Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-13-2011, 12:00 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072
Let me tell another story - a couple of decades ago the company I work for was called Salomon Brothers. It had recently converted from a partnership to a publicly traded corporation. Lou Ranieri was revoultionizing the mortgage business via pools, and Mike Bloomberg was doing the same with financial information.

Thing was, as a partnership the people who ran the place had their own wealth tied up in common. Once a public company, quarterly results became more important, and the people making big numbers grabbed more power. Internal control and compliance had real grunt in the early days, and we saw it weaken... until Meriwether & co got caught rigging treasury auctions. (Meriwether later, in an even less regulated viehicle, did even more damage via Long Term Capital)

This same process I believe is under way at Goldman, which remained a partnership longer.

I used terms of addiction above - and this is a true thing, traders get a high, get addicted, and get themselves and their companies into big trouble, without adequate oversight.

So, if it is true that when faced with a liquid situation with lots of earning potential, people who work for public (or entirely unregulated) corporations find the temptations too much, and if it is true that there's little in the market itself to correct this (save the scandalous failure), and if it is true that the nature of the business means failures cause global financial issues, then does it not make sense that a third party has to step in to provide the structure these entities cannot and will not impose internally?

A person whose super ego is getting weaker, whose id is getting stronger, and whose ego makes up stories to explain it all away needs external guidance.

10-13-2011, 12:42 PM   #17
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,325
Banks used offer toasters, blenders, or even cash as incentives to get us to open an account. How did we go from that to banks charging us a fee for the privilege of letting them use our money?
I just closed out a MM account a couple of days ago after I got my statement. The service charge of $7.75 was bad enough, but by some really strange coincidence it was worth exactly $7.75 less than it had been 60 days earlier. What are the odds, with the economy the way it is, that it would be worth exactly (except for the service charge) what it was worth 60 days prior if it weren't being manipulated?

Last edited by Parallax; 10-13-2011 at 01:30 PM.
10-13-2011, 01:06 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Finland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,196
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
...
The amount of money to be made is staggering, something most of us have no concept about. ...
Indeed. Banking/finance has been rather lucrative. The profits, however are real money siphoned off from the rest of the economy; on the grand scheme of things bank profits show up as losses / costs on someone else's balance sheet and therefore ultimately in the prices of the products and services the rest of the economy provides.
10-13-2011, 03:00 PM   #19
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Banks used offer toasters, blenders, or even cash as to get us to open an account. How did we go from that to banks charging us a fee for the privilege of letting them use our money?
I just closed out a MM account a couple of days ago after I got my statement. The service charge of $7.75 was bad enough, but by some really strange coincidence it was worth exactly $7.75 less than it had been 60 days earlier. What are the odds, with the economy the way it is, that it would be worth exactly (except for the service charge) what it was worth 60 days prior if it weren't being manipulated?

That's actually kind of a symptom of the problem: all the unbridled Wall Street profit-taking ... and all the policies they've bought to favor them via government has ended up trying to suck every last dime *out* of the real economy, as well as meaning fewer people have jobs working twice as hard and long ...And that means there aren't *customers* for the consumer end of the economy, while we haven't, for years, been actually *producing* much besides corporate profits. When all that has any say in matters is Wall street corporations which only exist to make money, that means that if they can make that money by gutting local economies or squeezing harder and harder, using computers to wring every last seven bucks out of people, sending jobs overseas, raising prices from all sides, demanding more fees for the same or less services, then they'll do all these things.

A key symptom of this is actually that the credit rating agencies have too damn much power, not just over companies, but individuals, and they're the ones who have caused a lot of these problems in the first place, particularly with the derivatives market and all the related 'financial products' that almost no one understands.

Personal credit card debt, especially among lower-income people, isn't a cause of the problems, it's a symptom. The statistics someone mentioned about consumer spending having gone up but not the number of transactions, ...well, that should be obvious: stuff costs more. People's labor isn't worth as much by comparison for ...well the 99 percent. And the thing about the credit card debt is that while they tried to keep us on a consumerist-only economy through all this, and that would end up expressing as personal debt, people being dependent on credit cards to even get through a month, if not maintain that standard of living they're supposed to expect.

(Going the not-borrowing route has its advantages, but also severe disadvantages: if you're out of money, that's it, there's nothing you can do.. And, yeah, you might end up paying more for the same stuff just because of the timing, perhaps even spending more than once on half-measures or make-do. ....And/or, for instance, ending up having to wait before being able to do a little job, ...not having a credit card also means you might end up having to put down really big deposits just to have the lights on, ...I thought I'd be starting this little phase in life with some working capital to try and bootstrap things together: instead, guess who's sitting on that money, now... Big corporations. (And there's a lot of inefficiencies there, just for *not* being in debt... you may not be paying credit card-related fees, but not only do you end up having to pay more, you're being the poor person chasing all over town, instead of, perhaps, doing other things with your limited stamina... (Which can also be a factor, incidentally, if you're not so healthy and you can't do a job *today* for lack of money for materials, you might end up not being up to it when the money *is* there.) Also, if you don't have a lot of credit history, it can severely-limit your housing and even employment options: the financial industry wants you to be in debt to them, so they punish non-cooperation there by saying 'not borrowing means you're rated as one of the irresponsible ones.'

People tend to rely on credit cards at varyingly-low ends of the scale, precisely because it's that much harder to just throw money at a given problem: it can end up adding up to a lot more expensive to be doing things piecemeal.

Obviously, too, the for-profit health care system based on insurance profits is pretty destructive: when the notion is to provide as little care for as much profit as possible, obviously we pay a lot more to be less healthy. It certainly didn't do me any favors or save the system any money to begrudge a little health care and help *before* my health problems became pretty permanently-debilitating. (Not to mention pretty hellish to actually live through: that certainly didn't do my nerves or mental health any favors. Was that worth protecting some profits/appeasing some people claiming to be fiscal conservatives? Then they turn around and say, 'It's your fault our system isn't working.' )


It's the greed, and all. I was in a *panic* last night just out of fear of making ends meet, and I'm thinking, 'You know, no wonder there's a lot of people out there who just *take,* the whole money system and our living is just way too adversarial, ...frankly, there's people out there spending more money (including government money, Mr. Boehner,) on demanding more discrimination and other disadvantages, than they'd be willing to see spent on things that are productive and help people. They'll spend trillions on wars, and don't want any of that to go to helping the people that come home broken from them. They roll back domestic violence laws in the name of 'budgets' just as you've both *got* an epidemic of PTSD and TBI, ....while still demanding more 'drug war' against pot... And just the money they blow on *denialism* could be putting some serious investment in projects of lasting value that would employ people: but instead they take that wealth and produce nothing but ignorance, inaction, waste, and resentment . Then they blame the 'liberals.'

Then claim there's some kind of *values* behind treating each other so badly, mostly in the name of protecting a wealthy few that some may *identify* with but will never, in any likelihood, even *be.*And then all we hear is this disconnect about 'Why do you want to abolish banks?' ...when that's just, as pointed out, a ridiculous false choice. The problem is that Wall Street *takes too much.* Money, power, control, homes people worked for, paid into, suddenly found they were worth a lot less than they *cost* thanks to speculator's bubbles... so they lose the homes, lose all that went into them, the banks claim huge debt over them, and *then* try to profit off the houses *again.* ...This unfettered corporate system, it takes *too much* And keeps demanding more and more. People are trying to live, and really finding they're being squeezed out of futures, more and more: of course they're *pissed,* and of course I'm *scared,* cause here I've been trying to pick myself up a little, and there's such a press of downward-mobility that really ought to be *my* customers, that it's clear, something's got to give, and the working classes have already given all they can. And maybe that's why the ultra-rich one percent and the big corporations aren't finding these big 'incentives' to actually invest in the real economy: how can they be expecting to make ever-increasing profits if they've been dead-set on a consumerist economy, and have *already got more than they could make off us if they could take it *all?** And they still want a bigger cut every year. Even if it comes from Granny's medicine money, ...even if they use their money and power to try and foment bigotry and fear when the people *most* need to work together.

And, certainly, if you so fear 'Communism,' civil disorder, some wild idea that 'banks will be abolished if there's any check on their profiteering at all!' or any number of things that aren't 'good for business,' the way to *avoid* such states of affairs is *not* to squeeze and push the populace ever-harder. People need to be invested in any system, not feeling hopelessly trampled by it, though.

Capitalism can work for a lot of things... But if it's not controlled, it *does* want to eat everything, everybody, and then itself. Some things, like for a health care system, it's obviously wasteful, counterproductive, and, well, based on a few pretty blatant conflicts of interest. And those conflicts aren't just against its own customers and the social good, but all the other *businesses* that for-profit health care sucks the life out of. The same can go for a lot of these 'debt crisis' measures, that try to preserve the Wall Street ever-growing profits, while taking more and more of the people's money away from the people's interest.

These big corporations have been living pretty high on the hog by, really, doing a lot of damage... Then when their own demanded tax cuts for themselves result in debt (often to *them* they then say, 'You can't afford to do anything but keep giving us more and more.' And while for the people who've been nearer the bottom all along, it's kind of just more and worse of the same, for people who are better off, they're suddenly finding that they're being ripped off and sqeezed dry, and not getting that better standard of living those same corporations kept promising. The problem certainly isn't that the rich don't have enough of the money, nor that they are somehow over-regulated when they tanked their own game *because* they were too unregulated,* ....The problem is they still want more and more of what's left to the regular folks. And they're showing no signs of satiation yet.

10-13-2011, 03:13 PM   #20
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,306
It cannot be truely denied that many people are over their heads in credit. But the problem resulted when the economy tanked and they had no headroom left. It was not their over extended credit cards, espeically those of low income earners that tanked your economy. Mike's solutions focused solely on those results not on any of the causes.

It is interesting that just today our finance minister, a conservative in ideology and in party name, stated that he understood why people were protesting at OWS events and went on to state how much better it is here due to not only having bank regulations but enforcing them. It is not paradise in Canada and we are also suffering the effects of the Wall Street meltdown. I think my points are Mike your solutions may help some but do nothing to address the cause of the problem in the first place and secondly no matter how well one may be prepared not all can be buffered by the financial hooligans of your banks. Prior to the crash we had budget surpluses and a conservative government (they inherieted the surpluses by the way) and yet even with what has been called the best banking system in the world we saw a steep rise in unemployment, loss revenue to all levels of governements and a decrease in our housing market. It was not our fault and yet as a country we were more prepared than most countries let alone individuals trying to make the best of what short life we have here. Look at the causes of the problems and try to solve them more than making it just a little bit easier on the poor when the next crash occurs. They would be better off without the crashes
10-14-2011, 05:22 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
It cannot be truely denied that many people are over their heads in credit. But the problem resulted when the economy tanked and they had no headroom left. It was not their over extended credit cards, espeically those of low income earners that tanked your economy. Mike's solutions focused solely on those results not on any of the causes
In general I agree with this, but would put it a bit differently. The US economy was fuelled by debt - unsustainable for individuals and many corporations, built on the assumption that we could grow out of the problem. This was not reality based. First off, real incomes have declined or been stagnant at best. Second, unless one's been lucky or exceptionally attentive and nimble, the financial markets have not lived up to the sales brochures. Third, the last gasp was real estate which also could not sustain the strain.

(As I've mentioned before, there is a real accounting crunch inside many corporations: in order to show profit now expense is pushed out to where it chokes future spending ability. This strategy only makes some sense if the future brings revenue growth and supports expense growth. Without that, the amortized cost slowly chokes off all investment.)

Debt can make sense if the thing financed will at least retain its value, if not appreciate. Debt can make sense if one's income is likely to be going up in the future. Buying consumer crap that loses its value, on credit, where next year you'll have less money left from your income is not a good long term strategy.

If we're in for a long period of stagnation, like some say, we're just 2 or 3 years into what will be at least a 7 year stretch. If we're in for a period of high inflation, at least we 'grow' out of the debt overhang... but unless something is done about health care, education, jobs and salaries, we're just trading stagnation for stagflation.
10-14-2011, 03:49 PM   #22
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
It cannot be truely denied that many people are over their heads in credit. But the problem resulted when the economy tanked and they had no headroom left.

Question: Where are 'people' supposed to put our heads, when , credit or no... where are we?


Way I see it, ....the big money conservatives are blaming people who lived on 'credit' for being closer to where *I* who hasn't borrowed a dime in over twenty years... Am anyway? I've 'virtuously' not borrowed all my life, and I'm still where a lot of others are: One paycheck away from being *boned.* I'm just more used to it.

10-14-2011, 04:55 PM   #23
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072
See, I believe the republicans / conservatives are closet debtors, most of them. Certainly statistically this is so. Therefore this is an issue close to their hearts - see, there's an aspect of *sin* and *clean/unclean* - the typical (of human psychology) split of the "bad" other and the "good" us.
10-14-2011, 05:01 PM   #24
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,306
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Question: Where are 'people' supposed to put our heads, when , credit or no... where are we?


Way I see it, ....the big money conservatives are blaming people who lived on 'credit' for being closer to where *I* who hasn't borrowed a dime in over twenty years... Am anyway? I've 'virtuously' not borrowed all my life, and I'm still where a lot of others are: One paycheck away from being *boned.* I'm just more used to it.
I think that to deny that people making decent salaries are not living over their head if their credit cards are always maxed out is wrong. Not everyone is in the same boat as yourself as it sounds like you are struggling in the real sense. But others are making good wages and buying new TVs or boats on the credit card and not being able to pay much more than the minimum payment most months. The plus side of it is their consuming helped keep the boom times going. But to deny that many live a more expensive lifestyle than their bank account would allow is just as wrong as to deny that the mortgage companies took advantage of the borrowers or the investment banks sold each other toxic assets just to make more bonuses. No way was I implying that the over extending of credit was the reason for the crash but it did mean that many suffered the crash more because of it. I have a relative who does not have a credit card as he cannot manage it and is better off for it.

While it is true that the neo conservatives are blaming the financial crisis/recession on the poor, those who could no longer make mortgage payments after loosing one or two incomes in the family and large credit card debt it is also true that those on the right are denying that too much debt is a problem. Both are wrong however the recession was caused by others than those with large VISA bills.
10-14-2011, 10:51 PM   #25
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
I think that to deny that people making decent salaries are not living over their head if their credit cards are always maxed out is wrong. Not everyone is in the same boat as yourself as it sounds like you are struggling in the real sense.
Then what's *right?* I'm over my head, it's just my credit limit is a few grand less than most. Zero. So it happens faster. When some redneck *lies.* That doesn't make me a saint, it doesn't even make me *smart.* Just a couple decades ahead of the curve on getting screwed.

(I'm sorry if I snapped at you there, There *are* though, so many people with all the maxed out credit cards *just cause the bills have been higher than what's coming in for too long,* And part of it is the same problem you have when you don't use credit, and one more thing goes wrong or one more price goes up, or someone gets sick, or however many things it takes to go wrong at once to push people over. It just it takes longer. The whole economic system here has been kind of based on Big Finance squeezing more profit out of the people:a lot of it *by* turning people's lives and lifestyles into *debt* to leverage and sell back to people as 'investment products.'

There was of course a big spate of consumer spending, for those that had that money and credit and a bunch of promises pay and jobs and all would be better soon, but it was a *consumerist economy,* with the corporations in fact profiting off that consumer debt, ((Go out and spend or there'll be more job losses, they were always saying, now it comes to this and they tend to blame people for, essentially believing *them.* )

Anyway, I'm obviously pretty distraught about how things have been personally, ...here I am just trying to keep one little rat claw somewhere *on* the economic ladder, ... and hear how so many of Wall Street's 'conservative' 'solutions' and obstructions in Washington seem to be all about making things worse, ...essentially geared to saying that rewarding greed and passing off the blame onto people they're shoving down the economic ladder is somehow going to start working.

I mean, I'm not the most-skilled money-manager, myself, (Maybe it's a little easier to be 'responsible' when there's not much there to waste, ) but I sure don't get any better at it during an anxiety attack. Even simple *errors* can be intensely-costly, though. (It used to be a lot worse, but it can cost someone sixty bucks or more if they just hit the wrong button on an ATM, if they're that hand-to-mouth. And that's on top of the usual cut the banks take just to *have* a bank account. (And try *not* having one.) If you're not working with a lot of 'disposable income' to begin with, that's like paying a 25 percent tax ....to the big finance corporations... on what little cash you actually spend. (And then people wonder why there isn't money in the local economies, never mind for 'frivolities' like art or ...actually enjoying life. )

You know, I'm scared pretty witless, but some people who are better off have been pretty nervous and scared a long time, too, and as I note in other contexts, scared people don't always make the best decisions, never mind do the best calculating about the deliberately-complex fine print. So, I'm just like, yeah, this has been a society much about over-consumption, but look what happens when there's *less* consumption going on, in the same darn system. The big corporations still want to make the same more-profits-this-year-than-last... Off of less...They made money hand-over-fist selling people houses, now they're making it hand-over-fist by *not* doing that... But rather taking them away (often bulldozing them to keep the prices up) and trying to make people keep paying for them anyway. How's that make sense?


The corporations really don't want to hear what *does* make sense. They got people my age who maybe had our dreams snatched away one too many times, you've got students who are quite aware that they're in massive debt just to get degrees that earn them a chance at what constitute diminishing prospects about even paying them off, never mind having a better life for it. (Meanwhile those employers that aren't hiring, of course, look at the job market and say, 'Go get experience somewhere else, or borrow more money to do an internship for free,' ....and if people *do* get the good job, don't get too comfortable, cause gone are the days when 'job security' was the norm, ....even if you stay with the company more than the average few years, get ready for job and pay cuts, maybe moving to a Red State offering lower corporate taxes ...and of course fewer civil rights for many of the employees. Meanwhile, the same corporations are like, 'Why can't we get educated workers.... We could... Pay workers? Naah. Let's spend billions to bankroll candidates who want to cut education, while demanding what's left of the public schools deliberately teach ignorance'

Then they turn around and say, 'Clearly it's got to be those libruls with no "values" that mean our corporate consumerist scheme only works for the hyper-rich.' Buy, buy buy, with less, and take the blame, as well, either way. I need a subsidy from you common people for my new Gulfstream. The old one's upholstery is getting a bit dated!'

They say it's 'class warfare' to say things like that, but we've been *in* class warfare a long time, it's just been a very one-sided 'war' for a long time.

The *real* solutions really are that one way or another, more of the investment needs to go into the *real* economy. The big money and the big corporate oligopolies need to stop getting such a free ride, either way, ...Where there *isn't* much of a 'real economy' left, the *people* need to make one. A sustainable and less-ruthless one. And if the big money wants to a piece of that action, *great.* They want something to invest in, how about *us?* I'm sure they feel very busy and productive, themselves, in those tall buildings, but they're mostly just playing games with *each other* at this point.

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 10-15-2011 at 12:37 PM.
10-15-2011, 11:54 AM   #26
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,306
What is right is some people do not know how to manage money, some people are doing fine until the wheels fall off and some people cannot live without sources of incomes for indefinite periods of time. Also too many have been marginalized by society and by the economic climate and some people are not able to compete with the majority for many reasons, many of which are not their fault.
And we ALL have been victimized by the greed and extremely bad business practices of wall street, even those not living under the laws that govern it. Wall Street's mismanament has most likely cost be 5 to 10 grand in loss revenue, maybe 40K in my RRSP and $75K in real estate values and all I hear coming from those who make the rules is to loose the rules for the banks even more and make it harder for the low income to use the banks and that will mean I will continue to lose value and the American rich and powerful will just get richer, not sure if they could become more powerful,

None of my comments were meant to reflect on your situation, simply that no matter how we rant against the wrong doings of Wall Street and their puppets, when people like Mike make comments about the regular folks part we should acknowledge it even though by far the bulk of the blame lies squarely on Wall Street and the US deregulation. Just because those who lay the blame on some carpenter falling behind on their payments does not mean we have to be as blind as them.

And we all should feel empathy and compassion for those less fortunate than ourselves otherwise it is not really a society we live in but I do not know a good term, jungle is not as even the animals behave better
10-15-2011, 12:29 PM   #27
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
What was the original figure? The first crash wiped out (between stocks and real estate values) 14 trillion of personal net worth in like one day......
Though most is paper losses IF you so happened to meed it it would have been very poor timing. And equiv. to a tornadoe through your finances.. One not easily planned for.
10-15-2011, 12:45 PM   #28
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
We could do it the original American way and give 'em beads for a house payment...........
10-15-2011, 02:40 PM   #29
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,306
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
What was the original figure? The first crash wiped out (between stocks and real estate values) 14 trillion of personal net worth in like one day......
Though most is paper losses IF you so happened to meed it it would have been very poor timing. And equiv. to a tornadoe through your finances.. One not easily planned for.
In a way it is a paper loss but in a way it is not. Anyone needing to cash in investments/mutual funds/RRSPs in the last couple of years or the next few have a lot less funds than if there needed the money a couple of years earlier. I need a rebound in the next three to four years or else retirement may be either delayed or a lot less comfortable. The loss of value of my own home is of little concern as do not plan on selling unless we either move out of town or can no longer manage the steep stairs, especially to the third floor darkroom.
10-15-2011, 07:28 PM   #30
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
In a way it is a paper loss but in a way it is not. Anyone needing to cash in investments/mutual funds/RRSPs in the last couple of years or the next few have a lot less funds than if there needed the money a couple of years earlier. I need a rebound in the next three to four years or else retirement may be either delayed or a lot less comfortable. The loss of value of my own home is of little concern as do not plan on selling unless we either move out of town or can no longer manage the steep stairs, especially to the third floor darkroom.
Wasn't trying to minimize it..........and yes, paper losses can be devastating.......
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon Q system using 1/2.3" sensor too = Pentax Q system? ogl Pentax News and Rumors 31 07-14-2011 07:47 PM
An alternative. justinr General Talk 5 03-10-2010 07:39 PM
Obama and our Big Banking Buddies Phil1 General Talk 22 01-25-2010 10:33 AM
Nature Banking pelican pingflood Post Your Photos! 2 11-21-2009 04:41 PM
Some help with or Alternative for Zenfolio? Bart Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 16 10-21-2009 12:08 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:51 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top