1. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

WOW….let’s see Doc, let us see….

in the meantime you better start getting that ass preped for 2016. i’ve already started your fundraising…M&M’s, Peanut Chews, Crunch Bars, i got ‘em

2. Clifton Harrison wrote:

I keep hearing this, but I can’t help but think tha Obama is a good leader (based on his campaign strategy). He didn’t have hsi VP going rogue, any leaks by people within his camp. It appears to me that he runs a very tight ship, so my hope is leaning toward Obama using Emmanuel’s fierce reputation and guiding it in the direction Obama wants.

But we shall see

3. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

lol @ WYLTK. I agree — lets just sit back and watch this unfold. What’s more interesting to me is the possible appointment of Valerie Jarrett for his senate seat. I hear they are good friends but she initially started this whole subprime mortage fiasco. That raises more red flags than Emmanuel does for me.

I think its too early to start critiquing his decision. Can we at least wait until Jan 20th?

4. Rudy wrote:

It’s hard to implement change with the same old agents of Washington.

5. Cert Vibes wrote:

A theory may be that Obama chose Emmanuel to widen his already broad perspectives with an atypical democrat. Especially one he knows and trusts. A decision like this will only increase the number of Obama supporters, overall.

6. Mr. Rate wrote:

Valerie Jarrett started the subprime mortgage fiasco? That’s news to me. Can you cite your source?

7. anita wrote:

It amazed me that he wants to bail out the car industry… I’m in the car industry and so this economy has negatively affected my life, but even I don’t think that these bailouts are the right way to go… It screws with the natural order of industry… What happened to the survival of the fittest?

8. Tanya wrote:

I heard Emmanuel was a petite man (in structure/skinny) who curses alot! LOL I heard he drops the F-bomb after every word!

9. Tanya wrote:

Marc,

Did you doubt Clinton’s “progressive bona fides” when he appointed Dick Morris as his Chief Advisor???

(I do think Obezzy is a closet conservative though! Whoohoo, YES!)

10. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

Anita,

I disagree. I think Obama’s right about the auto industry. He’s not talking about a pure bailout, but a loan. I’m not crazy about helping them out, given their rejection of fuel efficiency standards, environmental considerations, etc. Still, with the right provisions, this may be the only way to go…

11. ChgoSista wrote:

Has anyone checked on Garrett?? Seriously! I’m afraid he’s in a dark room somewhere, in his drawers, rocking back and forth while sucking his thumb!

12. anita wrote:

And what happens when pratices don’t change, Marc? They use the money, like AIG, to continue their unsuccessful ways and means? How will they pay US back>

13. anita wrote:

The truth is AIG is like the phone scammers of the 1990’s. Once they realize they have successfully scammed the victim they go back again and again until they have drained that victims bank account. The victim is the U.S. Government and us. The car industry has realized the free money scam works and are trying to get some for themselves before the well has run dry. As soon as the car industry gets their share the unions, who at this very moments are waiting with mouths salivating, will make sure they get their take… WE ARE A GREEDY NATION!!! What happened to us? What have we become?
Chevrolet, Pontiac, Ford etc etc etc knew this day was coming and held the course steady and in fact fuel the SUV flames even as gas prices were rising. They had ample time to change course, create alternative powered vehicles and instead held loyal to huge gas corporations and unions. They are like the titanic who at the last moment tried to turn, but to no avail. “Oh industry, whatever will become of me?” They should have said that long before this day came. They chose not to. Bailouts will only delay the inevitable, and cause debt for our nation.

14. R.oB. wrote:

Well let’s see, Marc doesn’t like Rahm because he’s too conservative and the conservatives cried foul at his selection as well. Hmmm, sounds centrist to me. I’m very glad he’s not living up to your standards, Marc. We need good governance and compromise, not the left version of the Bush administration.

As for whether his choice is good or not, I’ll wait until I actually see how he moves. All this talk (present company excepted of course!) is absolute crap with conjecture substituting for facts. Obama is clearly at disciplined leader who sets the tone. He’s Rahm’s boss, not the other way around. Quite frankly in a town like Washington, Obama will need a pitbull to push his agenda. The left will fragment into various special interest and the right will be obstructionist. I assume Obama is adding a little stick to his bipartisanship carrot and putting people on notice: Don’t mistake kindness for weakness.

15. R.oB. wrote:

Anita, it’s the oldest trick in the book. Incompetent management holds innocent parties hostage (workers, suppliers, retirees) so they get rewards with no risk to themselves. It’s the entire justification for the $700B bailout. I’m looking for an updated edition for one of my favorite books, Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists. They predicted this interplay exactly.

16. anita wrote:

R.oB. Thanks for the book tip, I’ll pick it up for the plane ride this weekend ! I hate it when people try to talk to me on those things, lol

17. Ann wrote:

@Anita: I am very disgusted with AIG. I am ready for the government to pull the plug on them mutha suckas. They are intent to go on as business as usual. WE need to make an example out of them by voiding their bailout agreement.

18. Nubian King wrote:

The White House Chief of Staff manages and does not govern….I heard Garrett moved to Alaska to take a job with Palin.

19. anita wrote:

True he does not goevern, but he infulences, which can go farther AND DO MORE DAMAGE than governing.

20. DCI74 wrote:

Lol @ Chgo & NK. If Garrett packed up his stuff and moved to Alaska my guess is he picked up John, derek alexander and hotchocolateboy on the way lol. Maybe they are going to help Sarah & Todd with the whole Alaska Independence Party thing.

21. econwhat wrote:

Northern Siberia LOL Northern Siberia

22. natural nubian wrote:

Anita & Ann:
The govt bailing out institutions is much bigger than most can grasp. I don’t know if either of you work in the financial secotr, but I watch and mantain assest for mutual funds so I see first hand every day how much money is being lost vs retained. Right now the US Treasury is in such a bind that your idea of NOT bailing out AIG and other banks would completely destroy the US dollar (USD) as we know it.
Here is the cliftsnotes version:
AIG provides insurance for 90% of what americans need insured–cars, credit cards, houses, life policies, etc.
AIG made very bad financial decisions, causing these insurance plans to default. so the majority of what AIG has their name on (those cars, credit cards, houses, life policies, etc.) as a guarantor has lost value.
To really simplify this, with your credit card not having AIG guarantee funds, your line of credit means nothing ’cause the concept of a credit cards means you charge now to pay later. AIG guarantees the credit card company will get their money. Without any line of credit though, we’re all reduced to cash.

Now the bailout will give AIG money to make sure your items insured still have value. Once nothing major is purchased on credit, we’ll be a nation of cash-only. The new problem that’s happened is you must print dollars for all this bailing out, and as with anything in surplus, when u print too much, the value goes down, resulting in inflation.

So i understand both sides of the argument, but ultimately, i don’t want to carry a purse of cash on me because my debit/credit card will be non-existent. The bailout is necessary, but it is the provisions of the bailout that make no sense (but with politics, whatever does).

23. natural nubian wrote:

geeze, pardon the typos guys.
doc, edit button is way overdue.

24. DCI74 wrote:

Thanks for that breakdown nn but I have a question for you. How can the government just continue to print money with all these bailouts while we still have a rising federal deficit? Isn’t that really just getting credit on top of more credit? If the “real” money isn’t there doesn’t printing more money just dig an even larger hole?

25. ChgoSista wrote:

Nubian King–were u downtown at all today? My gig is a block west of the Kuczynski (sp.) fed bldg. and man, this morning, there were a GAJILLION police officers around the whole block cuz Obama, Biden and nem were meeting in there. Po-pos on ALL levels–city, state, federal–etc–I have never seen anything like it!

26. anita wrote:

The gov’t didn’t bail out all the dotcomer’s and cali had a recession and now they are fine. Cali is a small country and has survived. What’s the difference. It’s the ebb and flow of life. Yes I understand the monies have disappeared. I’m in the car industry, we can’t get a person financed unless the beacon is 720 or above, so trust me my paycheck has SUFFERED! But I didn’t complain when my purse was swollen, so why should I complain now?

27. DCI74 wrote:

So anita since you are in the car industry how do you feel about that possible bailout? 1 in 10 people have job in the auto industry and that’s a lot of people. Granted I don’t know what the alternative solution could be but I’m curious what you think since whatever happens will certainly affect you directly.

