World Forums

RIP and hopefully this right wing government will put interventionsinto other sovereign nations to result and reduce the number of wackos mad at them and us for that matter.

The Money Honey Turns 41
Happy Birthday Maria from everyone at Crossing Wall Street!

Damn! Now that really is my kind of woman...one who will discipline me with finance!

Well, your Dream woman doesn't seem to care about the environment.

By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 12, 2008
SACRAMENTO -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for vice president, has urged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto a fee on cargo containers going through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, setting off a wave of criticism from California environmentalists.

Palin's letter to Schwarzenegger is dated Aug. 28 -- one day before presidential candidate and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) announced that he had picked her as his running mate. The letter argues that both consumers and the economy in California and Alaska would suffer as a result of the fee.



Palin's letter to SchwarzeneggerThough the issue might otherwise be viewed as a relatively parochial port matter, Palin's newfound status as a national political figure has raised the stakes in what state environmentalists consider to be their most important pollution reduction effort this year. They say Palin has no business getting involved in the California issue.

"Why should Gov. Schwarzenegger take into account what out-of-state interests are saying?" said Lisa Warshaw, a spokeswoman for the Coalition for Clean Air. "It's unfortunate that she is using her popularity to push her agenda on this state."

The bill's author, state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), said Palin appears not to appreciate how important the proposal is for the health of Californians.


"She certainly displays a lack of understanding," Lowenthal said.

Palin's missive attacks Senate Bill 974, which has been approved by the state Legislature but needs Schwarzenegger's signature to become law.

The bill would create a $60 fee for each 40-foot cargo container moving through the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland, which together handle more than 40% of the nation's goods.

The fees would raise $400 million annually for such pollution-reduction projects as installing cleaner-burning truck and train engines and building roadways under or over railroad tracks to avoid long lines of idling vehicles.

"Enactment of Senate Bill 974 will have negative impacts on both Alaska and California," Palin wrote. "For Alaskans, a very large percentage of goods [90% or more] shipped to Alaska arrive as marine cargo in a container."

Palin said many Alaskan communities lack road access and depend entirely on goods shipped by container, something that has significantly increased in cost in recent years. Many of those containers pass through the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports before arriving in Alaska, and Palin argues that the fee will add even more to the cost of goods shipped to her state.

"This tax makes the situation worse," Palin wrote. "Similarly, the tax may harm California by driving port business away from its ports."

The letter concludes by requesting that "due consideration be given to our state and that you not sign Senate Bill 974."

Schwarzenegger has not yet responded to Palin's letter, nor has he made a decision about whether to sign or veto the legislation, said spokeswoman Rachel Cameron.

"The governor will take it into consideration," she said of Palin's letter.

But she said Schwarzenegger has warned that he will not sign any bills until the state's overdue budget is approved by the Legislature.

"Right now the governor's top priority is getting a responsible budget approved," Cameron said.

Schwarzenegger has had concerns about the port fee and threatened to veto it last year unless Lowenthal met with retail and shipping representatives to address their complaints that it will harm business.

Lowenthal said he offered to amend the bill this year to address Palin's concerns by cutting the fee in half for containers loaded from one ship to another without leaving California ports by rail or truck.

Schwarzenegger's staff did not agree to the proposed change, the senator said.

On Thursday, with the Palin letter hitting the Internet, Lowenthal invited the Alaskan governor to travel to the Southern California ports to see first-hand why the fee is needed.

"We are losing about 3,400 Californians each year because of pollution," Lowenthal said. "No matter what Gov. Palin would like to see happen, the impact is killing Californians. I don't think Gov. Palin truly understands the impacts going on here."

John Casey, a spokesman for Lowenthal, added: "Maybe Sarah Palin doesn't care about Californians."

Palin's office in Juneau did not return calls late Thursday seeking comment.

Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has endorsed McCain for president, but Lowenthal said he hopes that politics will not play a role in the decision on the legislation.

"I'm hoping the governor sees above it. He says he is an independent. This will be a test," Lowenthal said.

Cameron denied that the governor's support for McCain will play a role.

"The governor is committed to doing what's best for Californians," Cameron said.

patrick.mcgreevy

Sure because raising taxes will stop pollution. Of course, it is your stupid legislators who come up with these hair brain schemes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7612778.stm

Russian bombers reach Venezuela for a military excercise.

