Welcome to Bad credit
The Option Arm For Bad Credit Page
Latest Option Arm For Bad Credit News
option arm for bad credit
The nation's economic bad health is creating financial aches and pains for hospitals in the central San Joaquin Valley and across the state. More patients without insurance are showing up in emergency departments for care, and more who have insurance ...
Read moreValley counties join in new Medi-Cal system - Fresno Bee
Thousands of US Marines stormed into the Helmand river valley under cover of night yesterday, the opening phase of Barack Obama’s new high-risk strategy in Afghanistan. In Operation Khanjar, or Strike of the Sword, hailed by one commander as a “D ...
Read moreEarly success as US Marines flood into Helmand in reversal of British ... - Times Online
In some instances, biometric security technology can be preferable to a traditional username/password system. However, biometrics is not synonymous with perfect security. For instance, trying to get a machine to recognize voices and faces without ...
Read moreA Look at the Guts of Biometric Systems - TechNewsWorld
All of a sudden we are bombarded with daily reports of a credit crunch and wild securities market fluctuations with mortgage and sub-prime lending at the root. What does it all mean? Much of what happens in securities markets is neither rational nor ...
Read moreSome perspective on sub-prime credit crunch - The Citizen Online
All the frustration that the Lions carry with them after failing to take the series with South Africa to a decider at Coca-Cola Park here on Saturday was epitomised by Mike Phillips. The Wales scrum half called Schalk Burger’s behaviour ...
Read moreSchalk Burger gets eight-week ban for gouging - Times Online
It’s been a relatively quiet but scientifically significant month on the Red Planet for the Mars Exploration Rovers. While Opportunity continued its long journey to Endeavour Crater, forced to take it slower and make longer stops to rest its ‘hot ...
Read morePlanetary News: Mars Exploration Rovers (2009) - Planetary Society
Outfielder Brian Anderson didn't see the comments from White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen last weekend. But he never really needed to. It's a numbers game now. With every day that Carlos Quentin gives a thumbs-up on a rehab program to strengthen his ...
Read morePull the plug on B.A. - FOXSports.com
Seattle (39-36) has won nine of its last 12 games after this weekend's series victory over the Los Angeles Dodgers, owners of the best record in the majors. At the moment, the Mariners are just 3 1/2 games back of the American League West-leading Los ...
Read moreAL West: Mariners keeping pace in division standings - News-Democrat
You are no longer in California, so the license plate on your car will have the same effect as lighting up a Pall Mall at a farmers market. Oregon cops take speed limits very seriously, particularly for vehicles with California plates. Above all ...
Read moreAshland: the plays aren't the only things - San Jose Mercury News
When he was running for president Obama promised, over and over, that he would cut taxes for the 95% of Americans making less than $250,000 per year. He pledged that his tax increases would only apply to the top 5% of Americans making over $250,000 ...
Read moreOption Arm For Bad Credit Questions asked
Open Question: Has anyone had success with pay-for-delete negotiations with Rent Collect Corp AKA IQ Data International?
My old apartment complex sent me to collections without sending me a bill. Of course I wasn't going to pay a collection company without notice from the apartment complex. And of course, the apartment management won't call me back or accept any of my certified mails since they've already written off the bad debt. Like every unethical collection agency, they're trying to strong-arm me by reporting it to the credit bureaus even though I've disputed it. Like a note from them on my report saying it's disputed is going to make a difference. Now I have this blemish on my report that I'm trying to figure what to do since disputing it with all parties (apartment, credit bureaus, collection company) haven't been successful. Taking it to court would be an option but that would just cost more money and time than it's worth. moreResolved Question: Anyone who can translate this from English to Italian?
I would be very pleased if there's someone who can translate in Italian this article frome "The Economist". EVEN Merton Miller, a Nobel prize-winning economist with a passion for financial arcana, found it “deadly dull”. But if ever there was a week when financial regulation set pulses racing, this was surely it—at least for those too young to remember the great reforms of the Depression. Having spent much of the past year trying to prevent all-out financial collapse, America’s leaders are now turning their attention to reinforcing the structures that would prevent a repeat. The proposals that Barack Obama unveiled on June 17th would refashion the federal rules governing almost every corner of finance, pushing government much more deeply into private markets and partially rolling back 30 years of liberalisation. It is, the president declared, nothing short of a “new foundation”, designed to curb “risks built on piles of sand”. Eye-catching though the 88-page “white paper” is, it is not as bold as it might have been. In any case, it merely sounds the opening salvo in a battle that could stretch into next year, since much of the plan requires approval in Congress, where jurisdictional and ideological clashes beckon. The emphasis is on closing gaps where risk had been allowed to build up. Supervision of all firms big enough to threaten overall stability will be consolidated under the Federal Reserve. These entities will be made to hold more capital and liquidity than smaller firms, though all will face higher requirements (which will be determined after a report at the end of this year). The Fed will be advised by a council of regulators that will also scan the horizon for emerging risks. Another priority is the construction of a mechanism to wind down any failed financial giant, not just banks, so that officials no longer face an unenviable choice between bail-outs (AIG) and system-shaking collapse (Lehman Brothers). The net is also being cast over markets in which freewheeling growth contributed to the crisis. Those who package loans together for securitisation will have to beef up disclosure and retain 5% of any deal they structure to encourage sounder underwriting—though the ban on hedging that exposure could be tricky to enforce. Sensibly, the plan calls for payment of arrangers’ fees to be spread over time and reduced if the loans blow up. It also builds on earlier proposals to rein in over-the-counter derivatives, such as credit-default swaps. Those not cleared centrally or traded on exchanges face higher charges. Perhaps the most eye-catching—and certainly the most populist—measure is the creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). Taking some powers from the Fed and other bank regulators, this would have broad rule-writing and enforcement powers over mortgages, credit cards and the like. In light of the “liar loans” and option ARMs (a radioactive type of mortgage) that proliferated in recent years, it is hard to argue against an overhaul of such regulation. Still, concern is already mounting that the new agency will take an overly restrictive view of permissible products, limiting access to credit and curbing good as well as bad innovation. Others worry that it will have less leverage than traditional supervisors over banks peddling dodgy products. A bigger concern is Mr Obama’s failure to rationalise America’s tangle of regulators. The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) will be subsumed into another agency, but that still leaves four federal bank regulators (plus state agencies), and these will have to work alongside the CFPA. “The alphabet soup has lost three letters and gained four,” moans one consultant. Dropping the idea of a single bank regulator and a merger of the agencies that oversee securities and derivatives, both of which were early Obama goals, was, say officials, a cold-blooded calculation based on the strength of political opposition: from congressional leaders, such as Barney Frank, who have cooled to the idea of a unified regulator in the wake of Britain’s unhappy experience; and from the committees that police, and take contributions from, banks and exchanges. Leaving the framework largely intact is risky. The current set-up is not all bad: one regulator may spot a problem that another misses. But even with the OTS gone, banks will be able to shop for friendly charters. Disagreements between agencies over the dangers lurking in commercial property led to a delay in urging banks to tighten standards. And inter-agency feuding has been growing: witness the spats between the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and other regulators over deposit insurance and their treatment of Citigroup. Other punches have been pulled, too. For big insurers, frustrated at having to be regulated state by state, the wait for an optional federal charter goes on. Nor were concrete proposals offered on money-market funds, runs on which intensified the trauma following Lehman moreResolved Question: Should I save my money as Euros instead of Dollars?
I'm finally about to get my career underway. I'm a pretty frugal person, so even though the initial pay isn't fantastic I should be able to save at least $10,000 in the first year while I pay off all of my credit card debt and auto loan debt. From then on out it's about 24k of structured student loans. Each subsequent year, I should be able to save at least $20,000. So over the course of 5 years with a small amount of interest, I should have $100,000 saved. I would like to put this toward the purchase of a house. Hopefully the housing market will be stabilized and deflated by then so I can make a wise investment. (Yes, deflated.) See http://www.businessinsider.com/the-housing-chart-thats-worth-1000-words-2009-2 Here's where I'm uncertain. The dollar is volatile, to say the least. If I hold onto my assets in the form of dollars, then my $100,000 in 2014 could have the buying power of 50k of today's dollars, or even 20k or worse. Would I be wise to convert the balance of my savings account into Euros? Can I even do that in a domestic bank, or would I have to open an overseas account? I'm trying to anticipate a solid way to save my money and maintain its buying power through thick and thin. I would be stupid to put money on a house before the upcoming Option-Arm housing crisis runs its course and the market loses another $1-2 trillion. I'm even contemplating buying gold (not gold "investing" as you see on those commercials, but physically owning gold coins), but that comes with a whole other set of concerns for keeping it safe. moreResolved Question: what s the option for someone who doesn't like credit cards?
