Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. Let's celebrate

Let's celebrate

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
htmldatabasecomquestion
33 Posts 13 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Shog9 0

    Heh. I don't really have much of an opinion one way or the other. It's always sounded like a sketchy voodoo con to me; evidence that my ignorant opinion happens to match up reasonably well with reality doesn't really make me feel any better about it.

    K Offline
    K Offline
    KaRl
    wrote on last edited by
    #9

    Yeah, I heard also about the news saying that prozac doesn't work ;)

    If you kill a whale, you get Greenpeace and Jacques Cousteau on your back, but wipe out sardines and you get a canning subsidy! Fold with us! ¤ flickr

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • I Ilion

      Because, after all, the *only* reason socialism has never yet worked is that it has never been applied at the correct scale. Whereas capitalism can be successfully scaled from the personal, to the local, to the regional, to the national, to the global, apparently socialism needs to be global (and universal) to work. And bring us heaven on earth.

      M Offline
      M Offline
      MrPlankton
      wrote on last edited by
      #10

      Trotsky would be proud.

      MrPlankton

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Stan Shannon

        Can't disagree with the observation. The sentiment isn't shared, however.

        Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

        L Offline
        L Offline
        led mike
        wrote on last edited by
        #11

        Stan Shannon wrote:

        The sentiment isn't shared, however.

        Which one? That the federal reserve bailout is proof that the free market is not capable of self healing?

        led mike

        S 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L led mike

          Stan Shannon wrote:

          The sentiment isn't shared, however.

          Which one? That the federal reserve bailout is proof that the free market is not capable of self healing?

          led mike

          S Offline
          S Offline
          Stan Shannon
          wrote on last edited by
          #12

          led mike wrote:

          Which one? That the federal reserve bailout is proof that the free market is not capable of self healing?

          That the abandonment of free market capitalism by the US is cause for celebration. The markets are self healing if the politicians would just keep their hands off of it. Hell, the entire reason this subprime loan bullshit became a problem is because of the government forcing lenders to not discriminate against minorities. If they cannot discriminate against people who are less able to repay loans, they have to get creative in other ways. The problem is clearly over regulation not under regulation.

          Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

          L P 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • S Stan Shannon

            led mike wrote:

            Which one? That the federal reserve bailout is proof that the free market is not capable of self healing?

            That the abandonment of free market capitalism by the US is cause for celebration. The markets are self healing if the politicians would just keep their hands off of it. Hell, the entire reason this subprime loan bullshit became a problem is because of the government forcing lenders to not discriminate against minorities. If they cannot discriminate against people who are less able to repay loans, they have to get creative in other ways. The problem is clearly over regulation not under regulation.

            Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

            L Offline
            L Offline
            led mike
            wrote on last edited by
            #13

            Stan Shannon wrote:

            That the abandonment of free market capitalism by the US is cause for celebration.

            Ah, guess I should have figured that out eh?

            Stan Shannon wrote:

            If they cannot discriminate against people who are less able to repay loans,

            :confused: I thought the whole reason for the subprime mortgages was for the purpose of lending to people who are less able to repay the loans.

            led mike

            S 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L led mike

              Stan Shannon wrote:

              That the abandonment of free market capitalism by the US is cause for celebration.

              Ah, guess I should have figured that out eh?

              Stan Shannon wrote:

              If they cannot discriminate against people who are less able to repay loans,

              :confused: I thought the whole reason for the subprime mortgages was for the purpose of lending to people who are less able to repay the loans.

              led mike

              S Offline
              S Offline
              Stan Shannon
              wrote on last edited by
              #14

              led mike wrote:

              I thought the whole reason for the subprime mortgages was for the purpose of lending to people who are less able to repay the loans.

              Thats my understanding also. But apparently (if I undestand things correctly) they began bundling these loans into untraceable chunks and selling them (which goes way over my head) to other banks around the world who thought they were buying safe loans. In that way, they were able to turn unprofitable loans into a reveune stream of some kind. I'm not a banker so I don't really understand how any of that works, but the banks were simply trying to deal with unprofitable practices forced upon them by the government. And now the government is using that as an excuse to dismantle capitalism. (BTW, having private corporations, such as banks, dedicated to implementing the state's political and social policies is the very definition of 'corporatsm' as originally envisioned by Musollini, and other fascists)

              Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

              L 7 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • S Stan Shannon

                led mike wrote:

                I thought the whole reason for the subprime mortgages was for the purpose of lending to people who are less able to repay the loans.

                Thats my understanding also. But apparently (if I undestand things correctly) they began bundling these loans into untraceable chunks and selling them (which goes way over my head) to other banks around the world who thought they were buying safe loans. In that way, they were able to turn unprofitable loans into a reveune stream of some kind. I'm not a banker so I don't really understand how any of that works, but the banks were simply trying to deal with unprofitable practices forced upon them by the government. And now the government is using that as an excuse to dismantle capitalism. (BTW, having private corporations, such as banks, dedicated to implementing the state's political and social policies is the very definition of 'corporatsm' as originally envisioned by Musollini, and other fascists)

                Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                L Offline
                L Offline
                led mike
                wrote on last edited by
                #15

                Stan Shannon wrote:

                but the banks were simply trying to deal with unprofitable practices forced upon them by the government.

                I work at a fortune 50 financial company and that's not at all what our CFO gave as an explanation of what happened and why. He just explained the subprime situation like 6-10 weeks ago in a company wide town hall meeting. They did it on their own for profit. That's how the free market works right? Or in this case doesn't work. I hope you understand that I will choose to take the word of a fortune 50 CFO over yours in this regard. However, as always, I am certainly open to learning the truth should you choose to offer any citations substantiating your position.

                led mike

                S 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • K KaRl

                  Remember Friday March 14 2008: it was the day the dream of global free- market capitalism died.[^]

                  When they kick at your front door How you gonna come? With your hands on your head Or on the trigger of your gun?

                  Fold with us! ¤ flickr

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  Lost User
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #16

                  Nice one Karl. A govt propping up a private bank? Thats socialism not capitolism.

                  Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

                  O K 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    Nice one Karl. A govt propping up a private bank? Thats socialism not capitolism.

                    Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

                    O Offline
                    O Offline
                    Oakman
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #17

                    fat_boy wrote:

                    A govt propping up a private bank? Thats socialism not capitolism

                    Only problem is, Bear Sterns wasn't propped up. It got bought on the remainders table at a little over 1 cent on the dollar. As a bank it, for all intents and purposes, has ceased to exist.

                    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • S Stan Shannon

                      led mike wrote:

                      Which one? That the federal reserve bailout is proof that the free market is not capable of self healing?

                      That the abandonment of free market capitalism by the US is cause for celebration. The markets are self healing if the politicians would just keep their hands off of it. Hell, the entire reason this subprime loan bullshit became a problem is because of the government forcing lenders to not discriminate against minorities. If they cannot discriminate against people who are less able to repay loans, they have to get creative in other ways. The problem is clearly over regulation not under regulation.

                      Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                      P Offline
                      P Offline
                      perryf_00
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #18

                      Gotta say, reading all the messages I've read, all the threads I've seen, this has to be the most racist, ignorant one I've ever read. Did you learn this by attending your weekly KKK meeting? The cause of the problem had absolutely nothing to do with the govt forcing companies to do anything. Other then if you want to say that by the Fed lowering interest rates as far as they did several yrs ago which in turn caused mortgage companies to get extremely greedy, they forced this to occur. From what I understand, many mortgage companies, Countrywide for example, typically bundle up a bunch of their mortgages and sell them to investors. It just so happens that their packages started including many sub-prime mortgages. Which may/may not have been understood by the investors buying these packages. But to say that the cause is the govt forcing companies to sell morgages to minorities is just plain redneck, racist tripe.

                      S 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • P perryf_00

                        Gotta say, reading all the messages I've read, all the threads I've seen, this has to be the most racist, ignorant one I've ever read. Did you learn this by attending your weekly KKK meeting? The cause of the problem had absolutely nothing to do with the govt forcing companies to do anything. Other then if you want to say that by the Fed lowering interest rates as far as they did several yrs ago which in turn caused mortgage companies to get extremely greedy, they forced this to occur. From what I understand, many mortgage companies, Countrywide for example, typically bundle up a bunch of their mortgages and sell them to investors. It just so happens that their packages started including many sub-prime mortgages. Which may/may not have been understood by the investors buying these packages. But to say that the cause is the govt forcing companies to sell morgages to minorities is just plain redneck, racist tripe.

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Stan Shannon
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #19

                        perryf_00 wrote:

                        this has to be the most racist, ignorant one I've ever read.

                        Yeah? So? Is that like a bad thing on your planet?

                        perryf_00 wrote:

                        Did you learn this by attending your weekly KKK meeting?

                        No. I read it on some ordinary news/opinion site. Don't really remember which one.

                        perryf_00 wrote:

                        From what I understand, many mortgage companies, Countrywide for example, typically bundle up a bunch of their mortgages and sell them to investors. It just so happens that their packages started including many sub-prime mortgages. Which may/may not have been understood by the investors buying these packages.

                        Thats precisely my understanding also. Subprime lending is risky for both lenders and borrowers due to the combination of high interest rates, poor credit history, and adverse financial situations usually associated with subprime applicants. A subprime loan is offered at a rate higher than A-paper loans due to the increased risk. Subprime lending encompasses a variety of credit instruments, including subprime mortgages, subprime car loans, and subprime credit cards, among others.[^] If the government is going to require banking institutions to not discriminate, and if minorities are generally more poor than the majority population, it goes without saying that they will incur additional risk trying to accomodate that requirement. I don't see how merely observing the obvious is racist but I honestly don't really care if it is. I'm sick of playng that game. I'm not defending the practice or the banks. But I feel perfectly confident that this would not have happened without government intervention in the process. Banks exist to make money, not as a means of implementing some political social policy. They should be left alone so that they can do that. If they fail, they fail, and should get no government help.

                        Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                        P 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L led mike

                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                          but the banks were simply trying to deal with unprofitable practices forced upon them by the government.

                          I work at a fortune 50 financial company and that's not at all what our CFO gave as an explanation of what happened and why. He just explained the subprime situation like 6-10 weeks ago in a company wide town hall meeting. They did it on their own for profit. That's how the free market works right? Or in this case doesn't work. I hope you understand that I will choose to take the word of a fortune 50 CFO over yours in this regard. However, as always, I am certainly open to learning the truth should you choose to offer any citations substantiating your position.

                          led mike

                          S Offline
                          S Offline
                          Stan Shannon
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #20

                          I'm sure as hell not going to argue with a CFO, but I don't really see how that contradicts what I said. I am opposed to the government bailing these guys out in any way. Let them work their own problems out. At the same time, however, government should cease trying bring about social change through private entities.

                          Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                          L 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • S Stan Shannon

                            perryf_00 wrote:

                            this has to be the most racist, ignorant one I've ever read.

                            Yeah? So? Is that like a bad thing on your planet?

                            perryf_00 wrote:

                            Did you learn this by attending your weekly KKK meeting?

                            No. I read it on some ordinary news/opinion site. Don't really remember which one.

                            perryf_00 wrote:

                            From what I understand, many mortgage companies, Countrywide for example, typically bundle up a bunch of their mortgages and sell them to investors. It just so happens that their packages started including many sub-prime mortgages. Which may/may not have been understood by the investors buying these packages.

                            Thats precisely my understanding also. Subprime lending is risky for both lenders and borrowers due to the combination of high interest rates, poor credit history, and adverse financial situations usually associated with subprime applicants. A subprime loan is offered at a rate higher than A-paper loans due to the increased risk. Subprime lending encompasses a variety of credit instruments, including subprime mortgages, subprime car loans, and subprime credit cards, among others.[^] If the government is going to require banking institutions to not discriminate, and if minorities are generally more poor than the majority population, it goes without saying that they will incur additional risk trying to accomodate that requirement. I don't see how merely observing the obvious is racist but I honestly don't really care if it is. I'm sick of playng that game. I'm not defending the practice or the banks. But I feel perfectly confident that this would not have happened without government intervention in the process. Banks exist to make money, not as a means of implementing some political social policy. They should be left alone so that they can do that. If they fail, they fail, and should get no government help.

                            Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                            P Offline
                            P Offline
                            perryf_00
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #21

                            This circumstance did not come because of govts requirements to not discriminate. That is a good rule. If a minority meets the same financial criteria I do, and I get a loan but he/she doesn't, that's a problem. The problem arose because of the cheap cost of money due to the very low interest rate. Companies who were greedy set out to make as much money as they could due to the basically free money. So they reduced, if not eliminated requirements for loan approval. This had absolutely nothing to do with the govt forcing them to do anything. Nothing. People without money, regardless of race/color/creed were suddenly able to qualify for morgages. There were certainly some minority neighborhoods decimated because of all the defaults. But at the same time, you have places like Nevada that are having a big problem now because of all the speculators that bought 2nd/3rd, etc. homes there because they could suddenly qualify to get money loaned to them for that purpose.

                            S 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • O Oakman

                              fat_boy wrote:

                              A govt propping up a private bank? Thats socialism not capitolism

                              Only problem is, Bear Sterns wasn't propped up. It got bought on the remainders table at a little over 1 cent on the dollar. As a bank it, for all intents and purposes, has ceased to exist.

                              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                              L Offline
                              L Offline
                              Lost User
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #22

                              The US govt though paid JP Morgan to buy it, and are buying it for 10$ a share no? Its similar to NorthernRock. Runs out of cash so the govt steps in. Its not so mush propping up a bank as proping up the economy I suppose since that is their aim.

                              Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • S Stan Shannon

                                led mike wrote:

                                I thought the whole reason for the subprime mortgages was for the purpose of lending to people who are less able to repay the loans.

                                Thats my understanding also. But apparently (if I undestand things correctly) they began bundling these loans into untraceable chunks and selling them (which goes way over my head) to other banks around the world who thought they were buying safe loans. In that way, they were able to turn unprofitable loans into a reveune stream of some kind. I'm not a banker so I don't really understand how any of that works, but the banks were simply trying to deal with unprofitable practices forced upon them by the government. And now the government is using that as an excuse to dismantle capitalism. (BTW, having private corporations, such as banks, dedicated to implementing the state's political and social policies is the very definition of 'corporatsm' as originally envisioned by Musollini, and other fascists)

                                Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                                7 Offline
                                7 Offline
                                73Zeppelin
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #23

                                I'm not sure why you got the 1-votes, but you are exactly right about the functioning of the loans. They were sold internationally so the sub-prime problem is not just restricted to the U.S. This[^] is a humourous (but not far from the mark) explanation of it, better than the technical one I would give you. And I agree with you - this is not cause for celebration.


                                Only memories, fading memories, blending into dull tableaux. I want them back.

                                S 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • K KaRl

                                  Have you to register to read the article? I did not :~

                                  When they kick at your front door How you gonna come? With your hands on your head Or on the trigger of your gun?

                                  Fold with us! ¤ flickr

                                  V Offline
                                  V Offline
                                  Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #24

                                  Yup. Most of the ePapers in India require registration. And more crazy thing is that 'The Hindu' ePaper is restricted for paying readers only.

                                  Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
                                  Tech Gossips
                                  A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • 7 73Zeppelin

                                    I'm not sure why you got the 1-votes, but you are exactly right about the functioning of the loans. They were sold internationally so the sub-prime problem is not just restricted to the U.S. This[^] is a humourous (but not far from the mark) explanation of it, better than the technical one I would give you. And I agree with you - this is not cause for celebration.


                                    Only memories, fading memories, blending into dull tableaux. I want them back.

                                    S Offline
                                    S Offline
                                    Stan Shannon
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #25

                                    Thanks. I thought I had a basic grasp of the issue. This[^] is the information I had that related the problem to government social policy towards minorities and the poor. This explanation makes perfect sense to me, as financial institutions are obviously going to find more creative ways to make profits when being expected to otherwise act in ways not in their economic best interests.

                                    Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • P perryf_00

                                      This circumstance did not come because of govts requirements to not discriminate. That is a good rule. If a minority meets the same financial criteria I do, and I get a loan but he/she doesn't, that's a problem. The problem arose because of the cheap cost of money due to the very low interest rate. Companies who were greedy set out to make as much money as they could due to the basically free money. So they reduced, if not eliminated requirements for loan approval. This had absolutely nothing to do with the govt forcing them to do anything. Nothing. People without money, regardless of race/color/creed were suddenly able to qualify for morgages. There were certainly some minority neighborhoods decimated because of all the defaults. But at the same time, you have places like Nevada that are having a big problem now because of all the speculators that bought 2nd/3rd, etc. homes there because they could suddenly qualify to get money loaned to them for that purpose.

                                      S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Stan Shannon
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #26

                                      No matter how you cut it though, the problem goes back to government trying to intervene in the free market system in some way. The only responsibility a business has is to make money. They have no social responsibility which the government can compel them to comply with.

                                      Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

                                      P 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • L Lost User

                                        Nice one Karl. A govt propping up a private bank? Thats socialism not capitolism.

                                        Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

                                        K Offline
                                        K Offline
                                        KaRl
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #27

                                        I would rather say it is pragmatism. Much better than any utopian ideology, may it be communist or ultra-liberal.

                                        Society is composed of two great classes, those that have more dinners than appetite, and those who have more appetite than dinners Fold with us! ¤ flickr

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • S Shog9 0

                                          Yup. Finally used BugMeNot to skip it, but yeah, huge turn-off.

                                          G Offline
                                          G Offline
                                          Gary Kirkham
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #28

                                          Interesting...I didn't have to register either.

                                          Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God" Me blog, You read

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups