| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/06/2008 12:09:30 PM · #276 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Keep up the good fight Hawkeye ! |
Delightfully nonsensical. I've got a bad cold this morning, but that really cheered me up. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:11:40 PM · #277 |
| Wall Street has just declared, "Thanks for the bailout...SUCKERRRRRRSS!" |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:12:58 PM · #278 |
Originally posted by Prash:
I still believe a part of it also affects consumer confidence ultimately. Tell me.. would one spend as much this holiday season if they were scared to lose their job, or their house? |
Yes, consumer confidence is a huge consideration, but it's not the reason for the Bailout specifically. After all, Joe Consumer hates the bailout. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:21:15 PM · #279 |
Since the government and a good percentage of the population seem to think bailing out banks and homeowners is the way to go, I̢۪m going to take advantage of it.
I̢۪m going to take all my savings and hide it in an off shore account (or under my bed), along with all my pay checks the next few months. I̢۪ll stop paying my house payment and the bank will threaten to foreclose. Then I̢۪ll negotiate with the bank to lower my principal and interest with taxpayer bail out money so my payments get lower. Because I bought my house before the market dropped out, I owe more on my house then it is worth, so I really have nothing to lose. If they take my house they do me a favor.
Shame on me for being so stupid and buying a house I can afford and actually making my payments. My punishment is higher taxes to help out those that were smart and got into loans they could not pay back. Lesson learned, won̢۪t make that mistake again.
Note: sarcasm
|
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:21:49 PM · #280 |
Originally posted by Phil:
Hey!!! The DOW is below 10,000 and the world markets are freaking!! So we pay over 3000 dollars apiece to bail out irresponsible lenders/borrowers and it's like it never made a dent?
Great job Government! You always know what's best for us. |
There is an alternative plan that was proposed (according to the radio show  posthumous shared), called the 'stock injection' plan, which would have given the government more control over a dying institution were it to be bought in by the government. this is in contrast to the current plan that passed (to my knowledge) wherein the government just acts as a helper from outside.
The main difference would have been, as i understand:
- with the current plan, the government can/will take taxpayer's money form the treasury, and use it to buy out stake in dying banks etc.
- with the other stock injection plan, the government would receive preferred stock: the tax payer would be the last ones to lose money if the value of the banks declined.
Apparently, the injection plan is also preffered widely by the economists. But HATED by the banks etc. Why? Because in the injection plan, if a bank doesnt perform well and dies anyways, there is the *answerability* to its own stock holders. Whereas if it gets bailed out (the first plan), there is no answerability to anyone.. and there could just be a dumb "Duh! Pffft! I dont know what happened.. but I just failed!"... yet, the bank could have used part of that money to fund an outgoining CEO's severence at a taxpayer's cost.
Also, it seems there were more financial lobbyists (>600) than congressmen working on influencing the bill. So theres the result! ;-)
|
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:22:54 PM · #281 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Prash:
I still believe a part of it also affects consumer confidence ultimately. Tell me.. would one spend as much this holiday season if they were scared to lose their job, or their house? |
Yes, consumer confidence is a huge consideration, but it's not the reason for the Bailout specifically. After all, Joe Consumer hates the bailout. |
Right. Sorry I wasnt clear. That was not the reason as I understood also. That is/may be one of the consequences.
Thanks again. Really appreciate it.
ETA: I just saw on TV, an LA Times columnist saying that now that the bailout is in process, the next most important part is consumer spending in teh coming months. Apparently, the bailout is like a morphine shot to reduce pain during the plunge.. the plunge will happen anyways.. slowly now.. over the months. And how much consumers spend will become a big part of how the economy takes shape now. So get your wallets out again, guys. The bailout wasnt expected to turn the economy around anyways (there goes the 700bln check down the carribeans and the limo house).. so now its up to us middle class dumbies again to spend as much as we can this holiday season to help refuel the economy. We paid then, and we pay now. lol!!
