How to Flush a Market

such bad news, but . . . . mid term elections are coming . . . tick tock, tick tock.

But he can do a lot of damage until Americans wake up and realize how dangerous BO and the Dumbocrats are to their financial well being and toss the bums out.

"Toss the bums out."

In favor of whom, pray tell. The Republicans haven't exactly appeared to be squeaky clean in all of the run up to the current "crisis". Once in a while, there is reference to Ron Paul as savior, but let's face it - Ron Paul will be seventy-seven years old by 2012. He ain't gonna be the one.

So, Fred - Who?

Funny, how the brain works, association and all that.

I thought at first that was an automobile tire, until I realized it was a drain.

Same thing kinda sorta

erik.....automobile tire,drain,toilet....same,same.They all flush money down the tuber.I say bring on the USSA.I want to see the Yank buck worth zilch.Then maybe the rest of us who are prudent and responsible can flush the likes of Chimpobama,Pelosie,Reid,etc.

Justthinkin - I am too scared to think of what that means re the USD.

Frankly, I loathe Reid and Frank, they will continue to live like royalty whilst kicking the crap out of industry.

I think we are in for a long ride.

US GDP is 60-70% domestic consumption. Savings rate is negative 1%. How can those keep on going in tandem?????

Oppppssss.....sorry.Re my last comment,that should be camelobama,seeing as he has more Arab than Black in him.
I can say that know,can't I? Seeing as how the Messiah has eleminated(sic) racism?

kakola I think you are on the right trail. What the US needs is all the scary things I have been hearing. The electorate has to be so PO'd they will not TAKE anymore of the get elected and stay for thirty years type of governence. The mid-terms better have some quality new faces for both parties or politics in the US is going to be Blago'd.
It isn't like I'm not paying now with my investments but eventually I want to see a turnaround. As the old saying goes when you are in too deep..stop digging.

More bailout-related news from the funny farm: AIG's in talks to get more capital from thew U.S. feds in the teeth of the former preparing to announce a $60-billion-or-so loss. "AIG in talks with U.S. government for more funds: source"

There's already rumours about AIG going into full bankruptcy, in part because of the suggested debt-for-equity swap Reuters mentioned. (Debt-to-equity conversions are not uncommon in Chapter 11 bankruptcies.) Unlike Lehman, though, this one's been long telegraphed by the stock market.

If our biggest trading partner, and the economy we are most closely integrated with, goes down the tubes, where are we in Canada? Somehow, some way, the US has to be pulled out of this death-spiral. If it is not, the forces of reactionary protectionism and Democratic statism will plunge it into ungovernable chaos.

We seem to think that Canada will somehow be immune. However, today the TSX is closing on half its value in 2007; some provinces are staring at major deficits, even the possibility of defaults; and significant export money- generators like the oil sands are being held hostage by anti-capitalist lunatics.

I for one have never been as scared for a future of "peace, order and good government" as I am today.

Patrick B, I agree. I think the whole "slip into anarchy with food riots" scenario is unlikely, but still remotely possible (in Canada and the US)

What I fear is a bunch of lawyers getting rich suing the pants off of companies, provinces, the federal government, etc etc, saying "this went wrong and it's your fault". "You didn't provide". "You owe XX $$$", etc etc.

I almost fear the latter more than the former!

But,if you listen to the investment industry and watch the ads, it's business as usual. The markets will simply double because they went down 50%. Great time to buy. How can you go wrong?

It's goin' to be tough sledding, if you ask me.

“In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute,” ... “In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”

Putin

Anything worth knowing can't be taught. Since WWII things have generally gone well with a few dips here and there. The generation in control now - the Baby Boomers - only know about hardship from the tales their grandparents told during the great depression. They still haven't figured out you can't continually borrow more than you produce.

The lesson will be a hard one for the entire planet with many casualties. Canada will be better placed than most but it will be very very tough. As bad as it is in the US it is even worse in Europe, Africa and South America. China laid off 20 million people. And when Iran gets the bomb, the terrorist take control of Pakistan and Israel feeling increasingly isolated who believes the big zero has what it takes to provide the leadership required? I am generally an optimistic person but over the next 5 to 10 years there is likely very little to get excited about.

Lindsay Graham is an idiot and he is the type of Republican that I would like to see lose their seat to a Blue Dog Democrat (now you know that's bad if I'd rather see a Democrat). His endorsement of McCain was a kiss of death. Thankfully Governors like Barbour and Jindal are coming out and nailing the "stimulus" for what it is - an expansion of the welfare state. I also think Michael Steele is good as the RNC chair and will turn the ship around. The only question is how bad will it get before 2010?

The best POTUS GOP candidate for 2012 looks to be Bobby Jindal - he was very good on MTP yesterday, but he has one huge potential flaw:

He seems to be an avowed creationist. that will be a deal-killer for well over 50% of voting americans.

Anyone else out there that may make a good POTUS (and Huckabee and Paul are non-starters, BTW)?

In light of the fact that this crisis started, and took off under Republican rule... I'd just shut up. You guys have literally gotten everything wrong you've ever bet on. I wouldn't trust you to cut my grass and not bung it up somehow.

I can just see it now... bald spots, flowerbeds cut, blood stains from what's left of the cat, neighbour's house on fire. Yeah... that's about right.

No, Jindal's not the best candidate. That's still Palin. Anybody that's a creationist (Pawlenty, Jindal) won't be able to get 40% of the electorate.

This is just one more reason I think this recession is going to be a little bit longer and a little bit deeper than most expect.

In talking to business people in the States over the last couple of months this is what they, general speaking, had to say. I'll be god damned if I will support this socialist bastard, I plan on protecting what I have and keeping it as far away from him as I can. The impression being very strongly in favor of looking after myself first and my Country, with him in charge, a distant second.

Actually hearing Americans saying that, and not just one of them, surprised me. A couple of things I expected, foreign bank accounts and buying gold but the one that really surprised me, all three had Canadian U.S. dollar accounts. They didn’t trust either their government anymore or their banks. A small sampling to be sure, but these guys are a thousand miles apart and don’t know each other. As businessman and investors they are nervous so I don’t think you can expect them to be investing their money at home any time soon.

A good laugh was had as I passed along an SDA poster’s feelings of what Obama stood for, One Big Assed Mistake America.

John

on the spot???

sure ain't on the money

this mess has lieberal written all over it

even Mr. Monica Clinton admitted such, so please try keeping up

I really don't see this as a Republican vs Democrat debate. The fact of the matter is that the US electorate has not been well served by the choice of candidates presented. I'm not sure what is wrong with the system or the choices but for many years now the US has been poorly directed by its elected officials. I'm not trying to be nasty towards the US because until PMSH Canada has been ill served by its politicians since the 1950's as well. Somehow or other the country seems to be serving the individual and not the individual serving the country.

So John, you and your ilk are in charge now and what do they plan on doing about it?

Obviously the wrong thing. Is there a problem three trillion borrowed dollars can't solve? Well, yes.

Mark my words....Obambi has four years if he is lucky.

More likely he will be run out of town on a rail for being so incompetent.

gord tulk - what about the Governor of S. Carolina, Mark Sanford?

Palin is toast - far too polarizing and deserved the rap that she is a lightweight on foreign affairs (and other federal issues).

ET: I was just going to bring him up actually. I know very little about him but I heard him on hugh hewitt last week and was very impressed.

Could it be that the MsM are giving pawlenty and jindal airtime so as to make them the front-runners only to blow them up with the creationist rap in 2012?

It will be interesting to see if George Prescott Bush has a national political future - Spanish speaking, and has an interesting non-GWB look.

If Bush's legacy is somewhat rehabilitated, could be interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_P._Bush

Sometimes, Kate, your stuff is really depressing.

legacy - wrong word - reputation amongst the mainstream, how 'bout

John:

if you think that this problem was started by the republicans then you need to read up on things more. The timeline is generally agreed to have begun in the carter administration, was mothballed during Reagan and bush one and then restarted and made even bigger under Clinton. Then GWB and others (McCain included) tried jawboning a reform to Fm &FM but did not have the courage to push things for fear of losing key support in the house and senate on the Iraq war.

ulinov,
If "unregulated capitalism" has been repudiated, why have heavily regulated economies not come out of this smelling like a rose? Why hasn't Germany completely avoided any problems, instead of being in, arguably, worse shape than the US?

If your answer is that the US took them down under Bush, than answer me why their regulators didn't see this coming and keep their banks out of risky US investments?

My expected response from ulinov? He will reject the argument, then ask a rhetorical question.

In light of the fact that this crisis started, and took off under Republican rule... I'd just shut up

Posted by: John | February 23, 2009 6:34 PM

John, for you to shut up would validate Mark Twain ("better to shut up and appear stupid...").

Google "community reinvestment act", "jimmy carter", "bill clinton", "janet reno", "chris dodd", "barney frank", "jamie gorelick", and "barack obama" if you wish to rise from the ashes of your own proud ignorance. Or don't; I could care less.

