[Raybyrnes]

felix

A good financial instrament? That’s a very subjective term relative to the risk you want to take on.

A risk free rate of retun might be somthing tied to treasuries in which case 2 to 3% might be an acceptable rate of return.

If you are looking at a brader market and are willing to take on risk we would need to consider performance rrelative to the market index. A loss of 3 or 4% might be pretty good on the S and P 500 if you compare it to the index which is probably down 7 or 8% ytd.

A gain of 5 or 6 % might be poor if you are in the equities market if you compare that to Gold or Oil whicha re up better than 10%.

So to address your question as to “good to get on a financial instrument at this time” it would seem to depend on what type of risk you are willling to take.

The same might be true of real estate. If you and a hypothetical buyer are both going to buy comparable homes on the same block and you pay 1 million adn he pays 1.3 millon then you probably got a good deal relative to the property at this point in time.

Lot of moving targets so without getting into your personsonal info I would ask that you provide addioal detail so that we ahve a little more to respond too.

[Raybyrnes]

felix

A good financial instrament? That’s a very subjective term relative to the risk you want to take on.

A risk free rate of retun might be somthing tied to treasuries in which case 2 to 3% might be an acceptable rate of return.

If you are looking at a brader market and are willing to take on risk we would need to consider performance rrelative to the market index. A loss of 3 or 4% might be pretty good on the S and P 500 if you compare it to the index which is probably down 7 or 8% ytd.

A gain of 5 or 6 % might be poor if you are in the equities market if you compare that to Gold or Oil whicha re up better than 10%.

So to address your question as to “good to get on a financial instrument at this time” it would seem to depend on what type of risk you are willling to take.

The same might be true of real estate. If you and a hypothetical buyer are both going to buy comparable homes on the same block and you pay 1 million adn he pays 1.3 millon then you probably got a good deal relative to the property at this point in time.

Lot of moving targets so without getting into your personsonal info I would ask that you provide addioal detail so that we ahve a little more to respond too.

[Raybyrnes]

felix

A good financial instrament? That’s a very subjective term relative to the risk you want to take on.

A risk free rate of retun might be somthing tied to treasuries in which case 2 to 3% might be an acceptable rate of return.

If you are looking at a brader market and are willing to take on risk we would need to consider performance rrelative to the market index. A loss of 3 or 4% might be pretty good on the S and P 500 if you compare it to the index which is probably down 7 or 8% ytd.

A gain of 5 or 6 % might be poor if you are in the equities market if you compare that to Gold or Oil whicha re up better than 10%.

So to address your question as to “good to get on a financial instrument at this time” it would seem to depend on what type of risk you are willling to take.

The same might be true of real estate. If you and a hypothetical buyer are both going to buy comparable homes on the same block and you pay 1 million adn he pays 1.3 millon then you probably got a good deal relative to the property at this point in time.

Lot of moving targets so without getting into your personsonal info I would ask that you provide addioal detail so that we ahve a little more to respond too.

[Raybyrnes]

felix

A good financial instrament? That’s a very subjective term relative to the risk you want to take on.

A risk free rate of retun might be somthing tied to treasuries in which case 2 to 3% might be an acceptable rate of return.

If you are looking at a brader market and are willing to take on risk we would need to consider performance rrelative to the market index. A loss of 3 or 4% might be pretty good on the S and P 500 if you compare it to the index which is probably down 7 or 8% ytd.

A gain of 5 or 6 % might be poor if you are in the equities market if you compare that to Gold or Oil whicha re up better than 10%.

So to address your question as to “good to get on a financial instrument at this time” it would seem to depend on what type of risk you are willling to take.

The same might be true of real estate. If you and a hypothetical buyer are both going to buy comparable homes on the same block and you pay 1 million adn he pays 1.3 millon then you probably got a good deal relative to the property at this point in time.

Lot of moving targets so without getting into your personsonal info I would ask that you provide addioal detail so that we ahve a little more to respond too.

[Raybyrnes]

felix

A good financial instrament? That’s a very subjective term relative to the risk you want to take on.

A risk free rate of retun might be somthing tied to treasuries in which case 2 to 3% might be an acceptable rate of return.

If you are looking at a brader market and are willing to take on risk we would need to consider performance rrelative to the market index. A loss of 3 or 4% might be pretty good on the S and P 500 if you compare it to the index which is probably down 7 or 8% ytd.

A gain of 5 or 6 % might be poor if you are in the equities market if you compare that to Gold or Oil whicha re up better than 10%.

So to address your question as to “good to get on a financial instrument at this time” it would seem to depend on what type of risk you are willling to take.

The same might be true of real estate. If you and a hypothetical buyer are both going to buy comparable homes on the same block and you pay 1 million adn he pays 1.3 millon then you probably got a good deal relative to the property at this point in time.

Lot of moving targets so without getting into your personsonal info I would ask that you provide addioal detail so that we ahve a little more to respond too.

[Raybyrnes]

svelte

Any info that might go along witt the chart to see who held the house or senate at the time.

Addiionally does anyone have any research that could present solid analytical data as to the lag time for presidential policy showing up in the statistical date. I have hear it is 7 years but no eveidence behind that.

[Raybyrnes]

svelte

Any info that might go along witt the chart to see who held the house or senate at the time.

Addiionally does anyone have any research that could present solid analytical data as to the lag time for presidential policy showing up in the statistical date. I have hear it is 7 years but no eveidence behind that.

[Raybyrnes]

svelte

Any info that might go along witt the chart to see who held the house or senate at the time.

Addiionally does anyone have any research that could present solid analytical data as to the lag time for presidential policy showing up in the statistical date. I have hear it is 7 years but no eveidence behind that.

[Raybyrnes]

svelte

Any info that might go along witt the chart to see who held the house or senate at the time.

Addiionally does anyone have any research that could present solid analytical data as to the lag time for presidential policy showing up in the statistical date. I have hear it is 7 years but no eveidence behind that.

[Raybyrnes]

svelte

Any info that might go along witt the chart to see who held the house or senate at the time.

Addiionally does anyone have any research that could present solid analytical data as to the lag time for presidential policy showing up in the statistical date. I have hear it is 7 years but no eveidence behind that.

[Raybyrnes]

Politics are pretty funny when you compare results fs promises.

Let’s take good old Mr, Kennedy. He promised to help students by providing grant money that would be obtained by cutting subsidies to Federal Studnet loan Providers. This program was suppose to be great becaeu it wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime.

Let see the reality. Not only have lenders closed their doors and decreased teh amoutn of competition they have also eliminated many borrwer beenfits that went back to reducing the costs for those who borrower.

Now lets’s see how the governemtn has to then react
T
he chairmen offer Secretary Spellings suggestions on how to prepare for a worst-case scenario. If markets do not improve in the coming weeks, most lenders will find it difficult to raise enough capital to meet peak demand next fall. That scenario seems unlikely given the soundness of federal student loan securitization and bond deals that are generally viewed as some of the safest investments around, according to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. But should the markets – and lenders’ situation – worsen, the chairmen suggest the Secretary be prepared to use lender of last resort provisions, including ADVANCING CASH to guaranty agencies to allow them to make loans directly to students.

WOW sort of seems like a cost to me. Politicians are such idiots. So easy to see this was going to be a result of their magical promises.

[Raybyrnes]

Politics are pretty funny when you compare results fs promises.

Let’s take good old Mr, Kennedy. He promised to help students by providing grant money that would be obtained by cutting subsidies to Federal Studnet loan Providers. This program was suppose to be great becaeu it wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime.

Let see the reality. Not only have lenders closed their doors and decreased teh amoutn of competition they have also eliminated many borrwer beenfits that went back to reducing the costs for those who borrower.

