Wednesday, October 01, 2008
First You Pump It In, Then You Suck It Out
The European Central Bank offered to drain 200 billion euros ($283 billion) from money markets after being swamped with record deposits from banks.So while some institutions are desperately borrowing money, others are swamped with it as no one wants to put it back out there in investments perceived to be risky:
The ECB said it will make the offer at 3 p.m. today at a fixed rate of 4.25 percent. Banks yesterday deposited a record 102.8 billion euros with the ECB overnight and borrowed 15.9 billion euros at the emergency marginal rate, the most since 2002. The ECB's deposit rate is 3.25 percent and the marginal lending rate is 5.25 percent.
The Frankfurt-based ECB today raised the amount of dollars it is offering banks overnight to $50 billion from yesterday's $30 billion. It allotted the full $50 billion after banks bid for a total of $70.9 billion.Today's the first day of the new quarter, so maybe things will quiet. Look at what one month treasury yields did yesterday.
European regulators are proposing reforms requiring banks to hold more capital, spread risks and require due diligence. However most of that is aimed at asset-backed. Since the swap market looks to be the next Grim Reaper, I suppose next year they'll propose limits on that.
"Historic Disapproval: Bush Hits All-Time Low Amid Economic Meltdown"
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?
a. better understands the economic problems people in this country are having:
b. would do more to bring needed change to Washington:
c. is the stronger leader:
d. has a better personality and temperment to be president:
e. would work better with both Democrats and Republicans in Congress
Wow, Obama is in trouble. McCain is kicking his butt on the works better with Dems and Reps question.
Just in fairness.
"October 1, 2008 - Obama Over 50 Percent In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Debate, Palin's Fade, Economy Put Democrat On Top"
* Florida: Obama up 49 - 43 percent pre-debate and 51 - 43 percent post-debate;
* Ohio: Obama up 49 - 42 percent pre-debate and 50 - 42 percent post-debate;
* Pennsylvania: Obama ahead 49 - 43 percent pre-debate and 54 - 39 percent post-debate. Pre-debate surveys ended at 8 p.m. Friday with post-debate surveys Saturday-Monday.
But what do I know.
I'll defer to MaxedOutMama on this.
"But last night Obama looked like such a fool that I can no longer pretend to myself that he is an alternative."
Teri, I literally cannot tell whether the other end of that link was intended as a joke, a parody, or was dead serious. It certainly describes Messiah Politics and Obama Fanboys.
When I can't tell, I assume it's dead serious. No matter how crazy you get as a parody or joke, you still cannot get more out on a limb than dead-serious True Believers. (And I count both World Net Daily and your link as done by Dead Serious TRUE BE-LEEEE-VERS.)
Check this out:
Posted by Mike Murphy
"As a former general in the GOP, I get a lot of emails from various operative types around the country. . . . One very smart consultant who knows McCain well sent me a link this morning to the video of McCain at Des Moines Register Editorial board interview. Set aside whatever you think of McCain's interview; this operative's point was purely technical and dead on correct:
What the Hell was McCain even doing there in the first place?
1.) Obama is going to win Iowa.
2.) Editorial board meetings are usually pure trouble to begin with and result only in newspaper endorsements that persuade very few voters beyond the immediate family members of the editorial board.
3.) Within the rarified category of newspaper editorial boards, the Des Moines Register is one of the most liberal in the country. I'm rather surprised that halfway through the McCain interview they failed to switch over to Esperanto, the peace-loving language of all nations.
So, 35 days left and McCain is in Iowa? Why put McCain in the wrong state, at the wrong place? No surprise the result is the wrong message and the wrong tone."
Any way you can post IPs of spammers?
I also see that the "suck it out" in the title brought teri back ;)
Now I could care less what clemente has to say about anything, but for those of you who support McCain and Palin, I'd just ask you to open you eyes.
I don't care about convincing anyone else, but here's my thought process.
1. I didn't much trust McCain to begin with, and the way his campaign has become more and more ridiculous it's just sickened me, starting with the whole Britney Spear Paris Hilton nonsense.
2. As a Republican, I'm not too happy with the direction the party has gone. I think Ron Paul made the most sense of anyone this election season, and he was laughed at and mocked by most Republicans.
3. The Sarah Palin picked really sealed the deal for me. At first, I didn't know much about her. But as time went on, I found myself just shaking my head. The Gibson interview was not good, but the Couric one was just horrendous. And since when do we nominate someone for vice president, and then refuse to take questions from reporters? If she's not up to speed enough to face reporters for 20 minutes of questions, how in the hell is she ready to deal with war or economic crisis?
So anyway, I've been a reader for a long time, and while I don't like this clemente character, I find him to be much less scary than the people that think McCain and Palin won't be an utter disaster for this country.
Call me old fashioned, but I'd like my leaders to know a thing or two about the world, like the quandary of democratic elections resulting in Hamas taking power in gaza or maybe basic understanding or two or more supreme court cases.
What are you doing here?
You've got free will. You've got a brain. What are you doing here?
(But that was a little harsh with the horses ass stuff, wasn't it? I mean, I'm just doing my job.)
Thanks for speaking up. I don't feel so alone now.
Here's my take. Just as religion and politics don't mix very well, economic analysis and politics don't go well together, either.
MaxedOutMom, I think you need to choose one or the other. It's your blog, but for me, I started coming her for the econ. The politics just puts me off.
And this pissing match between Clemente the Daily Kos clone and some of the other people here (especially the racist comments) just makes me sick.
I will say this for Clemente, however, World Net Daily is a troubling sign. It's just hard to take someone seriously that reads that tripe.
But that's just my view.
I rarely come here anymore, so if you all want to mix religion, politics and economics, have at it.
In my view it makes for a strange and toxic brew.
I'll put forward an idea. I'll cite my source. And then I'll step back.
(I'll try not to be a horses ass.)
Then we'll see how it goes from there.
Here's my idea: Some Republicans don't think Sarah Palin is such a great idea, and when they say so, they get hit with vitriol.
Here's a source backing up my idea: An article in the Chicago Tribune today, 10/1/2008, entitled "Speak correctly, or build a big bunker" by Kathleen Parker.
Here's an excerpt:
"Allow me to introduce myself. I am a traitor and an idiot. Also, my mother should have aborted me and left me in a Dumpster, but since she didn't, I should "off" myself.
Those are just a few nuggets randomly selected from thousands of e-mails written in response to my column suggesting that Sarah Palin is out of her league and should step down."
And another snippet:
"Of course, there's a difference between a lack of polish and a lack of coherence. Some of Palin's interview responses can't even be critiqued on their merits because they're so nonsensical."
I'm not happy. I started out this election swearing I'd never vote for McCain. But now....
To me it's long past the GOP/Dem stuff. We are now in the realm of trying to get past BS and rhetoric and solve problems for once because we've kicked the can down the road until we found ourselves at the edge of the cliff.
My belief is that you could follow traditional Dem values honestly and get to a workable situation, and you could follow traditional Republican values honestly and get to a workable situation. But I don't believe either party is currently honestly dealing with the problems. I think they will have to be beaten about the head and body by the voters until they take governing seriously.
There are flacks in both parties issuing a steady stream of nonsensical propaganda designed to mislead people. All I know is what is impossible. There isn't any easy way out of this, there isn't any painless way out of this. It coincides with the demographic shift and the retirement draw - we're going to have to pay higher taxes (most of us) and consume less to pay off debts we've accumulated.
I guess I'll have to hunt up the Palin interviews this weekend. I read the first Gibson transcript which didn't seem too bad. I'll watch the debate tomorrow, which hopefully will be a good test.
Congress is the key, though, whichever wins. For once, they will earn their pay.
If there were a viable third party I'd probably vote for it, but the Greens have McKinney running, the Libertarians often appear nuts, and the Constitution party seems formless.
There are always going to be some politics mixed with economics. Public policies in the US, India, China etc do change the economic world whether we like it or not.
For years I have been splitting my vote between candidates trying to get the one that looks the most serious about doing the job. I know a lot of people are doing likewise, and if the polling stuff I read is true, the independent faction keeps growing, so probably there are a ton of people doing the same thing.
But it isn't working.
Thanks for the response.
After reading that, I don't think we're that far apart.
I would just say this, however. You've come down pretty hard on Obama previously. I haven't heard you come down at all on Palin. (If you have, I apologize for missing it.)
It just doesn't strike me as honest to find fault with Obama but not with Palin.
I personally am alarmed at her seeming lack of knowledge of even the most basic national and international issues facing us.
Your response above is very reasonable. If you were able to reasonably and fairly examine Palin's strengths and weaknesses, this humble reader would feel much relieved.
And look, I'm not an Obama fan. There's plenty that concerns me about him, not the least of which is his experience.
But I can't, even as a life-long Republican, deny that the man can at least stand on his own two feet in a debate and in a press conference. I may not agree with his ideas and positions, but at least I have some idea what he believes and what his plans are.
With Palin, I have no such confidence. Some of her answers in the Couric interview literally made no sense. Most were just strings of talking points glued together. I'm just sick that the Republican Party thinks that this is an acceptable state of affairs.
I'll watch tomorrow's debate though. Lehrer did ask very good questions in the first presidential debate. I hope this debate is as substantive and that the two of them get nagged a bit if they try to respond with platitudes. They probably will try.
I hope Biden comes off better than he did in the SC confirmation hearings. He looked very, very odd there - very wrapped up in himself to the extent of ignoring the nominees. That's my major impression of him, and he probably will improve that impression because there is such huge room for improvement.
I wasn't for McCain, and although I wasn't originally for Obama I thought and think that he's better than Hillary. But one's too old and one's too young. I will not be encouraged by tomorrow's debate if I walk away thinking that one's too wrapped up in himself and one's a ditz.
OK, but did he know the law?
If I'm weighing "wrapped up in himself" vs. "but he knows what the hell he's talking about", that's not a close call.
Isn't substance worth something, or are we judging people, and potential leaders, on how they look, how they come across?
I think it's very telling that you didn't say a thing about the SUBSTANCE of Biden.
If that's the way you judge leaders, then Palin will fit in just fine. The fact that the substance isn't there won't matter a wit to you.
But she'll look good. Perky and positive.
God help us.
There was a time when we had people that regularly lived through small d "depressions". They were boring folks, who told us to save money, never go into debt and never trust banks. Over time, they just became old and tiresome with their conservatism. After all, why put off buying stuff when you could have it right now? So we just stopped listening, a lot like the way you are today, clemente. And now, it appears that we may get our very own depression. It's probably not going to be like the big d "Depression". That one was handled by a Democrat known for giving good speeches, who hung around with a lot of folks out on the left fringe. The press loved him, so that we haven't started to learn about how badly he bungled things until recently. I'd recommend "The Forgotten Man" by Amity Shlaes, but I know that you wouldn't read such things. It would contradict your world viewpoint. We couldn't have that.
So, while the rest of us read this blog to see how bad things are and how bad they may get, you post your silly posts, as though putting Obama in charge will make everything all right. Hang onto your fantasy as long as you are able. I've read a lot about that big D depression. My favorite story is from a cookbook, where they talked about canning weeds, just so they would have some food put away. Let's just hope we don't get to that point. It might cause you to turn bitter, clemente.
As for the recent SC confirmation proceedings, no one could have told whether Biden knew the law or not. He tied himself up in knots and barely asked questions. The Senate has a very real duty there, and he flubbed his part of it big time. That's substantive.
He wasn't the only one, but Leahy, for example, really grilled. He did his duty. I'm sure that Leahy's performance IRRITATED supporters of the nominee, but you had to respect Leahy.
However I dug far enough to get back to the Bork hearings (1987) Biden differed with Bork, but he showed good knowledge and bearing. But in the Thomas hearings he got all tangled up in his own rhetoric. In the interim, he had brain surgery. This has raised a doubt in my mind, but provides a potential reason why he might not have performed well there.
He's clearly not an empty suit; he has been a very active senator, and I have to admire him for being willing to come out and call Milosevic a war criminal.
I thought Biden's policy on Iraq (partition) was completely wrongheaded, but it wasn't stupid.
Biden did vote for the Bankruptcy Reform Act, but so did McCain. Obama opposed it.
Unfortunately, now we get to be those folks for the next generation.
Thanks for digging, MoM!
Unfortunately, now we get to be those folks for the next generation.
And get pooh-poohed as Those Old Fuddy-Duddies because Things Are Different Now -- and the "New Improved Snake Oil Looks Sooooo EXCITING! I WANT IT! I WANT IT! I WANT IT!"
Links to this post: