RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,177238,00.html

I was very heavily involved in the stock market - raising a family on $50 every two weeks and our $137.10 housing allowance, I had lots of money to invest. Okay, just a little humor. Funny, but we did same a $25 bond monthly. Never wrote a bad check, missed a payment, and remainded financial secure. Now live in a golf course community, have 6 figures in the bank, and get sick when I read that some of today military are deeply in debt. Is it lack of discipline and sacrfice? I'm 74 and still follow my father's advice - first payment to yourself, second payment to bills, and the third payment to fun. It works!!!!

Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This message has been edited. Last edited by: oseles,

Well,

Read the paper today ant it is true.
Paulson bought into 9 fiscally sound banks (which will now suffer from 'federal' wisdom, restrictions and oversight) rather than do something about the banks that really are in trouble.

From what I had heard 8 out of 9 of the CEOs wanted nothing to do with this buy-in.

So, since the FED has shown how good they are are running things (i.e. Freddie and Fannie) they will now penalize and direct those banks that actually knew what they were doing.

I have read that several of them flat out refused to go into the sub-prime market, want to be the next liberal president (either one) doesn't force them to?

I really think we need a RICO Act investigation into:
1) REP Frank
2) SEN Dodds
3) Mr. Raines
4) Mr. Johnson
5) ACORN - both for Mortgage Fraud and Illegal Vote Registration drives
6) Tons of unindited co-conspirators.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: oseles,

They tell the soldiers to ride it out (advice that is only good for the companies/retirement plans they are invested in) as the market continues its nose dive as it worries about being under the enlightened control of the federal government.

At the beginning of the year I did just that and watched my retirement investments drop by 10 percent.

Then I remembered something I never should have forgotten.

When the Democrats are out of the White House (or trying to put in a 'new' president) they talk the economy down and down and down, and the market responds.

By the end of spring we had pulled about 90 percent of our investment out of the more volatile funds, writing off the loss. At least we were largely out before the latest burn.

For chuckles I kept a side book tracking what would have happened if we had done nothing.
* As I look at it today, our retirement investments would have dropped about 40 percent.

If one has time to ride out this democrat inspire crash, people’s retirement funds will probably recover. But probably not as much as it would have without all the federal controls, new regulations, oversight and guidance that is coming.

And for those who do not like me placing this rose on the democrats, even President Clinton blames them for the Fannie/Freddie disaster. The Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis lead to the Mortgage Crisis, which in turn lead to the Banking Crisis and the Wall Street Crisis.

quote:

Originally posted by oseles:
Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This smacks of a government take over of all of the U.S. banks!...
Seems there should be specific laws against this and it has the potential for controlling all U.S. banks under, for lack of a better term, a one world economic system...
From what was supposed to be an "emergency" action to prevent an economic collapse, it appears to have been a "take over" and nationalization of our banking system...
This is very troubling, very troubling indeed!...
Do I hear Prescott Bush walking the halls of our government?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Heard an Obama speech where he was saying how this whole financial crisis was caused by EVERYBODY living beyond their means – BULL.

He had it partially right when he mentioned:
1) congress spending more money than was coming in,
2) people living on credit,
3) people buying houses that they could not afford,
4) banks giving loans to people that could not qualify for (gee, that’s what ACORN and the CRA were all about),
* failed to mention that the Justice Department and ACORN would intimidate Banks and Mortgage companies into giving those loans,
5) and then basically said EVERYBODY was living in excess of their budget.

Funny how not once in that speech did he mention that congress failed in its oversight roll, received lavish kick backs (lobbyist campaign contributions) from Fannie and Freddie, failed to investigate when Fannie and Freddie were reported to have committed FRAUD so executives could get ‘performance bonuses, refused 2 President’s requests for increase regulation and oversight of Fannie and Freddie, not to mention the calls from multiple Senators and Representatives for the same.

When my wife and I bought our house we were told that we qualified for 4 times as much house than we were in fact buying. The Realtors and Mortgage Company were both trying to push us into a more expensive house. We did not.

Part of the reason we qualified so high, and still do, was:
1) the simple fact that since we had gotten married we had been living with in our means;
2) putting away between 10 and 25 percent of our income for our retirement;
3) each month paid as much ‘extra’ as we could on our mortgage.
4) and we paid all our bills on time and paid our credit card bills in-full(imagine that).
5) If the money wasn’t there to get something we wanted – we waited.

I am sure there are many others on this forum that worked, saved, and lived with in their means – now you are being labeled as part of the problem.

Also mentioned was the Obama Tax plan which would significantly increase taxes on the top 5% of the population, those who made over $250,000. Couple of problems with his plan:
1) Per a 2004 Congressional Budget Office Study on the tax system, the break point for the 10% of the population was at $253,000. So, he is going to increase the taxes on 10% of the population, not 5%.
2) While some get the impression that the bottom 90% will receive tax cuts, he actually says he will not increase their taxes as much as McCain would.
3) His response to a Plumber in the crowd ramble quite a bit, but included the tidbit that ‘our salvation comes from sharing the wealth’. So, if you have a job, work hard, save and invest for your future – that money is liable for those who do not.
4) He still hasn’t explained where all the money to pay for his ‘new’ spending is going to come from. And that bill keeps growing, even before the so-called bail out.

quote:

Originally posted by otisotis:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,177238,00.html

Kind of like the band playing on while the Titanic sank.

"Nearer, my God, to Thee..."

It's been a pleasure playing with you, gentlemen

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by oseles:
Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This smacks of a government take over of all of the U.S. banks!...
Seems there should be specific laws against this and it has the potential for controlling all U.S. banks under, for lack of a better term, a one world economic system...
From what was supposed to be an "emergency" action to prevent an economic collapse, it appears to have been a "take over" and nationalization of our banking system...
This is very troubling, very troubling indeed!...
Do I hear Prescott Bush walking the halls of our government?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Why do you sound so surprised? When government gives with one hand, it grips tighter with the other.

People have forgotten how to be vigilant in the protection of their liberties in this country.

quote:

HOW TO CATCH WILD PIGS


There was a Chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab the Prof noticed one young man (exchange student) who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt. The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country’s government and install a new communist government. In the midst of his story he looked at the professor and asked a strange question.

He asked, ‘ Do you know how to catch wild pigs?’ The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line. The young man said this was no joke. ‘You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming. When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in the last side. The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd. Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how To forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.

The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening to America. The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc. while we continually lose our freedoms- just a little at a time.

I don't know how true this little story is, but it is a good parable at least.

General Comment:

Hope it's just a repositioning to bring about more positive results...it had to come down to this "show down".

Freakzilla....what a wonderful analagy. I love these because they sum complicated issues up so simply! A person handing knowledge down in the tradition of a "storyteller".

quote:

Originally posted by Tower_Flower:
General Comment:

Hope it's just a repositioning to bring about more positive results...it had to come down to this "show down".

Freakzilla....what a wonderful analagy. I love these because they sum complicated issues up so simply! A person handing knowledge down in the tradition of a "storyteller".

Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by freakzilla60:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by oseles:
Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This smacks of a government take over of all of the U.S. banks!...
Seems there should be specific laws against this and it has the potential for controlling all U.S. banks under, for lack of a better term, a one world economic system...
From what was supposed to be an "emergency" action to prevent an economic collapse, it appears to have been a "take over" and nationalization of our banking system...
This is very troubling, very troubling indeed!...
Do I hear Prescott Bush walking the halls of our government?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Why do you sound so surprised? When government gives with one hand, it grips tighter with the other.

People have forgotten how to be vigilant in the protection of their liberties in this country.

Surprised only in the aspect that the "rescue" plan was supposed to help the "failing" banks and institutions, not to take control of the "healthy" ones...
If someone was to talk to me of a conspiracy theory about this and folks on here know how I think that "conspiracy" theories are a total bunch of cr@p, this is one that I might just listen too!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Afeered to check on the status of the $30,000 I have stashed in TSP

I'm not retiring for at least a decade, so whatever shellacking I took will probably be made up. Once I'm out, will see about sticking my money elsewhere.

From Oct. 10, 2007, through Oct. 10 this year, the value of shares in TSP stock index funds fell more than 40 percent.

The Common Stock Index or "C" Fund, which matches the performance of Standard & Poor's index of 500 stocks, dropped 41 percent as did the Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment or "S" Fund.

The International Stock Index or "I" Fund fell by 46.8 percent.

During the same period, returns on government securities in the "G" Fund, which are protected against declines, had a gain of 3.9 percent.



So what have we learned here?

Well, if you were paying attention and saw the recession coming and you "panicked" last October and moved your money into the "G" fund, you are UP 4%.

If you didn't "panic" and "kept your cool" and kept your money in the other funds, you are DOWN 40%.



