(Untitled)

Oct 03, 2008 22:17

Finally got moved into a new section - I'm doing some real cool shit, it's awesome. Obviously I can't talk about it, but it's cool - trust me ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 11

I don't agree to this but... johnnytwobags86 October 4 2008, 11:12:33 UTC
Where they are going with this recession/depression thing is we have a five year low of people unemployed across America (something like 170k compared to last year like 50k..those numbers aren't exact but it shows the +100k difference, that much I remember). That's 170k worth of people not making money to stimulate the economy, leaving it in rough shape. I'm not gonna make a wild claim that these two are assosiated but also the Dow Jones is down something like 150-300 points (again not exact but it was drastic), enough to show how shitty our economy is feeling right now ( ... )

Reply

Re: I don't agree to this but... demonofrazgriz October 4 2008, 15:24:21 UTC
Only problem is almost all economy analysts agree that the buyout is going to cause a real depression in 2010.

Reply

Re: I don't agree to this but... sirmeatball October 4 2008, 17:33:15 UTC
Economists are also the ones that got us into this. that said, something needs to be done. We do agree, however, that the 700 billion bailout should not have been passed.

Reply

Re: I don't agree to this but... demonofrazgriz October 4 2008, 17:41:42 UTC
Carter started this. No one else.

Reply


sirmeatball October 4 2008, 12:56:24 UTC
The only reason there is a fight over a buyout is simple. Citi wanted to buy them out before the 700 billion bailout occurred. Within hours of making a statement about that buyout, the bailout passed. This made Wachovia stock shoot back up, since it meant their bad loans would be partially covered. Wells Fargo saw that they could make more money by buying out the now-slightly better (thanks to the bailout) Wachovia Bank. This has caused a bidding war over who will get it. I think the real important part of it is that they are nearing the point that they may be paying more to buy it than they will earn from getting it.

So how do these two banks have the money to afford to buy another? Citibank is an international bank. They are not based solely on out economy. Wells Fargo, while American, was rated as the safest bank in America in 2007. So basically, you're saying the US economy is fine because an international bank, and the safest bank in America are doing OK? If that's not appealing to the top 1%, I don't know what is.

Reply

demonofrazgriz October 4 2008, 17:42:06 UTC
Because a recession or depression in America isn't an International interest or anything.

Reply

sirmeatball October 4 2008, 19:15:47 UTC
It certainly is an international interest, but it affects the American banking industry considerably more than international banking systems. For that reason, I don't think it's appropriate to make statements about the American economy by foreign banks.

Reply

demonofrazgriz October 6 2008, 01:01:46 UTC
International =/= Foreign.

Also, Citibank was founded in the United States. To say they are not based "soley" in our Economy is pretty, I hate to say it but I lack a better word, stupid. Thats like saying that if McDonald's does poorly or well for that matter, it has no bearing on our economy, or a negligible amount. You are essentially saying we should trivialize them because they branched out of this country. How dare they!

If we were to follow your philosophy here, then practically every corporation and franchise in America is not an accurate reflection of this country's economy. If thats what you're selling me just stop, I WONT buy.

Also, God damn Wells Fargo for not making the same stupid mistakes as the other big names who bit it.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up