It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wall Street tumbles as fear grips the markets

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 



Lack of credit for small business will hurt us, no doubt. But we are a consumer driven economy, which means if the little guy has no money to spend, everyone, small businesses, big businesses, and foreign manufacturers alike are going to feel the pinch.

If there is no demand, because no one has the extra money to spend, it doesnt matter much how much money you can get for your business from the bank. You are still going to go under and jobs will be lost.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by Illusionsaregrander]




posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


that is the scaremongering that is been fed to us, guess what, the ones making the crisis and controlling and freezing the credit is the same big financial institutions that are pressuring congress with their fear mongering of not credit for the small guy.

How long will they be able to pull this one up?

See they are for making money anyway, so they will be losing if they keep the credit freeze.

this is nothing than deceivious practices.

If we all hold in there this will correct itself without the pain of more debt on the back of the tax payer and credit will fluctuate again.

We need to hang in there.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   
I thought that this video might be appropriate to the topic at hand




posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Why wouldn't people have money? Because they don't have jobs. If business can't get credit, jobs get lost. Thats why the consumer will stop consuming.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


They wont have money because most people are already living well above their means and putting not only luxury items on credit, but necessities.

www.usatoday.com...


Rising living costs, along with cheap and plentiful credit, have led consumers to rely more on plastic to pay for necessities they can't live without — and luxuries they don't want to do without. But as the economy weakens, consumers are starting to spend less on discretionary items, such as furniture and electronics, and more on such necessities as groceries and gas, according to government data. Such items increasingly are showing up on credit card bills.


This dynamic is much bigger and more worrisome than simply banks not being able to loan to businesses.

And to Marg, I am not for the bailout. However, I do not for a minute believe that all the talk of a collapse and "recession" are hype. I cannot see any possible way we are going to escape a serious economic impact. And I agree with you that weakening the dollar by pumping more money into the system is not the answer. But there is no doubt in my mind that letting this behemoth fall is going to hurt those of us living in its shadow. My own take on it is that it is a necessary thing, regardless how much it hurts us, and that the bailout will not bail us all out, only the ones on top.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
They wont have money because most people are already living well above their means and putting not only luxury items on credit, but necessities.


People have been living well above their means for years. The only thing that has changed is the credit market and its avalibility.



This dynamic is much bigger and more worrisome than simply banks not being able to loan to businesses.


In the situation you talk of, what would happen is a long, sloping downward recession. Painful but necessary. That is not what is happening, and not what I am worried about. That won't cause a depression. What you are talking about will bring about a much needed correction in the markets.

What will happen when the credit market freezes is not a slow sloping downturn of the economy. It is a sharp and violent collapse, where businesses cannot get credit and massive job losses ensue.

It is complicated, which is why I am trying to explain it in simple terms. We cannot allow the credit banks go under and cause a frozen credit market. Our entire economy depends upon it far too much. It would be a very violent and dramatic collapse that is in no ones best interests.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


I understand but the collapsing will be for those institutions that were all already knee deep on the crap they created.

Look at the dollar as the markets starting to go down today and look at the oil prices, guess what actually no passing the bill help the dollar get better.

See what I mean, this so devious is not funny, once the bill passes and people can get credit again and loans that actually they can not pay our debt will soar, our dollar will deflate and we will be in big inflation.

I say let the weaker bankers fail and crash we will survive.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Which of the news organizations is the most fixated on generating
fear? Someone said CNN, but I'm reading words on other network
sites like "tail spin", "free fall", even "meltdown" to describe today's
stock market activity. It's times like this when I'm glad that we
got rid of cable TV 4 years ago. The talking heads on those 24 hour
news channels are probably scaring the public silly tonight.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


Oil dropping like that is a BAD sign. It means that they expect the demand in the US to drop. Why would that happen? The demand will only drop here in the US if people can no longer afford it like we can now.

Think about that.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


I agree with you to a point, Grim, but if you were watching the markets the reason given for the drop of the oil prices today was due to the dollar been stronger.

But as you say it could be something else.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


biz.yahoo.com...

The dollar is not better or stronger. It rised in comparison because the european market was having trouble. Remember, they are 5 hours ahead of us. The rise in the dollar was just a decline in other currencies, in reality. The dollar didn't "gain strength", other currencies just experiences more weakness.

That "gain" as you put it, was erased.



nearly every factor worked against the US dollar during the New York trading session, but the House of Representatives’ defeat of the $700 billion bailout bill, or the Treasury Asset Relief Program (TARP), took the cake...


Yeah, this bill failing did not help the dollar at all.


edit: needed to add some better explaination.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by grimreaper797]



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Well I guess I was looking at the wrong information because even my son was keeping track of the dollar and the oil prices.

I guess I will have to be more careful of how I read the news.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


I do see your point. Believe me I do. And, I agree that the bailout would cause a long slow decline while no bailout will be a sharp rapid quite painful one.

I am just a proponent of the school of thought that if there is something ugly and difficult to be done, just do it. Get it over with as quickly as you can reasonably by working your butt off in the short run. Dont drag it out, make it last longer than it should, and try to avoid it.

I think this will be a "depression" whether it is termed that or not.

If the bailout passes and the rich are made happy, it will be called a recession to convince us that it isnt that bad.

If the rich suffer too, it will be called a depression.

All of that said, I do see your point, and I do agree one way is harder up front. I just think the harder up front way is the quickest surest route to a total recovery.

