home

Stock Market Loses $1 Trillion in Three Days

More bad news on the economic front. The Dow Jones dropped more than 410 points today.

The Dow Jones industrials dropped more than 410 points, and all the major indexes lost more than 4 percent. The stock market has lost about $1 trillion over the past three days, according to the Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 index, which reflects the value of nearly all U.S. stocks.

Among the reasons:

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said he was backing away from buying troubled mortgage assets and would focus on the capital needs of both banks and non-bank financial institutions.

[More...]

Another reason:

Paulson also announced a new goal for the program to support financial markets that supply consumer credit in such areas as credit card debt, auto loans and student loans. He said, "with a stronger capital base, our banks will be more confident" to support economic activity.

But investors are worried that a severe pullback in consumer spending — which drives more than two-thirds of the U.S. economy — will prolong a global economic downturn.

< Wednesday Open Thread | Why John Brennan Matters: Part 2 >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Toxic assets (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by wasabi on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 06:42:34 PM EST
    The original sum of $700B was to purchase toxic assets which we all were assured whould have to be done immediately to shore up the financial markets or the world would come to an end.  Now, not so much.

    I'd feel a whole lot better about this bailout if the foxes weren't in charge, but it appears (or so Paulson tells us) they are the only people who know where the bodies are hidden.

    Paulson exudes incompetence (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by pluege on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 06:53:20 PM EST
    he clearly belongs in a bush administration.

    Just as clearly we can kiss our cool $700 bil bye-bye without getting anything of value.

    Incompetence or Crookedness... (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 07:56:20 AM EST
    He is a Goldman Sachs guy who cashed out for 50 million for a job not so well done.

    We may have witnessed, and be witnessing, your run of the mill "taking care of my cronies" government fraud.

    [ Parent ]

    Can't we all just get along?? (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 09:11:54 AM EST
    No one gets a pass on this mess, and that includes Barney "Everything is fine going forward" Franks and Chris "What a deal I got on my mortgage" Dodd.

    You can pick the Repub names. Not for what they did as much for their not raising enough h*ll when they had the chance!

    [ Parent ]

    It wasn't Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac that started (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:20:20 AM EST
    or allowed the practices that led to the subprime mortgage meltdown:

    The Community Reinvestment Act applies to depository banks. But many of the institutions that spurred the massive growth of the subprime market weren't regulated banks. They were outfits such as Argent and American Home Mortgage, which were generally not regulated by the Federal Reserve or other entities that monitored compliance with CRA. These institutions worked hand in glove with Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, entities to which the CRA likewise didn't apply. There's much more. As Barry Ritholtz notes in this fine rant, the CRA didn't force mortgage companies to offer loans for no money down, or to throw underwriting standards out the window, or to encourage mortgage brokers to aggressively seek out new markets. Nor did the CRA force the credit-rating agencies to slap high-grade ratings on packages of subprime debt.

    Second, many of the biggest flameouts in real estate have had nothing to do with subprime lending. WCI Communities, builder of highly amenitized condos in Florida (no subprime purchasers welcome there), filed for bankruptcy in August. Very few of the tens of thousands of now-surplus condominiums in Miami were conceived to be marketed to subprime borrowers, or minorities--unless you count rich Venezuelans and Colombians as minorities. The multiyear plague that has been documented in brilliant detail at IrvineHousingBlog is playing out in one of the least-subprime housing markets in the nation.

    Third, lending money to poor people and minorities isn't inherently risky. There's plenty of evidence that in fact it's not that risky at all. That's what we've learned from several decades of microlending programs, at home and abroad, with their very high repayment rates. And as the New York Times recently reported, Nehemiah Homes, a long-running initiative to build homes and sell them to the working poor in subprime areas of New York's outer boroughs, has a repayment rate that lenders in Greenwich, Conn., would envy. In 27 years, there have been fewer than 10 defaults on the project's 3,900 homes. That's a rate of 0.25 percent.

    At Monday's hearing, Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., gamely tried to pin Lehman's demise on Fannie and Freddie. After comparing Lehman's small political contributions with Fannie and Freddie's much larger ones, Mica asked Fuld what role Fannie and Freddie's failure played in Lehman's demise. Fuld's response: "De minimis."

    Lending money to poor people doesn't make you poor. Lending money poorly to rich people does.

    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had nothing to do with CDOs and the subprime market:

    From 2003 to 2006, new issues of CDOs backed by asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities had increasing exposure to subprime mortgage bonds. Mezzanine ABS CDOs are mainly backed by the BBB or lower-rated tranches of mortgage bonds, and in 2006, $200 billion in mezzanine ABS CDOs were issued with an average exposure to subprime bonds of 70%.[citation needed] As delinquencies and defaults on subprime mortgages occur, CDOs backed by significant mezzanine subprime collateral experience severe rating downgrades and possibly future losses.

    As the mortgages underlying the CDO's collateral decline in value, banks and investment funds holding CDOs face difficulty in assigning a precise price to their CDO holdings. Many are recording their CDO assets at par due to the difficulty in pricing.[citation needed] The pricing challenge arises because CDOs do not actively trade and mortgage defaults take time to lead to CDO losses. However, in June 2007, two hedge funds managed by Bear Stearns Asset Management Inc. faced cash or collateral calls from lenders that had accepted CDOs backed by subprime loans as loan collateral.[citation needed] The now defunct Bear Stearns, at that time the fifth-largest U.S. securities firm, said July 18, 2007 that investors in its two failed hedge funds will get little if any money back after "unprecedented declines" in the value of securities used to bet on subprime mortgages.[17]

    Some CEOs have lost their jobs as a result of the crisis. On 24th October 2007, Merrill Lynch reported third quarter earnings that contained $7.9 billion of losses on collateralized debt obligations.[18] A week later Stan O'Neal, Merrill Lynch's CEO, resigned from his position, reportedly as a result.[19] On 4th November 2007, Charles (Chuck) Prince, Chairman and CEO of Citigroup resigned and cited the following reasons : "...as you have seen publicly reported, the rating agencies have recently downgraded significantly certain CDOs and the mortgage securities contained in CDOs. As a result of these downgrades, valuations for these instruments have dropped sharply. This will have a significant impact on our fourth quarter financial results. I am responsible for the conduct of our businesses. It is my judgment that the size of these charges makes stepping down the only honorable course for me to take as Chief Executive Officer. This is what I advised the Board."[20]

    The new issue pipeline for CDOs backed by asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities slowed significantly in the second-half of 2007 and the first quarter of 2008 due to weakness in subprime collateral, the resulting reevaluation by the market of pricing of CDOs backed by mortgage bonds, and a general downturn in the global credit markets. Global CDO issuance in the fourth quarter of 2007 was US$ 47.5 billion, a nearly 74 percent decline from the US$ 180 billion issued in the fourth quarter of 2006. First quarter 2008 issuance of US$ 11.7 billion was nearly 94 percent lower than the US$ 186 billion issued in the first quarter of 2007.[7] Moreover, virtually all first quarter 2008 CDO issuance was in the form of collateralized loan obligations backed by middle-market or leveraged bank loans, not by home mortgage ABS.[21]



    [ Parent ]
    Oh good grief Charlie DA.. (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:12:42 PM EST
    Next thing I know you will be telling us Hitler didn't invade Poland...

    [ Parent ]
    See comment 26 (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:55:48 PM EST



    [ Parent ]
    Slate... hmmm (2.00 / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 04:02:29 PM EST
    Wasn't that one of the sources that told us about Palin claiming her daughter's baby as hers?

    I mean we are who we hang with, right? (Sorry. I should remember that doesn't apply to Democrats.)

    ;-)

    Here we have what Barney said in response to Bush's 2003 go at fixing things.

    And here is what was said in 1999.

    ''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''


    [ Parent ]
    Heh (none / 0) (#33)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 07:23:02 PM EST
    Wasn't that one of the sources that told us about Palin claiming her daughter's baby as hers?

