wangdangdoodle @ 164

Hi wigwam, I am ignorant of these things, is a crunch not near as bad as a crash? I fear the worst, being a cynical old broad.

As I understand it, a credit crunch reflects a lack of money available to loan out, which would happen say when the Chinese stop extending us credit. In such a situation, interest rates go way up. Or so I’m told.

Hmmm, how to explain…

In the circle of cash flow from banks to businesses to individuals and back to businesses and banks and government there is a necessary amount of hard cash and (especially these days) a lot of credit. The cash may be pretty steady, but the credit fluctuates as needed by the economic activity using it.

When an industry dealing in loans and interest rates experiences problems, then everybody knows things have gotten out of kilter and that there isn’t enough cash flowing through the circle to individuals who would like to pay off their mortgages, but can’t.

What happens then?

Mortgages are seen as too risky and businesses which offer them raise their interest rate to compensate. Then, if some go bust they still make sufficient money off the other good loans.

But, …

Raising interest rates (the credit crunch) makes it harder for people to buy on credit and that (sort of artificially) forces a slowdown in economic activity.

So, if things slow and other kinds of businesses become involved, then there may be less money going to individuals. It can become a spiraling effect that becomes magnified, rather than being dampened by Fed Board easing on interest rates or government action.

One good thing is the recent minimum wage increase forces business to put more money in people’s pockets. That helps to keep the cash flow circle going.

Watching Maria Bartiromo (corporate voice) on t.v. the other day she said she didn’t think this would ripple out to other sectors of the economy. Who knows there’s a slim chance she’s right. We’ll see.

Curiously, she also said she didn’t think John Edwards was “too far to the Left” for Wall Street.

Next month, Gen. Petraeus will testify before Congress about how swell the troop surge has worked, while downplaying or not mentioning at all any of the negatives.

The passage of this FISA-gutting legislation is to be reviewed in six months. Any Bushite testifying before Congress at that time will say how swell things have worked with their increased spying capabilities, but when asked for specifics to prove it, they’ll say that that information is classified and can’t be divulged in an open committee meeting, but can only be talked about behind closed doors…with everyone being briefed behind closed doors sworn to secrecy. And no one in Congress (whether Republican or Democrat) will be able to verfiy anything the fascist-Republican Bushites claim, whether in public or private.

I fear for our republic. The fascist-Republican Bushites (and some of their Democrat enablers) have done more damage to our democracy than a thousand attacks by al Qaeda could possibly ever do.

(Note: Democratic versus Democrat. The Democratic Party contains IC, because these true, blue patriots do C, while the Democrat Blud Dogs are missing the IC, because these enablers of the power-mad fascist Republicans don’t C.)

TribeScribe @ 232

Protect America Act of 2007
(Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by Senate)[S.1927.ES]

[snip]

….And pups far and wide might also want to note:

`(m) A directive made or an order granted under this section shall be retained for a period of not less than 10 years from the date on which such directive or such order is made.’.

(italics mine)
so…anything ‘acquired’ in the next 6 months
will be retained for the next 10 years.
so be good for goodness sake –

I read the latter as saying that the “record” for the surveillance has to be retained for 10 years…it can’t be HIDDEN that the surveillance occurred. It doesn’t mean the surveillance can continue for 10 years.

we agree. i.e., anything hoovered up within the next 6mos timeframe
will be kept (retained) for 10 years. the surveillance itself may not continue,
but the “record” will stand in extended perpetuity for anyone wanting to
review it for content.

And the new protocol for emails is to copy Alberto Gonzales to save him the trouble of going to the NSA.

Someone who is more knowledgeable of text messaging that this geezer needs to invent the protocol for text messaging.

I’ve never given money before to a candidate, I can’t afford it, but so help me God, if Cindy Sheehan runs against Pelosi, I’m tossing money Cindy’s way

Until the Dems start listening more to the Feingolds of the party, and less to the Feinstein’s of the party, until the Dems start telling the Blue Dogs, as opposed to the numerically superior liberal bloc, to take a hike for a change, I will do everything I can-however limited it is-to make the Dems pay for their political cowardice, and seeing as how those W Buckaroo lackey Dems fear a massively unpopular and politically isolated President more than their own leadership-Rahm Emanuel-it’s obvious the Dems need a major change in leadership-I’m still willing to cut Dean a break, but only if the Dems impeach Gonzales and zero-out ALL Executive branch funding

And for those still trying to spin for the Dems complete cave-in on this issue, you better understand, that the Dems, come September, will once again roll over for W and whimper for mercy when Petraeus issues that BS called a “Progress Report”

It’s bad enough that the Dems gave ANY expanded powers to Gonzales, and even worse that W gets to use our Constitution as toilet paper, but one President with these unchecked powers is more than enough, no more should EVER have these powers

By waving the white flag of surrender to the bin Laden currently occupying our White House, the Dems certainly have enabled the terrorists in this Administration who truly do “hate our freedoms”

So fine, I can’t do anything about the Dems clear cowardice in joining with W to rape our Constitution, but I CAN call those worthless Dems who couldn’t wait to be faithful W Buckaroos

And I plan on saying “al-Qaeda” & “Usama bin Laden” when I make those calls, after all, shouldn’t the first ones to get warrantlessly spied on with this claptrap be the very same quislings who enabled it in the first place?