patrick.net

And when it goes to the Senate, there are a couple of Senators (M and O) who then get to show their worth. :)

Let's see...the Senate has 49 Dems, 49 GOPs, Lieberman and one other I. Tie goes to Dick Cheney.

Why is options liquidity so shitty nowadays? The bid-ask spreads are horrible even for large-cap stocks options.

Peter P :

When volatility is so high, the market makers often increase the spread. I haven't noticed any major drop in open interest.

I was watching Nightly Business Report on PBS just now, and they were trotting out one `talking head after the other that said congress better had pass the bill or else. No surprise there,

The only voice of reason was John Bogle of Vanguard fame. He basically stated that we need a support deal, but that it should be based on equity purchases and not bad asset purchases. Now there is a guy that I can support. He has always been in favor of the shareholder (that's you, surfer-x :-)) rather than the management.

If we must have a bailout, ANYTHING is better the the cuurent POS.

Why all the posturing? Why didn't Congress serously consider something else. What is Paulson not telling us?

"englishman26 Says:
US stock markets lost $1.1 trillion today. Most of that came out of people’s retirement accounts."

Then it's their own darn fault for not actually saving, and buying into the idea that investing=saving. Investing has risk, and if you lose, you have only yourself to blame for gambling.

Pay attention to your money. Nobody else is going to look out for your best interests; that's your job.

Tesh,

The problem is that if you "save", then somebody else will borrow the money and "invest" it for you. That's why watertight regulation is key.

When volatility is so high, the market makers often increase the spread.

I see...

It is also interesting to see how the short-sale ban is affecting the put-call parity.

The problem is that if you “save”, then somebody else will borrow the money and “invest” it for you. That’s why watertight regulation is key.

No, even with watertight regulation, air escapes. But airtight regulation suffocates everyone. That is not the answer either.

The solution is to *allow* credit deflation. It is a normal and necessary part of the credit cycle.

Kinda' reminds me of Barings - only really, really big.

P.S. John Bogle warned us about the 401k stuff in "The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism"

European central banks cut sales of gold

By Javier Blas in Kyoto , Financial Times, 28 Sep 2008

European central banks have cut their sales of gold to the lowest level in almost a decade, reversing the practice of recent years when hefty sales helped depress prices.

Institutions bound by the Central Bank Gold Agreement – the banks of the eurozone plus Sweden and Switzerland – sold about 343 tonnes of gold in the year that expired on Friday, the lowest amount since the first CBGA was signed in 1999.

This compares with 475.8 tonnes in the year to the end of September 2007. Under the agreement, the banks are allowed to sell up to 500 tonnes of gold each year.

The European trend is part of a global movement of reduced central bank selling and increased investor buying that is helping to underpin high prices at a time of turmoil in financial markets.

GFMS, the precious metals consultancy, estimates global central banks will sell 269 tonnes of bullion in 2008, the lowest since 1995.

Much of the selling by European banks took place between October and December last year.

As central banks sell less, investors are rushing into bullion-backed exchange traded funds to such an extent that some analysts refer to the ETFs as the "people's central bank" because they are now bigger than most countries' official reserves.

Bullion ETF holdings reached a record 1,056.7 tonnes – or more than $30bn – on Friday, up 33 per cent in the past 12 months and double the 2006 level.

The developments provide a bullish backdrop to the annual meeting of the London Bullion Market Association, which begins Monday in Kyoto.

"Less central bank selling sends a strong bullish signal to the market," said Philip Klapwijk, GFMS chairman.

"The investors' bullion-buying will be sustained for the time being if people continue to be concerned about financial system stability."

Gold prices surged last week to $911 a troy ounce, up more than 20 per cent from the level before the collapse of Lehman Brothers but below the high set last March at $1,030.80. Bullion closed at $885 an ounce on Friday.

Kamal Naqvi, head of commodity hedge fund sales at Credit Suisse, said: "We are witnessing strong buying of bullion as financial risks have increased."

Along with investors, some central banks that have sold gold are reviewing their position.

No bailout without equity

is the modern day equivalent of

No taxation without representation.

EBGuy,

are you suggesting that Fed has already started printing since it has less than $300B on its balance sheet? How fast can it print?

I think there will be a deal in the end, when the Wall Street losses begin to be reflected on Main Street in terms of massive layoffs, Americans will do exactly the opposite by faxing and calling their Reps and Senators for a deal. The huge drop in stock market is just a part of the negotiation process.

I am still suspicious that they are just doing a kibuke dance and will pass this anyway.

They must think it doesn't have enough baiout for the foreclosure house debtors----

Also--Buffet is for it because he invested 5B on the promise it would pass.
I'd be for it too---if I had 5B on the line.

Oh yea, they will come up with something. Hopefully it will it will have something in it for the taxpayer other than rhetoric. People want something for their money.

Does anyone think that today's market crash is at least half engineered?

But I do feel bad for retirees.

