Financial News

[Rex Kickass]

At least not now. But still this is a big step forward.

 

And if this holds true, it makes me a little happy to know he wasn't AS big of a POS as it was beginning to appear. Corzine is a Sox fan btw.

[NorthSideSox72]

And if this holds true, it makes me a little happy to know he wasn't AS big of a POS as it was beginning to appear. Corzine is a Sox fan btw.

We'll see. Someone is going down for this, as I've said all along. If Corzine has a get-out-of-jail-free email, then someone else HAD to know about it, whether or not Corzine did. And other evidence may point to Corzine. Just because they made a "House Wire" doesn't mean that is what actually happened, and it is entirely possible Corzine already knew what was going on, but the emails called it what it needed to be called to cover their asses.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

We'll see. Someone is going down for this, as I've said all along. If Corzine has a get-out-of-jail-free email, then someone else HAD to know about it, whether or not Corzine did. And other evidence may point to Corzine. Just because they made a "House Wire" doesn't mean that is what actually happened, and it is entirely possible Corzine already knew what was going on, but the emails called it what it needed to be called to cover their asses.

 

I believe this, despite the email. Regardless, the investigation is moving along pretty nicely if we have gotten to the point where we have a name. We'll see if this person was the main problem, or just the fall guy.

[Balta1701]

Nothing to do with financial news. I just love the fact that Bank of America now operates a system where your local branch no longer ever has to pick up its own phone to answer questions from its customers. If they don't pick up their phone, you're immediately routed to a call center that cannot provide you with information on your local branch because that call center is in fact not your local branch.

 

Oh, and they've removed virtually every possible means to submit a complaint through their website. Even if they do nothing about it, that's usually a decent way to make a customer feel better. Had to go through their online website technical support chat to be able to do so because that's the only thing that allows you to actually type what you want.

 

I can't wait until I can find a permanent position and be done with these guys.

[Y2HH]

Nothing to do with financial news. I just love the fact that Bank of America now operates a system where your local branch no longer ever has to pick up its own phone to answer questions from its customers. If they don't pick up their phone, you're immediately routed to a call center that cannot provide you with information on your local branch because that call center is in fact not your local branch.

 

Oh, and they've removed virtually every possible means to submit a complaint through their website. Even if they do nothing about it, that's usually a decent way to make a customer feel better. Had to go through their online website technical support chat to be able to do so because that's the only thing that allows you to actually type what you want.

 

I can't wait until I can find a permanent position and be done with these guys.

 

You work for BoA?

[Balta1701]

You work for BoA?

Nope, just have an account there that I keep because of the temporary status of my current job. Definition of inertia, I don't want to move funds completely out of there because it'll be much harder to move funds repeatedly than it will be to "Rip the band-aid" off once, if I can ever find a permanent job.

 

This is how they treat customers. And customers with substantial savings, btw.

[Y2HH]

Nope, just have an account there that I keep because of the temporary status of my current job.

 

They're my "bank", too...but that account only exists for paying bills, and because it's the closest bank to my house. We don't actually "keep" money there for anything other than a convenient place so it can be spent.

 

My actual savings and other accounts are all etrade.

[Balta1701]

They're my "bank", too...but that account only exists for paying bills, and because it's the closest bank to my house. We don't actually "keep" money there for anything other than a convenient place so it can be spent.

 

My actual savings and other accounts are all etrade.

I have a large sum in a credit union account also, but that credit union is going to be a pain to access and close the accounts if I can take the next step and find a permanent job, so I keep a good sum at BofA which is going to be much more accessible to make a down payment to a house, since no matter where I go I can go into BofA and find a branch within 100 miles or so.

 

But, that also means I have to deal with BofA.

[Y2HH]

I have a large sum in a credit union account also, but that credit union is going to be a pain to access and close the accounts if I can take the next step and find a permanent job, so I keep a good sum at BofA which is going to be much more accessible to make a down payment to a house, since no matter where I go I can go into BofA and find a branch within 100 miles or so.

 

But, that also means I have to deal with BofA.

 

I'm basically in the same position...but the convenience of being able to access my money trumps my dislike of the "big bank" industry.

[Balta1701]

I'm basically in the same position...but the convenience of being able to access my money trumps my dislike of the "big bank" industry.

I'm totally getting away from these guys when I can and slowly moving funds, but the moment I can move funds into a down payment on a house, that account vanishes. Well, not the moment, because they drag the "Closing your account" process out forever, but we'll go through that Hell once.

[Balta1701]

Work of the St. Louis fed .

We find no evidence that lenders increased subprime originations or altered pricing around the discrete eligibility cutoffs for the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) affordable housing goals or the Community Reinvestment Act. Our results indicate that the extensive purchases of risky private-label mortgage-backed securities by the GSEs were not due to affordable housing mandates.

[StrangeSox]

Some numbers on 2011 taxes that show that once you account for taxes at all levels, our system is essentially flat.

http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2012/04/who_pays..._in_america.php

 

All told, Americans pay about 28% of their income in taxes.1 The poor and working class pay a bit less, but the entire top half of the income spectrum, from middle class to super rich, pays almost exactly the same rate, around 29-30% of their income. Not a bad deal for the wealthy.

via

[Rex Kickass]

Dumb question. How can ADP payroll estimates and Government payroll estimates vary so widely?

[kapkomet]

Dumb question. How can ADP payroll estimates and Government payroll estimates vary so widely?

 

 

If I remember right ADP uses a completely different source then the government, and also the whole seasonally adjusted thing gets thrown out with ADP.

[StrangeSox]

The Buffet rule failed in the Senate yesterday, 51 YES 45 NO.

[Y2HH]

The Buffet rule failed in the Senate yesterday, 51 YES 45 NO.

 

It's as stupid "rule" anyway. They need to fully reform the tax code instead of attempting to nickle and dime like this would do. The buffet rule is nothing but a placate the have not's with the knowledge that a select few of the very rich, like Buffet are now paying higher taxes, IF, and only IF they continue investing exactly as they are now.

 

They need to reform things like this:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20...sa_vegas_junket

 

If you want to live in California, but work in DC, you should have to pay for that on your own. Hell, if I didn't live in Chicago, I couldn't work where I work...why is it we let these people get away with this sort of thing? Don't want to live in DC? Don't work for the government. Nope, instead of common sense like that, we foot the bill so they can live whenever they want.

[StrangeSox]

The buffet rule is political and meant to show that republicans are against any taxes on the wealthy while voting against payroll tax cuts as well. it is not presented as comprehensive tax reform but a starting point.

 

Anyway I just like highlighting bills with 50+ votes failing.

[Y2HH]

The buffet rule is political and meant to show that republicans are against any taxes on the wealthy while voting against payroll tax cuts as well. it is not presented as comprehensive tax reform but a starting point.

 

Anyway I just like highlighting bills with 50+ votes failing.

 

I understand it's political...but so are most things today. After a while, the message gets lost...and nothing gets done because they're too busy trying to get that message across...over...and over...and over...

[StrangeSox]

I understand it's political...but so are most things today. After a while, the message gets lost...and nothing gets done because they're too busy trying to get that message across...over...and over...and over...

This bill represented doing something. There is no way comprehensive tax reform is going to happen in an election year in normal circumstances. There is no way comprehensive tax reform is going to happen when one side refuses to allow any increase in revenues.

 

Piketty and Saez are two pretty influential economists in the area of income and wealth distribution and tax policy and they support it.

http://link.tapatalk.com/api/click?key=a7e...8f372351b321dd8

[Y2HH]

This bill represented doing something. There is no way comprehensive tax reform is going to happen in an election year in normal circumstances. There is no way comprehensive tax reform is going to happen when one side refuses to allow any increase in revenues.

 

Piketty and Saez are two pretty influential economists in the area of income and wealth distribution and tax policy and they support it.

http://link.tapatalk.com/api/click?key=a7e...8f372351b321dd8

 

At this point a lot of economists don't care if something is short sighted, so long as it gets something positive done, even if it's so miniscule in scope it's almost non existent. The additional money this rule would raise, short term, is a drop in the bucket at best, and long term, these investors will simply move on to gazillion other tax havens left untouched by this rule.

 

And let me fix your second line while I'm at it...

 

You said, "There is no way comprehensive tax reform is going to happen in an election year in normal circumstances."

 

You should have said, "There is no way comprehensive tax reform is going to happen, period." It has nothing to do with it being election year, or otherwise. It also has nothing to do with "one side" refusing the allow any increases in revenue, either. It has everything to do with rich people in the senate and congress knowing the system is rigged...and knowing nothing will change, while knowing they can get all the "regular folks" to argue about it while they secretly laugh about it. NONE of them have a true vested interest in raising taxes on themselves, or their friends, or the corporations that get them elected. And that includes Democrats.

 

Oh, add the word "comprehensive" to my list of pet peeve 'political' words that has lost all meaning.

 

"Welcome to the most important point you never get taught about economics: there are no such things as solutions. All we've got, all we can ever have, is a series of trade-offs."

[Balta1701]

Warren Buffett announces he has prostate cancer. However, the version he has is treatable and the 5 year survival rate is close to 100% from this cancer type.

[Y2HH]

Warren Buffett announces he has prostate cancer. However, the version he has is treatable and the 5 year survival rate is close to 100% from this cancer type.

 

He's also 81.

 

I'm not sure why, but when super old people announce some illness...I tend to not care.

[southsider2k5]

He's also 81.

 

I'm not sure why, but when super old people announce some illness...I tend to not care.

 

He runs one of the biggest market cap companies in the world. That is why people care.

 

More than anything I wonder if this will start to move BRK towards a clear plan of succession.

[Balta1701]

LF, you asked about the new refinancing HARP 2.0 program a few months ago and I said to at least be wary at the time. Here's one plausible ripoff coming from that program (although I can't vouch for the source, these small independent journals have been the places that told much of the original story about the mortgage market frauds so I wouldn't be surprised if they were on to something).

 

The banks are doing the refinancings in the HARP program and taking government money to do so, but in this version, the only place that can refinance your mortgage is the bank that already holds it. Thus, there's no ability to have competition for mortgage rates...and as a consequence, a bank forcing a higher than necessary rate on its customers through that program could be one possible ripoff to watch out for.

[Y2HH]

He runs one of the biggest market cap companies in the world. That is why people care.

 

More than anything I wonder if this will start to move BRK towards a clear plan of succession.

 

What does this have to do with my statement?

 

I didn't say "people" shouldn't care. I spoke for myself. As in, *I* don't care. And it has nothing to do with what company he runs...my only point is he's 81 years old. He has an illness...and? He's 81! He's at the age where you get...illnesses. It would be news to me if it was Mark Zuckerberg...a young man. This is not the case.

 

Anyone investing in BRK knows, or at least should know, that the person running it is 81 and time isn't slowing down. It's just not a surprise when old people get sick...it's expected.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Y2HH