Game Changer: U.K. Decides Too Big to Fail Is Too Big to Exist [View article]
Do not bank with the big banks. There is still enough choice out there that you do not have to get gouged but these banks. Try out the credit unions. I have been doing all my banking with CUs for the past 25 years with narry a problem and they have as innovative products as the blood sucking banks.
Supreme Court Rules Against Banks: A Win for Consumer Protection [View article]
So dont bank with them!
On Jun 30 09:52 AM Angry Banker wrote:
> Conceptually this makes sense, but the downside is that multi-state > banks will now have to implement 50 different localized compliance > regimes, which will undoubtedly increase their costs of doing business. > And you know who bears the burden of those costs, don't you?
Why Executive Pay Will Remain a Big Issue [View article]
This is the most sane article on this subject that I have read. The last decade and a half was of Robber Barons and if we do not contol them we will see another destructive cycle in 10 years! Isnt goverment there to enforce a fair system for all so what is different here?
Pierre Bourdieu, Tim Geithner, and Cultural Capital [View article]
Wall Street was created by the rich for the rich. It contributes zilch. My CEOs net worth is dictated by what wall street thinks of the company. Mine is dictated by how much product we can sell. It is a falacy created by wall street that they are necessary for survival of this country. Yes we need credit for the groth of capitalsim... Does the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh not provide credit? What about the local bank or credit union. They are the real engins of growth not BofA.
Currently there are no oppsing views in the adminstration. We urgently need a person at the helm who is not influenced by his time in wall street.
Why Economists Have Downgraded Obama to Bush-Plus [View article]
Are these the same economists who have been doing such a great job of calling the economy these last few years! man they sure know what they are doing!
Mortgage Refinancing Is Not the Solution [View article]
Just rehash on the old stuff. I have read this analysis in one form or another from everybody and their mother who writes about the housing crisis. Do you have a solution! If you dont then get out of the way and let them try!
Misunderstanding the Great Recession [View article]
My company is a prime example of one being run by bean counters. Of the top 10 executives not one has a background other than finance. over the past five years profits are generated by cutting cost rather than incresing reveues. I am sure that at least 50% of the S&P 500 companies have a similar management makeup. All those Harvard MBAs (like Mr. Bush) will run you into the ground filling their own coffers!
Don't Be Scammed by Madoff Investor Sob Stories [View article]
Dont really care it still hold true - If you play it can go either way. So no crying when you loose! My view of the bailout is that its payback to the industry for all the money they gave to the politicians!
On Dec 21 05:27 PM PBB wrote:
> Matthew-In all due respect, you have no idea what you're talking > about. And the comments posted indicated others are equally uninformed > as to what the investors were told, and what they thought. > 1. Many of the individuals were not investing in a hedge fund. They > opened segregated brokerage accounts in a registered broker/dealer, > and otherwise provided Madoff with discretionary investing over these > accounts. > 2. The concept that these people thought that Madoff was making money > for them by 'front running' is preposterous. > 3. Its not as if other fund 'managers' weren't delivering similar, > if not greater returns over the past decade. Paulson (John, not Henry); > Paul Jones; George Soros (his returns were more volatile, perhaps), > and even lesser-known people such as Israel Englander's Millenium > Partners. So receiving 8%-10% per year, when more high profile funds > were reporting 2x that amount was nothing short of brilliant on the > part of Madoff. He appealed to the investors sense of conservatism > and low-risk tolerance. > > 4. SIPC provides no more than $500,000 in protection.Nobody knows > what the average account size was. Let's guess the mean was $2.5 > million--but because at least 50 individuals had more than $10 million > on depsoit, and at least two dozen had $50 million+, and some representing > the absolute entirety of their assets (excluding their home, or perhaps > two homes), those people, at best, will be able to recover $500k. > The vast majority are in their late 60's to early 80's. That means > that those that lost every penny will have to wait at least two years > before they see any SIPC money, if they do at all. OK, they'll have > $500k to support themselves for the next 15-20 years. > > So the typical profile, a 73year old man and his wife, will need > to survive on a budget of $25,000 per year. That's about $2000 a > month. > Is that what you wish on your parents or your grandparents? > > Sure, most of the people were smart enough to put in no more 50%, > and many are left with at least several million to live off. So to > that extent, you're right, many will simply have to learn to less > in a less glamorous manner. B > > Before you post more comments on this topic, you might want to do > a bit more research, and actually speak to people that were impacted. >
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedGame Changer: U.K. Decides Too Big to Fail Is Too Big to Exist [View article]
Rajaratnam Indictment: Wall Street Wrongdoing Remains Pervasive [View article]
The Secret Paulson-Goldman Meeting [View article]
Supreme Court Rules Against Banks: A Win for Consumer Protection [View article]
On Jun 30 09:52 AM Angry Banker wrote:
> Conceptually this makes sense, but the downside is that multi-state
> banks will now have to implement 50 different localized compliance
> regimes, which will undoubtedly increase their costs of doing business.
> And you know who bears the burden of those costs, don't you?
The Coming Economic Collapse, Part 2 [View article]
Why Executive Pay Will Remain a Big Issue [View article]
Isnt goverment there to enforce a fair system for all so what is different here?
Pierre Bourdieu, Tim Geithner, and Cultural Capital [View article]
It is a falacy created by wall street that they are necessary for survival of this country. Yes we need credit for the groth of capitalsim... Does the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh not provide credit? What about the local bank or credit union. They are the real engins of growth not BofA.
Currently there are no oppsing views in the adminstration. We urgently need a person at the helm who is not influenced by his time in wall street.
Why Economists Have Downgraded Obama to Bush-Plus [View article]
Mortgage Refinancing Is Not the Solution [View article]
Misunderstanding the Great Recession [View article]
Exclusive Interview with Jim Rogers: Inflation Is Coming [View article]
The New Normal [View article]
I dont mind getting a raise if everythings going to cost less!
The Bailouts Are Doomed - All of Them [View article]
The Emperor has new clothes!
Don't Be Scammed by Madoff Investor Sob Stories [View article]
My view of the bailout is that its payback to the industry for all the money they gave to the politicians!
On Dec 21 05:27 PM PBB wrote:
> Matthew-In all due respect, you have no idea what you're talking
> about. And the comments posted indicated others are equally uninformed
> as to what the investors were told, and what they thought.
> 1. Many of the individuals were not investing in a hedge fund. They
> opened segregated brokerage accounts in a registered broker/dealer,
> and otherwise provided Madoff with discretionary investing over these
> accounts.
> 2. The concept that these people thought that Madoff was making money
> for them by 'front running' is preposterous.
> 3. Its not as if other fund 'managers' weren't delivering similar,
> if not greater returns over the past decade. Paulson (John, not Henry);
> Paul Jones; George Soros (his returns were more volatile, perhaps),
> and even lesser-known people such as Israel Englander's Millenium
> Partners. So receiving 8%-10% per year, when more high profile funds
> were reporting 2x that amount was nothing short of brilliant on the
> part of Madoff. He appealed to the investors sense of conservatism
> and low-risk tolerance.
>
> 4. SIPC provides no more than $500,000 in protection.Nobody knows
> what the average account size was. Let's guess the mean was $2.5
> million--but because at least 50 individuals had more than $10 million
> on depsoit, and at least two dozen had $50 million+, and some representing
> the absolute entirety of their assets (excluding their home, or perhaps
> two homes), those people, at best, will be able to recover $500k.
> The vast majority are in their late 60's to early 80's. That means
> that those that lost every penny will have to wait at least two years
> before they see any SIPC money, if they do at all. OK, they'll have
> $500k to support themselves for the next 15-20 years.
>
> So the typical profile, a 73year old man and his wife, will need
> to survive on a budget of $25,000 per year. That's about $2000 a
> month.
> Is that what you wish on your parents or your grandparents?
>
> Sure, most of the people were smart enough to put in no more 50%,
> and many are left with at least several million to live off. So to
> that extent, you're right, many will simply have to learn to less
> in a less glamorous manner. B
>
> Before you post more comments on this topic, you might want to do
> a bit more research, and actually speak to people that were impacted.
>
Obama's Choice for SEC Chief: 'Strong Investor Advocate' Schapiro [View article]