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.
Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Nucleardiver
Bravo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have all that data as been part of the market data thread, but like I said in my last post, people for ever will be dreaming about the" Saviour" that will take them from the financial oblivion
The government data is the most sugar coated, corrupted and misleading but many just put on their colored glasses and keep drinking the koolaid.
Remember Bush when he used to come live on TV and tell the people that the nations economy was fine and that our nation was prosperous, well I guess when 2008 market crash happen thanks to the ones like JP Morgan scam people still could not shed the glass colored glasses.
Great post.
Originally posted by libertytoall
What's interesting to me is how Romney had ties to the Bernie Madoff scandle and Obama has ties to JP Morgan and Solyndra.. Doesn't anyone see a pattern of schemes that are stealing the publics money?? How much did Obama get out of this 2 billion dollar loss?
He has a hefty stake in JP Morgan Chase, the megabank that just made a bad $2 billion bet. Obama has an account worth between $500,000 and $1 million.
Originally posted by neo96
Obama worth as much as $10 million
He has a hefty stake in JP Morgan Chase, the megabank that just made a bad $2 billion bet. Obama has an account worth between $500,000 and $1 million.
content.usatoday.com...
That dude is as crooked as they come!
What a conflict of interest there.
Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by braindeadconservatives
Well cause Cheney was corrupt because he held stock in Haliburton come on gotta live up to those standards that were set a decade ago,
What now there is a problem with that?
Obama does not have appointees in the bank and he does not have the power to
award them contracts.
Originally posted by Nucleardiver
Obama does not have appointees in the bank and he does not have the power to
award them contracts.
You are right, instead he just awards them bailouts. Call it contracts, call it bailouts, call it what ever you want its still a conflict. Just as Cheney being involved was wrong, so is Obama.
You can't have it both ways.
Under guise of helping homeowners, president Obama has finalized his plan to further aid banks. Please consider Obama's alleged Mortgage Relief Plan.
The White House on Tuesday announced it was cutting the mortgage fees charged by the Federal Housing Administration’s refinancing program in another effort to help the languishing housing market recover.
...
An estimated 2 million to 3 million FHA borrowers will be eligible to benefit from the revamped program, the White House said in a statement.
Contrary to the opinions of Seiberg, this plan will not be "broadly positive" for housing and the economy any more than numerous other misguided attempts purported to do the same thing, all of which failed at their stated intent.
Throwing more taxpayer money down the drain will of course be "broadly positive" for big banks that will see income rise.
Indeed, much of the rally in bank shares this year has been in regards to "broadly positive" measures by the administration and the Fed purposely designed to bailout banks in contrast to stated reasons.
Moreover, the plan is sure to be "broadly positive" for Obama's reelection chances, and "broadly negative" for taxpayers who will no doubt end up footing the bill, perhaps in more ways than one.
Obama Unveils New JP Morgan, Wells Fargo Bailout Plan, Disguised As Mortgage Relief
Originally posted by Nucleardiver
reply to post by braindeadconservatives
Uhmmm, yes JP Morgan received $936 million in tarp funds from the.federal government. Specifically the US Dept of Treasury which happens to be part of the Executive Branch.
Originally posted by xuenchen
Here is an example of Obama's "support". The Mortgage Relief Plan.
On the surface it is a "good thing" for the public.
Underneath, banks like JPM will benefit more than average people.
(and not all that many "people" either !)
Article from March 06, 2012
Under guise of helping homeowners, president Obama has finalized his plan to further aid banks. Please consider Obama's alleged Mortgage Relief Plan.
The White House on Tuesday announced it was cutting the mortgage fees charged by the Federal Housing Administration’s refinancing program in another effort to help the languishing housing market recover.
...
An estimated 2 million to 3 million FHA borrowers will be eligible to benefit from the revamped program, the White House said in a statement.
Broadly Positive For Whom?
Contrary to the opinions of Seiberg, this plan will not be "broadly positive" for housing and the economy any more than numerous other misguided attempts purported to do the same thing, all of which failed at their stated intent.
Throwing more taxpayer money down the drain will of course be "broadly positive" for big banks that will see income rise.
Indeed, much of the rally in bank shares this year has been in regards to "broadly positive" measures by the administration and the Fed purposely designed to bailout banks in contrast to stated reasons.
Moreover, the plan is sure to be "broadly positive" for Obama's reelection chances, and "broadly negative" for taxpayers who will no doubt end up footing the bill, perhaps in more ways than one.
Obama Unveils New JP Morgan, Wells Fargo Bailout Plan, Disguised As Mortgage Relief