RED ALERT: FX Dislocation In Process

Originally posted by redhatty
reply to post by tjeffersonsghost

 

And maybe, just maybe, Rick Santelli managed to express what most of Americans are feeling in a way they connect with, which is something Ron Paul didn't quite do, nor did Schiff.

By jove, Rick got THE RIGHT MESSAGE OUT THERE and people still want to shoot him down.

Is this a kill the messenger to kill the message movement? Or are you simply not aware that this is exactly the kind of outcome that COULD happen if you bicker about WHY and WHO rather than WHAT WAS SAID

Dude listen to me. Im game with the message. I dont want to shoot the messenger I want to praise it and I happen to like Rick Santelli. My point is please dont make the media out like they are trying to do something right now. Im sure a select few might but that is a very select few. They want to entertain. That is my point. It gets the message out fine great but a little investigation a few years ago might of saved us a whole lot of trouble...look at Madoff.....

Originally posted by tjeffersonsghost
My point is the media is in the business of entertainment and not reporting real news or doing any investigating. Ill give you an example from today....

The New York Times reports that an Israeli Spy has been caught and put in a Lebonese jail.

www.nytimes.com...

What they dont mention is that this Israeli spy is potentially related to one of the 9/11 Hi Jackers. So why do they not mention this? Is this on purpose? Wheres the investigating? Ill let you guys do the math......lets just leave it as the media doesnt investigate they propagate.

TJ, I like you, so please don't take this wrong... But isn't there an entire sub-section of ATS just for 9/11 stuff?

This thread was a market watch thread, and even discussing Rick Santelli is off topic, and I am guilty of that as well, but 9/11 is WAY off topic, my friend.

BTW folks, currencies are acting up again tonight, not as drastic as tuesday, but it ain't pretty either

reply to post by Rockpuck


I disagree Rock. There are plenty of viable banks out there. The whole economy wouldnt of collapsed a few banks would of. You know what would of happened if that happened? These viable banks or other investors would of bought their assets. This is how a free market works. We need banking I agree we just dont need Bank of America or Citigroup. You want proof of this look at Lehman bros. They went under and what happened. They were immediatly bought up and a lot of the peeps kept their jobs.

It makes no sense to borrow money at interest, to give to the banks, to lend back to us at interest. How much sense does this make? Its theft. This problem should of only cost at max $900 billion. That is what it would of cost to pay off ALL the mortgages of the subprime housing. But as we know it has cost us much more than this. Why? Theft thats why.

BTW this goes for the autos too. We could use an auto industry here. We NEED to start making things...we dont need GM or Chrysler. We need someone else who is better managed.

reply to post by ::.mika.::

"A dead structure in which is artificially injected and artificially moved around [by those that have the means to do so] enormous amounts of money that in reality don't even exist. "

Yup, it's a rework of "Weekend at Bernie's"
Great movie.

Originally posted by redhatty


TJ, I like you, so please don't take this wrong... But isn't there an entire sub-section of ATS just for 9/11 stuff?

This thread was a market watch thread, and even discussing Rick Santelli is off topic, and I am guilty of that as well, but 9/11 is WAY off topic, my friend.

BTW folks, currencies are acting up again tonight, not as drastic as tuesday, but it ain't pretty either

Fair enough I was just proving my point on our crappy media and how they dont investigate. I could of picked a better article but this one was the first one that popped up because I just read it In regards to tomorrow Im still short GS so I need a good tanking tomorrow for my options end tomorrow. So give 3 shouts for a tank tank tank tank.....

Edit to Add I like you to Red. In fact I like you so much I just deleted the post.

[edit on 19-2-2009 by tjeffersonsghost]

reply to post by tjeffersonsghost


I am fairly certain that if every major bank, and thus, every major regional bank failed, the entire world economy would effectively grind to a hault, if not dissolve entirely.

When ever a major institution failed, the take over was funded by the Government, through the devaluation of the dollar (Fed assistance in purchases) or outright capital injections.

Because no one bank had enough capital to cover the merging cost, and follows, the write downs from the mergers, it is safe to assume the entire bank would have went insolvent, consequently in October almost every major financial institution was insolvent, they all would have failed, along with several, if not all, major regional banks..

No one could afford the assets except the Government, and had the system folded and no one took ownership of those assets, and the debts owned to them (coupled with the long strings of securities backing the investors), the entire economy around the world would have dissolved.

Not being a fan of our current financial structure, I would accept that as a very good thing .. but then I have never lived through an economic collapse before, so I speak in ignorance. The severity was there, so the action, albeit full of injustice, was needed. Homeowner bailouts however, shows how far the government will go .. to far imo.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by tjeffersonsghost

 

Ok, we save the banks.. we HAD to, in order to save the economy. We can all agree on this.. Some of us are more hardcore Capitalist and Constitutionalist and support the Free Market. Bad banks should fail, and new ones take their place. Allow the depression to occur. Had they not "bailed" the banks out we would have seen complete economic collapse.

we didn't have to bail out the banks the way we did.....not at all

we poured good money in after bad and they still are going to go in the crapper.......

all holders of bank debt should take a haircut (all the way up the capital structure) including the bond holders when a bank like Bear stearns implodes....same thing with Citi when there day of reckoning comes

we didn't go in and change the management and the DAMN fed has YET to put any conditions ...regulations on the way the main CDS dealers issue their crap (JP ,GS, etc)

we have mostly been wiping out the equity holders and not going further up the capital structure to place our forign bond holding friends either due to fear or just political connection. We need to insure the deposits and protect the taxpayer but the gov't can't and Shouldn't backstop the other losses .....thing is we will be running quite a deficit that we need financed...and they may be scared of a treasury auction going bad should we upset our creditors.....

[edit on 19-2-2009 by cpdaman]

reply to post by redhatty


Australia ASX 100 -37.60 -1.32% 2,807.80 2/20 4:53pm
Australia ASX All Ords -45.00 -1.32% 3,353.00 2/20 4:53pm
Australia ASX Mid-cap 50 -76.70 -2.55% 2,929.70 2/20 4:53pm
Hong Kong Hang Seng -321.49 -2.47% 12,701.87 2/20 1:54pm
Hong Kong HSCC Red Chip -77.42 -2.58% 2,921.10 2/20 1:53pm
Japan Nikkei 225 -94.87 -1.26% 7,462.78 2/20 12:45pm

Asia down a healthy dose today, 1.3-2.6% down.

I was watching Bloomberg about an hour ago about Unemployment .. it is already being rumored that the US will see a record Unemployment payroll drop.. somewhere around 500,000 to 650,000+..

Normally I would say if we lost 650,000 jobs in February that the markets will drop like a rock.. but last time we lost 500,000+ jobs the market was up like 200 points.. so .. who knows. Futures are down.

reply to post by tjeffersonsghost


LOL slightly a little both on topic and off topic...

But in response to your comments on the media... its pretty obvious... remember when 11,000, 9500, 8500, then 7500 was the "bottom?"

How about the Jedi Mind trick they keep doing...

"Now here's Jim on the Economy"

*waves hand* "the economy is good"

*waves hand* "you don't need to see our balance sheets.."

*waves hand* "These are not the financials you are looking for"

sigh...

Meanwhile Wall Street is using the Vader "force choke" on the DJIA...

its shameful...

its especially shameful how much Star Wars i was able to put into this post...

reply to post by Rockpuck


Sure they could of afforded the assets. They would of had to be at the right prices though which means they would of had to be lowered dramatically. Assets are only worth what someone is willing to pay for it and that thought process of "we cant let prices go down" is one of our problems today. Prices of assets NEED to come down. Just like these banks saying mark to market is the problem. That is like blaming your temperature on the thermometer. The government is hindering these asset sales because banks dont want to lower the price to sell them because they think the government is going to come in and buy them high and the buyers dont feel they are priced low enough yet....

But lets go with your case though lets say these banks or investors didnt have the money. Then why not give them being the banks who managed themselves right the money to buy the assets and let them run these banks instead of giving the money to the morons who bankrupted the banks and letting them ruin them again this time with our money. I mean imagine how those small banks feel. It used to be this is how small banks would grow into big banks but now these small banks have to compete with the government. what is up with that? Is that American? Sounds like Soviet Union or some type of Mussolini type fascism.

[edit on 20-2-2009 by tjeffersonsghost]

reply to post by cpdaman


I completely agree.. I am just saying that compared to "bailing out homeowners" the urgency for the banks was obvious.

Done wrong, mismanaged, corrupted, all around a perfectly wasteful spending spree..

But when has the government done something that DIDN'T fit that description?

reply to post by tjeffersonsghost


Damn you TJ. I officially give up my role as playing Devils advocate. lol. Though I really do think that if the banks fail, the whole system unravels.. problem is, we put gum in the holes of a sinking ship.. and no effort to force restructuring or anything remotely close to "change".

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by tjeffersonsghost

 

Damn you TJ. I officially give up my role as playing Devils advocate. lol. Though I really do think that if the banks fail, the whole system unravels.. problem is, we put gum in the holes of a sinking ship.. and no effort to force restructuring or anything remotely close to "change".

Debate me will you.

I agree with you on the homeowners they shouldnt be bailed either. You know what is wrong with housing prices coming down. I mean must we live in a society where we must get loans for everything? I mean if they come down enough someone will buy them. Why cant people just go pay for houses in cash. I never understood why banks think that housing prices have to stay high. Letting foreclosures happen helps prices come down so the foreclosures is just the free markets way of saying prices are to high and need to come down. I nominate myself Secretary of Treasury

reply to post by nj2day

its especially shameful how much Star Wars i was able to put into this post...

No one was going to say anything... we where all thinking it though..

reply to post by tjeffersonsghost


Dude, cannot agree more.. why the hell is it everything major we buy has to be paid in 6years for a car, 30 for a house etc? ..

If the average income of American's is around $40k a year, you would think a decent middle class house would be 30-50k? .. Maybe have to take a 10k loan or something small..

I hear from the old folks that waaay back in the day, pre WWII, it was not like that..

I had posted my ideologies for credit limits before, so i will sum it up as:

The Government should establish a regulated percentage of your net income that you can hold out standing loans on (imo, around 20% .. meaning if you have combined income of 100k a year, you can have 20k in debt outstanding at any one time)... anything over the limit is automatically declined.

No one has an excuse for defaulting (unless laid off) and no one can overwhelm themselves through immoral lending practices banks use against us. Further more, the inflationary spiral we see in houses, cars, etc, would almost be wiped away, save the average income increases.

Upper classes, big corporate types, businesses, they wouldn't like me ideas, but to me, it makes sense to regulate the amount of credit we can have.

EDIT to add that this plan would work best with the Gold Standard.

[edit on 2/20/2009 by Rockpuck]

reply to post by nj2day


ROFL

That was funny - sadly though

Jim? as in Cramer? DO NOT GO THERE we will NEVER get back on topic!

Originally posted by redhatty
reply to post by nj2day

 

ROFL

That was funny - sadly though

Jim? as in Cramer? DO NOT GO THERE we will NEVER get back on topic!

I get the hint...back on subject....

I have a feeling tomorrow we will test the Nov lows on the SPX. I dont think we will break them and close lower. I also feel we will have a relief rally next week. So Fri Ill exit my shorts and go long at the end of the day....

BTW this is not investment advice...DYODD please.

