Well, this is it. The wheels are exploding off the bus. I am starting to hear of problems in some of the clearing exchanges - orderly trade may be falling apart. A lot of little guys could lose their lunch.

In my personal opinion...

1. There is too much leverage and too much of this leverage is coming from one-sided derivative contracts. At least debt leverage is two-sided and can be dealt with linearly.

2. De-leveraging has to be done on the liability side. We simply don't have enough wealth to capitalize our way out of the problem on the asset side. The central bank actions are fundamentally misguided.

3. They are going to have to shut down the global financial system, cancel large numbers of derivative contracts and maybe forgive large chunks of debt.

4. Complaining about mis-incentives and fairness is irrelevant. There simply isn't enough wealth to cover the obligations and they will be defaulted anyway. Might as well do the whole thing in an orderly manner.

5. I don't think these financial problems are necessarily peak oil generated, if at all. But the financial problems will have a profound impact on our ability to manage peak oil going forward.

The credit freeze has real life consequences:

Grain piles up in ports

http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=866522

Before cargoes can be loaded at port, buyers typically must produce proof they are good for the money. But more deals are falling through as sellers decide they don't trust the financial institution named in the buyer's letter of credit, analysts said.

Will this effect oil tanker deliveries?

Perhaps this is the big one.

I bet exxon and co. don't have to make a Letter of Credit at Citibank out to Saudi Arabia so they will probably get their tanker delivery.

This brings up the question of who are th customers and suppliers, National Oil companies and US and European refineries perhaps. What isthe chain from supplier to refiner and end customer and where could it break down so that oil won'T be delivered because somebody is not credit worthy?

Another question is whether the credit crunch will affect BP or ExxonMobile or Shell's oil production. Each of the US IOCs use a lot of subcontractors. These subcontractors can be highly leveraged. The gas stations can also be separately owned.

Some of the refiners are not IOCs. I found this news item:

Credit crunch may hit oil refinery output, trade

LONDON -- Liquidity problems in the global financial market may reduce oil product trade as refiners find it more difficult to obtain letters of credit and the number of trading counterparties falls, the IEA said on Friday.

With the letters of credit needed to facilitate exports subject to rising interest rates, refineries are finding it hard to maximise the value of their production, the Paris-based International Energy Agency said in its monthly oil market report.

"Counterparty risk is also limiting some trading companies' ability to deal with other companies, similarly resulting in reduced levels of trade," the report said.

Jeez. Denninger's right. If this goes on, there's going to be no food or fuel.

About 24 years ago, I read a book called "Normal Accidents", which laid out a thesis that accidents happen because people tend to misunderstand the situation within which they are operating, thus make fatal decisions. In the U.S., the present financial problems are due to the mortgage bubble, which came about from the creation of debit from lending for purchases which were not likely to be repaid while selling the mortgages to keep them off the bank's books. The resulting leverage coupled with the bursting of the speculative bubble then led to the implosion of the debit based financial system. Building a bubble based on leverage "creates" apparent wealth, which evaporates when the process is thrown into reverse as we are now experiencing.

The increased cost of fuel (whether due to Peak Oil or a short term mismatch between rapidly increasing demand and an the producers ability to increase supply) may have been the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" as the commuter's budget went bust. The systematic failure that resulted is the consequence of a lack of understanding by the economic theorists of very real resource limits on this finite Earth. The problem is that growth in resource consumption (particularly, fossil fuels) is not sustainable, no matter what the economists or politicians write or say.

E. Swanson

"Normal Accidents", which laid out a thesis that accidents happen because people tend to misunderstand the situation within which they are operating, thus make fatal decisions.



Great book.


The thesis is not so much that people misunderstand but rather that people do not operate well in complex environments; they are biased in a certain way. They "understand" and act in reflection of this bias and therefore mis-perceive the hazard and degree of risk exposure. The "accidents" are therefore not random events which cannot be foreseen but are "normal" artifacts of the manner in which the specific environment has been structured.


Three thousand people lost their lives on 9/11 with the result that the US has engaged in a costly war that has caused further great loss of life. Yet the automobile transport system results in an annual loss rate 10x the 9/11 losses and no one decides to wage war on Detroit. AGW may result in 100X the losses from 9/11 and still no one decides to wage war on Detroit.


We accept automobile casualties as a "normal" part of life, hence "normal" accidents. You are much safer on a commercial aircraft, or on an offshore MODU, than you are in your car but the public perceives the automobile as "safe" and the car and drilling rig as "risky" or dangerous.


