Is this crisis almost the end of the US?
-
AIG looks like it could be a bigger problem than Leyman should they fail to get the finance they need.
I agree. If AIG fails, I think there will be a disaster. Probably more reason not to cut rates right now...
...that mortally intolerable truth; that all deep, earnest thinking is but the intrepid effort of the soul to keep the open independence of her sea; while the wildest winds of heaven and earth conspire to cast her on the treacherous, slavish shore.
-
Well somebody deserves some serious blame for that... Just don't know that it's the fault of the US, I mean we don't really blame Canada for Celine Dion. If we can saddle somebody with blame for Gore, who gets it for Araphat's Nobel prize?
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Also, buy 3-4 houses if you can. Then just ride it out.
I have been buying 3-4 houses a month for the last 3 months. But it's really not that simple; I've been having the sellers fiance them to me. First, this doesn't hit my credit and second, it allows me to re-sell them with seller financing. When interest rates start to move up like they were in the 80's seller financing will be the absolute best way to move houses.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long
Chris Austin wrote:
I have been buying 3-4 houses a month for the last 3 months. But it's really not that simple; I've been having the sellers fiance them to me. First, this doesn't hit my credit and second, it allows me to re-sell them with seller financing. When interest rates start to move up like they were in the 80's seller financing will be the absolute best way to move houses.
You should write a book and have Tony Roberts sell it in an infomercial.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Also, buy 3-4 houses if you can. Then just ride it out.
I have been buying 3-4 houses a month for the last 3 months. But it's really not that simple; I've been having the sellers fiance them to me. First, this doesn't hit my credit and second, it allows me to re-sell them with seller financing. When interest rates start to move up like they were in the 80's seller financing will be the absolute best way to move houses.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long
Chris Austin wrote:
I have been buying 3-4 houses a month for the last 3 months
Wow, that sounds risky. And is contrary to your signature.
Chris Austin wrote:
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without.
Hope it works our for you.
MrPlankton
-
BoneSoft wrote:
we don't really blame Canada for Celine Dion.
We don't??? She, alone, is reason to annex Prince Edward island.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Ok, I can't speak for the country... But I suppose somebody should be blamed for her. I was leaning towards the makers of the movie Titanic who gave her a career. Or Vegas for keeping her in that career.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Just hypothetically, what would happen in the worst case scenario?
I become Benevolent Leader for Life of the entire world after I seize control of the Swiss banking system. I'm working on it now, oops, I mean don't worry about it.
...that mortally intolerable truth; that all deep, earnest thinking is but the intrepid effort of the soul to keep the open independence of her sea; while the wildest winds of heaven and earth conspire to cast her on the treacherous, slavish shore.
73Zeppelin wrote:
I become Benevolent Leader for Life of the entire world after I seize control of the Swiss banking system. I'm working on it now, oops, I mean don't worry about it.
He said worst case. That's not you becoming Benevolent Leader for Life, that's Ilion becoming Benevolent Leader for Life.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
A Wong wrote:
recruited by terrorist
Don't see that happening. I can see that people en masse protesting - perhaps violently - at the gates of Government buildings and financial institutions.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
I can see that people en masse protesting - perhaps violently - at the gates of Government buildings and financial institutions.
I like the idea of the heads of the heads of government being prominently displayed on the spikes on the gates of government buildings. . .
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
I become Benevolent Leader for Life of the entire world after I seize control of the Swiss banking system. I'm working on it now, oops, I mean don't worry about it.
He said worst case. That's not you becoming Benevolent Leader for Life, that's Ilion becoming Benevolent Leader for Life.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Well, I can be pretty tyrannical but you do have a point...
...that mortally intolerable truth; that all deep, earnest thinking is but the intrepid effort of the soul to keep the open independence of her sea; while the wildest winds of heaven and earth conspire to cast her on the treacherous, slavish shore.
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
As a young teenager, your parents should be able to protect you from the worst of the present ravages.
Protection? Ha! I don't need protection, I AM INVINCIBLE!
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Don't spend what you don't own. Don't buy on credit unless it is an affordable mortgage. Save what you can. Invest in a Pensions scheme for your old age (yep I know it is a very long way off but you need to think about it sooner rather than later).
OK, I'll remember that. And I have a pretty good memory, believe me. :-\
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Ha! I don't need protection, I AM INVINCIBLE!
Seen GoldenEye? You sound like Boris.
Cheers, Vıkram.
"if abusing me makes you a credible then i better give u the chance which didnt get in real" - Adnan Siddiqi.
-
Chris Austin wrote:
I have been buying 3-4 houses a month for the last 3 months. But it's really not that simple; I've been having the sellers fiance them to me. First, this doesn't hit my credit and second, it allows me to re-sell them with seller financing. When interest rates start to move up like they were in the 80's seller financing will be the absolute best way to move houses.
You should write a book and have Tony Roberts sell it in an infomercial.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Nope nothing infomercial about it. Just old school seller financing.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long
-
Chris Austin wrote:
I have been buying 3-4 houses a month for the last 3 months
Wow, that sounds risky. And is contrary to your signature.
Chris Austin wrote:
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without.
Hope it works our for you.
MrPlankton
MrPlankton wrote:
Wow, that sounds risky
Real estate is 100% local. In my marker we experienced almost none of the rampant inflation and subsequent deflation of house prices. Risk is mitigated by knowing your market and the worst case. Also, every loan I take out is a non-recourse loan which means it is only business credit with no guarantees by me personally.
MrPlankton wrote:
And is contrary to your signature.
Not really. These loans are not personal loans and have no guarantee by me personally. Also, these aren't loans for things like a TV or a car; this is revenue generation.
MrPlankton wrote:
Hope it works our for you.
Thanks, it has been working for quite some time. Now, our company has picked up it's pace of acquisitions.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long
-
I think its the only way out. They must manufacture and sell. They are still a resource rich country and weakening the dollar would help exports hugely. Anyone fancy a Dodge Viper for 15,000 euros?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Anyone fancy a Dodge Viper for 15,000 euros?
Thanks, but no thanks. Nice car, but the gas mileage is not good at all.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
No, there is no glee, it will be good to see the US get back to what it stood for 40 years ago.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
what it stood for 40 years ago
Free market capitalism and christianity?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Gotta pay your taxes to the king first. Back taxes I mean!
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
Waive the penalties and intereset and you've got a deal!
-
No. I've see this plenty of times before. Now is a really good time to buy stock in the DOW or S&P 500. Also, buy 3-4 houses if you can. Then just ride it out.
fat_boy wrote:
People have been saying for decades the US is bankrupt
Really? I remember not too long ago when Clinton wiped out the deficit.
My Blog: http://cynicalclots.blogspot.com
Dirk Higbee wrote:
when Clinton wiped out the deficit.
*cough* He what? Where was I? *cough* I seem to recall a hot economy (driven by the dotcom bubble) helping the deficit but the bubble burst well before the deficit was erased. What did Slick have to do with any of this?
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
when Clinton wiped out the deficit.
*cough* He what? Where was I? *cough* I seem to recall a hot economy (driven by the dotcom bubble) helping the deficit but the bubble burst well before the deficit was erased. What did Slick have to do with any of this?
According to this: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/hist.html[^] This xls file ( http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/sheets/hist01z1.xls[^] ) has the following (from the Total group for Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus or Deficit).
Year Total
Receipts Outlays Surplus or Deficit(−)1988 909,303 1,064,455 -155,152
1989 991,190 1,143,646 -152,456
1990 1,031,969 1,253,165 -221,195
1991 1,055,041 1,324,369 -269,328
1992 1,091,279 1,381,655 -290,376
1993 1,154,401 1,409,489 -255,087
1994 1,258,627 1,461,877 -203,250
1995 1,351,830 1,515,802 -163,972
1996 1,453,062 1,560,535 -107,473
1997 1,579,292 1,601,250 -21,958
1998 1,721,798 1,652,585 69,213
1999 1,827,454 1,701,891 125,563
2000 2,025,218 1,788,773 236,445
2001 1,991,194 1,863,770 127,424
2002 1,853,173 2,010,970 -157,797
2003 1,782,342 2,157,637 -375,295¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
According to this: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/hist.html[^] This xls file ( http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/sheets/hist01z1.xls[^] ) has the following (from the Total group for Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus or Deficit).
Year Total
Receipts Outlays Surplus or Deficit(−)1988 909,303 1,064,455 -155,152
1989 991,190 1,143,646 -152,456
1990 1,031,969 1,253,165 -221,195
1991 1,055,041 1,324,369 -269,328
1992 1,091,279 1,381,655 -290,376
1993 1,154,401 1,409,489 -255,087
1994 1,258,627 1,461,877 -203,250
1995 1,351,830 1,515,802 -163,972
1996 1,453,062 1,560,535 -107,473
1997 1,579,292 1,601,250 -21,958
1998 1,721,798 1,652,585 69,213
1999 1,827,454 1,701,891 125,563
2000 2,025,218 1,788,773 236,445
2001 1,991,194 1,863,770 127,424
2002 1,853,173 2,010,970 -157,797
2003 1,782,342 2,157,637 -375,295¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
1. My bad - I read "deficit" but thought "national debt". :-O 2. The big bubble in receipts (1998 - 2000) despite the steadily increased outlays during the same period seems to match my theory about credit going to the tech bubble v. Clinton. No?
I would *guess* that's partly true. But honestly I don't know enough about how this stuff works to offer much of an opinion one way or the other. It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?). And that the outlays (as you mentioned) *never* go down. Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence. In terms of national debt, http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif[^] According to the site, the graph is generated from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/[^] So from 1950 to 1980, national debt decreased steadily, increased back up during the 80's and early 90s (i.e. through Reagan-Bush) and decreased again during Clinton. Yet we ran a deficit from the 1950's all the way till now (with the exception of 1998-2000)! And for a whopper of an increase check out 1981-1983 - the deficit was -78,968 and by 1983 was -207,802. Yikes!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
I would *guess* that's partly true. But honestly I don't know enough about how this stuff works to offer much of an opinion one way or the other. It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?). And that the outlays (as you mentioned) *never* go down. Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence. In terms of national debt, http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif[^] According to the site, the graph is generated from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/[^] So from 1950 to 1980, national debt decreased steadily, increased back up during the 80's and early 90s (i.e. through Reagan-Bush) and decreased again during Clinton. Yet we ran a deficit from the 1950's all the way till now (with the exception of 1998-2000)! And for a whopper of an increase check out 1981-1983 - the deficit was -78,968 and by 1983 was -207,802. Yikes!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
Jim Crafton wrote:
It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?).
Given that the congress holds the purse strings couldn't one also say "accomplished by a Republican dominated house and senate with a Democratic president"? Sorry, my dislike of Bill Clinton is showing.
Jim Crafton wrote:
Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence.
Absolutely! The current administration and congress is spending like drunken sailors.
