USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
- Status
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Yes, that may well be the case. I have not been on a college campus in awhile, and I do not live in an all-black community. I do travel quite a bit and so it is not limited to one particular place.
Yes, that may well be the case. I have not been on a college campus in awhile, and I do not live in an all-black community. I do travel quite a bit and so it is not limited to one particular place.
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Not quite. The problem was a bit esoteric though.
It actually was a two-part problem.
The first part of the problem is what they call "counter-party risk." While it appeared that AIG received bailout money, the money actually did not "bail out" AIG, it flowed through AIG to the firms that were on the opposite side of trades with AIG. Normally those firms "should" have received dimes on the dollar; Paulsen (a Goldman alum) fixed it so that those firms were made whole (particularly Goldman). * Firms that had "responsibly" hedged their exposure were in danger of seeing those hedges become worth far less than what they paid for; the stories about "systemic risk" may have been inflated but they were not invented.
The second part of the problem with the Wall St. situation derives from fractional-reserve banking laws. Each $1 of bank reserves supports about $5 of money in circulation (the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago at one time published a fantastic monograph that explained how this works; I'm not sure if it is still available or not **). If bank reserves collapse by $20 billion, then the economy is hit with a $1 trillion contraction of money in circulation. That would have been hugely recessionary!
It's interesting that Ron Paul views fractional-reserve banking as a form of fraud, since that is how it actually did get its start! (back in the Middle Ages before there was much in the way of central governments) However, governments as they developed found it so expedient, they decided to make it legal instead. Fractional-reserve banking is one of the key innovations that led to such a dramatic increase in standards of living from the dawn of the Industrial Revolution until today.
* I wouldn't call it a "Wall St. bailout" as much as I'd call it a "Goldman Sachs bailout". The scope of "insider trading" between Paulsen and Goldman during the "crunch time" of the crisis is staggering (records show multiple phone calls between Paulsen, Goldman, and a few other Wall St. banks during those hectic few days....were these to 'co-ordinate' or to 'give advance notice'?)
** Is there a way I can scan a document and post it?
Not quite. The problem was a bit esoteric though.
It actually was a two-part problem.
The first part of the problem is what they call "counter-party risk." While it appeared that AIG received bailout money, the money actually did not "bail out" AIG, it flowed through AIG to the firms that were on the opposite side of trades with AIG. Normally those firms "should" have received dimes on the dollar; Paulsen (a Goldman alum) fixed it so that those firms were made whole (particularly Goldman). * Firms that had "responsibly" hedged their exposure were in danger of seeing those hedges become worth far less than what they paid for; the stories about "systemic risk" may have been inflated but they were not invented.
The second part of the problem with the Wall St. situation derives from fractional-reserve banking laws. Each $1 of bank reserves supports about $5 of money in circulation (the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago at one time published a fantastic monograph that explained how this works; I'm not sure if it is still available or not **). If bank reserves collapse by $20 billion, then the economy is hit with a $1 trillion contraction of money in circulation. That would have been hugely recessionary!
It's interesting that Ron Paul views fractional-reserve banking as a form of fraud, since that is how it actually did get its start! (back in the Middle Ages before there was much in the way of central governments) However, governments as they developed found it so expedient, they decided to make it legal instead. Fractional-reserve banking is one of the key innovations that led to such a dramatic increase in standards of living from the dawn of the Industrial Revolution until today.
* I wouldn't call it a "Wall St. bailout" as much as I'd call it a "Goldman Sachs bailout". The scope of "insider trading" between Paulsen and Goldman during the "crunch time" of the crisis is staggering (records show multiple phone calls between Paulsen, Goldman, and a few other Wall St. banks during those hectic few days....were these to 'co-ordinate' or to 'give advance notice'?)
** Is there a way I can scan a document and post it?
Last edited:
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
There's definitely a self-selection effect, but I think we know that Obama (I like that the H is back -- it's an election year!) has lower positives than he had in 2008. The Republicans still hate him with all the fire of a thousand suns, but that was the same back then, too. His problem is that the Kos types who used to at least be a little rah rah about him are now truly holding their noses.
I work in a place that is roughly 90% Republican so here's my anecdotal evidence FWIW. During the first half of the Obama presidency the people here were essentially a lynch mob. They could not wait to expel the evil, communist, traitorous, secular blah blah blah from the American political body. During the last 1.5 years they've gained absolutely no love for Obama, but they are a lot less militant. I don't think this has much to do with Obama, but their terror and anger has turned into a sort of depression as they've watched the GOP clown car lurch down nomination boulevard. Their low point was when Perry tanked and Cain imploded -- they were all on suicide watch for about a month. I dunno, maybe it was just that it was Christmas and they were saddened by people being nice and giving each other gifts. They've cheered up a bit, but last time around there were a ton of McCain bumper stickers in our parking lot. It is early, but I have yet to see *one* Romney bumper sticker. In the mean time, the guard staff (our only black employees) all have their Obama 2012 stickers already.
I wonder sometimes how often some of the people who post here emerge from their insulated cocoons.....in the grocery store or laundromat, overhearing people's conversations, traveling around the country, listeing to comments in restaurants, BHO is not very popular outside of a very narrow constituency. Not to say that the Repugnicans are any better....my guess is that there will be quite a few people holding their noses in the voting booth this November, wishing there was a "none of the above" option available.
There's definitely a self-selection effect, but I think we know that Obama (I like that the H is back -- it's an election year!) has lower positives than he had in 2008. The Republicans still hate him with all the fire of a thousand suns, but that was the same back then, too. His problem is that the Kos types who used to at least be a little rah rah about him are now truly holding their noses.
I work in a place that is roughly 90% Republican so here's my anecdotal evidence FWIW. During the first half of the Obama presidency the people here were essentially a lynch mob. They could not wait to expel the evil, communist, traitorous, secular blah blah blah from the American political body. During the last 1.5 years they've gained absolutely no love for Obama, but they are a lot less militant. I don't think this has much to do with Obama, but their terror and anger has turned into a sort of depression as they've watched the GOP clown car lurch down nomination boulevard. Their low point was when Perry tanked and Cain imploded -- they were all on suicide watch for about a month. I dunno, maybe it was just that it was Christmas and they were saddened by people being nice and giving each other gifts. They've cheered up a bit, but last time around there were a ton of McCain bumper stickers in our parking lot. It is early, but I have yet to see *one* Romney bumper sticker. In the mean time, the guard staff (our only black employees) all have their Obama 2012 stickers already.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Maybe I'm not fully understanding the difference between the two programs.
Aren't they both represented by significant government interference in the marketplace in order to support a large industry in trouble?
Maybe I'm not fully understanding the difference between the two programs.
Aren't they both represented by significant government interference in the marketplace in order to support a large industry in trouble?
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
My anecdotal evidence is similar in that I think people on the fence were initially enthusiastic about getting rid of Obama, but once Republican Jesus never emerged they went back to assessing him vs the actual alternatives and now seems slightly more resigned to voting for him than for the Romney/Anti-Romney GOP candidate. I often hear "I can't believe the Republicans can't find anybody good to run" following by a litany of complaints against the nominee du jour. Not that these people are in love with Barry O either, but I find the conventional wisdom is stupid right now. You hear a lot about elections being a referendum on an incumbent. That may be true, but the country has already rendered its view of Obama, which is 50/50. That means who he's running against gains a lot more importance, and therein lies the problem now on the right.
My anecdotal evidence is similar in that I think people on the fence were initially enthusiastic about getting rid of Obama, but once Republican Jesus never emerged they went back to assessing him vs the actual alternatives and now seems slightly more resigned to voting for him than for the Romney/Anti-Romney GOP candidate. I often hear "I can't believe the Republicans can't find anybody good to run" following by a litany of complaints against the nominee du jour. Not that these people are in love with Barry O either, but I find the conventional wisdom is stupid right now. You hear a lot about elections being a referendum on an incumbent. That may be true, but the country has already rendered its view of Obama, which is 50/50. That means who he's running against gains a lot more importance, and therein lies the problem now on the right.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Yes.
One has ramifications for the economy far beyond the affected industry....we all rely on money in circulation far more than we rely on automobile production from two companies in an industry with at least four other major companies that did not require a bailout.
PS I am not defending the Wall St bailout so much as explaining the rationale for it. There are elements to it that left a really bad taste in my mouth. However, TARP did work as it was intended to; the government has made money on it (which should have been used to reduce the national debt; not to have been spent a second time!!
)
GM and Chrysler could have undergone an orderly reorganization without a government bailout under the existing bankruptcy laws; instead their bondholders got royally screwed to benefit the UAW instead. A loss of trillions of dollars of money in circulation would have created unimaginable hardship worldwide. Differences in both kind and in degree between the two.
Besides, tactically, Romney can pretend to be a tough guy about the auto bailout because few UAW members would have voted for him anyway; while Wall St., which had been a major BHO donor in 2008, is annoyed with him over the Dodd-Frank fiasco, and has been donating more to Romney already than they did for McCain throughout all of 2008.
Yes.
One has ramifications for the economy far beyond the affected industry....we all rely on money in circulation far more than we rely on automobile production from two companies in an industry with at least four other major companies that did not require a bailout.
PS I am not defending the Wall St bailout so much as explaining the rationale for it. There are elements to it that left a really bad taste in my mouth. However, TARP did work as it was intended to; the government has made money on it (which should have been used to reduce the national debt; not to have been spent a second time!!
)GM and Chrysler could have undergone an orderly reorganization without a government bailout under the existing bankruptcy laws; instead their bondholders got royally screwed to benefit the UAW instead. A loss of trillions of dollars of money in circulation would have created unimaginable hardship worldwide. Differences in both kind and in degree between the two.
Besides, tactically, Romney can pretend to be a tough guy about the auto bailout because few UAW members would have voted for him anyway; while Wall St., which had been a major BHO donor in 2008, is annoyed with him over the Dodd-Frank fiasco, and has been donating more to Romney already than they did for McCain throughout all of 2008.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
No they couldn't. That would have involved both companies raising funds in the private markets, which had dried up at that time so yours is an argument based in fantasyland. With nobody lending them money, both companies would cease to operate and be liquidated.
No they couldn't. That would have involved both companies raising funds in the private markets, which had dried up at that time so yours is an argument based in fantasyland. With nobody lending them money, both companies would cease to operate and be liquidated.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Wrong.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/opinion/delusions-about-the-detroit-bailout.html
Stop perpetuating Mitt Romney's LIE.
Rover beat me to it.
Wrong.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/opinion/delusions-about-the-detroit-bailout.html
Stop perpetuating Mitt Romney's LIE.
Rover beat me to it.
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
You are confounding two different scenarios. Reorganization would have left bondholders as new equity owners of the existing manufacturing plants and unsold inventory. Generally those elements of a company continue to operate in a slimmed-down manner. Shareholder equity would have been wiped out, that is true, but there would be no reason to liquidate the company in terms of shutting it down entirely. It is very rare that a bankruptcy organization results in a company that ceases to exist; assets of the company continue to be utilized in a productive manner.
You speak as if everything would have been melted down for scrap. That would not be the case at all.
You are confounding two different scenarios. Reorganization would have left bondholders as new equity owners of the existing manufacturing plants and unsold inventory. Generally those elements of a company continue to operate in a slimmed-down manner. Shareholder equity would have been wiped out, that is true, but there would be no reason to liquidate the company in terms of shutting it down entirely. It is very rare that a bankruptcy organization results in a company that ceases to exist; assets of the company continue to be utilized in a productive manner.
You speak as if everything would have been melted down for scrap. That would not be the case at all.
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
No, I'm speaking of the actual scenario that unfolded for both companies. If you don't have money, you can't pay suppliers, employers, bond payments, etc. While you may pursue bankrupcy to hold off creditors for a time, you have to show in court that the company can right the ship if given more time and has a plan to do so or the judge will not approve. If you can't do so, start melting the place down because creditors want their money, whatever they can recover. With no source of funds to continue on, there was no hope of saving the companies.
What you describe is a generic example in normal times. Not applicable to reality in this case.
No, I'm speaking of the actual scenario that unfolded for both companies. If you don't have money, you can't pay suppliers, employers, bond payments, etc. While you may pursue bankrupcy to hold off creditors for a time, you have to show in court that the company can right the ship if given more time and has a plan to do so or the judge will not approve. If you can't do so, start melting the place down because creditors want their money, whatever they can recover. With no source of funds to continue on, there was no hope of saving the companies.
What you describe is a generic example in normal times. Not applicable to reality in this case.
leswp1
New member
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
I am not on a college campus and live in a melting pot of mostly wildly GOP supporters who can't even begin to think of how they can vote for Romney but have no viable alternative. Tere are some who would rather vote for the President than Romney (this shocked me down to the core) and a lot more who are plannig to stay home.
duper
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
It's still extremely anecdotal evidence. And for the record, while I do live in a very ethnically diverse neighborhood, I don't spend any time on college campuses.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Those are the ones that are thinking that a better option then any currently will present itself by 2016 and don't want Romney as the party's figurehead assuming a win in 2012.
Those are the ones that are thinking that a better option then any currently will present itself by 2016 and don't want Romney as the party's figurehead assuming a win in 2012.
Twitch Boy
Defacing this tagline is a MAX foul
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Okay, Rick, if you insist...
Is this the longest episode of Punk'd ever or something?
Okay, Rick, if you insist...
Is this the longest episode of Punk'd ever or something?
unofan
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
I think the word you used that was misplaced was "orderly" - given the financial meltdown going on worldwide at the time, I don't think the reorganization of two of the Big 3 automakers would have been "orderly." It probably still would have happened in some shape or form as you suggest, but the shiatstorm in the meantime could've turned the recession into a full fledged depression pretty quickly, especially as the prolonged shutdown reverberated down the supply chain.
I think the word you used that was misplaced was "orderly" - given the financial meltdown going on worldwide at the time, I don't think the reorganization of two of the Big 3 automakers would have been "orderly." It probably still would have happened in some shape or form as you suggest, but the shiatstorm in the meantime could've turned the recession into a full fledged depression pretty quickly, especially as the prolonged shutdown reverberated down the supply chain.
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
I am an MBA who gets the advantages of capitalism...but I'll defend the government intervention in both cases. You need to take drastic steps when emergencies dictate. That was done. We never experienced the destruction of huge public funds due to lost tax revenues...nor are we paying directly for unemployment/welfare and indirectly for all sorts of other costs from huge unemployment. The moves made to get us out of the recession appear in hindsight to be quite deft.
Romney's position of such strong support for the wall street 'bailout' and his strong distain for the auto 'bailout' for someone so tied to principles still don't jive.
I am an MBA who gets the advantages of capitalism...but I'll defend the government intervention in both cases. You need to take drastic steps when emergencies dictate. That was done. We never experienced the destruction of huge public funds due to lost tax revenues...nor are we paying directly for unemployment/welfare and indirectly for all sorts of other costs from huge unemployment. The moves made to get us out of the recession appear in hindsight to be quite deft.
Romney's position of such strong support for the wall street 'bailout' and his strong distain for the auto 'bailout' for someone so tied to principles still don't jive.
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
Another thing about Romney is the way he's won. You want to leave your opponents with some good will at the end of the primaries. Mittens two rivals absolutely hate him. While Obama and Clinton weren't best friends, clearly they got on enough for him to appoint her Sec of State. Can anybody picture Santorum and Romney working together? How awkward would an endoresment look?
I do subscribe to the theory that a lot of "severely conservative" people in the party want him to lose. This opens up the next contest to a far right candidate who can run on the "Romney wasn't conservative enough" platform. I'm wondering how much heavy lifting these people do for the ol' Mittster. McCain was in a similar situation until Palin came along.
Another thing about Romney is the way he's won. You want to leave your opponents with some good will at the end of the primaries. Mittens two rivals absolutely hate him. While Obama and Clinton weren't best friends, clearly they got on enough for him to appoint her Sec of State. Can anybody picture Santorum and Romney working together? How awkward would an endoresment look?
I do subscribe to the theory that a lot of "severely conservative" people in the party want him to lose. This opens up the next contest to a far right candidate who can run on the "Romney wasn't conservative enough" platform. I'm wondering how much heavy lifting these people do for the ol' Mittster. McCain was in a similar situation until Palin came along.
- Status