Obama's financing

Dumbass pinko-nazi-neoconservative-hippy-capitalists.
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Obama's financing

Post by Partha »

An example of this would be the Senates ruling today to "bail out" $300 Billion worth in mortgages. I think this is ridiculous, and those people who lent out/took out more than they could cover, should suffer their losses. Yet, now all of us will have to suffer to make up the difference. I'm sure someone on these boards will take one look at this post and go "You're an idiot, how can you not see it's good the gov't did this?!" -- but, fortunately, won't show me a link showing how great it is the gov't did it.
No link, just simple logic: If you're a conservative who deals in the idea that the welfare state is a bad thing, then does it really matter how they end up on it, considering that if you leave them to 'suffer their losses', they're going to qualify for all that stuff you hate anyways? It's similar to the whole health care argument - conservatives bitch about the idea of their tax dollars being spent for indigent health care, when it would be cheaper to treat the indigent any other way besides the way we have right now (emergency care) - and you're still paying either way.

And, of course, the oil and commodities issue. I laughed earlier because you don't seem to understand or want to - most commodities trading is done in the Intercontinental Exchange, and it's not regulated by the US.

I'm not linking, you can Google if you really must have the government report:
“Until recently, US energy futures were traded exclusively on regulated exchanges within the United States, like the NYMEX, which are subject to extensive oversight by the CFTC, including ongoing monitoring to detect and prevent price manipulation or fraud. In recent years, however, there has been a tremendous growth in the trading of contracts that look and are structured just like futures contracts, but which are traded on unregulated OTC electronic markets. Because of their similarity to futures contracts they are often called “futures look-alikes.”

The only practical difference between futures look-alike contracts and futures contracts is that the look-alikes are traded in unregulated markets whereas futures are traded on regulated exchanges. The trading of energy commodities by large firms on OTC electronic exchanges was exempted from CFTC oversight by a provision inserted at the behest of Enron and other large energy traders into the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 in the waning hours of the 106th Congress.

The impact on market oversight has been substantial. NYMEX traders, for example, are required to keep records of all trades and report large trades to the CFTC. These Large Trader Reports, together with daily trading data providing price and volume information, are the CFTC’s primary tools to gauge the extent of speculation in the markets and to detect, prevent, and prosecute price manipulation. CFTC Chairman Reuben Jeffrey recently stated: “The Commission’s Large Trader information system is one of the cornerstones of our surveillance program and enables detection of concentrated and coordinated positions that might be used by one or more traders to attempt manipulation.”

In contrast to trades conducted on the NYMEX, traders on unregulated OTC electronic exchanges are not required to keep records or file Large Trader Reports with the CFTC, and these trades are exempt from routine CFTC oversight. In contrast to trades conducted on regulated futures exchanges, there is no limit on the number of contracts a speculator may hold on an unregulated OTC electronic exchange, no monitoring of trading by the exchange itself, and no reporting of the amount of outstanding contracts (“open interest”) at the end of each day.”
Thanks again, fucking Republicans.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Tarfang_Trubasher
Mastah Elect of 9
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:42 am

Re: Obama's financing

Post by Tarfang_Trubasher »

Embar wrote:So maybe casting a protest vote in this election may scuttle McCain's chances at the White House. I ask you.. so what? Is McCain really going to be that radically different from Obama? Probably not. About the only thing he can do is whip out the veto, since the Dems will control both the Senate and the House. In all honesty, if you were going to toss a vote to make a statement, this is the election to do it.
This is well put - obviously, a few little debatables are the differences between Obama and McCain are basically in the military, though McCain seems to have started shifting toward the "okay, maybe it is time to leave" camp. I'm starting the think the further we get toward November, the candidates are going to meet in the middle, maybe slightly left. Then it becomes a popularity contest, which Obama will win.

I did read a classic yesterday -- someone voting for Obama because he's "tired of all the old men running the show. I disagree with Obama's politics but, he couldn't do any more harm."

/facepalm.

I've always agreed with voting your gut -- and this election year can speak volumes since the risk is lower (due to Rep & Dem similarities) to expend a "protest vote." Ron Paul's camp is currently split between Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party). I'm keeping an eye on this as well. Paul has mentioned he's "favorable of Barr," but hasn't backed him directly.

-TF
Tarfang Trubasher
Master Basher of the Trollie Kind
Post Reply