Bits Bucket For August 4, 2008
Please visit the HBB Forum. Post off-topic ideas, links and Craigslist finds here.
Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
Please visit the HBB Forum. Post off-topic ideas, links and Craigslist finds here.
Is Merrill’s kitsch-and-sink CDO fire sale a harbinger of more to come from other subprime mortgage lending kingpins? And what are the implications (if any) for home prices on Main Street USA?
Finance & Economics
Merrill Lynch
Thain takes the pain
Jul 31st 2008 | NEW YORK
From The Economist print edition
An unexpected fire-sale could mark a turning-point
… On July 17th, after Merrill announced its fourth quarterly loss in a row and the sale of its cherished stake in Bloomberg, a financial-information firm, Mr Thain said he believed the bank was in a “very comfortable spot” in terms of capital. Eleven days later Merrill unveiled another whopping write-down of mortgage-linked assets and further steps to shore up its finances with an $8.5 billion share offering.
Merrill’s news doubtless helped confirm the Federal Reserve in its decision, announced on July 30th, to extend its emergency lending facility for Wall Street firms until January (it also lengthened loan periods for commercial banks). But amid the red ink and the flip-flopping, there is also a hint of hope. The write-down stems mainly from a deal to sell collateralised-debt obligations (CDOs) with a face value of $30.6 billion to Lone Star, a vulture investor with a track record of buying distressed financial assets (see article), for a mere 22 cents on the dollar. A market-clearing price may finally be being established for the most toxic assets on banks’ books, albeit at a very low level. And after several false dawns (see chart) Merrill may be able to start looking past its immediate woes.
Paulson, “The US banking system is sound…”
but the real economy is contracting rapidly!
http://www.321gold.com/editorials/engdahl/engdahl080408.html
“”In an eerie echo of President Herbert Hoover in 1932, during a Presidential campaign against Roosevelt, following the stock market crash and collapse of numerous smaller banks, Paulson recently appeared on national TV to declare “our banking system is a safe and sound one.” He added that the list of “troubled” banks “is a very manageable situation.” In fact what he did not say was that the US bank deposit insurance fund, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has a list of problem banks that numbers 90. Not included on that list are banks such as Citigroup, until recently the largest bank in the world.
Behind the reassuring statements from Paulson and others that the “worst is over” the reality of the credit collapse since August 2007 is a deepening economic contraction which I have said several times in this space will surpass the Great Depression of the 1929-1938 period. A good friend who is an unemployed homebuilder in a prosperous part of Arizona just sent me the following list of US department retail store closures. It is worth noting that over 70% of the US GDP is consumer spending and that the entire Federal Reserve strategy of Alan Greenspan after the March 2000 collapse of the stock market bubble, was to bring US interest rates to their lowest levels since the 1930’s in order to stimulate consumer spending on credit, i.e. debt, to avoid “recession.” “”
Sounds like the same hype that was put out to the public in 1929!
“Turning Point” - well, going from bad to worse is a turning point of sorts.
They still don’t get it; the fallout from this mess will be HUGE. The debt to GDP ratio is worse than it was before the Great Depression, and never before in American history have so many with so little owed so much.
All of this, and the worst of the Housing Bubble - the Alt-A, Options-ARMS, and other toxic loans - has yet to hit. Then, we’ll have the “knife catchers” being toasted… and then the secondary effects will kick in (already starting) as this thing cascades upon itself… no, we’re not at any “turning point,” at least not one for the better.
The Dow Industrial trailing P/E is now NIL (like the dot coms in 2000)!
Can you say stagflation?
This is the real 12 month trailing number not forward 12 month estimate.
Check out the ‘Wall Street Journal P/Es & Yields Page on Major Indexes’. Also check out the Gold/Dow ratio on ‘Gold as an investment’ on Wikipedia.
Not sure I understand how P/E can be “nil”. Earnings are not zero, and getting close to zero would produce a P/E approaching infinity, not “nil”.
Anyone understand this reporting?
The Dow 30 stocks have negative net earnings over the last 12 months. The P/E ratio is price of the Dow 30 stocks divided by their net earnings.
P/E = NIL
NIL = none = no P/E’s ratio
The Dow 30 stocks have no P/E ratio like the dot com stocks in 2000!
Slump hits vacation homes in Costa Rica
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/calgarybusiness/story.html?id=812fa0aa-8e81-4f9e-87c8-8de2ded42360
Prices for some vacation houses and condominiums in the Central American country have dropped as much as 40 per cent from their peak a few years ago and sales have slumped at least 30 per cent over the past six months, they say.
“Most of the sales to Americans are in cash after they take out a second mortgage on a property or mortgage a property they have clear title to,” said real estate broker Iris Mailloux.
“I’ve only had seven sales that were (locally) financed in the 15 years I’ve been here.”
He gave an example of a three-bedroom house in the beach town of Tamarindo selling for $490,000, down from an asking price of $650,000.
I was last in Tamarindo about 2 years ago; the building boom was ridiculous. Only a few years prior to that it was a sleepy little town with a surf camp run by a few Americans that were driving through Central America in an old school bus, stopped, and never left. Some European princess attended, it was covered in the magazines, and things took off. 2 years ago it had 1 paved road and was connected to the outside world via a gravel “road”, a few hours drive from Liberia International Airport, which is very little more than a runway and a hanger. Customs was a guy at a folding table. The only other plane at the airport when I arrived was a US DHS AWACS.
Anyway, the housing aimed at foreigners was amazingly overpriced. Locals could still buy land and build a decent home for no more than US$50,000 while more or less the same thing when sold to an American cost $200,000.
Parts of mexico (SMA) are the same way. only dumb americans with cash buying from other dumb americans
As far as I’m concerned, good for the locals for protecting their own interests.
No doubt, people in poorer countries are sick and tired of spoiled Americans coming in and forcing prices up for the locals.
Could’nt agree more Brian. I spent 96 in the Tamarindo area building swimming pools for Americans. Could NOT believe the crap being offered for insane prices, w/o sewer or reliable power. Went thru 4 sets of shocks for my pickup that year driving the road to Liberia.
Made some money, surfed alot, met a sweet girl, got married,left.
Krugman raises a point which I am guessing has not crossed the minds of a vast majority of U.S. homeowners.
Op-Ed Columnist
A Slow-Mo Meltdown
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 4, 2008
A year ago, as the outlines of the current financial crisis were just becoming clear, I suggested that this crisis, unlike a superficially similar crisis in 1998, wouldn’t end quickly.
It hasn’t.
The good news, I guess, is that we’ve been experiencing a sort of slow-motion meltdown, lacking in dramatic Black Fridays and such. The gradual way the crisis has unfolded has led to an angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin debate among economists about whether what we’re suffering really deserves to be called a recession.
Yet even a slo-mo crisis can do a lot of damage if it goes on for a year and counting.
Home prices are down about 16 percent over the past year, and show no sign of stabilizing. The pain from this bust is widely spread: there are millions of American families who didn’t buy mortgage-backed securities and haven’t lost their houses, but have nonetheless been impoverished by the destruction of much or all of their home equity.
I wouldn’t worry too much about homeowners who can afford their payments living in houses whose false excess value is disappearing. That is money that never really existed anyway.
Coming from someone in that situation - I can vouch for that. I’ve lost tons of equity in my home. Not only that, but I’m losing my job - got laid off a couple of months ago, with the end date coming in two months. Am I worried? Not so much.
- I have lots of equity still, since I made a huge down payment.
- I can afford the mortgage no problem (under 2x my current salary, though that’ll probably change as my next job probably won’t pay as well)
- I have saved about 12 months salary, not including severance and vacation pay yet to be received.
- I don’t work in a real-estate-related industry, so the job market is OK (for now at least).
Someone in my situation who had mortgaged to the hilt and not saved would probably be freaking out, especially if they worked in an industry that was driven by the bubble (RE agent thru pirate store manager). There’s an amazing peace that comes with not over-extending your finances, such that even losing your job doesn’t have to be a big deal, at least assuming you can find another within a year or so.
That I hope is the big lesson that comes out of all this. We need to become a nation of savers, not spenders.
That I hope is the big lesson that comes out of all this. We need to become a nation of savers, not spenders.
——————————————————————-
I would sincerely hope so too but the govt subsidizes spending but not saving. One loses principal by saving now.
Sigh - you’re right the government is one big wet towel isn’t it?
Maybe they have not “lost any money”, however I bet they will not be rushing out to spend any money.
Preach it, WAman!
Over the weekend, my 17-year-old refrigerator finally succeeded in what it’s being trying to do for some time. It finally died.
So, a-hunting I have gone.
First stop was Home Depot yesterday morning. I can remember that place being packed on weekend mornings as recently as three years ago.
Not now. They were having what could best be described as an inventory reduction sale, and there weren’t many shoppers.
Since I didn’t find the fridge of my dreams at Home Depot, I went to a locally owned retailer to see what they offered. I’d purchased the deceased fridge from them, so, why not give them another whirl?
I walked into a store that was devoid of all but a handful of shoppers, and a cluster of obviously bored salespeople hanging out by the front door.
The salesguy I spoke with wasn’t too happy with my desire to buy a sub-10 cubic foot fridge for the Arizona Slim Ranch, but what can I say? There’s only me at the Ranch, and I don’t eat that much.
So much for the locally owned retailer.
Bright and early this morn, I hopped on the bike and pedaled up to Lowes. It was during the 7 a.m. hour that I encountered a Lowes that, in years past, would be busy, even at this early hour.
And, lookie-lookie! I found the replacement refrigerator of my dreams! I’ll go back tomorrow to pay for it. In full. That’s because I’m a strong believer in the Ultimate Easy Payment Plan: 100% down, no additional payments.
“Gotta move those refrigerators,
gotta move those color TVs.”
Dire Straits- “Money for Nothing”
(and chicks for free)
I’ll go back tomorrow to pay for it. In full. That’s because I’m a strong believer in the Ultimate Easy Payment Plan: 100% down, no additional payments.
