Stock Market

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by 2 Dollar Bill

The Robots are paid that much ??? No wonder we cant get health care.

Yer breakin' my heart----shut up.

[Danzig]

i wonder if the union is what's pushing obama and the dems to try to rescue the big three? unions always give a great amount of money to the dems-and dems generally support them right back. a lot of jobs, a lot of union funds go out the window if the big three go tits up.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Good article on the math behind the automaker's problems...Numbers are pretty crazy..

http://www.middletownjournal.com/o/c...308thomas.html

I would be a bit suspicious of an article that only quotes the Heritage Foundation. Even within the article itself there are things that don't make its argument:

What about Chrysler's bailout 30 years ago? It was a loan. Didn't Chrysler pay back the government? Wasn't it worth the risk to save jobs? According to the Heritage Foundation, the $1.2 billion in loan guarantees made by the Carter administration still resulted in a partial bankruptcy for Chrysler. "Most of the company's creditors were forced to accept losses just as they would if Chrysler had gone through Chapter 11, and the company ended up firing almost half its workforce, including 20,000 white-collar workers and 42,600 hourly wage earners. The only people who benefited from the bailout were Chrysler shareholders."

The shareholders would be the investor class, not the union workers. Looks like a lot of employees got fired, and I imagine many of those were union members.

Health care costs are crippling industries, no question, but that's not the union's "fault." There's plenty wrong with the current state of unions, but their job is to negotiate the best possible deal for their members. Just like a business' is to get the most profits for its shareholders. The article listed the average hourly wages including health care costs- I would be curious to know what the hourly wage was with that amount for health care deducted, but the article didn't say.

In all the screaming about how expensive a national health care system would be for this country, no one ever brings up what to me, is an important point- it would make manufacturing jobs in America attractive again to international companies, because they wouldn't have to factor health care in their costs. The thing about the insurance industry is that they only make money by not providing service. In cases like flood or fire or theft insurance it makes perfect sense- you pay a relatively little amount of money over time so that in the unlikely event something bad happens, you will get more than what you are paying in to cover catastrophic damages. Odds are, you'll never need it, and the insurance company makes money and you pay a little money for peace of mind and everyone's happy. In the case of health care, it's not a case of a rare instance where you might need care- we all need health care at one point or another. And so we, or an employer, pay a pretty big chunk of money to a company that is going to have to pay out at some point, but doesn't make a profit if it pays out more than it gets in, so it refuses to pay whenever possible. It doesn't make sense. Could you imagine paying money to a restaurant that then says, "Sorry; no food for you."

I'm not saying Europe or Canada have it figured out, but they do pay less per citizen than we do AND they have lower infant mortality rates and a higher life expectancy than we do, so they must be doing something right, as they're getting more for less.

As for the auto companies- I blame some of their problems on them putting all their eggs in the SUV basket, because the profit on them was so great, compared to small cars. They could have been improving gas mileage (and Congress could have required it), but preferred to pay money to lobbyists so that they could continue business as usual. Do any of these people ever think the ride will ever end? I swear, it seems like America is one big grasshopper, and we sure could stand to embrace the ant sometimes.

It's easy to bash the unions, but it's also worth remembering the labor movement are the folks who brought us the weekend. "Not Automatic" is a very dry read, but the accounts of conditions in the GM plants prior to the Sit-Down Strike of 1936 are pretty upsetting.

[GenuineRisk]

Which is not to say I didn't appreciate you posting the link, GBBob- I also like to read both sides of the argument. Thanks for posting it.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I would be a bit suspicious of an article that only quotes the Heritage Foundation. Even within the article itself there are things that don't make its argument:

What about Chrysler's bailout 30 years ago? It was a loan. Didn't Chrysler pay back the government? Wasn't it worth the risk to save jobs? According to the Heritage Foundation, the $1.2 billion in loan guarantees made by the Carter administration still resulted in a partial bankruptcy for Chrysler. "Most of the company's creditors were forced to accept losses just as they would if Chrysler had gone through Chapter 11, and the company ended up firing almost half its workforce, including 20,000 white-collar workers and 42,600 hourly wage earners. The only people who benefited from the bailout were Chrysler shareholders."

The shareholders would be the investor class, not the union workers. Looks like a lot of employees got fired, and I imagine many of those were union members.

Health care costs are crippling industries, no question, but that's not the union's "fault." There's plenty wrong with the current state of unions, but their job is to negotiate the best possible deal for their members. Just like a business' is to get the most profits for its shareholders. The article listed the average hourly wages including health care costs- I would be curious to know what the hourly wage was with that amount for health care deducted, but the article didn't say.

