southsider2k5

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:59 AM) @TSNBobMcKenzie: Confirming James Wisniewski to CBJ for 6 years at $33M. Oh to be an NHL free agent this offseason. That is just stupid money for Wiz. WTF? s***, Campbells contract even doesn't look that bad in comparison.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:49 AM) As long as you actually do it, it is not hyperbole, and therefore I will allow it. BTW, just to help you out.... http://maps.google.com/maps?q=chicago+sun+...l=en&tab=wl

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:44 AM) I can understand it, so none. Here's the problem with Cowley. He's trying to be the new Mariotti, so we need to do the same thing and ignore him. It's as simple as that. I made the mistake of reading this thread because it was posted in PHT, and it infuriated me. That's the exact response he's looking for. Is it against the new rules to suggest that I would punch Cowley square in the balls if I saw him in person and then kick him in the throat while he was writhing on the ground? As long as you actually do it, it is not hyperbole, and therefore I will allow it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:46 AM) Have you taken a look at Wall Street profits since 2009? A new record every quarter just about. Banks can, and do, be profitable, and bankrupt.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:41 AM) There's a 2 way street problem here, and it comes out of the Congress. The best way for this to work would be simple regulations. Both 2k5 and I agree on that. It saves accounting work (his opinion), it makes things idiot/lobbyist-proof (my opinion). Works either way. Problem is...the big banks know that too. If the regulations were simple, there wouldn't be workarounds. So any time a simple regulation solution...like an across the board limit on leverage, or having banks hold onto some fraction of assets they issue, or the dividing line between commercial banks and investment firms comes along...it gets hammered by lobbyists, so that it becomes complex enough that either they can lobby effectively on obscure issues or so that there are enough loopholes that the regulations really won't matter. What we wind up with is a patchwork of things that are occasionally effective but become huge enemies of the financial industry (See: the CPFB) and enormously complicated, loophole-filled regulations sit on the books, keeping lawyers employed finding workarounds and lobbyists employed rewriting the rules to make things slightly better for Wall Street at every step. It has also saddled them with billion in compliance costs, and up to a couple of dozen regulatory bodies looking at their books at different times. This system is a disaster. The fact that it has failed so many times, should be the onus on fixing it. Instead it we have done the equivalent of giving Adam Dunn a contract extension, today.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:35 AM) Thanks for the response! Good to know about hte balance transfer. Yea, Im just 21 yrs old and I started investing last summer since I have had some pretty well paying internships, so this is a long term investment (mainly so that Im not just sitting on a bunch of cash in a bank account that gives me nothing, and I wanted to get some practice in before I graduate). So far I've felt more comfortable buying stocks with good dividends to help increase my buying power and to offset some of the risk, but Im willing to invest a certain portion in riskier stocks. I just don't want to invest now and see the market tank and realize I could've bought more shares at a cheaper price in just a month or so. I'm not in a rush or anything but by the end of the summer my goal is to have close to 10k invested (currently at about 2k in those 3 stocks I mentioned before). If you goal is 50 years from now, don't worry about where the market is today when you buy.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:33 AM) That is, of course, what happens when we...um...listened to the banks (and you) and did exactly what they wanted. Remember your "Paying his neighbors mortgage" complaint? And the original Tea Party rant? That is exactly what that was about. If we took taxpayer money and did anything to really redeem those loans, it was bailing out people who screwed up unfairly. They had to learn their lesson. The biggest problem is your are forcing banks to hold up the removal of bad debts from their books, which means they can't lend, which is exactly what you are blaming here. Just like I told you three years ago, keeping debt on the books is only going to drag this out, and the sell off of prices is going to happen eventually. The government doesn't have enough money to spend itself out of this mess. The biggest problem with the banking sector was setting up governmental agencies that allowed banks to take risks, and then dump mortgages off on. Freddie and Fannie still need to be shutdown, because that problem there hasn't been solved. Encouraging and rewarding risk was stupid, and it still is stupid. If you force banks to be judicious with the loans they make, they won't take nearly the risk.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:26 AM) So, what are the rules about players playing overseas or with another league? I think if you are under contract, you can't. As a FA, you could.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:16 AM) Obama could show some real leadership here and dig into the regulation fuzziness. Agencies and Congress are fiddling, and its a major reason why the recovery has fallen into neutral. Obama could do a lot to get his agencies working on finalizing their end, and he could go to Congress with some allowances for what they want, in exchange for passing more complete, and more solid regulations. Make it a goal for the end of the year to be able to go to the financial sector and say, "OK, you guys are being watched, but you now know exactly what to watch for yourselves. Go to work." He can and should then follow up with consolidation of agencies and responsibilities to make the whole thing more efficient. Completeness and clarity first, efficiency next. He has to take leadership to make the first two things happen. This needs to happen soooooooooooo badly, but it won't, because the government will never shrink itself.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:13 AM) Laugh all you want...that's the exact story of Japan's lost decade. Little to no inflation pressure, banks imploded due to risky assets that they never moved off the books, banks sucked up every safe asset they could find but had little reason to invest in anything new. Undershot inflation target...actually wound up in deflation. Is that the new explanation? Japan is sunk because they never moved their debts off of the books. Which coincidentally is what the Obama administration is trying really hard to do by stalling foreclosures, plus all of the ridiculous programs to go with it that haven't worked, but sure cost us a lot, and still keep debt and toxic assets on the banks books. Remember your mantra about what happens when you stop spending in a recession? The Obama administrations response has done the exact same thing in banking. Blaming banks for sitting on cash, while forcing banks to sit on cash out of fear of being closed, is what is the problem here. If you want money to flow, you don't tighten regulations and oversight. It doesn't work that way.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 09:08 AM) Exactly the point! They imploded themselves. The logical response is to grab every safe asset possible and avoid risky investments. There's no reason to expect them to loan on anything risky when they can be holding T-Bills. The way around this is to satiate the demand for safe investments by making their value go down and to make those previously risky investments less risky by making their safety go up. In other words, stimulate demand by making sure people have jobs and for God's sake don't undershoot your inflation target. my turn

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:47 AM) Considering how weak Dodd-Frank was in the first place, and the fact that they've only really changed capitol requirements for systemically important institutions...I'd say maybe the New Deal, since it created the FDIC which would shutter banks instead of letting the runs happen? Considering that the large banks leveraged what, 50-1 and then imploded? I'd say that they are. Then don't expect banks to loan

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:52 AM) You gotta love Thibs... see you in a long time NBA. Dude is so going to be a stroke victim.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:47 AM) What, I can't play confused? He even gets it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:41 AM) Although the reactions to the thread are...odd...congratulations, I think? Oh please.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:40 AM) Yeah, it's Obama's fault that record numbers of banks are closing. Not the fact that they invested in assets that left them insolvent. It's Obama. That one ranks up there with thinking FNMA and FDMC caused the housing crisis when 6% of their mortgages went bad while 18% of private bank mortgages went bad. Who is responsible for the requirements?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:35 AM) Obama caused the 2008 crisis of confidence? Wierd. I'm always amazed at his time travel abilities. The market has never satiated the demand for safe assets that exploded in 2008. You can see that in the below-target inflation, you can see that in the bond markets, you can see that in investment numbers, you can see that every time there's any sort of international shakeup. Increasing regulations and mumbles about capital requirements while closing record numbers of banks = banks sitting on cash. You can't say one thing and then do another.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:30 AM) Where exactly is this crowding out coming from when bond yields are this low? When private financial firms and banks are sitting on cash reserves literally in the trillions of dollars? They don't want to invest because there's no demand for anything. Just as there was in 2009. Your guys' problem is that you just assume the private sector will always bail you out, when the logical financial decision for just about the entire private sector right now is to sit there, hoard cash, and do nothing. Thank your Obama government for that.

QUOTE (Bighurt52235 @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 05:27 PM) Mmm... that 2001 Mariners team still makes my nether regions tingle. One of the more impressive post season chokes around.

Maybe we should lock this thread in honor of the lock out?

Does she know?

If we lose today, it is because Balta broke the sacred chant.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 08:17 AM) What Obama didn't foresee was that the people who said this slump was going to be vastly worse and required much more aggressive action were right. That's the Dems #1 problem with government... It is never big enough. Ask Greece, you can't totally spend your way out of things. Eventually you have to have some private sector participation and confidence instead of crowding out.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 07:07 AM) Hail damage on the car. God told me that is what you get for believing in Global Warming.

Nicely done.