What would happen if there was no bailout? NOTHING!!! Other than a few bad businesses going bankrupt and a few Wall Street Fatcats losing a bunch of money.
In the last few days, I've heard some of the dumbest things said by people on TV. Jack Welsh just said on TV that businesses need loans to meet payroll! That's one of the most idiotic statements I've ever heard. Money for payroll comes from income - not loans (at least in successful businesses!!!
Life will go on without the bailout. People will still have jobs. People will still pay their bills. Yes, mortgages may be harder to get for a while. Yes, businesses may have a harder time getting loans for expansion. So what?
On the upside, the morons on Wall Street will go bankrupt. We'll send a powerful message to businesses in the future that reckless businesses will NOT be bailed out! Home prices will continue to drop until they come back to reality. People with bad credit will no longer be able to get loans. Lots of good things will happen!!!
Posted by glassman on :
we have to go on what they tell us don't we?
thing is? they lied to get us in this mess... so why beleive them?
Posted by T e x on :
I can't understand why to respond on this thread
Posted by Propertymanager on :
quote:I can't understand why to respond on this thread
You already did!
Posted by bond006 on :
Don't look now,the auto industry just got 25 billion to help retool so they can make vehicles that sell. Gov. spokesman said if they did not make the loan one of the big three would not be hear.
So what is what I say,what happened to capitalism?
If the auto people did not see a market change they missed in business that cost you money or your business IMHO
Posted by Propertymanager on :
quote:So what is what I say,what happened to capitalism?
I think that we have witnessed the death of capitalism and the birth of the United Socialist States of America (or worse). It's the ultimate government handout - taking money from the middle class and giving it to the Wall Street Fatcats! It makes me sick!
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
pssst. PM... (Your republican party is the one that brought this to the table.)
This bailout is BS.
Bad loans are cloging the credit channels? Fine. We own Fred and Fan now. Figure out which of these bad loans are clogging up and rewrite better loans for those who can afford to pay their mortgage.
All this other bs is worthless. Lets extend credit to banks so they will extend credit to each other so we can all live on credit like we have been doing for the past 20 years.
Remember the last time Bushy tried to push us into making a hasty decision??? (Hint: It started a Trillion dollar war based on lies.)
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by The Bigfoot: pssst. PM... (Your republican party is the one that brought this to the table.)
This bailout is BS.
Bad loans are cloging the credit channels? Fine. We own Fred and Fan now. Figure out which of these bad loans are clogging up and rewrite better loans for those who can afford to pay their mortgage.
All this other bs is worthless. Lets extend credit to banks so they will extend credit to each other so we can all live on credit like we have been doing for the past 20 years.
Remember the last time Bushy tried to push us into making a hasty decision??? (Hint: It started a Trillion dollar war based on lies.)
Why make the statement of it was a republican idea. It has no bearing on the subject, it just causes division on both sides. Looks to me that our leadership on both sides of the spectrum are selling us down a dangerous fork in the road.
Posted by a surfer on :
quote:Originally posted by The Bigfoot: pssst. PM... (Your republican party is the one that brought this to the table.)
This bailout is BS.
Bad loans are cloging the credit channels? Fine. We own Fred and Fan now. Figure out which of these bad loans are clogging up and rewrite better loans for those who can afford to pay their mortgage.
All this other bs is worthless. Lets extend credit to banks so they will extend credit to each other so we can all live on credit like we have been doing for the past 20 years.
Remember the last time Bushy tried to push us into making a hasty decision??? (Hint: It started a Trillion dollar war based on lies.)
All of the ingenious ways to lend money cheap came in the late 90's.
You think Bush started the slack lending.........NOPE.
Should he have let the mess started in the Clinton admin. get this far?? NOPE
The pointing the finger crap is useless.
War did not make the housing bubble happen. PERIOD.
Posted by bond006 on :
This bail out is bs but the fact that Bush operates by using fear he did so on going to war , approval of the patriot act, and same tactic different circumstances on a 700billion bailout package.Gee don't all of you miss the green,amber,and red lights?
Posted by glassman on :
Why make the statement of it was a republican idea. It has no bearing on the subject, it just causes division on both sides. Looks to me that our leadership on both sides of the spectrum are selling us down a dangerous fork in the road.
it's echoes Lock...