I moved to New York about 3 years ago and everyone is telling me I need to get a credit card because nothing can be done without one. I am not a big fan of paying later (with interests!!!) I buy when I have the money. I am debt free and plan to stay debt free. the only thing I have tried was a secured credit card (too bad WAMU closed). What are my other options? what other banks do secured credit card or regular credit card that will not charge me an arm an a leg in interests? I do have a debit card. and I am smart enough to know they need "My credit report" oops that wasn't meant for this question moreResolved Question: Should I walk away from a home that I will never live in again?
I have a home that I'm renting out, but I am unable to get a market rate that will cover the 1st mortgage. The 2nd mortgage isn't too bad, but I'm losing around 500/mo in the deal. Countrywide has proposed some kind of potential deal for their customers like me who have the Pay Option ARM loan. I can save 850.00 by doing so, but my credit will obviously be ruined for at least 7 years. I don't need to buy anything at this point anyways on credit, so that doesn't scare me too much. moreResolved Question: Housing market crash = people renting. Should I consider renting out my house instead of selling? How to?
So the housing market's pretty much crashed, and that means those forced to leave their homes will likely be looking for rentals. I need to move 550 miles away. I've kept it well cared for, and even remodeled the majority of the house over the past 3 years. I think I owe about the same that I'd sell my house for, so I'm really not going to get anything from selling it. It's a good house in a good neighborhood, and in a good location. It has some of the lowest utility costs in the state also. I also have some relatives in the immediate area who would likely help me out. I also have lawn care service among other things. The house is a 3 bedroom, 2 full bath, 1500 square foot home w/garage, pool, hot tub, heat pump + furnace, fridge/dish/mic/wash/dry/ etc. all stay, and entire home has been updated in past 5 years. Because of these facts, I was thinking it may be a better option to rent it out than sell it. Is this a good idea? Is there anything I should seriously consider? If I chose to rent it out, where do I get information as to how to do it? please assume in answering me you share my opinion that it's only going to get worse through 2009,10, and 11 as the Alt-As and option arms burn, and may continue to decline until '14 as credit card and auto loans struggle as a direct impact of the 07-'10 mortgage issues as this is an opinion I'm pretty sold on. In regards to the respondant who stated: "Don't ask opinons only of those who agree with you. Listen to all points of view. How will you ever get different insights on a situation if you depend on "yes-men?"" - I agree with you, however, I did not want this to be a debate whether or not the housing market is going to drop further over the next 5 years (I posted about that earlier, and you can respond to it in the "finance" question). Instead I wanted to ask and get help understanding the Rent vs. sell discussion, and that is why I stated what I did- Otherwise I agree with your comment. Thank you everyone for your responses- and if anyone else has anything else to add, I'd love to hear it! Thank you! moreResolved Question: Tell me honestly, would this make me a bad mother...?
Okay, I realise how awful this is going to sound before I even begin, I've probably answered my own question! What I was going to say is... I have an 11 month old son. I love him more than anything in this world. I'm a stay-at-home-single-mum, his dad isn't involved, I'm currently living off savings and child tax credits (which all UK parents get), studying a full time degree from home and will probably be looking at finding work in the new year related to the career I want to go into after my degree. I think I've had four evenings out since he's been born, but that's a thing of the past now as for the last few months he's been very difficult in the evening and at night, waking up a lot etc and only I know what to do with him, so going out isn't an option any more and to be honest I've gone off the whole going to a pub at night thing, it's not really my scene any more. The only time anybody has ever had him in the day other than me is when my dad took him for a couple of hours round to my grandparents house so I could get some serious spring cleaning done. Ok, I'm rambling... what would your opinion be of me if I asked my dad or my grandparents (both very trustworthy and brilliant with him) to watch him for an afternoon? It sounds awful... but just to have an afternoon off. There'd be no real point, I don't even know what I'd do, maybe go to the cinema or something or I don't know. I'll probably feel like I've lost an arm, I don't know how it feels to be without him especially not in the day, he's with me 100% of the time. It's not that I can't handle the responsibility or am wanting to get rid of him or ANYTHING like that, I'd miss him so much if it did happen!! A bit of it is because I'm so worried that if/when I go to work and put him in childcare that will be the first time he's experienced being apart from me and what if it all goes wrong and I'm at work and would have to give up my job. But if I'm being honest, that's only a bit of it, a bit is for entirely selfish reasons in that I'd just be doing it for an afternoon out on my own or something. Argh I know how awful this sounds!! I can't think of a way to say it that doesn't sound selfish, which probably tells me it's the wrong thing to do. I just wanted some outsiders opinions on it. I don't want to go to my dad/grandparents and say this and them think that I'm a terrible mother... so just wanted a few impartial opinions first to gauge what their response might be. Particularly for the fact that there is no specific purpose... I mean ok if I had to clean or do something necessary and it would help me out, but I don't even know what I'd say to them... "Would you mind babysitting for an afternoon... I have no reason but... I'd just like an afternoon off?" Does that sound terrible? Please don't bash me - if it's a bad idea then just say so, I don't need to hear what an awful mum I am etc! Sorry for the long ramble! Just wanted to add, if I didn't make it clear, that it would be a total one off. Not a regular arrangement or even an occasional arrangement, just an isolated one off. And by afternoon, I don't mean like a full day or anything, just 2 or 3 hours. I've just read my question back and realised how horrible it all sounds! Thank you for all these lovely answers, I was preparing myself for a good bashing! I should also mention that I'm only 20... I think my main issue is I'm SO paranoid about being tagged with the 'irresponsible young mum always ditching kids' stereotype. I'd never think any less of an older parent doing this, but I just know so many girls my age who's kids are with other people more often than they are with them, and I'm worried someone is going to see me walking down the street without my son and think I'm the same, and also that my family will think I'm going down that road, which wouldn't be the case at all. *smile* - thank you for the virtual valium - that did me some good LOL. And to whoever said about getting a haircut - GOOD IDEA... if I do this then that's what I might do, you should see the state of my barnet lol, hasn't had a cut or style since I was pregnant! moreResolved Question: Which of these quotes is your favorite?
A system of capitalism presumes sound money, not fiat money manipulated by a central bank. Capitalism cherishes voluntary contracts and interest rates that are determined by savings, not credit creation by a central bank. Ron Paul All initiation of force is a violation of someone else's rights, whether initiated by an individual or the state, for the benefit of an individual or group of individuals, even if it's supposed to be for the benefit of another individual or group of individuals. Ron Paul Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism. Ron Paul Cliches about supporting the troops are designed to distract from failed policies, policies promoted by powerful special interests that benefit from war, anything to steer the discussion away from the real reasons the war in Iraq will not end anytime soon. Ron Paul Deficits mean future tax increases, pure and simple. Deficit spending should be viewed as a tax on future generations, and politicians who create deficits should be exposed as tax hikers. Ron Paul Everyone assumes America must play the leading role in crafting some settlement or compromise between the Israelis and the Palestinians. But Jefferson, Madison, and Washington explicitly warned against involving ourselves in foreign conflicts. Ron Paul Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Ron Paul How did we win the election in the year 2000? We talked about a humble foreign policy: No nation-building; don't police the world. That's conservative, it's Republican, it's pro-American - it follows the founding fathers. And, besides, it follows the Constitution. Ron Paul I am absolutely opposed to a national ID card. This is a total contradiction of what a free society is all about. The purpose of government is to protect the secrecy and the privacy of all individuals, not the secrecy of government. We don't need a national ID card. Ron Paul I am just absolutely convinced that the best formula for giving us peace and preserving the American way of life is freedom, limited government, and minding our own business overseas. Ron Paul I have never met anyone who did not support our troops. Sometimes, however, we hear accusations that someone or some group does not support the men and women serving in our Armed Forces. But this is pure demagoguery, and it is intellectually dishonest. Ron Paul In time it will become clear to everyone that support for the policies of pre-emptive war and interventionist nation-building will have much greater significance than the removal of Saddam Hussein itself. Ron Paul Justifying conscription to promote the cause of liberty is one of the most bizarre notions ever conceived by man! Forced servitude, with the risk of death and serious injury as a price to live free, makes no sense. Ron Paul Legitimate use of violence can only be that which is required in self-defense. Ron Paul Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy. Ron Paul Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul The moral and constitutional obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people. Ron Paul The most important element of a free society, where individual rights are held in the highest esteem, is the rejection of the initiation of violence. Ron Paul The obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people. Ron Paul Throughout the 20th century, the Republican Party benefited from a non-interventionist foreign policy. Think of how Eisenhower came in to stop the Korean War. Think of how Nixon was elected to stop the mess in Vietnam. Ron Paul War is never economically beneficial except for those in position to profit from war expenditures. Ron Paul When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads. Ron Paul When the federal government spends more each year than it collects in tax revenues, it has three choices: It can raise taxes, print money, or borrow money. While these actions may benefit politicians, all three options are bad for average Americans. Ron Paul You wanna get rid of drug crime in this country? Fine, let's just get rid of all the drug laws. Ron Paul We need to reform Washington John McCain We need to change Washington Barack Obama moreResolved Question: Son has changed for the worst!!?
I moved overseas 5 years ago and got married, my 3 children who were aged between 12 and 24 did not want to leave their country or their father to join me even though that was an option. For the last 2 years my youngest ( who is now 17) has said he would like to join me but after he has finished his school. He has been coming over for holidays with us almost every year and spending up to 2 months with us, and has always enjoyed his stay. I have always told him the door is open and i am here for him. He gets on very well with my current husband and they have shared many great times together activities like swimming, driving range, funfair, cycling and generally having fun so they had a solid relationship, at one stage my son said that my current husband is more of a Dad than his own real one. We have always had good contact considering we are an ocean away. He has said for the last 2 years he wanted to come and live with us but would wait until his school was over. My husband agreed and he couldn't wait to come, it was a while before he found the courage to tell his father, he was worried about him being upset but his father accepted it and plans were put into place for him to come. He arrived 2 months ago, i then started Immigration for him, i am in debt and only in casual work, but i used my credit card for the Immigration, photos, physicians report. i was overjoyed to see him and we both welcomed him with open arms. Prior to him coming, we had arranged a good network so he could integrate here, community centre with basket ball, and my husband has friends with sons his age, and my cousin who lives 1 hour away was ready to help as much as possible. After a few days of him being here ( he is almost 18) he just wasn't the same, he didn't want to go out much, i did tell him this wouldn't be the holiday atmosphere that he was always used to when we went to wonderful places and i was with him 24/7 on his previous visits, he said he understood, but i could see he was very bored, i tried to coax him with going to the community centre but he had no interest, only thing he wanted to do was be on the laptop to his friends overseas. I filed all the Immigration papers which took me 2 weeks to fill out as there was a lot to do and lot sof supporting documents needed, he saw the physician and had his x rays and blood work. After a few days he said he has decided he wanted to go back. Please bear in mind when he came there was an urgency and even though i am heavy in debt, i used my card to pay for the flight which cost me around $1000. I was shocked to hear he wanted to go back, i couldn't believe it niether could my husband, he had only been here for 9 days, i told him to sleep on it, but next day he was even worse, he was getting agitated and threatened that if i didn't book a flight for him, that he would trash our place, i know he wouldn't do that but nevertheless it was still terrible to hear, he became more and more demanding, so i booked his return flight at an additional $100 cost and he flew back. After he got back he sent me a mail saying id idn't feel like a Mum to him when he was here, i said i had done everything possible to show him that i wanted him here with me and always had. he then said he wants no more to do with me, never wants to speak to me, it broke my heart, i went into a depression, i lost my part time job as they were upset that i had taken time off on the weekend that he returned when i was supposed to work that weekend, they didn't fire me but i felt too ill to work and had to quit because of all this upset and shock. I decided to back off and give my son time to calm down and hopefully in 2 weeks or so he would come to his snenses, after 3 weeks there was no conversation, so i said hello to him on the pc, he was even more worse and nasty, told me why am i talking, that he wants nothing to do with me, i told him my heart is breaking, he just didn't care, he then told me that when the immigration papers come, he will burn them, plus he will record it on his mobile phone and then send me the video. Again i just broke down, there was more nasty things said and then i had to close the conversation, but i was crying for a few days non stop. Then we spoke again, he spoke first, on the pc, and told me that he still feels the same about everything, he asked me what my husband had said about him burning the immigration papers, i explained that he had said well it is your choice, you will be the one to have to live with it. He then flipped and said well you can both drop dead, and he will spit and vomit on my grave. It was just soooo terrible, i broke down again and to add all the insult to injury, he sent my husband an e-mail calling him a faggot and to drop dead in capital letters. My husband was really shocked and upset at this and we sat down and tried to make sense and to come to a decision about the papers. My husband said well he has now closed the door on himself, i start i started arguing with him saying No, i will still keep the papers active, i won't cancel them, but i can see my husband who already said before that he would treat my son like his, didn't look happy and i could tell he didn't want him here. Now up to date, we obviously are no longer talking. Immigration papers are in process. Can anybody please offer me any advice about what you would do in the circumstances, would like to know whether you would cancel the papers, would you disown your son if he treated you and your spouse like that. Also would like to think of the next step, or maybe that is acceptance. The word he called my husband in asterisks was a f a g g o t By the way this is a word he commonly uses, his teacher is one, when he jokes with his friends he says you f and even once he called his dad that. moreResolved Question: Son has become very nasty?
I moved overseas 5 years ago and got married, my 3 children who were aged between 12 and 24 did not want to leave their country or their father to join me even though that was an option. For the last 2 years my youngest ( who is now 17) has said he would like to join me but after he has finished his school. He has been coming over for holidays with us almost every year and spending up to 2 months with us, and has always enjoyed his stay. I have always told him the door is open and i am here for him. He gets on very well with my current husband and they have shared many great times together activities like swimming, driving range, funfair, cycling and generally having fun so they had a solid relationship, at one stage my son said that my current husband is more of a Dad than his own real one. We have always had good contact considering we are an ocean away. He has said for the last 2 years he wanted to come and live with us but would wait until his school was over. My husband agreed and he couldn't wait to come, it was a while before he found the courage to tell his father, he was worried about him being upset but his father accepted it and plans were put into place for him to come. He arrived 2 months ago, i then started Immigration for him, i am in debt and only in casual work, but i used my credit card for the Immigration, photos, physicians report. i was overjoyed to see him and we both welcomed him with open arms. Prior to him coming, we had arranged a good network so he could integrate here, community centre with basket ball, and my husband has friends with sons his age, and my cousin who lives 1 hour away was ready to help as much as possible. After a few days of him being here ( he is almost 18) he just wasn't the same, he didn't want to go out much, i did tell him this wouldn't be the holiday atmosphere that he was always used to when we went to wonderful places and i was with him 24/7 on his previous visits, he said he understood, but i could see he was very bored, i tried to coax him with going to the community centre but he had no interest, only thing he wanted to do was be on the laptop to his friends overseas. I filed all the Immigration papers which took me 2 weeks to fill out as there was a lot to do and lot sof supporting documents needed, he saw the physician and had his x rays and blood work. After a few days he said he has decided he wanted to go back. Please bear in mind when he came there was an urgency and even though i am heavy in debt, i used my card to pay for the flight which cost me around $1000. I was shocked to hear he wanted to go back, i couldn't believe it niether could my husband, he had only been here for 9 days, i told him to sleep on it, but next day he was even worse, he was getting agitated and threatened that if i didn't book a flight for him, that he would trash our place, i know he wouldn't do that but nevertheless it was still terrible to hear, he became more and more demanding, so i booked his return flight at an additional $100 cost and he flew back. After he got back he sent me a mail saying id idn't feel like a Mum to him when he was here, i said i had done everything possible to show him that i wanted him here with me and always had. he then said he wants no more to do with me, never wants to speak to me, it broke my heart, i went into a depression, i lost my part time job as they were upset that i had taken time off on the weekend that he returned when i was supposed to work that weekend, they didn't fire me but i felt too ill to work and had to quit because of all this upset and shock. I decided to back off and give my son time to calm down and hopefully in 2 weeks or so he would come to his snenses, after 3 weeks there was no conversation, so i said hello to him on the pc, he was even more worse and nasty, told me why am i talking, that he wants nothing to do with me, i told him my heart is breaking, he just didn't care, he then told me that when the immigration papers come, he will burn them, plus he will record it on his mobile phone and then send me the video. Again i just broke down, there was more nasty things said and then i had to close the conversation, but i was crying for a few days non stop. Then we spoke again, he spoke first, on the pc, and told me that he still feels the same about everything, he asked me what my husband had said about him burning the immigration papers, i explained that he had said well it is your choice, you will be the one to have to live with it. He then flipped and said well you can both drop dead, and he will spit and vomit on my grave. It was just soooo terrible, i broke down again and to add all the insult to injury, he sent my husband an e-mail calling him a faggot and to drop dead in capital letters. My husband was really shocked and upset at this and we sat down and tried to make sense and to come to a decision about the papers. My husband said well he has now closed the door on himself, i start i started arguing with him saying No, i will still keep the papers active, i won't cancel them, but i can see my husband who already said before that he would treat my son like his, didn't look happy and i could tell he didn't want him here. Now up to date, we obviously are no longer talking. Immigration papers are in process. Can anybody please offer me any advice about what you would do in the circumstances, would like to know whether you would cancel the papers, would you disown your son if he treated you and your spouse like that. Also would like to think of the next step, or maybe that is acceptance. The word that is in asterisks is f a g g o t That word is used by him commonly he used to call ,his teacher, even his own father, even friends, it is his teenage word. Thanks everybody, it has helped, i will wait and not contact him even though it hurts like crazy, but to be honest, however cruel this sounds, i just don't feel the same about him anymore. moreResolved Question: NEED ADVICE PLEASE!!?
Hi, need serous advice, I have bad acne and its left quite a lot of scaring on my back and chest along with the acne! It really knocks my confidence. I have been to a NHS dermatologist and they wanted Io put me on roacutaine, the side effeccts range from heart problems to further scaring to increased suicide tendencies plus need regular blood tests.However i have found a private dermatology company that can help rid me of acne and reduce the scaring significantly, but it will cost a fortune! I'm a student starting my second year at uni and god it knocks my confidence. My parents can't help me out and i work all the hours god send but it wont be enough. Was hoping to have the treatment done soon in the holidays. So hears my dilemma several options; I could get a loan and keep the job/ get a new job at uni, but this will put pressure on my course sign up for some accounts with large overdrafts or try and find some government funding, I can't believe the NHS would not help me more other than trying to push this drug on me - I would have gone for it but if it dose not work I may not only get one of the many side effects but also not be allowed to have any further treatments until two years later in which time it could get so much worse! or go on roacutaine I have tryed to live with it for several years now but the pressure is really mounting to the point where I just cant cope with it anymore. I don't need pity just ideas, and Im worried i could much everything up with the credit crunch comming up! I seen a few different doctors at my local and nether seem to care, nether do my parents who say "live with it" and "you still have two arms and two legs" which is true and i sometimes fell selfish for being so down about it. But the truth is I need it sorted these are supose to be the best years of my life and i find this very resticting I use to love swimming and team sports and now can't face the changing rooms or the pool, also find it embarissing when it comes to woman, and i know any woman who can't acept it is not worth having, but it don't make me fell any better. So anyone got any ideas? open to all sugestions except leaving it! many thanks ps-sorry it was so long, but feals great to get it off my chest!, and sorry if there are spelling mistakes, spell checker not working. moreResolved Question: Recession : With War or Without it ? Isrel vrs Iran// War - and US??
Recession: With War or Without It? by Gary North by Gary North DIGG THIS The world's economy has been in growth mode at least since 1991. China has been in growth mode since 1979. The American economy had a sharp recession in 1991. Asia had a financial crisis in 1998. America had a very brief, very shallow recession in 2001. The Federal Reserve System pumped in money at an accelerating rate after mid-2000 through 2004, and did not go to tight money until the month Bernanke took over: February 2006. Inflation overcame the recession of 2001, and it overcame the crisis of 9/11, but it created the housing bubble and the commodity bubble. The housing bubble has popped. This is going to take the price of housing in the United States lower than it is today. I think 20% lower is a conservative figure. We are nowhere near the end of this popped bubble. The commodity bubble is still in full force. It is a worldwide bubble. The price of energy and the price of rice and other food commodities have received most of the attention. Federal Reserve policy since early 2006 has been one of relatively stable money. There is a lot of chatter to the contrary, but if we look at the two most significant monetary indicators, the adjusted monetary base and M1, we see that there has been very little growth in either. This is why the United States is now either in a recession or is facing one in the next few months. When a period of monetary inflation ends, economies go into recession. The American economy is slowing down, and it will continue to slow down. Both China and India have expanded their money supplies dramatically for a decade. Both countries are now facing a crisis of rising prices. Price inflation is a major threat to the continued prosperity of both countries. China's government has begun to impose selective price controls. This is creating shortages and production bottlenecks. India's government is considering doing the same thing. What both governments need to do is to tell their central banks to cease buying all government debt and all assets of any kind. The central banks need to stop inflating the money supply. But if the banks do this, both countries will experience major recessions. The governments do not want to have major recessions, but they also do not want to experience the effects of monetary inflation: price inflation. So, both of them are tempted to go back to the traditional policy of imposing price controls. This always creates shortages, and it always reduces the rate of growth of the economy. China and India are trapped. AN INTERNATIONAL TRAP The United States is in the same trap. The headlines scream of the skyrocketing costs of energy and food, but the broader consumer price indexes indicate slow increases: maybe 3% a year. This is because families are readjusting their budgets. As the prices of gasoline and food rise, families are forced to cut back expenditures in other areas. So, the general price indexes are not rising dramatically, but families are struggling with their budgets. This struggle will get much worse this winter, when the price of heating oil rises. This will exacerbate the existing economic slowdown. Furthermore, the rising price of oil means a rising balance of payments deficit for the United States. Oil-exporting countries are the main beneficiaries of the rising price of oil. This means that foreign sellers of oil will get the lion's share of the increase of the price of oil. American producers will pay for the prosperity of the oil exporting countries. They will pay in the form of