The Death of Direct Sales

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim

You don't know anything about most of us, so you don't know who is suffering and who isn't.

I can't stand to hear either polical side take joy during a crisis at the opportunity to point a finger. It's more about being able to say I was right and you were wrong, rather than actually wanting to see the country be successful.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

What's going on here?

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

<< It's more about being able to say I was right and you were wrong, rather than actually wanting to see the country be successful.>>

Not at all.

It's all about making this country successful again, by taking it out of the hands that have run it into the ground.

And do I gloat at the financial misfortune of one who brags about his 25,000 slabbed cards, and who constantly uses Obama's middle name during his diatribes as if the name alone makes him an enemy of this country? (Nothing racist there!)

You bet.

(That's right. I'm far from perfect. But sometimes we can take harmless pleasure in our faults.)

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

You know what David, regardless of where you stand in this election, the lunatics on the fringes are the ugly ones. Disagree all you want, with anyone you want. But don't make it personal. Every thread you contribute to turns into a personal attack on someone. Those kind of thoughts and feelings belong on another kind of message board.

[Archive]

Posted By: LetsGoBucs

Jim and his ilk certainly did cause this crises
----------------------------

I certainly hope that you have much more expertise in whatever subject you teach than your showing in regards to our financial crisis.

First, Yes the investment banks and banks that engages in securitized bundled mortgages deserve a lot of blame for basically ignoring common sense.

But, guess what. The people that bought 200K, 300K, 500K, etc houses with no money down, with promises of 2% interest (and don't worry you can refinance when your house is worth 40% more in two years), or by lying on their mortgage applications also deserve a lot of blame.

Government regulators deserve blame for basically choosing to ignore an entire investment class. Congress deserves some blame for trying to social engineer through the mortgage companies (I agree with the spirit, but the practicality is just wrong).

So there is a lot of blame to be shared.

To take out your fustrations on one individual from one of the above groups is really wrong. If anything, the fact that the gentleman held onto 180K shares all the way to the bottom give an indication that he felt that his firm would work it out in the end. If you want to express that the government should let these institutions fail, then do so.

Your language is simply out of line. There is a thing called civil discourse. I would assume someone in higher education would practice it as a matter of courtesy and of professional responsibility.

And two things that were incorrect. One, Enron had an entire pipeline division that installed and ran pipelines in the Midwest. When Enron collapsed (and I knew people there making good money), it wasn't the traders I felt bad for.....it was the pipeline division, which had created the company and most of those workers were there 20-30 years and had all their 401K in Enron stock. So not everyone at Enron was trading paper.

Two, Wall Street and Venture Capitalist provide a key service in capitalism. Private money gets directed to new ideas and technologies and that creates jobs and opportunities for millions. So the idea that they don't produce anything is simply wrong. You can point to fee structures that are out of line, you can point to incentives that are out of line and lead to bad behavior - and I think most would agree with you. But saying that our financial industry doesn't produce anything is incorrect.

Finally, your comment about service people working hard.....wouldn't that also apply to those on Wall Street that work 14-15 hour days year after year to achieve their wealth? It is far too easy to identify the things that were out of line and apply them to everyone working on Wall Street. And I would note that the gentleman in question hasn't made any post seeking sympathy, he seems to have decided to pick himself up and move on as best he can......something I'd like to see more of this country practice.

Personally, I'd appreciate it if you removed some of the language that you've used in your posts.

Regards,

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

The only possible response to Jim's hateful "Barack Hussein Obama" diatribes is personal.

No one who reasons, or responds to reason, speaks like that.

And if this crises is what it takes to restore this country to a sane and just course, than I welcome this crises.

Nothing personal there.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim- you said exactly what I have been feeling, and I think I've had an epiphany.

After staying with this thread through 350 posts, what I'm left with is everyone from one extreme shouting down at everyone from the other, with nothing exchanged except anger and frustration. Has one Democrat convinced one Republican to take a look at his position and reconsider it, or vice versa? Has anybody learned anything new from this whole thread (actually I have)? Things are spinning out of control.

I think I'll take the safe bet and place myself smack in the middle. I hate extremes of any kind, and political extremes are just plain loony.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

<<But, guess what. The people that bought 200K, 300K, 500K, etc houses with no money down, with promises of 2% interest (and don't worry you can refinance when your house is worth 40% more in two years), or by lying on their mortgage applications also deserve a lot of blame.>>

Bull. (I hope that word doesn't offend you.)