4 years ago when i, as republican, began trying to tell other members of my party how bad dubya is? i got alot of heat...
do you remeber the GOP convention in NYC? they wore red white and blue bandaids on their faces to make fun of Kerry...
heck we had one female poster here come on the day after the election and tell me NAH NAH NAH...
needless to say? most of those people don't post here anymore... i think they are embarrassed..
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
Lock.
That comment was directed squarely at PM who has been stating for months that the democratic party is intent on turning America socialist.
Well, here it is. The biggest socialistic plan ever in America and guess what, it wasn't authored by a democrat. The amount of money we are talking about more than doubles the cost estimate to switch our entire country over to a universal healthcare system.
And in typical Bush fashion he has been getting himself excited about worst case scenarios in the backroom with his advisers for months and now that he has lifted the curtain he wants congressional approval by next week!
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
That speech by Bush last night made me want to pull my hair out. If anyone looks as terrible as him in front of a teleprompter please let me know so I can see it.
The Republican Party has been bushwacked.
Posted by bdgee on :
"Why make the statement of it was a republican idea. It has no bearing on the subject, it just causes division on both sides. Looks to me that our leadership on both sides of the spectrum are selling us down a dangerous fork in the road."
Because there is an election in progress and the republican party is trying to make like this is a naturally occurring happening, that just by chance happened on their watch. It didn't just happen by chance, it happened as a result of of decades of pressure by the whole republican party to change the laws in favor of corporations, a thing called corporatism, which, as was pointed out by el Duce, is what fascism really is. It wasn't dubya alone that brough the financial markets to doom. dubya was only acting on behalf of the republican party, as he was supposed to do, according to republican dogma.
"You think Bush started the slack lending".
dubya? Of course not. Daddy Bush was already involved.
"Should he have let the mess started in the Clinton admin. get this far?"
Clinton didn't start the stuff, republican dogma did before he was ever in office. And it should have been stopped long ago.....would have been if it hadn't been a major part of the republican party mantra.
"pointing the finger crap is useless."
Useless to whom? The republicans want to say it is useless because a correctly pointed finger aims directly at the republican party. it was the republican part that brought us denuding the government of any way to properly monitor the actions of the financial sector of the society and, thus, we have this mess. Pointing the finger identifies the culprit at election time.
"War did not make the housing bubble happen."
No, it sure didn't. As a matter of fact, that Iraq war has the same source as this financial mess.....republican mishandling of the government. Their efforts have brought us to the reality of allowing the financial sector to operate with absolutely no responsibility and without safeguards to protect the public, and their lies to cover up the facts about how dismally the financial sector was operating has us now having a need to use public money to bail out the financial sector, and without their lies, we never would have illegally invaded a sovereign nation innocent of every charge the republicans claimed against it.
What is important is to make certain every voting American understands that without the dictatorial republican operation of the Federal Government, we wouldn't have this financial mess and we wouldn't be in Iraq blowing trillions of dollars of public money to fatten up the pockets of dubya's buddies in the oil business. Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: That speech by Bush last night made me want to pull my hair out. If anyone looks as terrible as him in front of a teleprompter please let me know so I can see it.
The Republican Party has been bushwacked.
I can see your point about how bad Bush looks on tv, providing you have never seen McCain on tv.
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
Here is a nonpartisan question.
I know Credit Unions have different rules and reg's than that of banks. Does anyone know what they are and how they will fare comparatively to banks if lending really does freeze up?
Seems to me that Credit Unions have a uniqe opportunity here to step up and become leaders in our banking
AAAAAAAAAA CNN saying breakthrough on bailout approved by both parties!!!!! NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO!
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: That speech by Bush last night made me want to pull my hair out. If anyone looks as terrible as him in front of a teleprompter please let me know so I can see it.
The Republican Party has been bushwacked.
That's a pretty good way to sum up the last 8 years IMO. We were "Bushwhacked"! And lord help us, we do not need another 4 or 8 years of getting "McBushwhacked" either.
Posted by Lockman on :
I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
Posted by Propertymanager on :
quote:That comment was directed squarely at PM who has been stating for months that the democratic party is intent on turning America socialist.
You are exactly right! Bush has done more to move this country toward Socialism in the past 2 weeks that Obama could have ever achieved in 4 years. As I've said many times before, I do not think Bush has done a good job on the economy. Now, I'd say that he is a SOCIALIST AND IS DOING A HORRIBLE JOB!
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
Whatever blows your skirt up Lockman. This mess occurred on Republican watch, spin it how you want, the facts won't change.
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
no, the GOP needs some new leaders.
we/they need to pull the plug on Hannity, Limbugger, Savage and even this guy Beck.. (he's a simpleton).
we need to forget about changing Roe v Wade and spend our time WITH our KIDS (instead of arguing about Roe) so they don't NEED to use those awful medical services..
any time a Preacherman brings up politics? we need to get up and walk out of Church...
Church is for Democrats too...
and all that would just be a start...
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman:
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
no, the GOP needs some new leaders.
we/they need to pull the plug on Hannity, Limbugger, Savage and even this guy Beck.. (he's a simpleton).
we need to forget about changing Roe v Wade and spend our time WITH our KIDS (instead of arguing about Roe) so they don't NEED to use those awful medical services..
any time a Preacherman brings up politics? we need to get up and walk out of Church...
Church is for Democrats too...
and all that would just be a start...
To be honest, both parties need to be completely revamped. They are but mere ghost's of what was intended by our fore fathers imo. It's friggin disgusting.
Posted by glassman on :
To be honest, both parties need to be completely revamped. They are but mere ghost's of what was intended by our fore fathers imo. It's friggin disgusting.
yeah, but people within each party have to step up and whip their OWN people into line instead of blaming the other guys...
i can't beleive that while the debt was being racked up? we were arguing over a dying girl in Fla....
that was about as immature a thing as i can imagine our Congress doing...
Posted by retiredat49 on :
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
We ALREADY have a one party system...
Have had for quite some time now...
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49:
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
We ALREADY have a one party system...
Have had for quite some time now...
Oh, oh, please explain this nugget of insight. We are not a one party system, but I will agree they both suck if that was your point!
Posted by Pagan on :
I mean, I see this picture I am posting and it disgusts me. Oldtime politicians determining our future who are completely out of touch. And I'm a friggin Democrat. Sickening, the backslapping!!!
Posted by retiredat49 on :
No...my point is that they are both actually one in the same...different rhetoric, same results!
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49: No...my point is that they are both actually one in the same...different rhetoric, same results!
I gotcha bond, but I am fed up with both parties. They need a serious revamp. Can we revolt to get change? Or will Homeland Security slaughter us before we "storm the gates"?
Posted by retiredat49 on :
Well...I don't know if the American people have it in them...but I'm getting ready for it.
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by Pagan:
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
Whatever blows your skirt up Lockman. This mess occurred on Republican watch, spin it how you want, the facts won't change.
I'm not spinning anything, you and your cronies constantly blame every bad thing that happens on the Republican party. I believe the democrats have had members in both houses of congress, what the heck have they been doing and if you say nothing then why would you think they'll lead us now.
So once the Dem's have total control will you be here defending their blunders or will you point out every mistake they make and call them on it?
Posted by Lockman on :
quote:Originally posted by Pagan:
quote:Originally posted by retiredat49:
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
We ALREADY have a one party system...
Have had for quite some time now...
Oh, oh, please explain this nugget of insight. We are not a one party system, but I will agree they both suck if that was your point!
It just seems if the Repulican party is responsible for every problem in the world then it should be dismantled, so the high in GPA average democratic party can run everything with out all these restrictions.
Posted by toothpick on :
what are you guys going to buy when the news is announced.
unless they say they are going to let the depression happen stocks should rally strong, what are you guys going to buy?
Posted by Propertymanager on :
Buy on the rumor, SELL on the news!
Once the traders realize that this bailout won't change things, the market should sell off - at least until Paulson, Bush, and the rest of the socialists fire their next magic bullet!
Posted by Propertymanager on :
I heard one of the congressmen say today that he is getting phone calls that are 300 to 2 AGAINST THE BAILOUT! Keep those calls coming. I called my congressmen again today and also sent them all an e-mail.
Posted by glassman on :
all of the Representatives are up for re-election this fall...
they are nervous...
i thinkthey'll pass something AND give US each a thousand$ to be delivered the day beofre the election, which will be hard todo, but they'll figure out a way... Posted by Propertymanager on :
quote:i thinkthey'll pass something AND give US each a thousand$ to be delivered the day beofre the election, which will be hard todo, but they'll figure out a way...
Giving us each $1,000 is easy - just print it!!! Unfortunately, running the printing presses full speed also increases inflation as our currency is devalued.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
I say let it collapse! We could call it tough love. I am shocked that for 8 years this wasnt seen coming at all and addressed to the public.
Posted by Propertymanager on :
I agree! Let it collapse! I am not at all convinced that a main street collapse is tied to the collapse of a few bad apples on Wall Street. Normal businesses can continue to operate (although usually not expand) without new loans.
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Why make the statement of it was a republican idea. It has no bearing on the subject, it just causes division on both sides. Looks to me that our leadership on both sides of the spectrum are selling us down a dangerous fork in the road.
it's echoes Lock...
4 years ago when i, as republican, began trying to tell other members of my party how bad dubya is? i got alot of heat...
do you remeber the GOP convention in NYC? they wore red white and blue bandaids on their faces to make fun of Kerry...
heck we had one female poster here come on the day after the election and tell me NAH NAH NAH...
needless to say? most of those people don't post here anymore... i think they are embarrassed..
Some of "us" still post Glass, pride be damned... I voted for Dubya twice, and I regret it. I believe I gave you some heat back in the day, so if I haven't said so already, sorry bout that... FWIW...
NR.
Posted by Highwaychild on :
Propertymanager,
I didn't see... did you ever get a reply from your F'n Congressman? If so, what'd he/she say?
Posted by glassman on :
Some of "us" still post Glass, pride be damned... I voted for Dubya twice, and I regret it. I believe I gave you some heat back in the day, so if I haven't said so already, sorry bout that... FWIW...
NR.
no need to apologise...
that's politics... i never took any of it personallly... and i was only offering MY opinions...
we need at least two parties to keep each other honest... and they aren't doing a very good job of that are they?
so in that one sense i often feel like we only have one party even tho there are some huge differences between the two
Posted by Highwaychild on :
What pisses me off is that stupid stimulus package the first part of the year... then they plan to take that back about four fold the first of next year! That's what I was saying back then, put that little cookie back in the jar, and try not to let our country's finances crumble.
WE USED TO BE IN THE BLACK! What have they done?
Posted by NaturalResources on :
Glass, I was both passionate and misguided about politics back then, and I'd like to think that since then I have become less of the latter, (though I admit my passion for politics has faded some, replaced by another passion).
As far as parties? I agree, you need two minimum, but three IMO would be much more ideal. Often times with two parties it seems like you end up with each representing an opposite extreme on the political spectrum, with "the guy in the middle" no choice but the lesser of two evils.
As far as the Dems and Reps being honest? I think we both would agree they are crooked. While they might spout political jargon that is on opposite ends of the spectrum, they are both working to screw the rest of us out of our hard earned money, AKA our lives.
JMO, anyway....
Highwaychild, The stimulus package was an easy sell... I mean, cmon, who is gonna say no to "free money"!!
Posted by Propertymanager on :
quote:I didn't see... did you ever get a reply from your F'n Congressman? If so, what'd he/she say?
Yes, I did get a response, both on the phone and via e-mail. Zach Space (D-Oh) said that he is furious about the bailout, but that something may need to be done (in other words, he just copied and pasted Nancy Pelosi's talking points). Sherrod Brown (D-OH) doesn't want to bail out Wall Street but feels that something must be done to prevent a collapse (more Nancy Pelosi talking points). George Voinovich (R-OH) is looking at the bill and listening to his constituents. He's a WEASEL and a DISGRACE that won't take a side and I ALWAYS VOTE AGAINST HIM!!!
However, even though I'm not happy with the response from my congressmen, IT IS WORKING. I've heard from congressmen on TV that they are receiving angry phone calls on the order of 300 to 1 AGAINST THE BAILOUT! These slimy politians want to be re-elected and voting against their constituents is not conducive to self-preservation.
KEEP CALLING - IT IS WORKING!
Posted by wallymac on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: To be honest, both parties need to be completely revamped. They are but mere ghost's of what was intended by our fore fathers imo. It's friggin disgusting.
yeah, but people within each party have to step up and whip their OWN people into line instead of blaming the other guys...
i can't beleive that while the debt was being racked up? we were arguing over a dying girl in Fla....
that was about as immature a thing as i can imagine our Congress doing...
Did you forget about steroids in baseball? Now that was really time well spent.
The biggest problem I see is that the government has become reactive to situations and then only provide short term solutions. They need to be proactive and spend their time solving problems at an early stage instead of waiting for the crisis to occur.
The only good that could possibly come of this is if enough politicians from both sides broke away from their parties and formed a 3rd party. Something more moderate that will keep the far left and right in check.
Posted by bond006 on :
A 3rd party can happen if there is a strong enough issue that sweeps the country. It took slavery to form the last 3rd party the republicans and a civil war after they got into the office of the president. So it is very possible
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
quote:Originally posted by The Bigfoot:
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: I guess the Republican party should no longer exist and we can go to a one party system.
We can call it Democan.
today both parties approved this bailout, so when it doesn't solve all the problems can we say it was a bipartisan blunder?
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To clarify: I was saying yes to the bipartisan blunder. I don't care if the Repub's exist or not. There will always be a conservative party of some type. I just want them to get back to their fiscal base and stop trying to "moralize" the nation.
And PM, I am with you. I have made it as clear as I can to both my senators and my congresswoman that their jobs are on the line here as far as I am concerned.
Posted by glassman on :
back to the topic:
Bernanke pushes computer modeling
By Bloomberg News | November 24, 2006
WASHINGTON -- Inside the U S Federal Reserve headquarters, a small team is testing a forecasting program that does the work of hundreds of economists. Never before has the Fed been able to crunch in real time such a large mountain of data -- as many as 150 indicators -- to divine where the economy is headed.
Chairman Ben S. Bernanke is pushing the "factor model" program -- so named because it reduces everything from home sales to mining capacity into a few weighted averages for making predictions. The Fed could use the help: Its gross domestic product forecasts, which influence its interest rate decisions, have missed the mark by an average of 1 percentage point since 2000.
"It's a powerful tool that can potentially improve the Fed's forecasts," said Richard Clarida, a global strategic adviser at Pacific Investment Management Co. and Columbia University economist who developed a factor model as an assistant treasury secretary in 2001. "Forecasting, especially in real time, is a challenge, and these programs are not swayed by the emotions or the conventional wisdom of the moment."
Bernanke called the models "especially promising" in a speech in 2004. He should know. In 2000, as an economist at Princeton University, Bernanke created one that examined 78 economic indicators. He found that its short-term inflation and unemployment predictions were about as accurate as those produced by some 200 economists at the Fed, according to his published paper.
or is the need for the bailout based on his model?
Posted by glassman on :
one thing that i "picked up" tonight listening to the after debate spintalk PM...
IF they don't do a bailout? or the House GOP's block a bailout? they will lose the over 55 vote, heres' why:
average people nearing retirement are much more concerned that their retirement savings/investments will disappear, they aren't traders, they are just people who contributed to their 401K their whole lives and they see the money disappearing, and they don't have ten-15 years to "get it back"...
if there's no bailout? the market will lose "trust" and drop severely (at best) simply because of the "psychotic" behaviour of the market..
regardless of whether a bailout was really needed or not, the market will react now that everybody has said one is needed...
even tho they are getting lots of calls to not do it? the House GOP are damned if they do and damned of they don't...
Posted by R1 Man on :
I think this is all because of the FREE TRADE agreement with all the countries. Thanks BUSH!!
Think about it....all these companies outsourced SOOOOO MANY JOBS over seas. Less jobs here means more foreclosures, higher inflation, poor get poorer, more chapter 7/11/13. Not to mention Consumer concerns.
No what happens if they get rid of FREE TRADE??? I think it will kill some companies completely and create jobs here again. It will be a gradual effect on the economy but positive in the long run. Jobs will slowly start coming back. Sure inflation will go up for a few years but would decrease over say 5-10 years. Foreclosures will decrease, the poor will start not being poor or as poor.