28. Nubian King wrote:

ChgoSis,
Yeah the Obama motorcade is constantly rolling. I hear that Hyde Park is on lock with much secret service, blocked-off streets and suspected undercover cops.

29. natural nubian wrote:

DC, that’s the problem with printing additional bills. The inflation level created spirals out of control and globally the USD has less and less of a value. So traveling abroad, travelers checks, any kind of currency exchange will be completely irrelevant. Nowadays the dollar has rebounded a little, but it is still a far cry from where it was before all the Lehman Bros/AIG *ish hit the fan.

Anita, the ’survival of the fittest’ mentality is ideal. But let’s put things into perspective ’cause folks have a strange tendency to not thinking things out and seeing the full extent of what happens. For instance, say we let the car dealerships sink. With business going under, employees are now unemployed. These ppl now have 2 options: return to school to learn something new, or remain in your field (auto/mechanic specialist) and wait for another job opportunity. Problem is, odds of you getting hire as well as admission into school boils down to competition. Before you were maybe one out of five ppl applying for the same job or spot in fall admissions. Now you’re one out of at least 100. Now I don’t know about you, but my undergrad GPA wasn’t that great. I mean I am a gator, but even now that means nothing ’cause I’m up against ivy league grads who have studied abroad, and mommies-n-daddies are in boosters clubs with the family name on the student center.

So yes, you weren’t complaining when your purse was swole. But trust me, it’s much bigger than not wanting to carry around cash. It’s more than even just an issue of the haves vs have nots, but the priveledged vs underpriveledged. If the the gov’t doesn’t step in and do something, I guarantee you you’ll be better off using monopoly money next time you go to the grocery store.

30. Miss Martin wrote:

please google zeitgeist addendum and watch…
money is NOT ‘real’….none of this (american $ + american economy) can keep going ‘as is’…america needs to be re-designed

31. DCI74 wrote:

And while your at it watch America: Freedom to Fascism, it touches on a lot of what zeigeist covers too.

32. Tanya wrote:

Anita,

Your #11 is excellent! Thanks for that perspective.

I was totally against the bailout from the beginning, and still am. However, would be kinda ok with the auto industry being assisted.

But if you, as someone who works in the industry, can view the bailout as delaying the inevitable, and not support it, that’s a dose of reality!

Thanks for accepting responsibility on behalf of the irresponsible corporate heads!

33. Tanya wrote:

R.oB.,

Your #12 is an excellent perspective as well! You know I’m hoping it all leans right, but you make a very good point!

PS – Did you see the “smoking gun” from Isaiah 33:22 I gave you on the other post?!?!?!

34. Tanya wrote:

natural nubian,

Thanks for the insight in #20! (there’s a lot of good stuff being tossed around on this post)

Rob & natural nubian,

As professionals in the financial field, considering that GM has dropped to $3, what are you guys doing??? Are you buying, selling, holding???

I’m sooooo tempted to buy in! I seriously doubt the government will ever allow them to fail! I think this could be a great opportunity to make a killing in the market!

What say you?!?!?!

35. R.oB. wrote:

natural nubian, you said it great. if it weren’t for AIG doing credit default swaps and/or reinsuring the rates on debt would be much higher. imagine the shrinkage in the economy when suddenly your rates on all your debt double. OOPS! urine icing on a feces cake!

DC, the money supply is what is affected when the Fed makes/prints more money. What happens when supply of something goes up with demand constant? It’s price goes down. So it takes more dollars to buy a given item. That’s the long term affect of printing money.

Tanya, I don’t play the market. Strictly buy and hold the market. Monkeys throwing darts at the WSJ stock page do better than 80% of fund managers. If I want to take risks, I’ll be an entrepreneur. Given this labor market, that might be sooner than later!

36. Shaheed79 wrote:

I’ve seen you on on O’Reilly a lot leading up to the election and had a great amount of respect for how you tried to debate O’Reilly who played the role of McCain and you as Obama. You seemed to try to cut through the all too common partisan lies and BS that plague our election process and stay in issue which impressed me initially.

As I have continued to see you on O’Reilly I would have mixed reactions to the way he was obviously using you to try and stoke the fires of racism and divide. Tonight it reached a breaking point when O’Reilly asked you to answer why gay protesters don’t protest in front of black churches in his all too familiar smugness. You replied as if your high school gym teacher were telling you to bend over and cough.

I have concluded that the O’Reilly factor uses you as a stooge for whatever his agenda is. Apparently you are either oblivious of this, which I highly doubt, or you know that you are being used and figured that at least you stand a chance to soften the blow of the racist propaganda that continues to prevail at Fox. Either way you should not make it easier in helping their agenda whatever your personal political views may be.

Quit Fox, please, before it’s too late.

37. anita wrote:

Trust me when I say I’m scared about the fate of my life after the car industry. I lost my job earlier this year from fears of all this coming to fruition. Luckily I was able to find another job relitively quickly. I have a house, all on my own, that has gone down in value since I purchased it a year ago. I have a SUV. I have no husband to fall back on, like my sisters. My parents are trying to retire and just watched their savings, once again, plummet in the market. I wish things were better for us all. And I believe it will be, eventually. We just got to get through this. It’s like coming out of a bad relationship, it’s easier to stay but staying is so not worth the consequences.

38. DCI74 wrote:

Tanya I’m not messing with any GM stocks regardless of the price. If they go bankrupt consumer surveys say that people won’t be interested in buying their cars then I’d be stuck with worthless stocks and even if they get part of that $25 billion bailout it still might not be enough to save them.

R.oB. I get that because in real estate supply and demand works the same way. What I don’t get is how you print more of something that technically doesn’t even exist.

39. DCI74 wrote:

That makes sense anita. So which are you in favor of, the auto industry filing Chapter 11 or getting a government bailout?

40. anita wrote:

It’s hard to not want a bailout, I love my job and am currently at a GMAC dealership and so it will be rough without one… but that’s not the solution. Big brother can’t bail everything out. I hate consequences…but it’s time we face them head on. Companies don’t change overnight, I know i’m beating a dead horse by refering to AIG, but it proves my point. The business choices they made that got them into the position before the bailout are the same choices they are making today. It would be the same for the auto industry.

41. Ann wrote:

Natural Nubian I am a banking executive and have been for the past 13 years. I know first hand how the credit market works and still dont give a damn about AIG. I supported the bailing out of AIG and the banking systems but at this point in the game I dont want to be held hostage to the likes of AIG. When do we say enough is enough? Maybe we all need to be taught a lesson.

42. Ann wrote:

I had to come back and say at my bank- I actually work for a bank holding company- we took a hard hit when a major car dealership folded a few months ago and as a senior bank auditor we constantly warned our Senior Loan Executives about the risky assets that we were holding in that loan portfolio but it was business as usual becuase that company had been in business over 75 years and a customer just as long but “the friends of the bank” just cost us to take a huge hit that our current loan reserves won’t cover.

So I think my frustration is with the executives in charge. The corporate culture has to change and until it does I dont want any of those mofos sipping mojitos off my dollar.

43. anita wrote:

Ann-The car dealer I worked for earlier this year had six dealerships, now he has one. The banks knew the deals were shady and ate them up anyway. (I was frustrated with the bank and the dealership management. They threw shit on the wall to see what would stick, so I know were you’re coming from.) Everyone profited and now they want help out of a bad situation. EXCUSE ME? My mom would slap me into next week if I expected someone to help me out of a situation I created. Who raised these people? *i’m adding this to the list of reasons why i won’t have children*

44. natural nubian wrote:

Ann I understand many folks, including insiders like you and me, want a firm to be made an example of to show the rest of the wall street that you cannot abuse the common man for your own personal gain. But the line must be drawn when it comes down to the mentality of “let them all defeat themselves.” As a banking exec you should have some understanding of how these markets work, and how we’re on such a vast global scale like never before. So if you want a firm to fall, let Lehman go. But I don’t want my 401k to have less of a market value than a mexican peso ’cause you want the #1 global insurance agency to go bankrupt and out of business. I’m 24 so I have some time, but I feel for those who are close to retirement whose insurance policies have dwindled, and folks still rootin’ for AIG to sink.

45. Logic wrote:

Its easy to say “let the industry fall off the cliff” but keep in mind that we are tied to the hip of the industry, if they go, we go. The more pragmatic thing to do would be to save the automakers (in effect saving ourselves) and then put up a fence i.e. regulations (so that they can’t do this again). Like my analogy?

46. natural nubian wrote:

And I can’t say where I work, but the more you understand who’s in charge and their work background, the more the Lehman Bro not getting a free pass like B.Stearns did makes sense. I always tell folks to understand these ppl in gov’t, ESPECIALLY those within the financial & US Treasury sector, have connections like no other. Everytime you hear on the news ’so-n-so is former CEO of firm ABC’ pay attention to who they use on their staff and what money suddenly is available for which firms. If anything, I am against former CEOs making bailout decisions “on behalf of the gov’t”. You know good-n-well you got your hand still in that firm’s money bag, and you need to save your own investment!

I completely agree the structure and design of what we know needs to be drastically changed. So back to Obama choosing Rahm Emmanuel for chief of staff, I’m just interested on Emmanuel’s background. I guess one good thing that brings some reassurance is his last name means “God is with us.”

47. anita wrote:

Logic- Who will put up that fence and do the maintenance required on it to verify that the fence keeps us all safe? The gov’t? yeah, that would work, yeah right. The gov’t is full of the former execs that started the problem to begin with… what a twisted web we weave…

48. Ann wrote:

Anita I bet you work for the dealership I am talking about. The company that folded had dealerships all over Ga, Fl, Tx, NV and Tn…..

NN: I am not the only one who feels betrayed, hurt, and angy at the continued extravagance that AIG executives are flaunting in the tax payers faces. I wish I was a shareholder…hmph…the board would hear from me..

49. Ann wrote:

and yes I know the importance of AIG but it aint gonna stop me from bashing them…I could go on and on…

50. natural nubian wrote:

Oh, and DC, can’t tell u what stock to buy, sell, or hold. But you’re young and (God willing) have time on your side. If you don’t do anything else, definitely BUY! Like everything economical, there’s a cycle. Some of the wealthiest men right now are buying because they understand exactly how these cycles happen. So if you can get basic stk w/companies like walmart, coca cola, mcdonalds, P&G, etc which may be undervalued, buy it now ’cause I predict if not mid way thru, but at the end of obama’s prez term, you’ll have a nice lil cushion of money from the stk price growth. it’s all about the cycle and either being a part of it or ahead of it.

51. natural nubian wrote:

my bad, sorry for the shorthand guys. “stk” = stock.

52. Logic wrote:

Gov’ment regulations would work if they had the right people in charge of the regulatory agencies. I honestly think an Obama administration will clean up most of the gov’ment beuracracy that holds everything back. Pure capitalism doesn’t work. There, I said it. Does that make me a socialist?

53. anita wrote:

Ann- Does the company your talking about also have a FL politician as one of the partner/owners? Then yes, we are talking about the same company…

54. anita wrote:

What will be will be. I’m sure by the time it’s said and done every company in America will have been bailed out… and prices will go up and we’ll need our own bailout plan. Like I say at work all the time, the big guys ask my opinion but at the end of the day they’re gonna do what they want anyway, what’s the point.

55. DCI74 wrote:

Thanks nn I’ll keep that in mind.

56. R.oB. wrote:

NN, I agree we can’t be damn them all to hell in these industries. We are just too interconnected and means that we are cutting off our nose to spite our face. Quick question: if I were forced to make stock plays, would you go with strict dividend payers a la Wisdom Tree? I must say that if I had to invest with another strategy, that seems reasonable enough and less like active management divination.

DC, the Fed creates money through market actions. Buying treasuries in the open market, they pay with created money. that money is fiat money, meaning that it can be used as “legal tender.” That means it’s not a worthless peace of cotton paper because the US government says so. People them exchange goods based on the government saying so.

57. Tanya wrote:

I just purchased 1,000 shares of GM today! Let’s see where this goes!

(What can I say, I’m a risk taker! Although, I really don’t think this was that risky! We’ll see!)

58. Reginald James wrote:

Obama kissed the ring of the Daley Machine, then he bowed to the Pro-Zionist lobby.
I’m still rolling with Cynthia. Slapping police all day.

59. anita wrote:

http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/topstocks/archive/2008/11/17/why-a-bailout-won-t-save-detroit.aspx

This is about how the bailout will not end the problems for the big three…

60. zxcz23 wrote:

Thank you for this new health but i need more info.,