What beliefs define a 21st Century American conservative?

[g5000]

For a better context of the recent crash in a long series of financial crises, I recommend [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Traders-Guns-Money-derivatives-Financial/dp/0273731963/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325896030&sr=8-1]Traders, Guns, and Money[/ame], written by a man in the business for three decades. He exposes the sheer lunacy of "risk management" and how Wall Street actually increases risk and repeatedly crashes the system.

This recent crash was a global crash. Iceland, Ireland, Spain all blew up. Banks all over the world blew up. To think this has something to do with too many negroes getting loans makes me laugh hysterically every time. If the problem was limited to too many negroes getting loans, we would not have a global credit crisis. I don't know how dumb you have to be to not realize that as you are standing in the entire global economy's ashes.

Next, I strongly recommend reading the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 and the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.

Here's a teaser. Section 117 of the CFMA:

This Act shall supersede and preempt the application of any State or local law that prohibits or regulates gaming or the operation of bucket shops

A bucket shop is a ripoff joint that steals from stock market investors. It's like a horse race bookie who takes bets from suckers who don't know the races are fixed.

Bucket shops are illegal for a reason. And this Act exempted Wall Street from state laws regarding bucket shops. That should be a HUGE red flag.

I find it telling that not one Republican to this day screamed over the way this Act steamrolled right over states rights.

 

[g5000]

But whatever. I learned when I was command duty officer during a stateside tour that when we were called in for a domestic dispute, not to turn your back on the abused while trying to arrest the abuser. You are likely to get a knife in your back.

Sometimes the abused are just as sick as the abuser and will defend their batterer to the death.

Enjoy your love affair with Wall Street's criminals robbing you blind.

Now be careful. I am not saying every Wall Street trader is crooked. But the current legal system encourages and incentivizes illegal behavior.

Don't be that battered wife.

 

[Gadawg73]

For a better context of the recent crash in a long series of financial crises, I recommend Traders, Guns, and Money, written by a man in the business for three decades. He exposes the sheer lunacy of "risk management" and how Wall Street actually increases risk and repeatedly crashes the system.

This recent crash was a global crash. Iceland, Ireland, Spain all blew up. Banks all over the world blew up. To think this has something to do with too many negroes getting loans makes me laugh hysterically every time. If the problem was limited to too many negroes getting loans, we would not have had a global crisis. I don't know how dumb you have to be to not realize that as you are standing in the entire global economy's ashes.

Next, I strongly recommend reading the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 and the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.

Here's a teaser. Section 117 of the CFMA:

This Act shall supersede and preempt the application of any State or local law that prohibits or regulates gaming or the operation of bucket shops

A bucket shop is a ripoff joint that steals from stock market investors. It's like a horse race bookie who takes bets from suckers who don't know the races are fixed.

Bucket shops are illegal for a reason. And this Act exempted Wall Street from state laws regarding bucket shops. That should be a HUGE red flag.

I find it telling that not one Republican to this day screamed over the way this Act steamrolled right over states rights.

A stock is sold at $1 a share.
It rises 80% the first year. The stock is marketed as it gained 80% the first year in all their literature.
In the second year the stock drops 50%. The stock is marketed as it has gone up 30% over the two years.
And the public believes it and buys more and more.
But in reality the stock went from $1 to $1.80 the first year.
The second year it dropped 50% and went to ninety cents a share, losing 10%.
But that is not what the stock companies state.
Never trust mutual fund or stock figures.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Enjoy your love affair with Wall Street's criminals robbing you blind.

robbing blind? Most of them went bankrupt. Some robbery!! If they robbed why be so afraid to present your best evidence?

Certainly your fear must tell you something about the brainpower of the OWS crowd???

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And the public believes it and buys more and more.

well if the public believes it what are you going to do, appoint angels, martians, or the public to regulate the truth for us??



Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.-Jefferson

 

[g5000]

A stock is sold at $1 a share.
It rises 80% the first year. The stock is marketed as it gained 80% the first year in all their literature.
In the second year the stock drops 50%. The stock is marketed as it has gone up 30% over the two years.
And the public believes it and buys more and more.
But in reality the stock went from $1 to $1.80 the first year.
The second year it dropped 50% and went to ninety cents a share, losing 10%.
But that is not what the stock companies state.
Never trust mutual fund or stock figures.

That's small stuff. The real bogus math is in structured finance, and that is the stuff your money manager is falling for.

For example, say you had $20 million to invest in 100 companies that each needed $10 million loans. You could spread your risk out by investing $200,000 in each one.

But Wall Street does not do it that way any more. They package those 100 companies into a CDO, with the equity tranche being $20 million, say.

Now let's say if a company defaults, you lose 60 percent of the loan. For a $10 million loan, that means you lose $6 million.

That means an equity tranche investment of $20 million will absorb the first three defaults.

So let's do the math.

Under the pre-CDO system, if three companies defaulted, you would lose 60 percent of $600,000 since you invested $200,000 in each of the 100 companies. That's $360,000.

Under the CDO system, as an equity trance investor you would lose $18 million dollars on the first three defaults, and the rest of your investment on the fourth. And the odds of three companies out of 100 defaulting is not that big a stretch.

That mean your debt leverage under the new financial system is 50 times greater.

This is just one of a zillion new ways Wall Street increases the risk of losing your money without you the 401k investor knowing it.

 

[g5000]

Enjoy your love affair with Wall Street's criminals robbing you blind.

robbing blind? Most of them went bankrupt. Some robbery!! If they robbed why be so afraid to present your best evidence?

Your 2008 401k statement wasn't enough evidence for you??? Your current statement isn't enough?

Certainly your fear must tell you something about the brainpower of the OWS crowd???

What does the OWS crowd have to do with this conversation?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Are you claiming that 3% of the entire mortgage dollars spent had MUCH IF ANY AN affect on the market?

If I claimed that I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away with your liberal tail between your legs once again.

You beat up that straw man pretty good didn't you?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Your 2008 401k statement wasn't enough evidence for you??? Your current statement isn't enough?

I did better than most of those on Wall Street who went bankrupt!! I guess they robbed themselves too?

What does the OWS crowd have to do with this conversation?

you demonize Wall Steet with the same brainpower they have.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This is just one of a zillion new ways Wall Street increases the risk of losing your money without you the 401k investor knowing it.

so then lets find some soviet angels to regulate everything for us!! But Wall street is so complicated isn't it. We could start with cars. How many read Consumer Reports before buying only to then get ripped off with one of the most unreliable cars.

We could pass a law that everyone must subscribe to the Magazine or we could just make the least reliable cars illegal to protect stupid consumers who really aren't suited to freedom!

Ive just discovered that strawberries in winter look just good sitting in the supermarket as summer strawberries, but then when I buy them they go bad in 2 days or so. There ought to a law!! In fact there ought to be another Soviet Union with lots of laws regulation capitalism!!

 

[bripat9643]

Why would anyone buy one of these CDOs? It sounds to me like you would have to be a complete fool to jump into one.

That's small stuff. The real bogus math is in structured finance, and that is the stuff your money manager is falling for.

For example, say you had $20 million to invest in 100 companies that each needed $10 million loans. You could spread your risk out by investing $200,000 in each one.

But Wall Street does not do it that way any more. They package those 100 companies into a CDO, with the equity tranche being $20 million, say.

Now let's say if a company defaults, you lose 60 percent of the loan. For a $10 million loan, that means you lose $6 million.

That means an equity tranche investment of $20 million will absorb the first three defaults.

So let's do the math.

Under the pre-CDO system, if three companies defaulted, you would lose 60 percent of $600,000 since you invested $200,000 in each of the 100 companies. That's $360,000.

Under the CDO system, as an equity trance investor you would lose $18 million dollars on the first three defaults, and the rest of your investment on the fourth. And the odds of three companies out of 100 defaulting is not that big a stretch.

That mean your debt leverage under the new financial system is 50 times greater.

This is just one of a zillion new ways Wall Street increases the risk of losing your money without you the 401k investor knowing it.

 

[bripat9643]

Your 2008 401k statement wasn't enough evidence for you??? Your current statement isn't enough?

Like all leftists, you have a highly idiosyncratic definition of "robbery." Furthermore, you can blame your 401K issues on people like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.

 

[ChinchillaBomb]

Conservatives of today are NOT the conservatives of even 20 years ago. It's quite sad that they have forsaken their roots of "gray men in gray suits" who were loath to become hung up in foreign affairs.

Check out the blog truthfeast.com. This guy seems to be somewhat conservative and somewhat liberal in a weird sense.

 

[Wry Catcher]

wow are you mistaken!! Yes, our founders did not want the religious wars of Europe to visit out shores but they were very very happy with moral behavior of individuals as promoted primarily by the church. They did not believe moral behavior
grew out of the dirt like a tree.

Now that the church is dead and without influence I'm sure our Founders would support Constitutional provisions to encourage moral behavior to fill the vacuum. Do you want the Girl Scouts to perform this function?

The founders were for the most part Deists.

The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God: "Deus."

"Deism is a natural religion. Deists believe in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority or holy text. Because of this, Deism is quite different from religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The latter are based on revelations from God to prophet(s) who then taught it to humans. We like to call natural religions by the title "bottom-up" faiths and revealed religions as "top-down."

Most importantly they were, socially, very very conservative. Had they know that religion would die, had they not taken a high degree of moral behavior for granted, they would have supported using the Federal Government to encourage morality.

Do you talk often with the founders?

 

[Gadawg73]

A stock is sold at $1 a share.
It rises 80% the first year. The stock is marketed as it gained 80% the first year in all their literature.
In the second year the stock drops 50%. The stock is marketed as it has gone up 30% over the two years.
And the public believes it and buys more and more.
But in reality the stock went from $1 to $1.80 the first year.
The second year it dropped 50% and went to ninety cents a share, losing 10%.
But that is not what the stock companies state.
Never trust mutual fund or stock figures.

That's small stuff. The real bogus math is in structured finance, and that is the stuff your money manager is falling for.

For example, say you had $20 million to invest in 100 companies that each needed $10 million loans. You could spread your risk out by investing $200,000 in each one.

But Wall Street does not do it that way any more. They package those 100 companies into a CDO, with the equity tranche being $20 million, say.

Now let's say if a company defaults, you lose 60 percent of the loan. For a $10 million loan, that means you lose $6 million.

That means an equity tranche investment of $20 million will absorb the first three defaults.

So let's do the math.

Under the pre-CDO system, if three companies defaulted, you would lose 60 percent of $600,000 since you invested $200,000 in each of the 100 companies. That's $360,000.

Under the CDO system, as an equity trance investor you would lose $18 million dollars on the first three defaults, and the rest of your investment on the fourth. And the odds of three companies out of 100 defaulting is not that big a stretch.

That mean your debt leverage under the new financial system is 50 times greater.

This is just one of a zillion new ways Wall Street increases the risk of losing your money without you the 401k investor knowing it.

I agree as I have a BBA with a minor in Finance, have worked as a consultant for the banks for many years and audited many an entity.
I put 90% of my $$$ in raw land 3 years. Bought it out here within 1 mile of the interstate and 1 mile of where 3 state highways intersect. All in a suburban area. Bought it at 1/3 of what it was. And the largest hospital in north Georgia is going to be built with 1/2 mile of it within a year.
I know it and live near it and can wait for it. Already it has almost doubled in 3 years. I am within 6 years of retirement so I can sell tracts as I need some extra cash.
I do not trust the market.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Personal responsibility is a key factor for most conservatives I believe. I am a conservative of fashion, but have varying views in many regards. However, the universal simplicity of most conservatives is the desire to be as self-sufficient and self-reliant as possible, and expect the same from others. If everyone takes personal responsibility for themselves and their actions, and does not lean on the reat of society or the government to carry themselves through life, things would be much better off.

martinsamerica.com

"Sink or swim!" smirks the Conservative from his yacht, as he watches us drown.

 

[Foxfyre]

The only problem with the stock market is:

1) Government meddling of a fashion that enhances the power and personal fortunes of those doing the meddling. Congress for instance can do insider trading perfectly legally while the rest of us can have our profits confiscated and enjoy some prison time. Those in Congress should be required to put all holdings in a blind trust and should be subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

2) Our instant gratification, 30-second-sound-bite morality is also reflected in the Stock Market so that people tend to play it like a slot machine instead of invest in solid businesses for the long haul. Day trading and selling short should be greatly restricted, perhaps by imposing substantial taxes on the profits--Wall Street should deduct these and submit to the treasury when the profits are paid. Long term capital gains investments should not be taxed at all or only minimally.

3) The modern American conservative would most likely approve such measures in the interest of the public good and for their own long term prospects. I wonder if modern American liberals would?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The only problem with the stock market is:

1) Government meddling of a fashion that enhances the power and personal fortunes of those doing the meddling. Congress for instance can do insider trading perfectly legally while the rest of us can have our profits confiscated and enjoy some prison time. Those in Congress should be required to put all holdings in a blind trust and should be subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

2) Our instant gratification, 30-second-sound-bite morality is also reflected in the Stock Market so that people tend to play it like a slot machine instead of invest in solid businesses for the long haul. Day trading and selling short should be greatly restricted, perhaps by imposing substantial taxes on the profits--Wall Street should deduct these and submit to the treasury when the profits are paid. Long term capital gains investments should not be taxed at all or only minimally.

3) The modern American conservative would most likely approve such measures in the interest of the public good and for their own long term prospects. I wonder if modern American liberals would?

1) Insider trading is not limited to members of Congress.

2) Day trader's trades and all trades ought to cost the trader .25 cents, be the trader an individual or a fund. In short order the markets would likely be less volital, and millions of dollars would be produced; if such fees were targeted by law for a specific purpose, and not squandered by the congress, much could be done to reduce the national debt.

3) Real conservatives might approve fees; the extreme brand now in Congress - no way.,

 

[M14 Shooter]

The founders were for the most part Deists.

The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God: "Deus."

"Deism is a natural religion. Deists believe in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority or holy text. Because of this, Deism is quite different from religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The latter are based on revelations from God to prophet(s) who then taught it to humans. We like to call natural religions by the title "bottom-up" faiths and revealed religions as "top-down."

Most importantly they were, socially, very very conservative. Had they know that religion would die, had they not taken a high degree of moral behavior for granted, they would have supported using the Federal Government to encourage morality.

Do you talk often with the founders?

Apparently -you- do as you claim thay if they were around today, their view on the right to arms would be very different.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Most importantly they were, socially, very very conservative. Had they know that religion would die, had they not taken a high degree of moral behavior for granted, they would have supported using the Federal Government to encourage morality.

Do you talk often with the founders?

Apparently -you- do as you claim thay if they were around today, their view on the right to arms would be very different.

Nope, if I made such a claim in the heat of 'battle' I was wrong. I have no idea what a founder might believe if exposed to the 21st Century. I do know that the weapons of today and the weapons commonly in use in the 18th Century are quite different.

One might infer from that truth a sane person from the 18th century who saw a vision of Virginia Tech, the Texas Tower, 101 California St, or the dozens of other mass murders would have a different perspective. But I suspect the same arguments would occur, some back then would salivate at the thought of weapons able to kill so efficiently and other would be appalled.