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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/12/2009 9:37:29 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 1587946

"Deregulation caused this mess." That's BS ...the opposite is true.....

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/12/2009 10:03:49 PM
From: steve harris	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1587946

I yell at the radio every time Geitner says we need to free up credit and get the banks loaning again. Ain't that what created this comedy of errors? Now with Obama busting contracts, no one with any sense is going to loan money knowing Obama and the media will destroy your life. Commodities are rising while the job market continues to tank, a sign of inflation for me. Obama's budget deficit will be 1.8 trillion, FOUR times larger than Bush's. bostonherald.com Too many hypocrites here to mention with that factoid...

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/13/2009 12:34:10 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1587946

<<"Deregulation caused this mess." Oh yeah, which one?>> How about either of these? Clinton signed the both into law, but both had a veto-proof (R) majorities behind them - so, what would be the point of NOT signing it? en.wikipedia.org "2007 mortgage and 2008 financial & economic crises Some economists state that the 1999 legislation spearheaded by Gramm and signed into law by President Clinton — the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act — was partly to blame for the 2007 subprime mortgage crisis and 2008 global economic crisis.[8][9] The Act is most widely known for repealing portions of the Glass-Steagall Act, which had regulated the financial services industry. One provision of the act allowed Credit Default Swaps.[10] Gramm responded to criticism of the act by stating that he saw "no evidence whatsoever" that the sub-prime mortgage crisis was caused in any way "by allowing banks and securities companies and insurance companies to compete against each other."[11] The Act passed the House by an overwhelming majority and passed by unanimous consent in the Senate, though it was introduced on the last day before Christmas holiday and never debated by either congressional body. [12] Gramm's support was later critical in the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which kept derivatives transactions, including those involving credit default swaps, free of government regulation.[13]"

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/13/2009 8:21:11 AM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1587946

I'd also like to know what good re-regulation the Democrats have put back into place now that they control both houses of Congress (for 2+ yrs now) and the Presidency. If de-regulation was the problem, what re-regulation have they done?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/13/2009 12:12:28 PM
From: bentway	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1587946

"Other than the repeal of Glass-Stegall, which was Clinton's doing" I showed you it was much more Phil Gramm's and the (R)'s doing than Clinton's - who just signed a bill he couldn't veto. So, you've started to lie like the rest of your pack of dogs.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/13/2009 12:14:56 PM
From: bentway	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1587946

Dethroned Miss Nevada Peeved by Miss California "Double Standard" eonline.com ( She just didn't have JEEZUZ on HER side! She's even got REAL tits! ) There once was a beauty queen who took naughty pictures and, some years later, did not get to keep her crown. Despite the magnanimity shown to Miss California Carrie Prejean, Katie Rees—Miss Nevada 2007—was out of luck when racy pics of her showed up after she won her title. And she's none too happy about what she perceives to be a "huge double standard." "Semi-nude photos are semi-nude photos," she told E! News, comparing the topless lingerie pics of Prejean with her own shots, which featured a 17-year-old Rees baring a breast, flashing her thong and doing her best Katy Perry impression. Miss Universe Organization honcho Donald Trump deemed the photos inappropriate and stripped Rees of her Miss Nevada USA title in December 2006. And this isn't the first time since that Rees has spoken out in opposition to the less harsh treatment doled out to some of her pageant peers. She called it "unfair" when Miss USA 2006 Tara Conner was allowed to keep her title after the then-underage beauty queen was spotted drinking in various NYC bars and, at one point, kissing one of her gal-pals. Rees said today that she and Prejean both signed contracts swearing that there were no nude or semi-nude photographs of them in existence. And they both broke the contract, Rees added, but she is the only one who had to pay so harshly for her mistake. She asked for a chance to reclaim her title, but was denied. "I don't know why I am the only one who was punished for their behavior," she said. "I was only 19 when those photos were taken of me, and it was me in my personal life, far before I was crowned Miss Nevada. Carrie actually posed for these professional semi-nude photos. "I think that's worse." Last week, after the blogosphere was already ablaze with Prejean's anti-gay marriage comments, a racy pic of the Miss USA runner-up was posted on TheDirty.com. Prejean later admitted to having posed for that and other shots when she was only 17, having been convinced "in her naiveté" to do so by the photographer. Earlier today, Trump ruled that Prejean will remain Miss California. Rees, who says that she has never actually met Trump, thinks the real-estate tycoon made a mistake by giving her the ax. "I have been scrutinized in the press and have tried to move on with my life, but it's hard," she told E! News. "Everywhere you go, people judge you on these photos and already think they know the type of person you are." But despite everything, she said, Rees is proud of the way she has handled the aftermath of her own pageant debacle. "At least when those pictures of me came out, I admitted I was wrong and told young women in America how big of a mistake it was and to be careful because everything can affect your future," she said. "That's more than Carrie has done. She has lied about her age when she took the photos, lied about how many there were and hasn't acknowledged that she was wrong by breaking the contract. I don't think that is a good role model and I hope young women recognize that." —Additional reporting by Ashley Fultz

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (480298)	5/13/2009 12:21:57 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1587946

EU slaps a record fine on Intel news.bbc.co.uk Computer chipmaker Intel has been fined a record 1.06bn euros ($1.45bn; £948m) by the European Commission for anti-competitive practices. It dwarfs the 497m euro fine levied on Microsoft in 2004 for abusing its dominant market position. The Commission found that between 2002 and 2007, Intel had paid manufacturers and a retailer to favour its chips over those of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). Intel has announced that it will appeal against the verdict. "Intel takes exception to this decision. We believe the decision is wrong and ignores the reality of a highly competitive microprocessor market," Intel chief executive Paul Otellini said. "There has been absolutely zero harm to consumers. Intel will appeal," he added. The fine was welcomed by AMD, which had lodged complaints in 2000, 2003 and 2006. "The EU decision will shift the power from an abusive monopolist to computer makers, retailers and above all PC consumers," said Giuliano Meroni, AMD's European president. 'Sustained violation' The Commission said that personal computer makers Acer, Dell, HP, Lenovo and NEC had all been given hidden rebates if they only used Intel chips. It is a major decision that shows the Commission is serious about curtailing abusive behaviour of dominant companies David Anderson, lawyer, Berwin Leighton Paisner. It also found that Media Saturn, which owns Europe's biggest consumer electronics retailer Media Markt, had been given money so that it would only sell computers containing Intel chips. "Intel has harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes. "Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated." A Commission spokesman said there was no question of action being taken against the firms who accepted the rebates. "They were not the ones abusing their dominant position in the market," he added. Last year, Intel made 80.5% of all the microprocessors in PCs, while AMD made 12%. 'Wall of resistance' The Commission has also ordered Intel "to cease the illegal practices immediately to the extent that they are still ongoing". In addition to providing rebates to manufacturers that bought almost entirely Intel products, the Commission found that the chipmaker had paid them to postpone or cancel the launch of specific products based on AMD chips. Ms Kroes joked in her own news conference that Intel would now have to change its latest advertising slogan from "sponsors of tomorrow" to "the sponsor of the European taxpayer". Both Intel and AMD are based in California. Intel has 83,900 staff worldwide and has a market value of $85.4bn. AMD employs about 11,000 people and has a market value of $2.6bn. "Despite its strong defence, Intel is facing a wall of regulatory resistance to its business practices around the world, with antitrust infringement decisions against it now in Japan, Korea, and the EU, while the US authorities are investigating Intel as well," said David Anderson, a lawyer at Berwin Leighton Paisner. "It is a major decision that shows the Commission is serious about curtailing abusive behaviour of dominant companies, especially in the high-tech sector." Technology analysts Gartner said the decision was unlikely to have any significant impact on market conditions. "The Intel-AMD market share is likely to remain roughly aligned with manufacturing capacity, adjusted for technology capabilities," said Gartner managing vice-president Martin Reynolds. "Intel will pay its fine and carefully inspect its sales relationships to protect against risky influence. AMD does not receive any money from the fine, which accrues to the EU tax budget. And Intel's greatest challenge will remain market growth, not market share."