Topics Topics Help/Instructions Help Edit Profile Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Visit The Brewery's sponsor!
Brews & Views Bulletin Board Service * World Expressions * DOW Below 10K..... < Previous Next >

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
 

HEU Brewer
Intermediate Member
Username: Heu_brewer

Post Number: 418
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 04:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

and you still can't short financials!

Just wait until the short ban is lifted.

The dinner check has come, the mortgage lenders, CEOs, etc have went to can and the busboy (i.e. public ) is stuck with the bill.
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5951
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:07 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It is clearly all Clinton's fault.
 

Mike Huss
Senior Member
Username: Mikhu

Post Number: 2017
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:17 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It's clearly all W's fault.

 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5952
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:18 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I think that Mike is closer than I am, but hey, what is 7.5 years among friends anyway?
 

HEU Brewer
Intermediate Member
Username: Heu_brewer

Post Number: 419
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:27 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It took a bi-partisan effort to screw up this big. For 6 years the GOP did nothing and for 2 years the Democrats did the same. THe GOP appointed SEC chair allowed financial to leverage up to 40x their cash balances. According to CNBC all the financials that petitioned the SEC for this are no longer solvent companies.

Some members of the public went on vacation with borrowed $$$. Mortgage lenders waived rules to make short term $$$. The public took out interest only loans. There is a lot of blame to go around.

The question is....will we learn from out mistakes? In the long run I say no
 

Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques

Post Number: 1160
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It's the fall of the Roman empire, all over again, in fast-forward and on a grander scale.

Sorry, a little maudlin and drunk from my maibock here...
 

Chumley
Senior Member
Username: Chumley

Post Number: 5618
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

People here blame the Democrats and the Republicans back and forth....I say, lets blame the REAL culprits.....the Europeans.

Specifically, one of the major reasons for a worldwide credit crunch is....SCANDINAVIA!
 

Mike Huss
Senior Member
Username: Mikhu

Post Number: 2018
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

HEU, that was my point in my mocking of Dan. EVERYONE screwed up here, but I still say the biggest culprits are the borrowers with no personal responsibility who got in over their heads.

When we first bought we were offered much more than we took out and we also looked at getting an ARM. We ended up doing neither because they both seemed waaaaay too risky, and in the end I was right.

Yes, there were plenty of predatory lenders out there but they weren't the ones signing on the dotted line. This is yet another classic example of our "It's not MY fault!" mentality of today.
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5953
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

HEU, you need to understand that, from a bimodal thinking perspective, it can only be one side's fault. A middle ground is "wishy washy" and only held by those whose various identities are held in question. You must pick a side to blame and you must do it NOW!
 

Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques

Post Number: 1161
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

And this from a guy with a quintessentially Scandinavian name :-)
 

Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce

Post Number: 9311
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 05:59 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

We have to be vigilant in order to rein in the excesses of greed, and that takes a discipline we seem to collectively (in general the system maximizes individual gain) lack today.

Ever since Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" (published in 1776 and claimed by some to be more important than the Declaration of Independence in the same year) we've been celebrating individual gain over collective responsibility. We need to recognize that largely unchecked and unregulated greed has a dark side and a huge cost. Republicans should recall that a major portion of Teddy Roosevelt's accomplishments involved regulating the worst practices of business at the time.
 

Bob Wall
Senior Member
Username: Brewdudebob

Post Number: 1905
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 06:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I blame the French.
 

Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques

Post Number: 1162
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 06:08 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

There really are a lot of parallels, though.

A rampant increase in standard of living (slavery <> readily available credit/outsourcing of jobs), which root causes take away from the middle classes their livelyhoods.

A standing army instead of a draftee army, making it that much easier to get involved in costly wars where they might not necessarily be worth it.

An increasingly top-heavy administration, where the executive usurps more and more power from the elected assembly.

Outside pressure from a foe/foes which are willing to employ asymmetrical strategies and tactics to undermine the militarily superior empire.

There are surely more, but this one is the most chilling to me: The fall of the stabilizing empire will spell a long, long period of darkness where might is right and the rule of law will take a long time to be reestablished.

I am frankly not especially optimistic.
 

HEU Brewer
Intermediate Member
Username: Heu_brewer

Post Number: 420
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 06:13 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Mike

We are in agreement on this one. My wife and I "bought" our house just a little over 8 years ago (September 2000). Our realator at the time showed us houses and told us the amout we could get a loan for. If I took her up on it we would not have been able to eat, pay utility bills, etc. I ended up ditching her and got a FSBO house.

The realators combined with the mortgage companies are in my opinion) the ones to blame.

