BGO Discussion Forum

MIB...I'm not a big BO supporter, but I gotta give you that one. You are absolutely right! Politics are politics, but what's good for the goose...

Yep. I also find that too many of the Tea Party supporters are simply AGAINST government, AGAINST rich people, AGAINST politicians, etc. They agree that something should change. I think about everyone agrees with that. When I ask them how it should change though, that's usually when they happen to find someone else to talk to.

Basically, our system is so royally messed up that no single change will fix everything. The logistics of going back to something sustainable and having everyone be supportive of the process are a nightmare...if such a thing is even possible. Look at what's happening in Greece right now, and look at what happened in Iceland last year. I'm starting to think it's easier for a government to just go bankrupt and start over. Going back on topic, I suspect most of the tea partiers wouldn't be too sad if that happened.

I think it's mostly because Obama was lauded as a great orator. Just like when it's a bigger deal when a Republican commits adultery, because they're supposed to have higher moral standards.

Honestly though, it seems to me that delivering the same speech with palm notes and scribbles takes more skill than doing so by reading verbatim off a screen.

Wow! Prez really don't like talking off the cuff. Is it common for presidents to use a teleprompter for such a small venue?

depends on the pre$ident

sometimes they need it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVMbtSOkhSA

rofl This is true, but perfection is boring.

Most do, Obama fan or not there is no way to compare Gov. Palin to President Obama when it comes to communication. I am not talking about message but when it comes to writing and speech making there is no comparison.

agreed.
fan or not, there was no teleprompter when he sat in a room full of his republican counterparts, held his own and delivered some grade A ether to john mccain (along with other overzealous righties).

but you know when a black man has substance...he also has enemies...

Absolutely right. Obama is a (former) professor of law and certainly has good recall to go along with excellent oratory skill and etiquette. It is hard to overcome him even when he is at fault. He can skim along and tread water as much as he needs...unlike his opponents who most times not only have no hand in writing their speeches but apparently don't read or understand them.

This is what I'm concerned with, right here:

U.S. Stock Futures Decline on China, Credit-Rating Concerns

and this, also from today's financial news:

China Talks Tough to U.S.

but all anyone is talking about is this

Obama calls for action on healthcare: 'We need courage'

Which, of course, takes up right back to the top. Vicious circle.

Take a look around. State and municipal governments don't have money to spend on services, infrastructure, public safety, etc. because people don't have jobs with which to pay taxes. The people want more services from the state and the federal government because they don't have jobs with which pay for the goods and services they need. 15 million people are about to or have entered foreclosure in this country. Meanwhile, the wealth and economic growth that China has suddenly realized is at the expense of $$$ that would be put into American households, had their jobs and the production facilities that are required to do them not been sent East. If that's not bad enough, the US is dependent on the monster that we created to pay for keeping this federal government afloat. Meanwhile, China, our arch-nemesis and a country that is hell bent on realizing its own hegemony, is the largest holder of American debt, and, apparently the only country rich enough to continue to buy bonds that are so worthless, they can't give them away on the international market. Worse of all, we're bankrolling them through and by corporate greed. Yet, this country's leadership is considering universal health care? Now? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. If that isn't a bribe to prevent the natives from becoming restless, I don't know what is.

When people really wake up and see the condition that this country is in, they'll have far more pressing concerns than whether they can make a run on medical services without producing a copay. Like when hyperinflation sets in and we have a full blown Argentina, Brazil, or Zimbabwe type situation on our hands. Only then will the problem will come into full focus, but then, it'll be way too friggin late. Too many of us aren't looking at the situation from a high level, macro point of view. Those of us that are are the core of people that comprise the movement that has been popularized by the Tea Party slogan.

Big +1 Moga. Way too many times I've seen someone say we need to have foreigners produce our products (whether here illegally or there legally) or else prices will go up. Yes, but WHY will they be going up?

