Randomotomy

(USNewswire) The leader of the nation’s largest veterans organization says he is “deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.

“It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. “He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.”

If a worker gets injured at work – the employer has to cover the related medical expenses. They usually do this through worker’s compensation insurance. However, according to Obama’s new plan, if a soldier gets injured while working for its employer – the military – it is NOT the responsibility of the employer? And we wonder why our premiums go up?

I have a great idea. How about we force all the private insurers into bankruptcy by requiring them to cover everything and everybody and then we can cry about lost jobs or weak economies.

This makes about as much sense as housing a pet chimp and feeding it ice cream and Xanax.

(And this is from a guy who ultimately believes the government should cover all medical expenses?)

Sincerely,
Ultimately Confused in the USA

(Marketwatch) Pressed by lawmakers, the Financial Accounting Standards Board on Monday proposed new guidance that could change how banks and other companies value illiquid mortgage assets.

At issue are controversial mark-to-market rules, an accounting methodology that requires banks and other corporations to assign a value to an asset, such as mortgage securities, credit-card debt or student-loan investments, based on the current market price for either the security or a similar asset.

Proponents of abolishing or modifying the rules say that assets owned by troubled banks have become impossible to value, as the market for these assets have frozen up due to the financial crisis.

The FASB’s proposed guidance would stop short of changing the mark-to-market rules, but it would clarify how auditors should unterpret those exisitng regulations. It would allow banks and other companies that have had a difficult time valuing illiquid mortgage and other securities, the ability to use “significant judgment” when valuing the assets.

In an effort to maximize profits, banks maximized risk. The increased risk eventually came back to bite them. In summary, the incompetent management teams at various banks made terrible decisions. Since the idea of getting new management teams and new ownership at these banks has been deemed a bad idea by the powers that be…they have to come up with something that keeps the same management teams and the same ownership structure. So – what to do, what to do?

Well, here is one method. You let the banks tell us how much they are worth. The banks have trouble valuing a lot of this stuff because it isn’t worth anything and they want it to be a lot. So the solution here is to allow the banks to tell the auditors and thus investors how much the stuff should be worth so that the banks can look brilliant again. Then everyone can get excited and the economy can come roaring back. Only minor problem is that the banks are suicidal sycophants regardless of the halloween mask you put on them.

In laymen’s terms, the FASB is saying,”We know you think this bar sucks cause there aren’t any hot chicks in it. We have a solution. Pound 10 glasses of scotch tonight and that chunky ogre in the corner will dazzle you.”

And, holy of holies – it works.

Maybe these guys are wizards afterall.

(Daily Mail) Lesbians living in South Africa are being raped by men who believe it will ‘cure’ them of their sexual orientation, a report has revealed.

Women are reporting a rising tide of brutal homophobic attacks and murders and the widespread use of ‘corrective’ rape as a form of punishment.

Call me behind the times, but somehow I don’t think this will prove to be overly effective. Now if they were killing people who were afraid of murder to remove the fear they might be onto something. But this rape idea sounds like it needs a little touch-up work in the planning department.

(Obama) “I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement -– the prescription drug plan — without a source of funding. And so I think it’s important just to note when you start hearing folks throw these words around that we’ve actually been operating in a way that has been entirely consistent with free-market principles and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word ’socialist’ around can’t say the same.”

Consistent with free-market principles? Giving away billions of dollars of the peoples’ money to Goldman Sachs and other banks via AIG. Signing bills for the government to build hotels, convention centers and office buildings. Fighting to allow courts to undermine the contractual duties underlying mortgages. Pumping trillions of dollars into the economy via the Fed.

I would rather hear one instance of free-market principles undertaken by Obama rather than hear that everything has been consistent with the free-market.

Bush was a disaster of epic proportions – this is not being argued. But to say that Obama has been consistently Mr. Free-Market is rather questionable.

In fact – I am not sure I can tell the difference between Bush & Obama. If there is a difference – it is something like the difference between cyan blue and sky blue…

Where do these people come up with such utterly ridiculous material??

Well. after flushing over $13,000,000,000 down the toilet, we find out this surprising nugget:

(Reuters) General Motors Corp on Thursday said its auditors had raised “substantial doubt” about its ability to survive outside bankruptcy if it fails to stem its losses and stop burning cash.

Wow. Amazing. Can’t. Quite. Believe. It. They must have some pretty sharp auditors there. I bet it was a real close call but the supersleuths pushed that decision over the edge.

Now, of course, the article then continues:

The “going concern” warning from the struggling U.S. automaker had been expected

Interesting. Because if we read further we find:

GM’s shares dropped 15 percent to $1.87 in premarket trading.

I wonder why the sell-off? After all, it had been expected right? Apparently a bunch of genius money-managers determined that GM was going to be out of the woods shortly and are just shocked at this turn of events.

So let’s do a little walk down memory lane simulation. Let’s suppose that we (as the government) didn’t throw $13B at GM to keep them afloat. In that situation, they would have gone bankrupt. That would have been terrible.

Mighty lucky for us – we gave GM $13B so they didn’t have to declare bankruptcy and now they can declare bankruptcy later instead of before. Crisis averted.

I am so glad we have the same financial geniuses that ran the ship aground operating the lifeboats. Makes one warm & fuzzy inside. And makes things even better that this isn’t just GM sucking up the cash – but a whole host of failed companies.

Oh – and GM is seeking $30B more so they can avoid bankruptcy. Hey, when the ship captain and crew is loaded with whiskey – may as well join in the drunken chorus and do the jig.

Don’t headlines like this make you really love the ingenious politicians.

“U.S. rescue efforts may risk double-dip recession”

(Reuters) U.S. companies, consumers and communities may grow so addicted to government financial help that cutting them off could trigger another recession soon after the current one ends.

Between the U.S. Federal Reserve’s trillions of dollars in lending programs, the $787 billion stimulus package and $700 billion — and counting — in bank bailout funds, no one can accuse officials of soft-pedaling their crisis response.

But there is increasing concern that when the flow of public money subsides — beginning next year when much of that stimulus package is spent — the economy still won’t be strong enough to stand on its own.

“The stuttering attempts to repair the banking and lending mechanisms so far by the new administration suggests that by late 2010, the specter of a second dip into recession will be looming large,” said Merrill Lynch economist Sheryl King.

I recall politicians getting mad at the auto executives for travelling to DC in corporate jets.

I recall politicians getting mad at banking executives for taking bailout money and using it for office renovations.

I recall the reasons were that while the economy is suffering – these greedy executives should tone things down as they are asking for the public’s hard-earned money.

Yet then I see things like this:

(AP) The White House is the place to be on Wednesdays.

Since the presidency changed hands less than six weeks ago, a burst of entertaining has taken hold of the iconic, white-columned home of America’s head of state. Much of it comes on Wednesdays.

The stately East Room, where portraits of George and Martha Washington adorn the walls, was transformed into a concert hall as President Barack Obama presented Stevie Wonder with the nation’s highest award for pop music on Wednesday.

A week before that, the foot-stomping sounds of Sweet Honey in the Rock, a female a cappella group, filled the East Room for a Black History Month program that first lady Michelle Obama held for nearly 200 sixth- and seventh-graders from around Washington.

Cocktails were sipped during at least three such receptions to date, all held on Wednesdays.

The governors’ dinner was “a great kickoff of what we hope will be an atmosphere here in the White House … after they had dined on Maryland crab, Wagyu beef, Nantucket scallops and citrus salad.

Interesting. So we are now about $11,000,000,000,000 in debt. We have unemployment of 8-18% depending on the calculation. We have people being kicked out of houses because they can’t afford their mortgages after getting pay-cuts or pink-slips.

And at the same time, the politicians are wacking Maryland crab, Wagyu beef, Nantucket scallops and citrus salads while doing conga lines to Earth, Wind & Fire?

Oh – but this is okay because we read this:

“We are just temporary occupants. This is a place that belongs to the American people and we want to make sure that everybody understands it’s open,” [Obama] said.

Great! Time to pack up the car, head over to the White House, waltz on in the doors and party on every Wednesday from here on out – Obama said it’s open!

(Hartford Courant) Friday before the state legislature’s banks committee, Dr. Henry Backe of the Orthopedic Specialty Group in Fairfield hoists a list of pension plans allegedly plundered by New York investor Bernard L. Madoff. Backe says he personally lost 17 years worth of retirement savings to Madoff.

Backe urged legislators to support stronger federal oversight and more federal relief for those whose pensions were affected by the Madoff scandal. He described Madoff as an “economic terrorist” who ruined people’s trust in pension plans, which he said will eventually “kill our economy.”

First off – federal oversight does little to nothing to prevent this type of thing. Remember Worldcom & Enron? Terrible frauds which wiped out employee’s retirement savings. Solution: More federal oversight. Outcome: Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Sarbanes-Oxley was supposed to essentially stop frauds with magic fairy dust or something – I don’t recall. But the whole gist at the time was that the federal government would step up oversight, tighten rules, force companies to shovel gobs of money at accounting firms, and utopia would arrive. So they created a deeply flawed set of regulations and laws full of loopholes and nonsense.

Surprise, surprise – Madoff still pulled off his fraud, did he not? Stanford Financial Group still pulled off a fraud, did they not? Why? Because Sarbanes-Oxley is a piece of legislation crafted by industry via a group of neophytes with little understanding of the subject matter, next to no understanding of common sense and zero honesty.

Not only that, but some people who were interested in possibly investing in, or emulating Madoff looked into his fund and determined that it was a fraud. There was no possible way for Madoff to be doing what he was doing.

They dug deeper and then alerted the Federal government.

The government’s response: nothing.

Multiple agencies, different personnel, different evidence and stories – didn’t matter. Henry Markopolos identified 29 red flags in a letter to the SEC in 2005 with a conclusion that Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme. The SEC did – nothing.

So, back to the solution. How exactly does increasing federal oversight make things peachy? How does it ensure this doesn’t happen again? The government had the whole smoking case in front of them – they didn’t even have to find it – and they still blew it. The government had Sarbanes-Oxley put in place to prevent frauds yet full of exceptions and loopholes so that it didn’t even cover Madoff. And, if it had covered Madoff – it wouldn’t have mattered.

In any case – we have this doctor now (among others) who are trying to get more federal relief to help bail them out of their losses. Here is the problem. Federal relief means the next door neighbors and guys 30 states over are being forced to give their hard-earned money away to bail someone else out. Hard working families who are living paycheck to paycheck need to bailout the doctor who was busy making 10% a year annualized from some snobby financier? Sounds like a lovely scheme.

Did this physicians’ practice do their due diligence and get a good understanding of how Madoff was making money? Or did they blindly throw their money at him since he was making gobs of cash for everyone else? I think I know the answer.

Secondly, even if they did their due diligence and everything checked out (which it most assuredly wouldn’t have) – why is it my problem? Life isn’t fair. Terrible things happen to great people everyday.

If it is reasonable to force everyone in this country to hand over money to people who lost money – don’t we also need to make everyone who lost money in the stock market 100% right as well? How about all the people who lost money in 401(k) accounts at Enron & Worldcom – should they come back for their savings? How about people who made bad business deals and lost money – should they be made right?

Eventually – everyone is owed money from everyone else – or, the people who made the wise decisions end up putting all their money into the people who made poor decisions. The Madoff scam was terrible. The guy should be beaten with a tire iron and made to live in a shanty town with roaches and rats for the rest of his life. Maybe inject him with some tuberculosis or cholera so that he can feel what living in poverty is.

On the other hand – I am not responsible for the bad investment decisions of others (just as you are not responsible for mine). If I buy a car from a dealership and the engine goes out on it the next day – you aren’t responsible.

I am just so deeply flummoxed at a society whereby everyone thinks they have a right to a perfect life. You don’t. Perfect lives don’t exist in real life. Bad decisions without ill consequence breeds bad decisions.

If banks made bad decisions – they should go out of business. If people made bad decisions – there needs to be consequences. If you run out into a busy street and get hit by a bus – it teaches you to wait your turn. If bad decision-makers are bailed out – it punishes good decision-makers and encourages bad decision-making. That sounds not so optimal, huh?

Go after Madoff and recover whatever you can – guy owes you everything he has (including his penthouse suite he currently occupies). He should also be subject to hard labour for the people he screwed. But don’t come after me, my grandmother, some hillbilly in West Virginia, and everyone else. We have nothing to do with this. We didn’t tell you to invest with Madoff. We didn’t tell Madoff to screw you over. We had zero to do with this.

You made a bad decision and you have a bad consequence – that is how things are suppossed to work. Next time, do more research. Next time, diversify. Next time, I wish you better luck. It is a terrible thing – but robbing me and everyone else is the most ridiculous idea of the day.

And the kicker -

The Orthopedic Specialty Group, which decided in 1992 to invest all of its 140 employees’ retirement assets — including employee and company contributions — in Madoff’s funds has so far not filed suit. The office is instead focusing its efforts on getting relief from the federal government.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??????????????
These fleabag bastards are actually trying to shake me dry out of my own hard-earned coin rather than going after the guy that did it?
W!
T!
F!
Maybe they should hire Madoff to fleece us – although the government does run a pretty specialized practice in that sector.

Unbelievable.

(NY Post) Congress went on a pork-a-palooza yesterday, approving a massive spending bill with big bucks for Hawaiian canoe trips, research into pig smells, and tattoo removal – all while the nation faces an economic crisis.

Among the recipients of federal largesse is the Polynesian Voyaging Society of Honolulu, which got a $238,000 “earmark” in the bill.

The group organizes sea voyages in ancient-style sailing canoes like the ones that first brought settlers to Hawaii.

The sailing club has a powerful wind at its back in the person of Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

My analysis shows ancient-style sailing has been proved to keep terrorism at bay. This is money well spent.

(Bloomberg) President Barack Obama’s first budget request would provide as much as $750 billion in new aid to the financial industry, as well as overhaul the U.S. health-care system and launch a program to cut carbon-dioxide emissions.

The spending blueprint, being sent to Congress today, anticipates the government will run a deficit totaling $1.75 trillion in the year ending Sept.

If this were Monopoly we would say “You are declared bankrupt if you owe more than you can pay either to another player or to the Bank. If your debt is to another player, you must turn over to that player all that you have of value and retire from the game.”

Or, in pictures: