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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: see clearly now who wrote (185728)	1/27/2010 11:14:10 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 362637

Welcome to USA, inc. Buy These Beaten-Up Banks By Daniel Dicker, Senior Contributor 01/27/10 - 09:21 AM I have a hard time believing the incredible opportunity we have right now with the investment banks. They've been beaten up in the last week by Obama rhetoric, but the recent Supreme Court ruling guarantees that Obama's bluster couldn't possibly have any teeth behind it. That makes even this cynical trader believe that these stocks are a tremendous buy right here. The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Citizens United vs.Federal Election Commission in essence equated corporations with individuals in their rights for free speech, removing the limits of funding broadcast campaign ads from a 63-year-old law and overturning much of the 2002 McCain/Feingold bill. It will simply open the floodgates of special interest influence on elections, where money has proven itself to be the most crucial commodity to success.This ruling couldn't have come at a better time for the investment banks. Deluged by resentment and the open attack of Obama, the largest banks, such as Goldman Sachs(GS Quote), Morgan Stanley (MS Quote), JPMorgan (JPM Quote), UBS (UBS Quote) and others can now confidently use their very deep pockets of profit to help ensure the election of representatives "favorably disposed" to their model of banking. Their coffers are huge and without opposition. Goldman Sachs recently reported a $4.9 billion fourth-quarter bonanza, topping a $13.3 billion year in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression. In this new world of tightened belts, it's clear who will have the ability to form the strongest PAC for the upcoming mid-term elections. More than 80% of those profits, remember, come from their "sales and trading" divisions -- their proprietary accounts, with which the company leverages its investment banking relationships for favorable fees and the purchase and sale of fixed-income and equity issues at "inside" prices. You and I don't get those advantages. These are precisely the advantages that the Glass-Steagall act kept at bay, and precisely the separation of trading and capital market financing that once kept the securities firms and the investment banks apart. The financial crisis we just experienced should have proven, once and for all, how much more dangerous and systemic these slanted playing fields can be. The fact that we were on the precipice of financial Armageddon is directly connected to the monopoly of leverage and risk heaped in only a few institutions -- the banks and the insurance companies particularly. But we need not worry about seeing any change in the laws or a reversion to Glass-Steagall "light," as Obama and Paul Volcker have been suggesting. This mid-term election will be dominated by candidates looking to mirror the results of Scott Brown in Massachusetts, an anti-Washington campaign dominated by quick and overwhelming financial resources -- the perfect candidate for the new money sure to pour in from the investment banks and drug companies. I look for opportunities, and the banks look like great ones. Goldman Sachs is down from $178 on Jan. 7 to close at $150.90 Tuesday; Morgan Stanley is off from $33 to close Tuesday around $27. With the Supreme Court ruling behind them, both of these banks are assured of the same advantageous marketplace that booked record profits this year and for the future. We secured the best government these guys can buy -- and the best policy to assure their continued success. I'm buying. thestreet.com

To: see clearly now who wrote (185728)	1/27/2010 11:25:00 AM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362637

Voters in Oregon OK tax hikes for some Corporations and wealthy families are targeted to help ease the state's budget crisis By Kim Murphy January 27, 2010 Reporting from Vancouver - Facing a budget crunch that threatened to close schools early, lay off teachers and slash healthcare benefits, Oregon voters ended two decades of tax scrimping Tuesday by approving higher taxes on corporations and wealthy families. The two ballot measures passed handily in a referendum watched closely around the country as a signal of whether voters are ready to approve targeted tax hikes to bail out cash-starved state treasuries. Oregon voters since 1990 have limited property taxes, rejected sales taxes and vetoed across-the-board income taxes. But with 87% of the ballots counted, the measure to raise income taxes on households earning more than $250,000 a year, and individuals earning more than $125,000, was winning with 54.1%. A second measure to raise the state's corporate income tax was ahead with 53.6%. Business leaders had fought the measures, arguing that they would drive away entrepreneurs and force struggling businesses to slash jobs. The two measures would raise more than $700 million to help close a gap in the state budget that at one point reached $4 billion. Kevin Looper, who ran the campaign to pass the measures, said the vote was a signal that predictions of a general conservative retrenchment following the Republican victory in this month's Senate race in Massachusetts were premature. "I think this is firmly a progressive, populist moment. It just takes leaders to stand up and say what we're about, and make sure things are clear to voters," he said. "Because when the choice gets made clear like that, voters will almost always make the right decision." Looper said the credit goes to Democratic leaders in the Legislature, who passed the tax increases against nearly unanimous Republican opposition. "It was an amazingly courageous thing for the Legislature to say, 'We're going to both protect schools and make a case for tax fairness by keeping the burden off middle-class families,' " he said. Opponents gathered signatures to force the referendum. Supporters, backed by public employee unions, raised $6.8 million, compared with $4.6 million by opponents who relied on the banking industry and business groups. Final financial reports have yet to be filed. "The biggest issue is we were substantially outspent by the public employee unions. They were able to double, and more than that, the money we were spending on the broadcast media, and were able to get that much more of their message out," said Pat McCormick, spokesman for Oregonians Against Job-Killing Taxes. latimes.com