The dow is going to tank tomorrow

[truthmatters]

The sub prime problem is coming at us from all sides.

[manu1959]

The sub prime problem is coming at us from all sides.

how many billions were lost in the banking scandal years ago............

[Dilloduck]

The sub prime problem is coming at us from all sides.

Sell

[manu1959]

Sell

actually if you have not already deversified into bonds and emerging markets it is too late to sell.....and if you are really smart you should start buying late tomorrow afternoon.....

[truthmatters]

Just remember who it was that was trying it to tell you the housing boom was being falsely inflated by sub prime mortgages and preditory lending.

I sure wish we would have had adults in our government when there was time to stop this mess.

[Dilloduck]

actually if you have not already deversified into bonds and emerging markets it is too late to sell.....and if you are really smart you should start buying late tomorrow afternoon.....

Blabbermouth---I had her convinced !!!! :laugh2:

[jimnyc]

I'll be willing to take on any betters that the Dow recovers within a weeks time.

[truthmatters]

Ill remember that.

[Dilloduck]

I'll be willing to take on any betters that the Dow recovers within a weeks time.

TM just wanted to look like a genius financial prognosticator and was hoping everyone else in the world didn't already know this.---oh and blame Bush too but thats a given. :laugh2:

[jimnyc]

Ill remember that.

As will I. There are drops in the Dow like this quite often and it almost always recovers. I'll admit there's an issue if it doesn't recover, will you admit you placed blame incorrectly if it does recover?

[jimnyc]

TM just wanted to look like a genius financial prognosticator and was hoping everyone else in the world didn't already know this.---oh and blame Bush too but thats a given. :laugh2:

I saw the Dow drop 200 points or more quite a few times only to recover and make gains within 48hrs. There is always reason to be cautious but a good broker will tell you that selling every time there's a bump is not a good idea.

[truthmatters]

To sugest this has nothing to do with the sub prime situation would leave you completely alone in the world Jim.

[jimnyc]

To sugest this has nothing to do with the sub prime situation would leave you completely alone in the world Jim.

Oh really? So what I've been reading from quite a few financial experts is part of my imagination? The last person in the entire planet I would listen to about ANY advice is you!

[manu1959]

Just remember who it was that was trying it to tell you the housing boom was being falsely inflated by sub prime mortgages and preditory lending.

I sure wish we would have had adults in our government when there was time to stop this mess.

you make it sound like general pelosi, lt col. reid, ptv obama, pvt kennedy just got into office.....

[truthmatters]

Who will you blame for the ensuing financial mess?

Will you blame the current congressional leaders?

Will you blame the next administration( only if it is Democrats)?

Will there be no blame for the people who presided over our country for the last 7 years?

[jimnyc]

Who will you blame for the ensuing financial mess?

Will you blame the current congressional leaders?

Will you blame the next administration( only if it is Democrats)?

Will there be no blame for the people who presided over our country for the last 7 years?

Look at you, already looking to place blame before anything has happened. Why not wait until the stimulus plan has a chance to take effect as well as the reaction from traders in the upcoming weeks? Feds will also drop interest rates. There are also lots of good things scheduled for the upcoming month in the industry that could shake things up.

No doubt in my mind though that you are HOPING for problems, simply so you can blame the administration.

[truthmatters]

Why do you always see the predictions as wishes?


I wish Bush had been a good steward of this country. I wish he had done such a good job that I desided to switch to the republican party. I would trade that straight acrossed for what we have today.


Would you be willing to say the same in reverse?

Would you trade your loyalty to the republican party for a country running like a greased wheel where we were not at war and had universal healthcare and that everything worked so well that you would say "damn I was wrong about these democrats they really have fixed the country" and switched to a democrat?

[jimnyc]

Why do you always see the predictions as wishes?

I wish Bush had been a good steward of this country. I wish he had done such a good job that I desided to switch to the republican party. I would trade that straight acrossed for what we have today.

Would you be willing to say the same in reverse?

Would you trade your loyalty to the republican party for a country running like a greased wheel where we were not at war and had universal healthcare and that everything worked so well that you would say "damn I was wrong about these democrats they really have fixed the country" and switched to a democrat?

You see, this is where you're clueless. I've supported many a democrat agenda, and supported Clinton when he was president. Of course I knocked things I disagree with that he did but I still supported him as leader of our country and respected him for the many good things he did. Not everyone is a piss poor partisan hack like yourself.

[truthmatters]

You will excuse me if I dont believe that without proof I hope?

[jimnyc]

You will excuse me if I dont believe that without proof I hope?

You do know that he hasn't been in office since I've had any political boards up and running?

But you're excused anyway. And anyway, I really don't care if you believe me or not. My posting history surely doesn't paint me as a democrat hater, although I can be labeled by some as too supportive of conservatives.

[Dilloduck]

Would you trade your loyalty to the republican party for a country running like a greased wheel where we were not at war and had universal healthcare and that everything worked so well that you would say "damn I was wrong about these democrats they really have fixed the country" and switched to a democrat?

You will excuse me if I don't believe the Democrats can do this I hope. :laugh2:

[truthmatters]

You will excuse me if I don't believe the Democrats can do this I hope. :laugh2:


Oh I know you dont think they can. That has no real bearing on if they can.

I really would love to have republicans that made me think hard about switching parties.

I wish you people didnt hate me just because you stand on the other side of a political devide. I wish people knew how to discuss these things without getting their guts in a knot and just used facts. I wish Americans felt like one country again. Those days are dead and we will never see them again. Its going to be the end of this country. I really hate that part.

[Kathianne]

Oh I know you dont think they can. That has no real bearing on if they can.

I really would love to have republicans that made me think hard about switching parties.

I wish you people didnt hate me just because you stand on the other side of a political devide. I wish people knew how to discuss these things without getting their guts in a knot and just used facts. I wish Americans felt like one country again. Those days are dead and we will never see them again. Its going to be the end of this country. I really hate that part.

Who are you trying to sell this to, TM? JPP? They think you are a partisan hack too, so to whom?

[truthmatters]

Who are you trying to sell this to, TM? JPP? They think you are a partisan hack too, so to whom?


Thanks for those kind words Kath

[Kathianne]

You see, this is where you're clueless. I've supported many a democrat agenda, and supported Clinton when he was president. Of course I knocked things I disagree with that he did but I still supported him as leader of our country and respected him for the many good things he did. Not everyone is a piss poor partisan hack like yourself.

Way too much credit to TM. she has proven an inability to separate herself from her agenda.

[truthmatters]

Way too much credit to TM. she has proven an inability to separate herself from her agenda.
why are you so nice to everyone on the other sight yet act like this on this sight?

[Dilloduck]

Oh I know you dont think they can. That has no real bearing on if they can.

I really would love to have republicans that made me think hard about switching parties.

I wish you people didnt hate me just because you stand on the other side of a political devide. I wish people knew how to discuss these things without getting their guts in a knot and just used facts. I wish Americans felt like one country again. Those days are dead and we will never see them again. Its going to be the end of this country. I really hate that part.

Perhaps you could be a role model for all of us and stop participating in or starting debates that ONLY serve to create and exploit the division.

[truthmatters]

I post what I believe Dillo.

why do you post nothing but insults for me because you have a differing opinion?

[avatar4321]

Just remember who it was that was trying it to tell you the housing boom was being falsely inflated by sub prime mortgages and preditory lending.

I sure wish we would have had adults in our government when there was time to stop this mess.

I wish we had adults in this country who realized that the government isnt responsible for people making stupid choices.

[Dilloduck]

I post what I believe Dillo.

why do you post nothing but insults for me because you have a differing opinion?

Thats a LIE---I've posted several requests for a dance with you !!!! :laugh2: The difference between you and I is you think one political party is innocent--I think they are both guilty--.

[avatar4321]

To sugest this has nothing to do with the sub prime situation would leave you completely alone in the world Jim.

I think it has to do with foreign markets always going down when we have a holiday.

[truthmatters]

Thats a LIE---I've posted several requests for a dance with you !!!! :laugh2: The difference between you and I is you think one political party is innocent--I think they are both guilty--.

Well I thought those were aimed at insulting me.

what are they both guilty of?



this aint looking good
http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/21/news/international/world_markets.ap/index.htm


Stocks fell sharply worldwide Monday following declines on Wall Street last week amid investor pessimism over the U.S. government's stimulus plan to prevent a recession.

U.S. markets were closed for Martin Luther King Jr. Day, but were primed to open Tuesday's session with steep declines, according to futures trading.

[Dilloduck]

Well I thought those were aimed at insulting me.

what are they both guilty of?

Actually I think you probably have a pretty decent heart underneath all that hatred and anger----political parties are guilty of damn near everything but mostly they want to take power and money away from the people. Government may be a neccesary evil but our ENTIRE POLITICAL SYSTEM has taken it to insane extremes for their own personal gain.

[Said1]

I think it has to do with foreign markets always going down when we have a holiday.

I know I had a slow day at work thanks to whatever day it is today. I'm going to get hammered tomorrow, I just know it. :(

[truthmatters]

Actually I think you probably have a pretty decent heart underneath all that hatred and anger----political parties are guilty of damn near everything but mostly they want to take power and money away from the people. Government may be a neccesary evil but our ENTIRE POLITICAL SYSTEM has taken it to insane extremes for their own personal gain.


I dont completely dissagree with you Dillo but I dont think its the parties. Its the people who own the parties do to the favors they have to give just to get elected. If we could take the monied interests out of the equation we coukld have a better government. Nothing is perfect but it could be much better.

People who know me in real life think Im pretty nice. I have republican family members who love and trust me and would even do so with their lives. I just see so much devision any more I dont think there is much hope for this country coming together to do what is nesessary to keep it afloat.

[truthmatters]

I know I had a slow day at work thanks to whatever day it is today. I'm going to get hammered tomorrow, I just know it. :(


Long term is what matters. If you got some years left to hang through it your OK. Its the people who have to retire soon who will be hit the worst.

[jimnyc]

I wish you people didnt hate me just because you stand on the other side of a political devide.

I'm going to give this another effort with you.

First off, I don't think people actually "hate" you, that's a pretty strong word to use about people that technically don't know one another. If anything, people hate the way another person posts. And I can only speak for myself, but I don't hate what you post because of what political party you support but rather because you seem to post with a strong agenda towards Dems and want to ridicule or make tons of baseless assumptions and accusations towards republicans. For the most part you steer clear of any thread that deals with negativity towards dems and only participate in threads bashing conservatives. You'll notice there are endless threads with conservatives disagreeing with Bush on many subjects, as well as many republican candidates right now. Most of us like or dislike based on what we feel is good for our country, not solely because of party affiliation.

[Dilloduck]

I dont completely dissagree with you Dillo but I dont think its the parties. Its the people who own the parties do to the favors they have to give just to get elected. If we could take the monied interests out of the equation we coukld have a better government. Nothing is perfect but it could be much better.

People who know me in real life think Im pretty nice. I have republican family members who love and trust me and would even do so with their lives. I just see so much devision any more I dont think there is much hope for this country coming together to do what is nesessary to keep it afloat.

Special interests own both parties. Ranting about only one party indicates that you approve of the other party doing it.

[truthmatters]

I'm going to give this another effort with you.

First off, I don't think people actually "hate" you, that's a pretty strong word to use about people that technically don't know one another. If anything, people hate the way another person posts. And I can only speak for myself, but I don't hate what you post because of what political party you support but rather because you seem to post with a strong agenda towards Dems and want to ridicule or make tons of baseless assumptions and accusations towards republicans. For the most part you steer clear of any thread that deals with negativity towards dems and only participate in threads bashing conservatives. You'll notice there are endless threads with conservatives disagreeing with Bush on many subjects, as well as many republican candidates right now. Most of us like or dislike based on what we feel is good for our country, not solely because of party affiliation.


But you seem unable to accept that I post what I believe and I believe what I belive because I feel it is best for my country.

These threads you say exsist I have never seen them. Im not saying they dont exsist Im saying I have never seen them. I start threads about what I believe. I have started threads about Dems doing things I felt were wrong on every site I have ever been on. This is an extraordinary time in history. When was teh last time one party had complete control for 7 straight years? I truely feel it has been a miserable failure in their hands. I am not alone in the world with this asessment.

I really have tried to stay civil on this site and have done a pretty dam good job of looking past all the insults and just answering the debate questions.

I did this in hopes people would at some point just com back with discussion instead of insult and maybe we could really listen to each other.

This post is an example of something seen as an attack when its really pretty much what every expert agrees is very likely going to happen tomorrow. Somehow it was seen as partisan hackery?

[Said1]

Long term is what matters. If you got some years left to hang through it your OK. Its the people who have to retire soon who will be hit the worst.

My point was in reference to Avatar's. If you remember, his remark was about today, specifically. The firm I work for lost hundreds of thousands of dollars because US business and firms were closed (including postal systems which is the primary reason patent and trade mark was so slow). I'm sure they'll make that up tomorrow, meaning I'll be twice as busy. Get it? Ha. Ha.


As for long term.....duh.

[MtnBiker]

Long term is what matters. If you got some years left to hang through it your OK. Its the people who have to retire soon who will be hit the worst.

What guarantee is there that the stock market will always do well?

[manu1959]

Long term is what matters. If you got some years left to hang through it your OK. Its the people who have to retire soon who will be hit the worst.

if you are going to retire soon you should not even be in the stock market it is too high risk......

[truthmatters]

Yeah if you are just a couple of years away and still in stock it will be ugly for you.

[manu1959]

I wish we had adults in this country who realized that the government isnt responsible for people making stupid choices.

i will ask you this......

who do you trust more to take care of you.....

you?

or

the govt?

[truthmatters]

What guarantee is there that the stock market will always do well?

None.

Its all a risk.

[avatar4321]

i will ask you this......

who do you trust more to take care of you.....

you?

or

the govt?

hmmm... tough choice... I am going to pick me.

[avatar4321]

None.

Its all a risk.

Where is the guarentee that you won't get hit by a bus when you cross the street?

Same answer. Everything in life is a risk.

So lets stop blaming it on government and start focusing on personal responsibility.

[truthmatters]

Where is the guarentee that you won't get hit by a bus when you cross the street?

Same answer. Everything in life is a risk.

So lets stop blaming it on government and start focusing on personal responsibility.


Stop thinking ...uh well I pass on that one.

[Yurt]

Who will you blame for the ensuing financial mess?

Will you blame the current congressional leaders?

Will you blame the next administration( only if it is Democrats)?

Will there be no blame for the people who presided over our country for the last 7 years?

its not as simple as blaming politicians. you do know what a "market" is right?

[truthmatters]

Why dont you have your guy run on that as part of his platform?

I am merciless to the economy and can do nothing to ward off economic disastor. See how well that one plays.

[Yurt]

Why dont you have your guy run on that as part of his platform?

I am merciless to the economy and can do nothing to ward off economic disastor. See how well that one plays.

i didn't say merciless, stop lying and putting words in my mouth, go back re-read my post :poke:

[truthmatters]

Much of this problem could have been blunted by timely action. That action never came.

[manu1959]

Much of this problem could have been blunted by timely action. That action never came.

any particular reason the dem controled congress did not take action?

[Dilloduck]

any particular reason the dem controled congress did not take action?

oooo oooo-----I know-----get ready---it's the response to this kind of question for years to come

" Bush and the republicans screwed things up so badly that it may take 100 years to fix everything "

[Yurt]

any particular reason the dem controled congress did not take action?

http://kruzeskanhoto.nireblog.com/blogs/kruzeskanhoto/files/capturaecra-achmed-the-dead-terrorist-tiagofarrajotacom-o-weblog-mozilla-firefox.png

[truthmatters]

any particular reason the dem controled congress did not take action?


Are you aware of they have been trying to do something about it and that by the time they took office the problem nearly unfixable?

The loans which would reset were already written. The collapse started in late 2006 fella.

[Dilloduck]

Are you aware of they have been trying to do something about it and that by the time they took office the problem nearly unfixable?

The loans which would reset were already written. The collapse started in late 2006 fella.

I rest my case -----:laugh2:

[truthmatters]

Dillo can you tell me what the New Dem majority could have done to prevent something that was alreadly in full swing?

http://technorati.com/posts/vmD5ddSn1BZqZhhPmGh4Qxb3PCF1Bed%2BAS1oxUBKu1Y%3D

This is from August of last year. The problem with stopping it now is that the loans were written years ago. They are now just resetting. Do you really not understand that? This was going full blown by the 1/20/07.

[manu1959]

Are you aware of they have been trying to do something about it and that by the time they took office the problem nearly unfixable?

The loans which would reset were already written. The collapse started in late 2006 fella.

so what did they try to do.....it isn't like there were no dems in congress prior to late 06.....

[Dilloduck]

Dillo can you tell me what the New Dem majority could have done to prevent something that was alreadly in full swing?

http://technorati.com/posts/vmD5ddSn1BZqZhhPmGh4Qxb3PCF1Bed%2BAS1oxUBKu1Y%3D

This is from August of last year. The problem with stopping it now is that the loans were written years ago. They are now just resetting. Do you really not understand that? This was going full blown by the 1/20/07.

The dems could have read the bill before VOTING FOR IT. Give it up TM. You look really ignorant trying to pin everything on Bush.

[manu1959]

The dems could have read the bill before VOTING FOR IT. Give it up TM. You look really ignorant trying to pin everything on Bush.

they voted against it before they voted for it.....they knew these were bad loans but bush mislead them ....

hey wait couldn't the dems just raise taxes on the rich to give to the poor so they can pay their laons.....

[truthmatters]

The dems could have read the bill before VOTING FOR IT. Give it up TM. You look really ignorant trying to pin everything on Bush.


No you people jhust refuse to let the Rs take any of the responsibility even though they held every position of power for seven years straight.

When was the last time any party had seven years of total power?

[manu1959]

No you people jhust refuse to let the Rs take any of the responsibility even though they held every position of power for seven years straight.

When was the last time any party had seven years of total power?


if the rs had total power your ss would be private.......

[truthmatters]

they had the house , the senate and the presidency. They ran the government. It happend on their watch and they did nothing. Its all on their laps. If it was reversed you would agree with me.

[Dilloduck]

No you people jhust refuse to let the Rs take any of the responsibility even though they held every position of power for seven years straight.

When was the last time any party had seven years of total power?

TM--I want you to listen very carefully------

IT WAS ALL MY FAULT

[manu1959]

they had the house , the senate and the presidency. They ran the government. It happend on their watch and they did nothing. Its all on their laps. If it was reversed you would agree with me.

so the dems do nothing through the whole thing and you give them a pass.....

i thought you said they tried to do something....what?

[theHawk]

Who will you blame for the ensuing financial mess?

Will you blame the current congressional leaders?

Will you blame the next administration( only if it is Democrats)?

Will there be no blame for the people who presided over our country for the last 7 years?

Why is there a need to blame anyone in the government? This is all private sector. If private businesses made bad decisions then they should end up paying for it. When government comes to the rescue and bails them out whenever they get into trouble, what incentive to they have to play it safe? Quite frankly I believe the government should stay out of the mess.

[Nukeman]

Why is there a need to blame anyone in the government? This is all private sector. If private businesses made bad decisions then they should end up paying for it. When government comes to the rescue and bails them out whenever they get into trouble, what incentive to they have to play it safe? Quite frankly I believe the government should stay out of the mess.Could not agree with you more on this.
TM just doesn't get it. The government does not need their fingers in every pot, if they were we would be a solidly Socialist/comunist country right now. I think she would prefer that in the end that means she doesn't have to think about ANYTHING...

[Nukeman]

On a side note with the tanking of the WORLD markets the oil prices have fallen by almost $4.00 a barrel. that is at least a little good news.... Sarcasm on Of course that is all because of the Democrats in office and if Bush wasn't in office it probably would have fallen by $5.00.... Sarcasm off

[truthmatters]

Why is there a need to blame anyone in the government? This is all private sector. If private businesses made bad decisions then they should end up paying for it. When government comes to the rescue and bails them out whenever they get into trouble, what incentive to they have to play it safe? Quite frankly I believe the government should stay out of the mess.


Hmmm So Jimmy Carter gets no blame now?

I was not talking about bail outs I was talking about fixing the problem as it occured instaed of insulting and or ignoring the peopel who were warning that the situation would cause big problems to the economy down the road. They did nothing because it was the only thing fueling the economy at the time.They wanted to get re elected more than they wanted a healthy economy.

[theHawk]

Could not agree with you more on this.
TM just doen't get it. Teh government does not need their fingers in efvery pot if they were we would be a solidly Socialist/comunist ****ry right now. I think she would prefer that in the end that means she doen't have to think about ANYTHING...

The thing is I don't believe the President or Congress really has that much to do with the economy these days. In the 90's it was the technology/internet bubble, today its the real estate/credit that got overinflated. Each of those market successes and failures had nothing to do with any President.

[theHawk]

Hmmm So Jimmy Carter gets no blame now?

I was not talking about bail outs I was talking about fixing the problem as it occured instaed of insulting and or ignoring the peopel who were warning that the situation would cause big problems to the economy down the road. They did nothing because it was the only thing fueling the economy at the time.They wanted to get re elected more than they wanted a healthy economy.

Ultra high taxes, such as those under Carter, could be blamed on both the President and Congress that inacted those taxes. Carter also had soaring inflation and oil shortages, stuff neither Clinton or Bush as really had to deal with.

What I am curious to know though, is what you mean by having the government "fix" the problem instead of ignoring it. About the only thing they can do is either raise or lower interest rates, or raise/lower taxes. As far as I know rates have been cut, and taxes are pretty low. So what specifically are you talking about? Or are you just making more feel good statements that sound nice for a speech?

[manu1959]

tank huh........seems our economy and entrepreneurs are more capable than you thought?.....

how disappointed you must be....

[truthmatters]

Ultra high taxes, such as those under Carter, could be blamed on both the President and Congress that inacted those taxes. Carter also had soaring inflation and oil shortages, stuff neither Clinton or Bush as really had to deal with.

What I am curious to know though, is what you mean by having the government "fix" the problem instead of ignoring it. About the only thing they can do is either raise or lower interest rates, or raise/lower taxes. As far as I know rates have been cut, and taxes are pretty low. So what specifically are you talking about? Or are you just making more feel good statements that sound nice for a speech?


They could have enaccted laws to hold down the number of subprimes the industry was selling. They could have deconsolidated the lending industry so they could no longer package off these loans with other assets to pass them off on the investors who bought them. They could have WARNED the public if nothing else instead of singing the praises of a economic situation the others were trying to tell the puplic was dangerous. Instead they insulted anyone who tried to warn about the results of such an economy. And said the economy was going gangbuster and everything was just perfect.

They sold the future economy out to get reelected.

[Yurt]

tank huh........seems our economy and entrepreneurs are more capable than you thought?.....

how disappointed you must be....

the feds were smart to slash interest rates

and if you look at the initial drop, not really that big of a drop, so, we are probably going to have some smart or lucky investors making some decent $$ today

yesterday, while the us market slept, the rest of the world once again realized just how important it is to keep the US economy strong.....

[manu1959]

They could have enaccted laws to hold down the number of subprimes the industry was selling. They could have deconsolidated the lending industry so they could no longer package off these loans with other assets to pass them off on the investors who bought them. They could have WARNED the public if nothing else instead of singing the praises of a economic situation the others were trying to tell the puplic was dangerous. Instead they insulted anyone who tried to warn about the results of such an economy. And said the economy was going gangbuster and everything was just perfect.

They sold the future economy out to get reelected.

can you link me up to all the legislation written and proposed by the dems that would have prevented this that the pubs killed....and while you are at it can you link me up to all the legislation proposed by the dems to help all the poor people losing their homes....

[manu1959]

the feds were smart to slash interest rates

and if you look at the initial drop, not really that big of a drop, so, we are probably going to have some smart or lucky investors making some decent $$ today

yesterday, while the us market slept, the rest of the world once again realized just how important it is to keep the US economy strong.....

yep ..... when it hit a neg 500 i issued a buy order .....

and today the we showed the world just how strong the private sector is .... the S+L crisis was worse than this and we recovered.....

[Mr. P]

DJIA 11,950.95 -148.35 -1.23% 11:29 AM ET
Nasdaq 2,295.76 -44.26 -1.89% 11:29 AM ET
S&P 500/1,308.26 -16.93 -1.28% 11:29 AM ET
Dow Util 487.97 -15.95 -3.17% 11:29 AM ET
NYSE 8,636.20 -158.66 -1.80% 11:29 AM ET
AMEX 2,176.53 -62.56 -2.79% 11:29 AM ET
Russell 2000 675.07 +1.89 +0.28% 11:29 AM ET
Semcond 348.74 -9.61 -2.68% 11:29 AM ET
30-Year Bond 42.79 -0.18 -0.42% 11:29 AM ET
10-Year Bond 35.52 -0.96 -2.63% 11:29 AM ET

We'll be up and down all week...but a tank this is not. This afternoon will be interesting.

[Yurt]

They could have enaccted laws to hold down the number of subprimes the industry was selling. They could have deconsolidated the lending industry so they could no longer package off these loans with other assets to pass them off on the investors who bought them. They could have WARNED the public if nothing else instead of singing the praises of a economic situation the others were trying to tell the puplic was dangerous. Instead they insulted anyone who tried to warn about the results of such an economy. And said the economy was going gangbuster and everything was just perfect.

They sold the future economy out to get reelected.

Warn the public not to take high risk loans? :poke: Everybody just witnessed the tech stock bubble burst and they were doing the same thing with real estate.

http://members.aol.com/ilovemy65stang/signwet.bmp

[manu1959]

We'll be up and down all week...but a tank this is not. This afternoon will be interesting.

it is an election year and the media wants a dem in office so it will be 10 months of bad news ...... expect a roller coaster ride ...... sit tight ..... 2years from now the dow will hit 15,000 ....

[manu1959]

Warn the public not to take high risk loans? :poke: Everybody just witnessed the tech stock bubble burst and they were doing the same thing with real estate.

http://members.aol.com/ilovemy65stang/signwet.bmp

no shit....why didn't big bill issue a warning that the tech bubble was going to burst.....where was my govt bail out on that.....

[Yurt]

no shit....why didn't big bill issue a warning that the tech bubble was going to burst.....where was my govt bail out on that.....

so his wife could come in later and be the savior candidate after Bush "ruined" the economy

[jimnyc]

can you link me up to all the legislation written and proposed by the dems that would have prevented this that the pubs killed....and while you are at it can you link me up to all the legislation proposed by the dems to help all the poor people losing their homes....

Don't hold your breath. I asked her for this before and she danced like she was competing on "Dancing with the Stars".

The dems had power, even when they were in the minority. She refuses to answer the specific questions because it will reveal that they share equal responsibility for the current financial issues. I'll repeat what I said earlier, she's a piss poor political hack.

[truthmatters]

Warn the public not to take high risk loans? :poke: Everybody just witnessed the tech stock bubble burst and they were doing the same thing with real estate.

http://members.aol.com/ilovemy65stang/signwet.bmp


You forget not all were paying attention to the tech stock situation. Many people who were buying their first home were kisds during that time and many owned no stock so payed no attention to it.

When greenspan and Bush were brushing off any talk of the coming effects of the policy and calling those people doomsayers and political hacks they certainly did have a hand in not solving the problem. They should have been trying to blunt its effects instead of basking in it.

[Dilloduck]

You forget not all were paying attention to the tech stock situation. Many people who were buying their first home were kisds during that time and many owned no stock so payed no attention to it.

When greenspan and Bush were brushing off any talk of the coming effects of the policy and calling those people doomsayers and political hacks they certainly did have a hand in not solving the problem. They should have been trying to blunt its effects instead of basking in it.

So you voting Democrat this time around ?

[Yurt]

You forget not all were paying attention to the tech stock situation. Many people who were buying their first home were kisds during that time and many owned no stock so payed no attention to it.

When greenspan and Bush were brushing off any talk of the coming effects of the policy and calling those people doomsayers and political hacks they certainly did have a hand in not solving the problem. They should have been trying to blunt its effects instead of basking in it.

an earthquake might occur where you live, run out into an open field right now...

[manu1959]

Don't hold your breath. I asked her for this before and she danced like she was competing on "Dancing with the Stars".

The dems had power, even when they were in the minority. She refuses to answer the specific questions because it will reveal that they share equal responsibility for the current financial issues. I'll repeat what I said earlier, she's a piss poor political hack.

i agree.......the difference between a liberal and a conservative is simply this....

a conservative would prefer to take care of themselves and will be responsible and accountable for the outcome....

a liberal would prefer to be taken care of and will look to hold someone else responsible and accountable if the they don't like the outcome.....

[avatar4321]

You forget not all were paying attention to the tech stock situation. Many people who were buying their first home were kisds during that time and many owned no stock so payed no attention to it.

When greenspan and Bush were brushing off any talk of the coming effects of the policy and calling those people doomsayers and political hacks they certainly did have a hand in not solving the problem. They should have been trying to blunt its effects instead of basking in it.

What kind of person doesnt pay close attention to everything when buying their first home? I know that's exactly what I would do because I know i dont have the experience to make an educated decision otherwise. the last thing id be doing id taking out high risk loans to pay for it.

The people taking high risk loans are the ones trying to turn the property over quickly so they can pay it off. they are trying to flip homes not live there.

[truthmatters]

Don't hold your breath. I asked her for this before and she danced like she was competing on "Dancing with the Stars".

The dems had power, even when they were in the minority. She refuses to answer the specific questions because it will reveal that they share equal responsibility for the current financial issues. I'll repeat what I said earlier, she's a piss poor political hack.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.CON.RES.107:

They are very hard to find due to the fact that Rs killed almost everything the dems sponsered over those years.

[truthmatters]

They were mislead by their lenders of the safety of the loans in the current market. No one was policing them at the time so they cashed in. Dems tried to propose legislation and were shut out of hte process.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d109:36:./temp/~bdWsZh:@@@D&summ2=m&

here is another one.

now that I have figured out where to find them I am finding them.

It seems the Democrats were trying to solve this one all along.

[theHawk]

They could have enaccted laws to hold down the number of subprimes the industry was selling. They could have deconsolidated the lending industry so they could no longer package off these loans with other assets to pass them off on the investors who bought them. They could have WARNED the public if nothing else instead of singing the praises of a economic situation the others were trying to tell the puplic was dangerous. Instead they insulted anyone who tried to warn about the results of such an economy. And said the economy was going gangbuster and everything was just perfect.

They sold the future economy out to get reelected.

Enacted laws? That would be the Congress' job. Did they attempt to pass any laws in the last two years? I'm not saying this is Congress's fault, but if you are saying laws should had been passed, then you should blame the Congress for not proposing the laws.

Who is supposed to warn the public, and what exactly are they supposed to be warned of? By "the public", I assume you're talking about people who were borrowing alot of money (i.e. mortgages). Anyone who gets a mortgage(myself included a few years back) should know what they are signing and know the risks.

This whole problem all stems from forclosures because people got greedy. People applied for mortgages they couldn't afford, for houses they couldn't afford, and the mortgage companies were equally guilty by awarding these loans. Normally a mortgage company wouldn't be all that hurt by a defaulted loan because they simply sell the house for what its worth, they simply miss out on 30 years on interest payments. The problem is that real estate got way overinflated and is now crashing back down to reality, so now they are actually losing money on the defaulted loans.

Any smart person should know that an adjustable rate is a very dangerous thing to get into. Personally I would never even consider an adjustable rate when buying a home. I fail to see where at any point during a home purchase some government representative would butt in with my negotiations with a mortgage company to give me some kind of "warning", but I guess common sense is becoming much more scarce.

Exactly what government agency has this responsibility?

[avatar4321]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.CON.RES.107:

They are very hard to find due to the fact that Rs killed almost everything the dems sponsered over those years.

If the Democrats sponsored bills, then the fact that they sponsored bills should be public knowledge even if they were killed.

[truthmatters]

So its fine with you that the markets can screw up the economy for years and congress has no responsibility to act on it in any way?


So how again does that effect why people called Carter a terrible president?

The congress is tasked with having oversite over the industires per the constitution.

[avatar4321]

They were mislead by their lenders of the safety of the loans in the current market. No one was policing them at the time so they cashed in. Dems tried to propose legislation and were shut out of hte process.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d109:36:./temp/~bdWsZh:@@@D&summ2=m&

here is another one.

now that I have figured out where to find them I am finding them.

It seems the Democrats were trying to solve this one all along.

Why do you assume its the governments job to police people? Why do you think people are too stupid to police themselves?

[avatar4321]

So its fine with you that the markets can screw up the economy for years and congress has no responsibility to act on it in any way?


So how again does that effect why people called Carter a terrible president?

The congress is tasked with having oversite over the industires per the constitution.

The markets dont screw up the market. People and government do

[truthmatters]

The markets dont screw up the market. People and government do

Niether govermnments or markets exsist without people.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!

[theHawk]

So its fine with you that the markets can screw up the economy for years and congress has no responsibility to act on it in any way?


So how again does that effect why people called Carter a terrible president?

The congress is tasked with having oversite over the industires per the constitution.


Carter and his Congress were responisble for passing the Community Reinvestment Act. This act pushed by the liberals forced banks to give loans to the more risky people. All in the name of helping out "the poor" and "minorities". Its a clear cut example of why the government should have no business telling private industry how to hand out loans.

[Nukeman]

So its fine with you that the markets can screw up the economy for years and congress has no responsibility to act on it in any way?

So how again does that effect why people called Carter a terrible president?

The congress is tasked with having oversite over the industires per the constitution.NO they don't have any resposibility to act upon it. Its called FREE MARKET and FREEDOM to choose your own path.

I can't believe the amount of "government regulation" you really want. Do you want the government to have that much power over the stock market. if so remember they could make or break any company that they wanted to.

The government is made up of people just like you and I and that means they are just as capable of being crooked and looking out for themselves. If the government were in charge of the free markets as you want the "insider trading" and wealthy beurocrats would be through the roof. Your just too dense to realize this. It has nothing to do with politicle affiliation but "human nature".........IDIOT......

[truthmatters]

Hawk that program helped to create home owners who held onto their houses.

The current problem created a massive economic problem.

You and your friend here seem to want a country where the market is just unleashed. This has been done in society and did not work very well. The constitution provides the congress with with the power of industry oversight.
Do you think the founders were wrong in that decision?

[avatar4321]

NO they don't have any resposibility to act upon it. Its called FREE MARKET and FREEDOM to choose your own path.

I can't believe the amount of "government regulation" you really want. Do you want the government to have that much power over the stock market. if so remember they could make or break any company that they wanted to.

The government is made up of people just like you and I and that means they are just as capable of being crooked and looking out for themselves. If the government were in charge of the free markets as you want the "insider trading" and wealthy beurocrats would be through the roof. Your just too dense to realize this. It has nothing to do with politicle affiliation but "human nature".........IDIOT......

It's amazing how critical of the government response truth and others of her like were when FEMA acted in New Orleans, but how much they want to give government more power in our lives.

[manu1959]

Hawk that program helped to create home owners who held onto their houses.

The current problem created a massive economic problem.

You and your friend here seem to want a country where the market is just unleashed. This has been done in society and did not work very well. The constitution provides the congress with with the power of industry oversight.
Do you think the founders were wrong in that decision?

really when.....

[manu1959]

The sub prime problem is coming at us from all sides.

looks like capitalists are stronger than you thought......

[theHawk]

Hawk that program helped to create home owners who held onto their houses.

The current problem created a massive economic problem.

You and your friend here seem to want a country where the market is just unleashed. This has been done in society and did not work very well. The constitution provides the congress with with the power of industry oversight.
Do you think the founders were wrong in that decision?


LOL, the law made banks give credit to more risky people. Umm you do realize that is the basis for the current crisis right? :laugh2:

[truthmatters]

Nope it is not.

It was the Number of these loans they wrote because they learned they could package them in other financial products and quickly sell them.They would use preditory lending practices to write these loans. The law wanted to end the preditory loan practices.



http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/congpowers.htm


Key Constitutional Grants
of Powers to Congress
Article I, Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;






http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.CON.RES.107:


Whereas predatory lenders target homeowners who are `equity-rich' and `cash-poor', particularly elderly, low-income, and minority households;

Whereas predatory loans are often made in such concentrated volumes in poor and minority neighborhoods, where better loans are not readily available, that the resulting loss of equity in, and foreclosure on, the properties devastate those already fragile communities; and

Whereas predatory lenders often use high-pressure tactics to charge customers extremely high, unaffordable fees so that the borrower will eventually default on the loan and lose the home, and the lender will profit from the equity in the property: Now, therefore, be it


Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Congress--

(1) fully supports the goal of increasing homeownership among families in the United States;

(2) recognizes the importance of homeownership in families establishing financial independence;

(3) fully supports programs for first-time homeownership, including the With Ownership Wealth Initiative of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation;

(4) urges the Federal Government and State and local governments--

(A) to take appropriate actions to encourage homeownership and fair housing practices; and

(B) to confront all forms of predatory lending with swift legislative action;

(5) recommits itself to making fair housing and homeownership a legislative priority in the 109th Congress; and

(6) urges the President to issue a proclamation encouraging the people of the United States to observe National Fair Housing Month with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

[manu1959]

Nope it is not.

It was the Number of these loans they wrote because they learned they could package them in other financial products and quickly sell them.They would use preditory lending practices to write these loans. The law wanted to end the preditory loan practices.

what about all the people that took these laons and are fine and have a house because of this opportunity....

[truthmatters]

what about all the people that took these laons and are fine and have a house because of this opportunity....


They got lucky huh?

what is the percent of these people compared to the ones who were harmed?

Probably about the amount that should have been written compared to the ones that the industry should have written under fair practices. BTW there is another victim that wont soon forget these actions. They are the foriegn investors who bought these packages and they will be much less likely to invest in America now.

[manu1959]

They got lucky huh?

what is the percent of these people compared to the ones who were harmed?

Probably about the amount that should have been written compared to the ones that the industry should have written under fair practices. BTW there is another victim that wont soon forget these actions. They are the foriegn investors who bought these packages and they will be much less likely to invest in America now.

caveat emptor........

luck had nothing to do with it......

what about all the banks that did not get hit.....

are you aware there were investors that bet against the housing boom and made billions....

[truthmatters]

Yes there were.

There were also lenders who did not make vast amounts of these loans.

There were those with too many morals to play this game.

[manu1959]

Yes there were.

There were also lenders who did not make vast amounts of these loans.

There were those with too many morals to play this game.

so that would mean the free market does work.....those that chose poorly will pay and those that did not will benifit....

accountablity and responsiblity for ones decisions.....

[truthmatters]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/08/17/avoiding_the_subprime_siren_song/

heres some reading for you on the subject.


It is no accident that banks did not succumb to the subprime siren song. Questionable products and sales tactics would surely be picked up by the banks' regulators so there's every incentive for bankers to avoid bad deeds and self-disclose the ones already committed. There is a chance that investment banks, had they shared the same relationship with their regulators, may have shied away from these combustible products and been more transparent in their pricing. At the least, these measures would move us to a better place, one of regulation by supervision as opposed to regulation by enforcement.

Cornelius Hurley is director of the Morin Center for Banking and Financial Law at Boston University.

[manu1959]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/08/17/avoiding_the_subprime_siren_song/

heres some reading for you on the subject.


It is no accident that banks did not succumb to the subprime siren song. Questionable products and sales tactics would surely be picked up by the banks' regulators so there's every incentive for bankers to avoid bad deeds and self-disclose the ones already committed. There is a chance that investment banks, had they shared the same relationship with their regulators, may have shied away from these combustible products and been more transparent in their pricing. At the least, these measures would move us to a better place, one of regulation by supervision as opposed to regulation by enforcement.

Cornelius Hurley is director of the Morin Center for Banking and Financial Law at Boston University.

seems the risk of these loans was common knowledge yet people went for them anyway.....some people benifitted and some didn't....such is life.....think of it as evolution and survival of the fittest....

[truthmatters]

Think of it as bad econimic policy.

The congress was given oversite by the founding fathers.

[avatar4321]

Nope it is not.

It was the Number of these loans they wrote because they learned they could package them in other financial products and quickly sell them.They would use preditory lending practices to write these loans. The law wanted to end the preditory loan practices.



http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/congpowers.htm


Key Constitutional Grants
of Powers to Congress
Article I, Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;






http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.CON.RES.107:


Whereas predatory lenders target homeowners who are `equity-rich' and `cash-poor', particularly elderly, low-income, and minority households;

Whereas predatory loans are often made in such concentrated volumes in poor and minority neighborhoods, where better loans are not readily available, that the resulting loss of equity in, and foreclosure on, the properties devastate those already fragile communities; and

Whereas predatory lenders often use high-pressure tactics to charge customers extremely high, unaffordable fees so that the borrower will eventually default on the loan and lose the home, and the lender will profit from the equity in the property: Now, therefore, be it


Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Congress--

(1) fully supports the goal of increasing homeownership among families in the United States;

(2) recognizes the importance of homeownership in families establishing financial independence;

(3) fully supports programs for first-time homeownership, including the With Ownership Wealth Initiative of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation;

(4) urges the Federal Government and State and local governments--

(A) to take appropriate actions to encourage homeownership and fair housing practices; and

(B) to confront all forms of predatory lending with swift legislative action;

(5) recommits itself to making fair housing and homeownership a legislative priority in the 109th Congress; and

(6) urges the President to issue a proclamation encouraging the people of the United States to observe National Fair Housing Month with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

It can be argued that the commerce clause doesnt mention anything about government involvement in finance

[hjmick]

The Market is now closed. I think we need a ruling on the field:

Dow 11,957.13 (-142.17)

NASDAQ 2,293.45 (-46.57)

S&P 1,309.41 (-15.78)

Did the Dow "tank" today as predicted by Truthmatters?

[PostmodernProphet]

lots of folks 'predicted' it....which makes me wonder....I can't recall ever reading in the paper that the market was going to fall on such-and-such a day.....

[MtnBiker]

Doesn't matter, she never said her definition of "tank".

[theHawk]

The Market is now closed. I think we need a ruling on the field:

Dow 11,957.13 (-142.17)

NASDAQ 2,293.45 (-46.57)

S&P 1,309.41 (-15.78)

Did the Dow "tank" today as predicted by Truthmatters?

A drop of 142 points? Are you kidding? Its The Great Depression II !!!

[jimnyc]

The Market is now closed. I think we need a ruling on the field:

Dow 11,957.13 (-142.17)

NASDAQ 2,293.45 (-46.57)

S&P 1,309.41 (-15.78)

Did the Dow "tank" today as predicted by Truthmatters?

The Dow didn't "tank" by any definition. A drop such as this with all the financial turmoil around the world is nothing. It's going to be some time before we see whether a full recession ticks in or if the stimulus package and other things prevent such a recession, but as of right now this was just an off day for the market. I've seen it drop 300-500pts a few times only to recover and set new records a short period later.

[Kathianne]

lots of folks 'predicted' it....which makes me wonder....I can't recall ever reading in the paper that the market was going to fall on such-and-such a day.....

It was the futures market, after the global sell off yesterday.

[jimnyc]

So much for TM's "tank" - the DJ finished up over 300pts today.

[hjmick]

So much for TM's "tank" - the DJ finished up over 300pts today.

Yeah, I saw that. Unless there is a new definition for the term "to tank," I'm going to have to say that TM's prediction was a tad off.

[jimnyc]

Well, just make it the 3,157th time she was wrong on this board. (look at her post count)

[truthmatters]

No where near as bad as I thought it would be.

That surprize .75 basis points helped save the day.

It was down near 270 today and is about 7+ percent on the year.

I really dont think it will recover by next week.

[jimnyc]

TM, you said "The dow is going to tank tomorrow". The Dow is actually UP since you made that statement.

Repeat after me and say it proudly - "I, truthmatters, was wrong"

[truthmatters]

Jim I said that on monday , his is wensday.

The dow was down @ 130 on tuesday and then @260 today.

At the opening on Tuesday is went down 460 in a very short time.

It fought its way back to only 130 down. Is 130 down a good day in the market?

[jimnyc]

Jim I said that on monday , his is wensday.

The dow was down @ 130 on tuesday and then @260 today.

At the opening on Tuesday is went down 460 in a very short time.

It fought its way back to only 130 down. Is 130 down a good day in the market?

A good day? No. Is it considered "tanking" - not even close! And within 48hrs of your declaration it not only recovered but made a gain. You were wrong.

[truthmatters]

A good day? No. Is it considered "tanking" - not even close! And within 48hrs of your declaration it not only recovered but made a gain. You were wrong.


Made a gain?


where did it make a gain?


I dont recall saying it would end at an historic low or anything but I do recall saying it would tank and I think most people would see 460 in early trading a tanking.



truthmatters
Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,168
Rep Power: 95
Rep Points: 5838



The dow is going to tank tomorrow

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The sub prime problem is coming at us from all sides.




Yeah that is what I though I said.



Jim I already said it ended better than I expected and everyone was pretty surprized Bernake did a 3/4 basis point and that did help because it was bigger than expected.

[jimnyc]

Made a gain?


where did it make a gain?


I dont recall saying it would end at an historic low or anything but I do recall saying it would tank and I think most people would see 460 in early trading a tanking.

It finished 162 down yesterday and over 300 up today - that is a GAIN since you made your comments. And early trading isn't the entire day is it? 162 down for the day isn't rosy but hardly even close to being considered "tanking". You stated it would happen yesterday, it didn't, you were wrong.

[truthmatters]

Man oh man !

the last I looked at it it was almost 300 down and that was not to far from the bell.

You are right. I took the dog to the vet and things completely changed.

Sorry I really thought it closed down like 260.

Damn I may even look at my 401k tomorrow. I was trying not to look.

[jimnyc]

We're not out of the woods yet so don't get excited. This problem might take awhile to fully be recognized by our entire economy, but I think the Feds cutting the interest rate and the bi-partisan stimulus package is what started things back up on the continued trend through today.

[truthmatters]

The really tough one is that there is a whole stink load of Subprimes ready to reset in the coming year.

[Psychoblues]

I think it waited until today to tank. But you were correct, it did tank eventually.