Month: May 2013

Do we need another FDR to save the Banks?Its official the worst banking crisis since the great depression?

Posted on by admin

Question by james T: Do we need another FDR to save the Banks?Its official the worst banking crisis since the great depression?
A fews month before FDR was president, every bank in the nation failed.Its unanimous he Reversed the 1933 Banking Crisis.Hes the reason we have the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. He openeded Federal reserve banks in 12 cities, created the security exchange commision. The reason we are having problems today is because of Securitization in structured finance he actually created reforms in this but Truman deleted this component of reform.I like Truman, but he wasn’t as savvy about Banks as FDR was.FDR is the greatest president ever not because of war because he saved our banking system with reforms…..

Do we need a new FDR?

Best answer:

Answer by labowu
Are you’re asking do we need a President with intergrity, courage, foresight, and wisdom? Of course we do. They’re just hard to come by.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

What are your thoughts on this?

Posted on by

Question by DONALD T: What are your thoughts on this?
Many Americans today are unhappy with the Democratic Party.

Yet according to a Gallup poll conducted in July 2010, Democrats were still ahead of Republicans, 49% to 43%, in voters’ generic ballot preferences for the 2010 congressional elections.

Why? A big part of the reason is voter dissatisfaction with the Republican Party. And a major reason for that dissatisfaction is that over the years voters have been fed numerous lies by Democrats and the mainstream media to discredit the GOP.

Here are five of those lies:

1. The Bush administration lied about the intelligence leading up to the Iraq War.
Two bipartisan investigations demanded by Democrats refute this myth. In 2004, the Robb-Silberman Report, along with a separate Senate Intelligence Committee report, both concluded that there was no evidence that administration officials manipulated intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs to justify an invasion of Iraq.

2. Republicans caused the mortgage crisis.

In reality it was the Democrats who caused the mortgage crisis and stifled Republican efforts to prevent it.
First, Bill Clinton broadened the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), bypassing the Republican-led Congress and ordering the Treasury Department to rewrite the CRA rules to force banks to fulfill loan “quotas” in low income neighborhoods.
Eventually, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were required by HUD to show that 55% of their mortgage purchases were to low and moderate income borrowers, and lending standards were lowered to meet those goals.
Intense competition caused by Fannie and Freddie’s increasing appetite for loans caused investment and commercial banks to compete for borrowers, and the looser lending standards eventually spread to higher-income and prime borrowers as well.
Then came Clinton’s most disastrous decision: he legalized the securitization of subprime mortgages that allowed the market to soar from $ 35 billion in risky loans in 1994 to $ 1 trillion by 2008, thus poisoning the entire mortgage industry.
Republicans tried to rein in Fannie and Freddie’s purchases of subprime mortgages. In both 2003 and 2005, they introduced legislation that would have required Fannie and Freddie to eliminate their investments in them. Both times their attempts were opposed by the Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee, so the bills never made it to Senate floor.

3. Eight years of Republican deregulation caused the financial crisis.

Some myths die harder than others. This is certainly one of them. Financial services were not deregulated during the Bush administration.
The repeal of the Depression-era Glass–Steagall Act in 1999, allowing banks and securities firms to be affiliated under the same roof, was supported by the Clinton administration and signed into law by the president.
Moreover, that was not the cause of the financial crisis. The crisis was caused by banks and investment firms purchasing vast numbers of bad mortgages and mortgage-backed securities.
What contributed to such a high volume of purchases? In 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Democrat Annette Nazareth, who ran the market regulation division at the time, unanimously adopted a rule change known as Basel II.
Adopted by all of the world’s central bankers, Basel II was an attempt to provide greater regulation of investment firms by more accurately evaluating the types of assets they held.
Unfortunately, AAA-rated mortgages were incorrectly considered to be some of the safest assets an institution could own. As a result, Basel II allowed investment banks to leverage their assets of mortgage-backed securities at a ratio as high as 30 to 1. Thus, although Basel II wasn’t the cause of the financial crisis, it certainly contributed to the size of it.