Message edited by author 2008-10-06 12:39:40.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:29:42 PM · #282 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Prash:
I still believe a part of it also affects consumer confidence ultimately. Tell me.. would one spend as much this holiday season if they were scared to lose their job, or their house? |
Yes, consumer confidence is a huge consideration, but it's not the reason for the Bailout specifically. After all, Joe Consumer hates the bailout. |
Don't you mean, "Joe Six Pack"? |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:41:29 PM · #283 |
Originally posted by Phil:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Prash:
I still believe a part of it also affects consumer confidence ultimately. Tell me.. would one spend as much this holiday season if they were scared to lose their job, or their house? |
Yes, consumer confidence is a huge consideration, but it's not the reason for the Bailout specifically. After all, Joe Consumer hates the bailout. |
Don't you mean, "Joe Six Pack"? |
Oh ya!, You Betcha. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 12:54:41 PM · #284 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Phil:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Prash:
I still believe a part of it also affects consumer confidence ultimately. Tell me.. would one spend as much this holiday season if they were scared to lose their job, or their house? |
Yes, consumer confidence is a huge consideration, but it's not the reason for the Bailout specifically. After all, Joe Consumer hates the bailout. |
Don't you mean, "Joe Six Pack"? |
Oh ya!, You Betcha. |
|
|
|
|
10/06/2008 01:18:26 PM · #285 |
I'm glad the media is finally nailing her for her debate performance. I was scared they were going to fall down on the job as they usually do these days.
Gwen Ifill basically said Palin just "blew her off" and decided to give a "rhetorical stump speech".
Thank god for Saturday Night Live. If they didn't do those skits shining a light on the glaring crap that came out that night I'm sure the media wouldn't be digging at all. They seem to love the dirt. It's easy to cover and doesn't require much journalistic effort to put out but pointing out the truth and ALL the contradictions takes some work.
Message edited by author 2008-10-06 13:29:39. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 03:06:14 PM · #286 |
Originally posted by Prash:
- with the current plan, the government can/will take taxpayer's money form the treasury, and use it to buy out stake in dying banks etc.
|
Well, actually no money is taken from the treasury. Mainly because there is *NO* money in the treasury. If you'll remember we're almost 10 TRILLION dollars in debt. So what they do is just print/distribute the 700 BILLION
dollars. Because the money came from nowhere it has the effect of deflating the value of all currency. So it's actually better than stealing the money from you. They're actually able to steal the value out of money you already have. Since bank accounts don't show this devaluation the suckers (US Citizens) for the most part don't notice. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 03:48:03 PM · #287 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by Prash:
- with the current plan, the government can/will take taxpayer's money form the treasury, and use it to buy out stake in dying banks etc.
|
Well, actually no money is taken from the treasury. Mainly because there is *NO* money in the treasury. If you'll remember we're almost 10 TRILLION dollars in debt. So what they do is just print/distribute the 700 BILLION
dollars. Because the money came from nowhere it has the effect of deflating the value of all currency. So it's actually better than stealing the money from you. They're actually able to steal the value out of money you already have. Since bank accounts don't show this devaluation the suckers (US Citizens) for the most part don't notice. |
This is news to me. Pardon my ignorance here, but isnt this what China has been accused of doing too: to print and inject loads of cash into their system, but not telling anyone about it? |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 03:51:09 PM · #288 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by Prash:
- with the current plan, the government can/will take taxpayer's money form the treasury, and use it to buy out stake in dying banks etc.
|
Well, actually no money is taken from the treasury. Mainly because there is *NO* money in the treasury. If you'll remember we're almost 10 TRILLION dollars in debt. So what they do is just print/distribute the 700 BILLION
dollars. Because the money came from nowhere it has the effect of deflating the value of all currency. So it's actually better than stealing the money from you. They're actually able to steal the value out of money you already have. Since bank accounts don't show this devaluation the suckers (US Citizens) for the most part don't notice. |
This is news to me. Pardon my ignorance here, but isnt this what China has been accused of doing too: to print and inject loads of cash into their system, but not telling anyone about it? |
No.
