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

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (72720)	4/20/2010 11:49:14 AM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 149317

SS is available when people need it. --- Then why is O gunning for it? Wall st. wants it of course. Funny how medicare is being gutted under Obamacare.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (72720)	4/20/2010 11:50:17 AM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 149317

The health care is not being forced on others; === No. Just the cost.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (72720)	4/20/2010 12:04:36 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 149317

Don't you find it odd that Clinton now says Summers and Rubin duped him and yet O has rehired them and is STILL following their advice? Where's Rico? kunstler.com By James Howard Kunstler on April 19, 2010 6:36 AM It's interesting and instructive to read The New York Times' lead story this morning, TOP GOLDMAN LEADERS SAID TO HAVE OVERSEEN MORTGAGE UNIT. While it pretends to report all the particulars of the huge scandal growing out of Friday's SEC action against Goldman Sachs, the story really comes off as an attempt to create an alibi for the so-called "bank." It pretends that some kind of an intellectual struggle was going on among GS executives as to whether the housing market was doing just fine or poised to tank -- therefore muddling the company's intent in setting up investment deals based on sketchy mortgages designed to blow up so that a favored big customer, John Paulson, could collect on the deal insurance known as credit default swaps. The truth is that anyone with half a brain could see the securitized mortgage fiasco coming from ten-thousand miles away. I said as much in Chapter Six ("Running on Fumes: the Hallucinated Economy") of my book The Long Emergency, which was published in 2005 but written well before that in 2002-4. And I had had no work experience whatsoever in banking generally or Wall Street investment banking in particular. One week before the SEC action against GS, the Pro Publica website published a story about virtually the same kind of mischief being run out of the Chicago-based hedge fund Magnetar led by a clever young fellow named Alec Litowitz. Like Goldman Sachs, Magnetar deliberately constructed investments (bundles of bundled mortgage-backed securities called collateralized debt obligations) that were certain to fail so that Magnetar could collect on credit default swaps that amounted to a bet against products they themselves had participated in creating. There was no question that Litowitz and his employees did this absolutely on purpose. Nor is there any question that they aggressively sold positions in these CDOs to credulous investors like Thrivent Financial for Lutherans and others. The question that now begs to be answered is: why is this activity not being investigated and prosecuted under the federal RICO statutes against racketeering? The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act was designed to punish exactly this kind of behavior, whether the defendant's name ended in a vowel or not. How is it not a racket to deliberately and systematically construct investments designed to fail so you can collect what amounts to insurance against them -- and then to sell those financial instruments to customers without telling them that these investments were engineered to blow up? At the very least it amounts to a failure to disclose material information, which is the basis for distinguishing illegality. More to the point, it almost certainly amounts to prosecutable criminal fraud and insider trading. Dylan Ratigan at MSNBC asked pretty much this question on Friday when interviewing Connecticut attorney general Richard Blumenthal (because the AIG company, headquartered in his state, sold gobs of credit default swaps to Goldman Sachs for dodgy CDOs, leading to a giant government bailout and incidental huge payoffs to Goldman Sachs). Blumenthal's answer was lame, to put it mildly -- that recent federal rules tied his hands, he claimed. He could have at least publicly protested his hand-tying and applied pressure to the US Department of Justice to enforce the anti-racketeering law. So where is the DOJ's criminal division in all this? The Goldman Sachs racket has been publicly known, in one form or another, for several years. I wrote in this space several times at least as far back as 2007 that Goldman was essentially shorting it's own issued securities, and I'm neither a lawyer or a finance professional. Anyone could see this from just reading the news. Magnetar's activity was so notorious that the very business of engineering dodgy CDO investments to collect insurance on their failure became known throughout the industry as "the Magnetar Play." The feigned cluelessness among some the highest-profile figures in these rackets is something to behold. For instance Citibank was among the companies that helped Magnetar put together their CDOs-designed-to-fail. Citi's chairman at the time, former US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, testifying before the new Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission said, "Almost all of us, including me, who were involved in the financial system -- that is to say financial firms, regulators, rating agencies, analysts and commentators -- missed the powerful combination of factors that led to this crisis and the serious possibility of a massive crisis." Bank of America's CEO, Brian Moynihan, told a congressional hearing, "No one involved in the housing system -- lenders, rating agencies, investors, insurers, consumers, regulators, and policy-makers -- foresaw a dramatic and rapid depreciation in home prices" [and therefore in investment instruments based on mortgages]. Either they lie or they are profoundly stupid and incompetent. If the former, then they might be induced to spend some time talking to federal prosecutors; if the latter then the US financial system is too hopeless to survive and we will all soon be bartering hand tools and designer shoes for food. Evidence of the latter is ample, for instance, in Citigroup's loss of 70 percent share value during Robert Rubin's chairmanship -- for which, in the crash year of 2008 alone, he was paid $17 million plus $33 million in stock options. The Goldman Sachs SEC action and the related Magnetar story seems to be a pretty big deal and appear to be dragging public opinion to a crossroads where we acknowledge the deep structural corruption of the financial system or watch the legitimacy of both banking and government dissolve. At least, it throws gouts of gasoline on the political fires lit by Tea Partiers and even more extreme political factions. I don't see how President Obama can keep Robert Rubin at his elbow or the hosts of other Goldman Sachs alumni in their federal jobs. The whole episode is disgusting in the purest sense of the word. If Obama doesn't shake these people loose, and if he doesn't pick up the phone and direct his attorney general to execute the laws -- including the RICO law -- then all the moonbeams issuing from his renowned smile will not avail to keep him in office, or keep the financial underpinning of the USA from collapse.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (72720)	5/11/2010 9:58:56 PM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 149317

Thank you for your invitation. After posting earlier about my son you expressed some interest. Most here are familiar that I am a conservative, but at the same time my life isn't that simple and I will elaborate. Six years ago my wife passed away from a sudden heart attack at the age of 49. It was a huge shock to family and friends since she wasn't overweight, didn't smoke, and rarely drank. At the time our son and daughter were 19 and 17. I didn't take it very well. Although my family income had essentially been cut in half not only did I refuse to file for the $300 spousal death benefit from social security, I also refused to sign my daughter up for minor survivor's benefits that would have been over $1100 a month for a year. I didn't want the money. Obviously I had a major case of denial going on. Looking back I can see it was a mistake. My children had not only lost their mother, but their father was also a wreck, but it is even more complicated than that. Both my children have disabilities. My daughter was born with congenital cataracts and has had numerous eye surgeries. Her vision is reasonable and she reads and does what she wants, but her vision falls short of being able to drive, inconvenient for sure, but manageable. My son on the other hand faced a greater challenge. He had been born with aspergers syndrome, a form of autism. In first grade we enrolled him in private school which lasted about a week when the school informed us they couldn't handle him. At that point he transferred to public school where he attended a special education class along with his regular classes all the way though till graduating from high school. My son however is fairly unique. Although his condition is pervasive, he also has an IQ of about 136. He was also a Boy Scout and earned Eagle Scout. Last year a movie came out called "Adam" whose title character suffered from aspergers syndrome. If any of you have seen the movie, you know what my son is like. After high school he went to Community College here and frankly didn't do very well. After a year there though, it was then that his mother died. As previously stated, I was a mess. My mother who is retired stepped in and suggested he come live with her and go to school there. She signed him up at Amarillo Community College and also signed him up with social security for his disability. He also gets government healthcare. Needless to say, my mom is a Democrat. She put a lot of time and energy into him. Really that was something my wife and I couldn't do as well because we both worked. Her effort paid off though and he graduated from Amarillo Community College with honors. He is also a member of Phi Beta Kappa. After Community College he transferred to West Texas A&M where he is continuing his degree in computer science and a minor in mathematics. He has is math done. He's been going slowly with 2 or 3 courses per semester because it's hard for him to focus on too many things at once, but his GPA is about 3.8 and he works hard on his studies over 8 hours a day. He helps my mom at the house and she drives him to college. She is in constant communication with all of his instructors who all like my son very much. His social security she set up also pays for all his college and he is able to help with groceries. Truthfully, I would be hard pressed to pay for his college and I know he has benefited from the social security he has received. * * *