Don't " Muck it up " POTUS says..

[Sum Dum Gai]

OK not much sense in arguing this point much further. You obviously still believe what your spoon fed.

Please tell me you actually believe this was all caused by government regulation requiring a certain percentage of lending to go to low income borrowers or something. I could use the laugh.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 3, 2012 19:02:46 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

"Which ones?"

Obamacare, and his rhetoric about being anti rich people and anti business create at atmoshere of uncertainty.

Gingrich has actually done more of that in the last month than Obama did in 3 years. who do you fear more?

[Deleted]

"Congress is NOT mimicking US sentiment."

Perhaps I chose the wrong word. I mean that the public is also of the mindset that their side is good and the other side is bad. The public is divided and unwilling to compromise, so Congress is, too.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 3, 2012 20:17:08 GMT -5 rockon said:

Congress is NOT mimicking US sentiment. That's why they have a 15% approval rating and Obama has a 47% approval rating.

Actually yet another bit of misinformation. While the majority don't approve of congress it is for opposite reasons. About half disapprove of the Democrats and half disapprove of the Republicans so it is a very divided populous.

if half disagreed with both, wouldn't their disapproval be 50%?

[rockon]

Please tell me you don't know that it was our government who was most involved with the creation of the Fannie and Freddie banks that were at the very heart of the housing problem. Also please tell me that you don't think it was the housing bubble that moved 28% of our high tech manufacturing jobs over seas in the last ten years.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 3, 2012 20:43:48 GMT -5 rockon said:

Please tell me you don't know that it was our government who was most involved with the creation of the Fannie and Freddie banks that were at the very heart of the housing problem.

please tell me that you DO know that Fannie and Freddie used to be public institutions, and held under intense scrutiny. please tell me that you DO know that they were eventually privatized. please tell me that you DO know that their privatization and lack of oversight was what lead to the problems.

it is not always government that causes crises.

[usaone]

Feb 3, 2012 20:17:08 GMT -5 rockon said:

Congress is NOT mimicking US sentiment. That's why they have a 15% approval rating and Obama has a 47% approval rating.

Actually yet another bit of misinformation. While the majority don't approve of congress it is for opposite reasons. About half disapprove of the Democrats and half disapprove of the Republicans so it is a very divided populous.

Not sure how that equates to an 85% dis approval rating.

[rockon]

if half disagreed with both, wouldn't their disapproval be 50%?

Actually if both sides disagree with the other everyone disagrees and the result would be 100% dissatisfaction.

[usaone]

Feb 3, 2012 20:40:49 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

"Congress is NOT mimicking US sentiment."

Perhaps I chose the wrong word. I mean that the public is also of the mindset that their side is good and the other side is bad. The public is divided and unwilling to compromise, so Congress is, too.

I do disagree somewhat. 20% of the left and 20% of the right do not want to compromise. The rest of us DO want to compromise.

[rockon]

please tell me that you DO know that Fannie and Freddie used to be public institutions, and held under intense scrutiny. please tell me that you DO know that they were eventually privatized. please tell me that you DO know that their privatization and lack of oversight was what lead to the problems

Fannie and Freddie have always had very tight connections with Washington's most elite politicians and many were very aware of the problems going on within these institutions long before the crisis happened.

[rockon]

The rest of us DO want to compromise.

So what would you specifically like to compromise on? Most likely it is on something different then some other person and that is how we end up divided.

[usaone]

Fanny and Freddie were part of the problem, but the banks are at the top of the list.

[rockon]

They are banks for all practically purposes. But the point I guess I'm trying to make is that we were already 12 trillion dollars in debt, had signed unfair free trade agreements with a communist country before this even happened. While this may have been the final straw we had created todays problems over many years and decades of poor management. what bothers me most is that we are falling for their explanation, pointing our finger at the banks, ignoring our real threat and doubling up our national debt that will be our more likely final downfall.

[Deleted]

"I do disagree somewhat. 20% of the left and 20% of the right do not want to compromise. The rest of us DO want to compromise."

I hope you're right. And I hope the next election takes care of the disconnect.

[Opti]

I didn't find any current information to counter Rockon's assertion that disapproval is mostly a partisan thing. However, if you look at the link below there is a graph when Gallup actually used to ask whether you thought one party in control of congress would do a better job or whether it would be basically the same. From 1999-2007? It appears the basically the same vote is 35% or better trumping the highest pick of political party during that timeframe.

www.gallup.com/poll/1600/Congress-Public.aspx

My feeling is the about the same answer would be higher now than ever not lower. IMHO.

[rockon]

There was just a link posted in recent days that showed exactly what I posted. Not sure what thread it was on. Maybe some one here knows. It showed an almost even divide between the reason people disapproved of our current congress and which side they disapproved of. There was only a small percentage who thought they did a good job as a collective.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 3, 2012 20:56:30 GMT -5 rockon said:

please tell me that you DO know that Fannie and Freddie used to be public institutions, and held under intense scrutiny. please tell me that you DO know that they were eventually privatized. please tell me that you DO know that their privatization and lack of oversight was what lead to the problems

Fannie and Freddie have always had very tight connections with Washington's most elite politicians and many were very aware of the problems going on within these institutions long before the crisis happened.

there were never any problems with them when they were public institutions.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 3, 2012 21:12:12 GMT -5 rockon said:

They are banks for all practically purposes. But the point I guess I'm trying to make is that we were already 12 trillion dollars in debt, had signed unfair free trade agreements with a communist country before this even happened.

a pittance compared to the HALF A QUADRILLION dollars of bad mortgages bundled as bad derivatives. the banksters make government look like the Girl Scouts.

[Deleted]

dj--$500T is about $4.5M per household. Real estate ain't that big.

[Opti]

From a Huffington article using a Pew Research poll.
Link should come up on first page of hits if you search on "pew research congress approval ratings"

The Pew Research poll finds that those who say Congress has done less lately are more likely to blame Republicans for the inaction (40 percent) than Democrats (23 percent). Majorities of all adults view the Republican Party as more extreme in its positions and less willing to work with the other side, and pluralities now view the Democrats as more honest and ethical and better able to manage the government.



Voters are critical of the leadership of both parties in Congress, but the Republican leaders receive lower job approval ratings (21 percent) than the Democratic leaders (31 percent). The report notes that "a good deal of this criticism is coming from within the GOP base." Nearly half of Republicans (44 percent) disapprove of the Republican leadership, and 70 percent of Republicans want to see most members of Congress replaced (compared to 60 percent of Democrats and 73 percent of independents).



The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press interviewed 1,521 randomly selected adults nationwide (including 1,211 registered voters) by telephone using live interviewers. The sample included both landline and mobile telephone numbers. The reported margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3.5 percentage points for both adults and registered voters.



Sigh, the tables didn't come over in the cut and paste. The closest I've found to a 50/50 split is if you look at a Pew Research poll concerning leadership of the two parties and ignore the independent voters.

[Opti]

Feb 4, 2012 11:23:56 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

dj--$500T is about $4.5M per household. Real estate ain't that big.

You are aware the derivative market is a high multiple of what it is based on, yes? If it is 20 times larger than the actual real estate value that would be only $250K per household.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 4, 2012 11:23:56 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

dj--$500T is about $4.5M per household. Real estate ain't that big.

i wasn't talking about the value of real estate. i was talking about the value of derivatives that were resold again and again and again. want a link??? this guy is even more cyincal than me. he estimates it at $1Q:

theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-coming-derivatives-crisis-that-could-destroy-the-entire-global-financial-system

[djAdvocate]

Feb 4, 2012 11:39:23 GMT -5 Opti said:

Feb 4, 2012 11:23:56 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

dj--$500T is about $4.5M per household. Real estate ain't that big.

You are aware the derivative market is a high multiple of what it is based on, yes? If it is 20 times larger than the actual real estate value that would be only $250K per household.

it is also a GLOBAL market. so i am not sure how dividing by 110M works.

[workpublic]

the same players(bankers and their owned politicians) are still in power. they are playing faster and looser than before. Making the too big to fail, "too bigger". more, larger bailouts will come.

[Deleted]

"You are aware the derivative market is a high multiple of what it is based on, yes? If it is 20 times larger than the actual real estate value that would be only $250K per household."

"i wasn't talking about the value of real estate. i was talking about the value of derivatives that were resold again and again and again."

Mortgages were packaged as securities (assets, not derivatives) that had a direct claim on the mortgage. You can't have $20 in securities with claims on $1 of assets. Also, only a portion of all mortages were bad.

-----------------------------------------------------------
"it is also a GLOBAL market. so i am not sure how dividing by 110M works."

The global wealth is only about $230T. There aren't $500T of mortgages in the world, either.

[billisonboard]

Feb 4, 2012 12:30:42 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

...

The global wealth is only about $230T. ...

If you had seen the sunrise I saw this morning, you would have a different sense of the wealth of this globe.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 4, 2012 12:30:42 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

"You are aware the derivative market is a high multiple of what it is based on, yes? If it is 20 times larger than the actual real estate value that would be only $250K per household."

"i wasn't talking about the value of real estate. i was talking about the value of derivatives that were resold again and again and again."

Mortgages were packaged as securities (assets, not derivatives) that had a direct claim on the mortgage. You can't have $20 in securities with claims on $1 of assets. Also, only a portion of all mortages were bad.

-----------------------------------------------------------
"it is also a GLOBAL market. so i am not sure how dividing by 110M works."

The global wealth is only about $230T. There aren't $500T of mortgages in the world, either.

again, i never claimed there were. did you click on my link? that wasn't a typo, ib.

EDIT: i quoted the value of ALL derivatives, not just the MBS market. my bad.

[Deleted]

"EDIT: i quoted the value of ALL derivatives, not just the MBS market. my bad."

Actually you quoted the "notional value" of all derivatives which is not the true value of the derivatives. It doesn't mean that value actually exists. It is a hypothetical value.

Also, MBSs are not derivatives.

Also, that guy doesn't strike me as the best source of reliable information. Maybe he is, but on what is his credibility based?

[djAdvocate]

Feb 4, 2012 14:18:02 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

"EDIT: i quoted the value of ALL derivatives, not just the MBS market. my bad."

Actually you quoted the "notional value" of all derivatives which is not the true value of the derivatives. It doesn't mean that value actually exists. It is a hypothetical value.

are credit swaps hypothetical, as well?

Also, MBSs are not derivatives.

i know that- but aren't many derivatives WRITTEN on MBS???

Also, that guy doesn't strike me as the best source of reliable information. Maybe he is, but on what is his credibility based?

that was the first one that popped up on Google. how about this:

www.bis.org/statistics/otcder/dt1920a.pdf

[Deleted]

I didn't say the instruments weren't real, I said the notional value is not. If you and I sign a forward agreement for some commodity valued at $500M, the notional value is $500M. But the value created is basically zero.

I did find plenty of sources that called MBSs "derivatives". I guess it depends on how you define the term. I don't think there were many MBS options, futures, forwards, and swaps. Perhaps I'm wrong, but even so, it would have amounted to a tiny % of the total derivates market.