-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PoliGAF 2011: Of Weiners, Boehners, Santorum, and Teabags
- Thread starter PantherLotus
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Novid said:the reason they will not go to jail is that they warned us in advance.
no they didn't. They bleated some plaintive cries of 'oops' as the market was tanking. I knew gaf had a defense force for everything, but for ratings agencies? Come on.
OuterWorldVoice said:no they didn't. They bleated some plaintive cries of 'oops' as the market was tanking. I knew gaf had a defense force for everything, but for ratings agencies? Come on.
With Moody's and Standard & Poor's now trying to make up for past wrongs, the pace of downgrades on mortgage securities shows no sign of slowing: There were $85 billion in mortgage securities downgraded in the third quarter of 2007, $237 billion in the fourth quarter, $739 billion in the first quarter of this year, and $841 billion in the second quarter of 2008.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/04/magazines/fortune/whitney_feature.fortune/index.htm
OuterWorldVoice said:no they didn't. They bleated some plaintive cries of 'oops' as the market was tanking. I knew gaf had a defense force for everything, but for ratings agencies? Come on.
Im not defending S&P. In fact I agree they should be proscuted for what they did in 2008.
Invisible_Insane
Member
I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I never actually finished reading the FCIC report, so my impressions my be misformed, but for as far as I'd read, I got the impression that it was they were really just shockingly incompetent. I'm with you on their having no credibility, but I think criminal negligence is about as far as you can get as far as any sort of legal culpability would go.OuterWorldVoice said:My problem is that the agency has zero credibility and frankly some of its officers should be in jail. One of the main reasons our economy and subsequently our politics, are in the toilet, is the nakedly criminal ratings boosting these fucks gave junk mortgage securities for years.
They are crooks and, without exaggeration, traitors of the highest order. If you are sitting on a depleted 401k and your mortgage is underwater, you can thank S&P for it's venal charade.
Edit: Nate Silver's take.
planar1280
Banned
The white house and democrats are using the phrase: a tea party downgrade to describe the S&P downgrade. Let's see if it catches on
balladofwindfishes
Member
if they hammer it enoughplanar1280 said:The white house and democrats are using the phrase: a tea party downgrade to describe the S&P downgrade. Let's see if it catches on
But these are the Democrats we're talking about
Invisible_Insane said:I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I never actually finished reading the FCIC report, so my impressions my be misformed, but for as far as I'd read, I got the impression that it was they were really just shockingly incompetent. I'm with you on their having no credibility, but I think criminal negligence is about as far as you can get as far as any sort of legal culpability would go.
Edit: Nate Silver's take.
That would sound reasonable were it not for the way ratings agencies actually bring in income.
http://twitter.com/#!/Reuters/statuses/100572313799507968S&P cuts Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac credit ratings from AAA to AA+
Invisible_Insane
Member
Good point.OuterWorldVoice said:That would sound reasonable were it not for the way ratings agencies actually bring in income.
Another take from a blogger at the Economist: Who cares?
BruiserBear
Banned
planar1280 said:The white house and democrats are using the phrase: a tea party downgrade to describe the S&P downgrade. Let's see if it catches on
The White House and Democrats don't want this sticking to them? No way!
eznark said:nice time to own gold
I eagerly awaiting for oil to come down and buy in like I did in 2008.
planar1280
Banned
Loudninja said:http://twitter.com/#!/Reuters/statuses/100572313799507968
now S&P are just trolling
planar1280
Banned
ToxicAdam said:I eagerly awaiting for oil to come down and buy in like I did in 2008.
I am not too famiiliar with Oil stock options but are they a part of the 401K investments?
teruterubozu
Member
planar1280 said:The white house and democrats are using the phrase: a tea party downgrade to describe the S&P downgrade. Let's see if it catches on
What a typical un-witty, clunky phrase by the Dems. As much as I hate to say it, Dems are pure shit on the soundbyte department.
teruterubozu said:What a typical un-witty, clunky phrase by the Dems. As much as I hate to say it, Dems are pure shit on the soundbyte department.
they need to use spongebob to get their message out more
teruterubozu said:What a typical un-witty, clunky phrase by the Dems. As much as I hate to say it, Dems are pure shit on the soundbyte department.
I've already heard it a bunch over the weekend on TV so it's catching on. ObamaCare/RomneyCare it's not, but it gets the job done.
teruterubozu
Member
eznark said:I've already heard it a bunch over the weekend on TV so it's catching on. ObamaCare/RomneyCare it's not, but it gets the job done.
Nobody watches news on the weekends. Let's see if lasts the week.
It is remarkable that their ratings correlate more with the CPI than any of the objective economic measures. Not that I am surprised that corruption correlates with fiscal and financial instability. Generally, I would expect more corrupt states to be at greater risk of default. But I did not expect it to be that significant. Moreover, the degree of their correlation is worrisome.Invisible_Insane said:I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I never actually finished reading the FCIC report, so my impressions my be misformed, but for as far as I'd read, I got the impression that it was they were really just shockingly incompetent. I'm with you on their having no credibility, but I think criminal negligence is about as far as you can get as far as any sort of legal culpability would go.
Edit: Nate Silver's take.
"I dont know whether or not S.&P. looks at these ratings. But the fact that the two sets of ratings are so closely related is troublesome. It suggests that S.&P. is making a lot of judgment calls about countries they have no particular knowledge about. Keep in mind that even when it comes to the United States, S.&P. made a $2 trillion error that reflects their lack of understanding of the way that bills are scored by the Congressional Budget Office. Are we to expect that they add value based on their perceptions of the political climate in Kazakhstan, or Cyprus, or Uganda?"
eznark said:I've already heard it a bunch over the weekend on TV so it's catching on. ObamaCare/RomneyCare it's not, but it gets the job done.
I saw it on the headlines of a couple of stories I couldn't make myself read and had no idea what they were talking about. I briefly wondered if Moody's had started rating political parties, which, I grant, makes no sense.
teruterubozu said:Nobody watches news on the weekends. Let's see if lasts the week.
People who write about the news get their cues from the weekend shows. It frames the rest of the week.
I saw it on the headlines of a couple of stories I couldn't make myself read and had no idea what they were talking about. I briefly wondered if Moody's had started rating political parties, which, I grant, makes no sense.
Axelrod and Kerry are the vanguard. I assume Barry will interrupt Bachelor Pad as soon as he can and trumpet it. Probably next week.
HamPster PamPster
Member
What podcasts do you all listen to?
Its a boring Monday at work and I need some listening material
Its a boring Monday at work and I need some listening material
teruterubozu
Member
eznark said:People who write about the news get their cues from the weekend shows. It frames the rest of the week.
Well, I haven't seen it over the weekend I consider myself up on the news. Of course the biggest news was the downgrade itself, which pretty much eclipses anything else.
The major story this weekend just seemed like a general finger pointing match between Geithner and S&P. If the Dems are also including the Tea Party as a source of rancor then they run the risk of seeming like they're lashing out at everybody (you can't blame them, but they may need to chill a bit).
planar1280 said:I am not too famiiliar with Oil stock options but are they a part of the 401K investments?
Not sure how individual 401k's handle commodities or futures. But, the average investor can get into ETF's, which can be bought just like a stock, and correlate pretty closely with the market. USO and OIL are the two big ones. I was able to get in on USO at a low price in 2008 and flip it for about a 60% gain a year later.
Invisible_Insane
Member
Fareed Zakaria GPS, Marketplace from American Public Media, and On The Media by WNYC are all worth checking out.HamPster PamPster said:What podcasts do you all listen to?
Its a boring Monday at work and I need some listening material
They didn't even manage to warn us after the fact.Novid said:the reason they will not go to jail is that they warned us in advance.
Novid said:Heads Up folks. BAC stock dying as of right now.
well the downgrade hits financial stocks, and they just got a $10 billion fraud suit filed against them by the government... er i meant AIG
planar1280
Banned
AIG has just sued Bank of America for $10 Billion for Mortgage Fraud. BoA Stock down 10%
speculawyer
Member
But conservatives told me that a downgrade was not going to happen. Wrong again. Just like WMDs. Evolution. Etc.
I was way off!!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60849.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60849.html
U.S. markets tumbled sharply on Monday morning the Dow was off 360 points and President Barack Obama planned to speak publicly this afternoon on the downturn.
Dummies never should have listened to the Treasury Secretary.But conservatives told me that a downgrade was not going to happen.
speculawyer
Member
He told us a downgrade was likely. Already working on that revised history, I see.eznark said:Dummies never should have listened to the Treasury Secretary.
speculawyer said:He told us a downgrade was likely. Already working on that revised history, I see.
This is one hell of a Tim Geithner impersonator!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlQaKRvxInM
FBN: "Is there a risk that the United States could lose it's Triple A credit rating, yes or no?"
Geithner (imposter?): "No risk of that"
FBN: "No risk?"
Geithner (imposter?): "no risk"
FBN: "So S&P is wrong, the United State will keep it's AAA credit rating"
Geithner (imposter?): "Absolutely"
NathanMcMahon
Banned
I'm sure this will be covered in the thread for the hacking scandal but this is an interesting turn of events:
source
source
Well-sourced information coming out of the Department of Justice and the FBI suggests a debate is going on that could result in the recently launched investigations of News Corp. falling under the RICO statutes.
Among the areas that the FBI is said to be looking at in its investigation of News Corp. are charges that one of its subsidiaries, News America Marketing, illegally hacked the computer system of a competitor, Floorgraphics, and then, using the information it had gleaned, tried to extort it into selling out to News Corp.; allegations that relationships the New York Post has maintained with New York City police officers may have involved exchanges of favors and possibly money for information; and accusations that Fox chief Roger Ailes sought to have an executive in the company, the book publisher Judith Regan, lie to investigators about details of her relationship with New York police commissioner Bernie Kerik in order to protect the political interests of Rudy Giuliani, then a presidential prospect.
jesusmoop2000 said:I'm sure this will be covered in the thread for the hacking scandal but this is an interesting turn of events:
source
moop2000 said:I'm sure this will be covered in the thread for the hacking scandal but this is an interesting turn of events:
source
Holy...shit.
Invisible_Insane
Member
Does it really require a presidential address every time the market takes a hit? There's precious little he can do about it; just let it ride.
RICO? Damn.
RICO? Damn.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Yeah, the bit that has to do with Kerik and Giuliani is so intriguing. I'd love for Giuliani to go down in flames by association as he somehow came off clean in the other Kerik shitstorm. Also, seeing Ailes finally get his would be nice too.
planar1280
Banned
well...
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=232185
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=232185
Israel to negotiate using 1967 lines, with mutually agreed swaps, if Palestinians accept two states, one Palestinian and one Jewish.
With the Palestinians set to seek recognition of statehood at the UN in just a number of weeks, Israel said Tuesday it would be willing to accept the 1967 lines as a framework for talks as part of a package in which the Palestinians would recognize Jewish state.
Israeli officials said this framework would be a package deal whereby Israel would agree to entering negotiations using the 1967 lines, with mutually agreed upon swaps, as the baseline of talks; and the Palestinians would agree that the final goal of negotiations would be two states, a Palestinian one and Jewish one.
RELATED:
PA: Israel-US plans to revive peace talks 'valueless'
Official: Netanyahu ready to discuss border 'package'
Opinion: The Palestinians treacherous path to the UN
Israel raised the formula as officials from both parties, the US, EU and Russia are continuing to work on a document to provide a framework for a return to negotiations that could make a Palestinian bid at the UN superfluous.
According to this formulation, one official explained, each side would get something: The Palestinians would get the 1967 lines as the baseline, something they have long sought; and Israel would get Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
Israel, according to the official, has made clear that it would agree to language in the framework that would reflect the ideas of US President Barak Obamas two speeches on the Middle East in May in which he first used the 1967 lines, with swaps, as a baseline for a return to talks.
Jerusalem, while not endorsing the 1967 lines, would agree to language that would say that Israel recognizes that this is the position of the international community. The willingness to show this degree of flexibility, the official said, would be contingent on the Palestinians demonstrating flexibility of their own and endorsing language nodding at recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
The Palestinians have so far opposed the insertion of this type of language inside the formula, saying they would return to talks only if Israel agreed to enter them with the pre-1967 lines as the baseline, and after freezing all construction in the settlements.
An additional issue is whether the Obama speech that would serve as the basis of the talks would be his speech at the State Department, with language that is more pleasing to the Palestinians; or his speech days later at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which had additional nuances sought by Israel.
From the American perspective, both speeches needed to be considered as inextricably linked.
President Obama has outlined principles and goals for these negotiations in his historic remarks. We are working with the parties and the Quartet to encourage direct negotiations on that basis, said a State Department spokesman, specifying he was referring to both speeches.
Both those remarks you cant take one and not the other. Theyre both the same message and the same thing, he said. The idea that those remarks go together is important.
The Europeans, however, are understood to be pushing for language that would be closer to the State Department speech, as they want to be more assured of Palestinian support for any statement they would back.
Tony Blair, envoy to the Quartet of the US, EU, UN and Russia, is handling coordination in an attempt to find a workable text. The major sticking points are seen as the size of the swaps envisioned, the issue of Israel as a Jewish state and how strong the language would be on rejecting a Hamas role in a Palestinian national unity government.
A package framework was brought to the Quartet at a meeting in Washington in mid-July, but the Quartet itself could not agree on it, with Russia reportedly balking at the need to include the Jewish state element into the deal.
In the wake of the Quartet meeting last month, there were still gaps between the parties about whether there was a common basis to resume negotiations, noted David Makovsy of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. I think the gaps have been narrowed, but they havent been closed. If past performance is an indication, odds are the Europeans are going to seek Palestinian support before agreeing to close those gaps.
Makovsky continued: This is a key moment because having terms of reference for peace talks may be the best way to avert a confrontation in September, and this seems to have motivated Israel at least in part to search for a common formula.
He characterized the Israelis as having come a considerable distance on moving towards the principles outlined by Obama as a basis for talks.
Makovsky also pointed out that this episode was the first in which the Quartet had inserted itself into negotiations, which he described as a reflection that the Europeans are considered pivotal voters at the UN in September.
Government officials said that since the July Quartet meeting there have also been signals that the Palestinians themselves were looking for ways to come off the UN statehood recognition tree, with PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and other senior Fatah members saying as much recently.
Invisible_Insane
Member
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INCONCEIVABLE. ISRAEL HAS SOLD OUT ISRAEL.planar1280 said:
I want to say this sounds like progress, but when it comes to this issue, I can't see how anything other than unbridled pessimism is called for.
planar1280 said:
Heh. I won't bother giving them hits, but a new Washington Post article came up when I googled that.
Is Bibi anti-Israel?‎ - Washington Post
Bulbo Urethral Baggins
Banned
eznark said:This is one hell of a Tim Geithner impersonator!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlQaKRvxInM
FBN: "Is there a risk that the United States could lose it's Triple A credit rating, yes or no?"
Geithner (imposter?): "No risk of that"
FBN: "No risk?"
Geithner (imposter?): "no risk"
FBN: "So S&P is wrong, the United State will keep it's AAA credit rating"
Geithner (imposter?): "Absolutely"
Why is he still employed?
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Why is he still employed?
i wonder if the GOP is getting in its own way here. How long would it take for a replacement to be voted in? Would it be done before the elections?
Probably because someone in the Senate would place a secret hold on his replacement's appointment.Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Why is he still employed?
I'm sure Obama wants to keep the number of appointments he has to make to a minimum, since they get held up by saboteurs.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:Why is he still employed?
because no one else will take the job most likely (also, lol at a confirmation in this atmosphere)
i wonder if the GOP is getting in its own way here. How long would it take for a replacement to be voted in? Would it be done before the elections?
I think the GOP would love for Geithner to stay in office. That clip I just linked to will be in many campaign ads. "Tax-Cheat Timmy, Obama's Boy, wrong on downgrade yet Obama refuses to hold him accountable."
gcubed said:i wonder if the GOP is getting in its own way here. How long would it take for a replacement to be voted in? Would it be done before the elections?
Clearly it's part of their master plan to further tank the economy so they can win in 2012.
eznark said:This is one hell of a Tim Geithner impersonator!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlQaKRvxInM
FBN: "Is there a risk that the United States could lose it's Triple A credit rating, yes or no?"
Geithner (imposter?): "No risk of that"
FBN: "No risk?"
Geithner (imposter?): "no risk"
FBN: "So S&P is wrong, the United State will keep it's AAA credit rating"
Geithner (imposter?): "Absolutely"
You mean when he said this in April not thinking that this thing was going to be dragged down to the last day before the default? That's a lot of grasping.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.