    No, unless they reported on the gossip on the web,
    but your attempt at 'poisoning the well' is duly noted, since you have naught to counter the facts I brought up about the subprime mortgage meltdown.

    As for your quote, you have noticed that the prediction didn't cover the possibility of having to bailout the banks and other institutions 'too large to fail' and it doesn't foresee the CDOs which became an important part of the
    SPMM mess, as outlined in my excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on the subject of CDOs.

    TTFN

    [ Parent ]

    No, I think one of their folks (none / 0) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 10:35:32 PM EST
    passed it on... Poisoned water?? Yes it was but the Left still drank the Kool-aid.

    The fact remains that it was the housing bubble, if you can go all the way back until 2007 that started the market slide which caused people getting out of stocks and other "papers" and moving into commodities which drove up oil which hurt the economy.... Remember that as late as last April it appeared the problem was under control but the declining economy driven by oil prices going straight up burst even more of the bubble, etc., etc.  It became a daisy chain of significant size.

    [ Parent ]

    Gersh, PPJ, can't you use Google or do more (none / 0) (#36)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:37:51 PM EST
    than give us vague recollections about what you 'think' was written in Slate more a little more than two months ago?

    passed it on... Poisoned water?? Yes it was but the Left still drank the Kool-aid.

    Gotta link to back up your contention?  I've given links and detailed excerpts to back me up, all you have are your memories, without any citations or links to what Slate wrote, if anything, about Bristol perhaps being the real mother of Trig.

    What was or wasn't written about the Palin family doesn't invalidate what I cited above about the subprime mortgage meltdown, btw.  If you were more sure of your facts on the subject of this thread, you wouldn't need to attempt to redirect our attention to another unrelated subject. C'est ne pas?

    The fact remains that it was the housing bubble, if you can go all the way back until 2007 that started the market slide which caused people getting out of stocks and other "papers" and moving into commodities which drove up oil which hurt the economy..

    Actually, there were signs of the housing bubble before 2007, as you can read here:

    THE air is slowly leaking from the global housing bubble. In most of the countries that The Economist tracks each quarter the pace at which house prices are climbing has slowed over the past year. An overwhelming majority of experts are still predicting a soft landing with no drop in prices. But property in many countries is so overvalued that even if prices do not fall, they could stagnate for up to a decade.

    America's market has remained hot for longer than most, but even it now seems to be coming off the boil. The 12-month rate of house-price inflation slowed to 12% in the third quarter of 2005, from 14% in the second. Prices of new homes, however, rose by only 1% in the year to October, down from 16% in early 2004. A glut of new building is forcing developers to cut prices. The best signal of a further slowdown to come is the increase in the stock of unsold homes. The number of existing homes on the market was equivalent to 4.9 months' sales in October, up from 3.8 months' sales in January....

    From the Wikipedia:

    The United States housing bubble is an economic bubble in many parts of the United States housing market including areas of California, Florida, Colorado, Michigan, the Northeast Corridor, and the Southwest markets. On a national level, housing prices peaked in early 2005, began declining in 2006 and may not yet have hit bottom. Increased foreclosure rates in 2006-2007 by U.S. homeowners led to a crisis in August 2008 for the subprime, Alt-A, Collateralized debt obligation (CDO), mortgage, credit, hedge fund, and foreign bank markets.[1] In October 2007 the U.S. Treasury Secretary called the bursting housing bubble "the most significant risk to our economy."[2]

    Housing bubbles may occur in local or global real estate markets. They are typically characterized, in their late stages, by rapid increases in the valuations of real property until unsustainable levels are reached relative to incomes, price-to-rent ratios, and other economic indicators of affordability. This may be followed by decreases in home prices that can result in many owners holding negative equity--a mortgage debt higher than the value of the property. The underlying causes of the housing bubble are complex; factors include historically-low interest rates, lax lending standards, and a speculative fever.[1][3][4][5][6] This bubble may be related to the stock market or dot-com bubble of the 1990s.[7][8][9][10][11] This bubble is roughly coincident with real estate bubbles in the United Kingdom, Spain and even South Korea.[citation needed]

    Remember that as late as last April it appeared the problem was under control but the declining economy driven by oil prices going straight up burst even more of the bubble, etc., etc.  It became a daisy chain of significant size.

    From Timeline of the United States Housing Bubble:

    # March 10: Dow Jones Industrial Average at the lowest level since October 2006, falling more than 20% from its peak just five months prior.
    # March 14-18: Dropping valuations of mortgage securities caused by skyrocketing default and foreclosure rates forces margin calls to the Wall Street bank Bear Stearns for debts the bank used to leverage mortgage issuances, and threatens BSC with bankruptcy and causes worldwide market jitters. In a weekend deal brokered by U.S. Treasury secretary Paulson and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, JPMorgan bank agrees to purchase BSC for $2 per share, compared to their 2007 high of nearly $170, in exchange for the Federal Reserve Bank agreeing to accept BSC's devalued mortgage backed securities as collateral for public loans at the newly created Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF), effectively providing a mechanism to bail out Wall Street banks threatened with insolvency.[72]


    [ Parent ]
    Yawn (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 08:38:16 AM EST
    Okay, the bubble started deflating in 2006.. So?

    From 1/2008 till 4/1 Oil went up slightly less than $5.00.

    Things looked better, not perfect but better.

    Then the oil rocket really took off in April... from around $98.00 on 4/1 to $146 by 7/15 a 49% increase in three and a half months..

    And the economy tanked.

    What happened to make the price sky rocket??

    Well, the Democrats blocked efforts to authorize opening up drilling in the US and the speculators figured they were safe.

    Why did it start going down??

    Bush rescinded the Ex. Order on drilling off shore.. Of course the Demos didn't do jack...

    [ Parent ]

    Yes, bedtime stories can make one sleepy (none / 0) (#39)
    by Dark Avenger on Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 09:18:00 AM EST
    What happened to make the price sky rocket??

    Well, the Democrats blocked efforts to authorize opening up drilling in the US and the speculators figured they were safe.

    Actually, there are millions of acres of land that the oil companies can drill on right now without authorization from Congress.

    Most folks would point to the increased demand in countries like China, India, etc., along with a weak dollar at the time of the price rises.

    Let's hear from someone who has studied the situation professionally:

    In this paper we have reviewed a number of theories as to what has produced the current high price of oil, including commodity price speculation, strong world demand, time delays or geological limitations on increasing production, OPEC monopoly pricing, and an increasingly important contribution of the scarcity rent. Rather than think of these as competing hypotheses, one possibility is that there is an element of truth to all of them.
    Unquestionably the two key features in any account are a decrease
    in the price elasticity of demand
    and the strong growth in demand from China, the Middle East, and other newly
    industrialized economies.
    These twin facts explain the initial
    strong pressure on prices that may have triggered commodity speculation in the first place. Speculation could have edged producers like Saudi Arabia into the discovery that small production declines could increase current revenues and may be in their long run interests as well. And the strong demand may have moved us into a regime in which scarcity rents, while negligible in 1997, are now an important permanent factor in the price of petroleum.

    Why did it start going down??

    Bush rescinded the Ex. Order on drilling off shore.. Of course the Demos didn't do jack...

    No, it's pretty much agreed that the reduction in oil prices is due to the reduction in demand here due to the current recession.

    You could listen to what someone who is in the energy market says:

    Energy Trader Jim Dietz said the next destination for oil is $50, which is very good news for U.S. motorists.

        "Slowing demand remains the primary concern. It's the exact opposite of market conditions 18 months ago, which is pretty amazing. The price continues to drop despite an OPEC cut and unless we get another one from OPEC pretty quick we're headed to the $50-range," Dietz said. Dietz added that he is currently short oil and unleaded gasoline, with monthly contracts.

        "Gasoline prices should drop to around $2 for unleaded regular in many sections in the U.S, if current trends continue," Dietz added.

    This is less recent, but still relevant:

    NEW DELHI: Higher oil prices are their own enemy: demand destruction caused by spiking energy costs will bring down global crude prices, stepped up production lending a helping hand.

    Crude oil prices, which fell by almost 16% over the past few days, may soften further unless spooked by a disruptive geopolitical development. Increased OPEC production, led by Saudi Arabia, coupled with a decline in demand in the developed world, especially the United States, is set to ease the tight demand-supply equation in the global oil market.

    Global crude oil price, which was threatening to breach the $200 a barrel-mark by the year-end, is now likely to stay closer to the current price (between $120 and $130 a barrel), leaving aside a geo-political eventuality like an Israeli attack on Iran.

    In an exclusive chat with ET, British Petroleum group chief economist and vice-president Christof Ruhl said: "Increased supplies from Saudi Arabia have already come into the market and the recent softening in prices is a direct fallout of that." Saudi Arabia had announced an increase in production by 700,000 barrels a day from July.

    On the demand side, growth in both OCED and non-OECD countries would be lower in 2008. While the US and European economies are facing a general slowdown, high oil prices are also beginning to bring in demand destruction in those economies where rising prices are passed on to consumers.

    Funny, how neither of them mention Bush's Executive Order on drilling as being a factor in the price drop.

    Explanations exist: they have existed for all times, for there is always an easy solution to every problem -- neat, plausible and wrong.    

                       H.L. Mencken

    I'll still be back here grinning in the back of the room, whether you like it or not

    TTFN

    [ Parent ]

    What happened... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 09:43:00 AM EST
    to make the price shkyrocket?

    Market manipulation more than anything.  Peep the cover story.

    [ Parent ]

    Reasons and reasons (none / 0) (#41)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 07:03:43 PM EST
    And that could happen only because the speculators knew that the Demos wouldn't go along with off shore drilling and/or ANWR.

    The price started to come down after Bush did his thing.... about 8 years too late

    [ Parent ]

    Heh (none / 0) (#42)
    by Dark Avenger on Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 07:26:01 PM EST
    And that could happen only because the speculators knew that the Demos wouldn't go along with off shore drilling and/or ANWR.

    If either were opened tomorrow, there would not be any product seen from them for years.

    As this gentleman stated:

    how Long Until We Can Get That Oil?

    Let's assume the offshore drilling ban was lifted later today ... just like that. Would the oil start flowing tomorrow? Of course not.

    Firstly, there is currently a five-year backlog for offshore drilling rigs/ships. As other nations such as China and India start developing their offshore resources, the demand for drilling equipment as skyrocketed. Ship builders are answering the call by building more equipment but, as you might guess, building a vessel that can drill in 3,000 m of water and 8,000 m into the subsurface can't be done on a weekend.

    Secondly, drilling an exploration well is but one step in a long process of getting the resource to market. Depending on the depths and other geologic factors, just drilling a hole to test the hypothesis of the presence of oil could take several months. Then, the company, country, or joint-venture needs to decide whether or not to proceed with the project ... sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. If they do decide there's enough oil to make the project economic then a development plan needs to be hammered out ... those other wells need to be drilled. That's just the drilling ... we haven't even gotten to the actual production facilities yet! You get the picture. Depending on water depths, distance from pipelines, and so on and so forth, getting an oil field online from time of discovery can take anywhere from a few years to more than a decade.

    Thirdly, only a handful of fields would come online in, let's be optimistic, a decade from now (2018). It's not like those 86 billion barrels are all going to magically be delivered to the refineries all at once. It would take many decades to deliver that resource.

    The price started to come down after Bush did his thing.... about 8 years too late

    Let's listen to someone in the industry(same link):

    As politicians debate whether to open federal offshore waters to oil and natural-gas drilling, there is agreement on at least one point: It isn't a short-term fix.

        If the bans were lifted tomorrow, it would be at least seven years -- and likely as long as a decade -- before the first oil began to flow off the coasts of Florida, California and the eastern seaboard.

        "Is it going to happen overnight? No," said Dan Naatz, vice president of the Independent Petroleum Association of America. "Is it going to solve all of our nation's energy problems? No."

    That's a report from The Wall Street Journal quoting the vice president of the Independent Petroleum Association of America (bold emphasis mine). These people actually work in the industry ... they know what's up.

    Facts be facts, PPJ, and unless you can provide quotes from the industry or other knowledgeable source to back up your assertions, you've ended up here with a busted flush, to use a term you may be familiar with.

    TTFN.

    [ Parent ]

    From your own sources (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 09:39:31 AM EST
    You should learn not to show your hole cards.

    Essentially, their argument is that gasoline prices will go down if we lift the drilling ban. Another version of the argument is that gasoline prices would not be as high as they are now if we had lifted the ban at some point in the past.

    Don't look now but gasoline is about $2.00 a gallon lower. And the fall just happened to start when Bush lifted the executive order.

    Your source also shows 85 billions of oil off shore. That doesn't include oil shale, the Baken field (200 billion) or ANWR.

    And the off shore figure assumes that there will be no improvements in technology to find and recover oil.

    Based on that thinking the country ran out of oil in 1946. (Sarcasm alert)

    And your five years assumes no emphasis on the task.

    The oil is here, the technology is here. What is also here is a Left wing government that is determined to bankrupt the country to fight a man made global warming hoax and, per Nancy P, "save the planet" and make her richer.

    As reported on dontgomovement.com, Speaker Pelosi bought between $50,000 and $100,000 worth of stock in Pickens' CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the day of the initial public offering:

    Is there a Special Prosecutor in the house?

    Snark away DA, one of the difference between us is that I don't play flush draws unless the odds are right. Of course you wouldn't understand such principles.


    [ Parent ]

    Heh-heh. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Dark Avenger on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 11:22:23 AM EST
    Don't look now but gasoline is about $2.00 a gallon lower. And the fall just happened to start when Bush lifted the executive order.

    Correlation doesn't imply causation, and we are to believe you over the facts?

    From the Economic Times, 2 weeks after the Executive Order was signed:

    In an exclusive chat with ET, British Petroleum group chief economist and vice-president Christof Ruhl said: "Increased supplies from Saudi Arabia have already come into the market and the recent softening in prices is a direct fallout of that." Saudi Arabia had announced an increase in production by 700,000 barrels a day from July.
    On the demand side, growth in both OCED and non-OECD countries would be lower in 2008. While the US and European economies are facing a general slowdown, high oil prices are also beginning to bring in demand destruction in those economies where rising prices are passed on to consumers.

    Put simply, consumers are now beginning to go slow on demand (like SUV sales coming down in the US and growth of hybrid cars) as high energy bills are no longer sustainable. Demand is also expected to moderate in developing economies like China, India, Thailand, etc, because of lower subsidies and moderation in economic activity. "This year is thus expected to see softening in prices as the tight market conditions ease," he said.

    "This year's Statistical Review shows clearly that markets do work, and that consumers and producers respond to changes in energy prices when given the opportunity to do so. However, in many places, policies interfere with market mechanisms. Further, in a number of countries, consumers are shielded from price increases via subsidies," Mr Ruhl said.

    Perhaps Mr Ruhl has BDS?

    Or, perhaps your simple-minded explanation doesn't have any relationship to reality?

    From CNN:

    Experts say offshore oil drilling would not have an immediate impact on oil prices because oil exploration takes years.

    "If we were to drill today, realistically speaking, we should not expect a barrel of oil coming out of this new resource for three years, maybe even five years, so let's not kid ourselves," said Fadel Gheit, oil and gas analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. Equity Capital Markets Division.

    And your five years assumes no emphasis on the task.

    Yes, you know more about it than someone who studies and analyzes the oil and gas market for a living.

    Your source also shows 85 billions of oil off shore. That doesn't include oil shale, the Baken field (200 billion) or ANWR.

    Actually, the figure for the Bakken field is 167 billion, but according to this info from the Wiki:

    While these numbers would appear to indicate a massive reserve, the percentage of this oil which might be extracted using current technology is another matter. Estimates of the Bakken's technically recoverable oil have ranged from as low as 1% -- because the Bakken shale has generally low porosity and low permeability, making the oil difficult to extract -- to Leigh Price's estimate of 50% recoverable.[10] Reports issued by both the USGS and the state of North Dakota in April 2008 seem to indicate the lower range of recoverable estimates are more realistic with current technology.