The credit crunch was a wholly-owned kleptocrat project. Why ELSE would banks give low-interest mortgages to completely unsuitable candidates (those on welfare, unemployed, and 5 million illegals) if not for the strong-arm tactics of (clinton/reno) government? Think before saying such dumb things, man.

Bush & McCain tried to push through fannie/freddie reforms, but were outvoted in the house. Oh yes; the efforts were firmly rejected by the Obamessiah, to boot, so he owns a goodly share of the disaster that ensued.

You guys have literally gotten everything wrong you've ever bet on

Read some history, brainiac. If you mean betting on "free market capitalism", then you're beyond hope. Perhaps you might research how swimmingly the socialist alternative worked behind the iron curtain, if you're into alternatives. And - hilariously - at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, it was none other than vladimir putin who warned the US against the dangers of government-controlled economies and socialism. How's that for irony, john? Does that register at all with you?

Try getting your facts from other than CBC, The Star, DailyKos and the Huffington Post, and you may one day be able to post something useful to the discussion.

mhb23re

The timeline is generally agreed to have begun in the carter administration....
By whom, other than the slack jawed, angry right fringe, who glean their world view from open mouth radio and Faux News.
Suck it up. man. The Republicans own this lock, stock and barrel.

I see a number of gleeful references in the comments here about how the economic crisis took off under Republicans. While I know the Republicans when they had power could have done more to stem this, and there was indeed a Republican President when things got going in the fall, I would like to point to the Democrat Congress and Senate, and ask who was really in charge of the crisis. On top of it, it was Democrats in '04 who blocked new regulation of the Fannie/Freddie banks, regulation which may well have stopped some of the bad lending in its tracks. When regulation was proposed then, the likes of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd denied there was any problem and said the Republicans just wanted to prevent loans to the poor folk. It was those same pair as well as Nancy Pelosi who were still singing from that Songbook well into 2008 until it was clear in July there WAS indeed a problem. And it was a Democrat by the name of Chuch Schumer who touched off the initial crisis early in July when he sparked a run on IndyMac.

Whats common here is Democrat, Democrat, Democrat, Democrat. So while George Bush signed into law the TARP bill in October, and Republicans didn't push for change early enough. I still see a lot of Democrat in this, and to say it was the Republicans that did this is nothing more than revisionist history.

Gee, CanuckInMI, it was Democrats in '04 who blocked new regulation of the Fannie/Freddie banks...there you go letting BillO'Reilly do your thinking for you.
A little excursion in da google reveals the Republicans had a majority in both the House - 232 to 202 Dems, 1 Ind.,
and the Senate - 55 to 44 Dems, 1 Ind.

Seeing that the Right Wing is all about personal responsibility, perhaps they should stop blaming everyone but their own leaders, who were at the helm when this ship ran aground.

Posted by: ulianov at February 23, 2009 8:44 PM

And just how was GWB supposed to stop the Zero's lawsuit,which was launched to allow welfare bums to get homes???

Trying to reason with clods like ulianov/phillboy is simply casting pearls before swine. As always, it's "Blame it on Bush". The chief architects noted in the posting above (frank, dodd, clinton/reno, etc.) might as well be from Mars. The fact that democrats forced the banks to grant low interest loans to high risk customers is simply not imaginable to the left; it interferes with the theme of dumping on Bush.

Happily, the upcoming financial "stimulus" disaster is a wholly owned kleptocrat initiative, and when it goes down in flames, the left can blame only themselves for it. The republicans (with a couple of RINO exceptions) have avoided it. So sit back, enjoy the orgy of keynesian spending in the hopes of outspending a recession, and wait until 2010. That should be enough time for most Americans to regain their senses and allow the Republicans to retake the House. Unfortunately, the socialist triad of maobama/reid/pelosi can cause enormous damage until then, but sometimes you have to suck up what you've voted for, to learn the facts of life.

Rampant socialism didn't make the US the successful country it is today; sooner or later the thought of punishing the achievers for the benefit of the slackers will strike the right chord, and things should right themselves.

mhb

One of the reasons George Bush had a 29% approval rating when he left office is because he was behaving like a democrat - he lost the fiscal conservative and libertarian support. Reckless spending (no vetos), deficits, expansion of federal government fingers into state affairs (no child left behind) capped off by the horrible TARP bill which was passed by Democrat Congress and opposed by Republicans. The left likes to portray Bush as an extreme right winger but he was a moderate. What I find really funny is that Obama is now taking all of Bush's failed economic policies and multiplying them by 10. This is hope and change?