reduced demand for their products. The world is facing simultaneous recession. Meanwhile, the American financial system has absorbed hundreds of billions of dollars of IOUs from home buyers who cannot possibly pay off their debts. They are in the process of defaulting to the lenders. This has created a crisis for America's largest banks, and for several major European banks. We all know the story by now, but psychologically, most Americans have not adjusted to the new economic reality. Most investors have not adjusted. Yes, the American stock market is down by 20% since last October. But still they think a recovery is just around the corner. The media keep saying this. American investors still have faith that the economy is essentially healthy, that there will not be a continuing fall in the stock market, and that the economy will not go into recession and stay in the recession for two or more years. So far, I am giving you the good news. The good news is there is going to be an international recession, rising corporate bankruptcies, bank failures, and retrenchment by consumers because they can no longer pay the rising cost of energy. Why is this good news? Because this recession is going to put a cap on the rising cost of energy. Commodity prices will fall during the recession; this includes the price of oil. NO MORE FISCAL WIGGLE ROOM Americans have steadily stopped saving over the last 28 years. In 1981, they saved over 11% of their discretionary income. Today, they save nothing. They are now in full spending mode. They have borrowed money against their future income, against their home equity, and on simple promises to pay (signature loans: credit cards). They have stretched themselves thin with respect to debt. If oil goes to $400 a barrel, or $500 a barrel, and stays there for a year, American consumers will be in panic mode. They will have to cut their budgets, and they have forgotten how to cut their budgets. They have forgotten how to save. The strategy of the optimists is to tell us that the worst is over economically. This is the government's official position. Chairman Ben Bernanke does not say this. He keeps hinting of more trouble to come. He keeps telling us that the Federal Reserve System is monitoring events. He keeps implying that there is some sort of rabbit still remaining in the Federal Reserve System's hat which they can pull out if the banking system moves into paralysis mode. But he doesn't tell us what these rabbits are, or under what conditions the FED will pull them out of its hat. The good news regarding the economy in general is not backed up by anything specific. The government tells us that the worst is over, but there are almost no indications that the worst is over. The housing market is still in decline. Foreclosures are still rising rapidly. The lenders are not selling foreclosed properties at market prices. Instead, they keep buying back the properties. There is a growing inventory of unsold properties on the books of the lenders. Meanwhile the two major sources of liquidity for the housing market, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are verging on bankruptcy. On Wednesday, July 9, the stock price of Freddie Mac dropped by 23%. Yet its stock price was down over 50% since January. These two stocks have continued to fall. Everywhere we look on the horizon of the domestic economy, there is bad news. There is no sector of the economy that is improving, unless it is heavily funded by the Federal government. Health care has not slumped, because health care as funded by Medicare and other state and local government programs. This means that the Federal deficit is going to get worse in any recession. Medicare and Social Security are non-discretionary spending items. The revenues will fall. So, the supposed strength sectors of the economy are in fact guarantees of a government fiscal crisis. If the general economy slumps, the Federal deficit is likely to go over $500 billion a year. When the recession hits, commodity prices will fall. If the recession does not hit, commodity prices will continue to rise. But rising commodity prices will force bankruptcies in those firms that are not in a position to pass on increased costs to their consumers. This means industries associated with discretionary spending. If your company is dependent upon discretionary spending by the public, your job is at risk. If the recession hits, your company will suffer. If the recession doesn't hit, rising commodity prices will squeeze your company. Consumers will spend their money for gasoline and heating oil, not on the products or services your company produces. The boom economy has not been based primarily on non-discretionary income. The boom has come at the margin: those areas of the economy in which consumers do have the option of spending their money rather than saving it. So far, I have been giving you the good news. The good news is there is going to be an international recession, rising corporate bankruptcies, bank failures, and retrenchment by consumers because they can no longer pay the rising cost of energy. THE BAD NEWS The bad news is that the State of Israel is increasingly likely to launch an air strike on suspected Iranian nuclear weapons production facilities. I have discussed this before. If this happens, the price of oil will skyrocket. This will force massive readjustments of family budgets in every country on a permanent basis. This is going to force producers to fire people out of fear of bankruptcy. Consumers are going to stop buying much in the area of discretionary income. That is, those items that can be cut back will be cut back. This could mean you. If the State of Israel launches an attack on Iran, the economic news will get really bad really fast all over the world. So, the most important question today is whether or not the Israeli Air Force will attack Iran. From an economic standpoint, this is the crucial question. Here, too, the mainstream media have generally promoted optimism. They suggest that the Israelis will not attack Iran. The problem is, they can't point to anything specific that officials in the State of Israel have said that indicates that there will not be an attack. On the contrary, officials there keep saying "no comment." Something else is really ominous. The political leaders in the countries over which Israeli bombers will have to fly are deadly silent. They are not telling Israel in full public view that if Israel sends planes over their airspace, they will go to war with Israel. They are not saying that they are preparing right now to shoot down every Israeli plane that flies over their airspace. They are saying nothing. Why? I think the main reason is that they will not back up their words with deeds. They will not shoot down Israeli planes. They say nothing in public because they will do nothing if the overflights take place. If they go public with bellicose threats today, their own people will turn on them if they fail to back up their words with deeds if the flights take place. "You said you would do something. You did nothing. Get out!" This could start internal revolutions in the overflown countries. Silence is golden. It's yellow, but it's golden. This tells me that the overflight countries' leaders think the attack may take place. They would prefer to be accused of having been caught flat-footed by the Israeli Air Force than unwilling to back up a threat. American officials are offering the bipartisan line: "We must settle this through diplomacy." (To which Israeli government officials can respond, Tonto-like: "Who you mean we, paleface?") They are not saying anything about what sanctions against the State of Israel that America will impose as soon as Israeli jets bomb Iran. That is because there will be no such sanctions. Admiral Mullen supposedly sent Israel a statement in early July saying that the United States has not issued a green light for an Israeli attack on Iran. This supposedly means something important in itself. It means nothing in itself. What it means is the United States has not issued a red light against an Israeli attack on Iran. This means that there is no stop sign. There is no red light, so the absence of a green light means nothing. Of course no one has said that the United States will help Israel in such an attack. So what? Israeli officials are not asking for a public offer of American help. If the United States and those governments over which the Israeli Air Force must fly are not issuing public statements at this time warning that there will be significant negative sanctions imposed on the State of Israel as soon as the attack is launched, then this is an implied green light. Do we imagine that senior decision-makers in the Israeli government care a whit about the lack of an official American green light to their attack on Iran? They are as unconcerned about the lack of a green light as Iran is unconcerned about President Bush's threat of sanctions if Iran does not comply with all requirements announced by the Bush administration. Iran knows what Israel knows: the Bush administration is terminal. It will end on January 20, 2009. It has no teeth. Lame ducks don't bite. They merely squawk. Why should we think that either Iran or Israel gives a fig about the red light/green light debate? American pundits may think this debate is important, but why should anyone with common sense think it's important? TIMETABLES Iraq has announced that the United States must pull out its troops. It is demanding dates for this withdrawal. The Bush administration is pooh-poohing all this, and will not under any circumstances announce such a timetable, but so what? There is a timetable for the Bush administration's withdrawal: January 20, 2009. This means that the United States is going to be pressured by Iraq's government to leave Iraq from now on. Most of the troops will be forced to leave Iraq unless things change dramatically. Then what will be done with the 14 major military bases that have been built? As the pressure increases to force us to leave Iraq, and as the pressure from the Taliban increases in Afghanistan, and as the pressure from voters increases to get our troops out of both countries, and as the likelihood of the election of Obama increases, decision-makers in the State of Israel are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. If the United States pulls out of the region, the State of Israel will be left high and dry. But there is another possible scenario. If Iran's surrogate Shia forces in the region take on the United States troops in reaction to an Israeli attack on Iran, American public opinion will swing in favor of keeping the troops there, no matter what. "Who do those Iranians think they are? We issued no green light to the Israelis. It's not our fault." If Iran begins to supply weapons to Shia forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the American death rate goes up, then American voters will switch back to a pro-war position. At least, this is a possibility. Americans do not like to be pushed around. Any escalation of war in the region will create havoc for the supply of oil. The world economy is moving into recession already; it may go into a true depression if oil goes to $500 and stays there. So, the stakes are enormous. The outcome is no longer in the hands of the United States, Europe, Asia, or any of the other outsiders to the Middle East. The outcome, or at least the trigger, is completely in the hands of the decision-makers in the State of Israel. They hold the gun. Unless the United States and Western Europe tell the decision-makers in the State of Israel that Europe and the United States will impose significant negative sanctions after an attack on Iran, then decision-makers there are going to make a decision based on the self-interest of the ruling party, not the self-interest of American or European