News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #125 on: February 27, 2009, 09:36:04 PM »
Lou,
   I am curious what part of Obama's plan seeks to eradicate the TX oil industry, where would I find that information? As you know I am an Obama supporter, but I am always interested in learning something.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #126 on: February 27, 2009, 09:48:08 PM »
Lou/Craig/Bill,

    If you guys are going to spread blame, you need to look no further than the American consumer. Nobody pointed guns at peoples heads and said you must buy a house they can't afford, drive gus guzzling cars and generally live way beyond their means. We Americans have gotten greedy and created a since of entitlement. I'm entitled to a big screen tv, a 3 car garage filled with so much crap I can't park my cars in it, etc..    
Well said Craig.

    The most annoying thing about all this stimulus is how it tries to encourage spending. Most people don't have extra to spend, if you need proof ask them to pay cash. Outside of basic necessities (food and shelter) how many Americans actually NEED something?
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #127 on: February 27, 2009, 09:52:38 PM »
Does anyone really believe that all of the proposed programs will be paid for by merely raising taxes on households making $ 250,000 or more ?




ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #128 on: February 27, 2009, 09:53:46 PM »

For as far as I can see into the future it is trillions (Republican version) or tens of trillions (Democratic version) of unfunded spending plans combined with slightly incremental redistributionism (Democratic version) or frankly incomprehensible tax-cut-ism (Republican version) whittling around the margins. Not a whiff of any acknowledgment of the enormous dose of reality that will come crashing down on these morons a few years hence. They don't care one bit and there's nobody I can vote for who does.

Hopefully not true, but it isn't looking too encouraging at this point. Once I see what the health care details are I will have a better idea if our leaders have any clue at all.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #129 on: February 27, 2009, 09:58:31 PM »
Does anyone really believe that all of the proposed programs will be paid for by merely raising taxes on households making $ 250,000 or more ?





   Intuitively it doesn't seem like we could get that much money out of 5% of the population, especially since that 5% has the means to find ways to protect their money from taxation. I don't know what anyone can really accomplish with the piddling amount of money Obama proposes sending to us, it seems that that money would be better spent on properly constructed infrastructure (ie not the Minnesota bridge or Big Dig tunnel).
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #130 on: February 27, 2009, 10:12:43 PM »
Mike,

Any way you slice it,  its still plain old dem hypocrisy.  Obama outspent Bush in every category, yet there was no outcry or otherwise about all the wasted money.  And the economy was in much better shape 4 years ago than now.

Thats the only thing that matters in the final analysis....

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #131 on: February 27, 2009, 10:18:23 PM »
Quote
And the economy was in much better shape 4 years ago than now.

I only read the last page of this, and will go back for the gist of the whole thread, but Kalen - you can't be serious about that last post!!!   :o :o :o
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Tim_Cronin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #132 on: February 27, 2009, 10:22:15 PM »
What a lively thread. I can't help recalling that what precipitated this current financial crisis was not at all political, no matter how much people was to holler. It was Wall Streeters creating financial instruments the way Zero Mostel created percentages in "Springtime For Hitler." Just like the little old ladies, people bought in.
Time and prudent spending and saving will solve all this. As for credit being tight, I'm refinancing some property right now through B of A, and they're very busy.
And if sponsors dry up, what happens to pro golf? This: Smaller purses, but not too many fewer tournaments. The pro game was there before corporate title sponsors and it will be there after. What I'd like to see is a for tournaments to donate as much or more to charity as they pay in the purse. I know all the reasons it doesn't happen, but I'd still like to see it.
The website: www.illinoisgolfer.net
On Twitter: @illinoisgolfer

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #133 on: February 27, 2009, 10:44:59 PM »
RJ Daley,

Just four (4) years ago we met and played golf together in Nebraska with "The Sarge".  Those were great times. 

Who else but TEPaul would go to dinner and leave all his lights on in his room, with all the doors and windows left open.  Upon return, Ran thought the room had become the bug convention center of the Midwest.
TEPaul was immune from the bugs because he was smoking six cigarettes at a time.  Poor ran was being carried away by swarms of bugs when Gene Greco and George Bahto pulled him back to the ground, bitten in 7,459 places, but, happy to be alive.  Ran has since demanded that he not room within 100 feet of TEPaul, horizontally or vertically, on any future trips.

Are you trying to tell me that times now are better than they were just those four (4) short years ago ?

I'll take my position four (4) years ago over my position today, in a heartbeat, side effects and all, and I'll take that position four (4) years ago versus into the foreseeable future.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #134 on: February 27, 2009, 10:51:42 PM »
Quote
And the economy was in much better shape 4 years ago than now.

I only read the last page of this, and will go back for the gist of the whole thread, but Kalen - you can't be serious about that last post!!!   :o :o :o

Rj,

If you'd take today over 4 years ago, then thats just laughable...but you already knew that.  Getting back to the question though, why no outrage over the amount of money spen on the inaguration...

And for that matter why no outrage on Obama proposing a budget that dwarfs anything Bush and his GOP'ers ever came up with?

So excuse me if I have a really hard time taking anything the dems suggest seriously....
« Last Edit: February 27, 2009, 10:55:22 PM by Kalen Braley »

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #135 on: February 27, 2009, 11:01:38 PM »
Patrick Mucci....you can give all the "incentives" you want to business and they will not hire a single person until there is DEMAND for the products they sell...

The idea behind cutting payroll taxes, and increasing unemployment benefits is that putting another $30-$40 bucks a week into someones pocket will end up being spent....spent on the the groceries Lou claims are sitting on the shelves.....

The idea behind cutting taxes for middle class and low income workers is they are far more likely to spend the money...once again creating DEMAND.

For the last 30 years this country has tried the "tax cuts" and "less regulation" will lead to prosperity program, and I would say it has failed miserably...though you can make a very good case that 90% of the wealth in America is now in fewer hands, and many corporations have enjoyed many years of record profits, while wages have fallen and jobs have been shipped overseas...by the way...please show me a company that actually pays taxes at the highest rate...
LOCK HIM UP!!!

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #136 on: February 27, 2009, 11:22:23 PM »
Lou,
As I recall it was you who took the first shot at me. Go back and look, post 45, paragraph 4. I had still not addressed you when, at your post #56, you took another swipe at me.
I then made an innocuous reply, post #61, to you saying that I didn't think that the NT's share price would be harmed by more than $.50 if they kept the 450 workers on the payroll.
This was followed by my post #117, giving you the facts, directly from Congress, that republicans and democrats both exacerbated the housing problem by their inaction.  Of course, you didn't address those facts at all, but chose to sail off on another tack, accusing the 'left' of 'pent up hatred' from the days of Reagan, and citing CRA as a purely democratic plan. You then totally ignored my factual reply that CRA was a 32 year old program that got republican as well as democratic votes, and the republicans have been in power many times since 1979 and could have effected some changes, had they wanted to.

Now your calling my arguments dishonest, but I've backed them up with facts, and using the 'victim' defense by accusing me of trying to 'denigrate' you because I said your second paragraph "..sounds like it came right out of Rush Limpbough's playbook' also has a hollow ring to it. Tell me Lou, how can you see that as denigration, Limpbough is your hero, and you said that you, an American, would rather spend the day with him  than with your President.

I'll tell you what, instead of carrying this on any longer why don't you and I just forget about 'speaking' to each other if a thread has political issues in it. It never seems to come out well.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2009, 11:28:59 PM by Jim_Kennedy »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #137 on: February 27, 2009, 11:54:52 PM »

Patrick Mucci....you can give all the "incentives" you want to business and they will not hire a single person until there is DEMAND for the products they sell...

The idea behind cutting payroll taxes, and increasing unemployment benefits is that putting another $30-$40 bucks a week into someones pocket will end up being spent....spent on the the groceries Lou claims are sitting on the shelves.....

Craig,

You don't get it.
Nobody is going to spend the money, whether it's $ 30 a week, $ 40 a week or $ 192 per week.

You have to create PROJECTS, be they infrastructure or other endeavors that will cause employers to HIRE people.  

People with JOBS spend money, UNEMPLOYED people don't spend money.

People with JOBS get the lion's share of their healthcare paid for, they get life insurance, long term disability insurance and Pension or 401K money put away for them.


The idea behind cutting taxes for middle class and low income workers is they are far more likely to spend the money...once again creating DEMAND.


It AIN'T gonna happen.

The media spent over two (2) years undermining consumer confidence in an attempt to get a Democrat elected.  Well they succeeded, but, at what cost ?

Consumer confidence isn't going to be restored by giving people, especially unemployed people, $ 30, $ 40 or $ 192 a week, nor will any tax cut result in general consumer spending, irrespective of whether or not it's the low, middle or upper class.

What's good for business is good for the country, it's irrefutable.


For the last 30 years this country has tried the "tax cuts" and "less regulation" will lead to prosperity program, and I would say it has failed miserably...

That's your opinion, not one shared by many.
The last 30 years have been wonderful for this country and its citizens.


though you can make a very good case that 90% of the wealth in America is now in fewer hands,

If you think that's a result of the tax policy that's existed for the last 30 years you really don't understand what's happened.

You, like others would probably have liked to have capped Bill Gates's and everyone else's pay at $ 250,000.

You're a socialist/communist so I understand your point of view, I just disagree with it.

If someone works 18 hours a day, or works smarter than someone else, why shouldn't they reap the rewards of their efforts ?  It's the American Dream.


and many corporations have enjoyed many years of record profits,

And who benefited from those profits ?  
First, the local, state and federal governments.
Second, the shareholders, the pension funds, retirees, and individuals who owned shares in those corporations
Third, the employees of those companies.
What's wrong with that ?
Corporations have as their primary goal, the obligation to perpetuate themselves PROFITABLY.
You see profits and you want to confiscate them, depriving the investors of a return on their money and worse yet, a return of their money.
As I said, you're a socialist/communist, so we disagree on this issue, amongst others.

You're disgruntled with the American way, I'm happy to have been born here and to have benefited from my educational and work efforts.
I was lucky to have benefited from the best medical care anywhere, and so have thousands of Canadians who flock to America to receive expeditious care, along with many foreigners.


while wages have fallen and jobs have been shipped overseas...


Blame those smucks in the State capitals and Washington for that travesty.
Your politicians who drove business from our shores to foreign shores.

Do you want to start with the Textile industry, an industry where I have a smattering of familiarity ?

by the way...please show me a company that actually pays taxes at the highest rate...

You know you really are more than obtuse, you're deaf, dumb and blind.

Off the top of my head I can name about 50 of my clients who pay the highest corporate tax rates.  

Are you out of your mind ?  
Where do you get this drivel that corporations don't pay taxes at the highest rate ?   That somehow they manage to pay little or no taxes ?
Have you examined corporate tax returns ?

With business down substantially, taxes will be down because revenue and profits are down.  I suppose you'll applaud that reduction in profits.
Just ask employees who are layed off if they would have prefered for their employer to have been profitable or grossly profitable.

Do you pay income taxes at the highest rate, or do you try to take advantage of the tax laws and reduce your taxable income ?

Do you donate 5 to 10 % of your earnings to charity ?

What did Supreme Court Judge Learned Hand advise when it came to paying taxes ?

Judge Hand stated in 1947 that "there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible".

Yet, you want to demonize that practice ?
WHY ?

Might I ask what you do for a living ?
Please don't tell me that you're the regional director of the socialist/communist party.

Perhaps knowing your backround would provide some insight into your perspective and information base.



Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #138 on: February 28, 2009, 12:08:22 AM »
Patrick..what do you think unemployed people do with their checks? 

You are absolutely correct Patrick...people need a job.

I was just watching an economist talk about spending...and she said there are only three customers when it comes to spending...people, business and government..and right now people and business are not spending...that leave government....and it seems to me the economic stimulus plan has a large dose of spending by government ,and tax cuts to encourage spending by people, and lastly some tax cuts to encourage spending by businesses.
LOCK HIM UP!!!

Jeff Goldman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #139 on: February 28, 2009, 12:11:49 AM »
"You have to create PROJECTS, be they infrastructure or other endeavors that will cause employers to HIRE people.  

People with JOBS spend money, UNEMPLOYED people don't spend money.

People with JOBS get the lion's share of their healthcare paid for, they get life insurance, long term disability insurance and Pension or 401K money put away for them."

Patrick,

Sounds like you think that Obama's stimulus program might not be big enough, given that there is such a huge amount of excess capacity right now, and no one is going to invest in anything with that kind of oversupply, so the only way to create projects is for the gov't to do so.

« Last Edit: February 28, 2009, 12:59:42 PM by Jeff Goldman »
That was one hellacious beaver.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #140 on: February 28, 2009, 02:33:04 AM »
Pat, I interpreted Kalen's comment as saying that the economy was so much better 4 years ago AND now that Obama is in office and the economy is in a mess, it is somehow proof the things were good under Bush and now are bad under Obama.  Come on, give me a break!  We are here in this mess at the bungled mess that WAS the last 4 years - no 8 years, that was a steady clusterf*&%$#$ to the poor house (as Jon Stewart's regular skit has named it).

But, I agree with you Pat on the fact that this stimulus putting 14 or whatever $$ in folks pockets is somehow all that effective is lame.  I agree that we must get way more serious on infrastucture than the current stim.  I agree that we need more JOBS JOBS JOBs that are regular and steady income from which consumers can build a life and real expectations of prosperity that generates a healthy economy.  Stim jobs building a new road isn't the ultimate answer when the road is built in a year or so and the job goes away.  We need manufacturing, that is there for a long time, with pay checks every week of every year.

I partially agree (though I think it is overstated) that it was the local, state and fed gov regarding policies that "drove" businesses to relocate overseas and decimated all those previous jobs that were our economic backbone.   NIMBY, some enviro regs that were feel good saviors of owls or red darters, and such repelled some industries, but not that many compared to tax rate shopping. 

But, I believe a legislative atmosphere where taxes were not so much a certainty at a fair level as compared to an atmosphere where special tax loopholes were constantly trading back and forth causing uncertainty and an atmosphere of "whose up and whose down" in the political power buying arena, are what caused businesses to go to a place where it was cheaper taxes, with more certainty.  Lobbying is a pain in the ass trying to figure out which politician to ride for your loopholes to the point corps are giving money to both sides in hopes of getting a tax favor.

I also think that many companies that relocated to countries where health care is more of a certainty and the fixed cost was attractive, and they are glad to be away from this sink hole of health care russian roulette here that ate at their bottom lines.  (Pat, I bet more people are going to India for health care medical tourism than these hords of Canadians coming here that you keep citing, but I can't see here near the border!!!)  ::)

BUT beyond taxes, most companies that departed were because they left for greed to make more profits due to obscenely low third world wages on the backs or poorer desparate populations.  That is greed and exploitation of the poor, and corporate traitorism in abandoning their own country and its workers in my book.  They moved the jobs to the point that we don't manufacture hardly anything anymore.  And, without those steady paychecks, the illusion of wealth became a paper game of Wall ST funny money derivitives and monopoly money and stimulated credit and housing bubble wealth, until they have now burst.

And, my disdain is not directed at a shareholder class so much as a corpocracy made up of executive management class.  In fact, I think shareholders have been treated very bad by the inbred and entrenched executive class.  The system is rigged against shareholders and in favor of execs naming their own committees to compensate themselves in a closed club manner.

I continue to maintain that we won't have anything in this country until we have a new ethic.  It is hard to put one's finger on a definition of a new ethic, but it has to do with realizing that the highest profits above all other considerations are not the be all and end all of a properly functioning society.  The current ethic notion that the guy that dies with the most toys wins is only assured of one thing; you're dead in the end, but the game goes on without you - the winning by garnering the most toys was all an illusion. 

Along the lines of my idea of a new ethic needing to take hold in this country, it was observed in a very early post on this thread by Jim Kennedy:
Quote
I'll take a guy like Leonard Abess over anyone at NT, anyday of the week. You can make a fortune in this country without ever stripping it off someone else's back.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami-dade/story/904842.html
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Mike Sweeney

Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #141 on: February 28, 2009, 03:03:35 AM »
Mike,

Any way you slice it,  its still plain old dem hypocrisy.  Obama outspent Bush in every category, yet there was no outcry or otherwise about all the wasted money.  And the economy was in much better shape 4 years ago than now.

Thats the only thing that matters in the final analysis....

Kalen,

I am a huge believer in 2 term presidents. I voted for Bush 41 for both elections and obviously he lost the second time. As a result of this belief, I voted for Clinton's second term, against my registered party at the time. I only voted for George W's first term.

Four years ago, our family probably had one of our best years financially. Four years ago I was a registered Republican.

Today I am an independent, and the great thing about this last election is I now view my vote in the same way as that Kevin Costner character where the entire election rides on my single vote.  ;) Reality is, living in New York with a democratic base, it would be difficult for my vote to actually swing an election.

Yes, George Bush was the final straw to drive me away from the party. (Sorry Lou.) I voted for Obama, and I do like John McCain. I am now reading Jeremy Rifkin's "The European Dream - How Europe's Vision of the Future is Quietly Eclipsing The American Dream."

I think the problem with both parties are the extreme views that they both seem to cling to. Nancy Pelosi is the new George Bush. She is there for all the wrong reasons.

I hope in four years that Obama wins because that means we are all out of this and the economy is humming again. I support him today. He has to spend right now to get our confidence back. Trust me, I am not giving him a free pass and he needs to support the small business guy financially and emotionally. Remember I am the Kevin Costner guy that decides everything.  :D

Even in this billion dollar bailout era, I don't think any of us can appreciate how much Iraq cost us and I am thankful that Obama has specific targets now to get out. That money can go a long way back here, if nothing else to pay off debt, which by the way was at its peak four years ago:



I was not a huge fan of Bill Clinton due to his many character flaws but I have to say right now a Monica Lewinsky scandal would look pretty good. The guy knew how to run a budget. The argument can be made that Clinton started us down the path of the housing mess, but it was done with good intentions of increasing housing for people that we now understand can't really afford it.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2009, 03:33:23 AM by Mike Sweeney »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #142 on: February 28, 2009, 05:58:55 AM »
Mike

I largely agree with you.  Clinton wasn't my type of guy, but he did focus on one of the biggest issues facing American politics - getting the budget under control.  This is without a doubt the single best thing the government to do to contribute positively to the economy.  It is a great pity that this concept couldn't have turned into a more promising legacy.  We all know Bush had other ideas and when the final figures come in on what the war cost I believe the numbers will be so staggering that it is clear that paying for this war headed off any possibility of rectifying our current problems while they were relatively mild.  The massive increase in the price of petrol (caused by the war - which we started in part to stabilize the price of oil ) played a significant part in the economy turning sour and exposing our underbelly for what was really there - a soft and pink flabby area that surely would necessarily have to be trimmed or consume us.

I have said before that I don't have time for either side of the aisle because the goal is always the same, to retain or grab power with little thought to long term plans that should be developed for critical areas such as the deficit and energy.   However, I can see no other way out of this mess other than government led projects which lead to job creation.  Nobody else can kick start the economy like the government can because nobody has access to limitless supplies of money like the government does.   The last thing I want to see is a drive to create spending in an already indebted middle class.  We are where we are today because of borrowing on cockiness.  Now, the average American household has more debt than it is worth and who has to pay for this other than the sensible folks who didn't push their budget and do keep money tucked away.  Certainly future governments don't want to act as cheerleaders for more personal debt.  Instead, they should be doing something to create an incentive to repay debt. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024:Winterfield, Alnmouth, Camden, Palmetto Bluff Crossroads Course, Colleton River Dye Course  & Old Barnwell

John Keenan

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #143 on: February 28, 2009, 09:08:29 AM »
Mike Sweeney

Great Post and of all the dribble and patrician posts your cuts to the heart of the issues. Both parties are more concerned with the Party than the Country. No matter what Obama says the Republicans will say it is awful. Conversely when W was in no matter what he did the Dems would say it was awful. The objective is to govern the country in the best possible way to move it ahead.

I have read that the man who helped Clinton really understand the importance of the economy, balanced budget and jobs was Rubin now of Citi fame. He fought hard on these points

Pat Mucci

Jobs Jobs Jobs are what is needed. People do not spend if they are in fear of losing their job. I do not understand why this concept is hard for some to see. I would add that incentives are great and we need a lot more for business to invest but something else is needed. Confidence. Across the board we lack it.  We had dinner with some friends and one felt the way to solve this mess is to shut down all the CNBC's, Talk show and all the rest. When it was going well they told us it would never end now it is bad they tell us it will never end.  Daily we are pelted with talking heads who continue to tell us it is awful will get worse etc.  John Bogle founder of Vanguard is quite clear when he says no one repeatr no one knows what is going to happen despite their claims.
 

The things a man has heard and seen are threads of life, and if he pulls them carefully from the confused distaff of memory, any who will can weave them into whatever garments of belief please them best.

Justin_Zook

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #144 on: February 28, 2009, 09:21:26 AM »
Don't forget gentlemen that if one turns an oven on for an hour at 475 an turns it off, the warmth will linger even after the oven is turned off.  So this notion that Bill Clinton was somehow responsible for the economic growth during his administration isn't necessarily accurate.  Our economy was so hot, it was hard even for the government to spend it all!

Also do not forget that the Republican majority in congress had a GREAT deal of sway as it related to Clinton's balanced budgets.  

Are we not concerned that Barney Frank was dating Herb Moses, the assistant director of public initiatives, one of the very men who pushed this whole effort to make banks give loans to people who couldn't afford them?  From an economic standpoint, this is the least compassionate, most insulting thing one can do to an already downtrodden segment of society.  There really ought to be a hearing on this, with implications of impeachment on the table.

Of course, a few banks threw up their hands in frustration and said, "Well, this sucks.  If the government's forcing us to be stupid, let's play stupid and give loans to people who can't afford them.  When they can't pay and the government won't pay, we'll just acquire the assets these people never really owned and sell them to people who are good for the money."  Of course, this doesn't necessarily work either when it happens in the widespread.

And then there is envy out there among the people.  Our society is unfortunately made up of a fewer and fewer who use their minds.  We go home and watch television instead of reading good books, spending time interacting with our families and teaching our kids how to behave, work hard, and develop an ownership mentality in all that we do.  Hollywood and an incompetent mass media who preach sex, money, comfort, selfishness, instant gratification and envy doesn't help either.

It really is incorrect to say that nobody can kick start the economy like the government.  The government is a consumer of moneys that are available in the market.  When these moneys are taken out of supply, they don't generate any growth.  

We should start evaluating our government like we do our businesses.  Are we getting a good return for our investment of taxes?  Probably not; we don't see a whole lot coming back.  Senior citizens see money every month through social security checks, but by the time I retire, I won't see a dime, "not a dime", and so social security for me is also a tax and this sucks very much.

And please don't waste your time assuming that I don't seek to take care of those in need who are less fortunate that me.  I give a significant portion of my income to real charities who do real work.  If I give 10,000 of my income a year to charity, the net societal benefit is FAR, FAR greater, then if it were acquired by the government through some tax, processed, and handed out to someone at perhaps 50% or less it's original value.  

The same is true of market activity.  The government hurts more than it ever helps.

And yes, jobs do help one more confidently spend money.  But what if those jobs are unsustainable as it relates to the market?  Even if you have a job, nothing limits your spending like the possibility of being included in the next round of layoffs. 

I don't think anyone knows if these jobs of Obama's are sustainable and clearly the market is skeptical too.
We make a living by what we get...we make a life by what we give.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #145 on: February 28, 2009, 10:10:16 AM »
Shivas...

Clinton got surpluses by accident...through no fault of his own. Blind, dumb luck.

I love it....and the beat goes on....and the beat goes ononnnnnnnnn.
LOCK HIM UP!!!

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #146 on: February 28, 2009, 10:15:09 AM »
Getting back on topic....

I was listening to NPR this morning and they talked about Northern Trust wanting to pay back the TARP money....and they said Northern had come under attack recently for a lavish"golf outing"....

Clearly, Northern Trust and the PGA have handled this like bumbling idiots if the media still does not know the difference between a "golf outing" and the sponsorship of a tour stop event.

LOCK HIM UP!!!

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #147 on: February 28, 2009, 10:19:56 AM »
Two comments:

Even Art Laffer acknowledges that Clinton was a great president.  I heard him say so Tuesday.

Look no further than Albert Haynesworth signing a contract for $100 million to play defensive tackle to know that this nation is fiscally (and perhaps morally) bankrupt.  Sheesh.

Bogey
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Steve Lapper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #148 on: February 28, 2009, 10:53:20 AM »
I cannot sit here and read this drivel without adding some economical history perspective, the kind that is less driven by party or ideological line, and more strongly rooted in fact and timeline.

If we look back over the last quarter of a decade, as far back as 1980 (early Reagan), the economy was in a recession, led by high unemployment, severe inflation (although abating under Volcker's stern rate medicine), an harmfully strong dollar and the prospect of rising federal deficits. The American consumer did not carry high amount of debt, housing or personal, and saved (even in inflationary times). Money supply, as measured by contemporary metrics was very low (choked by inflation and slow exports).

This was a crisis that provided, in essence, a perfect storm...setting the stage for an unlocking of an enormous monetary and productivity boom that was unleashed with the  Fed easing of the discount rate, M1 & M2 growth, a set of Reagan tax cuts, and market prognosticators (Henry, aka Dr. Doom Kaufman) turning tide to bullishness. The stock market soared, Reagan gave great press and Paul Volcker's war on inflation had worked. Unemployment fell, real & median incomes rose, and productivity began to rise. The cold war was won, globalization of trade flourished. Americans bought homes with 20% or more down financed by local & regional banks.

Throughout the early 80's there was NO large scale securitization instrument markets for debt and little, if any, excess leverage within any financial system, save for a sneaky and ominous trend of specious lending by S&L's, created years back by competition with newly created money-market funds. Free-market de-regulation allowed these S&L's to depart from their original mission, borrow larger sums of $$ and begin OWNING (instead of just lending to) real estate and other tangible assets. Still these were great economic times for our country. The stock market went up and everyone bought new cars and new homes and most, if not all, assets continued to appreciate dramatically. Trees grow, but not to the Ozone layer!

1987 gave us the instantaneous risk adjustment of an over-heated equities market with Black Monday, but the American economy shook it off, led by a sharp uptick led by US consumer spending. Most of our historically close trading partners were not so lucky and fell into sharp recessions. We trudged on, though red ink was beginning to fill the balance sheets of banks and the US Treasury.

Around this time though, US Savings & Loans revealed their toxic pattern of large, highly levered, poorly-collateralized lending practices over the past decade. They had been pushed by regulation over the last decade to consolidate, get larger, ultimately leading to collapse, thus requiring a $170 bailout by the gov't and the establishment of the RTC.

1990 through 1992 serves up a plate of the newly expensive Gulf War, a concurrent oil price shock and marked a period of sharp, but short-lived recession. Unemployment rose, government spending accelerated and Germany & Japan became dominant global trade machines outpacing US growth and competing with the USD for prominence. Budget deficits, mostly due to a bloated defense spending spree grew near exponentially. Our politicians explain it away as the cost of winning the cold war and becoming the world's police force.

1993 sees Clinton/Rubin gets credit for new fiscal discipline, reducing the national budget & trade deficits, adding jobs, and pushing new home construction and ownership. Greenspan lowers rates, re-igniting the capital markets and by 1998 there is a budget surplus (for the first time since 1969), low unemployment, income growth, GDP expansion and savings rates drop nearer to 1% (by 2000). He may have been busy under the Oval Office desk, but the economy flourished.

By 1998, we've stopped savings, begun speculating in equity and housing markets and have the tacit endorsement of the FRB (by Greenspan's easy money). We share a delusional belief that the good times will go on forever. Little worry is ascribed to the now-prescient collapse of LTCM(caused by massive leverage and disconnect of market correlation's). Emerging markets, now a hotbed of capital investment, demonstrate their ability to instantaneously combust and the NY Fed successfully orchestrates a Wall Street-led quasi public-private bailout. Nobody thinks twice about resuming the party. The kool-aid continues to flow freely, and again the $$ spigot is dialed wide open.

  It is right here that the securitization markets for debt begin their exponential growth, further fueling debt expansion (now with other people's money) and we expand the ability of larger financial institutions to take risk by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, (essentially inviting the larger banks to the party's keg and letting the free-market decide who will make the most coin!). Again, trees don't get to outer space.

The Nasdaq/Internet bubble is but another blip as financial engineers outweigh risk managers and the once provincial and local nature of the US housing market is given the wholesale endorsement by both political parties, the FRB, and the President. Concurrently (as a tonic for the short-shock of 9/11), our government endorse the idea of expanding personal credit and excessive (read: borrowed) consumer spending to lead our economy higher! Most interestingly, median income growth stagnates, becomes the most dichotic between the upper and lower economic strata since the 1920s...hmmmm!!

Market oversight is abandoned and abhorred, accounting standards loosened, and the quest for the holy grail of sequentially higher (albeit specious) earnings becomes the new mantra as we embark on a several trillion-dollar, questionable, war in Iraq. Again, federal deficits soar, the USD tanks but that can't stop the daily fixation on more wealth, little or no savings, and an ever-rising DJIA. Don't forget the then-common(and Presidentially-endorsed) mentality that every red-blooded American should pursue his/her dream of buying a home and has a nearby mortgage-banker with a pal at a GSE to make this a reality. The amount of leverage in the US financial system is nearly 3X it's GDP :o

Onto this shaky mix add the liquid oxygen combustibility of CDOs, CDSs, and the always false premise that housing (the underlying for most all of these derivatives) will go up forever. Allowing these to go on the books of our most critical financial institutions was the directly akin to lighting a fuse to a fiscal neutron bomb. Guess what...it went off and we are now seeing how well we can contain the poisonous radioactivity.

WHAT THE HELL DID ANYONE EXPECT TO HAPPEN :o :o >:(

All the political and ideological bullshit expounded here should take a very long look at their respective parties, their ideologies, and recognize their roles in bringing us to the brink of historic disaster (the edge of the back of one of Cape Kidnapper's cliffside fingers). Both parties have failed us miserably.

All of you spout off about taxes, spending, slanted and false histories and blame and credit, blah..blah...blah...Politicians aren't alone in contributing to this mess. The media has played a large and non-constructive role in this as well and deserve a lambasting. They conveniently go from giddiness and celebrity worship to never-ending gloom and prognostication of fault.

HOWEVER,WE LET IT HAPPEN OURSELVES!!! Pat, Dave, Kalen, Lou, Craig everyone...take some damn responsibility. I know I do. Break this chain of ascribing blame.

We've allowed our collective conscience to take a hiatus in the name of personal gain, greed, avarice and excessive comfort. We went from a nation of strong, often Purtian-like values, to one of weak thought and ignorance of consequence. We have lost our ethical and moral compass.

The only thing worth loudly advocating, IMHO, is a wholesale surge (and then purge) of Congressional reform. Let's use the American spirit and will to demand the very real abolition of lobbying by term limits, federally-financed elections (cheapest government fix I can see), and the end of the seniority system. I didn't vote for either Nancy Pelosi or Mitch McConnell and I resent their ability to dominate the potential legislation for the world they'll leave my daughters. My generation is probably screwed, but theirs doesn't have to be. Let's have legislators who make the office responsible to us, not their financial benefactors (be they corporations, unions, think-tanks, or other political ideologies).

We may not like the medicine we are about to take and it won't taste good, but without some of it (and I don't pretend to sit here and tell anyone what will work and what won't...wtf knows just yet???)  we are doomed to watch this accelerating spiral of deflationary pressure sink us into a morass that might take multiple decades to recover from! Let's stop arguing over what's right and wrong with every bailout and every piece of legislation...they are mostly attempts at short term fixes. Stop worrying over what taxes you will have to pay and start thinking about where this country has to get to. We need real and dramatically different solutions to successfully extract us from this mess.

They won't come from the stale monotony of ideologic bullshit.



« Last Edit: February 28, 2009, 11:21:53 AM by Steve Lapper »
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking."--John Kenneth Galbraith

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Northern Trust under pressure...
« Reply #149 on: February 28, 2009, 11:28:04 AM »

Steve,

    WOW!! You have my vote for post of the year!!

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back