Philboy:

Don't let the facts get in the way of your bias. The CRA was started in the Carter administration, and expanded during the Clinton years. Clinton signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall. When interstate banking was allowed (also during the Clinton years), many banks that applied for mergers were denied them on the basis that they didn't do enough lending to minorities. Groups like ACORN were encouraged to petition against the mergers, based simply on the banks' CRA compliance.

I'm not trying to give the Republicans a free pass; they're equally responsible. But to blame a mess 30 years in the making on Bush? Pathetic.

It's the Big Owe's show now.

It was he who signed into law spending committments in one month that exceed the entire amount of money spent by Dubya in his last seven years.

With the Big Owe, the buck doesn't stop and the honest, hard-working taxpayer is stuck with the bill.

If not Palin, and I posted earlier she'd be the nom, Eric Cantor's on that list, too. Photogenic, smart and making a name for himself.

If it's not one, it's the other.

The easiest way for the Dow to double is with 50 cent dollars. The economy doesn't even have to improve.

And at the rate the Fed is printing money, it may not take long.

Just three years of 10% inflation (dollar devaluation) and a dollar buys about a third less.

Just the threat of a drastically devalued dollar will send hoards of cash to equities, houses, goats - anything.

Guaranteed ?? Nope. Just that it has ALWAYS turned out that way in the past. Eventually. It took longer in the 1930s because the money supply was reduced before they started printing again.

Deleveraging is still ruling the day right now. aka, selling to raise cash in order to remain solvent. In a rising market cash is trash. In a falling market cash is king - until the threat of devaluation, inflation.

Inflation is ALWAYS and only the result of printing too much money.

Fiat Currencies can be devalued overnight. All currencies of the world today are Fiat Currencies. Not backed up by gold, silver standards, ect.

Our money is as good as our Politicians word. You can bank on it !!

'Money Mischief' by Milton Friedman - borrowed money is always paid back. Either by the borrower or the lender or by inflation.

Sean:

Cantors a nice guy with very good to excellent leadership skills. But when was a congressman elected potus?

To me he has the big flaw that Nixon had - the thing that ike tried to convince him to address before running for potus and that he never did and that was his ultimate undoing (IMOat least) he has no administrative experience.

That is also BOs biggest failing next to being a socialist machine hack.

ET :

I checked sanford's wiki bio and he seems to have he right stuff and he's from a good state with Florida roots to boot. He seems to have done an interesting job of getting support from paul groupies and McCain rinos while respecting but not kowtowing to the fundamentalists in a very Christian state. He has also been a leader amoung governors in fighting the Obama porkulus.

The only hitch seems to be his lack of burning desire to be POTUS - but that could change.

I would like to find out more about him on foreign affairs before getting too xcited. How about a sanford/kantor ticket? Too east coast perhaps?

As always the left have nothing in their arsenal, certainly not history or the facts to back up their "it's all Bush's fault" mantra.
An old adage that applies today: "Tis better to be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt"
Something the left SHOULD take to heart but don't and won't. They think they have all the answers and are superior in their articulation of same.
As has been demonstrated in posts above, they cannot even cull and process information easily obtained and come up with any sensible remarks whatsoever.
The prosperity enjoyed the last 8 years is as a direct result of tax cuts. Meaningful tax cuts that benefited the middle class and small business. Small business creates most of the jobs in North America. The damn democrats cannot stand money they cannot control and they stood in the way of any regulation while stating that the Repubicans were responsible for the mess of Fannie and Freddie. They benefited from this obstruction, personally and poltically.
Chuck Schumer, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank all are guilty as hell but are now the ones in control of humilating corporate America.
These men and others like them in Congress are responsible for this mess.
They generated this 'economic crisis' specifically to get Obama elected.
Pelosi and Reid are incompetents and promote dishonesty and malfesance daily. Obama is a puppet that cannot do anything without showing his strings.
If the Birth Certificate lawsuits do not bring this imposter down it will be an outpouring of outrage from a broad spectrum of Americans who will vote out first democrats in Congress and then Obama.
THIS is one of the reasons the money is so important. THEY must control it. For in that control is their ticket to re-election.
It will pay for the skids to be greased to that end and it does and will pay for ACORN to ensure voter fraud is even more rampant than it was in the 2008 election. That , they think, will give them a majority in Congress and the White House in perpetuity. If there is a vacany on the Supreme Court as there is likely to be in the next 4 years, they will have that nailed down. Their liberalized destruction of the US Constitution,US Industry and all things that made the US work as a prosperous country will be complete.
Michelle Obama does not state that "Obama will REQUIRE you to work hard" for nothing.
That is her word going out to those who now and will make up "Michelle's Army".
They intend that money to go to their Citizen Army that will rival the military while they decimate the military with defense cuts.
This will end with the complete domination of the US by Communist Marxist Ideology, thereby ensuring either a migration out of the country to Canada, elsewhere or Civil War. Failing that, an attack on US soil by our enemies who still lurk plotting all sorts of destruction. Come to think of it all three have excellent chances of coming to be unless the America I know rises up and puts an end to this utter nonsense.
Canada appears to me to be a safe haven for more than money. Canadian bank stocks should be soaring. The Canadian Gold Maple should be soaring. Out of sight. If any of these things happen Canada will become the haven of choice as long as we have Stephen Harper and the Conservatives in power. The left in this country are salivating over what Obama is doing and will be looking to implement the same kind of policies here under Ignatieff or some other such fool.