voters. They are going to take care of their perceived problem, exactly as we would expect any other national political leaders would take care of their problem. That's why all talk about war being a threat to the self-interest of the whole makes sense only if the Israelis conclude that the economic crisis will be so severe that it will take them down in the whirlpool of economic collapse. They are not afraid of military retaliation from Iran. They are also not afraid of the United States, Europe, Asia, or any other coalition that does not have the backbone to say in advance that there will be major sanctions placed on the State of Israel if there is an attack on Iran. This is why I am concerned about the threat of an Israeli attack on Iran. I am in no way calmed by statements attributed to Admiral Mullen. When Admiral Mullen holds a press conference and says publicly that there is no green light for an attack by the Israeli Air Force on Iran, and that any flyover of Iraq by Israeli planes will lead to shoot downs of Israeli planes by American planes, then I will stop worrying about the threat of an attack on Iran by the Israeli Air Force. How likely do you think such a press conference is? We must face reality: the decision to go to war with Iran is 100% in the hands of Israeli decision-makers. It is not in the hands of the United States, Europe, or Asia. In other words, the economic fate of the West over the next decade is now in the hands of decision-makers who are concerned about the long-term survival of their own country. They are concerned because they do not want to have Iran in the possession of nuclear weapons. Both candidates for President have said the same thing. We have seen saber-rattling by the Iranians with the film-doctored test of the missiles this week. These missiles are militarily useless as weapons against the Israelis. They are as irrelevant militarily as Germany's V-2 missiles were in 1945. They cannot inflict enough damage to make a difference, unless they are used against Saudi Arabian oil fields. But, if they had a nuclear warhead, that would make all the difference. The Israelis know this. So, they are going to make their decision in terms of this long-term threat. The main inhibition against an attack is the possible collapse of the Western economy, which buys Israeli-produced goods. This threat may be sufficient to keep them from attacking. I dearly hope that it is. But it is naïve to believe that they are going to make their decision because of worries about whether Admiral Mullen has issued a green light or not. CONCLUSION When you invest your money, do not ignore the worst-case scenario. Set aside some of your money on the assumption that the worst-case will come true. This is what any military strategist does. He makes his decisions in terms of what the enemy can do, not what it would be convenient for the enemy to do. I suggest that you be aware of this threat. I suggest that you sit down with the family budget and outline what your response would be if the price of gasoline were $10 a gallon or $15 a gallon or $20 a gallon. What would you do? I know what you would do. You would drive less. Ignore the happy-face assessments of the geopolitical strategists. Ignore the happy-face assessment of the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry "Goldman Sachs" Paulson. These assessments are being issued to keep panic from spreading. I am doing my best to encourage people to take rational steps with some of their liquid assets: to hedge themselves against the possibility that there will be an attack on Iran before January 20, 2009. This doesn't mean that I think such an attack is a sure thing. Decision-makers in the State of Israel are going to have to live with $400 oil, just like all the rest of us. They may decide that this risk is too great. They may decide to put up with the threat of a future nuclear-armed Iran. I won't bet all of my money on this. I don't think you should either. July 12, 2008 Gary North [send him mail] is the author of Mises on Money. Visit http://www.garynorth.com. moreResolved Question: Recession : With War or Without it ? Isrel vrs Iran// War - and US??
Recession: With War or Without It? by Gary North by Gary North DIGG THIS The world's economy has been in growth mode at least since 1991. China has been in growth mode since 1979. The American economy had a sharp recession in 1991. Asia had a financial crisis in 1998. America had a very brief, very shallow recession in 2001. The Federal Reserve System pumped in money at an accelerating rate after mid-2000 through 2004, and did not go to tight money until the month Bernanke took over: February 2006. Inflation overcame the recession of 2001, and it overcame the crisis of 9/11, but it created the housing bubble and the commodity bubble. The housing bubble has popped. This is going to take the price of housing in the United States lower than it is today. I think 20% lower is a conservative figure. We are nowhere near the end of this popped bubble. The commodity bubble is still in full force. It is a worldwide bubble. The price of energy and the price of rice and other food commodities have received most of the attention. Federal Reserve policy since early 2006 has been one of relatively stable money. There is a lot of chatter to the contrary, but if we look at the two most significant monetary indicators, the adjusted monetary base and M1, we see that there has been very little growth in either. This is why the United States is now either in a recession or is facing one in the next few months. When a period of monetary inflation ends, economies go into recession. The American economy is slowing down, and it will continue to slow down. Both China and India have expanded their money supplies dramatically for a decade. Both countries are now facing a crisis of rising prices. Price inflation is a major threat to the continued prosperity of both countries. China's government has begun to impose selective price controls. This is creating shortages and production bottlenecks. India's government is considering doing the same thing. What both governments need to do is to tell their central banks to cease buying all government debt and all assets of any kind. The central banks need to stop inflating the money supply. But if the banks do this, both countries will experience major recessions. The governments do not want to have major recessions, but they also do not want to experience the effects of monetary inflation: price inflation. So, both of them are tempted to go back to the traditional policy of imposing price controls. This always creates shortages, and it always reduces the rate of growth of the economy. China and India are trapped. AN INTERNATIONAL TRAP The United States is in the same trap. The headlines scream of the skyrocketing costs of energy and food, but the broader consumer price indexes indicate slow increases: maybe 3% a year. This is because families are readjusting their budgets. As the prices of gasoline and food rise, families are forced to cut back expenditures in other areas. So, the general price indexes are not rising dramatically, but families are struggling with their budgets. This struggle will get much worse this winter, when the price of heating oil rises. This will exacerbate the existing economic slowdown. Furthermore, the rising price of oil means a rising balance of payments deficit for the United States. Oil-exporting countries are the main beneficiaries of the rising price of oil. This means that foreign sellers of oil will get the lion's share of the increase of the price of oil. American producers will pay for the prosperity of the oil exporting countries. They will pay in the form of reduced demand for their products. The world is facing simultaneous recession. Meanwhile, the American financial system has absorbed hundreds of billions of dollars of IOUs from home buyers who cannot possibly pay off their debts. They are in the process of defaulting to the lenders. This has created a crisis for America's largest banks, and for several major European banks. We all know the story by now, but psychologically, most Americans have not adjusted to the new economic reality. Most investors have not adjusted. Yes, the American stock market is down by 20% since last October. But still they think a recovery is just around the corner. The media keep saying this. American investors still have faith that the economy is essentially healthy, that there will not be a continuing fall in the stock market, and that the economy will not go into recession and stay in the recession for two or more years. So far, I am giving you the good news. The good news is there is going to be an international recession, rising corporate bankruptcies, bank failures, and retrenchment by consumers because they can no longer pay the rising cost of energy. Why is this good news? Because this recession is going to put a cap on the rising cost of energy. Commodity prices will fall during the recession; this includes the price of oil. NO MORE FISCAL WIGGLE ROOM Americans have steadily stopped saving over the last 28 years. In 1981, they saved over 11% of their discretionary income. Today, they save nothing. They are now in full spending mode. They have borrowed money against their future income, against their home equity, and on simple promises to pay (signature loans: credit cards). They have stretched themselves thin with respect to debt. If oil goes to $400 a barrel, or $500 a barrel, and stays there for a year, American consumers will be in panic mode. They will have to cut their budgets, and they have forgotten how to cut their budgets. They have forgotten how to save. The strategy of the optimists is to tell us that the worst is over economically. This is the government's official position. Chairman Ben Bernanke does not say this. He keeps hinting of more trouble to come. He keeps telling us that the Federal Reserve System is monitoring events. He keeps implying that there is some sort of rabbit still remaining in the Federal Reserve System's hat which they can pull out if the banking system moves into paralysis mode. But he doesn't tell us what these rabbits are, or under what conditions the FED will pull them out of its hat. The good news regarding the economy in general is not backed up by anything specific. The government tells us that the worst is over, but there are almost no indications that the worst is over. The housing market is still in decline. Foreclosures are still rising rapidly. The lenders are not selling foreclosed properties at market prices. Instead, they keep buying back the properties. There is a growing inventory of unsold properties on the books of the lenders. Meanwhile the two major sources of liquidity for the housing market, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are verging on bankruptcy. On Wednesday, July 9, the stock price of Freddie Mac dropped by 23%. Yet its stock price was down over 50% since January. These two stocks have continued to fall. Everywhere we look on the horizon of the domestic economy, there is bad news. There is no sector of the economy that is improving, unless it is heavily funded by the Federal government. Health care has not slumped, because health care as funded by Medicare and other state and local government programs. This means that the Federal deficit is going to get worse in any recession. Medicare and Social Security are non-discretionary spending items. The revenues will fall. So, the supposed strength sectors of the economy are in fact guarantees of a government fiscal crisis. If the general economy slumps, the Federal deficit is likely to go over $500 billion a year. When the recession hits, commodity prices will fall. If the recession does not hit, commodity prices will continue to rise. But rising commodity prices will force bankruptcies in those firms that are not in a position to pass on increased costs to their consumers. This means industries associated with discretionary spending. If your company is dependent upon discretionary spending by the public, your job is at risk. If the recession hits, your company will suffer. If the recession doesn't hit, rising commodity prices will squeeze your company. Consumers will spend their money for gasoline and heating oil, not on the products or services your company produces. The boom economy has not been based primarily on non-discretionary income. The boom has come at the margin: those areas of the economy in which consumers do have the option of spending their money rather than saving it. So far, I have been giving you the good news. The good news is there is going to be an international recession, rising corporate bankruptcies, bank failures, and retrenchment by consumers because they can no longer pay the rising cost of energy. THE BAD NEWS The bad news is that the State of Israel is increasingly likely to launch an air strike on suspected Iranian nuclear weapons production facilities. I have discussed this before. If this happens, the price of oil will skyrocket. This will force massive readjustments of family budgets in every country on a permanent basis. This is going to force producers to fire people out of fear of bankruptcy. Consumers are going to stop buying much in the area of discretionary income. That is, those items that can be cut back will be cut back. This could mean you. If the State of Israel launches an attack on Iran, the economic news will get really bad really fast all over the world. So, the most important question today is whether or not the Israeli Air Force will attack Iran. From an economic standpoint, this is the crucial question. Here, too, the mainstream media have generally promoted optimism. They suggest that the Israelis will not attack Iran. The problem is, they can't point to anything specific that officials in the State of Israel have said that indicates that there will not be an attack. On the contrary, officials there keep saying "no comment." Something else is really ominous. The political leaders in the countries over which Israeli bombers will have to fly are deadly silent. They are not telling Israel in full public view that if Israel sends planes over their airspace, they will go to war with Israel. They are not saying that they are preparing right now to shoot down every Israeli plane that flies over their airspace. They are saying nothing. Why? I think the main reason is that they will not back up their words with deeds. They will not shoot down Israeli planes. They say nothing in public because they will do nothing if the overflights take place. If they go public with bellicose threats today, their own people will turn on them if they fail to back up their words with deeds if the flights take place. "You said you would do something. You did nothing. Get out!" This could start internal revolutions in the overflown countries. Silence is golden. It's yellow, but it's golden. This tells me that the overflight countries' leaders think the attack may take place. They would prefer to be accused of having been caught flat-footed by the Israeli Air Force than unwilling to back up a threat. American officials are offering the bipartisan line: "We must settle this through diplomacy." (To which Israeli government officials can respond, Tonto-like: "Who you mean we, paleface?") They are not saying anything about what sanctions against the State of Israel that America will impose as soon as Israeli jets bomb Iran. That is because there will be no such sanctions. Admiral Mullen supposedly sent Israel a statement in early July saying that the United States has not issued a green light for an Israeli attack on Iran. This supposedly means something important in itself. It means nothing in itself. What it means is the United States has not issued a red light against an Israeli attack on Iran. This means that there is no stop sign. There is no red light, so the absence of a green light means nothing. Of course no one has said that the United States will help Israel in such an attack. So what? Israeli officials are not asking for a public offer of American help. If the United States and those governments over which the Israeli Air Force must fly are not issuing public statements at this time warning that there will be significant negative sanctions imposed on the State of Israel as soon as the attack is launched, then this is an implied green light. Do we imagine that senior decision-makers in the Israeli government care a whit about the lack of an official American green light to their attack on Iran? They are as unconcerned about the lack of a green light as Iran is unconcerned about President Bush's threat of sanctions if Iran does not comply with all requirements announced by the Bush administration. Iran knows what Israel knows: the Bush administration is terminal. It will end on January 20, 2009. It has no teeth. Lame ducks don't bite. They merely squawk. Why should we think that either Iran or Israel gives a fig about the red light/green light debate? American pundits may think this debate is important, but why should anyone with common sense think it's important? TIMETABLES Iraq has announced that the United States must pull out its troops. It is demanding dates for this withdrawal. The Bush administration is pooh-poohing all this, and will not under any circumstances announce such a timetable, but so what? There is a timetable for the Bush administration's withdrawal: January 20, 2009. This means that the United States is going to be pressured by Iraq's government to leave Iraq from now on. Most of the troops will be forced to leave Iraq unless things change dramatically. Then what will be done with the 14 major military bases that have been built? As the pressure increases to force us to leave Iraq, and as the pressure from the Taliban increases in Afghanistan, and as the pressure from voters increases to get our troops out of both countries, and as the likelihood of the election of Obama increases, decision-makers in the State of Israel are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. If the United States pulls out of the region, the State of Israel will be left high and dry. But there is another possible scenario. If Iran's surrogate Shia forces in the region take on the United States troops in reaction to an Israeli attack on Iran, American public opinion will swing in favor of keeping the troops there, no matter what. "Who do those Iranians think they are? We issued no green light to the Israelis. It's not our fault." If Iran begins to supply weapons to Shia forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the American death rate goes up, then American voters will switch back to a pro-war position. At least, this is a possibility. Americans do not like to be pushed around. Any escalation of war in the region will create havoc for the supply of oil. The world economy is moving into recession already; it may go into a true depression if oil goes to $500 and stays there. So, the stakes are enormous. The outcome is no longer in the hands of the United States, Europe, Asia, or any of the other outsiders to the Middle East. The outcome, or at least the trigger, is completely in the hands of the decision-makers in the State of Israel. They hold the gun. Unless the United States and Western Europe tell the decision-makers in the State of Israel that Europe and the United States will impose significant negative sanctions after an attack on Iran, then decision-makers there are going to make a decision based on the self-interest of the ruling party, not the self-interest of American or European voters. They are going to take care of their perceived problem, exactly as we would expect any other national political leaders would take care of their problem. That's why all talk about war being a threat to the self-interest of the whole makes sense only if the Israelis conclude that the economic crisis will be so severe that it will take them down in the whirlpool of economic collapse. They are not afraid of military retaliation from Iran. They are also not afraid of the United States, Europe, Asia, or any other coalition that does not have the backbone to say in advance that there will be major sanctions placed on the State of Israel if there is an attack on Iran. This is why I am concerned about the threat of an Israeli attack on Iran. I am in no way calmed by statements attributed to Admiral Mullen. When Admiral Mullen holds a press conference and says publicly that there is no green light for an attack by the Israeli Air Force on Iran, and that any flyover of Iraq by Israeli planes will lead to shoot downs of Israeli planes by American planes, then I will stop worrying about the threat of an attack on Iran by the Israeli Air Force. How likely do you think such a press conference is? We must face reality: the decision to go to war with Iran is 100% in the hands of Israeli decision-makers. It is not in the hands of the United States, Europe, or Asia. In other words, the economic fate of the West over the next decade is now in the hands of decision-makers who are concerned about the long-term survival of their own country. They are concerned because they do not want to have Iran in the possession of nuclear weapons. Both candidates for President have said the same thing. We have seen saber-rattling by the Iranians with the film-doctored test of the missiles this week. These missiles are militarily useless as weapons against the Israelis. They are as irrelevant militarily as Germany's V-2 missiles were in 1945. They cannot inflict enough damage to make a difference, unless they are used against Saudi Arabian oil fields. But, if they had a nuclear warhead, that would make all the difference. The Israelis know this. So, they are going to make their decision in terms of this long-term threat. The main inhibition against an attack is the possible collapse of the Western economy, which buys Israeli-produced goods. This threat may be sufficient to keep them from attacking. I dearly hope that it is. But it is naïve to believe that they are going to make their decision because of worries about whether Admiral Mullen has issued a green light or not. CONCLUSION When you invest your money, do not ignore the worst-case scenario. Set aside some of your money on the assumption that the worst-case will come true. This is what any military strategist does. He makes his decisions in terms of what the enemy can do, not what it would be convenient for the enemy to do. I suggest that you be aware of this threat. I suggest that you sit down with the family budget and outline what your response would be if the price of gasoline were $10 a gallon or $15 a gallon or $20 a gallon. What would you do? I know what you would do. You would drive less. Ignore the happy-face assessments of the geopolitical strategists. Ignore the happy-face assessment of the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry "Goldman Sachs" Paulson. These assessments are being issued to keep panic from spreading. I am doing my best to encourage people to take rational steps with some of their liquid assets: to hedge themselves against the possibility that there will be an attack on Iran before January 20, 2009. This doesn't mean that I think such an attack is a sure thing. Decision-makers in the State of Israel are going to have to live with $400 oil, just like all the rest of us. They may decide that this risk is too great. They may decide to put up with the threat of a future nuclear-armed Iran. I won't bet all of my money on this. I don't think you should either. July 12, 2008 Gary North [send him mail] is the author of Mises on Money. Visit http://www.garynorth.com. moreResolved Question: What car finance company gves loans on bad credit but perfect car payment history.?