If Lowes is anything like Home Depot, I’m sure you can get that fridge 0% interest, no payments for 12 months… my feeling is whenever someone offers you money for free, you should take it.
I’m with you there.
So much for the locally owned retailer.
Christie’s?
If they haven’t lost their homes, how have they been impoverished by the declining equity? That seems a little dramatic to me. They may be unable to sell (but if they don’t have to, who cares?). But impoverished?
I didn’t buy a bunch of .com stocks back in the day, but the bursting of the tech bubble put a 6 figure hurt on my balanced portfolio. I learned from experience and prepared my portfolio accordingly.
People think their home is not just a shelter but it is also their nest egg. Those folks might feel impoverished.
SUGuy,
Just think about all the publicity that drove the homeowners into the housing markets.
1. govt and private individuals claiming that SS & Medicare will be broke in the near future-do not count on it.
2. guaranteed benefit pensions failing and declining at large corporations.
3. broker/co. directed 401ks with matching company stock of the employer.
4. dramatic reduction in cap gains for the selling of real estate over the last decade.
5. loosing up of bank lending standards up to and including no standards whatsoever.
6. get quick schemes offered by financial specialists.
7. constant marketing on TV and newspapers about rapid rise in home values (can you say for at least the last 40 years, the steady drum beat of buy more house than you can afford due to leverage).
8. static wage increases (no inflation in wages).
9. etc, etc, etc…
And you wonder why people bought into the RE ponzi scheme?
heck, it was like leading the sheep to the slaughter! The minority of the public were the odd balls in not buying into the whole scam.
To answer your question, this is why the public considered RE an investment, even if it was their primary residence.
“The minority of the public were the odd balls in not buying into the whole scam.”
I agree that there was a lot of social, governmental, and financial pressure to buy a home. There is just as much pressure to marry a trophy wife or a rich husband, and to be “successful”. Being responsible, thrifty and unpretentious would make you the butt of jokes.
Americans used to be allergic to debt, but our recent prosperity was driven more by the availability of easy credit and our increasing willingness to become debt slaves.
“The minority of the public were the odd balls in not buying into the whole scam.”
I agree that there was a lot of social, governmental, and financial pressure to buy a home. There is just as much pressure to marry a trophy wife or a rich husband, and to be “successful”. Being responsible, thrifty and unpretentious would make you the butt of jokes.
Trophy wife (check)
Rich (check)
Successful (check)
Did not buy a home yet (a very smart check)
I came very close to buying the whole scam – Smile
Btw In my experience those who have it usually don’t flaunt it
Lostcontrol you have articulated the heard mentality of the American public very nicely.
SUGuy,
actually SUG, it makes a lot of sense for these sheeple to do exactly what they did. They looked around to determine how they were going to provide for their retirement, send their kids to college and assist their aging parents in their retirement. While this was not true 100%, I suspect that most families were just trying to logically figure out a way to take care of their own without poverty.
Isn’t amazing that it may be successful for a few individuals to do the appropriate thing (invest in houses for investment), however when everyone does it we have an absolute mess.
Some call the law of unintended consequences. I say its the disconnect between micro and macro economics.
Everyone, it seems to know micro economics, ie. free enterprise, free markets, supply and demand the invisible hand, etc. Somehow these concepts do not readily translate on the macro level. If anything, on the macro level, it is more “facism” (read govt pvt. corp. collusion) than capitalism.
Live and learn!
What surprises me is so many people get sucked into this and we are just off the heels of the 90s bust.
I mean we had a heck of a time in bush1 the housing bust.
The fact that many people close to retirement got sucked in is astounding. Didn’t they remember the 80s AND 90s busts?
What about the dot com fiasco? We keep hearing about this new paradigm or some such thing.
My guess is a lot of these “victims” full well understood they could get burned. They just were trying to time the market and make a big score. A good number of them clearly had no plan whatsoever and tried a desperation move. I’m not sure we should consider bailouts or rewards for large scale stupidity.
If you are under 55 then you can deal with the damage, if you are over 55 then you SHOULD have know better. When prices skyrocketed some of us asked questions. Another substantial portion of us didn’t get sucked into running up debt.
It would be good if we got a more clear answer on the percentage of the population that got in trouble. I suspect its less than 20% and a lot of those people are repeat screwups.
Remember there is a substantial fraction of the country that owns outright and another fraction that rents. That probably makes up 70% of the population. The delinquencies and problems, while substantial probably only make up <10% of the pools. Enough to whipe out the value of a lot of assets but not enough to cause financial armageddon.
–
Doping Americans is an extremely profitable business and “free market” principles of profits-motive would dictate more doping of the population to its own detriment. The Propaganda Machine will remain in over-drive as long as it generates profits and gives power to people operating it.
The problem of massive doping is fundamental to nature of the system. Legality has fully replaced morality and it has been all downhill.
Jas
I agree totallly the American standard of living is being consistently eroded and the loss of home equity is the final linch pin in the ever expanding spiral down.
I have always said that the next President should explain how the “New Deal” is 70-80 years old and the American people are due a “New” New Deal!!!
The social security mess is MUCH more complicated than simply “not planning on it”. By not planning on it you are assuming a simple government default / a controlled hit of 15% of your income for how ever many years until they can it.
The other option is that they decide to print the money instead of default. This option is probably more in line with what is politically viable and wouldn’t leave everyone who “didn’t plan on it” out in the street.
If they decide to print the money, then you will be hit everywhere with the dollar crashing. The only thing anyone should be planning for in the next 10 years is the collapse of the dollar, the resulting riots, etc. Then be prepared to take advantage of the new economy on the other side of the hyperinflation.
I have about $300k in equity in my home now (still) How can it not be considered a “nest egg.” Hard to ignore it.
Unless you plan to move to a much cheaper locale, that equity is pretty much dead money.
Not to mention opportunity cost of capital.
Your $300k in equity has not been figured correctly. I can pretty much guarantee that.
My favorite line from the column.
“And nothing much can or should be done to support home prices, which are still much too high in inflation-adjusted terms.”
Right on, Prof. K.
Krugman is your typical north east ‘Ivory Tower’ bolshevik academic. Being a contrarian of the Shaeffer sort, I discount every thing he spouts.
Economics
Up, Up and Away …
Half the world is living with double-digit inflation, as boom gives way to bust.
By Rana Foroohar | NEWSWEEK
Published Aug 2, 2008
From the magazine issue dated Aug 11, 2008
For years and years the Economist printed money-supply growth figures for most countries on its last page. I think they may have stopped recently. But it was clear that double-digit rates of growth in money supply were absolutely the norm in almost every country.
Important point raised here: Not only are inflation expectations endogenous, but they are very persistent, and painful to eradicate once they take root. Bernanke apologists take note.
Even if the inflation handwriting is clearly inscribed on the wall in bold letters, I expect no preemptive action from the Bernanke Fed, as the temptation to do nothing rather than potentially precipitate a harder, faster landing will overwhelm them.
Learn the right inflation lessons from the 1970s
Published: August 1 2008 03:00 | Last updated: August 1 2008 03:00
From Mr Edwin M. Truman.
Sir, Mark Gertler (“America must not act rashly over inflation”, July 29) correctly reminds the Federal Reserve not to overreact to rising headline inflation in the US as necessarily presaging a return to the 1970s. However, as someone who lived through that period on the staff of the Federal Open Markets Committee, I believe it is important to learn the right lessons and not to underreact either.
First, Prof Gertler knows but did not state that inflation expectations are endogenous. As long as market participants believe that the Fed will do the right thing, inflation expectations will remain well anchored, as they appear to be at present. However, they remained anchored well into the late 1970s, as demonstrated by a negative inflation premium in 10-year interest rates. It was replaced by a substantial positive inflation premium that persisted into the late 1980s.
Stop it already! Don’t you know we’re in a period of DEflation?! If you don’t believe me, just ask combotechie.
Yeah, luckily there’s so much inflationaly cash laying around otherwise people would have problems paying their bills and states would suffer a revenue shortage.
Do higher inflation expectations lead to higher interest rates and thus more interest for savers?
LOL!
The War on Savers underway apparently has a primary objective of suppressing the inflation risk premium on long term debt, by dangling a perpetual scepter of deflation over the bond market’s head.
Diverting cash from savings has the benefit of propping up the Potemkin village economy and promoting investors to put their income into assets and stocks for a higher return, even though the risk has become essentially unacceptable compared to saner times.
The deflation of dollar valued assets is also beneficial for the trade deficit decreasing demand for imports and increasing demand for imports.
–
Bond market (by which I mean the US Treasuries) is not as stupid as inflationists think. Stupid people don’t play in the bond market. They seek thrills in the Scam Market, especially, in commodities Scams.
A long-time US Treasury long bonds lover,
Jas
Any worries about the Fed accepting MBS toilet paper as collateral? Or the Treasury’s now-explicit guarantee of GSE debt?
Methinks they may also need to come up with some more credible inflation statistics on which to hang their policy target.
Mishkin calls for Fed to adopt inflation objective
By Krishna Guha in Washington
Published: July 29 2008 03:00 | Last updated: July 29 2008 03:00
The Federal Reserve should adopt a specific numerical inflation objective, outgoing governor Frederic Mishkin said yesterday, saying it would help the US central bank deal with financial -crises and other economic shocks.
a specific numerical inflation objective, hopefully something realistic like 10%?
(if they follow ECB policy, that means that a tad over 20% would still be acceptable in real life).
The real deficit and how we came to it
The Bush Administration is projecting the deficit for the next White House will be about half a trillion. But Allan Sloan takes Scott Jagow through the numbers and explains why it’s probably closer to $900 billion.
That is, the are spending the entire excess regressive payroll taxes people have paid since 1983 to “save Social Security” and then some. So all that extra money is gone. As I wrote here:
http://www.r8ny.com/blog/larry_littlefield/social_security_the_generational_betrayal_reprised.html
Today’s older generations have cashed in our future, a future that was built for us by the work and toil and sacrifice and blood of those who came before.
Our generation has been royally screwed in an intergenerational Ponzi scheme known as Social Security, and the next generation in line is not sufficiently large nor wealthy for us to repeat the scam.
You’re wrong. Social security has nothing to do with our current economic debacle. Our generation has also been royally screwed by the Wall Street Ponzi scheme.
The “Reagan Revolution” created poorly designed tax laws, exotic debt instruments and Greenspan’s bad monetary policy that resulted in seducing savers into overly speculative markets supported by “creative” accounting, securitization, and buying off ratings agencies.
A policy of putting stockholders over workers and reinvestment has outsourced most of our domestic industry, risking our national security for the short term interests of specuvestors.
Thank you, NoSingleOne! In just three grafs, you’ve said it all.
You nailed it, NoSingleOne!!!
I can understamd the anger about paying for social security (I am self employed so I pay 2 X ) but I have never much understood the despise of the boomers for so called taking advantage…SS was created in 1935 long before the first baby boomer was born…They inherited the program they did not create it…If there is any fault for the system I suggest we direct that anger at congress & Presidents and not the group who just followed the law that was in place during their working years…
Don’t forget the 1983 deal to “save Social Security.” Blame Greenspan.
Usually you have some very important observations, however SS is the best program ever created!
Like it or hate it, it is noteworthy that similar problems have happened before and disaster was averted, if only for a few decades, but adjusting revenue collected and benefits paid out. This raises the possibility that more adjustments could either fix the problem or drastically reduce its magnitude.
Social Security is small compared to medicare.
The fact remains that the government has deferred trillions of dollars of debt by borrowing from “itself”. The net effect is the same as if they had never raised the social security tax rate. They created a ponzi scheme where one generation pays for the previous, then changed it to a “forced savings” plan where the “boomers will pay for their own retirement via higher taxes today AND their parents”. And then they spent that extra tax revenue to mask the true deficit. Now they want to shift it back to a “pay as you go” plus interest on all of those SS taxes they collected in the past.
Fact remains that even with 100% income tax we couldn’t pay for it. Even if the economy remained strong we couldn’t pay for it. So there is no safety net. And we cannot avoid the massive poverty (whether realized via hyperinflation or hyper-defaults).
Adjustments have been under way for some time. One reason the feds consistently under-report inflation is to keep the annual increases in SS payments and other entitlements (I love that word) to trivial amounts.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/business/04lend.html?hp
I know this has been talked about on this blog before, but it’s the first time that I’ve seen something like this in the NYT. Housing problems are not limited to sub-prime.
“The percentage of mortgages in arrears in the category of loans one rung above subprime, so-called alternative-A mortgages, quadrupled to 12 percent in April from a year earlier. Delinquencies among prime loans, which account for most of the $12 trillion market, doubled to 2.7 percent in that time.”
“Defaults are likely to accelerate because many homeowners’ monthly payments are rising rapidly. The higher bills come as home prices continue to decline and banks tighten their lending standards, making it harder for people to refinance loans or sell their homes. Of particular concern are “alt-A” loans, many of which were made to people with good credit scores without proof of their income or assets.”
“Subprime was the tip of the iceberg,” said Thomas H. Atteberry, president of First Pacific Advisors, a investment firm in Los Angeles that trades mortgage securities. “Prime will be far bigger in its impact.”
The MSM has an annoying habit of ignoring icebergs lurking in the shipping lanes up until the time they are struck.
I found the article still overly optimistic as it focused too heavily on inability to pay in my opinion. Once prices fall below 25% (which they already have in many areas), many of those with great credit, fixed rate mortgages, and more than enough money to easily make the payments will find it most cost effective to just walk away, especially states with non-recourse statutes in place. Why would anyone want to bring $200k to the closing to pay off the old mortgage if the state says you dont have to worry about it? Ability to pay is irrelevant if you want out and you are are not required to pay a deficiency judgement.
That’s a very good point. Does anyone know how many states are non-recourse?
It’s my understanding that all you have to do is refinance and the non-recourse protection is lost. And you’re not shielded from your HELOC or 2nd mortgage balance.
This is very true. The non-resourse protection applies only for purchase, 1st mortgage. It doesn’t apply once you refi, cashout or not, and it also doesn’t cover 2nds. So the non-recourse is applicable to a relatively small percentage of homeowners, as the majority underwater types are either refis, 80-10-10, etc…
“as the majority underwater types are either refis, 80-10-10″
These % of applicable loans grows significantly once you pass the 25% drop level which I why I really see it as the point of no return, once you hit this level, the next 10% or more is almost certain as a whole new class is impacted (e.g., the entire 20% down crowd that purchased near bubble peak prices). There has been talk whether refi kills qualification in CA, but I do not think this has been decided yet and no such deficiency judgement has been upheld. I didnt research this, but saw this point in a few articles. Feel free to let me know if you have info to the contrary.
True. My husband and I bought a home in 1993 in California. Took a home equity loan in 1995. Husband lost job. Tried to sell in 1998 but was upside down (sound familiar).
Couldn’t sell so we walked away (sound familiar). The second came after us. We had to BK on them. I’m not proud of this fact but it was the best thing for us to do at the time.
We’ve been renting and SAVING since.
Proving Tim’s point…and there will be a whole heck of a lot of lost jobs coming down the pike.
http://www.helocbasics.com/list-of-non-recourse-mortgage-states-and-anti-deficiency-statutes/
Think it’s any coincidence that CA, FL and AZ are on the list?
http://www.heloc basics.com/list-of-non-recourse-mortgage-states-and-anti-deficiency-statutes/
Use this URL without the space between heloc and basics. When I try to post links I think that Ben’s spam filter blocks me.
(Not Legal Advise but) I believe Cali is non-recourse for purchase money first mortgage…
Walking away from an underwater mortgage hurts the banks but it also means the borrower can reduce their mortgage/rental payments, thus giving them more disposable income with which to support the economy.
This is very true. But leaving the bank stuck with the debt forces them to write the debt down which depletes its reserves.
Depleted bank reserves must be replenished which means money circulating throughout the economy stops circulating once it hits the banks balance sheet. That means the bank is now sucking out from the economy the money it previously put into the economy.
So, while the individual may benfit from walking away from an underwater debt obligation collectively everyone must suffer the consequences of a diminishing supply of this circulating money.
What’s the monthly payment on a hundred thousand dollar loan, something like $1,000? If so, then that means monthly payments of 100 of these loans must be collected to replace just one of these loans that has been written off. This is a very big deal when millions of these loans are written out of existence; there aren’t enough performing loans with enough payments to make up the difference and keep the bank solvent.
Amazingly some are still arguing that what is going on in the housing markets is no big deal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/03/AR2008080301572.html
“We conclude that declines in house prices are highly likely to remain small. Our analysis reveals, unsurprisingly, that foreclosures and home prices have negative effects on each other over time, but this does not imply a vicious cycle of collapsing prices. Our models predict that as foreclosures continue to climb in many states, house prices will remain flat or decline in those states — but will not collapse.
One reason for this is that the effect of foreclosure shocks on house prices is small. Furthermore, other fundamental factors (such as employment growth and a slowing of the growth of the housing supply over the past year and a half) will cushion the impact of foreclosures.”
“In our own research, we use quarterly historical (1981-2007) state-level data on the OFHEO price index, foreclosures, home sales, permits and employment to explore how foreclosure shocks affect future home prices.”
This period of study includes nothing comparable to the current bubble.
i conclude that based on evolutionary scientific precepts that pigs will fly.
Yeah, I nobody will read this, but I am pretty sure I had pork on my last flight.
Dean Baker takes the Post to task.
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=08&year=2008&base_name=the_post_oped_page_still_sees
“In addition, extrapolations from periods in which local periods experienced no extraordinary run-up in prices are not likely to be informative about periods following extraordinary price increases. The decline in the NASDAQ following the late 90s bubble could not have been predicted from any analysis of its price fluctuations in the 70s and 80s.”
Scary thought when the insiders expect prime defaults to triple in the coming MONTHS!
Housing Lenders Fear Bigger Wave of Loan Defaults
The first wave of Americans to default on their home mortgages appears to be cresting, but a second, far larger one is quickly building.
Homeowners with good credit are falling behind on their payments in growing numbers, even as the problems with mortgages made to people with weak, or subprime, credit are showing their first, tentative signs of leveling off after two years of spiraling defaults.
In a conference call with analysts last month, James Dimon, the chairman and chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, said he expected losses on prime loans at his bank to triple in the coming months and described the outlook for them as “terrible.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/business/04lend.html?hp
This is a completely predictable financial disaster to anyone familiar with Ivy Zelman’s famous reset chart. Nonetheless, I expect the MSM to feign startled bewilderment as these falling shoes hit the ground over the next three years.
And what will this do to Freddie and Fannie? Anyone? Anyone?
Not sure, now that they have an explicit too-big-to-fail guarantee, courtesy of Uncle Sam.
That is false. There are US government agencies that now have the been given by Congress the power to spend up to $800 billion. Even if all of that money is spend and all of it goes to Fannie and Freddie, which is not the plan, there would still be several hundred billion in uncovered debts. They didn’t get a blank check, that money is to be shared by other charity cases.
It makes sense to criticize what is being done, but to state that there is an explicit guarantee as you have is just flat out wrong. That is a lie. How is it that lies help at this point? There is no “explicit too-big-to-fail guarantee, courtesy of Uncle Sam”. Things could go that way over time, but all you have to point out now is $800 billion in someone else’s hands and that is several hundred billion short of what is needed, not to mention that even a meteoric fall would still mean that the next Congress is going to have as much say as this one does and might go in some other direction. Seriously, this total lack of respect for facts and reason and logic is utterly shameful. Such a guarantee would matter greatly, but there isn’t one. Hyperbole and distraction are not helpful.
