Some good news

According to the fed - as of today March 02 2008, over 2/3 of every American family that has stocks, bonds and 401K packages have officially lost 50% of there invested income.

And just think, the fed says the free fall is not yet starting to slow. If your lucky like me, you can't touch your 401k to stop the hemorrhage.

Chin up.

Duck wrote:According to the fed - as of today March 02 2008, over 2/3 of every American family that has stocks, bonds and 401K packages have officially lost 50% of there invested income.

And just think, the fed says the free fall is not yet starting to slow. If your lucky like me, you can't touch your 401k to stop the hemorrhage.

Chin up.

Ahh, and once again the savvy paycheck-to-paycheck non-investor cleans up 😀
Sucks to be the rest of the country, though.

Well I cashed in my investments last year to buy a house... so I missed the stock crash, but caught the housing bubble instead. So far the house has lost 30% of its value plus the gas plant that was going to be built there has been scrapped due to environmental lawsuit threats.

Ouch.....

I lost my ass in November 06. I was on an uphill swing by the time the shit really hit the fan!

All I can say is that it is a good thing I still have almost 30 years until I can retire 🙁

Plenty of time for the market to go back up (and come back down too)

Atomm wrote:Ouch.....

I lost my ass in November 06. I was on an uphill swing by the time the shit really hit the fan!

I think we are going to see this happen over and over again at least for the next few months. The more left this gov leans the more investors are going to pull out of the stock market.

Wait until fuel doubles again, which it will. We are really going to be in the shit.

Yes cause everything was a utopia when GWB was in office. Open up your mind beyond two parties, and think maybe this recession was brought on by a dumb American public taking stupid mortgages that they couldn't afford, while greedy bankers were offering dumb mortgages to people who shouldn't have gotten them. It was stacks of people being greedy. Had the government had any involvement, maybe it wouldn't be such a mess as it is.

I would just to say:

I have noticed that some folks here have not specifically gone into politics in this thread (or have barely gone into it, which for them is virtually the same thing as NOT going into it 🙂 ), even though this is an area in which they hold strong opinions, and the subject of this thread easily lends itself to political discussion. Impressive restraint, particularly since some are hurting due to the economic downturn. Granted, it WAS the elephant in the room, but seeing the temptation to run up and kick it in the balls resisted for so long is really impressive.

I think now the floodgates have been opened. God help us all 😉

The attempt to get along doesn't HAVE to stop here, even if political discussion DOES follow. Name-calling is for playgrounds, and facts and cites speak louder than hyperbole. Also, choosing not to join the discussion is always an option, although sometimes a DIFFICULT one.

If you do, however, try exchanging facts and ideas, and explain where you see fault, without bile and vitriol.

And I hope everyone has read the three links in Sarge's post here. . .
/forums/odds-and-ends/true-enough-learning-to-live-in-a-post-fact-society-5120/" target="_blank">/forums/odds-and-ends/true-enough-learning-to-live-in-a-post-fact-society-5120/

so they know how big the circle-jerk is that they're about to engage in 😀

(Mom)
Now run along and play nice!
(/Mom)

I read an article the other day that really made a lot of sense. It basically said that one man created an algorithm that allowed the investment banks to leverage large amounts of money in a way that had never been seen before while making a profit. That in itself is not a problem, but when all the banks bought into the algorithm, every institution was doing the exact same thing.

Because of this, it created a bubble. In investments, you can't have everyone doing the same thing. That's bad. The housing market was caught up in this scheme.

Also, Bubba, I have a different take on Lexx's comments. The investors are starting to get spooked that the government is going to get so involved that it will stimy their investments. The more the government seems to take over, the more scared the market gets. I think there is some truth to this. It's also a problem because we need a stable stock market to provide stability to the companies that make up the majority of the economy.

While I don't disagree with you Atomm, it is still a bunch of stupid people taking what should be rational thought out decisions and making them instead on rumors and speculation on things they don't understand.

The day facts are introduced into the arguements, these people would be making very different decisions.

My wife and I were in fact offered all of these rediculous mortgages. We were offered a mortgage that I am not sure I could pay today (4 years later, have nearly doubled our income), when my wife was working as a temp and I had a paid internship. We knew it was a path to economic disaster and that we shouldn't walk that road.

People need to start thinking based on facts again and actual research they have looked into, they need to stop believing and speculating on XYZ (insert your favorite blog, newstation, talking head, local idiot who spout out information, guy at work who "knows everything").

As for the politics, I didn't feel the need for this thread to go there, but Lexx brought it there with his one size fits all "Blame the Democrats". My reading and learning about this crisis all seems to point rather clearly that things are far worse since Paulson got involved. He dropped the ball on Lehman Bros, he thought their failure wouldn't have a ripple and it had a huge ripple.

Hate to say it Bubba, but there are "reputable" news organizations starting to Poo Poo him, the Dems and socialism all together.....

Obama lied; the economy died
Big government is really his bag, but he doesn't own up to it
Tony Blankley - Washington Times.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Washington Times, a notoriously left leaning paper always in love with liberalism:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/m...e-economy-died/

Newsweek - says it all

http://www.newsweek.com/id/183663

And the media CNN, HLN, Fox et all are starting to refer to Hope-and-change-Hussein's budget as "the European Socialist Act of 2009"


So as bitter as it may be to swallow, he's gonna fuck it up for us, there are no two ways to look at it.
I hope he fails.
I hope we lose all confidence in our present system of government, Democ-rat and Republican alike.

Bush did not help, he was useless in oney matters, but raising my taxes and spending 3.6 TRILLION dollars is INSANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

$3.6 trillion in spending divided by 139 million taxpayers equals $25,573.48 apiece. YEARLY!

Put it on your kids’ tab: by 2019 the annual deficit will still be north of $700 billion and the national debt will stand a shade over … $15 trillion, almost double what it is now. WITH HIS BUDGET THEY ARE PASSING AS WE WRITE THIS!!!!!!

WHAT THE FUCK OVER?

A one-third increase in the size of government in a single year. The budget released by the White House today is loaded with job-killing tax hikes and a slate of even more government spending.

How is this good for me? For you? For all of us?
And how can ANYONE rat or elephant alike sit idly by and just let them continue to ass rape us like they are - and all we do is sit idly by and say thank you hussein may I have another?

The more the gubernment' spends, the more they put their hand in the private sector pie, the more they take from me to give to whom they deem more fit for my money then I, the less people will invest in private business (stock market) if there is any privatization left to invest in.... it's just going to spiral down to nothing....

I'm sick - and sorry I started t his post. Not for the fact that were back to the cess pool of political posting (again) but for the fact that all this shit depresses me.

OH LEXX Fule - listen to this - from our president -
From the same Washington Times article.

Mr. Obama's energy secretary, Steven Chu, said last year: The price of electricity in America is "anomalously low." You see how much smarter that Nobel prize winner is than you. You probably thought you were already spending enough on electricity and fuel.

And sure enough, Mr. Obama explained last week that in order to make alternative energy sources wind, solar - perhaps eventually human muscle power? - economically competitive, he intends to raise the price of carbon-based energy until it is so expensive that even solar power will be such-a-deal.

Here's what we can look forward to as New-France-West.

[rant off]
[Flame retardant suit on]

Duck, I think you make a lot of great points. Just remember, the name that you choose to use sidetracks the real issues. Not bashing you for using it, but it is somewhat of a red herring to the real problem.

On to the topic at hand.

Read this article from the Wall Street Journal's website. This is what I am trying to say.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html

As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama's policies have become part of the economy's problem.

I know I know I know and you all should know by now too, I just can't call IT by IT'S real name.
No matter how loosely I try.

I had more but it was too venomous.

Maybe tomorrow.

So wait in October there is the biggest melt down in the US economy since the depression. The Stock market tumbles and tumbles. In the middle of the tumble we get a new president and it's his fault?? (Take a look at the Dow for the past 6 mo) Linky (note the even bigger "peak" than Obamas swearing in... election day)

I won't for a second deny that Wall St is trying to speculate on what impact Obama will have and that must have had some secondary effect on the market, however to blame low stocks on his first two months in office is like blaming the Civil War on Andrew Johnson.

Duck as for your post... maybe if you had read the article you would have seen this quote...

"The U.S. government has already—under a conservative Republican administration—effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries. That seems a stronger sign of socialism than $50 million for art. Whether we want to admit it or not—and many, especially Congressman Pence and Hannity, do not—the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state."

Basically your Newsweek article goes on to say we are a rather centrally based country, and socialism is rather far away from where we are or where we are going. i.e. it disagrees with you more than I do.

As for your Washington Times, which as you state tends to lean liberal, What you posted was and editorial from the Times, you could've written it, I could have written it. Again it was written by a self admitting Republican who starts by pointing out this is his revenge for Democrats being mean to the Bush Administration.

So while I actually have some common ground on the bailouts, your attacks try to pull us apart from that common ground. You posted two sources one which disagrees with the point you were trying to make, and another that doesn't try to hide that he is as far on your side of the aisle as possible. Again I implore you and the others to do your own research and don't rely on an editorial, or the front cover of a magazine to inform you.

I think it is too soon to tell what Obama's policies are doing - good or bad. A problem of this magnitude cannot be corrected overnight, or even in a few months, and the market is reacting, like it always does. What the reporter in the WSJ opinion piece (and it is an editorial) is missing, is the larger view. He is seemingly stating that the "fall panic" is an isolated event and not symptomatic of the larger economic issues that we have in this country. From October of 2007 to October 2008, the market dropped over 30%. The first bailout was done on October 3rd and the market dropped 18% in just a week afterward including a single day where it dropped 11%. So is this better or worse than that? The market is up over 200 points right now does that mean that Obama's policies are working? What everyone seems to forget (or choose to ignore) is that when this country is in a major economic crisis like we are, the markets tend to get very volatile and charge forward or panic at the merest hint of a problem or relief. Dr Housing Bubble shows that of the top 20 daily gains and losses of the market a majority of them occurred in 2008. When you look at the % gains and losses, 2008 and the 1929-1930's dominate as well. So I would expect much more volatility this year no matter who was in charge and what they are doing. Are we better off without Bush in office? Most definitely. Will Obama be our economic savior? That remains to be seen, but don't close the door yet.

It is so funny to me that we rely so much on the reaction of the markets for a measure of these policies. I mean, the markets boomed under junk bonds, the tech bubble, the housing bubble and the run up on mortgage derivatives, and the over extension of personal and corporate credit. Is that looking like the best reaction now? The root of the problem is that for the last 20+ years, the foundations of our economy have been being eroded by the decline in us actually making things, a reliance on too much credit, and weasels in expensive suits on Wall Street creating "investment vehicles" that have proven unwise in hindsight. We rely to an amazing amount on consumption to drive the economy. So much of what is being preached by the conservative side on "how to save the economy" is tax cuts to allow people to spend more. The problem with that is now people are pulling back from spending because they are worried about their jobs (if they still have one) and are starting to figure out that maybe they can't afford a giant house, new TVs, and a new car every three years like they thought they could. People aren't going to spend until they feel comfortable doing it, no matter how much of a tax cut they are given.

.

Never mind it's not worth it, or arguing with anyone one of you again.
Another thread gone to fuck all because of politics.


Good bye.

Duck,

I thought we were doing ok on this one...... Don't get down now.

I guess my biggest problem is I don't believe we need more debt to get us back on track. Sure we need to spend to create jobs, but we seem to be bleeding money at the seams. At a certain point, we have to realize that this market is correcting itself and if we keep feed the monster, it will become full and we will have nothing left to show for it.

Unfortunately, we are going to pay for the past no matter what. The real question is how long do we want our children to pay for that past as well?

I agree with you 100% Atomm. The one thing I would add to your sentiment, If you are going to try and solve this by throwing money at it, you can throw the money 3 places.

1.) The banks try to bail them out.
2.) The people in trouble, try to bail them out
3.) Aim for a trickle down effect.

#1 is what they tried this past fall. All of the money went out, no one knows where. We found out imediatly this was a wonderful thing for the bank exec to give them selves bonuses and other perks, didn't help anyone else.

#2 In this scenario everyone is mad at each other and unhappy. "Why does Joey down the block get free money for buying more than he can afford?" (look at Ducks avatar)

#3 Who knows if it works, many economists think it might, many think it won't. The one benefit is most of this is going to infrastructure that will need to be spent on at some point. The downfall is, can we support all of the infrastructure on an ongoing basis? (The CCC created many wonderful things, but now we realize we can't pay for their maintenance, same with the Interstate Highways).

I agree with you Atomm, everyone seems to forget this isn't found money we are talking about, this is money that you and I are paying back, this is money your poor daughter will be paying back.

Ron Paul said in the debates one of the most wise things and was basically laughed off the stage for it. He said "We can't afford to be at war, why are we there?". Its time to think about priorities and make the tough decisions. Its going to hurt no matter who you are. But like your own creditcard debit, we can't just ignore it forever it doesn't go away. But once you face it and own it and make an effort to fix it, it goes away quicker than you ever imagined.

I don't get the Avatar Duck. Can you help me understand what I am looking at?

Bubba, you make a great point on being able to continue paying for something. I'm worried the states will use the money on project that will only bleed more money after the stimulus bus has left town. I'm sure you see that a lot in your profession.

<--- Credit Card Free since November 08. I finally get that part and it's changed the way I look at money being used.

I heard on NPR a guy talking about the amount of Personal Debt vs GDP. In 2000, the people of the US carried 50% debt vs the GDP of the year. By 2008, that number had risen to 100% vs GDP.

They asked the guy if his researched show this ever happening before. He said you had to go back to 1929.

Let that sit in. Does Black Tuesday ring a bell? Yep, it happened in 1929.

We really need to learn our lesson about Debt.

A few more things come to mind. We are bailing out the banks, but it's those same banks that led us to this debt. Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for personal responsibility, but who here hasn't been suckered into doing something debt related that they shouldn't have? College and your first Credit Card? Taking the ARM over the conventional 30 year loan? They've never had our best interest at heart.

So, if we bail out the old guard, then all we are doing is maintaining the stats quo. Maybe those same banks need to crash. Maybe things need to change. Whats the phrase, Creation through Destruction?

Atomm wrote:I don't get the Avatar Duck. Can you help me understand what I am looking at?

Ahh, something in this thread I feel OK talking about 🙂

Going by past history and the apparently revolving part, I figured it was an automatic weapon's loading mechanism. Grabbing the Avatar and dragging it to my desktop revealed the name AKbolt.jpg. We'll see if Mr. Obvious is right when Duck gets back to confirm or deny. 😉

I liked his old animated bolt better because it was edumacational. 👍

When I referred to the avatar I was thinking of the one he had recently that said something like "honk if I am paying your mortgage"

I once heard a story, I am guessing this probably isn't true, but it really sank into my head and is a good lesson regardless of its true history.

Henry Ford weathered the depression relatively fine. Why, he took his money out of the market beforehand. Why did he do it. He was getting his shoes shined and the shoe shine boy was telling him how he was making money hand over fist in the market. Ford knew that not everyone can be making money... that money has to come from somewhere. He decided if everyone was speculating and making money that meant eventually the situation would catch up. He removed his money from investments and was absolutely right... in any market not everyone can make money at the same time.

Ok, first I meant what Atomm said. I've seen the market going down since Obama won the primary and we were stuck with McCain. Doom was in the air then. Allow me to blame whom I want.

While Bush was in office, he was hamstringed by Pelosi and Reed. Barney Frank, Clinton, and the black caucus had as much to do with the housing bs as anyone. How do you think Clinton earned his title of 'the first black president'? I just get tired of 'its Bush's fault', ad nausea. I agree he dropped the ball on the warfront, then again, he has sewn the seeds of democracy in the middle east. He may be proven right in a few decades. He had a good grip on the economy and unemployment until he turned lameduck with dems in control of the houses.

Next, my income depends on the market. When it gets spooky like this I start to lose big contracts. I've had 3 cancellations in the last couple of weeks, so forgive me if I drop a short little quib, this is going to really hurt me if it doesn't reverse soon.

As for Obama, his policies, his ideology... I absolutely loathe everything about him. His cabinet, his reversals of Bush's moral policies, his spending bills, his arrogance at rubbing it in our faces. I don't want condoms handed out to my 13yr old daughter, my doctor forced to do abortions, or my friends and neighbors that work 12hr days getting punished for working hard. I don't want to see nationalism of our utilities, fuel production, or the fed owning or controlling banks, housing, healthcare, education, or forcing the auto industry to build cars we don't want. Everyday I read the hoopha of another 'change' and it just kills me a little bit more. Clinton at least worked with congress to govern from the center, as did Bush 1/2, but not this hack. All opposition was squashed and he pushed by those two hugh bills that our grandchildren are going to have to pay back. 44 days? How much more tax and spend is he going to rack up in the next two years at this rate??

I've been responsible for every aspect of my life. I bought my last house with cash, very small, very outdated, but no loan to fail on. Essentially I've lost a small fortune in just the last 3 months. Again forgive my personal angst.


I'd like to be able to talk politics here, as would Duck and probably Pal and Atomm, but somehow we have to agree to disagree without the bent feelings. I swear to God we all use the opposite side of our brains to think these matters out 🙂

If we are going to get past the 2 party problem, we have to start forgiving each other for small anger outbreaks and not deteriorate to the level of every blog in the country.

I think the thing is, look back and read. Sarge and I never did anything more than debate. It is you and Duck that have slung the arrows in this thread. I can deal with a differing opinion. My father is 100% in line with your thinking Lexx, I still have a great relationship with him. I hold no ill will towards you Lexx or towards Duck. In fact you are two of the people here I like a
lot.

Do I agree with you, no. Do I find one thing in this thread offensive? Not really, I don't see a need to insult Obama.

I'd like to add another point. I may get the numbers slightly off, but I think you'll see the point.

With the way we are spending, we, the tax payers, will owe nearly 28% of the GDP in taxes. With the way health care is going, we spend about 26% of GDP on health care.

Those two things alone are worth +50% of GDP.

Now, we add to that 100% of GDP in personal debt.

Now we are sitting at 150% of GDP due to personal debt, taxes and health care.

This doesn't take into account any part of the consumerism we are suppose to partake in to get the economy back on it's feet.

Folks, as far as I'm concerned, something has got to give. If we can't figure out how to fix this, then we will not recover. Of the three, only 2 have any chance of changing. Personal debt can go down and taxes can go down. Health care could go down, but we all know that ain't gonna happen.

However, taxes are going up and personal debt is slowly being pushed down by defaults and lenders forcing customers out the door. That's not a good solution, but at least it's moving.

Taxes. Man, we really screwed that one up.

Lol, yah Bubba I should have put //rant on/off//. Your right of course, which pissed me off even more, but I needed just a small release to get it off my chest. I really don't trust the guy.

Logically Bush blamed Clinton for the recession he inherited, Obama probably deserves the same kind of leeway. Whether that is true or not is still a kind of economic mystery to me. If 60% of voters think Obama is the cats meow, why is the market still dropping 200pts a day?

Remember too I was raised by union card carrying democrats, but we manage to make it through holiday dinners without too much political fighting.

I'm just getting really concerned about the market, the housing bailout, stuff like that. There is no way I can hope to recover if this tax and spend continues much longer. I'd almost rather he fails bad now, let the market crash, and start over from scratch in 6 months.... almost.

Its all speculation Lexx, that is the problem. Its a negative feedback loop, confidence is shaken so things go down, seeing things are going down makes people less confident, seeing less confidence stocks go down. The reality its the people who are pulling out and panicking. While my investments are down, and that sucks I know its cyclical and they will be up eventually, and I am sure they will be down at least 1 or 2 more time before I retire. The people this is scary for is the people who need their investments up now.

Its kinds like traffic jams. Ever been in one where there is no accident and nothing that actually jammed the traffic. typically they happen beause someone slowed down which caused the car behind him to hit his brakes and so on and so forth. Then people start switching lanes. each switch ties up the lane for a couple seconds. Multiply this over many people and you have a traffic jam. If everyone stayed in 1 lane and drove a constant speed there wouldn't be jam most of the time (unless you truly geometrically overfilled the road with cars). This is similar to the stock market.

I don't necessarily trust him either Lexx, I could have trusted McCain until he started pandering hardcore towards the same people as GW. I don't think GW was all that bad, though the people he let make his decisions were horrible (hence GW gets a horrible reputation). Cheney is horrible to me. In his past McCain has been fairly decent, just he threw that away mid summer last year. And Palin was beyond inexcusable as VP choice. I was almost up in the air until the Palin and pandering. I think Obama has done only ok with his appointments. I am glad he has put some people who actually know the environment in leading positions again. I am happy with his FCC appointment. I am unhappy with his RIAA appointments.

People need to get over this one size fits all mentality. Both parties are gonna screw you, pick the best of what is offered regardless of their party. After that you need to work with whoever is there.

Very well said Bubba.