My mom was financed through Honda two cars paid perfect never late nothing. The home I live in is in her name. We fell behind last year due to the arm loan. we are now caught back up but she just got a letter from honda saying they wont finance her again and her lease is up in july. I have been working on my credit and its getting better. Not sure if I can cosign for her if I can I will but are ther any other car finance companies that are more based off of how your car payment history is and that are understanding of the current mtg. co. situation. She has credit cards and her bank account is with capital one I told her she should try them but any options would help GREAT. Thanks moreVoting Question: How bad can mortgage loan restructuring hurt your credit?
I am looking for a way to get out of a bad investment. I bought a house for 325 K and now its only worth $200,000, thanks to the current market. I owe the bank 280 K and its a negative option arm loan, so they let me pay less than interest. Soon the Bank will realize that this house is worth so little. The may force me to make a full payment and I will not be able to. The Rent I earn now barely pays the minimum payment. So I have 4 choices: 1) walk away, 2) Foreclose 3) Short Sale and 4) Loan Restructure. Do you think the last one will have the least or shortest impact on my credit? If I do it, I plan to pay the new loan on time forever. I plan to send many disputes to the credit bureaus until they erase the 90 days of skipped payments that I will have to do in order to get this approved. I added even more details at www.blogsomebody.com. which contains full details in various posts moreResolved Question: Do you like the story I wrote?
moreResolved Question: Are Option ARM loans REALLY as bad as everyone talks about?
We are looking at this option to better utilize extra cash to pay off some consumer debt (that cannot be included in the refinance) but people are so negative about it. We are going with an option ARM and WILL be making the full amortization payment (based on a 40 year loan). We are going to be using the 12MAT program (I can't seem to get enough information on this) but it appears to be relatively stable based on the 12-month Treasury Average. I understand about the "interest only" payment and are fully avoiding that. We can't go with a decent fixed rate due to our income to debt resulting in a 680 FICO score. Will our plan, we should be able to pay off most of the consumer debt in 2 years then refinance into a fixed rate. Does this sound like a realistic plan. With paying as we will (fully 30 year), does this loan have a chance for negative amortization? Believe me, we have learned our lesson on using credit cards and taking out loans. We own our house, valued at 700K and have 1 mortgage, HELOC and the consumer debt. We want to combine the 1st and HELOC to lower our payments to start paying off our debt (which cannot be added to the refi). The lender will let us borrow up to 95% of the value of our home. Again, what is so bad about Opt ARM when you can make a fully amortizing payment? moreVoting Question: What is wrong with my car ad?
Here is my car ad' it's for a Lexus that we just put on the market, and we're getting no calls. I'm very new at car dealing so i was hoping that a few of you could help me with this. I have got zero calls about this car! Here is the ad - A Characterless 1998 LEXUS GS300, BLACK ON TAN LEATHER, BIG MILEAGE, EXTREAMLY SKANK!! AT NATURAL PRICE! TODAY ONLY!!! ROUTINE OPTIONS AND PARTIALLY LOADED, FOG LIGHT, CASSETTE CHANGER, MEMORY AND HAND OPERATED PASSENGER AND DRIVERS SEATS, AC, Typical SEATS, CLEAR WINDOWS, CRISIS CONTROL, MOON ROOF, ALARM, AIR BAG, MIRROR, CRUISE CONTROL AND SO MUCH MORE... COME OVER AND SEE FOR YOUR SELF! FINANCING IS OUT!! BAD CREDIT? NO CREDIT? PROBLEM! (OAC) JUST CALL US: 818-BLAB ROBERT OR RACHEL...; Air Conditioning, Wheels,AM / FM Cassette player,Brakes,,Keyless Entry,Center Arm Rest,Cruise Control,Daytime Lights,Air Bag,,Mirror,Fog Light,NO Alarm,Gauge Cluster,Wipers,Basic Interior,Moon Roof,Power Door Locks,Power Mirrors,Power Steering,normal Windows! moreResolved Question: Why dont the Feds reduce the interest rates. And Cap the interest rates of people with bad credit.?
The higher the rate the more likely people will lose there home, the more likely banks will close their doors and it is a domino reaction. If the Fed's would come in and regulate the Mortgage Broker Industry completely STOP PRE-PAY PENALTIES and cap the Interest rates of people who have had some bad luck at 2 points above A paper loans there would be a tremendous decrease in forclosures in the Mortgage Industry today. Less Realtors, Bankers, Builders and General Contractors would lose everything because the market went from so GREAT to Major Banks closing there doors overnight. I am a Mortgage Broker in NW Florida and I along with most everyone in this area is about to lose everything I have I can hardly buy groceries and pay bills and keep a roof over me and my kids head it is almost as bad as another Hurricane atleast then there would be some help. Come on someone step up lowere rates and ELIMINATE OPTION ARMS ot does not take a rocket scientist to figure out this would solve the pro moreResolved Question: How long should I pay the minimum on an option arm on my mortgage? Will it hurt my credit?
I am one of those people who are being afftected by the refinance boom. Is it good to pay the minimum? Will my credit get worse? moreResolved Question: How long should I pay the minimum on an option arm on my mortgage? Will it hurt my credit?
I am one of those people who are being afftected by the refinance boom. Is it good to pay the minimum? Will my credit get worse? moreResolved Question: Should you consider filing Bankruptcy if you have an overwhelming amount of debt in credit cards?
If you have debt including car loan, credit cards, and other misc debts more than the amount you make in a year or more is filing Bankruptcy the best option? I am young with a child and have accumulated so much debt making bad decisions and now I have to face the situation sooner or later. There really isnt any other option I can think of besides consolidationg or a debt management plan and if I were to consider a program like that I would be able to afford that. I am young and I figure if I was to file BK and get a fresh new start things will get better for me. but then I will have to face the penalties of filing BK and after that your credit score is ruined and alot of companies try to charge you an arm & leg with rates and everything. Eventually I want to buy a home dont want to have to rely on people for a co-signer everytime I will need credit. I sure can say this is a learning experience. Please respond if you fell you have good advice in this situation. moreTop Option Arm For Bad Credit Links
Warning: file(http://beta.search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=option+arm+for+bad+credit&format=rss&FORM=R0RE) [function.file]: failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.0 400 Bad Request
in /home/lpluscco/public_html/bad-credit/boetie/serp2.php on line 4
Warning: implode() [function.implode]: Invalid arguments passed in /home/lpluscco/public_html/bad-credit/boetie/serp2.php on line 4
Menu
- Home
- Cash Advance For Bad Credit Raters
Student Living Expenses Bad Credit
Different Celluar Phone Choices For People With Bad Credit
Bad Credit Score Indicates
Rent Bad Credit
Bad Credit Shopping
Bad Credit For Consolidation
Bad Credit Real Estate
How To Buy An Engagement Ring With Bad Credit
Credit Apporval For Bad Credit
Lones For Bad Credit - Sitemap
- Privacy Policy
Offers
|
Option Arm For Bad Credit |
|
Option Arm For Bad Credit Is Here |
|
Free Tech, Product & Gadget Videos! |
|
News Pop videos! The best online. |
|
Deals Trade Show Banners |
Copyright
Bad credit Site is © 2008 | All Rights Reserved | All trademarks are the exclusive property of their respective owners.