Crash??
-
Artist:
-
Track:
So, what's going on with the big picture?? Is Wall Street in big crash mode?? Can/Should the government continue the bailouts?? What's that gonna cost the common man if they do/if they don't?? I don't have these answers. If my bank fails, what becomes of my mortgage if my bank goes belly up? Do I get kicked out? If I can still make payments...whose interest would that be in? I can't answer these either...can you??? The addition of Ariel Bender (the former Spooky Tooth guitarist known as Luther Grosvenor) to Mott's arsenal is a brief and unfairly overlooked stint that featured some amazingly intense moments of sting-bending rock dreams. Not Jimmy Page, but this guy had a style that I have always found strikingly unique and appealing (did somebody say "Widowmaker"?) fin side1
Locating MOG account...
Comments (13)
are you kidding? Ariel Bender Luther Grosvenor, whatever you want to call him - genius
i saw widowmaker a few times - there was a line-up change in between the first and second set of times - i believe they have just 2 albums.... deep purple's bob daisley was in the band too
great rock r roll of the english persuasion with a little bit of soulful pop - from vocalist john butler.
i'm thinking i saw them open for heart but i could be wrong about that
but i definitely saw them on their own at the whisky a go go in 1977 and even though i was deep into the punk rock, luther brought the glam, the trash, the rock. indeed!
as for wall street.... ralph nader was right 8 years ago. its just too bad nader ran for president. his talents would have been better spent in a non partisan way and perhaps someone somewhere would have taken need
It has never felt so good to be renting and have nothing invested. Of course I'd be a fool to whistle past the grave yard and not see this having some serious aftershocks. I was some what forced to scale down my life drastically about 4 years ago, and while I'm not suffering, and getting by, I've definitely learned that it's possible to live (and be happy) with less.
I was an early example of what bad lending practices could beget ( I didn't have to foreclose on anything - but came damn near close), I came away with the moral "why the hell did anyone lend me that much money in the first place!?"
Remeber after 9/11 when it felt like everyone lost their mind. Kinda feels that way again, though it feels like they lost it a couple years ago and we're just now realizing it.
This failure of socialist inspired policies has apparently taught us nothing. Why are we buying the roving gambler's debts?
"Failure of socialist-inspired policies"? Wha? Is this your knee-jerk excuse for everything? Listen, I've had a ringside seat for this. I've worked for a major Wall Street firm for the past five years - though not, thank God, as one of the money guys, though I speak with them on a regular basis. I actually know what I'm talking about, to the degree anyone can. This was brought on by a number of factors, but if there's one that stands out, it's the free-markets-are-intrinsically-good-regulation-is-intrinsically-bad ideological blinders worn by the current administration, which have led to any kind of meaningful oversight being either gutted or ignored. We have, essentially, trusted people to do the right thing rather than accumulate mountains of money for themselves. Yeah, that's always gonna work out. The truth is almost never ideological. So, I would love to hear which socialist-inspired policies have been responsible for this....
that was my reaction too Bill...
G. W. Bush has tried to impose oversight on Fannie & Freddie for years. He's had every effot thwarted by a bi-partisan bloc in the senate led by Barney Frank & Tom Daschle. There is a vast difference between regulation & transparent accountabilty. Fannie & Freddie were immune to both.
In our zeal to see every American in "their own home" we deregulated to a dangerous degree & encouraged greedy lenders to cater to greedy borrowers. I do not argue that this was a partisan issue, there were snouts in the trough from both parties, but it was born of wealth distribution philosophies of the left, aided & abetted by the rapacious greed of government drunk with spending.
@Bill, Issues that capture my attention get my full attention, I read vociferously from as many souces as I can find, and then I distill my opinions & views. Friggin' knee-jerk ideologue I am not. That I am critical of certain....(philosophies) is no big secret.
Now, if you wish I will provide the numbers of the Senate bills that Bush tried to get passed, (That would be tomorrow after work, I'm hittin' the hay soon) You can even see how each Senator voted. But you who are far more computer savvy than I can easily verify this without my help.
what becomes of my mortgage if my bank goes belly up?
Another bank buys the mortgage for pennies on the dollar, meanwhile, you continue to pay a dollar on the dollar. Would you rather buy it yourself for pennies on the dollar? Too bad.
"but it was born of wealth distribution philosophies of the left, aided & abetted by the rapacious greed of government drunk with spending."
hmmm sound like somebody you know ???? someone who wears lipstick perhaps
woo-hoo...I don't think I can add anymore to this. That's why I stay away from politics, I see everyone's side and leave more confused than when I came in. Saddle up to the trough, I'm waiting for the morning slop before I address anything to do with lipstick...
Actually, so far as I can ascertain, Bush introduced one bill in 2003 and McCain introduced one in 2005 that would each have put greater regulatory control on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Each was defeated. Good for them, shame on the opposers - though I know little about the substance of each bill.
But I hope you're not trying to assert that if we had only regulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we wouldn't be in this mess. Because that is simply a bizarre idea. Let me sketch out an oversimplified but not inaccurate picture of what has happened. What we have seen in the housing markets is a 3 percent jump in serious mortgage deliquency rates. Not that big a deal, right? Well, not on the face of it. But the market has been weakened by overleveraging, and the major source of overleveraging in the U.S. market is hedge funds, whose operations depend upon the use of certain kinds of financial instruments called derivatives. Hedge fund operators can control, through derivatives, positions far in excess of the capital they put in. And that leads to greater market volatility, because it can magnify the impact of certain market events, like the housing crisis.
OK, so where am I going with this? Here: the reason that hedge funds have been able to flourish in the last eight years - and also the reason that complex bundles of bad mortgages were able to be packaged into something called CDOs - can be traced back to the 1999 Commodities Futures Modernization Act. One of its provisions essentially put derivatives off-limits to regulators. And the bill's sponsor and prime mover? Phil Gramm, who is now one of McCain's chief economic advisers, as well as an executive at the Swiss bank UBS. I'm not saying this was was an evil plot, but clearly somebody who thought regulation of derivatives was a bad idea has, in the end, dealt our economy a serious blow. And yes, a hearty up-yours to Clinton for signing the bill into law
But to get back to the original question, Is this the socialist-inspired policy we're talking about?
Apologies for wandering off the music track. By the way, I remember seeing Mott the Hoople on the first tour after Ariel Bender joined. The band was seriously off that night, but he was a flippin' star all the way....
No apologies neccessary Ivy, thanks to you (and everyone) for the insightful and informative discussion. If I could retitle this post, it would read "Mog Finance 101" or perhaps "The Fragility of the US Housing Market...I'll Huff, and I'll Puff..."
Yes, Ivy and I would also ad the creation of the Mortgage Backed Securities market, being another new and unregulated market - or is that the same thing as the commodities you speak of. Basically, the way Iunderstand it every one was trading the percieved credit value of these packaged mortgage among themselves (kind of passing the buck) in a way that had never been seen before. Basically a market was created before we ever new what it was capable of.
Soros wrote a book about it, how the old "market will correct itself" mentality does not apply. Of course that name should put a burr under DMDM's saddle, but the guy does understand the markets...
Get the idea we're not going to hear any more about the socialist policies that led to the market meltdown?