The federal reserve the IMF and the WTO....with these organizations in place, every politician is ultimately a puppet in the end. To pretend otherwise is quite ridiculous. Hence the saying give me control of a nations money and I care not who makes it's laws.
The day Obama talks seriously about addressing the fore mentioned criminal institutions will be definitely an interesting day. Has he yet at any point thus far?
Until then it's all smoke and mirrors with happy words in a shiny package.
One documentary to check out for thew doubters is "Fiat Empire". Give it a google or a torrent sometime.
This is a conventional politics thread, Roland.
We're not wanted here.
Never mind you that the men behind the Federal Reserve are the same men backing Obama.
Lets just take the conventional view of this.
What in your opinion does it mean that "Wallstreet" is funding Obama?
:rolleyes:
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
This is a conventional politics thread, Roland.
We're not wanted here.
Never mind you that the men behind the Federal Reserve are the same men backing Obama.
Lets just take the conventional view of this.
What in your opinion does it mean that "Wallstreet" is funding Obama?
welcome back. hope your stunningly persuasive rhetorical fireworks were worth the time off. and who knew, after you were gone, your well-reasoned and coherent arguments convinced almost everyone! there havent been any threads about the evil conspiracy of the fed reserve since, becos you won so handily everyone just accepted it!
welcome back. hope your stunningly persuasive rhetorical fireworks were worth the time off. and who knew, after you were gone, your well-reasoned and coherent arguments convinced almost everyone! there havent been any threads about the evil conspiracy of the fed reserve since, becos you won so handily everyone just accepted it!
i never got a time-out.
i just lost interest in arguing against a brick wall.
:rolleyes:
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
hey, where is the economy post today? I'm disapointed? Oil at $105
Like i said, i just gave up talking to a brick wall. On all fronts.
You want an economy post?
I just cashed out my ENTIRE Roth IRA Retirement Fund.
1\4 of it is in Gold EFTs so i have some leverageable liquidity. The rest of it is going in to bags of silver or cash on hand.
The economy is in the shitter.
The Ambac bailout "hit a snag" today.
The market plummeted.
Dow down 340 points right now.
If it wasn't Friday, it would probably be down 600.
S&P down 40.
Gold is at an alltime high again, 975 or something an ounce.
Oil still over 100
The dollar is like fractions of a penny off a new all time low.
Like 73.5 on the dollar index.
I think i said it would be in the 60's by mid year
... looks like i'll be right.
Traders on the floor, and at corporate trading desks being interviewed on CNBC are saying, "in the short term we are headed down, and in the long term we are headed down."
One guy was on today rambling about how "the real problem is we've been operating at unsafe levels of leverage in the financial sector. But the bigger problem is that our government has been overlevereage for quite some time. We've had 4 successive administrations, Bush, Clinton, Bush & Reagan who all thought deficits were not important. Today we are running at massively unsustainable deficits. This has no where to play out except in the dollar. The dollar is under heavy pressure and is continuing to weaken. Prices are on the rise, and the Fed is basicaly going in to this crisis attacking the dollar. Its very hard to see any light on the horizon at this point."
Thats basicaly what the guy said.
They're trying to sugar coat this by saying "we're seeing light volume today. nothing out of the ordinary." ... uh yeah you nimwits, it's fucking friday. No one wants to hold positions over the weekend. Duh!
We will probably get a pop next week when they announce for the 3rd time now that Ambac is getting a bail out, but the rally will fade fast, as we have had NOTHING but horribly bleak economic news this week and last.
GDP is bad.
Unemployment is still up.
Housing prices are down another 10%.
Sales are still flat.
New home sales are like 70% lower than last year.
Banks are getting margin calls which is BAD news.
Numerous private indicators came back 10 to 20 points below expectation.
Consumer confidence is at an 18 year low.
I mean i could go on and on.
Every day some new number that sucks asshole has come out.
IF there is an upside, most people with a brain are pretty hard pressed to find it.
???
you wanted an economic post
you got it.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
yeah man it was pretty rough today. well done moving some into gold. I'm still hopeful this will turn around, but ultimately what you bolded up there is the issue. Massive fiscal irresponsibility. Layoffs everywhere.
The positive is... this is going to force some technological change. Perhaps pull back from such big hulking companies and start building, growing, buying locally.
Eventually, bills do come due.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
The rest of it is going in to bags of silver or cash on hand. We've had 4 successive administrations, Bush, Clinton, Bush & Reagan
euros? Surely not greenbacks.....don't understand why the weak ass dollar's not scaring the shit out of people right now....wanna buy some decent stocks....catapilliar, boeing, GE.
What most people don't understand is it has nothing to do with the overall health of our real economy ... goods, services, workers doing good work. None of that matters for dick.
The problem is the banks.
The banks and the Federal Reserve have put us in a pickle of epic proportions.
The banks are over leveraged with money created out of thin air and lent to them, which they in turn lent irresponsibly.
Those loans were all securitized and put on the books and in turn used by the banks as capital to borrow off of themselves. But the loans are collapsing in value to such an extend that among myriad other problems this causes, the banks are physicaly coming due for margin calls.
People have no idea what the implications of this are. Today we heard a ton about it on the news because the markets are being flooded with municiple bonds which are being sold off by the hundreds of millions of dollars to help banks get back under margin caps.
Basicaly the assets on their books (lots of bad loans) are no longer worth enough to support the amount of leverage (borrowing) that the banks have incurred. Say Citibank had 50million in the securitized home loans (value as of January). As of january they had $25 million borrowed against that. That would be 50% margin. Usualy 70% is a cap (i have no idea what the banks get away with) ... now say the value of those 50 million in securitized loans drops by 40%. Suddenly the banks only have $30million on the books (not 50). But they still have $25million borrowed against it. 25mil\30mil is 83% !
But the banks are only allowed to have 70% margin. Thats a 13% descrepancy. When this happens they are literaly forced by law to sell something (not the bad loans, cause no one wants them!) of value ... so they have to get rid of the only good assets on their books, municipal bonds, to cover the difference.
This causes their captial\reserve supply to fall drasticaly.
This means their capacity for business operations falls too.
Business operations are making loans.
Making loans is what makes money in our economy.
If banks aren't making loans, the money supply is retracting.
That is called deflation, and its what the anti-gold idiots constantly argue as the reason we can't have a gold standard.
Except we are approaching stagflation at a rapid pace.
And this marin-call bullshit is just ONE problem that hte mortgage crisis is causing.
SERIOUS problems here.
Deep fundamental problems that can not be addressed in any way but for the Federal Reserve to literally continue printing money as fast as they can to provide the liquidity that the banks have foolishly lost.
Unfortunately the dollar is HURTING.
HURTING BAD.
As the government continues to bail out the economy by printing money, it will unwittingly destroy the currency and sodomize the economy it thought it was sustaining.
:(
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
euros? Surely not greenbacks.....don't understand why the weak ass dollar's not scaring the shit out of people right now....wanna buy some decent stocks....catapilliar, boeing, GE.
Clinton balanced.
Trust me, i do NOT want to be holding dollars.
Unfortuantely the US has something called "legal tender" laws which REQUIRE purchases to be made in USD.
I am only going to be holding as much $ as is needed for short term transactions, and also enough held in reserve to account for a suspiscion that gold will pull back $20 or so in the short term. There is still a ever-decreasing possibility that stocks could rebound in the next month, and that could temporarily depress gold.
That is the ONLY reason i'm holding cash back.
Basicaly because i listened to my dumb ass FM and did not liquidate and go in to gold in August. :rolleyes: ... and now i'm literaly chasing the market.
Bah.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
those are the highest return investments. and making a few extra bucks is worth a few legal or human rights violations, esp when you can rationalize it by saying you werent really THAT involved.
You're absolutely right. You can rationalize anything if you really want to...look at Nazi Germany. You did a good job of rationalizing away Obama's donors earlier in the thread. Not much you can say to that...but that I'm sure you're all aware there IS a practice of corporations making rather large contributions through employees so that they are able to appear not 'connected' to one another. OR haven't you heard?? It wouldn't look too good if these firms started their own political action committees for Obama. People would start to question what's in it for them and rightly so since Obama's speeches have been against special interests. Is this the case with Obama? Are these legit donors or is it more than just that simple? Hard to tell. It definitely is quite the coincidence that so many donors just happen to come from financial firms. His vote against the credit card interest rate cap starts to look kinda like a favor. But nah, Obama wouldn't do that. It's only speculation and pretty hard to prove. So can we trust Obama to protect the people's concerns over predatory lending and other related issues? Or should these coincidences be of no concern? It just seems odd how liberals traditionally hold conservatives to the flames for these same types of matters and as of late Hillary, also. Obama, the golden child, continues to earn free passes.
Concerning the Nader article...it shocked me. And yes, I do view it as hypocritical. Today I have contacted his campaign and even his myspace page asking for answers and any further info they can share on this matter. I'm not going to just rationalize this away as if it isn't something of substance because it is. It would serve all of you well to do the same concerning the claims against your candidate instead of just giving them a free pass as if it doesn't matter to you anymore because it's Obama and not Hillary. Have any of you addressed the Obama campaign about the nuclear power industry support, about the holes in his healthcare plan, anything at all? Or do you just sit back and let them call all the shots for you while you simply follow behind whatever direction they take? It's up to you, to all of us to keep our politicians in check and let them know we are watching, force them to be more honest and upfront, let them know what matters to us! If you give them no challenge then they WILL do the LEAST amount for you it takes to get them by. So it's all up to you what is good enough. If you want change...you have to make it.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Obama, the golden child, continues to earn free passes.
Not to beat a dead horse (or candidate) but i really like the irony here where Obama is outed on accepting millions from an industry that is proclaimed "The Last Plantation" ... literally accepting millions from racists in action. And yet the man is never once questioned in his empathy or apathy for "black people". Why? Probably because of a racist opinion that goes something like this: "Yeah, but Obama is black."
But then, Ron Paul gets one measely contribution from a guy in the klan and bada-bing ... Racist.
(this story by the way, now outed as having been a "zionist" plot. no shit)
:rolleyes:
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I don't care too much about the nuclear power issue (I actually don't mind the idea of nuclear power), believe Obama when he says he voted against the interest rate cap because he didn't want to sweeten a bad bill (he voted against the entire bill), and think opening up Federal health insurance at subsidized rates (but not making it mandatory) is a reasonable compromise and good first step toward universal health care, can I still call myself a Liberal?
If I don't care too much about the nuclear power issue (I actually don't mind the idea of nuclear power), believe Obama when he says he voted against the interest rate cap because he didn't want to sweeten a bad bill (he voted against the entire bill), and think opening up Federal health insurance at subsidized rates (but not making it mandatory) is a reasonable compromise and good first step toward universal health care, can I still call myself a Liberal?
You don't have to ask permission from me.
So do you view the contributors mentioned in the OP as all coincidences? Do you think there is no connection to the interest rate vote or the banking industry in general? Would you feel the same if it was Hillary?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
So do you view the contributors mentioned in the OP as all coincidences? Do you think there is no connection to the interest rate vote or the banking industry in general? Would you feel the same if it was Hillary?
I don't know if they're coincidences or not. I will say that the reason we know who those contributors are is because of the Obama-Feingold ethics bill that was passed. And I wouldn't really hold these against Hillary Clinton either.
One of my primary reasons for not supporting Hillary Clinton is because she's a Clinton. Been there done that. And I don't really see her growing the number of "liberal" voters in this country. In fact, I see her shrinking that number the same way her husband did.
P.S., sorry if my last post sounded a little snarky. Rough day, you see.
I don't know if they're coincidences or not. I will say that the reason we know who those contributors are is because of the Obama-Feingold ethics bill that was passed. And I wouldn't really hold these against Hillary Clinton either.