    The flurry of drilling activity in the Bakken, coupled with the wide range of estimates of in-place and recoverable oil, led North Dakota senator Byron Dorgan to ask the USGS to conduct a study of the Bakken's potentially recoverable oil. In April 2008 the USGS released this report, which estimated the amount of technically recoverable, undiscovered oil in the Bakken Formation at 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels, with a mean of 3.65 billion.[11] Later that month, the state of North Dakota's report [12] estimated that of the 167 billion barrels of oil in-place in the North Dakota portion of the Bakken, 2.1 billion barrels were technically recoverable with current technology.

    You will note that there is a great difference between 167 and 4.3 to 2.1 billion.

    Based on that thinking the country ran out of oil in 1946. (Sarcasm alert)

    Based on your thinking, the prices dropping as the world-wide economy deals with a recession is just a coincidence, the oil companies cut their prices because of all the oil that will be coming online from offshore drilling in 3 to 5 years.(Dense thinking alert).

    As for Pickens:

    On July 8, 2008, Pickens announced a major energy policy proposal, called the Pickens Plan.[49] The plan promotes "alternatives" to oil, including natural gas, wind, and solar.[50] A major feature of the plan is replacing the 22% of its electricity that the United States gets from natural gas with wind energy, which would then allow that natural gas to provide 38% of the nation's fuel for transportation and reduce its dependence on foreign oil. The Pickens Plan calls for the United States to utilize its wind corridor in the middle of the country stretching from Texas through the Great Plains to the Canadian border. He noted in Congressional testimony in July 2008 that his plan would generate new jobs and provide economic stimulus to this area, while noting that it would also require new transmission lines which traditionally antagonize some environmentalists and/or nearby populations.

    Gersh, she's investing with someone who wants to reduce American dependence on foreign oil, that must be a high crime or misdemeanor of some sort, we need to get someone on it right away.

    Snark away DA

    No, you've shown a greater ability to do so, and fact/reference-free as well, I bow to your superior abilities in this field.

    one of the difference between us is that I don't play flush draws unless the odds are right. Of course you wouldn't understand such principles.

    Of course, you could show that you do by quoting someone who follows the energy markets saying that the EO you allude to made the difference.

    You could even address the other facts I've brought up instead of quibbling over numbers.

    You could demonstrate why all the folks I've quoted who study the oil and gas markets for a living, or make their living off of trading in them, are wrong, and you are correct.

    Sorry, PPJ, you've busted here again, and I'll be in the back laughing at your lack of facts and logic, whether you like it or not.

    TTFN

    [ Parent ]

    heheheh (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 10:21:01 AM EST
    So Bush dumping  the EO re off shore drilling and all the polls showing 75% plus of Americans  demanding we drill had no effect.

    hahahahahahaha

    Got a bridge for sale??

    And when it comes to how fast new oil could be brought on line, I note that all your experts are people who either are "analysts" or people who will not profit if more oil is brought on line.

    To claim that we can't bring the new oil on line in under two years is stupid and insulting to anyone's common sense, yet these people keep on doing it.

    Of course if we don't start it will never happen.

    You know DA, my finances and retirement are secure. You need to start thinking about what you will wash down that cake that Pelosi and the Left wing Demos is feeding you.

    [ Parent ]

    Conflict of interest (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 10:31:27 AM EST
    Gersh, she's investing with someone who wants to reduce American dependence on foreign oil, that must be a high crime or misdemeanor of some sort, we need to get someone on it right away.

    Makes no difference, the conflict of interest is obvious.

    And here I thought you guys demanded your politicians be as pure as Caesar's wife.

    If she was selling stock they would charge her.

    [ Parent ]

    For the third time (none / 0) (#47)
    by Dark Avenger on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 01:29:26 PM EST
    So Bush dumping  the EO re off shore drilling and all the polls showing 75% plus of Americans  demanding we drill had no effect.

    hahahahahahaha

    Got a bridge for sale??

    If you have a link where someone in the energy industry or studies it for a living makes a case aside from acting like a beserk parrot on the subject as you have on this thread, post it, and I'll dig up a bridge for you.

    Now, what new twattle have you come up with since you last posted?  

    I don't like to be disappointed, you understand.

    And when it comes to how fast new oil could be brought on line, I note that all your experts are people who either are "analysts" or people who will not profit if more oil is brought on line.

    Why do you think the 'analysts' are wrong?  Have you ever held a job or profited from trading in the energy field?

    Why would T. Boone Pickens say that he wants to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and that we can't drill our way into doing so?

    You really think T. Boone Pickens couldn't figure out a way to make money out of  more oil being brought online?

    I think you've sold yourself the bridge, PPJ, not noticing that the planks are slowly crumbling under your feet........

    I don't think you could make your accusation about this fellow, BTW

     

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Allowing oil drilling in U.S. offshore waters that are now closed to energy exploration would do little to lower gasoline prices paid by consumers, the government's top energy forecaster said on Wednesday.

    In response to record pump prices, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain and President George W. Bush this month called for Congress to end its moratorium on drilling off the East and West coasts and in Florida waters, leaving it up to each affected state to decide where to permit drilling.

    McCain and Bush said the additional oil supplies likely to be found in the closed areas would help reduce gasoline costs.

    However, Guy Caruso, who heads the federal Energy Information Administration, said consumers would see little savings at the pump.

    "It would be a relatively small effect, because it would take such a long time to bring those supplies on," Caruso said during a briefing at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on the EIA's new long-term international energy forecast. "It doesn't affect prices that much."

    Most energy experts say it would take five to 10 years to find oil in the closed areas and bring the crude to market. Caruso said the additional supplies would amount to only a couple of hundred thousand barrels of oil a day.

    "It does take a long time to develop these resources, and therefore the price impact is muted by that," he said.

    To claim that we can't bring the new oil on line in under two years is stupid and insulting to anyone's common sense, yet these people keep on doing it.

    Link

    Firstly, there is currently a five-year backlog for offshore drilling rigs/ships. As other nations such as China and India start developing their offshore resources, the demand for drilling equipment as skyrocketed. Ship builders are answering the call by building more equipment but, as you might guess, building a vessel that can drill in 3,000 m of water and 8,000 m into the subsurface can't be done on a weekend.

    Secondly, drilling an exploration well is but one step in a long process of getting the resource to market. Depending on the depths and other geologic factors, just drilling a hole to test the hypothesis of the presence of oil could take several months. Then, the company, country, or joint-venture needs to decide whether or not to proceed with the project ... sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. If they do decide there's enough oil to make the project economic then a development plan needs to be hammered out ... those other wells need to be drilled. That's just the drilling ... we haven't even gotten to the actual production facilities yet! You get the picture. Depending on water depths, distance from pipelines, and so on and so forth, getting an oil field online from time of discovery can take anywhere from a few years to more than a decade.

    Thirdly, only a handful of fields would come online in, let's be optimistic, a decade from now (2018). It's not like those 86 billion barrels are all going to magically be delivered to the refineries all at once. It would take many decades to deliver that resource.

    All of the sudden, lifting the ban on offshore drilling is the most important issue of the day for some conservatives (e.g., here). Now, let's be clear ... I'm not saying that allowing development and production of these resources wouldn't impact our dependence on foreign oil in the long term. It most certainly would. My point is that implying that lifting the ban would somehow magically result in an immediate return to cheap (and sustained) gasoline prices is disingenuous. Moreover, if you do peruse the pro-drilling websites, you probably won't find much quantification of undiscovered resources ... just phrases like "vast amounts" and "a lot". If long-term prices are indeed driven by supply-demand, to what degree will 15 oil-years affect global supply-demand dynamics?

    Common sense, indeed!

    Of course if we don't start it will never happen.

