delta 777

Bloomberg Reports Extreme Recession: I'm Shocked

Cash for clunkers is hardly a fair or equitable use of taxpayer dollars-people usually own clunkers for two reasons: either they are too poor to buy a better car (and therefore are too poor to buy an new car), or-if they are wealthy- they have kept the clunker as a secondary back-up car because it was worthless to sell or trade it in. Cash for clunkers selectively rewards the second group, while providing no benefit for those owners who were either prudent or sufficiently conscientious to dispose of a clunker as soon as possible. A possible third group: those who are wealthy enough to have given/sold their clunker to their kids, and now are wealthy enough to arrange an upgrade.
In all cases, despite the immediate gratification boon this gives to auto makers, this program will quickly reflect in future lower auto purchases.
It is also obvious from actual sales information that, in general, the new vehicles purchased under this program are far from being true economy cars.
Cash for Clunkers constitutes investment of taxpayer dollars to a select few individuals for consumable items; as opposed to using this taxpayer money to create infrastructure that will be of lasting benefit to the taxpayer that pays for it. (in addition to the obvious immediate creation of broad-based jobs)


On Aug 02 12:37 PM mushrumps wrote:

> Well, I am "disgustipated" with the clunkers program: 1) merely takes
> from future sales; 2) subsidizes the few who can afford to buy a
> new car with taxes and higher costs on those who cannot; 3) worst
> of all, deprives tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of potential buyers
> of serviceable transportation for $500 or so (think pizza, paper
> delivery people, etc.!)

Durable Goods Report: May vs. June Spin Cycle

your poignant statement:

"What struck me...... is that clear manipulation and fungible number play is right now being accepted..."

Pretty much sums up the sorry state of current ethics in Finance.

Why Obama's Economic Policies Are Failing

fascinating how you discuss the causes of bubble/bust/recession without mention of of CDOs/SIVs/credit default swaps and other assorted off-the-books financial instruments

Where Are the Jobs?

a lot of "working" folks are now on 5%-10% cuts in base pay in addition to mandatory unpaid furloughs--32 hour weeks.
Very hard on workers, and employers that want to survive have no other choices available to retain key employees.

Roubini Just Won't Turn Positive on the Economy

it looks like we will have a wonderful holiday season this year, judging from all the merchandise that is now being ordered for the season???Just think, the retailers will be able to close up their shops well before the season, and take their holidays early to go shopping??? Main streeters without jobs will also have so much extra time on their hands that they will just spend it shopping till they drop???and foreclosures that are now on hold will remain on hold??? and of course banks will be able to completely repay borrowed money and cover their written-down ass ets, and exotic derivative problems will have disappeared.

Welcome to Salvation (aka Mark to Myth)

assets based on home valuation should be based- not on last sale of that particular home- but on current sale of comps in the neighborhood--such realistic valuation for the asset should be in in perfect accord with what the bank can demonstrate it is currently willing and able to loan on purchase of that home to a person with reasonable credit. Such valuation must include neighborhood foreclosure valuations, because these valuations are the current reality ....any competent real estate appraiser can easily come up with accurate valuation based on comps--they do it every day---and banks lend on this basis.
ANY OTHER METHOD IS ONE BIG LIE.


On Apr 06 10:18 AM petyaczar wrote:

> Mark 2 Market should actually be called our for what it is
> Mark to Model where the model is based on the last sale
> Ergo M2M is really mark to lasat sale.
>
> Mark to Market is beyond Stupid. Its a theoretical construct that
> requires a willing owner (Unwilling seller) to mark down his assets
> to the point that a disinterested (unwilling potential buyer) might
> consider buying the asset.
>
> Show me where - in the real world - An willing owner/unwilling seller
> is required to mark down assets to the point where an unwilling buyer
> might consider a purchase of said assets.
>
> Only in Bizarro World. Never confuse accounting with reality. <br/>
>
> Dump Mark to Market as they did in the 1930's when they determined
> Mark to Market contributed greatly to the Great Depression as it
> sets up a cyclical feedback loop, the worse things get, the greater
> the mark downs and so the worse things get.
>
> Destroy Sarbanes/Oaxley, get rid of FASB 157.
> Reinstate Glass Steagall ACT separating commercial and iinvestment
> banks
> Reinstate the uptick rule on short sales
> Up margin requirements on commodities trading to 50%
> GET ALL POLITICIANS out of attempting to run U.S. companies.
> Make it illegal for politicians to interefere with U.S. copmany operations.
>
>
> IMO

Scary Numbers

kind of like a crowd eagerly attending a nascar race----there to watch the crashes even more than watching for who wins