Bolivia, Venzuela expel their US diplomats. Bolivia accuses the US of trying to overthrow its government. Honduras postpones the approval of their US diplomat.

Hugo Chavez to US Diplomat to Venzuela, Patrick Duddy: go to hell 100 times

was about time. The US has intervened in Latin America for 100 years.

Let's send Senator Obama to talk to them.

it definitely is a Hispanic thing

"go to hell 100 times"

I think you told me that once

when Fidel croaks, does Russia become Cuba's protectorate ?

Jay Nordlinger


Did you hear the wisdom of Sean “P. Diddy” Combs on our energy problems? I quote an article from the Telegraph:

“Gas prices are too motherf******g high,” he ranted to fans in a recent YouTube video, which was shot by a member of his entourage as he wandered through an airport terminal. [Yes, the Telegraph used one too many asterisks. Someone needs to be counting.]

“As you know, I do have my own jet, but I’ve been having to fly back and forth to LA pursuing my acting career. Now, if I’m flying back and forth twice a month, that’s like $200,000, $250,00 round trip. I’m back on American Airlines.”

While Combs’ own particular dilemma is likely to be confined to the hiphop aristocracy and its considerable entourage of hangers-on, his point about soaring oil prices will resonate well outside the “hood”.


This is not so funny. MEMRI tells us of a Lebanese music-video director who semi-admits he’s gay. That’s interesting — novel. (Not the gayness, the semi-admission, in that part of the world.) But he makes up for it, so to speak, by saying that he supports the attacks of 9/11 — is glad of them.

He would be welcomed to Latin America the way JFK was. Given his mixed race, familiarity with Latin American history and his time as a child among the poor in Indonia, he is better prepared to be a partner with the new breed of Latin American leaders. Leaders forged form the people and not appointed by American Fruit Companies.

Don't try to debate Latin American policy with me son. Thanks but no thanks. Unless you believe that McCains proximity to Mexico gives him foreign policy experience.

FROM ANOTHER SITE -- dedicated to palo. Who's the real victim here, palo ?

Quote

We are vigilant at our home and it's not enough. I have taught my family to lock doors, be aware of the surroundings, watch for suspicious people, etc.

Here's how my Friday went.

Per normal for work, I had a meeting in ATL proper this AM. Planned to pick my daughter up at home after her morning classes. Lunch with Dad. Called her at 11:30 to tell her I was on the way. She was getting changed and ready.

At 11:55, she text messaged me saying that someone was in the house.

She had already secured herself in her "safe room". (with her cell phone and a pistol)

By then, I was 90 seconds from the driveway. My P220 was on my hip and loaded. I went to the front door which was partially open. I entered the house and started clearing rooms, with the intent of making it as far as my daughter's room and then getting her out while waiting for the Police. I didn't want to be shot or attacked from behind, so I cautiously went through the house , room by room.

I cleared the first two rooms. I noticed some kitchen knives were missing from the butcher block. I could see into the ground floor bathroom and there was a Santuko knife on the vanity. I cleared the bathroom and shut the door. The next room was a spare bedroom, I checked the closet and under the bed. The next bedroom is larger and somewhat cluttered. The light was off. I flipped on the light switch, took cover in the doorway and announced to anyone in the room to "come out, hands raised".

Imagine my surprise when a young black male stepped out of the closet armed with a folding knife. I immediately commanded him to drop the knife and prone out or I would kill him. (Much to my chagrin, he did so).

I had him put his hands out in front of him and cross his feet at the ankles. Then I called 911. (my daughter already was on with them).

While waiting for Police, my daughter took photos of the perp and the scene. (she thought it might be good to do)....I just wanted her by me where I knew she was safe.

In approx 6 minutes, we had Officers on the scene. The 911 operator knew I was holding him at Gunpoint and I tell you, the most nerve wracking seconds were the ones waiting for them to enter the house. I placed my pistol on the floor once the officers entered the hallway. They were cool. One officer unloaded the Sig and handed it back to me, sans ammo and magazine.

They cuffed him and while searching his person, found another knife in his pocket, and a meat cleaver in the closet where he was hiding. I have no doubt that he had more evil intentions than a simple burglary. During the ensuing investigation and the CSI folks gathering evidence, we found that he had broken the door knob to my Daughter's room trying to gain entry.....

