Global Correction

[Naam]

the current global derivative market exposure is $47 TRILLION, good luck

you forgot quite a few global derivatives Bingo.

NEW YORK, Wednesday, September 24, 2008 – The International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) today announced the results of its Mid-Year 2008 Market Survey of privately negotiated derivatives.

Notional amount outstanding of interest rate derivatives, which include interest rate swaps and options and cross-currency swaps, grew by 22 percent to $464.7 trillion from $382.3 trillion. This compares with 10 percent growth from $347.1 trillion during the second half of 2007. The annual growth rate for interest rate derivatives to mid-2008 is 34 percent to $464.7 trillion from $347.1 trillion in mid-2007.

http://isda.org/

[glyph]

Hey, he was off only by a factor of 10!!

[cclub75]

Notional amount outstanding of interest rate derivatives, which include interest rate swaps and options and cross-currency swaps, grew by 22 percent to $464.7 trillion from $382.3 trillion. This compares with 10 percent growth from $347.1 trillion during the second half of 2007. The annual growth rate for interest rate derivatives to mid-2008 is 34 percent to $464.7 trillion from $347.1 trillion in mid-2007.

What is interesting too is the details : on those 464, 54 are for credit derivative... And I think this is the key.

Furthermore, the last sentence is highly ironic... and terrifying as well : "The above notional amounts, which total $531.2 trillion across asset classes, are an approximate measure of derivatives activity, and reflect both new transactions and existing transactions. The amounts, however, are a measure of activity, not a measure of risk. "

To play with 54 000 billions in credit derivative (based on credit, therefore on risk) is... not a risk... just a mere measure of activity.

It's good to play with words too...

Edited September 25, 2008 by cclub75

[LaoPo]

Latest news:

No deal reached at White House, officials say

By Greg Robb

Last update: 5:27 p.m. EDT Sept. 25, 2008 That's 04.27AM Thai Time, Sept. 26, 2008; a few hours before the Asian/Pacific markets open...

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- President Bush was unable to seal a deal between Republicans and Democrats on his $700 billion mortgage rescue plan, officials said. "It was not a negotiating session," said House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer.

The two presidential candidates, Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barak Obama, attended the meeting but left the White House without talking to reporters.

A revolt among House Republicans appears to have emerged as the key stumbling block.

Hoyer said that some plans have recently been put on the table that even Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson hasn't seen. "On our side, there is a consensus on how to go forward, we'll have to see if that consensus can grow," Hoyer said. It was up to Bush to talk to Republicans, he added.

The Wall Street Journal/MarketWatch

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/no-d...E-CECC019DBD15}

LaoPo

Edited September 25, 2008 by LaoPo

[cclub75]

Latest news:

Come on LaoPo don't be disappointed !

It's a very good news.

Some members of the Senate showing moral strength, it's indeed a good news.

I'm thinking about all the suckers who believed today, on Wall Street and in Europe, the headlines "deal almost done", "plan soon to be voted" blablabla... It's hilarious.

Bloody red again tomorrow, all over the markets.

[LaoPo]

Latest news:

Come on LaoPo don't be disappointed !

It's a very good news.

Some members of the Senate showing moral strength, it's indeed a good news.

I'm thinking about all the suckers who believed today, on Wall Street and in Europe, the headlines "deal almost done", "plan soon to be voted" blablabla... It's hilarious.

Bloody red again tomorrow, all over the markets.

Me, Sir..............disappointed ?

OK, what do YOU think...will the debate take place tomorrow ? It's all in the game and election time

I'd say McCain is wetting his pants for this debate.....

LaoPo

[flying]

OK, what do YOU think...will the debate take place tomorrow ? It's all in the game and election time

I'd say McCain is wetting his pants for this debate.....

LaoPo

Last I heard McCain said he was too busy Did he change his mind?....again?

[LaoPo]

OK, what do YOU think...will the debate take place tomorrow ? It's all in the game and election time

I'd say McCain is wetting his pants for this debate.....

LaoPo

Last I heard McCain said he was too busy Did he change his mind?....again?

The point with McCain is that he said (so say the media) that he first wants to see the WHITE SMOKE coming out of the White House's Chimney (like a new Pope in the Vatican) that there is a MUTUAL deal, agreed by the 2 parties.....but......there seems to be a plan ($ 250 Billion immediately and $ 100 Billion later and the 2nd part of the 700 Billion AFTER new political negotiations).....but some hardliners within the Republican Party who are warned by their 'backbones' at home (who say they will not vote for them anymore) are reluctant to sign or agree upon the mutual deal.

It's election time...

Obama wants to continue with the debate but both are in Washington now, whilst the debate is tomorrow night in Missisippi....

The clock is ticking...and in FACT there is no WHITE SMOKE yet, coming out of the Chimney....

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Last Update at 6.13PM EDT - USA That's 5,13AM Sept. 26 -2008 THAI Time

Dodd says White House meeting was a disaster

By Greg Robb

Last update: 6:13 p.m. EDT Sept. 25, 2008

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Sen. Chris Dodd, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, said Thursday that bipartisan meeting with President Bush at the White House on the mortgage rescue plan was nothing short of a disaster.

In an interview on the CNN cable news network, Dodd described a meeting in which Democrats were blindsided by a new core mortgage proposal from House Republicans, with the tacit backing of Republican presidential candidate John McCain. "I am not going to sign on to something I just saw this afternoon," he said.

Dodd said Republicans and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson had to decide what they wanted to support. The whole meeting "looked like a rescue plan for John McCain," Dodd said. He said he was simply going to pretend that the meeting had never happened.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/dodd...0-751A5259D7F4}

LaoPo

[Wrong Turn]

LaoPo[/color]

After reading the post cut and paste about the "republican revolt" and now reading this, I am assuming that election-year politics are playing a part in this.

With the public angry about this, and a 1/3 of the House and a 1/3 of the Senate up for re-election in 37 days, people are maneuvering carefully on this.

[teatree]

Republican Senator Richard Shelby explained that a major reason why there is no deal so far is that 192 top economists (including 3 nobel prize winners) have signed a letter saying that the plan could be fatal to the US economy:

To the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate:

As economists, we want to express to Congress our great concern for the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Paulson to deal with the financial crisis. We are well aware of the difficulty of the current financial situation and we agree with the need for bold action to ensure that the financial system continues to function. We see three fatal pitfalls in the currently proposed plan:

1) Its fairness. The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayers’ expense. Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses. Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise.

2) Its ambiguity. Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear. If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards.

3) Its long-term effects. If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, America's dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.

For these reasons we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.

Signed

Acemoglu Daron (Massachussets Institute of Technology)

Adler Michael (Columbia University)

Admati Anat R. (Stanford University)

Alexis Marcus (Northwestern University)

Alvarez Fernando (University of Chicago)

Andersen Torben (Northwestern University)

Baliga Sandeep (Northwestern University)

Banerjee Abhijit V. (Massachussets Institute of Technology)

Barankay Iwan (University of Pennsylvania)

Barry Brian (University of Chicago)

Bartkus James R. (Xavier University of Louisiana)

Becker Charles M. (Duke University)

Becker Robert A. (Indiana University)

Beim David (Columbia University)

Berk Jonathan (Stanford University)

Bisin Alberto (New York University)

Bittlingmayer George (University of Kansas)

Boldrin Michele (Washington University)

Brooks Taggert J. (University of Wisconsin)

Brynjolfsson Erik (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Buera Francisco J. (UCLA)

Camp Mary Elizabeth (Indiana University)

Carmel Jonathan (University of Michigan)

Carroll Christopher (Johns Hopkins University)

Cassar Gavin (University of Pennsylvania)

Chaney Thomas (University of Chicago)

Chari Varadarajan V. (University of Minnesota)

