It Didn't pass!

[phirang]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Yeah, Crammer can be very funny to watch, sometimes ...

Ya think the money-laundering will be permitted in the next edition of the bill?

[Jay]

Re: It Didn't pass!

What happened to the PPT today? What out of ammo? ;)

[Supercilious]

Re: It Didn't pass!

What happened to the PPT today? What out of ammo? ;)

They were send home ... to rest They have been replaced by a group of "volunteers" :p


For Phirang-- I guess that money laundering was already supposed to be legal in the version rejected today.

[phirang]

Re: It Didn't pass!

They were send home ... to rest They have been replaced by a group of "volunteers" :p


For Phirang-- I guess that money laundering was already supposed to be legal in the version rejected today.

No, I recall distinctly hearing some republican drone on about how the US isn't able to repatriate x billions of wealth and how it saved us the last time we suspended the taxes on cayman island acct's.

[The Outback Oracle]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Maybe this has been said in other words...if they used this Martial Law thing they meant it to fail. Obviously many members your Congress were very upset that Paulson came up with a 3 page Bill that just precluded oversight and appeal. It was the reason he was given a fle in his ear in the first place. Then they try to railroad people again!@!! They knew what reaction they'd get. They meant it to fail! So I reckon most posters are right...there is something else going on!

[dbarberic]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Can anyone explain how this connects to the "marshal law" crap? There's hints that this vote isn't the end-all. Like Mega's "They held the vote open!", and Tulpen's "they'll revote one way or the other just watch". If this is some sort of congressional strong-arm tactic to coerce representatives to vote yea, can anyone explain the legality of it?

Isn't the vote, like, the vote?

This is a more far out theory that is floating around and it goes like this...


The house and congress fight and nothing is passed. Around early to mid-October things get so bad in the market that Bush passes an executive order funding the bailout and doing an end-round congress and the house. The executive order may or may not be done after declaring a state of emergency. I would imagine that such a blatant display of going directly against the will of the people would have such an effect that there would be civil unrest. To stamp down the civil unrest, local martial law is declared.

[cschx]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Maybe this has been said in other words...if they used this Martial Law thing they meant it to fail. Obviously many members your Congress were very upset that Paulson came up with a 3 page Bill that just precluded oversight and appeal. It was the reason he was given a fle in his ear in the first place. Then they try to railroad people again!@!! They knew what reaction they'd get. They meant it to fail! So I reckon most posters are right...there is something else going on!

I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I don't quite understand what you're saying. Do you mean that Paulson intended the bailout to fail, or that Congress did? What would be the motivation for that? I can see how the former scenario could be used to manufacture a crisis that could give the administration an opportunity for an even bigger power grab... but Congress? The vote was split along party lines. Do you think there was some kind of backroom agreement between the parties to deliberately kill the bill while making it look like one party supported it? What would be the point of that?

[jtabeb]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Basic question I'm sure, but I thought gold would skyrocket if it passed, not if it failed.

It seemed generally accepted that, if the bailout passed, we'd be more likely to see high inflation in the future. That would make holding gold more desireable.

Is the huge gold jump people simply getting out of stocks/treasuries and needing somewhere to dump it short term? If so, does this mean we'd expect another drop short term followed by another positive gold spike when an eventual version of the bill passes?

Gold is a better DEFLATION play than (dis)inflation play (just look at stocks over the last 30 years to get the proper perspective). Gold is also an excellent hyper-inflation play.

My guess is the gold market is seeing either hyper-inflation or defaltion, but I'm in the EJ camp that says "no deflation, then lots of inflation" so that would put us into the hyper-inflation camp.:eek:

[bart]

Re: It Didn't pass!

So I reckon most posters are right...there is something else going on

One that is way off most radars is the general area of the Amero or Intor (Robert Mundell's global currency).

[bart]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Major reasons for gold price changes, in no particular order

1. Limits in supply, "peak cheap gold"
2. Changes in demand
3. Inflation direction & speed of change
4. Real interest rate direction
5. Fear - social, political, "financial system"
6. Changes in confidence of money or a given currency or the "financial system"
7. Manipulation/control by central banks and others
8. Mania
9. Technical analysis factors

[Supercilious]

Re: It Didn't pass!

One that is way off most radars is the general area of the Amero or Intor (Robert Mundell's global currency).

Amero will be first

Anyway the quote du jour:

“The problem with financial institution balance sheets is that on the left hand side nothing is right and on the right hand side nothing is left.” London Banker Blog

[The Outback Oracle]

Re: It Didn't pass!

I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I don't quite understand what you're saying. Do you mean that Paulson intended the bailout to fail, or that Congress did? What would be the motivation for that? I can see how the former scenario could be used to manufacture a crisis that could give the administration an opportunity for an even bigger power grab... but Congress? The vote was split along party lines. Do you think there was some kind of backroom agreement between the parties to deliberately kill the bill while making it look like one party supported it? What would be the point of that?

I have no idea! I'm not in the USA so I know less about it than anyone else. I have, however, managed people for 40 odd years. The way to get their backs up is to try to order them around and give them no say in what is going on.
Paulson is a manager (certainly not an effing Economist) and he knew his first proposal would would get everyone upset. Then they go away and together with a few Senior members of Congress come back with a Bill that they deliberatley again, annoy everyone and essentially take away any Member's right to debate the Bill! They were being deliberately obstinate in order to create a hostile reaction in teh Congress....I have no idea why they would do it but I reckon you can bet this has been quite deliberate

[D-Mack]

Re: It Didn't pass!

One that is way off most radars is the general area of the Amero or Intor (Robert Mundell's global currency).

I have never heard of the Intor before.


Googling for it I found this site

http://www.singleglobalcurrency.org/feedback_names.html

I recognize only "Unitas" & "Bancor" from Bretton Woods and "Phoenix" from the Economist

[bart]

Re: It Didn't pass!

I have never heard of the Intor before.


Googling for it I found this site

http://www.singleglobalcurrency.org/feedback_names.html

I recognize only "Unitas" & "Bancor" from Bretton Woods and "Phoenix" from the Economist

Look up Robert Mundell and his papers from the '90s. I think he also has a site.

[BrianL]

Re: It Didn't pass!

Thank you both for the info. I just started paying attention to gold recently (new at all of this) and am still trying to build an extremely simplified mental model of some of it.

(I read my first Harry Browne book over the weekend and finally decided to buy gold; a first for me. I was going to wire money into BullionVault this afternoon. Not the best timing on my part. )