Oh For Crying out loud

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
whats that website that tracks all the failing banks

Economy Failure websites

YES!

this is great stuff.

Can't wait to hear about those wall street bonuses come christmas

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
whats that website that tracks all the failing banks

Economy Failure websites

YES!

this is great stuff.

Can't wait to hear about those wall street bonuses come christmas

Why?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
This plus disdain for MBA's translates to liberal arts degree (at best).

If you weren't an idiot, you would have realized the point I made when I criticized you for your rush to assumption. But you are, and so you didn't, and you continue the mistake.

You also failed to understand my second comment on your lack of reading comprehension.

I'm not 'disdaining' MBA's by any means at all. I simply explained - correctly - that they are not an 'I win' button in discussions on broad public policy.

Your challenging that notion shows how desperately you need to try to use it that way, for the bankruptcy of any other ammo like, say, a solid argument.

At the end of the day, you trolled, I mocked you. Get over yourself, you can't be as brilliant as you think you are in all subjects.

At the end of the day, you are an idiot, and your attempt to mock something exposed that.

What part of my not caring to hear more garbage from you is not clear? You're wasting both our time with your continued attempts to salvage something from your mistake.

Quit digging the hole for yourself.

Riiiiight, and you didn't call me a 13 year old right winger either. :roll:

I know some moronic know it all uneducated left wing chavez nut suckers from San Fran, but you might or might not be one of them.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

I don't know who's fault this is, but reducing or eliminating 25 rules/regulations by Fannie/Freddie in 2003 (at the urging of the administration) so that many more people could get mortgages certainly didn't help.

But it's the Democrats who advocate helping some groups to get mortgages easier.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
This plus disdain for MBA's translates to liberal arts degree (at best).

If you weren't an idiot, you would have realized the point I made when I criticized you for your rush to assumption. But you are, and so you didn't, and you continue the mistake.

You also failed to understand my second comment on your lack of reading comprehension.

I'm not 'disdaining' MBA's by any means at all. I simply explained - correctly - that they are not an 'I win' button in discussions on broad public policy.

Your challenging that notion shows how desperately you need to try to use it that way, for the bankruptcy of any other ammo like, say, a solid argument.

At the end of the day, you trolled, I mocked you. Get over yourself, you can't be as brilliant as you think you are in all subjects.

At the end of the day, you are an idiot, and your attempt to mock something exposed that.

What part of my not caring to hear more garbage from you is not clear? You're wasting both our time with your continued attempts to salvage something from your mistake.

Quit digging the hole for yourself.

Riiiiight, and you didn't call me a 13 year old right winger either. :roll:

You refuse my repeated advice to quit digging your hole deeper, I'll respond approrpriately one more time, and am not planning to waste more time. Dig all you like.

No, I did not call you a 13 year old right-winger - you're now 0 for 3 on reading comprehension.

Here's what I actually said:

I tell you, I'm convinced that many or most right-wingers are stuck at the 13 year old level of understanding these issues, once they heard from some propagandist that democrats are against profit, and they realized profit has an important role to play and from then on consider themselves of opponents of the Democratic Party based on that straw man as they defend the nation from communism, not realizing what they're actually doing is enabling the blocking of helpful regulation.

You see the picture I'm painting? That the error is so basic, it's the sort that might typically be fored when you are 13 years old - and you appear to have done so and not corrected it later. You see the phrase "from then on"? It's saying not that you are 13, but that you have not developed your uinderstanding since then. You see where it says you are blocking helpful regulation because of your misguided view? If you weren't an idiot, you would not claim I was saying 13 year olds go around blocking regulation.

You would recognize what I did say, how many people who are in some powerful positions able to block useful regulation - not 13 years old - have this same fallacy.

Now, I'm sure you can go on with more bad assumptions and more bad reading comprehension and making false statements post after post, and make an even bigger fool of yourself, but that's up to you whether you want to, the issue has been settle, the only question now is how long your tantrum continues as you refuse to take responsibiolity for idiotic post after idiotic post. Which sort of reminds me of a 13 year old too.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

I don't know who's fault this is, but reducing or eliminating 25 rules/regulations by Fannie/Freddie in 2003 (at the urging of the administration) so that many more people could get mortgages certainly didn't help.

But it's the Democrats who advocate helping some groups to get mortgages easier.

There's a difference between helping them get mortgages easier with *aid* like subsidies or guarantees it's understood will have defaults, and making it easier to allow lender greed, when the public policy for guarantees is aimed at protecting the lenders more than the borrowers.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

I don't know who's fault this is, but reducing or eliminating 25 rules/regulations by Fannie/Freddie in 2003 (at the urging of the administration) so that many more people could get mortgages certainly didn't help.

But it's the Democrats who advocate helping some groups to get mortgages easier.

It was the Bush Administration who went to Fannie/Freddie in 2003 and requested and persuaded them to drop/lower the regulations. A GOP Congress was in place at the time. If the Dems wanted that to happen, Bush would have went the opposite way at the time as that is all he ever did when the Dems wanted something. Bush and crew, like most GOP, wanted fewer regulations and it's come back to bite them on the ass. If the bailout bullshit continues, all regulations (and maybe more) should be put back into place, period.

 

[alchemize]

You're comical. You'll defend your troll to the end of the world and back! Here it was originally, just for anyone else following along:

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

I don't know who's fault this is, but reducing or eliminating 25 rules/regulations by Fannie/Freddie in 2003 (at the urging of the administration) so that many more people could get mortgages certainly didn't help.

But it's the Democrats who advocate helping some groups to get mortgages easier.

It was the Bush Administration who went to Fannie/Freddie in 2003 and requested and persuaded them to drop/lower the regulations. A GOP Congress was in place at the time. If the Dems wanted that to happen, Bush would have went the opposite way at the time as that is all he ever did when the Dems wanted something. Bush and crew, like most GOP, wanted fewer regulations and it's come back to bite them on the ass. If the bailout bullshit continues, all regulations (and maybe more) should be put back into place, period.

What was the vote? Was there a filibuster? Like most disasters, the dems have been complicit (not sure if they were in this case or not, but likely they were). Like most ideas, it probably seemed to be a (somewhat) good idea at the time. Let's get this economy going with a robust housing market! One party can cause problems, but it really requires both to create a true disaster

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: alchemize
o place, period.

What was the vote? Was there a filibuster? Like most disasters, the dems have been complicit (not sure if they were in this case or not, but likely they were). Like most ideas, it probably seemed to be a (somewhat) good idea at the time. Let's get this economy going with a robust housing market! One party can cause problems, but it really requires both to create a true disaster

[/quote]

As pointed out earlier, too little regulation (i.e. let them run wild unchecked) usually = disaster. Let's keep government out of the control loop...but only while we're doing well...then boom, first downturn and look to ole Joe Taxpayer for a bailout. Bah.

Let's remove all speed limits so we can move goods to market quicker. How long before we have major highway crashes? Sure seemed like a good idea at the time...."not".

 

[Pliablemoose]

I remember housing prices spiraling up and the response from the industry was: "The housing market is regional, and if there are corrections, they'll be regional too."

Most of my friends under 40 are in homes they really can't afford. Hell my second marriage tanked largely because I wouldn't buy a $250-$300K house. My ex timed it perfectly, we divorced, she remarried and she & her husband bought a house right before the market tanked, they'll be paying for that house till they're in their 70's. My house will be paid for in 2-5 years. Stupid bitch.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I remember housing prices spiraling up and the response from the industry was: "The housing market is regional, and if there are corrections, they'll be regional too."

Most of my friends under 40 are in homes they really can't afford. Hell my second marriage tanked largely because I wouldn't buy a $250-$300K house. My ex timed it perfectly, we divorced, she remarried and she & her husband bought a house right before the market tanked, they'll be paying for that house till they're in their 70's. My house will be paid for in 2-5 years. Stupid bitch.

:beer: and :laugh:

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: lac3513
Failing banks should be allowed to fail. The near term financial pain would be significant. Stakeholders should sue to try and recover losses from stupid executives and the government should stay out of the bailout business and get back into the oversight business. In the long term a stronger financial system would emerge and the CEOs of financial institutions would learn not to count on a
government bailout.

However, the goverment will try to make it look llike they are helping but in the end all they will accomplish is hundreds of billions of dollars added to the defceit. If I hear VP Cheney say again that deficit don't matter I may have to buy gold ingots and keep them under my mattress.

Sounds great; the problem is when banks fail the system collapses - the near term pain isn't 'sgnificant', it's 'tremendous'.

