Bear Stearns Bank

[alaskacouple]

Seems to me that folks are getting a bit hung-up on just who the Fed. bailed out - call it what you want, it doesn't change the fact that the government had to step in and rescue the so called free market (and if anyone doesn't think that a 30 BILLION dollar deal with JP Morgan/ Chase doesn't constitute a bail out - so be it)

The smoke has obscured the fire here though. The main point for us to understand is that there is no such thing as a free market. And I'm okay with that because if there were free markets, we would be in constant turmoil and upheaval (I just wish that we could admit that our "markets" are rigged and then insure that the super-rich didn't have such a large say in the way they are "rigged".) But, it seems that some people have been duped into believing that there is a free market and that it is the only way to "salvation". The danger of the misconception is that it usually goes hand-in-hand with a hardened heart which denounces any and all social involvement by the government as being somehow anti-American.

I pity those who, though not rich themselves, have been brainwashed into being the cheerleaders for this so called "free-market". I am sad for them, but I suspect that the rich just get a good laugh out of their zeal!

[12voltman59]

The link below is a pretty good Q&A type of format article which explained exactly the Federal Reserve did do in the Bear Stearns situation.

Technically they did not do a direct "bailout"--but the Fed did agree to back up $30 billion of Bear Stearn's assets.

http://www.kansascity.com/business/story/535373.html

And another interesting piece--more of a financial blog than a pure journalistic story--but it does answer a lot of questions about what really happened.

http://www.crosstabs.org/stories/eco...arns_situation

[jazzer]

It is interesting that the Fed has now entered the area of financial support for non bank lenders (Jamie rightly pointed out that Bear Stearns is a non bank lender). How deep and how widespread problems are in the US financial system is anyone's guess. The worst case scenario is that the US may enter a period of deep recession that could be a repeat of the Japanese experience. The Japanese are still struggling to get out of the financial hole they dug for themselves in the early 90's with their "bubble economy" and failure to allow the free market to work and by allowing banks to trade while they were technically insolvent. The main problem for the Fed is how do you allow the system of free enterprise to work and at the same time prevent a collapse of the banking system?
Hopefully the US has learned by the mistakes the Japanese have made and the global economy will continue to prosper. Let us all hope so.
In the meantime if Bear Stearns employees have seen their pension fund become almost worthless (as Jamie stated), one can only have the deepest
sympathy for them.
Well on the positive side President Bush looks very happy in his recent TV appearances, so I guess things aren't as bad as we think they are!

[Dianna219]

AlaskaCouple, you have answered your own question, why should the government "bail out" in your words, Bear Stearns or any others, to put it in simple terms, they(The Fed) were/are attempting to "save the "little guy" remember, free markets work based upon ,Trust and Liquidity, the availability of capital to "pay your way" on a "good day" and "pay your way" on a" bad day" the point is, I can't remember that the last time I paid a premium for FDIC insurance, should i go back and reconcile my accounts? The simple facts are that when crap goes south, blame the government, whichever one you prefer, no matter, when things are going well, hey, i voted for them, they're our guys, when things become shakey as perceived by the 10 second sound bites, hey, those sons of bitch's, i didn't vote for "them". The point is why argue, bitch, complain about it, factually the government really has no choice in this "new" free market world, in order to avoid utter chaos. Yes, i knew that inestments/deposits are not covered by FDIC insurance, I thought I pointed that out, duh! Jamie is correct, here we go again, another , WorldCom and Enron as I said in the original post, why, I, don't feel sorry for the employees, however, I am sad for the innocent "mutual funds investors" who simply, are/were to lazy to do a bit of analysis and went with the "branch banker and the "local stock guy" oh well, so be it. Really, don't understand your asolute disgust about the free market, does it exist? or is it a mental fanatsy? i'm perplexed, seems to me it has worked extremely well since that "great" "super" investment wise intellect" and etc etc of that wizard of finance/economics Pres Jimmy Carter. Possibly you should research the effects of a constrianed/restricted and go nowhere economy, under that rule.WOW, Prime Rate 19+ % , geez where do I invest in the superficial balloon of "losing money".

Oh, and please don't give this "this is where we are heading arguement"!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bisexualinsocal]

Second page and still no evidence of a government bailout.


This is getting interesting.

[Dianna219]

Isn't it though, all I see is politacal slamming, oh well, I'm still confused, lets see, the government is supposed to take care of me, give me this give me that and ,so, you have my vote hmmm, but, when the government tries to "bail out" the little folks, wow, it's a sacralige, because a private independent firm was trying to make money for these little folk, it's perplexing, give me, but, i don't want to pay for it.

[alaskacouple]

Dianna,

I was going to try and make a reasoned response to your comments. I have read them all over several times, and I'm sorry but I just can't make any sense at all of what you are saying.

You sound upset and angry in your post, so let me wipe the slate and simply reiterate the couple of points that I have hoped to make here.
1. The failure of a bank of the size and stature of Bear Stearns is a big deal. Something of this magnitude brings to light the damaged and fragile state of our economy.
2. The Federal Reserve has made intercessions that are unprecedented in the history of the Fed. This too is a big deal and further shows how damaged and fragile our economy is.
3. In the opening thread post I quoted portions of an ABC news piece which described the actions taken by the Fed. as a "bailout" and that "the free market did not work today, the government did." They used this to segue into the question; Why did the current Administration seem so reluctant to interfere in the free market when it comes to helping homeowners with mortgage problems, but did not hesitate to do so when Wall Street got into difficulties? They didn't answer that question on the broadcast, but left to the viewer to consider.

After that opening, many people have made their comments - some are well thought out and informative. Some have expressed their sympathy for those who have seen their savings wiped out. I have spoken about the "mirage" of this so called "free market". You mistakenly said that I had answered my own question as to why should the government bail out a Bear Stearns - if you will look just three posts up from your question, you will see that I made it clear that I was okay with the Fed's actions because without government controls/interventions over such things we would be living in chaos. One thing that I have been critical of is the misinformed notion that America operates under a free market system.

I hope this recap helps. The bottom line is that we, and the world, are treading on dangerous ground. I hope and pray that those in power do have the wisdom and the tools to avert a worldwide economic meltdown.

[Dianna219]

Dianna,

I was going to try and make a reasoned response to your comments. I have read them all over several times, and I'm sorry but I just can't make any sense at all of what you are saying.

You sound upset and angry in your post, so let me wipe the slate and simply reiterate the couple of points that I have hoped to make here.
1. The failure of a bank of the size and stature of Bear Stearns is a big deal. Something of this magnitude brings to light the damaged and fragile state of our economy.
2. The Federal Reserve has made intercessions that are unprecedented in the history of the Fed. This too is a big deal and further shows how damaged and fragile our economy is.
3. In the opening thread post I quoted portions of an ABC news piece which described the actions taken by the Fed. as a "bailout" and that "the free market did not work today, the government did." They used this to segue into the question; Why did the current Administration seem so reluctant to interfere in the free market when it comes to helping homeowners with mortgage problems, but did not hesitate to do so when Wall Street got into difficulties? They didn't answer that question on the broadcast, but left to the viewer to consider.

After that opening, many people have made their comments - some are well thought out and informative. Some have expressed their sympathy for those who have seen their savings wiped out. I have spoken about the "mirage" of this so called "free market". You mistakenly said that I had answered my own question as to why should the government bail out a Bear Stearns - if you will look just three posts up from your question, you will see that I made it clear that I was okay with the Fed's actions because without government controls/interventions over such things we would be living in chaos. One thing that I have been critical of is the misinformed notion that America operates under a free market system.

I hope this recap helps. The bottom line is that we, and the world, are treading on dangerous ground. I hope and pray that those in power do have the wisdom and the tools to avert a worldwide economic meltdown.

