May 14, 2009

Bits Bucket For May 14, 2009

Post off-topic ideas, links and Craigslist finds here. Please visit the HBB Forum. And see the American Visionaries series from Schwarzfilm.




RSS feed | Trackback URI

349 Comments »

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 05:05:01

O.k., since all of my picks are up at least 15%, I put t-stops on them @10%

I’m just experimenting, so I’m going to let them run wild, but since they’re up, this gives them a little room to wiggle, but protects my initial investment.

Am I missing something?

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 05:10:25

Also, Combo, you’re right — trading isn’t for me. I played with fire, but didn’t get burned. I’m going to let my picks run a while and then close my account.

It really put a lot in perspective for me. It reminded me why I do what I do. I like my day job,and I don’t really having any financial goals other than cover my responsibilities, save some cheddar for the golden years.

I managed to drive the Lamborghini without flipping it (I’m saving the nitrous for Friday night). I realize I was just lucky with timing and that I will eventually time incorrectly.

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 07:15:48

Muggy, Stay with it for now. Let it ride. Stops on 2Xetfs are usless (the swings are so huge). Put a GTC of 150 for SKF and 100 SRS. The green shoots are starting to wilt and there is a drought forecast along with a soccer game scheduled to be played on top of the weak shoots. A bullfight (maybe even a bearfight?) comes next on what is left of the trampled shoots. Sprout meet cloven hoof.

Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 07:41:10

Agreed that the stops are much more likely to kick in, and may have this am for Muggy, but I can’t agree that they are useless. They will still preserve his profit, even if potentially limiting more upside at a late date.

This morning we had bad unemployment and worse inflation, yet Walmart hitting its number overrode that and sent the market higher… At any time, we are just one (more) gov’t program away from killing SKF for a while. Fundamental don’t matter as much as they used to.

Again, just my 2 cents, I am an amateur of the worst kind and enjoy reading others comments and suggestion, no animosity intended and no useful investment advise in my comments!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 07:58:03

your advice is good. Mine is of the more reckless variety. I could not agree more about the house loading the odds against SKF but I stay with it against all reason just out of principle - putting my money where my mouth is. Probably the single most stupid thing I have ever done but I can’t seem to help it. If Muggy burns, I am going down with him. Reality has become a fantasy of mine.

 
Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 08:24:45

Reckless is good as long as a man knows his limitations(wiht apologies to Clint Eastwood)

I still have my SKF and SRS as well. My F calls are now up 27% less than 24 hours after I bought them, yet I just KNOW they are going up MORE so I ignore my own advice and let them ride. Almost a perfect definition of reckless. I am going to hop over and put down side stops on them just in case, though the option market is very fickle. The I guess I have to actually do some work today, how boring.

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 09:02:07

I wanted to play with F, but my mom sold ‘em part time when the kids were all grown, and I drive F’s, and want them to succeed, so I figure I can’t really be objective.

I don’t really root for anything in particular, but I do like Ford and falling house prices.

 
 
Comment by David
2009-05-14 11:16:22

The investment advice on this board used to be holding physical gold, now its holding ultraleveraged ETFs. sheeesh, things have changed

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by dude
2009-05-14 14:51:13

I would still advise holding at least 10% PM.

IMHO

 
 
 
Comment by Rental Watch
2009-05-14 16:15:24

I’m personally not a trader, so I don’t pay much attention to short term swings (although I do watch). I generally try to find things that are overvalued (and buy puts), or undervalued and go long. As long as I feel that the stock is still fundamentally over/undervalued, I hold.

With the volatility today, it can be a little gut wrenching with that mentality, as the swings can be enormous day-to-day.

I try to invest with Graham’s mantra - “In the short run, the market is a voting machine, but in the long run it is a weighing machine.” In other words, I try to ignore the market perception day-to-day and go with what I think is strong fundamental value, with the belief that eventually that value will show up in the stock price.

 
 
Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 05:56:54

Impeccable timing Muggy.
Congrats!

Congrats all Bears!

“Am I missing something?”

Research “double” “ultra” ETFs for shortcomings and pitfalls.
They were never designed to be held much longer than a couple of days.
On the other hand, let it all ride on black!

Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 06:25:37

Muggy, More unemployment and higher inflation this morning (who’d a thunk), looks like you caught the wave!!! Let it ride and then get out. My SKF is almost back to even. Those crazy $5 F calls I bought yesterday are looking a little better toady, though still a flyer for sure….

Trading has shown me that I’m not as smart as a thought I was. It is only “extra” money, in relatively small amounts I play with, but when I was doing it my head, I always seemed to win. When it was real money, well you lose some and win some.

Good luck and enjoy the wave!

Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 06:35:06

toady = today. MORE COFFEE!!!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 06:46:24

I’m going to ride this wave for sure — with that in mind, the t-stops make sense, yes? I mean *not investment advice*, but for a guy testing the waters, it put a floor on my potential losses, or, in this case, gets me my original chunk back, and a few bucks.

Anyway, I would have loved to dabble in this in my twenties when I was reckless, unwed, and childless in NYC.

I’m going to get back to ruminating about house prices, conspiring against boomers, hating Pinellas County, and snuggling my littleman. My wife will be happier, too (honey, we’re moving to NYC; honey, we’re moving back to Rochester; honey, let’s move to Florida; let’s NOT buy a house; honey, I’m going to grad school; honey, I’m going to try day-trafding. Lol…).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 07:12:17

Yes, I think you have done the right thing. For me its like going to the casino. If I break even I win, if I come out a few bucks ahead, I am a big winner. SO in my mind, you have guaranteed yourself a winning outcome even if you get stopped out today. Again, my retirement investments are a completely different approach then this stuff. My F calls are up 15.5% since I bought them yesterday and I should get out, but I haven’t, I just KNOW I am going to hit it big. Glad you are following a good course, I should know better…. I think it is lack of discipline that hurts amateurs like us and you have shown great discipline and deserve the spoils.

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 06:49:42

“Trading has shown me that I’m not as smart as a thought I was.”

But bubble-sitting showed you that you’re smarter than, well, basically everybody out there.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-14 07:21:28

Agreed.

Funny that when I had to sell my house for 20% below what I bought it at (I sold in 1996), I was upset for years. But when my net worth dropped from $400,000 to $250,000 in 2000 through 2002 I did not feel upset.

And I did not get scared away from equities in this downturn either.

Most people recently declared they are out of equities for good. Those are the ones who sold March 9.

I’m not saying stock indices won’t go lower. They probably will. But I’m buying more shares at lower prices and in about twelve years we will certainly have a small government. I hope for the same at the state levels.

 
Comment by Carlos Cisco
2009-05-14 08:41:23

Are you sure you know just what kind of government that will be?

 
Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 08:54:21

Bill in Los Angeles,

God love you sir!

Yeah, I did plenty of cold-calling in CA during the early/mid 90’s and the sheer amount of angst and disgust over stalled/falling RE values was practically oozing through the phone.

People there were ‘not’ having fun. In the end the winners tended to view it as a maturing process and moved on. Those that obsessed over their home’s “vapor equity” choked on their own vomit.

 
Comment by cactus
2009-05-14 09:27:26

“Yeah, I did plenty of cold-calling in CA during the early/mid 90’s and the sheer amount of angst and disgust over stalled/falling RE values was practically oozing through the phone.”

RE bubble bust round two has spread to almost every US city

I was a home owner during round 1 in Cali bought in 1989 sold in 2006 never ever buy a townhome condo again.
I’ll rent them though

 
Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 09:33:57

cactus,

I ‘almost’ bought a condo-version in Imperial Beach in 1989 but elected to get out of the service and move up to OR instead.

Several of our friends bought around the same time and were constantly asking for “extensions” on the tours so they wouldn’t have to transfer out and sell an underwater condo etc. What we found was that OR’s market bottomed out (actually the whole economy) around the same time so our home here appreciated wildly practically from the day we bought it. Scary some would say?

I just thought Bill in Los Angeles’ comments were a breath of fresh air!

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-14 20:28:14

Thank you DinOR, I think people here have gotten too carried away under this dark cloud. Seriously, a sheep has only so much of its coat to sheer. The 401ks and Roths are at skin level on this sheep.

Take a personal poll from boomer people in their late 40s or early 50s where you work, with money in 401ks. Ask the the ones who plan to retire in more than ten years if they are stopping their stock contributions in their 401ks or IRAs.

The unemotional ones are dollar cost averaging into diverse assets. You got more than ten years? solid stocks. When I’m 58 I will be 90/10 equities to government bonds. The next year 80/20. In three more years it will be 50/50 and I’ll probably end up at 40/60 stocks to bonds when I retire at 67.

 
 
Comment by Watching The Carnage
2009-05-14 19:37:50

realestateskeptic,

Too funny - you could be my lost twin on this one. My mental trades in ETF’s that seemed so spectacular don’t seem to be working out so well when real money is involved. Like you, it’s not money that is going to break me but enough to keep my attention…which really should be focused on my job that pays the bills.

Muggy - read this, I luckily timed in with some FAZ gambles that played out brilliantly. I did double down and found the April market surprise left me way underwater. So…I “brilliantly hedged” my position with a matching FAS purchase.

So now I’m caught in a “double dutch” clutch (I think I made that up) I’m getting tired as the jump ropes cross each other at the same point up and down. I can’t get out and I’m getting tired of jumping.

Stupid gambling and I’m done - worst case I get tripped up and scrape my knees, then I’m done with this trading Krap.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 06:56:50

Muir,

You mean “Direxion Funds”?

I’d say intra-day ( but that’s just me )

*Not Inv. Advice

Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 07:35:59

“Double” or “ultra” long or short do a good job of tracking the DAILY double/triple of the underlying index.

They do a HORRIBLE job of tracking that index, say over a 6 month period.

There are TONS of examples out there.
2x long ETFs that went NEGATIVE as the underlying index went up!

Short ultra ETFs that went 30%+ down over a year, even as the underlying ETFs they were tracking went down as well!!

The mathematical reasons for this are also well understood by institutions though not widely disseminated.

When people say that the “ultra” ETSs are “degrading” they may or may not understand what they are saying. The index are supposed to track a DAILY 2x/3x not a weekly monthly.

There are simple short ETFs: SH and my favorite SEF.

Some very smart people here have recommended holding double or triple ETFs as a intermediate long term play; they are wrong.

Do a simple spreadsheet with a non-leveraged column, a “double” long and short and a “3x” then just play with it with each entry an imaginary day.

I think many here would be very surprised by the results.

(p.s. I’ve been out of the market since last week when I sold my GSG after a nice profit and am not giving financial advice either, just commenting on the math)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 07:44:56

Muir,

Right, nor am I. I did however call the wholesalers directly and asked them to explain the divergence? In the end, leverage costs!

Shortly after they rolled out one of their shorts they had an explanatory email warning against holding the position long term. Meaning… more than a week?

I’ve been disappointed w/ the results I’ve gotten from Rydex as well. The transaction costs can eat you alive as well. Even if you’re using a discounter. IMHO/NIA etc.

 
Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 09:15:11

“I did however call the wholesalers directly and asked them to explain the divergence? In the end, leverage costs!”
___

Nope.
Maybe they themselves do not understand.

Warning: Leveraged and Inverse ETFs Kill Portfolios

news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=271892

THis is MUST reading for those doing the “double” “ultra.” Many REAL examples.

 
Comment by cactus
2009-05-14 09:29:39

“Double” or “ultra” long or short do a good job of tracking the DAILY double/triple of the underlying index.

They do a HORRIBLE job of tracking that index, say over a 6 month period.

There are TONS of examples out there.
2x long ETFs that went NEGATIVE as the underlying index went up!”

correct

 
Comment by dude
2009-05-14 14:56:36

So you short a double short gold, DZZ for example. If you think gold is headed up shorting the short gives you your expected gain plus whatever decay may happen.

 
 
 
Comment by holytrainwreck
2009-05-14 12:59:59

Muggy’s my investment advisor now! ;)

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 16:29:23

“Muggy’s my investment advisor now! ”

Cardboard box and warm whiskey free when you open an account today!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by FB wants a do over
2009-05-14 07:17:13

10% is a fair percentage to start with. As you may have noticed the challenge with those rocket ships your holding is that they have a tendency to swing 10+ percent in either direction on any given day. Hence when applying t-stops the first step is to research the stock’s average daily swings percentage wise and apply t-stops (essentially with big enough collars) accordingly to create a sort of balance between managing the swings and maximizing gains. Suspect you’ve already reasoned this out but thought it was worth mentioning.

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 07:35:33

“Suspect you’ve already reasoned this out but thought it was worth mentioning.”

Mostly… if they go up more, I figure I’ll open the % some to give them more room to move down (just not past 0).

 
 
Comment by mikey
2009-05-14 07:22:58

Muggy..Put the Quja Board DOWN, put your hands UP and STEP AWAY from the computer…NOW !!

;)

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 07:34:03

LMFAO, part of the fun is pretending that I know what’s going on!

 
 
Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 08:06:18

The phrase “playing the stock market” takes on significance when you’re doing the trading, don’t it?

You got to know when to hold ‘em
Know when to fold ‘em
Know when to walk away
Know when to run

How’s your poker game, Muggy? ;)

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 08:36:00

FAZ may tap out…

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-05-14 05:12:18

I listened to T.T. Timmay a few days ago state that ‘they’ want to control the market in such a fashion that we would not experience “boom” markets in the future. This arrogant little twit and his posse can make all the new rules and regulations they want. The market will find ways around them, always has always will.

Treasury asks for control of derivatives market
AP. By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Anne Flaherty, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 33 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is asking Congress to extend its oversight of the financial system to include the shadowy market of derivatives, the kind of complex financial instruments that helped bring down the giant insurer AIG.

In a two-page letter sent Wednesday to congressional leaders, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said he wants to create a central electronic-based system that would track the buying and selling of derivatives. He also wants to ensure that financial firms selling the instruments have enough capital on hand in case they default and subject them to stringent standards of conduct and new reporting requirements.

The legislative proposal is the administration’s first major step in overhauling the nation’s financial regulatory system.

“All (over-the-counter) derivatives dealers and all other firms whose activities in those markets create large exposures to counterparties should be subject to a robust regime of prudential supervision and regulation,” Geithner wrote in his letter.

“Key elements of that robust regulatory regime must include conservative capital requirements, business conduct standards, reporting requirements and conservative requirements relating to initial margins on counterparty credit exposures,” he adds.

New rules would deter financial firms from taking undue risk, prevent fraud and ensure they are marketed appropriately, according to the letter.

Current law largely excludes regulation of the instruments, which are referred to as “over-the-counter” derivatives because they are traded privately rather than through commodity exchanges now regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

It was unclear how the rules would affect hedge funds, which are large, mostly unregulated entities that use complex trading tactics to earn big returns for high-dollar investors. Many hedge funds use derivatives contracts to offset risk on other transactions.

The proposal is strikingly similar to legislation proposed by a small group of major Wall Street banks. Critics of that proposal say the regime would give the same banks that contributed to the financial meltdown exclusive control over a larger part of the derivatives market.

Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 06:58:02

Here’s a better idea, just eliminate them.

Comment by James
2009-05-14 07:28:10

Uh, if they have to have capital to issue them its going to be pretty close to eliminating them.

 
 
Comment by awaiting wipeout
2009-05-14 07:05:33

So, the International Swap & Deriviative Assoc. (ISDA) means nothing to our govt.? I thought that ISDA was an international exchange.What am I missing here?

Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 07:48:53

Oh I’m just voicing frustration here. I’m the kind of guy that if Warren Buffet says he doesn’t understand them and expresses concern..? Hey that’s good enough for me.

The earliest known warning “I” could find from WB was from 2002. I realize there are times where I can be a PITA, but can you imagine that man’s frustration w/ this situation?

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-05-14 05:13:53

From Canadian Business magazine, May 18, 2009
Economic forecasting
Investor 500: If you go into the market today

Get four of the world’s gloomiest forecasters in one room and you soon realize: these aren’t teddy bears, and this ain’t no picnic.
By Jeff Sanford

It was a flashy, high-wattage affair that took the trend of economic-news-as-entertainment to a remarkable new level. On a rainy Tuesday evening in early April, 1,500 clearly wealthy clients of Sprott Asset Management filled the ornate Elgin Theatre in downtown Toronto to hear an A-team of economic doomsayers muse about how this recession is going to get much worse yet. The group included a celebriconomist known for his erotic wall art, a formerly obscure Wall Street analyst married to a professional wrestler, and an ex-platoon-commander-turned-financial-historian who divines the cycles of life through market movements.

And so things threatened to veer toward the absurd. But as events go, A Night with the Bears (as the evening was so aptly titled) provided a plausible take on the root causes of our current woes. For the bears, it’s all about the big chunk of consumer debt still outstanding and how that debt is going to be expunged from the system. It’s a story that is more complex than the Twittering of the newspaper reporters could hope to capture. So while good reasons exist to think there may be a market bottom forming right now, and no end of advisers are suggesting investors get back into markets: Be careful. This downturn is an odd one.

The drastic plunge in economic activity is still sending shock waves across markets. A recent report from the International Monetary Fund suggests total financial industry writedowns will hit US$4 trillion — more than many had assumed. And lots of bad news is likely yet to come, possibly enough to swamp this spring’s nascent market recovery and make the bounce one of the dead-cat variety.

Those who pass by these bears without paying attention to what they’re roaring about are putting their wealth at risk.

The big name of the night was Nouriel Roubini, the former Clinton White House staffer who has taken on the sobriquet Dr. Doom for his dour outlook on the economy. He’s garnered a bit of minor celebrity as a result. (Trendy gossip website gawker.com has been following the prurient interest in his wall art and his rising popularity on the New York party scene.) Also up from New York for the event was Meredith Whitney, the former Oppenheimer analyst who was the first to call the debt crisis at Citibank. Joining those two on stage was Eric Sprott, the namesake of the Bay Street firm throwing the event, and Ian Gordon, a genial former investment adviser from Vancouver who was the grizzly bear at this gathering.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:19:23

Is anyone in the market for a nice horse racing track?

Schwarzenegger eyes selling state assets, including Del Mar Fairgrounds
By Michael Gardner U-T Sacramento Bureau

8:37 p.m. May 13, 2009

SACRAMENTO – Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Thursday is expected to propose putting a for-sale sign in front of several landmark state properties – including the Del Mar Fairgrounds – to raise badly needed cash for a state on the brink of insolvency.

The governor’s team estimates that selling the properties could bring in as much as $1 billion, according to documents outlining the plan.

“It’s shocking to me,” said Michael Alpert, a Del Mar Fairgrounds director. “I know these are very tough times, but I can’t even imagine (it).”

The Del Mar Fairgrounds sits on slightly more than 400 acres of prime coastal real estate and is a popular venue for horse racing, the San Diego County Fair and other events.

Schwarzenegger Thursday afternoon is expected to reveal more details as part of his revised spending plan that will reflect twin grim scenarios: a deficit of more than $15 billion that will grow to over $21 billion if voters reject budget-related measures on the Tuesday special election ballot.

State officials also say California could run out of cash by this summer.

“In this time of fiscal challenge it is imperative the state explores every opportunity to raise revenues to avoid cutting programs,” said a report detailing the proposal.

“Changing the way the state manages and thinks about real estate has the potential to generate more than a billion dollars for the general fund to help pay off state debt,” the document continued.

Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-14 07:22:59

“In this time of fiscal challenge it is imperative the state explores every opportunity to raise revenues to avoid cutting programs,” said a report detailing the proposal.

Some programs should be cut, if not eliminated. Raising taxes when you’re among the highest taxed states shouldn’t be the first option.

“Changing the way the state manages and thinks about real estate has the potential to generate more than a billion dollars for the general fund to help pay off state debt,” the document continued.

Burning down the house to stay warm shouldn’t be the first option if you’re still going on vacation. How the state continues to think about real estate, that it’s a cash cow, is a big problem.

 
Comment by mikey
2009-05-14 07:58:41

I have to laugh California…you reap what you sow.

You recalled Gray Davis for THIS piece of MEAT ?… Arnold the Gropinator on steriods. The old pothead got a friggn’ CORRESPONDENCE course BA from the University of Wisconsin-SUPERIOR with a major in {international marketing of fitness and business administration} in 1979.

D’oh
:)

Comment by desertdweller
2009-05-14 09:58:58

Not me, I figured Arnie was just a big bag of wind, and Gray wasn’t any different. It was just that ***FLASH*** of stardom that got lots of folks thinking, oh ‘reagun re-visit’ bs.
Otherwise, it isn’t different. Bet he wished he didn’t win.

And on the other foot/hand, the Mrs is sure getting ‘out there’ again on tv.

 
 
Comment by DennisN
2009-05-14 09:43:01

Horse race tracks are a poor bet these days. Boise’s trying to sell of “Les Bois Park”, the local horse race track, to the highest bidder. So far no luck. The present high bidder has been deemed a poor credit risk.

Have Indian casinos and state lotteries made betting on horses old-fashioned?

 
Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:00:18

The scary thing is, I think that their current projections are based on the assumption that the propositions will pass. Not so fast boys…

 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-05-15 10:03:36

Maryland’s horse racing is about to fall over as well.

Naturally, our Dear Leaders will Bail them out while quietly ignoring how the Preakness track probably loses money every day of the year (seriously, who the heck gets together with this buddies to bet on horses these days?!), save for Preakness weekend, and that’s only profitable since it’s a good location and excuse for people to party and drink… something that they could do in many other places that having nothing to do with horses.

Slot machines might let the place break even, but that is going nowhere while at the same time, they are trying to push to stick slots in an area mall which would result in overcrowding and runaway crime in the area.

Come to Maryland - we have many flavors of stupid here!

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:24:03

Problemo numero uno with mortgage modifications:

How does one “reduce the debt” without “stiffing the creditors”?

May 14, 2009

U.S. mortgage-aid plan not building momentum
Only 55,000 offers so far; foreclosure filings up 32%
By Tara Siegel Bernard

NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE
2:00 a.m. May 14, 2009

So far, two months after the program went into effect, about 55,000 homeowners have been extended loan-modification offers, according to a senior administration official.

At the same time, foreclosures continue apace. RealtyTrac reported yesterday that foreclosure filings reached 342,000 last month, up 32 percent from April 2008. Moody’s has estimated that more than 2.1 million homeowners will lose their homes this year.

Although it is too early to know how effective the program will ultimately be, many homeowners who have tried to gain entrance say they have been successful only through persistence – and sometimes, the help of a lawyer.

What may be a larger issue, however, is the continuing deterioration of the economy, experts say. The longer it takes to set the program in motion, the fewer people will qualify for modifications, they say. The expected rise in unemployment in coming months may keep a growing number of homeowners out of the program.

“We have a debt crisis, and mortgage is at the center of it,” said Alan M. White, an assistant professor at Valparaiso University School of Law in Indiana who specializes in foreclosures. “To get out of it, we need to reduce the debt, and that is not really happening.”

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:32:01

‘The administration remains confident that the program will end up offering help to as many as 3 million to 4 million homeowners, with the pace of modifications beginning to pick up in coming months.

“If you think about the context and scale involved, it is an extraordinary, rapid effort,” said Jenni Engebretsen, a Treasury spokeswoman. She noted that 14 mortgage servicers had signed up for the program, covering 75 percent of the market.’

I find myself reminiscing on the Bush mortgage relief plan’s gaping shortfall in the number of homeowners actually helped versus what they projected.

If the Obama program is supposed to help 4 million homeowners, then so far it has only assisted (55,000/4,000,000)*100 = 1.4 percent of its intended beneficiaries, after slightly more than 100 days. Since there are just over 1300 days to go in Obama’s first term, if the current success rate continues, the program may ultimately help a few hundred thousand home debtors, but probably not over a million.

I am also wondering about whether the failure to pass the cramdown legislation throws a severe wrench into this program’s potential to achieve its objectives?

Comment by lavi d
2009-05-14 09:27:40

I am also wondering about whether the failure to pass the cramdown legislation throws a severe wrench into this program’s potential to achieve its objectives?

I tend to agree with the opinion voiced around here that a lot of the stuff proposed to “help home owners” is largely cosmetic and intended primarily to slow the melt down by encouraging FBs to continue to make their payments in hopes of imminent rescue and therefore thin the inevitable en masse jingle-walk to something less than a flood.

 
 
Comment by Jim A.
2009-05-14 06:19:24

How does one “reduce the debt” without “stiffing the creditors”?

You stiff the taxpayers (or even better, FUTURE taxpayers) instead. What, you just got here?

Comment by cactus
2009-05-14 10:44:28

“How does one “reduce the debt” without “stiffing the creditors”?

You stiff the taxpayers (or even better, FUTURE taxpayers) instead. What, you just got here?”

Moving debt from private business to the government helping a few FB’s not be so well received if the same FB’s figure out what this will do to their Social Security benefits.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 11:42:45

One thing I have learned about disaster capitalism from paying attention over the last decade or so is that one never need worry about looming problems like the breakdown of social security so long as there is a more pressing crisis (like the housing market meltdown) that more urgently needs to be addressed.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Jim A.
2009-05-14 12:06:26

It’s not even that paying attention to today’s problems lead to ignoring tomorrows. Tomorrows problems are often a DIRECT RESULT of the solutions to todays problems.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-14 05:24:06

Riverside man allegedly booby-traps foreclosed home - LATimes

9:46 AM | May 13, 2009
A 42-year-old Riverside man has been arrested on suspicion of setting up fake booby traps outside his foreclosed home, authorities said today.

A U.S. Bank representative was checking the house Tuesday in the 1400 block of Orange Street when he discovered several explosives outside the structure. Officers from the Riverside Police Department arrived about 2:45 p.m. and confirmed the explosives were made to look like pipe bombs, officials said in a statement.

At least nine homes in the neighborhood were evacuated, police said.

Former homeowner Daniel Gherman was booked on suspicion of attempting to assemble a device designed to cause great bodily injury and on four counts of assembling or possessing a facsimile explosive, officials said. The investigation is ongoing.

– Ruben Vives

Oh dear!
Leigh

Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 06:49:28

That incident goes to show you how deep the housing lie really is.

Comment by are they crazy
2009-05-14 08:19:17

To me it shows how screwed up people are about housing. It’s a roof over your head - go find another one. Risk going to jail and screwing up your life over?

Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 08:58:40

are they crazy,

LOL! But true! For me, having HGTV ( an -entire- network devoted to koi ponds and kitchens ) is like having “The Shoe Channel”!

WTF?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jbunniii
2009-05-14 09:07:22

I’m sure there would have been “The Tulip Channel” if TV had existed in Holland in the 1600s.

 
Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 10:36:37

jbunniii,

LOL! I’ll bet they would’ve. I mean they must have had the printing press by then, right?

 
 
 
 
Comment by Mr. Drysdale
2009-05-14 07:04:07

Isn’t all of California pretty much a fake booby trap?

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-14 07:23:31

Those fake booby traps must have been implants.

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 08:44:20

“discovered several explosives outside the structure”

Cost: $37
Added Value: $15,000

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by jbunniii
2009-05-14 09:06:01

“assembling or possessing a facsimile explosive”

Am I the only one who finds it sort of chilling that this is illegal? Interpreted broadly enough, many of the toys I had as a child could put me in the big house if I still had them today.

Comment by lavi d
2009-05-14 09:31:24

“assembling or possessing a facsimile explosive”

Man, they might try to arrest me for my car!

 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 09:33:54

A lot of the toys we had as kids would get us gunned down by the cops these days. Now all toy guns have to be orange.

And I remember fondly buying M-80s as a kid and destroying old toys. Every kid in the neighborhood had SOMETHING to donate to the cause. Usually their sister’s malibu barbie car.

Comment by Al
2009-05-14 11:22:13

Wait until the ganstas start painting their real guns orange.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 11:23:34

I will be unsurprised when it happens.

 
 
 
Comment by DennisN
2009-05-14 09:50:05

Army surplus stores in CA sold dummy practice grenades until quite recently, even though simple possession of them in CA is a felony.

You’ve probably seen those desk accessories that include a dummy grenade with a “take a number” tag attached to the pin, and a sign stating “Complaint Dept. - Take A Number”. Owning one of those is now a felony in CA.

Aren’t overbroad repressive “gun control” laws fun?

Comment by DinOR
2009-05-14 10:40:47

Well, we can all have a little fun on this one but as a kid, I remember some pretty close calls. For all the Chicago area posters, remember the old abandoned quarry off of Bartlett Road? That thin slip of Cook County heading west?

A friend and I we having “just another day” w/ 22’s and some explosive devices and blew the doors off an old fridge just as a Cook County deputy rolled up. “IN… the car boyz!”

We were lucky to still have all our limbs.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-05-15 10:06:01

Anyone here remember Megatron the classical Transformer and Optimus Prime’s nemesis?

He’d be illegal today since he looks like a gun.

Yet it is still legal to not pay your taxes if you’re a “big whig” like TIMMY!!!

 
 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-14 05:26:22

Seeking Alpha

Freedom of Information Act Disclosure Busts Paulson, Geithner, Bair
by: Tyler Durden May 14, 2009

Judicial Watch, which lucked out majorly on a FOIA request to the Treasury, has received several hundred pages of stunning revelations, among which are that Hank Paulson essentially used the same tactics that he used on Ken Lewis on a group of nine bankers at the October 13 meeting which apportioned government investments to the various “critical” banking institutions. The major disclosure was captured in a memo called CEO Talking Points, which delineates the continuous use of strongarming tactics by not just Paulson, but by Tim Geithner, and Sheila Bair, who were also present at the meetings. According to one of the Talking Points:

If a capital infusion is not appealing, you should be aware that your regulator will require it in any circumstance. We don’t believe it is tenable to opt out because doing so would leave you vulnerable and exposed.

Among the banking CEOs who were forced into a pre-envisioned arrangement were:

Ken Lewis, BofA (BAC)
Vik Pandit, Citi (C)
Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman (GS)
Jamie Dimon, JP Morgan (JPM)
John Thain, Merrill
Robert Kelley, Bank of New York (BK)
Ronald Logue, State Street (STT)
John Mack, Morgan Stanley (MS)
Richard Kovacevich, Wells Fargo (WFC)
(cont’d)

Leigh

Comment by polly
2009-05-14 08:14:07

The details may be interesting, but this is not much of a revelation. The original story line was always that they were going to make everyone take the “help” so that the ones that really needed it wouldn’t have to admit they were the ones in the biggest trouble. Exactly what Paulson and company said to make them do it is not such a big deal.

The fact that Geithner and Bair were actually present is interesting but not all that surprising.

 
Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:04:02

That’s about as stunning as a “revelation” that Paulson and Bernanke put the interests of bankers ahead of Americans.

 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-14 05:30:23

TheLedger.com

Stimulus Pays for Public Housing Redo, Shuffles Residents

LAKELAND | Elizabeth Wilkins says she’s gung-ho over the nation’s plan to stimulate the economy by putting millions of people to work. She just didn’t expect to lose her home in the process.

The 64-year-old Lakeland woman raising two grandchildren, ages 8 and 9, is being relocated along with dozens of other public housing residents to allow for extensive renovations.

In all, three Lakeland public housing complexes will get an extreme makeover, including Paul Colton Villas, Cecil Gober Villas and John Wright Homes - all built in 1981-82.

Renovations, to include new cabinets, plumbing and other fixtures, flooring and central heating and air systems, are courtesy of roughly $13 million in federal stimulus money available to the Lakeland Housing Authority.

money to modernize public housing

The money is part of the $789 billion stimulus package approved by Congress in February to kick-start the anemic economy. Thousands of housing agencies have received funds to modernize public housing, including the Housing Authority of Bartow, which got $162,231, and the Winter Haven Housing Authority, allocated $457,196. (cont’d)

Leigh

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 05:32:20

Amazing. PHAs are so corrupt, it’s unbelievable.

Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 06:22:34

It sure beats having them out amongst the rest of the public.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 06:19:57

No kickbacks going on there I am sure.

 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 09:38:07

Exactly how much modernization does a place built in 1981-82 need? Especially if it’s public housing? Are we worried that the people living in subsidized housing will feel bad that they don’t have granite counters?

This is ridiculous.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:34:59

MarketWatch First Take
May 13, 2009, 12:08 p.m. EST
Dump these four states from our housing nation
Commentary: The worst offenders on the way down should sound familiar

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — Take California, Nevada, Florida and Arizona. Please. Take them off the housing market’s hands and we could start to cheer a recovery.

You know the tale of these states well. They were the same places that reveled in the excesses earlier this decade, when housing prices in many markets within their borders were leaping by double digits every year, in some cases rising 25% or more annually. They were the places where new houses went up everywhere, regardless of whether there were buyers, and where condominium projects not even in the ground were doing a brisk business in contract-trading as investors bid on nothing but paper.

Back then, those places skewed the national housing data to the upside. When people in Bismarck, N.D., or Fort Wayne, Ind., read that home prices were up 9% or 10%, they laughed, because prices sure weren’t moving in their neighborhood. Folks in the Heartland wondered if everybody on the coasts was crazy.

Now see how the data is skewed the other way.

Look at RealtyTrac’s foreclosure figures for April. The realty company said foreclosure filings of all types hit a record last month, up 32% over the year-earlier number — putting one in every 374 U.S. households in danger of losing their home. See Economic Report.

But, gosh, who do we have here as the worst offenders? No. 1 in foreclosures, Nevada. No. 2, Florida. No. 3, California. No. 4, Arizona. Together they accounted for 193,659 foreclosure filings out of 342,038 nationwide — nearly 60% of all the activity.

Comment by Neil
2009-05-14 08:47:48

But, gosh, who do we have here as the worst offenders? No. 1 in foreclosures, Nevada. No. 2, Florida. No. 3, California. No. 4, Arizona. Together they accounted for 193,659 foreclosure filings out of 342,038 nationwide — nearly 60% of all the activity.

#1 most populous state: CA
#2 most populous state: FL

Ok, NV and AZ are not yet huge states.
CA is 17% of US jobs. Its sinking. But in past recession, CA has been able to sustain part of the rest of the economy. I’m not seeing how the rest of the nation can sustain CA.

Of the large population states (which really are the ones that drive the economy), only TX and VA are doing ok. Oh, CA was a HUGE bubble… but its like a wounded T-Rex. You can cheer its pain, but watch how far it can lash out.

Got Popcorn?
Neil

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 09:26:36

“#1 most populous state: CA
#2 most populous state: FL”

Pretty stoopid, yeah?

Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2009-05-14 20:50:18

I read them too fast. I thought I saw:

“#1 most pompous state: CA
#2 most pompous state: FL

Now, that was pretty stoopid!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by DennisN
2009-05-14 09:57:19

FL is 4th, not 2nd, in population behind #2 TX and #3 NY.

 
 
Comment by eastcoaster
2009-05-14 10:40:49

Take them off the housing market’s hands and we could start to cheer a recovery.

Not me. I won’t be cheering until I can afford a house in my Pennsylvania town.

 
 
Comment by KJ
2009-05-14 05:36:18

Maybe I am missing something. But it would appear to me like UAW members voted for Obama in huge numbers. Obama then took over GM and gave 1/2 the company to the UAW as payback. And now the UAW owned and controlled GM will be selling Chinese made cars through its dealer network.

Hey good thing we didn’t elect one of those Republicans that loves to outsource jobs to India. Imagine what that would have done to the manufacturing base in Michigan and Ohio. Phew, we dodged that bullet.

Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 07:38:44

GM has a lot more retirees than actual workers. Retirees will be gaining control. Union solidarity only goes so far.

Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 09:42:20

Why should anybody who is retired get any say in the union’s current activities? No representation without taxation!

Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 10:31:52

GM agreed to setup a fund to pay the promised benefits to retirees a couple of years ago. I think the proceeds from the 40% will go to fund this.

New employees don’t get the same pay or benefits.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 11:27:03

Pensions and Social Security both suffer from this. More an more money being taken from current workers who get promised less and less to feed the people who went through the system in front of them, but they at least get the comfort of knowing that the system will shaft the people behind them even harder.

Eventually somebody will say ‘enough’ and the whole system comes down.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-05-14 13:45:46

If this outsourcing of jobs continues, along with a policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” in regards to the employment of illegal alien labor, this country is doomed to failure.

 
 
 
 
Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 08:28:45

Another story has Kia and VW opening plants in Tenn. and Georgia. Why couldn’t they open plants in Mich., Illinois, NY or Calif.? oh, I forgot. It seems the red states are stealing all those high paying manufacturing jobs. BTW, GM’s side of the story is that the cars made in china are to be sold in china. Not so hard to believe since buick has a large following in china. Can the MSM get to the truth? They could, but where’s the controversy in that. Besides, it doesn’t fit their agenda.

Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 08:48:27

Avoiding unions is easier in the South. Are TN and GA right-to-work states?

Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 09:14:39

BINGO Elanor. It’s better known as “right to work……. for less states.

Further to the point… In northern states, It is state, county and local govts. reviewing automaker proposals for relocating to their respective areas in the north. In the south, businesses give the orders and the local governments march lockstep.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 09:20:13

Exactly my point Elanor. The states I mentioned are held hostage by union political contributions and are losing jobs because of it. IMHO, this is the biggest story right now. Will the democrats succeed in creating a European economy or will Europe fall apart financially before the democrats succeed.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 09:44:13

Considering auto plants in the south are highly subsidized, does that mean you’re a socialist?

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-05-14 09:56:12

Will the democrats succeed in creating a European economy or will Europe fall apart financially before the democrats succeed.

Or will the champions of unfettered capitalism finally succeed in implementing the race to the bottom, bringing down the working person’s wages, rights, and safety to a manageable level in relation to the global competition?

 
Comment by desertdweller
2009-05-14 10:07:43

be careful what you wish for kirisdad, as with unions going down, so will all pay. There won’t be a need for mftg etc to compete with pay benefits etc. Minimum wages here we come.
2% elite gentry vs 98% serfs/slaves.
Dismantle the middle class and humble all US citizens, but the 2%.

 
Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 10:25:17

Just wait until they ram thru the card check rule as further payback for Union support. Then we won’t even be able to get new plants down south.

 
Comment by Al
2009-05-14 11:32:51

“Or will the champions of unfettered capitalism finally succeed in implementing the race to the bottom, bringing down the working person’s wages, rights, and safety to a manageable level in relation to the global competition?”

I wouldn’t say that the race needs champions. In anything resembling capitalism, this will inevitably happen. Smaller/hungrier competitors will eventually beat out bigger/complacent ones. This is true whether we’re talking companies or nations. The only way to stop it is to completely reject capitalism.

 
Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 11:42:49

Ya know Ya’ll can pass judgement that unions may/do serve a useful purpose, but the bottom line is two new auto plants, from foriegn companies, just opened in Tenn. and Georgia. Thousands of jobs, while Detroit has withered away since the seventies. Either the unions give the orders or local businesses, politicians will always be corrupted. Which states get the jobs? they will have to force card check rule or the game is over.

 
Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 12:19:15

Card Check here we come.

 
Comment by KJ
2009-05-14 19:38:07

Kia has a plant in Georgia.
BMW has a plant in Alabama
Hyundai has a plant in Alabama
Toyota has plants in Kentucky and Texas.
Mercedes has a plant in Alabama.
Nissan has a plant in Tennessee.

All of them are state of the art. They look mighty impressive just driving by them on the interstate. All are non-union. None of them have laid anyone off and most are expanding. I drove by the Kia plant in LaGrange, GA a while back and they are in full expansion mode, looks like lots of additions are coming.

It is so irritating to hear the media talk about the “troubled American auto industry”. Nothing troubling about this part of the auto industry. What is troubling is that Obama is willing to spend tens if not hundreds of billions to prop up the bloated unionized Big 3 that produce garbage products that nobody wants.

 
Comment by exeter
2009-05-15 05:03:34

And all of them are subsidized.

 
 
 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-05-14 08:59:59

Obama gave the UAW a bankrupt company as payback? Sounds like he’s found a very cost-effective way to buy votes.

Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 10:27:03

Until he bails them out, guarantees things they would have otherwise lost and ordains and bestows other gov’t “benefits” upon them.

Comment by Carl Morris
2009-05-14 12:25:54

“Honors and benefits already at the age of nine!”

[Christmas Story]

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:37:27

May 13, 2009, 12:01 a.m. EST
Is it time to stress-test the Federal Reserve?
Commentary: Congressional critics ramp up efforts to corral central bank

By Darrell Delamaide

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — While not quite in the same league as Tina Fey’s take on Sarah Palin, Saturday Night Live’s spoof on the banks’ stress tests last Saturday was pretty funny.

Will Forte as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner explained that the stress test went from being a graded test, to a pass/fail, to a pass/pass-with-an-asterisk, to a pass/pass system, and then he congratulated all the banks for passing. Watch the video.

Time will tell how useful the stress tests were, but few serious economists or analysts believe the banking problem is solved.

In the meantime, there’s a groundswell in Congress for closer scrutiny of the stress tester - the Federal Reserve itself. America’s central bank is a curious public-private sector hybrid, largely free from any governmental oversight or control.

But as the steward of the nation’s money, the Fed’s actions in recent months to print hundreds of billions of dollars in new money seem to cry out for some sort of democratic review. Congress, after years of fawning over Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan as the maestro of monetary policy, has learned the hard way that, while trust is good, control is better.

So there is a bill before Congress that calls for a full-scale audit of the Federal Reserve System — the Federal Reserve Board based in Washington, and the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks.

That bill, H.R. 1207, now has 149 cosponsors and counting. It was introduced by Texas Rep. Ron Paul, now nominally a Republican, but a former leader of the Libertarian Party who is still best known for his strong libertarian principles.

Comment by James
2009-05-14 07:31:39

What is the point? Ron knows what we all know. The Fed reserve is technically insolvent just like the major banks.

In fact the treasury is keeping them quasi-solvent by continually funneling money into their store.

Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:08:19

Good question. Ron Paul would rather eliminate the Fed than audit it, but the point is, one step at a time.

 
 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 08:07:01

Awesome!

Now - where’s the equivalent legislation for the IMF?

(See the danger here?)

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:39:15

Retirement Living

May 11, 2009, 6:04 p.m. EST
Better get used to your 401(k)
New milestone in death of traditional pensions, but hybrid plans may grow

By Andrea Coombes, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — More than half of Fortune 100 companies now offer only a 401(k) or other defined-contribution plan to new employees, the first time a majority of the nation’s 100 largest firms does not offer a traditional pension, according to an annual survey released Monday by consulting firm Watson Wyatt.

The new statistic comes even as many savers rue the day their retirement became dependent on a 401(k), and as criticism of defined-contribution plans grows because these vehicles put the onus on individuals to invest and manage their savings.

Social Security is one of the most reliable sources of retirement income. But people often make mistakes when they tap into the system, inadvertently reducing their monthly payment for the rest of their lives, says Gail Buckner, a retirement specialist with Franklin Templeton Investments. MarketWatch’s Andrea Coombes reports.

As the S&P 500 dropped by about 37% in 2008, many people watched their plans for an imminent retirement disappear. Yet the trend away from pensions isn’t likely to change any time soon.

Today, 55 Fortune 100 companies offer solely defined-contribution plans to new hires, up from 46 at the end of 2007. Four of the companies made the change this year alone, according to Watson Wyatt.

Comment by Mike in Miami
2009-05-14 05:52:48

Problem with 401Ks are numerous:
- limited choices, no all are good.
- limited trades per quarter
- tax deferred. Future taxes are likely to be significantly higher given current fiscal irresponsibility.
- While stocks increased in the past due to 2 factors, rising profits and an increase in buyers for stoks, the latter is bound to reverse to to demographic trends. Profits might also have peaked.
- Try to write off investment losses in a 401K? Good luck!
…and looking into my crystal ball I see:
- With social security going broke government will likely resort to “means testing” before dispersing any social security. Those people with a fat 401K will be forced to draw down their funds before getting any government benefits. If it’s not that, government will find another way to steal your 401K money. In short, the responsible will be punished while the irresponsible will be rewarded…business as usual.
Personally, I make the minimum distribution to get the maximum match. anything beyond that is a waste of money.

Comment by KJ
2009-05-14 06:27:56

I agree completely. Putting away money in retirement accounts is the worst thing you can do since the govt will know to the dime how much you have and where it is. And what they can see, they can take. Thanks but no thanks, that’s not worth the tax savings.

I’ll take this one step further with college tuition. Having become a new dad recently and started to think about such things, my plan is to be destitute (on paper) when my daughter enters her senior yeah of high school. That will open up all sorts of freebies from the gubmint.

If there is one thing I have learned over the past 3 months is that the more irresponsible one is, the more one is rewarded. Hope and change baby, hope and freaking change.

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-05-14 07:20:41

With each passing day I’m feeling better and better for not having been more prodigious in my retirement saving.

You guys are so right, one can see what’s coming from a mile away. Trust the PTB at your own peril.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by polly
2009-05-14 08:18:07

You need to plan to be destitute from about the middle of her junior year in high school on, or that is my recollection from way back when. Remember, tax years and academic years don’t match up.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by are they crazy
2009-05-14 08:26:27

The other road to college funding is the child doing exceptionally well in school and/or paying for private school k-12 level. Paying $9k/year paid off for us. Just got financial aid package for sr year of college. Bulk of award is scholarship. She will get through 4 years @ $40K/yr with NO loans and little saved pre college.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:21:29

“my plan is to be destitute”

Just keep in mind - they base the freebies off of your income (your tax filings, actually), not your savings.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2009-05-14 10:43:28

That is simply not true. Assets count, the child’s and the parent’s.

 
 
 
Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 06:28:21

I think people with Roth IRAs are going to be in for a taxing shock as well.

Comment by rusty
2009-05-14 06:42:45

you mean like they will invent a tax for the ROTH ?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:26:11

Taxing Roths on the way out is essentially double taxing. I never thought the government could be capable of something so atrocious as that… until the bailouts.

 
Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 10:33:29

Don’t forget that Social Security income was tax free up until 1983.

 
 
Comment by ylekiot1
2009-05-14 06:49:22

Maybe we should make up a new term for that and call it “taxic” (toxic) assets.

DEFINITION - Taxic assets - Visible assets that the government strives to take from you via taxes.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-14 07:29:05

There will be a massive revolution if they screw with the 401k and IRA rules to steal more of our money.

You underestimate the amount of people regularly saving in those tax deferred schemes. Many lost a lot of net worth and are trying to recover by putting more money in.

The U.S. savings rate is up more. People are becoming more frugal.

And you think we will allow the numbnut Congress to keep its friivolous spending and taxing ways while we citizens live the “new frugality” lifestyle? NOT A CHANCE!

A sea change will be at hand in a few years from what we have running our country now. Okay, to make you all happy, It does not have to be from the Republican Party. I am 100% social liberal anyway. It could be another Ross Perot, but with success.

 
Comment by James
2009-05-14 07:46:10

The health care proposal might push a lot of people over the edge. My taxes would go up by 30% to pay for it. It would break me.

When people say social liberal I start thinking “health care is a right”.

We were warned that several things were in the liberal think tanks. They wanted to seize 401Ks and give you social security chits as compensation. The other idea would be means testing. I suspect that means testing will be the easier way. It will massively punish those who bothered to save. An additional 8-9% taxes. Think about all the matching contributions along with losing the benefit.

The problem with this is; it is compounded by the lower income margin creeping up, the people who get paid for nothing. So, the benefit of working is going down hill. Could see things becoming very European where social mobility is very limited and unemployment is very high (why work? you will have health care, food, housing exc).

I would like to note these are think tank proposals and far from becoming law. Think tanks also tend to be pretty extreme positions.

 
Comment by are they crazy
2009-05-14 08:28:48

I’m betting your 30% increase is way less than medical costs of premiums, co-pays and out of pocket.

 
Comment by polly
2009-05-14 08:40:38

I hate to pop the conspiracy bubble here, but it is as good as impossible to take away tax benefits that (at a guess) 70% of the people who make between $50K and $250K a year take advantage of. Please note that the current administration is not recommending upping the 25% marginal rate to 27%, they are recommending raising the 35% rate to 39% or thereabouts. Tax breaks for the middle of the bunch are very hard to take away. And, unless you have your money buried in the back yard or tucked away in a tax haven, the government already knows how much you have or can figure it out based on the 1099-INT your banks reports out each year, though as of now, I don’t believe that Social Security has access to that information. Putting it in a 401K or an IRA does not change its visibility at all. Oh, and the trend is that the tax haven won’t help either in a few years. Backyard is about the only option you have left.

A few people in a liberal think tank may have included a change to Roth IRA rules if they were assigned to research every revenue raising idea they could think of, but they aren’t going to try to do it any more than conservatives are going to recommend legalizing personal ownership of tactical nuclear weapons or executing doctors that perform abortions. Just not going to happen.

Please remember that whatever you think of politicians, they are answerable to voters. That means you and me and whole bunch of other people. If enough people who vote really, really hate something, it is very unlikely to happen. And if it does happen, it will get changed back pretty quickly. I know it doesn’t seem that way to a lot of you - especially if you hate the bailouts or the federal reserve. But the amount of hate you have for a particular policy doesn’t matter at all. Only the number of people who join you. Please note, that there is NO talk in DC about adding more money to the bailouts. The reason they are going to let the big banks start to pay back their TARP money is because they need to bailout the smaller ones as they get hit with their commercial loans going bad - reusing the money instead of making new appropriations. The fact that people hated the bailouts is affecting decisions here in DC.

 
Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:33:07

“Please remember that whatever you think of politicians, they are answerable to voters. That means you and me and whole bunch of other people. If enough people who vote really, really hate something, it is very unlikely to happen.”

I’d venture a guess that a ridiculous majority of Americans have come to hate the banking bailout. Little that has done to stop it.

 
Comment by polly
2009-05-14 10:52:31

I addressed that issue a few words after you cut off your quote. And I bet you would find out that many many people believed it when they were told that not doing the bailout would cause the whole economy to collapse. Regular folks didn’t get really peeved until the AIG bonuses got made public. And pols are NOT trying to appropriate more money for TARP. All the ideas now are little finesses (not that they won’t cost money, they will) like letting the big boys repay TARP so the funds can be recycled to bail out the smaller banks that will need help as commercial loans go bad, and making the $8000 tax break available up front, rather than the following year. No talk about large NEW money. Just fights over how to split up the old money.

 
Comment by Julius
2009-05-14 12:17:21

“When people say social liberal I start thinking “health care is a right”.”

“Socially liberal” generally refers to those who believe that government should respect personal freedoms. The terms “socially liberal” and “fiscally conservative” are generally used together to describe libertarians, who certainly do not support single-payor health care.

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-05-14 13:09:03

” Just fights over how to split up the old money.”

polly, I disagree. They are shoveling out TONS of new money.

But they’re doing it in a way that is less noticeable. Why do the big banks have the liquidity to even consider paying back the TARP funds?? Not due to earnings, newly floated equity offerings, or anything like that.

The answer is that they’re borrowing it via the FDIC (actually from the markets, but only able to sell it due to FDIC guarantees) or via the Fed.

In other words, we’re replacing transparent support efforts with transactions where the taxpayer is similarly on the hook, but does not have access to the information to really understand the level of risk that has been transferred to the taxpayer.

That’s why there is “No talk about large NEW money.”

 
Comment by polly
2009-05-14 13:32:07

But the original point is why I don’t think they are going to change the tax code to tax ROTHs or confiscate 401ks. Those would be very very visisble changes that lots of people could recognize as affecting them directly. Comparing that to sophisticated financial shenanigans buried deep in the bowels of the FED or the FDIC is silly. Getting away with the later does not imply they can get away with the former.

No one in Congress is talking about appropriating another trillion bucks for more bank bailouts. They can’t get away with it. They can’t get away with eliminating the Roth tax exemption either. Voters will not let them. Not this generation, anyway.

 
 
Comment by drumminj
2009-05-14 09:26:58

I think people with Roth IRAs are going to be in for a taxing shock as well.

I’ve been considering liquidating my roth (or at least pulling out my contributions) due to this thought…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by MrBubble
2009-05-14 11:27:59

I’ve spoken to some people already on that train too. It’s a 10% hit plus taxes now, right? The PTB need that money in the market to buoy stock prices though. So can’t you imagine them bumping it to 25% as the “first to panic” people start cashing out? Too tin-foil hat of me? Thanks.

MrBubble

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-05-14 11:49:15

My understanding is you can withdraw contributions penalty-free. However, withdrawing the gains would be equivalent to taking an early distribution from a 401k - you’d be taxed and pay a penalty on top of it.

 
 
 
Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 07:40:28

I wish they would survey and see how many companies have now stopped their 401k matches.

 
Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 08:40:43

Instead of means testing, I’d rather see an extra 2% contribution for all earnings above the current $106,000 FICA cap. At least it’s not changing the rules midstream and doesn’t make SS into another welfare-like system.

 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 09:53:22

And the problems with pensions is that if you’re not hired early on in the companies life, you’re not getting a dime. The burdens of paying people to not work eventually collapses the company. And even if they fully fund the pensions, a market correction like this one will ruin the pension just as thoroughly as underfunding it. Much like Social Security. I don’t expect to see a dime of that.

Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 10:36:09

Thats not true. Companies set aside money for pension obligations up until the 80’s when corporate raiders started taking over companies to “free” that money that had been set aside. It was Wall Street, not mismanagement that doomed pensions.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by 2banana
2009-05-14 10:49:30

Well, I guess that would explain the dismal pension funding at Ford, GM and Chrysler…not

 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 11:30:55

Skroodle, pensions ALWAYS underfund via under assuming costs and over assuming returns. Realistic pension funding would quickly drive a company out of business. And even if you had the cash to fully fund them, the pressure of ‘meeting and beating’ the expectations by your investors would quickly allocate that cash elsewhere.

And pensions are a suckers bet for the employee. “Let us underpay you today in exchange for a promise to pay you later.”

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-05-14 11:51:58

And pensions are a suckers bet for the employee.

I don’t know…my father is collecting a $90k/year pension from Lucent. It’s a % of the average of his last 5 years salary, I think.

A sucker? Personally, I think he got a good deal.

 
Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 13:06:12

GE has been around for over 100 years and has not defaulted on its pensions. Jack Welch even gets a free apartment and chef in Manhattan as part of his pension.

 
Comment by calex
2009-05-14 21:40:50

And how do you think a thief would get that? By buying up smaller companies letting them think they would now be a part of some large company, then he would start the process of having the work done overseas, and then layoff everybody and close down the shop. And don’t forget how he would force these companies to replace all their equipment first with over inflated priced equipment bought by the large company’s financial arm and then leased to the new company for an overinflated price.

Now financial arm would sell those over inflated lease contracts to the market, meet the numbers and viola…stock price goes up. Six Sigma at its finest…work those numbers till they say what you want.

Book the profit upfront…delay the loses in off balance sheet accounts until you can get out with a fat pension, paid for apartment, paid for chef, first and complete access to boeing business jet free of charge. Or was it that the large company gave the prick the jet but he had to give it back or the wife he commited adultry on would get half ownership of the jet?

Oh yeah, then go on CNBC claiming to be some superhero business man and blame the loses on the current CEO.

A company may have been able to pay the pensions for a 100 years, but after what these slimeballs have done…all bets are off. Pension Guarantee Corp is going to have its hands full because of these modern day robber barons.

And look for the dividend to suffer as the savior from omaha has been gifted millions of shares to stave off the mess that this slim has caused. All so he could have a personal chef on the shareholders dime.

If the shareholders weren’t such sheep they would hang him in public square and then piss on his grave for what he has done to a once great company.

 
 
 
Comment by desertdweller
2009-05-14 10:13:23

Funny how you found a few of the bad things with 401ks, here is another …my corp (is it any different from other corps?) had its 401k overseen by the corps VPs. who IMHO did not know squat about 401ks etc but the serious conflict of interest finally got them to offer 10 more funds, over the 12 offered.
Then as you said, they limited trades from 2x per month to 1 x per 90 days. Now how in the f are you supposed to be able to maneuver those funds to increase your wealth? Answer? they don’t want you to increase your wealth. It is just another way for them to use your money and give you a pittance. Later ‘you’ can skrew it up more when you have to take it out.

Comment by KJ
2009-05-14 19:44:02

“Please note that the current administration is not recommending upping the 25% marginal rate to 27%, they are recommending raising the 35% rate to 39% or thereabouts.”

That is a very naive way of thinking. You could double the taxes on everyone making more than $250K a year tomorrow. And still, you would fall well short of getting enough money to pay for all of Obama’s proposed spending.

Where do you recokon the rest will come from? Hint: not the rich.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by darthrealtor
2009-05-14 06:57:57

Best retirement plan is to save half your paycheck and live below your means. It’s that simple.

Comment by Left LA
2009-05-14 07:20:41

And then along comes currency collapse. The ultimate irresponsible entity is the US Government. The only way to repay it’s credit card (T-bills) is to inflate.

Comment by MommyK
2009-05-14 11:08:34

But with inflation, having bought property might have been the way to go.
I don’t think any one asset class is sure thing for all time. We’re putting our eggs in a lot of baskets.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by takingbets
2009-05-14 07:25:40

+1000

 
Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 07:43:13

I think the best retirement plan is to not have a paycheck.

 
Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 08:11:36

There are few people who could save half their paycheck and still eat, and have a place to live that didn’t involve a cardboard box.

 
Comment by are they crazy
2009-05-14 08:30:29

Long time ago, I read that the best financial plan is low overhead and knowing the difference between need and want.

Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 08:46:13

Crazy, that’s just crazy.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:45:43

May 13, 2009, 9:21 p.m. EST
California formally asks Geithner for TARP assistance
By John Letzing, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — California Treasurer Bill Lockyer asked U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday to authorize assistance for his state from the federal Troubled Asset Relief Program, warning that depressed tax revenues may cut into basic services and halt the building of infrastructure.

In a letter, Lockyer asked Geithner for TARP assistance for California and “other financially strapped states and local governments which face a severe cash flow crunch.”

“If we cannot obtain our usual short-term cash-flow borrowings, there could be devastating impacts on the ability of the State or other governments to provide essential services to their citizens,” Lockyer wrote.

In particular, Lockyer cited fire and police protection, education and social services.

No credit

In addition, Lockyer warned in the letter that California’s cash flow problems may lead to trouble accessing the long-term bond market, which could “eventually even halt our infrastructure construction programs.”

Lockyer estimated that California’s cash flow shortfall in fiscal 2009-2010 will be more than $13 billion.

But weakness in the credit markets will cause difficulties in short-term borrowing to make up that difference, Lockyer wrote, necessitating the use of TARP money to help make funds more easily available through banks.

Comment by Mike in Miami
2009-05-14 06:04:04

Hey Big Spender!

Comment by Julius
2009-05-14 07:21:03

“In particular, Lockyer cited fire and police protection, education and social services.”

In a recession, you don’t get everything you want…meaning that California needs to pick two of the three “essentials” listed above before whining to Geithner for TARP money (?!?).

(And here’s a hint: the last “essential” in the list, isn’t.)

 
 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 06:30:59

Cripes - they’re already getting several billion from the stimulus package - I guess that wasn’t enough. Not sure the exact figure, but I believe there was $75 billion or so set aside for the states; presumably a good chunk of that went to California.

 
Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 06:31:33

If only California could issue their own money.

Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-14 06:48:08

“If only California could issue their own money.”

It’d be Zimbabwe.

Comment by Julius
2009-05-14 07:15:17

At this point, California might as well follow Detroit’s lead and start issuing scrip.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 09:53:12

If only California could issue their own money.”

Are you guys familiar with Ithaca Hours?

Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 13:07:14

No, but if you hum a few bars, I might.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 00:13:45

Yep — I looked at Ithaca Hours when I was a grad student. My recollection is that:

1) They serve to protect the local economy from Federal taxes (at least until the IRS agents get nosy);

2) They create a double-coincidence-of-wants problem that the dollar does not (I need to find a fellow Ithaca trading cartel member who has what I want and who wants what I have);

3) In light of 2), these might work well for tax-free adult service transactions, provided one is not too choosy in his/her wants.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 10:22:12

Note that they never mention having trouble making payroll for the representatives and governor. No, they’ll have to cut services, not cut their own paychecks.

 
 
Comment by ACH
2009-05-14 05:47:25

AIG Will Never Be Worth What We Are Going To Pay For It

In 2004 AIG had 2.6 Billion shares at $78 per share. This makes a total worth of $203 Billion.

So far we have paid them 180 Billion to unwind 1.6 Trillion worth of crap on their balance sheet. AIG has a 2.7 Trillion position that requires unwinding. We will pay $300 Billion of the pleasure of helping them out.

We are not going to get our money out UNLESS Little Bennie Bernanke succeeds in inflation. We will then get all our money back so that we can carry it in wheelbarrows to buy a loaf of bread.

Speaking of a loaf of bread, my wife recently told me that Wal Mart reduced the size of their Harvest bread by 4 ounces while maintaining the same price per loaf.

His Mother must be so proud of him!

Idiot.

Roidy

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 07:31:43

That loaf of bread has ‘added value’ per oz now because the ingredients are that much better now. This is what the bean-counters who track inflation would try to sell you if you cried foul. What a Billy Mays scam.

 
Comment by samk
2009-05-14 07:44:36

My wife reports that ice cream is now sold in 1.75 quart packages rather than 2 quarts. Possibly posted before but it was new to me.

Comment by InMontana
2009-05-14 08:24:13

Lots of things like that now. The old 3 lb can of coffee is 2.5 I think. Yogurt 8 oz to 6 oz. Grandma’s Cookies in the lunch room snack machine have been shrinking for years.

 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 10:26:36

In our stores in California they’re down to 1.5 quarts. No lie! Same price as the 2 quarts used to be about a year ago. They stepped down to 1.75 and now again to 1.5

Comment by In Colorado
2009-05-14 12:19:41

Same here

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 05:49:30

Wife and I attended a high school organization meeting last night. It was for Del Norte HS, at the western edge of 4S Ranch (sometimes mockingly referred to here as Foreclosure Ranch). This state-of-the-art school is supposed to open this fall. They have a fantastic physical plant, but there are questions about whether they will attract enough students from other parts of the Poway district to be able to open. I cannot help but wonder whether the popping of the bubble severely impacted their projected enrollment, as the land to the west of the school appears to be graded for real estate development, but instead is all open space as far as the eye can see.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 05:51:39

Sanity’s been restored Federal Housing Administration loans, which require only a 3.5 percent down payment and allow for lower credit scores

First-time home buyers: The new niche market?
Middle-class workers who couldn’t afford to buy during the boom are having a change of fortune — and snapping up bargains during the bust.

By BARBARA MARSHALL

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Thursday, May 07, 2009

For Conniston Middle School teachers Areceli and Alberto Ramirez, the advantage of not being able to afford a house during the boom is snapping up a bargain during the bust.

The couple bought a three-bedroom, two-bath home in Wellington last month for $215,000. A few years ago, it would have cost about $330,000, according to their Realtor.

First-time home buyers Scott and Rose Heard bought a 1925 home with a two-story cottage in West Palm Beach’s Old Northwood for $299,000, about $250,000 less than they would have paid during the housing boom.

“It was a great deal,” Alberto said of the home in Lakeview of the Landings.

So was the $8,000 check they received from the federal government as first-time home buyers, part of February’s federal housing rescue plan.

“We used it to buy furniture,” Alberto said.

First-time buyers like the Ramirezes — teachers, firefighters and other middle-class workers once priced out of Palm Beach County — are rejuvenating the low end of the county’s real estate market.

Instead of being saddled with overpriced homes purchased during the boom, these first-time buyers can take advantage of prices down 34 percent since last year and nearly 50 percent from the height of 2005.

“People can buy a house for almost what they can rent and they’re going to get $8,000 back, which is basically what they’re putting down as a down payment,” said John Diaz of First Nation Realty in West Palm Beach, which holds seminars for first-time buyers.

There are indications that the long standoff between buyers and sellers may be ending, according to new statistics.

In Palm Beach County, the number of signed sales agreements climbed 134 percent from March to April (see Page 1A). Sales contracts are contingent on financing, appraisals and inspections, among other things.

Eric Sain, president of the Realtors Association of Palm Beach County, was so shocked at the results that he ran the figures twice.

“Those are spectacular numbers,” he said.

Although Multiple Listing Service does not track how many of those are people buying their first homes, experts say it’s probably the majority.

“Sanity’s been restored. People are realizing there is a chance to get into housing for a lot less money,” said Mike Larson of Weiss Research Group in Jupiter.

Buyers are getting assistance from:

Interest rates, at a historic low of about 5 percent.

Sellers, including banks trying to unload foreclosed properties, offering to pay 3 percent to 6 percent of closing costs.

Federal Housing Administration loans, which require only a 3.5 percent down payment and allow for lower credit scores and are easier to obtain than bank mortgages.

Many area Realtors say they’re busier than they’ve been in several years, thanks to first-time buyers.

“These are people who have been sitting on the sidelines and waiting and waiting,” said Gilbert Orr, with Re/Max Prestige in West Palm Beach.

Comment by smathis
2009-05-14 06:54:39

“First-time home buyers Scott and Rose Heard bought a 1925 home with a two-story cottage in West Palm Beach’s Old Northwood for $299,000, about $250,000 less than they would have paid during the housing boom.”

Old Northwood? Good Lord. OK, there are some cool older houses there (and yes, in South Florida, houses dating from the ’20s is about as old as it gets).

But a friend of mine, then newly-married, bought a house in that neighborhood circa ‘97 for, I hope I’m remembering correctly, around $80K. At any rate, it was less than 6 figures. It did not have a “two-story cottage” and was small, probably around 1100 sq. ft. But still. $299K doesn’t sound like a great bargain to me.

The other thing is, unless things have changed a LOT in a few years, it is a TERRIBLE neighborhood for crime. The friend I mentioned was pregnant while living there. One morning while she was at home on bedrest and close to popping, there was commotion in her backyard. She looked out the window to see a policeman wrestling with a guy on the ground, trying to get the handcuffs on. The guy had apparently committed an armed robbery, took off on foot, went over the wall around her backyard, where the cop nailed him. Very nice.

In other words, I wish I could be happy for that couple. But knowing that area’s history…I think that unfortunately they’ll live to regret their decision.

Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 07:13:39

“The other thing is, unless things have changed a LOT in a few years, it is a TERRIBLE neighborhood for crime”

No, great neighborhood only steps to great shopping, crack cocaine and prostitution. And I am sure most of those young armed robbers will be headed off to college soon.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 07:26:56

“I think that unfortunately they’ll live to regret their decision.”

Hopefully they’ll live to regret their decision.

 
Comment by phillygal
2009-05-14 08:00:58

Recently I moved to the neighborhood where I grew up. Was taking a walk around last night, noticed a house with a Sheriff’s Sale notice on front door. It was just the kind of house I’m looking for - cottage/bungalow style, with yard, not on a main street. Sheriff’s sale appeals to me because even in this blue collar neighborhood, sellers are asking wishing prices that are way off the mark.

I checked the records on the property, in 2005 it sold for $104,000.00. Similar houses in the area are now listed for $130,000.00 - and remain unsold. In my county, it’s up to the bidder to research the title to discover any additional liens. Depending on what I find out, I can’t see myself bidding more than 25k.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 06:56:48

The FHA and HUD have insured over 34 million home mortgages and 47,205 multifamily project mortgages since 1934. FHA currently has 4.8 million insured single family mortgages and 13,000 insured multifamily projects in its portfolio.

In the more than 60 years since the FHA was created, much has changed and Americans are now arguably the best housed people in the world. HUD has helped greatly with that success.

 
 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 06:18:52

LOL at this from PB last night:

“Does owning a car debt free qualify us for membership in the Ownership Society?”

No - you don’t count as an owner of something unless you have a loan against it. Didn’t you get the memo?

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-05-14 07:32:54

A get title loan and set that equity free!

 
Comment by VaBeyatch in Virginia Beach
2009-05-14 07:41:01

Realtors think renters are losers, but they sure do lease a bunch of cars.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 09:29:29

It’s all about appearances, I guess. One of my favorite characters in 20th century corporate lore is Sam Walton, Wal-Mart founder, who reportedly insisted on tooling around in beat-up pickup trucks.

Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 13:08:47

Ross Perot drove a Buick the first time he ran for President. It was a nice Buick though.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 09:51:17

“Realtors think renters are losers, but they sure do lease a bunch of cars.”

ZING!

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 11:18:34

Leasers are losers — it has a nice ring to it!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 10:37:16

The only point of owning something is for equity extraction!

Unfortunately the bank wouldn’t let me take a CELOC (Canine Equity Line of Credit) out on my dog Ash. I told them they were racists. They said I was white. I pointed out that this is California, so I’m now a protected minority. I’m still waiting for my apology.

 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-14 06:23:48

test

Comment by Mikey(2)
2009-05-14 06:50:27

What, you have one today?

Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-14 07:26:23

*chuckles*

My posts were taking longer than usual, and I was wondering if it was my old clonker of a ‘puter.

Leigh ;)

 
Comment by phillygal
2009-05-14 08:21:21

Mikey2,

I may have been spending too much time on this blog.

I’ve been making inquiries to landlords and realtors, and instead of the accomodating reception I expected, they’ve been throwing me six kinds of attitude.

The real doldrums haven’t hit our area yet.

Comment by eastcoaster
2009-05-14 10:50:24

Nope - not much has changed around here. Yet. I hope “yet”. Sometimes I wonder. But I don’t believe anywhere is “different”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Mikey(2)
2009-05-14 13:29:03

Hey P-gal. I feel your pain, though I have found myself a realtor who is a bit more savvy to what’s going on. I presume it’s because she actually has a business degree from a decent school, as opposed to the realhousewifetors.

No, the doldrums haven’t hit yet, but we’re sorta kinda on our way.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 06:24:56

MAY 14, 2009, WSJ
SEC Poised to Charge Mozilo With Fraud
By KARA SCANNELL and JOHN R. EMSHWILLER

The Securities and Exchange Commission staff is readying civil fraud charges against Countrywide Financial Corp. co-founder Angelo Mozilo, in what would be the highest-profile government legal action against a chief executive connected to the financial crisis.

The SEC staff sent a so-called Wells notice to Mr. Mozilo several weeks ago alerting him to the potential charges, people familiar with the matter said. Mr. Mozilo’s lawyers could still persuade the SEC’s commissioners that there isn’t sufficient evidence to bring a case.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124224647957816523.html#mod=testMod

Comment by darthrealtor
2009-05-14 07:01:22

For his punishment they should not allow him within 100 yards of a tanning booth.

Comment by matthew
2009-05-14 07:42:06

For punishment, I’d make him Bernie Madoff’s cell mate..

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 08:55:43

“BasicallyFor punishment, I’d make him Bernie Madoff’s cell mate.. ”

C’mon, Matthew, what else would you like to do?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 08:44:58

Hell, Bleach the bastard!

 
Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 09:24:44

I posted a response that Ben must have nixed. Suffice to say, I think your suggested punishment is the very least of what he deserves. A good start, though.

 
 
Comment by patient renter
2009-05-14 10:52:12

May I say that this was accurately predicted by many bubble bloggers a whilte back. Kudos!

 
 
Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 06:26:45

In case anyone missed the election news this weekend from Dallas, even though there is a budget deficit in the city budget, the city of Dallas will be entering the hotel business. Yes, $500 million+ will be spent on a hotel:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/local/stories/051109dnmetdalwinners.418663e.html

Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-14 07:04:48

Yet another city trying to support a convention sector with too much capacity already. Put me in the camp of those that believe that the convention business as we have known it isn’t coming back. Taking on more debt now to expand convention capacity appears extremely unwise.

Comment by Neil
2009-05-14 08:53:11

Put me in the camp of those that believe that the convention business as we have known it isn’t coming back.

For the price, this hotel purchase is stupid. But long term, there still will be a convention business. Most cities have voted themselves out of the process. How? They are too difficult to schedule a small to midsize convention. My sister helps plan small conventions (400 to 600 attendees) for her medical specialty (doctors). Only Las Vegas and Orlando are ‘easy’ to plan. But its a ‘been there, done that’ situation for those cities.

Dallas, thanks to the huge American Airlines hub, has quite the chance to grow its convention business. There is actually a lot of easy ‘low hanging’ fruit to grab in the convention market. Mostly due to many of the major convention destinations making the planners job too difficult for small/mid-size conventions. e.g., LA, New Orleans, and others are easy marks to take away business from.

I’m a bear… But there are opportunities out there. A smart city building a ‘convention district’ cheap as stimulus is actually not too bad of an idea. Oh, I think the industry will shrink, but so many of the estabilished conference centers are so poorly managed that new entrants will be at an advantage.

Got Popcorn?
Neil

Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 09:45:48

Dallas already has the convention center.

Dallas already has hotels.

$500 million is a lot of money to gamble for the taxpayers of Dallas.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Jon
2009-05-14 10:07:56

Yeah, but who the heck wants to go to Dallas? I’ve been to Dallas. It has highways, malls, bars & restaurants. So does every other city on the planet.

I have no idea why people even live there.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by polly
2009-05-14 09:08:37

I’m going to blame that movie. You know, the one with, “If you build it, he will come”? Yeah, that’s it. Let’s blame the movie.

 
 
 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 06:29:04

Was just reading through some stuff posted on BB last night after I went to be. One interesting thing was the legislation floated regarding an extra surcharge for CC purchases.

Seems to me like that’s yet another volley in the War on Savers, and may be a prelude to high inflation.

Many of us I know like to still use credit cards, and pay them off each month, taking advantage of some of the cash rebates and also the “float” period. These advantages would be offset (and then some, probably) by the new fees.

Lately that float period has been quite meaningless, since you can’t make any significant interest on the extra money in your bank account during that period. However - if (when) we get to high inflation that will no longer be the case; there will be significant extra savings by taking advantage of the float. So perhaps the proposed legislation is a preliminary shot; to take away this advantage of Savers before it can be used in an inflationary environment?

(adjusts tin foil hat)

Comment by darthrealtor
2009-05-14 07:02:54

The day I have to pay to use my CC is the day I cut the thing into little tiny bits.

Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 07:49:07

You pay now, you just don’t realize it.

That 3% transaction fee doesn’t appear out of thin air. Merchants would have been charging extra to use credit cards if the banks had not lobbied and made it illegal (hence the “cash discounts”).

Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-05-14 10:43:55

Exactly Skip. Right now we’re all paying extra to use credit cards regardless of whether or not we’re using the cards. CC companies know that if the 3% surcharge gets VISIBLY passed on, people will drastically cut down on CC spending. So they strong-armed an agreement where the dealers have to have a “credit same as cash” by default.

Passing legislation that makes it illegal to demand retailers do ‘credit same as cash’ doesn’t mean that retailers will immediately start doing cash discounts, or credit surcharges, or however you want to look at it. If I were a store, I might just leave my prices 3% higher and advertise “credit same as cash” and get the CC addicted consumers shopping there.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 10:51:30

The fundamental difference though is that the transaction fees are paid by *all* customers, including those that pay cash. At least for most businesses anyhow. There are some that offer cash discounts, but they are few, and certainly don’t include big box stores like Target etc.

The proposed legislation is a fee specifically for credit card use.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by drumminj
2009-05-14 11:42:34

My understanding is it’s not “illegal”, it’s just part of the contract they sign. Is there actually a law on the books that says a merchant can’t do that?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 13:16:22

It has been illegal to charge a extra fee for credit card purchases since the Truth-in-Lending Act of 1968.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-05-14 14:43:53

Interesting. Well color me newly-informed. Thanks Skip.

 
 
 
Comment by Wickedheart
2009-05-14 08:22:45

Same here, bye, bye Amex.

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 08:57:36

(adjusts tin foil hat)

You look fabulous!

 
Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 09:06:47

You mean in addition to the 3 % or so the CC companies already make on purchases? How…special. If that day ever comes, guess I will mournfully say buh-bye to the frequent flyer miles we get with every purchase. Dang, I’ll miss those free business-class tickets to exotic destinations. :(

Comment by skroodle
2009-05-14 10:43:00

I think they are talking about showing the CC transaction cost similar to how sales tax appears as separate line item on the receipt.

Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 11:03:21

Well, as long as it doesn’t cost the customer any more money, why not? The CC statements already have to do that for foreing transactions. Oooooh, maybe they’re scared that fewer people will use credit cards! :roll:

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 11:05:04

Foreign. Not “foreing”. Sheesh.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-05-14 06:43:17

Kremlin: Battles over energy may lead to wars.
AP
By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV, Associated Press Writer Vladimir Isachenkov, Associated Press Writer – Wed May 13, 5:49 am ET

MOSCOW – A Kremlin policy paper says international relations will be shaped by battles over energy resources, which may trigger military conflicts on Russia’s borders.

The National Security Strategy also said that Russia will seek an equal “partnership” with the United States, but named U.S. missile defense plans in Europe among top threats to the national security.

The document, which has been signed by President Dmitry Medvedev, listed top challenges to national security and outlined government priorities through 2020.

“The international policy in the long run will be focused on getting hold of energy sources, including in the Middle East, the Barents Sea shelf and other Arctic regions, the Caspian and Central Asia,” said the strategy paper that was posted on the presidential Security Council’s Web site.

“Amid competitive struggle for resources, attempts to use military force to solve emerging problems can’t be excluded,” it added. “The existing balance of forces near the borders of the Russian Federation and its allies can be violated.”

The paper didn’t elaborate or name any specific nations.

Medvedev’s predecessor Vladimir Putin, who is now Russia’s powerful prime minister, often accused the West in the past of trying to expand its clout in the ex-Soviet nations and push Russia out of its traditional sphere of influence. The Kremlin has fiercely opposed NATO’s plans to incorporate its ex-Soviet neighbors, Ukraine and Georgia.

Russia currently controls most natural gas export routes out of the former Soviet region, but that grip is coming under growing pressure from China and the West.

The European Union, which depends on Russia for about one-quarter of its gas needs, has sought alternate supply routes, including the prospective Nabucco pipeline that would carry the Caspian and Central Asian gas to Europe but skirt Russia.

Intensifying rivalry for influence in the ex-Soviet region fomented tensions and helped stage the ground for last August’s war between Russia and Georgia, which sits astride a key export pipeline carrying Caspian oil to Western markets.

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-05-14 07:27:21

Not IF, WHEN.

Comment by Bad Chile
2009-05-14 09:37:45

Hello Russia:

There’s this movie. Kinda new, been out maybe 25 years at the most. It is called “Mad Max”.

Watch it some time. Might help you understand a few things.

My bill covering the $11.5 million consulting fee to help you figure out your energy crisis in the future will be arriving shortly.

 
 
Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:16:05

Battles over energy may lead to wars. The Kremlin is a couple of decades late & a few rubles short on this prediction. We’re already in a couple of wars over energy. The oil money the US sent overseas the last few decades paid for the 9/11 attackers’ plane fares & flight school tuition, the madrassas, etc. etc.. Notice North Koreans are not welcome here, and coincidentally have caused little trouble on our shores.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-05-14 12:37:41

I’m so sick of oil. Some shill was just on CNBC talking about crude really breaking out to the upside. This, after every bit of evidence has shown that demand has cratered not only nationally, but worldwide. Oil is back in a bubble, already. This isn’t the Greater Depression, but rather the complete failure of capitalism, due to rampant, unchecked speculation in all asset classes. Money for nothing.