Complex systems have multiple points of failure that interact in unpredictable and often undetectable ways, and are very difficult to diagnose and fix. We think of autos as under our control but in fact automobile operation is subject to a large range of variables over which we have little or no control.


With regards to the credit problem it is difficult to see how having several trillion of notional value (credit) supported by 1/60th of its true value (assets) could have any outcome other than the one we now experience. Having the people who bear responsibility for the problem attempt to resolve it is unlikely to work (unless you are a friend of Hank). The credit crunch is what occurs when you are no longer operating in a reality based economy. I would argue that the entire US is no longer anchored in reality and the problem is that reality will always assert itself.


The full title of the book is Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies

Exactly this is why I don't care much for the popularity of the concept of black swan events.
They are intrinsic if you will in complex systems if we really understood complex systems we could prove statements such as in a sufficiently complex system that contains white swans black swans would also exist. These sorts of concepts are actually related to prime numbers for example the unanswered questions that deal with primes actually deal with complexity. Are numbers complex enough that the distribution of primes cannot be written in a closed form ?

I for example came up with a conjecture that between every prime and its square exists another prime. This density assertion seems true.

Turns out its closely related to Goldbach's conjecture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach_conjecture

In fact if my statement is true then you can prove Golbach's conjecture and if Golbach is true you can prove my statement.

Damn :)

And worse the two statements are not equal but similar thus immensely tantalizing.
If I ever get thrown in prison I'll work on it again. The key is the density of primes needed for Globach's conjecture to be true is less than the requirement for mine thus primes are denser than than the prime and its square.

My point is that narly problems exist and proof of these are actually like what we consider a black swan they are a singular event you solve them once just like the proof of fermats last theorem.

This is complexity in all its beauty and power and we have not even left the integers to explore a more complex space. The complexity explodes almost immediately. Simply creating a pile of sand and predicting when it will suffer a big slide is impossible.

This is life its our universe its the way things really work.
j
Give this what do you do ?

You build in buffers and redundancy you do not push or stress these sorts of systems in fact you better treat them with gentleness and respect and go with the flow if you will. They can and will bite back.

Renewable concepts and all sorts of living in harmony concepts are really just recognition that we are really dealing with complex systems that we better not stress at our peril.

At some point we failed to communicate these truths to the average person certainly after we discovered the atomic bomb we lost our way. It could well have even been earlier with the discovery of the steam engine. We never figured out how to translate this complexity into a form that the common person could understand instead we reinvented the shaman and his secrets. Eventually we have create a world full of secrets a complex financial system full of acronyms understood by none and reliance on a finite energy source a reckless life style etc.

All of this in my opinion comes from our arrogance and inability to explain the unknown most people don't even realize we don't even fu%@!+n understand integers.

Simply creating a pile of sand and predicting when it will suffer a big slide is impossible.

On the one hand you dismiss Black Swan theory, then quote examples which agree with it.

On numbers, Godel showed that any sufficiently complex system contains propositions that are undecidable. Chaos theory shows that many natural phenomena, as well as artificial ones, are inherently unpredictable. We tend to dismiss the random part as being "abnormal", and prefer the linear parts. But the random part is normal, and we ignore it at our cost. This is what Black Swan theory alludes to.

Instead of acting all surprised about financial crashes, we should expect them to happen as an inherent and normal feature of the system. In order to create a truly stable system, it would have to be a lot simpler. Unfortunately, simpler systems do not provide the dopamine rush we crave.

A general theme throughout some cultures is to treat outliers as exceptions, instead of part of the norm. This assumption is fixed in the Judeo-Christian tradition, as well as others, where a creation of God is assumed to be harmonious and predictable. Other religions incorporate the idea of uncertainty, in the form of capricious gods who wreak destruction. The idea of the clockwork universe easily predates the atomic age. The idea of the chaotic universe has yet to percolate into popular understanding.



Reading Memmel I had the same confusion. He provides evidence for black swan events and then seeks to deny them. Do not understand his position.


I posit the existence of two parallel systems: 1) the human cognitive system anchored in language. This gives us the basis for logic and rationality which we try (to greater and lesser degrees) to ensure is self-referentially complete and without contradiction; 2) the enveloping reality in which we find ourselves embedded and about which we lack full understanding but which we attempt to "map" to conceptual constructs with varying degrees of success. The reality keeps "biting back" which reveals the shallowness of our own understanding and the true chaotic nature of that in which we are embedded.

Denninger is apoplectic. He's demanding that people take to the streets.

And CNN is turning increasingly against the bailout, which they pushed. They're now saying things like it's a failure, or that Paulson didn't have a plan for what to do with the money once he got it. The picture they painted is of people who just don't know what to do. It's not working out like they hoped, and they're running out of options.

Dow falls below 8000.

Fell more than 600 points but bouncing now (up over 400 points in 5 minutes). Looks like an attempt to stop the fall. Last night on Bloomberg they were talking matter of factly about how the PPT stepped in to halt the rot on Monday. Now on Bloomberg one expert is saying it's time the powers that be got out of the way as he thinks stretching things out is just making things worse not better.

And now Dow turns positive!

Someone's buying financials. Who could that be?

I wonder if this could be the "panic spike down" today Stoneleigh predicted recently to a false bottom. Then a slow recovery (which could be stretched for a few months) followed by a return to the downslope.

In any case this has to temporarily stabilise within days I would guess at some level but this is Friday and as a commentator just said: "Who want's to go into this weekend long".

Everyone always says that the fed and treasury can't inflate out of this mess as they can not get the money into the hands of the people.

Question; Is it possible to pump money into the public through the stock market by TPTB buying high and selling low?

Was this the thought behind putting everyone in the stock market via social security?

Bush vows to stabilise US economy
Breaking News

President George W Bush has promised the American people the US government is working "aggressively" to restore stability to the economy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7663926.stm

It's the "aggressively" part that worries me.

And the "US Government" part as well.

Srivathsa

That picture is slightly misleading. It ignores the fact that for the past several decades the elites have done the so called named 'starve the beast' strategy. which is basically take a good government organization. under fund it, then put at the head of it a complete idiot so it self destructs and then claim it was like this all along.

A properly run government can do allot of things, most of them very well. it's just that there is a religion here that for profit companies can do things better and to make it look like that they do the above.

The picture is not slightly misleading, it is greatly misleading. You are perfectly correct. Government can do things well. The problem since 1980 the group in power has been actively trying to destroy government.

I should have used the term - "the current US administration" and not government in general.

Srivathsa

Undertow, congratulations, the most optimistic posting all day... so far.

Hate to burst the bubble but the Dow is downward sliding again at 10:20 a.m. at -136 points.

I suspect the treasury, the FED, and anyone with any kind of authority in the US will do anything ... and I mean anything!! ... to stop this hemorrhaging leading into the long weekend. Food and gasoline shortages starting on US Columbus Day would not be pretty.

The G7 finance ministers may have a bit of trouble getting home, too, if disruptions to international lines of credit interfered with air travel. Now that would be a first.

We'll see how long this upswing/downswing roller coaster lasts. And I'm very interested to hear what slight of hand card trick Dubya has for us today.

Undertow, congratulations, the most optimistic posting all day... so far.

Hate to burst the bubble but the Dow is downward sliding again at 10:20 a.m. at -136 points.

It comes in waves ;-)

LSD — My Problem Child

Then in a flash of insight I realized to my horror that the black thing was actually devouring me. I was the flower and this foreign, creeping thing was eating me!

I shouted or screamed, I really don't remember. I was too full of fear and loathing. I heard my guide say: "Easy now. Just go with it. Don't fight it. Go with it." I tried, but the hideous blackness caused such repulsion that I screamed: "I can't! For God's sake help me! Help me!" The voice was soothing, reassuring: "Let it come. Everything is all right. Don't worry. Go with it. Don't fight."

I felt myself dissolving into the terrifying apparition, my body melting in waves into the core of blackness, my mind stripped of ego and life and, yes even death. In one great crystal instant I realized that I was immortal. I asked the question: "Am I dead?" But the question had no meaning. Meaning was meaningless. Suddenly there was white light and the shimmering beauty of unity. There was light everywhere, white light with a clarity beyond description. I was dead and I was born and the exultation was pure and holy. My lungs were bursting with the joyful song of being. There was unity and life and the exquisite love that filled my being was unbounded. My awareness was acute and complete. I saw God and the devil and all the saints and I knew the truth. I felt myself flowing into the cosmos, levitated beyond all restraint, liberated to swim in the blissful radiance of the heavenly visions.

--Albert Hofmann

Hey dude you boguarding pass it on. Then you realize your just setting there stoned off your ass and all you really care about is sleeping with the patchouli smelling girl across from the fire.

At first you waver do you re-enter the world of unity or light or do you go talk to her and see if you can get her in your bed.

With a sigh you get up and circle around the fire leaving the white light to dim and die and embrace the wild scents of dust, sand, patchouli oil and female sweat.

Looking back years later you have no regret having chosen the brief richness of life over the stark pure world of understanding.

FRANCIS CRICK, the Nobel Prize-winning father of modern genetics, was under
the influence of LSD when he first deduced the double-helix structure of
DNA nearly 50 years ago.
http://mail.psychedelic-library.org/show.cfm?postid=8020&row=27

==

Mullis begins with the event that changed his life, during a May 1983 nighttime drive through the mountains of Mendocino County (of course:>) in a silver Honda. Applying his knowledge of computer programming, Mullis mentally conjured up a technique of finding a specific sequence on DNA and replicating the hell out of it. 'Natural DNA is a tractless coil,' he says, 'like an unwound and tangled audiotape on the floor of the car in the dark.' The polymerase chain reaction makes sense of that tape. Now 'you could have all the DNA you wanted,' he writes. And it's 'easy.' P.C.R. finds and multiplies tiny fragments of DNA. After 30 doublings, for instance, you have a billion times as much as you started with.

Mullis explains: 'It was a chemical procedure that would make the structures of the molecules of our genes as easy to see as billboards in the desert and as easy to manipulate as Tinkertoys. . . . It would find infectious diseases by detecting the genes of pathogens that were difficult or impossible to culture. . . . The field of molecular paleobiology would blossom because of P.C.R. Its practitioners would inquire into the specifics of evolution from the DNA in ancient specimens. . . . And when DNA was finally found on other planets, it would be P.C.R. that would tell us whether we had been there before.'

Mullis submitted his paper to the two most prestigious science journals in the world, Science and Nature. Both rejected it. He had some consolation. On Oct. 13, 1993, a phone call from Stockholm offered him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. 'I'll take it!' he said, displaying the decisiveness that has marked his career. He then called his mother to tell her she could stop sending him articles from Reader's Digest about advances in DNA chemistry.

http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about3996.html&highlight=

"FRANCIS CRICK, the Nobel Prize-winning father of modern genetics, was under
the influence of LSD when he first deduced the double-helix structure of
DNA nearly 50 years ago."

That's what druggies might have you believe, and while Crick may have taken LSD (a lot of people did...), there is no evidence it influenced his work.

Not sure if it affected Crick's work, but it was a big part of Mullis' life (at least from what I've heard).

I'm thinking "L" shaped, where the DJI levels off in a trading range of - what? Maybe 5-10K at best, or maybe 4-8K?

I'm thinking a hockey stick standing up where it goes from vertical decent to slightly downward sloping decent until it is done away with.

You can get seasick, whiplash, and mush-brained if you follow the stock market minute by minute or hour by hour. Step back and get a bit of perspective. When the market closes today will it end up back where it was in 1987 when the market "crashed?" Buy index funds and make periodic investments; sleep well and prosper. People who panic in the stock market usually come out on the short end of the stick.

Buy index funds and make periodic investments; sleep well and prosper.

Don't buy index funds. That worked for the previous generation. It won't work now.

I'm with Stoneleigh. Most people should be on the sidelines now. In cash.

Leanan, there's no reason to sit idly by now, when there's so much to be made in such a short time with inverse funds. I've never written a put option in my life, but I nonetheless have been profiting by them. I just liquidated all of my QID at 91 - nice to be able to trade them intraday - but I'm betting that the MSCI EAFE has still got a ways to slide yet. Now it's almost time to go back into metals and NPK. Almost.

Fine for you. Most people don't understand those things.

And most importantly, like Nate says...nobody wants to play the game when the biggest kid can change the rules whenever he wants.

Stoneleigh recommended not even trusting the FDIC, and I'm inclined to agree.

I would have to agree. I had everything in stocks, in a fund that tracked the S&P 500, up until about a year ago, when I switched it all over into cash. As several posters have noted on TOD -- the discretionary consumer economy in the U.S. is dying. All one has to do is look at the list of the companies that make up the S&P to realize how many of them are dependent on discretionary consumer spending, which is in turn dependent on the cheap oil-and-gas economy. Index funds unfortunately are not the way to go any longer.

Well, the U.S. stock market is headed off a cliff this AM. At 9:42, the Dow was down 690 points to 7,888. A wild opening for sure. It's already headed back up...we hope...

E. Swanson

I don't really want to see it go up, not very much anyway. IMHO, it is just now getting down to something approaching a reasonable p/e range. I don't see the real economy doing well for the next few years, if ever again, so there really is no good reason for the DJI to be much above where it has gotten to right now.

Both Nate and Stoneleigh think we'll see a rebound. Temporary, of course.

I'm expecting a lot of volatility.

Bets on whether trading limits will be triggered?

Definitely volatile today...

Really, really volatile...

Pretty strange when ending down "only" a hundred points seems like a good thing...

And that chart's just not sensitive enough to fully show it. Looks like someone scribbling with a pen.

Actually crossed over between positive and negative 16 times in the last hour before settling down 128

"Well, the U.S. stock market is headed off a cliff this AM. At 9:42, the Dow was down 690 points to 7,888. A wild opening for sure. It's already headed back up...we hope..."

I saw the DOW down 1100 points on YAHOO while GOOGLE showed only 500 or so. Apparently there was a LARGE number of sell orders this AM. Those were processed first, then the resulting buy orders. It took almost an hour for those sell/buy orders to process.

The Yahoo ticker had some issues this morning. For the first hour or so, they were confused regarding the value of yesterday's close, and the error carried through to their calculation of the loss for today. I think the mistake originated by using Wednesday's closing numbers (~9300) rather than Thursday's close (~8600).

Leanan, you posted this yesterday about Anderson Cooper's "10 Most Wanted", but I don't think you posted links to the actual video segments:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/business/2008/10/10/ac.10.most.wanted.f...

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2008/10/10/ac.10.most.wanted.a...

I just love the part where they are showing Fuld, who made (ripped off?) almost $500 million as head of Lehman, and his palacial mansion in Grennich, Conneticut, his $21 million apartment in New York and his multi-million dollar estate in Miami.

All this is necessary and will be cathartic for the nation if these men are eventually stripped of their wealth and sent to prison. Does the nation still have the political will to do this? Does the word "accountability" still exist in America? Even though many politicians are rushing to exculpate criminality with arguments of incompetence, I hope the grass roots can raise enough of a cry and howl that justice will eventually prevail. If these men are not brought to justice, confidence in the system cannot be resored.

The country went through a similar process during the Great Depression:

Intermittently throughout the year 1933 the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency, with the aid of its inexorable counsel, Ferdinand Pecora, had been putting on one of the most extraordinary shows ever produced in a Washington committee room: a sort of protracted coroner's inquest upon American finance. One by one, a long line of railroad and public-utility holding-company promoters, stockbrokers, and big speculators—had filed up to the witness table; and from these unwilling gentlemen, and from their office files, had been extracted a sorry story of pubic irresponsibility and private greed. Day by day this story had been spread upon the front pages of the newspapers.

The investigation showed how pool operators in Wall Street had manipulated the prices of stocks on the Exchange, with the assistance of men inside the companies with whose securities they toyed. It showed how they had made huge profits (which represented the exercise of no socially useful function) at the expense of the little speculators and of investors generally, and had fostered a speculative mania which had racked the whole economic system of the country--and this not only in 1928 and 1929, but as recently as the spring of 1933, when Roosevelt was in the White House and Wall street had supposedly been wearing the sackcloth and ashes of repentance. The investigation showed, too, how powerful bankers had unloaded stocks and bonds upon the unwary through high-pressure salesmanship and had made millions trading in the securities of their own banks, at the expense of stockholders whose interest they claimed to be serving. It showed how the issuing of new securities had been so organized as to yield rich fruits to those on the inside, and how opportunities to taste these fruits had been offered to gentlemen of political influence. It showed how that modern engine of financial power, the holding company, had been misused by promoters: how some of these promoters had piled company upon company till their structures of corporate influence were seven or eight stories high; how these structures had become so complex that they were readily looted by unscrupulous men, and so unstable that many of them came crashing down during the Depression. It showed how grave could be the results when the holding-company technic was applied to banking. It showed how men of wealth had used devices like the personal holding company and tricks like the sale of stock (at a loss) to members of their families to dodge the tax collector—at the very moment when men of humbler station had been paying the taxes which supported the government. Again and again it showed how men occupying fiduciary positions in the financial world had been false to their trust.