    There are limiting factors, unfortunately:

    Mr. Bush called on Congress Wednesday to end a longstanding federal ban on offshore drilling and open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil exploration, arguing that the steps were needed to lower gasoline prices and bolster national security. But even as oil trades at more than $135 a barrel -- up from $68 a year ago -- the world's existing drill-ships are booked solid for the next five years. Some oil companies have been forced to postpone exploration while waiting for a drilling rig, executives and analysts said.

    Demand is so high that shipbuilders, the biggest of whom are in Asia, have raised prices since last year by as much as $100 million a vessel to about half a billion dollars.

    "The crunch on rigs is everywhere," said Alberto Guimaraes, a senior executive at Petrobras, the Brazilian oil company that has discovered some of the most promising offshore oil but has been unable to get at it.

    Now, I suppose Mr. Guimaraes wouldn't profit if his company could bring more oil online.

    You know DA, my finances and retirement are secure.

    Like I really care, PPJ.

    You need to start thinking about what you will wash down that cake that Pelosi and the Left wing Demos is feeding you.

    That's what I like about you, PPJ, the constant insult that if one doesn't think the way you do, it's because one is letting others do ones thinking.

    If anyone would recommend that as a way of life, a perusal of this thread should be more than enough to deter them from that primrose path.  

    I dug up my citations with no help from the Democratic Party, Nacy Pelosi, Far Left anti-American terrorist huggers, etc., while you can't find a sound argument to back you up and thus turn up the snark and ridicule, albeit it poorly and illogically, especially when you unsuccessfully invoke 'common sense'.

    SSDD, IMHO.

    Makes no difference, the conflict of interest is obvious.

    If you can show where any of her specific votes have demonstrated a conflict of interest rising to the level of an ethical or legal violation, that would be worth investigating, but I would suspect that it isn't that unusual for Congresspeople to buy and sell stock. I don't think it would prove anything if you found another Democrat/Republican Congressperson had bought the same stock.

    And here I thought you guys demanded your politicians be as pure as Caesar's wife.

    Did I?  Can you link to the thread where I used that phrase?

    I think for myself, so have the directness to address me directly instead of slickly using the term 'you guys'.

    I've been consistant in my position, and as in many things, what you thought isn't related to what I've written here in the post about the subject.  

    Do some research once in a while, it'll break the obvious tedium of retirement that hangs over your posts like a grey fog above the Golden Gate bridge on an autumn night.  Find out what I've written about the subject, you brought it up, and you can then confront me with my words, not 'what I thought' were my words.

    If she was selling stock they would charge her.

    Sure they would, PPJ.  Now please stand over here for the mobility activity, you've had done enough of your hot air exercise for the day..............

    TTFN


    [ Parent ]

    crunch a bunch of oil stocks (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 04:28:25 PM EST
    Sure there's a crunch. All we have to do is put some national leadership on it and that can be fixed in a hurry... oh wait... National leadership...oil drilling...Lefties... Hahahahahahaha

    The point with Pelosi is real simple. She owns stock in a company that is involved in alternative fuels. When the price of oil goes up, the value of her stock goes up.

    yadda yadda all you want, make fine points of logic, demand to see what you want...but

    That is a clear conflict of interest.

    [ Parent ]

    Still no links to support your contentions. (none / 0) (#49)
    by Dark Avenger on Tue Nov 18, 2008 at 09:23:48 PM EST
    Sure there's a crunch. All we have to do is put some national leadership on it and that can be fixed in a hurry... oh wait... National leadership...oil drilling...Lefties... Hahahahahahaha

    Leadership, unlike when GWB suggested that Clinton 'jawbone' OPEC and the Saudis et al about the price of gasoline.

    WAYNE, Mich., June 27 -- Gov. George W. Bush of Texas said today that if he was president, he would bring down gasoline prices through sheer force of personality, by creating enough political good will with oil-producing nations that they would increase their supply of crude.

    "I would work with our friends in OPEC to convince them to open up the spigot, to increase the supply," Mr. Bush, the presumptive Republican candidate for president, told reporters here today. "Use the capital that my administration will earn, with the Kuwaitis or the Saudis, and convince them to open up the spigot."

    Implicit in his comments was a criticism of the Clinton administration as failing to take advantage of the good will that the United States built with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia during the Persian Gulf war in 1991. Also implicit was that as the son of the president who built the coalition that drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait, Mr. Bush would be able to establish ties on a personal level that would persuade oil-producing nations that they owed the United States something in return.

    Of course, better that they fixing things in a hurry than not fixing things at all, as in GWB and his party had control of both Houses from 2002-2006 and didn't do anything to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

    The point with Pelosi is real simple. She owns stock in a company that is involved in alternative fuels. When the price of oil goes up, the value other stock goes up.

    Lets see what those Marxists at Popular Mechanics have to say about your contention:

    Conclusion
    Today, many families have several cars--often more cars than they have drivers. So before we see our national fleet running on hydrogen, we believe that many households might have an electric or plug-in hybrid for short trips, an E85/electric hybrid sedan, SUV or minivan to squire the whole team, and a diesel pickup fueled by B30 or B50 to haul most anything else. All will reduce greenhouse gases and use renewable resources that come from inside our borders. By pursuing these multiple pathways, we can reduce our dependence on any single energy source--something we haven't achieved with petroleum.

    But don't discount the appeal of gasoline too quickly. David E. Cole, chairman of the Center for Auto Research, says, "If gasoline prices get too high and we look to other fuels--like hydrogen--you can expect that oil-producing nations will reduce our fuel costs. They want to continue to pump oil out, pump dollars in, and they could see the hydrogen economy as a threat."

    Link

    Got any other fallicies to perpetrate tonight?

    yadda yadda all you want, make fine points of logic, demand to see what you want...but

    I've demonstrated support for my POV, using links for the reasoning and facts in all my posts, you've linked to nothing with facts or reasoning to back up your assertions, so far.

    Call me pessimistic, but I haven't been holding my breath for you to do so, FWIW.

    All you've used is "I thought", "I seem to remember", unfunny and unintelligent snark, an unwillingness to answer questions I bring up in response to your assertions, and introducing a new subject when the latter begins to take place.

    Why is that?

    That is a clear conflict of interest

    I'm glad that your retirement hasn't sapped your ability to move the goalposts around when it suits your fancy.

    Demonizing a "Far-Left anti-American terrorist hugging Democrat" is all that's left in your bag of tricks.  How sad and terrible for you that you can't take losing an honest argument when you're given the chance to make your points with more than unsupported assertions.

    TTFN.

    [ Parent ]

    Uncle Sam... (none / 0) (#1)
    by kdog on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 05:50:16 PM EST
    better get out the checkbook...the gamblers are still panicking.

    Or should I say Chairman Mao?

    I think just the fact that Paulsen (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by of1000Kings on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 05:54:59 PM EST
    is changing strategies is going to hurt the market, and did today...along with more bad economic info...

    I mean, if the government is already changing the process, a process that had just begun, and a process that was approved by Congress, then how much faith can there be in believing that the government can sort out this problem, and not just give away money?

    it doesn't leave me very inspired to know that Paulsen et al don't really have a game plan other than buying stock in poorly run companies...

    you would think Paulsen of all people would know that leadership and consistency would be keys at this point, not just handing out billions of dollars to whoever comes knocking...

    [ Parent ]

    He should be arrested (none / 0) (#10)
    by Amiss on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 11:32:57 PM EST
    I feel he sold us a bill of goods, and had no clue what he was doing and of course wanted none of it to be transparent.

    I am so sick of the Bush Administration, I could just cry, it feels like they are doing everything in the treasury dept to spend every penny our children could ever hope to make before Obama takes office and all with our help.

    [ Parent ]

    The casinos are still running (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 07:43:49 PM EST
    and at least they run honest games..

    ;-)

    [ Parent ]

    No kidding. I told my husband that we should have (none / 0) (#7)
    by Angel on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 08:32:50 PM EST
    taken our money on a trip to Vegas.  At least we would have had 50% odds on red/black odd/even at the roulette table.  More fun than suffering the daily stock market losses.  Hindsight is 20/20.  

    [ Parent ]
    Actually... (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 07:49:03 AM EST
    red/black or even/odd is a less than 50% chance...don't forget 0 and 00, the numbers on the wheel that helped build Las Vegas.

    But your point is well taken...I trust the wheel, I don't trust the NYSE.  And definitely a helluva lot more fun!

    [ Parent ]

    Except for craps never do table games (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 09:04:53 AM EST
    or slots or any variation thereof. The odds are with the house.)

    I also don't do craps.

    You have a chance at poker because you aren't playing the house..

    BTW, Kdog. You coming down to the WPT tournament  in Tunica in Jan?? The side action will be good and I'll buy dinner!

    [ Parent ]

    I'd love to.... (none / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 10:00:27 AM EST
    I'll have to see how I do at the WSOP Circuit Events in AC in December, planned on playing one or two of the small buy-in events.  If I make a score I'm there old friend...otherwise I don't think the roll can hack it.  Golden rule "don't bet what you can't afford to lose" and all.

    Wish me luck...If I take one down dinner is on me:)

    PS...Of course you're right about the table games, but they sure are fun!!

    [ Parent ]

    you have a chance at poker, but pay attention (none / 0) (#28)
    by of1000Kings on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:47:50 PM EST
    to the rakes...if you're playing a small limit game like 3/6 then the rakes might be high enough that making a profit over a large span of time is nearly impossible...

    courtesy of Johnny Chan, and common sense...
    it is a casino, lest we forget...

    [ Parent ]

    I had a stock broker friend (none / 0) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 09:00:34 AM EST
    who liked to opine the old straw that....

    Rather than try and trade in the market most people would be better off learning Blackjack and going to Vegas... the games are honest, the odds are better and you get free drinks, food and maybe a free room.

    Of course his theory was that you use a professional and invest over the long term... When I spoke with him last week he was mum on the subject.

    [ Parent ]

    1T in 3 days. (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 06:00:25 PM EST
    Paulson's 700B is starting to sound like he's bringing a knife to a gun fight...

    The stock market lost 1 trillion? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Romberry on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 09:52:36 PM EST
    Actually...no. The markets may have seen market capitalization decline by a trillion dollars, but market capitalization isn't real money. Imagine everyone who owns stock all lining up to sell every share. What would that stock then be worth?

    As long as investors own their shares and the companies theu invested in are not bankrupt or otherwise out of business, they own what it is they bought (the shares of stock) and have "lost" nothing. If they sell at a loss, then the loss is realized and they may come out in the red, but that's the way stock market gambling works.

    "I am not a crook" (none / 0) (#13)
    by NYShooter on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 05:49:00 AM EST
    "I did not have sexual relations with that womam"

    "have "lost" nothing"

    You're kidding, right?


    [ Parent ]

    If you still have your original investment (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 09:07:34 AM EST
    then you have lost only the use of your money...

    And if went in pre-tax, don't forget to figure in the tax you would have paid..

    [ Parent ]

    Paulson's answer? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 11:08:23 PM EST
    Sink $250 billion of the bailout into...

    Wait for it...

    Bank stocks.

    either he's a super genius (none / 0) (#11)
    by of1000Kings on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:39:33 AM EST
    or super stupid...

    I know what I'm voting for..

    [ Parent ]

    Che's Lounge my man... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:04:10 PM EST
    good to see ya...you and PPJ in the same thread no less...just like the old days:)

    You've been missed.

    [ Parent ]

    And we haven't even begun (none / 0) (#12)
    by BrassTacks on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:37:54 AM EST
    All the auto bailouts, and all the other companies. I sure hope we can all get a bailout, or at least our mortgages paid.  

    Seriously.... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 07:58:26 AM EST
    Uncle Sam should just cut a check for every man, woman, and child for 50k and be done with it.

    [ Parent ]
    Epochal Transformation Accelerates as Global Finan (none / 0) (#23)
    by Truthseeker2 on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:00:28 PM EST
           Epochal Transformation Accelerates
       As Global Financial Matrix Disintegrates

       Now that the genie is out of the bottle, worldwide economic, political and social events will proceed with the inexorable force of destiny.  The forthcoming changes, shifts and breaks with the past that are delineated below do concern the unsavory business of WHAT, positively, will not be brought into the future.  This is of critical importance.  Why?  Because those who do not know, and understand, and heed history, are always, always forced to repeat it.                                

    I.   As we all sat back and waited for this year's October Surprise, please know that it came a little bit early this year on September 15th which will forever be known as PITCH BLACK MONDAY.  Actually, the entire month of October was set up to be a series of Black Monday's, as well as every other day of the week shaped up to be.  It's really a good time to brace your self since this year's election cycle, and beyond, will bring with it a whole new season of surprises.  Things like the beginning of the end of FIAT money - the real root cause of all our financial problems and economic ills.  This foundational flaw, together with all of the multi-layered financial/economic/accounting mechanisms and schemes that have insidiously crept into the system, are the `not talked about' institutionalized culprits and structural deformities that really need to go.  Without them, the perps wouldn't be so tempted to stack the deck against us all the time.  
       The only legitimate currency is that which is backed by GOLD, or some other precious commodity that is universally valued, and issued directly by the US Government, not a privately owned, organized crime syndicate like the FED.  Debt driven, fractional-reserve banking - the real bane of global finance - will then be banished from the planet forever, along with the overlords of disaster capitalism, institutionalized usury & loan-sharking (e.g. World Bank & International Monetary Fund), as well as their economic hitmen.  Finally, the central organizing principle of modern society, and especially Western Civilization, will no longer be: maximizing shareholders' wealth.
       The writing is on the wall: THE FED IS DEAD.  And so is the Fed's collection agency - the IRS.  The FED has obviously been on extreme life support since September '08, and the only compassionate response is to let it go peacefully into the sunset.  Perhaps we should organize a simple taxpayers' revolt, not too unlike those that occurred prior to the American Revolution, to bury this beast forever.  When the people do wake up, and realize that the Federal Reserve Note that they carry in their pocket is exactly that - a note (i.e. debt, obligation, debit, commitment, instrument of indebtedness), things will start to get REEEEAL interesting !  

    II.   Another little surprise will come in the form of an announcement that goes something like this:  The USA was conceived to be a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, not a democracy by plutocracy.  Or corpocacy, or oligarchy/synarchy, or crony capitalism or any other ism/cracy/archy they have tried to foist upon US.  The founding fathers would be absolutely horrified to see the "mob rule by the privileged elites" into which this once great nation has degenerated.  Every political philosopher knows that democracy, when sufficiently dumbed down and unduly influenced by the moneyed ruling class, will always devolve into a despotic tyranny.  Therefore, the wholesale exportation of our fraudulent notion of democracy, and its supposed freedoms (to buy, buy, buy after watching the boob tube hucksters), by the political and corporate classes must be reconsidered.  And it will be soon, on a new channel during this "Fall" season's new lineup!  Stay tuned ---
       The recent presidential election, incidentally, is perhaps the most flagrant example of how the US constitutional republic has been repeatedly suspended (at the very least, once every 4 years, right?).  Just as much as the voting populace has been suspended in the state of perpetual ignorance is bliss for generations.  Can you imagine - the winner having raised close to $700 MILLION in campaign contributions - just how many debts the president-select (Demoplican or Republocrat - either way they are still both sides of the same coin.  The coin of the realm which excludes We The People.)  has incurred?!  How, pray tell, do you think these debts will be paid back in light of the trillions that are already owed across the world by the US Treasury, US corporations, US citizens, etc.  They won't be paid, because they can't be paid.  The US Corporation is, and has been, bankrupt for quite some time now.  It's stone cold broke and plum busted.  And We The People are thoroughly disgusted.  Therefore, this fraudulent corporate entity can now be trotted off the global stage, so that the REAL Constitutional Republic can be resurrected to its proper place in the nation's governmental and political life.

    III.   Another announcement will be made, in the not too distant future, about the business entity commonly known as the CORPORATION - the main huckster of this `brand' of faux democracy.  Surely, if the devil were to ever choose the perfect form in which to enter in order to carry out his nefarious designs, Inc. is it.  Is there any other entity on earth - person or party, organization or association, government or institution, jurisdiction or bureaucracy, club or group, fraternity or sorority, etc. that can function with such impunity, as it hides behind the shield of LIMITED LIABILITY.  Those two words have given complete cover for the flagrant and wanton destruction of planet Earth.  
       You name it - oil slicked coastlines, razed rainforests, beaches strewn with dead dolphins and whales.  Not to mention the complete erosion of human, civil and national rights, wherever INC decides to set up shop.  
       Let's pick a country.  Let's go to India and visit Bhopal of Union Carbide fame.  Close to 8000 people died within two weeks of that December day in 1984 in what is known as the worst industrial disaster of the last century.  Now that Dow Chemical owns Union Carbide, you can only imagine the veritable phalanx of attorneys who are paid unconscionable fees to ensure proper responsibility and accountability will never be assumed by their master.  
       Or let's visit the Punjab and talk to the thousands of widows of farmers who committed suicide because of Monsanto's "seedless seeds".   Or go to just about anywhere on that subcontinent where a Walmart is being protested for land theft, encroachment and despoilation.   Let's not forget about all the Coca Cola bottling plants that have become notorious for stealing the most precious commodity that every Indian cherishes and covets - WATER.  Well, that takes care of land, water, air ... and blood.  What else in heaven's name do these stakeholders want?!  
       We all know the deal.  It's the one where the individual, and his/her environment, is always trampled in favor of the corporate interest.  Isn't it time to really take stock of what our current predicament has left us with?  Perhaps it's also time to seriously think about actually re-ordering the ORDER, instead of once again rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.  Like we've said, "optimizing stockholder profit" will soon be history, as the cease and desist orders are not far from being issued to Corporate America.  Might as well get a head start on dissolving (or re-chartering) that corporation.

    IV.   Termination of Globalization:  The dominating and predatory form, that is.  No other global initiative has been more unsuccessful at creating a framework for a more efficient transfer of goods and services around the planet.  Truly, every aspect of this corporate inspired policy has failed miserably.  Wherever it promoters trumpet its stated intention to make markets more streamlined, effective and resilient, it has done quite the opposite.
       One only needs to look at the current debacle within the European Union concerning the banking, credit, and stock market breakdowns.  Never has a response from the appropriate governing bodies been more disorganized, full of mixed messages and working at cross purposes with the member states.  It's like watching The Three Stooges (France, Germany & Italy) play musical chairs blindfolded with no clothes on.  What an unprecedented spectacle, and in plain view for the entire world to watch!  This will undoubtedly put the brakes on the concretizing of a North American Union and their planned currency - the Amero.  Praise the Lord!  
       As a matter of fact, all of the financial unions and economic superstates (e.g. European Union; Southeast Asian Association for Regional Cooperation; Union of South American Nations) that have been created over the past many years will, by sheer necessity and desperation, be forced to re-organize themselves in the coming months and years.  Even South America, which has two distinct camps that are constantly gummin' up the works for each other, will abandon their current emerging model in favor of one that enjoys complete freedom from its North American taskmaster.  To their credit, they have set the bar higher than it has ever been set concerning their strongly stated desire to be free of IMF and World Bank control.  Only Russia has exceeded their standards, as they had already been fleeced by the Oligarchs in what may very well be the grandest larceny of national wealth/resources in history.  This, of course, was preceded by a 75 year scourge of incessant rape, pillaging and plundering by the Bolsheviks and their Western financiers & handlers.  Clearly Mr. Putin will not allow a repeat of any such conduct within his borders, and the international persecution that he has suffered certainly reflects their displeasure and frustration with him.  No wonder Vladimir Putin is now considered a "reincarnation" of Peter the Great by his own people.
       The ruinous influence of these two globalization thugs (IMF & WB) can be instantly assessed by looking at the economic calamities they caused in Argentina (1999-2002), as well as in Thailand, South Korea & Indonesia during the 1997 Asian currency crisis.   Likewise, every nation in Africa that has chosen to take on their monetary yoke has only misery and war and financial oppression to show for it.  Wherever these 2 scrooges show their faces, it's quite like Ebenezer himself showing up to make a house call.  You know the patient will soon find himself in a pine box after all the gold fillings and rings have been removed.
       We have seen this globalization scam unfold in country after country, as a ruse to steal a nation's resources, always taking from those who have, and giving to those who want it.  In fact, an objective assessment of all the world's current conflicts would reveal that the vast majority are directly the result of this geo-political/commercial dynamic.  The privatization of water sources/bodies/supplies/rights is perhaps the most provocative and glaring, and can be found at the root of a number of these resource wars.  
       Clearly the verdict has been delivered:  Economies are much less vulnerable, the more locally they are positioned and the less centralized their decision-making process.  This arrangement affords much greater resiliency when dealing with the vicissitudes of the marketplace.  And it takes the power away from those who are insulated in ivory towers, and far from the plight of the common man.  It is time for everyone on the planet to "think globally; act locally".

    V.   Stock market will become extinct.  There is no greater tool at the disposal of those who can, and do, manipulate the various markets than the charade of "setting up" a formal system of trading, buying and selling of anything, as exemplified by the NYSE.  This is where it all happens.  From devastating whole national (and regional) economies, to toppling uncooperative corporate execs, to bringing 150 year old multi-billion $$$ companies to their knees within a week's time.  From triggering stockholder revolts, to propping up corporate raiders, to extorting billions from national and/or corporate treasuries.  They can, and do, do it all right there on the floor.
       Really, the very best example of what occurs in these speculative market exchanges is the gambling casino.  In Vegas, everyone knows that the house ALWAYS wins.  It never loses. Even when there is the appearance of losing, it still wins.  Go figure, but it's true. Your stockbroker is not too unlike the blackjack dealer.  And your financial planner is often a croupier in disguise.  So, the question remains, do you honestly know what your hard earned retirement money is invested in?  If not, this is a very good time to find out!!!
       For those of us who have been there, we know that whether you call it an oil bourse, a commodity exchange, or a bond market, you're still playing in a game that can go against you at any time.  Wipe out your earnings in a heartbeat; devour your principal in a flash.  It's often been said that when he comes, "he comes like a thief in the night".  Do you still feel you know where your entire life savings is currently residing?
       The derivatives market represents the single greatest threat to worldwide economic stability and financial security.  It poses such great potential for financial abuse and economic devastation that the current institutional arrangements of this commercial realm have become completely unacceptable.  The alarming proliferation of hedge funds, as well as the growing number and variety of derivative instruments, has reached a critical mass that is incompatible with living a financially sound life on planet Earth.  Simply put, some of these instruments are so far from the street - economic reality - that they put into jeopardy all the hard work, which appears in the form of real goods and services, that is produced by any economy at any given time.  This predicament signifies a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to us all.  
       Remember - DERIVATIVES are the real megilla.  Derivatives, by their very nature, can be highly radioactive, and can go nuclear any time circumstances conspire in just the right, or wrong, way.  Those who control their destiny can, likewise, utilize their inherent threat as a means of conducting financial and economic terrorism anytime, anywhere completely under the radar screen.  It's time for them to go.  And we trust it's just a matter of execution at this point.    

    VI.   Mass Consumerism & Perpetual Economic Growth - the Fric & Frac of our Age - are history.  One need not look any further than the inside of one's own home to see the ravages of these adopted twins.  They own the bedroom, the living room, the family room and all the closets.  They've taken over the kitchen, the den and the garage, as well. Since their middle names are Amass and Accumulate, we can only imagine what might lay hidden in the attic, the basement and the shed.  
       Ever since they became the twin pillars of Kali Yuga's overarching philosophy of life, things started to really go to hell in a handbasket ... or rather gilded cage.  How so?  What else could one expect from a political economy that demands growth, necessitates growth and extols the virtues of growth at every turn (and on every other commercial and newscast).  Growth, at the expense of WHAT!!  We'll tell you what - Life!
       One of the most tragic parts of this ever-unfolding tragedy has been the dramatic change in the spirit of the people with whom these twins associate.  The very society loses its refinement, as the culture becomes debased.  Aren't so many things associated with Americana experienced as coarse, and crude, and crass?   Likewise, the nation, which was once known as the "land of the free; home of the brave", morphs into a country reviled for its unkindness, lack of compassion and cruelty.    Before anyone realizes, the citizenry is easily being herded, and then stampeded, into wars and conflict of every sort and kind.  
       What else could be expected when the meme of consumerism is subliminally implanted at such a young and tender age, and relentlessly reinforced from cradle to grave?  And, what does it really say about a society when all who belong to it are known as consumers. Kind of like little pac-men (and pac-women) gobbling up everything in sight.  Starts out with BIG Macs and 24 oz  cokes, then super-sized HUMMERS, then oil fields and gold mines and precious rainforests, and then whole countries.
       Likewise, in the corporate realm, any board director, company officer, division president, regional director, department manager, production supervisor, etc. will candidly speak to the greatest pressure in their lives.  More income, more sales, more profit, more production, more revenue - anything that will show an increase in year over year growth.  Always gotta GROW, even though yuv been out of puberty for 20 or 30 years!?
       Well, you can imagine that this state of affairs can only go on for so long.  As a matter of fact, this party's now over.  And the hangover is about to begin.  Perhaps it's time to send these twins on a permanent vacation to the waterless region.

    VII.   War, as a means of wealth creation, is now bankrupt.  War, as a means of conflict resolution, is over.  As a means to any end whatsoever, war is finished.  You get the picture, don't you?  War has outlived its usefulness, and has become as obsolete as the derivatives hawker.  There is simply no more place for it in civil society.  It's time for the curtain to fall on this show for the last time, and for all of its bad actors to hit the stage exit.
       It never was a legitimate policy for conflict resolution, as we know.  Virtually all conflicts and wars were manufactured in the boardrooms of the world.  And impeccably stage managed by the directors of the war studios.  Isn't the Iraq war a perfect example of this kind of terrible and awful-to-watch "B" movie?  
       Any deliberate, probing and unprejudiced analysis of all the major wars going back to the French Revolution will reveal an extraordinary degree of  carefully calculated and coordinated events leading up to the actual conflagrations we call war.  Just read the actual history that is only now beginning to surface, and you will reach this very same conclusion.
       War has consistently served its masters in three ways which no longer have relevance in an enlightened civilization: (i) population control (ii) artificial creation of wealth for the plutocracy (iii) imposition of a tyrannical order in the wake of the chaos that always results from war.  Population control in this context has different meanings.   The number of people who are systematically genocided, wantonly annihilated and deliberately infected with disease agents serve the purpose of population reduction.  Then there is the sheer terror of war and its effects on whole populations (see how easily controlled both the Germans and Japanese were after WWII).  "Order out of chaos" is made easy when all concerned parties have been faced with the extraordinary distraction, mayhem and pandemonium that war always brings.
       There are, of course, many other declared wars whose battlegrounds are far from the traditional battlefields of armed conflict.  The WAR on Drugs.  The WAR on Poverty.  The WAR on Crime.  The WAR on AIDS.  Just like the WAR on TERROR, all of these so called wars are entirely bogus and fabricated, as they all have consistently produced outcomes that are completely contrary to their stated purposes.  How so?  Because each of them has been designed, and engineered, to perpetuate and expand the status quo.  The War on Drugs, for instance, was designed in part to ensure that the opium (and all of its profitable derivatives) flows freely and efficiently from the poppy fields of Afghanistan to the targeted markets in America and elsewhere.  In this way, all clandestine US and foreign intelligence agencies/secrets services are able to fund their innumerable black operations without any congressional oversight or public scrutiny from the massive revenues generated that this perfectly controlled black market provides.  Oh, yes, did we forget to mention that most of these black ops are actually wars as well.  What a Racket?!  As Major General Smedley Butler once proclaimed to the world in his book: "WAR IS A RACKET."
       May the shadow governments of the warmongering and real Axis of Evil - the USA, the UK and Israel - truly imbibe the message contained in this ongoing proclamation: WAR is no longer an option.  For each of these nations is facing an economic armegeddon of staggering and unprecedented proportions.  When confronted with such an incapacitating monetary meltdown, the impulse (and subsequent orchestrated plan), historically, has been to provoke wars through false flag attacks/operations.  This knee-jerk, and carefully calculated, reaction will no longer work.  The consequential global financial apocalypse this time around will simply be too demanding and debilitating, especially for those who would attempt to plunge the planet into a WWIII scenario.  
       The 4th Reich has completely run its course.  This last covert phase of the "Holy Roman Empire" is finally over.  And it's now imperative that the maestro in `Rome' gets over it.  Let us once again proclaim, here and now, that: WAR HAS COME TO AN END.  

     VIII.   There is a very profound and significant connection between the US Government sponsored and staged terrorist attacks of 9/11/01 and the PRE-PLANNED Financial & Economic 9/11 of 2008 that may be difficult for many to fully embrace.  But here it goes:  
       The OMEN that 911 truly was, looks a little bit like THE LORD OF THE RINGS.
    Remember the Twin Towers?  When they came down in NYC, it was a message to humankind that the reign of the Almighty Dollar was coming to an end.  As a nation's currency goes, so goes its destiny.  Her financial strength and economic prowess were on the wane, and soon to be greatly diminished.  Just as the WTC (financial capital of the world) was pulverized into dust, the US Dollar would be swept into the ash heap of history.  Just as we see it collapsing all around us, exactly 7 years after the original 911 apocalyptic events.
       When the Ring of Power was finally destroyed, like the Pentagon (ring-shaped command center of the military-industrial complex) was mortally wounded and damaged, the message was equally clear.  Her military might and superior force would be reduced to rubble in the twinkling of an eye.  She would, likewise, soon see the demise of Her all-pervasive state sponsored terrorism.  This, because She had lost all moral ascendancy.  Besides, the empire could no longer be sustained politically, financially, practically or ethically, as the seeds of its own destruction had fully sprouted.  The most fatal seed grew into that extremely corrupt and predatory form of corporate, crony capitalism which was so socially unconscious, and so environmentally unaware, it was quite doomed from the very beginning.

        The GOOD NEWS is that this nation - its people - will now be compelled to beat their "swords into plowshares" and their "spears into pruning hooks".
       Just as the Phoenix rose from its ashes, so too will America ascend to even greater heights.  As long as She ascends with the guidance of the highest of ideals, loftiest of   principles and noblest of intentions.  And She reforms, and transforms Herself, in good faith, in earnest and with haste.  
       As a modern day prophet said in the days immediately following September 11, 2001:
    "America, Wake up ! ! !  Seize this God-given opportunity.  There is no more time to dally in fear and ignorance and greed.  For yours is a destiny that must serve as a beacon of Light and Hope and Peace to the world.  Make haste, the time is drawing nigh!"

    T. Anthony Michael    
    11/13/08

    Publication, posting and printing of this article is expressly authorized.


    Repent ye sinners! (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 04:04:09 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    As you've so eloquently stated here so many times (none / 0) (#26)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:52:21 PM EST
    "Just think of me, in the back of the room, grinning at you."

    Think of you? (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 04:04:41 PM EST
    Surely you jest.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, the possibility of you thinking (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 07:11:29 PM EST
    instead of regurgitating right-wing pap here and at your blog is risible ;)

    [ Parent ]
    Don't complain (none / 0) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 10:37:11 PM EST
    On some occasions I let some of your efforts be posted... Only Heaven knows why...

    [ Parent ]
    I'm just stating the facts (none / 0) (#37)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:51:06 PM EST
    You do enough complaining for 5 people both here and there, I wouldn't want you getting paranoid that  you might have a competitor in this line of endevour :>)

    [ Parent ]