Our financial system is crumbling this week.

[Hungary Jack]

Americans have a child-like ignorance to economic matters. As long as we can get our stuff, we're fine. We assume there are wizards that magically make it all work. IMO this is very sad.

Most people think that understanding the economy involves knowing terms like collaterized debt obligation, short selling, or treasuries... We shouldn't allow so much detail to confuse US. The national economy is hardly different than the one in our own homes...but perhaps this explains some of our ignorance - a lot of US don't even understand our own checkbooks, but we do know how to charge and buy expensive things.

Ironically, the national economic problem mirrors what's going on in so many homes. (or vice versa). What the govt is doing again is using a big credit card check (from the bank of China) to pay for expensive things (like Iraq War and bank bailouts.) As long as we have those blank credit card checks, we'll be fine.

Well put. Any consumer who plunges his/her self into debt much beyond a mortgage is basically saying "I'll be happy to be your (female dog)". And the elected officials in the federal government have been putting it on the credit card for years. They just don't have the guts to face the obvious.

[ghostrunner]

On Obama, all I'm saying is that he gave some credibility to the accusation. I think what he said was elitist in the true, negative sense. It's also part of what makes me uncomfortable about him. It's not the first time he's said something that put him and his supporters apart from other kinds of people, whoever they may be.

And yet it has nothing to do with our financial system crumbling and I believe this is at least the 43rd or 44th time you've mentioned it.

It's funny, you're usually not prone to exaggeration like this.

[clement]

There was a time in our country's history where people would get out and do something about things that were happenning.

What history was this? I've expressed outrage throughout this thread, but how does one actually do something about these kind of things? Express outrage at the polls.

I was thinking of things like the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement during the Vietnam war... Even the Iraq War, as unpopular as it has been, can't motivate Americans to organize a decent demonstration. The Gulf War of 1991 (which had far broader support) inspired better protest. We're an apathetic people. Sure, we type all kinds of things into blogs and baseball forums on the internet, but I don't see that as the same thing as good old-fashioned protest.

On Obama, all I'm saying is that he gave some credibility to the accusation. I think what he said was elitist in the true, negative sense. It's also part of what makes me uncomfortable about him. It's not the first time he's said something that put him and his supporters apart from other kinds of people, whoever they may be.

I honestly don't know where this is coming from. What are all the other elitist things he has said? How is it any different than any other candidate saying what he believes and it alienating those who disagree? John McCain has implied about a million different times that anyone who supports withdrawal from Iraq is an anti-patriot who wants to retreat, 'cut and run' and is an advocate of defeat and hopelessness. How is that any less elitist or devisive than what Obama has been quoted as saying (and taken way out of context) one time at a private fundraiser more than 5 months ago?

[ghostrunner]

There was a time in our country's history where people would get out and do something about things that were happenning.

What history was this? I've expressed outrage throughout this thread, but how does one actually do something about these kind of things? Express outrage at the polls.

I was thinking of things like the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement during the Vietnam war... Even the Iraq War, as unpopular as it has been, can't motivate Americans to organize a decent demonstration. The Gulf War of 1991 (which had far broader support) inspired better protest. We're an apathetic people. Sure, we type all kinds of things into blogs and baseball forums on the internet, but I don't see that as the same thing as good old-fashioned protest.

On Obama, all I'm saying is that he gave some credibility to the accusation. I think what he said was elitist in the true, negative sense. It's also part of what makes me uncomfortable about him. It's not the first time he's said something that put him and his supporters apart from other kinds of people, whoever they may be.

I honestly don't know where this is coming from. What are all the other elitist things he has said? How is it any different than any other candidate saying what he believes and it alienating those who disagree? John McCain has implied about a million different times that anyone who supports withdrawal from Iraq is an anti-patriot who wants to retreat, 'cut and run' and is an advocate of defeat and hopelessness. How is that any less elitist or devisive than what Obama has been quoted as saying (and taken way out of context) one time at a private fundraiser more than 5 months ago?

I posted it a while back, but he said some thing about himself being the one who can change the way other countries look at us, take the country down a new path. Things of that sort. I'll have to find it. Not so much elitism as him indulging in the "savior" persona.

[Freed Roger]

updated 19 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Federal Reserve said Sunday it had granted a request by the last two major U.S. investment banks — Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — to change their status to bank holding companies.

The Fed announced that it had approved the request of the two investment banks. The change in status will allow them to create commercial banks that will be able to take deposits, bolstering the resources of both institutions.

The change continued the biggest restructuring on Wall Street since the Great Depression.

not sure what this announcement means...but banks and government institutions working on Sundays?!?

[arnie.k]

updated 19 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Federal Reserve said Sunday it had granted a request by the last two major U.S. investment banks — Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — to change their status to bank holding companies.

The Fed announced that it had approved the request of the two investment banks. The change in status will allow them to create commercial banks that will be able to take deposits, bolstering the resources of both institutions.

The change continued the biggest restructuring on Wall Street since the Great Depression.

not sure what this announcement means...but banks and government institutions working on Sundays?!?

might be a first step towards more regulation. as far as i know commercial banks are under much stricter regulation of the fed. (please correct me if i'm wrong).

[sighyoung]

updated 19 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Federal Reserve said Sunday it had granted a request by the last two major U.S. investment banks — Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — to change their status to bank holding companies.

The Fed announced that it had approved the request of the two investment banks. The change in status will allow them to create commercial banks that will be able to take deposits, bolstering the resources of both institutions.

The change continued the biggest restructuring on Wall Street since the Great Depression.

not sure what this announcement means...but banks and government institutions working on Sundays?!?

might be a first step towards more regulation. as far as i know commercial banks are under much stricter regulation of the fed. (please correct me if i'm wrong).

I think you're right, but the ability to take in deposits matters tremendously for both investment banks right now.

[arnie.k]

I think you're right, but the ability to take in deposits matters tremendously for both investment banks right now.

yes. the primary motivation is probably to allow them to accumulate some liquid wealth, to make sure they don't collapse.

i think they determined this would be the best way to accumulate that wealth, because it would also allow them stricter regulation.

on its face this looks like a very wise move.

[heyzeus]

From an article on the bailout bill:

"Some Democrats are seeking to add provisions to the massive rescue bill, such as limiting pay for executives of the troubled companies in need of the bailout.

The president said such efforts would "undermine the effectiveness of the plan.""

The golden parachutes that some of these execs are getting make me sick. I have no problem conditioning the acceptance of billions in federal money on requiring reasonable severance.

[fanforever]

Here are currently .. America's biggest rats imo:

1. Christopher Cox ... Bush's appointed chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commision. The really nice guy who oversaw this whole fiasco and didn't do a damn thing to try and stop it.

2. CEO Stan O'Neal .. chief executive officer of Merril Lynch

3. CEO Dick Fold .. of Lehman Brothers.

4. CEO James Cayne of Bear Sterns.

Each took home tens of millions of dollars in pay for making decisions that destroyed their firms.

They all belong in jail pending further investigation by the Justice Department