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.
Hi Doc.007
The Ur-Chicken must have been created during- and by the evolution at some point, is the only possible explanation and that also answers the other questions.
Well, there is the egg first possibility that can also be explained by evolution.
Explaining the evolution itself by all details, we as humans also just part of the evolution cannot and therefore related will always remain some "Secrets For Us" for which for the wording "God" originally got created.
The question for me is unknowable and so there is a mysterium (like so many things) that remains and there is an easiness with not knowing and knowing the limit of reason, words and faith.
However, one can leave the mysterium and venture to imagine and believe the chicken came first or imagine and believe the egg came first for whatever man-made reasons.
That we need to accept and we also don't need to have answers for everything, accepting and respecting the nature of what we cannot explain is enough.
Yes and without naming.
Hi Doc.007,
My answer is simple "The Chicken must be first, because as known only Chicken can produce Eggs."
This also means that at some point in the evolution there must have been some Ur-Chicken capable to create Eggs to multiply for the Chickens able to exist. Using known physical facts to form conclusions is legitimately.
Maybe you could be agree with me, or otherwise you at least would have something to counter if someone is trying to trick you with this.
Ur-Chicken?
Question: Where did the Ur-Chicken or first Chicken come from? An egg? where did that egg come from?
Hi Doc.007,
what is originally first "The Chicken or The Chicken-Egg ?"
If the "Chicken-Egg" has the same meaning as an "egg with a chicken embryo", then I do not know the answer.
It seems unknowable.
I can only guess and speculate about it using what I know about paleontology, evolution and mutations.
However, it is all imagining with little or no evidence or facts of any kind.
Supplement for GSE traders and investors :)
Politics By Aristotle
See Parts VIII and IX
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.1.one.html
Hi bcde,
Learning the distinction between natural and artificial chrematistics could be useful.
Thanks Dax1 for that.
Any news?
Hi curious999,
The report is at odds with Calabria et. al. notions of recap and cannot be taken seriously or as a factual account of what was stated until the note or report from which this news was supposedly extracted is located.
Hi fadeawayinc,
There is no issue with who is Ed Mills.
The issue is the source of statements attributed to policy analyst Ed Mills or Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
It was reported that there was an Ed Mills "note" or a Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. "report."
So far neither note nor report has been found.
ano is querying Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. since the report may be from Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. or from Ed Mills, who is a Managing Director and a Washington Policy Analyst at Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.
Hi ano,
That is a practical and useful solution. Thanks for that effort.
Hi ano,
There may be some confusion in the June 6, 2008 reporting of the source of the statements made by analyst Ed Mills of Raymond James Financial, Inc.
The common line repeated in digital media is:
You are welcome Guido2.
Hi tutt1126,
Thanks for the two articles.
Hi Guido2,
You are welcome.
Here are some 2008 David S. Hilzenrath articles.
Freddie CEO Feels Strain Of Firm's Twin Missions
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/05/AR2008080503351.html
U.S. Nears Rescue Plan For Fannie And Freddie
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/05/AR2008090503351.html
Treasury to Rescue Fannie and Freddie
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/06/AR2008090602540.html
Feds To Fannie: Your Jobs Are Secure
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washbizblog/2008/09/feds_to_fannie_your_jobs_are_s.html
David S. Hilzenrath articles at the Washington Post can be found here. 2008 articles start on page 35 of the search. From page 35 work backward (page 34, 33, 32, etc.) to cover all of 2008.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/newssearch/?datefilter=All%20Since%202005&query=David%20S.%20Hilzenrath&sort=Date&startat=0&utm_term=.78885d124e28&spellcheck#top
Some more 2008 articles/clips - http://www.fedfin.com/presscenter/press-clips/22-2008-press-clips
Thank you TRCPA.
Hi Blushing green,
As you may know, prudence advises against publicly revealing that.
I used Open Office Calc and data from May 31 2019 back to the election. I only update it once per week so I didn't have data until June 4 available.
The calculations are curious. Were publicly available closing prices used in calculating trailing and average log returns? If the latter is so, could you share the sheet(s) having the data, log return formulas and p values?
Hi chessmaster315,
#5. While an assumption that our government will act in accordance with the laws is "presumed", given that in the past the government acted outside of the applicable laws, it is entirely plausable it could happen again.
Yes.
#7 Thank you for correcting me on the IPO. (INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING). Since FNMA is an existing company, they can not have a "second" IPO.
You are welcome.
#11 There is no doubt that the government has spent NWS dividends. And, there is also no doubt it would be a "burden" for the US government to have to repay the overpayments. However, the decision makers who authorized this fiasco should have considered that possibility and the liablity therof, prior to confiscating shareholder funds and taking private property. I would like to see this happen to prevent this from happening again. If the government has "o" penalty for confiscation of private funds without due process, then the likeliness for a repeat in the future is high.
