f*ckity f*cked f*cking f*ckwad of a djia, me and my big mouth- Page 2

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 11:54am

eh, who cares if we have investors anyway? the gov't will take care of everyone and everything. the only purpose investors might serve is to pay some taxes to sustain the gov't until it has effected a full takeover of the means of production. when that's done they may work as servers at the people palaces once they have completed their re-deucation.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 11:58am

Looks like someone has hopped the "Socialism Is Coming!" Wells Fargo Wagon.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 12:03pm

now, now, borstal. i have been riding on the totalitarianism badwagon like slim pickens on a nuke for quite some time. socialism, schmocialism. this is merely about total control.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 12:22pm

Nice straw-man throw out there papa.

Where did I say that we do not need investors? Nice diversionary action there.

Institutional Investors have been killed these past few months - and until there is some better regulation in the market, people will be hesitant to rush back in.

I have a decent chunk of change invested in the stock market, whether it be through my 401K or my own private investments. I want a healthy US stock market because it helps everyone.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 12:40pm

i learned my diversionary tactics same place yer boy did. alinsky's school for stalinism.

i think maybe your team might wanna just not talk until they have something tangible to say. hope doesn't sell to investors. they actually want plans. everytime they go out there with the kinda smoke and mirrors that won them the masses they drive the market down even further.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 12:46pm

I don't disagree with you there. And, Geither first appearance did not help matters much.

I think right now Obama is focusing his message on main street, and that is spooking wall street.

But, unfortunately, main street does not trust wall street, so he is going to the consumer first, and then the investor second. Wall street will eventually recover, but it does not like regulation, strings and conditions. Except of course when they work in its favor.

BTW - it is not "my team". It is my President. (As was Bush after 9/11, when many of his former critics rallied behind him).

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 4:06pm

noted neocon and card carrying member of the vrwc, robert byrd on obama's czars.
"...white house staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of senate-confirmed officials.”

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 4:14pm

It is a fair criticism if in fact Obama's appointees actually circumvent the authority of Congress.

I guess after 8 years of Bush, we just assume the worst from the Executive.

Right now, Bryd is complaining about the possibility of over-reaching by the White House, as opposed to actual actions:

Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.”

I wish the Dems had the balls to care when Bush was rolling over the constitutional duties of the Congress left and right...

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 4:35pm

uh huh. but, but, bush. thanks, goth. oh i mean ywiw.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 4:52pm

Papa, if anything, I was slamming the Democrats for being cowards and not reigning in excesses of the Bush Administration.

It is amusing how you bring up Bush whenever you want to compare Obama to him but put that post up when I mentioned how Congress rolled over and played dead when challenged by him.

I get that you had to put up with years of folks criticizing Bush on this Board, and now get some pleasure throwing back their own words in their faces. Have fun.
Updated On: 2/25/09 at 04:52 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 5:00pm

i find it more amusing that you canot contemplate any action of the obama administration without making reference to the bush administration by way of excuse. who would have thought that you would be resorting to that so early in the reign of the annointed one. well, i did, but that's neither here nor there.

on the other hand, my references to the bush administration are generally to point out the many policies where saint obama has deferred to the evil bush.

have fun pretending that your but, but bush is any different than the but, but clinton that was roundly ridiculed for the last 5 years.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 2/25/09 at 5:10pm

Papa,

I am not even sure how to respond to that, other than to say carry on trying to get a reaction, and tweak those who support Obama.

And since I was talking about Congress, it makes sense that I would refer to how it reacted to the last, preceding Administration. If Obama exceeds his constitutional authority, and undermines the Congress, he should be called on it.

I was complaining about Bush exceeding his constitutional authority when he was in office, and if Obama does the same, I will similarly complain.

I will just remind myself that I am not allowed to mention precedent if I ever comment on one of your threads again.

Again, have fun. Tweak away.
Updated On: 2/25/09 at 05:10 PM

[javero]

Posted: 3/2/09 at 11:17am

The bottom will fall out shortly.

Call me naive, but there is no company too large to fail.

Obama, please pull the plug on AIG, insolvent banks, unscrupulous brokerage firms, and focus on propping up the Big 3 and keeping the states & municipalities from going under.

Updated On: 3/2/09 at 11:17 AM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 3/2/09 at 11:48am

yeah, talk is 5500 by year-end.

5500.

they're not this stupid. this is intentional. only when the populace is at the brink of complete breakdown will they surrender the last vestiges of free will and succomb to the will of the new regime. martial law by year end. total nationalization of the majority of the gdp by 2011. the homes which are not foreclosed will be seized by community based financial cooperatives via eminent domain and distributed via lotteries - and at the whim of the heads of the cooperatives. dissent will be crushed. elections cancelled. instead all elections will be replaced with national card check procedures.

am i paranoid? any more so than the people who were sure that there would be gay gulags?

fortunately i know the woman who will lead the resistance and free american once again from the "democratic" regime of president for life obama. in around 2033. 'til then? we're so screwed.

[Yawper]

Posted: 3/2/09 at 11:52am

Dare I mention that it first topped and sustained over 1000 less than 30 years ago?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 4:15pm

wow.
since 1/20/09

[javero]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 5:01pm

It's about ready to flatline. Many of the former blue chip stocks are on the verge of being de-listed. With the credit squeeze still in play, the timing couldn't be worse. If they can't raise another round of equity financing and the banks won't loan them short-term loans, they'll be SOL.

[Yawper]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 5:31pm

All short selling and any other potentially manipulative non-straight up buy/sell trading should be banned. There's too much crap like that going on now for the market to accurately reflect any type of reality now.

There has been speculation for some time now that the US automakers' stock has been being worked, most likely by non-US interests, and now this comes out -
Morgan Stanley looking for major holdings for shorting

[javero]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 6:20pm

Under ordinary circumstances, I don't come down hard on short sales despite the fact that I hate them. They're perfectly legally usually.

But what irks me here is a TARP recipient trying to coax one of its clients into lending it shares of Ford which is in line to receive a major taxpayer-subsized loan. If the loan goes through, Ford's stock is sure to crater.

This is double dipping of the worst f*ckin' kind!

[Yawper]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 6:29pm

Ford is not looking for any loans (yet).

[javero]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 7:10pm

There I go, all loud and wrong LOL.

I forgot that Ford was the lone holdout where loans are concerned.

yawper--if Ford missed its goal of retiring that retiree benefits debt in Jan 2010, what would be its option other than asking for some kind of federal bailout?

I like Ford's proactive stance but don't like MS betting against Ford with taxpayer money one bit. There something about the gambit that I don't fully comprehend though.

What's the basis of MS's hunch that Ford's stock will crater before the Jan 2010 milestone?

[Yawper]

Posted: 3/5/09 at 7:28pm

They're still going around with the UAW on that. The most recent proposal (Ford has proposed replacing some of the cash requirement with equity) is up for vote now but it looks like it's not going to be approved.

The question with MS is who's really behind the shorting? There's a feeling in Detroit that GM and Ford have been targeted and that Ford's stock in particular isn't where it should be.

[son_of_a_gunn_25]

Posted: 3/6/09 at 2:22pm

Updated On: 12/26/09 at 02:22 PM

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 3/7/09 at 12:11pm

Good article: Where is the bottom??

[Yawper]

Posted: 3/7/09 at 2:46pm

This is still mild compared to the Great Depression - then the market lost 90%, nationwide unemployment peaked at 24.9 (in 1933), and banks were closing left and right. In late 1930 on a single day 66 banks in Arkansas alone closed. Some 800 banks closed between November 1930 and January 1931 and that wasn't even the final bank panic of the period.