nnuut's Account Talk

[Silverbird]

It's the bungee bounce, I tell you.

 

[Birchtree]

I say keep those filters clean, the water sweet and the wife happy.

 

[nnuut]

Wow Birch look at my standing today? I'd best straighten up!
-6.66 % 0.16 %

 

[FogSailing]

As Nnut said: Ribit!!! Ribit!!! Hessian...

FS

 

[nnuut]

And the "S" Fund just said to the "C" Fund, "TAG!!! You're it"!!!

 

[nnuut]

I think we all understand what Bush is saying here!:worried: No Sir, I don't like it!!

Bush Says Breakaway Regions Must Remain Part of Georgia

Saturday, August 16, 2008

• • CRAWFORD, Texas — President Bush is sending a stern warning to Russia that it cannot lay claim to two disputed regions in Georgia.

Bush says there is no room for debate on this point. He says the breakaway provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia are part of Georgia and lie within internationally recognized borders. Russia's foreign minister has said that Georgia could forget about getting back those provinces.
Russia's president met in the Kremlin this past week with the leaders of those regions. That was seen as a sign that Moscow could absorb the areas.
Bush also says Russia must abide by a cease-fire that Georgia and Russia now have signed. It calls for both forces to pull back to positions they held before fighting broke out Aug. 8.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,404937,00.html

 

[luv2read]

Bush needs to keep his mouth shut and his fingers out of the pie. Too bad he doesn't learn from his mistakes. Oops, I forgot, he doesn't make mistakes. :toung:

 

[nnuut]

I think you could replace Condalisa Rice!
Weekly Shadow trader!!
http://www.redoption.com/shadow_video.php

 

[nnuut]

Why the buck stops here

The dollar has had a nice run, but a soft economy is likely to cut the rally short.

By Colin Barr, senior writer
August 13, 2008: 10:37 AM EDT

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- The dollar has sprung off its deathbed, but a swift return to ruddy good health looks like a long shot.
After years of steady depreciation, the U.S. currency has rallied strongly this month. The surge in the dollar's purchasing power - a euro now fetches $1.50, down from $1.57 near the end of July and $1.60 in April - is good news for U.S. consumers, because a stronger currency makes imported goods cheaper and helps to hold down inflation.
And inflation, of course, can use some holding down: even after recent declines, the prices of commodities from crude oil to corn remain sharply above year-ago levels.
Unfortunately, the dollar may not be much help there in coming months, because its run may be coming to an end. Yes, it's true that European economies are struggling against a looming recession, which is bad for the euro. But the fact is that weak U.S. fundamentals - particularly in the housing and finance sectors, as well as the nation's need to borrow overseas to finance current spending - are likely to cap the dollar's gains.
"Nothing here is sunny," said CMC Markets currency strategist Ashraf Laidi. He likens the dollar's recent gains against the euro to a campaign between two unpopular politicians, one of whom "wins by default."
A sharp fall...[more]http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/13/news/buck_stops.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008081310

 

[nnuut]

100% "G" COB today!! that's it until Sept. 2 IFTs such a deal, I feel so much more secure!!:nuts:

 

[nnuut]

Another BIG down day so far. Might be conformation of a retest of the July Low? Happy where I am for now. View attachment 4486

 

[nnuut]

Banks still paying for being Crooks!!
They think it's a long way from being over!


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7569903.stm

US bank 'to fail within months'

A "whopper" bank is going to "go under", Mr Rogoff said

The global financial crisis is set to get worse, with a large US bank likely to collapse in the next few months, a former IMF chief economist has warned.

Kenneth Rogoff's comments came as shares in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sank on a report that the home lenders would, in effect, be nationalised.
Despite hopes that the US economy had turned the corner, Mr Rogoff claimed it was "not out of the woods".
"I would even go further to say 'the worst is to come'," he said.
"We're not just going to see mid-sized banks go under in the next few months," said Mr Rogoff, who held the IMF role between 2001 and 2004.
"We're going to see a whopper, we're going to see a big one, one of the big investment banks or big banks."

We have to see more consolidation in the financial sector before this is over

Kenneth Rogoff

Speaking at a conference in Singapore, Mr Rogoff, now an economics professor at Harvard, forecast that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would "probably" not exist in their present form in a few years.
"We have to see more consolidation in the financial sector before this is over."
On Monday, shares of Fannie Mae fell more than 22%, or $1.76, to close at $6.15. Shares of Freddie Mac fell almost 25%, or $1.46, to $4.39.
'Wrong move'
Shares in Freddie and Fannie first fell sharply last month on fears that they would run out of money to fund their business, forcing the US government to take radical steps to ease the panic.
The two firms are the backbone of the US mortgage market as almost all US lenders rely on them to buy their mortgages in order to access the funds to lend to consumers.
As mortgage guarantors, they must pay out when homeowners default on their loans.
With the housing market across the US crumbling, their finances have come under severe stress.
Problems in the US housing sector prompted the Federal Reserve to slash interest rates to 2% earlier this year. But Mr Rogoff said the Fed was wrong to cut interest rates as "dramatically" as it did. "Cutting interest rates is going to lead to a lot of inflation in the next few years in the United States," he added.

 

[luv2read]

More on that here:

http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showpost.php?p=176321&postcount=16

Fed and Paulson set precedents with bailouts of BSC and Fannie/Freddie. I doubt they can or will allow any of the major banks to fail...the same faulty logic they used for those bailouts still applies. Letting any other banks fail would raise too many questions as to why BSC/JPM received favored treatment. And they will always save their buddies instead of telling them to pull up their big boy britches, take their lumps and get over it.

 

[Birchtree]

My question is why are so many creepy homeowners wanting to default on their home loans - what ever happened to taking responsibility for ones' actions. I hope these fools all end up living in tents rather than subsidized government housing.

