The one guy I like is rex tillerson. He's a serious man and wants to stay in the paris deal. The rest seem shady. Rwnj's.Is that like him draining the swamp and putting them all in the WH?Trump Talked About Banning Lobbyists, Now He Might Put Them In Charge | HuffPostTY you're killing me
Sean Spicer Claims Covfefe Is A Secret Trump Code Word Then Abruptly Ends Briefing
As the nation tries to figure out Trump meant when he tweeted covfefe, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer claimed that it was code word understood by Trump and a few people.…
And what did bush teach them with Iraq? Give up your weapons and Republicans will eventually invade you. Look what we did to Saddam.
Before I read the rest, remember the stock market went up when Trump won? Well sorry consumer confidence went down on bushs watch.
So?
Clinton left office with an ARM on the nation, leaving a toxic balloon payment on the interest of the national debt, ******* crook, coupled with the dot com bust
{The current Bush administration's claim that it inherited a recession from Clinton became somewhat more credible last week, when the Commerce Department revised its estimates of GDP, the broadest measure of economic growth, in the first, second and third quarters of 2001, showing that it shrank in all three quarters.}
Bush says he inherited recession - Aug. 7, 2002
So in fact the recession began in January of 2001.
You are in fact a hack, Bush came into office with a recession, followed by a major terror attack that occurred because of the gross negligence and malfeasance of the Clinton administration.
Also, how did what Bush did (tax rebates to the middle class) cause the central banks to commodore mortgage backed securities and intertwine solvent and non-solvent assets?
Explain precisely what Bush did? I mean, I only ask because we both know you're lying, and that I have shredded you on lies like this a dozen times.
Now let's review Silly Bonobo, the MBS goes back to the Carter years of the mid-70's. Bush had nothing to do with it, nor did any Republicans since the democrats held all branches of government at the time. What really changed was the use of tranche cross pollination in the 90's. Prior to the fast and lose Clinton years, a Bbb tranche contained higher risk MBS packaging that was shopped to home buyers at higher interest rates to offer a higher reward commensurate with that risk. But during the wild west years of no oversight under Clinton,the big guys started "securitizing" MBS' by creating trusts. Aaa tranches were combined with Bbb tranches made primarily of subprime mortgages with the myth that the Aaa tranche mitigated the risk. So we have a MBS that is really high risk sold as Aaa because the 50% Bbb tranche is diversified by 50% Aaa, with Wall Street suddenly declaring the entire securitized package Aaa through Standards and Poor, et al..
Soon the REAL crooks came out (Todd disagrees with me on this, he holds that CDO's are legitimate. We have agreed to disagree) by introducing the CDO. A CDO takes an MBS and adds other securities. The CDO goes way beyond a securitized MBS, Take a toxic MBS and add non-mortgage securities such as bonds and then write a prospectus touting the package as low risk - hence a collateralized debt obligation. CDO's were in fact often toxic, which is why the really smart guys started shorting them. Shorting a stock is simply a wager that a stock will drop in value, or in this case a CDO. Party A grants a stock to party B with an agreed upon date that party B will return the stock. Party B then sells the stock on the market. Say the stock is worth $50 a share at the time of the sale and the return date is 20 days. Party B puts the $50 into escrow and waits for 20 days, then he buys the same stock and returns it to party A. If the stock drops to $30, then party B makes $20 on the deal and party A gets the stock back, though it is now at a lower value. If the stock rises to $100 then party B loses $50 and party A gets the stock back. As I said, a short is a gamble, but one that is based on research. Generally the party A is willing to do this because they want short term cash, and party B in fact makes a compensatory payment against the return of the stock, ie floats a loan against the stock value. The cash must be returned after the agreed date.
Go ahead and challenge me on this Bonobo. Go for it.
Fox News is setting US policy
Yes, Sean has sold his soul.
Sean Spicer Claims Covfefe Is A Secret Trump Code Word Then Abruptly Ends Briefing
As the nation tries to figure out Trump meant when he tweeted covfefe, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer claimed that it was code word understood by Trump and a few people.…
Then who's land is it? Before you answer I'll give you a hint, it's not the Palestinians land. It is land won in a battle / 7 day war Israel did not start. Does Mexico own California?
Before I read the rest, remember the stock market went up when Trump won? Well sorry consumer confidence went down on bushs watch.
So?
Clinton left office with an ARM on the nation, leaving a toxic balloon payment on the interest of the national debt, ******* crook, coupled with the dot com bust
{The current Bush administration's claim that it inherited a recession from Clinton became somewhat more credible last week, when the Commerce Department revised its estimates of GDP, the broadest measure of economic growth, in the first, second and third quarters of 2001, showing that it shrank in all three quarters.}
Bush says he inherited recession - Aug. 7, 2002
So in fact the recession began in January of 2001.
You are in fact a hack, Bush came into office with a recession, followed by a major terror attack that occurred because of the gross negligence and malfeasance of the Clinton administration.
Also, how did what Bush did (tax rebates to the middle class) cause the central banks to commodore mortgage backed securities and intertwine solvent and non-solvent assets?
Explain precisely what Bush did? I mean, I only ask because we both know you're lying, and that I have shredded you on lies like this a dozen times.
Now let's review Silly Bonobo, the MBS goes back to the Carter years of the mid-70's. Bush had nothing to do with it, nor did any Republicans since the democrats held all branches of government at the time. What really changed was the use of tranche cross pollination in the 90's. Prior to the fast and lose Clinton years, a Bbb tranche contained higher risk MBS packaging that was shopped to home buyers at higher interest rates to offer a higher reward commensurate with that risk. But during the wild west years of no oversight under Clinton,the big guys started "securitizing" MBS' by creating trusts. Aaa tranches were combined with Bbb tranches made primarily of subprime mortgages with the myth that the Aaa tranche mitigated the risk. So we have a MBS that is really high risk sold as Aaa because the 50% Bbb tranche is diversified by 50% Aaa, with Wall Street suddenly declaring the entire securitized package Aaa through Standards and Poor, et al..
Soon the REAL crooks came out (Todd disagrees with me on this, he holds that CDO's are legitimate. We have agreed to disagree) by introducing the CDO. A CDO takes an MBS and adds other securities. The CDO goes way beyond a securitized MBS, Take a toxic MBS and add non-mortgage securities such as bonds and then write a prospectus touting the package as low risk - hence a collateralized debt obligation. CDO's were in fact often toxic, which is why the really smart guys started shorting them. Shorting a stock is simply a wager that a stock will drop in value, or in this case a CDO. Party A grants a stock to party B with an agreed upon date that party B will return the stock. Party B then sells the stock on the market. Say the stock is worth $50 a share at the time of the sale and the return date is 20 days. Party B puts the $50 into escrow and waits for 20 days, then he buys the same stock and returns it to party A. If the stock drops to $30, then party B makes $20 on the deal and party A gets the stock back, though it is now at a lower value. If the stock rises to $100 then party B loses $50 and party A gets the stock back. As I said, a short is a gamble, but one that is based on research. Generally the party A is willing to do this because they want short term cash, and party B in fact makes a compensatory payment against the return of the stock, ie floats a loan against the stock value. The cash must be returned after the agreed date.
Go ahead and challenge me on this Bonobo. Go for it.
Imagine if Obama got 9_11ed
Bush thrived on negative GDP
So?
Clinton left office with an ARM on the nation, leaving a toxic balloon payment on the interest of the national debt, ******* crook, coupled with the dot com bust
{The current Bush administration's claim that it inherited a recession from Clinton became somewhat more credible last week, when the Commerce Department revised its estimates of GDP, the broadest measure of economic growth, in the first, second and third quarters of 2001, showing that it shrank in all three quarters.}
Bush says he inherited recession - Aug. 7, 2002
So in fact the recession began in January of 2001.
You are in fact a hack, Bush came into office with a recession, followed by a major terror attack that occurred because of the gross negligence and malfeasance of the Clinton administration.
Also, how did what Bush did (tax rebates to the middle class) cause the central banks to commodore mortgage backed securities and intertwine solvent and non-solvent assets?
Explain precisely what Bush did? I mean, I only ask because we both know you're lying, and that I have shredded you on lies like this a dozen times.
Now let's review Silly Bonobo, the MBS goes back to the Carter years of the mid-70's. Bush had nothing to do with it, nor did any Republicans since the democrats held all branches of government at the time. What really changed was the use of tranche cross pollination in the 90's. Prior to the fast and lose Clinton years, a Bbb tranche contained higher risk MBS packaging that was shopped to home buyers at higher interest rates to offer a higher reward commensurate with that risk. But during the wild west years of no oversight under Clinton,the big guys started "securitizing" MBS' by creating trusts. Aaa tranches were combined with Bbb tranches made primarily of subprime mortgages with the myth that the Aaa tranche mitigated the risk. So we have a MBS that is really high risk sold as Aaa because the 50% Bbb tranche is diversified by 50% Aaa, with Wall Street suddenly declaring the entire securitized package Aaa through Standards and Poor, et al..
Soon the REAL crooks came out (Todd disagrees with me on this, he holds that CDO's are legitimate. We have agreed to disagree) by introducing the CDO. A CDO takes an MBS and adds other securities. The CDO goes way beyond a securitized MBS, Take a toxic MBS and add non-mortgage securities such as bonds and then write a prospectus touting the package as low risk - hence a collateralized debt obligation. CDO's were in fact often toxic, which is why the really smart guys started shorting them. Shorting a stock is simply a wager that a stock will drop in value, or in this case a CDO. Party A grants a stock to party B with an agreed upon date that party B will return the stock. Party B then sells the stock on the market. Say the stock is worth $50 a share at the time of the sale and the return date is 20 days. Party B puts the $50 into escrow and waits for 20 days, then he buys the same stock and returns it to party A. If the stock drops to $30, then party B makes $20 on the deal and party A gets the stock back, though it is now at a lower value. If the stock rises to $100 then party B loses $50 and party A gets the stock back. As I said, a short is a gamble, but one that is based on research. Generally the party A is willing to do this because they want short term cash, and party B in fact makes a compensatory payment against the return of the stock, ie floats a loan against the stock value. The cash must be returned after the agreed date.
Go ahead and challenge me on this Bonobo. Go for it.
While I'm far from ashamed of my IQ it's your I WILL not your IQ but a repub wouldn't know what I'm talking aboutYo, Edward with an IQ of 37, since you think it's funny, go ahead and show us what I got wrong?
Come on smart boi, explain how Bush was the culprit in the housing bubble, I'm dying the hear it!
No?
