Bailout Bank Blows Millions Partying in L.A.

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: dahunan
It is sad that humans choose a place to invest their money based on how good the hookers are instead of how good the investment performs

LMFAO! Exactly....

And no one made this bank take TARP money. That is utter bullshit.

-Robert

Might pay you to read up on it a bit.

You should be angry with the government, not this bank.

And as far as you and others' critisms of their busines model - it seems to be working just fine. They are profitable, unlike banks with the business model you suggest.

They are a private company; they can do what they h3ll the want. You don't like it; don't buy their stock or open an account. I'm sure they'll somehow manage to get over the disappointment.

There are plenty of place to rightfully direct anger; this ain't one of them.

Fern

What's so great about their business model? And how do you know they are doing well? They just fired 400 employees, so I guess they are just rolling in the dough, eh? Too much business probably?

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik
Which part of "client event" is so hard to understand? That's what you do get high net worth clientele...


Also EXACTLY why you don't want gov't running business, because everything that revolves around high net worth clients (read: LUXURUY...bentleys picking you up at airport etc.) will be mentioned by the populist idiots like Bawney Fwank. Because, you know, class warfare get democrats re-elected.

1. The part where you pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for talent;
2. The part where you give away Tiffany goodies;
3. The part where you provide high end hotels and meals.

If I were an investor (I'm totally in cash and T Bonds), I'd not be excited about a company that wasted so much money on frivolous gifts. I'd wonder if they hadn't gotten the memo. Also, I'd wonder about a company that just took TARP funds, and what they weren't telling me.

On the other hand, if they are just as dumb as most Republicans, I could be wrong about all of that.

-Robert

What exactly is your background in managing accounts for high net worth clients?

Like I said this is EXACTLY what happens when you mix politicians with business - nothing but bullshit populist outcries to score re-election points with class warfare. Look there! Rich people are enjoying themselves, even though this is shitty economy!

If I'm Northern Trust and I manage your millions, I will treat you to whatever luxuries you're used to. If your daily driver is a Flying Spur, picking you up with a Ford Focus and offering free Days Inn lodging doesn't exactly inspire confidence...

You really are twisted.... Rich people aren't fungible, like socks or stocks. They are all different. Many are dumber than a box of rocks, and we have Hollywood and Wall Street as ample proof. Most are quite savvy however.

But, if you have to PUT OUT, in essence, to get paid, then the client shouldn't be surprised if he comes down with a bad case of financial syphilis. I wouldn't lodge my cock or my money with a whore.

This is a stupid model of client building. It might appeal to old dowagers who would't know a T Bond from a Model T, but it isn't going to get Warren Buffet's money, or mine, or most investor's money. If they have a solid wealth building program, that's all they need. Word of mouth and the golf tournament will do the rest.

I've been investing since I've been 12. I've only given my opinion to clients when they've asked for it, but I've never charged for investment advice. Based on the current situation, I'd say most of the guys who have been charging for investment advice should be in jail or hanging. Where is Charles II when you need him?

-Robert

I have no idea wtf are you saying in the drivel above, but to repeat my question... what's your background in managing high net worth accounts? Because I'd put money on line and say you're talking out of your ass.

I worked in the Investment Research division of a very prominent ibank and every time we'd have institutional and private wealth investors (generally $50M+ on the PWM side), both the sales teams and analysts would bend over backward for them. Bentley/s500 limo and heli service goes without saying. If prime brokerage pulls 100+mil from 'em, 100K for some limo and travel is cost of doing business.

In conclusion, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about...

In conclusion, your sales teams and analysts are idiots. How's your bank doing now, Mr. I'm a Brilliant Investment advisor? Did you advise Northern Rock? Citibank? Maybe Wachovia? One of the reasons these banks are in deep shit is because they thought the Dumb Money Follies could go on forever. The sort of shenanigans you are talking about is exactly what the American public is pissed off about. I'm surprised they brought bands to this group of investors because they are all FUCKING TONE DEAF!

Your system failed. Get over it and yourself.

-Robert

Actually my former employer is doing fairly well, actually well enough that Warren Buffet bought up a huge stake in the firm. They also went short on housing back in early 2007 IIRC...

What system are you talking about?

More importantly, what is your background? You seem to have in deph knowledge of investment management, investment banking, public policy and just about any other thing that hits the news nowadays....

If Buffet just bought a huge stake in your former firm that means their stock is at bargain prices. So, why is it at bargain prices? Because your sales team and analysts are a bunch of geniuses?

-Robert

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik
Which part of "client event" is so hard to understand? That's what you do get high net worth clientele...


Also EXACTLY why you don't want gov't running business, because everything that revolves around high net worth clients (read: LUXURUY...bentleys picking you up at airport etc.) will be mentioned by the populist idiots like Bawney Fwank. Because, you know, class warfare get democrats re-elected.

1. The part where you pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for talent;
2. The part where you give away Tiffany goodies;
3. The part where you provide high end hotels and meals.

If I were an investor (I'm totally in cash and T Bonds), I'd not be excited about a company that wasted so much money on frivolous gifts. I'd wonder if they hadn't gotten the memo. Also, I'd wonder about a company that just took TARP funds, and what they weren't telling me.

On the other hand, if they are just as dumb as most Republicans, I could be wrong about all of that.

-Robert

What exactly is your background in managing accounts for high net worth clients?

Like I said this is EXACTLY what happens when you mix politicians with business - nothing but bullshit populist outcries to score re-election points with class warfare. Look there! Rich people are enjoying themselves, even though this is shitty economy!

If I'm Northern Trust and I manage your millions, I will treat you to whatever luxuries you're used to. If your daily driver is a Flying Spur, picking you up with a Ford Focus and offering free Days Inn lodging doesn't exactly inspire confidence...

You really are twisted.... Rich people aren't fungible, like socks or stocks. They are all different. Many are dumber than a box of rocks, and we have Hollywood and Wall Street as ample proof. Most are quite savvy however.

But, if you have to PUT OUT, in essence, to get paid, then the client shouldn't be surprised if he comes down with a bad case of financial syphilis. I wouldn't lodge my cock or my money with a whore.

This is a stupid model of client building. It might appeal to old dowagers who would't know a T Bond from a Model T, but it isn't going to get Warren Buffet's money, or mine, or most investor's money. If they have a solid wealth building program, that's all they need. Word of mouth and the golf tournament will do the rest.

I've been investing since I've been 12. I've only given my opinion to clients when they've asked for it, but I've never charged for investment advice. Based on the current situation, I'd say most of the guys who have been charging for investment advice should be in jail or hanging. Where is Charles II when you need him?

-Robert

I have no idea wtf are you saying in the drivel above, but to repeat my question... what's your background in managing high net worth accounts? Because I'd put money on line and say you're talking out of your ass.

I worked in the Investment Research division of a very prominent ibank and every time we'd have institutional and private wealth investors (generally $50M+ on the PWM side), both the sales teams and analysts would bend over backward for them. Bentley/s500 limo and heli service goes without saying. If prime brokerage pulls 100+mil from 'em, 100K for some limo and travel is cost of doing business.

In conclusion, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about...

In conclusion, your sales teams and analysts are idiots. How's your bank doing now, Mr. I'm a Brilliant Investment advisor? Did you advise Northern Rock? Citibank? Maybe Wachovia? One of the reasons these banks are in deep shit is because they thought the Dumb Money Follies could go on forever. The sort of shenanigans you are talking about is exactly what the American public is pissed off about. I'm surprised they brought bands to this group of investors because they are all FUCKING TONE DEAF!

Your system failed. Get over it and yourself.

-Robert

Actually my former employer is doing fairly well, actually well enough that Warren Buffet bought up a huge stake in the firm. They also went short on housing back in early 2007 IIRC...

What system are you talking about?

More importantly, what is your background? You seem to have in deph knowledge of investment management, investment banking, public policy and just about any other thing that hits the news nowadays....

If Buffet just bought a huge stake in your former firm that means their stock is at bargain prices. So, why is it at bargain prices? Because your sales team and analysts are a bunch of geniuses?

-Robert

Uhh this level of idiocy doesn't even warrant my response. Pull up a chart of DJIA over the pat 6 months for the answer.

I'm starting to see why other people here are allergic to your comments though...although the leaps of logic and the 'holiday inn' syndrome are amusing.

 

[JS80]

chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik
Which part of "client event" is so hard to understand? That's what you do get high net worth clientele...


Also EXACTLY why you don't want gov't running business, because everything that revolves around high net worth clients (read: LUXURUY...bentleys picking you up at airport etc.) will be mentioned by the populist idiots like Bawney Fwank. Because, you know, class warfare get democrats re-elected.

1. The part where you pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for talent;
2. The part where you give away Tiffany goodies;
3. The part where you provide high end hotels and meals.

If I were an investor (I'm totally in cash and T Bonds), I'd not be excited about a company that wasted so much money on frivolous gifts. I'd wonder if they hadn't gotten the memo. Also, I'd wonder about a company that just took TARP funds, and what they weren't telling me.

On the other hand, if they are just as dumb as most Republicans, I could be wrong about all of that.

-Robert

What exactly is your background in managing accounts for high net worth clients?

Like I said this is EXACTLY what happens when you mix politicians with business - nothing but bullshit populist outcries to score re-election points with class warfare. Look there! Rich people are enjoying themselves, even though this is shitty economy!

If I'm Northern Trust and I manage your millions, I will treat you to whatever luxuries you're used to. If your daily driver is a Flying Spur, picking you up with a Ford Focus and offering free Days Inn lodging doesn't exactly inspire confidence...

You really are twisted.... Rich people aren't fungible, like socks or stocks. They are all different. Many are dumber than a box of rocks, and we have Hollywood and Wall Street as ample proof. Most are quite savvy however.

But, if you have to PUT OUT, in essence, to get paid, then the client shouldn't be surprised if he comes down with a bad case of financial syphilis. I wouldn't lodge my cock or my money with a whore.

This is a stupid model of client building. It might appeal to old dowagers who would't know a T Bond from a Model T, but it isn't going to get Warren Buffet's money, or mine, or most investor's money. If they have a solid wealth building program, that's all they need. Word of mouth and the golf tournament will do the rest.

I've been investing since I've been 12. I've only given my opinion to clients when they've asked for it, but I've never charged for investment advice. Based on the current situation, I'd say most of the guys who have been charging for investment advice should be in jail or hanging. Where is Charles II when you need him?

-Robert

I have no idea wtf are you saying in the drivel above, but to repeat my question... what's your background in managing high net worth accounts? Because I'd put money on line and say you're talking out of your ass.

I worked in the Investment Research division of a very prominent ibank and every time we'd have institutional and private wealth investors (generally $50M+ on the PWM side), both the sales teams and analysts would bend over backward for them. Bentley/s500 limo and heli service goes without saying. If prime brokerage pulls 100+mil from 'em, 100K for some limo and travel is cost of doing business.

In conclusion, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about...

In conclusion, your sales teams and analysts are idiots. How's your bank doing now, Mr. I'm a Brilliant Investment advisor? Did you advise Northern Rock? Citibank? Maybe Wachovia? One of the reasons these banks are in deep shit is because they thought the Dumb Money Follies could go on forever. The sort of shenanigans you are talking about is exactly what the American public is pissed off about. I'm surprised they brought bands to this group of investors because they are all FUCKING TONE DEAF!

Your system failed. Get over it and yourself.

-Robert

Actually my former employer is doing fairly well, actually well enough that Warren Buffet bought up a huge stake in the firm. They also went short on housing back in early 2007 IIRC...

What system are you talking about?

More importantly, what is your background? You seem to have in deph knowledge of investment management, investment banking, public policy and just about any other thing that hits the news nowadays....

If Buffet just bought a huge stake in your former firm that means their stock is at bargain prices. So, why is it at bargain prices? Because your sales team and analysts are a bunch of geniuses?

-Robert

Uhh this level of idiocy doesn't even warrant my response. Pull up a chart of DJIA over the pat 6 months for the answer.

I'm starting to see why other people here are allergic to your comments though...although the leaps of logic and the 'holiday inn' syndrome are amusing.

Pitiful dodge! Since you won't divulge your former employer, we can't very well challenge the accuracy of your comments can we? Blaming it all on the DOW, eh? It couldn't have been all those toxic assets your bank generated? How much are they getting in TARP II money? Did they get TALP funds? Oh, wait, Paulson tied down all the bankers and forced money into their pockets, so your former employer is now TARRED by TALP?

LOL. The right wing will try to justify all their mean spirited low life, anti-humanistic ways and pawn it off as good for America.


-Robert

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Good grief....

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

Double good grief....

Go and sin no more.

You are blind and tone deaf because you worked for the devil itself.

Are we a bit bitter? Life crumbling before you?

-Robert

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

Double good grief....

Go and sin no more.

You are blind and tone deaf because you worked for the devil itself.

Are we a bit bitter? Life crumbling before you?

-Robert

How ironic that a lawyer, a profession that represents the epitome of a leech and undue burden and cost to society, would rail against investment bankers, who happened to make this one small mistake of peddling bad mortgages. And the cherry on top - he calls them the devil! Hah!