The next neighborhood over has had 4 break ins in the last 2 nights.

I thank God that my Daughter was unharmed.

Stay safe, make sure your loved ones have either the means to defend themselves or a place to wait in safety until the Cavalry arrives.

This Thug cut a screen on a window and broke in through a locked kitchen window. Bastard is 16 years old and will be charged as a Juvenile with Burglary....he's probably already home eating supper.

I'm trying not to Monday morning quarterback what I did and didn't do, only happy that my Daughter wasn't harmed.

Once he dropped the knife and complied with my command to prone out, I had no legal reason to kill him ( although I truly wanted to). If he had charged me, I would have killed him without a thought.



diversity is our strength...

That article just reflects who you are and your lmited view on life.

Do enjoy.

Jesus fucking Christ

you're such a fucking PUSSY to admit that blacks commit more crimes. Didn't some black man say "da trut will set ya'll free" ? Well, what's the problem then ?

fuck off, palo. View on life ? oh you mean what my eyes tell me ? Yep.

If yolu need that to justify your hatred of black people, more power to you.

Well lookie here. Hey palo, looks lijke one of your brothers from down South may have been to blame for that train crash in LA yesterday. Instead of paying attention, fucking guy was too busy texting his buddy's. Only probably got his gig due to some government quota anyways...

http://cbs2.com/local/Metrolink.Engineer.Robert.2.817045.html

He may your brother, I don't select my friends based on ethnicity or common haterd. Trust me, there are many Mexicans as ignorant as you.

Hate on though. If it makes you happy.

We should all be happy. The government filled it's quota with a substandard worker and buddy was too busy texting and playing on his phone that he ran SIX signals.

Isn't it wonderful that the most qualified person wasn't hired ? At least the US government taught us a stern lesson that it's better to be the direct cause of 13 deaths and untold damage rather than being, well, honest...

Diversity is our strength...

yawn. Train engineers are private employees, moron. Their jobs are highly regulated by the Federal Railroad Administration.

Only an idiot like you would read into stuff like that when 25 people just lost their lives.

Fine job that mother of your did. I bet you she's proud. Too bad she didn';t have a condom the night or day she conceived you in that dirty alley.

mi no comprende ingleesh...

you don't cpmprende too may things. You are the classic moron.

Trains = a European thing...

The Wall Street Journal
Where Was Lehman's Board?


Nine of them are retired. Four of them are over 75 years old. One is a theater producer, another a former Navy admiral. Only two have direct experience in the financial-services industry.

Meet the Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. external board directors, a group of 10 people who, perhaps unknowingly, carried the health of the world’s financial system on their shoulders the past 18 months.

As the world nervously awaits the effects of the unprecedented Lehman Brothers liquidation, one can’t help but wonder how and why this board let its long-time chairman and patron, Richard Fuld Jr., cling to both hope and power.

Perhaps it was because Mr. Fuld wanted it that way. Over the years, Mr. Fuld had become the living embodiment of the securities firm, creating a top-down culture that sometimes had a military feel to it. Most mornings, Mr. Fuld rode alone in an elevator up to his executive suite. His colleagues simply call him “The Chairman.” And it is telling that press accounts of Lehman’s capital-raising efforts focused entirely on the efforts of Mr. Fuld, and make nary a mention of the 10 other members of Lehman’s board.

Who was on this board? Until the 2008 arrival of former US Bancorp chief Jerry Grundhofer, the group was lacking in current financial-knowledge firepower. A number of the members did have past financial-markets expertise, but most of their working lives were tied to a different era: The one before massive securitization, credit-default swaps, derivatives trading, and all the risks those products created.

The board’s members include John Macomber, 80 years old, a former McKinsey & Co. consultant and chief executive of chemical-maker Celanese Corp; John Akers, 74, former IBM chief; Thomas A. Cruikshank, 77, chief executive of Halliburton Co. prior to Vice President Dick Cheney; and Henry Kaufman, 81. In the 1970s and ’80s, Kaufman, the chief economist at Salomon Brothers, was known as “Dr. Doom” for his bearish views on the U.S. economy. Ironically, in April, Mr. Kaufman termed the credit crisis a “global calamity” and criticized the Federal Reserve for “providing only tepid oversight of commercial banking.”

Other current members include: Sir Christopher Gent, 60, the one-time chief of mobile-phone company Vodafone PLC; theater producer Roger S. Berlind, 75; former Telemundo Chief Executive Roland Hernandez, 50; Michael Ainslie, 64, former chief executive of Sotheby’s Holdings; Marsha Johnson Evans, 61, one-time head of the Red Cross and a former Navy rear admiral.

Until 2006, Lehman's board included Dina Merrill, the 83-year-old actress once featured in the old Katharine Hepburn movie “Desk Set,” as well as “Caddyshack II.”

How much was Lehman’s board monitoring the company’s on-going risk as it began accumulating its portfolio of real-estate assets and securities? In both 2006 and 2007, the risk committee of Lehman’s board met twice each year, according to Lehman’s SEC filings.

Lehman, Merrill and AIG, how much of an impact do the three have on Main Street? Or is the affect for the most part on Wall Street? No doubt that those who invest heavily in the market got hit hard today and may take a time to recover. But for most Americans, who have some savings in the bank, if that, will today's news change anything? Will this have an impact beyond southern Manhattan? Just wondering.

The United States is now in the throes of its biggest banking crisis in 70 years, stirring terrible memories of panics, bank failures, bankruptcies and mass unemployment. First Bear Stearns had to be rescued. Then the government had to take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two largest US mortgage providers. Now Lehman Brothers.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestn ... 4494032.jp

It's certainly a mess and the tax payer has to bail them out.

These assholes make decisions that bring them millions and then their companies go in the tank. They don't pay. They don't give back the millions they stole to help bail out the company but instead the suckers pay.

pramzan,

with risk of being accused of being too diplomatic..had Sarah Palin not had husband and kids she would likely have been accused of not having sufficient "caring" traits to be suitable for such office..however you twist and turn the ass is always located behind you (something Mr Berlusconi could be well advised to consider now and then since his strive to keep AlItalia italian looks like having the effect that in a not too distant future Lufthansa or other would be the mjor aircarrier in Milan).
Another example, the Russian health minister seems to be a "hot woman" up your alley but apparantly she doesn't seem to have anything to provide whence they were to arrange some sort of lottery where people could supply suggestions for her to present. i don't know whether she hjas kids or something else that may distract her from her ofice in a country where people die at considerably lower age than comparable countries though. But I suppose she's "caring" aside of good looking since she has accepted to hold the position (and income) despite it's like a cut and paste made for comic mockery.

"The United States is now in the throes of its biggest banking crisis in 70 years, stirring terrible memories of panics, bank failures, bankruptcies and mass unemployment. First Bear Stearns had to be rescued. Then the government had to take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two largest US mortgage providers. Now Lehman Brothers"

Did you manage to get your investments out there so you finally can buy yourself a caterpoillar and dig holes in the ground or will you have to go back to be Ljonja in russian banking commercials? Seeing Genie hasn't posted in a while I suppose your brother "Vanja" may have got his caterpillar and started his business?

DOW up 142. Oil down to $93 per barrel. AIG may get it acts together. Not a bad rebound for today.

Fed to lend $85 billion to AIG, take 80 percent stake
Tue Sep 16, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Reserve Board on Tuesday said the Federal Reserve Bank of New York will lend up to $85 billion to the American International Group in a plan aimed at saving the insurer from a "disorderly failure" that could wreak economic havoc.

The Fed said under the two-year facility the U.S. government will receive a 79.9 percent equity interest in AIG and has the right to veto payment of dividends to common preferred shareholders in the deal, which has the full support of the Treasury Department.

"The Board determined that, in current circumstances, a disorderly failure of AIG could add to already significant levels of financial market fragility and lead to substantially higher borrowing costs, reduced household wealth and materially weaker economic performance," the Fed said in a statement.

The Fed said the loan, secured by all assets of AIG and its primary non-regulated subsidiaries, was designed to assist the insurance giant in meeting its obligations as they come due.

The loan will facilitate a process under which AIG will sell certain of its businesses in an orderly manner, with the least possible disruption to the economy.

The loan is expected to be repaid from proceeds of the sale of the firm's assets.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, in a separate statement, said that U.S. financial regulators were engaged in a broad effort to try to restore some stability to battered financial markets.

"We are working closely with the Federal Reserve, the SEC and other regulators to enhance the stability and orderliness of our financial markets and minimize the disruption to our economy," Paulson said in a brief statement of support for the Fed's action.

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/id ... 1120080917

Silvio Berlusconi casts an appreciative eye over Miss Italy, Miriam Leone.
Mr Berlusconi was appearing on the current affairs show, Porta a Porta, and found himself discussing the issues of the day with Miss Leone, a 23-year-old student who possesses a pair of enviably long legs.

CrossingWallStreet

It was almost ten years ago that Time magazine ran a cover with Greenspan, Rubin and Summers called "The Committee to Save the World." Let's just say that I couldn't imagine a similar cover running today with Bernanke, Paulson and Geithner.

Hmm...for Palin's presumed lack of environment feelings. Some week or so ago I read a piece by american ambassador Michael Woods in my morningpaper. Somewhat good and despite the matter was about EU's dependance of Russian energy (and correctly and sort of almost un-american loudmouth manners he provided tables that displays that Sweden is among the countries who rely the least on Russian energy). Now if some of the loudmouth american senators and governors really would be called to put the money where their mouth is Sara palin would have to carry plenty of caterpillars and other devices to Alaska to be able to supply energy to for instance Ukraina's industries if they are to be able to aquire it to a similar price as they do today (is it even a quarter of what german industries pay for their energy today?).

And obviously pramzy need not worry about being viewed as sexist for having doubts about Palin since the national womens organization who have never advocated a candidate before now does so for...Obama.

Wall Street's Unraveling

By Robert J. Samuelson
Wednesday, September 17, 2008; Page A19

Wall Street as we know it is kaput. It is not just that Merrill Lynch agreed to be purchased by Bank of America or that the legendary investment bank Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy or that the insurance giant AIG is floundering. It is not even that these events followed the failure of the investment bank Bear Stearns or the government's takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the largest mortgage lenders. What's really happened is that Wall Street's business model has collapsed.

Greed and fear, which routinely govern financial markets, have seeded this global crisis. Just when it will end isn't clear. What is clear is that its origins lie in the ways that Wall Street -- the giant investment houses, brokerage firms, hedge funds and "private equity" firms -- has changed since 1980. Its present business model has three basic components.

First, financial firms have moved beyond their traditional roles as advisers and intermediaries. Once, major investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Lehman worked mainly for their clients. They traded stocks and bonds for major institutional investors (insurance companies, pension funds, mutual funds). They raised capital for companies by underwriting -- selling -- new stocks and bonds for the firms. They provided advice to corporate clients on mergers, acquisitions and spinoffs. All these services earned fees.

Now, most financial firms also invest for themselves. They use partners' or shareholders' money to place bets on stocks, bonds and other securities -- so-called "principal transactions." Merrill and other retail brokers, which once served individual clients, have ventured into investment banking. So have some commercial banks that were barred from doing so until the repeal in 1999 of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

Second, Wall Street's compensation is heavily skewed toward annual bonuses, reflecting the profits traders and managers earned in the year. Despite lavish base salaries, bonuses dominate. Managing directors with 15 years' experience can receive bonuses five to 10 times their base salaries of $200,000 to $300,000.

Finally, investment banks rely heavily on borrowed money, called "leverage" in financial lingo. Lehman was typical. In late 2007, it held almost $700 billion in stocks, bonds and other securities. Meanwhile, its shareholders' investment (equity) was about $23 billion. All the rest was supported by borrowings. The "leverage ratio" was 30 to 1.

Leverage can create huge windfalls. Suppose you buy a stock for $100. It goes to $110. You made 10 percent, a decent return. Now suppose you borrowed $90 of the $100. If the price rises to $101, you've made 10 percent on your $10 investment. (Technically, the price has to exceed $101 slightly to cover interest payments.) If it goes to $110, you've doubled your money. Wow.

Once assembled, these components created a manic machine for gambling. Traders and money managers had huge incentives to do whatever would increase short-term profits. Dubious mortgages were packaged into bonds, sold and traded. Investment houses had huge incentives to increase leverage. While the boom continued, government remained aloof. Congress resisted tougher regulation for Fannie and Freddie and permitted them to run leverage ratios that, by plausible calculations, exceeded 60 to 1.

It wasn't that Wall Street's leaders deceived customers or lenders into taking risks that were known to be hazardous. Instead, they concluded that risks were low or nonexistent. They fooled themselves, because the short-term rewards blinded them to the long-term dangers. Inevitably, these surfaced. Mortgages went bad. The powerful logic of high leverage went into reverse. Losses eroded firms' tiny capital bases, raising doubts about their survival. This year, Lehman lost nearly $8 billion in "principal transactions." Otherwise, it was profitable.

How Wall Street restructures itself is as yet unclear. Companies need more capital. Merrill went to Bank of America because commercial banks have lower leverage (about 10 to 1). It seems likely that many thinly capitalized hedge funds will be forced to reduce leverage. Ditto for "private equity" firms. In time, all this may prove beneficial. Financial firms may take fewer stupid and wasteful risks -- at least for a while. Talented and ambitious people may move from finance, where they were attracted by exorbitant pay, into more productive industries.

But the immediate effect may be to damage the rest of the economy. People have already lost their jobs. States and localities, particularly New York City and New Jersey, that depend on Wall Street's profits and payrolls will face further spending cuts. Banks and investment banks may tighten lending standards again and impede any economic recovery. The stock market's swoon may deepen consumers' pessimism, fear and reluctance to spend. There may be more failures of financial firms. It's hard to know, because financial crises resemble wars in one crucial respect: They result from miscalculation.

Yesterday there was some about Lehman's in the businesspaper "Dagens Industri" (Today's industry) and apparantly some employed at thefirm had gone bonkers in front of a journalist and pitiful screamed "Do you think it's funny?!?!". I bet Barclays does.
And similarly, the analysts that believed that federal reserve was going to lower the interest rate must have forgotten that they have done so repeatedly in the past just for the sake of adressing these problems. And the institutions have mumbled about that "Problem solved" while obtaining bonuses as ordinary. Why would they believe that lower the interest (which already is really ridiculously low) would do it this time? The interest rate is 2 % and inflation is...(with the reservation that inflation have been driven mainly by a few commodity which from a theoretical perspective then could be argued that it can to a considerably degree be more or less dismissed)?

The Wall Street Journal
Law Blog

Law Prof Who Opposes Affirmative Action Denied Access to Bar Stats

Richard Sander, a UCLA law prof who, according to his bio, studies “social and economic inequality,” hopes to prove the so-called “mismatch” theory of affirmative action, at least as it applies to law. The theory: that affirmative action programs hurt the career prospects of minority law students and that students who are weaker than their classmates will often do better academically (and on the bar) if they attend a less-competitive school.

But Professor Sander’s research hit a roadblock, and the L.A. Times editorial page is none too happy about it. Apparently, when Sander requested data about the performance of white and minority law grads on the bar examination, along with info about the schools they attended and their grades, he was denied. Bar officials reportedly cited the need to protect the privacy of test takers and to honor an agreement that test material will remain confidential. (Sander reportedly promised that no individual student would be identified by the statistics.)

At the same time, writes the LAT, some defenders of affirmative action have argued against releasing the data because they think Sander’s project could have only one purpose: to discredit the idea of racial preferences. The LAT writes:

It’s also unfair to accuse Sander of seeking to dismantle racial preferences. True, his hypothesis is that affirmative action students are disserved because they derive less benefit from an elite law school than students who meet the usual admission standards. . . .The mismatch theory may be mistaken. But suppose it were found to be valid? That wouldn’t necessarily lead to the abolition of racial preferences. Another result might be the strengthening of mentorship and other programs to help less-well-prepared students achieve at higher levels.


Scalia: U. of Chicago Law Lost Its Conservative Cred

What with the summer SCOTUS break we’ve been having a bit of Justice Scalia withdrawal around here. But recently he’s been back on tour, stopping yesterday in Chicago, where he served up a withering critique of the University of Chicago’s new liberal bent.

According to the piece in the Chicago Sun-Times, Scalia told 500 members of the Federalist Society that, back in the days when he used to teach at Chicago — from 1977 to 1982 — the courses had more rigor and the school had a more conservative ethos.

“I regret it,” Scalia said. “I don’t think the University of Chicago is what it was in my time. I would not recommend it to students looking for a law school as I would have years ago. It has changed considerably and intentionally. It has lost the niche it once had as a rigorous and conservative law school.”

Scalia also had advice for students. “I took nothing but bread-and-butter classes, not ‘Law and Poverty,’ or other made-up stuff,” said Scalia, a Harvard law grad. “Take serious classes,” he urged students. “There’s so much law to learn. Don’t waste your time.”

And of course a Scalia speech wouldn’t be a Scalia speech without a shot at his perceived “activist” colleagues on the Court. “What did I learn at Harvard Law School or at my practice in Ohio or in the federal government that qualifies me to determine whether there ought to be and therefore is a right to abortion or to homosexual sodomy or a right to suicide?” Scalia asked. “I don’t know any more about that than Joe Six-pack.”

Anyone hear from Mate? I hope he is OK with the market going south. It will recover. It always does.

hopefully he off'd himself.

SEC Issues Short-Selling Rules
In Bid to Stop Manipulation
By KARA SCANNELL


WASHINGTON -- With stocks tumbling, the Securities and Exchange Commission launched an effort aimed at making it harder for traders to improperly drive down stock prices.

The three rules, which go into effect Thursday at 12:01 a.m., follow a weekend of tense negotiations with Wall Street firms, which have asked SEC Chairman Christopher Cox to stop a tide of short selling. Some hedge funds have been pointing a finger at other hedge-fund managers, claiming that short sellers share responsibility for the recent panic on Wall Street, which has been especially brutal for financial stocks.

Falling stock prices have made it harder for banks to raise money to shore up their funding, and manipulative trading may have contributed to the fall of Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. In a short sale, a trader sells borrowed stock, hoping it will fall in price and can be repurchased later at a profit. The trader has to return the borrowed stock within three business days.

Corporations and others have complained that loopholes in the existing rules made it easier for traders to manipulate the market by shorting stock without actually borrowing the stock and then failing to deliver it within three days. The SEC has said that most traders who missed the deadline delivered shares within five to 10 business days and that the delays are often the result of clerical errors.

Under the new provisions, the SEC will eliminate the wiggle room by penalizing a trader who doesn't deliver shares within three business days. For violating that rule, the SEC will bar the broker executing the trade from engaging in any short sale without actually borrowing the shares before selling them.

The SEC also is tightening requirements on market makers that trade options and making it illegal for a customer to mislead a broker about having located stocks and then failing to deliver them.

The new curbs apply to the entire market, not just the 19 financial firms covered by emergency short-selling rules that took effect earlier this summer but have since expired. Wednesday's move bypassed the usual public-comment process, reflecting the urgency with which the agency views the situation.

Edward Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association, said he was pleased with the rules, but added: "This needed to be done yesterday, frankly." He added, "We're in a very dangerous situation."

In a memo to clients, attorneys Edward Herlihy and Theodore Levine of law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz called the SEC moves "too little too late" and said the SEC needs to take more-dramatic steps and to look at short sellers' related transactions "to determine whether these strategies are contributing to the severe dislocations taking place in the marketplace."

Other traders, while approving of the SEC's new short-sale rules, suggest that the rush to blame short sellers is misguided. "There's no reason loopholes should exist," said Rick Schottenfeld, who runs New York trading firm Schottenfeld Group, which buys and shorts stocks. "But...we're placing the blame in the wrong place. Short sellers are seeing how leveraged financial companies are and are reacting to that."

Some traders and lawyers and others were frustrated that the SEC didn't reinstate a Depression-era rule that put speed bumps in place to slow the pace of short sales. The so-called "uptick" rule, which the SEC repealed in July 2007, prohibited traders from selling short unless there was an uptick, or higher bid, in the stock. Traders say that tamped down volatility and applied the brakes during times of heavy selling.

Some fund managers say they hope to discuss with members of Congress ways to potentially curb short selling, perhaps by putting a limit on the ability of investors to target financial shares.

Wednesday, Morgan Stanley Chief Executive John Mack called Mr. Cox, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein about how to stop short sellers betting on a decline in Goldman and Morgan Stanley shares, a person familiar with the matter said.

The previous short-selling crackdown for financial stocks helped limit the downside in those shares, many observers say.

—Gregory Zuckerman and Aaron Lucchetti contributed to this article.
Write to Kara Scannell at kara.scannell@wsj.com

CrossingWallStreet

Now that the Feds own 80% of AIG, which is one of Manchester United's largest sponsors. So our government now sponsors Man U.

Part of the Fed's deal is that AIG's CEO had to go, but what happens to this kid?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VvGW98D3XA