The US will lose its role as a global financial superpower in the wake of the financial crisis, Peer Steinbrück, German finance minister, forecast on Thursday in the most outspoken comments by a senior European government figure since Wall Street plunged into chaos two weeks ago.
Mr Steinbrück, a Social Democrat and long-time champion of tougher financial market rules, said the US government was to blame for the severity of the crisis because it had resisted European calls for stricter regulation until it was too late.
The US will lose its status as the superpower of the world financial system with the emergence of stronger, better-capitalised centres in Asia and Europe, he told the German parliament. The world will never be the same again.
His comments echo deep anger in Germany at the perceived recklessness of Anglo-Saxon financial engineering and a feeling that the US model of economic liberalism has failed while the more regulated, long-term oriented and industry-based German economy has proved more resilient.
Ten years from now, he later told journalists, we will see 2008 as a fundamental rupture. I am not saying the dollar will lose its reserve currency status, but it will become relative.
The minister said it had been irresponsible of the US government to oppose stricter regulation even after the subprime crisis had broken out. This laisser faire ideology, he said, was as simplistic as it was dangerous ... This largely under-regulated system is collapsing today.
Mr Steinbrück did have warm words for the USs crisis management in the past fortnight, including the planned $700bn rescue package for the financial sector. Washington, he said, had acted not just in the USs interest but also in the interest of other nations.
Speaking after Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president and current holder of the European Union presidency, called for an emergency G8 meeting on the financial crisis, Mr Steinbrück said tougher capital market rules were now urgently needed.
His proposals include a ban on speculative short selling; a crackdown on variable pay for bankers; a ban on banks securitising more than 80 per cent of any asset they hold; international standards making bank managers personally responsible for their trades and increased supervisory co-operation.
He said France and Germany would set up a working group of treasury, central bank and supervisory authority officials.
#1
If you say so, Herr Finanzminister Steinbrueck. You did notice that recently the Euro fell, what was it, 10% against the U.S. dollar? Clearly not everyone agrees with your assessment at the moment -- although admittedly this crisis will be a while unwinding, and stronger, better-capitalized financial centers in Europe and Asia would certainly be a good thing for us all. But I do not doubt the Germans dislike the American way of doing things when it is different than the German way. 'Tis ever so.
#3
Yeah, Besoeker - guess he couldn't bring himself to compliment us.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/25/2008 20:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I wish there were an isolationist running. We should withdraw from Nato and sign a mutual defence treaty with Poland, the Baltic, and the Czech Republics.
#5
Peer, The rest of the world has been catching up to the U.S. for decades. Glad you've finally noticed.
Also, please allow me to make my own prediction. Germany gets hammered by this. Anytime there's a global slowdown, export based economies take the harder hits.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
09/25/2008 21:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Compare wid WAFF.com > RUSSIA'S GLOBAL WAR GAMES [jamestown.org artic] > "STABILITY 2008" RUSSO-BELARUSIAN MILEX reportedly is premised on an increasingly deteriorating geopol situation and POSSIBLE NUCLEAR WAR AGZ THE US-NATO; + TOPIX > US ARMY GENERALS PLAN FOR FUTURE RESOURCE WARS + NEW ARMY STRATEGY DETAILS 30-40 YEARS OF PERSISTENT WORLDWIDE WARFARE FOR RESOURCES [mainly agz RUSSIA-CHINA].
Jodie Evans, the Obama bundler who rushed the stage during Sarah Palin's convention speech, met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last night.
I guess he wanted to tell her, "good job."
Contemplating the extraordinary behavior that the Obama campaign will excuse before they stop taking a bundler's money, I'm reminded of Dennis Miller's routine about just what the heck you have to do to get kicked out of Guns and Roses.
Posted by: Mike ||
09/25/2008 10:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
One might think that you wouldn't want people like this anywhere near your campaign. The nuts cant account for more than a few percent of the vote, 5%?, max? Why do they coddle them so? They are no doubt having a negative effect on the Dem campaign, every comment section on every rational website article leads me to believe this. Why don't they shake loose of these loons?
#2
Because they don't think they are loons, BigJim. This is what mainstream thinking is according to the left. The Cause before all else, and the more over the top you behave supporting it, the more they love it/you.
#3
These people are not 'hangers on' for Obama's crusade. They are his crusade. Without the wild-eyed kooks, there is no 'is' to Obama. He lacks definition and purpose.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
09/25/2008 12:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Look on the bright side - we haven't heard from Cindy Sheehan in a while...
CBS news so salt to taste. But it's not surprising that the old war-horse, when called, would charge out of his foxhole and yell, "Follow me!" He's that kind of man.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/25/2008 11:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think McCain could kill the MOAB if he came out against it. I don't know if he can save it, thought.
David Deming
EDMOND -- When Benjamin Franklin was dispatched to France as ambassador of the United States in 1776, he won the hearts of the French through his authenticity. Rather than take on an affected and phony continental style, Franklin eschewed the powdered wig of the European gentleman and donned the fur cap of an American frontiersman. Original genius and polymath, Franklin understood that the French would see through any false pretension but respect an authenticity that sprang from an unpretentious and naive love of country.
What a contrast there is between Franklin and Barack Obama. Obama is a Harvard lawyer who is a mile wide and an inch deep. He is only the latest in a long line of shallow elites that consider it stylish and intellectual to despise their own culture and heritage.
Nothing exemplifies Obama's antipathy for American culture better than his statement that Americans "cling to" religion and guns out of frustration or bitterness. We only can suppose that Obama regards religion or firearms as aberrations that need to be eradicated.
Of course, both guns and religion are essential aspects of American culture. The United States was founded by people seeking religious freedom. Does the word "Pilgrim" ring a bell with anyone? Our freedom and the right to self-government were won by farmers with guns.
The American Revolution started when the British marched to Concord with the intention of confiscating colonial arms. Both the right to "keep and bear arms," and the right to "free exercise" of religion are enshrined in the Bill of Rights. We have come a long way when the presidential nominee of a major political party regards the exercise of fundamental rights as a mental aberration.
When Obama refers to "my Muslim faith," the verbal gaffe resonates as a Freudian slip because of Obama's thinly veiled hatred for this country's unique culture and institutions. Obama sat for 20 years in a church where the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr preached "goddamn America." He only resigned from the congregation when it became politically expedient to do so. When earlier this year, Michelle Obama said "for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country," can we conclude that her husband disagrees? Is it not remarkable that Michelle Obama can be so small-minded as to find nothing in the history of the United States that merits her admiration but the personal success of her husband?
What is Barack Obama for? His campaign motto is "change." But even a 6-year-old child understands that "change" can be either good or bad. Lacking specifics, the invocation of "change" as policy is completely empty. As we witness Obama's minions mindlessly endorse the meaningless maxim of "change," it only can call to mind the barnyard animals in George Orwell's "Animal Farm" chanting "four legs good, two legs bad!"
The choice of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate has been devastating for the Obama campaign precisely because she is everything Obama is not. Palin is not ashamed of her culture or country. She is not embarrassed by being an American, but naively embraces her birthright. Unassisted by affirmative action, Palin has risen to national prominence on the basis of her character, intelligence and natural gifts. In a word, she has guts. This is a woman who is proud of her country, not because it has granted her personal success, but because she respects what America stands for: freedom, opportunity, and individualism.
Obama is a vapid demagogue, a hollow man that despises American culture. He is ill-suited to be president of the United States. As the weeks pass, more Americans will come to this realization and elect McCain/Palin in a landslide.
DAVID DEMING is an associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma, but his opinions do not necessarily represent those of the university.
#3
He is only the latest in a long line of shallow elites that consider it stylish and intellectual to despise their own culture and heritage...Obama is a vapid demagogue, a hollow man that despises American culture.
Where does David come up with this fluff?! Nothing intelligent, just 1/2 truths and smears.
Is there only one culture and heritage in America? The author seems to think so. He doesn't understand it and he fears it. Change keeps democracy fresh.
#4
Is there only one culture and heritage in America?
Yes, obviously, unless you buy into multiculturalism, and believe that a country and a NATION is a set of separate communities, each with its own culture and own heritage. Western Nations were built against that model, painful as it was. Melting pot, not salad bowl.
Because nothing sez change as a professional chicago machine politician waaaayyyyy to the radical left, with mob connections, whose early sponsor was the area slum landlord, and who's been prepped up by 60's radicals rejects (ayers & co) and a messianic billionaire (soros and his own machine) to become their manchurian candidate, and this only because his skin color makes him a viable bet.
#6
Change is what we will have if Obama passes his tax hikes. That's all we will have.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
09/25/2008 12:33 Comments ||
Top||
#7
A new code word has entered the left's political lexicon. Change = Marxist stealth revolution.
Posted by: ed ||
09/25/2008 12:42 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Is Rupert the DNC's latest Troll-of-the-Day offering?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/25/2008 13:05 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Rupert Sninert6826 ,
We need change, nobody would argue with that. The national debt has nearly doubled in the last 8 years, Real wages are less than in the 60's, the trade deficit sets record highs ever year. But socialist policies are not the change we need. That's not how this country's political model was set up and that's not how our financial model was crafted. We need to spend less, earn more, and give American businesses and industries a fair shake. If you want to go socialist, try Venezuela, or Bolivia.
#10
Amen Big Jim. We need to grow our way out of this problem. We need to reduce government regulation that stifles real business growth (not the business of the money changers, but the business of companies that actually make things), we need to reform our legal system to introduce a loser-pays result to several types of cases, we need to eliminate the tyranny-of-the-minority that exists now (via the legal system) that stops/inhibits and makes more expensive any needed project (see energy infrastructure). And most of all we need term limits at all levels of government and non-partisan or computerized districting. These are just a few of the things I would do if I were king for a couple of days. (Might invite Heidi Klum over for a friendly cup of tea too, but I digress)
#11
Nothing exemplifies Obama's antipathy for American culture better than his statement that Americans "cling to" religion and guns out of frustration or bitterness
I read that directly as Obama whining like a two year old "They Scare ME"
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/25/2008 19:55 Comments ||
Top||
#12
A level of antipathy matched only by his wife Michelle's comment...."for the first time in my adult life I am proud of American."
These people are the Snap On tools of donk socialism.
#13
For those who are so big on Obama's CHANGE mantra--could you please send me some? I've got some bills to pay, and it would really be in keeping with Obama's philosophy to help me out. In fact, if everyone in Obama's campaign and his voters would just send me one thin dime, I could retire a sizable amount of debt and be better able to cash in on my slice of the American pie.
WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama is an immensely talented man whose talents have been largely devoted to crafting, and chronicling, his own life. Not things. Not ideas. Not institutions. But himself.
Nothing wrong or even terribly odd about that, except that he is laying claim to the job of crafting the coming history of the United States. A leap of such audacity is odd. The air of unease at the Democratic convention was not just a result of the Clinton psychodrama. The deeper anxiety was that the party was nominating a man of many gifts but precious few accomplishments -- bearing even fewer witnesses.
When John Kerry was introduced at his convention four years ago, an honor guard of a dozen mates from his Vietnam days surrounded him on the podium attesting to his character and readiness to lead. Such personal testimonials are the norm. The roster of fellow soldiers or fellow senators who could from personal experience vouch for John McCain is rather long. At a less partisan date in the calendar, that roster might even include Democrats Russ Feingold and Edward Kennedy, with whom John McCain has worked to fashion important legislation.
Eerily missing at the Democratic convention this year were people of stature who were seriously involved at some point in Obama's life standing up to say: "I know Barack Obama. I've been with Barack Obama. We've toiled/endured together. You can trust him. I do."
Hillary Clinton could have said something like that. She and Obama had, after all, engaged in a historic, utterly compelling contest for the nomination. During her convention speech, you kept waiting for her to offer just one line of testimony: I have come to know this man, to admire this man, to see his character, his courage, his wisdom, his judgment. Whatever. Anything.
Instead, nothing. She of course endorsed him. But the endorsement was entirely programmatic: We're all Democrats. He's a Democrat. He believes what you believe. So we must elect him -- I am currently unavailable -- to get Democratic things done. God bless America .
Clinton 's withholding the 'I've come to know this man' was vindictive and supremely self-serving -- but jarring, too, because you realize that if she didn't do it, no one else would. Not because of any inherent deficiency in Obama's character. But simply as a reflection of a young life with a biography remarkably thin by the standard of presidential candidates.
Who was there to speak about the real Barack Obama? His wife. She could tell you about Barack the father, the husband, the family man in a winning and perfectly sincere way. But that only takes you so far. It doesn't take you to the public man, the national leader.
Who is to testify to that? Hillary's husband on night three did aver that Obama is 'ready to lead.' However, he offered not a shred of evidence, let alone personal experience with Obama. And although he pulled it off charmingly, everyone knew that, having been suggesting precisely the opposite for months, he meant not a word of it.
Obama's vice presidential selection, Joe Biden, naturally advertised his patron's virtues, such as the fact that he had 'reached across party lines to ... keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists.' But securing loose nukes is as bipartisan as motherhood and as uncontroversial as apple pie. The measure was so minimal that it passed by voice vote and received near zero media coverage.
Thought experiment. Assume John McCain had retired from politics. Would he have testified to Obama's political courage in reaching across the aisle to work with him on ethics reform, a collaboration Obama boasted about in the Saddleback debate? 'In fact,' reports the Annenberg Political Fact Check, 'the two worked together for barely a week, after which McCain accused Obama of 'partisan posturing'' -- and launched a volcanic missive charging him with double cross.
So where are the colleagues? The buddies? The political or spiritual soul mates? His most important spiritual adviser and mentor was Jeremiah Wright. But he's out. Then there's William Ayers, with whom he served on a board. He's out. Where are the others?
The oddity of this convention is that its central figure is the ultimate self-made man, a dazzling mysterious Gatsby. The palpable apprehension is that the anointed is a stranger -- a deeply engaging, elegant, brilliant stranger with whom the Democrats had a torrid affair. Having slowly woken up, they see the ring and wonder who exactly they married last night.
#1
Clinton 's withholding the 'I've come to know this man' was vindictive and supremely self-serving I dislike HRC also, but give her some credit for being honest.
#3
With the root causes of market and lending failures (green flags to unqualified minority and illegal immigrant borrowers) beginning to surface and all that is going on right now I would give Obama a snowball's chance in HELL! I remember my father sitting down to pay bills in the 1950's and asking..."where is it all going to end." He didn't live to see it, but it appears I may.
#5
After the way BO's supporters treated Hillary (kinda/sorta the same sort of BS they are aiming at Sarah....they've got serious female problems in his base), to ask her to vouch for his wonderfulness and sterling qualities is a bit much.
#9
Keeriste, the stoopid A-hole's numbers are going up, not down, since this mess emerged. F**king fool populace seems to believe His Nothingness is preferable to the current crew. Their transference to McPain is 100%. And, every time McPain ought to be making points, he screws it up and does something self-defeating. Instead of pulling away, he's dropping back. This, of course to me, is insane. Buuttt, I conclude that there are many insane voters. This is what scares the living crap out of me.
#10
Woozle, you are seeing the effects of mass advertising dollars as well as the constant fawning media coverage. Turn on the TV and you will see many times more Obama commercials than for McCain. The polls reflect what has most recently been implanted in the viewing public's mind.
Posted by: ed ||
09/25/2008 13:04 Comments ||
Top||
#11
while i think McCain was right to go to DC, i also think he was wrong to drop his campaing commercials and announce he was suspending his campaign. that has led to all the buzz about inability to multi task, his age, etc. Noble ideals, but i fear it has cost him the election.
#12
I watched The One this morning for as long as I could stand it, then went to the barber shop. No escaping the issue there. People are really fired up about this piece of Kak and his constant references to starving children in Kenya and unrest in Africa.
#13
My GP's receptionist was very annoyed that Candidate McCain was deserting the campaign to swan around the Senate, until I explained he was taking his entire team to really work on the bailout plan. Now she thinks Candidate Obama is a ponce for avoiding the difficult work of government when it's critical.
#14
USN, a week is a long time in politics. I suspect the money spent on ads right now will have been wasted and McCain will have a new message after the rescue deal is done, and especially after the next debate. Remember, there's two to go and Bambi won't be getting better.
#15
Obama as Gatsby is brilliant. Charming, shallow, obsessed with his own desires and ultimately destructive to himself and those around him. Obama is an American archetype, but not one who offers much after the party, inevitably, comes to an end.
Posted by: Baba Tutu ||
09/25/2008 15:54 Comments ||
Top||
#16
The BO show is becoming the show of the audacity of self-aggrandizement.
Pamela Geller (aka "Atlas Shrugs") has a fascinating piece here, explaining why Hillary Clinton really bailed out of Monday's rally at the U.N., organized by Jewish leaders, to demonstrate opposition to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime's goals. My first guess, last week, was that she pulled out when Sarah Palin accepted because the Obama campaign did not want a head to head clash, and asked (told, that is) her to. I could imagine too, that she did not want to be eclipsed by the new star power that Palin would bring to such an event. This made sense given that the Obama campaign refused to send anyone else as a surrogate -- and then used very thuggish tactics to intimidate the rally's organizers into disinviting Palin.
But, as Geller points out, Hillary is not in competition with Palin. She is looking to 2012. She argues that Hillary decision to bail was a direct hit at Obama:
Hillary did not want to be the one to represent Obama. Obama's position on Iran is sophomoric, idiotic and dangerous. Hillary has been more responsible and she was not going to clean up his mess.... Clinton was not going to be the face of Obama's Iranian foreign policy. Obama has said he would meet with Ahmedinejad without condition -- essentially rewarding him for his nuclear arsenal and genocidal threats. No way was Hillary going to pave that road for him, so she pulled out forcing Obama to face the jihad music.
In withdrawing she forced him send someone in his stead -- but who? Biden? Joseph Biden is the poster boy for Iran appeasement. His record on Iran is so weak that he could never make the case for a muscular policy on Iran's nukes and Ahmedinejad's genocidal threats. There was talk of Wexler, but he has his own problems (residential fraud), and he has lied about Obama's positions and support of the Jews. Sending a silly Florida representative would have spoken volumes on the importance Obama assigns to a nuclear, Jew-hating Iran. Besides, Wexler would have paled next to Palin.
Hillary's withdrawal ... may have seemed to have backfired because folks were so disappointed with her, (but) I am not so sure it was a failure. Palin, in the speech she would have given, quoted statements that Clinton has made against the Iranian regime. Palin never mentioned Obama, but spoke of Clinton most admiringly. The Jews in America cannot rest easy knowing Obama did not think the existential threat to Israel and the free world important enough to address.
Geller goes on to say that "Clinton could not have known that Jewish lay leadership would cave to their left wing activists, but that was of little import to her." . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
09/25/2008 14:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dunno that I buy the idea. The Dems cannot afford to have anything occur that looks like Hillary supporting/approving of Palin since that opens the floodgates for all those Hillary supporters to also support Palin. Obama/DNC called her off.
#2
It sure looked and sounded like Bill Clinton was supporting John McCain today. It looked like a mutual admiration society to hear them. I don't think BO is ready for prime time. I think that Hillary and Bill have their eyes on 2012 or 2016. They appear to be supportive of BO. Have we had the Sister Soulja moment yet?
#3
I have to agree with Goober on this one. Hillary doesn"t want Obama to win but she also doesn't want McCain/Palin as she would most likely be facing Palin in nuaght12. Palin with 4 years of VP experience could be a very formidable opponent. She's caught.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/25/2008 19:00 Comments ||
Top||
In the past week followers of Al-Qaeda have launched vicious attacks despite Ramadan on key fronts - Pakistan, Yemen, and Mauritania. These events occurred just after intelligence officials said that the Al-Qaeda threat remains despite reports of "imploding" and US President George W. Bush's announcements concerning a renewed focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Al-Qaeda may be starting its own surge; strikes in Europe and the US cannot be ruled out as a strategic distraction may be taken place from West Africa to South Asia.
Al-Qaeda Launches Strategic Chaos
Despite a spate of articles concerning Al-Qaeda's demise due to ideological disputes, criticism from key Sunni clerics, and the loss of public sympathy, the movement is not waning. It was almost exactly 20 years ago this month that Al-Qaeda was born in Afghanistan as a movement of violent jihadis that was prepared to fight and die to protect the Islamic umma, or community, from foreign assault. To this day the movement still discusses defensive jihad, puritanical interpretations of religious doctrine, and the use of various tactics, techniques and procedures to achieve goals. Now Al-Qaeda affiliates may be applying strategic chaos to destabilize various countries and create new battle fronts.
Pakistan
In Pakistan, specifically from the tribal areas of Waziristan, Al-Qaeda appears to be endangering the new Pakistani government through terrorist attacks - such as the Marriott bombing that killed dozens at the start of the iftar meal - is meant to further destabilize the state thereby triggering a crisis between Washington and Islamabad. Al-Qaeda knows what it is doing and announced it would do so before this Ramadan. On August 10, 2008, Ayman al-Zawahri, speaking in English for the first time on As-Sahab Media, called for the Pakistani Army and people "to rise up." The Marriott bombing itself, in terms of targeting, destroyed a well-known land mark in the capital where foreigners and Pakistanis meet to conduct business. Moreover, Al-Qaeda hit hard in the city's center in the vicinity of the Parliament where the new president, Aif Ali Zardari, just finished his acceptance speech targeting Al-Qaeda and the Taliban and rejecting American military intervention on Pakistani soil. More spectacular bombings and possibly assassinations are likely. Ultimately, a rise in violence against the Pakistani government and a further collapse of the state to function may force another armed intervention by the United States. Unlike Iraq, however, the US will face a different type of battle space - one in which a large recruitment base of young, madrasa-trained, politically marginalized Pakistanis already exists. And the United States will come fast because of Pakistan's nuclear weapons inventory; Al-Qaeda may be seeking to draw the US into a trap.
Yemen
In Yemen, the attack on the US Embassy, leaving 16 people dead and the largest attack since September 11, 2001, against a US facility outside of Iraq and Afghanistan, shows how ungovernable the country really is as a result of the evolving extremist threat. The government appears to be unable to successfully interrupt the Yemeni cells to conduct operations against targets. In past attacks against the US Embassy, the operations were immature with unsophisticated tactics. The latest attack was a marked changed clearly influenced by the battlefields of Iraq and/or Somalia - the use of two car bombs, RPGs, gunmen dressed as local police, and automatic weapons. After the attack, the statement by the Organization for Islamic Jihad stated that other targets on the group's hit-list include the diplomatic facilities of Britain, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. This fact signals specifically a further escalation and expansion of targeting.
Even before the attack on the US Embassy, another Yemeni group, Soldiers of the Yemen Brigades, repeatedly attacked oil facilities. On June 30, the group took credit for rocket attacks against an oil refinery in Safir, located east of the capital Sanaa, in Maarib Province. The group later posted video footage of the attack on a radical Islamist Web site. The attack represented the latest in a series of strikes against oil infrastructure and personnel in Yemen over the last year by militants tied to Al-Qaeda, including a May 30 attack against an oil refinery in the port city of Aden.
Overall, destabilizing Yemen is a key strategic goal of Al-Qaeda because the state lies at the crossroads between East Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and South Asia - useful territory in which to possibly launch further violent attacks against neighboring states. Plans for terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia have been recently uncovered during raids in Yemen, most notably the raid in which Yemeni Al-Qaeda leader Hamza al-Qaeiti was killed in Aden. To date, nothing public has been released about the United Arab Emirates. And like in Pakistan, there is anti-American sentiment among portions of the Yemeni population.
Mauritania
In Mauritania, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb appears to be increasing its level of violence to challenge the new military government. The group has claimed responsibility for killing 15 Mauritanian soldiers in a 2005 raid, killing four soldiers and four French tourists in December 2007, and attacking the Israeli Embassy in Mauritania in February 2008. After the August 6, 2008, coup, the group called for a full-scale "holy war" to turn Mauritania, seen as a US ally in the global "war on terror," into an Islamic state. Now, during Ramadan, 12 Mauritanian soldiers who were abducted in an attack on their patrol by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb were found decapitated in what can be seen as a powerful message to the Mauritanian government. In addition, the attacks may be seen as an extension of operations further southwards into sub-Saharan Africa which is a source of crude oil to the West.
Implications for the US and its allies There are two broad implications to consider that may be forthcoming. The first is economic warfare involving the "oil weapon." Al-Qaeda seeks to inspire or launch attacks as part of a long-term strategy to bankrupt the US by engaging in a war of attrition. According to an essay titled "Al-Qaeda and the Battle for Oil" that has been circulating on radical jihadi Web sites, militants are well aware of the economics of oil. The author of the essay goes as far as to claim that Al-Qaeda's strategy to defeat the US rests on bankrupting America by driving up oil prices by any means necessary. The author also mentions that the attacks against oil infrastructure in Yemen, along with past attacks in Iraq and Saudi Arabia, have been critical to Al-Qaeda's battlefield lessons learned to date so far. With the economic chaos on global markets, particularly in the US and Europe, now may be a good time to disrupt these economies further. It is important to recall that in February 2007, Al-Qaeda's Sawt al-Jihad online magazine called for attacks against Western hemisphere oil infrastructure that supports the US economy.
The second implication is an attempt to manipulate the presidential race in the United States. In 2004 Al-Qaeda influenced the elections in Spain by carrying out a series of bombings on Madrid commuter trains. In the week before the 2004 American presidential election, Osama bin Laden recorded a video message to the American people promising repercussions if Bush was re-elected. In later messages, Al-Qaeda's leader claimed credit for helping re-elect Bush in 2004. By enflaming the situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Yemen and Mauritania, Al-Qaeda wants to influence public opinion "behind enemy lines" and "egg on" the Obama and McCain campaigns. In addition, Al-Qaeda possibly seeks to show that US attention was minimal to a much more dangerous situation in Pakistan in contrast to America's invasion of Iraq. Overall, by using these countries as platforms, there may be more sophisticated attacks against US allies throughout South Asia, the Gulf littoral and North Africa. Strikes in Europe and even North America cannot be ruled out. The "October Surprise" may not be a confrontation with Iran - as some pundits are arguing - but Al-Qaeda confronting the West and her allies again.
Theodore Karasik is director of research and development at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/25/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda
#1
Again, RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN CONFLICT/WAR = the US-ALLIES are now in a WAR AGZ RADICAL ISLAMISM FOR THE DE FACTO CONTROL AND DOMINATION OF THE ASIAN MAINLAND [priority], INCLUD ANY "NEAR ABROAD" = LOCAL PERIPHERAL ENCLAVES-AREAS. The Islamists desire both to rebuild and recover from losses received fighting the US = US-Allies in IRAQ-AFGHANISTAN, plus to "hedge" and increase their odds of PAN-ISLAMIST NUCLEARIZATION + STRATEGIC WEAPONIZATION, etc mostly vee PROTECTION AND EMPOWERMENT OF NUKE-AMBITIOUS IRAN, ALREADY NUCLEAR PAKISTAN, MAJOR ASIAN MAFIAS + BLACK MARKETS e.g. DRUG TRADE, + FORCED IMPOSITION OF SYMPATHETIC NEW LOCAL GOVTS-NETWORKS [local anarchy/revolution].
Lest we fergit, UNO > the THIRD WORLD = DEV COUNTRIES, espec in ASIA, are LEADING INTENSIVE INTERNATIONAL EFFORT TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN INDIGENOUS NUCLEAR [Energy?] PROGRAMS.
* TOPIX/IRNA > AHMADINEJAD: US IS TRYING TO SURROUND AND ISOLATE IRAN; + ASIAN MINORITY GROUPS FEAR SPREADING MILITANT ISLAMISM.
* SINO-DEFENSE FORUM > NATO CHIEF: AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN BORDER NEEDS TO BE BOLSTERED [protect agz Militant-Terror crossovers].
* WAFF.com > FRANCE AND NATO INTENTIONALLY DECEIVING THE PUBLIC OVER FRENCH COMBAT DEATHS? The Taliban, etc. becom BETTER DISCIPLINED, BETTER ARMED, + GENER MORE COMBAT EFFECTIVE AGZ NATO FORCES???
Also from WAFF > FROM THE CAUCASUS TO THE BALKANS: AN UNSTABLE WORLD ORDER [long, but good article]. Besides [well-reported] RUSSIA-specific instabiliies [anti-US ANGRY RUSSIA, ala GEORGIA], many post-Cold War/USSR lessor Nations espec in ASIA are resorting to DEV DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICIES BASED ON MILITANT LOCAL NATIONALISM IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY ENLARGEMENT OF THEIR NATIONAL TERRITORIES BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
* CHINESE MIL FORUM > Poster Thread > TAI-DUS PREDICTS US ECONOMIC COLLAPSE MAY LEAD TO CHINESE CIVIL WAR!?
I'm trying to watch historically ANTI-WESTERN CHINA's reaction to the new and escalating US-PAKI Truubles, + ISLAMIST THREAT TO WESTERN CHINA [Uighurs], MONGOLIA, SOUTH ASIA, + FORMER SSRS [Kazakhs, Uzbeks, Turkomens].
CHIN NETTERS > opine that iff NORTH KOREA ever becoms destabilized ala KIMMIE's HEALTH PROBS, CHINA SHOULD AND MUST BE THE ONE - AND ONLY ONE -TO TAKE OVER NORTH KOREA [Unilater or as NATION-IN-CHARGE of International Coalition] FROM PYONGYANG, NOT THE US-WESTERN ALLIES NOR US-LED UNSC.
#5
Attacks in Pakistan, Yemen and Mauritania (and even Afghanistan) are not exactly the same as the jihadi heroes attacking the invading unbelievers. What this suggests to me is that Al Qaeda realized they do not actually own the Umma heartland as they had thought when they sent the airplanes into the Twin Towers. But of course, I could be wrong.
#4
If this is such a sure thing, why aren't private and foreign investors stepping up to the plate, given that current prices are way below the inflated prices that Treasury proposes to pay? Let's face it - neither Kessler nor Paulson know what they're talking about. It's not that they lack technical expertise - any more than the CEO's of Lehman or Bear Stearns lacked technical expertise - it's that they are saying nice things about these assets even though they cannot know how things will turn out. The fact is that every sunny prediction Kessler and Paulson have made over the past year has failed to come to fruition. These people are basically putting out fact-free propaganda much like the stock analysts of the Internet era - they are, in effect, saying once again that "this time, it's different".
#5
What really stinks about this is that, like the illegal alien amnesty bill, this Wall Street handout program is being backed by Bush, a guy I used to think of as a rock-ribbed conservative. The guy should be tarred and feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail. I'm starting to think that the second coming of Carter won't start with Obama - it may have started with Bush.
#6
ZF, on the domestic front re: Bush, I am in total agreement with you. On the foriegn policy front, Bush is the anti-Carter and we've been lucky to have him (for the most part...there are exceptions).
#7
why aren't private and foreign investors stepping up to the plate
I've read that the Japanese are very happily, and quietly, buying up American investment firms. It's just that who except the American government has that much money to spend all at once?
#8
I've read that the Japanese are very happily, and quietly, buying up American investment firms. It's just that who except the American government has that much money to spend all at once?
We're not spending it all at once. And the global markets are worth about $50T. A lot of investors currently have money parked in Treasuries, while waiting for the debt crisis to shake out the weaker players (i.e. the ones that can't pay their debts - companies like Washington Mutual, for instance). The fact is that Paulson is committing taxpayer cash to purchases of junk assets way before the bottom. I, too, have junk around the house I'd like to get rid of. Too bad Paulson wants to pay inflated prices for valueless junk only if they're sold by large corporations that bet too much money on the wrong horse.
#9
That $50T figure referred only to the debt markets. There are substantial sums of cash in the equity markets. Lots of funds have holdings in both debt and equity, and would likely be buying distressed debt with both hands if they were confident of being paid back, given the high yields on this debt (Citibank debt with months to go has a double-digit yield). But the reality is that they are not confident of being paid back on a lot of these debt assets. Like I said, we are taking Paulson's word about the value of these assets over the word of millions of private investors, who - unlike Paulson - actually have skin in the game. Why would I take Paulson's judgment over the judgment of the market?
My latest information on executive pay-caps and government ownership warrants which are now being called equity protection is that they would apply to bond sellers, not buyers. (My original warning is here.) I guess that makes it only half as bad. But I must say, it still is bad.
Why should a successful bank whether large, medium, or small give up ownership and allow pay-caps for executives?
Even the big guys like BofA and JPMorgan Chase are still solid banks. So is Goldman and Morgan Stanley. And Wells Fargo. And many others.
Why should they agree to this? It just makes the plan unworkable. Sources tell me the Treasury is opposed. Stay tuned for more.
If they're successful banks, why do they need this handout? Why would we want to give handouts to successful banks? It is sparkling clear why Wall Street wants this handout package - it's an all-expense paid package to Easy Street - courtesy of the taxpayer - for them.
#11
a guy I used to think of as a rock-ribbed conservative.
Huh? He's never been a card carrying conservative. He and his daddy were middle of the roaders for a long time. After the debacle in '96, he was 'picked' to run in '00 because the Trunks had no other viable candidate that they saw could get the White House. It was more of a denial operation, that is to take the office whether than to let the Donks get it. As it was, they did, but just barely. The conservatives haven't found a decent runner since the '80s [until maybe now in the form of the governor of Alaska].
#12
The bailout might be the "Bridge to Nowhere." Money is the meth of our Congress. What's to keep them from coming back again and again for more money? There is always the detox program and tough love for Congress.
#14
a guy I used to think of as a rock-ribbed conservative.
George W. Bush called himself a "compassionate conservative" in the 2000 campaign to distinguish himself from the rock-ribbed Conservatives. Functionally, a Republican Third Way-er. He has never pretended to be anything else, which is why centrist Republicans, centrist Democrats, and Independents enough voted for him in 2000 to put him over the top. In 2004 he got the centrist and Independent votes, plus those of us who are warmongers. ;-) The reason John McCain won the Republican primary is that -- sorry, guys -- there are more centrist Republicans than there are conservatives. And even amongst the conservatives, there are many like Governor Palin, whose conservatism is lived personally rather than something she attempted to impose on the state whose executive she was.
#16
I just listened to Obama saying he wanted to include a program to allow people to keep their homes even though they are not paying their mortgage payments. I don't yet own the place I live in and he wants me to pay someone elses' payments? Blow a dead bear, Obama.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/25/2008 19:30 Comments ||
Top||
#17
If the MOAB passes, knowing that Uncle Sam is about to pick up the tab, where is the incentive for anyone to pay for anything....?
The Biggest Lie of the bailout pimps is this: Give us $700 billion of your money and we promise we'll give it back someday.
The Second Biggest Lie of the bailout pimps is this: Give us $700 billion of your money and not only do we promise we'll give it back to you, but you'll actually make money back off your "investment." Later. Someday. Really.
HAAAAHHHH! Did you feel a tremor? That was me, laughing my you-know-what off. I think it registered 7.0 on the LMAO Richter Scale.
Continued on Page 49
"With redundancies at investment banks around the globe looming, now is the time for us to show the world how much we care. It's just not right. Hundreds of investment bankers in your very own country are living at or just below the seven-figure income level! Atrocious!
And, as if that wasn't bad enough, they will be deprived of pay for several weeks, possibly a whole year, as a result of their redundancy. But now you can help!
For about two thousand pounds a day - less than the cost of a large screen projection TV - you can help an investment banker remain economically viable in his time of need. Two thousand pounds a day may not seem like a lot to you, but to an investment banker it could mean the difference between a holiday golfing in Florida or a Mediterranean cruise. For you, two thousand pounds is no more than three months' rent or mortgage payments. But to an investment banker, it will almost replace his pay.
Your commitment will enable an investment banker to buy that home entertainment centre, trade in the year-old BMW for a new Ferrari, or enjoy a weekend in Rio.
Each month, you will get a complete financial report on the investment banker you sponsor. Detailed information about his stocks, bonds, property portfolio and other investment holdings will be mailed to your home.
You'll also get information on how he plans to invest the £5 million lump severance package he will receive upon redundancy. Plus you will receive a photo of the banker. Put the photo on your refrigerator to remind you of other people's suffering."
Posted by: Abu do you love ||
09/25/2008 1:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
:)
We are SAPS,
Everyone is stealing from us. EVEN BANKERS, LAWYERS, and CEOs want More Money from us CITIZENS.
Even a million ILLEGAL Immigrants who ILLEGALY bought a house with variable-interest-loans and now can't or refuse to pay them back, are DEMANDING YOU AND ME TO BAIL THEM OUT!!
Go ahead you SAP CITIZENS bail the Illegals Immigrants and CEOs out!
OH I almost forgot, DON'T FORGOT The Corporate Lawyers who sheltered the Corporate Executives from any CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, or STEALING LAWS. Well quite naturally they also DEMAND some hand-out walk-around-money too!
grrrr
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
09/25/2008 2:09 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The toxic debt was issued by Fannie/Freddie Mae. The banks bought it because they thought it was guaranteed by the US government and the current bailout proves they were right.
Don't forget all the greedy citizens borrowers who bought houses they couldn't otherwise afford with no down interest only adjustable mortgages that their citizen popularly elected legislators told banks to issue mortgages to the worst citizens credit risks in the worst neighborhoods and who planned to flip them in a year...whoops, that's us stealing from us. There's plenty of blame to go around. The only innocents in this game are hermits.
1. Nationalize the offending institutions and sell their stock to responsibly managed private interests as resources and conditions warrant.
2. Fire their cooked or foolish managers, and limit their severance pay to $20 in quarters and cab fare to the Brooklyn Bridge.
3. Foreclose all the bad mortgages, deport non-citizen borrowers and move the rest into redundant FEMA trailers.
4. Round up the Clinton appointees who ran Fannie and Freddie into the ground; especially including Jamie Gorelick; and send them to Gitmo.
(Gorelick is the Typhoid Mary of national policy, having now done the same thing for the economy that she did for the World Trade Center.)
#8
Ok. If Banks aren't bailed out we will have 1929 all over again. Right?
If Banaks are bailed out they will never learn right?
Solutions? Bail out banks but sent managers and members of the board to firen squad or, if you are soft hearted to Sing Sing (not in one of those nice prisons for white collars) or, still better to had labor.
IndyMac's failure in July 2008 (the most expensive failure covered by FDIC ever) took a large bite out of FDIC reserves, and if scores of other banks fail in the year ahead, the fund will be depleted. Taxpayers will have to step in. By the end of 2009, about 100 U.S. banks with collective assets of more than $800 billion will fail, predicts Christopher Whalen, managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, a Torrance, California-based firm that sells its analysis of FDIC data to investors. The FDIC has some idea of which banks are at risk; it has a watch list with 117 institutions. The agency won't disclose their names because doing so could cause depositors to panic and pull out all of their funds.
The FDIC insures about $5 trillion in deposits at US branches of FDIC member banks. An additional $2.6 trillion in deposits is uninsured.
Investors are now worried that Washington Mutual (WaMu) may be the next bank to go TU. An FDIC takeover would cost taxpayers another $24 billion.
The FDIC had fallen into the same trap as member banks, relying on the recent past to predict the near future. In March it estimated 2008 costs to cover bank failures as $1 billion, which wasn't even close. Critics of the FDIC say chairman Bair's currently optimistic rhetoric matches the FDIC's failure to grasp the scope of what is likely to come in the next 18 months.
#10
I'm certainly no economic guru, but I do remember the stories my father told of the last depression. This situation looks amazingly similar. Bailout or no, if this crash isn't the knock out punch, the knock out punch isn't far behind. Consumer spending on non-essentials is plummeting, traveling and motoring are off, at least in the SE. I suspect we may see a run on the market and banks in the very near future. I think we're in for a history making ride over the next few years, possibly a decade.
#11
I think we're in for a history making ride over the next few years, possibly a decade. I agree completely. I liquidated my stock holdings, personal & tax-protected, in 8/2007, preserved a ton of money that way. Can only hope my nest egg retains its value.
#14
Watching Paulson and his Merry Band of Thieves takes me back to Sunday school. Darn, I should have paid more attention to what they were saying. Paulson will be out of a job in six weeks, right! Hence the need for urgency.
#15
"Can only hope my nest egg retains its value."
That's really the trouble AH9418, it won't. This whole charade is going to result in monumental inflation. It's going on now. Just as recently as the Peanut Farmer's term we saw this. The only things of value were hard physical assets. Every dollar your granddad had in 1908 has the purchasing equivalence of $.10 now. This is going to happen to monies we hold today. The issue we have to try and perceive is whether these same geniuses who created this mess can wave the magic wand and extract us. Doubtful. Some very basic adjustments must be made. We cannot continue to exist on foreign credit. They will quit loaning. This is the Washington Panic. This globalization scheme by the wealth holders of exporting American jobs to make things at greatly reduced cost, yet try to sell back into the only major market, the US, to extract maximum profit for the few wealth holders, is non-sustainable. You don't even have to be a fifth-grader. Second graders can handle this. This does resemble many of the conditions existing around 1930, when Hoover kept telling the public that the basic economy was sound, don't worry. As recently as two weeks ago Bush was repeating this same mantra. Now, suddenly, we must bailout "the system". If this mess crashes, it will take several years to regain smooth functionality, as in the 1930's. If some resolution is reached, it's going to greatly devalue our assets. And, this continued living on borrwed cash must be halted. Anyone want to talk about lifestyle adjustments.
#16
I liquidated my stock holdings, personal & tax-protected, in 8/2007, preserved a ton of money that way. Can only hope my nest egg retains its value.
Excellent move Anguper, as for the foreseeable future, cash will be king. For most people their house is their main source of wealth.
Stabilization in the U.S. housing sector is nowhere in sight: inventories and vacancies are at a record high and continue to put downward pressure on home prices which continue to free fall translating into trillions of real wealth losses for the engine of the economy: the U.S. consumer. You just can't gouge that amount out of any economy and not expect the engine to seize up.
We are moving into an era characterized by the Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times"
#18
All those empty houses? It depends on the city and state. It isn't so bad out here in the center of the Midwest. Detroit is apparently another story... for several reasons.
One thing to consider, though, is that there would have been empty houses anyway. The Baby Boomers have started to retire. Sooner or later they would have left the houses in which they reared their children and moved either to something smaller, in with their children, to Florida or Arizona, or to a retirement home.
Lonzo dear, all those illegal workers in the construction business needed somewhere to live... and they were earning pretty good money. Not to mention that after all the other borderline borrowers had been serviced, the mortgage brokers had to find clientele somewhere. Hence all the advertising in Spanish in the last few years.
#19
Unless we can only see a few minutes forward, that hotdog truck out front only takes cash, which means, yes, cash will be king for the foreseeable future.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
09/25/2008 14:56 Comments ||
Top||
#20
#7 Atomic Conspiracy git's my vote,
[#17 For Lonzo: AND AC gits all my EXTRA VOTES that I manage to either mail in or vote at various precincts on election day to off-set some of the millions of Illegal Immigrants stealing Votes in our sovereign elections.]
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
09/25/2008 15:44 Comments ||
Top||
#21
No, Lonzo, we are asserting that illegal aliens are not entitled to free housing at the expense of the US taxpayer. Do you disagree? If so, why? Are citizens similarly entitled to free housing? If so, who is going to pay for it?
#22
Meanwhile, the largest bank failure in US history came down this afternoon.
"Washington Mutual, the largest U.S. savings and loan, was closed by the federal Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp was named receiver. Customers should expect business as usual on Friday, the FDIC said. The FDIC said the transaction will not affect its roughly $45.2 billion deposit insurance fund. Washington Mutual's roughly $227 billion book of real estate loans put the thrift at the top of the critical list of U.S. lenders, analysts said. More than half of this portfolio was in home equity loans and in adjustable-rate mortgages and subprime mortgages that are now considered risky. "
#23
More than 150 prominent U.S. economists, including three Nobel Prize winners, urged Congress to hold off on passing a $700 billion financial market rescue plan until it can be studied more closely.
#24
The bozos at WaMu were still doing zero down Option ARM programs up till a few months ago. The guy who ran the place into the ground seriously needs to be persecuted.
What can I say, it's Spengler
Why should American taxpayers give US Treasury Secretary "Hank" Paulson a blank check to bail out the shareholders of busted banks? Why should the Treasury turn itself into a toxic waste dump for their bad loans? Why not let other banks join the unlamented Brothers Lehman in bankruptcy court, and start a new bank with taxpayers' money? Or have the Treasury pay interest on delinquent mortgages, and make them whole? Even better, why not let the Chinese, or the Saudis or other foreign investors take control of failed American banks? They've got the money, and they gladly would pay a premium for an inside seat at the American table.
Paulson's dreadful scheme will become law, because Americans love their bankers. The bankers enable their collective gambling habit. Think of America as a town with one casino, in which the only economic activity is gambling. Most people lose, but the casino keeps lending them more money to play. Eventually, of course, the casino must go bankrupt. At this point, the townspeople people vote to tax themselves in order to bail out the casino. Collectively, the gamblers cannot help but lose; individually they nonetheless hope to win their way out of the hole.
#1
Studies done on gambling addiction have shown that the thrill of the chronic gambler does not come from the hope they will win but the anxiety they feel when they fear losing.
FWIW.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
09/25/2008 5:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
700 Billion? Recharter the Bank of the United States and become the prime lender rather than those who 'got their piece of the action' when the going was good and the now want to make the public basically financial serfs to their life style and careers. [Didn't we do that already in history, like how the original serfdom was initiated?]
The base argument is that capital is 'drying up'. It can be just as well infused into the market by a Bank of the United States as it can by other organizations who are looking out for their next big dividend to make the brokers happy or their next big bonus. Cut out the middlemen.
#3
The base argument is that capital is 'drying up'. It can be just as well infused into the market by a Bank of the United States What has really happened is a huge misallocation of resources (overpriced housing sold to people who can't repay their loans). This capital has been wasted more than dried up, & this has rendered many lenders insolvent. They may as well go out of business & new lenders get the new capital. Warren Buffet put $5-10 billion into Goldman Sachs recently -- this could as well have been put into starting an entirely new bank. Or, as suggested, the Treasury could start its own bank with this kind of money.
Our esteemed representatives (M.C. could mean Member of Congress, or Misguided Child) continue to drink the slime-green Koolaid of "preventing foreclosures" and "helping homeowners" rather than face this reality. The MOAB (Mother of All Bailouts) will just waste more precious resources and delay the inevitable.
#5
The most interesting thing about the Congressional hearings so far is that not a single independent economist has testified about the MOAB. The MC's don't want to hear any alternative views. They just want to be seen as part of the consensus. If/when disaster happens, they will be sure to avoid the blame for their inaction, as they have so far.
#6
I would okay the bailout if all the principles and their deputies were drawn and quartered in Central Park on live TV and it was mandatory for all bankers and stockbrokers to attend in person to learn a lesson.
#11
that seems short-sighted considering how well governments run businesses. Not so short-sighted considering how well BUSINESSES have been running businesses lately.
#12
One help that they never seem to think of is to give the money to the debtors. They're talking about buying discounted mortgage packages to get them out of the system. Last night, one talking head was talking about paying ten cents on the dollar for these loans. How about offering a piece of that to me? Only a few per cent of those loans will default. Most of us can and will pay them off. Supppose, that for every dollar extra that I paid on my mortgage, I would get ten off my balance. Rest assured, I would make sacrifices to add every additional dollar possible to my payment. Nothing else could possibly give me a return for my money like that. Bean and rice three days a week would be a joy if I could get that kind of deal. Cash flow for the mortgage holders would increase, reducing the need to borrow. Less pressure on the borrowing would ease conditions throughout the econmy. I've just solved the economic crisis for the country and paid my mortgage off in three years!
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
09/25/2008 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Only a few per cent of those loans will default. At present we have no way of knowing the ultimate percentage of defaults. Your guess is as good as mine, which is a great deal higher. The market in mortgage securities has cast its vote -- by their extremely low bids on the securities. That market has not failed -- it just won't pony up the cash the holders of the securities want.
Some regions have been reporting price drops of 40%, and the situation is still progressing. Many buyers signed for mortgages far beyond their ability to pay, others signed for mortgages on grossly overpriced houses, other mortgage holders are experiencing drops in income -- for many of these buyers, foreclosure is the best choice available to them.
#14
So, if we are nation of gamblers then we should have no problem in letting this problem run its course with a bailout. Take the risk that the banks won't fall like dominoes and that everyone's IRA, 401K, real estate and other assets will maintain or even increase in value. And if news reports are correct, most American's are against this bail-out/rescue plan. Everyone said all this about Superfund and other big programs but then all those "toxic" sites that have been cleaned up and are now "brownfield" have sold well and have been redeveloped for economic gain. This is a $700bn gamble - all in - do you play or take your chips and stay home hoping for the best?
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/25/2008 13:20 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Sorry, first sentence above should read "without a bailout".
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/25/2008 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Jodie Evans, the Obama bundler who 