4. Republicans are the “party of Wall Street, big business and special interest groups.”
In the 2008 national election cycle, more campaign donations from the largest banks and Wall Street firms went to Democrats, not Republicans.
Ninety of the top one hundred corporate donors leaned Democratic, and nearly 75 percent of all hedge fund donations in that same period went to presidential candidate Obama.
Furthermore it is the Democratic Party which has deep-rooted unholy alliances with special-interest groups—labor unions, teachers unions, trial lawyers, environmental groups, community organizations such as ACORN and welfare beneficiaries—that often places the interests of those groups ahead of what’s best for the country. Their alliance with trial lawyers, for example, is why tort reform, an effective way to lower health care costs, was not included in the health care bill.

5. Democrats have always stood up for black Americans—and Republicans are either uncaring at best, or overt racists at worst.

Many Americans would be surprised to know that Martin Luther King, Jr. embraced conservative ideals.

Yet King’s choice of political affinity made perfect sense: it was R

Best answer:

Answer by middleclassman
What is going on is that the young world and the fading generations are clashing. The youth is less restrained and has more resources to get information then the fading generations that are mostly Republicans. Also the big wig Republicans don`t want to take the house or senate and share guilt with Obama before the 2012 election.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Why did the Federal Government sue the Wall Street banks that sold Fannie and Freddie bad mortgages?

Posted on by admin

Question by ideogenetic: Why did the Federal Government sue the Wall Street banks that sold Fannie and Freddie bad mortgages?
Shouldn’t the “buyer beware”* or is there a role for regulation to prevent criminal economic activity in the debt securitization markets that lead to catastrophic financial collapses?

* Since S&P had ‘AAA’ ratings on the junk paper, how would the buyer know?
For those who missed it:
“Federal Regulators Sue Big Banks Over Mortgages”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/business/bank-suits-over-mortgages-are-filed.html

Best answer:

Answer by TheOnlyBeldin
Because Barney won’t let them go after the true culprit: Fannie and Freddie themselves.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

“PAY FOR PERFORMANCE ACT OF 2009″…is this the beginning of a nationalized economy?

Posted on by

Question by The Federalist: “PAY FOR PERFORMANCE ACT OF 2009″…is this the beginning of a nationalized economy?
Barney Frank has introduced a bill in congress that would give the Government authority to set the salary of EVERY SINGLE employee of companies who have utilized government capital aka bail out funds…

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Beyond-AIG-A-Bill-to-let-Big-Government-Set-Your-Salary-42158597.html

Since Frank’s policies are a large part of why we are in this mess doesn’t seem like this was all planned? Force low standards on lending….greenlight the securitization and selling off of government chartered debt….watch it infect the banking system….give hand outs to sick banks….impose complete control over those banks now that they owe billions of dollars.

Barney Frank is as much to blame for this economic mess as anyone on Wall Street or in Washington DC and he wants to use the crisis that he helped create to take total control of the companies that his policies put at risk…It’s like a sick little toad who wants to show all the giants of industry at the private organizations that keep this country moving in a positive direction that the dimwits in Washington are going to take over their jobs by force.

Barney Frank should be tarred and feathered on the steps of Capital Hill and sent to jail for crimes against society and abuse of power. He is the most detestable type of politician I can imagine exists…the type who causes problems with his ignorance and then uses the damage to his own benefit…all while blaming others.
The idea that the failing of these companies will set off a massive depression is a falacy….they told us the exact same thing when GM and Dodge came hat in hand two months ago…they gave them 30 billion because they couldn’t afford to fail….now GM is talking about going into Chapter 11 bankruptcy….so the 30 Billion dollars was wasted and the end result is still the same…And you who said people don’t get to demand better pay….your right…no one will be paid better for better work…so no one will work hard…and the country will slowly diminish under th guise of “fairness”…”THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS” this policy of taxing the producers to provide to the challenged will not stop until the last bone of the last taxpayer is picked clean and their is nothing left to take…the envious ones who have not suceeded will continue to elect those who will take from the producers in this country until their is nothing left…socialism is a failed principle.

Best answer:

Answer by demonhunter5110
i agree. that goes for all of Obamas cabinet. whats he thinking electing the former federal reserve. what a joke. thats how our government or better yet a combination of the bankers and government always work. they did a similar thing to create the first depression and they are doing it again. heres what ya do. April 15 come join American on the new tea day protest. ill give you a link all you do is pick your state and find one in your area. we need protesters from evry state. lets start the revolution!!

http://www.officialtaxdayteaparty.com/index.html

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

is anyone good with international relations?

Posted on by admin

Question by Amanda: is anyone good with international relations?
15. How are international organizations changing the practice of international politics? Do they represent a fundamental force, or simply a minor detail?
16. How are transnational advocacy networks changing the practice of international politics? Do they represent a fundamental force, or simply a minor detail?
17. What are the major approaches to international ethics? [What are the main problems with applying each approach in practice?]
18. Will environmental problems lead to greater cooperation or increased conflict in the international system; or will they have little effect? [why?]
19. What are the links between international environmental problems and economic development?
20. How is “security” being redefined in the contemporary world?
21. How does globalization facilitate transnational crime?
22. What is a “collective action” problem, and how does that concept help us understand international
politics? [Discuss an important collective action problem in international politics as well as the possible solutions.]

Best answer:

Answer by George D
This test is gonna suck tmrw, but 17 is impossible im pretty sure, if u figured it out or 22 post it as a comment on here if you could

15. How are international organizations changing the practice of international politics? Do they represent a fundamental force, or simply a minor detail?

•IO’s Changing
oStarted Effects of a Cause (need ppl to contain problems)
oMoving toward a Cause → Effect (acting, making agendas)
oThousands of IO’s
•Link governmental decisions
•Norms being established
•Affairs are being regulated without an “all-powerful” international government
•Fundamental Force
oTruly Effective when states work together
oUN
•Can apply military force
•Can make agendas on what to try and fix
•Decides members of the int’l community
oEU
•Democratization of Europe
•Brings power to Europe
•Pooled Sovereignty

16.How are transnational advocacy networks changing the practice of international politics? Do they represent a fundamental force, or simply a minor detail?

•TAN’s Changing
oLobbying governments in favor of policies
•Human Rights Watch
•Compel gov’s with stats and publication
oHelp IO’s by setting int’l agendas before issues arise
•Give IO’s easy way to deal with problems
oProvide services
•Delivery of aid
•Red Cross
•Minor Detail
oAlthough they help to do these things, they can be done by larger IO’s if required
oDoes give voice to those in need
oHelps to lighten the load for IO’s so they can focus on more important problems at hand.

17. What are the major approaches to international ethics? [What are the main problems with applying each approach in practice?]

18. Will environmental problems lead to greater cooperation or increased conflict in the international system; or will they have little effect? [why?]

•Conflict
oStart out as attempted cooperation
oFinger pointing is inevitable
oGet defensive and feel targeted
oStates take sides over restrictions
•Kyoto Protocol
•Reduces greenhouse gas emissions
•U.S. refused to sign b/c of fossil fuel usage

19. What are the links between international environmental problems and economic development?

•To Fix Environmental Problems, you have to cut back on things that are more efficient, or spend unnecessary money to do things a different “greener” way
•Tragedy of the commons
oShared resources over consumed, but every state needs them to sustain economic growth/stability
•Oil shortages are due to the fact that we have produced more than we can support
•Too many cars for amnt of oil
•Export Led Growth
oProduces high quantity of scrap or waste
oRecycling is expensive
oHow are countries supposed to make money if they have to spend money to keep it clean?

20.How is “security” being redefined in the contemporary world?

•Discussion of what constitutes a security threat
•When something is defined as a security issue, it is implicitly given higher priority
•Terrorism now included as a threat to security
•Securitization: the process in which an issue that didn’t used to be thought of as a security issue is now a security issue
oChanges the scope of possible responses
oExample: U.S. military spending lots of time and money to combat disease in Africa→sees this as a preventative measure to societal breakdown

21. How does globalization facilitate transnational crime?

•Borders provide safe havens for criminals; different jurisdictions within different borders
•Globalization helps money laundering→fast movement of money throughout banks around the world
•Globalization is good for smuggling →easier to hide contraband when so many things are moving around the world

Give your answer to this question below!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

what does investor restriction mean?

Posted on by

Question by caliman316: what does investor restriction mean?
The “Make Home Affordable Plan” is only available to borrowers who are either past due on their mortgage and/or are current but the value of the home is actually less than the amount you owe.

It doesn’t sound like Fannie Mae is the actual servicer of your loan. First thing you need to find out who actually services your loan.

Investor Restriction refers to the actual investor that owns your loan. When you take out a mortgage you go through a bank, but once the loan is complete the bank sells it through a process called “securitization”, and it becomes part of a Mortgage Backed Security that trades in the bond market. Whoever purchases the MBS that contains your bond is now the investor. Generally, there is a contract between the servicer and the investor that states what kind of actions
the servicer is allowed to take. There is some flexibility but at the end of the day the investor has control over what loans in the security do. If the investor feels that the act is not in their best interest they can restrict the action.

If Bank of America tells you that the loan is investor restricted it means the investor and servicer of your loan have not signed a contract to participate in the “Make Home Affordable Program”. You can find more in depth information at the link provided below

I got this answer a few hours ago which was very informative according to the reply i had to find out who services my loan. I make my mortgage payments to bank of america which i assume is the one servicing my loan and is backed by fannie mae/freddie mac. If I bank of america is not servicing my loan then why am i making payments to them? If I call bank of america would they actually tell me who is servicing my loan or will they just say it’s them so they won’t disclose who it actually is? I appreciate your responses

Best answer:

Answer by financegal27
If you make your payments to BofA then your servicer is likely Bank of America, if they aren’t servicing the loan then they definitely can tell you who is and it should be included on your statement. They are required by law to tell you this information, see the link below for more info:
http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/res/rightsmtgesrvcr.cfm

Bank of America should be able to tell you who owns the loan as well the website for the program does state that only loans owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac are eligible for home affordable refinancing, it does not sound like that’s the case here and its probably why you don’t qualify because you are looking to refinance and you aren’t passed due so you don’t qualify for the modification program which is a little more flexible. You can check to see if your loan is owned by Fannie or Feddie here:
http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/loan_lookup.html

Give your answer to this question below!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Since a new economists’ study traces the roots of the Recession to the 90s, is Clinton more to blame than Bush?

Posted on by admin

Question by Richard RIGHT: Since a new economists’ study traces the roots of the Recession to the 90s, is Clinton more to blame than Bush?
This study says it all comes down to there being nothing to back inter-bank loans: “The REPO market of interbank loans had always existed but it grew dramatically in the 1990s to support securitization. But since there was no deposit insurance for institutional loans measured in hundreds of millions of dollars, counterparties demanded collateral to back these overnight REPO loans that generally replaced demand deposits in the banking system.”

http://www.housingwatch.com/2010/02/26/it-wasnt-a-mortgage-recession-after-all-so-why-dont-we-feel-b/?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.housingwatch.com%2F2010%2F02%2F26%2Fit-wasnt-a-mortgage-recession-after-all-so-why-dont-we-feel-b%2F

Best answer:

Answer by Paul Grass™
Absolutely he is, so is the Democratic controlled congress

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Should Obama replace Timothy Geithner with Paul Krugman as Treasury Secretary?

Posted on by

Question by Julius S: Should Obama replace Timothy Geithner with Paul Krugman as Treasury Secretary?
In the deregulation-minded Reagan era, old-fashioned banking was increasingly replaced by wheeling and dealing on a grand scale. The new system was much bigger than the old regime: On the eve of the current crisis, finance and insurance accounted for 8 percent of G.D.P., more than twice their share in the 1960s. By early last year, the Dow contained five financial companies — giants like A.I.G., Citigroup and Bank of America.

And finance became anything but boring. It attracted many of our sharpest minds and made a select few immensely rich.

Underlying the glamorous new world of finance was the process of securitization. Loans no longer stayed with the lender. Instead, they were sold on to others, who sliced, diced and puréed individual debts to synthesize new assets. Sub-prime mortgages, credit card debts, car loans — all went into the financial system’s juicer. Out the other end, supposedly, came sweet-tasting AAA investments. And financial wizards were lavishly rewarded for overseeing the process.

But the wizards were frauds, whether they knew it or not, and their magic turned out to be no more than a collection of cheap stage tricks. Above all, the key promise of securitization — that it would make the financial system more robust by spreading risk more widely — turned out to be a lie. Banks used securitization to increase their risk, not reduce it, and in the process they made the economy more, not less, vulnerable to financial disruption.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/133775/krugman%3A_the_market_wizards_were_exposed_as_frauds_–_too_bad_obama%27s_team_still_believes_in_their_magic/
Attention Ditto Heads: This is a serious question, so please treat it as such. I recognize that Lush Rimbaugh has been trashing Timothy Geithner, but Lush is negative for negative sake, not because he wants to make America better.
Attention: Obamabots, Barack Obama has shown that his Wall Street buddies are more important than America’s best interest. If that weren’t true, Barack Obama would not have waited almost 3 months: to propose regulating credit default swaps that were specifically unregulated by Phil Gramm and the Republican Cabal of Reagan Devolutionists; to reinstate the 70 year old SEC Uptick Rule requiring shortseller stock market manipulators to sell at higher stock prices; to return the power to bankruptcy court judges to renegotiate first mortgages and cram down sub-prime mortgages and underwater mortgages for all honest Americans.

Best answer:

Answer by Isabella
Debate it on disagreewithobama.com

Add your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Why is the US economy so bad?

Posted on by admin

Question by NONAME: Why is the US economy so bad?
I heard that it was because of the Jews.

Best answer:

Answer by simplicitus
Boy, those Jews must be pretty stupid. If I had that kind of power, I’d pull a Dr. Evil and demand a ransom NOT to destroy the U.S. economy. Surely the U.S. would rather pay several hundred billion dollars to avoid a recession rather than spend more than a trillion dollars to fix it once it was broken.

Actually, you have a choice of blaming Congress and the politicians or the financial services industry that bribed them. The root cause was the lack of regulation of several aspects of the financial industry, including derivatives trading and the securitization of mortgages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_conservative_origins_of_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis

Was President Bush Jewish? How about your two senators and your congress-critter (How did they vote when financial regulation came up in Congress – the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act for one – or don’t you know?)

If you want to listen rather than read, I can suggest:
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=355
http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=365
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=375
If you prefer reading:
http://baselinescenario.com/financial-crisis-for-beginners/

What do you think? Answer below!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

English text correction – Social Sciences?

Posted on by

issue by Leane : English text correction – Social Sciences
Someone could correct this short and / or text to suggestions for improvement? “Spurred by increased opposed the liberal West to fundamentalist groups since 9/11 violent ideological and physical conflict, the first decade of the 21st century has seen an impressive increase in the fear of the other. As a direct result, many immigrants Western host societies have responded by implementing restrictive immigration, integration and citizenship policies. scholars have marked this policy change a “retreat from multiculturalism”, the “return of assimilation” and “securitization of citizenship.” This research examines recent changes in policies .. in Canada, the United States and Europe, focuses on issues related to citizenship and naturalization main research questions of this project are the following: How can countries that receive immigrants face tension oppose their national identity historically developed and expression of diversity ethnic due to immigration? through their policies and practices in recent citizenship, are these companies contribute to constructive change identities or are they reinforce the disconnect between citizens and foreigners, what are the costs of these attitudes ? to the research process, these issues will be broken into a number of sub-questions: What are the advantages and disadvantages for the host societies have included immigrants socially How important issues of identity in optimization of “living together” What are the main factors that affect the social inclusion of selected immigrants and their families: cultural openness, access to citizenship, economic opportunities, adapting institutions their differences and needs Where would appropriate environments for immigrants to develop a sense of commitment in the host society: ethnic associations, NGOs, workplace, educational institutions, informal recreational space Finally, how? can host companies participate constructively in this process “Thank you Best answer:

response Warsilver
I do not know what you want. As a very casual opening statement, it is absolutely perfect. But if you write an essay, this layout for an introduction would be ugly. One suggestion might be to cut the question marks and make the most evocative phrases. Eg “What are the advantages and disadvantages for the host societies of immigrants who included socially?” could be “immigrants have included socially has advantages and disadvantages for the host societies that I intend to explore further.” Also, for a mission that is, you may want to focus specifically on one country and a unique part of the company, because with all these themes that you would keep writing forever to cover everything in verbose mode.

Give your answer to this question below!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

can you understand this???? please help???

Posted on by admin

Question by joa: can you understand this???? please help???
Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc. (Nasdaq: HAYZ) today reported financial results for its fiscal year ended January 31, 2007. The results were in line with preliminary results announced on March 16, 2007 and with guidance the Company provided to investors in December 2006.

For the fiscal year, the automotive and commercial highway wheels and components maker reported sales of $ 2.06 billion, up 5.1% from sales of $ 1.96 billion in the prior fiscal year. Earnings from operations were $ 4.8 million for fiscal 2006, compared with a year earlier loss from operations of $ 215.2 million, which included $ 185.5 million of goodwill impairment charges. Capital expenditures for the fiscal year were $ 80.8 million, down from $ 95.2 million a year earlier. The foregoing results exclude the suspension components business reported as discontinued operations, which had sales of $ 230 million, a loss from operations of $ 46.0 million and capital expenditures of $ 9.1 million.

The Company reported a net loss of $ 166.9 million for fiscal 2006, compared to a net loss of $ 457.5 million for fiscal 2005. The Company reported a loss from continuing operations of $ 120.9 million, compared with a loss from continuing operations of $ 287.1 million a year earlier.

Adjusted EBITDA for fiscal 2006 (including the suspension components business) was $ 188.6 million, up 7.3% from $ 175.7 million a year earlier. For the full fiscal year, Hayes Lemmerz reported free cash flow of negative $ 9.1 million, excluding the impact of the Company’s securitization program, an improvement of $ 71.6 million from a year earlier.

“Hayes Lemmerz is a much stronger company today than it was five years ago,” said Curtis Clawson, President, CEO and Chairman of the Board of Hayes Lemmerz.

“We have significantly decreased our dependence on U.S. markets, and continue to grow our international business, especially in Asia. By divesting non-core businesses and focusing on high growth/high return markets, we are continuing to execute our strategic business plan and our drive toward profitability and positive free cash flow. Sales to GM, Ford and Chrysler in the U.S., excluding discontinued operations, now account for only about 18% of global sales. Given the extremely difficult conditions in our marketplace, our results for 2006 are encouraging.”

As previously announced, as part of its continuing profit-enhancing initiatives, the Company completed the sale of two aluminum suspension components plants in February 2007. “These divestitures further reduce our dependence on the North American automotive market and free us from a very capital-intensive business,” said Mr. Clawson.

“Our new business wins point the way toward our future. We won over $ 575 million in annualized sales in 2006, of which 75% is international business,” Mr. Clawson said. “We continue to win with Japanese and Korean manufacturers, including Toyota, Hyundai, Nissan and Honda, both in the U.S. and internationally. We continue to win new business with our European partners, and in the U.S. markets our new business wins diversify our product mix with more crossover and passenger vehicles,” he said.

As previously announced, the Company�s board of directors has approved a rights offering for existing shareholders, for up to $ 180 million of common stock. Proceeds will be used to repurchase the Company�s 10.5% Senior Notes. The offering must be approved by shareholders at a special meeting scheduled for May 4, 2007. “By raising new equity capital and retiring high-cost debt, we are de-leveraging, strengthening our balance sheet and significantly improving free cash flow,” Mr. Clawson commented.

For the full fiscal year 2007, Hayes Lemmerz expects to achieve sales of about $ 2.1 billion, Adjusted EBITDA of approximately $ 195 to $ 205 million, positive free cash flow (excluding securitization impact) and capital expenditures of approximately $ 85 to $ 90 million.

Conference Call
Hayes Lemmerz will host a telephone conference call to discuss the Company’s full fiscal year 2006 financial results this morning, at 10:00 a.m. (ET).

To participate by phone, please dial 10 minutes prior to the call: (888) 295-5935 from the United States and Canada; (706) 758-0212 from outside the United States. Callers should ask to be connected to Hayes Lemmerz earnings conference call, Conference ID # 2107451. The conference call will be accompanied by a slide presentation, which can be accessed through the Company’s web site, in the Investor Kit presentations section at http://www.hayes-lemmerz.com/investor_kit/overview/presentations/www-presentations.html.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOW

Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc. is a world leading global supplier of automotive and commercial highway wheels, brakes and powertrain components. The Company has 30 facilities and approximately 8,500 employees worldwide.

This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, nor shall there be any sale of securities in any state in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state. The Rights Offering will be made only by means of a prospectus. When available, copies of the prospectus may be obtained from Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc., 15300 Centennial Drive, Northville, Michigan 48168, (734) 737-5000, Attention: Corporate Secretary.

Use of Non-GAAP Financial Information
EBITDA, a measure used by management to measure operating performance, is defined as earnings from operations plus depreciation and amortization. Adjusted EBITDA is defined as EBITDA further adjusted to exclude asset impairment losses and other restructuring charges, reorganization items and other items. Management references these non-GAAP financial measures frequently in its decision making because they provide supplemental information that facilitates internal comparisons to historical operating performance of prior periods and external comparisons to competitors� historical operating performance. Institutional investors generally look to Adjusted EBITDA in measuring performance, among other things. The Company uses Adjusted EBITDA to facilitate quantification of planned business activities and enhance subsequent follow-up with comparisons of actual to planned Adjusted EBITDA. Free cash flow is defined as cash from operating activities minus capital expenditures plus cash from discontinued operations and the sale of assets. Management uses free cash flow to identify the amount of cash available to meet debt amortization requirements, pay dividends to stockholders or make corporate investments.

Forward Looking Statement
This press release contains forward-looking statements with respect to our financial condition and business. All statements other than statements of historical fact made in this press release are forward-looking. Such forward-looking statements include, among others, those statements including the words “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” believe,” and similar language. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ significantly from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements include, among others: (1) competitive pressure in our industry; (2) fluctuations in the price of steel, aluminum, and other raw materials; (3) changes in general economic conditions; (4) our dependence on the automotive industry (which has historically been cyclical) and on a small number of major customers for the majority of our sales; (5) pricing pressure from automotive industry customers and the potential for re-sourcing of business to lower-cost providers; (6) changes in the financial markets or our debt ratings affecting our financial structure and our cost of capital and borrowed money; (7) the uncertainties inherent in international operations and foreign currency fluctuations; (8) our ability to divest non-core assets and businesses; (9) the risks described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and our periodic statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and (10) our ability to consummate the previously announced rights offering. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this press release.

Contact:

Marika P. Diamond
Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc.
(734) 737-5162

HOME | INVESTOR KIT | PRESS KIT | CAPABILITIES | PRODUCTS | LOCATIONS | ABOUT HAYES
Contact Hayes Lemmerz. � 1998-2007 Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Subject to Acceptable Usage Policy

Best answer:

Answer by pimpcess
i wish i could help you but sorry i dont get this=[

What do you think? Answer below!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Q&A: Is this the beginnings of a world wide central bank or worse a private takeover of world credit supplies?

Posted on by

Question by bimma b: Is this the beginnings of a world wide central bank or worse a private takeover of world credit supplies?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080915/ap_on_bi_ge/banks_plan

Best answer:

Answer by krollohare2
No. Foreigners have had their fingers in our pie for years. Maybe if we stopped buying from overseas and making our own stuff, they’d have to cash out eventually and use that money to buy what they need from us.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Q&A: Explain the two main causes of market failure and give an example of each?