I am not arguing about a fragile economy, the western world in entirity is fragile. You have made the point quoting ABC News or any other sound bite medium. Whatever happened to doing your research and making your own decision, that's my point. God forbid, I'm to blame, nah, can't happen. Don't you think that the Fed by doing this, did in fact, "bailout the little guy" and forgot the Bears Stearns employees, stockholders etc. Factually, the Administration did "guarantee" Bears balance sheet, investment portfolio, presumably, to protect the investor base and hopefully walk away with something for better or worse. That simply is the position, the "poor middle souled investor" is by nature too stupidor, too lazy to make his/her own decission, and, true, that's why you have Investment Houses. and the points go on and on and on. Call it like it is, why shoud I, feel "bailed out" . The government does what it has to do, in order for the populous to stop bitching about "Our Tax Dollars", look at it, extract the politics and probably/maybe you'll see that this has been happening since the late 1930's. Realistically, I'm happy that the Fed did what they had to do, .20 on the dollar is better than .00 Sure, do I feel symphatec to Bears Stearns employees, no, of course not, no more tears shed than those of WorldCom or Enron, they were all living high on the hog, and knowing fairwell that the company was full of crap as I said, above, why do you want to or feel compelled to invest in your employer, perceived job security, I don't know, but, I do know this, not a smart move.

I have faith in the global investment community, rightfuly or wrongfuly so, but, I really do not want to hear this "meltdown theory" there are enough safeguards in 'the system" to anticipate, analyse, correct, adjust and respond
to the financial/economic negatives that may occur, most, are very very short term. Well, that's it, I didn't respond to a few of your "points" because I believe they were answered or put forward previously. So, that's that.

You're fundamentally pissed off becuse the government didn't ask you, shoud we, or shoudn't we, bail oy Bear Stearns, of course they didn't ask, you forgot to pay your FDIC Premium, I hate it when that happens!

Anyway
Peace, Love and grow Petunias

[RockGardener]

Urban Word of the Day
www.urbandictionary.com

March 20, 2008: bear stearned

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...&defid=2931981

to crash, to collapse, to plummit, to fail

1. I can't believe it, I completely bear stearned that test.

2. For the third time this week, my computer bear stearned on me.


I didn't realize this bank was so well known!!

[Bluebiyou]

I can't believe everyone is getting so upset about a bunch of handsome overweight men in leather (mostly sporting facial hair and hairy asses sticking out of their leather).
Gol-ly!

[alaskacouple]

I am not arguing about a fragile economy, the western world in entirity is fragile. You have made the point quoting ABC News or any other sound bite medium. Whatever happened to doing your research and making your own decision, that's my point. God forbid, I'm to blame, nah, can't happen. Don't you think that the Fed by doing this, did in fact, "bailout the little guy" and forgot the Bears Stearns employees, stockholders etc. Factually, the Administration did "guarantee" Bears balance sheet, investment portfolio, presumably, to protect the investor base and hopefully walk away with something for better or worse. That simply is the position, the "poor middle souled investor" is by nature too stupidor, too lazy to make his/her own decission, and, true, that's why you have Investment Houses. and the points go on and on and on. Call it like it is, why shoud I, feel "bailed out" . The government does what it has to do, in order for the populous to stop bitching about "Our Tax Dollars", look at it, extract the politics and probably/maybe you'll see that this has been happening since the late 1930's. Realistically, I'm happy that the Fed did what they had to do, .20 on the dollar is better than .00 Sure, do I feel symphatec to Bears Stearns employees, no, of course not, no more tears shed than those of WorldCom or Enron, they were all living high on the hog, and knowing fairwell that the company was full of crap as I said, above, why do you want to or feel compelled to invest in your employer, perceived job security, I don't know, but, I do know this, not a smart move.

I have faith in the global investment community, rightfuly or wrongfuly so, but, I really do not want to hear this "meltdown theory" there are enough safeguards in 'the system" to anticipate, analyse, correct, adjust and respond
to the financial/economic negatives that may occur, most, are very very short term. Well, that's it, I didn't respond to a few of your "points" because I believe they were answered or put forward previously. So, that's that.

You're fundamentally pissed off becuse the government didn't ask you, shoud we, or shoudn't we, bail oy Bear Stearns, of course they didn't ask, you forgot to pay your FDIC Premium, I hate it when that happens!

Anyway
Peace, Love and grow Petunias

Dianna,

Very odd response. I'm not sure where you're coming from with the misquotes and anger. I have gone back and read my posts and I find nowhere that I ever said or indicated that I was in any way "pissed off" and certainly not "pissed of because the government didn't ask me"! The fact is I'm not pissed off at all - simply concerned. Of course, I don't have the "faith" you do in the "global investment community" - but I certainly don't begrudge you your faith.

Anyway, I'm sorry you are so angry. This really isn't worth getting angry over you know - it's just a simple exchange of thoughts and opinions, but it seems by your responses that you read words that have not been spoken. So, Peace and Love we can agree on (too early up here for the petunias though).

[BronzeBobby]

Why did the current Administration seem so reluctant to interfere in the free market when it comes to helping homeowners with mortgage problems, but did not hesitate to do so when Wall Street got into difficulties?

It's been a long time since I studied macroeconomics, so I have to admit I'm just making sense of this by reading the newspaper and watching the news on TV.... but I have a response to your question, Alaskacouple.

They've been lowering interest rates and the like to try to stave off the 2.2 million foreclosures, so people can stay in their homes. I have an issue with this, though I'm not sure if it's the same thing on the minds of the current Administration. With the 15-16% of the country poor, almost 50 million uninsured, and a third of the country not even owning their homes, why should the government scramble to spend billions of dollars to allow people to stay in oversized homes they were never really able to pay for in the first place?

A lot of the houses going up for auction are McMansion monstrosities, and while I feel sympathy for the middle class people being foreclosed, my sympathy hits its limits, seeing as I'm still renting because my family has been so cautious about saving. Though I'm a professor, according to the federal standards I'm "working class;" anyway I'm part of that bottom 3rd that doesn't own a home. My wife and children live in a 1-bedroom rental, and we survive, though of course our lifestyle doesn't exactly impress rich and powerful socialites. But is it really so awful that millions of middle class people have to move out of their huge houses and live like the rest of us? I dunno.....

Is it a crisis for John and Mary Johnson, with their two children, to have to move out of their 5-bedroom and 2-acre house in a Denver suburb, with a swimming pool and 3-car garage complete with air-conditioning, and move into a two-bedroom flat in the city, down the street from actual living, breathing POOR PEOPLE? I don't know if that's so horrible that I'm willing to weep salted tears and spend lots of my tax dollars to keep the Johnsons living beyond their means (especially since they are probably the first people to keep my family out of their gated subdivision, the minute they get their mortgage back on track!)

Facilitating the bargain-basement sale of Bear Stearns (whether you call that a bailout or not) is a little different because it means propping up a pillar of the economy, which if it collapses could spell severe economic trouble. Bailing out individual mortgages would be, in my mind, like giving a huge bonus to families that are already privileged, as a reward for living too lavishly, while punishing people like me & my wife who lived on very tight budgets and did everything we could to save. Now the returns on my savings are going down, because of the lower interest rates, which have been lowered to help the people who spent lavishly on their lives and didn't save anything.

I may be rambling, but I hope I can offer a little bit of counterpoint.

[void()]

Perhaps I mis-spoke in my opening post in that I assumed that most informed citizens owned the appropriate technology (such as TV's or the internet) in order to keep up with the top news story of the last several days. I guess I thought that most informed Americans would think that the Federal Reserve assuming 30 Billion in bad debt so one private bank will buy another private bank at fire sale prices is big news. Guess that's no big deal for some - go figure?

For any of those that haven't kept up to date, I hear that Best Buy is having a big sale on just the stuff one needs to do so. Personally I find it quite rewarding to be able to research these things on my own and not have to rely on second hand interpretations or dubious "links to documentation". But that's just me - you know the independent Alaskan spirit and all...

We do not watch television here. I only look at the classified ads, and maybe the comic strips in a newspaper. Frankly, I'm not to concerned over this issue one way or another. It's "more of the same" from the same song "rich get richer, poor get robbed."

