GM, PLEASE FILE FOR REORGANIZATION AND STOP BURNING THROUGH OUR MONEY, PLEASE! NOTE TO GOVERNMENT, BUY SOME OTHER STOCK INSTEAD, NOT GM STOCK FOR ME!

GENERAL MOTORS is burning through OUR money, it announced today. Nice going GM, it burned through $10 BILLION or so, out of the $15 BILLION it received.

Now over the years I have done my part in helping GM by buying their cars, practically resisting buying “foreign” cars, even those made in the USA by the “foreign” companies employing thousands of Americans right here in the good ole USA. I wanted to help American companies.

Let’s see if I can remember my list of GM cars over the years ( I have also bought my share of other American cars too, including Fords, Lincolns, Chryslers, Mercurys and Dodge): 6 Cadillacs of every type (one of them a stretch limo bought from the dealer who used it as a model car with 100 miles on it even though it was 3 years old at the time), 5 Pontiacs, 1 Chevy G20 Conversion Van with custom captain chairs ( when those were the rage) and even 1 Chevy Vega purchased for my mom (remember those cars?). There may have been another one somewhere but I just can’t remember it.

So I have done my part, what else could I do personally for GM.

I stopped buying GM cars after the local dealership shafted me on servicing my Van, and I never went back for any GM automobile. Writing a complaint letter to the factory, I received no reply, so I was finished with GM. I thought that after all that money I spent, it would be nice if they sent me a $10 off coupon for an oil change for instance, but no, GM could care less that I bought no less than 13 cars from them; I deserved nothing for that loyalty.

So I became loyal no more.

Could this be the story of other GM customers? Probably not, I’m sure that nobody else ever had my similar experience with GM, that’s why they are now so popular, NOT!

Now GM is getting the shaft from the government, from its customers and from the stock market, that it deserves. Like every business, it has management to blame, and nobody else, and it needs to sink or swim within the marketplace, not being propped up by my TAX money.

So why is it that I/WE have to bail out this company, with our TAX money? Why?

There are over 1,500 different car models to choose, most of which are not being made with my tax money.

PLEASE GM, STOP BURNING THOUGH MY MONEY AND FILE FOR THE REORGANIZATION so that the pain of paying $75/hour for your employee costs is not MY PROBLEM!

ALSO, PLEASE DO NOT LET THE GOVERNMENT START MAKING GM CARS (GOVERNMENT MOTORS)..PLEASE SAVE US.

General Motors Corp said it burned through $10.2 billion in the first quarter as it failed to cut costs fast enough to offset a sharp decline in global sales and was kept afloat by a federal bailout.

Revenue dropped by almost half to $22.4 billion as the company cut production by about 900,000 vehicles and tried to run down costly inventories on dealer lots in the United States and Europe.

Chief Financial Officer Ray Young said there was evidence consumers were scared away from GM cars and trucks because of concern the automaker was headed for bankruptcy.

“You could not offset the revenue implosion that we experienced here,” Young told reporters following release of the quarterly results on Thursday.

He said GM still hoped to complete a debt restructuring out of court but was ready for bankruptcy if that proved necessary. He said GM was pressing ahead with contingency plans for a quick bankruptcy process, drawing on the experience of Chrysler LLC, which filed for bankruptcy last week.

“We are very very cognizant of this issue of revenue perishability and how consumers react to the threat of bankruptcy,” Young said.

“So that’s from our perspective the importance of avoiding bankruptcy at all costs. But if we have to go through a bankruptcy, the importance of doing it quickly — get in and out very very quickly — in order to alleviate the concerns of consumers,” he said.

Young said GM would make a decision at the end of this month on whether an offer to extinguish $24 billion in bond debt in exchange for new shares had garnered enough support for the company to avoid a bankruptcy filing.

GM lost market share in the quarter as its global sales fell 28 percent, compared with an industry wide decline of 21 percent.

DEADLINE LOOMS

GM posted a first-quarter net loss of $6 billion, compared with a loss of $3.3 billion a year earlier.

Excluding $73 million of one-time net charges, it lost $9.66 per share. That was within the wide range of analysts’ expectations.

GM is facing a government-imposed June 1 deadline to reach agreements to overhaul its operations and cut more than $40 billion in debt. To date, the company has taken $15.4 billion in emergency loans from the U.S. Treasury.

The first quarter was also marked by GM’s failure to win federal backing for a turnaround plan that the U.S. autos task force concluded was too slow-moving to succeed.

The Obama administration ousted Rick Wagoner as GM chief executive at the end of the quarter.

Creditors have been looking beyond GM’s results, focusing instead on whether it succeeds in winning debt concessions from its bondholders and the United Auto Workers union.

The automaker said on Thursday that it had not yet reached the deal it needs with the UAW.

It also said the Treasury had not yet agreed to convert half of the loans it has extended to GM into stock in a restructured company, as the automaker has proposed.

Young said GM was back in talks with union representatives this week and was ready to negotiate around the clock to reach a settlement.

The UAW faces pressure to accept GM stock in exchange for about $10 billion the union is owed for a trust fund for retiree health care. That would give the union a 39 percent stake in the restructured company. That’s nice, they get to own the company stock now as probably its biggest stockholder. What will those wage negotiation be like now?

Under the restructuring plan GM detailed last month, the government would own a majority stake, effectively nationalizing the 100-year-old Detroit-based automaker.

Hello, big brother, I do not want to buy GM stock, why are you buying it for me, NO, NO!

GM shares rose to $1.72 in pre-market trading, up from a close at $1.66 on Wednesday.

How much is the government buying MY stock for?

Please buy some Microsoft, or Apple or maybe Toyota instead?

SHAFTING THE SECURED CREDITORS – NEW GOVERNMENT STRATEGY WORTHY OF BIG AL

You can call the plan to merge Chrysler and Fiat good for the economy. You can think it creative.

You can say it’s the start of “a vibrant new company,” as Chrysler LLC Chairman Robert Nardelli did last week.

But there’s one word that you can’t call the Chrysler bankruptcy package: legal.

The plan would overturn basic rules of bankruptcy by setting up a sort-of sale to sidestep pesky legal requirements. It would bulldoze well-established rights of secured creditors, property rights the U.S. Constitution guarantees.

So if U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Arthur Gonzalez follows the law, the Chrysler rescue plan dies. If he blinks and approves it, secured creditors everywhere should feel a shiver of unease, and quick sales of insolvent companies to avoid court scrutiny would multiply.

The other option is a settlement, and that might well be where this is headed.

I hate to say it, but the dissident Chrysler lenders are right, the ones President Barack Obama described as greedy hedge funds selfishly blocking Chrysler’s survival.

The president’s fist-waving looks a lot like the posturing lawyers use to scare an adversary into surrender, never mind the law. In fact, several are giving up the cause.

At the heart of the plan, and at the heart of the plan’s problem, is the idea that Chrysler would sell itself quickly rather than go through months or years of court-supervised reorganization, within 60 Days.

Called a 363 sale for the relevant section of the bankruptcy code, it can close within 60 days and unload all or part of the company. The sale to Barclays of a piece of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. took about a day.

A 363 sale is perfectly legal when a sound business reason demands it and when it isn’t reorganization in disguise.

But if it’s aimed at resolving creditors’ claims, that is what reorganization is for. Bankruptcy reorganization promises secured creditors at least the same payout they would get if the company liquidated, and Chrysler’s proposed sale looks like a way around that.

Figuring what creditors have coming to them requires lots of paperwork and hearings. That’s why it takes so long.

Drawn-Out Bankruptcy

And that is what Chrysler is trying to avoid. In fact, it must avoid a long, drawn-out bankruptcy if it is to survive.

But with a 363 sale, there is no chance to figure the value of Chrysler’s assets if sold piecemeal, much less what each creditor should get.

The secured creditors who are complaining about this helped save Chrysler the last time it almost went under, in 2007 after the marriage to Daimler AG soured. How much of a haircut should they be forced to take?

The dissidents say the sale is nothing more than what bankruptcy law calls a sub rosa reorganization, a secret reordering dressed up to look like a sale, which the law forbids.

Plus, would it even be a true sale?

In public statements Chrysler says a United Auto Workers health benefits trust would get 55 percent of the shares of New Chrysler and a $4.6 billion note to satisfy some of the group’s unsecured claims against the company.

Paying nothing but offering its fuel-efficiency expertise, Fiat SpA would own 20 percent initially and could increase its stake by another 15 percent. The U.S. and Canadian governments, which are providing billions in interim financing, would own the rest.

Phony Sale

Chrysler is essentially selling itself to itself, says Lynn LoPucki, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. He teaches secured transactions and maintains a database of major bankruptcies.

So, if the “sale” isn’t a true sale, and if it dictates payout to secured creditors, isn’t that a sub rosa reorganization?

If it favors junior creditors over senior creditors, doesn’t it violate the very basics of bankruptcy law? Senior creditors can volunteer to give up some of what’s due them but they can’t be forced to by a bankruptcy court.

“Those are property rights, and they are protected by the Constitution,” says Daniel Glosband, a partner in Boston’s Goodwin Procter. “You can’t just take them away.”

And yet, it could happen.

‘Enormous Momentum’

“There’s an enormous momentum in favor of the government plan,” says Jay Westbrook, who teaches bankruptcy law at the University of Texas.

It’s naïve to assume bankruptcy judges feel compelled to follow the law, says LoPucki.

He argues that bankruptcy courts across the country compete for the big cases by giving lawyers for major companies what they want.

“According to the law, this plan should not be approved,” LoPucki says.

Yet he predicts Gonzalez will do it anyway to persuade other companies (General Motors Corp. comes to mind) to pick Manhattan’s bankruptcy court over, say Detroit’s.

Already the Chrysler case is one for the books. You have the federal government sending a company into bankruptcy court, financing its reorganization, deciding who will get what, setting a strict timetable and urging a judge to blink at the law.

If the argument that Chrysler’s welfare is so critical to the national interest that longstanding laws can be ignored, what’s next?

Some future president will find a way to justify blatantly illegal conduct. Such as torture.

Ann Woolner is a columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.

Chrysler LLC wants to eliminate 789 of its U.S. 3,200 dealerships, saying in a bankruptcy court filing Thursday that the network is antiquated and has too many stores competing with each other.

The company, in a motion filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York, said many of the dealers’ sales are too low. Just over 50 percent of the dealers account for about 90 percent of the company’s U.S. sales, the motion said.

The move, which the dealers can appeal, is likely to cause devastating affects in cities and towns across the country as thousands of jobs are lost and taxes are not paid.

Chrysler spokeswoman Kathy Graham would not comment other than to say the company will notify dealers before speaking publicly.

Chrysler dealerships aren’t the only ones scheduled to get bad news this week. General Motors Corp. says it is notifying 1,100 dealers that it will not renew their franchise agreements when they expire at the end of September of 2010.

In its motion, Chrysler said it has many dealerships that sell one or two of its brands, with Chrysler-Jeep dealerships competing against Dodge dealers as well as other automakers’ stores across the country.

“In addition, as suburbs grew and the modern interstate system continued to evolve, longstanding dealerships no longer were in the best or growing locations,” the company said in its filing. “Many rural locations also served a diminishing population of potential consumers. Some dealership facilities became outdated. Other locations faced declining traffic count and declining populations.”

Chrysler has received $4 billion in federal loans and has been operating in bankruptcy protection since April 30. Its sales this year are down 46 percent compared with the first four months of last year and it reported a $16.8 billion net loss for 2008.

HOW MUCH CAN YOU FINANCE ON A $1 HOME FORECLOSURE AND ACTUALLY MAKE IT LIVABLE?

There are so many rescue and bailout plans for foreclosed homeowners, but the foreclosed homes, when the foreclosure does go though to its ultimate end, resulting in a sheriff’s sale, often (38% of the time) is too damaged to qualify for mortgage financing of any type for a new buyer who will needs funds to fix it first.

When this occurs, the property simply sits, vacant, abandoned and an eye sore, often vandalized for its copper plumbing, cabinetry or any other fixtures that can be stolen and resold.

So in effect, about 1,216,000 homes will sit as abandoned eye sores.

So much for the usual government help.

The issue is how much of the financing for such a home can include some added funds to fix the home, making it salable and habitable?

The government programs do not provide for that, and in fact they would discourage any such project financing, since the standard method of obtaining financing is by having the home APPRAISED as to its lendable value.

What do you tink will be the value of a stripped and damaged home to be submitted by the appraiser for financing? How about literally nothing, or a token $1.

How much home financing can one get on an appraisal of $1????

Do you see the point now? We need a different level of appraisals to clear out the glut of abandoned homes which can be fixed up and purchased for a reasonable amount.

Is there nobody out there to figure this out?

CHRYSLER AND FIAT-DYNAMIC DUO TO FORGET, AND WHAT ABOUT THE SHAFTED PARTS SUPPLIER NETWORK?

The deal so pushed by the government as the end all be all, a Chrysler-Fiat venture, is bound to be a DUD, with a capital D.

Did anyone notice that FIAT, aka FLAT, made cars that nobody wanted to buy in America. That is why that brand is not sold here-FIAT made funny cars in which it was hard to figure out which end was the front and which was the back, and it had a bad reputation of always having something not working just right.

I personally never owned an Italian FIAT, but I owned an Italian airplane, the fabulous Waco Vela, which always needed some part. The last part it needed was mandated by the FAA, otherwise it was not allowed to fly, a landing gear part that could pulverize on landing.

I placed the order with the Italian factory, and after about a year I received it; enough said.

Remember those little cars more suited for European drivers used to driving with their knees in their chin? Oh, and do you remember the rust that would engulf the cars after just a few years.

I am not talking about exotics, just the ones that regular people might buy.

For the same amount as the government is now spending to keep this dead DUD alive, it could have built a new robotic factory in Tennesee or Alabama, or Texas, and have billions left to spare, however, that may not include a union pension plan, or outrageous wages as well, so it was dead on arrival.

Now that the wise men ( aka WISEGUYS) from the government are running Chrysler, the first order of business after getting billions in cash, was to SHUT DOWN ALL THE PLANTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD OF TIME.

That move is so stupid, it can not be adequately described with a sufficient number of *@%&!!! symbols. All the assembly plants will close, and they will start up again….whenever the company exits its Chapter 11 process.

Did someone forget that Chrysler does not actually really make cars, it just assembles them from the parts and pieces that are sent to its “assembly plants” by all kind of little and big REAL manufacturers.

What are these REAL manufacturers to do while Chrysler goes into a type of financial hibernation? Will these often crucial suppliers just wake up too when it comes back to life?

Don’t count on it.

In the real world of manufacturing, these other independent businesses need to have a steady stream of revenues to in turn pay their employees, and to STAY IN BUSINESS.

What if when Chrysler says to them “I’m back start shipping me those door handles and oil dipsticks and ashtray covers”, nobody answers the phone because these manufacturers are out of business. This may have been a little detail all the new guys running the business may have forgotten, Chrysler really does not REALLY build any cars, the suppliers do, and they can not all just hibernate too, and spring to life when needed.

In a free market this deal would never happen on the announced terms, it would happen as it should though a real reorganization, and Chrysler may have been able to emerge as a competitive business.

Don’t buy the stock too soon, until you see what this car line will look like.

START YOUR OWN CHINA-EUROPE SHIPPING BUSINESS; $300 SHIPPING FEES NOW FROM CHINA TO EUROPE!

There are advantages to the recession, and the overcapacity that now exists in the container shipping business from China to Europe, as well as the between China and the USA.

This is a great time to start to specialize in shipping, as the rates for shipping a 20 foot container from China to Europe has gotten to be as low as $300 (plus various fuel and transit fees), which compares to $3,000 a year ago.

The rates for the USA have also dropped about 80%-90%, so this is great time for developing the import business.

Another reason for the drop in shipping fees is that the MEGA ships which carry the containers can now accommodate up to 13,800 containers on one ship. Several shipping lines have on order ships which can carry 22,000 containers!

Shipping brokers estimate that rates will remain for low for at least the next 2-3 years due to this tremendous capacity, and the slow down in shipping.

IS IT REALLY GOOD NEWS, OR JUST WISHFUL THINKING; BEN BERNANKE AND HIS CRYSTAL BALL

The Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke looked into his crystal ball again and predicted that the US will miraculously start to change its downward spiraling economy by the end of 2009.

That miracle prediction must have come to him in a dream perhaps, sort of like the TV show, MEDIUM, where he dreams an event and it come true. And now another prediction from the one, the only, Ben Bernanke. Let’s all just sit quietly while the GREAT BEN sees directly into the future while laying on his couch.

Oh, it is now becoming clearer, Ben is now about to predict an occurrence that has never happened before in the history of the world….but it is so, Ben said so, and he smiled too!

It must happen, it will happen; all will be just great by the end of 2009!

Now that we heard the dream, let’s analyze the reality, by studying the results of polls of purchasing agents, retail sellers, hiring officers and of course the SAGE OF OMAHA, Warren Buffet, a former adviser to the administration.

These front time people do not agree with the FED Chairman as they see a continuation of sluggish sales, sluggish hiring and sluggish inventory and raw material purchasing.

So how can these predictions be so different, after looking at the same data?

The answer is the new economic model called “WISHFUL THINKING.”

Simply put, just keep saying it and it will happen-it is that simple.

So, just keep saying: “I will hire more people, even though I do not need any more; I will buy more supplies and inventories, even though the bank has not given me more credit to so so with; I will buy a new house even though I do not have the down payment, etc.

What, you say, those are contradictory terms?

Now you understand, how opinions are just that, opinions. But coming from the FED Chairman, one would hope that there was more than just an opinion, but something based on real facts.

TARP FUNDS CREATING A HOUSE OF CARDS FOR 555 FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS!

Participants in Government Investment Plan

Most financial institutions have received capital infusions via the Treasury’s Capital Assistance Program, a bank-share purchase program intended to restore confidence in banks and get them to lend. This program is funded with $250 billion of the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program authorized by Congress in October 2008 via the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. Below, see a list of participating companies.

