We're in a lot of trouble!

[black elk speaks]

This "crisis" was bound to happen. Many sane people on Wall Street have been pointing to the housing bubble for years, then putting their cash on gold and shorts.l

Has anyone read Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine?"

She posits that the ruling class uses crises to get into place long sought changes in policy. Surprise, surprise, see how Paulson is moving quickly to consolidate power in the president's cabinet.

We should email all our represenatives and have them vote against it.

An alternative is for the government to buy the stock of the failing companies at the current fire sale prices, get rid of current management, and use the power of ownership to help mortgage holders recover.

But we don't have the money to do that with. They are just going to print more. < == bad idea.

[mpjh]

Duh, they are going to print it anyway and give it to wall street types. Get real.

[black elk speaks]

Duh, they are going to print it anyway and give it to wall street types. Get real.

and you think that this is okay? You no doubt understand that when they print off a bunch of new money and pump it into the economy, that means that there will be more currency. that means that it will be worth less. About 700 billion less.

[mpjh]

Yes, it will expand the money supple and create long term inflation, but not 700 billion. You don't need that much to buy these bastards' stock. It is a firesale. You can then liquidate the assets and recoup most of what the government spent.

I am proposing liquidation, not bail out.

[Nikolai]

Except that liquidation requires buyers. You can't just say "I declare that this stock just turned into dollars." Not even if you're the all-powerful US government.

[mpjh]

I am not talking about reselling the stock, but liquidating the assets. All these companies have profitable operations, they eat it. For example, all the units of AIG are profitable, only the holding company is dying. Take it over, nationalize it, and sell the profitable assets, they will be plenty of takers. The government may even make money.

[black elk speaks]

Yes, it will expand the money supple and create long term inflation, but not 700 billion. You don't need that much to buy these bastards' stock. It is a firesale. You can then liquidate the assets and recoup most of what the government spent.

I am proposing liquidation, not bail out.

So what exactly is your point? I agree that those companies that are wrapped up in this economic quagmire need to liquidate their assets, but then they need to go out of business. The US tax payer does not need to foot the bill for this.

Bush's Republicrat proposal is tantamount to Communism! Years ago I heard a bit on the radio where it was suggested that as the Cold War was waged, the interactions between the East and West actually tainted each the ideas of the other. The Leftist Communist empire became more capitalists just before its collapse. I can finally see the writing on the wall where the same thing is happening here.

I can feel the noose around the neck of freedom. Domestic operations military bases are coming online next month. NEXT MONTH! The are in the process of writing laws that suspend the second amendment during times of crisis and emergency when, at least I believe, that is precisely the time when our Constitution's framers intended those rights NOT to be infringed.

mp, you need to open your eyes to the bigger picture. The liberties and freedoms that make America great are on the chopping block. What is happening to our country is the work of our enemies, make no mistake. What is unclear is whether those enemies are foreign or domestic. Civil unrest in not far off. If you own a firearm and you have not tested it in a while, my recommendation to you is to clean it and stock up on ammo.

[PLAYER57832]

The problem is the securities insurance.

In normal insurance, you take on lots of folks, thus spreading out the risk. One house burning down in Chicago won't make a house across town or in New York burn. BUT, in the case of mortgages, that IS what happens. One house goes down, and others do also.

Start with some almost shady and outright fraudulant lenders such as Country Wide, some people who took on WAY too much mortgage (either knowingly or by listening to loan "advisors" who were actually just sellers of loans), add in increased interest rates and balloon payments (this is where a lot of outright fraud came in ... some contractors would have elderly folks sign loans for home improvements that would then tack on thousands in fees).

We have to remember that when folks talk "deregulation" what they are really saying is "I am stronger and I want to make the rules". Consolidation and "efficiency" have meant that a few people at the top are so removed from the every day worker that laying off hundreds, even thousands means little more than numbers on a balance sheet. Folks forget what got us here. Study economic history. Look at what happened around the turn of the century. Then it was gold hoarding, followed by monopolies.

Folks are greedy. There will always be a few at the top who won't be satisfied even with very high salaries. They want it ALL. It is a game to be in the top money makers. But, they forget that those funds have to come from somewhere. AND, when you keep skimming dollars and cents off the ordinary folks ... to the point where they cannot take their kids to the doctor, put them through good schools, put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads. It is just plain WRONG.

THAT is the foundation we ALL seem to forget... and keep forgetting every time we shop at Walmart because it is cheaper, never mind that almost every employee there is being subsidized by us to pay for food, get child care, etc... because Walmart is not paying them enough to do those things.

[PLAYER57832]

Except that liquidation requires buyers. You can't just say "I declare that this stock just turned into dollars." Not even if you're the all-powerful US government.

You have to go even deeper.

Stocks are ultimately worth no more than the products a company makes. Yes, I am fully aware that many on Wallstreet can manipulate sales and make money off every losing game. BUT, the bottom line is that someone, eventually has to pay. You can take your earnings and fly for a while, but when the foundation of our economy is eroded, when folks completely forget and bypass the basic workers and productions of products ... then there is no paper left.

OUr system is built upon the idea that by competing, companies/people will ultimately do what is best for the economy, us as a whole. BUT, history shows that is not so. There will always be those who are not happy, who want more, who will do whatever they can to manipulate the system. In the old days, it was Rockafeller giving kerosene away until he drove his competition out of business and could them jack up prices (to name just one of the more well known examples). The government had to come in and say "no monopolies".

Now, the government has to come in and say that you can no longer loan out money unless you have a certain percentage of REAL ASSETS to back it. Unfortunately, things are so far gone that the amount of money that must NOW be gauranteed is so astronomical no company, ONLY the federal government can do it.

It is shameful, it should make ALL of us angry, but that is the reality. At the same time, I, and I believe most of congress (but NOT the Bush administration) think the bigwigs should take some hits in exchange for this huge bonus. They can whine and complain all they want about having to reduce their incomes and bonuses from the 20,000,000-30,000,000 range to "just" a couple of million. You know what, most of us don't care.

[black elk speaks]

Except that liquidation requires buyers. You can't just say "I declare that this stock just turned into dollars." Not even if you're the all-powerful US government.

You have to go even deeper.

Stocks are ultimately worth no more than the products a company makes. Yes, I am fully aware that many on Wallstreet can manipulate sales and make money off every losing game. BUT, the bottom line is that someone, eventually has to pay. You can take your earnings and fly for a while, but when the foundation of our economy is eroded, when folks completely forget and bypass the basic workers and productions of products ... then there is no paper left.

OUr system is built upon the idea that by competing, companies/people will ultimately do what is best for the economy, us as a whole. BUT, history shows that is not so. There will always be those who are not happy, who want more, who will do whatever they can to manipulate the system. In the old days, it was Rockafeller giving kerosene away until he drove his competition out of business and could them jack up prices (to name just one of the more well known examples). The government had to come in and say "no monopolies".

Now, the government has to come in and say that you can no longer loan out money unless you have a certain percentage of REAL ASSETS to back it. Unfortunately, things are so far gone that the amount of money that must NOW be gauranteed is so astronomical no company, ONLY the federal government can do it.

It is shameful, it should make ALL of us angry, but that is the reality. At the same time, I, and I believe most of congress (but NOT the Bush administration) think the bigwigs should take some hits in exchange for this huge bonus. They can whine and complain all they want about having to reduce their incomes and bonuses from the 20,000,000-30,000,000 range to "just" a couple of million. You know what, most of us don't care.

And the crowd goes wild!

[Juan_Bottom]

http://news.aol.com/article/white-house ... 1200629216

It's a shouting match...
Congress might actually care about this...

(either knowingly or by listening to loan "advisors" who were actually just sellers of loans),

It's true. Banks would by loans off of each other. They'd but like 5,000 loans in a package, when only 1,000 were good. Then they'd re-package it and send it off to the next one.
Also, they knew everytime that they were buying bad debt.

Start with some almost shady and outright fraudulant lenders such as Country Wide,

They all were.

add in increased interest rates and balloon payments (this is where a lot of outright fraud came in ... some contractors would have elderly folks sign loans for home improvements that would then tack on thousands in fees).

I'm amazed how much you know about Countrywide. They were the most difficult bank to do paperwork for... BUT! they were a crap bank. They had no cap for broker profits, which on an adjustable rate mortgage, can be a lot of money. For example, I once someone take out a first and second mortgage. The first was for 80,000 and the Broker made 8,000 in upfront fees(ALL THAT WAS WAS A CREDIT CHECK).
We also had a broker who sold the same house every year for 5 years. He would give the customers a Balloon Mortgage and then when they couldn't make the payment, he would get the house back and then sell it to the next guy. I turned him in for fraud, and HUD told me to shut up or face prosecution.
I can give you a hundred horrer stories.



So WAMU collapsed last night after the stock market crashed, and within hours was given over to CHASE bank. Insider information? Was it pre-planned to fail after the stock market closed on a high note, and then turn over to CHASE?

The Army Times is reporting that the 3rd Army to be activated on American soil is being equipted with spike strips, road block, and non-leathal gear.
This is all sounding a little too pre-planned.

OUr system is built upon the idea that by competing, companies/people will ultimately do what is best for the economy, us as a whole. BUT, history shows that is not so. There will always be those who are not happy, who want more, who will do whatever they can to manipulate the system. In the old days, it was Rockafeller giving kerosene away until he drove his competition out of business and could them jack up prices (to name just one of the more well known examples). The government had to come in and say "no monopolies".

The problem is that everything in the business sector is so preditory. It's all about taking advantage of people.
Whether your creating a need with some pavlovian method, lieing to your customers, or sharking people with loans, that's how it's done.

[Nikolai]

Except that liquidation requires buyers. You can't just say "I declare that this stock just turned into dollars." Not even if you're the all-powerful US government.

You have to go even deeper.

Stocks are ultimately worth no more than the products a company makes. Yes, I am fully aware that many on Wallstreet can manipulate sales and make money off every losing game. BUT, the bottom line is that someone, eventually has to pay. You can take your earnings and fly for a while, but when the foundation of our economy is eroded, when folks completely forget and bypass the basic workers and productions of products ... then there is no paper left.

OUr system is built upon the idea that by competing, companies/people will ultimately do what is best for the economy, us as a whole. BUT, history shows that is not so. There will always be those who are not happy, who want more, who will do whatever they can to manipulate the system. In the old days, it was Rockafeller giving kerosene away until he drove his competition out of business and could them jack up prices (to name just one of the more well known examples). The government had to come in and say "no monopolies".

Now, the government has to come in and say that you can no longer loan out money unless you have a certain percentage of REAL ASSETS to back it. Unfortunately, things are so far gone that the amount of money that must NOW be gauranteed is so astronomical no company, ONLY the federal government can do it.

It is shameful, it should make ALL of us angry, but that is the reality. At the same time, I, and I believe most of congress (but NOT the Bush administration) think the bigwigs should take some hits in exchange for this huge bonus. They can whine and complain all they want about having to reduce their incomes and bonuses from the 20,000,000-30,000,000 range to "just" a couple of million. You know what, most of us don't care.

Actually a lot of that is blatantly false propaganda. For instance, stocks are worth whatever people will pay for them, not the value of the product produced. Any number of companies don't actually produce anything, but have very high stock prices. And no, someone somewhere doesn't eventually have to pay. Economics isn't a zero-sum game. We figured this out about the time mercantilism went out and Adam Smith came in. And your theories about how competition doesn't help the economy are laughable, particularly since you use an example that consists of the government insisting that competition is necessary.

I'm not saying that people don't do nasty things. But the free market structure is the best thing anybody's come up with to work with people's tendency to do nasty things, instead of idealistically assuming that everyone will do what is best for everyone (e.g. communism.)

Oh, and this stuff about hitting the bigwigs for the bailout is ridiculous. I offer several practical reasons why this is so.
1. They aren't going to stick around here if they're expected to pay for everyone else's mistakes. Same reasons so many corporations are moving elsewhere... we say "Oh, they're a big corporation, they can afford to pay extra taxes so we can subsidize their smaller, inept competition" and they can't, so they leave. Then we whine. California has been seeing this happen in terms of rich individuals for years... tax them just because they're rich, and they'll leave.
2. These are the people who have demonstrated the ability to turn their money into more money. If I look at someone who's demonstrated the ability to create wealth in our economy, I don't consider it a good idea to take their capital away, reducing their wealth creation ability, and give to someone who's demonstrated the ability to destroy wealth in our economy... vis. a lot of welfare moms. (Don't get me wrong, I know some welfare moms for whom I have tremendous, tremendous respect... but I know more who are government parasites.)
3. Right now, rich people are taking the biggest, meanest hits on Wall Street. Granted, your average working man might be losing value on his 401k, but there are rich people who are losing their daily income, often because they're trying to support the economy by continuing to invest.
4. By encouraging taxation of rich people, you reduce the incentive to become a rich person by creating wealth. If I know that I'm going to move up several tax brackets and not really make much more money than I am now by starting a new business with an idea I have, I'm not encouraged to put in all the time and effort it would take to make it work. Same thing if I'm considering moving into personal stock trading or something. I am, effectively, being discouraged from investing in the economy.

Now, I'm not saying that rich people don't make mistakes, or that there aren't rich people who need to be slapped down for their actions in precipitating the current crisis. But laying a smackdown on the group as a whole for the sins of a few is ridiculous, and could be seriously damaging to the economy at a time when we desperately need to avoid more such damage.

Maybe next time, you should consider basic economics instead of popular politics?

[Pedronicus]

Not me, sadly. I will pass away from this earth before I retire under a soviet regime.

Ditto. If you run to this hills, run to mine. It'd be nice to fight for freedom with a fellow CCer. In our downtime, we can get out the board game and play for/with soviet teeth or something.

You two are a pair of fucking idiots. You really expect Russia to invade America? - and then you two holed up in some mountain pass are going to fight the Ruskies with the guns, that you cling to so dearly.
Do yourselves a favour and shoot the pricks that stuck you in this situation in the first place. You know their names and you know they live in America (a lot closer than Russia)

Why shoot and blame Russians. Red Dawn was a film. It was fiction.

Your currency going down the plughole is real and rich Americans caused it. Time to take up arms against those that are doing harm to you right now.

Shoot Bush and the bankers. Not Russians

You are what we called in the 60's a "provocateur." You are either too stupid to poor piss out of a boot with the instructions on the bottom, or you are a pig trying to provoke others into illegal action. Either way you are dangerous, and should be diligently ignored.

Well I consider myself able to follow the instructions on the sole of the boot you mention, therefore I must fall into the other category.

Why should I be ignored? - Your current government has been in place for 7 years and cannot blame this current crisis on anyone else. the glut of housing in America is behind the financial bubble that has burst, and surely the amount of housing being built could of been reduced by your current government.
The main reason I suggest shooting Bush is because this current plea for 700 billion due to the economy failing is no different to his plea to invade Iraq because of aledged WMD's in that country.
The cunt's in charge of the Banks on 10-40 million salaries are getting off Scott free and will still claim such outrageous pay packets even if they were in charge of these failed businesses.

This is a situation that affects the man in the street more than these fat cats. GW isn't taking these selfish morons to task, he's just passing their failure onto Joe public. It's time that Joe public passed on this failure to the idots that caused it.

Your famous fore fathers wrote a constitution that so many Americans cling to, yet don't use it to their advantage (you are armed to the teeth) to remove the blinkered, greedy, self obsessed men in suits, that have brought your once proud country to it's knees.

I'm angry about it because the obscene size of the companies involved are going to reverberate around the globe and we will all lose.

Enron should of been a huge wake up call and yet we are all in this shit situation.

[Fruitcake]

How bad is this crisis anyway?

Recently I received this through my electronic mail. I thought about responding, but meetings with my Mortgage advisor kind of took precedence.

________________________________________________________

Dear one,

It is my pleasure to contact you for a business venture which I intend to establish for our mutual benefits hence I write with due respect.

I need to ask you to support this urgent secret business relationship with a transfer of funds of great magnitude. I am writing to you at the suggestion of a business acquaintance of one of our members; he felt you would be a respectable person and God fearing to do the business with.

I am Ministry of the Treasury of the Republic of America. My country has crisis that has caused the need for large transfer of funds of 800 billion dollars US. If you would assist me in this transfer, it would be most profitable to you.

I wish to request for your assistance in transferring and investing this money in a lucrative venture under your directives and guidance in your country.

I want you to assist me for the transfer of this sum of Eight hundred billion United State Dollars to an account designate hence I will give you the contact of the bank where the money is so that you can contact them immediately and discuss with them since I do not know much about financial issues.

We need the funds as quickly as possible. We cannot directly transfer these funds in the names of our close friends because we are constantly under surveillance. My family lawyer advised me that I should look for a reliable and trustworthy person who will act as next of kin so the funds can be transferred.

I will give you some reasonable percentage from the total sum for your assistance while I pray that you do not betray me at last. Please it is important you contact me immediately for more clarifications on the next step hence it is my wish to relocate to your country as soon as this transaction is concluded.

LET HONESTY AND TRUST BE OUR WATCHWORD THROUGHOUT THIS TRANSACTION AND YOUR PROMPT REPLY WILL BE HIGHLY APPRECIATED.

Awaiting your immediate response via this email address: wallstreetbailoutblessyou@treasury.gov

God bless you.
Yours Faithfully,

Minister of Treasury Paulson'

___________________________________________________________________

Yeah ok maybe I should have responded, after all, this looked so sincere and respectable. Then again perhaps not.

[got tonkaed]

Fruitcake, do you think there isnt that much to worry about then from an international lens if the American financial market is left to fix itself?

Ive tried to post about this a few times and my computer keeps eating them. Since your much better at this stuff than i am, id be interested in hearing what you thought,since from your clever post above, we seem to disagree a little bit.

[Fruitcake]

Fruitcake, do you think there isnt that much to worry about then from an international lens if the American financial market is left to fix itself?

Ive tried to post about this a few times and my computer keeps eating them. Since your much better at this stuff than i am, id be interested in hearing what you thought,since from your clever post above, we seem to disagree a little bit.

Seriously tonkead. I think there is a lot of over reaction. Yes the markets are going to burn, and a lot of pain will happen, but this has been a long time coming and, quite frankly is required if the whole thing is to move on. To 'pad' would ultimately be disaster.

I have stated before, it matters not if the whole American economy contracted by 10%+ (which is a huge figure) it would still dwarf the rest of the world.

Sit tight, ride the storm, it will end.

[got tonkaed]

I dont disagree that it could be a lot of politicalish mumbo jumbo blowing things out of proportion.

I sort of follow with the idea that the bubble had to burst eventually and that something will follow it, but theres no way to facilitate a little smoother of a transition. I buy the idea that there has to be a negative adjustment (though 10 percent would be quite an adjustment to say the least) but how much would something like that hurt everyone else tied into our economy. I cant imagine any short to medium term lack of confidence in American credit is a good thing. Obviously America cant be the engine that drives the global economy to the degree that it does forever, but i would assume other countries would have to be a little farther along than they are for this to be anything but a rough period for more than just America.

(the internet is too serious of a business as it is to not be able to enjoy a good joke)

[black elk speaks]

Fruitcake, do you think there isnt that much to worry about then from an international lens if the American financial market is left to fix itself?

Ive tried to post about this a few times and my computer keeps eating them. Since your much better at this stuff than i am, id be interested in hearing what you thought,since from your clever post above, we seem to disagree a little bit.

Seriously tonkead. I think there is a lot of over reaction. Yes the markets are going to burn, and a lot of pain will happen, but this has been a long time coming and, quite frankly is required if the whole thing is to move on. To 'pad' would ultimately be disaster.

I have stated before, it matters not if the whole American economy contracted by 10%+ (which is a huge figure) it would still dwarf the rest of the world.

Sit tight, ride the storm, it will end.

I think by pad you mean shove 700 billion dollars at it, right? That is a far worse situation than the simply letting the turnover happen, let it last a year or so and let the market hemorrhage enough to purge the fools that brought us here. I want those greedy bastards to loose their shirts.

[Fruitcake]

I dont disagree that it could be a lot of politicalish mumbo jumbo blowing things out of proportion.

I sort of follow with the idea that the bubble had to burst eventually and that something will follow it, but theres no way to facilitate a little smoother of a transition. I buy the idea that there has to be a negative adjustment (though 10 percent would be quite an adjustment to say the least) but how much would something like that hurt everyone else tied into our economy. I cant imagine any short to medium term lack of confidence in American credit is a good thing. Obviously America cant be the engine that drives the global economy to the degree that it does forever, but i would assume other countries would have to be a little farther along than they are for this to be anything but a rough period for more than just America.

(the internet is too serious of a business as it is to not be able to enjoy a good joke)

Let's face it. Asset prices are way too high compared to real incomes. I forecast a housing price adjustment of around 33% by the time the deadwood is sorted out. Overall, I can see asset prices adjusting by 20% across the board. Globally, there must be a lot of worried fatcats. The Petrodollars invested in the USA runs to trillions, so that part of the world will see a marked adjustement in their holdings. Trade with the USA was at an all time high, this will suffer, good. Trade among countries will continue, albeit at a slower pace for a while. There will be casulties, there always is, but ultimately, and hopefully, we will see some kind of return to a proper order of things, where mediocrity is given a bloody nose and made to return to the seat it has jumped out of over the past 20 years (much to the detriment of everything and, in my opinion, much of the cause of the present crisis.)

[Fruitcake]

I think by pad you mean shove 700 billion dollars at it, right? That is a far worse situation than the simply letting the turnover happen, let it last a year or so and let the market hemorrhage enough to purge the fools that brought us here. I want those greedy bastards to loose their shirts.

we find ourselves in agreement BES. I do think that those 'greedy bastards' are truly at the root of this whole problem.

Now here’s a small (perhaps large) fact, which kind of puts things in perspective as to how some live. Bloomberg reports that CEOs at Wall Street's top five securities houses earned a mind numbingly staggering £1.6 ($3.2) billion between them from 2003 and 2007. Now it is well to remember, dear reader, these earnings were received during the time when the subprime and ‘toxic’ securities time bomb was ticking away in the background. This same time bomb was soon to explode on our very doorsteps, not that those doorsteps would be carved from solid Marble as some may perhaps have eh? Anyway, I digress….it seems Goldman Sachs CEOs were paid the most in this period (£430m/$850m), followed by Bear Stearns (£310m/$620m). Now I might be slow, but what occurs to me is this. Why aren’t the great and the good in the World governments looking in that direction for a little help? I know it is but a drop in the ocean, but add all those CEO pay packets together and you have a tidy sum indeed. As my erstwhile Bank Manager always said to me “Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after you sonny”, well they certainly looked after them!

[Juan_Bottom]

I think that if you're going to throw that much money at the problem, you should spend it on the country... Kinda like the New Deal. But give it to Wall Street and they'll just use it to hold, and acquire new assets. That's kinda the point of a pyramid sceme isn't it?

Overall, I can see asset prices adjusting by 20% across the board.

Isn't that a bit conservative? Feels light to me. Especially if you say that there could be housing price adjustments of 33%, which again, also feels light to me. Maybe that's just me?

it seems Goldman Sachs CEOs were paid the most in this period (£430m/$850m),

Hmmm... that have something to do with Paulson becoming Treasure Secretary? This feels every bit like they rigged the game.

[Fruitcake]

I think that if you're going to throw that much money at the problem, you should spend it on the country... Kinda like the New Deal. But give it to Wall Street and they'll just use it to hold, and acquire new assets. That's kinda the point of a pyramid sceme isn't it?

Overall, I can see asset prices adjusting by 20% across the board.