Failing banks should be rescued from failure, but ownership and management should be hung out to dry. Take over the bank, right it, and re-issue the stock, while confiscating executive compensation (not ordinary salaries, but bonuses, profits from stock/option compensation, and discretionary payouts) retroactively to help offset losses. (Either for a set period, or based on forensic accounting's answer to 'when did they know the ship was sinking?'). This would require changing laws, and it will never happen.

Then let the system collapse.... Banks should not be rescued ... if they want to be rescued then do it on their dime not mine. ie, all the banks should pay for a failure.

I don't care how many band aids / buy outs you preform it's still gonna collapse.

Pliablemoose, same situation as you, but my house is fully paid off! Did it before I turned 40!

tho... No longer married. Hmmmmmm....

Oh well, you lose some you win some.

Job well done! Keep up the good work!

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: alchemize
This has everything to do with firms leveraging capital and chasing the "profits" of subprime. Firms that turned their noses up at the allure of those profits are sitting pretty. Those who did not, as we can see, are getting chewed up and spit out.

I got my mortgage in June and asked the loan officer about all of the interest-only zero-down loans that everyone seems to have. She said that the credit union doesn't offer those and as a result is doing pretty well.

I have no idea why the average home buyer would think that zero-down interest-only loans would be a good idea.

 

[BansheeX]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

Well, the 'liberal agenda' is a regulated market keeping it serving society's interests and not running off a cliff to profit a few - while profiting people as the grease for themachine.

I tell you, I'm convinced that many or most right-wingers are stuck at the 13 year old level of understanding these issues, once they heard from some propagandist that democrats are against profit, and they realized profit has an important role to play and from then on consider themselves of opponents of the Democratic Party based on that straw man as they defend the nation from communism, not realizing what they're actually doing is enabling the blocking of helpful regulation.

Oh, bull-fucking shit already. Leave it to socialist Craig to be the first one blaming it on the free market. This begins with the Fed, the central bank, one of the ten planks of the communist manifesto. It begins there. Centralized price fixing of interest rates is a socialist idea, it's one that both neo-cons and democrats agree with, and when Greenspan held them at 1% in a recessionary environment, it sent the completely wrong signal to investors. The end. It incentivized massive speculation and abandonment of self-regulation. The market got drunk and it was the Fed that spiked the punch bowl. Massive inflation was created during the 90s, it went into tech stocks and no one complained. Those collapsed and Greenspan filtered it into real estate and no one complained. When that illusory wealth collapsed, the inflation came home to roost in commodities and the stuff people don't want to go up, and now everyone's complaining. Der der der, gee I wonder what a purely monetary commodity go up 300% in five years. Now you know.

And Craig the idiot comes in here and blames the problem on spontaneous evolution of man becoming more greedy in the year 2000. Then he calls for more centralized "regulation," which, in his ignorance and misplaced trust, is an unnecessary power that will inevitably be used to benefit the few by enabling corporations to collude with it for an unfair advantage in the marketplace in return for campaign financing. This is how socialism builds on itself, by perpetually proposing government socialist solutions to problems that were in reality caused by previous socialist enablements. Socialism ends with a pyramid of wealth, a few at the top and everyone else at the bottom, and we are about to enter the final stages. Stay tuned, folks.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
whats that website that tracks all the failing banks

Economy Failure websites

YES!

this is great stuff.

Can't wait to hear about those wall street bonuses come christmas

The sad part is these criminals will continue to get millions and millions for this huge success they have done.

Oh and now can I say it?

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
whats that website that tracks all the failing banks

Economy Failure websites

YES!

this is great stuff.

Can't wait to hear about those wall street bonuses come christmas

The sad part is these criminals will continue to get millions and millions for this huge success they have done.

Oh and now can I say it?

You can Count Bush Jr to be one of those criminals profiting from this and don't think he isn't...

 

[Napalm]

Originally posted by: BansheeX
Oh, bull-fucking shit already. Leave it to socialist Craig to be the first one blaming it on the free market. This begins with the Fed, the central bank, one of the ten planks of the communist manifesto. It begins there. Centralized price fixing of interest rates is a socialist idea,

You do know the "Fed" is actually the banking industry and not the government, don't you???? If not, see link:

http://land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/federal_reserve.shtml

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I remember housing prices spiraling up and the response from the industry was: "The housing market is regional, and if there are corrections, they'll be regional too."

Most of my friends under 40 are in homes they really can't afford. Hell my second marriage tanked largely because I wouldn't buy a $250-$300K house. My ex timed it perfectly, we divorced, she remarried and she & her husband bought a house right before the market tanked, they'll be paying for that house till they're in their 70's. My house will be paid for in 2-5 years. Stupid bitch.

:beer: and :laugh:

I just wanted to bump this. lmao!

 

[First]

Originally posted by: BansheeX

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

Well, the 'liberal agenda' is a regulated market keeping it serving society's interests and not running off a cliff to profit a few - while profiting people as the grease for themachine.

I tell you, I'm convinced that many or most right-wingers are stuck at the 13 year old level of understanding these issues, once they heard from some propagandist that democrats are against profit, and they realized profit has an important role to play and from then on consider themselves of opponents of the Democratic Party based on that straw man as they defend the nation from communism, not realizing what they're actually doing is enabling the blocking of helpful regulation.

Oh, bull-fucking shit already. Leave it to socialist Craig to be the first one blaming it on the free market. This begins with the Fed, the central bank, one of the ten planks of the communist manifesto. It begins there. Centralized price fixing of interest rates is a socialist idea, it's one that both neo-cons and democrats agree with, and when Greenspan held them at 1% in a recessionary environment, it sent the completely wrong signal to investors. The end. It incentivized massive speculation and abandonment of self-regulation. The market got drunk and it was the Fed that spiked the punch bowl. Massive inflation was created during the 90s, it went into tech stocks and no one complained. Those collapsed and Greenspan filtered it into real estate and no one complained. When that illusory wealth collapsed, the inflation came home to roost in commodities and the stuff people don't want to go up, and now everyone's complaining. Der der der, gee I wonder what a purely monetary commodity go up 300% in five years. Now you know.

And Craig the idiot comes in here and blames the problem on spontaneous evolution of man becoming more greedy in the year 2000. Then he calls for more centralized "regulation," which, in his ignorance and misplaced trust, is an unnecessary power that will inevitably be used to benefit the few by enabling corporations to collude with it for an unfair advantage in the marketplace in return for campaign financing. This is how socialism builds on itself, by perpetually proposing government socialist solutions to problems that were in reality caused by previous socialist enablements. Socialism ends with a pyramid of wealth, a few at the top and everyone else at the bottom, and we are about to enter the final stages. Stay tuned, folks.

Bottom line, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, and not a single smart person here is fooled into thinking otherwise.

 

[HeXploiT]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: BansheeX

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

Well, the 'liberal agenda' is a regulated market keeping it serving society's interests and not running off a cliff to profit a few - while profiting people as the grease for themachine.

I tell you, I'm convinced that many or most right-wingers are stuck at the 13 year old level of understanding these issues, once they heard from some propagandist that democrats are against profit, and they realized profit has an important role to play and from then on consider themselves of opponents of the Democratic Party based on that straw man as they defend the nation from communism, not realizing what they're actually doing is enabling the blocking of helpful regulation.

Oh, bull-fucking shit already. Leave it to socialist Craig to be the first one blaming it on the free market. This begins with the Fed, the central bank, one of the ten planks of the communist manifesto. It begins there. Centralized price fixing of interest rates is a socialist idea, it's one that both neo-cons and democrats agree with, and when Greenspan held them at 1% in a recessionary environment, it sent the completely wrong signal to investors. The end. It incentivized massive speculation and abandonment of self-regulation. The market got drunk and it was the Fed that spiked the punch bowl. Massive inflation was created during the 90s, it went into tech stocks and no one complained. Those collapsed and Greenspan filtered it into real estate and no one complained. When that illusory wealth collapsed, the inflation came home to roost in commodities and the stuff people don't want to go up, and now everyone's complaining. Der der der, gee I wonder what a purely monetary commodity go up 300% in five years. Now you know.

And Craig the idiot comes in here and blames the problem on spontaneous evolution of man becoming more greedy in the year 2000. Then he calls for more centralized "regulation," which, in his ignorance and misplaced trust, is an unnecessary power that will inevitably be used to benefit the few by enabling corporations to collude with it for an unfair advantage in the marketplace in return for campaign financing. This is how socialism builds on itself, by perpetually proposing government socialist solutions to problems that were in reality caused by previous socialist enablements. Socialism ends with a pyramid of wealth, a few at the top and everyone else at the bottom, and we are about to enter the final stages. Stay tuned, folks.

Bottom line, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, and not a single smart person here is fooled into thinking otherwise.

Actually you're the one who's clueless.
I suppose you think you're one of the smart people? HA! lol.:laugh:
The smart ones are probably everyone who's been defending this thing all the way down?
Yes the tides are changing and people are learning the truth. Unfortunately for our nation it very well might be too late.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Perry404

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: BansheeX

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234
Where are the right-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are federal insurance like FDIC that make borrowers less wary and encourage excessive risk?

If we just get rid of consumer protection like that, then the risk will properly keep businesses from overextending. It's all the Democrats' fault.

Where are all the left-wingers to say that the cause of the problems are the free market? That if we socialized all lending institutations there would be no need for profits?

If we just get rid of profits, then the businesses would keep from overextending. It's all the Republicans fault.

Well, the 'liberal agenda' is a regulated market keeping it serving society's interests and not running off a cliff to profit a few - while profiting people as the grease for themachine.

I tell you, I'm convinced that many or most right-wingers are stuck at the 13 year old level of understanding these issues, once they heard from some propagandist that democrats are against profit, and they realized profit has an important role to play and from then on consider themselves of opponents of the Democratic Party based on that straw man as they defend the nation from communism, not realizing what they're actually doing is enabling the blocking of helpful regulation.

Oh, bull-fucking shit already. Leave it to socialist Craig to be the first one blaming it on the free market. This begins with the Fed, the central bank, one of the ten planks of the communist manifesto. It begins there. Centralized price fixing of interest rates is a socialist idea, it's one that both neo-cons and democrats agree with, and when Greenspan held them at 1% in a recessionary environment, it sent the completely wrong signal to investors. The end. It incentivized massive speculation and abandonment of self-regulation. The market got drunk and it was the Fed that spiked the punch bowl. Massive inflation was created during the 90s, it went into tech stocks and no one complained. Those collapsed and Greenspan filtered it into real estate and no one complained. When that illusory wealth collapsed, the inflation came home to roost in commodities and the stuff people don't want to go up, and now everyone's complaining. Der der der, gee I wonder what a purely monetary commodity go up 300% in five years. Now you know.

And Craig the idiot comes in here and blames the problem on spontaneous evolution of man becoming more greedy in the year 2000. Then he calls for more centralized "regulation," which, in his ignorance and misplaced trust, is an unnecessary power that will inevitably be used to benefit the few by enabling corporations to collude with it for an unfair advantage in the marketplace in return for campaign financing. This is how socialism builds on itself, by perpetually proposing government socialist solutions to problems that were in reality caused by previous socialist enablements. Socialism ends with a pyramid of wealth, a few at the top and everyone else at the bottom, and we are about to enter the final stages. Stay tuned, folks.

Bottom line, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, and not a single smart person here is fooled into thinking otherwise.

Actually you're the one who's clueless.
I suppose you think you're one of the smart people? HA! lol.:laugh:
The smart ones are probably everyone who's been defending this thing all the way down?
Yes the tides are changing and people are learning the truth. Unfortunately for our nation it very well might be too late.

I said smart people, not you.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Actually you're the one who's clueless.
I suppose you think you're one of the smart people? HA! lol.:laugh:
The smart ones are probably everyone who's been defending this thing all the way down?
Yes the tides are changing and people are learning the truth. Unfortunately for our nation it very well might be too late.

Gawd you're such a libertopian tool. You've really got no clue.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: CrazyHelloDeli
Whatever happens, the only thing we can be sure of is that Dave predicted it.

Then...

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: DomS
Anyone remember that thread? Search P&N for 'financial doomsday' and look at the locked thread. The guy is starting to look a bit prescient.

Interesting since I called all this out back in Jan 2007.

I guess CrazyHelloDeli called that back in Sept, on the 14th at 8:54 pm....

 

[mshan]

"...it is abundantly clear that deleveraging (of the balance sheets of our financial intermediaries and in the disintermediation surrounding the world's hedge fund community) is a rabid bitch and has contributed to the current bear market in stocks and bull market in risk-aversion."

"During today's period of stress and deleveraging, there is "nowhere to run to, baby, no place to hide." Investors/traders face the unenviable (and sometimes non-rigorous) task of gaming hedge fund activity rather than gaming fundamentals. It helps to explain a market without memory from day to day, and it helps to explain why the smartest hedge fund investors extant are sitting on their hands with plenty of liquidity, just waiting to capitalize on the aforementioned fear."

http://www.thestreet.com/story...ss-short-on-logic.html