Chauvin Keith W. (University of Kansas)

Chintagunta Pradeep K. (University of Chicago)

Christiano Lawrence J. (Northwestern University)

Cochrane John (University of Chicago)

Coleman John (Duke University)

Constantinides George M. (University of Chicago)

Crain Robert (UC Berkeley)

Culp Christopher (University of Chicago)

Da Zhi (University of Notre Dame)

Davis Morris (University of Wisconsin)

De Marzo Peter (Stanford University)

Dubé Jean-Pierre H. (University of Chicago)

Edlin Aaron (UC Berkeley)

Eichenbaum Martin (Northwestern University)

Ely Jeffrey (Northwestern University)

Eraslan Hülya K. K.(Johns Hopkins University)

Faulhaber Gerald (University of Pennsylvania)

Feldmann Sven (University of Melbourne)

Fernandez-Villaverde Jesus (University of Pennsylvania)

Fohlin Caroline (Johns Hopkins University)

Fox Jeremy T. (University of Chicago)

Frank Murray Z.(University of Minnesota)

Frenzen Jonathan (University of Chicago)

Fuchs William (University of Chicago)

Fudenberg Drew (Harvard University)

Gabaix Xavier (New York University)

Gao Paul (Notre Dame University)

Garicano Luis (University of Chicago)

Gerakos Joseph J. (University of Chicago)

Gibbs Michael (University of Chicago)

Glomm Gerhard (Indiana University)

Goettler Ron (University of Chicago)

Goldin Claudia (Harvard University)

Gordon Robert J. (Northwestern University)

Greenstone Michael (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Guadalupe Maria (Columbia University)

Guerrieri Veronica (University of Chicago)

Hagerty Kathleen (Northwestern University)

Hamada Robert S. (University of Chicago)

Hansen Lars (University of Chicago)

Harris Milton (University of Chicago)

Hart Oliver (Harvard University)

Hazlett Thomas W. (George Mason University)

Heaton John (University of Chicago)

Heckman James (University of Chicago - Nobel Laureate)

Henderson David R. (Hoover Institution)

Henisz, Witold (University of Pennsylvania)

Hertzberg Andrew (Columbia University)

Hite Gailen (Columbia University)

Hitsch Günter J. (University of Chicago)

Hodrick Robert J. (Columbia University)

Hopenhayn Hugo (UCLA)

Hurst Erik (University of Chicago)

Imrohoroglu Ayse (University of Southern California)

Isakson Hans (University of Northern Iowa)

Israel Ronen (London Business School)

Jaffee Dwight M. (UC Berkeley)

Jagannathan Ravi (Northwestern University)

Jenter Dirk (Stanford University)

Jones Charles M. (Columbia Business School)

Kaboski Joseph P. (Ohio State University)

Kahn Matthew (UCLA)

Kaplan Ethan (Stockholm University)

Karolyi, Andrew (Ohio State University)

Kashyap Anil (University of Chicago)

Keim Donald B (University of Pennsylvania)

Ketkar Suhas L (Vanderbilt University)

Kiesling Lynne (Northwestern University)

Klenow Pete (Stanford University)

Koch Paul (University of Kansas)

Kocherlakota Narayana (University of Minnesota)

Koijen Ralph S.J. (University of Chicago)

Kondo Jiro (Northwestern University)

Korteweg Arthur (Stanford University)

Kortum Samuel (University of Chicago)

Krueger Dirk (University of Pennsylvania)

Ledesma Patricia (Northwestern University)

Lee Lung-fei (Ohio State University)

Leeper Eric M. (Indiana University)

Leuz Christian (University of Chicago)

Levine David I.(UC Berkeley)

Levine David K.(Washington University)

Levy David M. (George Mason University)

Linnainmaa Juhani (University of Chicago)

Lott John R. Jr. (University of Maryland)

Lucas Robert (University of Chicago - Nobel Laureate)

Luttmer Erzo G.J. (University of Minnesota)

Manski Charles F. (Northwestern University)

Martin Ian (Stanford University)

Mayer Christopher (Columbia University)

Mazzeo Michael (Northwestern University)

McDonald Robert (Northwestern University)

Meadow Scott F. (University of Chicago)

Mehra Rajnish (UC Santa Barbara)

Mian Atif (University of Chicago)

Middlebrook Art (University of Chicago)

Miguel Edward (UC Berkeley)

Miravete Eugenio J. (University of Texas at Austin)

Miron Jeffrey (Harvard University)

Moretti Enrico (UC Berkeley)

Moriguchi Chiaki (Northwestern University)

Moro Andrea (Vanderbilt University)

Morse Adair (University of Chicago)

Mortensen Dale T. (Northwestern University)

Mortimer Julie Holland (Harvard University)

Muralidharan Karthik (UC San Diego)

Nanda Dhananjay (University of Miami)

Nevo Aviv (Northwestern University)

Ohanian Lee (UCLA)

Pagliari Joseph (University of Chicago)

Papanikolaou Dimitris (Northwestern University)

Parker Jonathan (Northwestern University)

Paul Evans (Ohio State University)

Pejovich Svetozar (Steve) (Texas A&M University)

Peltzman Sam (University of Chicago)

Perri Fabrizio (University of Minnesota)

Phelan Christopher (University of Minnesota)

Piazzesi Monika (Stanford University)

Piskorski Tomasz (Columbia University)

Rampini Adriano (Duke University)

Reagan Patricia (Ohio State University)

Reich Michael (UC Berkeley)

Reuben Ernesto (Northwestern University)

Roberts Michael (University of Pennsylvania)

Robinson David (Duke University)

Rogers Michele (Northwestern University)

Rotella Elyce (Indiana University)

Ruud Paul (Vassar College)

Safford Sean (University of Chicago)

Sandbu Martin E. (University of Pennsylvania)

Sapienza Paola (Northwestern University)

Savor Pavel (University of Pennsylvania)

Scharfstein David (Harvard University)

Seim Katja (University of Pennsylvania)

Seru Amit (University of Chicago)

Shang-Jin Wei (Columbia University)

Shimer Robert (University of Chicago)

Shore Stephen H. (Johns Hopkins University)

Siegel Ron (Northwestern University)

Smith David C. (University of Virginia)

Smith Vernon L.(Chapman University- Nobel Laureate)

Sorensen Morten (Columbia University)

Spiegel Matthew (Yale University)

Stevenson Betsey (University of Pennsylvania)

Stokey Nancy (University of Chicago)

Strahan Philip (Boston College)

Strebulaev Ilya (Stanford University)

Sufi Amir (University of Chicago)

Tabarrok Alex (George Mason University)

Taylor Alan M. (UC Davis)

Thompson Tim (Northwestern University)

Tschoegl Adrian E. (University of Pennsylvania)

Uhlig Harald (University of Chicago)

Ulrich, Maxim (Columbia University)

Van Buskirk Andrew (University of Chicago)

Veronesi Pietro (University of Chicago)

Vissing-Jorgensen Annette (Northwestern University)

Wacziarg Romain (UCLA)

Weill Pierre-Olivier (UCLA)

Williamson Samuel H. (Miami University)

Witte Mark (Northwestern University)

Wolfers Justin (University of Pennsylvania)

Woutersen Tiemen (Johns Hopkins University)

Zingales Luigi (University of Chicago)

Zitzewitz Eric (Dartmouth College)

[Scott]

I wonder if this is a case of Nero fiddling while Rome burns--or maybe the fire started a long time ago and some just got around to calling the fire department!

I am not an economist, but the situation is scary. In the past 20 years, I can count on one hand the number of times I've heard the Great Depression mentioned by anyone, anywhere. You don't read about it any more and other than history books it seems long forgotten--until last week. Now I can't count the number of times I've heard some reference to it. Quite scary.

