2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Your mutual fund company cannot lie to you about the underlying investments in any of its funds. They are required to fully disclose its top 20 investments, which is the minimum number of investments to be recognized as a mutual fund, and it's all available within the funds' prospectuses. These days, you should be able to find a full list of every investment held EOD by each fund, thanks to electronic recordkeeping and information access, though I doubt most fund companies have actually implemented this.

True. They don't lie. They just name the fund wrong and describe it wrong. I had a lot of money in my retirement account in a safe "income" fund. I lost the most money out of that one. But, I hear ya. It's my fault. Still my fault. Even if I read it and looked at it now I wouldn't really know what to do. Those who do, great.,

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

True. They don't lie. They just name the fund wrong and describe it wrong.

That is patently illegal and has been for decades. If they did that to you, file a lawsuit.

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

US Bank isn't anywhere near in the same league as BoA. Besides that, US Bank already owned a financial investment firm at the time in Piper Jaffray, and the US government wasn't looking to consolidate too many of those companies into their direct competitors.

Besides that, here's this entry from wiki:


Bolding added by me.

A couple of things. First, it was BOA's decision to acquire Merrill. It was not the governments decision. So there is absolutely no blame merited there. Second, when BOA decided to back away from the deal...the Fed said that if they were to take over control of BOA that the board would be gone. I think that's the right of any owner even if they are the government and after BOA acquired Countrywide and its track record of making poor decisions, the board should have been fired anyways. And in any event, what would stop BOA management from saying 'stuff it', just walk away anyways. They had complete control over that decision. In the end, for 2009 Merrill generated $3.7B of BOA's $4.2B profits. Seems like they should fire Lewis for wanting to bail on the deal.

In a normal case, I can't imagine this worthy of seeing the light of day. But its a political world we live in and the government is to blame for everything.

[unofan]

True. They don't lie. They just name the fund wrong and describe it wrong. I had a lot of money in my retirement account in a safe "income" fund. I lost the most money out of that one. But, I hear ya. It's my fault. Still my fault. Even if I read it and looked at it now I wouldn't really know what to do. Those who do, great.,

Did you pull your money out our leave it in, because it should have rebounded and then some if you just let it be.

The only people who should've been hurt investment wise are those who were near or in retirement and not able to ride it out.

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Just to follow up on my previous post, there are many out there who think that the US should not have bailed out the banks at all. Do we really feel that the US should bailed out the banks unconditionally?

I have no problem with the US influencing the outcome of banks as potential and/or part owners for the gain of the US economy during a time of crisis when major sums of US taxpayer monies was involved.

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Just to follow up on my previous post, there are many out there who think that the US should not have bailed out the banks at all. Do we really feel that the US should bailed out the banks unconditionally?

I have no problem with the US influencing the outcome of banks as potential and/or part owners for the gain of the US economy during a time of crisis when major sums of US taxpayer monies was involved.

We should have nationalized some financial functions. At a certain level, for the vast majority, finance should be a public utility. The eejits with uncontrollable testosterone levels should be free to play the casino into penury; just don't risk the wealth of people who work for a living.

[Handyman]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Except all the watchdog organizations from the SEC down to the ratings agencies and the financial media were in on the game. I don't blame most of the people for signing for a loan that all these "experts" were telling them they qualified for. None of the entities that were charged with regulating the industry did their job and the banks got away with outright fraud.

I'll grant you people were suckers, believing the banks' claims of the equivalent of a Nigerian prince scam, but at the end of the day you put the scam artist in jail, and none of the perps went to jail. Far from it, they walked away even richer by pocketing tax payer relief funds as bonuses, and they're free to do it again now. Moral hazard, baby. We should have lined up everybody in management for Goldman, JP Morgan Chase, BofA Merrill, and Citigroup against the wall at 11 Wall Street and applied a Second Amendment remedy. Not so much to punish the criminals, but to deter future misconduct.

Oh the Banks should do more than just pay a fine, people should have been punished. That doesnt negate the responsibility of the people who took out the loans though.

That wasnt going to happen though when former Goldman guys run the financial part of the government.

[Handyman]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

There was predatory lending going on. People can't be expected to read the leagelease on 500 forms and understand it. They relied on the experts they were talking to and the experts were telling them to do it. And as Kepler said, the watchdogs and the RATING AGENCIES especially were flat out lying to everybody. Lying is hard to see if you don't have a clue what you're looking for.

Add that to the President and his "push" for his "ownership" society economic agenda and you had a perfect storm.

<------And, yes, this is one of the guys who looked at the numbers every day and was smart enough to see it was vapor. Didn't matter though. My accumulated wealth went down with the ship along with many others.

I agree but still...common sense says if you make 40k you can only afford so much.

[mookie1995]

Oh the Banks should do more than just pay a fine, people should have been punished. That doesnt negate the responsibility of the people who took out the loans though.

That wasnt going to happen though when former Goldman guys run the financial part of the government.

"Former"?!?

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

"Former"?!?

Seriously. Goldman is like cancer -- it might be forced into remission, but it can't be cured.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Did you pull your money out our leave it in, because it should have rebounded and then some if you just let it be.

The only people who should've been hurt investment wise are those who were near or in retirement and not able to ride it out.

Oh, I left it in. It's back now. I was able to buy a lot of shares when it was low. Dollar cost averaging.

Even so, the totality is nowhere near what it should have been. The 2000-2010 era of investment was a blackhole of crap.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I agree but still...common sense says if you make 40k you can only afford so much.

Can't wait until you see The Big Short. They highlight what you're saying here with a mile wide highlighter.

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Oh, I left it in. It's back now. I was able to buy a lot of shares when it was low. Dollar cost averaging.

Even so, the totality is nowhere near what it should have been.

Isn't it? I can't find a full historical map of the DJIA with a 7% trend line / projection, but I suspect if I did we'd probably be right about on beam after the wild swings both up and down.

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Unless Scooby is retiring don't sweat the fluctuations. Stocks traditionally return 10% over time. Buffett says we can now expect 7-8%. Either way that's not bad over 30 years. Using the Rule of 72 (72/expected return) you would double your money in 10 years if you achieve a 7% return.

[unofan]

Just to follow up on my previous post, there are many out there who think that the US should not have bailed out the banks at all. Do we really feel that the US should bailed out the banks unconditionally?

I have no problem with the US influencing the outcome of banks as potential and/or part owners for the gain of the US economy during a time of crisis when major sums of US taxpayer monies was involved.

The banks should have been bailed out and then broken up. If you're too big to fail, then you're too big to exist (or should be nationalized). The bailouts were not the problem, the problem was the lack of follow through afterwards to prevent it from happening again.