One of my primary reasons for not supporting Hillary Clinton is because she's a Clinton. Been there done that. And I don't really see her growing the number of "liberal" voters in this country. In fact, I see her shrinking that number the same way her husband did.
P.S., sorry if my last post sounded a little snarky. Rough day, you see.
I know your voting strategically and that you're ideal stance on the issues, at least on healthcare, isn't what you're getting with Obama...but you feel the baby steps are enough and don't want another Rep in office. But I, myself, have serious doubts about Obama and Clinton. I've see the half-assed years of Clinton that went by as wasted time with little real progress. So I can't see myself, in good conscience, voting for a person who says he 'wants to expand and modernize the military'. How is he going to expand the already bloated defense budget and ridiculously large and wasteful military while also implementing these social programs he touts? You know my other gripes...you're cool with the nuclear power even though it's short sighted and we have no way to dispose of it's waste properly. You're cool with the gradual withdrawl which can change at any moment and it that seems he wants to have a presence in the middle east, whatever that means....Anyhoo, I have to vote for the person who best fits my ideals of what is best for this country. With the Democratic candidates all I'm seeing is 'Welcome to nowhere fast' and I don't want to waste another 4 years.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
It's not that strategic. I actually like Obama. Yes, I would prefer a single payer healthcare system - but it's not up to the president to enact one. Congress has to write it up - and I think that if they actually did, he would sign it. However, I know he won't push for single payer, and I accept that.
I believe gradual withdrawl is the best option, not a compromise. And I don't see a problem with having troops in the Middle East, provided they're in friendlier territory. As for modernization of the millitary, I believe improved technology - particularly in the area of Special Forces - would be the best way to deal with actual terrorists. I don't believe he's in favor of invasion and occupation.
He's also said that he wouldn't support new nuclear power plants without vastly improved methods of dealing with the waste. Again, I'm o.k. with that stand.
No, he's not an "ideal" candidate - and, put simply, there is no such thing.
No, he's not an "ideal" candidate - and, put simply, there is no such thing.
Very true. But there are people out there closer to my 'ideal' than Obama who I believe would fight harder for the kinda changes I'd like to finally start seeing in this country.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Very true. But there are people out there closer to my 'ideal' than Obama who I believe would fight harder for the kinda changes I'd like to finally start seeing in this country.
That's cool. Provided he wins on Tuesday, I'll have 8 months to change your mind.
This is a conventional politics thread, Roland.
We're not wanted here.
Never mind you that the men behind the Federal Reserve are the same men backing Obama.
Lets just take the conventional view of this.
What in your opinion does it mean that "Wallstreet" is funding Obama?
:rolleyes:
Conventional....that about sums it up. Getting some people to understand economics is like...well... you know already quite well I'm sure.
Obama is better than McCain and Hillary, but not the best obviously. Thats about as real as it gets. I suppose some don't care about depreciating wealth and how the fed is structured to channel wealth specifically in a certain direction (away from the population). You need to strike at the root, many like to hack away at the branches in denial for some reason.
Forgot to mention...check out the documentary by Robert Kane Pappas - "Orwell Rolls in his Grave" the beginning of that perfectly explains my take on Obama and the mainstream candidates in general. Highly recommended viewing.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
those are the highest return investments. and making a few extra bucks is worth a few legal or human rights violations, esp when you can rationalize it by saying you werent really THAT involved.
it also said they were mutual funds, right? does anyone on here know what exact stocks are in their 401k's mutual funds?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
1. there isn't really a major law firm in this country that doesn't do lobbying. hell, i applied to and interviewed with half the firms on that list. the firm i am working for does lobbying too.
2. they bury the determinative part in the middle of a sentence turned into a question to make a perfectly legit answer seem incredulous: "these funds are coming from the employees of these firms." now, maybe the author has never worked a day in his life in a law firm, but that is not farfetched at all. there can be a hell of a lot of equity partners in a firm, and they are perfectly capable of doing whatever they damn well please with their money. if the money is coming from private citizens within the firm, i see nothing shady about that. nobody would blink twice if ed made a large donation to ralph nader. why should citizens be banned from financially supporting candidates of their choosing becos they work for a law firm? should we ban greenpeace members from donating to any campaigns becos their organization lobbies for change too?