[lannarebirth]

Here's my take. Equity markets could be cut in half from here and there still wouldn't be much "value" there. If nothing else, this grand clusterfuc_k should be pointing out to people they had no business being in such risky investments. Unfortunately, not content to take the risk inherent in their choices, they've managed to drag in all manner of "safer" investment paths into the mix.

[BEENTHEREDONETHAT]

Teatree.............That is one impressive letter. I don't see how that can be ignored by the house and senate and if it is, those who vote for the bail out should be voted out of office.

[glyph]

For years, Bush43 and the Congress has allowed the "mortgage crisis" to fester. Now htat it's an election year, it's time for them to try to look like leaders. Ha! Bush lied about Iraq's WMD, and he is doing the same trying to use 700B to save his friends.

On another note...adjusted for inflation, the entire WWII episode cost the US $5 trillion, and that's LESS than what Bush43 has committed for the war on Iraq.

Finally, teatree, you've added your opinion which had nothing to do with the letter that you posted. You opined that the bailout "could be fatal to the US economy", but nothing of the sort was in the signed letter. How do account for that?

Edited September 26, 2008 by glyph

[midas]

Here's my take. Equity markets could be cut in half from here and there still wouldn't be much "value" there. If nothing else, this grand clusterfuc_k should be pointing out to people they had no business being in such risky investments. Unfortunately, not content to take the risk inherent in their choices, they've managed to drag in all manner of "safer" investment paths into the mix.

lannarebirth " Equity markets could be cut in half from here " - GULP .............! that is scary and and do you thing that

could also mean a catastrophic run on the banks ............?

[Naam]

Finally, teatree, you've added your opinion which had nothing to do with the letter that you posted. You opined that the bailout "could be fatal to the US economy", but nothing of the sort was in the signed letter. How do account for that?

with some phantasy one could derive that from #3 in the letter in context with "fatal pitfalls". my question is "why didn't these top economists come up with an alternative or at least pointing in the direction of an alternative?"

i am not in favour of the Bush administration but what is needed now is action instead of partisan bickering and dilly-dallying with a look over the shoulder what U.S. voters might think.

[lannarebirth]

Here's my take. Equity markets could be cut in half from here and there still wouldn't be much "value" there. If nothing else, this grand clusterfuc_k should be pointing out to people they had no business being in such risky investments. Unfortunately, not content to take the risk inherent in their choices, they've managed to drag in all manner of "safer" investment paths into the mix.

lannarebirth " Equity markets could be cut in half from here " - GULP .............! that is scary and and do you thing that

could also mean a catastrophic run on the banks ............?

I don't know midas, I'm the wrong one to ask. I always think equity markets could get cut in half, as I almost never see any value in owning stocks.

Ever own a business? I have. Go to a business broker sometime and see what kind of P/Earnings, P/Sales, P x Revenues, etc YOUR business would command. It's a fraction of what the compaies on Wall Street sell for. You can't issue new stock, pay high salaries when your company didn't make any money etc. To me it's all a scam, but of course I'm a little conservative in my risk aversion.

[cclub75]

The Market Is Healthy.

The drama continues, and it's getting very exciting. Almost no one has noticed the bankruptcy of Washington Mututal last night ! One more. Who cares ?

The banksters are doing a great job. Meanwhile, the gogos continue to wonder : "hum it might be a good entry point in the market. Should I stay or should I go ?".

It's not the Magnificient Seven. Not even London Calling... But it's certainly The Clash.

It's hilarious.

And what is even more hilarious is that McCain is probably loosing the elections... right now. Game over.

Meanwhile, the BOT is ready to "provide liquidities"... Apparently they are not fed up (yet) to copycat their friends at the FED, ECB etc.

The pathetic shadow theatre shall continue. And we need more pop corn.

