BSG 4.∞ microreview

[wrog]

(... I'd like to think this isn't actually a spoiler, since the thought of somebody reading my stuff closely enough to pick up on this to the extent that it would be a spoiler scares me more than a little bit... but it's going behind a cut anyway, since this is a scary world we live in...)

So, ...

Remember that totally, utterly, completely lame, lame, LAME ending that I was so worried about them doing back in 1978, so much so that I gave the Original Series serious points once it became absolutely clear that they were not going to do that?

Call it the One Redeeming Grace of Galactica: 1980, if you like.

well,...

They did it.

and I think they may have even made it work.

Buh.

Comments

[dougo.livejournal.com]

You mean the "they founded our race" thing?

[wrog]

I mean the whole "The commander's name is Adama ... oh shit they're not to do that are they? Aaaaaaaaargh," (sound of brick narrowly missing the TV set) thing.

It may not be quite the oldest cliché in science fiction, but it's up there. Harlan Ellison would be rolling in his grave if he were actually dead.

[(Anonymous)]

Ha, I never noticed that. He's more of a Moses than Adam, though.

[dougo.livejournal.com]

Sorry, that was me, posting from my G1.

[firni.livejournal.com]

So where's Eve?

[greyaenigma.livejournal.com]

They covered that, believ it or not.

[firni.livejournal.com]

Now I really am confused.

[firni.livejournal.com]

Back in '78, I was too busy coming back in time to tell you not to go to the prom, so no... I don't remember.

[wrog]

you're allowed to be in 2 places at once, you know.

[wrog]

or five. We don't really know how many times that particular time-line has had to be averted.

[firni.livejournal.com]

A lot, given the fit Christian Bale threw on the set.

[firni.livejournal.com]

Which brings me to another question, O Wise One: how is it that Fannie Mae supposedly owns my mortgage (I looked it up) but I'm sending my money to Chase?

Also, is there any difference in the types of loans that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac (Freddie Mac?) take? ie one of them more likely to take jumbo loans?

ALSO: if Fannie Mae and Freddie/Freddy Mac OWN all those mortgages (90%, from what I saw in an article), why are the banks going under?

[wrog]

(1) I would assume it's because they sold it to Chase.
(2) I don't know if there is any difference -- I think Freddy was formed solely to be competition for Fannie; neither of them are supposed to touch jumbo at all
(3) F&F don't own all of the mortgages. what they do (*) is buy mortgages, package them into securities and then sell the securities. the idea being that what they sell, unlike the original mortgages, is guaranteed by them, therefore worth more, hence profit... the downside being that if original mortgage goes south then they are stuck making up the difference to whoever currently owns the security. The banks were doing the same thing but with the subprime/jumbo loans, where the loan terms were dicier to begin with, and they evidently weren't charging enough to cover the risk they were taking on and now they are likewise stuck making up the difference, only the in this case it's bigger because a larger percentage of the jumbo loans have been going under. And if they can't make the payments then the end owners of the securities get fucked because what they have on their books as an asset is worth way less than what they thought it was.

And what made things extra-special-wonky was that the banks were taking all of these obligations-to-make-up-the-difference and likewise packaging them up and selling them to each other (as CDOs) for prices that were basically fantasy because nobody had any idea how to really evaluate them. So it was one big tulip market.

(*) as I understand it from having just read the wikipedia article.

Being in Two Places at Once

[saagaadaa.livejournal.com]

Sure you are. It's called bi-location.