Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 1:31 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed for Christmas

Recent

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

Akamai Technologies, Inc. Message Board

  • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Feb 22, 2010 1:09 AM Flag

    Issues affecting the economy and stock market (1)

    This is turning into a longer post than I expected, and has ranged far from the Super Bowl game topic, so I'm making it a new topic. I'm replying to your 2:24 PM post "Re: (OT) Re: Super Bowl game" (210495) at

    http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=700&tid=210179&mid=210495

    http://
    messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z
    %29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=700&tid=
    210179&mid=210495

    >>It might be an incredibly expensive victory. If government health care becomes established it will probably be impossible to kill it and then Democrats will have their cause: if you don't elect us the Republicans will take away your healthcare. That's the whole reason for it.<<

    The Democrats' threat could be effective with people who refuse to go off welfare, but what about workers (the majority of voters?) who will lose their excellent employer-provided healthcare because the government reportedly intends to make it cheaper for employers to pay the fee/fine(?) to avoid providing it?

    And what about the Obamacare scheme to make taxpayers fund the slaying of unwanted infants? And the Obamacare scheme to euthanize seniors via withholding potentially beneficial medical care from them? Do you think voters will ignore and forget those three slaughters — health insurance companies, infants, seniors? Will health insurance company lobbyists go into dormancy?

    Tonight an AP report says about the version of Obama's healthcare plan that the WH is expected to post on its Website Monday:

    <. . . The plan . . . was expected to require most Americans to carry health insurance coverage, with federal subsidies to help many afford the premiums.

    Hewing close to a stalled Senate bill, it would bar insurance companies from denying coverage to people with medical problems or charging them more. . . .>

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/21/obama-version-health-reform-expected-monday/

    http://www.
    foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/21/obama
    -version-health-reform-expected-monday/

    In a nutshell, Obama says he will force people to buy health insurance, but he will also FORCE health insurance companies to grant coverage for preexisting conditions . . . while DISALLOWING them to commensurately raise their prices.

    Those medical costs for preexisting conditions will not just potentially zero the health insurance companies' profits, they can bankrupt them because they'll owe tremendous amounts to medical personnel, hospitals, pharmaceuticals, et al.. Is Obama's scheme premeditated slaying of the health insurance companies or isn't it?

    And after being bankrupted, can a health insurance lobbyist still exist to fight Obama's unholy crusade against those companies?

    In case the involuntary euthanasia for seniors doesn't seem like a done deal, the AP report includes this:

    <. . . The plan would be paid for with a mix of Medicare cuts and tax increases. . . .>

    Will seniors forget they are targeted and then vote for the Socialist candidates?

    >>It does to me [seem like an oxymoronic investment]. Gold is betting against the pre-eminence of the dollar, C is betting for it.<<

    That's why I wonder if Soros is hedging, not sure which way the wind will blow but hoping the profit from one will cancel the loss from the other. For the record, the number of Citigroup shares Soros bought in Q4 (he held zero in Q3) is 94,697,095. He already owned several gold sources in Q3.

    If it will help you figure out Soros's game plan, his 2009 Q4 report on his holdings is here. The stocks he owned as of that filing are in alphabetical order, so you can take it in with a glance.

    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1029160/000101143810000073/0001011438-10-000073.txt

    http://www.
    sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1029160/
    000101143810000073/0001011438-10-000073.txt


    Continues . . .

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • >>There's an update on the companies taking charges. Boeing announced it will cost them $150 million.<<

      You're right, Waxman needs a big tent.

      >>. . .They're saying that Obama's decision to drill, albeit limited, means the death of Cap and Tax. Do you see that happening? . . .<<

      What? Oh look over there, it's a Christian militia attacking a Girl Scout Troop.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Mar 31, 2010 1:47 PM Flag

      >>I don't understand why all health insurances stocks haven't crashed . . . I suppose they're thinking they'll all be rich when everyone has to buy their policies. Except they don't (that is the mandate isn't enforced), and the insurers will in a few years have to sell a regularly priced policy to all comers whether they are healthy or not. That situation can only end badly for the insurer (out of business) or the insured (premiums through the roof), probably both.<<

      The insurers will sell policies if the insurers are healthy, which, if all goes according to scheme, they won't be. Why don't investors understand that?

      There's an update on the companies taking charges. Boeing announced it will cost them $150 million.

      There's also (tentative?) good news today, if the commenters have interpreted it correctly. They're saying that Obama's decision to drill, albeit limited, means the death of Cap and Tax. Do you see that happening? Is the optimism premature?

    • >>This, however, is horrible. Is it the start of a trend?<<

      I don't understand why all health insurances stocks haven't crashed . . . I suppose they're thinking they'll all be rich when everyone has to buy their policies. Except they don't (that is the mandate isn't enforced), and the insurers will in a few years have to sell a regularly priced policy to all comers whether they are healthy or not. That situation can only end badly for the insurer (out of business) or the insured (premiums through the roof), probably both.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Mar 30, 2010 3:47 PM Flag

      >>That's not merely obvious but at 2700 pages plus reconciliation items it would be incredible if anyone did. They passed a massive mess of unknowns to 'save Obama's presidency' and we will suffer for it.<<

      And just the number of pages isn't all of it. Remember the Democrats' secret meetings at night with their door bolted against the Republicans? Those weren't coffee klatches. How much of that Obamination did they insert, remove, and change?

      I rejoiced today when I saw that Prudential announced it is taking a $100 million charge. It doesn't bode well for Prudential's customers, but it adds to the highly publicized witness against Obama and his Democrat cabal.

      This, however, is horrible. Is it the start of a trend?

      http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/03/30/ehealth-oppenheimer-sees-hit-from-cap-on-insurance-costs/

      http://
      blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/
      2010/03/30/ehealth-oppenheimer-sees
      -hit-from-cap-on-insurance-costs/

      >>The 'Republicans and their business cronies are big fat liars trying to embarrass the president' rhetoric is just standard point the finger and draw attention elsewhere Democrat demagoguery.<<

      Did you see that Pinocchio Himself is describing his healthcare scheme as "centrist"? I am so thankful that not one of the Republicans betrayed the others and every one of them voted against that people-and-economy killer.

    • >>The Prowler says they [senators and administration people] didn't know [what was in the bill]. . . .<<

      That's not merely obvious but at 2700 pages plus reconciliation items it would be incredible if anyone did. They passed a massive mess of unknowns to 'save Obama's presidency' and we will suffer for it.

      The 'Republicans and their business cronies are big fat liars trying to embarrass the president' rhetoric is just standard point the finger and draw attention elsewhere Democrat demagoguery.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Mar 29, 2010 11:26 PM Flag

      >>Speaking of which, if I were one of those companies I would be sure to trot out every adverse effect of Obamacare I could find. But of course the government's intent is to scare all the other adversely affected companies quiet.<<

      Obamacare must be overflowing with adverse effects. And judging by the letter that four business and labor (AT&T, Verizon, Communications Workers of America, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers) execs wrote in December to Reid stating their concerns about two provisions in the reform bill, they have studied at least part of the bill. It wouldn't surprise me if, well before they wrote the letter, they each hired a team of lawyers to eyeball every comma and invisible character in the bill.

      In that letter they even put in writing that "accounting rules dictate that, immediately upon the signing of the health reform legislation, employers would have to recognize, on their books, the long-term impact of the new tax liability." Should we think Reid kept their message hidden?

      Intimidation is the Obama government's trademark. In fact, the Washington Prowler, who authored the second article ("Obama in Rude Denial") in L's must-reads, said that on Friday Rahm and Valerie Jarrett were phoning the CEOs and DC heads of the companies that had announced the charges they were taking and _attacked_ them. 'Attacked' was the Prowler's word. The Prowler almost always conveys information not found elsewhere, so I look for his (her?) rare articles first thing. Did you read today's in L's list?

      <The White House political and legislative operations were said to be livid with the announcement by . . . companies . . . .

      "These are Republican CEOs who are trying to embarrass the President and Democrats in general," says a White House legislative affairs staffer. . . .

      . . .

      . . . says a senior lobbyist for one of the companies . . . . "My CEO sat with the President . . . with two other CEOs, and each of them tried to explain to the President what this bill would do to our companies and the economy in general. First the President didn't understand . . . . Then he basically told my boss he was lying. . . . he clearly . . . didn't know what was in the bill.">

      A lot more juice in the Prowler's report.

      http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/29/obama-in-rude-denial

      http://
      spectator.org/archives/2010/03/29/
      obama-in-rude-denial

      >>It's possible these guys really don't know what's in that bill and they're simply springing a trap on themselves.<<

      The Prowler says they didn't know. Some House Energy Democrat staff said they had memos regarding those very issues but thought no House Democrat so much as looked at them. Apparently the sole thing they cared about was passing the bill. Didn't Pelosi say the bill had to be signed so people would know what was in it? I bet she did her utmost to prevent her own Democrats from knowing. If I were in a church that provided votive candles, I'd light so many for that trap to be sprung on Waxman, Stupak & Colluders that the church would catch fire. Let them all be hoist by their own petard!

    • >>How can the peeps help but notice when four of these victimized companies — AT&T $1 billion, John Deere $150 million, Caterpillar $100 million, 3M $90 million, AK Steel $31 million, Valero Energy up to $20 million, Verizon — will be in the national spotlight at the hearing to which Waxman demanded they bring a few mountains of documents? . . .<<

      Speaking of which, if I were one of those companies I would be sure to trot out every adverse effect of Obamacare I could find. But of course the government's intent is to scare all the other adversely affected companies quiet.

      >>Stupak will be presiding over this hearing. Do you think he'll be stupid enough to ask the CEOs how they plan to pay for their charges, out of pocket or by making their customers (the recipients of Obama's healthcare gift) pay for them?<<

      It's possible these guys really don't know what's in that bill and they're simply springing a trap on themselves.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Mar 29, 2010 12:44 PM Flag

      >>I think that's just a shut up and sit down sort of thing to keep the peeps from seeing any of the adverse affects of Obamacare.<<

      How can the peeps help but notice when four of these victimized companies — AT&T $1 billion, John Deere $150 million, Caterpillar $100 million, 3M $90 million, AK Steel $31 million, Valero Energy up to $20 million, Verizon — will be in the national spotlight at the hearing to which Waxman demanded they bring a few mountains of documents? This is from Waxman's letter to AT&T, which I presume is the same letter he sent to the CEOs of John Deere, Caterpillar, and Verizon:

      <To assist the Committee with its preparation for the hearing, we request that you provide the following documents from January 1,2009, through the present: (1) any analyses related to the projected impact of health care reform on AT&T; and (2) any documents, including e-mail messages, sent to or prepared or reviewed by senior company officials related to the projected impact of health care reform on AT&T. We also request an explanation of the accounting methods used by AT&T since 2003 to estimate the financial impact on your company of the 28% subsidy for retiree drug coverage and its deductibility or nondeductibility, including the accounting methods used in preparing the cost impact statement released by AT&T this week.

      We ask that you provide the requested information by April 9, 2010. For purposes of this request, the term "senior company officials" includes all company officials at the level of Vice President and above for the company or any subsidiary. . . .>

      http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20100326/Stephenson.Letter.pdf

      http://
      energycommerce.house.gov/
      Press_111/20100326/Stephenson.Letter.pdf

      Those requests imply that the subcommittee hearings will be long and drawn out, and Rush et al. will make hay with them (if they haven't begun already), making sure all of conservative-radio-listening America hears every relevant detail. Obama wants the spotlight on his triumph, but that kind?

      Stupak will be presiding over this hearing. Do you think he'll be stupid enough to ask the CEOs how they plan to pay for their charges, out of pocket or by making their customers (the recipients of Obama's healthcare gift) pay for them?

      Aren't you thankful the Democrats own 100 percent this beneficent Socialist entitlement?

    • >>Is the government now attempting to regulate all the companies that announce the charges they must take due to the Obamacare monster? They have been ordered to the District of Corruption for an interrogation and told to bring their books. <<

      I think that's just a shut up and sit down sort of thing to keep the peeps from seeing any of the adverse affects of Obamacare.

    • pantone101naturalblondie pantone101naturalblondie Mar 28, 2010 2:21 PM Flag

      >>No but the government can regulate them because all the states have to participate.<<

      That was my second choice. :-) Seriously, between the two, I just wasn't sure.

      >>I don't think it [too costly an illness] matters, the insurance companies will happily permit the government to implement rationing of services. They'll just be government toadies in any case . . . if they don't cooperate the government can regulate them out of business.<<

      Is the government now attempting to regulate all the companies that announce the charges they must take due to the Obamacare monster? They have been ordered to the District of Corruption for an interrogation and told to bring their books.

      <Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republicans describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation.">

      If you don't read anything else in this article, do look at what Waxman is demanding of your aunt and uncle's company. It's indented, so easy to spot. If the companies don't comply with Waxman's imperious demands they risk subpoenas and threats from him.

      http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Democrats-threaten-companies-hit-hard-by-health-care-bill-89347127.html

      http://www.
      washingtonexaminer.com/politics/
      Democrats-threaten-companies-hit-hard
      -by-health-care-bill-89347127.html

      The one who chairs that delightful Energy and Commerce Committee's investigative subcommittee is Obama's toady Stupak.

    • View More Messages
 
AKAM
64.34-0.25(-0.39%)Dec 24 12:59 PMEST

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.