"My expected response from ulinov? He will reject the argument, then ask a rhetorical question." - Me upthread.

Ulinov's response? First he rejects with no supporting argumentation of any kind that even comes close to addressing my point that hyper-regulated Europe is in dire straits as well:

"Bush was President for 8 years. He may not have caused the financial crisis, but he didn't do anything to stop it." - ulinov

Then the cherry on top rhetorical question:
"Whatever happened to 'The Buck Stops Here?'" - ulinov

Bwa ha ha ha ha ha! Comedy gold is ulinov.

BTW Ulee, ask Obama, he is the one who just spent a trillion dollars we don't have... He can't blame that on Bush or the Republicans. When the stagflation comes, you can pretend that Bush caused it too.

Hey Ulianov,

Your own comrade, Yuri Bezmenov, an ex KGB operative who fled the USSR in the 1970 warned us 2 decades ago about the dangers of socialism...
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Later the USSR collapsed like predicted. Just last friday, Vladimir Putin, another of your comrades warned the US of the dangers of socialism.

My conclusion is that you are not even worthy of your Russian "Ulianov" SDA handle anymore.
May I suggest a few:

"Pelosism"

"Shame Penn"

"Mike Mired"

"Baldwit, Alec"

"Stephane Dion"

Although the link I give below is from a Christian site, Dr. RC Sproul gives an excellent description of Marxism and how Carl Marx came to have his ideas and their impact on the whole of western civilization-very pertinent for today's political direction. This is a series - Consequences of Ideas - under the heading Marx and Comte. It is NOT a sermon nor is there ANY conversion attempt in this insightful "history" lesson-the bible or Christianity is not even mentioned. Unfortunately, the whole series can not be accessed on this site. Dr. Sproul is a very intelligent man and and an excellent lecturer. He also discusses Marx's' childhood and the impact of his father's business decisions on the formulation of his philosophy. You will need real player or windows media player - can also be downloaded for free to mp3 player.

http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/Renewing_Your_Mind/archives.asp?bcd=2/21/2009

Right Honorable Terry Tory
You forgot Taliban Jack.

Never ceases to amaze me how people can just dismiss fact. Ignore things done and documented in the past. I guess Ignorance is bliss. I wish I could ignore all the fallout of the realestate and ecomomic crisis the same way these morooons are ignoring the cause of it.

Uli uli ulee,
Why don't you explain to us what is in your link? I long ago gave up chasing down links that were supposed to be fact filled-replies to my questions. If the answer is there, why don't you cut and past the relevant points, *not the whole post*, but the relevant points that you think address my argument that hyper-regulated Europe is doing worse than the US, and that the next answer, communism, has also been shown to be a miserable, 50 year wrong turn, while market crashes are usually recovered from within a few years with the citizens not in shackles.

I don't think you can make the argument in your own words, and suggesting that I lack "research skills" because I am not scouring the web looking for supporting evidence for your arguments is pretty funny too, now that I think about it.

What do I think will be ulinov's response, you ask? I think he will go to the link he gave me, and cut it and paste it into this thread *in full*, without giving any hint of which pieces of evidence or argument he thinks are particularly strong or telling, or any indication of how he thinks that hyper regulated markets have somehow been vindicated. This is because he is gun shy from getting his butt kicked in debate after debate. He wants to make no statement that requires defense because he knows how pitiable his debating skills really are. That would be my guess, anyway.

Or, very probably, he will swear at me again or just ignore this post.

Whatever ULI. I forgot about the "I won't waste my time debating" gambit. That is always a good one when painted into a corner.

You can't describe whatever it is on that link of yours in your own words, obviously, or you would have done it. I am "obviously someone who will refuse to accept any answer" I don't know how you knows this, since you haven't given me answer one. Just pointed me to some link full of someone else's ideas with no guidance as to what I am looking for there that will answer my questions.