In all the screaming about how expensive a national health care system would be for this country, no one ever brings up what to me, is an important point- it would make manufacturing jobs in America attractive again to international companies, because they wouldn't have to factor health care in their costs. The thing about the insurance industry is that they only make money by not providing service. In cases like flood or fire or theft insurance it makes perfect sense- you pay a relatively little amount of money over time so that in the unlikely event something bad happens, you will get more than what you are paying in to cover catastrophic damages. Odds are, you'll never need it, and the insurance company makes money and you pay a little money for peace of mind and everyone's happy. In the case of health care, it's not a case of a rare instance where you might need care- we all need health care at one point or another. And so we, or an employer, pay a pretty big chunk of money to a company that is going to have to pay out at some point, but doesn't make a profit if it pays out more than it gets in, so it refuses to pay whenever possible. It doesn't make sense. Could you imagine paying money to a restaurant that then says, "Sorry; no food for you."

I'm not saying Europe or Canada have it figured out, but they do pay less per citizen than we do AND they have lower infant mortality rates and a higher life expectancy than we do, so they must be doing something right, as they're getting more for less.

As for the auto companies- I blame some of their problems on them putting all their eggs in the SUV basket, because the profit on them was so great, compared to small cars. They could have been improving gas mileage (and Congress could have required it), but preferred to pay money to lobbyists so that they could continue business as usual. Do any of these people ever think the ride will ever end? I swear, it seems like America is one big grasshopper, and we sure could stand to embrace the ant sometimes.

It's easy to bash the unions, but it's also worth remembering the labor movement are the folks who brought us the weekend. "Not Automatic" is a very dry read, but the accounts of conditions in the GM plants prior to the Sit-Down Strike of 1936 are pretty upsetting.

^^^^ Member of Actors Guild.

No wonder.




Hopefully more 70 year old + stories having nothing to do with today are lost.


What a dysfunctional beast.

[Mortimer]

But she's MommyDearest's best friend...don't ya know.




More closet fodder.

[2Hot4TV]

People with money are sitting on the cash waiting for something they can invest in and not be taken for a ride.

The Banks are not loaning money because they have increased the cash on hand to cover any run on the bank.

The amount of jobs that will be lost due to Ford and GM shutting down or large cut backs will funnel down to all the smaller suppliers and then you will have a depression that you cannot recover from with any amount of bailouts.

We have seen layoffs in all job markets ( with more to come) on the west coast except areospace, but that can be just around the corner as poeple stop traveling.

The best position to be in right now is debt free and hang on.

I think our worst fears have come to past and we are just waiting for someone to put a fork in it.

I sure hope I am wrong.

[Mortimer]

You tell 'em .

[geeker2]

If I had a second floor ..I'd jump

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

People with money are sitting on the cash waiting for something they can invest in and not be taken for a ride.

The Banks are not loaning money because they have increased the cash on hand to cover any run on the bank.

The amount of jobs that will be lost due to Ford and GM shutting down or large cut backs will funnel down to all the smaller suppliers and then you will have a depression that you cannot recover from with any amount of bailouts.

We have seen layoffs in all job markets ( with more to come) on the west coast except areospace, but that can be just around the corner as poeple stop traveling.

The best position to be in right now is debt free and hang on.

I think our worst fears have come to past and we are just waiting for someone to put a fork in it.

I sure hope I am wrong.

This was Bernake's excuse for taking the bailout cash and giving it to the banks to loan - and it is complete horsesh!t. What they are really saying is they don't have the cash to loan at higher rates to less than stellar credit risks (the people they have been preying on for decades) because the risk now hits home - They need the coffers filled back up to go after the moderate credit risks which is their bread and butter but they don't want to assume the risk with their money -

If you have decent credit, they are still climbing over each other to loan you money. I just bought a new truck and financed from a local bank 4.25%apr for 72 months. A local bank, not some dealer financed scheme... and for what it's worth, the banks I inquired at and did not use are STILL calling my house to see if I want their money.

The bailout now loads the vaults back up - with your cash - so it can be loaned back to you.
So you get to borrow your own money and pay them interest to do it, and if the loans default, no biggie we just go back to the money tree and get more to loan... Friggin' Brilliant. These criminals never cease to amaze

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

This was Bernake's excuse for taking the bailout cash and giving it to the banks to loan - and it is complete horsesh!t. What they are really saying is they don't have the cash to loan at higher rates to less than stellar credit risks (the people they have been preying on for decades) because the risk now hits home - They need the coffers filled back up to go after the moderate credit risks which is their bread and butter but they don't want to assume the risk with their money -

If you have decent credit, they are still climbing over each other to loan you money. I just bought a new truck and financed from a local bank 4.25%apr for 72 months. A local bank, not some dealer financed scheme... and for what it's worth, the banks I inquired at and did not use are STILL calling my house to see if I want their money.

The bailout now loads the vaults back up - with your cash - so it can be loaned back to you.
So you get to borrow your own money and pay them interest to do it, and if the loans default, no biggie we just go back to the money tree and get more to loan... Friggin' Brilliant. These criminals never cease to amaze

Rudeboy, im sorry, but this isnt really the case. Many banks dont have much money to lend...AT ALL regardless of risk. Notice I said "many" banks as opposed to "all" banks.

The bank that you got your loan from is probably a good healthy small to medium size bank. Thats great. They are getting fed funds at a rate that is effectively zero and lending it to you for 72 at 4.25. Decent spread. Thats what they were supposed to do. Most likely, they have a healthy amount of deposits and don't have a lot of mortgages on their books. This isnt the type of bank going to the TARP window.

There are many banks that didnt make risky subprime loans commercial or residential and are STILL IN TROUBLE. Such is the peril of borrowing short and lending long. Securitization was the name of the game until last summer. Many millions of dollars of loans were made to GOOD clients that are still paying on time but can't get sold. Those loans are clogging the balance sheets and banks cant get those loans off of the books to get more money to lend.

There is some liquidity coming back into the markets and consumer loans are easier to get now than they were a month ago. This is not true for mortgages. There is still absolutely no execution for triple AAA rated jumbo mortgage backs. In plain english? Even if you have perfect credit and qualifications, you have to pay a huge premium to get financed unless it can be purchased by a fannie/freddie or FHA/VA.

[miraja2]

I feel bad for Obama.
If McCain had won, I would have felt bad for him too.

Of course, the two of them are still doing quite well financially, but winning that election is like getting voted captain of the Titanic after it already hit the iceberg.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I feel bad for Obama.
If McCain had won, I would have felt bad for him too.

Of course, the two of them are still doing quite well financially, but winning that election is like getting voted captain of the Titanic after it already hit the iceberg.

Makes ya wonder why Obama spent 150 million to get it

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Rudeboy, im sorry, but this isnt really the case. Many banks dont have much money to lend...AT ALL regardless of risk. Notice I said "many" banks as opposed to "all" banks.

The bank that you got your loan from is probably a good healthy small to medium size bank. Thats great. They are getting fed funds at a rate that is effectively zero and lending it to you for 72 at 4.25. Decent spread. Thats what they were supposed to do. Most likely, they have a healthy amount of deposits and don't have a lot of mortgages on their books. This isnt the type of bank going to the TARP window.

There are many banks that didnt make risky subprime loans commercial or residential and are STILL IN TROUBLE. Such is the peril of borrowing short and lending long. Securitization was the name of the game until last summer. Many millions of dollars of loans were made to GOOD clients that are still paying on time but can't get sold. Those loans are clogging the balance sheets and banks cant get those loans off of the books to get more money to lend.

There is some liquidity coming back into the markets and consumer loans are easier to get now than they were a month ago. This is not true for mortgages. There is still absolutely no execution for triple AAA rated jumbo mortgage backs. In plain english? Even if you have perfect credit and qualifications, you have to pay a huge premium to get financed unless it can be purchased by a fannie/freddie or FHA/VA.

Ah love Dala Coulter....don't you?

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i wonder if the union is what's pushing obama and the dems to try to rescue the big three? unions always give a great amount of money to the dems-and dems generally support them right back. a lot of jobs, a lot of union funds go out the window if the big three go tits up.

Fine point.

Following the money is so revealing.

[Danzig]

well...i said it would drop into the 7's...wish i was wrong tho...

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Danzig

well...i said it would drop into the 7's...wish i was wrong tho...

I heard today that supposedly 7800 is a big support level. If we break through that it could get even uglier (if that's possible).

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I heard today that supposedly 7800 is a big support level. When we break through that it will get even uglier (if that's possible).

FTFY

Capitulation...we are very close.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

FTFY

Capitulation...we are very close.

Well that certainly didn't take very long!

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Well that certainly didn't take very long!

We need a 500+ point drop today. A giant meltdown. Everytime i say that, the market rallies. But if it melts down, i think you will see a lot of money from the sidelines get back in the game.