 

[ElFenix]

so his company went from being so bad that buffet would't invest with it, but then when he bought a large part of it it's because they're idiots. awesome. you win the internets.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

Double good grief....

Go and sin no more.

You are blind and tone deaf because you worked for the devil itself.

Are we a bit bitter? Life crumbling before you?

-Robert

Wow, you must be a labor lawyer or some equally lefty nuttery - perhaps social justice nonprofit?. You know if we all lived in communes and grew organic food in coops, you'd be unemployed... (that is if you actually are a lawyer, which i doubt given the 'arguments' you've typed up)

Last I checked Goldman didn't make any mortgages or pressured some poor, innocent minorities to buy and live in multi-thousand sqft mansions. It's clear from the above, though, that you subscribe to the drivel that Barney Frank feeds his audience. Down with the Burgeois! Proletariat will rule once more!

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

Double good grief....

Go and sin no more.

You are blind and tone deaf because you worked for the devil itself.

Are we a bit bitter? Life crumbling before you?

-Robert

Wow, you must be a labor lawyer or some equally lefty nuttery - perhaps social justice nonprofit?. You know if we all lived in communes and grew organic food in coops, you'd be unemployed... (that is if you actually are a lawyer, which i doubt given the 'arguments' you've typed up)

Last I checked Goldman didn't make any mortgages or pressured some poor, innocent minorities to buy and live in multi-thousand sqft mansions. It's clear from the above, though, that you subscribe to the drivel that Barney Frank feeds his audience. Down with the Burgeois! Proletariat will rule once more!

No, real estate.

You mean this Goldman Sachs? http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/1...postversion=2008121608

Actually, I would say they probably aren't in as bad shape as, say, Citibank, which is all but moribund.

I wonder what Buffet paid a share for his $5 billion? Did he get preferred shares? Just what did he buy?

I also notice that they want to pay back TARP I because of the restrictions on things like pay. Must be hell to be a Rolls-Royce kinda' guy and have to get by riding in a fucking Lexus, eh? But, no values are skewed at Goldman Sachs!

Oh, and your French sucks, s'il vous plais.

-Robert

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

What's so great about their business model? And how do you know they are doing well? They just fired 400 employees, so I guess they are just rolling in the dough, eh? Too much business probably?

-Robert

I looked at their financials.

Nice profit for '07, too early yet for '08.

But I looked at a draft balance Sheet for year ended 12/31/08. Looked OK to me. Their assets exceed their liabilities, and the equity section of the balance sheet looked pretty strong.

Yeah, I know they laid off abot 400 people; the economy is not good. So what?

Their business model looks much better then Lehman, BoA etc.

Re: TARP funds. Read up on it. No one but you is arguing that the Treasury pushed TARP money on banks that didn't need/want it. The Treasury was afraid that otherwise acceptance of TARP money would signal which banks were in really bad shape and it would just end up destroying them. Since the TARP money was (originally) a loan (or even if preferred stock) if that happend the government would dooming their (our) investment. It does make some sense, no?

Likewise with repayment - Treasury doesn't want tip off which banks are big trouble by their inability to repay. So, for now no one is allowed to repay (even if they meet Congressional guidelines) without Treasury approval.

Fern

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

Double good grief....

Go and sin no more.

You are blind and tone deaf because you worked for the devil itself.

Are we a bit bitter? Life crumbling before you?

-Robert

Wow, you must be a labor lawyer or some equally lefty nuttery - perhaps social justice nonprofit?. You know if we all lived in communes and grew organic food in coops, you'd be unemployed... (that is if you actually are a lawyer, which i doubt given the 'arguments' you've typed up)

Last I checked Goldman didn't make any mortgages or pressured some poor, innocent minorities to buy and live in multi-thousand sqft mansions. It's clear from the above, though, that you subscribe to the drivel that Barney Frank feeds his audience. Down with the Burgeois! Proletariat will rule once more!

No, real estate.

You mean this Goldman Sachs? http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/1...postversion=2008121608

Actually, I would say they probably aren't in as bad shape as, say, Citibank, which is all but moribund.

I wonder what Buffet paid a share for his $5 billion? Did he get preferred shares? Just what did he buy?

I also notice that they want to pay back TARP I because of the restrictions on things like pay. Must be hell to be a Rolls-Royce kinda' guy and have to get by riding in a fucking Lexus, eh? But, no values are skewed at Goldman Sachs!

Oh, and your French sucks, s'il vous plais.

-Robert

Actually the top MDs fly in from long island, traffic in nyc is terrible...