 

[luv2read]

My question is why are so many creepy homeowners wanting to default on their home loans - what ever happened to taking responsibility for ones' actions. I hope these fools all end up living in tents rather than subsidized government housing.

Because so many greedy bankers sold them creepy loans under false pretenses without checking their credit or making sure they could afford them. :toung:

 

[Silverbird]

My question is why are so many creepy homeowners wanting to default on their home loans - what ever happened to taking responsibility for ones' actions. I hope these fools all end up living in tents rather than subsidized government housing.

Dunno, Birch, Luv, most of the guys who wrote those loans sold them off as tranches and already got their money. Responsibility was not to be found on either side of this transaction, and only the loan writers got the money. The banks happen to be the ones holding the bag, though they are equally foolish for buying this junk.

The extent of the mess: unknown, since these loans presented no risk for the lenders, and the paperwork connected to them is probably highly questionable. Regulations needed here cause someone can legally run away with the money with no economic consequences, actually the situation encourages the largest and most foolish loan possible.

 

[nnuut]

My question is why are so many creepy homeowners wanting to default on their home loans - what ever happened to taking responsibility for ones' actions. I hope these fools all end up living in tents rather than subsidized government housing.

I agree with that in most of the cases, but some, probably didn't have any idea what they were getting into, but the bankers did and should NOT have approved their loans. I think the majority were well aware of what they were doing, If they over bought, if it was for speculation, "flip that house", trying to make a killing, then they should eat it!
When I bought my first house the VA would NOT approve your loan if the loan payment was more than 25% of your gross salary, WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT? Politicians let us down again to make a buck, I'd say!!:notrust:

 

[XL-entLady]

My question is why are so many creepy homeowners wanting to default on their home loans - what ever happened to taking responsibility for ones' actions. I hope these fools all end up living in tents rather than subsidized government housing.

Someone in my extended family is inching closer to foreclosure every day. He was downsized out of a job because of the economy and found another job in another area. Now he owes more on his house than it's worth (3 years ago he had 25% equity) and he can't sell his house because credit has tightened enough that ordinary folks aren't qualifying for loans anymore. So he's paying for his house payment and a rent payment every month and doing it on less than he used to make.

How many months do you think my family "creep" can keep doing that before he defaults? :blink:

Lady

 

[luv2read]

Credit squeeze getting worse, banks say
Most banks less willing to lend to businesses, consumers
By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
Last update: 3:34 p.m. EDT Aug. 11, 2008
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The credit squeeze worsened in the past three months, the Federal Reserve reported Monday, and most banks expect to keep a lid on credit for the next year at least.
Despite all the aggressive moves by the Fed in the past year to ease the flow of credit to the economy, a record percentage of banks were making it more difficult for borrowers in the three months ending in July, the Fed said in its quarterly senior loan officer survey of 52 major banks.
A majority of banks tightened their rules for granting loans to businesses and consumers. The survey shows little appetite at banks to lend for home mortgages, credit cards, home equity loans, commercial real estate loans, or commercial and industrial loans.
No bank in the survey eased credit terms for any type of loan in the past three months, and only one bank said it anticipated easing standards for consumers in the next 12 months.
Tighter credit could slow economic growth, especially consumer spending, economists say. Lack of credit could sink the commercial real estate market, and curb capital investments by businesses. The survey is considered a leading indicator of credit creation in the United States.
"This is consistent with our view that consumer spending will slow markedly over the next several quarters," wrote economists for Lehman Bros.
"The impending tightening may ultimately curb consumer credit noticeably," wrote Harm Bandholz, an economist for UniCredit Markets. "This in turn would be another nail in the coffin of the U.S. consumer, who is already suffering from the weak labor market, high inflation and falling house prices."
Despite the tighter credit standards, however, other data from the Fed show consumers increased their borrowing on credit cards and auto loans through the end of the second quarter, perhaps because other sources of borrowing, such as home-equity loans and auto leases, are less available.
Banks told the Fed they were restricting credit because of worries about the economy, worries about risk or illiquid markets, and worries about their own fragile capital position.
Ninety-eight percent of the banks cited the uncertain economy, 92% cited illiquid secondary credit markets, and 75% cited reduced appetite for risk.
Banks were lowering credit lines, increasing interest-rate spreads, requiring more documentation, demanding more collateral, or requiring co-signers and or covenants before granting credit.
Consumers continued to be hit hard by tighter credit standards. A record 74% of banks said they had tightened standards for prime mortgages, usually given only to those with the best credit. A record 84% of banks said they tightened standards on nontraditional mortgages (also known as Alt-A), and a record 86% of banks that still make subprime mortgages said they had tightened those standards.
Businesses were also being squeezed. A record 65% of banks tightened standards for commercial and industrial loans to small customers. For commercial real estate loans, a record 81% tightened standards.
Details
C&I loans: Fifty-eight percent of banks tightened standards for commercial and industrial loans to large and medium firms, while 65% tightened for small firms.
Commercial real estate: Eighty-one percent tightened standards, while 50% said demand was weakening.
Residential mortgages: A record 74% of banks said they tightened standards for prime mortgages, while 53% said they saw reduced demand. For subprime mortgages, 86% tightened standards, with the number of banks who offer such loans declining to 14% of banks from about 30% two years ago. For nontraditional mortgages, 84% tightened standards while 63% reported reduced demand.
Consumer credit: A record 36% of banks reported less willingness to extend consumer installment loans; only 2% were more willing.
Eighty percent tightened standards on home-equity lines of credit.
For credit cards, 67% tightened standards, mostly by refusing new loans to consumers without good credit.

...

 

[nnuut]

Sad to say that many, many fell into this trap and there is no way out for many GOOD FAMILIES!!! Where is the BAILOUT? :nuts: