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.
Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (34006)9/21/2008 6:40:09 PM
From: Mac Con Ulaidh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Why do we so little of Bush now? The first of his life-long lasting penaces is to stand guard over the red phone so Cheney can't bo-bo-bo-bo-bomb Iran before he is booted. In his brief breaks from said duty, Barbara I is in charge, and we know how scary she is.



To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (34006)9/21/2008 7:48:49 PM
From: koan  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Why Obama is doing what he is doing. I am hyper today and wrote this in response to a question on mish's thread-lol:


Here is the problem RJA. You sound like you think along these lines.

Science has learned people respond to emotions more than logic or facts. Digressing briefly-lol, our minds are constructed more for pattern recognition than sequential logic; and respond more to emotions than facts and logic.

Karl Rove et all, know that, and Obama has learned that-lol; so all that the campaigns are about today, is negative campaigning, lipstick on a pig and lying. No honest discussion of facts or problems!!! AT ALL. Voters do not respond to facts or logic.

So the politicians have learned negative advertising works much much better than logic or facts, so now everyone lies and instead of facts and logic they put a mirror to the people and say "vote for me I am like you", which is to get the emotional reaction"----"see I am like you"---- "a hocky mom who knows nothing about government, but who needs knowledge, I am so cool-lol.

So we cannot blame the politicans, we need to blame the people. Politicians are just reacting to what people react too.

Regarding population, we cannot do anything about it because religion and culture are at the very foundation of population control and also at the foundation of our thinking ie. emotions.

The one thing no one can discuss anywhere, is religion and then ones culturre, yet what variables are more correlated to population growth than religion and culture??

We humans are at the apex of our very survival and I do not think we are going to make it because we are not hard wired to face reality unless it is a charging lion.

We can deal with a charging lion with calm focus-lol. But not our emotions!!

James Joyce said it best: "it takes the fiercest sort of courage to face reality".

PS Russia and China have always been a much larger threat to us than Iraq (which was never anything more than a little brush fire), yet where did we spend all our money and grind down our military. Iraq, while russia and china gained on us quietly. Iraq was sold to us emotionally!!!!!!!!

Cheers,



To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (34006)9/21/2008 9:28:01 PM
From: sylvester80  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 149317
 
Freddie and Fannie were not the problem. The credit rating houses were the problem who after colluding with the investment banks miracoulsly turned junk sh*t mortgage loans into AAA rated ones. Freddie and Fannie were NOT the ones giving huge bonuses to loan officers to push people to subprime/Alt-A/ 100% financing/negative amortization toxic loans. That was the Wall Street Investment banks. They then would take these junk toxic loans, packaged them into CDOs that the credit rating houses had miracoulsly had turned into AAA ones and sell them for some very nice fees. It is that that's caused the problems and greed of loan people to keep writing more and more and more of these loans. And with the free money out there it became an avalanche that swallowed everything. So the problem is NOT Freddie and Fannie. The problem is calling JUNK TOXIC mortgages AAA rated ones. And that is why every CEO of every investment bank and credit house, including Henry Paulson, needs to be thrown in jail immediately and their illegally gotten fortunes seized!!!



To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (34006)9/21/2008 9:38:31 PM
From: sylvester80  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Chances are most if not all of the major commercial and investment banks are insolvent. Not one of them is opting out of the do-not-short list, and they don't seem to have the confidence in their survival to opt out of the L3 asset swap program Secretary Paulson is proposing.

It is also very likely that acutely dangerous systemic risk already exists, not merely from direct lines of credit among the banks, but especially from credit default swaps, which if activated by more than one large bank default would probably bring down many others. Remember, though, that this systemic risk is highly concentrated in the top 25 or so banks in the world, and does not jeopardize the 6,000 other community banks in the U.S.

Third, it is also highly probable that as this recession worsens, and as housing values continue to sink, forcing more foreclosures, the large banks will be even closer to collapse.

Having worked for many years in the banking industry and been closely involved with risk management and derivatives, I can tell you that it looks like catastrophe is already here.