Company	Capital	Capital Repayment Announced
1st Constitution Bancorp	$12,000,000	3/31/2009
1st Enterprise Bank	$4,400,000	3/31/2009
1st FS Corporation	$16,369,000	3/31/2009
1st Source Corporation	$111,000,000	3/31/2009
1st United Bancorp, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
AB&T Financial Corporation	$3,500,000	3/31/2009
Adbanc, Inc.	$12,720,000	3/31/2009
Alarion Financial Services, Inc.	$6,514,000	3/31/2009
Alaska Pacific Bancshares, Inc.	$4,781,000	3/31/2009
Alliance Financial Corporation	$26,918,000	3/31/2009
Alpine Banks of Colorado	$70,000,000	3/31/2009
AMB Financial Corp.	$3,674,000	3/31/2009
AmeriBank Holding Company	$2,492,000	3/31/2009
American Express Company	$3,388,890,000	3/31/2009
American State Bancshares, Inc.	$6,000,000	3/31/2009
Ameris Bancorp	$52,000,000	3/31/2009
AmeriServ Financial, Inc.	$21,000,000	3/31/2009
Anchor BanCorp Wisconsin Inc.	$110,000,000	3/31/2009
Annapolis Bancorp, Inc.	$8,152,000	3/31/2009
Associated Banc-Corp	$525,000,000	3/31/2009
Avenue Financial Holdings, Inc.	$7,400,000	3/31/2009
BancIndependent, Inc.	$21,100,000	3/31/2009
Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc.	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
BancPlus Corporation	$48,000,000	3/31/2009
BancStar, Inc.	$8,600,000	3/31/2009
BancTrust Financial Group, Inc.	$50,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of America Corporation	$15,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of America Corporation	$10,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of Commerce	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of Commerce	$17,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of George	$2,672,000	3/31/2009
Bank of MarinBancorp	$28,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of New York Mellon Corporation	$3,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Bank of North Carolina	$31,260,000	3/31/2009
Bank of the Carolinas Corporation	$13,179,000	3/31/2009
Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.	$75,000,000	3/31/2009
Bankers’ Bank of the West Bancorp, Inc.	$12,639,000	3/31/2009
BankFirst Capital Corporation	$15,500,000	3/31/2009
BankGreenville	$1,000,000	3/31/2009
Banner Corporation	$124,000,000	3/31/2009
Banner County Ban Corporation	$795,000	3/31/2009
Bar Harbor Bankshares/Bar Harbor Bank & Trust	$18,751,000	3/31/2009
BB&T Corp.	$3,133,640,000	3/31/2009
BCB Holding Company, Inc.	$1,706,000	3/31/2009
BCSB Bancorp, Inc.	$10,800,000	3/31/2009
Beach Business Bank	$6,000,000	3/31/2009
Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc.	$40,000,000	3/31/2009
Bern Bancshares, Inc.	$985,000	3/31/2009
Blackhawk Bancorp, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Blue Ridge Bancshares, Inc.	$12,000,000	3/31/2009
Blue River Bancshares, Inc.	$5,000,000	3/31/2009
Blue ValleyBan Corp.	$21,750,000	3/31/2009
BNB Financial Services Corporation	$7,500,000	3/31/2009
BNC Financial Group, Inc.	$4,797,000	3/31/2009
BNCCORP, Inc.	$20,093,000	3/31/2009
BOH Holdings, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Boston Private Financial Holdings, Inc.	$154,000,000	3/31/2009
Bridge Capital Holdings	$23,864,000	3/31/2009
Bridgeview Bancorp, Inc.	$38,000,000	3/31/2009
Broadway Financial Corporation	$9,000,000	3/31/2009
Butler Point, Inc.	$607,000	3/31/2009
C&F Financial Corporation	$20,000,000	3/31/2009
Cache Valley Banking Company	$4,767,000	3/31/2009
Cadence Financial Corporation	$44,000,000	3/31/2009
California Bank of Commerce	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
California Oaks State Bank	$3,300,000	3/31/2009
Calvert Financial Corporation	$1,037,000	3/31/2009
CalWest Bancorp	$4,656,000	3/31/2009
Capital Bancorp, Inc.	$4,700,000	3/31/2009
Capital Bank Corporation	$41,279,000	3/31/2009
Capital Commerce Bancorp, Inc.	$5,100,000	3/31/2009
Capital One Financial Corporation	$3,555,199,000	3/31/2009
Capital Pacific Bancorp	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
Carolina Bank Holdings, Inc.	$16,000,000	3/31/2009
Carolina Trust Bank	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
Carrollton Bancorp	$9,201,000	3/31/2009
Carver Bancorp, Inc.	$18,980,000	3/31/2009
Cascade Financial Corporation	$38,970,000	3/31/2009
Cathay General Bancorp	$258,000,000	3/31/2009
Catskill Hudson Bancorp, Inc.	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
CBB Bancorp	$2,644,000	3/31/2009
CBS Banc-Corp.	$24,300,000	3/31/2009
Cecil Bancorp, Inc.	$11,560,000	3/31/2009
CedarStone Bank	$3,564,000	3/31/2009
Center Bancorp, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Center Financial Corporation	$55,000,000	3/31/2009
Centerstate Banks of Florida Inc.	$27,875,000	3/31/2009
Centra Financial Holdings, Inc./Centra Bank, Inc.	$15,000,000	3/31/2009
Central Bancorp, Inc.	$22,500,000	3/31/2009
Central Bancorp, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Central Bancshares, Inc.	$5,800,000	3/31/2009
Central Community Corporation	$22,000,000	3/31/2009
Central Federal Corporation	$7,225,000	3/31/2009
Central Jersey Bancorp	$11,300,000	3/31/2009
Central Pacific Financial Corp.	$135,000,000	3/31/2009
Central Valley Community Bancorp	$7,000,000	3/31/2009
Central Virginia Bankshares, Inc.	$11,385,000	3/31/2009
Centrix Bank & Trust	$7,500,000	3/31/2009
Centrue Financial Corporation	$32,668,000	3/31/2009
CIT Group Inc.	$2,330,000,000	3/31/2009
Citigroup Inc.	$25,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Citizens & Northern Corporation	$26,440,000	3/31/2009
Citizens Bancorp	$10,400,000	3/31/2009
Citizens Bancshares Corporation	$7,462,000	3/31/2009
Citizens Bank & Trust Company	$2,400,000	3/31/2009
Citizens Commerce Bancshares, Inc.	$6,300,000	3/31/2009
Citizens Community Bank	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
Citizens First Corporation	$8,779,000	3/31/2009
Citizens Republic Bancorp, Inc.	$300,000,000	3/31/2009
Citizens South Banking Corporation	$20,500,000	3/31/2009
City National Bancshares Corporation	$9,439,000	3/31/2009
City National Corporation	$400,000,000	3/31/2009
Clover Community Bankshares, Inc.	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
Coastal Banking Company, Inc.	$9,950,000	3/31/2009
CoBiz Financial Inc.	$64,450,000	3/31/2009
Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc.	$16,500,000	3/31/2009
ColoEast Bankshares, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Colonial American Bank	$574,000	3/31/2009
Colony Bankcorp, Inc.	$28,000,000	3/31/2009
Columbia Banking System, Inc.	$76,898,000	3/31/2009
Columbine Capital Corp.	$2,260,000	3/31/2009
Comerica Inc.	$2,250,000,000	3/31/2009
Commerce National Bank	$5,000,000	3/31/2009
Commonwealth Business Bank	$7,701,000	3/31/2009
Community 1st Bank	$2,550,000	3/31/2009
Community Bancshares of Kansas, Inc.	$500,000	3/31/2009
Community Bank of the Bay	$1,747,000	3/31/2009
Community Bankers Trust Corporation	$17,680,000	3/31/2009
Community Business Bank	$3,976,000	3/31/2009
Community Financial Corporation	$12,643,000	3/31/2009
Community First Bancshares Inc.	$20,000,000	3/31/2009
Community First Bancshares, Inc.	$12,725,000	3/31/2009
Community First Inc.	$17,806,000	3/31/2009
Community Holding Company of Florida, Inc.	$1,050,000	3/31/2009
Community Investors Bancorp, Inc.	$2,600,000	3/31/2009
Community Partners Bancorp	$9,000,000	3/31/2009
Community Trust Financial Corporation	$24,000,000	3/31/2009
Community West Bancshares	$15,600,000	3/31/2009
Congaree Bancshares, Inc.	$3,285,000	3/31/2009
Corning Savings and Loan Association	$638,000	3/31/2009
Country Bank Shares, Inc.	$7,525,000	3/31/2009
Crazy Woman Creek Bancorp, Inc.	$3,100,000	3/31/2009
Crescent Financial Corporation	$24,900,000	3/31/2009
Crosstown Holding Company	$10,650,000	3/31/2009
CSRA Bank Corp.	$2,400,000	3/31/2009
CVB Financial Corp.	$130,000,000	3/31/2009
D.L. Evans Bancorp	$19,891,000	3/31/2009
DeSoto County Bank	$1,173,000	3/31/2009
Dickinson Financial Corporation	$146,053,000	3/31/2009
Discover Financial Services	$1,224,558,000	3/31/2009
DNB Financial Corporation	$11,750,000	3/31/2009
Eagle Bancorp, Inc.	$38,235,000	3/31/2009
East West Bancorp	$306,546,000	3/31/2009
Eastern Virginia Bankshares, Inc.	$24,000,000	3/31/2009
ECB Bancorp, Inc./East Carolina Bank	$17,949,000	3/31/2009
Emclaire Financial Corp.	$7,500,000	3/31/2009
Encore Bancshares Inc.	$34,000,000	3/31/2009
Enterprise Financial Services Corp.	$35,000,000	3/31/2009
Equity Bancshares, Inc.	$8,750,000	3/31/2009
Exchange Bank	$43,000,000	3/31/2009
F & M Bancshares, Inc.	$4,609,000	3/31/2009
F & M Financial Corporation	$17,000,000	3/31/2009
F&M Financial Corporation	$17,243,000	3/31/2009
F.N.B. Corporation	$100,000,000	3/31/2009
Farmers & Merchants Bancshares, Inc.	$11,000,000	3/31/2009
Farmers & Merchants Financial Corporation	$442,000	3/31/2009
Farmers Bank	$8,752,000	3/31/2009
Farmers Capital Bank Corporation	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
Farmers State Bankshares, Inc.	$700,000	3/31/2009
FCB Bancorp, Inc.	$9,294,000	3/31/2009
FFW Corporation	$7,289,000	3/31/2009
Fidelity Bancorp, Inc.	$7,000,000	3/31/2009
Fidelity Financial Corporation	$36,282,000	3/31/2009
Fidelity Southern Corporation	$48,200,000	3/31/2009
Fifth Third Bancorp	$3,408,000,000	3/31/2009
Financial Institutions, Inc.	$37,515,000	3/31/2009
Financial Security Corporation	$5,000,000	3/31/2009
First American International Corp.	$17,000,000	3/31/2009
First Bancorp	$65,000,000	3/31/2009
First Bancorp	$400,000,000	3/31/2009
First BancTrust Corporation	$7,350,000	3/31/2009
First Bank of Charleston, Inc.	$3,345,000	3/31/2009
First Bankers Trustshares, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
First Banks, Inc.	$295,400,000	3/31/2009
First Busey Corporation	$100,000,000	3/31/2009
First Business Bank, N.A.	$2,211,000	3/31/2009
First California Financial Group, Inc.	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
First Capital Bancorp, Inc.	$10,958,000	3/31/2009
First Choice Bank	$2,200,000	3/31/2009
First Citizens Banc Corp.	$23,184,000	3/31/2009
First Colebrook Bancorp, Inc.	$4,500,000	3/31/2009
First Community Bank Corporation	$10,685,000	3/31/2009
First Community Bankshares Inc.	$41,500,000	3/31/2009
First Community Corporation	$11,350,000	3/31/2009
First Defiance Financial Corp.	$37,000,000	3/31/2009
First Express of Nebraska, Inc.	$5,000,000	3/31/2009
First Federal Bancshares of Arkansas, Inc.	$16,500,000	3/31/2009
First Financial Bancorp	$80,000,000	3/31/2009
First Financial Holdings Inc.	$65,000,000	3/31/2009
First Financial Service Corporation	$20,000,000	3/31/2009
First Gothenburg Bancshares, Inc.	$7,570,000	3/31/2009
First Horizon National Corporation	$866,540,000	3/31/2009
First Intercontinental Bank	$6,398,000	3/31/2009
First Litchfield Financial Corporation	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
First M&F Corporation	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
First Manitowoc Bancorp, Inc.	$12,000,000	3/31/2009
First Market Bank, FSB	$33,900,000	3/31/2009
First Menasha Bancshares, Inc.	$4,797,000	3/31/2009
First Merchants Corporation	$116,000,000	3/31/2009
First Midwest Bancorp, Inc.	$193,000,000	3/31/2009
First National Corporation	$13,900,000	3/31/2009
First NBC Bank Holding Company	$17,836,000	3/31/2009
First Niagara Financial Group	$184,011,000	3/31/2009
First Northern Community Bancorp	$17,390,000	3/31/2009
First PacTrust Bancorp, Inc.	$19,300,000	3/31/2009
First Place Financial Corp.	$72,927,000	3/31/2009
First Priority Financial Corp.	$4,579,000	3/31/2009
First Reliance Bancshares, Inc.	$15,349,000	3/31/2009
First Resource Bank	$2,600,000	3/31/2009
First Security Group, Inc.	$33,000,000	3/31/2009
First Sound Bank	$7,400,000	3/31/2009
First Southern Bancorp, Inc.	$10,900,000	3/31/2009
First Southwest Bancorporation, Inc.	$5,500,000	3/31/2009
First State Bank of Mobeetie	$731,000	3/31/2009
First Texas BHC, Inc.	$13,533,000	3/31/2009
First ULB Corp.	$4,900,000	3/31/2009
First United Corporation	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
First Western Financial, Inc.	$8,559,000	3/31/2009
Firstbank Corporation	$33,000,000	3/31/2009
FirstMerit Corporation	$125,000,000	3/31/2009
Flagstar Bancorp, Inc.	$266,657,000	3/31/2009
Florida Business BancGroup, Inc.	$9,495,000	3/31/2009
Flushing Financial Corporation	$70,000,000	3/31/2009
FNB Bancorp	$12,000,000	3/31/2009
FNB United Corp.	$51,500,000	3/31/2009
Fortune Financial Corporation	$3,100,000	3/31/2009
FPB Bancorp, Inc.	$5,800,000	3/31/2009
FPB Financial Corp.	$3,240,000	3/31/2009
Fresno First Bank	$1,968,000	3/31/2009
Fulton Financial Corporation	$376,500,000	3/31/2009
Georgia Commerce Bancshares, Inc.	$8,700,000	3/31/2009
Germantown Capital Corporation, Inc.	$4,967,000	3/31/2009
Goldwater Bank, N.A.	$2,568,000	3/31/2009
GrandSouth BanCorporation	$9,000,000	3/31/2009
Great Southern Bancorp	$58,000,000	3/31/2009
Green Bankshares, Inc.	$72,278,000	3/31/2009
Green Circle Investments, Inc.	$2,400,000	3/31/2009
Green City Bancshares, Inc.	$651,000	3/31/2009
Greer Bancshares Incorporated	$9,993,000	3/31/2009
Gregg Bancshares, Inc.	$825,000	3/31/2009
Guaranty Bancorp, Inc.	$6,920,000	3/31/2009
Guaranty Federal Bancshares, Inc.	$17,000,000	3/31/2009
Hamilton State Bancshares	$7,000,000	3/31/2009
Hampton Roads Bankshares, Inc.	$80,347,000	3/31/2009
Haviland Bancshares, Inc.	$425,000	3/31/2009
Hawthorn Bancshares, Inc.	$30,255,000	3/31/2009
HCSB Financial Corporation	$12,895,000	3/31/2009
Heartland Financial USA, Inc.	$81,698,000	3/31/2009
Heritage Commerce Corp.	$40,000,000	3/31/2009
Heritage Financial Corporation	$24,000,000	3/31/2009
Heritage Oaks Bancorp	$21,000,000	3/31/2009
HF Financial Corp.	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
Highlands Independent Bancshares, Inc.	$6,700,000	3/31/2009
Hilltop Community Bancorp, Inc.	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
HMN Financial, Inc.	$26,000,000	3/31/2009
Home Bancshares, Inc.	$50,000,000	3/31/2009
Hometown Bancorp of Alabama, Inc.	$3,250,000	3/31/2009
Hometown Bancshares, Inc.	$1,900,000	3/31/2009
HopFed Bancorp	$18,400,000	3/31/2009
Horizon Bancorp	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
Howard Bancorp, Inc.	$5,983,000	3/31/2009
Huntington Bancshares	$1,398,071,000	3/31/2009
Hyperion Bank	$1,552,000	3/31/2009
Iberiabank Corporation	$90,000,000	3/31/2009
IBT Bancorp, Inc.	$2,295,000	3/31/2009
IBW Financial Corporation	$6,000,000	3/31/2009
ICB Financial	$6,000,000	3/31/2009
Idaho Bancorp	$6,900,000	3/31/2009
Independence Bank	$1,065,000	3/31/2009
Independent Bank Corp.	$78,158,000	3/31/2009
Independent Bank Corporation	$72,000,000	3/31/2009
Indiana Community Bancorp	$21,500,000	3/31/2009
Integra Bank Corporation	$83,586,000	3/31/2009
Intermountain Community Bancorp	$27,000,000	3/31/2009
International Bancshares Corporation	$216,000,000	3/31/2009
Intervest Bancshares Corporation	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	$25,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Katahdin Bankshares Corp.	$10,449,000	3/31/2009
KeyCorp	$2,500,000,000	3/31/2009
Kirksville Bancorp, Inc.	$470,000	3/31/2009
Lafayette Bancorp, Inc.	$1,998,000	3/31/2009
Lakeland Bancorp, Inc.	$59,000,000	3/31/2009
Lakeland Financial Corporation	$56,044,000	3/31/2009
LCNB Corp.	$13,400,000	3/31/2009
Leader Bancorp, Inc.	$5,830,000	3/31/2009
Legacy Bancorp, Inc.	$5,498,000	3/31/2009
Liberty Bancshares, Inc.	$57,500,000	3/31/2009
Liberty Bancshares, Inc.	$21,900,000	3/31/2009
Liberty Financial Services, Inc.	$5,645,000	3/31/2009
Liberty Shares, Inc.	$17,280,000	3/31/2009
LNB Bancorp Inc.	$25,223,000	3/31/2009
Lone Star Bank	$3,072,000	3/31/2009
LSB Corporation	$15,000,000	3/31/2009
M&T Bank Corporation	$600,000,000	3/31/2009
Madison Financial Corporation	$3,370,000	3/31/2009
Magna Bank	$13,795,000	3/31/2009
MainSource Financial Group, Inc.	$57,000,000	3/31/2009
Manhattan Bancorp	$1,700,000	3/31/2009
Marine Bank & Trust Company	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
Market Bancorporation, Inc.	$2,060,000	3/31/2009
Marquette National Corporation	$35,500,000	3/31/2009
Marshall & Ilsley Corporation	$1,715,000,000	3/31/2009
Maryland Financial Bank	$1,700,000	3/31/2009
MB Financial Inc.	$196,000,000	3/31/2009
Medallion Bank	$11,800,000	3/31/2009
Mercantile Capital Corp.	$3,500,000	3/31/2009
Merchants and Planters Bancshares, Inc.	$1,881,000	3/31/2009
Meridian Bank	$6,200,000	3/31/2009
Metro City Bank	$7,700,000	3/31/2009
MetroCorp Bancshares, Inc.	$45,000,000	3/31/2009
Metropolitan Capital Bancorp, Inc.	$2,040,000	3/31/2009
Mid Penn Bancorp, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Mid-Wisconsin Financial Services, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Middleburg Financial Corporation	$22,000,000	3/31/2009
Midland States Bancorp, Inc.	$10,189,000	3/31/2009
MidSouth Bancorp, Inc.	$20,000,000	3/31/2009
Midtown Bank & Trust Company	$5,222,000	3/31/2009
Midwest Banc Holdings, Inc.	$84,784,000	3/31/2009
Midwest Regional Bancorp, Inc.	$700,000	3/31/2009
MidWestOne Financial Group, Inc.	$16,000,000	3/31/2009
Millennium Bancorp, Inc.	$7,260,000	3/31/2009
Mission Community Bancorp	$5,116,000	3/31/2009
Mission Valley Bancorp	$5,500,000	3/31/2009
Monadnock Bancorp, Inc.	$1,834,000	3/31/2009
Monarch Community Bancorp, Inc.	$6,785,000	3/31/2009
Monarch Financial Holdings, Inc.	$14,700,000	3/31/2009
Moneytree Corporation	$9,516,000	3/31/2009
Monument Bank	$4,734,000	3/31/2009
Morgan Stanley	$10,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Morrill Bancshares, Inc.	$13,000,000	3/31/2009
Moscow Bancshares, Inc.	$6,216,000	3/31/2009
MS Financial, Inc.	$7,723,000	3/31/2009
MutualFirst Financial, Inc.	$32,382,000	3/31/2009
Naples Bancorp, Inc.	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
Nara Bancorp, Inc.	$67,000,000	3/31/2009
National Bancshares, Inc.	$24,664,000	3/31/2009
National Penn Bancshares, Inc.	$150,000,000	3/31/2009
NCAL Bancorp	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
New Hampshire Thrift Bancshares, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
New York Private Bank & Trust Corporation	$267,274,000	3/31/2009
NewBridge Bancorp	$52,372,000	3/31/2009
Nicolet Bankshares, Inc.	$14,964,000	3/31/2009
North Central Bancshares, Inc.	$10,200,000	3/31/2009
Northeast Bancorp	$4,227,000	3/31/2009
Northern States Financial Corporation	$17,211,000	3/31/2009
Northern Trust Corporation	$1,576,000,000	3/31/2009
Northway Financial, Inc.	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Northwest Bancorporation, Inc.	$10,500,000	3/31/2009
Northwest Commercial Bank	$1,992,000	3/31/2009
Oak Ridge Financial Services, Inc.	$7,700,000	3/31/2009
Oak Valley Bancorp	$13,500,000	3/31/2009
OceanFirst Financial Corp.	$38,263,000	3/31/2009
Ojai Community Bank	$2,080,000	3/31/2009
Old Line Bancshares, Inc.	$7,000,000	3/31/2009
Old National Bancorp	$100,000,000	3/31/2009
Old Second Bancorp, Inc.	$73,000,000	3/31/2009
Omega Capital Corp.	$2,816,000	3/31/2009
OneUnited Bank	$12,063,000	3/31/2009
Pacific Capital Bancorp	$180,634,000	3/31/2009
Pacific City Financial Corporation	$16,200,000	3/31/2009
Pacific Coast Bankers’ Bancshares	$11,600,000	3/31/2009
Pacific Coast National Bancorp	$4,120,000	3/31/2009
Pacific Commerce Bank	$4,060,000	3/31/2009
Pacific International Bancorp	$6,500,000	3/31/2009
Park Bancorporation, Inc.	$23,200,000	3/31/2009
Park National Corporation	$100,000,000	3/31/2009
Parke Bancorp, Inc.	$16,288,000	3/31/2009
Parkvale Financial Corporation	$31,762,000	3/31/2009
Pascack Community Bank	$3,756,000	3/31/2009
Patapsco Bancorp, Inc.	$6,000,000	3/31/2009
Pathway Bancorp	$3,727,000	3/31/2009
Patriot Bancshares, Inc.	$26,038,000	3/31/2009
Patterson Bancshares, Inc.	$3,690,000	3/31/2009
Peapack-Gladstone Financial Corporation	$28,685,000	3/31/2009
Peninsula Bank Holding Co.	$6,000,000	3/31/2009
Penn Liberty Financial Corp.	$9,960,000	3/31/2009
Peoples Bancorp	$18,000,000	3/31/2009
Peoples Bancorp Inc.	$39,000,000	3/31/2009
Peoples Bancorp of North Carolina, Inc.	$25,054,000	3/31/2009
Peoples Bancshares of TN, Inc.	$3,900,000	3/31/2009
PeoplesSouth Bancshares, Inc.	$12,325,000	3/31/2009
PGB Holdings, Inc.	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
Pierce County Bancorp	$6,800,000	3/31/2009
Pinnacle Bank Holding Company, Inc.	$4,389,000	3/31/2009
Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc.	$95,000,000	3/31/2009
Plains Capital Corporation	$87,631,000	3/31/2009
Plumas Bancorp	$11,949,000	3/31/2009
Popular, Inc.	$935,000,000	3/31/2009
Porter Bancorp Inc.	$35,000,000	3/31/2009
Prairie Star Bancshares, Inc.	$2,800,000	3/31/2009
Premier Bank Holding Company	$9,500,000	3/31/2009
Premier Service Bank	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
PremierWest Bancorp	$41,400,000	3/31/2009
Princeton National Bancorp, Inc.	$25,083,000	3/31/2009
Private Bancorporation, Inc.	$4,960,000	3/31/2009
PrivateBancorp, Inc.	$243,815,000	3/31/2009
Provident Bancshares Corp.	$151,500,000	3/31/2009
Provident Community Bancshares, Inc.	$9,266,000	3/31/2009
PSB Financial Corporation	$9,270,000	3/31/2009
Puget Sound Bank	$4,500,000	3/31/2009
Pulaski Financial Corp	$32,538,000	3/31/2009
QCR Holdings, Inc.	$38,237,000	3/31/2009
Redwood Capital Bancorp	$3,800,000	3/31/2009
Redwood Financial Inc.	$2,995,000	3/31/2009
Regent Bancorp, Inc.	$9,982,000	3/31/2009
Regent Capital Corporation	$2,655,000	3/31/2009
Regional Bankshares, Inc.	$1,500,000	3/31/2009
Regions Financial Corp.	$3,500,000,000	3/31/2009
Reliance Bancshares, Inc.	$40,000,000	3/31/2009
Ridgestone Financial Services, Inc.	$10,900,000	3/31/2009
Rising Sun Bancorp	$5,983,000	3/31/2009
Rogers Bancshares, Inc.	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
Royal Bancshares of Pennsylvania, Inc.	$30,407,000	3/31/2009
S&T Bancorp	$108,676,000	3/31/2009
Saigon National Bank	$1,549,000	3/31/2009
Salisbury Bancorp, Inc.	$8,816,000	3/31/2009
Sandy Spring Bancorp, Inc.	$83,094,000	3/31/2009
Santa Clara Valley Bank, N.A.	$2,900,000	3/31/2009
Santa Lucia Bancorp	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
SBT Bancorp, Inc.	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
SCBT Financial Corporation	$64,779,000	3/31/2009
Seacoast Banking Corporation	$50,000,000	3/31/2009
Seacoast Commerce Bank	$1,800,000	3/31/2009
Seaside National Bank & Trust	$5,677,000	3/31/2009
Security Bancshares of Pulaski County, Inc.	$2,152,000	3/31/2009
Security Business Bancorp	$5,803,000	3/31/2009
Security California Bancorp	$6,815,000	3/31/2009
Security Federal Corporation	$18,000,000	3/31/2009
Security State Bancshares, Inc.	$12,500,000	3/31/2009
Severn Bancorp, Inc.	$23,393,000	3/31/2009
Shore Bancshares, Inc.	$25,000,000	4/15/2009
Signature Bank	$120,000,000	3/31/2009
Somerset Hills Bancorp	$7,414,000	3/31/2009
Sonoma Valley Bancorp	$8,653,000	3/31/2009
Sound Banking Company	$3,070,000	3/31/2009
South Financial Group, Inc.	$347,000,000	3/31/2009
Southern Bancorp, Inc.	$11,000,000	3/31/2009
Southern Community Financial Corp.	$42,750,000	3/31/2009
Southern First Bancshares, Inc.	$17,299,000	3/31/2009
Southern Illinois Bancorp, Inc.	$5,000,000	3/31/2009
Southern Missouri Bancorp, Inc.	$9,550,000	3/31/2009
Southwest Bancorp, Inc.	$70,000,000	3/31/2009
Sovereign Bancshares, Inc.	$18,215,000	3/31/2009
Spirit BankCorp, Inc.	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
St. Johns Bancshares, Inc.	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
State Bancorp, Inc.	$36,842,000	3/31/2009
State Bankshares, Inc.	$50,000,000	3/31/2009
State Capital Corporation	$15,000,000	3/31/2009
State Street Corporation	$2,000,000,000	3/31/2009
StellarOne Corporation	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
Sterling Bancorp	$42,000,000	3/31/2009
Sterling Bancshares, Inc.	$125,198,000	3/31/2009
Sterling Financial Corporation	$303,000,000	3/31/2009
Stewardship Financial Corporation	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Stockmens Financial Corporation	$15,568,000	3/31/2009
Stonebridge Financial Corp.	$10,973,000	3/31/2009
Summit State Bank	$8,500,000	3/31/2009
Sun Bancorp, Inc.	$89,310,000	4/8/2009
SunTrust Banks, Inc.	$3,500,000,000	3/31/2009
SunTrust Banks, Inc.	$1,350,000,000	3/31/2009
Superior Bancorp Inc.	$69,000,000	3/31/2009
Surrey Bancorp	$2,000,000	3/31/2009
Susquehanna Bancshares, Inc.	$300,000,000	3/31/2009
SV Financial, Inc.	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
SVB Financial Group	$235,000,000	3/31/2009
Synovus Financial Corp.	$967,870,000	3/31/2009
Syringa Bancorp	$8,000,000	3/31/2009
Taylor Capital Group	$104,823,000	3/31/2009
TCB Holding Company, Texas Community Bank	$11,730,000	3/31/2009
TCF Financial Corporation	$361,172,000	3/31/2009
TCNB Financial Corp.	$2,000,000	3/31/2009
Tennessee Commerce Bancorp, Inc.	$30,000,000	3/31/2009
Tennessee Valley Financial Holdings, Inc.	$3,000,000	3/31/2009
Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc.	$75,000,000	3/31/2009
Texas National BanCorporation	$3,981,000	3/31/2009
The Bancorp, Inc.	$45,220,000	3/31/2009
The Bank of Currituck	$4,021,000	3/31/2009
The Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation	$34,000,000	3/31/2009
The Baraboo BanCorporation	$20,749,000	3/31/2009
The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company	$5,448,000	3/31/2009
The Elmira Savings Bank, FSB	$9,090,000	3/31/2009
The First Bancorp, Inc.	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
The First Bancshares, Inc.	$5,000,000	3/31/2009
The Freeport State Bank	$301,000	3/31/2009
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.	$10,000,000,000	3/31/2009
The Little Bank, Inc.	$7,500,000	3/31/2009
The PNC Financial Services Group Inc.	$7,579,200,000	3/31/2009
The Private Bank of California	$5,450,000	3/31/2009
The Queensborough Company	$12,000,000	3/31/2009
The Victory Bank	$541,000	3/31/2009
TIB Financial Corp.	$37,000,000	3/31/2009
Tidelands Bancshares, Inc.	$14,448,000	3/31/2009
Tifton Banking Company	$3,800,000	3/31/2009
Timberland Bancorp, Inc.	$16,641,000	3/31/2009
Titonka Bancshares, Inc.	$2,117,000	3/31/2009
Todd Bancshares, Inc.	$4,000,000	3/31/2009
TowneBank	$76,458,000	3/31/2009
Treaty Oak Bancorp, Inc.	$3,268,000	3/31/2009
Tri-County Financial Corporation	$15,540,000	3/31/2009
Tri-State Bank of Memphis	$2,795,000	3/31/2009
Triad Bancorp, Inc.	$3,700,000	3/31/2009
Trinity Capital Corporation	$35,539,000	3/31/2009
TriState Capital Holdings, Inc.	$23,000,000	3/31/2009
TriSummit Bank	$2,765,000	3/31/2009
Trustmark Corporation	$215,000,000	3/31/2009
U.S. Bancorp	$6,599,000,000	3/31/2009
UBT Bancshares, Inc.	$8,950,000	3/31/2009
UCBH Holdings, Inc.	$298,737,000	3/31/2009
Umpqua Holdings Corp.	$214,181,000	3/31/2009
Union Bankshares Corporation	$59,000,000	3/31/2009
United American Bank	$8,700,000	3/31/2009
United Bancorp, Inc.	$20,600,000	3/31/2009
United BanCorporation	$10,300,000	3/31/2009
United Community Banks, Inc.	$180,000,000	3/31/2009
United Financial Banking Companies, Inc.	$5,658,000	3/31/2009
Unity Bancorp, Inc.	$20,649,000	3/31/2009
US Metro Bank	$2,861,000	3/31/2009
Uwharrie Capital Corp	$10,000,000	3/31/2009
Valley Commerce Bancorp	$7,700,000	3/31/2009
Valley Community Bank	$5,500,000	3/31/2009
Valley Financial Corporation	$16,019,000	3/31/2009
Valley National Bancorp	$300,000,000	3/31/2009
Virginia Commerce Bancorp	$71,000,000	3/31/2009
VIST Financial Corp.	$25,000,000	3/31/2009
W.T.B. Financial Corporation	$110,000,000	3/31/2009
Wainwright Bank & Trust Company	$22,000,000	3/31/2009
Washington Banking Company/Whidbey Island Bank	$26,380,000	3/31/2009
Washington Federal Inc.	$200,000,000	3/31/2009
WashingtonFirst Bank	$6,633,000	3/31/2009
Webster Financial Corporation	$400,000,000	3/31/2009
Wells Fargo & Company	$25,000,000,000	3/31/2009
Wesbanco Bank Inc.	$75,000,000	3/31/2009
West Bancorporation, Inc.	$36,000,000	3/31/2009
Westamerica BanCorporation	$83,726,000	3/31/2009
Western Alliance BanCorporation	$140,000,000	3/31/2009
Western Community Bancshares, Inc.	$7,290,000	3/31/2009
Western Illinois Bancshares Inc.	$6,855,000	3/31/2009
White River Bancshares Company	$16,800,000	3/31/2009
Whitney Holding Corporation	$300,000,000	3/31/2009
Wilmington Trust Corporation	$330,000,000	3/31/2009
Wilshire Bancorp, Inc.	$62,158,000	3/31/2009
Wintrust Financial Corporation	$250,000,000	3/31/2009
WSFS Financial Corporation	$52,625,000	3/31/2009
Yadkin Valley Financial Corporation	$36,000,000	3/31/2009
Zions BanCorporation	$1,400,000,000	3/31/2009
Total: $198,888,248,000 Firms Participating: 555

GM FEDERAL HELPERS ( aka AL CAPONE) GIVE CREDITORS A DEAL THEY CAN NOT REFUSE – JUST LIKE IN THE MOVIE!

GM took the FEDERAL help, to “help” it weather the time of losses by getting time to propose a financial restructuring. The FEDS have provided it with $27 BILLION so far of helpful loans to continue operations.

They were supposed to present a plan for its own recovery as a condition of receiving more aid.

Now the FEDS have taken a page out of the screenplay from the GODFATHER movie, and given the creditors of GM “a deal that they can not refuse.”

The Feds have proposed that holders of $27 billion in existing bonds, “exchange” them for a 10% equity stake in the new GM business, while the FEDERAL $27 billion in loans be exchanged for a 50% equity stake. Nice deal, if you have a gun to your head.

The UAW would “give up”claims” calculated at $20 billion, and would receive a 39% stake in the new business.

Finally, the existing stockholders, those people who actually provided all the capital over the last 80 years or so, would receive a 1% equity stake in the new business.

So this is the price for the government help-push out all the free market loans aside, push out the stockholders and elbow-in the government and the unions for a 89% ownership interest.

GM’s CFO said that if the various debt/bond holders do not accept this plan, he would ask a bankruptcy court to cram down this plan in any bankruptcy reorganization.

As a side note, many of the bonds and debt held is held by banks that are themselves part of the FED’s “helping hand” program, so please explain to us how exactly does this work?

The taxpayers give money to GM, then GM converts that money into worthless stock and the banks keep the money they got…say again?

Word of advice, don’t take the money when it’s offered, when someone says, ” I’m from the government, and I am here to help.”

FEDS – ECONOMY IS RECOVERING BY BEING WORSE??? ONLY THE GOVERNMENT THINKS LIKE THIS

The economy shrank at a worse-than-expected 6.1 percent pace at the start of this year as sharp cutbacks by businesses and the biggest drop in U.S. exports in 40 years overwhelmed a rebound in consumer spending, said the Commerce Department.

This negative report was greeted by the market as positive, go figure.

The Commerce Department’s report, released Wednesday, dashed hopes that the recession’s grip on the country loosened in the first quarter. Economists surveyed expected a 5 percent annualized decline.

Instead, the economy ended up performing nearly as bad as it had in the final three months of last year when it logged the worst slide in a quarter-century, contracting at a 6.3 percent pace. Nervous consumers played a prominent role in that dismal showing as they ratcheted back spending in the face of rising unemployment, falling home values and shrinking nest eggs.

In the first quarter consumers came back to spending, boosting their spending after two straight quarters of reductions. The 2.2 percent growth rate was the strongest in two years. Wow, is that a sign of recovery, or could this be the effect of the shopping done at all the store closings and liquidation sales?

Still, the consumer rebound was swamped by heavy spending cuts in virtually every other area.

Businesses cut spending on home building, commercial construction, equipment and software, and inventories of goods. Sales of U.S. goods to foreign buyers plunged as they retrenched in the face of economic troubles in their own countries. Even the government ( yeah right) trimmed spending. It was the first time that happened since the end of 2005.

The sharp cuts underscore the toll the housing, credit and financial crises — the worst since the 1930s — are having on the country. The recession, which began in December 2007, has taken a big bite out of national economic activity and snatched 5.1 million jobs.

As a way to cushion the impact of the downturn, the Federal Reserve has slashed a key bank lending rate to a record low near zero and rolled out a string of radical programs to spur lending. The Fed at the end of its two-day meeting Wednesday is expected to keep its key rate near zero and probably hold it there well into next year.

President Barack Obama is counting on his $787 billion stimulus of tax cuts and increased government spending on big public works projects to help bolster economic activity later this year. The administration also has put forward programs to rescue banks and curb home foreclosures — big negative forces weighing on the economy.

The weaker-than-expected report had some analysts stuck to predictions that the economy would shrink less in the current April-June period — at a pace of 1 to 2.5 percent — as Obama’s stimulus begins to take hold. Those analysts also continue to hope the economy would start to grow again in the final quarter of this year.

“The recession was bad in the first quarter but won’t be as bad going forward,” said John Silvia, chief economist at Wachovia. “I don’t think this lessens the expected pattern that the economy will be entering a recovery by the end of this year.”

Now I ask you where is this guy living, his bank just got taken over!

Recent outbreak of the swine flu, which started out in Mexico and has spread to the United States and elsewhere, poses a new potential economic decline danger. The flu might stifle trade and may force consumers to cut back further, those negatives would worsen the recession.

I have not heard from anyone that they as businessmen, expect a robust year or improvement for their business in 2009. A recent survey by a business publication showed that fully 67% of business CFO’s expected a lower profit year in 2009, only 13% expected better, and 20% expected the same results.

ECONOMY – GOOD NEWS/BAD NEWS, AND WORSE NEWS

Everyone wants to be optimistic about our country and its economic future for 2009 and beyond, except that future will be tightly controlled and its potential economic improvement is totally in the hands of our government.

“I’m from the government and I am here to help you,” is the scariest statement that a business or individual would like to hear.

For instance, just look at the mixed signals sent to us every day by economic gurus, government financial advisers, economists, money advice talk show hosts, TV shows about personal finance and the financial media.

The most conservative financial advisers always suggest that we start a savings program, and they all show how after putting away a few dollars every week, after 20 or 30 years…presto, we will have a few million dollars in savings.

However, the American economy is a consumer driven economy. It is driven by consumer spending which accounts for approximately 70% of the total of the goods and services produced.

Why heck, we drive all the world’s economies by what we consume in America, as we buy goods from all countries. American buy anything and everything; have you ever seen a SKYMALL catalog? I did not think I needed a garden thermometer shaped like a caterpillar, made in Sri Lanka until I saw it for only $4.99 in a catalog along with the matching barometer.That folks is called disposable income, and our government wants us to spend it all, otherwise it will spend it for us, on our behalf-hopefully not buying thermometers shaped like caterpillars.

The President wants us to spend more to help the “recovery”, and since we are not spending enough, he has taken our money and is spending it for us, apparently for our own good.

Then on the other hand, smart financial advisers tell us to stop all that spending, to cut back in these tough economic times and NOT buy anyhing we do not need, and to save our money.

So, what are we to do? Save, and save for a rainy day, or spend everything we have and maybe more by charging all our purchased on credit cards with 29.9% rates or higher?

Mixed signals, all around.

It can be summed up this way; we spend and borrow when we feel good about the future, and we do not spend, and tend to save when we do not.

So, when will there be a recovery, when will people start to spend buying all those caterlippal shaped theremometers again to revive our retailers and Sri Lankan factories?

Oh, I forgot, the government wants any extra money you may make as the recovery happens, because it has already spent your future money “helping” you recover.

Further complicating the process is the fact that interest rates are at all time lows, so your savings are earning very little sitting in banks, banks that you may be afraid to put your money into, since they may be seized at any time by the government. Buying government bonds and notes is even worse since their interest rates are even lower than the bank rates, and worse yet, you are lending the government your own money which they took from you in the form of new debt left for your children and grandchildren to pay off.

So, spend, or save?, that is the question…..and the good news/bad news.

We asked, and everyone is confused, but remember, when you SAVE, you are doing YOURSELF good, protecting your own interests. When you spend, you may be doing good for the TAMIL rebels in Sri Lanka who sell those caterpillar shaped thermometers you do not really need.

GM’S PONTIAC DIVISION ENDS, BRINGS BACK MEMORIES OF AN ERA OF MUSCLE CARS – GOODBYE OLD FRIEND

GM has finally pulled the plug on a car brand named after an Indian Chief who led the Midwest Indian tribes. Why the car was originally named for him, nobody remembers-other than there were a lot of native names used for cars, for some reason.

I remember that my first contact with a Pontiac muscle car was when my best friend in college got a new PONTIAC Le Mans muscle car from his parents as his present upon getting into college. That was his present, and we loved riding with him as he sped on the tollway for our weekends off to his parents lake house in Michigan.

We could make that trip in very short order from our college campus due to the 80 mph average that the car could do on the toll road and our CB radio and “good buddy” talk with truckers alerted us to any “smokeys” on the road ahead of us. heck it was not unusual for us to do 100MPH back then when the speed limits were 75 on the highways, and trucks would pass you up at that speed.

The Pontiac had it all; muscle, speed, air conditioning and a 8 track player to blast the music of the day that we sang along to on our road trip.

What great memories we had in that Pontiac. Cruising for girls on Saturday nights, going to the drive-in theaters, and having little worries in our adolescent lives. That was 1971, and it was the era of the Pontiac-Pontiac ruled with its TRANS AM, GRAND AM, LE MANS and even with popular bigger cars like the BONNEVILLE, fit for a whole family.

There was something unique to that car’s engine, it had a unique sound to it. I always remember it to this day, and it had that sound always.

After college I ended up owning a few Pontiacs, a couple of Grand Am’s and of course a couple of the sporty and powerful Fieros , the 6 cylinder “sport car” two seater with the engine in back of the driver. They all made that unique Pontiac engine sound. The Fiero was the first car with plastic body panels so it never had any rust ( in those days rust was a major reason to get a new car). Also, it looked really cool.

The car lost its luster as we teenagers aged and needed a family car or van, but the memories live on.

What killed Pontiac
GM pulls the plug on a brand credited with originating the muscle car.

The Pontiac car brand, once marketed as General Motors’ “excitement division,” will be killed off by the end of next year, the carmaker announced Monday.

The decision to shutter Pontiac was one of several aggressive steps GM spelled out in an updated survival plan Monday. The government has given the company until the end of next month to restructure and slim down in order to survive.

The new GM will focus on four core brands: Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac.

The fate of three other troubled lines — Saturn, Saab and Hummer — will be decided at a later date, GM said. They are likely to be sold off or shut down, while Pontiac will be shuttered.

Pontiac’s problem was not sales, GM Chief Executive Fritz Henderson indicated during a conference call Monday. In 2008, Pontiac was the company’s third-best selling brand behind Chevrolet and GMC and sold twice as many vehicles as Buick, a brand that will apparently survive the changes at GM.

The problem for Pontiac has been profitability. GM doesn’t generally break out profits by brand, but Buick and GMC, which are sold in dealerships alongside Pontiacs, are more profitable, Henderson said.

“We didn’t have a strategy that we were satisfied with that would allow us to win with the Pontiac brand,” he said.

Roots in the 1950s

Pontiac’s identity as a “performance” brand dates back to the late 1950s and early 1960s. Pontiac cars were designed with wider bodies for cosmetic reasons and the wheels were pushed out to match. This “wide-track” design became a selling point and was advertised as giving Pontiac cars a distinct cornering advantage over other cars.

The idea of Pontiac as a performance brand was solidified in 1964 with the creation of the Pontiac Tempest LeMans GTO. That car quickly evolved into the GTO and is often credited with creating a new class of American car, the muscle car.

“There was a time, a long way back now, when you knew exactly what Pontiac stood for,” said Kevin Smith, editorial director for the automotive Web site Edmunds.com. More recently, under vice chairman Bob Lutz, GM tried to revive Pontiac’s image.

One strategy floated for Pontiac was to sell only, or mostly, rear-wheel-drive cars. That would have set it apart from other GM divisions, and most cars sold in America. Rear-wheel-drive is associated with performance brands like BMW.

Unfortunately, the 2004 model year reintroduction of the Pontiac GTO name on a performance coupe imported from Australia didn’t result in big sales. So far, the Pontiac G8, a rear-wheel-drive four-door sedan also imported from GM’s Australian Holden division, hasn’t been a sales success either despite good reviews.

Pontiac’s most popular products remain the G6, a decent but unexciting midsize car available as a sedan, coupe or convertible, and the Vibe, a small wagon shared with Toyota, which sells it as the Matrix.

Any plans to return Pontiac to the heavy-horsepower days of the 1970s ended as gas prices rose and Congress prepared stricter fuel economy rules for the industry.

In response to those pressures, GM quietly introduced the Pontiac G3, which had been sold in Canada only. Once again, Pontiac was selling a rebadged Chevrolet product, this time the Korean-built Aveo subcompact car.

Pontiac’s lack of focus as a brand may finally have brought its demise, said Smith. “That’s just death in a marketplace where there’s so much competition and so much quality,” he said.

FORECLOSURE FILINGS CAUSE JUDGE TO STOP COURT APPEARANCES FOR HOMEOWNERS! – DEADBEATS WIN!

Chicago’s Cook County Circuit Court usually known for its notoriety more than actual fairness, has delayed all actions against homeowners due to the crush if new filings. The presiding judge of the Chancery Division which handles all the cases, so called Mortgage Default Calls (first court appearances made a lender when a borrower has failed to respond to a foreclosure action), has canceled all such calls for July and August.

In the first three months this year 13,200 new foreclosures were filed, and the first appearance is the date on which the homeowner needs to respond or be”defaulted”. There were 46,850 foreclosure files pending and this caseload has made it impossible to maintain a meaningful case administration.

This action will allow the homeowners to get additional time to work out deals with the lenders to save their homes, and does not provide any additional time to those homeowners that have filed an answer or consented to the foreclosure.

So, again folks, those people who have done nothing, get the break, while those who follow the rules get the shaft! Those people who do not bother to take any positive action are getting a break.

The Treasury Department started to sign contracts with lenders in the so called MAKING MORTGAGES AFFORDABLE program, a $75 billion program by the administration to help homeowners refinance of modify their mortgages.

The delay may have the unintended consequences of helping deadbeats stay in their homes, making the homes less valuable to the lenders, and therefore causing larger write offs at the banks due to the abatement of foreclosure actions.

It pays to be a dead beat.

WORLD PRODUCTION TO SHRINK FIRST TIME IN 60 YEARS – WAKE UP CALL TO HELP BUSINESSES

The world’s total economy is likely to shrink in 2009 year for the first time in 60 years according to a report from the IMF..

The International Monetary Fund projected the 1.3 percent drop in a gloomy forecast released Wednesday. That could leave at least 10 million more people around the world jobless; ARE THEY KIDDING lets make that 100 million, and 10 million alone in the USA. Where are they getting these numbers?

“By any measure, this downturn represents by far the deepest global recession since the Great Depression,” the IMF said in its latest World Economic Outlook. “All corners of the globe are being affected.”

The new forecast of a decline in global economic activity for 2009 is much weaker than the IMF had estimated in January.

Big factors in the gloomier outlook: It’s expected to take longer than previously thought to stabilize world financial markets and get credit flowing freely again to consumers and businesses. Doing so will be necessary to lift the U.S., and the global economy, out of recession.

The report comes in advance of Friday’s meetings between the United States and other major economic powers, and weekend sessions of the IMF and World Bank. The talks will seek to flesh out the commitments made at a G-20 leaders summit in London last month, when President Barack Obama and the others pledged to boost financial support for the IMF and other international lending institutions by $1.1 trillion.

The IMF’s outlook for the U.S. is bleaker than for the world as a whole: It predicts the U.S. economy will shrink 2.8 percent this year. That would mark the biggest such decline since 1946.

We believe that these forecasts are not correct as they are made by people who do not really understand the major reasons for why all this is happening, especially in the USA which will have a much longer recovery, if any even next year, 2010. Why would there be a recovery when the US government is looking to add taxes for all businesses, add EPA regulations, add costly compliance with all sorts of new mandates?

Among the major industrialized nations, Japan is expected to suffer the sharpest contraction this year: 6.2 percent. Russia’s economy is predicted to shrink 6 percent, Germany 5.6 percent and Britain 4.1 percent. Mexico’s economic activity would contract 3.7 percent and Canada’s 2.5 percent. we believe that all these estimates are TOO HIGH, these economies will shrink a lot more due to the overall weakness in the US credit markets which drive world trade.

For instance, non-bank lenders who comprise about 40% of all lending in the USA, remain largely out of the business of making new loans. Lending declined overall in 2008, from 2007 by some 24%, while bank lending declined 11% (and that is for 2008!.)

China, meanwhile, is expected to see its growth slow to 6.5 percent this year. India’s growth is likely to slow to 4.5 percent. Thse numbers are also too high in our opinion.

The lost output could be as high as $4 trillion this year alone, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner estimated. This again we believe is too low, as this may be the decrease in the top four economies alone.

In addition to trillions in lost business, a sinking world economy means fewer trade opportunities and higher unemployment. It raises the odds more people will fall into poverty, go hungry or lose their homes. And while keeping a lid on interest rates and consumer prices, the global recession increases the risk of deflation, which would drag down prices and wages, making it harder for people to make payments on their debt.

The jobless rate in the United States is expected to average 8.9 percent this year and climb to 10.1 percent next year, the IMF said. We belive that the 10% rate will be reached shortly, and this year, not next.

In Germany, the jobless rate is expected to average 9 percent this year and 10.8 percent next year. Britain’s unemployment rate is projected to rise to 7.4 percent this year and to 9.2 percent next year.

The 1.3 percent projected decline would be the first in roughly 60 years. In a report issued in mid-March, the IMF predicted global activity would contract this year “for the first time in 60 years,” though it didn’t offer a precise estimate then.

Next year, the IMF predicts the world economy will grow again — but just 1.9 percent. It said this would be consistent with its findings that economic recoveries after financial crises “are significantly slower” than ordinary recoveries typically are. Oh, right on, and if you belive that one, we have a bridge in brooklyn we would like to sell you.

All those factors tend to weigh against prospects “for a speedy turnaround,” the IMF said.

In 2010, the IMF predicts the U.S. economy will be flat, neither shrinking nor growing. Germany’s and Britain’s economies, meanwhile, will shrink less — by 1 percent and 0.4 percent respectively — it estimates.

Others countries, such as Japan, Russia, Canada and Mexico are projected to grow again. And China and India should pick up speed.

The crisis entered a tumultuous new phase last fall, shaking confidence in global financial institutions and markets. Total worldwide losses from the financial crisis from 2007 to 2010 could reach nearly $4.1 trillion, the IMF estimated in a separate report Tuesday.

Where have these guys been getting their information, just the losses in the USA stock market exceed that, before real estate value losses.

To date, actions by the United States and government in other countries have helped ease the crisis in some ways. But markets are still not operating normally in any sense of measurement.

The 185-nation IMF, headquartered in Washington, is the globe’s economic rescue squad, providing emergency loans to countries facing financial troubles, and has urged countries to take bolder actions to bolster banks.

The IMF also has pushed countries to work more closely together (oh sure like they always do). It favors coordinating fiscal stimulus efforts through tax reductions (NOT THE USA, they do not get it in Washington) or greater government spending to stimulate the appetites of consumers and businesses ( and how does that work exactly-they take our money to stimulate us with that $13 weekly estimate of our tax savings?). And it warned countries to resist the temptation of enacting protectionist trade measures ( like those promoted by our government).

“Fiscal policies had made a gigantic difference,” said IMF Chief Economist Olivier Blanchard. Without them, the hit to the global economy would have been much greater and pushed it perilously close to “a depression,” he added.

Because the world economy won’t be back to normal next year or perhaps even in 2011, Blanchard urged countries to spend money on big public works projects ( that is really smart, especially when it creates gigantic deficits)– something the Obama administration is doing — to bolster activity (of government spending, and litle else).

Bold policy actions could set off a mutually reinforcing “relief rally” in financial markets and a revival in consumer and business confidence, the IMF said in its report.

“The problem is that the longer the downturn continues to deepen, the slimmer the chances that such a strong rebound will occur, as pessimism about the outlook becomes entrenched and balance sheets are damaged further,” the IMF said in its report.

With the global economy stuck in a recession, the risks of a dangerous bout of deflation — a prolonged decline in prices that can worsen the economy — has risen. The IMF cited a “moderate” risk of deflation in the United States and in the 16 countries that use the euro. It saw a “significant likelihood of deeper price deflation” in Japan.

Please note that the worlds largest economies are the USA, China, Japan, Germany, Russia, the UK, India.

The Chinese economy operates by being the cheap supply chain for the others, so when times are tough in the major countries which China supplies, it folds too.

Please check out our prior blog about how the world is dependent on overlapping countries to trade with each other, where we described the problem or having angora goats repossessed by Mongolian banks due to the price of the silky soft fabric dropping.

So far our predictions for investing last year beat all the investment gurus, we suggested and compared putting money into a mattress, versus the stock market and beat all advisers.

The IMF seems to be way off the mark, but then again when you do not live in the real world of real salaries and business problems, it is hard to see the forest for the trees.

MONGOLIAN HERDERS NOW IN A CRISIS AS ANGORA/CASHMERE SWEATER DEMAND WANES WORLDWIDE-PROOF WE ARE ALL CONNECTED

We knew it, we saw it coming. Even the farthest corners of the world are now connected in our GLOBAL ECONOMY.

Mongolia, a remote and historic country whose territory is best known as having the Gobi Desert, is home to some 2.5 million people, the majority of whom earn their income by raising animals for profit to supply the rest of the world with that soft fiber from angora and cashmere goats and sheep.

The population has accepted the newest conspicuous consumption models of the rest of the world but on a more needy basis such as having solar panels for their tents to provide electricity for instance. Can you imagine solar power in Mongolia? I did not think of it there.

Mongolian herders too got over-extended in receiving loans from their banks for the purchase of larger herds, as as prices have fallen significantly for the animals and their cashmere, their banks have been demanding payment, so the herders must sell their animals in order to pay back the loans.

Surprisingly, banks have discovered that many herders submitted inaccurate information on their loan applications attesting to the number of animals that they used for collateral, and often then qualified for loans that were larger than the number of animals….what a shock, even in Mongolia we have sub-prime borrowers!

Now keep in mind that 2.7 million togrogs (their money) is about $1,900, and that the average herder loan is about 500,000 togrogs, about $350.

Everything is relative in an economy in which the families still eat the animals themselves after selling the cashmere and angora wool, and drink the milk and make by-products for the family meals.

Banks have actually started to compete for the business, with rates of 2%-3% a month.

The herders make money in two seasons; spring they sell the angora and cashmere, and in the fall they sell the skins and meat, so those are the times for loan repayments.

Our consumption of the high-end sweaters, scarves and clothing using the soft fibers has slowed, and guess what, we now have defaulting herders in Mongolia!

So if you though times were bad, think about the visit from the Mongolian repo-man who will repossess the animals who will no longer produce the soft fibers in the scarves you just “gotta-have”.

It is a global market place, and we just have to be able to get along with everyone. The supply chain is longer than we realize.

One suggestion is to help budding entrepreneurs around the word, including Mongolia by making a KIVA loan. Your loan can be a small as $25, and when it is paid back you can loan it out again..

Visit www.KIVA.org to find out about this organization and pick who you want to lend the money to…the payback is quick and you will be helping with a micro loan to needy and entrepreneurial people all over the developing world, even Mongolian herders.
We Let You Loan to the Working Poor

Kiva’s mission is to connect people through lending for the sake of alleviating poverty.

Kiva is the world’s first person-to-person micro-lending website, empowering individuals to lend directly to unique entrepreneurs around the globe.

The people you see on Kiva’s site are real individuals in need of funding – not marketing material. When you browse entrepreneurs’ profiles on the site, choose someone to lend to, and then make a loan, you are helping a real person make great strides towards economic independence and improve life for themselves, their family, and their community. Throughout the course of the loan (usually 6-12 months), you can receive email journal updates and track repayments. Then, when you get your loan money back, you can re-lend to someone else in need.

Kiva partners with existing expert microfinance institutions. In doing so, we gain access to outstanding entrepreneurs from impoverished communities world-wide. Our partners are experts in choosing qualified entrepreneurs. That said, they are usually short on funds. Through Kiva, our partners upload their entrepreneur profiles directly to the site so you can lend to them. When you do, not only do you get a unique experience connecting to a specific entrepreneur on the other side of the planet, but our microfinance partners can do more of what they do, more efficiently.

Kiva provides a data-rich, transparent lending platform. We are constantly working to make the system more transparent to show how money flows throughout the entire cycle, and what effect it has on the people and institutions lending it, borrowing it, and managing it along the way. To do this, we are using the power of the internet to facilitate one-to-one connections that were previously prohibitively expensive. Child sponsorship has always been a high overhead business. Kiva creates a similar interpersonal connection at much lower costs due to the instant, inexpensive nature of internet delivery. The individuals featured on our website are real people who need a loan and are waiting for socially-minded individuals like you to lend them money.

USA BANKS WILL SUFFER $2.7 TRILLION IN LOSSES, ACCORDING TO IMF, AND $4 TRILLION WORLDWIDE

The updated information from the IMF about the projected losses attributed to the CRISIS worldwide and in the USA came after a “optimistic” reports from various government sources, predicting a financial improvement later in 2009 and definitely into 2010.

The International Monetary Fund said Tuesday worldwide financial institutions could suffer more than $4 trillion in losses from the global credit crisis with the U.S. leading the way with a total of $2.7 trillion.

The $2.7 trillion estimate for the United States was nearly double the IMF’s projection from just six months ago. The agency for the first time estimated losses for other regions of the world, saying the global total could surpass $4 trillion.

This projection would also fall far short of the funds that have been allocated to assist banks with regulatory capital.

So who do we believe; the IMF report or our government officials?

The IMF also warned that governments must take decisive policy actions to contain the fallout. The agency said governments have made progress getting extra money into the banking system, but more needs to be done to deal with toxic assets on banks’ books and shutting down insolvent financial institutions.

Additional capital is needed to cushion balance sheets against further loan losses and to restore investor confidence, the IMF said. The Obama administration has said it’s considering converting some of the $200 billion in loans to banks into purchases of common stock as a way to bolster their capital reserves.

Would it not be better to simply keep it as preferred stock, for the better position it offers as well as interest?

The financial system remained under “severe stress” as the economic crisis broadens from the banking sector to consumers and businesses, the IMF said in its “Global Financial Stability Report.”

“Further determined policy action will be required to help restore confidence and to relieve the financial markets of uncertainties that are undermining the prospects for an economic recovery,” the IMF said.

The stability report and an updated economic outlook due out Wednesday will form the basis for meetings slated to begin with talks among the Group of Seven rich industrial nations and the Group of 20 major industrial and developing economies on Friday.

Discussions among the nations that serve on the steering committees of the IMF and World Bank are scheduled for Saturday and Sunday. Those talks will seek to flesh out the commitments made at a G-20 leaders summit in London last month. At that meeting, President Barack Obama and the other leaders pledged to boost financial support for the IMF and other international lending institutions by $1.1 trillion.

Emerging economic powers like China and Brazil are demanding a bigger voice in how the IMF and World Bank are run in return for their increased support. That is all we need, a communist country like China telling us all how to run things, and Brazil, a big developing nation where only 9% of the population has ever traveled on a plane.

These countries want to be our financial advisers.

The 185-nation lending institution came under severe criticism during the 1997-98 Asian currency crisis, for the types of stringent reforms it imposed on countries seeking IMF loans.

IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn has sought to revamp the agency’s lending programs to make them more flexible. The IMF has created a new line of credit it’s willing to extend to countries with solid economic track records without the tough restrictions of normal IMF loan programs. So far, Mexico has been offered $47 billion and Poland $20.5 billion under the new program.

The agency already has shown greater flexibility in the loans it has extended for countries caught up in the current crisis, including those made to the formerly communist Eastern European countries of Hungary, Latvia, Ukraine, Serbia and Romania.

Some economists worry that without stringent IMF programs, countries will not make the tough choices needed to trigger an economic rebound. But most believe the new flexibility is a welcome change from past approaches.

There was a general feeling after the Asian crisis that some of the loan conditionality had been too intrusive.

Oh, yes why have any conditions attached to the loans. Let’s just give the countries billion and billions with no accountability. Why not, our TARP had no conditions for the first $350 billion.

The old IMF was too harsh. Some of the conditions they imposed in the past did not take into account practical realities, but accountability and oversight should certainly be a part of that.

At the same time, some member nations are pushing to give the IMF greater powers as a global economic watchdog. They argue that if the agency had played a greater monitoring role, some of the financial market excesses that led to the current crisis could have been avoided.

However, any move to increase the IMF’s oversight is likely to meet stiff resistance among countries like China where officials have objected to IMF lectures on its undervalued currency.

The financial stability report said the estimate of $2.7 trillion in losses in the U.S. included $1.07 trillion in loan losses and $1.6 trillion in losses on securities backed by mortgages, consumer and business debt. The losses for the 16 nations using the euro currency and Britain were estimated at $1.2 trillion. The losses in Japan were put at $149 billion.

The IMF said banks worldwide have raised about $900 billion in new capital since the crisis began, with about half of that coming from public sources. In the U.S., the government has spent $200 billion from a $700 billion bailout fund to inject fresh capital into more than 500 banks.

THRIFTY GOVERNMENT, IT WILL SAVE $100 MILLION OVER MANY YEARS ON $3.6 TRILLION BUDGET!

We are always talking about how the government wastes money. Well no more of that, not anymore thanks to our sharp government accountants (see photo).

It was announced today that about $100 million will be SAVED in the $3.6 trillion budget, by buying paperclips and pencils more carefully-among other things. Nobody apparently thought of this before; like “hey we want to buy $10 million of paperclips from you, can we get a discount?”

Wow, what sharp buyers we have there in the government!

Also they intend on saving $3 million on the seals and logos to be designed for various agencies. We could have saved a lot more if they just went on the internet and typed in LOGO design, I saw some from $10 and up! President Barack Obama called his first formal Cabinet meeting on Monday, telling department and agency chiefs to find ways in the next 90 days to cut at total of $100 million out of their budgets.

Here are savings the White House said already have been identified, a tiny portion of next year’s overall budget which is forecast at about $3.5 trillion. Many of the cuts listed by the administration stretch years into the future and will not have a significant impact in next year’s spending.

AGRICULTURE

–Combining 1,500 employees from seven office locations into a single facility in 2011 – saving $62 million over a 15-year lease term

–Improper farm program payments, $16 million

–Internet rather than in-person training, $1.3 million

EDUCATION

–Savings in allocation of computer equipment to employees, $8.7 million.

–Eliminating a position at the Paris UNESCO office, closing office, $713,000.

HOMELAND SECURITY

–Buying office supplies in bulk, $52 million over five years.

–Buying multipurpose office equipment, $10 million over five years.

–Consolidation of computer software license purchases, $47 million.

–Transportation and electricity savings, $3 million.

–Ending consulting contracts for creation of new seals and logos, $3 million.

JUSTICE

–Switching asset forfeiture notices from newspapers to Internet, $6.7 million in first five years.

STATE

–Converting immigrant visa processing to electronic correspondence, $1 million.

–Consolidating posts at embassies, saving US AID and Department of State, $5 million annually.

–Consolidation of contracts for communications, office supplies, furniture, medical supplies, 7 percent to 10 percent over current costs which were not given.

–Savings estimated on at tens of thousands of dollars by ending storage of excess equipment.

TRANSPORTATION

–Cost monitoring by senior officials that is saving an estimated 15 percent to 20 percent on projects put for bid under the Obama stimulus package.

VETERANS AFFAIRS

–Canceling or delaying 26 conferences, saving nearly $17.8 million by using less expensive alternatives like video conferencing.

I really think that there may be a few other things to save on like less limos and drivers, and less deputies of every department and less relatives on everybody’s payrolls.

Do we really need those thousands of junkets, and a million extra people working for the government this year? NOT! But just try to change those expenses, and you may be surprised how necessary they are.

THE UN-STIMULUS PACKAGE-NEW STUPID REGULATIONS TO CURB INDUSTRIAL GROWTH FOR AMERICA – EPA AT IT AGAIN

The government not only tells us how much water our toilet can use, but now the findings of how dangerous various natural gases in our atmosphere are, has started a process to destroy American industry, your jobs and your ability to enjoy life as you know it.

Read, and weep, as you will discover than from now till your children retire, o The Environmental Protection Agency said greenhouse gases pose a danger to the public, opening the way for new U.S. regulation of cars, power plants and factories.

The proposed finding, announced by the agency today, marks the first formal action by the federal government toward restricting carbon-dioxide emissions that climate scientists say contribute to global warming.

The decision may spur regulation of General Motors Corp. and other automakers and utilities such as American Electric Power Co., as well as manufacturers led by chemical and steel makers. It also pressures Congress to back legislation on emissions, rather than letting the EPA set all the rules, said David Bookbinder, chief climate counsel of the Sierra Club.

“I don’t think the EPA ought to be regulating carbon emissions,” Representative Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. “I think we ought to deal with it under this cap-and-trade program and the overall energy bill we are moving through.”

Draft legislation being debated next week by a panel of the House Energy and Commerce Committee would “supersede” EPA regulation, said Waxman, the committee chairman. The measure would require industrial polluters to get permits for emissions, which then could be bought and sold on a market.

“There is no longer a question of if or even when the U.S. will act on global warming: We are doing so now,” said Bookbinder, of the environmentalist Sierra Club, in a statement.

A petrochemical-refiner group and a Republican lawmaker said the EPA decision may lead to higher costs to consumers and overburden industries with new rules.

‘Assertion of Authority’

Regulations “would constitute EPA’s single largest and potentially most complex assertion of authority over the U.S. economy and Americans’ lifestyles,” said Charles Drevna, president of the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association.

“Today’s action by the EPA is the beginning of a regulatory barrage that will destroy jobs, raise energy prices for consumers, and undermine America’s global competitiveness,” said Senator James Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma.

Supreme Court Ruling

The so-called endangerment finding, which won’t become final until after a public review, is based on a Supreme Court ruling in April 2007. The court said the government could restrict heat-trapping gases under the Clean Air Act if it found them a danger to the public health and welfare, and it ordered the EPA to make a determination.

Former President George W. Bush’s administration declined to act, passing on the issue to President Barack Obama.

“This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in a statement.

Obama has made curbing greenhouse gases a priority. He has called on Congress to pass legislation that would cap carbon- dioxide emissions. The president’s budget plan assumes almost $650 billion in revenue from a cap-and-trade system from 2012 to 2019.

The draft legislation proposed by Waxman and Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, would cut greenhouse-gas emissions 20 percent by 2020. By 2050, emissions would be reduced 83 percent from 2005 levels under the plan.

The EPA said today that climate change related to carbon dioxide and five other gases can lead to increased drought, more flooding, heat waves and wildfires and cause harm to water, agriculture and wildlife. The finding doesn’t include any proposed regulations.

The EPA also found today that heat-trapping emissions from motor vehicles cause or contribute to global warming.

Cars, Trucks

While the Supreme Court case concerned new cars and trucks, the Clean Air Act directs the EPA to limit emissions from other sources such as power plants if a finding is made that greenhouse gases pose a danger, said Bookbinder of the Sierra Club.

The EPA’s proposed rules for vehicles could come by the end of the year, Bookbinder said. Proposed rules for power plants would probably follow early next year, he said. After that, it would be several months to a year before any regulations take effect.

Power plants account for about 40 percent of carbon-dioxide emissions, and vehicles make up about 30 percent, according to government figures.

The U.S. produces about 20 percent of the planet’s man-made carbon-dioxide emissions, according to Energy Department figures.

Policy Priority

Since Obama took office in January, the EPA has taken steps to prepare for regulating greenhouse gases. The agency proposed in March requiring factories to give annual reports to the federal government on emissions.

The first reports would be submitted in 2011 and cover emissions in 2010, according to the proposal. Car and engine makers would begin their reports for 2011 models.

The endangerment case goes back to 1999, when environmental organizations asked the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases from cars and trucks.

In 2003, the Bush administration’s EPA said that it wouldn’t regulate such emissions from new vehicles, citing “substantial scientific uncertainty” about the effects of climate change on human health and the environment and about the best means to deal with the issue.

A dozen states, including California and Massachusetts, joined the environmental groups and sued the EPA.

The Supreme Court in 2007 ordered Bush administration environmental officials to reconsider their refusal and said the EPA didn’t follow the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
Soon, our cows will have to pay a tax for their pollution as well.

NORMAL PEOPLE CUT BACK ON SPENDING WHEN TIMES ARE TOUGH; GOVERNMENT CAN NOT FIGURE THIS OUT, AND WHEN BROKE, SPENDS MORE!

When someone (a normal person) loses a job, or gets a salary cut, they spend less.

People learn to turn down the lights, cut out unnecessary expenses, cancel the milk delivery and the lawn service, cut back on driving, and take the kids out of private school or buy at lower prices grocery stores using more coupons, and watch for sales specials at retailers, shopping only for great deals.

But what does our government do when times get tough?

You guessed it, it does the opposite, it spends and spends, and increases its spending.

It has that luxury, it takes YOUR money however to do all that extra spending. It “needs to do that”, is their excuse in Washington. The pols need to take your money, for your own good and spend it on projects you do not want or others that will have absolutely no impact on your local area or you, in particular.

It is done for the “common good”.

“We will emerge from this recession, a stronger country,” is was said.

Now how exactly does that work?

We do not have any funds to spend, we cut back on everything personally, but the government takes our money that we have not yet earned, gives the debt to our children and their children, and we become stronger?

While all this is being done, the government increases the taxes paid by the job creators in our country, small business, and those 10% of the population that pays most of the taxes in the country and this is supposed to allow us to emerge stronger than ever?

This must be one of those fantasy movies (instead of the stark reality we face), in which no matter what is done in the course of the movie, the ending is fantastic, and all problems are solved in the course of 90 minutes.

This will not be the case here, as our system of free enterprise work differently. It actually works by allowing failure to occur. it is sort of like burning the under-brush in an overgrown forest or prairie. When the old stuff burns, new beautiful greenery grows back instantly.

I saw that many times as the farmers or ranchers followed this process, and green grasses and colorful wild flowers took the place of the old growth.

That is exactly what happens in a free economy.

Common sense will tell you that when things are constricting, one does NOT spend more to incur more debt; one cuts back the spending to get things stabilized.

If you lived on $5,000 a month, now you adjust to live on $4,000 a month or whatever the new available amount is going to now be. You do not go out and decide that now, you will spend $6,000 a month to improve your financial position.

The government has actually used this logic, and nobody seems to understand this nonsense!

Oh, I forgot, the government, unlike we in the real world, never pays back its debts, it just raises the allowable debt ceiling, giving itself unlimited spending while we all have to live within our means.

In a speech this week summarizing his administration’s economic policies, President Obama grossly overstated the support these policies enjoy by claiming, “economists on the left and right agree that the last thing the government should do during a recession is cut back on spending.” There are a great many economists who were surprised to learn that, apparently, they now agree with the President.

Reading straight from the Keynesian playbook, Obama justified the creation of multi-trillion dollar deficits by asserting that the government must fill the spending void left by the contraction of consumer and business spending. As one of those mythical economists who do not agree with the President, I argue that it is precisely this type of boneheaded thinking that got us into this mess, and it’s the reason we are now headed for an inflationary depression.

We do not need, nor should we attempt, to replace lost demand. As Obama himself pointed out in the same speech, Americans have been borrowing and spending too much money. These actions created artificial demand, underpinned by the illusion of real wealth in overvalued stock and real estate markets. Given his intelligence and rhetorical training, it is hard to fathom how President Obama cannot notice the inherent contradiction in his argument.

While Obama commended millions of American families for making the hard choices to reduce spending, pay down debt and replenish savings, he later outlined the government’s intention to spend every American household deeper into debt, thereby undermining all the good that personal austerity would have otherwise produced.

Obama also made the clear-eyed observation that the foundation of our economy was unsound and that a sturdier one needed to be laid. To do this, he even asserted that we need to import less and export more. This has been one of my fundamental points. Our economy is unsound precisely because it is built on a foundation of consumer debt. Instead of spending for today, we need to invest for tomorrow. However, we cannot save more unless we spend less. Production requires capital, which only comes into existence when resources are not consumed.

However, by interfering with this process, Obama prevents the very transformation he acknowledges must take place. When the government spends what individuals save, private investment is crowded out. Society is deprived of the benefits such savings would otherwise have brought about. How can we lay a solid foundation if the government takes away all our cement?

This brings up an oft-repeated, but oft-forgotten, point: government does not have any money of its own. It only has what it takes from the rest of us. If individuals repay their debts, but their government takes on additional debt, we are all simply swimming against the tide. All forward progress is lost as private debt is replaced by public debt, which must be repaid by private individuals. Whatever gains individuals hope to achieve are negated by the higher taxes or increased inflation necessary to repay their share of a larger national debt.

Obama claims that much of the additional debt is not going to finance consumption, but rather “critical investment.” This is a vain hope. In the first place, much of what he categorizes as investment, such as additional spending on education, is not investment at all. Yes, an educated workforce is important, but throwing more government money at education will do nothing to achieve this goal. Spending money on education and calling it an investment squanders resources that otherwise would have financed real investments. In the second place, to the extent some government money is invested, those investments will likely be less efficient than those the private sector might otherwise have financed. There is absolutely no evidence that governments have the foresight or incentives to make investments that facilitate real economic growth. “Five year plans” didn’t work in the Soviet Union and they won’t work here. If the government simply builds bridges to nowhere, society gains nothing.

If we are going to rebuild our economy on a solid foundation, the market, not the government, needs to draw the plans. When private citizens invest their own capital, those who invest wisely are rewarded with profits, while those who do not are punished with losses. Bad investments are therefore abandoned, with capital reallocated to more successful ventures. Conversely, when governments invest money, these checks and balances do not exist. There is nothing to correct bad investments, as losses are endlessly subsidized by taxpayers. In fact, the more a government plan fails, the more it tends to be funded in the hope that additional resources will finally achieve success. Obama himself proves this by allocating still more funds to government-run schools and student loan subsidies. Other examples, such as Amtrak, the New York MTA, the U.S. Postal Service, Fannie/Freddie, and countless others, prove this process is never-ending – until perhaps the bureaucracy collapses under its own weight.

When it comes to government making tough choices, Obama talks a good game, but refuses to actually make any. However, once the dollar finally begins its collapse, he will have no choice but to match his rhetoric with action. It’s unfortunate that we cannot make these tough choices on our own terms, rather than waiting for our creditors to force our hand.

Peter Shiff, economist, author.

NUMBER OF BILLIONAIRES SHRINKING FAST DUE TO SLOWING ECONOMIES AND MARKET LOSSES

When billionaires shrink, what happens to the rest of us?

Everyone is affected by a shrinking value of all goods, services and stock market values. Billionaires are no exception, however, as we may have to use more store coupons, the billionaires are not exactly worried if their value went from $20 billion to $2 billion.

They still do not need coupons.

It’s been a tough year for the richest people in the world. Last year there were 1,125 billionaires. This year there are just 793 people rich enough to make the list.

The world has become a wealth wasteland. Like the rest of us, the richest people in the world have endured a financial disaster over the past year. Today there are 793 people on our list of the World’s Billionaires, a 30% decline from a year ago.

Of the 1,125 billionaires who made last year’s ranking, 373 fell off the list–355 from declining fortunes and 18 who died. There are 38 newcomers, plus three moguls who returned to the list after regaining their 10-figure fortunes. It is the first time since 2003 that the world has had a net loss in the number of billionaires.

The world’s richest are also a lot poorer. Their collective net worth is $2.4 trillion, down $2 trillion from a year ago. Their average net worth fell 23% to $3 billion. The last time the average was that low was in 2003.

Bill Gates lost $18 billion but regained his title as the world’s richest man. Warren Buffett, last year’s No. 1, saw his fortune decline $25 billion as shares of Berkshire Hathaway fell nearly 50% in 12 months, but he still managed to slip just one spot to No. 2. Mexican telecom titan Carlos Slim Helú also lost $25 billion and dropped one spot to No. 3.

It was hard to avoid the carnage, whether you were in stocks, commodities, real estate or technology. Even people running profitable businesses were hammered by frozen credit markets, weak consumer spending or declining currencies.

The biggest loser in the world this year, by dollars, was last year’s biggest gainer. India’s Anil Ambani lost $32 billion–76% of his fortune–as shares of his Reliance Communications, Reliance Power and Reliance Capital all collapsed.

Ambani is one of 24 Indian billionaires, all but one of whom are poorer than a year ago. Another 29 Indians lost their billionaire status entirely as India’s stock market tumbled 44% in the past year and the Indian rupee depreciated 18% against the dollar. It is no longer the top spot in Asia for billionaires, ceding that title to China, which has 28.

Russia became the epicenter of the world’s commodities bust, dropping 55 billionaires–two-thirds of its 2008 crop. Among them: Dmitry Pumpyansky, an industrialist from the resource-rich Ural mountain region, who lost $5 billion as shares of his pipe producer, TMK, sank 84%. Also gone is Vasily Anisimov, father of Moscow’s Paris Hilton, Anna Anisimova, who lost $3.2 billion as the value of his Metalloinvest Holding, one of Russia’s largest ore mining and processing firms, fell along with his real estate holdings.

Twelve months ago Moscow overtook New York as the billionaire capital of the world, with 74 tycoons to New York’s 71. Today there are 27 in Moscow and 55 in New York.

After slipping in recent years, the U.S. is regaining its dominance as a repository of wealth. Americans account for 44% of the money and 45% of the list’s slots, up seven and three percentage points from last year, respectively. Still, it has 110 fewer billionaires than a year ago.

Those with ties to Wall Street were particularly hard hit. Former head of AIG Maurice (Hank) Greenberg saw his $1.9 billion fortune nearly wiped out after the insurance behemoth had to be bailed out by the U.S. government. Today Greenberg is worth less than $100 million. Former Citigroup Chairman Sandy Weill also falls from the ranks.

Last year there were 39 American billionaire hedge fund managers; this year there are 28. Twelve American private equity tycoons dropped out of the billionaire ranks.

Blackstone Group’s Stephen Schwarzman, who lost $4 billion, and Kohlberg Kravis & Roberts’ Henry Kravis, who lost $2.5 billion, retain their billionaire status despite their weaker fortunes.

Worldwide, 80 of the 355 drop-offs from last year’s list had fortunes derived from finance or investments.

While 656 billionaires lost money in the past year, 44 added to their fortunes. Those who made money did so by catering to budget-conscious consumers (discount retailer Uniqlo’s Tadashi Yanai), predicting the crash (investor John Paulson) or cashing out in the nick of time (Cirque du Soleil’s Guy Laliberte).

So is there anywhere one can still make a fortune these days? The 38 newcomers offer a few clues. Among the more notable new billionaires are Mexican Joaquín Guzmán Loera, one of the biggest suppliers of cocaine to the U.S.; Wang Chuanfu of China, whose BYD Co. began selling electric cars in December, and American John Paul Dejoria, who got the world clean with his Paul Mitchell shampoos and sloppy with his Patrón Tequila.

ENDING OF PIRATE SHIP HIJACKINGS BY PLANNING CONVOYS!

Every year about 30,000 ships , about 100 per day sail the waters off Somalia.

That works out to about 50 ships a day in each direction.

With a little planning, these ships can basically assemble into a small group of ships every day or two and be easily escorted by the various naval vessels now on site there.

HAVE NONE OF THESE VARIOUS WORLD CLASS NAVY ADMIRALS LOOKED BACK INTO THEIR NAVAL HISTORY BOOKS FOR THE ANSWER?

Pirates and terrorists who lurk on these shipping lanes simply wait on any portion of these shipping lanes, and wait for the ships to come to them.

The escort ships could very easily escort a convoy of 20-30 ships each, and if threatened, they could easily destroy any pirates; especially pirates in a little canoe/motorboat 100-200 miles off shore.

The modern navy now has helicopters and can run a perimeter around the ships with another ship and totally provide the needed security.

This is the same naval tactic which defeated the U-boats in World War II.

The pirates are nowhere close to being as dangerous to the ships as the U-boats, and would easily be repelled.

No more ransoms, no more hostages, and a safe passage for all. In fact, there could be a payment per ship, that would probably be less than the present insurance rates for that risky transit.

Come on, how many people in the Pentagon worked on this pirate project?

Anybody there, listening, watching, thinking?

Furthermore, this process could give the navy’s of the world who are there now some needed target practice.

MAYOR NUTTER TYPICAL SILLY GOVERNMENT PAPER SHUFFLER SCREWS UP A GREAT IDEA

We should seriously consider a blog about all the silly, and sometimes downright stupid things that government officials all over the country dream up “for the good of the people.”

If only there was a requisite stint required for public officials to have actually succeeded in running a successful business, employing people, meeting payrolls, fighting with zoning officials, OSHA inspectors, etc., before they “ran” a city.

That is just wishful thinking, but would that be beautiful?

The Philadelphia Mayor NUTTER, (see photo ), (NUTTER, known affectionately as Mayor Nutty by the ever dwindling business community), had a good idea, but buried it in the usual governmental bungling and confusing requirements, as can be expected of all government types, especially running the other highly successful big cities such as Detroit, Los Angeles and New Orleans.

As you might faintly recall, New Orleans is the model of the working together by local City government and the Federal government to create nothing, while spending $80 billion.

First of all we all agree that his basic idea was good, in fact worthy of praise-he should have a dinner and award ceremony providing him with a plaque or statute and a photo with Paris Hilton or Paula Abdul or some other “celebrity”, so that he can make the front page news headlines.

Here is the rest of the story of how a great idea got “governmentalized” and of course died.

Today’s tax-filing deadline is expected to come and go without a single company applying for one penny of Mayor Nutter’s new $5 million tax-credit program that was designed to encourage the hiring of ex-offenders.

The mayor NUTTY, unveiled the initiative on the campaign trail as an innovative way to drive down Philadelphia’s crime rate, and City Council wrote it into law nearly 18 months ago. Under its terms, local companies can receive tax breaks of $10,000 a year – for three years – for each ex-offender working at least six months as of Jan. 1, 2008.

This is the first tax year companies would have been able to receive the credits, which would be counted against the business privilege tax they pay the city.

But no one applied.

Instead, while a handful of businesses expressed interest, they mostly balked at the program’s requirements – namely, that they be publicly identified, according to Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Everett Gillison, who oversees the initiative for Nutter.

City Councilman W. Wilson Goode Jr. expressed some optimism.

For years, he advocated similar programs that offered less in tax credits – $1,000 and $5,000 – but drew little interest from companies.

Then NUTTY unveiled his proposal for the $10,000 tax break during the mayoral race in 2007. Goode agreed to sponsor it, and the measure became law nearly two months before Nutter even took office.

To receive the credit, companies must provide $2,000 worth of tuition support and vow to remain in Philadelphia for at least five years. As for the ex-offenders, they must turn over 5 percent of their paychecks to the city.

The administration set aside $5 million for the tax credits, limiting the program to 500 ex-offenders yearly.

“This is one of the best crime-prevention programs we’ll ever have,” Nutter said last year, touting the program on his 100th day in office.

But the initiative has faced a bevy of problems.

Some companies, in addition to not wanting to be publicly named, object that the program requires them to pay ex-offenders more that their current unionized workforce. For a company to get the tax credit, it must pay ex-offenders 150 percent of the federal minimum hourly wage – which currently adds up to about $10 an hour.

“Employers don’t want to set up a situation where their union employees are paid less,” Gillison said. He added that the administration planned to introduce legislation before June to address this issue and others.

Ray Jones, a director at Impact Services Corp., which helps find ex-offenders jobs, pointed to another possible impediment, saying some ex-offenders opposed giving up 5 percent of their paychecks. Given that many have restitution and child-support payments on top of rent and food bills, he said, “it just does not make a whole lot of sense for them to buy into it.”

Additionally, several provisions of the law creating the program have yet to be carried out. For instance, city contracts or tax abatements of $1 million or more are not supposed to be given unless the recipients identify potential jobs for ex-offenders. “We’re still looking at how to get in compliance on this one,” Gillison said.

In another example, the Managing Director’s Office failed to file a detailed report evaluating the program by Jan. 31, as required. That will happen soon, Gillison said, attributing the delay to the administration’s focus on the city’s financial troubles.

Still other problems were unforeseen, most notably the national economic collapse.

“There’s little doubt in my mind that the economic contraction is the retardant in getting ex-offenders into the workplace,” said Mark Schweiker, president of the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce, which supports the program.

One local construction company that has hired ex-offenders plans to apply for the tax credit next year, but did not this year.

“Unfortunately, I was laying off more than I was hiring,” said Bill Reddish, owner of Gensis Group in Roxborough. “Once the economy starts to pick up, we anticipate that we will be aggressive in trying to place ex-offenders on our payroll.”

But for now, he said, “I need to keep the best and most skilled guys.”

Another government official trying to help, I guess.

So, let’s give him a gold star at least for his effort.

Note to Mayor REMEMBER THE OLD ACRONYM: “KISS”- KEEP IT SIMPLE, ST…..ID..

DEATH SENTENCE; GOVERNMENT MANDATED SMALL CARS KILL/INJURE OCCUPANTS THE MOST

(ABOVE IS THE SMALL CAR CRASH TEST DUMMY SHOWING SERIOUS INJURY IN CRASH, HONDA FIT AND TOYOTA YARIS WERE THE WORST IN TEST CRASHES)

Again our government is at it…telling us and the auto industry how to build cars and which ones to punish and which one’s to reward.

First, it was the mandate to have airbags in cars.

Then it was proven that children would be killed or injured in the vehicles due to the force of the airbags deploying.

Then it was shown that the drivers who might be wearing glasses or contact lenses in crashed would be blinded by having the airbag push the glasses into they eyes.

Then, and worst of all the automobiles which had in addition to the front airbag, (as extra safety feature) the autos had side airbags or curtain airbags that opened up on the sides, caused such a build up of high pressure in the cars, that they exploded the ear drums or worse, of the occupants.

Thank you, big hand of government again, causing more injuries and adding expensive airbags that tend to kill and injure, not help.

Also, it appears that as the cars get older, the airbags that are in them may deploy at random, causing fatal crashes or injuries to not just the occupants, but to the drivers on the road around them as they crash from the sudden deployment and sudden shock.

Now, the worst statistics yet.

The small cars touted by the government as being fuel miserly, tend to be so small that they cause injury and death as “death traps” when involved in accidents, especially with larger vehicles such as SUV’s, pick up trucks and full size automobiles.

So as you though you could save the eco system or something like that, you put yourself and your family instead into a death trap vehicle which now will clearly cost you, not just in added insurance but medical costs as well.

What will they mandate next? Smaller SUV’s, smaller pick up trucks?

Remember that old quote, ” I’m from the government, and I am here to help you.” ????

Another government stetement that is really a joke, in real life……

SCREWING THE TAXPAYER (AGAIN) WITH STIMULUS MONEY-THE DAVIS-BACON (PORK) ACT

It is time to screw the taxpayers again with the idiotic DAVIS-BACON ACT requirements that force the payment of “prevailing wages” on any construction projects involving even the slightest bit of state or federal funds.

When the government orders something to be built, it surely will be a stupid, overpriced, unneeded, or “in-the-family” project.

Now with all those stimulus funds just itching to be spent, the taxpayers will be forced to pay more than they need to on every stimulus related project, since the requirements of the Act will mandate that the labor component be paid at the unnecessary and artificially high union labor rates.

It is no wonder that 84% of all churches, schools, arenas, and airports are built with NON union labor and therefore save money; they operate in a highly competitive environment that provides price competition, not price fixing of labor costs.

The government should be encouraging free market competition to create the best value for the money for taxpayers money, instead of artificially in needlessly paying more than the jobs are worth for all infrastructure projects.

Hello, anybody listening in Washington?

These prevailing wages only protect inefficient union companies from going out of business, which they should, and give the rest of us a tax break from the silly and expensive Socialist experiments.

BARACK OBAMA AND HILLARY CLINTON HARD AT WORK FOR US, SOLVING WORLD PROBLEMS, AT THE SANDBOX

We are always told by the press secretary how hard our President and Secretary of State work for us, the little people.

Today we heard from the White House that the economy is going in the right direction….up I hope.

I frankly do not understand the thinking put out by a President who has no idea how the economy works-it is driven by entrepreneurs, great idea thinkers, businessmen willing to put their capital on the line to start or expand a business.

Our top management in and around the White House does not have one businessman in the group, but a lot of life-timers in government “public service”.

Nobody has run a business that they started, or that they built up.

Nobody there has dealt with the crooked building inspector coming around for a pay-off, or an OSHA inspector, or a Department of Labor bureaucrat visiting to check your employees time cards. Nobody has run a business ruined by union organizing or run out of busijness due to local rules and taxes.

Now these same people are trying to sell the business community a bill of goods telling us that the business outlook is improving…it will be just great!

What is in their executive private chef’s soup?

What industry group is hiring employees?

What business group is forecasting higher revenues? AUTOS, HOUSING, MANUFACTURING, TRAVEL, AIRLINE, STEEL, TRUCKING; who exactly is showing the improving signs?

The improvements could come very quickly if business taxes were low, such as 10% flat tax on profits, but we are hearing the opposite—-TAX EVERYTHING IN SITE AND ESPECIALLY TAX THE JOB CREATORS, THOSE EVIL PROFITEERS, THE BUSINESSES THAT MAKE A PROFIT OF OVER $250,000 A YEAR!

These erroneous forecasts are very destructive to the average person who then sees a glimmer of hope, and is later snuffed out when he attempts to get a new credit card or a new house, and his application is denied.

Where are the signs, REALLY?

Unemployment is scheduled to keep climbing though 2009, and into 2010 or even though most of 2010. It will be a domino effect as people lose jobs, they buy less, the factories that produce goods for them lay off employees, those employees buy less and default on car loans, home loans, etc…..etc…..THE DOMINO EFFECT IN FULL GEAR.

An important component of the possible new job growth is the ability of the job creators to have the capital to start a business or hire a new employee. These people have lost half of their stock investments, half of their reserve capital-why would they now risk the rest in an “iffy” economy with the threat of even higher taxes?

So, Mr. President, maybe you need to get on that swing and get someone to push you who actually ran a real business, you might get a better idea of the real world (same goes for Hillary).

SOCIALISM VERSUS CAPITALISM IN THE USA, MORE AND MORE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT SOCIALISM IS BEST!

Stunning and shocking as it may be to most “older” Americans, the younger population is UNSURE which system is better.

Part of the problem (a shocking part) is that only 45% of Americans know what the term “SOCIALIST” means. The majority considered someone a SOCIALIST, because he possesses good “social” skills! So this entire survey may be way off due to the lack of understanding by the average citizen of the meaning of the term.

Got to blame the school system again!

My suggestion, go to CUBA, OR VENEZUELA OR RUSSIA and live there for a year or two to help your decision process.

Only 53% of American adults believe capitalism is better than socialism.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national survey found that 20% disagree and say socialism is better. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are not sure which is better.

Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided. Thirty-somethings are a bit more supportive of the free-enterprise approach with 49% for capitalism and 26% for socialism. Adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism, and just 13% of those older Americans believe socialism is better.

Investors by a 5-to-1 margin choose capitalism. As for those who do not invest, 40% say capitalism is better while 25% prefer socialism.

There is a partisan gap as well. Republicans – by an 11-to-1 margin – favor capitalism. Democrats are much more closely divided: Just 39% say capitalism is better while 30% prefer socialism. As for those not affiliated with either major political party, 48% say capitalism is best, and 21% opt for socialism.

The question posed by Rasmussen Reports did not define either capitalism or socialism

It is interesting to compare the new results to an earlier survey in which 70% of Americans prefer a free-market economy. The fact that a “free-market economy” attracts substantially more support than “capitalism” may suggest some skepticism about whether capitalism in the United States today relies on free markets.

Other survey data supports that notion. Rather than seeing large corporations as committed to free markets, two-out-of-three Americans believe that big government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors.

Fifteen percent (15%) of Americans say they prefer a government-managed economy, similar to the 20% support for socialism. Just 14% believe the federal government would do a better job running auto companies, and even fewer believe government would do a better job running financial firms.

Most Americans today hold views that can generally be defined as populist while only seven percent (7%) share the elitist views of the Political Class.

Wow what a difference 50 years makes!

WELCOME TO THE NEW SOCIALIST STATES OF AMERICA.

INSTANT SOLUTION TO ALL THE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS IN THE USA, GUARANTEED! ALL PROBLEMS FIXED IN ONE DAY; UNEMPLOYMENT, AUTO INDUSTRY, MORTGAGES, ETC.

Some of the greatest financial minds have been tapped by our government to solve CRISIS after CRISIS.

There is the housing crisis; not having enough new homes being built or the bad mortgages not being paid.

There is the auto industry crisis; not enough cars being bought.

There is the unemployment crisis; people do not have jobs.

The government has decided that their way to solve all these CRISES is to spend a minimum $4 trillion dollars by throwing the money at the problems….none of which appear to have been fixed, nor do they appear to be forecast to be fixed any time soon.

A client proposed that the solution to all these CRISES could be made, with immediate impact, and with immediate beneficial results, spending the same $4 trillion more effectively.

We sent this memo around to our experts, and we are in unanimous agreement that the proposed $4 trillion that the government has spent, will not solve any of the CRISES, but instead we should take the advice from the email to solve all these CRISES immediately.

The proposal is something like this-easy to understand.

We randomly pick through a lottery 40 million people over the age of 50, and mandate that they must retire from the work force if they take the deal.

The deal would be that they get $1 million as a grant ($4 trillion?) in total.

Each person quitting leaves a job opening to be filled (40 million new jobs available-a historic record of job creation).

Unemployment problem fixed in one day.

With this money they will each buy a new car (40 million new cars ordered). NOTE, the USA sells about 10 million at the present rate annually.

ALL PRESENT UNSOLD CARS AT ALL DEALERS INSTANTLY SOLD.

The auto industry fixed in one day.

Each recipient will then either pay off his mortgage, or buy a new house with no mortgage.

Housing problem fixed, housing industry booms.

Bank mortgage problems, and housing problem fixed in one day.

The balance of the money, after the mortgage and housing and the car purchase goes into a retirement fund that invests in the market indexes, thus driving up the market on all this buying to DJIA 20,000 ????

The 401K’s fixed in a day.

All problems fixed in one day.

FORECLOSURES SOARING ALONG WITH CREDIT CARD DELINQUENCIES AND CUT-OFF CREDIT LINES

More U.S. consumers are falling behind on their mortgages, an indication that the housing market has yet to hit bottom, a top credit bureau executive told Reuters.

Dann Adams, president of U.S. Information Systems for Equifax Inc, reported that 7 percent of homeowners with mortgages were at least 30 days late on their loans in February, an increase of more than 50 percent from a year earlier.

He also said 39.8 percent of subprime borrowers were at least 30 days behind on their home mortgage loans, up 23.7 percent from last year.

“I’m trying to find optimism in these numbers, but I’m pretty hard pressed to do that,” Adams said, despite a recent burst of relatively positive news that has fueled hope that the U.S. housing market has turned a corner.

Late last month the Commerce Department reported that sales of newly built U.S. single-family homes rose to a 337,000 annual pace in February, the highest in 10 months.

Such news has boosted homebuilder shares, which are up about 45 percent since March 6, according to the Dow Jones U.S. Home Construction Index.

But Adams said the continued increase in mortgage delinquencies revealed in his data foreshadows more foreclosures, short sales and home price declines as homeowners default and banks then repossess the homes to sell them at deep discounts.

LIFELINE OF CREDIT

The Equifax data also reveals the impact of the rise in unemployment, which is at its highest rate since 1983. Employers cut 663,000 jobs in March, sending the national unemployment rate to 8.5 percent, the Labor Department said on Friday.

The rising jobless rate manifests itself in consumers’ increasing reliance on credit cards even as lenders try to restrict access to credit, Adams said.

Banks closed 8 million credit card accounts in February, reducing the number of open cards to 400 million from a July 2008 peak of 483 million, according to Equifax data.

Credit limits fell as well, to $3.27 trillion in February from a July 2008 peak of $3.59 trillion.

“Limits are falling because lenders are trying to minimize their losses,” Adams said.

The data shows that lenders have good reason to be wary. Bank card delinquency is at its highest level in the past five years. Some 4.5 percent of total balances on bank-issued credit cards were at 60 days past due in February, a 32.7 percent increase from a year earlier.

“Their credit card is their lifeline,” he said.

CHINA BECOMES NUMBER ONE IN AUTOMOBILE SALES IN THE WORLD!

OK, all their cars are the size of transistor radios, but still the sales for last month totaled over 1 million CHINESE vehicles .

The reason attributed to these sales results were that the government lowered TAXES on the autos and had less mandates as to their mileage performance and pollution controls. THEY WANTED CARS FOR PEOPLE TO AFFORD AND ENJOY.

Preliminary figures show auto sales in China reached about 1.03 million in March, exceeding U.S. sales for the third month in a row, state media reports said Wednesday.

Data from 14 major auto makers, accounting for roughly 90 percent of total sales, totaled 1.026 million, the Shanghai Securities News and other state-run newspapers said, citing Chen Bin, head of the Department of Industry at China’s main economic planning agency.

Full industry data due to be released by the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers in coming days could push March auto sales in China, the world’s second-largest auto market, to a monthly record, the reports said.

China’s industry wide auto sales in March 2008 totaled 1.06 million, it said.

Americans bought 857,735 new vehicles in March, down 37 percent from the 1.36 million sold in the same month a year earlier, according to Autodata Corp.

But a 25 percent jump in U.S. sales from February raised hopes that the worst may be over for an industry battered by global economic malaise and financial catastrophe.

China is bound to eventually overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest auto market, and recent developments have accelerated that trend, with Chinese vehicle sales in January and February exceeding U.S. monthly sales for the first time ever.

China’s first-quarter sales may exceed those in the U.S., Chen told a shipbuilding conference in Beijing. Sales for the full year are forecast to exceed 10 million units for the first time ever.

With sales slumping elsewhere, China is one of the few bright spots for the ailing industry.

General Motors Corp. (GM) said Wednesday that it sold 137,004 vehicles in China in March, up 24.6 percent from a year earlier. Its mini vehicle joint venture, SAIC-GM-Wuling, saw sales surge 38 percent to 90,784 vehicles.

But China’s promise is also a curse for automakers facing ever intensifying competition among both domestic and foreign manufacturers.

On Wednesday Stuttgart, Germany-based Daimler AG (DAI) was launching its Smart model in China – the 39th market for the two-seater mini car. Other automakers are also planning launches ahead of and during the April 20-28 Shanghai Auto Show.

“The confidence in China is back,” said Klaus Maier, president and CEO of Daimler’s Mercedes-Benz (China) Ltd.

While he said Mercedes expects double digit growth in China’s luxury car segment, the industry focus now is mainly on smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles likely to appeal to frugal families, rather than big sedans.

To help spur auto sales, the government halved taxes on purchases of small autos and is spending 5 billion yuan (about $730 million) on subsidies for purchases of light trucks and minivans in the countryside, where most of its 1.3 billion people live.

Those policies, part of a plan to boost 10 strategically vital industries singled out for special support, helped push China’s vehicle sales up 25 percent in February from a year earlier.

But Zhang Xin, an analyst at Guotai Junan Securities, in Beijing, cautioned against reading too much into volatile monthly figures.

“Sales may be surpassing the U.S., but at the same time profits are being squeezed due to the lower prices of the smaller cars,” Zhang said.

CITIES AND BUSINESSES ARE PRINTING THEIR OWN CURRENCIES – WHAT A GREAT IDEA!

The dollar is not only being attacked by China, Russia and Iran as a means of settling debts, but now by cities and businesses all over America as they start to issue their own currencies.

The process is really nothing new, but it is becoming more and more in use than ever before as a means to stimulate local shopping at local businesses.

The process is really simple, and you may have already used this new currency without realizing it when you purchased a gift certificate from a store at a discount, and gave it to someone as a present, for instance.

The process is simple. You buy $1 worth of the “currency” that can be used at a particular business or a group of businesses (such as any stores at a mall), for say $.90 and thus get a 10% discount and spend the full dollar value at the selected stores.

I just got a $50 certificate for $25 to use at a group of restaurants. That is a better deal than outright buying the dinners directly.

So the “currencies” not only work, but they are better than using the dollars directly. Why use the dollars directly?

This is a great idea that can catch on big time!

All cities can thus issue these currencies at a discount, and the buyers get a great deal at redeeming the currency at face value at local businesses.

The indirect bad thing is that the businesses are offering a discount on their normal pricing so will they do better, or worse-will they even survive?

Only a free market could come up with such ideas?

With the government programs in place now, you pay $1 and get 90 cents worth or product for instance.

What a difference there is between the government and the free markets!

BUSINESS HATES SOCIALIST POLICIES AND MICRO-MANAGEMENT

First there was the fear spread by our President advising that there is a CRISIS, in just about every aspect of our economy.

(Photo of government mandated future transportation.)

In fact there was a speech I no longer remember in which I believe that he used that word more than 20 times. Everything was a CRISIS, and he had the answer to that CRISIS, to every matter defined as a CRISIS.

Now keep in mind that everything in our economy was defined as a CRISIS, no matter what it was; bank capital shortages, bad loans, predatory lenders, high oil prices, low oil prices, no inflation, high inflation, high government deficit spending, the falling dollar, growing unemployment, GM rescue, insurance companies writing new policies or paying old ones, new organizing rules for unions, executive pay, Mexico free trade…on and on and on.

Everything was a CRISIS; nice scary talk by our fearless leader.

But, have no fear fellow Americans, there was a one size fit all solution to every conceivable CRISIS. That solution was to spend, spend and spend your children s and grandchildren’s future income.

The solution was needed and immediately necessary, it had to be voted on right away, without reading, without further comment-TRUST ME, was the mantra of our fearless leader.

And so, as we all remember, the CONGRESS voted on a massive bill which nobody read.

It is expected that its present total impact will be a minimum of $12. 5 TRILLION over its life. That by the way is the value of the entire output of all the goods and serviced of the USA, in a year.

That is approximately equal to almost the output of all the G20, members ( for instance Russia’s total output is $1.5 Trillion).

However, there was catch, a catch that nobody knew about because nobody read the bill. In fact I tried to see it in final form and as much as I tried all I got was certain versions on the Internet, making it difficult to decide which was the final bill.

The final bill, the one that Congress voted for, contained a few surprises that in effect were that the government would now run the businesses that took any money from the government.

Now keep in mind, that our new President, (as described by Joe Scarborough on his morning TV show today) has never had a job at a business, has never had to run a business and deal with the myriad of government meddlers ranging from local zoning to licensing, to all the other matters of daily managing of a business. he never had a paycheck from a real business, never.

Now he was going to tell the most sophisticated financial institution in the world how to run their business. He was going to tell them how to wind down their derivatives, and he fired the CEO of GM on the air, by saying so. The board of directors did not fire him, our President did!

Then, the government advised that GM would be building cars for which technology was not yet invented for, while stopping the realistic expansion of the availability of electricity, and outright stating that electric rates would rise dramatically for all users due to their mandates and initiatives.

The government (make that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd) also proposed what salaries, what bonuses would be paid to recipients of government money, and special taxes of 90% were proposed on bonuses.

Now something is starting to happen. The recipients of the government money, now read the bill-they read the conditions of doing business with the devil , sorry I meant the government.

The recipients want to give back the loans, or pay back the loans early and are being arm twisted to not pay the loans back!

In a free market, business attracts key employees by offering attractive pay, or bonuses or other perks to get the best people. In a new government run business model, such incentives do not exist.

For instance under the government model, a successful business that offers a $1 salary to an employee and unlimited bonus tied to financial performance, is penalized as he will be taxed at crazy confiscatory rates on his bonus.

For instance, the new employee making $1 billion in profits for the employer, and being rewarded with a bonus of 5% of the profit or $50 million, would have to pay 90% in taxes, under the government program of being employed by a recipient of government largess.

On the other hand, the government does not impose such a tax if the employee was paid $50 million in a guaranteed salary, and $1 in bonus!

So working for a government, at a company which has received government funds can be a better deal for a slacker, since his salary is guaranteed. But all the highly motivated employees will work elsewhere.

The government is using a Socialist type of compensation-equal pay for all slackers, as usual, and that is starting to become clear to businesses who want to be free of the government restrictions on how to run a business.

The banks, the companies taking government money are learning the hard way to Not do business with the government as they will be burdened by the usual slow moving and non-motivational policies of a bureaucracy, and will make that business not competitive with others.

As in the case of GM, we saw a failure of the company to exist on its own and causing an even greater and more expense bailout than a pure bankruptcy reorganization would have provided, not to mention that it is now a government run zombie company.

Socialism and free enterprise just do not mix, and the sooner our government gets it, the sooner will we see an economic recovery in the USA.

FORECLOSURES SOARING ALONG WITH CREDIT CARD DELINQUENCIES AND CUT-OFF CREDIT LINES

More U.S. consumers are falling behind on their mortgages, an indication that the housing market has yet to hit bottom, a top credit bureau executive told Reuters.

Dann Adams, president of U.S. Information Systems for Equifax Inc, reported that 7 percent of homeowners with mortgages were at least 30 days late on their loans in February, an increase of more than 50 percent from a year earlier.

He also said 39.8 percent of subprime borrowers were at least 30 days behind on their home mortgage loans, up 23.7 percent from last year.

“I’m trying to find optimism in these numbers, but I’m pretty hard pressed to do that,” Adams said, despite a recent burst of relatively positive news that has fueled hope that the U.S. housing market has turned a corner.

Late last month the Commerce Department reported that sales of newly built U.S. single-family homes rose to a 337,000 annual pace in February, the highest in 10 months.

Such news has boosted homebuilder shares, which are up about 45 percent since March 6, according to the Dow Jones U.S. Home Construction Index.

But Adams said the continued increase in mortgage delinquencies revealed in his data foreshadows more foreclosures, short sales and home price declines as homeowners default and banks then repossess the homes to sell them at deep discounts.

LIFELINE OF CREDIT

The Equifax data also reveals the impact of the rise in unemployment, which is at its highest rate since 1983. Employers cut 663,000 jobs in March, sending the national unemployment rate to 8.5 percent, the Labor Department said on Friday.

The rising jobless rate manifests itself in consumers’ increasing reliance on credit cards even as lenders try to restrict access to credit, Adams said.

Banks closed 8 million credit card accounts in February, reducing the number of open cards to 400 million from a July 2008 peak of 483 million, according to Equifax data.

Credit limits fell as well, to $3.27 trillion in February from a July 2008 peak of $3.59 trillion.

“Limits are falling because lenders are trying to minimize their losses,” Adams said.

The data shows that lenders have good reason to be wary. Bank card delinquency is at its highest level in the past five years. Some 4.5 percent of total balances on bank-issued credit cards were at 60 days past due in February, a 32.7 percent increase from a year earlier.

“Their credit card is their lifeline,” he said.

IS FORD SMARTER THAN GM? It has also smartly repaid its debt by $9 BILLION

DETROIT – Ford Motor Co (NYSE:F) has reduced its automotive debt by 38 percent, or $9.9 billion, part of a series of moves to bolster its finances amid a deep industry downturn, sending its shares up more than 11 percent.

F	3.64	+0.39
GM	2.24	+0.14

The debt reduction, which Ford estimates will trim its annual cash interest expense by more than $500 million, is the latest evidence that Ford is powering ahead of domestic rivals General Motors Corp (NYSE:GM) and Chrysler in restructuring to survive the lowest U.S. auto sales in three decades.

Ford, the only U.S. automaker that has not sought emergency U.S. government loans, is using $2.4 billion in cash and 468 million shares of its common stock to reduce its outstanding automotive debt by $9.9 billion from $25.8 billion at the end of 2008.

Ford was also the first to reach an agreement with the United Auto Workers union that would slash cash payments for its retiree health care. GM and Chrysler remain in discussions with the UAW to restructure their remaining obligations into a retiree health-care fund.

“As with our recent agreements with the UAW, Ford continues to lead the industry in taking the decisive actions necessary to weather the current downturn and deliver long-term profitable growth,” Ford Chief Executive Alan Mulally said in a statement.

Ford, through its finance arm Ford Motor Credit, used $1 billion in cash to buy back $2.2 billion of debt at 47 cents on the dollar, and $1.1 billion in cash to purchase $3.4 billion of unsecured notes.

In addition, $4.3 billion of Ford’s 4.25 percent senior convertible notes were tendered by April 3, when a debt restructuring offer closed. Ford will use $344 million to pay a cash premium to noteholders who tendered.

Ford, which borrowed $23 billion in late 2006 secured with most of its remaining assets including the familiar blue oval logo, has tried to restructure its debt to slash financing costs at a time of plunging sales and tight credit.

GM, which has been operating with $13.4 billion of government loans since the start of the year, is under pressure to reach sweeping concessions with bondholders and the UAW by June 1. The Obama administration has said the alternative would be a government-controlled bankruptcy.

Ford’s shares were up more than 11 percent at $3.62 on the New York Stock Exchange.

1963 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OF THE STATED GOALS OF THE COMMUNIST TAKEOVER OF AMERICA; Similar to Democratic Goals TODAY ?

Is there some hint of an answer in this for the future of America…..read it see if there are similarities happening TODAY.

Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a “religious crutch.”

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

SECRET AGENDA OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO CONTROL BANKS?

The government bailout of the banks was to save the nation from a financial disaster, or was it?

By:  STUART VARNEY

I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn’t much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street’s black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell ‘em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration’s thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash — which was often forced on them in the first place — the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That’s what’s happening right now.

Here’s a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He’s been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with “adverse” consequences if its chairman persists. That’s politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can’t a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can’t special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit — until now.

Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I’m an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration’s goal of controlling the financial system.

Scary is it not?

BANK STABILIZATION PLAN, DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY TAXPAYER OR GOVERNMENT FUNDS! BANKS OR INSURANCE COMPNIESE CAN ALL USE THIS PLAN!

We have watched in awe (horror?), as the Treasury, Congress and their financial advisers have attempted to rescue banks and insurance giant AIG.

The entire attempt at stabilizing the banks and the Insurance giant was based on simply giving them funds that approximated their losses and those funds could be unending.

There is a better way, and it does not require one cent of government funds (taxpayer funds) to achieve stability in the banking industry and the insurance industry.

We have provided the plan outlined below to select members of Congress and CEO’s of key banks in the hope that they consider it as a substitute to the phenomenal and unending cash black hole that is currently the plan.

BANK STABILIZATION PLAN

NO GOVERNMENT FUNDS TO BE UTILIZED

BANK RESCUE PLAN FOR THE UNITED STATES AND ANY COUNTRY

NO CASH FUNDS ARE NECESSARY TO FUND THIS PROGRAM

JUST THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE GOVERNMENT

RE: BANK STABILIZATION PROGRAM

This memorandum is prepared after an examination of the proposed “rescue” announced by the Treasury Secretary and after evaluation of all the proposed means of dealing with the bank’s problem loans and future capital deficiencies.

THE ANNOUNCED PROGRAM IS NOT ONLY COSTLY TO THE TAXPAYERS, TO THE TREASURY, BUT HAS NO GUARANTEE OF SUCCESS TO EVER GET ANY MONEY BACK, WHILE THIS PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM DESCRIBED HERE, COSTS NOTHING AND CAN BE INSTANTLY MORE EFFECTIVE, THUS CAUSING THE ENTIRE WORLD’S FINANCIAL SYSTEMS TO STABILIZE.

Our group consists of seasoned businessmen and investment professionals involved in private investment banking/consulting engaged in the acquisition, valuation and structuring of over 3,700 businesses since 1985. This total includes valuations of banks, manufacturing businesses, wholesale distribution, printing, contracting, brokerage of securities and real estate, retail and trucking companies.

We have been intrigued to see the significant funds committed to the “rescue” of banks and investment banks, when no such funds are actually necessary to affect the necessary stabilization.

In order to understand the simple principles of the program, it will be necessary to outline the “financial impact” of the problem as it exists in the financial markets, and the necessary means to quickly (almost instantly) establish order in the markets and revive normal lending at all levels.

The description of the BANK STABILIZATION described herein, excludes any management changes or other means that the parties may wish to utilize in the future relating to the institutions participating in the program.

THIS PLAN ONLY DEALS WITH THE MECHANICS OF SETTING UP THE NECESSARY MEANS TO ACCOMPLISH THE STABILIZATION.

The proposed program is applicable to ANY financial institution, any asset size and, any country can utilize its principal operational means of accomplishing the necessary stabilization of the institution in question.

W will attempt to provide a short yet detailed synopsis of the simplicity of the plan based on a hypothetical example of a hypothetical FAILING or failed BANK and how it would “play out” in stabilizing it without the use of ANY government funds.

BASIC PRINCIPLES OF BANKING AND LENDING

All private ( non-government) banks in the world, operate on the same business model.

The descriptions herein are for basic illustrative purposes and not meant to be full legal compliant disclosures of any type. These illustrations and descriptions are made for purposes of an illustrative explanation of the Stabilization Plan.

A bank charter is issued to a bank to operate as a bank; taking in deposits, making loans, etc., after it organizes itself with an initial capital base of the amount deemed necessary for its planned operations.

The starting capital is the amount of a “cushion” to protect its depositors’ assets in the event of operating losses which could wipe out their deposits. Typically this capital amount is a ratio of maximum liabilities of some type which the bank needs to adhere to in order to provide a degree of safety to the deposits entrusted to it.

For instance, a bank with $1 BILLION in deposits may be considered a relatively secure bank, if it’s capital is $100 million: or 10% of its assets. Often the smaller the bank, the larger percentage of capital it may have as it relates to its total assets, while large international banks may be able to have smaller ratios. This is just often a desire to have less leverage by the smaller banks which are typically locally owned and do not engage in much lending outside their immediate trade area and may further have “conservative” lending policies and a local board of directors, allowing less loans to be outstanding.

However, no matter what the size of the bank, they all make loans and take on collateral they deem adequate for the variety of the loans that are made.

When a loan is not repaid, or its scheduled payments are not made according to its terms, the bank then determines how such loan is ACCOUNTED FOR. It becomes a collection matter, a foreclosure or an asset seizure of the underlying collateral or a restructuring of some type to bring the loan into compliance or to have it repaid.

Each of the above actions causes the bank to record a profit or loss; typically a loss of some type. The bank tries to minimize the anticipated loss through its own means designed typically to recover the maximum amount of the outstanding loan amount.

This LOSS, then directly affects its capital base, by lowering it in the amount of the loss. Any profits that the bank makes that year are first added to the capital base and often “cushion” the losses incurred in its lending; that is typical banking.

The net result is that the profits are greater than the losses, and the bank is profitable for that year. If on the other hand the bank’s losses are greater than its profits from all its loan activities, the CAPITAL of the bank decreases and its RATIO gets smaller; it’s cushion is smaller and it becomes a weaker bank with less capital.

When a decrease in capital occurs, the bank may consider what means it will use to bring up its capital to a higher amount. Typically, when the markets functioned normally, the bank may simply solicit its existing stockholders for more capital, or go into the capital markets and have an investment bank arrange a private placement of more capital.

This may no longer be the case even if temporarily.

The government has become the new investor of LAST RESORT, without having it become so.

CURRENT BANK RESCUE PROBLEMS

The government has “invested” into banks whose losses are now decreasing their capital or has arranged quickie mergers with stronger banks.

However, these arrangements under either option have resulted in the government having to PAY billions to the surviving institutions to have them properly capitalized, since they may incur or have incurred losses decreasing their capital and their capital ratio.

At this time the actual amount that may be paid is unknown. Speculations by experts predict trillions and trillions more that can possibly be paid out.

ALL THESE PAYMENTS WILL INCREASE THE DEFICIT AND THE FEDERAL DEBT, BUT THE RESCUE DOES NOT HAVE TO COST ANYTHING!

Under the present method of “rescuing banks”, the government in effect balances the loss or decrease in a bank’s capital by providing it with REPLACEMENT CAPITAL in the amount equal to its loss or projected loss.

It becomes the only willing investor in a bank; a BAD bank.

This replacement capital is taking many forms such as loans, stock purchases and the like, with no real ability to know when it may, if ever, get the money back.

Furthermore, the government is then considering burdening itself further by acquiring the “toxic assets” that caused the losses at the banks, often being unable to establish a value on those assets, thus causing further losses to the government of an unknown future amount.

The losses to the government could continue on and on without end under the present program as more banks are closed, merged and each one requires the government to assist in its sale, closure or merger.

Under the present system the problems may and could continue, theoretically forever.

NONE OF THIS IS NECESSARY TO CAUSE THE TOTAL STABILIZATION OF THE BANK OR BANKS IN QUESTION.

THE BANK STABILIZATION PROGRAM

NO OUTLAY OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS AND A PROFIT LATER

There is no pressing need for the government to immediately inject funds into money losing banks and jump at every one that is losing money or decreasing its capital base. They can continue operate without great fanfare and without ANY GOVERNMENT FUNDS.

This by no way implies that the management should not be put under government supervision/oversight, but that is a different matter to be dealt with separately and not germane to the explanation of the STABILIZATION PROGRAM.

Simply put, the program relies on the good faith and credit of the GOVERNMENT as the central important component of its success. The USA and other large governments are capable of executing this plan in their own countries, avoiding ANY direct payments being necessary by the government.

The program is the quick fix that the financial markets expected but did not get from TREASURY or anyone else. They need a quick fix and understandable solution, NOW.

The STABILIZATION PROGRAM works like this:

When a bank is identified as needing financial help, the TREASURY provides it with a TREASURY PREFERRED CAPITAL NOTE, to supplement its existing capital.

The NOTES are in the amount needed to shore up its regulatory capital ratio to the necessary amount. The NOTES are either payable (at face value) or exchangeable into stock at a future date if that work better for the TREASURY.

In effect, the TREASURY makes money on this program as pure profit in either case; exchanging the notes for stock or getting paid (since it invested no funds).

NO GOVERNMENT CASH is provided or needed, since the troubled bank needs no cash to continue to operate. There is no run on its deposits, and it can operate in the ordinary course of business with Federal supervision that the TREASURY can devise for its officers, directors and otherwise.

The bank does not have to make asset valuations, the bank does not have to sell any assts to the government-the bank does not close. It operates business as usual with the new CAPITAL NOTES making up the capital shortfall.

There is no need to pay out millions, billions or otherwise to rescue every bank that may need to be rescued. The NOTES are issued by the TREASURY…there is no need to have the financial markets worry about ANY bank.

As the banks continue, they may have losses or write-offs or finally establish derivative values as they are “worked off” in the ordinary course of business, but none of this costs the government or taxpayers any money.

THE TREASURY CAPITAL NOTES provide the needed capital base and capital ratio for the bank, any bank, without any need to pay out the proposed billions and trillions.

Of course the normal banking business needs to continue with lending standards that are appropriate, but there is no run on the bank and its future assured due to the Government NOTES replacing the diminished capital of the banks.

Suggestions are that the amount of the provided NOTES as a percent of capital of the bank could be the future calculation of what percent of the bank’s stock they can be exchanged into. For example, if a bank has $1 billion in capital now but receives $250 million in NOTES, those notes may be convertible/exchangeable into 25% of its stock.

THE GOOD PART-PAYBACK AND PROFITS FOR THE GOVERNMENT

Under this program, the government puts out no funds, but will be either repaid at the face value when able, or it will convert the NOTES into shares that can or will be sold in the market again creating a PROFIT to the government.

If one considers that there could be $1-$2 TRILLION in NOTES to be issued, the PROFIT to the government can be in that same amount in the future, as the industry stabilizes.

We always wanted to do something special for the USA, as citizens and this may be it….for our President and its elected members of the Congress to use if they so choose.

This financial crisis needs to be dealt with, and until there is a stable banking system that is understood by the financial markets all over the world, there will be continuing financial instability.

The announcement of this program, by the USA, will allow all the other “problem” countries to “clone” this process in their countries, and consider the USA as the world leader that it is..

This may make friends at countries now facing melt-downs slowly, many of which will want to warm up to the USA due to this financial solution being presented by the USA. The world is waiting for our country for leadership.

The viability of the worlds most important countries financial and banking systems are at stake. We hope that this will aid the stabilization of the markets.

LIVE LIKE A DECADENT DICTATOR – 10 WORST DICTATORS OF RECENT TIMES

There could be a lot said that some of the names of the top 10 should be replaced, but then again feel free to add to the list others, and let’s try to avoid adding George Bush or Ronald Reagan to the list, please.

A revolving gold statue, pink champagne and a “Pleasure Brigade” of nubile retainers all feature in Times Money’s list of history’s most decadent dictators. While their people suffered, these men – and sometimes their wives and children – agonized over how best to spend their ill-gotten gains…

1. Kim Jong-il, “Dear Leader” of North Korea since 1994. The son of the communist state’s “Great Leader”, Kim Jong-il has super-expensive tastes, with 17 palaces and collections of hundreds of cars and about 20,000 video tapes. On one state visit to Russia, he reportedly had live lobsters airlifted daily to his armoured private train. He is believed to spend around $650,000 a year on Hennessy VSOP cognac and maintains an entourage of young lovelies known as the “Pleasure Brigade”

2. Ferdinand Marcos, President of the Philippines, 1965 – 1986. The Second World War freedom-fighter turned kleptocrat secreted billions of dollars in overseas accounts. His wife Imelda, however, was the big spender, leaving 888 handbags and 1060 pairs of shoes in the Malacanang presidential palace when the family fled mob justice after Marcos was deposed. Her pricier purchases included the $51 million Crown Building and $61 million Herald Centre in New York and art by Michelangelo and Botticelli

3. Nicolae Ceausescu, President of Romania, 1967 – 1989. The “Genius of the Carpathians” was congratulated (by telegram) by Salvador Dali on his excesses, which included his use of a kingly sceptre. Despite an official salary of just $3,000, he found the cash for 15 palaces, a superb car collection, yachts, fine art and bespoke suits. Tens of thousands of homes were demolished to make space for his 1,100-room, 480-chandelier Palace of the Parliament in the capital, Bucharest

4. Saparmurat Niyazov, President of Turkmenistan, 1990 – 2006. The President for Life and “Turkmenbashi”, or Father of all Turkmen, was at the centre of an awesome cult of personality. His vanity projects included a £6 million revolving gold-plated statue of himself in the country’s capital, Ashgabat. He shifted around £3 billion to overseas accounts, renamed the month of January (after himself), banned beards and ordered that his musings be displayed alongside the Koran in mosques

5. Idi Amin, President of Uganda, 1971 – 1979. The “Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea”, “Emperor of Uganda” and “King of Scotland” awarded himself the VC, or Victorious Cross, and CBE, or Conqueror of the British Empire. He also spent millions on a super-lavish lifestyle – maintaining a reported 30 mistresses as well as five wives and fathering at least 43 children. A typically mad-capped project was the creation of a personal bodyguard of bagpipe-playing 6ft 4in Scotsmen

6. Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, 1922 – 1953. The “Gardener of Human Happiness” and “Brilliant Genius of Humanity” was celebrated in his lifetime in thousands of stylised statues and monuments erected across the Soviet Union – many of which were moved or destroyed in later “de-Stalinisation” drives. He also had a taste for palaces, booze and cigars and preferred to travel by armour-plated private train with a Tsarist-style entourage

7. Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Persia, 1941 – 1979. The “King of Kings” and “Sun of the Aryans” spent a reported $100 million on celebrations for the 2,500th anniversary of the Persian monarchy in 1971, serving breast of peacock on Limoges china to dignitaries in a 160-acre tent city at Persepolis – close to poor villages. His superb collection of sports cars can be seen at the National Car Museum of Iran, alongside custom models by Mercedes-Benz and Porsche for his son, the Crown Prince

8. Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq, 1979 – 2003. The Baathist leader with a fondness for gold-plated bathroom fittings, and Kalashnikovs, rebuilt Babylon on kitsch rather than authentic lines, stamping each brick of the “reconstruction” with his own name in the manner of Nubachadnezzar, the ancient Babylonian king and conqueror of Jerusalem. His playboy eldest son Uday, meanwhile, kept a private zoo with lions and cheetahs at his Baghdad residence and owned a collection of 1,200 luxury cars

9. Mobutu Sese Soku, President of Zaire, 1965 – 1997. Siphoning his country’s wealth into Swiss bank accounts was a speciality of the “All-Powerful Warrior”, whose personal fortune was estimated at $5 billion in 1984 – then equivalent to Zaire’s national debt. Mobutu’s extravagances included palaces and pink champagne, yachts and shopping trips to Paris by chartered Concorde. His second wife Bobi Ladawa rivalled Imelda Marcos as a compulsive spender – with a reported 1,000-dress wardrobe

10. Suharto, President of Indonesia, 1967 – 1998. The former bank clerk embezzled more money than any other leader in history, according to Transparency International. In 1999, Time Asia put his family’s wealth at $15 billion. Playboy son “Tommy” was the biggest-profile spender – lavishing money on cars and clothes and buying a majority stake in Lamborghini before a conviction for murder in 2002. Suharto’s daughter “Tutut”, meanwhile, spent $100,000 on one shopping flight to the US.

This a certainly a list that can go to 100 easily, feel free to add your own favorites to the list.

FILTHY RICH – 10 HIGHEST PAID HEDGE FUND MANAGERS

Ok, so it is excessive, but is this the real free market at work?

The top 25 managers averaged $464 million each in compensation for their work last year, some made more; James Simons was paid $2.5 BILLION last year. Bruce Kovner, a former NYC cab driver made $640 million last year (still drives the cab-just kidding, now a real CASH CAB.)

Would you turn down a $1 billion payment if it was offered to you by your board of directors for outstanding performance?

What would Barney Frank do with such bonuses?

Keep in mind that a billion does not go far these days, it is two AIRBUS 380 airplanes, that’s all you get.
10 highest paid hedge fund managers of 2008

10 highest paid hedge fund managers of 2008

Stock markets across the world may have tanked last year but that didn’t stop the top performing hedge fund managers from making themselves a huge pile of cash.

In fact, the top 25 made £8.275 billion or an average of $464 million (£331m) each in 2008, according to research by Alpha Magazine. That is enough money to pay for 30 hospitals, employ more than 300,000 nurses for a year, or vaccinate every child in poverty from five preventable diseases.

Anyway, here is the list of the top 10, and how they made their millions (billions).

(Earnings have been calculated by adding each managers’ share of their firm’s performance and management fees, and gains on their own capital invested in their funds.)

1. James Simons, Renaissance Technologies Corp: $2.5 billion

Mr Simons generated an 80 per cent return for investors at his 20-year-old Medallion Fund last year. His exact investment strategy is a mystery but he says that it is based on rapid-fire trading across almost every possible market. Alpha Magazine says that his fund relies on computer-driven programs designed by an army of more than 100 Phds.

2. John Paulson, Paulson & Co: $2 billion

Mr Paulson also appears in our list of the 10 biggest winners of the financial crisis after he made millions in 2007 short selling risky pools of collateralized debt obligations. Last year he continued short selling and continued to make huge profits. However, Mr Paulson has felt the effects of the slump in the US housing market. Last year, he cut the asking price for his 6,800-square-foot Southampton, New York, home twice, by a total of $5.6 million, to $13.9 million.

3. John Arnold, Centaurus Energy: $1.5 billion

Energy trading John Arnold achieved an 80 per cent return at his Houston-based fund last year. The former Enron trader, who manages $5 billion in assets, deals mostly in natural gas, using futures and other derivatives.

4. George Soros, Soros Fund Management: $1.1 billion

Mr Soros’s $21 billion Quantum Endowment Fund eventually rose 8 per cent last year but it was a close call. In an annual review he published in the Financial Times, Mr Soros said he was losing money until bet correctly that the US dollar would fall. Mr Soros made his name and millions of pounds by betting against Sterling in the early 1990s.

5. Raymond Dalio, Bridgewater Associates: $780 million

Mr Dalio’s $38.6 billion Pure Alpha Strategy fund made 8.7 percent last year after a series of successful currency trades. Mr Dalio went long on the Japanese yen and shorted certain credit positions and emerging markets.

Although Mr Dalio’s is unlikely to suffer personally, he is very pessimistic about the future of the world economy. In his year-end letter, he wrote: “One of the most important lessons for those who did badly in 2008 is to have a ‘timeless and universal investment’ perspective” and to “understand what happened in long-ago times (e.g., the 1930s) and faraway places (like Japan and Latin America).”

6. Bruce Kovner, Caxton Associates: $640 million

Bruce Kovner, a former NY cab driver, made 13 per cent last year (after a 30 percent performance fee) on his $4.3 billion Caxton Global Investments fund . Most of the profit came from fixed-income investments.

7. David Shaw, D.E. Shaw & Co: $275 million

D.E. Shaw & Co.’s $13 billion macro fund was up about 7 per cent last year, offsetting most of the loss from its flagship $15 billion multistrategy fund, which ended 2008 down 8 to 9 percent.

8. Stanley Druckenmiller, Duquesne Capital Management: $260 million

Mr Druckenmiller made his money last year by reducing both his long and short exposures, instead building up cash. By the end of the year, he had cut his exposure to equities frop $5.8 billion to just $745 million. He also correctly bet on the dollar staging recovery last summer.

9. David Harding, Winton Capital Management: $250 million

Mr David Harding rode a number of trends — both up and down — including large moves in bonds, equity indexes and commodities (especially energy and grains), according to Alpha magazine. His $5.5 billion flagship Winton Futures Fund rose 21 per cent.

10. Alan Howard, Brevan Howard Asset Management: $250 million

Mr Howard’s Multi-Strategy fund made a 21 per cent gain in 2008 mostly from interest rate and foreign exchange arbitrage.

COMPETING WITH $.69 HOURLY WAGES IN INDIA AND $.74 CENT HOURLY WAGES IN CHINA

Our fearless leader, President Obama has recently said in a speech, that …” we will emerge from …this…stronger than ever.”

He was saying that due to his STIMULUS package, and the fact that the US Economy will “turn around”, it will be stronger than ever.

Too bad that he did not take ECONOMICS 101; he would have known better than to make such a contradictory statement.

Let us do a short analysis of the “prediction” that was made.

The President wants to raise taxes on employers generally;

on the bad oil companies he wants their profits;

on multinational corporations headquartered in the USA he wants to punish them;

raise the FICA tax to infinity; force health insurance coverage and expenses on everybody;

wants soldiers to pay for their own medical treatment; wants to triple the cost of electricity;

wants to bail out only the losers in industry; wants to saddle the employers in costly industries to keep operating with loans from taxpayers;

wants to limit income and levy 90% taxes on excess earnings; wants every business to be unionized;

wants illegal aliens not to be rounded up; wants us all to buy American more costly goods only;

stopped free trade with Mexico in violation of the Treaty;

wants to force GM to make cars that nobody wants to buy; wants to use clean coal (a techology that has not yet been invented;

Need we say more?

How are any of these initiatives going to make the USA stonger?

The workers in the USA, are competing with wages of $.69 cents an hour in INDIA, and $.74 cents an hour in China. How are they going to emerge stronger, exactly?

To be perfectly honest with you, I and all of us, would rather pay $.99 cents for a comb from China or India, than the same comb being manufactured in the USA, by a UNION organized company, with wages and benefits at $75 an hour, and a $10 price for the comb.

So let’s get real. We want prices to be as low as possible, that will only happen through global sourcing, which is a natural progression.

TATA MOTORS, an Indian auto manufacturer, just announced that their new car will sell for $1,995 at the dealer.

In the USA, due to the endless mandates, rules, regulations and needless litigation, $1,995 is the price for the airbags in a USA built car.

Again, I would rather buy the INDIAN manufactured car at $1,995, than just an airbag to inflate in the USA for the same amount.

We need to stop focusing on the wage rates, but rather help our businesses compete in the global marketplace on other products.

But instead, our government is consistently suing our most important industies, exporters, etc….they wanted to collapse Microsoft, Exxon, AT & T, the nuclear industry, they want to stop oil exploration and stop coal production.

The government wants to protect industries which operate in unsustainable cost structures, instead opf fostering devevopment of new indusrties that the entrepreneors are so cable of in the USA.

What would happen if the USA levied a simple 10% tax on businesses?

What if they gave out tax credits for employers who hire new employees?

What is a new business paid no taxes for the first 5 years?

Instead, the government is doing everything possible to force businesses to move its production overseas, and then it complains that the production moved overseas.

Let’s see, if my worker cost me $.69 cents an hour, or $75 dollars an hour, where will I hire new employees?

Only the government would argue with that….so if we do not wake up soon, we will be paying those wages here, because people will have few options for employment. Learn Chinese…oh wait, you do not have to since Chinese schools are teching English so the next generation of Chinese, will be English speaking.

In the next decade, the largest English speaking country in the world will be CHINA.

Can you guess which will be the largest Spanish speaking country in 2050?

GM: GOVERNMENT MOTORS, OR HOW TO SCREW UP A PRIVATE BUSINESS IN 4 MONTHS OR LESS

It was inevitable, so there is no surprise that GM is tanking under the “oversight” of the government. What can the government operate when it tanked its very own cafeteria?

The company needs to change its name to GOVERNMENT MOTORS, the new name for the acronym, GM.

Just imagine what a car designed by the government would look like…????? See above.

We were against the type of forced loans foisted upon this company late last year, since all we saw was in effect a bailout of the union benefits, and we saw no benefit to the company or its stockholders.

It was such nonsense to believe that this company could survive by getting loans, and then it was to have a magical plan for its success that was to be presented in a few months?

Part of the problem was that this was a failed company to begin with.

The Board of Directors of this firm should all be sued and hung out to dry since they have violated their fiduciary responsibilities, and thus maybe the stockholders can recover though their director liability insurance polices, the money lost under the inept leadership of, Nosferatu-aka, Rick Wagoner.

Mr. Nosferatu, came on board in 2000. The GM stock was trading at $70 a share.

This year it hit $1.27. Would you as a board keep the guy responsible?

The GM Board has got to be the dumbest group in history.

Since 2004, the company has not made a profit, and since then has recorded a staggering loss of $82 BILLION.

When would have this inept leader be terminated by a still more inept Board?

One year of losses, two, maybe three? No, they still had no plans to terminate Nosferatu after 5 years of the staggering losses of $82 BILLION!

So, at least he is gone, but so is the company.

It is naive to think that any restructuring other than a total re-make of the employee contracts, as well as the redesign of its cars and a shrinking of the entire business model can accomplish a “turnaround”.

If the normal free market forces were allowed to work their usual magic, the company would have entered into a reorganization, it could have changes its contracts, and possibly re-emerged as a new slimmer and healthy business.

There is no way that it can now…unless it takes the steps immediately.

Or it is too late?

With government running the company, mandating what cars to build and at what prices, and with what contracts, will we see a competitive business ready to survive on its own, or just another ZOMBIE, headed by another Nosferatu, the living dead?

Also, it is fair competition for other car makers to have to compete on uneven terms with this out of date dinosaur?

The US government is now standing behind their warranties issued on the sold cars, it is standing behind its sales contracts, and it is forcing the company to build cars that nobody wants to buy, such a tiny dangerous hybrids or cars to be operating using technology that is not yet invented.

PLEASE SOMEBODY STOP THE GOVERNMENT FROM INVESTING OUR MONEY INTO MONEY LOSING ENTERPRISES AND HELP THE FEW PROFITABLE BUSINESSES TO SURVIVE INSTEAD.

Business needs tax incentives, lower taxes and all the tax breaks possible in order to jump start the economy.

Government Motors, needs to make it on its own using the “system” that was designed for that purpose: the Bankrupcy Law.

No investor would ever consider investing in or much less providing a loan to a business as troubled as GM. Common sense says that one invests or gives loans only to a well run profitable business, not a “dog with fleas”.

So far, against every known common sense ideology, our government had instead, ONLY given loans or grants or handouts solely to BAD businesses-businesses that would never be granted loans in the free marketplace.