Those people were preyed upon by the lenders who knew and didn't care one whit that the loans would be defaulted upon. They made their money up front. And they were the "experts." Can you really blame the uneducated and financially unsophisticated people that believed them? (Why, better educated people than they, right here, believe that McCain is a "maverick," and that Sarah Palin has a brain.)

To everything there is a season. There is a time for civil discourse.
And a time to dispense with it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Barry,

For the record, I'm a lifelong, registered Republican who has voted Democratic twice in his life. My BS meter told me that Bush was a moron in 2000 and 2004.

I will probably not vote for McCain this time for a couple of reasons. The greatest of which is that a GOP win would serve to validate the last 8 years in the minds of those party wonks.

That said, I'm a true fiscal conservative who wants smaller government, a balanced budget, and entitlement programs that are under control.

I may not have a true candidate for twenty years.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jerry Hrechka

Quite frankly, the bankers, investment houses, financial ministers et. al. do not understand the financial markets. If they did they would be able to place an accurate valuation on the complex derivates that have been poisoned by the mortgage defaults.

Right now, no one knows which institutions are solvent & which ones aren't - a big reason for the panic on the worldwide exchanges.

Unless the Central Banks start printing money, there is not enough cash to cover all the guarantees.

Current deficit is in the 3 to 400 billion dollar range, national debt is 10 Trillion - the last figure I saw for unfunded Govt. liabilities (Social Security & Medicard) is in the 30 Trillion dollar range. To this add all the local govt. debts & liabilities plus personal debt. Many more trillions (Don't have any numbers on this).

Soon we'll be talking about quadrillions, quintillions, sextillions, septillions, octillions, nonillions and maybe even decaillions of dollars (Sorry couldn't resist).

The debt house of cards is collapsing. Where it will end I don't know.

Anyone want to go back to the Gold Standard?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

David,

<<Those people were preyed upon by the lenders who knew and didn't care one whit that the loans would be defaulted upon. >>

You believe too much what you read in the paper or hear in a sound bite on TV. You are out of your depth in discussing economic issues. Stick to Physics. If every mortgage loan written in the last 8 years defaulted, it wouldn't add up to a crisis of this size. To blame it all on lenders OR borrowers is an oversimplification.

Look at Credit Default Swaps (CDS). Look at ratings services that gave AAA ratings and then pulled them arbitrarily, causing unexpected margin calls. Look at naked short sellers. All have a bigger part of this than brokers and borrowers.

I thought rocket scientists were supposed to be smart.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

How many of the rabid right, on the airwaves and the net, who call him Barack Hussein Obama would use his middle name if it was Steven?
Jim VB - a true fiscal conservative would not have taken a huge surplus and
turned it into a humongous deficit. A true conservative would never have attacked Iraq, true conservatives do not believe in foreign entanglements.
These people are neo conservatives, a totally different breed. There are Republicans who were pleading (see National Review) for Palin to be dropped from the ticket, but she is a neo con and they have too much power and apparently (considering who is running his campaign) a hold over McCain.
=

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Jerry Hrechka

Jim VB

In my limited understanding, Credit Default Swaps are a way of leveraging debt obligations, which magnifies any defaults.

Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

[Archive]

Posted By: LetsGoBucs

Can you really blame the uneducated and financially unsophisticated people that believed them?
----------------------

My father had a high school education, military service, and a lifetime of hard knocks. He used to tell me..."if its too good to be true".

Yes I do blame people who bought houses knowing there was no way they could afford them. I know people that were making 40-50K that were buying 400K houses. How could they reasonably think that they could afford that house?

I do agree that elderly people were "hoodwinked" by mortgage brokers and many were tricked or bullied into refinancing their mortgages. I fully support government action for anyone over the age of 60 that owns one home that they have lived in for more than 5-10 years. If they refinanced into an ARM mortgage and say they didn't understand what they agreed to, then I'm willing to help.

For all others, especially those that BOUGHT a house, they have to take personal responsibility. After all, just because someone reads an analyst report that a stock might go to $100 when its at $40....doesn't mean you can go out and spend $60 and then ask someone to give you money when the stock doesn't get to $100.

People made personal investment decisions. I have friends that have good jobs that bought homes in the early 2000's.....and by 05 and 06 had refinanced (their homes had gone from 250- 500 or even 700K in "value") and used the money to buy cars, take trips, buy jewerly. Thats fine, but to later say that well now we can't actually afford to pay the money back is a matter of their own responsibility. I have other friends that bought houses before they were built assuming that they would resell for 20-40% higher a year later....for a year or two they actually did. But when that ends they have to take responsibility for the two houses they have mortgages on.

There is a percentage of buyers who I'm sure fit your description as uneducated and unsophisticated. But some of them are probably fairly clever and use common sense (and have learned life's lessons the hard way). I have no doubt that some of them aren't clever nor use common sense....and it is unfortunate that not everyone in life is thinking of others. But (aside from the elderly I mention above), I do believe that these people must take responsibility for their actions. I do fully support prosecuting anyone that lied or made untrue promises (including both mortgage agents and buyers who falsified their incomes).

Too much of this fits into the category of "keeping up with the Jones'es" and "easy money" mentality. Hopefully those that fell into that trap, or were just plain greedy, or didn't use common sense will learn some tough lessons and apply them later in their lives to their advantage.

We as a nation need to step up and start taking responsibility. For too long we've voted for politicians that "promise" things for free. We have a lot of hard work ahead of use to improve our country and the sooner we start the sooner we'll achieve it. And it will require sacrifice from all, and responsibility from all. Just as we all have rights, we all have responsibilities. And when you enter into a responsibility, I do believe that you individually should be held to it.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

You're right about that Jim. I'm no expert in financial matters.

I've spent forty years of my life studying theoretical physics, and I am an expert there.

But in the financial realm I've got to make educated choices. And enough people with enough experience are saying that the mortgage situation-which, of course, is just another manifestation of the unbridled greed that some above have called "good," is at the heart of it.

But even if that is not the case it certainly was not caused by the people who have never designed and/or produced a "financial product."

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

I've just got one question: who let the Unabomber out?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Richard,

I don't understand your post. Or, more precisely, I don't think you understood mine. Bush is not, and never was, a fiscal conservative. I specifically said I did not vote for him.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Lets go Bucs makes a lot of sense.

When my house went from 100K to 500k I did not use it as an ATM.

Thank God too, as it now is a 250k house

I also did not buy a house up on the hill, even though I'd love too.

The only thing IMO that will get us as a nation out of this mess is for

People to start saving again. People need to pay down the CC and start saving

again.

Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

JimVB - I understood what you had said, I just wanted to get my point across that we don't have a true conservative administration now or for the past 8 years.
btw group- Bush was the first president in history to cut taxes during wartime and look at what has happened. We are losing the Afghanistan war, which could have been a success if the moron had concentrated all our efforts there, and maybe we are holding our own in the other war. The troops never had proper equipment but the neo cons kept their multi millions.
=

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Jerry,

I'm not an expert either, but here's my understanding.

Credit Default Swaps are a financial instrument that can be purchased to protect you in the event that the bundled mortages go into default. As such, it sounds like insurance. But the people selling them go out of their way to make sure they are NOT insurance. (AIG used a completely different division than their Insurance unit, to avoid conflict.) If they were insurance, they would have been regulated. Reasonable and adequate reserves against claims would have been required. None were. Mostly though, if you go to insure real property, you usually must have an ownership stake in said property. This isn't the case with CDS's. Anyone could buy one. This ability to sell multiple times is what magnifies the amount of the original mortgages. This alone, clearly moves it from the "insurance" category to a form of legalized gambling. When the talk of huge POTENTIAL defaults started, ratings companies downgraded many of these investments from AAA all the way down to junk. Many state funds and pension funds can own AAA investments, but, by law, they can't own junk. This ratings change then forces selling, which causes the investment banks to come up with cash. Short sellers, anticipating this cash squeeze, began to short these investment firms. (Naked shorts can sell the stock, without owning it, promising to repay the shares later.) This selling drove down the stock prices.

This isn't a political issue. Both sides have dirty hands, from enabling and pushing bad mortgages to allowing this whole derivative industry to form without regulation.

Keep in mind, that everyone involved in these transaction made out well from them,at some point. Mortgage brokers made a commission. Homeowners borrowed more, and bought bigger, nicer houses than they should. Mortgage companies bundled these loans and sold them (Fannie and Freddie). Investment banks sold the derivatives, lots of them. Execs at those firms pocketed nice bonuses. And each time a package was resold for a profit, investors had their portfolios grow. And now it comes apart. No one has a clue how big the outstanding liability is.

As I say, I'm not an expert and will gladly step aside for anyone who is, and learn something.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Steve,

<<People to start saving again. People need to pay down the CC and start saving again.>>

(LOL) Sheesh! Those of us whose livelihood is tied to the retail industry disagree! Did you see last month's comps at major retailers? Most guys were down 5-15%! Go to the mall. Pay cash if it makes you feel better, but just shop. You're killing me.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

Jeff,

The Unabomber's manifesto, in all its insanity, was at least inspired by the deeply held (and incredibly misguided) principles of its author, not personal jealously and thinly veiled greed.

Based on his posts in this thread and an earlier one, I honestly believe that if David swapped incomes with you he'd be Republican and happy and probably would never post on this board, other than to agree with Jim Crandall or sing the praises of John Sidney McCain.

The vitriolic nature of his posts speaks to something much deeper than the issues being discussed. He believes he's gotten a raw deal because he's had to work so hard at such a noble profession and never got rich while fatcats like you and Jim just sat on your couches for the past 20 years watching the easy money pile up in front of you. Whatever wealth you may or may not have accumulated did not come from your hard work or smart career decisions. It was luck. After all, he's as smart as you guys, right? He teaches theoretical physics, doesn't he?!!! Where's his cut? All he wants is what's owed to him.....by all of us.

But this thread actually has been educational for me regarding theoretical physics. I learned that none of my children will be allowed to study a subject that might lead to such an empty and bitter life like what awaits the future theoretical physics professors of the world.

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Ryan,

<<John Sidney McCain>>


Very nice touch.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

Although I don't approve of a lot of David's comments, the right-wingers have repeatedly (habitually) said much more personal and callous things than he has. Now they're whining about the decibel level of his rhetoric?? Give me a break.

You people (this board as a whole right now, except for Barry) are all full of crap. I'll talk to you after the election-- maybe.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Last night John McCain called upon his supporters to quit making incredibly stupid, lying, and offensive remarks about Obama. I think he is attempting to lock the barn door after the cows have left. He once was gleeful about Palin's ability to be an "attack dog" and how she could turn on the far right troglydites of the party to make drooling, mindless and cruel statements about Obama, mouthing the lies to somehow give them credibility. Well you know what folks, it didn't work. Do you remember this famous line: "You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." The haters are shocked that their venom isn't sticking this time and the polls reflect that American voters are more and more turned off by the bile espoused by the "good old boys." Thank God!

I am also a little puzzled about the comments about how the Hispanic population will vote. I think it is too early to start making widespread predictions. The poor and lesser educated have traditionally been drawn to the Democratic Party, whether they be Irish or Italian or from Central Europe, but times have changed. A great percentage of the Hispanic population is Catholic and, unlike White Catholics, have shown a greater propensity to be unyielding in their convictions and those of the Church with reference to issues like abortion, and tend to be more conducive to voting for conservatives who share their beliefs. Also factor in that many Hispanics consider themselves to be extremely patriotic and supportive of the war effort. I think finally you have to temper any predictions because it is unknown how many Hispanics will actually vote as opposed to those who are merely being polled. (Ditto the young voters who have turned out at the polls in previous elections in disturbingly small numbers).

I see this going down to the wire. Hopefully it won't come down to Florida once again.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

"Who let the unibomber out?"

Funny.

The ignorance shown by the Skidmore physics professor is unbelievable.

The vitriole is not even worth addressing. It is scary hopwever that he is teaching children or young adults.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

I have no strong problems with David's comments, even if I don't agree with all of them. And Jim, David was responding to a specific quote claiming that borrowers had to share "a lot" of the blame for this mess when you called him out of his depth, then you want to list credit swaps, margin calls etc. as causes and that actually bolster his position--perhaps you should assess your own depth.

It is fundamental common sense that people don't lend money unless they're confident it will be repaid. What happened here with lenders was an old Badfinger song--"If you want it, here it is, come and get it, make your mind up fast.....Did I hear I you say that there must be a catch, would you walk away from a fool and his money?" That's exactly the pitch that was going on--"you can re-fi again in two years", "the market has been going up for several years and shows no sign of slowing down" etc. Mortgage brokers, underwriters and lending execs at best had their heads in the sand-- they were getting their's off the top. I remember when I refinanced in '05 my mortgage broker was at first incredulous and then actually upset that I would not borrow the full 80% LTV they were offering, turning away about $100K extra cash out. When I said I didn't want the increased monthly payment I was given the above BS lines I already quoted and also, my favorite, "you could just keep that extra $100K in a reserve account in case you were unable to make the monthly payments". Yeah right. So as and between lenders and borrowers, who were given the hard sell that they could afford the mortgage and that the offered deal was in their best interests, the blame falls far, far more squarely on the lender. BTW, notions of falsified loan apps, while possible, certainly weren't happening here in Arizona (where foreclosures are about 3x the National avg)--here you could damn near be pushing your belongings in a grocery cart and get a loan. Falsified or abysmally unrealistic appraisals, now that's another story.

The credit swaps, margin calls, etc, are indeed a large part of the problem--now tell me, how much involvement did Joe six-pack have with those? Maybe Sarah can answer that one. As for foreclosures, kick the people out on the street for lack of personal responsibility--where will that get you? They'll find apartments, gov't housing, live with friends, etc. Leaving aside unemployment and the possibility of inflation, you will STILL have a crisis because the housing market has TANKED!!!!! This is very much like the S&L disasater of not quite 20 years ago, when lenders were stuck with unbelievable amounts of property due to, hmmm, let's see, oh yeah, BAD LOANS. Credit got tight and markets puckered up. Maybe some here are too young to remember (enjoy being 33 James), but McPain sure isn't. Garn St. Germain and other, deregulatory laws helped bring that one about too.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

<<David was responding to a specific quote claiming that borrowers had to share "a lot" of the blame for this mess when you called him out of his depth>>


Uh... No. David was blaming predatory lenders only.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

um, yes--here's his exact post:

"<<But, guess what. The people that bought 200K, 300K, 500K, etc houses with no money down, with promises of 2% interest (and don't worry you can refinance when your house is worth 40% more in two years), or by lying on their mortgage applications also deserve a lot of blame.>>

Bull. (I hope that word doesn't offend you.)

Those people were preyed upon by the lenders who knew and didn't care one whit that the loans would be defaulted upon. They made their money up front. And they were the "experts." Can you really blame the uneducated and financially unsophisticated people that believed them?"

He was certainly responding to a claim that borrowers "deserve a lot blame"

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

David's response - <<Those people were preyed upon by the lenders who knew and didn't care one whit that the loans would be defaulted upon. >>


Your conclusion - <<He was certainly responding to a claim that borrowers "deserve a lot blame">>



His response was that the lenders deserved all the blame. As I pointed out, neither argument is correct.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

I see neither the words "only" nor "all" in David's post. Seems to me that was your assumption, as you went on to call him out of his depth. I didn't read his post that way at all--and I don't think I'm out of my depth.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

If you can read his post and NOT see it as blaming the lenders, then, unfortunately you are out of your depth.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

As and between the two, he did indeed believe the lenders were to blame. He called Bull. And he is right.

Yet still,you deign to tell us exactly what he said, while telling him what subjects to stick to, that he is out of his depth, and you intimated that people of his profession should be smarter than that. I find that to be a smug**** response from someone who has no right to say it, or if he does, should be prepared to be called on it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

I'm glad you finally agree with me.


Edited to add - I would not begin to question anything he said concerning Physics. My undergraduate degree is in Economics. Alas, they didn't mention one thing in school pertaining to the current mess.

[Archive]

Posted By: Glyn Parson

I must be the luckiest man alive. The way some are dooming and glooming on here. Ive been a fulltime dealer of vintage baseball cards since 1990 (with the exception of the year I worked at SGC) and I can tell you Ive had my BEST month ever retailing and wholesaling cards. "Goes to show you don't ever know." Can we stop all this political fighting, nobody ever changes anyone elses minds in these exchanges. Lets get back to the cards.
Thanks,
Glyn

[Archive]

Posted By: 1880nonsports

of "Joe six pack" is - what box for ethnicity would Joe check on his census since he seems to be a focal point of some sort? I too have read each and every thread. I'm still scared of maveric's and dreamers and see myself as a centrist as well. People died to give me the right to vote for president. I have to chose the one I feel best represents my views. I only wish more of the posters here agreed with me on who that should be

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark Evans

This is an enlightening thread, as it reflects the views of bright, passionate folks on important issues of the day, albeit somewhat unrelated to vintage cards. The hostility and personal attacks, however, should cease. They are unnecessary and just demean the Board. Mark

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

<<But this thread actually has been educational for me regarding theoretical physics. I learned that none of my children will be allowed to study a subject that might lead to such an empty and bitter life like what awaits the future theoretical physics professors of the world.

-Ryan>>

You're going to decide what your children can and cannot study?!

Nice.

And don't presume to know what I would or would not do, or would or would not feel, if I had Crandall's income. You don't have a clue.

I consider myself very well off. And I'm quite happy, too.

And since I'm well off, I wouldn't mind sharing a bit of what I've been blessed enough to receive, in the form of higher taxes, so that all in this country have the basic necessities, and a good chance for a better future.

And if one particular fat-cat racist thinks that makes me "the unibomber,"
I can easily live with that.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim

The problem I have with this thread and politics today as a whole is that there is no middle ground. Both the left and the right have become so entrenched in their views that there is no true debate anymore. Both sides have become so inundated with talking points that back up their argument that they are no longer willing to listen to opposing opinion and give it any consideration.

I am a lifelong Republican that is dreading the upcoming election. Obama is the better politician and given the choice of candidates he is the most intelligent and best suited for the job even given his lack of experience. Biden I see as another Dan Quayle. He has a lot of gaffes but is a solid VP on the whole.

McCain is strong in his convictions and has shown that he is capable of reaching across the aisle but I don’t know if that is enough. Though I think Pahlin isn’t the boob she has been made out to be, I don’t think she is ready or suited to lead our country.

I am truly disappointed that these are the best candidates that our country has to offer.

It’s sad to me that as this country and the world drifts deeper into turmoil that instead of the two parties growing closer they drift further apart.

The current economical problems are a perfect example. How can any democrat or republican say it’s one parties fault more than the other. When looked with true open eyes it’s the fault of both parties through the years. Pointing fingers will not fix the problem and unfortunately I don’t feel like my vote right now either way will help. I will vote as I always do, but his time it’s with the heaviest heart I have ever cast a ballot.

It’s time for both sides to stop being the party of “I’m right and you’re not” to the parties of “let’s do the right thing.”

I know it’s too much to ask but I can hope.

[Archive]

Posted By: sportcollectorsdisplay.com

People who have the high end stuff don't need to sell.

www.sportcollectorshub.com


www.sportcollectorsdisplay.com

Show off your high end stuff.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Back to the Hispanic vote issue in the three western states, the Hispanics will make up a larger percentage of the voters than ever before. This may not be as a result of greater growth in the Hispanic population but through efforts by Acorn and others to increase the Hispanic turnout and get them to the polls.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

right-wingers have repeatedly (habitually) said much more personal and callous things than he has. Now they're whining about the decibel level of his rhetoric?? Give me a break.
--------------

Well, I'm the one that asked David to edit his remarks. I'm not a right winger, nor do I recall saying more callous things than what he wrote.

[Archive]

Posted By: LetsGoBucs

It is fundamental common sense that people don't lend money unless they're confident it will be repaid.
-------
Todd, I think that this is a good and fair point. And it points to the breakdown of government regulation that permitted a new investment class to exist outside the scope of any existing oversight. Unfortunately, the Congress helped push the idea along of lending to those that shouldn't have qualified for a loan. Though I will also state that I think its down on the list of causes to the overall mess.

I do believe though that even in the cases of the "hardest" sell, the buyers still have responsibility. As I clearly stated in one of my posts I believe the government should step in and help elderly homeowners that refinanced into ARM loans. I would hazard that 70-80% of them were victims of crooked salemen and our tax dollars should be used to keep them in their homes.

Outside of that though, what has happened to "buyer beware"? During the housing boom most traditional banks still operated normally. I went to my local credit union to see what type of mortgage I could get when I thought about buying a house. They presented me with a few options ranging from a 15 year mortgage to a 30 year mortgage. And the amounts of the mortgage were very similar to what you would find you qualify for in a mortgage calculator. But I could go down the street to a "mortgage lender" and get double the size of the mortgage...only now it had variable rates of interest, different interest payments in different years, etc. Now if I would have chosen the second option and bought a house twice as big and expensive, don't I have responsibility for that action - irregardless of how well the salesperson spoke about the "upside" or "market"?

I have helped a friend move out of a house he can no longer afford. I feel really bad for his two daughters. And yes he has moved his family into a two bedroom apartment and later he might have to move in with his wife's parents. But what else would you suggest? He's my friend. But lets be clear that he lived far above his means, he took trips that he couldn't afford, he owned two large gas guzzling cars, and they had credit card debt equal to about 1/3 of his pay. They never failed to buy $50 clothes for the kids instead of $10 clothes. It goes on and on. And I don't really think he is alone in this.

Unfortunately, we have two very different sets of people in this country in terms of finance. Those that live within their means and those that don't. We need to be finding ways to reduce the size of those that don't.

Perhaps its because I grew up in a lower middle class household (and there were a few years that was stretching it), or becuase I've lived in parts of the world where people earn 8-10K USD/year and live within their means - and enjoy their lives. But something is really wrong in our country in regards to spending money. Its wrong at the governmental level, and its wrong at the individual level for a big chunk of the population. And I see no way of having that change other than through personal responsibility.

[Archive]

Posted By: PC

I hope that mainstream Democrats will not resort to race-baiting as a form of argument.

The furthest left on this board certainly have.

Shameful.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Dorskind

Certainly this is the song they should play during the 7th Inning stretch
at Major League Ball Parks in 2009.

It will be the first season since 1932 to begin during a great depression
and much like the 30's depression it will run during the entire term of
the newly elected President

Remember it was our group that predicted the Depression of 2008 and
the collapse of the stock market.

Look next for a new major terrorist incident in the US- probably by year's end

In the interim, whilst we prepare for that tragedy, we advise everyone to follow
our life long advice to all- Trust No One Double Check Everyone

We do follow our advise and shifted all of our portfolio to 100% cash more
than 5 years ago.

America It is time to take responsibility- that means everyone.

(1) Congress will not be allowed to have special interest legislation (pork) attached
to any bill unless said legislation is related to the bill itself

(2) All meetings with lobbyists must be recorded and taped and on the web sites
of the Congressmen, Senator or public official who attended.

(3) Any law suits which are brought for any non-criminal or non-public issue matter
will require that the losing party pay all of the court costs and attorney's fees incurred
by the winning party

(4) Delay the payment of executive bonuses for 2 years after a double review by
two different accounting firms of the financial statements. Let the money earn
interest in the interim

(5) Since Americans never learn unless they pay, and it is impossible to change habits
unless we tax people out them- we suggest the following

(a) 200% health tax on all foods which the government (based on some tbd standard) deems unhealthy.
This would go along way toward curing most of America's Health Problems. All the tax money
collected could be used to fund the healthcare system
(b) Death penalty for dealing of all illegal drugs
(c) Deportation of all illegal immigrants by 2012
(d) Return all illegals in our jails to their home country (except terrorists) and cut off foreign aid
to any country that does not accept them
(e) Flat tax on income spent -tax incentive for savings


If we restore morality, order and discipline we will solve our economic problems Clearly we have a country
where irresponsible people believe that society has an obligation to take care of them.

That was never the intent of the framers of the constitution. We must correct their
immoral behavior and must not allow them to destroy their lives, and expect law bidding,
hard working, God fearing, honest citizens to pay for their sins


Bruce Dorskind
Do What's Right For America

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

<<Back to the Hispanic vote issue in the three western states, the Hispanics will make up a larger percentage of the voters than ever before. This may not be as a result of greater growth in the Hispanic population but through efforts by Acorn and others to increase the Hispanic turnout and get them to the polls.>>

How dare these organizations try to ensure that everyone eligible exercise their franchise!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

"How dare these organizations try to ensure that everyone eligible exercise their franchise!"

Everyone, including their cats, dogs and dead relatives! Change!

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Deportation of all illegal immigrants by 2012?

Isn't that something like 11 million people? How exactly do you see this happening? Cattle cars? It would be another holocaust.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bruce Dorskind

America can not afford to take care of anyone beyond its own citizens

Our healthcare system and infrastructure will collapse.

Someone who has no legal right to be here should not be here.

We will need to find an orderly way of returning all illegal aliens
to their home country.

America must straighten its own act out first. One important step
is to focus on the welfare of its government, own citizens and own
infrastructure.

Whilst our proposals are radical, the problems are extreme and
ordinary solutions will not begin to solve them

Bruce Dorskind
Do What's Right For America

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Hey, Jeff! Gettin' on the Bruces' bandwagon?

With all those capital trials for drug dealers (none in the tobacco industry, sadly) you ought to have a field day! (As long as Bruces allows them trials.)