Each of us, as Americans, should spend some time performing economic research for ourselves using the FRED engine (Federal Reserve Economic Data) to get an unbiased glimpse into the state of affairs of our country. Its our money that's being unwisely spent, and its also our debt to repay tomorrow. Punch in “FRED economic data” in Google to be taken to a Federal Reserve website where you can see for yourself. I thought to link to graphs in this post to show visually how things look, but I don’t want to come off as a know-it-all, and most of all, not as a pedant. So, if any are interested, look at how much less monies the government is getting in (Government Current Receipts, or GRECPT; percent change from year to year) compared to how much its *currently* spending (Federal Net Outlays, or FYONET, same delta) for a time span of your choosing. Next, look at how much the economy is really contracted (National Income, or NICUR). Very quickly, a dismal picture begins to emerge. We can't afford what we spend, NOW. Just like normal citizens, when governments need a loan to cover the bills until they can get a breather, they borrow. And also just like normal citizens, when the borrower is overextended, the bank puts the borrower on notice. This is what the world has been doing now for about two years.

Well, as a country, we've about borrowed all we can. The lenders (foreign states, mostly in emerging markets of the East) are looking at our income potential (NICUR), and they aren't confident in our ability to meet our future obligations. In fact, they aren't even sure that we can continue to make the INTEREST payments on how much we owe, on time. It’s so bad, that interest repayment is the second largest expenditure of our government, right behind human services, and neck and neck with National Defense [source : http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/index.html ] So, not only are the lenders not going to lend us more money, but other lenders that have invested in instruments denominated in the US Dollar are swapping out their notes and reserves in favor of denominations of other countries’ because of how much we've borrowed, and how little faith there is in the eyes of many for us to even continue to meet our interest payments, given how little money with which we have to work.

Notice nowhere is there mention of GDP. Know why? Comparing national debt to GDP, the measure of productivity of our country's private + public sector, is not the same as looking at how much money the government alone has at its disposal. So, for instance, the government doesn’t have Microsoft’s, Apple’s, National Basketball Association’s, or even Smith & Wesson’s earnings and capital at their disposal to use or borrow against as it sees fit. Our government raises income to spend on the administration of this country one of two ways: either through collection of taxes, or by borrowing. THAT’S IT. So, GDP to debt will always paint a quite different picture (rosy) than National Income to debt, and we have access to the data that will demonstrate how much our government has, compared to how much it spends. Remember the interest payments alone consume over 400,000,000,000 USD every year, and outlays are already at record levels. This is why so man were pissed when AIG was bailed out, when the Big Three were bailed out, when numerous other banks were bailed out. With what money??? But, to add insult to injury, some propose to add Universal Health Care to the mix, in a time of shrinking receipts and soaring federal outlays, and unfortunately when the world has very little confidence in the American economy and aren't willing to buy any more US Treasury Securities. Folks, what you have a very, very lethal economic and financial combination that causes a lot of worry for the near horizon. When the world starts dumping the dollar because of its volatility to loss on the international exchange markets, then we’ll have loaves of bread that cost 50x what it costs now, twenty dollar gallons of gas, etc, just like was seen not long ago in countries of the Western Hemisphere, and the same people that clamored for universal health will wonder from where it came. What happened? Some of us know better and are trying to resist that fate while there is still time.

I am not a financial guru. I completed undergrad economics and finance, that’s it. There may be some facets I haven’t explained clearly, or other factors that I haven’t discussed or accounted for at all, because it’s not my profession, honestly, and I’m pretty tired. I apologize in advance if we have some economists amongst us who, unlike me, have done more than just slept in the Holiday Inn. Although I don’t have all the answers, an advanced degree from Wharton isn’t needed to understand what’s going on. All that you need to know is that Wharton’s brightest of the bright are headed out of America and toward China and other points East for jobs. What does that tell you? On a serious note though, it’s as simple as reading the financial statements we all get every month from our lenders, or from the banks that we use to transact our bills. You know when your spending more than you can afford, so the thought of one of the income earners losing a job on top of that is enough to drive the family into the abyss. Not the best metaphor, but it'll do. I know that we can't ignore this problem for much longer, or continue to believe that the government will provide for us. Word.

One more: http://www.c-span.org/pdf/obamainterview.pdf

I draw your attention to the bottom of page 4, and into page 5. Skip the subterfuge and listen to what's really being said. It may be seen as a document in the browser if downloading is not possible or desirable.

The best,simple explanation to date. I couldn't have said it better myself. Unfortunately there are those that will not get it until we are literally fighting each other. To fix this mess, it's gonna be painful to a lot of people(Government Officials & Common Folks) to make the changes needed to keep the country afloat but nowhere near as painful if we have to give away parts of the country to satisfy our lenders or if there is a total collapse of commerce and government.

As much as health care reform is needed, especially for those whose life is hanging in the balance, with the current state of affairs it should not be the priority at this moment. More folks are beginning to understand this and because of this it's looking pretty slim that President Obama, many Democrats, and even moderates will see re-election within the next 4 years.

I would like to share this article that was written in March 20 , 2010 .Daily reports for a month now inform us of the "surprise" that subprime borrowers are delinquent on payments. But everyone in the business has expected it since 2004. What happened from 2004 to 2006 in the mortgage markets can be fairly described as a scam. And you are about to pay for it.

In late 2003, Wall Street investment banks realized that with interest rates so low they could make a bundle selling shares in baskets of mortgage loans. Investors craved higher returns in a low-interest-rate environment and welcomed this investment vehicle. Then-Federal Reserve Chief Alan Greenspan encouraged this scenario by keeping the federal funds rate at a 45-year-low of 1 percent. In a Feb. 23, 2004, speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association, he noted that the common man had long suffered under his fixed-rate mortgage and needed help to something a bit more exotic. This unusual advice is a clear example of a tacit promise that if investors are reckless and things go bad, the Federal Reserve will bail them out.

As a result, mortgage banks no longer worried about a borrower's ability to repay because they didn't hold the note. Instead, you own it. You own it because Wall Street sliced and diced these loans into "tranches" of mortgage bonds containing different risk classes and then sold them to your pension fund, retirement investments -- even your insurance company.

Investors priced risk based on recent experience. As home prices rose rapidly, delinquencies were unknown. A hot market rescues everyone because investors seeking deals buy lists of delinquent borrowers, and then stop by their homes to explain how they'll be rescued, for a small profit, of course.

Bankers, real estate agents, appraisers and mortgage brokers had an incentive to keep the game going. Out-of-work computer programmers, waiters, even a security guard in my old office building, became real estate agents or mortgage brokers. Some went from $10-an-hour jobs to a $200,000-a-year gig of giving away money to anyone with a pulse.

I've read the mortgage documents of illegal immigrants. One I knew worked as a restaurant-delivery driver making $42,000 a year and held a $650,000 interest-only mortgage on a home bought with zero down. Bankers call such loans "Alt A" -- alternative documentation and a grade "A" borrower. This driver might have good credit because he paid his $300 car payment on time, but that doesn't mean he will pay his $4,000 mortgage payment when his rate resets. For his "alternative" documentation, he could have written on his loan application that he makes $200,000 a year.

What made home prices rise so fast? If credit liquidity defines the market because few people write a check for a house, then loose lending drives up prices. Lenders and Congress complain, "We need these loans so people can afford the high prices." But the truth is the reverse -- it is loose lending that drives up prices. The purpose is to have homeowners take on big debts so that we become an income-generating investment. Rising home prices benefited banks, not ordinary Americans. When your home's price rises, other homes rose in price, too. The capital gains still make you unable to buy a house without a risky loan. Thus, you continue to live in the same house, too poor to buy a larger one without risky financing..

All but a handful of subprime and "Alt A" borrowers made no down payment. A few put down 5 percent to secure the loan. The law may protect many of these borrowers in California. If they walk away, the law bars lenders from going after their other assets.

There are two ways out of this: inflation or deflation. Either home prices drop until they return to their historical relationship to wages, or the price of everything except houses goes up as the Federal Reserve and Congress bail out "homeowners." The Federal Reserve can do it with its current chief's money-dropping helicopters, or Congress can do it by using our tax money to pay off the bad debts of investment banks while pretending to "bail out homeowners who will lose their homes!" Either way, we taxpayers lose and banks win.

U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., suggested that just less than $200 billion could rescue these poor "homeowners." But a bail out will amount to at least five times that when the Alt A market fails.

When your congressional representative says, "but we have to help him with your tax money because he's going to lose his house," remember: He doesn't own his house, the bank does. He didn't put any money down and if he walks away, he doesn't lose anything because he never had anything. He only had the obligation to make a monthly payment and the hope that in 30 or 40 or 50 years, he would "own" a home. For most of these borrowers, their house is worth less than when they bought it and they'd be better off walking away.

Would you like to teach investment bankers that they shouldn't package $650,000 zero down loans for people making $42,000 a year? Then let's tell the Federal Reserve and Congress that they cannot give them our tax money for a bailout
Where were tea party when all this was happen ?
This article appeared on page B - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle March 20 ,2007