Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Thanks, man! I appreciate the remarks.
On the surface, that's a good idea since there's significantly fewer mortgages than actual tax payers. The hard part is identifying those mortgages to pay down and by how much.
Do we pay down only the out of control adjustable rate mortgages? Are the conventional loans NOT in foreclosure going to be paid down? And, what about that $30k income earner who rents and doesn't make enough to actually pay taxes but sees all this money going to only home owners? I don't think any of our representatives are prepared for that political recourse.
Your idea is great because it would send the money back to the lenders' deposits, help homeowners keep their houses, help other homeowners build wealth (that's where you'll see the political recourse from the non-achievers), help the economy, and increase property values due to a slowing supply in the form of foreclosures.
Go a few steps further. After paying down the mortgages, force the lenders to rewrite the terms as conventional loans. Implement a one time 90% tax against the CEO's and CFO's that would go directly back to the treasury. And of course, a % of the lenders' deposits after 2 or 3 years should be taxed year after year until the bailout amount is paid back + 20%.
Not sure what that last step would do to the cost of mortgages though. We'd probably see loan fees double.
Interesting.
Since it's a big deal to the market and options trading, can we get the iBox updated with the list? LOL!
We'll feel the effects for years to come.
An add...
5) Election year - Representatives will do whatever it takes to save the banks or their political a$$'$
6) Increase in government
What we won't see...
1) CEO's pay redirected to help fund the bailout
2) Any bailout money going to help main street (yeah, this is one area I agree with Obama)
3) Accountability
4) Reprimands
5) Fines
6) Jail time
7) the Free Market dictating what banks will survive or not
8) Decrease in government spending, more than likely
Saw that on Yahoo finance. Had to be a typo. Here's what it's doing now:
GOOGLE(NasdaqGS: GOOG)
After Hours: 404.70 63.27 (18.53%)4:33PM EThelp
I guess earnings are going to be good.
Yeah, it had nothing to do with current volitility and the fact investors are setting themselves up accordingly to what they think the earnings will reveal.
Geesh.
Dollar gained which tells me there's no fear of diluting the U.S. currency. However, an article says the market rebounded because people believe a bailout plan will go through.
So which is it?
Gawd I hope the bailout doesn't happen.
Wow, regained 64% of yesterday's loss on the DOW.
Time for IBM to tank! But I have far out calls on them too. I guess it doesn't matter.
Here's my take on the crisis, as well as, why the blame game needs to stop. I believe the ones making the accusations fail to see their own actions into this mess. It isn't just the Democrats. It's Republican spending that got us to the point where we can't afford a bailout in the first place. My apologies in advance if this is against the forum rules: http://samaelrocks.wordpress.com/
No more politics on this thread from me. LOL!
Actually, GW called for regulation in FNM and FRE back in 2003. At least a dozen warnings or more from GW since 2001 to get more insight into at least those two institutions. Some on the other side fought against that because they thought it would make it tougher for low income, bad credit borrowers to get loans.
Of course, was calling for insight better or worse? Maybe GW should have simply sent a memo to the CEO's of these banks with his opinion as to what was going to happen if they kept extending risk into these mortgages. Followed by a note stating that tax payers were NOT going to bail them out.
The Mel Watt's, when fighting against the oversight increases, should have also stated that the government was not going to bail them out. But those same lenders would have, under the Community Reinvestment Act, been blasted for not approving enough loans.
Yup, there's plenty of blame to go around. But I'm tired of hearing about GW taking the hit. This started in 1997, period.
I'm more interested in seeing how the market will react to NOT getting a bail out. I hope it does not happen. A true test in seeing what the free market can accomplish.
Edit - Today, those same institutions can make the decision whether or not to foreclose. They can make the decision whether or not to rewrite the terms so that the subprime folks could get back a reasonable payment/interest rate. They don't need the government.
It was a voter's revolt. Constituants phoned in their disdain of the bill and the representatives listened.
Republicans (voters) generally do not think it's the government's responsibility to bail out private business.
The vote counts speak pretty clearly to that, IMO.
LOL! When does Rufus plan to file for the increase in authorized shares?
I was kinda surprised the media made Republicans out to be Pro-bailout. I wasn't surprised with what the voting showed on either side of the aisle. LOL!
If you COULD have puts! LOL!
Even IBM was added to the no short list.
It's going to get worse. But not because of the markets or the SEC. It's going to get worse because banks are going under. No money to lend thus no investments for growth in the way of small business loans, property, and harder to get money for consumer items from clothes to automobiles. Also less capital going into the market. Here's my take:
http://samaelrocks.wordpress.com/
The only thing about capitalism that bugs me are the unusually large salaries paid to those officers that bankrupt companies. Hell, look at Delta. There's a lot of them. We can also blame that on board members and majority holders of public companies. Of course, those board members and majority share holders are generally the officers that create the huge salaries anyway.
Maybe the Fed should offer bailouts to those companies prepared to cut CEO salaries by 90% plus regardless of what the board thinks. Or, let them keep their salaries as long as 90% goes to bailing out the lowest income level borrowers of their institutions from foreclosure. LOL!
It all surrounds lending risky terms money without proper backing.
LOL!
Naw, I just didn't hedge my plays. I also fully expected the bail out to go through and boost the market even though I don't like the bailout idea.
I just lost the bet this time.
Let's see how many positions I can close without taking a beating. I'll keep my IBM calls but the rest has got to go whenever anything decides to bounce.
I KNEW I shouldn't have bought those RIMM calls. Darn it. LOL!
Down over $3,000 from last week across all positions. Argh!
That's a good thing, IMO.
But then again, with all these banks going under, that also means HIGHER unemployment. I wonder what that's going to cost?
Wow! GOOG is down $35.
At -$25, I was thinking maybe buying some calls for a bounce but I don't think I'll be buying anything today. Geeze.
Check out GOOG as well. Wow.
IBM is down also but only by $3 + so far. Actually hoping it drops to $100 so I can buy up the stock. They have a .50 dividend.
100k bucks @ $100 per share = 1000 shares which = $500 per quarter. 2% return in dividens alone.
Anyone playing AAPL? Man, I just looked at the ticker. Down $20! Wow!
If anyone is interested when this credit crisis started:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
"Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999
In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring."
When he put them on the balance sheet without showing the liability side.
When Rufus claimed the book value was $70+ due to the "assets."
When Rufus claimed that he could sell the assets if he wanted without owing anyone any money in return.
Who owns those billion in treasury notes he wanted Alana to deposit for him? LOL!
Do any of you faithful understand the subject matter of P/E and how it relates to the book value and works as a multiplier as to what people are willing to pay for the stock?
How much trading experience do you guys have? I know some only have the 2 years due to this mess but fail to read anything they don't believe or understand.
I just can't believe what the faithful don't know after all this time reading about the markets.
You're not on trial. Rufus was. Rufus was the one that said he owned them, or at least CSHD did thus he lied.
Duhhhhh.
Yeah, I played follow the leader (against my better judgement) and bought these:
.RULCT RIMM MAR 2009 100 Calls @ 4.90.
I'm down about 10% but since the bailout went through, the market ought to look pretty good on Monday. Hopefully, that will translate to RIMM as well.
I would never have looked if it weren't posted and the stock being down 25 bucks! LOL! But, looking at the history and not the tech's on the stock, seems no way to go but up!
BTW, it might be too late but IBM calls are doing well now. DIA calls started doing well late last week. More to grow on those with the DJI, IMO.
I think there were a few crazies on the secret board that thought CSHD wsa going to come in to help the market after the crisis. LOL!
I'm only guessing here but if the bond agreements were real, Rufus could have used part of the float he claimed to have locked up and sold about 300k shares to pay for the use of the assets.
LOL!
That would have been too much like "work."
Well, my point is this...
How in the hell are you going to use that logic regarding what the company owes or doesn't owe Delaware, yet abandon the same type logic when it comes to the assets that were lied about?
LOL!
Has it really come to this? Arguing over what the company owes Delaware?
LOL!
I think the point is that Rufus doesn't care enough about the company to set Delaware straight regarding whether or not he wants to keep the corporate status in tact and clean.
Thanks! Watching those now.
Why is it dropping so much? I may take your suggestion and buy some calls on this.
The math is wrong.
Exactly well put:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080926/financial_meltdown.html
"Sen. Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican who appeared on the same show, said many GOP lawmakers dislike the proposal that has been pushed on the administration's behalf principally by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
"Basically, I believe the Paulson proposal is badly structured," Shelby said. "It does nothing basically for the stressed mortgage payer. It does a lot for three or four or five banks . ... "
Though both the lender and the borrower share = responsibility in these risky mortgages, it's making me sick that we only want to focus on bailing out one side of the issue.
There's no doubt in my mind that part of the monies for the bailout will be used by banks to pay attorneys doing the foreclosures, fixing up foreclosed homes for resale, and then deposits to back up new loans for people picking up cheap property.
IMO, if the bailout goes through, watch the foreclosures increase because the banks will have the influx of cash to accelerate the process.
Now that's funny. I actually saw my face on all those little bullet points making those same statements to my friends who don't trade. LOL!
Yeah, give it until Monday though. What's going to happen with the options is the premiums will die tomorrow so calls will be cheap.
It will churn while both calls and puts drop. So Monday will be the day, IMO. Not sure I'll bite though.
LOL! Why would it go up? Strong profit. Strong guidance. Of course it's going to tank.
I just read and watched what happened here. I do not have a position, but... The way it's acting, they must think ALL my funds are in RIMM calls though.
Thanks! Just write in "Samael" when you vote in November. Hehehe.
They'll wait till after the bell today. LOL!
They want to see Friday's action kick some butt so they feel vindicated.
They should have just divided all that cash up amongst all tax filers for 2007 and send us the checks. That would be about 3500 per tax payer. 7000 for joint filers (married couples).
700 Billion divided by about 200 Million tax payers.
I wonder how many houses that would save from foreclosure? And how much of that would go to banks in the form of deposits? And how much would go to buy a new car thus helping the economy and jobs? And how much would go to home improvements and thus helping the economy and jobs?
Noooooo. By giving it to the banks, the CEO's will probably see their multimillion dollar salaries cut by 10% at best. Banks will use the money to fund the attorneys they had to pay for foreclosures. They'll also use the cash to fix up houses that were foreclosed on, usually from the very tax payer that helped with the bailout, so they can sell it to someone else. Average foreclosure cost to lender is around 60 - 70k now days.
That's what I see happening. And the stock market will go up for a little while because of it. Meanwhile, shorters are salivating at the premium prices put on stocks between now and January when the short selling ban is lifted. Lifting that ban, as well as, negative news regarding the impact of the bailout will KILL the prices again.
Get your puts ready for next year! I just hope I earn enough in the market to beat next year's inflation. LOL!