What Sec. Paulson wants you to believe is that catastrophe is approaching, but it can be averted if only Congress acts urgently to give him the extraordinary authority he is requesting. The implication is if you don't give him $700 billion in borrowing authority within a week, markets will collapse and it will be all your fault.

We've seen this drill before, with the Patriot Act and with the Iraq War authorization. The scare tactics, the urgency, the implied threat of blame for any failure - this is what the Bush administration does. Some of you in the Senate were able to stand up to this pressure, and that type of strength is desperately needed now.

If insolvency is here now for the big banks, the last thing you want to do is throw $700 billion of money that is not yours at bailing out the banks who created this disaster. You'll need every bit of that money to protect the taxpayers and their deposits in these banks when these financial companies are thrown into the bankruptcy courts. You'll need that money to make sure consumer deposits are protected with insurance, and you'll need it to keep the healthy parts of these banks that deal with consumers and businesses functioning until they come out of bankruptcy.

And forget about comparing Paulson's plan to the RTC. These L3 assets aren't homes, condos, or commercial real estate that can be easily sold at the right price. They are bits of paper giving the bond holder the right to some small portion of thousands of mortgages, a right that is shared with all the other investors, who are required to agree on what is done with foreclosed properties in the pool. This is one of the reasons no one wants to buy this stuff, and no one will for many years until it is crystal clear what the final losses will be.

Once you give Paulson the authority he seeks, he will buy these securities at 65 cents/dollar, then quietly auction them off at a nickel each. It will be "unfortunate but necessary" to revitalize the banking industry, even though you will discover the banks won't be lending after this is all over to any but the finest credits. You will have rewarded the banks for their calamitous decisions, stuffed the taxpayers with huge losses, squandered your remaining ability to shore up the FDIC, not prevented the big banks from collapsing anyway, done nothing to help the community banks that will constitute the new banking system in this country when these problems are solved, and in the end made the situation much worse.

If you want to do something practical, require the SEC to go into these banks, open up their L3 holdings to public scrutiny, auction off a sampling of these securities, and apply those prices to the L3 portfolios of all the banks. In this way we will know which banks are insolvent. You won't need to go through this charade of having the Treasury take ownership of these assets, because the core of the problem is not that these assets are clogging up bank balances sheets, as Paulson says (which is tantamount to saying, by the way, that no one will buy them). The core of the problem is that there is no transparency about these portfolios and their real worth. Congress doesn't need $700 billion of our money to create that transparency, and if it shows as I suspect that many of these banks are insolvent, that's why we have bankruptcy courts. You can certainly protect the banks from bank runs while they are in bankruptcy.

Paulson is basically rolling you and the rest of Congress into giving him unprecedented power to protect his friends on Wall Street. This decision you are making is probably as momentous as the Iraq War resolution. Don't fall for this bailout disguised as the only way to prevent Armageddon. Armageddon is already here - at least for the big banks - and it needs an entirely different solution. Spend our money protecting us, by ensuring the FDIC is properly funded, by throwing these too-big-to-fail banks into bankruptcy if they truly are insolvent, by preserving the healthy parts of these banks while in bankruptcy, and bringing them back out again so they function under much better safety and soundness regulations. We've had airlines functioning properly and safely for years while in bankruptcy, and there is no reason we can't do the same with banks.

Please, please, do not fall for some useless compromise or bipartisan agreement that gives the administration what it wants in the end. Kill this proposal here and now, protect us from this bailout, and deal with the real problem - the insolvency of the major banks, not the paper that is supposedly blocking their lending capabilities.



To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (34006)9/21/2008 10:31:10 PM
From: Nicholas Thompson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
True; I think the GOP is more responsible for the mess , but both contributed



To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (34006)9/22/2008 3:40:49 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 149317
 
Additionally, the Glass-Stegal act that separated the functions of banking and investing was repealed in 1999 under Clinton's Administration.

It was repealed under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999......sponsored by the whiner himself and the advisor to McCain.......Phil Gramm.