Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where are all of the liberals at today who were all over the threads when the market was going up?
Todays statistics
out of the 7,000 stocks that I watch
71% of them are down
13% of them are even
16% up
All of you liberals who proclaimed that Obama was a genius, who claimed that Obama was to credit when the market went up, all of you who claimed the economy was better.. What happened?
I mean if your going to give Obama credit, then is he not responsible for the fall?
It's actually called the SINK MARKET and MR. Ostupid, has virutally nothing to do with the STINK MARKET, because who has full control f the STOCK SINK MARKET is the SHADOW GOV who conrols of USA GOV. THEY call all the shots, the wonderful corrupt GLOBAL ELITES, and thousands of them own their own CORPORATONS. So fools, get with the program. and Mr. Ostupid is just a slave puppet, controlled and told what to do and say. HE is working for the newworld order, and the global elites OWN this corrupt STOCK STINK MARKET.. what world are you livng in FAIRY TALE LAND... that is MEN FOR YOU, in dream land hehe haha
Where are all of the liberals at today who were all over the threads when the market was going up?
Todays statistics
out of the 7,000 stocks that I watch
71% of them are down
13% of them are even
16% up
All of you liberals who proclaimed that Obama was a genius, who claimed that Obama was to credit when the market went up, all of you who claimed the economy was better.. What happened?
I mean if your going to give Obama credit, then is he not responsible for the fall?
Are you asking why lending has decreased since the TARP loans? I dont know why.
Are you asking why the govt is threatening to convert TARP money into common shares? I suppose for the same reason they're getting involved with the toxic assets - to force liquidity. "[C]onverting those loans to common shares would turn the federal aid into available capital for a bank -- and give the government a large ownership stake in return, The Times pointed out." - AFP: US govt considers becoming bank shareholder
(it would also eliminate the need to ask for more funding for banks from Congress - make the same money work smarter.)
- the market adjusted, either saw the positive side or put off worrying til the next problem or both, and rallied - buy oppties at excellent lows. A bear rally but a rally.
If the market is down on BAC's chairman's unoptimistic outlook - I dont know, probably that too.
Friday was the day to get out of financials anyway.
I'd say the market is down on a combination of these - the Obama factor you're interested in would be skittishness on the common shares talk. The market rallied after the TARP business - it'll rally again after this.
Maybe a lot of people on the left are more sophisticated than to believe that static in the stock market is a major indicator of much of anything.
Not so on the right. If Obama gives a speech or a press conference or a town hall meeting or confers with foreign leaders or outlines a new policy and the stock market happens to go down that day, it'll be brought up. If it happens to go up that day, it won't.
Are you asking why lending has decreased since the TARP loans? I dont know why.
Are you asking why the govt is threatening to convert TARP money into common shares? I suppose for the same reason they're getting involved with the toxic assets - to force liquidity. "[C]onverting those loans to common shares would turn the federal aid into available capital for a bank -- and give the government a large ownership stake in return, The Times pointed out." - AFP: US govt considers becoming bank shareholder
(it would also eliminate the need to ask for more funding for banks from Congress - make the same money work smarter.)
- the market adjusted, either saw the positive side or put off worrying til the next problem or both, and rallied - buy oppties at excellent lows. A bear rally but a rally.
If the market is down on BAC's chairman's unoptomistic outlook - I dont know, probably that too.
To be clear, I'm asking if Obama deserves any criticism from liberals for the market collapsing because you all were there to credit him for the rise.
As for your other questions, the reason why the banks are not re-loaning out the TARP money is several reasons..
1) What bank in their right mind wants to loan money out to buyers in a neighborhood where properties are dropping and everyone has the attitude of wait, it'll get worse...
2) Banks were sitting on trillions in bad debts, the TARP money was an actual incentive to sit on properties and use these funds to maintain profitability until the market recovered and they can sell their properties for a higher value.
3) There was proposal after proposal to bail out these banks with new programs, such as the Obamas plan to buyout "toxic" assets and sell them off to the investors. What bank would want to sell their property today for $.50 on the dollar when the administration was proclaiming that they could get more for them by waiting for a new "buyout program" to be put into place..
4) Converting these loans into stock does not remove the need to ask for more money. If the bank isnt profitable, it needs money to operate. When did Democrats like taking the Social Security money (i.e. our tax money) and using it to prop up the stock market? Didnt you guys criticize McCain for suggesting that and now Obama is doing the exact same thing?
All of these govenrments plans do is buy the banks time until the market recovers, it does not force the banks to deal with the problems that they helped contribute with, its rewarding bad behavior by not making CEO's deal with the problems that their own companies face.
Want an alternative suggestion from me?
Have banks sell off their assets to homebuyers and investors with the banks holding financing. Odd idea, making a bank finance properties that they previously have financed and now have foreclosued on. I know.. almost a foreign idea.
Example, I bought a new home last year, bank asked $135K for the home, property appraisal $212K, bank REFUSED to finance even though I was putting 20% down. They want to get these assets off of their books, not carry them out for another 30 years.
Rather than give banks money directly, the best thing that can be done is give banks an incentive to finance their repod properties rather than an incentive to unload. Had they offered financing, I would have been more than willing to go up in what I paid, and I'm sure others would also.. After all, it took 4 appraisals to get the deal completed because the other banks kept questioning why it was such a great deal..
Maybe a lot of people on the left are more sophisticated than to believe that static in the stock market is a major indicator of much of anything.
Odd, then explain all of the Obamas a genius and Republicans upset threads that were created when the market was up..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's talk about the STINK MARKET