The government "diverted" these funds previously, and, it follows that this can be reversed. If you drive over the top of a mountain, there is a high likeleness you can also drive back.
In time, we will see the denouement of all of this.
#13 I dont pretend to have all the answers on "which shareholders" should benefit from a possible remedy. In the case of dividends, declared by a BOD, the Board declares an "x dividend date" to which shareholders are/are not entitled to dividend by owning shares on x date. "x dividend date" could, in theory, be the date of an en banc decision, for example.
This too will become apparent at a future time.
Hi Doc.007,
Sorry for the late reply. In transit.
It's my first post to you. I appreciate your participation here and how you can find historical documents and also your style.
Basically your findings reconfirm of what I before already posted, but to make It short not by the suffistication and details as by you.
Thank you.
That the initial 2008 Contracts by the Parties have been signed not by mutual agreement, contrary under huge illegal Gov pressure and force is very clear and therefore principally any signatures should been withdrawn and voided, where resulting also the one Freddie Mac Executive did even take his Life !
The basic steps towards the signing of the Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements included 1) the signed consent letters of the Board of Directors of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to be placed in the conservatorships and 2) once this consent was officially given, the FHFA Director (Lockhart) and US Treasury Secretary (Paulson) were able to sign the original Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements.
So far only one signed conservatorship consent letter from the Fannie Mae Board of Directors has been found...at Judicial Watch. See this document - scroll down to page 25 to see "Fannie Mae, Certificate of Corporate Secretary." - https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/F_D_2009_520_FHFA_appealresponse_9_22_2009.pdf
Was Fannie Mae's consent letter signed under duress? Was there a meeting of the Board of Directors before composing and signing? Was the Board put under duress to sign? How? Where is Freddie Mac's signed conservatorship consent letter? And the same questions above apply to Freddie Mac.
It is clear that pressure was applied to Chairmen, Mudd and Syron in the ways that has been documented. Was similar pressure applied to the GSE Board Members as individuals and/or as a group and how and why did they give assent to the conservatorship? By vote? Are there corporate minutes of those meetings? Does the pressure applied amount to signing conservatorship consent under duress? The Chairmen and Board members full narrative of those days in 2008 has not been provided or discovered.
Of course there was no duress in the signing of the original SPSPAs by Lockhart and Paulson, even though the signed pages of those documents are now not readily available as they once were.
After all we can say that F+F in 2008 made a huge mistake by not immediately forming a Fannie & Freddie Consortium together and let the Courts Decide if they legitimated to sign all the by long-hands prepared Gov Contracts & Agreements to take advantage from the situation as insisted and provoked by the past Gov.
Yes.
However, we have here already a lot of history matters if not even too much and therefore I'm concentrating more on the present Objective Essentials & Practicalities as orientation we need to aware by "What" or "How" to do !
Not too much....
Please, As in first and only priority handle this As The FNMA Board, because Anything Else did not prove to be practically possible, very contrary, where the Prefs by its selfish behaviors create even Anti-Prefs People's and Allergies Against as Made By Prefs.
Keep Up Your Good Participation !
Trying to do so when possible.
Happy FNMA Investing
Ditto.
Fortunately, Zeus is not punishing me.
FMCKJ - FED HOME LOAN MTG 8.375% PERP P
FMCCH - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.1% PRF USDS
FMCKI - FED HOME LOAN MTG 6.55% PERPETU
FMCCK - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.79% PRF PER
FMCCP - FED HOME LOAN MTG 6% PRF NON-CU
FMCCI - FED HOME LOAN MTG VAR % PRF USD
FMCCT - FED HOME LOAN MTG 6.42% PRF NON
FMCKP - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.7% PRF USDS
FMCKN - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.66% NON-CUM
FMCKL - FED HOME LOAN MTG 6.02% NON CUM
FMCCL - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.97% PRF PER
FMCKM - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.57% NON CUM
FMCCJ - FED HOME LOAN MTG VAR% PRF NON
FMCKO - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.9% PRF NON-
FMCCM - FED HOME LOAN MTG VAR% NON CUM
FMCKK - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5% PRF PERP U
FREJP - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.3% PRF USDS
FMCCO - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.81% NON-CUM
FREJO - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.1% PRF USDS
FMCCS - FED HOME LOAN MTG VAR RATE NON
FMCCN - FED HOME LOAN MTG VAR% NON CUM
FREJN - FED HOME LOAN MTG NON CUM PER P.
FREGP - FED HOME LOAN MTG 5.81% PRF USD
FNMAS - FED NATL MORT ASSC 8.25% PRF SE
FNMAJ - FED NATL MORT ASSC 7.625% PRF N
FNMAI - FED NATL MORT ASSC PRF NON CUM
FNMFN - FED NATL MORT ASSC PRF CNV SERI
FNMAT - FED NATL MORT ASSC 8.25% PRF NO
FNMAN - FED NATL MORT ASSC 5.125% PRF S
FNMFM - FED NATL MORT ASSC 5.1% PRF SER
FNMAH - FED NATL MORT ASSC NON CUM PRF
FNMAL - FED NATL MORT ASSC 4.75% PRF SE
FNMAK - FED NATL MORT ASSC 5.5% PRF SER
FNMAP - FED NATL MORT ASSC VAR RATE PFD
FNMAM - FED NATL MORT ASSC 5.81% PRF PE
FNMAO - FED NATL MORT ASSC VAR RATE PRF
FNMAG - FED NATL MORT ASSC 5.375% PRF S
FNMFO - FED NATL MORT ASSC 5.375% CNV P.
Yes. That document can also be found at the FCIC Resource Library:
Resource Library Files
https://fcic-static.law.stanford.edu/cdn_media/
FCIC Documents
https://fcic-static.law.stanford.edu/cdn_media/fcic-docs/
Fannie Mae Strategic Plan, 2007-2011, "Deepen Segments - Develop Breadth" is also found here:
https://fcic-static.law.stanford.edu/cdn_media/fcic-docs/2007-00-00_Fannie_Mae_Strategic_Plan_Deep_Segments_Develop_Breadth.pdf
Hi Tutt1125,
Thanks.
FYI, that blog post is a copy and paste work. For example, text was copied and pasted from briefs filed in 2015 and 2016 without giving due reference.
Here are two filings from which bodies of text were copied and pasted.
https://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Robinson/15-00109-0001.pdf
http://www.gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Roberts/16-02107-0022.pdf
Still looking. It may turn up.
You are welcome Fully Diluted.
Was Mudd outvoted
It is not clearly stated anywhere so far that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the Board members voted or not for conservatorship. There is no mention of such meetings by Paulson, Lockhart or the FCIC. Below is one article that argues that no such meetings and voting took place.
https://thetruthaboutfannieandfreddie.wordpress.com/2015/11/10/fannie-and-freddie-boards-did-not-consentbecause-they-never-met/
...do you know what else legitimized the imposition of the conservatorships?
All the base information is found in The FCIC report and Henry Paulson's 2010 book, On the Brink.
See all of Chapter 17 and, if wishing to cut to the arm twisting see page 320, 2nd paragraph in the FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION REPORT linked below. The endnotes to Chapter 17 can be read beginning on page 610 for source material.
https://cybercemetery.unt.edu/archive/fcic/20110310173545/http://c0182732.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/fcic_final_report_full.pdf
Read Chapter 1, the first 12 pages, of Henry Paulson's On the Brink.
http://library.aceondo.net/ebooks/HISTORY/On_the_Brink__Inside_the_Race_to_Stop_the_Collapse_of_the_Global_Financial_System.pdf
Missing is the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Chairmen and Board of Directors full narrative about this.
If there is a Board member that would be opposed to being placed in the conservatorship in 2008, it would be Fannie Mae Chairman Daniel Mudd. Here is a public response to FCIC questions concern agreement with the conservatorship and other matters.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files//docs/historical/fct/fcic/fcic_followup_mudd_20100409.pdf
You can find FCIC interviews in pdf and mp3 format here:
https://fcic.law.stanford.edu/resource/interviews
Paulson, Mudd, Syron are there.
The archive can be searched here:
https://fcic.law.stanford.edu/resource/document-archive
Looked for the filing but have not yet found any documents.
Hi Always wondering,
Quick question....I am 99% sure I read an article approximately 6 months ago(?) stating the original board of directors filed a court action/suit pertaining to this. For the life of me I cannot find that document.
The document stated the board filed the complaint due to govt manipulation of facts, aggressive tactics and misrepresentation of the conservatorship timeline.
Have you seen or heard of this document or filing?
No. Was the suit vs. FHFA, Treasury or...?
Hi Embers,
See all of Chapter 17 and, if wishing to cut to the arm twisting see page 320, 2nd paragraph in the FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION REPORT linked below. The endnotes to Chapter 17 can be read beginning on page 610 for source material.
https://cybercemetery.unt.edu/archive/fcic/20110310173545/http://c0182732.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/fcic_final_report_full.pdf
Read Chapter 1, the first 12 pages, of Henry Paulson's On the Brink.
http://library.aceondo.net/ebooks/HISTORY/On_the_Brink__Inside_the_Race_to_Stop_the_Collapse_of_the_Global_Financial_System.pdf
Missing is the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Chairmen and Board of Directors full narrative about this.
Hi whipstick,