Sat, Aug 23, 2014, 3:34 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Frontline Ltd. Message Board

SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    " the very right to have a job"

    You GREATLY misunderstand. There is NO such right. Neither in TX law. Nor in Federal law. Nor in Scripture.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    " when you single out "lefties like Barney Frank" and then tack on "and his predecessors" your stated point isn't exactly focused on all pol.s now is it."

    I didn't introduce Barney to the discussion, our friend Rog did. He seems to believe that the whole of financial mess started and ended with GWB. My inclusion of Mr. Frank in responses has been to point out that he too had his fingers in the pie.

    "A mortgage backed security isn't a bad thing. It wasn't the problem. "

    Theoretically, no. It was how they were USED that became problematic.

    MBSs based on sub-prime loans, and the silliness of CDOs based on those sub-prime MBSs - CDOs that were stupidly assigned AAA ratings, WERE part of the problem.

    This part of the financial problem cratered the banking sector - WaMU, BAC, and others. The CP they issued to support their off-balance sheet SPVs was, at least potentially, a huge threat to the money market funds / industry.

    "A REIT is basically a mortgage backed security."

    I'm not sure I follow your logic here. Many (most?) REITs own real estate outright. mREITS invest in, they PURCHASE, MBSs. How are you viewing REITS ***as**** an MBS?

    "The problem was the derivitives. "

    Absolutely, that was another, if separate, PART of the problem - it is what took out AIG.
    .
    "There was a very real possibility that if it wasn't mortgages that blew up it was going to nationalized debt."

    You're starting to sound like a tea-party republican. 8-)

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    rogere, I totally agree that integrity and politics are like oil and water. That said, the Republican party tends to stand for more moral integrity than the Democratic party (relatively speaking) and is more strongly supported by those who expect high moral character in their representatives than the "what's in it for me from the Government" Left. The "typical working man" will vote for the party that most closely represents his/her values, and the typical non-working man will do likewise.

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    nikk the really weird part of Texas Law is that a HUGE majority of Texans who vote either or effected workers or will be yet they continue to vote in people that make sure their rights as human beings are taken advantage of. Of those who are losing big time in this Du Point disgrace my bet is that 75% of them are white and of that 60% vote GOP. So they will reap what they sow.

    A working man blue collar of white somehow deceives themselves into thinking that such things as pensions and worker rights and the very right to have a job is not as important as being anti Gay, pro gun, and throw in racism and you got the typical working man voter white voter in Texas and I imagine other states as well.
    The GOP has for years been able to get the working class to vote to cut their throat with a dull knife and smile why they do it.

    While any law that allows or encourages fraud, lies and total lack of integrity what harm has been to Du Point in all this? You think people care that they did what they did? We get what deserve in the long run.

    Remember that the GOP controlled house actually had a bill that would make bribery legal by US Companies operating in Foreign Countries. Making money with crooks is more important to a great many in the House than having integrity and character and many of them or from the Christian Right and Jesus was clearly not for bribing folks to make a buck. I do not think we ever had a "moral compass" in this country and we sure do not want to be burdened with one now.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    " when I folks going into debt for low paying careers I just shake my head."

    Agreed. The education / student loan situation is a big mess. No easy solutions. Not every program of "education" will result in a large salary - or necessarily even qualify someone for a job. Paying significant tuition and fees for such a program seems crazy - unless one has the resources to pay for the program without going into debt and does not, will not,need the resources for any other life purpose.

    " Luckily the dollar amounts in student loans are so much less than the mortgage crisis numbers."

    True. And the repayment terms are normally fairly relaxed - meaning that the longer one stretches the payback period the more likely the loan principal will be monetized by inflation.

    "You lost me on the medical costs though. Insurance companies have buying power on their side."

    His point may have been that, in a 3rd party payer system (of whatever form), the **consumer** of healthcare has little to no incentive to be cost conscious - particularly where there is no or very low deductible, co-pays, co-insurance, etc.

    It isn't clear, either, the degree to which the posited "buying power" has improved pricing given that the very existence of insurance has *distorted* pricing.

    And insurers don't make their decisions in a vacuum. Whenever they attempted to compel significant reform of the healthcare delivery "system" to reduce cost insureds, and healthcare providers, react ednegatively (which isn't a surprise). Remember HMOs?

    " If you think that you're going to get a better deal on medical services at the time that you need them"

    How does one price shop a colonoscopy? For that matter, since it is, or could be, a discretionary purchase, when does the service go on sale?

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    "Now, now. My point has been that the pols from BOTH parties contributed to the mess."

    I agree with that whole heartedly but when you single out "lefties like Barney Frank" and then tack on "and his predecessors" your stated point isn't exactly focused on all pol.s now is it.

    "It was GNMA / HUD that originated what we know as an MBS."

    A mortgage backed security isn't a bad thing. It wasn't the problem. A REIT is basically a mortgage backed security. The problem was the derivitives. There was a very real possibility that if it wasn't mortgages that blew up it was going to nationalized debt. As bad as the great recession was/is that problem would have been far far worse, in multiples. Try to imagine how bad things would have been if it wasn't banks that were crashing but sovereign nations.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    "Yeah, Lefties like Reagan..."

    Now, now. My point has been that the pols from BOTH parties contributed to the mess.

    "It was the financial institutions that invented securitization."

    Not with respect to the US residential mortgage market. It was GNMA / HUD that originated what we know as an MBS. The private label structured securities that were issued by investment banks came later when it became apparent there was a lot of moolah to be made packaging and administering pass-throughs..

    " It was Greenspan and Summers that sabotaged any regulations on it."

    Their "contribution" to the mess was not in regards to a failure to adequately regulate the MBS market but, in failing to regulate the rapidly expanding derivatives market.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    "A similar scenario is now happening in the college loan arena...."

    Student loans in some respects is actually worse! If you have a house that gets foreclosed on, you lose the house and your credit is reduced for 7 years. With student loans you can claim bankruptcy but your student loans will follow you. Even into retirement, your social security isn't immune from garnishments. That's why when I folks going into debt for low paying careers I just shake my head. Luckily the dollar amounts in student loans are so much less than the mortgage crisis numbers.

    You lost me on the medical costs though. Insurance companies have buying power on their side. If you think that you're going to get a better deal on medical services at the time that you need them than an insurance company would ahead of time, you're fooling yourself.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    All very true and well said, semp. Another major result of the easy home loan money era was an unrealistic rise in home values, which the average person saw as a rise in home equity which they proceeded to borrow against. When the bubble burst in 2008, not only did the house of cards that the financial institutions were holding collapse, but so did the value of real estate. A similar scenario is now happening in the college loan arena, where many folks who have no credit are afforded easy college loan money from the government which is resulting in colleges and universities being able to jack up what they charge. A similar scenario of rising costs happens in the medical business when the consumer is disconnected from the cost of medical services because it is covered by their health insurance. Easy money causes prices to rise every time.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    "But lefties like Frank and his predecessors thought society had an **obligation** to provide no / low income individuals ..." Yeah, Lefties like Reagan who was promoting home ownership of governemnt subsidized housing. It was the financial institutions that invented securitization. It was Greenspan and Summers that sabotaged any regulations on it.

    I'm not going to defend the GSE's. They have their issues but they also are what is keeping a fluid market.

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    My conclusion is that when I quit my job rather than be transfered to Texas was an extremely wise decision. As far as this case goes, the key is whether they have a contract or not. As "at-will" employees, under Texas law, their case is lost. From a broader standpoint for employees in Texas, if you're not working under a contract you may as well be a day laborer with all of the certainty that entails.

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    And your conclusion?

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    " In this case Countrywide didn't give a hoot what people were stating on their applications because they weren't hanging onto the note."

    Exactly right.

    And WHY did the **GSEs** introduce securitization? Because banks were NOT willing to lend to bad risks. Remember all the fuss about "red lining"?

    But lefties like Frank and his predecessors thought society had an **obligation** to provide no / low income individuals EXACTLY the same sort of lifestyle enjoyed by the middle and upper class. So they ENCOURAGED - indeed DEMANDED - that banks to make loans that they - the banks - would NOT otherwise have made by buying the risky loans from them, packaging, and selling the stuff as pass-throughs.

    Then they blamed the banks when the loans later blew up.

    The whole mess got out-of-control when the likes of Countrywide, as well as mom-and-pop shop originators, realized that no one was bothering with due-diligence. The junk was sold on to investment bank / non-gov consolidators such as ML and BAC, who also did not care about quality since their only objective was to package the loans and sell them while retaining servicing right income.

    If BAC is at fault for not doing due diligence on the loans - for accepting the "warranties" made by the mom-and-pop shops, Countrywide, etc., then so TOO are the GSEs. They relied on what they were told just as the loan consolidators relied on what they were told.

    Everyone started to get concerned about loan quality - INCLUDING the folks that were advising Frank and other congress people, but everyone benefited - until the bottom fell out.

    The "blame" for this mess lies with more than BAC et. al. It also lies with the politicos.

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    "The Fifth Circuit asks:
    1. Under Texas law, may at-will employees bring fraud claims against their
    employers for loss of their employment?
    2. If the above question is answered in the negative, may employees covered
    under a 60-day cancellation-upon-notice collective bargaining agreement that
    limits the employer’s ability to discharge its employees only for just cause,
    bring Texas fraud claims against their employer based on allegations that the
    employer fraudulently induced them to terminate their employment?" Pg4

    "As previously stated, “[a]t-will employment is an important and long-standing doctrine in
    Texas, and we have been reluctant to impose new common-law duties that would alter or conflict
    with the at-will relationship.” Although common-law fraud is certainly not new, allowing it to be
    asserted to alter or conflict with at-will employment would be. For all these reasons, we answer the
    Fifth Circuit’s first question: an at-will employee cannot bring an action for fraud that is dependent
    on continued employment. Pg9

    "The Employees argue that we should look to federal labor policies in deciding whether they
    can sue for fraud, but that is not our place. The Fifth Circuit has asked only for our interpretation
    of Texas law. DuPont’s CBA required that “[a]n employee, who believes he has been unjustly
    discharged, shall be allowed ten (10) calendar days, from the date of notification of discharge, in
    which to register a complaint”. The requirement would be excused by any fraud by DuPont, but
    only for a reasonable time after it became apparent that DTI would be sold. Whether the
    Employees’ rights under the CBA have been lost is a matter we leave for the Fifth Circuit.
    We agree with the Employees that we should not answer the Fifth Circuit’s second question
    broadly. Our answer is: in the situation presented, no." Pg15

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    "So, it's okay for individuals to engage in fraud. But they shouldn't don't expect to participate in the benefits when the bank that THEY defrauded is penalized by the Feds because of the individual's fraudulent action?"

    Of course not but any lender, whether a bank, S&L or someone buying a bond, needs to do their own due diligence. In this case Countrywide didn't give a hoot what people were stating on their applications because they weren't hanging onto the note.

    Surely you remember what was going on back then. I refinanced the house that I had at the time and never saw anybody. Co-workers of mine were refinancing every 3 months.

  • Reply to

    OT Bank of America settlement

    by scs_dan Aug 21, 2014 11:26 AM

    " if you signed falsified info on your application you aren't eligible for the write downs. "

    So, it's okay for individuals to engage in fraud. But they shouldn't don't expect to participate in the benefits when the bank that THEY defrauded is penalized by the Feds because of the individual's fraudulent action?

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    nikkorott Texas Proud lol. I was born and lived in Texas all my life and ALL that time Demo or GOP controlled it has been ruled by Big Business of All kinds not just the Oil industry but they surely get a free pass. This ruling shows what total disregard the Texas Law makers have for ALL working people both blue and white collar as bend over and take it applies to all. However where they are union agreements the at will clause can not be held up above union contracts as even in Texas Contract Law does still a little meaning.

    One reason you see so many sexual discrimination suits by employees in Texas.
    At Will does not give the employer the right to sexually abuse an employee since that is covered by other laws. Same applies to other violations of law.
    If an employee hits an employee he may be subject to criminal law but could then turn around and fire the hit employee. Shine my shoes boy if you want a job or any other demeaning demands is totally legal in the minds of the Texas Legislature.

    Funny thing is one of the reason for such a law is that Christian want the right to fire anyone who does not their idea of living a sinless life. Homosexuals can be fired for lifestyle since they are at will employees.

    Lie, cheat and steal is fine as long as you the Big Boss Man and get those shoes shined too while your at it. Texas way of doing things.

    East Texas was once the bastion of populist politics and now the first Dist of Texas a good old East Texas Dist. have perhaps the most right wing nut job in office in the house (ok that is a bold claim so let me at least in the Top 5)
    How the state has changed and all since the civil rates act. No racism in any of that lol.

  • Reply to

    Employers Can Legally Lie to Workers, Court Rules

    by nikkorott Aug 22, 2014 9:48 AM

    Aargh. Another yahoo message drop. Apologies if this is a repeat.

    You can disagree if you wish, Nikk, but here is a link to the court ruling:

    "https://www.supreme.courts.stateDOTtxDOTus/historical/2014/apr/120626.pdf"

    Look specifically for the court's comments about CBAs.

    They booted the matter back to the fifth district. One can infer that they were not entirely in agreement with the "at will" provisions of TX state law.

    But that is a matter for the legislature, rather than the court, to deal with, yes?

  • Reply to

    Contango

    by msnapp82 Aug 21, 2014 1:21 PM

    lakers - Libya's civil unrest is just a power grab, and the power is desired so as to control the oil riches. Things appear to have met a compromise, as Libya is now pumping oil. The country need money in a big way, as they lost so much when the ports were closed. I suspect they will pump like mad to fill the coffers, they don't care if Brent drops in price. If Brent continues to fall, the contango will widen.

  • Reply to

    results q2 2014

    by mvandelden_nl Aug 22, 2014 12:08 PM

    Surely you have some interest Rami. Otherwise, why do you follow FRO?

FRO
2.60+0.06(+2.36%)Aug 22 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.