Robot's Comments

President Obama’s stunning decision to demand Rick Wagoner's (GM) resignation "was based on the wrong set of premises and raises the prospect that the administration will intervene too deeply in the automaker, seriously jeopardizing a transformation effort that has come a long way in the right direction." - William J. Holstein, author of Why G.M. Matters

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:07:14 -0400

Everyone has an opinion.

Instead of trumpeting the fictitous benefits of "clean coal," the coal industry needs to get its head out of the mine and help find its own replacement - before it finds itself asking for TARP loans.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:59:32 -0400

The problem with people like you is that you don't understand global climate change as evidenced by the fact that you call it global warming. There is a general warming trend, but the impact of that has both warming and cooling consequences in areas traditionally the opposite of what they would be. David, try harder...

On Mar 27 02:45 PM davidingeorgia wrote:

> chock full of almost every global warming myth in existence...congrats
> on packing so many into such a small amount of type.

While lawmakers press for answers about what happened and is happening at AIG (AIG), WSJ discovers the government's had a paid mole there for the past four years.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:18:35 -0400

Nick, I didn't think about that angle, but it should be an obvious one. Thanks.

While lawmakers press for answers about what happened and is happening at AIG (AIG), WSJ discovers the government's had a paid mole there for the past four years.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:34:55 -0400

ETFtrader got it right!! Thanks!

While lawmakers press for answers about what happened and is happening at AIG (AIG), WSJ discovers the government's had a paid mole there for the past four years.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:33:02 -0400

That didn't work at all, but the point is, I found the link. Sorry for the posts with nothing in them.

While lawmakers press for answers about what happened and is happening at AIG (AIG), WSJ discovers the government's had a paid mole there for the past four years.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:31:17 -0400

online.wsj.com/article...

While lawmakers press for answers about what happened and is happening at AIG (AIG), WSJ discovers the government's had a paid mole there for the past four years.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:31:04 -0400

possibly this link?

online.wsj.com/article...

While lawmakers press for answers about what happened and is happening at AIG (AIG), WSJ discovers the government's had a paid mole there for the past four years.

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:27:42 -0400

Good on the government! Seriously, I couldn't care less about the lenders or the stupid people who took on overwhelming risk/debt. To be honest I am curious how all this plays out because I want to know how it effects the various facets of society in general. Unfortunately, our species probably still isn't smart enough to really be proactive enough to take the big leaps and bounds I think we need. That could just be because we are all quite different at an individual level, though.

Get it right, or else: "If we do not use current political momentum to fundamentally reform a system which has shown itself to be unstable and even dangerous, a second opportunity may come at a very high price."

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:48:58 -0400

I had breaks in my response and I don't know where they went. Sorry for the block of text.

Get it right, or else: "If we do not use current political momentum to fundamentally reform a system which has shown itself to be unstable and even dangerous, a second opportunity may come at a very high price."

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:47:39 -0400

2houndz = sweet name!! Actually, I'm just trying to be nice.

Remington is implying that political momentum in and of itself will lead to hasty and costly mistakes. That isn't true in the slightest. Sure, political momentum has the possibility to lead to hasty mistakes, but political momentum can be the catalyst for positive change as well! There are historical examples of both. Political momentum may be just what we need to drive reform now rather than attempting to cautiously apply a band-aid to a flesh wound! By the way, there are arguments that support both sides. My only fear is that if we wait too long to undertake reform we will end up with a problem temporarily solved through other means (for example, time itself).
Also, in reading Remington’s comments he seems to dumb things down to republicans vs. democrats/conservatives vs. liberals. Read with my understanding of who Remington is, his statement reads, “Left-dominated, political momentum = hasty, costly mistakes.” This is a dumbing down of the situation at hand. I could be wrong and I am absolutely open to that, but unless I am corrected that is all I have to operate off of.

With regards to your response, I wouldn’t disagree that haste should be avoided, but purposeful urgency isn’t a bad thing.

On Mar 25 08:01 PM 2houndz wrote:

> Robot = Dumbass who can't read inference.
>
> Nowhere above is anyone suggesting that we don't need reform, we
> just don't need to do it in such a hurry and under such duress that
> legislation doesn't get read before being signed into law. We now
> know from experience that when that happens more legislation is needed
> the very next week to adjust the law Congress signed that they didn't
> even read.

Get it right, or else: "If we do not use current political momentum to fundamentally reform a system which has shown itself to be unstable and even dangerous, a second opportunity may come at a very high price."

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:15:37 -0400

j_remington = dolt! What blanket statement is ever completely right? We do need to reform a system that is dependent on huge debt for huge growth. Many of the resources that we have have reached peak and many say that led to where we are now. This system does need reform.

On Mar 25 06:57 PM j_remington wrote:

> political momentum = hasty, costly mistakes

True, we managed to have a national debt that exceeded 100% of GDP at the end of WWII - but of course the entire globe was either bombed to rubble, in a primitive economic state or under the boot of communism, which stifled economic competition. Does that sound like the world we live in today?

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:32:35 -0400

Can someone help me out on this one? The bid-to-cover ratio was low and Seeking Alpha clearly shows the percentage drop. Interest in the securities at auction were low. Now, on to the middle finger part. Who exactly were the bidder's and what are they waiting on? Is it simply unhappy folks trying to throw their weight around?

On Mar 25 03:57 PM trader1138 wrote:

> i believe it's called a 'rhetorical' question. and just for kicks,
> look at the bid-to-cover on today's treasury auction...what's that?...a
> giant middle finger from the bidders? wow, i think that's what we
> call a "shot over the bow".

Paychex (PAYX): FQ3 EPS of $0.36 in-line. Revenue of $529M (-0.7%) vs. $537M. Shares -0.3% AH. (PR)

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:18:32 -0400

I just don't understand investors sometimes.

True, we managed to have a national debt that exceeded 100% of GDP at the end of WWII - but of course the entire globe was either bombed to rubble, in a primitive economic state or under the boot of communism, which stifled economic competition. Does that sound like the world we live in today?

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:45:38 -0400

What people do you see as being able to "pull it off?" You can be idealistic here. Name anyone (looking for a tandem here) that you think would have all the tools and sense necessary.

On Mar 25 03:41 PM j_remington wrote:

> The main difference is after WWII the foriegn countries needed to
> rebuild which provided worldwide stimulus. Today there is mainly
> worldwide contraction whichis exactly opposite.
>
> A deficit is appropriate at the right time. Now is far from being
> the right time. Obama/Geithner has no economic sense nor experience.
> And this will perpetrate the downfall of the US.

Geithner may have it right after all, Newsweek's Michael Hirsh says. Or, as Abby Joseph Cohen gushed, "The reaction to the new sheriff and his posse is finally turning positive."

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:42:08 -0400

I don't have enough of a grasp on history to know how things play out, but do you think that even if people don't have a ton of control (due to emotion, shortsightedness, etc.) over where we are headed, some things are just self-fulfilling?

For example, people hope that things will be better and of course we want things to be better. Fear can paralyze us in the face of say, the current financial crisis, but is just thinking positive and projecting positive enough to be a self-fulfilling catalyst to better times?

On Mar 25 02:38 PM Jolly_Rancher wrote:

> I think these people commenting really don't know. I think they're
> scared of the nightmare we're experiencing; they don't want to lose
> their jobs, or, even worse, their livelihoods. So I think they say
> to themselves, let's just think positive and project positive and
> the world will be positive eventually. And maybe they are right.

Jake DeSantis, EVP of AIG's (AIG) financial products unit, resigns. "I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations... and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut."

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:31:15 -0400

You've hit the nail on the head if you ask me. You should watch the movie, Split: A Divided America. I wouldn't say the film goes too in-depth, but the media piece is very interesting. The film itself is very non-partisan as well. At least from my point of view.

On Mar 25 02:46 PM CJJ wrote:

> What I love here so much is that the media, bloggers and many posters
> were outraged at the bonuses going to AIG. Now this guy writes an
> OP-ED piece and the people are still saying "hey the bonuses are
> crap no matter if you were involved in the Derivities group or not
> and if you stuck around expecting them, your problem"...but the same
> media that fueled the furor over the bonuses in the first place is
> now flip flopping and saying the bonuses are valid and should have
> been paid...or at least renegotiated prior to asking people to return
> them.
>
> I'll say it one time. THERE IS NO JOURNALISM ANYMORE. THERE IS ONLY
> EDITORIALISM and SENSATIONALISM.
> People look for the next shoe to get riled up about. Do that for
> 2 weeks and then move on.
>
> Oil prices go sky high. Outrage to drill. Outrage to fund alternative
> energy...etc, etc. Oil goes down, issue goes away.
>
> Health care prices are out of control while 20% of people don't even
> have health care...People want the problem fixed for a few weeks.
> Then they say other issues are more pressing and lets hold off.

>
> Its a freaking joke and the reason Congress, the Media, and the People
> of this Nation would rather rankle and roar about a new issue every
> week than actually solving anything.

Yielding to international pressure, Andorra and Liechtenstein (accounting for 1% of the $11.5T offshore banking industry) promise to relax their bank-secrecy laws. The real question is whether major tax-havens like Switzerland will follow suit.

Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:39:31 -0400

The Swiss should not yield!

John Hussman: However It's Written, TARP Is a Bad Idea

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:30:24 -0400

I'm thinking my comment was to Whidbey, but something goofy is happening on SA (Seeking Alpha). If my post applies to your post then my questions were directed at you. Thanks all.

Sarah Palin's Stock Portfolio

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:28:19 -0400

Curious cat, that last statement again goes off of some pretty wild assumptions. Take some advice here and don't let yourself be ruled by fear and ignorance. What evidence, since the burden of proof lies with you on this, does McCain show/provide that he isn't crazy? If anything, you are supporting the fact that you think McCain is indeed crazy (Obama can be included here as well, for all I care). For example, "in general, anyone running for office has got some kind of mental problem. we just have to elect the "positive" crazies." I thought we put the notion of positive and negative crazies to rest, but you persist. In any case, I couldn't care less about Palin's portfolio and to be honest I doubt she manages most of it. Why, when she should be devoting much more of her time to family and her political career? That's not to say she doesn't have an interest in her portfolio though. Either way, the issue concerning whether or not she manages her portfolio does little to stir my soul. Neither do her choices in general. Last little bit, kumayoriburu, I completely agree with your assessment of the two political tickets.

John Hussman: However It's Written, TARP Is a Bad Idea

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:58:48 -0400

I like this better than what Dave wrote a few days ago! He was pleading with everyone to accept the Tarp. Let's just say, I didn't find his reasoning very convincing. Generally speaking, this article seems to makes some sense. A lot is being left out though, so the idea hardly leaves me spell-bound. Oh and Zooey, are you headed to the bomb shelter in the backyard or something? Armageddon is upon us and you emerge after it has taken place? Haha, I hope you get this, but I'm curious to know what you think it entails to have currency once again backed by metals. Are you referring to a new standard? Please give me a clue.

Paulson's Plan: Stop the Rot

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:37:41 -0400

Thank you market insight. This should not pass. We have got to find another way. Dave, the article reeks of naivete.