40 replies to this topic

[SemiBizz]

Here's the thing that's really sick folks... let's say Joe Six-Pak does do the American thing and with the extra week between Turkey Day and Christmas, when we count his gas sales, he breaks some kind of record... is this a bullish event for economy?... given the debt implications corporate, public or private? Who are we kidding?

[Tor]

In all fairness pure technicians are just as much out there. I think Jesse livermoor referred to the chartist as a "pet freak". In the ST technicals are all that matter IMO, but still worth looking at funnmentals to make bug $$$$$$$$$$$. You can bet big with funnmentals, rather than large amounts of smaller trades. As buffet.

[wyocowboy]

The Fed has always followed the bond market - or have you noticed? Many can't seem to grasp that concept..........nuff said...........

[OEXCHAOS]

What about individual responsibility ? It's like saying - "It's not my fault that i smoke, but it's all Phillip Morris' ".

As for Greenspan, i never understood him either. I have always considered him a hypocrite, a politician more than a beaurocrat.

NAV,

Everyone has to take responsibility for their actions, but borrower only is responsible for his loan. The systemic responsibility ultimately lies in the hands of those who lent the money.

The problem is that between government and industry, they managed to create a disconnect between lender and responsibility. That's what created the bubble--everyone acting rationally except for the people in charge of minding the hen house--they thought that they could somehow evade responsibility. And for a while, they did and were rewarded for it. Handsomely.

Eventually, though, the chickens come home to roost.

Mark

[linrom1]

This is getting political, but the problem started in the 1980's with Ronald Reagan. The republican agenda has been to effectively neuter enforcement ablity of the Federal Government. First they went after IRS, then EPA, OSHA, SEC, Banking, Finance, Customs.......Immigration, etc. The Fed Government does not enforce a darn thing. All enforcement in US was left up to local communities and individual States. Just look at what is happening: Arizona is fighting Feds on immigration, New York on SEC enforcement, California on EPA, pollution, Ohio on Banking enforcement etc.

[dasein]

What about individual responsibility ? It's like saying - "It's not my fault that i smoke, but it's all Phillip Morris' ".

No, it not like saying that, at all. But what about individual responsibility?

If you are a creditor, you are making an investment. If you want your money back, you make sure the guy you lend 50 bucks to pays you on payday. Creditors are not nice guys, they loan money to make a profit, a big profit, mortgages have a nice spread. Folks here believe you dont get paid if you dont take a risk, so you have to see that the creditors took the risk. Responsibility for getting their money back is with the Creditor!

Thus, creditors pull up actuarial tables, check the collateral and the ability of the debtor to pay. But when creditors get greedy, they arent responsible anyore, they think the spreads will last forever - they didnt. Because the lenders got greedy, and gave loans to people (often unsophisticated people who in turn are told to and dutifully do rely on "expert advice" in the form of their banks financial advisor!) they had no business giving loans to, the creditor should get hurt. The bailout is not to help these little borrowers who got loans with no money down - their best, rational decision would be to drop off the keys and walk - the bailout is to keep people in homes they should not be in, for the sole purpose of keeping them servicing the debt as long as possible to keep the irresposible lenders afloat - even though everyone knows these borrowers will eventually default. And yes its totally unfair, but the govt cares about more about those lenders, because regulators worldwide let this bubble effect nearly every person, mutual and pension fund.

As I said earlier - the high level economists have kept pressuring Joe&P to save the world economy by buying more of everything - they had no alternative to expanding the economy without Joe til recently (the BRICS are now big enough to do so) They did not care if the credit being pushed on Joe was wise or not, they had to keep the growth going.

But maybe you side with those shareholders who sue the company for losses when the stock price of their 1465 PE, 545 PS buggy whip company's stock suddenly drops to a PE of 12.

klh

[milbank]

What about individual responsibility ? It's like saying - "It's not my fault that i smoke, but it's all Phillip Morris' ".

As for Greenspan, i never understood him either. I have always considered him a hypocrite, a politician more than a beaurocrat.

First, I apologize for not responding sooner NAV, I went to bed before your post and was out this morning, which I rarely am during market hours.

I want to add to those who have responded to the above-post you made that Phillip Morris is not in the business of, nor does it have a business interest in, protecting the public's health and well being. The governments, both federal and state along with the regulatory agencies who enforce what regulations there are and even the lenders who have a fiduciary duty through their licensing, do.

There is an understanding, of course, when the mortgage is made that the borrower could default on their end of the agreement. It's the lender's responsibility to themselves and the borrower, to make that possibility as small as possible. Loans like the NINJA and others, do not.

It is the responsibility of elected officials both federal and state who make the rules of the game to make, to make sure there are rules that promote the most fair and possitive outcomes to those agreements, agencies chartered by said governments who's job it is to enforce those laws and regulations and lenders who's licenses require that they understand that they have a fiduciary duty to give loans that have a reasonable possibility of being paid back by the borrower in total.

The institutions exist, whether via election, charter or licence to serve the welfare of the people and society as a whole. The people do not exist for the welfare of the state...yet.

I feel very strongly about personal responsibility. I live my life accordingly. I, as an individual, can not control the lack of responsible, ethical behavior in others. That's where government comes in. To protect my well being from them.

[milbank]

I want to add but couldn't edit on my last post that... As for Greenspan, I'm not as good at articulating how I see his part in all this. I will say he used his powers not as a passive, reactionary beaurocrat keeping an even keel on the economy through controlled rate cuts and rises in rates as prudently needed but, as an active politician with a political agenda that was pro business utlimately at the expense of the people. By the time he realized he had gone too far and too long with his rate cuts and his actions were about to hurt the business interest of America, it was too late and he then found out that he couldn't toggle his way back out of the monster he had created. Benanke is about to learn the same lesson with his rate cuts. In both cases, the welfare of the country is at the effect of their misunderstanding, in my opinion, of this aspect of rate control. Bottom line... Those who are in charge of making the rules of the game are the most responsible for making the game work. Those who supply the money to underwrite the game have the responsibility to make sure the monies are responsibly and prudently doled out to the players.

Edited by milbank, 30 November 2007 - 12:46 PM.

[NAV]

Mark, Dasein, Milbank, Many good points there. Can't argue with that.

[OEXCHAOS]

Re: Greenspan I have watched him for some time and read his earlier writings. I keep coming way with the feeling that there was a whole lot more going on then we will ever know. For the most part, however, the stuff that I can clearly see, and clearly analyze (not just speculate about) makes a good case for Greenspan as the good guy between a rock and a hard place. I certainly don't blame him for the real estate debacle. HE didn't lower lending standards/mislead consumers. He didn't inflate credit ratings on paper, either. Did he provide ample liquidity? Sure. Lots. I'm pretty sure it was a brilliant move and would have had few ill effects had lenders and rating agencies done their jobs.