Naturally the composite picture blocked out by these revelations was not fair to the financiers generally. The worst scandals got the biggest headlines. Yet the amount of black in the picture was shocking even to the most judicial observer, and the way in which the severity of the Depression had been intensified by greedy and shortsighted financial practices seemed blindingly plain. So high did the public anger mount that the New deal was sure of strong support as it drove on to new measures of reform.

Frederick Lewis Allen, Since Yesterday

The greedy elites should at least be classified a flight risk. Release those denied a fair trial from Gitmo, and prepare the way for those that truly utilized the WMDs of unregulated finance. Is Paulson a L or XL in orange suits?

Funny enough, the orange suits come in only two sizes
to big and to small. But you have a choice of colors, as long as its orange.

Yet again the financial elites fleece the common man, where before it was the common investor. They promulgated retirement through the use of 401k retirement plans, IRAs, etc. Even today, people cling to the idea that they MUST invest in their 401k, it's been brainwashed into their minds. "I can't pull my money out, I'll take an IRS penalty," they proclaim, while watching their portfolios drop BELOW what the 10% penalty would cost them in a MERE DAY.

I think this time, due to the inability of FWO's to grow their own food, they will not stand in line for food, they will gather outside the mansions of CEO's, demanding blood.

Durandal,

I'm reading an excellent book by Jacob S. Hacker called The Great Risk Shift that gives many of the dirty details of just how and why the fiction you speak of--that 401(k)s are superior to defined-benefit plans--was crafted and sold to a gullible and unsuspecting American public.

If the old virtues of defined-benefit plans seemed less compelling to employers, the one singular virtue of 401(k) plans became all the more irresistible: 401(k)s are dirt cheap. In the late 1970s, employers devoted more than 4 percent of workers' payrolls to pensions. By the late 1980s, they were contributing around 2.5 percent...

If employers were the biggest beneficiaries of Section 401(k), they were hardly the only ones. Mutual funds and investment banks embraced 401(k)s as the Second Coming. One financial planning publication seemed unable to find sufficient praise: "A cultural icon, a measure of our financial well-being, and a symbol of democratic power--individuals of all walks of life own Corporate America through their 401(k)s." In 1999 Money magazine offered up a breathless history of mutual funds and the 401(k). "Over the full sweep of time, mutual funds have shown that they are probably the greatest contribution to financial democracy ever devised," the review began.

I may have to pick that up. I've been thinking for a couple of years now, about why we have 401(k)s. I think they are designed in part to force everyone to care about what happens to the stock market. The biggest reason for their use, being the shifting of risk to the individual.

I read once that the 401(k) was originally designed to be a supplemental fund, something in addition to the pension. Or maybe that's just the way it was sold, the real intention being that it would replace pensions.

If you have an interest in this subject, you might also want to take a look at this PBS Frontline special from a couple of years ago:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retirement/view/

I think I may have seen this before and it was one of the things that influenced my opinion on 401(k)s. I'll try to watch it again though if I can find time.

I think this was the show that told of a truck driver with a 401(k). He really didn't know what to invest in and he made some poor choices. As a result, he had a fairly low balance when he retired and then he made the mistake of withdrawing the whole balance at once and got hit with a huge tax bill. I think he was left with something like $20,000 to retire on. He went back to work.

The people who are really hurting are the ones who let their 401K money be invested by the "experts". These are people who "knew" that the stock market "always" went up in the long run, that growth stocks always outperformed all other investments, and that portfolios should be heavily weighted toward equities, even when the investor is nearing retirement age. Thus, the average 401K account was way overloaded with risky equities, many bought at or near market peaks. Very few 401K investors even know how to request that their funds be transferred to safer investments, or even knew that this was possible. Thus, I am hearing stories now of people with 401K balances down 30%, 40%, even 50% or more.

Big mistake, trusting "experts" like that.

I can reallocate portions of my 401K online with my company. When I saw international funds tanking earlier this year and read about resets in ARMs, I decided to transfer it all to a conservative, stable fund to ride out the storm. It is just barely in the green at this point.

"Does the nation still have the political will to do this? Does the word "accountability" still exist in America? "

Both should be answerred by a firm NO I'm affraid. Y'see, if war criminals are in charge and can remain in charge for so long, justice don't longer exists.

Yeah, just ask congress when they plan to finally bring Rove and Meiers in for their little Parley..

apparently, accountability is off the table.