss goes on to say that in 1970 his dad said, "Now, after adjusting for inflation, $1 trillion in net new debts has been added. So, if the ratio holds up in the next cycle, the short-term T-bill rate will have to leap from about 7% where it is today to as high as 17% where I think it will eventually peak."

The result of this prediction? "Precisely ten years later, in 1980, that's exactly where the 3-month T-bill rate peaked: At 17%. Meanwhile, the price of crude oil rose by over tenfold."

Then he fast forwards to today. "Even adjusting for inflation, today's numbers make America's 1970 debt pyramid look like an anthill by comparison."

So how high will interest rates go if this rule of thumb (one percentage point higher rates for every $100 billion in new debt)? Search me. How do you measure debt? Do you include derivatives? I dunno. But comparing the end-state 17% interest rate of 1980 as an "anthill" to today's insane levels of debt, I must conclude that 17% will look "anthill-like", too!

-- If you wanted more proof that the economics profession has been taken over by grubby idiots (beyond the proof offered by the fact that the Federal Reserve was chaired by Alan Greenspan, and now by Ben Bernanke!), then get a load of the Wall Street Journal editorial Tuesday that showcased a letter by "500 prominent economists, including five Nobel laureates" who signed a letter to President Bush saying that "immigration has been a net gain for American citizens." Hahaha!

Their analysis is that they work cheap, see, which helps keep prices down. This is the "net gain" for America. In short, ruthless exploitation of the tragically poor is a "net gain", while, somehow, the $80,000 in taxpayer money spent per illegal immigrant per year is NOT supposed to be part of this "net gain" for America. And this all comes at the same time the Democrats are working feverishly to increase the minimum wage by 40% over the next two years because wages are so low? Idiots! All of them! Idiots! Hahaha!