Edited September 26, 2008 by cclub75

[midas]

Here's my take. Equity markets could be cut in half from here and there still wouldn't be much "value" there. If nothing else, this grand clusterfuc_k should be pointing out to people they had no business being in such risky investments. Unfortunately, not content to take the risk inherent in their choices, they've managed to drag in all manner of "safer" investment paths into the mix.

lannarebirth " Equity markets could be cut in half from here " - GULP .............! that is scary and and do you thing that

could also mean a catastrophic run on the banks ............?

I don't know midas, I'm the wrong one to ask. I always think equity markets could get cut in half, as I almost never see any value in owning stocks.

Ever own a business? I have. Go to a business broker sometime and see what kind of P/Earnings, P/Sales, P x Revenues, etc YOUR business would command. It's a fraction of what the compaies on Wall Street sell for. You can't issue new stock, pay high salaries when your company didn't make any money etc. To me it's all a scam, but of course I'm a little conservative in my risk aversion.

Yes I did own a business and I always remember within the first six months having run up a sizable

overdraft that after receiving my first big cheque it all went back to pay off my debt that after that

everything just went smoothly. But that's the way it should have been.

On BBC World they were just commenting how in France a mortgage is based on a maximum

of 30% of one's salary and also with a 20 percent deposit !

How did UK and USA go off the rails so badly ?!!

[Naam]

On BBC World they were just commenting how in France a mortgage is based on a maximum

of 30% of one's salary and also with a 20 percent deposit !

go to Germany and try to buy property with less than 35 (in many cases even 40%) down. the bankers will smile and tell you "come back in a few years after you have increased your savings."

[bingobongo]

oh my

[VegasVic]

The Market Is Healthy.

The drama continues, and it's getting very exciting. Almost no one has noticed the bankruptcy of Washington Mututal last night ! One more. Who cares ?

The banksters are doing a great job. Meanwhile, the gogos continue to wonder : "hum it might be a good entry point in the market. Should I stay or should I go ?".

It's not the Magnificient Seven. Not even London Calling... But it's certainly The Clash.

It's hilarious.

And what is even more hilarious is that McCain is probably loosing the elections... right now. Game over.

Meanwhile, the BOT is ready to "provide liquidities"... Apparently they are not fed up (yet) to copycat their friends at the FED, ECB etc.

The pathetic shadow theatre shall continue. And we need more pop corn.

Relax Cclub, I am watching the debate as I post here (the first hour just finished) and McCain is kicking but, Obama sems to be rattled more often than not. Its actually kind of surprising because I though this kind of format would benefit Obama greatly. Anyway the second half has started so I must go and get my popcorn!!!

[siamamerican]

Teatree.............That is one impressive letter. I don't see how that can be ignored by the house and senate and if it is, those who vote for the bail out should be voted out of office.

In this day in age having 192 “ACEDEMICS” sign a letter stating that the plan “COULD” be fatal is a simple process. Send a mass email out to all the university professors and a small minority will sign on.

Send out another mass email to the same audience, stating that those earning over $250k should pay taxes of 80% on all dollars earned over $250k. Again, I assume, a small minority, but probably greater than 192 would sign on. Fortunately this isn't how decisions are made.

[OlRedEyes]

Been watching this scenario developing for some 18+ months now, with great trepidation. The dominoes have been slow to start falling, but it is still just in the beginning stages of falling. Cannot see their rescue plan helping much. Many hands on deck suddenly, running around feverishly shouting 'we're gonna hit the iceberg'. Too late to do anything about it really, isn't it.

If a 'rescue plan' is agreed and adopted, the markets will probably react a little positively for a short while. The calm before the real storm. I'm 99% sure there's gonna be plenty of blood on the streets, worldwide. I desperately hope that I am wrong.

Great depression? This time round it'll be worse.

And it won't stay in the financial arena.

[midas]

Teatree.............That is one impressive letter. I don't see how that can be ignored by the house and senate and if it is, those who vote for the bail out should be voted out of office.

In this day in age having 192 “ACEDEMICS” sign a letter stating that the plan “COULD” be fatal is a simple process. Send a mass email out to all the university professors and a small minority will sign on.

Send out another mass email to the same audience, stating that those earning over $250k should pay taxes of 80% on all dollars earned over $250k. Again, I assume, a small minority, but probably greater than 192 would sign on. Fortunately this isn't how decisions are made.

How many " university professors " do you need then to convince you?

[BEENTHEREDONETHAT]

Teatree.............That is one impressive letter. I don't see how that can be ignored by the house and senate and if it is, those who vote for the bail out should be voted out of office.

In this day in age having 192 "ACEDEMICS" sign a letter stating that the plan "COULD" be fatal is a simple process. Send a mass email out to all the university professors and a small minority will sign on.

Send out another mass email to the same audience, stating that those earning over $250k should pay taxes of 80% on all dollars earned over $250k. Again, I assume, a small minority, but probably greater than 192 would sign on. Fortunately this isn't how decisions are made.

Guess I am having one of my dense days, but why are they signing the letter? Or are you infering that they are not bright enough to check the source and content of the letter before signing. If that is true the US education system is in really deep trouble.

[siamamerican]

Teatree.............That is one impressive letter. I don't see how that can be ignored by the house and senate and if it is, those who vote for the bail out should be voted out of office.

In this day in age having 192 "ACEDEMICS" sign a letter stating that the plan "COULD" be fatal is a simple process. Send a mass email out to all the university professors and a small minority will sign on.

Send out another mass email to the same audience, stating that those earning over $250k should pay taxes of 80% on all dollars earned over $250k. Again, I assume, a small minority, but probably greater than 192 would sign on. Fortunately this isn't how decisions are made.

Guess I am having one of my dense days, but why are they signing the letter? Or are you infering that they are not bright enough to check the source and content of the letter before signing. If that is true the US education system is in really deep trouble.

I have no clue why they are signing the letter. I assume the reason being that they have reservations. They have opinions and 192 is a small minority. Another mass email could be sent out to top economists listing the strenghs of the plan and IMO 192 signatures wouldn't be hard to gather.

I don't feel this letter is substancial evidence that the plan doesn't have merrit. The letter states that the plan "COULD" be fatal. Could not implementing the plan be fatal also? In the end, something will be passed in the next 10 days and the delay might be possitive. My point is that the letter was probably sent to a mass audience and I would expect a great number of top economists support and don't support the plan.

Don't think your having a dense day. I do think that basing your judgment on one letter is a little simplistic. Haven't read your other posts so you might have other reasons for not supporting the plan.

[flying]

Relax Cclub, I am watching the debate as I post here (the first hour just finished) and McCain is kicking but, Obama sems to be rattled more often than not. Its actually kind of surprising because I though this kind of format would benefit Obama greatly. Anyway the second half has started so I must go and get my popcorn!!!

I watched it too & thought just the opposite.

McCain never once even looked at Obama very odd?

Also the way he would take part of a statement & try to twist it into something else reminded me why his burned out style of politics would only be more of the same that got us where we are today.

Today I see the results of polls agree with what I saw.

Poll of Debate

I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican per se' but that is how I saw it.

[LaoPo]

Relax Cclub, I am watching the debate as I post here (the first hour just finished) and McCain is kicking but, Obama sems to be rattled more often than not. Its actually kind of surprising because I though this kind of format would benefit Obama greatly. Anyway the second half has started so I must go and get my popcorn!!!

I watched it too & thought just the opposite.

McCain never once even looked at Obama very odd?

Also the way he would take part of a statement & try to twist it into something else reminded me why his burned out style of politics would only be more of the same that got us where we are today.

Today I see the results of polls agree with what I saw.

Poll of Debate

I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican per se' but that is how I saw it.

Thanks for the link flying !

Did you realize one can watch the entire debate ? It says: Watch the entire debate, Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.

Just tried Part 1 and it works (but I have ADSL)...

LaoPo