If I work at Burger King as a toilet cleaner and I want to buy a 500k house and I get the loan is it my fault? Perhaps yes, I wanted too much house for my money. But now placing myself as the lender why in Gods green earth would I loan money to a Burger King toilet cleaner for a 500K house? Why would I take such a risk?

Perhaps.. did I expect the person to default on the loan so I could get that 500K house (that at the time of default could now be worth 600K) but in reality due to the housing bubble burst is now worth 400K or maybe even 300K.

It is very complex situation indeed

(Message edited by HEU_Brewer on October 06, 2008)

(Message edited by HEU_Brewer on October 06, 2008)
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5954
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 06:22 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

No Bill, either you have laissez-faire or communism. There can be no middle ground without a slippery slope toward the bad side. Any fool can see this.

Note,"liassez-faire" does not sound English to me, Bob.
 

Ron Siddall
Advanced Member
Username: El_cid

Post Number: 664
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 06:31 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"Why would I take such a risk?"

Because in a lot of those situations you sold portions of the loan to others for a steady stream of income. Everyone wanted to have a piece of that mortgage payment so it created a frenzie and the perception of a free lunch.

Remember, Wall Street et al was constantly fueling the belief in getting rich quick and having your cake and eating it too. This is a powerful narcotic that few people are able to resist.

If someone is giving you free money almost everyone is going to dip their hands in and take it.
 

Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce

Post Number: 9313
Registered: 01-2002
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 06:34 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Ah, isn't Liz Phair a singer? (Actually, a friend of mine went to high school with her.)
 

Mike Huss
Senior Member
Username: Mikhu

Post Number: 2020
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 08:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"HEU, you need to understand that, from a bimodal thinking perspective, it can only be one side's fault. A middle ground is "wishy washy" and only held by those whose various identities are held in question. You must pick a side to blame and you must do it NOW!"

Ironic words coming from the guy who wants to BLAME BUSH for everything.
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5956
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 09:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I rest my case. Only one person can be blamed from the bimodal perspective. That is even projected onto others!
 

Mike Huss
Senior Member
Username: Mikhu

Post Number: 2021
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 09:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

How is reminding you that all you do is blame Bush projecting on my part? I'm just repeating what you've been telling us all along.

Again, I personally have not blamed this on the Dems. If you would take the time to read instead of just posting snipe posts you would see that to a point I blamed everyone involved, but I mostly blame those who took out mortgages that were beyond their means. Complete and total lack of personal responsibility is at fault here.

So yes, if all the people who irresponsibly took out mortgages that were bigger than they could afford are all the same person, then yes, my response is bimodal.
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5960
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Monday, October 06, 2008 - 09:53 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Fine, fine Mike . . .
 

davidw
Senior Member
Username: Davidw

Post Number: 1875
Registered: 03-2001
Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 01:49 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I blame the homebrew supply shop owners for artificially inflating the price of the 2007 hop crop. Obviously since there are still 2007 hops available, (which shops are now trying to sell at a discount), the "shortage" was used as an excuse to price-gouge the consumers. For that reason I'm going to start buying all my hops directly from Freshops or Hops Direct in order to cut out the people who obviously have little love for this great hobby and who's only desire was to reap profit.

Isn't it easy to choose who you are going to point the finger of blame at and legitimize it with the facts that you feel support your side?
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5961
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 02:08 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It is easy to say that homebrew shops artificially inflated hop prices but when you are charged distributor prices that you used to sell hops for at retail, you have to raise prices or you become an unfunded charity.

Even more important was that, at the time, there was a very real fear that homebrew shops may well run out of hops toward the end of the season. You might debate whether or not that fear was real, but the shops only knew what they were told and they reacted accordingly. The worse thing a shop could ever say to a customer was "We are out of hops.

The distributor prices have yet to move down.


"Isn't it easy to choose who you are going to point the finger of blame at and legitimize it with the facts that you feel support your side."

Yes.
 

davidw
Senior Member
Username: Davidw

Post Number: 1876
Registered: 03-2001
Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 02:22 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

It is easy to say that homebrew shops artificially inflated hop prices . . .

And it's just as easy to blame the guy sitting in the oval office vs. the multiple players that have gotten us where we are today.

I rest my case.
 

Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann

Post Number: 5962
Registered: 03-2004
Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 - 02:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Who blamed the "guy sitting in the oval" exclusively? I only object to exonerating him exclusively as in "the president does not have that sort of power." To some degree, he does. Bimodal thinking can only handle either he has the power and it is all his fault or he does not and is innocent, nothing in between.

Then I just love it when the "It's Clinton's fault" line comes out!

My case also rests.

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: