What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[RobDownSouth]

Looks like another Obama miracle energy company, Solar Trust of America is filing for bankruptcy. Another group of know it all environmental energy clowns crash and burn:


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/02/solartrust-bankruptcy-idUSL2E8F2DWX20120402

Nothing like a random Vetteman factoid to totally "disprove" the fact that the economy is improving and unemployment claims are falling.

 

[mercury14]

Looks like another Obama miracle energy company, Solar Trust of America is filing for bankruptcy. Another group of know it all environmental energy clowns crash and burn:


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/02/solartrust-bankruptcy-idUSL2E8F2DWX20120402

Looks like they got a $2.1 billion DoE loan to build a power plant. What does this have to do with Obama? Do you think the president micromanages loan applications?

 

[JohnnySavage]

The DoE established a $2.5 billion loan guarantee program to support solar in the United States. In response, China established a $30 grant program for their companies; with the sole purpose of driving American companies out of the market.

I see the usual America hating suspects have no problem with China declaring economic war on American companies. How typical.

 

[islandman]

I have $45 in my pocket. Which American industry can I put out of business?

 

[JohnnySavage]

I have $45 in my pocket. Which American industry can I put out of business?

If you had $30 billion you could make solar panels and sell them below cost, until all the American companies go under, then you own the market.


Wait... someone already thought of that!


Economic terrorism is worse than ...physical(?) terrorism. The war heads here won't understand that.

 

[Sean Renaud]

If you had $30 billion you could make solar panels and sell them below cost, until all the American companies go under, then you own the market.


Wait... someone already thought of that!


Economic terrorism is worse than ...physical(?) terrorism. The war heads here won't understand that.

They understand. They just think China's making a terrible investment and we should be drilling for our own oil.

 

[mercury14]

If you had $30 billion you could make solar panels and sell them below cost, until all the American companies go under, then you own the market.


Wait... someone already thought of that!


Economic terrorism is worse than ...physical(?) terrorism. The war heads here won't understand that.

This is exactly right. And it's why the GOP's energy policy is contrary to our national interest.

It's in China's best interest though.

 

[JohnnySavage]

They understand. They just think China's making a terrible investment and we should be drilling for our own oil.

No, they are scared to death of people wearing towels on their heads. So some terrorists kill 5,000 or 10, 000 Americans. Big deal. That many die in car accidents every year and they don't care about that. The threat to all Americans is China's economic policy.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

No, they are scared to death of people wearing towels on their heads. So some terrorists kill 5,000 or 10, 000 Americans. Big deal. That many die in car accidents every year and they don't care about that. The threat to all Americans is China's economic policy.

C'mon. The most sucessful terrorist attack in history was just under 3k, and grand total (depending on how you want to count) is between 7 and 15 thousand. We could safely ignore them and be no worse off than we already are.

I don't think Towlie is the problem, it's the philosophy as a whole.

 

[Beco]

Thank you for the ad hominem response. I'm sure you're setting an excellent example for your "daughter".

I think it's amusing that gold, which traditionally has been where goldbugs and investing cowards such as yourself flee to in times of uncertainty, has had a beta that can only be described as a "whipsaw" the past 10 months. In the meantime, stocks have enjoyed a gentle, steady rise.

I imagine this keeps a number of fools who invested in gold recently up at night, fraught with worry.

...but I know this doesn't apply to you, Mr. Market Timer. You've been timin' the market, buyin' low and sellin' high, for the entire ten+ years I've known you.

....Sure, you'll never give us details of these sooper-trades, coz that's "proprietary"...but since you're in that .0000001 per cent of successful investors, I'm truly surprised that Wall Street hasn't beat a path to your teepee.

It can go to zero, I aint selling my gold!

 

[Dribble]

people sure do bitch alot here. Yet everytime I have asked, "what country do you think we should be more like in terms of economics"...a relatively simple question...it goes unanswered. Why?

 

[Beco]

people sure do bitch alot here. Yet everytime I have asked, "what country do you think we should be more like in terms of economics"...a relatively simple question...it goes unanswered. Why?

I think we should emulate the USA....

 

[mercury14]

I think we should emulate the USA....

No you don't.

 

[Sean Renaud]

No you don't.

Yes he does. Hell while I want some serious tweaks so do I. . .and millions and millions of Renauds followers.

 

[patrick1]

Peter J. Wallison
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/02/the-big-lie-defense

I think David Min of the Center for American Progress has dealt with this minority opinion - the erroneous belief that Fannie and Freddie caused the financial crisis - comprehensively, over and over again.

His latest report, from last month, is here: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/03/pdf/sec_cause_effect.pdf

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I think David Min of the Center for American Progress has dealt with this minority opinion - the erroneous belief that Fannie and Freddie caused the financial crisis - comprehensively, over and over again.

His latest report, from last month, is here: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/03/pdf/sec_cause_effect.pdf

That's nice.

If you are a Statist/Progressive/Interventionist, then you will, of course, be able to prove that government had nothing to do with anything, it's always the fault of Capitalism, greed and unregulated markets...

I get that, however, I think it's a full load of happy horse shit.

What I like is the way the author took his debunkers own book and research to reach the conclusion that he did.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Did you even bother to read the link?

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The reason the Supreme Court MUST find Obamacare Constitutional!


The Government takeover of the student loan industry...

WASHINGTON (AP) - The federal student loan program seemed like a great idea back in 1965: Borrow to go to college now, pay it back later when you have a job.
But many borrowers these days are close to flunking out, tripped up by painful real-life lessons in math and economics.

Surging above $1 trillion, U.S. student loan debt has surpassed credit card and auto-loan debt. This debt explosion jeopardizes the fragile recovery, increases the burden on taxpayers and possibly sets the stage for a new economic crisis.

With a still-wobbly jobs market, these loans are increasingly hard to pay off. Unable to find work, many students have returned to school, further driving up their indebtedness.

Average student loan debt recently topped $25,000, up 25 percent in 10 years. And the mushrooming debt has direct implications for taxpayers, since 8 in 10 of these loans are government-issued or guaranteed.

President Barack Obama has offered a raft of proposals aimed at fine-tuning the system and making repayments easier.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120403/D9TTAEAG0.html

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Evil capitalists and evil gunz, are at the root of all liberal headaches.

We should eliminate trade!

 

[RobDownSouth]

I think David Min of the Center for American Progress has dealt with this minority opinion - the erroneous belief that Fannie and Freddie caused the financial crisis - comprehensively, over and over again.

His latest report, from last month, is here: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/03/pdf/sec_cause_effect.pdf

I find it rather amusing that the low-information right wing still clings to the discredit "but...but...Fannie and Freddie!" meme long after it was discredited as the bogeyman root cause of Bush's housing bubble.

Since I realize that the half-breeds here seldom click on links, here's the salient points...

Fannie and Freddie did not cause the housing and financial crises because the timing is all wrong.
The SEC’s complaints allege that Fannie and Freddie executives, in response to market share lost to Wall Street’s securitization of subprime mortgages, dramatically increased their exposure to “subprime-like” mortgages from December 2006 to August 2008. But by December 2006, the subprime mortgage boom was already well underway and the housing bubble was beginning to show signs of popping.

The SEC charges make clear that affordable housing policies were not a factor.
Fannie and Freddie’s decisions to add more subprime-like risk to their loan was not due to affordable housing policies but rather to a desire to regain market share and profits lost to Wall Street, as the SEC’s complaint makes clear. Indeed, the overwhelm -ing majority of loans labeled as subprime-like would not have qualified for the afford-able housing goals of Fannie and Freddie.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It was genewaw Wepubwiccan phiwosophy!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

In Michael Lewis's book, The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine, he effectively questions the very assumptions under which businesses evaluated risk, particularly credit default swaps.

Yet the sudden increases in debt forgiveness, starting with the GM bankruptcy, have wrought havoc with the traditional understanding of debt versus equity, of stocks versus bonds.

Students had been taught that debt was a cheaper form of financing for a corporation than equity capital. Quite simply, interest was to be tax-deductible, while dividends were not.

Traditionally, financial advisers advised clients that as one was closer to retirement, one should consider shifting some of his investment funds into bonds (debt of the issuer) rather than equity. Bonds were considered less risky than equity investments. The principle portion of debt was considered "safer" than equity because of debt's preference in bankruptcy.

Investment managers were advised, by legal counsel, that it was prudent for a trustee to invest funds in a "balanced portfolio" of debt and equity that reduced overall portfolio risk. A fiduciary's responsibilities under ERISA are very clear and specific and include a "prudent man" rule such that an adviser must act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances.

Then came 2008, and the next bubble burst!

The General Motors bankruptcy saw massive debt forgiveness as a result of the bankruptcy, and the value of GM bonds was decimated.

Just recently in 2012, when GM reported record profits, the president touted the great success of the GM emergence from bankruptcy. What was not mentioned by the president was that GM did not survive bankruptcy. A new company emerged, but in the process of the bankruptcy, over $100 billion of debt was forgiven.

In 2012, a write-down of Greek debt occurred, which allowed Greece to avoid default. Over €100 billion was written off in this transaction.

Bondholders of other eurozone debt must be equally concerned about the solvency of the various European sovereign debt. Even the United States' debt rating has been downgraded.

To further exacerbate the debt fiasco, over $2 trillion of toxic assets are still held by the Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac.

The conventional wisdom in academia and in business has been that bonds are a cheaper and safer form of investment than equity for the investor.

When a bond has the ability only to earn an interest rate with no upside earnings potential, are bonds a "prudent" investment? If the principal of the bond is not assured and given priority claim over other debts and equity, the very valuation models for the bond instrument become invalidated.

The Greek settlement was no better. Nor were the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac settlements any better for the long-term survival of our economy. All that has been done is to undermine the very foundation of the "rule of law" that Dr. Greenspan describes in his book as being essential to the normal functioning of an economy.

In reviewing the number of publicly traded companies that pay dividends in excess of a 3% yield (over 1,000 companies) when yields on "safer" federal bonds issues are far less, one must question whether or not a fiduciary is being responsible by investing in a bond, let alone a government bond. I would think that the fiduciary is being "prudent" should the bond repayment be relatively assured; however, when the value of the bond is undermined by the courts or government, then the soundness of a bond must be questioned.

The implications of the undermining of the value proposition of the bond and the "rule of law" are severe.

First, for the investor, the value of investing in bonds will have been severely degraded.
Second, for the fiduciary, considering an asset allocation, for which bonds are included in the portfolio, may no longer be truly "prudent" when dividend yields on equities are so much higher than fixed-income yields.

While with an equity investment there is downside potential, there is also upside potential. With the bond there is only downside risk. The risk of default and inflation as well as the lack of security of the underlying bond, when impaired, make a bond potentially a negligent form of investment for a fiduciary under the circumstances we have in today's markets.

Third, the ability of governments to raise debt financing may become impaired when the principles of commerce are undermined. In that event, the economies of the world will become severely deleveraged immediately as investors scrambled to the "safety of equity" markets!

The only thing preventing continued massive deleveraging of our economy and a depression from occurring is the fact that no one knows where to invest safely.

If the president and Congress are serious about stabilizing this economy, they must work together to re-establish the rule of law, which permits debtors and creditors to engage in commerce with the rights of both groups protected and respected.

When people or institutions are vilified because they have lent money they will stop lending. Perhaps this is why our economy has not yet recovered. Our economy will not recover until our government reaffirms the mutual rights and responsibilities of both debtors and creditors and reestablishes a stable, balanced "rule of commerce."

Col. Frank Ryan, CPA, is a retired Marine Reserve colonel who served in Iraq and briefly in Afghanistan. He specializes in corporate restructuring and lectures on ethics for the state CPA societies


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...major_economic_dislocation.html#ixzz1qyproPHg

 

[RobDownSouth]

Col. Frank Ryan, CPA, is a retired Marine Reserve colonel who served in Iraq and briefly in Afghanistan. He specializes in corporate restructuring and lectures on ethics for the state CPA societies


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...major_economic_dislocation.html#ixzz1qyproPHg

DUH-flectors on full, chief!