A college degree of any sort don't mean a whole lot in my view unless your in Medical. Every sector is getting beat up dramatically.
So they raise the mininum wage....so what??? Did I or you get a raise....nope! Unless your at Minimum wage. I haven't had a raise for 2-3 years and I work at Chrysler. Everyone wants more and more cuts....because of a bad economy. Job cuts only makes the economy worse.
The MSNBC CLOWNS keep bring up how everyone still has the STIMULIS CHECKS in their accounts. Sorry, mine was spent the same month. I highly doubt that more then 10% of the people have saved theirs or did it even make a dent. I think a check of $5,000 would make a dent and help but its only short term.
Well, enough of the rant and raves.
Posted by Relentless. on :
Well.. you work at Chrysler.. and except for the Viper.. Chrysler sucks.. they went the polar opposite of the market in terms of vehicles they designed. They went with heavy gas gulping adaptations of former muscle cars of days long since forgotten. They should have gone with fuel sipping nimble roadsters of this day instead. As far as "free Trade"? It is unavoidable no matter your desire to blame the other guy. We are humans living on a speck of dust... Not giants on the center of entirety.
Posted by jgrecoconstr on :
I try to stay out of these discussions but what the heck I'll probably piss some people off with my opinion. Talking about trade and jobs sent overseas no one hear mentioned part of the problem. Partly IMO is union greed. When I was in college I worked summers in a paper mill I rememeber one night the guy I relieved coming up to me and saying he filed a grievence because neither of us were called in for overtime. The result was a free days pay for both him and me. So many union rules drive up the cost of production which in turn drives up the cost of goods. It's no wonder companies want to ship jobs overseas. Several years ago I came up with an idea for a product. I was firm in wanting it made in the US and for several years it was but the price kept rising to manufacture them and my profit was less than what it cost to manufacture. Most products have a target price to sell at, what the market will bear. You can have the best idea in the world but if you can only move your product for no more than 9 bucks and it costs $2.20 to manufacture then it doesn't work out. I know what your thinking ........ theres a seven dollar spread there that's a hell of a profit but it doesn't work that way. You have to add in shipping costs, discounts for distributors, your own shipping costs to get the product out. Distributors get an average of a 55 to 60 percent discount off the retail price plus free shipping. So your 9 dollar product now sells to a distributor for anywhere from $3.60 to $4.05 less manufacturing costs of $2.20 less whatever your shipping charges are. Not much profit there is there. It was a tough decision but the only sensible thing was to have them made in China for considerably less .88 to be exact. What my point is, is that even if you want to have something made here in the US unless you have millions of dollars to invest for a lower price you can't afford to do it. Manufacturing is just to expensive for a small company. Your actually pushed into sending jobs overseas or fold your company it's that simple. I was always pro american for products but I have a much better view now of why you can't find anything made in the US anymore. It's not just politicians that did this to this country. It's unions, corporate greed, and our demand for lower prices on goods. We did this to ourselves so there really is no need to complain.
Posted by glassman on :
JGRE, i am quite familiar with all of the value added problems in pricing, and yes there's been plenty of union mistakes, and management mistakes.
but the reason you ended up having to go to China was because you are competing against Chinese made already.
the market couldn't bear more because people have developed lower expectations of quality.
import duties should have been applied from the very beginning and only lowered as the Chinese economy came to our level.
to suddenly impose huge import duties now would be detrimental too...
but the fact is the Chinese peoples economy is completely controlled by their govt. and the govt specifically manipulates it to keep labor cheap. cheap labor means no jobs here, and if we do not seriously address this issue now? the recent credit crisis is only the beginning.
just baling out Wall St will not fix the underlying problem... we are broke...
Posted by glassman on :
i have been unable to verify this but i recently saw a special on business in China as part of the Olympic buildup.
one of the things that they asked the manger was how much he was payed compared to his workers... he said less than double...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Quote Glassman:
"import duties should have been applied from the very beginning and only lowered as the Chinese economy came to our level."
"just baling out Wall St will not fix the underlying problem... we are broke..."
_________________________________________________
As long as they are meeting this weekend might as well throw those into the discussion and a few other things they can take care of while they are okaying the bailout.
I would think that if the government steps in they are going to sell off a lot of their assets to pay back this loan.
There has to be a ton of money in reserve for all their insurance claims which are suppose to be reserved with the worst case scenario in mind.
This part of there business is overseen by the dept of insurance which again is suppose to make sure that they are constantly updating those reserves.
Posted by glassman on :
i think we can assume that the insurance (CDS'es) were all sold back and forth amongst one another and there isn't anything in reserve backing them up...
that's the real crime.. they looked at the derivatives as trading vehicles instead of insurace and it made them all co-dependent.. Japan has similar problems in their market too...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Quote Glassman:
"i think we can assume that the insurance (CDS'es) were all sold back and forth amongst one another and there isn't anything in reserve backing them up..."
_________________________________________________
I assume you are saying the banks have used this money in a questionable manner?
From what i have read AIG's insurance business is suppose to be sound, which would mean the reserve is sound.
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Quote Glassman:
"i think we can assume that the insurance (CDS'es) were all sold back and forth amongst one another and there isn't anything in reserve backing them up..."
_________________________________________________
Although if this was true then i do not think we would have any choice but to bail them out because so many regular people would be at risk if they go under.
Lots of questions that i am not sure we will ever know the answers to.
Posted by glassman on :
seems to me that if they held their CASH reserves? they wouldn't need the bailout...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Quote I HUB board:
"The bank 'liquidity' scare is a SCAM.
You have to ASK the question.
If the investment banks leveraged over 100 times (each) their capital, and sold it as bundled paper (CDO, CLO, SIV etc...)
WHERE is the money now? Money in the system DOESNT disappear, it may be transferred from bank to bank to bank, but it MUST go somewhere.
A. Bank loans money for a mortage to a person B. Person takes money and pays off existing loans, thus, money goes to Bank B C. Investment banks buy the mortgages from Banks A, B, and C, thus moving money to Banks A, B, and C D. Investment banks bundle up mortgages and sell them as Bonds (CLO, CDO, SIV), and receives money from bond purchasers
Wash, rinse, repeat
So WHY is there the farce of a liquidity crisis? There isnt. One step is missing of course.
Investment banks move ALL money offshore into Hedge Funds, thus removing cash from financial system. They still HAVE the money, but since hedge funds are NOT regulated, OR are required to file their assets with the FED or SEC, they can be completey out of the system.
Thus, Investment banks show liquidity problems on THEIR balance sheets, and come hat in hand for taxpayers... NOT to save them, but to give them ADDITIONAL free money.
The elite bankers win either way. If the govt DOESNT re-liquify them, they STILL control the assets of their offshore Hedge Funds, and lehman goes to bankruptcy (example), if the 700 billion dollar bailout occurs (Really 5 trillion), then they can move even MORE money offshore, and Paulson can say it wasnt enough and the credit markets are STILL frozen.
So... what has the investment bank Hedge funds been doing with this money?
Buying our infrastructure, commodities, water systems, etc...
The derivative numbers have been calculated at over 1 quadrillion dollars. But guess what?
61 billion dollars would pay for every mortgage owned by the public since 2004... the time frame that lenders opened up subprime lending.
Yet WHY do they need 700 billion? 61 billion would end foreclosures for Americans, and common logic says that money circulates in an economy, not disappears.
So you tell me... what smells rotten here in Denmark?"
_________________________________________________
This quote and theory spells out pretty much what you are saying.
-
Posted by glassman on :
OK, that is why when Paulson went looking for more money from China last year, and they said no?
that IMO, was the trigger....
QUOTE: 61 billion dollars would pay for every mortgage owned by the public since 2004 ---------------------------------------- that's just not true...
200,000$ into 61,000,000,000$ is only 305,000 homes...
as of June? there were 4 million homes either late or in foreclosure, i posted that earlier...
this problem is not nearly as simple as alot of people want to think it is... but the shell game part is more or less correct..
the part missing is that China and house Saud has most all the cash IMO..
i propose that the banks created money out of thin air..
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Okay throw that theory out.
Back to the reserves, if these reserves are gone then our Gov. screw it up again.