New Zealand 2576.68 -40.25 -1.54% 17:31
Australia 3353.00 -45.00 -1.32% 16:47
Nikkei 225 7412.69 -144.96 -1.92% 14:59
TOPIX 739.03 -12.56 -1.67% 14:39
TSE 2nd Sec 1810.85 -14.04 -0.77% 14:39
JASDAQ 40.60 -1.38 -3.29% 14:39
Korea 1071.07 -36.03 -3.25% 14:40
Taiwan 4436.94 -91.93 -2.03% 13:43
Taiwan OTC 64.40 -1.05 -1.60% 13:40
Shanghai 2233.83 6.71 0.30% 13:59
Shanghai A 2345.25 7.27 0.31% 14:00
Shanghai B 146.19 4.00 2.81% 14:00
Shenzhen A 775.35 15.15 1.99% 13:44
Shenzhen B 323.30 3.14 0.98% 13:45
SHSZ 300 2318.63 20.22 0.88% 13:44
Shenzhen comp 8346.66 132.75 1.62% 13:45
Hong Kong 12701.87 -321.49 -2.47% 14:00
HK CN Ent 7047.20 -219.03 -3.01% 14:00
HK Aff Crp 2921.10 -77.42 -2.58% 14:00
Singapore 1600.86 -28.49 -1.75% 13:45
SGX China 54.01 -1.00 -1.82% 14:00
Vietnam 252.57 -2.28 -0.90% 11:01
Thailand 436.72 -4.90 -1.11% 12:31
Philippines 1881.44 -18.36 -0.97% 12:11
Malaysia 890.50 -9.09 -1.01% 14:00
Indonesia 1314.02 -9.67 -0.73% 12:59
India 8852.01 -190.62 -2.11% 11:29
Pakistan 4447.37 12.24 0.28% 10:39

Gold 973.60 -0.60 -0.06% 01:00
Silver 14.08 0.02 0.14% 01:00
Platinum 1069.00 -3.00 -0.28% 00:58

EUR-USD 1.2594 -0.0080 -0.64% 00:53
GBP-USD 1.4229 -0.0064 -0.45% 00:54
USD-CHF 1.1800 0.0064 0.54% 00:53
USD-RUB 36.0260 0.1250 0.35% 00:53
USD-HUF 240.8150 1.2750 0.53% 00:54
USD-TRY 1.7010 0.0045 0.27% 00:53
USD-ZAR 10.1810 0.0913 0.90% 00:54
USD-ILS 4.1349 -0.0022 -0.05% 00:53
USD-MAD 8.7592 0.0490 0.56% 00:08
USD-JPY 94.1200 -0.0775 -0.08% 00:53
USD-CNY 6.8357 -0.0012 -0.02% 00:52
USD-HKD 7.7538 -0.0010 -0.01% 00:53
USD-TWD 34.8200 0.2800 0.81% 00:42
USD-KRW 1505 20.2500 1.36% 00:53
USD-THB 35.7350 0.1950 0.55% 00:51
USD-SGD 1.5377 0.0096 0.63% 00:53
USD-PHP 48.2100 0.3375 0.70% 00:02
USD-MYR 3.6765 0.0140 0.38% 00:17
USD-IDR 12100 5.0000 0.04% 00:17
USD-INR 49.9650 0.3250 0.65% 00:53

they are today again buying dollars and/or US T-bonds, right ?

yoyo

(I stick to my previous intuitive-feeling -> forget gold, go for platinum this time - and don't forget to tip me if you investors people come out of all this rich as a banker because of that idea héhé)

Originally posted by Rockpuck
If the average income of American's is around $40k a year, you would think a decent middle class house would be 30-50k? .. Maybe have to take a 10k loan or something small..

I think the "rule of thumb" that is "appropriate" to use is the house should be NO MORE than 3X annual income with a 30 yr FIXED mortgage.

But I understand what you are saying, let's just stop having mortgages - save and buy at VERY reasonable prices.

And you know, you're right, because when you get right down to it, shelter (a home) is simply a place to sleep, bathe and store your stuff.

I hear from the old folks that waaay back in the day, pre WWII, it was not like that..

My dad was in WWII and as a Sgt he made $19 a month. So if houses were only $40K... well you do the math...

The Government should establish

Sorry didn't get any farther than this. FAIL!!!! Government should NEVER regulate what a person is WORTH. Credit worthy people DESERVE more credit Because they are responsible and PAY THEIR BILLS.

Gov SHOULD regulate the banks, NOT THE PEOPLE.

reply to post by tjeffersonsghost


Umm, lest you forget...

Tomorrow IS OPEX

just what do you think the T-Bill Options are going to look like?