Taking just one nibble at this, okie. In your last post you advocate turning total control back to the local school districts (eliminating the U.S. Dept of Education?)
And you suggest that total control includes funding through local taxing.
What happens if the school district is in, say, Detroit or in some red clay county in the rural south, where there is no tax base sufficient to do that funding?
I anticipated that question. Two things, first I agree this is a downside, but I think the upside outweighs the downside, and secondly, quality of education is not directly proportional to money. No amount of money can make kids that are from bad family environments and do not want to learn, to learn.
By placing the responsibility squarely on people, and challenging them to take the reins, sink or swim, is what often brings the best results in the long run. There comes a time to kick the birds out of the nest, and I think this fits that analogy. It is time for the feds to cut loose the ropes that not only help but strangle. There is no area so poor, that if the people really care, and they know it is up to them, they will find a way to educate their children on not much money. It used to happen.
My comments come from a belief that we need to return to our roots, to return to the things that worked, and that to turn this around, we need to abandon the road we are on, and start over with new and fresh ideas, that work, because they worked before. Hardship is real, we can't escape it, but if people have power to make decisions instead of feeling powerless as they do now, they can turn it around. Most people feel powerless now because the teachers union and bureaucracy has a stranglehold on the educational system.
Wachovia will halt wholesale mortgage operations today, and I highly doubt they will still be in business by the end of the month.
Another one bites the dust.
http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2008/07/report-wachovia-existing-wholesale.html
Cycloptichorn
okie wrote:I anticipated that question. Two things, first I agree this is a downside, but I think the upside outweighs the downside, and secondly, quality of education is not directly proportional to money. No amount of money can make kids that are from bad family environments and do not want to learn, to learn.
By placing the responsibility squarely on people, and challenging them to take the reins, sink or swim, is what often brings the best results in the long run. There comes a time to kick the birds out of the nest, and I think this fits that analogy. It is time for the feds to cut loose the ropes that not only help but strangle. There is no area so poor, that if the people really care, and they know it is up to them, they will find a way to educate their children on not much money. It used to happen.
My comments come from a belief that we need to return to our roots, to return to the things that worked, and that to turn this around, we need to abandon the road we are on, and start over with new and fresh ideas, that work, because they worked before. Hardship is real, we can't escape it, but if people have power to make decisions instead of feeling powerless as they do now, they can turn it around. Most people feel powerless now because the teachers union and bureaucracy has a stranglehold on the educational system.
Very well said.
In the case in the example, I believe the government of Detroit has amply demonstrated that added Federal funds will merely delay the day of reconing for a local government that has already demonstrated its incompetence and preference for the proceeds of corruption rather than meaningful improvement of the services it provides to the people to whom it is nominally responsible.
The myth of a booming economy does not reflect the everyday experiences of working-class Americans
Cycloptichorn wrote:Wachovia will halt wholesale mortgage operations today...
I can't find that story on any of the mainstream financial news sources I use, Cyclops, like Forbes or the WSJ.
Duly noted, Cyclops. Thanks.
okie wrote :
Quote:By placing the responsibility squarely on people, and challenging them to take the reins, sink or swim, is what often brings the best results in the long run.
would you say that should also apply to all businnes : SINK OR SWIM ?
if memory serves me right , governments will often claim "that they had to intervene " - read : prop up the corporation - for the good of the economy .
hbg
Let's see, the feds propped up Chrysler, the Savings and Loan, Bear Sterns, IndyMac Bank, Mac and Mae, and they're ready to prop up more of the failing banks.
Isn't it amazing how much the feds are helping the middle class and the poor? IMPORTANT NOTE: The middle class and the poor have little or no savings. Guess who benefits from these prop ups? Ya know, those folks who are paying too much income tax already.
Wachovia posted a 2nd Q loss of $8.9B, mostly related to writedowns of bad loans of the sub-prime lending company it bought just a year or so ago. The bank cut its dividend to a mere 5 cents a share and is letting some 10,700 people go.
I think it is unlikely the bank will do an IndyMac and collapse. Indy got a lot of its money from on-line depositors seeking a slightly better yield. A very fickle group of customers. Wachovia has a much more loyal base of customers.
The CEO insisted that the bank is not for sale and I would give that about a 70-30 chance of being true, in part because there are so few potential buyers.
The stock was up some 20% today, perhaps reflecting the sentiment that the company decided to take the big hit this Q and things will improve from here on with the new management. Or perhaps they are thinking that the company is dressing itself up in hopes of finding a mate who might pay a premium for access to Wachovia's strong retail presence.
(ps: C.I. I don't think the Feds propped up Indy. The FDIC did what it is supposed to do-guarantee deposits up to $100M and take it over until the assets and liabilities get liquidated. A small quibble).
rjb, You're right about Indymac doing a good share of their business through the internet, because we used to have CDs at their bank for the higher interest rate until about a year ago, but we cashed out.
However, the feds took over Indymac bank because of their liquidity problem; no more money to support their cash outflow - or in a word, liquidity. Same-o with Bear Sterns; cash flow problems. More huge banks are going to be following Indymac because of their liquidity problems as they find that their investments in sub-prime mortgage loans aren't bringing in any cash, and they must write-down huge losses. That's when their liabilities exceed their assets, and the feds will have to take it over to pay off the FDIC guaranteed monies.
From NYT:
By ERIC DASH
Published: July 23, 2008
After the last week brought another round of woeful quarterly results from the industry, capped by news on Tuesday of multibillion-dollar losses at the Wachovia Corporation and Washington Mutual, that question is nagging banking executives and their investors.
Kenneth D. Lewis, the chief executive of Bank of America, insisted this week that the industry was turning the corner, after his company reported a mere 41 percent drop in profit. Many investors seem to see signs of hope in red ink that once would have shocked them.
But it has now been a year since the credit crisis erupted, and, so far, the optimists have been proven wrong time and again. Skeptics say it could take years for banks to recover from the worst financial crisis since the Depression. And even when things do improve, the pessimists maintain, banks' profits will be a fraction of what they were before.
There are many reasons for caution. Home prices continue to decline, and defaults are accelerating on a wide range of loans. As lenders struggle, loans are becoming even more scarce for hard-pressed consumers and companies. That, in turn, could slow any recovery in the broader economy.
***************
I'm in the skeptic crowd who thinks this liquidity problem is long term with the decline in home prices will continue for two-three more years. With higher interest rates in the battle to fight inflation, more will be kept out of the housing market for at least the short-term.
It seems WAMU lost 3b in the last quarter and will be writing off 8b on their books to reflect the bad loans - for now. Another big bank in trouble, and we bank with them. When I transferred my IRA check to WAMU last month, they put a hold on it for 15-days even though most checks clear in three work days. I smelled trouble back then.
cicerone imposter wrote:It seems WAMU lost 3b in the last quarter and will be writing off 8b on their books to reflect the bad loans - for now. Another big bank in trouble, and we bank with them. When I transferred my IRA check to WAMU last month, they put a hold on it for 15-days even though most checks clear in three work days. I smelled trouble back then.
And of course we are to accept anything you say about the economy, right?
How can we, when you admitted to being both senile AND an idiot?
MM wrote:How can we, when you admitted to being both senile AND an idiot?
Yes and when shiksa revealed that I lived on welfare I admitted to that as well. Knowing CI I would offer that he is neither senile nor an idiot but he is every bit as opinionated as most a2k posters (perhaps less so than I or you)
dyslexia wrote:MM wrote:How can we, when you admitted to being both senile AND an idiot?
Yes and when shiksa revealed that I lived on welfare I admitted to that as well. Knowing CI I would offer that he is neither senile nor an idiot but he is every bit as opinionated as most a2k posters (perhaps less so than I or you)
I am only quoting him.
He said...
Quote:Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 20:31 Post: 3327717 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have an excuse for being an idiot; I'm senile. But in your case, you have your full faculties and stupid.
And here is the link to him saying it...
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3327717#3327717
So dont blame me, I'm just quoting him.
mysteryman wrote:dyslexia wrote:MM wrote:How can we, when you admitted to being both senile AND an idiot?
Yes and when shiksa revealed that I lived on welfare I admitted to that as well. Knowing CI I would offer that he is neither senile nor an idiot but he is every bit as opinionated as most a2k posters (perhaps less so than I or you)
I am only quoting him.
He said...
Quote:Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 20:31 Post: 3327717 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have an excuse for being an idiot; I'm senile. But in your case, you have your full faculties and stupid.
And here is the link to him saying it...
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3327717#3327717
So dont blame me, I'm just quoting him.
i will blame you because it was more than obvious that CI was being sarcastic and YOU know that.
dyslexia wrote:mysteryman wrote:dyslexia wrote:MM wrote:How can we, when you admitted to being both senile AND an idiot?
Yes and when shiksa revealed that I lived on welfare I admitted to that as well. Knowing CI I would offer that he is neither senile nor an idiot but he is every bit as opinionated as most a2k posters (perhaps less so than I or you)
I am only quoting him.
He said...
Quote:Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 20:31 Post: 3327717 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have an excuse for being an idiot; I'm senile. But in your case, you have your full faculties and stupid.
And here is the link to him saying it...
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3327717#3327717
So dont blame me, I'm just quoting him.
i will blame you because it was more than obvious that CI was being sarcastic and YOU know that.
But you dont deny he said it??
As for you blaming me, since I am doing nothing more then quoting him, how can I be blamed for anything?
mysteryman wrote:dyslexia wrote:mysteryman wrote:dyslexia wrote:MM wrote:How can we, when you admitted to being both senile AND an idiot?
Yes and when shiksa revealed that I lived on welfare I admitted to that as well. Knowing CI I would offer that he is neither senile nor an idiot but he is every bit as opinionated as most a2k posters (perhaps less so than I or you)
I am only quoting him.
He said...
Quote:Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 20:31 Post: 3327717 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have an excuse for being an idiot; I'm senile. But in your case, you have your full faculties and stupid.
And here is the link to him saying it...
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3327717#3327717
So dont blame me, I'm just quoting him.
i will blame you because it was more than obvious that CI was being sarcastic and YOU know that.
But you dont deny he said it??
As for you blaming me, since I am doing nothing more then quoting him, how can I be blamed for anything?
I have also said I have an 8th grade education, do you believe that?
