This will probably piss a few people off, but here goes.
Some comments on  this piece in the WAPO.

The country might be not be in a
depression, but many Americans feel that
they are. Local and national mental health
experts said that the loss of jobs, homes
and retirement savings has triggered an
increase in the number of people with
symptoms related to anxiety or depression,
such as changes in sleeping and eating
patterns, headaches, and nervousness. Some
psychologists and therapists said they are
getting calls from new clients seeking
their help in dealing with the financial
crisis. Others said current patients are
increasingly talking about how the
recession is causing them angst. Financial
advisers, meanwhile, said they are spending
more time, on the phone or in person,
reassuring their clients.

"People were riding a false wave," said
Nicholas Yrizarry, an adviser with Nicholas
Yrizarry & Associates in Reston. "Their
house values were going up. They were
spending money. They were buying brand-new
cars. This puts a tremendous strain on
people when not only are their portfolios
down, but they've lost their jobs."

First of all the old addage applies here. "Don't play the Market
unless you can afford to loose it all."  Secondly a new car every
year or even every other year is simply not necessary.

In the latest Washington Post-ABC News
poll, 57 percent of those surveyed said the
nation's economic condition is a cause of
stress in their lives. More than a quarter
said they had "serious" anxiety. The
percentage of stressed-out people was
higher among those who said their finances
had suffered "a great deal" from the
recession. Among this group, 83 percent
said they were stressed, with 55 percent
reporting serious anxiety.

If you think you cannot get through this on
your own, experts say, it's crucial to turn
to friends, family, clergy, financial
advisers or mental health professionals.
Maintaining your physical health by eating
well, exercising, sleeping enough, taking
walks when you need fresh air, and doing
fun things that don't cost much money are
also important.

"Some people are doing what we call
catastrophizing," said Mary Alvord, a
psychologist in practice in Rockville and
Silver Spring and also the American
Psychological Association's public
education coordinator for Maryland.
"They'll think this will go wrong and that
will go wrong."

Because ??

Mercedes Gutierrez, 40, has turned to her
financial adviser, Yrizarry.

She has found herself in the unfortunate
position of hunting for a job during a
recession.

A divorced mother of three, she has come to
realize that what she makes as a part-time
Pilates instructor is no longer enough to
sustain her family. On top of that, she is
trying to refinance the Loudoun County
house she bought with her then-husband in
order to gain sole ownership and is not
sure if she will qualify for the same low
interest rate on her own. As if she doesn't
have enough to worry about, she has seen
the value of her stock portfolio decline by
33 percent.

In over your head and living in a fantasy world. Stay out of
the Market unless you are George Sorros or Warren Buffet.
Ditch the second house some way. You don't need it and
it will just drag you down. What does a divorced mother of
three need with two houses ??

"I have to find a way to make up that lost
money," she said.

So far, she has cut costs. She and her
children don't eat out as often. She's more
careful about what she buys at the grocery
store. She has eliminated luxuries such as
pedicures and manicures. Vacations, for
now, are out.

Well bully for you. Pedicures and manicures ??
Do your own damn nails.

She gets a little more anxious each time
the market plunges significantly. "I call
Nicholas or we meet, and it gives me more
peace of mind," she said.

I'm sorry but I have little to no sympathy for the nouveau
riche who think they deserve to live like some Wall Street
high roller.

The irony, advisers and economists say, is
that an anxious investor, consumer or
worker actually compounds the economy's
distress. The fear is driving people to
make rash decisions with investments, thus
contributing to the volatility of the stock
markets. It is keeping consumers from
spending money, not a good thing
nationally, considering that consumer
spending makes up 70 percent of the
economy. And it is making many workers less
productive at work.

Good. Maybe we will get an economy that is actually
based on developing and making things. Oh God....
what a concept.

"It is a vicious cycle, and people are
under remarkable stress," said Charles
McMillion, chief economist at MBG
Information Services in the District.
"There are a lot of people that are
severely affected by this and have never
had to deal with it before and don't know
where to turn because the country hasn't
dealt with it."

And that last sentence nails it. They were born with
silver spoons in their mouths and dishwashers to keep
them clean and sanitary. Now the spoons have morphed
into plastic and they have to wash them by hand. Hey...
thats life. Deal with it. Oh and learn how to check the oil
in your car and get a good mechanic to keep it running for
a good long while.

C

Here is his take on this. With mine as well.

Mr Frank's committee oversees the US
banking system. He said government
takeovers of banks should not wipe out
debt to bondholders. Defaulting on
banks' debt would hurt many innocent
investors and could deprive banks of
future capital.

Bonds issued by Citigroup and other
troubled entities showed recently a
rising default risk, reflecting fears of
bankruptcy or government ordered
writedown of debt, though that risk
diminished after Friday's Treasury
announcement. But Mr Frank said wiping
out the bondholders, including owners of
riskier subordinated debt, risked
damaging investors such as university
and hospital endowments and driving them
away from the banking sector for good:

And this is a problem ????

"These are not all bad people . . . a
lot of good entities, a lot of public
purpose charitable entities, got
hornswoggled into swaptions and other
things that they in no way understood .
. . do you want to tell some people
never to get back in the business of
investing in banks again?

Number one..anyone who is still investing in these banks is
a fool and deserves what they get...nothing. Number two, to
answer the question just above...yes.

"I hope five years from now there will
be a lot of people investing in banks .
. . I don't want people to learn the
lesson that this is a terribly risky
thing to do."

Can you say "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice
shame on me." ?

Mr Frank said he was "agnostic" on
whether the US should temporarily
nationalise troubled banks. He said the
mismanagement of the troubled asset
relief programme (Tarp), the $700bn
financial rescue launched by Hank
Paulson, former Treasury secretary, in
October, had made the task harder.
"Anything that would require a lot more
commitment of funds, like buying up much
more of the institutions, is on hold . .
. part of the problem is that Paulson's
administration of the funding so angered
people."

Try enraged, infuriated, livid.....

Mr Frank said that before asking for
fresh money, the administration needed
to do more to show the current money was
being spent well, that homeowners
threatened with foreclosure were being
rescued and that credit had begun
flowing again. "They wouldn't get it
today," he said. "If we have not made
more progress in alleviating public
anger, the votes won't be there."

Alleviate the public anger. The only way you could do that
is by lining the boozoes up in front of a firing squad.

Neither a need for fresh capital
revealed by the administration's
so-called "stress tests" of the largest
banks, nor renewed turmoil in the
markets would necessarily bounce
Congress into acting. "Market mayhem
could make it worse," he said. "The
public might say: these people are worse
than we thought. Give them nothing."

Hello Barney .... they are already saying that. Moot point.

Mr Frank's scepticism about Capitol Hill
enthusiasm for a fresh Wall Street
bail-out was echoed by Charles Grassley,
senior Republican on the Senate finance
committee. He said that even a repeat of
the market turmoil in the days before he
voted for the first Tarp plan last
October might not convince him again. "I
might come to the conclusion . . . that
better let the marketplace work," he
told the Financial Times. "I'd probably
say I made a mistake the first time."

You did make a mistake the first time.

Mr Grassley said he needed to see the
first Tarp getting credit to flow before
supporting more funding. "Does it show
confidence? Does it show results? I
might vote for it," he said. "If it were
right this minute, the answer would be
no."

Not this minute....not ten years from now.

C

And so does William K. Black He definitely gets it.

    * the FBI accurately described mortgage
      fraud as "epidemic"

    * nonprime lenders are overwhelmingly
      responsible for the epidemic

    * the fraud was so endemic that it would
      have been easy to spot if anyone looked

    * the lenders, the banks that created
      nonprime derivatives, the rating
      agencies, and the buyers all operated
      on a "don't ask; don't tell" policy

    * willful blindness was essential to
      originate, sell, pool and resell the
      loans

    * willful blindness was the pretext for
      not posting loss reserves

    * both forms of blindness made high
      (fictional) profits certain when the
      bubble was expanding rapidly and
      massive (real) losses certain when it
      collapsed

    * the worse the nonprime loan quality the
      higher the fees and interest rates, and
      the faster the growth in nonprime
      lending and pooling the greater the
      immediate fictional profits and
      (eventual) real losses

    * the greater the destruction of wealth,
      the greater the (fictional) profits,
      bonuses, and stock appreciation

    * many of the big banks are deeply
      insolvent due to severe credit losses

    * those big banks and Treasury don't know
      how insolvent they are because they
      didn't even have the loan files

    * a "stress test" can't remedy the banks'
      problem -- they do not have the loan
      files.

But apparently neither Geithner nor Bernanke do.

C

Bank 'Stress-Tests' Could Discourage Many to Lend  Ya think ???
Kind of like the kid who shoves all his toys and stuff in the closet
so his room looks cleaner than it actually is when his mother
comes in.

This is not OK. Period. I'm totally livid about Obama giving one more
penny to these slime balls and con artists. If they fail...TFB !


C

At least Krugman thinks so.

I just don't get it. And my sinking feeling
that the administration plan is to
rearrange the deck chairs and hope the
iceberg melts just keeps getting stronger.

And using ALDIS lamp to boot. Man the life boats...
CEOs and stock holders
first.


C

Would please me no end. I hope someone can get a list
and post it everywhere for all to see.

C

Nothing more needs to be said.

C