Just how many average retirees have $10,000 in the stock market? If so, they have an "average" paper loss of about $700. Any assets in bank CDs or even Money Market Mutual Funds are insured. Therefore, I do think the average investor will be hurt. Even so, I think the "average" guy would be better off with the nominal $9300 than with the original $10,000 inflated by bailouts.

This bailout is for the benefit of the big boys. The ones with several hundred thousand in the market, along with the apparatus that profits from them.

Oops, I meant I DON'T think the average investor will be hurt

Millions of investors voted with their feet today. They thought a handout was coming but it did not. The bailout bill is a rip-off for american taxpayers and is a give away to the irresponsible lenders, borrowers, and foolish investors.

Why should we have a bailout that directs the money to them?

We really do need something - but not a money giveaway for the greedy fools who caused this problem.

The government can guarantee the deposits in banks so people and other banks will be willing to put their money in banks. That will solve the liquidity problem without buying bad investments from the fools who own them.

A new scare tactic -Credit Crunch

The idea being that without the bailout, banks will not loan and all business will come to a halt.

Let's see. 95% of banks are solvent. The only way they make money is to grant loans. But since it will be much harder to package and sell off risky loans, banks will insure the borrowers can demostrate the ability to repay and provide adequate collateral. "Credit Crunch" may actually mean "Sane Lending Practices." Whenever you here some newsman, politician, or wall streeter say "Credit Crunch," I bet you could substutute "Sane Lending Practice" into his sentence without changing the meaning.

now that's genius, Senator Fuckstiens website will not take comments.

Beeeeaaautiful.

@ englishman26,

While I lost a bit in my stocks, I made a bit in my gold and bonds. Remember the old saying "every portfolio starts with a heart of gold"

Balance my friend, balance.

now that’s genius, Senator Fuckstiens website will not take comments.

Therefore, you must go to her house, crack her open like a shotgun, and deliver your message personaly.

Englishman,
Listen to Tesh. You should "save". Yes. Investment is NOT equal to savings. Unless you invest in things like mattresses, fallout shelters, propane tanks, land in the choice (meaning redneck) parts of Idaho or Montana, failing that some lots up in the remote Sierras will do, gold, gun racks, guns, Screw Paulson bumper stickers, gold, seeds (for planting), buggy whips, buggies, mules, gold, large safes to put your gold, gold (can't mention that enough). Yes, cash out your 401K, empty out your IRA, kiss your job goodbye and head for the hills.

While I lost a bit in my stocks, I made a bit in my gold and bonds.

All in paper, I presume.

READ MY LIPS!!! No new Bailout!!!

hey i am justcurious, how many of the duly elected bay area reps voted yes?

As in, hell yes, give more money to the gambling fucks.

every portfolio starts with a heart of gold

and every street in the bay area is paved with gold.

Musgrave (R) - No
Udall (D) - No
DeGette (D) - Yes
Salazar (D) - No
Lamborn (R) - No
Tancredo (R) - Yes
Perlmutter (D) - Yes

Well, everybody in Colorado knew that Tancredo is a whore. Perlmutter disappoints me. Fortunately, my rep is Marilyn Musgrave. And Udall... more spine than I would have ever thought, especially with the Dems pushing the bill. Good show, all Colorado reps who voted No.

btw, no huge surprise for DeGette. Her district is geographically tiny, encompassing Denver, which is a big financial hub. So not exactly a mind-blowing betrayal there. Perlmutter is from the exact same area, excluding Denver.

@HeadSet,

Be careful what you presume.

Cheers!

Paul Krugman was on CNN advocating he Swedish equity-based rescue model. Go Krugman!

EBGuy pointed out what I think is the most underreported story of the day: The huge expansion of the Fed balance sheet.

Suze Orman is running arund on CNN like a headless chicken, trying to scare up support for the rescue bill. God, that b*tch is annoying.

I am so fucking sorry my horseshoe hair wearing friends.

tinyurl.com/3f5wzw

man, just when you thought it couldn't get worse. But hey, there are still those fond memories of woodstock.

oh, go fuck yourselves boomers.

There's nothing wrong with a Wall Street bailout as long as Wall Street pays for most of it, esp since they're going to reap the most benefits. To SNMR: It's ridiculous to argue that we need this particular bailout simply because some economists and barrons say we need some type of bailout. And why does the money have to go to Wall Street? $700 billion mailed directly to taxpayers would have a much greater impact on Main Street than this ridiculously one-sided bill. Thank goodness congress voted against it. Unfortunately my CA rep McNerney chose to ignore his voters. So, I just registered to make sure there's one more vote against him on election day.

I had another nightmare. In this nightmare, the current crisis lasted for more than two years and all the world's major currencies collapsed. The Central Banks of every nation gathered to announce our economic salvation: one world electronic currency. The evolution from barter, to metal coins, to paper reserve notes, to paper draft checks, to electronic money was complete. The leaders rejoiced and exclaimed that one universal currency required more than a central bank - it required one world government. Then I awoke in a cold sweat, grateful to be alive. In Stockton - where my mundane concerns are drive-by shootings, home invasion robberies, or being dragged from my car and beaten to death.