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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (70345)	9/12/2008 1:40:26 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Yes, C2, of course we can blame the presence of money for a bank robbery or a 711 holdup, but the proximate cause is the criminal mind which decided to have a go. Yes C2, of course we can blame the attractive 8 year old girl for being raped and murdered - her parents should hide her inside and not let her play freely on the street where freaks and monsters lurk unhindered. We shouldn't think of such murderers as criminals but rather as organ donors. <So let them be shamed in public for their hypocrisy and zealotry that has caused so much financial and economic damage. > The person to blame for somebody stealing an ounce of gold is not the inventor of the unit of measurement, "ounce", nor the person who left their wallet on a cafe table, nor the people who dug up the gold, nor the cafe owner, nor the police who weren't regulating the cafe closely enough. The person to blame is the thief. So blaming the inventor of the unit of measurement "US$1" for a mortgagor failing to pay the interest on their borrowing is silly. There were two parties responsible for the loan = the borrower and the lender. The borrower is the person who promised to repay the loan and pay interest. Blaming the lender is also silly because they do not have control of the free will of the borrower, though a judicious lender would attempt to select a creditable borrower as best they can. You socialists prefer not to put the responsibility where it lies, which is with the person who of their own volition decides what they do and promise to do. Socialists like to absolve the individuals of the consequences of their minds and expect governments to run everyone. The creators and maintainers of the unit of measurement US$ are not hypocrites or zealots. They are more like mechanics adjusting the spark timing on an engine in a Formula 1 car while it's racing. Hmmm, on second thought that's not a very good analogy, but it'll do. Anyway, there hasn't been much economic damage. USA GDP is going along nicely, unemployment is within normal bounds, the cyberspace revolution continues apace. There hasn't been a loss of wealth. People feeling poorer isn't a loss of wealth. The houses are still there. The house is the wealth, not the money which was borrowed to pay for it. What's happening is the ownership of the houses is going from the conditional owner to the mortgagees. Because some silly prices were put on the houses by both the borrowers and lenders doesn't mean that is how much wealth was represented by the houses. The value of the house was always the value of it as comfort and shelter. In financial and other decisions, it's a good idea to take responsibility for one's ideas because then one might learn. I don't blame Uncle Al KBE for providing me with US$ to borrow to buy Globalstar, nor do I blame the financial institution who loaned me the money, nor do I blame the person who sold me the shares, nor do I blame the company for existing as a unit of value. I blame me for incorrectly evaluating the company's management. Of course I blame the management for misrepresenting the company's sales success but I primarily blame me for incorrectly judging the situation. Perhaps I should contact the Federal Reserve for a bailout, Congress for a cheque, and generally whine and moan and point the finger at other people. See the Zombie stream... Subject 53236 Did you think "Wait a minute, I'm not a socialist!! How come he's calling me a socialist?" I wasn't indulging in name-calling, it was just a little joke. Of course a real socialist would be pleased to be called a socialist. But you must admit that calling for more government control has socialist tendency. A department of loan approvals would be annoying. Governments already set loan limits but how much borrowers and lenders decide on is their own business. It's annoying to have some ignorant government wastrel telling me how to run my life "Sorry Morry, you aren't allowed to borrow to fund Globalstar because we think you should only be allowed to borrow 20%". Grrr.... Mqurice

To: carranza2 who wrote (70345)	9/12/2008 1:49:01 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Also, if you check the share price of Lehman Brothers, you'll see that shareholders are NOT expecting anything that they would consider a bail out. Nor did Fannie, Freddie or Bear Stearns get much of what they would consider a bail out. They more likely feel impoverished. I doubt there will be a bail out. Some OPEC people with huge stashes of US$ to recycle are the obvious buyers. Or perhaps China. I expect they'd put it through some other financial institution to provide the management services by way of acquisition and firing a lot of Lehman Brothers executives who got it wrong. No, wait. I recall Lehman Brothers arranged funding for Livedoor [a company in Japan of which I own a portion] to do acquisitions in Japan. Livedoor is doing quite well these days despite the political and legal dramas of Horie [the ex-CEO]. They could go on a big buying spree of USA financial assets in distress, returning the favour. Japan has a LOT of money looking for something useful to do. NZ$ uridashi are going belly up, as are NZ mortgagors who borrowed and hoped, revaluing houses double and double again. Mqurice