"I'm out of equities the first chance I get".
At this rate with this stock, that'll be...uh....hmmm...
Here's a tip...buy LOW and sell HIGH...not, buy at $12 after touting and pumping BS about a raise in the dividend...and watching as the stock languishes around $4.
Yeah...keeping blaming democrats and liberals for your inability to manage your money.
This country has been run by democrats and republicans...liberals and conservatives...people have made money in all environments...
..well, except you.
You are one dumb ass.GW has screwed up our country so bad it will take years to fix.Then a dumb shit come along and starts blaming Obama,who will take office in Jan.You are a dip shit punk who doesn't know his ass from a hold in the ground.Keep watching fox asshole.
In his infinite wisdom, Sayfu writes: You duffus liberals are dying to have the US socialistic like your French brotherns..high taxes, high unemployment and a no growth economy...for years! Screw you.
My first inclination was to say that you've now revealed yourself as a true pinhead for all to see. On second thought, you may not have quite reached the pinhead level yet. Let's just say that your level of narrow-minded poison and hostility clouds badly any kind of however-lame point you're trying to make.
You apparently believe the sky is going to fall under Obama. What if it doesn't? What if the economy comes back like gangbusters? Then you've wasted all that negative energy on nothing, possibly giving yourself ulcers in the process. My advice to you is to turn off that right-wing pablum you've been fed on the radio or Faux. Then you might be able to think much more clearly. And definitely have less poison buildup.
Although almost none of this colorful conversation really has anything to do with SBLK and their divy.. The only minor tie-in is this:
Obama's policies do support increased international trade. Whether his policies will increase unemployment here in the US(my biggest concern) at all or not really doesn't affect SBLK at all. His presidency should be good for shippers; but that is still a ways off. This is something that will not get priced into any stocks until the change to tariffs and trade limitations actually occurs.
Sayfu: But please keep me informed of all of those Republicans responsible for the root cause of this problem. I won't hold my breath waiting for names.
Anyone still bugling deregulation when the public's interest is at stake should also be wearing a huge dunce's hat, and there are plenty of republicans who still want to jam that proverbial square peg into a round hole. Regulation is the only sure way to limit the unbridled greed and cheating that becomes epidemic when officials are looking the other way or not looking at all.
But if you're looking for arguably the most obvious poster boy for the subprime scandal, check no further than Phil Gramm, the long-time Texas senator who happened to be co-chairman of McCain's campaign and is deeply implicated in the banking/bailout messes on a number of fronts.
-- Check out the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999. That managed to reverse a decades-old law that had established a firewall between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies and securities firms. Suddenly those people could be in bed with other people -- a one stop screwing, as it were -- and the ensuing merger fever created a number of the companies that the government eventually had to label too big to fail, and thus eligible for a taxpayer bailout.
-- But the biggest anchor around taxpayers necks came in 2000, when Gramm snuck something called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act into a budget bill. That prevented the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from regulating any new financial products, which allowed an eventual $63 trillion derivatives industry to be unregulated and become the biggest financial nightmare of our time. One portion of that bill included an exemption from energy trading oversight for Enron. But the ultimate much greater damage came from something called credit default swaps. That was a deceptive way to insure a product upon default without calling it insurance, which would have then had to be regulated. Only problem was, the companies insuring the products didn't have nearly enough money to pay off claims when the collapse began. Hence, for one thing, AIG's bugled collapse.
-- As chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Gramm repeatedly turned down the SEC's pleas for more funding to better police Wall Street. There's plenty of documentation on that.
-- Gramm also was one of the biggest cheerleaders -- and eventually a paid lobbyist -- when the mortgage industry successfully pressed Congress to roll back strong state rules designed to thwart the rise in predatory tactics by lenders and brokers. The rise in high-cost mortgages soared.
-- Gramm eventually went to work for the Paine Weber investment arm of Swiss Bank UBS, a bank that benefited greatly from the legislation that he had championed.
Scumbag? Maybe not in the most commonly used sense. But certainly one can say that he worked much more for banking interests than he did taxpayers'. And we'll be paying the tab for a long time.
Sayfu: i don't necessarily want to get into a pissing match with you because it appears, for one thing, that you're incredibly naive. You say: They FORCED THE BANKS TO MAKE BAD LOANS.
If you truly believe that, you don't have much grasp of the capitalist system. No business, including banks, will do something against its self-interest for very long. The banks were complicit and particularly the mortgage brokers, real estate lawyers and loan-rating services. A lot of those people made fast money and ran. Banks continued to give absurd bonuses and stock options. They acted as if everything was OK because their top people and plenty of underlings were making money off of it.
Bottom line: the massive list of those guilty as hell goes far deeper than Fannie and Freddie, including many boatloads of, yes, Republicans.
There is plenty of anecdotal evidence out there. For instance the head of Countrywide Financial, which was at the time a big seller of loans to Fannie, asked the head of Fannie to visit him in California. At their meeting, the Countrywide guy said they now had other people (Wall Street) interested in buying their loans and they would cease doing business with Fannie unless Fannie bought many of their lower-rated loans. He knew he had the Fannie guy over a barrel because Fannie needed to buy a certain number of loans.
Bottom line again: Countrywide was guilty as hell in the whole process, but skated free and Fannie took the rap. Many people stole money in this scandal.