Good thing you listened to the "military financial experts" instead of using your own common sense.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by freakzilla60:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by oseles:
Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This smacks of a government take over of all of the U.S. banks!...
Seems there should be specific laws against this and it has the potential for controlling all U.S. banks under, for lack of a better term, a one world economic system...
From what was supposed to be an "emergency" action to prevent an economic collapse, it appears to have been a "take over" and nationalization of our banking system...
This is very troubling, very troubling indeed!...
Do I hear Prescott Bush walking the halls of our government?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Why do you sound so surprised? When government gives with one hand, it grips tighter with the other.

People have forgotten how to be vigilant in the protection of their liberties in this country.

Surprised only in the aspect that the "rescue" plan was supposed to help the "failing" banks and institutions, not to take control of the "healthy" ones...
If someone was to talk to me of a conspiracy theory about this and folks on here know how I think that "conspiracy" theories are a total bunch of cr@p, this is one that I might just listen too!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

That's how liberty is lost. Not because twelve men are sitting around in a dimly lit smoke-filled room saying "let's destroy liberty and get rich mwahahahahaha!"

It's systemic to how governments operate to want more control. In the same way police can get out of control because they get so focused on solving the problems society has charged them to solve, that everything else becomes secondary to them. Governments are meant to regulate SOME THINGS, but it's easy for governments to think "it could be done better" then end up imprisoning people who don't do it "their" way.

Note that I'm not speaking in specifics, only generally. I'm just saying that we need to be vigilant in protecting our liberties, and that is why I take a dim view of government expanding its already broad powers.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by oseles:
Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This smacks of a government take over of all of the U.S. banks!...
Seems there should be specific laws against this and it has the potential for controlling all U.S. banks under, for lack of a better term, a one world economic system...
From what was supposed to be an "emergency" action to prevent an economic collapse, it appears to have been a "take over" and nationalization of our banking system...
This is very troubling, very troubling indeed!...
Do I hear Prescott Bush walking the halls of our government?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Hello!!! The current President of the United States is Prescott Bush's grandson.

quote:

Originally posted by freakzilla60:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by freakzilla60:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by oseles:
Just heard that Paulson called in Bank CEOs to a meeting - all the big, solvent banks. They thought they were going to a meeting to discuss how to help with the weaker banks.

He gave them a 1 page 'agreement' for them to sign giving (selling) the government a prefered stock in their banks. It was a sign before you leave 'or else'.

These are banks that did not need and did not want to be part of the bail out.

And I thought the bailout/prefered stoke was going to be to 'save' the failing banks.
Golly, Gee.

Long reign TSAR Commissar paulson - NOT

This smacks of a government take over of all of the U.S. banks!...
Seems there should be specific laws against this and it has the potential for controlling all U.S. banks under, for lack of a better term, a one world economic system...
From what was supposed to be an "emergency" action to prevent an economic collapse, it appears to have been a "take over" and nationalization of our banking system...
This is very troubling, very troubling indeed!...
Do I hear Prescott Bush walking the halls of our government?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Why do you sound so surprised? When government gives with one hand, it grips tighter with the other.

People have forgotten how to be vigilant in the protection of their liberties in this country.

Surprised only in the aspect that the "rescue" plan was supposed to help the "failing" banks and institutions, not to take control of the "healthy" ones...
If someone was to talk to me of a conspiracy theory about this and folks on here know how I think that "conspiracy" theories are a total bunch of cr@p, this is one that I might just listen too!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

That's how liberty is lost. Not because twelve men are sitting around in a dimly lit smoke-filled room saying "let's destroy liberty and get rich mwahahahahaha!"

It's systemic to how governments operate to want more control. In the same way police can get out of control because they get so focused on solving the problems society has charged them to solve, that everything else becomes secondary to them. Governments are meant to regulate SOME THINGS, but it's easy for governments to think "it could be done better" then end up imprisoning people who don't do it "their" way.

Note that I'm not speaking in specifics, only generally. I'm just saying that we need to be vigilant in protecting our liberties, and that is why I take a dim view of government expanding its already broad powers.

I would caution that you need, IMHO to be quite selective as to what is controled and what is left to it's own devices. My example would be the deregulation of the banking system and the financial market in general. Both deregulation and lack of regulatory enforcement has led to the financial situation this country is currently in.

Good posts Guys.

I disagree with you Ol_Doc, I think that over-regulation and plain old greed have caused this problem. And since you can't legislate greed out of people, just let them suffer the consequences. Things will get better, even pension funds that are suffering now will rise like Phoenix from the ashes when the market turns around. New government regulations will only get in the way of that.