On 24/04/2010 5:37 PM, bpuharic wrote:
the right wing is going to bat for wall street! who coulda guessed?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

The industry has been damaged further by a series of embarrassing
developments, including the recent fraud charges levied against
Goldman Sachs by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Democrats
also criticized Republican leaders for holding a private meeting with
two dozen Wall Street leaders just before the GOP lawmakers threatened
to block Dodd's bill.

Although Obama and other Democrats held the edge on Wall Street
fundraising during the 2008 election cycle, the political action
committees for major banks and financial services companies have
dramatically shifted their giving toward Republicans in recent months,
data show. Goldman's PAC, for example, gave almost $300,000 to
candidates and parties in March, nearly two-thirds of which went to
the GOP.

Maybe the financial markets should move offshore?


--
Socialism and statism are great as long as someone else pays for it.

On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:16:59 -0400, wrote:



That will probably happen with the derivatives market.
BTW did you see Larry Summers on CBS this morning saying he was just a
college professor and why would anyone blame him for what went on?

Hmm, maybe because you are presidential economic ADVISOR for Obama and
SoT for Clinton? Maybe because you were leading the cheer for
everything Gramm was doing in the late 90s? Even his brief tenure at
Harvard was marked by his association with a swindler.

'wall street' and 'swindler' is a redundancy

On 4/25/10 2:45 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:26:42 -0400, wrote:

'wall street' and 'swindler' is a redundancy

It really makes me wonder why you allocated your 401k into equities if
you feel this way.

So much of this economic upturn you keep touting is really just a rise
on Wall Street that it makes me wonder if you understand the economy
at all. I agree that here is certainly a casino aspect to Wall Street
but if you play the game and lose you can't immediately assume the
game must be crooked. For every loser there is a winner. In this case
it was the people who shorted the housing market. The liberal hero
George Soros made a ****load of money in this crash and took an
inordinate amount of TARP money from his AIG positions.

Your post assumes a modicum of honesty on the part of those who control
Wall Street. Ha! The game is crooked.

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

On 4/25/10 8:18 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:47:49 -0400,
wrote:

I agree that here is certainly a casino aspect to Wall Street
but if you play the game and lose you can't immediately assume the
game must be crooked. For every loser there is a winner. In this case
it was the people who shorted the housing market. The liberal hero
George Soros made a ****load of money in this crash and took an
inordinate amount of TARP money from his AIG positions.

Your post assumes a modicum of honesty on the part of those who control
Wall Street. Ha! The game is crooked.

It all depends on what you mean by "honest".
If you are saying honest means your books are in order and the
transactions are somewhat transparent then they are mostly honest.
There are plenty of swarmy things going on that are legal and
"honest". That doesn't necessarily mean they are moral or ethical.



I don't trust the books, the outside bookkeepers, the brokerage houses,
or the bankers. In the good old days, you could trust the outside
certified auditors to reasonably and fairly present the books of a large
corporation. These days, there's not much difference between the crooks
who rob you with a six gun and the ones who rob you with a fountain
pen/computer keyboard.


--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

In article ,
says...

On 4/25/10 8:18 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:47:49 -0400,
wrote:

I agree that here is certainly a casino aspect to Wall Street
but if you play the game and lose you can't immediately assume the
game must be crooked. For every loser there is a winner. In this case
it was the people who shorted the housing market. The liberal hero
George Soros made a ****load of money in this crash and took an
inordinate amount of TARP money from his AIG positions.

Your post assumes a modicum of honesty on the part of those who control
Wall Street. Ha! The game is crooked.

It all depends on what you mean by "honest".
If you are saying honest means your books are in order and the
transactions are somewhat transparent then they are mostly honest.
There are plenty of swarmy things going on that are legal and
"honest". That doesn't necessarily mean they are moral or ethical.



I don't trust the books, the outside bookkeepers, the brokerage houses,
or the bankers. In the good old days, you could trust the outside
certified auditors to reasonably and fairly present the books of a large
corporation. These days, there's not much difference between the crooks
who rob you with a six gun and the ones who rob you with a fountain
pen/computer keyboard.

Just like the mob robbing union pension funds.

On 5/1/10 10:04 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleu5SdnenQD8nkQEnWnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

On 4/25/10 8:18 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:47:49 -0400,
wrote:

I agree that here is certainly a casino aspect to Wall Street
but if you play the game and lose you can't immediately assume the
game must be crooked. For every loser there is a winner. In this case
it was the people who shorted the housing market. The liberal hero
George Soros made a ****load of money in this crash and took an
inordinate amount of TARP money from his AIG positions.

Your post assumes a modicum of honesty on the part of those who control
Wall Street. Ha! The game is crooked.

It all depends on what you mean by "honest".
If you are saying honest means your books are in order and the
transactions are somewhat transparent then they are mostly honest.
There are plenty of swarmy things going on that are legal and
"honest". That doesn't necessarily mean they are moral or ethical.



I don't trust the books, the outside bookkeepers, the brokerage houses,
or the bankers. In the good old days, you could trust the outside
certified auditors to reasonably and fairly present the books of a large
corporation. These days, there's not much difference between the crooks
who rob you with a six gun and the ones who rob you with a fountain
pen/computer keyboard.

Just like the mob robbing union pension funds.



Sorry, Bertbrain, but i'm not aware of any recent cases of "the mob"
robbing union pension funds, other than, of course, your wall street "mob"

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

On May 1, 10:25*am, hk wrote:
On 5/1/10 10:04 AM, BAR wrote:





In articleu5SdnenQD8nkQEnWnZ2dnUVZ_rmdn...@earthlink .com,
says...

On 4/25/10 8:18 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:47:49 -0400,
wrote:

I agree that here is certainly a casino aspect to Wall Street
but if you play the game and lose you can't immediately assume the
game must be crooked. For every loser there is a winner. In this case
it was the people who shorted the housing market. The liberal hero
George Soros made a ****load of money in this crash and took an
inordinate amount of TARP money from his AIG positions.

Your post assumes a modicum of honesty on the part of those who control
Wall Street. Ha! *The game is crooked.

It all depends on what you mean by "honest".
If you are saying honest means your books are in order and the
transactions are somewhat transparent then they are mostly honest.
There are plenty of swarmy things going on that are legal and
"honest". That doesn't necessarily mean they are moral or ethical.

I don't trust the books, the outside bookkeepers, the brokerage houses,
or the bankers. In the good old days, you could trust the outside
certified auditors to reasonably and fairly present the books of a large
corporation. These days, there's not much difference between the crooks
who rob you with a six gun and the ones who rob you with a fountain
pen/computer keyboard.

Just like the mob robbing union pension funds.

Sorry, Bertbrain, but i'm not aware of any recent cases of "the mob"
robbing union pension funds, other than, of course, your wall street "mob"

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Gee, fat ass, I thought someone who was SO well connected and high up
in the union organizations that you would have been better informed:

http://www.nrtw.org/blog/union-pensi...d-private-jets

http://www.workers.org/2006/us/renco-0302/

On 5/1/2010 10:25 AM, hk wrote:
On 5/1/10 10:04 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleu5SdnenQD8nkQEnWnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

On 4/25/10 8:18 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:47:49 -0400,
wrote:

I agree that here is certainly a casino aspect to Wall Street
but if you play the game and lose you can't immediately assume the
game must be crooked. For every loser there is a winner. In this case
it was the people who shorted the housing market. The liberal hero
George Soros made a ****load of money in this crash and took an
inordinate amount of TARP money from his AIG positions.

Your post assumes a modicum of honesty on the part of those who
control
Wall Street. Ha! The game is crooked.

It all depends on what you mean by "honest".
If you are saying honest means your books are in order and the
transactions are somewhat transparent then they are mostly honest.
There are plenty of swarmy things going on that are legal and
"honest". That doesn't necessarily mean they are moral or ethical.



I don't trust the books, the outside bookkeepers, the brokerage houses,
or the bankers. In the good old days, you could trust the outside
certified auditors to reasonably and fairly present the books of a large
corporation. These days, there's not much difference between the crooks
who rob you with a six gun and the ones who rob you with a fountain
pen/computer keyboard.

Just like the mob robbing union pension funds.



Sorry, Bertbrain, but i'm not aware of any recent cases of "the mob"
robbing union pension funds, other than, of course, your wall street "mob"

Love the way you qualify your statements. *****"recent"*****

On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:35:57 -0400, wrote:


BP doesn't understand, half his 401k profits were taken before he ever
even saw them by fund managers who churned the holdings to increase
fees.

so you say.

any other fairy tales you want to spin? you're not doing so well with
this one.

desperation is a poor motive for your type of myth

On 25/04/2010 8:57 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:48:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:35:57 -0400, wrote:


BP doesn't understand, half his 401k profits were taken before he ever
even saw them by fund managers who churned the holdings to increase
fees.

so you say.

any other fairy tales you want to spin? you're not doing so well with
this one.

desperation is a poor motive for your type of myth

Do you even have a clue about what your 401k managers are charging
you?
Hint, it is not on your statement.

Should we help him out?

--
Socialism and statism are great as long as someone else pays for it.