<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Kill all the shorts!!!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:06:37 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: William Burr</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>William Burr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-50</guid>
		<description>It is terribly amusing that people don&#039;t seem to mind all the pumping of stocks but get positively outraged if someone should happen to mention that maybe a company, BSC for example, is holding a highly leveraged pile of smoldering mortgage derivatives that aren&#039;t worth anything close to what they are carrying them on their books for.

Shorts selling, naked, legal, illegal or otherwise doesn&#039;t affect the value of a stock in the slightest.  

If some worthless company gets shorted to zero, good.  The sooner the better.

Restricting short sellers will merely delay the inevitable decline in the price of overvalued stocks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is terribly amusing that people don&#8217;t seem to mind all the pumping of stocks but get positively outraged if someone should happen to mention that maybe a company, BSC for example, is holding a highly leveraged pile of smoldering mortgage derivatives that aren&#8217;t worth anything close to what they are carrying them on their books for.</p>
<p>Shorts selling, naked, legal, illegal or otherwise doesn&#8217;t affect the value of a stock in the slightest.  </p>
<p>If some worthless company gets shorted to zero, good.  The sooner the better.</p>
<p>Restricting short sellers will merely delay the inevitable decline in the price of overvalued stocks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Pisciotta</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Pisciotta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:15:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-34</guid>
		<description>I understand your point of view Liz, and I really enjoy your enthusiasm and reporting commentary.  We differ on this point, and I talk about the short sale rule in my blog.  The elimination of the uptick rule is almost criminal.  This is how J.P. Morgan made his fortune, and how companies can be destroyed by rumor and speculation.  That is why the regulation was amended.  A white knight finds it hard to intervene because even they cannot stop the shorting and the price erosion.  The uptick rule would change this.

In a free market economy (something that presently seems like a thing of the past) the market sorts this entire situation out and the stock price is in parity.  It is a good tool for traders and investors (consider the ability go short vs. the box to postpone capital gains or losses) or just profit and an inflated market price bringing it back down where it belongs.  If you decided to do away with this, would you then eliminate put options as well?  You see, where would we go from there?  

I really enjoy you and your team, and would love the opportunity to work with you in whatever capacity I could add the most value.

Regards - Anthony Pisciotta</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand your point of view Liz, and I really enjoy your enthusiasm and reporting commentary.  We differ on this point, and I talk about the short sale rule in my blog.  The elimination of the uptick rule is almost criminal.  This is how J.P. Morgan made his fortune, and how companies can be destroyed by rumor and speculation.  That is why the regulation was amended.  A white knight finds it hard to intervene because even they cannot stop the shorting and the price erosion.  The uptick rule would change this.</p>
<p>In a free market economy (something that presently seems like a thing of the past) the market sorts this entire situation out and the stock price is in parity.  It is a good tool for traders and investors (consider the ability go short vs. the box to postpone capital gains or losses) or just profit and an inflated market price bringing it back down where it belongs.  If you decided to do away with this, would you then eliminate put options as well?  You see, where would we go from there?  </p>
<p>I really enjoy you and your team, and would love the opportunity to work with you in whatever capacity I could add the most value.</p>
<p>Regards &#8211; Anthony Pisciotta</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dennis</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>Dennis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:42:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-31</guid>
		<description>Liz,

As a mortgage broker, I would LOVE to see Mr. Buffet&#039;s idea implemented.

Unfortunately, no one knows what the future interest rate change will be until it happens.  A borrower who had an ARM that reset in 2002 probably would not have seen a potential change until 2006 / 2007.

Another possible solution would be to simply underwrite the loan at the maximum rate permissable under the mortgage contract.  If a homeowner cannot afford a 12% mortgage, why tease them into it at 6%?  That sort of sets people up for a difficult future situation, does it not?  

Lenders hate that solution because most of their subprime customers were already tapped out at a 50% Debt-to-Income Ratio at a 6% rate (guaranteed future foreclosure).

Dennis Kline
Executive Loan Officer
Pathfinders Mortgage, Inc.
Portland, Oregon
971.327.8054 Direct</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Liz,</p>
<p>As a mortgage broker, I would LOVE to see Mr. Buffet&#8217;s idea implemented.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, no one knows what the future interest rate change will be until it happens.  A borrower who had an ARM that reset in 2002 probably would not have seen a potential change until 2006 / 2007.</p>
<p>Another possible solution would be to simply underwrite the loan at the maximum rate permissable under the mortgage contract.  If a homeowner cannot afford a 12% mortgage, why tease them into it at 6%?  That sort of sets people up for a difficult future situation, does it not?  </p>
<p>Lenders hate that solution because most of their subprime customers were already tapped out at a 50% Debt-to-Income Ratio at a 6% rate (guaranteed future foreclosure).</p>
<p>Dennis Kline<br />
Executive Loan Officer<br />
Pathfinders Mortgage, Inc.<br />
Portland, Oregon<br />
971.327.8054 Direct</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greedom</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator>Greedom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-28</guid>
		<description>By the time the US had woken up to realize it had been naked shorted on Weapons of Mass Destruction, and there was no stock to cover Bush - e.g.  They never produced the WMD&#039;s - analog to - they were never able to produce a stock to even borrow ? 

It was too late.

Damage was done.

Indeed Muriel Siebert - rumor mongering, indeed- Weapons of Mass Destruction -  rumor mongering.

And just look at the damage of this thinking system in a military/political content ? 

Sheesh- if you can naked short a company out of existence overnight by rumors ?
 
You could probabaly use a wealth of TV, Radio and Newspaper resources to spread some rumors too eh  ? 

lol

Hey, live the life you live.  I find lawyers and economicsts creepy.

Both are fully capable of getting cancer OR parasites like the rest of us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the time the US had woken up to realize it had been naked shorted on Weapons of Mass Destruction, and there was no stock to cover Bush &#8211; e.g.  They never produced the WMD&#8217;s &#8211; analog to &#8211; they were never able to produce a stock to even borrow ? </p>
<p>It was too late.</p>
<p>Damage was done.</p>
<p>Indeed Muriel Siebert &#8211; rumor mongering, indeed- Weapons of Mass Destruction &#8211;  rumor mongering.</p>
<p>And just look at the damage of this thinking system in a military/political content ? </p>
<p>Sheesh- if you can naked short a company out of existence overnight by rumors ?</p>
<p>You could probabaly use a wealth of TV, Radio and Newspaper resources to spread some rumors too eh  ? </p>
<p>lol</p>
<p>Hey, live the life you live.  I find lawyers and economicsts creepy.</p>
<p>Both are fully capable of getting cancer OR parasites like the rest of us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DrDetroit</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>DrDetroit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:52:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-27</guid>
		<description>from article:

 Lemme tell ya, Muriel’s a firecracker and passionate about reinstating the Short Sale Uptick Rule because, she says, rumor mongers are taking down good companies just to make a buck. 


end clip



This is EXACTLY the tactic Rove uses to take down political candidates.

In the book, and movie &#039;Bush&#039;s Brain, Karl Rove&#039;   you learn that Rove went about notifying fundamentalist churches that McCain in 2000 - had a child with a &#039;black&#039; prostitute.  Odd,  Turns out - the girl was ADOPTED from a MOTHER THERESA ORPHANAGE.

And now Rove is backing McCain ? What formality is THIS ? 

Rove is JUST the kind of person that has mastered Shorting - and Naked Shorting.

I do believe, acting as Bush&#039;s advisor ? the two at the least have naked shorted the entire US, from those WMD&#039;s they could never find to oh ? hmm... let&#039;s just wait and see - why spoil a surprise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>from article:</p>
<p> Lemme tell ya, Muriel’s a firecracker and passionate about reinstating the Short Sale Uptick Rule because, she says, rumor mongers are taking down good companies just to make a buck. </p>
<p>end clip</p>
<p>This is EXACTLY the tactic Rove uses to take down political candidates.</p>
<p>In the book, and movie &#8216;Bush&#8217;s Brain, Karl Rove&#8217;   you learn that Rove went about notifying fundamentalist churches that McCain in 2000 &#8211; had a child with a &#8216;black&#8217; prostitute.  Odd,  Turns out &#8211; the girl was ADOPTED from a MOTHER THERESA ORPHANAGE.</p>
<p>And now Rove is backing McCain ? What formality is THIS ? </p>
<p>Rove is JUST the kind of person that has mastered Shorting &#8211; and Naked Shorting.</p>
<p>I do believe, acting as Bush&#8217;s advisor ? the two at the least have naked shorted the entire US, from those WMD&#8217;s they could never find to oh ? hmm&#8230; let&#8217;s just wait and see &#8211; why spoil a surprise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Loree</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Loree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:29:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-26</guid>
		<description>Hello Liz,

Great article! There is much to agree with. It&#039;s sad that there are those with little or no consideration for others, just that they make a buck.

So glad you&#039;re with Fox. I enjoy seeing you on &quot;The Factor&quot; from time to time.

All Best,
Ron Loree</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Liz,</p>
<p>Great article! There is much to agree with. It&#8217;s sad that there are those with little or no consideration for others, just that they make a buck.</p>
<p>So glad you&#8217;re with Fox. I enjoy seeing you on &#8220;The Factor&#8221; from time to time.</p>
<p>All Best,<br />
Ron Loree</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DrDetroit</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>DrDetroit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-25</guid>
		<description>In a way ? 

Regarding short selling ? 

it&#039;s not too indifferent than taking a TV station, calling it a news station, and then seeking to alter the value a viewer will give to an idea - or stock analagously here.

In other words,  Naked Shorting can damage a stocks value even if the trade is going to fail, the naked short STILL influences and causes loss to the stock.

Same with guests on Fox News  !  Just merely being traded around ? 

They lose - all it takes is one person like Karl Rove in this world to just &#039;say something&#039; - or naked short trade,  without any regard to having to back it up.

At the end of the day ? The damage caused will be so great ? It will be as if you just robbed a bank, walk out and a tornado had just passed through, so all of a sudden ? no one even cares you just robbed the bank.

Naked shorting is the worst,  it requires nothing backing it - oh wait

naked shorting ? sub prime ?   EXACT SAME thinking system.  It&#039;s attempting to leverage yourself on nothing.

Hmm-   Thankfully we only have these pathologies in economics ? and never TV news ? 

I mean, sheesh, imagine if someone just &#039;bought&#039; the software CNN used - and virtually over night just created themselves as a TV news network with one sole purpose - 

and that sole purpose has nothing to do with reporting the news in any fair and balance regard.

Heck - Fox News IS an SEC and FCC violation in waiting.

I can&#039;t WAIT until the hearings.

To have worked at Fox will be a black mark I anticipate MOST places in the world - so make sure you get paid enough !  gonna need it !

the mess of who said what - did what will be so intertwined,  the world ? will just black mark fox after the sweet hammer of justice comes down on Fox - YEARS over due.

Rove - sorry pal, you&#039;re out of the loop - Maybe you should start bothering the CIA Karl - the FBI likely has had enough of your trip tripe.

Fox News IS one big fat short sell with no intent to ever produce the stock - or the weapons of mass destruction !

In fact, Iraq with WMD&#039;s was a short sale.

There was never a stock to be borrowed - 

I&#039;m content life is short, I&#039;ve had too much insolence, ignorance and incompetence to last me the rest of my days just observing Fox, Ollie North and Bush - what Tony took to the grave isn&#039;t necessarily in the ground Moody !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a way ? </p>
<p>Regarding short selling ? </p>
<p>it&#8217;s not too indifferent than taking a TV station, calling it a news station, and then seeking to alter the value a viewer will give to an idea &#8211; or stock analagously here.</p>
<p>In other words,  Naked Shorting can damage a stocks value even if the trade is going to fail, the naked short STILL influences and causes loss to the stock.</p>
<p>Same with guests on Fox News  !  Just merely being traded around ? </p>
<p>They lose &#8211; all it takes is one person like Karl Rove in this world to just &#8217;say something&#8217; &#8211; or naked short trade,  without any regard to having to back it up.</p>
<p>At the end of the day ? The damage caused will be so great ? It will be as if you just robbed a bank, walk out and a tornado had just passed through, so all of a sudden ? no one even cares you just robbed the bank.</p>
<p>Naked shorting is the worst,  it requires nothing backing it &#8211; oh wait</p>
<p>naked shorting ? sub prime ?   EXACT SAME thinking system.  It&#8217;s attempting to leverage yourself on nothing.</p>
<p>Hmm-   Thankfully we only have these pathologies in economics ? and never TV news ? </p>
<p>I mean, sheesh, imagine if someone just &#8216;bought&#8217; the software CNN used &#8211; and virtually over night just created themselves as a TV news network with one sole purpose &#8211; </p>
<p>and that sole purpose has nothing to do with reporting the news in any fair and balance regard.</p>
<p>Heck &#8211; Fox News IS an SEC and FCC violation in waiting.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t WAIT until the hearings.</p>
<p>To have worked at Fox will be a black mark I anticipate MOST places in the world &#8211; so make sure you get paid enough !  gonna need it !</p>
<p>the mess of who said what &#8211; did what will be so intertwined,  the world ? will just black mark fox after the sweet hammer of justice comes down on Fox &#8211; YEARS over due.</p>
<p>Rove &#8211; sorry pal, you&#8217;re out of the loop &#8211; Maybe you should start bothering the CIA Karl &#8211; the FBI likely has had enough of your trip tripe.</p>
<p>Fox News IS one big fat short sell with no intent to ever produce the stock &#8211; or the weapons of mass destruction !</p>
<p>In fact, Iraq with WMD&#8217;s was a short sale.</p>
<p>There was never a stock to be borrowed &#8211; </p>
<p>I&#8217;m content life is short, I&#8217;ve had too much insolence, ignorance and incompetence to last me the rest of my days just observing Fox, Ollie North and Bush &#8211; what Tony took to the grave isn&#8217;t necessarily in the ground Moody !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DrDetroit</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>DrDetroit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:11:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-24</guid>
		<description>I suppose all people are doing is shorting humanity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose all people are doing is shorting humanity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:08:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-22</guid>
		<description>Muriel Siebert is 100% correct in saying the application of rules to a selective group to the exclusion of others is absolutely wrong.

And the way the uptick rule was eliminated last year has long been a standing joke. While pretending to be concerned about the protection of shareholders, the SEC, without any move to consult anyone, except those who benefited by removal of the requirement, made it possible to speed up the process of destroying the share value of targeted equities.  All this in the name of &quot;providing liquidity in an orderly market.&quot; What a joke.

Thank you, Ms Clayman, for having Muriel Siebert on the program, and for giving the public a glimpse of the ugliness and greed in the stock market that has long been hidden.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Muriel Siebert is 100% correct in saying the application of rules to a selective group to the exclusion of others is absolutely wrong.</p>
<p>And the way the uptick rule was eliminated last year has long been a standing joke. While pretending to be concerned about the protection of shareholders, the SEC, without any move to consult anyone, except those who benefited by removal of the requirement, made it possible to speed up the process of destroying the share value of targeted equities.  All this in the name of &#8220;providing liquidity in an orderly market.&#8221; What a joke.</p>
<p>Thank you, Ms Clayman, for having Muriel Siebert on the program, and for giving the public a glimpse of the ugliness and greed in the stock market that has long been hidden.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Somers</title>
		<link>http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/23/kill-all-the-shorts/comment-page-1/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Somers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 22:42:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liz.blogs.foxbusiness.com/?p=7#comment-21</guid>
		<description>Dear Liz,
I forgot to thank you for doing all this fine work on illegal short selling. Seems you are the only one on national T.V. that has the courage to tell the truth. We sure need you.
Dan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Liz,<br />
I forgot to thank you for doing all this fine work on illegal short selling. Seems you are the only one on national T.V. that has the courage to tell the truth. We sure need you.<br />
Dan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>