When you live it daily it stops being _interesting_, _noteworthy_, _news_, real quickly. Instead you try to decide if you'll have food or gas next week, or even tomorrow. You start thinking "banks have money, hm might want to go make an unexpected withdraw soon", or other such non-thought thoughts, because jail isn't worth it.

Middle class being eliminated? "Hey buddy, you been under a rock for twenty years? There's no damn middle class anymore."

And vitt's right, even we can get the $600 bribe to keep us from hearing our leaders say we're fucked economically, that $600 is gone before it greases our palms. So what the fuck?

It's not a matter of not wanting to be informed. Some of us who don't seem to 'pay attention', really just got other things we consider more important than all the bullshit hype and blather. And we do peek in at times, see if anything is there we can do to pitch in. Most often there isn't much for us to do.

I mean really, how's a guy making $800 a month going to pay a Trillions high American debt? For that matter, tell that guy how he's supposed to dream about going to college and attaining an education for a better job, or tell him how he and his wife can find a nice home in the country, afford it.

You can't do that anymore. So fuck the banks, who cares? Fuck government too, because even if they do try helping their more likely to snug the noose round your neck. We'll get by though. She and I were both raised by folks who either came through the Depression or were parented by Depression survivors. We'll be looking out for our own, suggest everyone else try doing the same, bout all we can do.

I'm planning a Victory garden this year, using old heritage seed. I don't want no genetically modified crap foods. We'll grow and swap surplus, trade seed with neighbors and such. Can and put up food. We'll keep a garden going except on the seventh years, then we'll plow it under and let it rest a year. Then burn brush over that, restart the cycle.

Also planning on getting the wife more interested in selling her crochet, taking in projects. I might even decide to look into setting up a small pottery shop. Might, but don't know yet. Going to look into DIY type of stuff to help defer costs of building and setting one up, may just hire out as extra hands to local farms, and work as long as I can at the supermarket.

The point being it's survival, now. That's about all we've got. So why worry of something a single person can't change in a good full day's worth of hard work? Instead of fighting demons you can't see, grab the ones in front of you by the throat. You can at least do something about them.

[alaskacouple]

It's been a long time since I studied macroeconomics, so I have to admit I'm just making sense of this by reading the newspaper and watching the news on TV.... but I have a response to your question, Alaskacouple.

They've been lowering interest rates and the like to try to stave off the 2.2 million foreclosures, so people can stay in their homes. I have an issue with this, though I'm not sure if it's the same thing on the minds of the current Administration. With the 15-16% of the country poor, almost 50 million uninsured, and a third of the country not even owning their homes, why should the government scramble to spend billions of dollars to allow people to stay in oversized homes they were never really able to pay for in the first place?

A lot of the houses going up for auction are McMansion monstrosities, and while I feel sympathy for the middle class people being foreclosed, my sympathy hits its limits, seeing as I'm still renting because my family has been so cautious about saving. Though I'm a professor, according to the federal standards I'm "working class;" anyway I'm part of that bottom 3rd that doesn't own a home. My wife and children live in a 1-bedroom rental, and we survive, though of course our lifestyle doesn't exactly impress rich and powerful socialites. But is it really so awful that millions of middle class people have to move out of their huge houses and live like the rest of us? I dunno.....

Is it a crisis for John and Mary Johnson, with their two children, to have to move out of their 5-bedroom and 2-acre house in a Denver suburb, with a swimming pool and 3-car garage complete with air-conditioning, and move into a two-bedroom flat in the city, down the street from actual living, breathing POOR PEOPLE? I don't know if that's so horrible that I'm willing to weep salted tears and spend lots of my tax dollars to keep the Johnsons living beyond their means (especially since they are probably the first people to keep my family out of their gated subdivision, the minute they get their mortgage back on track!)

Facilitating the bargain-basement sale of Bear Stearns (whether you call that a bailout or not) is a little different because it means propping up a pillar of the economy, which if it collapses could spell severe economic trouble. Bailing out individual mortgages would be, in my mind, like giving a huge bonus to families that are already privileged, as a reward for living too lavishly, while punishing people like me & my wife who lived on very tight budgets and did everything we could to save. Now the returns on my savings are going down, because of the lower interest rates, which have been lowered to help the people who spent lavishly on their lives and didn't save anything.

I may be rambling, but I hope I can offer a little bit of counterpoint.

Excellent Post!!

In fact I agree with your position about the bailout of both individual homes and Bear Stearns.

What is the root of the problem though? It seems that we have witnessed one speculative market bubble after another for many years now. In recent memory is the "dot -com" bubble, now the "sub-prime mortgage" bubble and most recently a building bubble in oil. This begs some questions; Do speculative bubbles represent the free market or are they the result of predatory practices of sophisticated speculators? Should the government be more involved to prevent such speculation or should we allow these to continue in the spirit of "free market" despite the obvious damage they cause to the broader economies of the world?

The current housing crisis is a result of just what you said. But what fueled it was the attitude that by buying bigger and bigger houses John and Jane were "investing". And as the "bubble grew", those left out of the housing market (such as young people and working poor) simply resigned themselves to the fact that they would never "own" a home. And those who had even a slim chance to buy in saw all of this happening and did whatever they could to get in before it was too late. However, little did John and Jane realize that behind the scenes were these "sophisticated" investors who were reinventing the way we have always bought homes in this country. Now I am of the opinion that these investor knew what they were doing - they knew that many of these mortgages would go into default (that's why they dumped them on the broader investment market).

So, should we as a nation allow these speculative bubbles to be created time and again? Clearly they are a danger to our economy (as both the dot -com and the mortgage issues have shown). Or should we, through our government curb such activities?

[12voltman59]

Well-it seems that both the financial types and the politicians on a bipartisan basis have "seen the religion" about the relative lack of controls that have been in place in the past decade or so---they are already calling for re-regulation of this aspect of the financial markets to a degree they did not have before----kind of typical-- there probably will be a great over reaction to this being many a day and a few billion dollars late, of course.

But better late then never I suppose.

I heard some financial person on a financial show this morning say that in the area that Bear Stearns operates---for the top people in that industry--bonuses have totaled $135 billion since the year 2000 till now.

Some people got very fat and happy from the way they have been conducting their business---all without any sort of controls at all.

[12voltman59]

Well-it seems that both the financial types and the politicians on a bipartisan basis have "seen the religion" about the relative lack of controls that have been in place in the past decade or so---they are already calling for re-regulation of this aspect of the financial markets to a degree they did not have before----kind of typical-- there probably will be a great over reaction to this situation, being many a day and a few billion dollars late, of course.

But better late then never I suppose.

I heard some financial person on a financial show this morning say that in the area that Bear Stearns operates---for the top people in that industry--bonuses have totaled $135 billion since the year 2000 till now.

That is a one heck of a pile of money that was made by a relative handful of individuals and what did they really do??? They did not make cars, or airplanes or appliances or grow food--they merely shifted numbers around on spread sheets!!! They sure have not done their companies or the rest of the economy any good--unless I guess you consider high end real estate people, car dealers, watch makers, interior decorator/designers and things of that nature that these people "need" to spend "their" money on.

Some people got very fat and happy from the way they have been conducting their business---all without any sort of controls at all.

[12voltman59]

Well-it seems that both the financial types and the politicians on a bipartisan basis have "seen the religion" about the relative lack of controls that have been in place in the past decade or so---they are already calling for re-regulation of this aspect of the financial markets to a degree they did not have before----kind of typical-- there probably will be a great over reaction to this situation, being many a day and a few billion dollars late, of course.

But better late then never I suppose.

I heard some financial person on a financial show this morning say that in the area that Bear Stearns operates---for the top people in that industry--bonuses have totaled $135 billion since the year 2000 till now.

That is a one heck of a pile of money that was made by a relative handful of individuals and what did they really do??? They did not make cars, or airplanes or appliances or grow food--they merely shifted numbers around on spread sheets!!! They sure have not done their companies or the rest of the economy any good--unless I guess you consider high end real estate people, car dealers, watch makers, interior decorator/designers and things of that nature that these people "need" to spend "their" money on.

Some people got very fat and happy from the way they have been conducting their business---all without any sort of controls at all.

Dammit!!! I hate freggin' double posts--I don't know how in the heck that happened--sorry--there must have been some sort of bisexual.com glitch!!!!

ARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!!

To the site administrators---please consider updating the software so we can always go back and either delete or edit our posts at any time--well past a time limit of only one hour!!!!

[the mage]

Mage,

I always enjoy reading your input and comments (although I must admit that they leave me somewhat unsettled - perhaps you are hitting to close to the truth for comfort?). Might I ask if you and any of your fellow Canadians are doing anything specific in the way of preparations for the impending difficulties that you predict?



............On a personal level in truth yes...For my part I have retired way early. I sold the big 4 bed house and live in a 1 bedroom condo. Drove a good old car till it got wiped out. I intentionally moved to a place where I have forest on 1 side to walk my big dog, and a shopping mall including Wal Mart on the other to walk to to buy food. My Lady commutes to work with a friend who live in this same building. Little of my cash goes to big oil.

I'm quite convinced from a LOT of inside info i have accessed that we have 5 year at best before the shit really hits the fan in society.
I'm doing my good living now, I have quite enough cash to get by.

Blue,

Some good thoughts there I think - some things that we could all do to not only conserve our dwindling energy resources but also prepair ourselves should the prediction from 'The Mage' turn out to be even partially accurate.

I myself have been giving some thought to this. I sincerely hate to see people become locked into a 'dooms day' mentality. I saw this happen in the 1970's with the hysteria of our imminent doom at the hands of the invading Soviets. Most of us can become overly pessimistic if we allow our fears to run away. However, there is also the need to be aware and to act in a prudent manner to do what we can if our lives are disrupted by forces beyond our control.

There are many educated and wise individuals throughout the world who are doing what they can to halt the mad rush to globalization and the ensuing disruption of economies and 'ways of living' that have have sustained us all for centuries. Let's be realistic for a moment; is it not a fact that "globalization" by multi-national corporations is a very new and untried economic model? In many parts of the world ancient and sustainable ways of life are being destroyed in the mad rush to this 'new way'. And we in our own 'advanced society' have increasingly been separated from our own connection with a sustainable pattern of life. It begs the question; How long can we hope to maintain our energy consuming way of life? What will happen to you and your family when it costs more to grow and transport you food than you are able to pay? Would it make sense to begin to "eye" that plot of earth you now have covered in grass with the thought of just how one might go about producing some food on it?

Anyway, I hate to be an alarmist - but I would also hate to be a fool (especially a dead or starving fool!)

Globalization is Fascism in corp speak.

You MUST face the very real fact that there are 5 Billion too many humans on this planet. In another thread someone went on about nature and its perceived kindness.. that is incorrect. Nature is unforgiving in its constant fight to achieve equilibrium. We will be reduced in numbers.
Society has limited time.
This is KNOWN.
The powerful wealthy class are abandoning all pretense of "trickle down economics" or what ever cute name you give it.
The power stops at the top now. Soon it will be literal.

[DiamondDog]

Okay, okay!
A bunch of overweight (but handsome) furry guys in leather (with the butts cut out of their leather jeans so you could see their hairy asses) posted this:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/b...-S-bear_sterns

No hot sexy men like you described were at that link at all.

Also FYI, not all BEAR men even like leather/denim or Tom of Finland's kitschy art that has men with unrealistic/overexaggerated bodies/penises.

[lucky.cucky]

Friendship is born at that moment when one person says to another: "What! You too? I thought I was the only one."

C. S. Lewis

Re: Bear Stearns Bank:
…ron paul is the only truly qualified candidate who can clean up the whole mess and most of the population doesn’t see this as they are ignorant or running with their feelings instead of understanding facts and history. if he doesnt get elected, the country is in sad shape and will get worse.

Hi Alan,
I read your post today. A little late, but I was overseas when that whole Bear Stearns thing broke apart in 2008. You are so right about Ron Paul. I support him in 2012, and think that he is the only one with a clue in D.C. It is amazing how ignorant we all are/were, mostly due to our biased press.

Lily & Lucky