Now lets’s see how the governemtn has to then react
T
he chairmen offer Secretary Spellings suggestions on how to prepare for a worst-case scenario. If markets do not improve in the coming weeks, most lenders will find it difficult to raise enough capital to meet peak demand next fall. That scenario seems unlikely given the soundness of federal student loan securitization and bond deals that are generally viewed as some of the safest investments around, according to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. But should the markets – and lenders’ situation – worsen, the chairmen suggest the Secretary be prepared to use lender of last resort provisions, including ADVANCING CASH to guaranty agencies to allow them to make loans directly to students.

WOW sort of seems like a cost to me. Politicians are such idiots. So easy to see this was going to be a result of their magical promises.

[Raybyrnes]

Politics are pretty funny when you compare results fs promises.

Let’s take good old Mr, Kennedy. He promised to help students by providing grant money that would be obtained by cutting subsidies to Federal Studnet loan Providers. This program was suppose to be great becaeu it wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime.

Let see the reality. Not only have lenders closed their doors and decreased teh amoutn of competition they have also eliminated many borrwer beenfits that went back to reducing the costs for those who borrower.

Now lets’s see how the governemtn has to then react
T
he chairmen offer Secretary Spellings suggestions on how to prepare for a worst-case scenario. If markets do not improve in the coming weeks, most lenders will find it difficult to raise enough capital to meet peak demand next fall. That scenario seems unlikely given the soundness of federal student loan securitization and bond deals that are generally viewed as some of the safest investments around, according to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. But should the markets – and lenders’ situation – worsen, the chairmen suggest the Secretary be prepared to use lender of last resort provisions, including ADVANCING CASH to guaranty agencies to allow them to make loans directly to students.

WOW sort of seems like a cost to me. Politicians are such idiots. So easy to see this was going to be a result of their magical promises.

[Raybyrnes]

Politics are pretty funny when you compare results fs promises.

Let’s take good old Mr, Kennedy. He promised to help students by providing grant money that would be obtained by cutting subsidies to Federal Studnet loan Providers. This program was suppose to be great becaeu it wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime.

Let see the reality. Not only have lenders closed their doors and decreased teh amoutn of competition they have also eliminated many borrwer beenfits that went back to reducing the costs for those who borrower.

Now lets’s see how the governemtn has to then react
T
he chairmen offer Secretary Spellings suggestions on how to prepare for a worst-case scenario. If markets do not improve in the coming weeks, most lenders will find it difficult to raise enough capital to meet peak demand next fall. That scenario seems unlikely given the soundness of federal student loan securitization and bond deals that are generally viewed as some of the safest investments around, according to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. But should the markets – and lenders’ situation – worsen, the chairmen suggest the Secretary be prepared to use lender of last resort provisions, including ADVANCING CASH to guaranty agencies to allow them to make loans directly to students.

WOW sort of seems like a cost to me. Politicians are such idiots. So easy to see this was going to be a result of their magical promises.

[Raybyrnes]

Politics are pretty funny when you compare results fs promises.

Let’s take good old Mr, Kennedy. He promised to help students by providing grant money that would be obtained by cutting subsidies to Federal Studnet loan Providers. This program was suppose to be great becaeu it wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime.

Let see the reality. Not only have lenders closed their doors and decreased teh amoutn of competition they have also eliminated many borrwer beenfits that went back to reducing the costs for those who borrower.

Now lets’s see how the governemtn has to then react
T
he chairmen offer Secretary Spellings suggestions on how to prepare for a worst-case scenario. If markets do not improve in the coming weeks, most lenders will find it difficult to raise enough capital to meet peak demand next fall. That scenario seems unlikely given the soundness of federal student loan securitization and bond deals that are generally viewed as some of the safest investments around, according to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. But should the markets – and lenders’ situation – worsen, the chairmen suggest the Secretary be prepared to use lender of last resort provisions, including ADVANCING CASH to guaranty agencies to allow them to make loans directly to students.

WOW sort of seems like a cost to me. Politicians are such idiots. So easy to see this was going to be a result of their magical promises.

[Author]

Posts