Posted on by admin

Question by zaar: Explain the two main causes of market failure and give an example of each?

Best answer:

Answer by LucaPacioli1492
One kind is the divorce of market prices from reality: sometimes called “irrational exuberance.” These occasion asset “bubbles” of various kinds that have occurred throughout history. The Dutch Tulip bubble of the 1630s, as do many, envisaged the continual, monotonic increase in the price of tulip bulbs. The fundamental idea that tulips represented an attractive future market ( Holland’s present market for tulips is larger than the total trade in tulips during Tulipomania ) but the prices outstripped any reasonable valuation. More to the point of similarity with other bubbles, the use of credit, leverage and new financial instruments ( such as options contracts, futures, etc. ) allowed unbridled buying that would have been less had it been limited to cash deals. Stock market crashes that are more familiar are 1929, the tech bubble of 2001 and the recent one starting in Summer 2008. The latter was initiated by the asset bubble in housing and, most importantly, the credit expansion that fueled it ( both the low interest rates artificially maintained too long by the Fed, the artificial stimulation provided by government through the Community Reinvestment Act and the provision of unsound credit through the sub-prime (meaning “bad risk”) lending fostered by the CRA. The invention of new financial instruments followed the historical pattern with mortgaged-backed securities ( combined with irrational ratings from agencies ) adding to the innovation of securitization to allow other financial markets to be tapped and the mortgage pool to be reloaded.

Another kind of market failure is when there just isn’t enough liquidity to sustain transactions ( usually where, as a consequence, the bid-asked spread becomes impossibly large.) A recent example of this is the market for “Auction-rate Preferreds” where seven-day paper was touted widely for almost 20 years as an alternative to money-market funds until February 2008 when the auctions failed and those backing these markets just withdrew and the whole market froze into illiquidity.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Ecommerce,business,finance,accounting,acca Ebooks

Posted on by admin

A few Finance products I can recommend:

Ecommerce,business,finance,accounting,acca Ebooks
Ecommerce,business,finance,accounting,acca Ebooks
Earn 75% $ Upto 11 Times For 1 Time Effort.few Affiliates=few Rivals=few Mkt Time.these Are Nicely Priced,viable,recession Proof Ebooks. No Ext Link,ad,exist Popup.demo & Nice Sales Copys. Keywords,backlinks,pics,mkt Plan,testi,ebooks 4 Viral Mkt & $ Fast
Ecommerce,business,finance,accounting,acca Ebooks

Esprit Riche
Esprit Riche
Comment Trouver Une Idée De Business ? Comment Automatiser Vos Finances ? Ne Plus Payer De Frais Bancaires ? Préparez Vous À L’indépendance Financière Et À Vivre Pleinement. Découvrez Comment Faire Avancer Efficacement Vos Projets Et Gérer Votre Temps.
Esprit Riche

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share

Q&A: Wall Street Rating Agencies?

Posted on by

Question by Maxwell: Wall Street Rating Agencies?
This is for my test…

Wall street had to sell the rating agencies on the concept of securitization, where mortgages moved off the balance sheets of banks. And into a pool of securitized and backed by many mortgages so that the risk of default was minimized. Discuss the role of the rating agencies. Were they were involved in fraudulent activity since they made money by reviewing the bonds and making money on the bonds? If not fraudulent activity, what other rememdies could be made to protect the public interest?

thanks for the help. Will give out Best Answer to whoever even remotely helps me with this

Best answer:

Answer by Dr. Mengele
Well to put it simply the rating agencies, like Stand and Poore’s, were actually paid by investment banks to rate their securities. It was not fraudulent since the agency offers a opinion which is not legally binding. Since the agencies gave CDOs a AAA rating, they were popular among pension funds. Since pension funds backed up their securities with insurance agencies, the default of CDOs destroyed AIG. So in conclusion no, legally there is nothing there you can say was fraudulent, however the rating agencies destroyed the biggest insurance company in the world.

Give your answer to this question below!

Share on Tumblr
Share on Myspace Share