Of course I refer to National Economic Growth & Recovery Opportunities, for short NEGRO. We tried TARP because we screwed the pooch with FANNIE, FREDDY, NAFTA, CAFTA, and WHO. This we backed up with FICA and FDIC while SEC slept at the switch and WS sliced and diced our way to eternal prosperity with backing from the FED.
CITI got too big, GE too diverse, AIG too complicated and GM stalled to a crawl. The DOW, NASDAQ, SP along with our EU buds, FTSE and DAX tanked while the BRICS fell and even HANG SENG swooned. FOREX went up before FOREX went down. GWB said WTF and the GOP thought we needed Big MAC to resist the ONE. The ONE who won, who just so happens to be an African American, (not that there is anything wrong with that) sounded to most, to be the answer, but has turned out to be a WMD to 401K. $3,000,000,000,000 has been lost since he and the lovely Michelle took over the WH. The POTUS with the Mostus has no clue and has been coming up with TETRA flop budgets. So I leave it to you to support NEGRO with NEW ideas before we all lose HOPE. What are the National Economic, Growth and Recovery Opportunities?
Please help and find US a real good NEGRO.
Heard a pretty good medical analogy on the radio tonight. Said it's like we've taken a lot of toxic assets into our system and are now on detox with which comes a crisis of healing, which we are in, where things seem worse. But the healing is going on if no more toxic assets are slurped into the system.
ReplyDeleteWe've had so much in unproductive stuff, we need to sober up and get it back into productive stuff.
Ahh, but ash, the Cabal is there, in both political Parties and the buerocrats they employ. No doubt of that.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that Paul Volker engineered the 1983 recession, so why would one think that the current Federal Reserve and Administration planners, in both Administratons, would not 'give it a go', too?
It worked out, well, for Mr Volker.
His NEGRO worked, Mr Bernake's did not.
How about something WHITE--Western Heavy Industry and Technology Expansion?
ReplyDelete(fill in your own words at your leisure)
ReplyDeleteWHITE is better than something REDD--Ruinous Expensive Desert Debtor.
ReplyDeleteSP's ("Stimulus Parties") at WH under investigation.
ReplyDeleteOBAMA WATCH CENTRAL (OBC)
White House nightlife under investigation
'This party atmosphere sends the wrong message'
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WND
(Super Bowl party at White House-- White House photo)
An organization that serves as a watchdog on the U.S. government for American taxpayers has launched a campaign to uncover exactly how much tax money is being spent on parties at the Obama White House.
The president has shown a penchant for lavish galas, such as the huge assembly orchestrated in Denver when he accepted his party's nomination for president – an outdoor gathering for some 75,000 featuring a stage with Greek columns. He also held a multimillion-dollar victory celebration in Chicago, and his fancy inauguration cost an estimated $170 million, according to ABC News.
Now, Larry Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch, told WND today he's seeking information about the partying in the White House since the Obamas moved in.
As WND reported this week, Freedom Watch is seeking information from the federal government on who had input into bailout legislation and whether they got anything in return.
Klayman said the reports of the partying at the White House, "with the likes of Steve Wonder and other high priced entertainment stars," will be the focus of document requests being submitted to the General Services Administration. The requests will seek to determine how much taxpayer money is being used.
"Barack and Michelle Obama have been throwing taxpayer funded parties nearly every night with their 'friends' and supporters, with Michelle Obama even exhorting them not to 'break' White House property," Klayman's announcement said.
"This party atmosphere sends the wrong message to the American people. As the Obama-Clinton crowd party on, the American people are suffering greatly," Klayman said.
We hired two more nurses in our area for $1.3 million for a year to solve the national health crisis. To be fair there were 13 others hired as well, lacking a job description.
ReplyDeleteThe Dow average dropped 31 percent since Obama’s election through yesterday. The 30-stock gauge traded at 8.04 times annual earnings, the cheapest since 1995 and down from 10.06 times on Inauguration Day.
ReplyDeleteCitigroup Inc. led the plunge, losing 71 percent. The government proposed taking a 36 percent stake in the New York- based bank, cutting the percentage owned by shareholders. Detroit-based General Motors Corp. tumbled 53 percent after the largest U.S. automaker said it needs more government aid.
“It’s the Obama bear market,” said Dan Veru, who helps oversee $2.8 billion at Palisade Capital Management in Fort Lee, New Jersey. “We don’t know what the rules are in so many different areas the government is touching.”
When political and economic power is centralized, as described by Michael Hirsh in this piece
ReplyDelete‘Government Sachs’ Is Back
Who's designing Geithner's rescue plan? Goldman guys, of course.
As it was in the beginning, so shall it be in the end: Goldman Sachs will be there.
Back in the '90s and through the mid-'00s, major figures from Goldman Sachs such as Robert Rubin, Gary Gensler and Hank Paulson stood fast against derivatives regulation (Rubin and Gensler) and lobbied successfully for higher leverage ratios so they could bet more of their capital on the market boom (Paulson). When those policies came to grief and Wall Street imploded, and the Feds scrambled to rescue stricken insurance giant AIG, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein was reportedly the only bank executive invited to an emergency meeting at the New York Federal Reserve (convened by then-Fed president Tim Geithner).
Now Treasury Secretary Geithner—a Rubin protégé, of course—has assigned two more ex-Goldman men to fix the vast mess their colleagues helped to create.
They are Steve Shafran, a former favorite of Paulson's, and Bill Dudley, Goldman's former chief economist and now the successor to Geithner as head of the New York Fed. Shafran and Dudley have been given the mind-bending task of resurrecting the market for securitized assets, ...
Read More
And this from none other than Paul Krugman:
ReplyDelete..."Take the plan’s latest incarnation: a proposal to make low-interest loans to private investors willing to buy up troubled assets. This would certainly drive up the price of toxic waste because it would offer a heads-you-win, tails-we-lose proposition. As described, the plan would let investors profit if asset prices went up but just walk away if prices fell substantially.
But would it be enough to make the banking system healthy? No."
Out of curiosity, let's figure what the Dow drop, was during the Bush Administrtion tenure of the "Crisis"
ReplyDeleteOn 4/28/08 the Dow as at 13,058.
On 1/19/09 is stood at 8,077.
A drop of 39%.
Everything accelerates on Obama time.
In real terms, though, the Bush Team destroyed more wealth, almost 5,000 points off the Dow in the 9 months before they left office, while Team Obama has just dropped from 8,700 to 6,626. Just shy of 2,100 points in 2 months.
ReplyDeleteThe trendlines continue, no matter who is in the White House or which Goldman Sachs man is pulling the levers.
The "toxic" assets are only toxic if marked to market, not if valued on a cash flow basis.
ReplyDeleteRepeal mark to market and value those assets by cash flow, instead.
That the politicos will not admit the error, the unforeseen consequences, of the mark to market "reform".
Since Obama has been in the White House so has Hollywood:
ReplyDelete1. Brad Pitt
2. George Clooney
3. Bill Clinton buddy and Liz Hurley impregnator Steve Bing.
4. "Earth, Wind and Fire" to help Obama, Michelle and several hundred friends party on your dime of course.
5. Stevie Wonder( see #4).
6. Michelle Obama's social secretary sent on a "fact-finding mission" to New York Fashion Week, to keep Michelle looking fine.
All of this and much much more while you and me and ten of millions of Americans keep losing their wealth, savings, security, and equity for which they worked all their lives.
Party on mother fuckers.
How is your Hope doing?
ReplyDeleteChange working out OK is it?
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure anymore.
ReplyDeleteVacancy rate highest since the 60's!
1 out of ten in foreclosure.
Sales up only where banks are selling foreclosed properties.
---
Graph: Predicting the Future of a Housing Crisis
A Gloomy Outlook for Home Sales’ Big Season
Despite signs of recovery in hard-hit areas, the broader market is far from its nadir, economists say.
“The leverage is being squeezed out of the economy.”
Don't forget the $100/lb Kobi Beef, 'Rat!
ReplyDelete(or "Wagu" whatever that is)
Chas of Arabia
ReplyDeleteThat's a nice post there, partner. Very good...Well done..
ReplyDeleteHil is looking particularly stunning these days, isn't she?