3. im very curious what 6 donors he felt we did not need to know about... i thought censorship and screening and propaganda was what evil corporations did. im glad he has decided to filter things for us.
i guess it depends on if these 2 sentences are different to you or not:
'Citigroup gave Obama $X.'
'The ppl who run Citigroup gave Obama $X.'
a lot of execs on the list, and it's not just that but having an exec of citigroup, actually the guy who called the treasury dept asking for a favor for enron, as one of his top advisors, i've posted another article or part of one before stating some of his top donors, at the time, were credit card lobbyists, nuclear poewr lobbyists...not just employees who have a right to give money to whomever they support, but lobbyists and top executives...yes, they have a right, too. all i'm saying is if this were that 'mullet-headed bitch' would you all shrug it off? what if it were mccain or bush or romney or whoever the other person is?
and what's nader have to do w/ anything in the original post?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
You're absolutely right. You can rationalize anything if you really want to...look at Nazi Germany. You did a good job of rationalizing away Obama's donors earlier in the thread. Not much you can say to that...but that I'm sure you're all aware there IS a practice of corporations making rather large contributions through employees so that they are able to appear not 'connected' to one another. OR haven't you heard?? It wouldn't look too good if these firms started their own political action committees for Obama. People would start to question what's in it for them and rightly so since Obama's speeches have been against special interests. Is this the case with Obama? Are these legit donors or is it more than just that simple? Hard to tell. It definitely is quite the coincidence that so many donors just happen to come from financial firms. His vote against the credit card interest rate cap starts to look kinda like a favor. But nah, Obama wouldn't do that. It's only speculation and pretty hard to prove. So can we trust Obama to protect the people's concerns over predatory lending and other related issues? Or should these coincidences be of no concern? It just seems odd how liberals traditionally hold conservatives to the flames for these same types of matters and as of late Hillary, also. Obama, the golden child, continues to earn free passes.
Concerning the Nader article...it shocked me. And yes, I do view it as hypocritical. Today I have contacted his campaign and even his myspace page asking for answers and any further info they can share on this matter. I'm not going to just rationalize this away as if it isn't something of substance because it is. It would serve all of you well to do the same concerning the claims against your candidate instead of just giving them a free pass as if it doesn't matter to you anymore because it's Obama and not Hillary. Have any of you addressed the Obama campaign about the nuclear power industry support, about the holes in his healthcare plan, anything at all? Or do you just sit back and let them call all the shots for you while you simply follow behind whatever direction they take? It's up to you, to all of us to keep our politicians in check and let them know we are watching, force them to be more honest and upfront, let them know what matters to us! If you give them no challenge then they WILL do the LEAST amount for you it takes to get them by. So it's all up to you what is good enough. If you want change...you have to make it.
i'd be interested in hearing an answer to this, myself. their stock answer seems to be 'i don't care!!'
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Comments
This is a conventional politics thread, Roland.
We're not wanted here.
Never mind you that the men behind the Federal Reserve are the same men backing Obama.
Lets just take the conventional view of this.
What in your opinion does it mean that "Wallstreet" is funding Obama?
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
welcome back. hope your stunningly persuasive rhetorical fireworks were worth the time off. and who knew, after you were gone, your well-reasoned and coherent arguments convinced almost everyone! there havent been any threads about the evil conspiracy of the fed reserve since, becos you won so handily everyone just accepted it!
i never got a time-out.
i just lost interest in arguing against a brick wall.
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
hey, where is the economy post today? I'm disapointed? Oil at $105
Like i said, i just gave up talking to a brick wall. On all fronts.
You want an economy post?
I just cashed out my ENTIRE Roth IRA Retirement Fund.
1\4 of it is in Gold EFTs so i have some leverageable liquidity. The rest of it is going in to bags of silver or cash on hand.
The economy is in the shitter.
The Ambac bailout "hit a snag" today.