“That is false.”
Whatever you say, Mr. Mole.
Stuff this in your pipe and smoke it.
Op-Ed Contributor
Too Big to Fail, or to Survive
By WILLIAM POOLE
Published: July 27, 2008
CRITICS of the Congressional housing package complain that we are now committing taxpayers to huge new outlays to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That view is wrong: Congressional inaction over the past 15 years had already committed taxpayers to the bailout.
Congress could and should have required Fannie and Freddie — which enjoy a peculiar and highly advantageous status as quasi-public agencies and quasi-private companies — to maintain more capital, but didn’t. Now the costs from Congressional inaction are becoming painfully apparent, and they cannot be avoided. To permit the two mortgage giants to default would set off a worldwide crisis. But we can decide what should become of Freddie and Fannie after this crisis. The best option is one getting little mention in Washington: get rid of them.
Because the government cannot permit Fannie and Freddie to default, their obligations are part and parcel of the full-faith-and-credit obligations of the United States. Thus, the national debt, usually viewed as the $5 trillion held by the public, is really $10 trillion once we add the Fannie and Freddie obligations and the mortgage-backed securities they guarantee.
The debt limit was just raised to 10.6 Trillion from 9.8 and we are at a national debt of roughly 9.6T. How the f*ck does this guy get away with saying the national debt is 5 Trillion? Is this some sort of “new math” spin that the PTB is trying out on us? I don’t doubt it’ll work either now that we’ve proven what a bunch of math wizards the general population of the US is by witness of their loan defaults.
They’re using data from before the bush presidency… no problems here, move along please
It means more trips to the golf course perhaps or some other perk. What do you think?
I think what makes these loans AltA and not prime is that they did not meet Fannie/Freddie requirements.
Right. No-doc and neg-ams.
The most dangerous loans of all, IMHO.
Has there ever been another point in U.S. economic history when it was so easy for the guys at the top of the economic pyramid to screw those below them and get away with it?
PAGE ONE
Companies Tap Pension Plans
To Fund Executive Benefits
Little-Known Move
Uses Tax Break Meant
For Rank and File
By ELLEN E. SCHULTZ and THEO FRANCIS
August 4, 2008; Page A1
At a time when scores of companies are freezing pensions for their workers, some are quietly converting their pension plans into resources to finance their executives’ retirement benefits and pay.
Much like other benefits-consulting firms, Watson Wyatt Worldwide Inc. markets the Qserp, or “qualified” supplemental executive retirement plan, as a way to give top officers bigger benefits from the regular pension plan “without [necessarily] increasing staff benefits at all.” Read a page from Watson Wyatt’s Web site on the “quirky executive perk.”
In recent years, companies from Intel Corp. to CenturyTel Inc. collectively have moved hundreds of millions of dollars of obligations for executive benefits into rank-and-file pension plans. This lets companies capture tax breaks intended for pensions of regular workers and use them to pay for executives’ supplemental benefits and compensation.
The practice has drawn scant notice. A close examination by The Wall Street Journal shows how it works and reveals that the maneuver, besides being a dubious use of tax law, risks harming regular workers. It can drain assets from pension plans and make them more likely to fail. Now, with the current bear market in stocks weakening many pension plans, this practice could put more in jeopardy.
Silence from the supply side corporatist apolgistas.
What does corporatism have to do with supply-side economics?
It is the corporatists who benefit the most from the supply side lie.
Supply-side economics is a theory, not a statement of fact, so the word “lie” is inapposite, even if you disagree with it.
Also, supply-side economics has nothing to do with recommending that companies play tax games to skew pension benefits to top executives (the original subject of this thread).
Such shenanigans only become possible when corporate statists in government grant far too much power to large companies, in violation of free-market principles.
Such shenanigans only become possible when corporate statists in government grant far too much power to large companies, in violation of free-market principles.
On the contrary, such shenanigans become possible because the “supply siders” and mutant variations thereof, whether in the governmental sector or not, believe that “tax games,” rampant deregulation, funny money accounting and numerous other dubious ploys serve to help the bottom line, which helps the fat white guys in the top line, which in turn helps all the rest of us through the miracle of Trickledown Nirvana.
Voila!
ET, so you think the intent of the “variations” was to act in the best interest of “the rest of us”?
So these are basically good-hearted folks with the best of intentions.
become possible because the…variations…believe that…dubious ploys…helps all the rest of us
You’re a kind and generous soul (if a tad gullible).
LVG, skewing tax policy is precisely the aim of the supply side lie. It serves to benefit only those who have the resources ($$$) to leverage the system and leaves the burden of unmet revenues, or more accurately, deficits on those who don’t. Not only do you and I have to fund these tax cuts for the supply side liars, we have to pay a 6% premium in financing.
Nice system eh?
So these are basically good-hearted folks with the best of intentions.
You’re a kind and generous soul (if a tad gullible).
Uh, no.
You seem to have entirely misread my previous comments … perhaps you missed the sarcasm.
In fact, I was saying that supply siders and their various mutant strains are A.) cretins who fundamentally misunderstand economic realities, or B.) unscrupulous bastards out to bilk their fellow citizens.
Does that clarify my position?
Ok, that helps. In which case you basically agree with LVG then. Your opening line “On the contrary,” threw me off.
My “on the contrary” preface was in disagreement with LVG’s comment that supply-side economics has nothing to do with recommending that companies play tax games to skew pension benefits to top executives — I agree with Exeter in believing that “supply side” and “corporatism” go hand-in-hand as mutually beneficial, interlinked philosophies. “Tax games,” outsourcing, promoting corporate welfare, ignoring safety regulations and other means of profitably subverting the law are seemingly fair game to each group.
Agree with exeter and ET.
“Supply-side” economics favors capital over labor, and therefore seeks to benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle-class, thought that’s not explicitly stated.
The sheeple are supposed to believe that corporate and executive wealth will “trickle down” on us. We’re getting trickled on, alright.
For once Exeter I have nothing to say about your liberal rants.
We should have a lot better protections for peoples pensions. I have one but consider it to have zero value until proven otherwise.
I’m trying to strike a balance between regulation/enforcement that is helpful and that which is not. For investors/workers/consumers aka people… we really could use government help as an independent third party to protect us from conflicts of interest. Its tough because agencies like FDA, SEC and OTS are overwhelmed, corrupted or unable to keep up.
I also suspect that more and more people will lose confidence in the markets and solve the problem that way. Like to see more criminal prosecution of CEOs that played out illegal accounting tricks but don’t see it happening.
The public just doesn’t have any friends in washington. I’d vote for Paul/Green or anybody not connected to Rep/Dem at this point.
as an independent third party
Except they never are.
Isn’t it interesting that a loon comes out and throws a worn out label when the truth is told about the supply side lie.
And guess what — pension income is exempt from state and local income taxes in New York — no matter how high that pension income is.
pension income is exempt from state and local income taxes ??
Thats why we are seeing some flight out of Cali to Nv., TX., & Fl…
But for how long?
Sure NY can sell off their bridges and expressways this year, but what happens 5 years down the pike?
They sell Manhattan back to the Indians? Or the Dutch? Or England?
Yes. The period before The New Deal was similar.
Easy predictions:
1) President Obama will serve up a New New Deal.
2) R-cans will pin the blame on his policies for the worst stock market crash in half a century, forgetting the role of the Greenspan Fed in creating unsustainable asset price inflation.
President Obama will serve up a New New Deal ??
I agree Bear…How do you bet the futures ?? Water infrastructure..??…Unions ???
technology and health care.
Obama New Deal …
Third Hour - 2nd recording.
http://www.financialsense.com/fsn/main.html
And a large swath of voters will believe the Rs? I wonder if they’ve dipped the stupid well one too many times. The R party may not survive in its current form. It all depends on what fills the void.
A plague of black swans descends on Wall Street…
MORE
INVESTING IN FUNDS
After a Tough First Half, Pros Say Where They Went Wrong
By DIYA GULLAPALLI
August 4, 2008; Page R1
It’s treacherous out there: Mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac face losses so potentially steep that the Treasury Department has taken steps to prop them up. Household-name banks and giant Wall Street firms are selling family jewels to shore up their capital.
Home values keep falling, oil prices are punishingly high, and consumer confidence has taken a dive. For investors, it’s easy to go wrong — even if you are a veteran fund manager with one of the best long-term records around.
The average U.S. diversified stock mutual fund was down 11.7% for the first seven months of the year, the worst showing for that period since the tough bear market of 2002, according to preliminary Lipper Inc. figures.
Well, I’m still out.
Ya’ll let me know when to jump back in, okay? ;->
Do they ring a bell at the bottom..?
http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080724/NEWS/807240439
City suicide attempts double
PORTSMOUTH — When police officers spent 90 minutes persuading a man not to jump from the Piscataqua River bridge early Saturday morning, it was the 56th suicide-related call in the city during the past year.
“Epidemic” is how police and fire department chaplain Father Angelo Pappas describes the escalating number.
“For a small town, I can’t believe the number of suicides. I’m baffled,” he said. “And this is a problem that is going to get worse, especially as the economy gets worse.”
On a brighter note, some people are trying to solve the housing affordability problem in Portsmouth:
http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080803/BIZ/808030311/-1/ARCHIVE
“The couple attributed (a friend)’s death to the fact that, like many other employees in Seacoast communities, the fire lieutenant could not afford to live in the community where he worked and had to travel on sometimes treacherous roadways just to earn a living. They decided immediately to turn the apartment they were building in their new home for extra income into one that would be rented for a much less to others whose income did not allow them to live in the town where they worked.”….
“That was the birth of Teach a Man to Fish, a private, for-profit company that is focused on rehabilitating housing on the Seacoast where those who serve the region’s communities in either municipal or service industry jobs can afford to live.
So far, the couple owns and manages two other work-force housing projects: a 10-unit building in Dover and a seven-unit building in South Berwick, Maine.”
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he’ll invite himself over for dinner. — Calvin Keegan.
Teach a man to fish and he will keep on fishing until there are few fish left in the ocean.
and of course, before the fish run out completely he will be demanding more subsidies and damage compensation from the government because his fat profit is declining. With the right to fish (or farm, or raise cattle etc) comes the entitlement of becoming a multimillionaire within a few years (at least in the Netherlands, but I don’t think it is much different in other developed nations).
Um,nhz, it was private owners helping those people out in Portsmouth. There was no gov money involved.
CarrieAnn: OK, glad to hear that at least in this case US policy makes more sense than support policies over here
Build a man a fire & he’ll be warm until it goes out. Set a man on fire & he’ll be warm for the rest of his life.
tresho, you are my hero, I owe you a gyro -
Now that’s the kind of story I prefer to hear.
In US, gas prices mean more riders, fewer buses
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080804/ap_on_re_us/mass_transit_gas_prices
According to a May survey by the American Public Transportation Association, about one in five of the nation’s transit agencies have cut service over the past year. They include Cleveland; Corpus Christi, Texas; and San Diego, which has seen one of the largest increases in bus ridership in the country.
The cutbacks come at a time of increasing interest in public buses and trains: The transportation association says people took 2.6 billion trips on public transportation nationwide in the first three months of 2008 — almost 88 million more than last year.
I wonder if the same corporate lobbies that demand land subsidies, tax abatements and taxpayer financing where there to support the people in their demands for a continuation of a bus route.
Got stagflation?
latest news
U.S. PCE inflation up 4.1% in past year, most in 17 years
ECONOMIC REPORT
Planned job cuts up 33% this year
July’s announcements rise to 103,312, led by airlines
By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
Last update: 7:31 a.m. EDT Aug. 4, 2008
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — U.S. corporations have stepped up the pace of layoffs this year, according to an unscientific survey released Monday by outplacement firm Challenger Gray & Christmas.
After seeing planned job cuts rise to 103,312 in July, corporate announcements of layoffs have risen 33% so far in 2008 compared with the same period a year ago. Corporations have announced the elimination of 579,260 jobs so far this year.
July’s total of 103,312 is up 26% from June and up 141% from last July.
Transportation companies, such as airlines, announced 17,051 layoffs in July, followed by 15,517 in the financial services.
So far financial firms have said they’ll eliminate 100,775 jobs this year.
“We have seen job cuts increase in the majority of industries that we track, indicating that the downturn, which was isolated to the housing and financial sectors just a few months ago, has spread throughout much of the economy,” said John Challenger, CEO of the firm that released the survey.”
For anyone who is not well-versed in government acronyms, PCE = personal consumption expenditures (e.g., food and energy costs). Burgeoning PCE inflation coupled with increasing unemployment and stagnant incomes serves to drive another nail through the heart of U.S. housing demand. Falling home prices are a likely result.
As long as the Ministry of Rectification (MinRec) continues to ‘manage’ Mr. 6Pack’s expectations, everything will be fine. Be calm. All is well. It’s only temporary and containable.
Winston
Economic management by mendacity is hitting a thick brick wall of economic reality right about now.
Reality is not going to stop MinRec’s efforts. It creates new realities daily. Reality is a bump in the road, a minor obstacle. Already there is much talk about the next stimulus package and the next F and F bill. We shall continue to prosper as they save us.
Inflation-adjusted consumer spending falls as prices surged by largest amount since 1981
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080804/economy.html
The Commerce Department reported Monday that consumer spending dipped by 0.2 percent in June, after removing the effects of higher prices, the poorest showing since a similar drop in February. The higher prices reflected a big surge in gasoline costs and helped to drive an inflation gauge tied to consumer spending up by 0.8 percent in June, the biggest increase since a 1 percent rise in February 1981.
The blight of abandoned homes.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080804/ARTICLE/808040344/2055&title=Nobody_wants_derelict_duties
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=812131553
Meredith Whitney on CNBC talking about her past direct hit predictions and making some new ones for the housing and credit industries.
NEW YORK (Fortune) — The credit crisis is far from over, star analyst Meredith Whitney tells Fortune magazine in its upcoming issue.
She also argues that banks need to “get real” about how they’re valuing their problem mortgage-related debt, much as Merrill Lynch has now done. Merrill recently sold a large package of toxic mortgage debt for just 22 cents on the dollar.
Whitney’s idea of “real” is pretty drastic. Whereas most banks are estimating 20% to 25% peak-to-trough declines in housing prices, the Case-Shiller housing futures traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange portend a much steeper 33% decline, she points out.
In fact, Whitney thinks the actual declines will be worse - closer to 40% - because of the loss of the securitization market and the paucity of mortgage credit available. And that means more defaults: “The consumer’s ability to refinance his way out of trouble has diminished greatly.”
“Merrill recently sold a large package of toxic mortgage debt for just 22 cents on the dollar”
The word “sold” is used when describing that transaction even though its also been reported that ML is lending the buyer most of the money to complete the sale.
Anyone want to dissect that one?
Put down a non-refundable 6 cents on the dollar downpayment with the option to purchase the whole thing for an additional 16 cents on the dollar if it turns out to be worth more than 16 cents on the dollar (anything over 16 cents will make the loss less than the non-refundable 6 cents).
The “buyers” are still betting it is worth at least 22 cents on the dollar, but their immediate downside risk is limited to 6 cents, and total downside risk is limited to 6 cents plus whatever they have to pay on the loan.
Oh, so that’s set up to protect the buyer. I thought perhaps it was a way to maintain a form of ownership for the seller while getting it off their books.
Thanks polly!
Well, you are sort of right. If the CDOs are not eventually determined to be worth at least the 16 cents, then the sellers will probably get stuck with them again since the buyers will default on the loan and the seller will get the CDOs back as the property securing the loan.
Ownership has changed hands from a legal persective, but then, so has a house that is sold even if the same bank that gave a mortgage to the seller gives a mortgage to the buyer. From a risk perspective, this isn’t a finished transaction.
“From a risk perspective, this isn’t a finished transaction.”
That’s what I was looking for. Thx!
My interpretation: 6-cents/$ was the buyer’s bid. 22-cents/$ was ML’s asking price. Buyer did not blink, so ML closed the deal at the bid price, but with the caveat that they get the asking price is things go better than buyer’s expectations.
Quite a wide bid-ask spread, IMHO.
ML still holds all the risk in between bid and ask. Buyer’s risk is capped at 6-cents/$. Buyer gets all the upside above 22-cents/$.
Thanks for that, Prime. I saw Maria Bartuaromo *sp?* grilling John Thaine at 4pm today on this very question. Seems a lot of his investors weren’t feeling too warm and fuzzy about it either.
I have to admit, he sure is a smooth dancer.
Stupid financial markets comment of the decade? Everyone and his dog knows the Fed is going to stand pat on interest rates this week.
August 4, 2008 9:37 A.M.ET
BULLETIN
Wall St. tips to early losses
Trading kicks off on a weaker note as investors key their strategies to the Fed’s interest-rate decision on Tuesday.
Sounds like the omnipotent Fed badly needs some Viagra.
U.S. ECONOMY
Worst inflation in 27 years
Inflation-adjusted consumer spending dips 0.2% in June, as personal incomes rise and overall inflation runs hotter than anticipated.
• Stagflation rears ugly head (24/7 Wall St.) | Fed unlikely to adjust rates
CNBC reporting Wall Street bonuses could be down 30% to 40%. I believe our NY governor was preparing us for a rough patch based on a 20% cut of Wall St. bonuses.
I still do not understand the concept of giving bonuses to executives of companies that lose money.
In years in which their company makes money (despite the fact that it is a good economy and a money throwing turds at a yes/no chart could have made decisions that make money) they get bonuses for their “outstanding leadership and results.”
In years in which they don’t make money, they get bonuses because the company “needs stable leadership during these challenging times.” Please note that these “challenging times” may also take place during the good economic monkey turd years, but that would require the board to compare their CEO buddy’s performance to the rest of the sector and math (other than golf scores) is hard.
I still do not understand the concept of giving bonuses to executives of companies that lose money. Think of it this way, it’s not about whether or not the company makes or loses money, it’s about how much boodle the real company owners can carry off. Get it?
Gosh, I’m just heartbroken. Arrogant money boys getting paid less? I’d better get out my violin.
It’s right here in this matchbox…
My apologies if this was posted earlier.
At least the Boston Globe stops cheerleading long enough to print some reader opinions:
“Hackles rising over bailout
I have an idea for a piece the Globe should write (”Inside Congress’s housing repair kit,” July 31): an analysis of two buyers who bought roughly the same house in the same neighborhood for the same price (say $500,000) at the peak of the market. The first buyer does things the right way: 20 percent down, documents income, fixed interest rate, mortgage = 28 percent of monthly income. The second puts nothing down, lies about his income, gets a negative amortization adjustable rate mortgage that resets so that he now pays 40 percent of his income. Home prices drop 20 percent since they bought.
The first guy has lost all his equity. The second guy gets to participate in Barney Frank’s and Chris Dodd’s great bailout plan. He negotiates his loan down to $360,000 and gets a lower fixed rate than the first guy since his new mortgage is subsidized by the Federal Housing Administration (read: the US taxpayer). He is rewarded for stupidity and lying.
Do I have this right? Is this still the USA we live in?
I have never in my life been more sickened by a piece of legislation than this one.”
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/08/03/overlooking_a_teeny_fact/?s_campaign=8315
Correction: This is the Senator Richard Shelby(r) bailout plan.
Oh, stop. No one has their hands clean on this.
About the buyers in question… Well, the guy that lied about his income wouldn’t be eligible for the reduced plan if he gets caught.
Further he probably can’t afford a mortgage on a 300K FHA loan either.
Finally, guy 2 will probably default anyway and the comps will get pushed down making the loss of equity a moot point i.e equal with respect to getting a new FHA loan.
Also note the interest rates are pushing upwards so that guy 2 probably isn’t getting anything out of this anyway.
Guy 2 gets to go to the coming agriculture work camps when he defaults…
Guy 1 may be still non-recourse.
The letters to editor have been much more insightful than the articles themselves. I’m not sure the Globe’s business editors are looking out for the reader, either b/c they don’t fully understand the real estate issues or b/c they like a nice upbeat message, constantly, unquestioned.
I don’t see the problem or the bailout.
The first borrower has lost some equity, but other than that doesn’t really have a problem and is likely not to walk unless significantly underwater. So, they bought property during an insane record boom and are now shocked, shocked to see that the boomtime asset they spent on has lost value? That is really not excusable behavior, is it?
The second borrower is toast and will likely walk without some kind of intervention. What this seems to argue for is more aggressive reduction of principle. It is notable that the first borrower is also in a great position to negotiate principle reductions directly. If necessary arm twisting can be applied by exposing the problems with the appraisal used for a suddenly the equity is gone type loan.
There was a boom and people loved it. Regulations that had been considered essential for close to a century were thrown away. Loans were split and traded without even proper records of what properties secured them. The way to avoid unjust movements of funds is to catch bubbles as they grow. Once the downside is around there is not much to do but choose between bad fates. If justice crusaders prevent government involvement with principal reductions and that speeds up the process by allowing more loans to fail, what then? There is an implicit assertion here that a fast correction will be better and more just, but economics suggests that a speedy correction will have a magnified negative impact on labor markets. Is making things worse for millions of workers really necessary or helpful at this time? Is it morally superior to let a bubble get out of control, then make a big huff about closing the barn doors afterward?
But, the bail out plan is discrimination . You are rewarding the guy who put nothing down and most often times didn’t qualify long term for the toxic adjustable loan ,while the guy who put 20% or more down will lose his savings and he/she qualified for the loan .
Sure it might keep the guy who went on a sub-prime loan at a low down payment in his house ,but the guy who was responsible is the guy who really had a loss of all his savings .It really isn’t right to penalize the guy who actually lost life savings of a down payment ,the guy who really had skin in the game ,who really qualified for their loan . How about the people who took out equity who will benefit by the housing bail out ? Certainly those people are getting a double reward .
There has never ever been anything fair about this Housing Bill . I have always believed that the housing downturn was a matter for the Courts to solve as well as the Banks re-working loans if they thought it was in their best interest ,(on their own dime ).
There are many hidden reasons for the bail-outs ,in IMHO ,that have to do with helping the lenders and avoiding Court actions and
bailing out certain investors from the Secondary Market . You got to figure that so much “foul play ” went on during the boom that
it would blog down the legal system for years .
No ,there is nothing fair about the Housing Bill ,and there is nothing fair about the savers and people who didn’t buy into the
housing scam being penalized by the greedy “acts” of others by inflation and being taxed for such funds to save Firms and people who really were taking big gambles with other peoples money .
My mind is blow over how many people will be destroyed or reduced financially in one form or another by this crime-ridden housing boom in which many who don’t deserve it will benefit or will never have to answer for their mania or criminal behavior .
That being said ,in spite of it not being fair ,the Housing Bill does offer some relief for some people who really might want to keep their homes ,(but this is something that I believe the lenders should do on their own ,because of what they did ).
Real estate is a cartel. It has free market influences, but the market is heavily manipulated. Understanding the manipulation is key to doing well.
The manipulators are the government at the base, slurping up huge quantities of mortgages that the market would not absorb, via Fannie and Freddie. The politicians like high RE prices due to the property tax taken in. Money gives politicians power and that is their narcotic.
The NAR, NAHB, and big financial companies keep the politicians well lubricated with contributions/bribes, to pass the legislation they wish to see passed, all geared towards supporting RE prices with government action.
So, RE is a cartel.
But, with the relentless borrow and spend policies of the last many years, then adding this giant bailout into the mix, plus the guaranteeing of Fannie and Freddie - eventually, the currency may take a big hit and unleash the inflation genie as the currency devalues.
After all, a dollar is supposed to mean more than just be a piece of paper. It is supposed to be a store of value. Borrow enough, then have to backstop something like Fannie and Freddie, there could be serious consequences.
There is of course, the concept of “moral hazard”.
I have learned that during the next real estate boom to buy the most expensive house I feel comfortable lying to get and either make a lot of money, or wait for that government bailout that will be sure to come.
Either way, I will end up in a nicer house.
peter schiff:
http://www.safehaven.com/article-10887.htm
Gold and Silver seem to be flirting with their 200DMAs. Sort of looks like something has to give, by October maybe. About a year ago, it was a breakout toward the moon.
BTW, my busines is having a great year riding a huge Titanium Sponge boom and solar cell manufacturing investment. As of July already sold more equipment by 2x than any previous year. All of a sudden, it is quiet enough to hear a pin drop.
Word is that WCI is in Chapter 11 and will likely default on 1 billion + of debt. I seem to remember the consensus on this blog was that that WCI was doomed (I agreed). Out of the blue, Carl Icahn stepped in and a few people thought perhaps he knew something we didn’t.
Seems not. Even the masters of the universe sometimes get burnt.
WCI is trading at $0.60. Ha!
At last - the first good-sized homebuilder goes under. Many more to come, I’m sure…
Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) — WCI Communities Inc., the homebuilder whose chairman is billionaire investor Carl Icahn, plans to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after failing to obtain new financing and losing 90 percent of its value in the past year.
How come so many billionaire investors are highly adept at running American businesses into the ground?
Having worked for one or two of these, there’s a “don’t tell me the problems, only show me solutions” attitude.
There is a real failure to understand that sometimes the best solution given the circumstances is where you lose the least amount of money.
When this happens, the smarter people just leave the sinking ship rather than be vilified for (a) both understanding the problem, and (b) giving the right solution.
The sycophants stick around saying, “it’s all good” until one fine day, the ship hits the iceberg.
That’s exactly right. The smart people are the first to leave. They pursue growth opportunities. The lucky ones are the first to get canned. They find new jobs and recover quickly. The others stick around and stab each other in the back until the doors close.
I don’t know if its fair to say that he ran the company into the ground. Sometime in late 2006, he purchased around 15% of the company because he felt that the shares were undervalued. In 2007, he joined the board (eventually becoming chairman) and tried to sell off the company’s land holdings. He apparently overestimated their value and was unable to make the sales, but the land purchases (what really doomed the company) were made well in advance of his involvement in the company.
I think that he’s a pompous ass, but Wall Street would be better off if more billionaires were “activist investors” and demanded that their managers be held accountable to their shareholders.
Having recently traveled to and fro on airplanes with cramped leg space, I am having some bitter associations with Carl Icahn’s name.
If consumers weren’t so price sensitive, then a higher level of service would be offered. But airlines can’t stay in business selling a $600 ticket for a flight in which their competitor sells $300, even if the legroom, etc. is far superior.
Sites like Orbitz, which further commodified airline tickets, are more responsible for squeezing every available fanny on a plane as possible, are more to blame then the airlines or their corporate governors themselves.
There is some truth to this tragedy of the commons argument.
Same for the decline of taste in vegetables in favor of appearances.
I’m talking about you, tomatoes, here! Lawd, they suck bigtime in this country.
http://www.southwest.com
I’m talking about you, tomatoes, here! Lawd, they suck bigtime in this country.
Depends where you get them tomaters. Me, I don’t even look at the fresh tomatoes in a supermarket. Waste of time. Farmer’s market or homegrown is the only way to go.
(I do agree that appearance and shapeliness in vegetables seems to have taken precedence over flavor and texture in the popular consensus. People who believe a flawless, symmetrical veggie is the best veggie are the same kind of people who believe a bigger house is necessarily a better house, however.)
Yeah, I get them at the farmers’ market too.
Pay a pretty penny too but I can do that since I’m a renter.
The flawless, symmetrical tomatoes I picked in my back yard tasted pretty good, IMHO. The flawed ones I threw away. I started the plants from seed 6 months ago.
Many billionaire investors put up 10 -15% of their own moneys and borrow the rest from banks. It bypasses the SEC regulations on margin and, if the investor has a great track record, the loans are unsecured without a personal guarantee.
Question: How do you become a millionaire?
Answer: You start with one billion dollars.
lol
Roubini on CNBC at the moment. He might as well have been wearing a black cloak and holding a scythe. He wasn’t telling us anything we didn’t know, but there was almost an audible “gulp” from the co-hosts.
Banks are going to start fire sales by the end of August.
Of REOs or CDOs? Or something else?
Sorry, I have a hard time keeping track of all the overvalued assets they need to liquidate…
“When you see a bank CEO or a top government official tell you that everything is alright, run for the hills. They are lying. They didn’t see this coming and they have no idea how it will end.”
James Quinn
Wife and I are starting to hear the August desperation. Parents, desperate to sell so they can get their kids enrolled in the new school system for the start of classes. We have some friends who are getting pretty flexible with their asking price.
The porn stars are getting more attractive too!
If anybody wants to write to “our” Ahansen, email me and I will forward to her. Her strory is nothing short of legendary and I bet she would like to hear from Prof Bear!
It sounds like she kept her powder dry and has a lot of reconstruction surgery ahead. She is in great spirits. Gentlemen and ladies get out your pens and write her a note of encouragement.
annmoorman@att.net
At least she still has a sense of humor. That’s good news. Send her my best wishes and hopes of a speedy recovery.
So far five ladies and two guys have written her.
I wonder if she is going to have to meet the govanator?
Thank you.
Singapore Home Prices set to fall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqmmBST_Tes
On another Lowered Expectations
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxL1uXwSrdU
First National Bank (one of South Africa’s “big four” banks) is cancelling mortgages that have already been approved but not paid out yet.
Nice little graff on how meaningless AAA rating is
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iQUy2GaasArs
“…The 66-year-old Mr. Hu’s appearance before foreign reporters Friday was a rare move into the public spotlight for a leader who has long shunned it. Mr. Hu has never given a news conference in China or abroad….”
WSJ
“…Here’s a rather representative list of sites that are now available in China, which include newspaper, magazine and NGO web sites previously hard blocked. This is taken from some that were sent on a recent Great Firewall list, and some I’ve added.
* 西方媒体:(Western media)
o 路透社 http://cn.reuters.com/
o 维基百科 http://zh.wikipedia.org/
o 自由亚洲电台 http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/
o 美国之音 http://www.voanews.com/chinese/
o 华尔街日报 http://chinese.wsj.com/gb/index.asp
o 金融时报中文 http://www.ftchinese.com/sc/index.jsp
* 香港媒体:(Hong Kong media)
o 明报新闻网 http://www.mingpaonews.com/
o 明报月刊 http://www.mingpaomonthly.com/cfm/main.cfm
o 亚洲时报 http://www.atchinese.com/
o 亚洲周刊 http://www.yzzk.com/cfm/main.cfm
o 南华早报 http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/
o 南华早报中文 http://olympics.scmp.com/GCO_Simpchi_Index.aspx
o 苹果日报 http://www1.appledaily.atnext.com/template/apple/sec_main.cfm?
* 台湾媒体:(Taiwan media)
o 联合新闻网 http://udn.com/NEWS/main.html
o 中国时报 http://news.chinatimes.com/mainpage.htm
o 自由时报 http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/index
* NGOs
o Human Rights Watch http://www.hrw.org
o Reporters Sans Frontiers http://www.rsf.org (Chinese site unblocked only in Olympics media center)
o Amnesty International http://www.amnesty.org
”
Andrew Lih
The Olympics are doing more to ease tensions than I could possibly have expected. I expected a lot.
The mopes that worry about a 3rd war with China are looking at the wrong data. China does not care what the business makes or does just as long as it does not criticize the government. China cares about creating at least 5MM jobs every year.
“The mopes that worry about a 3rd war with China are looking at the wrong data. China does not care what the business makes or does just as long as it does not criticize the government. China cares about creating at least 5MM jobs every year.”
Correct hoz. My brother was in China a couple of years ago and he was told the same thing by his Chinese associates. “We love American and American business, just don’t tell us how to run our government.”
yes, I agree. I worry seriously about all the unjustified China-bashing that is going on lately (some bashing is justified, but countries like US and Netherlands with their Iraq/Afghanistan war, torture scandals etc. should keep their mouth shut).
In my country China already is the scapegoat for every problem, from petrol/food prices and general inflation to global warming and armed conflict all over the world. I’m sure they will blame China too when the Dutch housing bubble pops ;-(
You know the attitude by China is “just don’t tell us how to run our government “,yet China sells us products in which the government has to enforce product productions and have laws in line with USA
standards .If you want to do business with the World ,you can’t just do anything you want .
Was Credit Stress in 2Q the Bottom? Few Think So
“…A review of earnings releases by the country’s 18 largest banking companies with retail operations showed their provisions rose 20% from the first quarter — when the previous record was set — and a stunning 296% from a year earlier, to $33.3 billion. These companies, which hold the majority of the country’s banking assets, served as a reliable bellwether of overall industry performance in the past….
Credit losses related to falling house prices produced high-profile hits for residential construction portfolios, prime mortgages, and home equity loans, but deterioration is increasingly evident in all lending types.
“Delinquencies are rising across the board. That’s what happens when you go into a downward swing of a business cycle,” said Kevin Blakely, the chief executive of the Risk Management Association. “We can expect continued asset quality deterioration for a period of time. We are in the early stages.”…
The question dogging the industry is the loss content of the bad assets, and there is little in public disclosures to provide clarity on that score. That has led executives into a rhetorical battle to convince investors and regulators that the bank has lent more prudently than its competitors, and that relatively stronger underwriting standards and stronger collateralization will mitigate exposure in the case of default.
Outsiders are largely at the mercy of executives, so trust ultimately plays a strong role in market valuation. About the only consolation — and a slim one for investors — is that the truth will ultimately come out. In the meantime, determining loss content without access to credit files is a sucker’s game….
“Only 14% of NPAs is in other real estate owned, and during the last real estate cycle that number peaked in the mid-30s in 1993,” said Mr. Davis. “We are still in the early stages of these banks foreclosing, taking title, and getting ready for resale. That process is still really getting under way.”
All of which means the second quarter’s unhappy record is unlikely to remain a record for long.
“Most of the folks we talk to are looking to ‘09 or ‘10 for the equilibrium to come back into the housing market,” Mr. Blakely said. “We have been dealing with the consumer credit cycle for a year already. Maybe it takes another year for things to begin settling down to the point where we see definite improvement.”….
American Banker
A quick WAG in 1993 RE was peak to trough down 6%, Standard and Poors is projecting a 17% decline in the next 8 months. So NPAs went to the mid 30s in 1993 and at this time NPAs are only 14%.
This is just starting to get ugly.
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4728
Scroll down to the youtube screen for:
Trailer for the movie IOUUSA which is premiering at Sundance.
Easy commission loan biz has dried up, so what’s a guy to do?
This:
“The FBI has announced that a former Countrywide employee and his accomplice were arrested on charges related to “illegal access of computers containing personal information,” and “illegal sale of the data.” A criminal complaint filed last Friday alleges that one of the men, Rene L. Rebollo Jr., a senior financial analyst for Countrywide Home Loan’s subprime mortgage division (who was let go in July), had been harvesting data from Countrywide’s computers for the past two years — downloading and storing the information on personal flash drives.”
“Rebollo would then sell these “leads” to another man,Wahid Siddiqi, for $500 per batch. The FBI says that Mr. Rebollo admitted that he profited approximately $50,000 to $70,000 from selling the data, which included the Social Security numbers of as many as 2 million mortgage applicants.”
“The LA Times says:
Rebollo would copy information on about 20,000 customers at a time on Sunday nights by using a [Countrywide] computer that did not have the same security features that other machines in the office had, according to the affidavit by FBI Special Agent Richard P. Ryan.”
“At that rate, the U.S. attorney’s office said, Rebollo would have compromised up to 2 million customer profiles for about 2.5 cents each — an astonishingly small amount considering the importance of the material. Mortgage leads are among the most expensive for sale because of the potential payoffs to intermediaries when loans are made.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/03/sunday/main4317458.shtml
Can someone please tell me why Ben Stein is still given a forum, any forum? To me this reads like, yeah I was wrong, but so were a lot of other people. I’ve recently seen him discussing real estate on Fox Business and his current advice is something like, “I don’t know what’s going to happen in the market, but if you find a house you love, buy it”.
My favorite Ben Stein moment was when he was on CNBC with Peter Schiff and he excoriated Schiff for suggesting that Merill Lynch was in a lot of trouble (Stein evidently had a lot of Merrill stock). This was a little bit over a year ago, and we know what has happened since. Another good one was a column he wrote for the NYT criticizing the chief economist at Goldman Sachs for saying that real estate could fall another 30% nationally. Yet no matter how many times he is wrong, no matter how idiotic and unsupportable his positions are people keep printing his columns and inviting him on talk shows. Where can I get a gig like that?
Try and find a father who was a famous economist.
Bit hard though retroactively.
He believes in creationism and the market fairy and that if you click your heals together three times and wish real hard trillions of dollars of bad debt will disappear.
I know there are a lot of less than intelligent people who manage to make a living spewing their opinions. But for whatever reason I can’t imagine who in their right mind thinks it’s a good idea to give this guy a platform. Every once in a while Dean Baker at the American Prospect will dissect one of his NYT columns, you would think that the people at the Times would be embarrassed to keep printing his column.
All I hear when he speaks anyway is “Bueller, Bueller” so it doesn’t really matter.
Oh, he actually MEANS what he says in his columns?
I thought it was satire. I’ve been laughing hysterically this whole time…
Is there an ETF that is ultra-short Ben Stein? Anyone? Bueller?
The short answer:
Fools like Ben Stein serve corporate media’s interests better than folks like Peter Schiff.
So the BBC bit yesterday suggested that the CDS market has increased to 62 trillion, hard to imagine people are still willing to continue with this given counterparty risk. Given that much of this is circular betting what kind or real losses are likely? Bonds or CDO’s are overrated due to insurance that may or may not be there when times get tight. Banks own a boat load of this stuff and provided the insurance. I’m sure pensions insurance companies and Mutual funds are full of this stuff as well. Some will be winners, some will be winners that don’t get paid, some will be losers, and some will be losers that go bankrupt and never pay out, but an absolute # on losses due to CDS failures is harder to come by. Hard to measure something in a black box I guess.
University endowments are chock full of ‘em too.
The BBC item was interesting, but off target.
Think of swaps as insurance policies and how the insurance companies pay off on claims.
As an insurance company lays risk by underwriting myriad policies in the market so do CDS underwriters.
Lets say you bought the CDS for Lehman at 100 over nad it is now going for 1300 over you have a 1200 bps profit -if you sell it, but the underwriter has no loss until and if Lehman defaults. Not the person or speculator or firm that might by the swap from you at 1300 can be doing myriad trades against it, e.g. selling WAMU swaps at 14pt upfront plus 500 over.
The swaps market hasn’t defaulted yet. It may default, but only if a half dozen banks collapse first.
Ambac sold the CDO insurance and paid $850 to Merrill to get out of the risk for $1.4B. Merrill did this because when the CDOs default, Ambac may not have sufficient funds to pay out all the claims. In this case both Merrill and Ambac were winners. Merrill recouped some of what it had written down and Ambac recouped some of what it had written down.
When you buy a short fund, I imagine they buy credit default swaps. Is this the explanation for the growth in CDS to 62 trillion???