ReplyDeleteAIG and CITI are a mess. Son totalled my Expedition. Wifey wants new car. I want ten thousand more shares of Citi. The new car's probably a better deal, but, damn, I don't see how they can let Citi fail. (did I ever mention I'm a terrible "stock-picker?")
ReplyDeleteI guess we'll get a "flex-fuel" chevy.
I think we'll get just a little bit of "growth" in the 2nd quarter.
Uh, then again, maybe not. Ad for the new, nationalized F**k'n Citibank
ReplyDelete2164th quoting Dan Veru:
ReplyDelete“We don’t know what the rules are in so many different areas the government is touching.”
I think this relates to the problem rat refers to below:
Rat said:
"The "toxic" assets are only toxic if marked to market, not if valued on a cash flow basis.
Repeal mark to market and value those assets by cash flow, instead."
If you knew the 'rules' it might be easier to place a price on the asset i.e. if you knew the government wasn't going to be taking the bad stuff off your hands you can then get down to the task of evaluating the worth of any particular asset and that would be based on the cash those assets are spinning off. There should be no need to get rid of mark to market because the market should be able to find its own natural equilibrium.
I have trouble with this notion of discarding mark to market because how else do you value something? When looking at purchasing a bond the yield and safety go into the equation toward determining its value on the open market. Maybe getting rid of a mark to market valuation might help folk like pension plans and those entities carrying loads of debt collateralized by the value of their assets in the short term but it strikes me as simply a method of burying the problem which will rear its ugly head anyway.
I was puzzling through the mortgage securities and our talk of money supply. Here is a simplification of the process which, I think, demonstrates just how toxic these beasts are and how much of a threat they pose systemically:
Bank A has 110 million of cash.
Bank A writes 100 million of mortgages and keep 10 million in reserve.
Bank A sells 100 million of mortgage securities (sliced and diced mortgages into tranches) to investors.
Bank A now has 110 million (plus or minus a bit) of cash.
Investors have 100 million in assets. Investors leverage assets by borrowing from Bank B and buying...more mortgage backed securities (they are throwing off cash are they not?)
You can see how the 110 million became much much more. Now, start to unwind it...
Cramer's a turd!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI kinda think Hope & Change WANTS the illusion of a melt down...
ReplyDeleteSo when things get bad enough, and rams down our throats his agenda he can throw the "mark to market" rule off and what the dow sore 3000 points in 4 weeks...
Couple that with the recession (on it's own) ending around July the country will hail our new King as a genius....
The stage is set...
Sit back and watch...
I agree, WIO. He's got it "set up" pretty.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong. There was a Real Danger back in October. A real, honest to goodness, danger danger. But, it's largely passed.
ReplyDeleteNow, it's just pretty much just an exercise in "Timing."
Herbert's conclusion in his NYTimes op/ed:
ReplyDelete" don’t know whether President Obama’s ultimate rescue plan for the financial industry will work. He is a thoughtful man running a thoughtful administration and the plan, a staggeringly complex and difficult work in progress, hasn’t been revealed yet.
What I know is that the renegade clowns who ruined this economy, the Republican right in alliance with big business and a fair number of feckless Democrats — all working in opposition to the interests of working families — have no credible basis for waging war against serious efforts to get us out of their mess.
Maybe the markets are down because demand has dried up, because many of the nation’s biggest firms have imploded and because Americans are losing their jobs and their homes by the millions. Maybe a dose of reality is in order, as opposed to the childish desire for yet another stock market bubble.
Maybe the nuns in grammar school were right when they counseled that patience is a virtue. The man has been president for six weeks. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/opinion/07herbert.html
He is a thoughtful man running a thoughtful administration and the plan, a staggeringly complex and difficult work in progress, hasn’t been revealed yet.
ReplyDeleteyeppers, I knew as much. Just hasn't pulled to rabbit out of the hat, yet. Still grooming the rabbit, so to speak.
Frannie and Fred started the tumble, which Bush had warned against, and from the rise of Obumble, it's a turd in a toilet.
ReplyDeleteHillary doesn't look her best and brightest these days, 'tis true.
ReplyDeleteRufus, would you like me to throw some darts to see what you should do with that car and stock problem?
ReplyDeleteI work at 2% normally, but for you, for free.
Bob The Predictor