If my memory serves me right, Buffet bought preferred shares with warrants for common equity.

But yeah, it would be very difficult to attract top talent with executive pay caps - how many Harvard lawyers could you find if you cap the first year biglaw salary to 70K in nyc? How many 2000+ billable hour partners if you capped it at 500K?

 

[The-Noid]

Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

What's so great about their business model? And how do you know they are doing well? They just fired 400 employees, so I guess they are just rolling in the dough, eh? Too much business probably?

-Robert

I looked at their financials.

Nice profit for '07, too early yet for '08.

But I looked at a draft balance Sheet for year ended 12/31/08. Looked OK to me. Their assets exceed their liabilities, and the equity section of the balance sheet looked pretty strong.

Yeah, I know they laid off abot 400 people; the economy is not good. So what?

Their business model looks much better then Lehman, BoA etc.

Re: TARP funds. Read up on it. The Treasury was afraid that otherwise acceptance of TARP money would signal which banks were in really bad shape and it would just end up destroying them. Since the TARP money was (originally) a loan (or even if preferred stock) if that happend the government would dooming their (our) investment. It does make some sense, no?

Likewise with repayment - Treasury doesn't want tip off which banks are big trouble by their inability to repay. So, for now no one is allowed to repay (even if they meet Congressional guidelines) without Treasury approval.

Fern

"No one but you is arguing that the Treasury pushed TARP money on banks that didn't need/want it."

LMFAO! Do you actually read what you write? This might be the dumbest sentence in this thread. Care to try again? And I never said any such a thing.

If you are getting your information from their balance sheet then you'd better never invest in any stock. Balance sheets are entire works of fiction, and lousy fiction at that.

I repeat, no one forced any bank to take TARP I money. The banks took it because there were very few strings attached. PERIOD.

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

You might try reading a bit closer, superman.

-Robert

 

[chess9]

More on the Bankers and Morons on Wall Street: http://www.slate.com/id/2211922/

-Robert

 

[The-Noid]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

You might try reading a bit closer, superman.

-Robert

This is a good counterpoint, I can see why you have so much time to post here, instead of working, superman.

Let's all argue ad hominem that always works.

Also, find me any readings that say demand side pull works in a severe recession/depression. The stimulus bill that came out was a democratic wish list of the last 8 years pushed down our throats by our president with the idea that if it didn't pass the USA was going to end.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

You might try reading a bit closer, superman.

-Robert

This is a good counterpoint, I can see why you have so much time to post here, instead of working, superman.

Let's all argue ad hominem that always works.

Also, find me any readings that say demand side pull works in a severe recession/depression. The stimulus bill that came out was a democratic wish list of the last 8 years pushed down our throats by our president with the idea that if it didn't pass the USA was going to end.

Dude, if you read more of other's people's posts and THOUGHT about them you wouldn't post this trash. I oppose the stimulus bills! And, just to pound it into your dweeby thick skull, I am retired, I practiced commercial real estate law, not suing people. For your information most lawyers never sue anyone. Trash lawyers all you want, but I'd suggest you start thinking and stop spouting off irrelevant bullshit about derivatives.

-Robert

 

[K1052]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/...=aQUs3vSIIvpI&refer=us

The Dems in the House are now racing to make this an issue when it isn't.

The Treasury leaned on NT to take the TARP funds when they didn't really need them and now they're being vilified for it by a Congress who hasn't even passed the fucking required legislation to allow straight repayment.

 

[The-Noid]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

You might try reading a bit closer, superman.

-Robert

This is a good counterpoint, I can see why you have so much time to post here, instead of working, superman.

Let's all argue ad hominem that always works.

Also, find me any readings that say demand side pull works in a severe recession/depression. The stimulus bill that came out was a democratic wish list of the last 8 years pushed down our throats by our president with the idea that if it didn't pass the USA was going to end.

Dude, if you read more of other's people's post and THOUGHT about them you wouldn't post this trash. I oppose the stimulus bills! And, just to pound it into your dweeby thick skull, I am retired, I practiced commercial real estate law, not suing people. For your information most lawyers never sue anyone. Trash lawyers all you want, but I'd suggest you start thinking and stop spouting off irrelevant bullshit about derivatives.

-Robert

Why, because it takes away from your parties arguments about these giant swap black holes that are going to implode, that your party keeps using as a war piece?

The largest war in the world right now is not being fought in IRAQ it is by the democratic party against the American people.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

You might try reading a bit closer, superman.

-Robert

This is a good counterpoint, I can see why you have so much time to post here, instead of working, superman.

Let's all argue ad hominem that always works.

Also, find me any readings that say demand side pull works in a severe recession/depression. The stimulus bill that came out was a democratic wish list of the last 8 years pushed down our throats by our president with the idea that if it didn't pass the USA was going to end.

Dude, if you read more of other's people's post and THOUGHT about them you wouldn't post this trash. I oppose the stimulus bills! And, just to pound it into your dweeby thick skull, I am retired, I practiced commercial real estate law, not suing people. For your information most lawyers never sue anyone. Trash lawyers all you want, but I'd suggest you start thinking and stop spouting off irrelevant bullshit about derivatives.

-Robert

Hi Chess, I just wanted to say I read this whole thread and I think you've been schooled. I'm not saying you are stupid, but it appears members who are more knowledgable and wise to the reality of the situation have stepped in and you are too high on your horse to admit it.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: JS80
chess9 is a worthless lawyer. he will burn in hell anyway. disregard him.

Really? That's an awful lot of leaps and strawmen for someone who makes living by arguing... shens here.

Edit: Goldman Sachs ... i thought it was obvious with the shorting the mortgage and Warren Buffet comments.

Double good grief....

Go and sin no more.

You are blind and tone deaf because you worked for the devil itself.

Are we a bit bitter? Life crumbling before you?

-Robert

How ironic that a lawyer, a profession that represents the epitome of a leech and undue burden and cost to society, would rail against investment bankers, who happened to make this one small mistake of peddling bad mortgages. And the cherry on top - he calls them the devil! Hah!

Actually, you might want to rethink that. Banker's reputations never were too good and all the shit that's going on in the banking industry hasn't exactly been good PR.

But do they care? Hell no!! Only the best is good enough for them. :evil:

 

[wkabel23]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Preferred shares with a $115 warrants for buffet whose book is down 40 percent in a 3 month period...

With democrat's president and cabinet doing so poorly all they have left is to ridicule the banks, not comment on how they are in way over their heads and that a demand side economic stimulus has never worked during a severe recession/depression. This is in a sense an economics textbook that will play out in the next three years.

My hope is their democratic wish list does work, but even if it does it just postpones are propensity to stop spending a few years down the road.

As for being a lawyer, there are lawyers that serve a purpose and then there are the lawyers that make that purpose by suing for every purpose they can find to make a profit for themselves. My guess is the poster in this board falls under category two.

You might try reading a bit closer, superman.

-Robert

This is a good counterpoint, I can see why you have so much time to post here, instead of working, superman.

Let's all argue ad hominem that always works.

Also, find me any readings that say demand side pull works in a severe recession/depression. The stimulus bill that came out was a democratic wish list of the last 8 years pushed down our throats by our president with the idea that if it didn't pass the USA was going to end.

Dude, if you read more of other's people's post and THOUGHT about them you wouldn't post this trash. I oppose the stimulus bills! And, just to pound it into your dweeby thick skull, I am retired, I practiced commercial real estate law, not suing people. For your information most lawyers never sue anyone. Trash lawyers all you want, but I'd suggest you start thinking and stop spouting off irrelevant bullshit about derivatives.

-Robert

Hi Chess, I just wanted to say I read this whole thread and I think you've been schooled. I'm not saying you are stupid, but it appears members who are more knowledgable and wise to the reality of the situation have stepped in and you are too high on your horse to admit it.

Agreed. chess9 you are embarrassing yourself by repeatedly bleating the same nonsense in the face of reason. As it has previously been mentioned, numerous times, NT pretty much had to take TARP money. If you want to make a distinction that the government didn't hold a gun to their head, but rather showed the holster in order to get NT to take the money then be my guest. The rest of us will see that NT, and many other profitable banks, took TARP money at the behest of the federal government.

Your class warfare rhetoric is beyond reprehensible. Your posts reek of jealousy and a general misunderstanding of the world. Life is not fair; people lose jobs; some people have more money than others. A profitable company lays off 450 workers...sounds to me like they are trying to maintain their profitability. In your twisted view, this company is laying off workers so they can lavish their rich customers with gifts and luxury. You have a disconnect with reality; this company is following the business plan that led profitability. Sometimes people lose their jobs; I'm sure the company did not take joy in letting go of good workers. But they have a business to run. You seem disconnected from reality...might I suggest taking your head out of your ass and plugging back in? There is no conspiracy of the rich here, just a group of armchair politicians/economists/businessmen pathetically denying reality.