What China does is fix the value of their currency by dictating its exchange rate. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 05:39:26 PM · #289 |
I agree.
Comedians typically are better at getting us to see "truths". Connecting the dots - so to speak. THis has been my perception anyway. Journalists still have to color between the lines - comics go beyond them.
I laugh whenever I think about that SNL skit the other night. I was cracking up the entire time. The bit about young people being forced into marriage was super slick. And 'Biden' was hilarious with going back and forth about loving McCain.
It certainly is more memorable than the actual debate â€Â¦ it's almost like watching the debate after the blinders have been taken off â€Â¦ and on pot ;)
---
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Thank God for Saturday Night Live. If they didn't do those skits shining a light on the glaring crap that came out that night I'm sure the media wouldn't be digging at all. They seem to love the dirt. |
Message edited by author 2008-10-06 18:13:14. |
|
|
|
10/06/2008 09:52:07 PM · #290 |
Originally posted by metatate:
I agree.
Comedians typically are better at getting us to see "truths". Connecting the dots - so to speak. THis has been my perception anyway. Journalists still have to color between the lines - comics go beyond them.
I laugh whenever I think about that SNL skit the other night. I was cracking up the entire time. The bit about young people being forced into marriage was super slick. And 'Biden' was hilarious with going back and forth about loving McCain.
It certainly is more memorable than the actual debate â€Â¦ it's almost like watching the debate after the blinders have been taken off â€Â¦ and on pot ;)
---
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Thank God for Saturday Night Live. If they didn't do those skits shining a light on the glaring crap that came out that night I'm sure the media wouldn't be digging at all. They seem to love the dirt. |
|
Must see TV...Weekend Update on Thursday too! |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:14:21 PM · #291 |
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:15:07 PM · #292 |
WOW!!! I just listened to this episode on my ipod (I listen to this show as a podcast). I was thinking of starting a new thread to get this link out until I saw posthumous had already posted it here.
This is the most interesting & informative presentation of the economic crisis that I have seen or heard by far. Do yourself a favor if you really care about this issue and listen to that episode. It is very even handed with regard to the blame game but more importantly it takes the time to dissect and explain a couple of the core ingredients of our current situation. Also, it does not pretend to know the answers from here, which is refreshing, although a bit unnerving.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:16:06 PM · #293 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
You forgot Andrew Jackson. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:16:28 PM · #294 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
And we'll go down as the most irresponsible generation of all time. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:18:54 PM · #295 |
Originally posted by Phil:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
And we'll go down as the most irresponsible generation of all time. |
You mean for voting Bush in? :-P |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:22:49 PM · #296 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
You forgot Andrew Jackson. |
I think you mean Andrew Johnson... |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:26:30 PM · #297 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
You forgot Andrew Jackson. |
I think you mean Andrew Johnson... |
Nope, I meant Andrew Jackson, "Old Hickory," 7th president. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:27:12 PM · #298 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Phil:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Wow. I figured I wouldn't start a whole new thread about this but this to me is pretty amazing. Bush is likely to go down as one of the worst presidents of all time.
S&P close January 22, 2001 (day after Inauguration): 1342.90
S&P close today: 996.24
Market growth during 8-years of Bush: -25.9%
I'll take nominations for worse presidents. James Buchanan might hold an edge. Hoover potentially as well. |
And we'll go down as the most irresponsible generation of all time. |
You mean for voting Bush in? :-P |
Not to mention the little fact that we're okay with having loan payments that exceed our monthly income. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:30:02 PM · #299 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Nope, I meant Andrew Jackson, "Old Hickory," 7th president. |
Whatcha got against Mr. Twenty? |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 04:50:34 PM · #300 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 04:22:36 PM EDT.