I feel the slower way will only prolong the agony and could place us in position for a compounding of the problem due to the fact that everyone responsible for the mess will not pay the consequences. If you dont suffer, you dont change. Its human nature.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Its not like that in a speculative market. Its not a "two roads leading to the same point." In a speculative market, such a rapid decline leads to a much more severe situation than the gradual decline.

Even that doesn't accurately portray what I am talking about here. This isn't a "we can do it fast and painful or slow and slightly less painful", this is more along the lines of causing an added problem to the already problematic system.

We are living beyond our means, thats a problem. This government deficit spending is a problem. All of this together is a debt problem that will take a long time to solve and recover from. A freeze in the credit market is a completely new problem that can be avoided.

If we can manage to avoid the credit freeze, we can advert the depression we may face and turn it back into a much needed correction.

This credit freeze wouldn't happen in a slow downturn in the market. You don't want a depression. The country will recover...but it will not be the same, and it will certainly not be a better country.

No country, in history, ever became a better country through desperation and poverty. People like hitler come into power with desperation. Centralized governments result from desperation. A depression is the mass spread of desperation.

This country won't "get back on it's feet" when the people are starving and desperate for any type of salvation. What will happen, is the further centralization in government power. People won't become indepedent, but more dependent.

The one similiarity we can draw from the great depression to the future depression will be the human reaction to the situation. It will be "government, save us!" The government will "save us" but at a cost. Desperation will allow this government to do whatever it wants, because the people will be at their weakest.

Call me cynical, but I don't trust government when its people are too weak and desperate to protect its rights.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Very good points.

I will have to consider that. I guess I am hoping that the desperation will make people decide to pay attention, take action, and ensure this sort of thing does not happen again.

Apathy and comfort are allowing our government to be stolen slowly from us, bit by bit, bill by bill, law by law.

I can definitely see your point that a sudden collapse may cause people to give their power away out of fear. And you may well be right. I guess I am just hoping that there is that small chance that the smack in the face will wake us up enough to stand up on our feet and take the power back.

In our apathetic state, I see the slow decline of an enabled alcoholic. Nothing ever gets so awful that they must face their demons and decide to live. In my opinion, if we are "enabled" we WILL lose our country, our Constitution for certain. It is just a matter of "when." I think we are so close right now it is terrifying.

I suppose I am hoping that a serious crash will be the "rock bottom" that sometimes turns lives around. Makes people wake up, makes them decide to change the behaviors that got them to the bottom. I think the odds are slim that we will take our country back from corporate control, but I think it is possible, slim chance or not.

Of course, even in my own analogy, some people do not change when they hit rock bottom. They just die. And that is entirely possible. I guess I am just an optimist at heart. I have faith in Americans. No matter what is said about us, I think we have what it takes to turn this around and do better.

Edit to add clarity.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by Illusionsaregrander]



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Unfortunately, history does not agree with you. Rock bottom will promote fear of death and support for the first person who promises a better life/way out. Hey, thats what hitler and mussolini did. A desperate population is the easiest to manipulate. They are emotional, tired, and weak, both physically and mentally.

I will take my chances with buying time and attempting to reform the system, than a depression that relies on the good nature of human beings to create a fair system.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Agreed to disagree.


Good arguments though. You have definitely given me much to think about.

Particularly your argument from history. Your points are well taken and well thought out and presented. If it is any consolation, even though I am not a convert completely, I do think that your way is very likely to be the way this will in fact play out.

I would be very surprised if the will of the people were not overridden by the panic of our leaders the next time the bailout plan comes up for vote.

If it does, and the people are so mad that they vote out every single incumbent in office as a response, I will be just as happy (maybe even happier) than if the bailout plan fails. Perhaps there can be a silver lining no matter which way this swings.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by grimreaper797
 


Grim,

I appreciate the civil discussion going on here and also understand your points. I have to counter something though, this current crisis has caused more people around me to wake up than I would have expected. This is the first time in my 40 year life I've regularly contacted my representatives. My well to do father in law sees the issue for what it is. Yes, people are scared, but they are also much more aware of the complexity of the issues now than they were before. I would rather see the initial refusal of this bill create due diligence and a careful assessment of the problem than a knee jerk quick fix that appears to solve the problem. This is overall a good thing. If a real fix is necessary, it’ll happen but under close scrutiny.

Just look here at ATS for an example. The right hand list of current topics has exploded with financial market info. It’s brought the issue of monetary policy into the spotlight and it’s only going to make it more popular. People need to understand the basics of this system and stop trusting the “experts” to know what’s best.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   
I am failing to see what the big fuss is about. The markets went down based of fear and reactionary selling, now they seem to be going back up again.

Maybe a few positive news articles saying how "it isn't really that bad after all, carry on as normal" would stop the declines which really seem based on hyperbolic negative media spin.

Businesses fail all the time for various reasons; if there is a shift in the economy then new ones offering new services will spring up to fill the gap. It's all very organic.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Lobbying by financial institutions to loosen lending standards and reserve requirements opened the flood gates of liquidity and now we are supposed to believe that the solution is more liquidity. Hank Paulson was CEO of Goldman Sacks. He was paid until 2005. Are we supposed to believe he does not have a conflict of interest. It is sickening how ignorant the American people are. I say let let it fall. We have antitrust laws in this country that are ignored, steifling competition and putting all the wealth and power into the hands of a few. The Glas Steigle Act of 1933 forbid the horizontal integration of different types of financial institutions, but we repeal it in 1999 under pressure of the same crooks that profited from and caused this problem.
Sickofit




top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join