The market plummeted.
Dow down 340 points right now.
If it wasn't Friday, it would probably be down 600.
S&P down 40.
Gold is at an alltime high again, 975 or something an ounce.
Oil still over 100
The dollar is like fractions of a penny off a new all time low.
Like 73.5 on the dollar index.
I think i said it would be in the 60's by mid year
... looks like i'll be right.
Traders on the floor, and at corporate trading desks being interviewed on CNBC are saying, "in the short term we are headed down, and in the long term we are headed down."
One guy was on today rambling about how "the real problem is we've been operating at unsafe levels of leverage in the financial sector. But the bigger problem is that our government has been overlevereage for quite some time. We've had 4 successive administrations, Bush, Clinton, Bush & Reagan who all thought deficits were not important. Today we are running at massively unsustainable deficits. This has no where to play out except in the dollar. The dollar is under heavy pressure and is continuing to weaken. Prices are on the rise, and the Fed is basicaly going in to this crisis attacking the dollar. Its very hard to see any light on the horizon at this point."
Thats basicaly what the guy said.
They're trying to sugar coat this by saying "we're seeing light volume today. nothing out of the ordinary." ... uh yeah you nimwits, it's fucking friday. No one wants to hold positions over the weekend. Duh!
We will probably get a pop next week when they announce for the 3rd time now that Ambac is getting a bail out, but the rally will fade fast, as we have had NOTHING but horribly bleak economic news this week and last.
GDP is bad.
Unemployment is still up.
Housing prices are down another 10%.
Sales are still flat.
New home sales are like 70% lower than last year.
Banks are getting margin calls which is BAD news.
Numerous private indicators came back 10 to 20 points below expectation.
Consumer confidence is at an 18 year low.
I mean i could go on and on.
Every day some new number that sucks asshole has come out.
IF there is an upside, most people with a brain are pretty hard pressed to find it.
???
you wanted an economic post
you got it.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
i remember the perception
The positive is... this is going to force some technological change. Perhaps pull back from such big hulking companies and start building, growing, buying locally.
Eventually, bills do come due.
euros? Surely not greenbacks.....don't understand why the weak ass dollar's not scaring the shit out of people right now....wanna buy some decent stocks....catapilliar, boeing, GE.
Clinton balanced.
I'm going to Italy in July, you best believe I'm buying up some Euros now.
i wish i could even be that optimistic.
What most people don't understand is it has nothing to do with the overall health of our real economy ... goods, services, workers doing good work. None of that matters for dick.
The problem is the banks.
The banks and the Federal Reserve have put us in a pickle of epic proportions.
The banks are over leveraged with money created out of thin air and lent to them, which they in turn lent irresponsibly.
Those loans were all securitized and put on the books and in turn used by the banks as capital to borrow off of themselves. But the loans are collapsing in value to such an extend that among myriad other problems this causes, the banks are physicaly coming due for margin calls.
People have no idea what the implications of this are. Today we heard a ton about it on the news because the markets are being flooded with municiple bonds which are being sold off by the hundreds of millions of dollars to help banks get back under margin caps.
Basicaly the assets on their books (lots of bad loans) are no longer worth enough to support the amount of leverage (borrowing) that the banks have incurred. Say Citibank had 50million in the securitized home loans (value as of January). As of january they had $25 million borrowed against that. That would be 50% margin. Usualy 70% is a cap (i have no idea what the banks get away with) ... now say the value of those 50 million in securitized loans drops by 40%. Suddenly the banks only have $30million on the books (not 50). But they still have $25million borrowed against it. 25mil\30mil is 83% !
But the banks are only allowed to have 70% margin. Thats a 13% descrepancy. When this happens they are literaly forced by law to sell something (not the bad loans, cause no one wants them!) of value ... so they have to get rid of the only good assets on their books, municipal bonds, to cover the difference.
This causes their captial\reserve supply to fall drasticaly.
This means their capacity for business operations falls too.
Business operations are making loans.
Making loans is what makes money in our economy.
If banks aren't making loans, the money supply is retracting.
That is called deflation, and its what the anti-gold idiots constantly argue as the reason we can't have a gold standard.
Except we are approaching stagflation at a rapid pace.
And this marin-call bullshit is just ONE problem that hte mortgage crisis is causing.
SERIOUS problems here.
Deep fundamental problems that can not be addressed in any way but for the Federal Reserve to literally continue printing money as fast as they can to provide the liquidity that the banks have foolishly lost.
Unfortunately the dollar is HURTING.
HURTING BAD.
As the government continues to bail out the economy by printing money, it will unwittingly destroy the currency and sodomize the economy it thought it was sustaining.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Trust me, i do NOT want to be holding dollars.
Unfortuantely the US has something called "legal tender" laws which REQUIRE purchases to be made in USD.
I am only going to be holding as much $ as is needed for short term transactions, and also enough held in reserve to account for a suspiscion that gold will pull back $20 or so in the short term. There is still a ever-decreasing possibility that stocks could rebound in the next month, and that could temporarily depress gold.
That is the ONLY reason i'm holding cash back.
Basicaly because i listened to my dumb ass FM and did not liquidate and go in to gold in August. :rolleyes: ... and now i'm literaly chasing the market.
Bah.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
You're absolutely right. You can rationalize anything if you really want to...look at Nazi Germany. You did a good job of rationalizing away Obama's donors earlier in the thread. Not much you can say to that...but that I'm sure you're all aware there IS a practice of corporations making rather large contributions through employees so that they are able to appear not 'connected' to one another. OR haven't you heard?? It wouldn't look too good if these firms started their own political action committees for Obama. People would start to question what's in it for them and rightly so since Obama's speeches have been against special interests. Is this the case with Obama? Are these legit donors or is it more than just that simple? Hard to tell. It definitely is quite the coincidence that so many donors just happen to come from financial firms. His vote against the credit card interest rate cap starts to look kinda like a favor. But nah, Obama wouldn't do that. It's only speculation and pretty hard to prove. So can we trust Obama to protect the people's concerns over predatory lending and other related issues? Or should these coincidences be of no concern? It just seems odd how liberals traditionally hold conservatives to the flames for these same types of matters and as of late Hillary, also. Obama, the golden child, continues to earn free passes.
Concerning the Nader article...it shocked me. And yes, I do view it as hypocritical. Today I have contacted his campaign and even his myspace page asking for answers and any further info they can share on this matter. I'm not going to just rationalize this away as if it isn't something of substance because it is. It would serve all of you well to do the same concerning the claims against your candidate instead of just giving them a free pass as if it doesn't matter to you anymore because it's Obama and not Hillary. Have any of you addressed the Obama campaign about the nuclear power industry support, about the holes in his healthcare plan, anything at all? Or do you just sit back and let them call all the shots for you while you simply follow behind whatever direction they take? It's up to you, to all of us to keep our politicians in check and let them know we are watching, force them to be more honest and upfront, let them know what matters to us! If you give them no challenge then they WILL do the LEAST amount for you it takes to get them by. So it's all up to you what is good enough. If you want change...you have to make it.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Not to beat a dead horse (or candidate) but i really like the irony here where Obama is outed on accepting millions from an industry that is proclaimed "The Last Plantation" ... literally accepting millions from racists in action. And yet the man is never once questioned in his empathy or apathy for "black people". Why? Probably because of a racist opinion that goes something like this: "Yeah, but Obama is black."
But then, Ron Paul gets one measely contribution from a guy in the klan and bada-bing ... Racist.
(this story by the way, now outed as having been a "zionist" plot. no shit)
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
You don't have to ask permission from me.
So do you view the contributors mentioned in the OP as all coincidences? Do you think there is no connection to the interest rate vote or the banking industry in general? Would you feel the same if it was Hillary?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
One of my primary reasons for not supporting Hillary Clinton is because she's a Clinton. Been there done that. And I don't really see her growing the number of "liberal" voters in this country. In fact, I see her shrinking that number the same way her husband did.
P.S., sorry if my last post sounded a little snarky. Rough day, you see.
I know your voting strategically and that you're ideal stance on the issues, at least on healthcare, isn't what you're getting with Obama...but you feel the baby steps are enough and don't want another Rep in office. But I, myself, have serious doubts about Obama and Clinton. I've see the half-assed years of Clinton that went by as wasted time with little real progress. So I can't see myself, in good conscience, voting for a person who says he 'wants to expand and modernize the military'. How is he going to expand the already bloated defense budget and ridiculously large and wasteful military while also implementing these social programs he touts? You know my other gripes...you're cool with the nuclear power even though it's short sighted and we have no way to dispose of it's waste properly. You're cool with the gradual withdrawl which can change at any moment and it that seems he wants to have a presence in the middle east, whatever that means....Anyhoo, I have to vote for the person who best fits my ideals of what is best for this country. With the Democratic candidates all I'm seeing is 'Welcome to nowhere fast' and I don't want to waste another 4 years.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I believe gradual withdrawl is the best option, not a compromise. And I don't see a problem with having troops in the Middle East, provided they're in friendlier territory. As for modernization of the millitary, I believe improved technology - particularly in the area of Special Forces - would be the best way to deal with actual terrorists. I don't believe he's in favor of invasion and occupation.
He's also said that he wouldn't support new nuclear power plants without vastly improved methods of dealing with the waste. Again, I'm o.k. with that stand.
No, he's not an "ideal" candidate - and, put simply, there is no such thing.
Very true. But there are people out there closer to my 'ideal' than Obama who I believe would fight harder for the kinda changes I'd like to finally start seeing in this country.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Until then, shake?
I'll be glad to shake but that doesn't mean I'm going to quit voicing my concerns about Obama and the Democratic party.
So *shakes*
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Conventional....that about sums it up. Getting some people to understand economics is like...well... you know already quite well I'm sure.
Obama is better than McCain and Hillary, but not the best obviously. Thats about as real as it gets. I suppose some don't care about depreciating wealth and how the fed is structured to channel wealth specifically in a certain direction (away from the population). You need to strike at the root, many like to hack away at the branches in denial for some reason.
Forgot to mention...check out the documentary by Robert Kane Pappas - "Orwell Rolls in his Grave" the beginning of that perfectly explains my take on Obama and the mainstream candidates in general. Highly recommended viewing.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
it also said they were mutual funds, right? does anyone on here know what exact stocks are in their 401k's mutual funds?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
i guess it depends on if these 2 sentences are different to you or not:
'Citigroup gave Obama $X.'
'The ppl who run Citigroup gave Obama $X.'
http://opensecrets.org/pres08/search_donor.asp
http://opensecrets.org/pres08/moneyweb.asp?cycle=2008
a lot of execs on the list, and it's not just that but having an exec of citigroup, actually the guy who called the treasury dept asking for a favor for enron, as one of his top advisors, i've posted another article or part of one before stating some of his top donors, at the time, were credit card lobbyists, nuclear poewr lobbyists...not just employees who have a right to give money to whomever they support, but lobbyists and top executives...yes, they have a right, too. all i'm saying is if this were that 'mullet-headed bitch' would you all shrug it off? what if it were mccain or bush or romney or whoever the other person is?
and what's nader have to do w/ anything in the original post?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
i'd be interested in hearing an answer to this, myself. their stock answer seems to be 'i don't care!!'
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Yeah but he knows how to talk, Kabong.
And that is a very important skill.
Oh, and the rest of the world will like us a lot more, because he will be a "uniter".
:rolleyes:
Serioulsly. "He knows how to talk"?
Seriously?
Bonus:
"I'm A Uniter, Not A Divider"
- George W. Bush
Seriously.
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
http://stumpsspirit.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/hc019
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
404 — File not found.
You can create your own free blog on WordPress.com.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
http://stumpsspirit.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/hc019-pic-a.jpg
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Yup, the whole country has gone retarded. I guess they just want something "amazing and fresh".
The Great Black Hype... uh .... I mean Hope
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?