DiscussMormonism.com

In light of all the recent crisis including the financial mess, are believers thinking we seeing signs of the last days?

I used to hear, (quite frequently actually) that as the US constitution began to crumble the LDS church ie. the Priesthood would come in and save the country. I had several friends in BYU Law School who were preparing for the day. ;-)

It could be argued that some of the events of last week have moved us toward Socialism...

What do you think?

And, what do you think our government (or for believers, the LDS church) must do to help us out of the crisis?

What do you think is ahead?

Have the recent events altered your personal life?

And, in light of all that is going on in the world, I find the LDS church's unequaled obsession with Prop 8 silly.

~td~

TD,

I listened to a very disturbing session with pastor chuck smith of calvary chapel last week. he presented an aspect of the last days events I'd never heard of, I'd thought I'd pretty much heard all the little gems at one point or another. He pointed to the well-known belief that the antichrist will rise in power and dominate the world economy with the 666 stuff. He will bring economic prosperity.

But what I hadn't heard is one way in which the economic prosperity is brought. It's so obvious, and *logical* in the way of simplistic Christian ignorance, I could almost kick myself for not thinking of it first. Keep in mind, for Christians, the rapture happens before the antiChrist. Now: think about the natural consequences a minute, do you see? I wouldn't have thought of this in a million years.

If all the christians are taken, then they leave behind all their stuff, their cars, their money, and so on, so this additional transfer of wealth to those "left behind" will make the world richer. LOL! ok, let's not think of the loss of human capital, but it's a brilliant idea in all its inanity and it made my day!

You have no idea how much I respect Chuck Smith. If I had the charisma and business talent, and the drive, I'd start my own cult for sure and live *the life*.

TD, I don't know if you've seen this link, but it's one worth reading (and it's updated):

End of World Predictions Since 44 AD

I am as dumb as dirt about our bailout to the tune of hundreds of billions (BILLIONS!!!). Is it true that China holds these debts? Are they receiving all that interest rate also? Does that mean we have literally been sold out?

Gaz:

Keep in mind, for Christians, the rapture happens before the antiChrist

Not all Christians believe in the rapture and it's not Biblical. Just pointing that out.

I think we're decades away.

If I had to guess I think racial tension will begin to divide the U.S. We'll have small wars begin cropping up everywhere with economic crises as the world economy suffers.

In the end though in JST Matthew Jesus describes the end of Jerusalem when the Romans come and the end of the world. For the end of Jerusalem he warned them when to flee, what to be prepared for, and instructions on what to do and what not to do. For the end of the world he told of signs but gave no precautions. Just that two people will be in the field and one taken and one left.

JustMe wrote:I am as dumb as dirt about our bailout to the tune of hundreds of billions (BILLIONS!!!). Is it true that China holds these debts? Are they receiving all that interest rate also? Does that mean we have literally been sold out?

The bailout consist primarily of the US Treasury purchasing 700 billion dollars of illiquid mortgage related assets, primarily home loans and mortgage backed securities. Right now, no one is getting the interest on these. They are "non performing" loans and nobody wants to buy them. That is why they are "illiquid". The hope is that the Treasury can buy these loans from banks at a significant discount from their book value. The treasury would then either hold on to them and sell them at a profit when the market recovers or offer new terms or a mortgage reduction to home borrowers in order to stop foreclosure. Preventing foreclosure will reduce the supply of houses on the market and thereby help stabilize prices.

The benefit to the bank is that they have exchanged an illiquid asset for cash, which hopefully they will now use to make loans.

The 700 billion that the Treasury spends for this bailout will come from the American taxpayer in the form of money that is created and sold to investors. These investors come in all shapes and sizes and from all over the world, including China. The Chinese do have alot of money right now, as do the Japanese, Russians and Saudis. They may buy this debt which we as taxpayers will be obigated for, both principal and interest. Theoretically, the proceeds over time from the disposition of the assets purchased by the Treasury could exceed the cost of the purchased assets. This depends on the price at which the assets can be purchased relative to the market price at which they can be sold.

Is it a negative if foreign investors hold this debt? Some would say yes. In my mind, it doesn't matter since debt is debt. The problem is that we are adding 700 billion to the national debt (11.3 trillion) and will be obligated for the additional interest. In addition, we are releasing an additional 700 billion into the money supply and prostituting our currency.

JustMe wrote:I am as dumb as dirt about our bailout to the tune of hundreds of billions (BILLIONS!!!). Is it true that China holds these debts? Are they receiving all that interest rate also? Does that mean we have literally been sold out?

There is already an article on wiki discussing this, and a damn fine one at that. I particularly love this part:

In 2003, the Bush Administration sought to create an agency to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The proposal was shot down by Congressional Democrats such as Barney Frank who said that "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis".[12]In 2005, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 was introduced in the Senate. The bill would've increased government oversight of loans given by Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac. In 2006, John McCain become a cosponsor of the bill, saying that "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole." The bill never passed either the House or Senate.[13] Both are now viewed as possibly preventing the current market meltdown. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_ta ... reddie_Mac

Pretty hilarious since Obama is on the campaign trail lying about how this happened. He actually tries to accuse McCain of "deregulating" it when in fact McCain was one of a few who saw this trainwreck ahead of time. There were regulating entities already in place, but they were just useless bureaucracies that didn't do anything - obviously. So what did Obama do about it? He averaged more donations from Freddie Mac/Fanny Mae lobbyists than any other politician. Aside from that, he just followed the general democrat, lobbyist driven belief at that time:

"These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed. http://sweetness-light.com/archive/bush ... ng-finance

Yong Xi wrote:

Is it a negative if foreign investors hold this debt? Some would say yes. In my mind, it doesn't matter since debt is debt. The problem is that we are adding 700 billion to the national debt (11.3 trillion) and will be obligated for the additional interest. In addition, we are releasing an additional 700 billion into the money supply and prostituting our currency.

I agreed with everything up to this point. It can matter at times who is holding this debt and it does affect domestic and foreign policy at times. While living in Japan, when the Japanese government felt too much pressure from the U. S., usually over trade imbalances, they would warn the U.S. to back off or they would sell off the debt they were holding for the U.S. Worked every time.

While I don't think anyone is going to do it, it would be a near catastrophe, if even only Japan refused to finance the U.S. I can't imagine how it would turn out if a few countries, together, refused to finance them.

What do you think?

gramps wrote:Yong Xi wrote:

Is it a negative if foreign investors hold this debt? Some would say yes. In my mind, it doesn't matter since debt is debt. The problem is that we are adding 700 billion to the national debt (11.3 trillion) and will be obligated for the additional interest. In addition, we are releasing an additional 700 billion into the money supply and prostituting our currency.

I agreed with everything up to this point. It can matter at times who is holding this debt and it does affect domestic and foreign policy at times. While living in Japan, when the Japanese government felt too much pressure from the U. S., usually over trade imbalances, they would warn the U.S. to back off or they would sell off the debt they were holding for the U.S. Worked every time.

While I don't think anyone is going to do it, it would be a near catastrophe, if even only Japan refused to finance the U.S. I can't imagine how it would turn out if a few countries, together, refused to finance them.

What do you think?

I would agree that foreign or domestic policy could be affected. The lending nation could attempt to use their "bank" status for political leverage. I am sure these kinds of things happen all the time. We, of course, could always remind them that we enjoy having our naval base
in their country.

The U.S. still appears the safest place to invest for foreign investors. Asian, Russian and European markets all shudder when the U.S. runs into a blip. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The day that that large foreign investors refuse to lend to the U.S. will be a new day in world order. Would they then draw down their foreign exchange reserves held in $$? China holds about two trillion in dollars. Japan about one trillion.