Repel the calls to contain competitive markets
By Alan Greenspan
Published: August 4 2008 18:54 | Last updated: August 4 2008 18:54
…
The insolvency crisis will come to an end only as home prices in the US begin to stabilise and clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world’s mortgage-backed securities. However, US home prices will stabilise only when the absorption of the huge excess of single-family vacant homes that emerged as the US housing boom peaked in 2006 is much further advanced than it is now. New single-family home completions are currently barely under the rate of home demand generated by household formation and replacement needs. Only later this year will the current suppressed level of housing starts be reflected in completion levels consistent with a rapid rate of liquidation of the inventory glut, and this, of course, assumes that current levels of demand for housing hold up.
…
I love the way he talks! If my reports for my clients sounded like that, I wouldn’t last long.
I saw this add to entice savers on the tube last night. It looks like savers may be about to get some revenge.
Yeah, but if you’ve been a good saver, you need to find 10 or 20 or more banks with rates like that, because of the FDIC limit
Isn’t the law of cause and effect wonderful. 41Cadillac
Was in Beaverton and Hillsboro OR this weekend lots of homes for sale but prices staying high…. reminds me of Phoenix 2.5 years ago.
WHAT?? I thought everyone was moving here?
How dare these people sell? Where do they think they are going? Oh, I know. They’ve bought one of the South Waterfront (SoWhat District) condos, right?
Combotechie, looks like others want cash too. Surprisingly enough they didn’t ask for gold. Go figure.
“Icahn, chairman of WCI’s board, said the filing was necessary because the Bonita Springs, Fla.-based developer’s entire $1.8 billion debt may soon be in default. Icahn said this was confirmed when some holders of $125 million convertible notes insisted on being paid in cash in full on Tuesday.”
“Surprisingly enough they didn’t ask for gold. Go figure.”
Lol. They probably didn’t want to spend all day standing in line at the pawn shop along with dozens of others that’s trading their gold for much needed and very spendable cash.
There’s an amusing/infuriating graph on p. 12 of this week’s Business Week. (8/11)
“Higher Rates make Homes Less Affordable”, drawn up by our friends at the NAR.
It tries to “prove” that raising the interest rates now would be a disaster for housing.
Of course, this graph is one big lie! Plenty of people bought homes in 1984 and 1985 when mortgage rates were over 10%. House prices were simply cheaper! I was working on Long Island at that time for Eaton Airborne Instruments Labs (making Air Traffic Control systems!). Ordinary co-workers, making 50K, with wives that brought in 10K or so with a p/t job were easily buying houses in Bethpage, Farmingdale, Babylon, etc. House prices were at best 2x income, and many were available for 1x or 1.5x. Of course these weren’t McMansions. The cheaper houses were generally from the 30s and the more expensive ones from the 50s.
Maybe more people were getting the title for homes in 2005, but they certainly weren’t more affordable than they were in 1985!
This graph from the NAR is one big lie, and BW printed it w/o question!
And here’s the letter I just dashed off to them:
Bravo Reuven!
That’s fantastic. Let us know if you get any feedback.
NY Times
Housing Lenders Fear Bigger Wave of Loan Defaults
The first wave of Americans to default on their home mortgages appears to be cresting, but a second, far larger one is quickly building.
Homeowners with good credit are falling behind on their payments in growing numbers, even as the problems with mortgages made to people with weak, or subprime, credit are showing their first, tentative signs of leveling off after two years of spiraling defaults.
The percentage of mortgages in arrears in the category of loans one rung above subprime, so-called alternative-A mortgages, quadrupled to 12 percent in April from a year earlier. Delinquencies among prime loans, which account for most of the $12 trillion market, doubled to 2.7 percent in that time.
…
“Subprime was the tip of the iceberg,” said Thomas H. Atteberry, president of First Pacific Advisors, a investment firm in Los Angeles that trades mortgage securities. “Prime will be far bigger in its impact.”
In a conference call with analysts last month, James Dimon, the chairman and chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, said he expected losses on prime loans at his bank to triple in the coming months and described the outlook for them as “terrible.”
…
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/business/04lend.html?em
“Milwaukee man faces foreclosure because he didn’t pay parking fine ”
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=779234
Talk about predatory lenders. This guy got a ticket for having his own car parked in his own driveway, but with no license plate. Now they want the house.
Greedy bastards. Governments cry and whine about foreclosures only because it cuts into their tax base. This is their chance to prove otherwise. It was a $50 ticket and they want the house. A bank lends $500,000 to some jerk who lies on his mortgage application and they cry a river for him.
I think it is a great object lesson for the rest of US citizens, myself included. It reminds me that every rinky dink law, ordnance or statute is backed up by the force of a gun.
Let this guy refuse to leave his house and he will get to experience that as well. Otherwise, the system bankrupts him and leaves him to die should he not comply with his rulers. Some laws are necessary but everyone of them is backed up by force, even the little ones eventually. This is one of the bullshit ones, IMO.
Article from CNN about how BHO wants another stimulus!
http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/31/news/economy/stimulus2/index.htm?postversion=2008073117
It’s hard for me to understand how his plan to put everyone on Welfare will help America.
Reuv,
Another stimulus may work. But a one and done is a joke. Mr. Paul Krugman is very much in favor of another stimulus and advocated that the 2nd stimulus should have been included in the original plan. Some other economists have suggested that it should be a quarterly stimulus with at least 4 checks.
I am ambivalent. The US is on a dollar corrective path that should lower the dollar by another 15%. I have so little exposure to the dollar that I do not worry about the governments failed policies.
It sends a terrible message! Want to stimulate the economy? Reward the people who were DOING THE RIGHT THING these past few years!
Some examples:
1. Eliminate income tax on savings bank and CD dividends!
2. Eliminate the $5000 limit on I-Bond purchases (enacted in 2007. You used to be able to buy $60K of I-Bonds a year, inflation protected savings bonds. Not any more.
test
You know… the top executives and the brain trusts in the financial industry are probably well on their way to figuring out to inflate the next bubble.
A reasonable assumption.
“The insolvency crisis will come to an end only as home prices in the US begin to stabilise and clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world’s mortgage-backed securities.”
from “Repel the calls to contain competitive markets”
By Alan Greenspan
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3aaef4f6-623f-11dd-9ff9-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
An incredible number of economists did see this crisis coming as long ago as 1999 and even you commented about the housing bubble in 2001. The Atlantic Monthly wrote about the problem in 2002.
Mr. Greenspan your solution failed and merely transferred wealth from those that could least afford to lose it to the rich.
“Robert Barro of Harvard University and Stanford University’s Hoover Institution talks about disasters–significant national and international catastrophes such as the Great Depression, war, and the flu epidemic in the early part of the 20th century. What do we know about these disasters? What is the likelihood of a catastrophic financial crisis in the United States? How serious is the current economic situation in the United States? The conversation also includes discussions of economic stimulus, tax policy, and the recent worldwide rise in commodity prices.
A one hr podcast
Aug 4, 2008
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2008/08/barro_on_disast.html
“…Barro points out that the demand for risk-free assets is high, as indicated by the low yields on treasury-indexed securities. See William J. Bernstein. That, along with the boom in commodity prices, may indicate that investors have an unusually high probability of a disaster….”
He also points out what happens when foreign owners of Treasuries lose faith in the US government.
Question to think about:
China’s Olympics start Friday. China financial government offices are closed. The US is auctioning $35B in Bonds this week. Soince CHina will not be a buyer, how much will treasury interest rates rise?
Taxes have a place in economic policy
By Edward Lotterman
” …Blanket no-new-taxes pledges reflect an inane political fetish that has harmed our nation’s economy for 20 years. …The nation faces its most difficult economic challenges in 80 years. We have increased our gross national debt by 70 percent in the past eight years. An unprecedented fraction of that debt is now held by foreigners. The administration itself projects a half-trillion-dollar deficit for next year. The economy is slowing and the Fed struggles to juggle recession and unemployment. The dollar’s value is near record lows abroad. Our balance of payments remains unsustainably skewed.
These developments are not unrelated to simplistic anti-tax rhetoric. Government borrowing has contributed to a national savings rate that is near zero. We invest little in public infrastructure and not enough in private plants and equipment. Long-term productivity suffers. Fed-engineered money growth pumps consumption but creates asset bubbles.
We cannot solve these problems long term without putting federal government finance on a sustainable basis. And we cannot do that without increasing taxes or imposing spending cuts both parties rejected in the past. Would we rather repeal the Medicare drug benefit? Should we pull all U.S. forces back home to save money? Will we finally abolish all farm subsidies to make a small deficit reduction?
At this historic juncture, do we really want a candidate who swears not even to consider an important policy option for four years?
Great economies do not enter into decline because of factors beyond their control. They do so because their political systems generate self-destructive policies. In democracies those usually result from collective self-delusion. If we choose candidates based on the single issue of no tax increases, we deserve what we inevitably will get….”
http://www.twincities.com/lotterman/ci_10077143?nclick_check=1
Common sense from Minnesota
“Blanket no-new-taxes pledges reflect an inane political fetish that has harmed our nation’s economy for 20 years.”
Actually 28 years. But fiscal restraint would be better. Bread and circuses and fiddle while the nation burns is the vote du jour.
There’s only one fair and ethical way to raise taxes:
Raise EVERY BRACKET by the same percentage!
Current brackets are 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, and 35 (let’s forget about AMT for now).
If BHO were to propose making them 11, 16, 26, 29, 34, and 36 I’d have a LOT more respect for him.
Instead he wants to start a class war, and punish the few people who are finding ways to be productive in a country where most people just want to get rich quick, and get a handout when things don’t work their way.
This is really off-topic, but how come it seems no one can get a handle on the oil supply? Just today there are articles about how the latest oil supply report shows an increase that no one expected, which caused the stock market to rise. Why does it take a government report to ascertain how much oil supply there is? Just curious.