Well, perhaps it would be better to trust the judgement of Buffett's 
(Jimmy this time) after all  :0
--------------------------------------
Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
ASPCA Knowledge Management
1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
217-337-9761
http://www.aspca.org


"Free, Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/26/2008 12:10:21 PM:

> As long as the list is going tilt today much like our finances, I’d 
> seriously look at Paulson’s history before I said that I trust him….
> I’m with John, I clearly don’t understand it all but the bi-partisan
> resistance is noteworthy…
> 
> Excerpt from a transcript of a public radio show I heard the other 
> night that was rather illuminating….granted it’s slanted to the left
> but facts are facts
> 
> “I found this article in BusinessWeek that ran when Paulson was 
> appointed to the Treasury, and I just want to read you one sentence,
> because I think it’s all we need to know about Henry Paulson. This 
> is from BusinessWeek, when he got the appointment as Treasury 
> Secretary in 2006. The headline of the article is “Mr. Risk Goes to 
> Washington.” It says, “Think of Paulson as Mr. Risk. He’s one of the
> key architects of a more daring Wall Street, where securities firms 
> are taking greater and greater chances in [their] pursuit of 
> profits. By some key measures, the securities industry is more 
> leveraged now than it was at the height of the 1990s boom.” 
> 
> 
> Then it goes on to say that when Paulson took over Goldman Sachs in 
> 1999, they had $20 billion in debts. When he—in these high-risk 
> gambles. When he left, they had $100 billion, which means he took 
> their risk level from $20 billion to $100 billion. So it is 
> absolutely no exaggeration to say that Henry Paulson, far from 
> speaking for Main Street, is actually bailing out his colleagues for
> some of the very debts that he himself accumulated. This is an 
> extraordinary conflict of interest.”
> 
> After I heard that, I went and read the actual article- http://www.
> businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_24/b3988001.htm
> 
> Scary stuff….seems like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse to me.
> 
> You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming… J
> 
> 
> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 7:47 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: $700B?
> 
> I will say this… It’s a complex issue, and there are few who truly 
> understand it. I’m not one of those few.
> 
> Among those few are Bernanke, Paulson, and Buffett (Warren, not 
> Jimmy). I’ve gotta say, I’m leaning towards trusting their judgment on 
this.
> 
> From: Devin Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 10:29 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: $700B?
> 
> 700 Billion / 300 Million = $2,333.  Thats what every resident 
> (legal and non-legal) will be paying to bail out the crooks.  How 
> bout sending US a check instead.  Shutting up now.
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Eldridge, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> I like the idea going around to reverse the "trickle down" and start
> at the bottom and let 700b flow upwards. J
> 
> From: Vue, Za [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 7:33 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: $700B? 
> 
> This sounds more like a ransom from the master of evil for wanting 
> to take over Earth or a Lewis Farrakhan lawsuit.
> 
> -Z.V.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
> the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
> information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
> prohibited.
> 
> If you have received this message in error, please contact
> the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
> original message (including attachments).
> 
> 
> This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and 
> does not represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.
> This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named 
> above, may be confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be 
> treated as such in accordance with state and federal laws. If you 
> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use
> of this communication, or any of its contents, is prohibited. If you
> have received this communication in error, please return to sender 
> and delete the message from your computer system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Devin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to