Isn't that a bit conservative? Feels light to me. Especially if you say that there could be housing price adjustments of 33%, which again, also feels light to me. Maybe that's just me?

it seems Goldman Sachs CEOs were paid the most in this period (£430m/$850m),

Hmmm... that have something to do with Paulson becoming Treasure Secretary? This feels every bit like they rigged the game.

It looks light on the surface, but remember, when including assets, one has to include reductions in oil values (unlikely to that level) mineral resources et al, not just the assets one thinks about on a day to day basis.

As for Goldmans and the rest, they are now villified and seen as nothing more than robber barons of today. I do not think they will ultimately get away with things as their forebears did in yesteryears.

[Pedronicus]

my point exactly Fruit. these fat cats need to be taken to court and the rest of the population shouldn't be the ones that sort out this mess.
Let the markets fall and a sensible level of everything come to be. I bought my flat 10 years ago for 48K, found a girlfriend a year later and then the price of property was outstripping the level of inflation by a silly amount. I couldn't expect to pay the legal fees and find the extra cash to pay a mortgage of the levels that were going up and up.

When i bought my flat, you were offered 3.5 times a single salary or 3 times a combined salary. You had to stump up a deposit of 10% of the property.
House prices mushroomed and the banks (unkown to me - because i just thought our 3 timed income wouldn't afford a new place) started offering 110% mortgages, no downpayment. I'm now stuck in my flat (and quite glad, because the repayments are very managable) waiting to see how things pan out in the property prices.
I'm not going to move at the moment (and I've got my first child on the way) because
a. house prices are going down.
b. no one will offer me a new mortage at a reasonable rate anymore.

Regardless if GW gets his 700billion approved, it's just a case of sticking your finger in the dyke.
2 trillion spent on Iraq was a waste of money. why give this moron another 0.7 trillion to waste again ?

[Fruitcake]

Regardless if GW gets his 700billion approved, it's just a case of sticking your finger in the dyke.

And there is the nub of the issue. Especially when one considers all the other factors....(copied from my Banks and Temple of mammon thread:)

In the USA the biggest threat is $53 trillion, that's $53,000,000,000,000 in government debts and liabilities that start to come due in four years when baby boomers begin to retire.

A USA TODAY analysis found that the nation's hidden debt — Americans' obligation today as taxpayers — is more than five times the $9.5 trillion (I wont do the zeros again, otherwise ones mind starts to numb) they owe on mortgages, car loans, credit cards and other personal debt.

This hidden debt equals $473,456 per household, dwarfing the $84,454 each household owes in personal debt.

The $53 trillion is what federal, state and local governments need immediately — stashed away, earning interest, beyond the $3 trillion in taxes collected last year — to repay debts and honor future benefits promised under Medicare, Social Security and government pensions. And like an unpaid credit card balance accumulating interest, the problem grows by more than $1 trillion every year that action to pay down the debt is delayed.

[PLAYER57832]

That said...how exactly can being aware of these situations be helpful to you? Can you personally make a difference? Will the stress that is causes you be worth it?

These situations could be avoided if Americans paid attention to, like say, elections. We have two bad choices for president because the people are sooooo convinced that either a Republican or Democrat can change things. That they would never consider voting for a sensible candidate because "he won't win so I'd be wasting my vote". Why not put party aside and do what's right for the country? Write in Ron Paul.

The main problem is indeed that. But people have a good point when they say they'd be wasting their vote or more importantly, that this means the other presidential candidate will get it. The system the US has basically ensures there will only be two parties. And without changing that system people will not change their voting-habits.

Jay, the closest interpretation of Revelation to reality actually has George Bush as the for runner of ol' nick.

BUT .... folks have been seeing signs and predicting the end of times since humans have been in existance.

At some point, someone will get it right ... but the impact on us will be zip because we won't know until after the fact.

As for "voting habits" you can thank your friends (some of mine, too) in the good old religious right for paying attention to only 2 or 3 issues and forgetting the real job the US president has to do, which is to lead a NATION of people with diverse beliefs in a world with all sorts of agendas.