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.
ObamaRama 8
- Thread starter ScottM
- Start date
- Status
Re: ObamaRama 8
Don't forget that 52.9% = landslide, so really, pretty much any win is a minor debris flow of some kind.
SPIN CONTROL
is in charge
Re: ObamaRama 8
For Kennedy I assume. Unless of course, you can somehow break out of your trance and realize that the Kennedy on the ballot is not who you think it is.
Never had them up, but I will be out voting on Tuesday.
For Kennedy I assume. Unless of course, you can somehow break out of your trance and realize that the Kennedy on the ballot is not who you think it is.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: ObamaRama 8
How much is a mandate?
Don't forget that 52.9% = landslide, so really, pretty much any win is a minor debris flow of some kind.
How much is a mandate?
Re: ObamaRama 8
Thought you'd never ask... Don't worry, I drink Budweiser, so I'm cheap.
Thought you'd never ask... Don't worry, I drink Budweiser, so I'm cheap.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: ObamaRama 8
So...you drink water... you're really cheap.
But that's a man-date. What % is required for a mandate? 50.1%?
This is a mandate (or landslide)
Thought you'd never ask... Don't worry, I drink Budweiser, so I'm cheap.
So...you drink water... you're really cheap.
But that's a man-date. What % is required for a mandate? 50.1%?
This is a mandate (or landslide)
Re: ObamaRama 8
Why would I vote for a guy who works at State Street Bank? That place sucks and is populated by idiots.
For Kennedy I assume. Unless of course, you can somehow break out of your trance and realize that the Kennedy on the ballot is not who you think it is.
Why would I vote for a guy who works at State Street Bank? That place sucks and is populated by idiots.
SteveF
* * * * *
Re: ObamaRama 8
well that is a little oversimplifying things. first, the govt forced a lot of banks to take on the money in the beginning just to avoid the appearance that only some banks needed the money. i believe they did this to avoid sending more warning signs regarding the few banks that were about to fail.
second, those banks that didnt need the money just repaid the loan immediately in the grace period to avoid any extra charges
yah its pretty appalling. but everyone in the system was making money on the rising prices. including joe and sally homeowner taking out all the home equity lines of credit. it was more about greed and willfull ignorance than stupidity
well that is a little oversimplifying things. first, the govt forced a lot of banks to take on the money in the beginning just to avoid the appearance that only some banks needed the money. i believe they did this to avoid sending more warning signs regarding the few banks that were about to fail.
second, those banks that didnt need the money just repaid the loan immediately in the grace period to avoid any extra charges
yah its pretty appalling. but everyone in the system was making money on the rising prices. including joe and sally homeowner taking out all the home equity lines of credit. it was more about greed and willfull ignorance than stupidity
True Blue Fan
USAF
Re: ObamaRama 8
I have heard the "forced to take" arguement a few times. They were not forced to take this money, but it was presented as basically an int free loan. Any institution would have been crazy not to take free money for any length of time. Simply good business for the institutions involved, take money invest it earn on it and pay it back at deadline. Provided enourmous free revenue for them.
I have heard the "forced to take" arguement a few times. They were not forced to take this money, but it was presented as basically an int free loan. Any institution would have been crazy not to take free money for any length of time. Simply good business for the institutions involved, take money invest it earn on it and pay it back at deadline. Provided enourmous free revenue for them.
Re: ObamaRama 8
Trick question. There's really no such thing as a mandate - you're either elected or you're not. Once you're elected, your ability to achieve your agenda depends almost entirely on your political acumen and essentially none at all on the election returns (duh).
It's not as if the constitution grants the President extra powers if he collects a high enough % of the votes. That'd be an interesting concept...
Trick question. There's really no such thing as a mandate - you're either elected or you're not. Once you're elected, your ability to achieve your agenda depends almost entirely on your political acumen and essentially none at all on the election returns (duh).
It's not as if the constitution grants the President extra powers if he collects a high enough % of the votes. That'd be an interesting concept...
ScottM
**** it feels good to be a bankster
Re: ObamaRama 8
So, when Hank Paulson handed pieces of paper to each bank CEO at the Treasury with a specific number on it, they weren't being forced to hand over a chunk of their equity to the feds in exchange for this "loan"? The only thing missing was the Hammer saying "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse." It's not an "arguement" ... it happened, and it's been well documented.
It's too bad the Obama folks don't realize banks aren't in the business of propping up their social agenda, especially while they treat them as a whipping boy. Banks aren't going to give money away, especially when regulators are pressing them to increase their Tier I capital. The wonks would look a lot less foolish when they realize the banks are making more money, with less risk, trading on near-zero rates from the Fed window and 2-3% Treasuries than lending to risky consumers or businesses. If rates start to increase, you'll probably see more lending.
So, when Hank Paulson handed pieces of paper to each bank CEO at the Treasury with a specific number on it, they weren't being forced to hand over a chunk of their equity to the feds in exchange for this "loan"? The only thing missing was the Hammer saying "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse." It's not an "arguement" ... it happened, and it's been well documented.
It's too bad the Obama folks don't realize banks aren't in the business of propping up their social agenda, especially while they treat them as a whipping boy. Banks aren't going to give money away, especially when regulators are pressing them to increase their Tier I capital. The wonks would look a lot less foolish when they realize the banks are making more money, with less risk, trading on near-zero rates from the Fed window and 2-3% Treasuries than lending to risky consumers or businesses. If rates start to increase, you'll probably see more lending.
True Blue Fan
USAF
Re: ObamaRama 8
I don't dispute that insitutions took TARP money that did not need it, what I disagree with is the forced to take part. Any financial institution would have been crazy not to take what amounted to free money.
I fail to see how the govt can go to a financially healthy and solvent company and force them to take a loan. What they can do is make the offer so attractive that they would be foolish to decline it.
I don't dispute that insitutions took TARP money that did not need it, what I disagree with is the forced to take part. Any financial institution would have been crazy not to take what amounted to free money.
I fail to see how the govt can go to a financially healthy and solvent company and force them to take a loan. What they can do is make the offer so attractive that they would be foolish to decline it.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: ObamaRama 8
You'd have to ask 5mn_major on that one - he's the one who proclaimed that Obama would "still" win in a landslide. From that, I surmised that by *his* definition, 52.9% = landslide.But there is such a thing as a landslide?
rufus
rock and roller
rufus
rock and roller
Re: ObamaRama 8
And isn't that why these guys are supposed to getting paid the immense sums that they get? So greed and willfull ignorance don't overwhelm sound business practices and common sense?
And isn't that why these guys are supposed to getting paid the immense sums that they get? So greed and willfull ignorance don't overwhelm sound business practices and common sense?
rufus
rock and roller
Re: ObamaRama 8
I thought this wasn't happening. Some brilliant mind on here let me know it in no uncertain terms.
I thought this wasn't happening. Some brilliant mind on here let me know it in no uncertain terms.
True Blue Fan
USAF
Re: ObamaRama 8
Interesting article on the TARP program.
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1858844,00.html
Interesting article on the TARP program.
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1858844,00.html
SteveF
* * * * *
Re: ObamaRama 8
the article you just posted shows why they were forced to take the money. it was to avoid panic in the banks that were really needing the money. it was kind of a shell game in that regard.
and its not free money; it was a loan. so they paid it back in the grace period. the interest rate is irrelevant at that point. what is the big deal?
the article you just posted shows why they were forced to take the money. it was to avoid panic in the banks that were really needing the money. it was kind of a shell game in that regard.
and its not free money; it was a loan. so they paid it back in the grace period. the interest rate is irrelevant at that point. what is the big deal?
- Status