Thus they will have to bail them out for 3 quick reasons.
1.There are so many regular people that will be hurt and people would no longer trust that if they pay for insurance that they will have protection.(not that feel great about it now but there is a big differance)
2. Government would be caught with there pants down in a hugh way since they are suppose to be protecting this part of insurance claims.
3. If they do not bail them out this problem would be exposed big time, where is if they do they can hide it a lot easier.
Posted by glassman on :
Okay throw that theory out.
it's not that it's wrong entirely..
it's just simplistic..
for instance? if you go look up our REAL trade deficits? you can see where the cash is...
add them up year over year...
of course a few hedges cleaned out the brokers... that's kind of funny since the brokers extended so many special privileges to them and allowed them to clean out just about everybody else...
but like a zoo? then when the animals had nothing else to "eat"? they turned on their "keeper"
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
What we need to do is start convincing our friends and neighbors to start thinking about "True Cost" economics. To insist on purchasing responsible products.
What grade material was used to create the item? Was it created in a responsible manner? What percentage of the cost of this product goes to labor/manufacturing/shipping? What type of pollution is created and how is it contained?
(Yes, I know it'll take an act of congress for most companies to volunteer this information but until we insist on this who knows what product Melamine will end up in next?)
Next we need to start buying responsibly ourselves. When our grandfather (maybe great-grandfather for the young) purchased a new kitchen table it was not some pre-fab thing from IKEA with a 5 year lifespan. It was meant to stay with the family for decades and then be handed down to the children.
That is the essence of the word "Reduce" within reduce/reuse/recycle. The least understood of the environmental motto. Choose products that have the least amount of impact on the world and on ourselves. Right now that would exclude nearly everything from China until they learn how to regulate their pollution (Course...in some industries the same can be said here.)
Posted by glassman on :
yes BF, we need to educate people to be better consumers...
you wouldn't believe how many people ask me why glass is so expensive...
here's where alotof the cash went:
and it's kinda funny how people were saying ( in '06) that the Chinese were not very "sophistiocated" in their investing practices...
i think they could see that all the derivatives were just a bunch of malarkey...
Posted by glassman on :
this is a pretty good article from last April... it was written just after Bear Sterns collapsed:
Credit default swaps are the most widely traded form of credit derivative. They are bets between two parties on whether or not a company will default on its bonds. In a typical default swap, the “protection buyer” gets a large payoff if the company defaults within a certain period of time, while the “protection seller” collects periodic payments for assuming the risk of default.
CDS thus resemble insurance policies,
but there is no requirement to actually hold any asset or suffer any loss,
so CDS are widely used just to speculate on market changes. In one ****ger's example, a hedge fund wanting to increase its profits could sit back and collect $320,000 a year in premiums just for selling “protection” on a risky BBB junk bond.
The premiums are “free” money - free until the bond actually goes into default, when the hedge fund could be on the hook for $100 million in claims. And there's the catch: what if the hedge fund doesn't have the $100 million? The fund's corporate shell or limited partnership is put into bankruptcy, but that hardly helps the “protection buyers” who thought they were covered.
Bear Stearns helped fuel the explosive growth in the credit derivative market, where banks, hedge funds and other investors have engaged in $45 trillion worth of bets on the credit-worthiness of companies and countries. Before it collapsed, Bear was the counterparty to $13 trillion in derivative trades. On March 14, 2008, Bear's ratings were downgraded by Moody's, a major rating agency; and on March 16, the brokerage was bought by JPMorgan for pennies on the dollar, a token buyout designed to avoid the legal complications of bankruptcy. The deal was backed by a $29 billion “non-recourse” loan from the Federal Reserve. “Non-recourse” meant that the Fed got only Bear's shaky paper assets as collateral. If those proved to be worthless, JPM was off the hook. It was an unprecedented move, of questionable legality; but it was said to be justified because, as one headline put it, “Fed's Rescue of Bear Halted Derivatives Chernobyl.” The notion either that Bear was “rescued” or that the Chernobyl was halted, however, was grossly misleading. The CEOs managed to salvage their enormous bonuses, but it was a “bailout” only for JPM and Bear's creditors.
![[More Crap]](graemlins/morecrap.png)