 
 
Comment by Mikey(2)
2009-05-14 06:54:44

I paid a dollar for freakin’ cucumber today, and all my wife and I are gonna do with it is eat it. Gas is up about 20% over the last month. Glad I started a vegetable garden and work from home.

Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 07:17:23

Seems like everyone is getting into gardening now. I think it’s a great trend. I, too, planted some veggies this year, for the first time in a long time. I’m in NYC, so I never bothered before, but this year I got permission from my landlord to use the roof of our building. The setup works perfectly. It’s very sunny, and I expect (hope) I’ll have fewer pests. It’s been a lot of fun so far.

Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 07:45:53

“Seems like everyone is getting into gardening now.”
You guys are late.

Pot ‘grow house’ operation busted, feds say
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published September 21, 2006

PORT ST. LUCIE - Authorities said Wednesday they have broken up a marijuana cultivation ring in which people were recruited to operate more than 50 “grow houses” producing thousands of plants.

More than 35 people have been arrested and 4,000 pounds of marijuana seized since the investigation began in May, according to federal prosecutors, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and local police. Authorities didn’t give an estimated total value of the seized drugs.

The scheme involved financiers in New Jersey who offered people “relocation packages” featuring 100 percent financing for homes in the Port St. Lucie area, officials said. The homes allegedly were converted into marijuana grow houses, which the homeowners agreed to operate for two years.

At the end of the two years, a homeowner could either sell the place and split the profits with the New Jersey financiers or keep growing pot.

The homeowner received about $1,000 of the $4,000 value of a harvested marijuana plant, with each home yielding between $136,000 and $1.3-million per harvest, said Miami U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta.

Comment by Left LA
2009-05-14 09:34:11

I wonder what Chinese drywall does to the flavor of marijuana. I am guessing that the sulfur would intensify the “skunk”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 08:20:29

Seems like everyone is getting into gardening now. I think it’s a great trend.

Agree that it’s a great trend, but IMO a very disturbing one in this respect - this trend is driven in part by need, not desire.

How long before we go to start making our own tools, because the ones in stores are too expensive? Since we don’t have access to iron ore, most people would start making them out of stone.

See what I’m getting at? Society is supposed to progress forwards, not backwards. Part of that progression means that it’s supposed to be a *lot* more efficient for a farmer to produce ears of corn with huge machines and such than it is for individuals to grow their own food. Individuals grew their own food out of necessity, since these efficiencies didn’t most exist - back in the 1700’s.

The efficiencies of modern technology and scale still exist. The problem is that they’re offset by the inefficiencies of the Nanny State, which are paid for by taxes, taxes, and more taxes. So even though it’s super-cheap for a large-scale farmer to produce an ear of corn (at least - if the taxes on purchasing things like fertilizer; on paying the wages of workers, etc. didn’t exist) - by the time it gets to the consumer the cheapness is gone. This is wrong - really, really wrong.

Don’t get me wrong - I love gardening - I have one with tomatoes, beans, peas, lettuce, carrots, etc. growing in my yard as we speak in fact. But it’s supposed to be for pleasure and for teaching my kids; it’s not supposed to be for necessity.

Comment by polly
2009-05-14 08:48:00

See, if you love gardening then it is just a shift of your leisure time from something that has an intangible end result (saw a movie, read a book, played a game) to something that has a tangible end result (eventually, a tomato). I don’t see that as regression.

If you hated gardening and did it to keep from going hungry, it might be different. But there can’t be many crops that most people can produce that cost less than buying it from the store - especially if you included processing for storage.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 09:30:35

I’m not sure I “love” gardening but the ROI of the herb garden I talked about here has been “off the charts” (even counting for the initial mishaps.)

If only I could find such financial investments. :-)

 
Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 10:30:17

What kind of “herbs” are you growing ;-)

 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 12:48:32

Nothing too fancy - tarragon, sage, thyme, oregano, basil, rosemary, cilantro, chives.

 
Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:59:20

If only I could find such financial investments. :-)
The French have such investments. There it is possible to directly invest in dairy cows. When they calve, the investor can either have the calf sold, or retain it in the herd. 4-5% annual gains are being reported.
See this article:
“At the moment, there are about 37,000 cows under contract in France at some 880 farms, according to the French Association for Investment in Cattle .”

 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 15:21:58

I don’t want a cow. I want ROI. :-D

 
 
Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 09:27:47

“Society is supposed to progress forwards, not backwards.”

I don’t see our current food system as progress versus the way my grandparents ate. In terms of food, I think progress would be taking a step back. Apart from that, I agree with you.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 09:51:33

+1 on this sentiment.

(and a howdy, neighbor - I think!)

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-05-14 10:11:51

Our current food system is most decidedly not progress, except when measured by the metrics that chemical and agribusiness companies choose to employ. There’s more to life than high-yield soybeans and high fructose corn syrup.

The good news is there are multiple contrary movements afoot, and smaller, sustainable, regional farms are doing well in many areas of the country.

 
Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 10:55:52

FPSS, do you live in NYC? I can’t remember, as I haven’t kept up with this blog lately like I used to. Always fun to drop by, though.

 
Comment by packman
2009-05-14 11:15:44

I don’t see our current food system as progress versus the way my grandparents ate. In terms of food, I think progress would be taking a step back. Apart from that, I agree with you.

The problem though isn’t the food production - it’s the consumption choices.

Or actually I should say the problem isn’t the *efficiency* of food production, which is what I was talking about originally w/regards to progress.

With regards to progress of the quality of our food - you’re right we most definitely have regressed in most areas (not all - e.g. at least “fatback” isn’t a common side item in a lot of areas like it used to be). This is indeed due in part to food production - e.g. putting more HFCS into things and such, though mostly it’s about the bad consumption choices that are causing big jumps in obesity and such.

 
Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 11:37:14

at least “fatback” isn’t a common side item in a lot of areas like it used to be

And I see this as regression versus the way food is mass-produced today. And, no, I’m not kidding. I’ll take lard over canola oil any day. The obese people I see are the people drinking diet sodas and eating fat-free this or that and protein bars made mostly of soy and all the other stuff that is marketed as health food. I call BS. None of that stuff is healthy. Just like yesterday’s supposedly healthy alternatives of margarine and Crisco turned out to be exactly the opposite. Bottom line for me: eat like my older relatives who lived into their late 90s, with sharp minds to the end. Bacon, eggs, lard, whole milk, etc., are just fine. They won’t kill you. Probably the opposite. But there’s just not a lot of money to be made selling actual food as opposed to processed crap. So companies spend gobs of money trying to convince us that we really want the processed crap. And they even spend gobs of money convincing the gullible that some of that stuff is actually better for them. Again, I call BS.

 
Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:23:17

Biochemically/physiologically the fastest way to add fat to your fat cells is to pig out on carbohydrates. Fats/oils that you eat digest very slowly, suppress the appetite, and take a long time before they can be incorporated into fat cells.
My mother’s generation in the back woods of northern Michigan ate lard sandwiches on homemade bread, fresh fish fried in bacon grease or lard, everything fried in bacon grease, greens & berries when they could get them. The vast majority of that generation were skinny as rails. Now their grandchildren mostly look like blimps.

 
Comment by MrBubble
2009-05-14 12:29:54

Seed sellers are seeing huge increases in sales. Double the increases that were seen in the early 70s and early 80s. My gardens, the garden I put in with my brother at his place and the one’s that I have installed for the homeless around SF are part of that increase. Just pre-bought a heritage turkey that’ll be raised by a friend’s mom. Food security and knowing how it was grown seem to be in “the parlance of our times”…

MrBubble

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-05-14 12:30:43

This is indeed due in part to food production - e.g. putting more HFCS into things and such, though mostly it’s about the bad consumption choices that are causing big jumps in obesity and such.

You have it turned around.

Current consumption choices are driven by multi-national corporations, not by the average consumer. Factory farming, HFCS, monocultured varieties of soybeans and corn, pesticide-dependent plants, heavily processed, high fat, high sodium, high sugar “foods” — these things have been systematically chosen by corporations for their utility and profit potential while downside issues (to consumer health, to the environment, to the flavor and quality and variety of food) are systematically glossed over or ignored altogether. “Value” in foodstuffs became increasingly linked to portion size, to the exclusion of all else.

Go to a poor urban neighborhood sometime and see what kind of consumption choices the consumer can reasonably make. The answer is not many, and most of those choices are highly processed.

The relatively wealthy, the relatively self-sufficient, and the relatively aware members of society can and do make different food consumption choices. Most or all of the people here fall into at least one of those three categories; all too many Americans, sadly, do not.

 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 13:20:49

FPSS, do you live in NYC?

UWS here.

 
 
 
 
Comment by awaiting wipeout
2009-05-14 07:24:48

Mikey(2)
Good for you, starting a garden. You’ll know what’s in it. FYI, the COOL law (country of origin law) Congress passed, makes any chain grossing over $237K/yr in produce sales responsible to post on their signs, where the stuff was grown. I looked it up, when my local produce mart wasn’t disclosing it.

Yeah, no inflation, unless you buy gas, health insurance, food, meds, etc…

Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:38:58

Society is supposed to progress forwards, not backwards. “supposed to”?? According to what divine law? A “society” at any given moment is just the total of what all of its members are engaged in & what resources they utilize. It is “efficient” for farmers to grow vast fields of corn, as long as you assume many things, among them: cheap fuel, credit as needed for their year-to-year funding, commodities exchanges, a continued supply of parts, a long line of middlemen who process & store the harvested grain and ship the products to the end user. These are the social inputs. I am not including the natural inputs to the process, such as weather. Just triple the price of diesel fuel and the “efficiency” of this process will break down.

Comment by packman
2009-05-14 13:19:18

Gimme a freaking break.

By “supposed to” of course I meant in theory - I thought that much was obvious. The difference between theory and practice being primarily government-caused problems.

Progress is natural because of one thing - accumulated knowledge of invention. E.g. we can create clothes with a lot less labor than we used to due to things like the cotton gin, etc. Computers, robots, engines, etc. - all these are inventions that should over time make everything we produce cheaper, for the exact same product. Instead we have rising costs due to government and Federal Reserve intervention.

The only thing in that list that you give that is truly a theoretical hindrance of progress is fuel, due to exhaustion of fossil fuels - which we’re nowhere close to at this point.

Cheap fuel - in theory could be a hindrance due to loss of reserves, just not yet.
Credit - shouldn’t change significantly over time, but does due to government and Federal Reserve interference.
Commodities exchanges - should become cheaper over time due to computers, cheaper shipping, etc. Is hindered however by government trade interference, taxes, etc.
Parts - same thing; production efficiencies gained by inventions should make them cheaper. Is hindered however by government interference in the form of taxes on sales of parts, etc.
Middlemen - if middlemen weren’t more than offset by economies of scale, then addition of middlemen by some producers should cause the prices of those producers’ products to increase above their competitors, in which case that producer would go out of business, and we’d be left with the less-middlemen producers.
Weather - not a long-term factor.

The best example of what I’m talking about is electronics. The vast majority of the costs of electronics is the invention costs, not the materials costs. Say hypothetically 80% invention cost vs. 20% materials, production, and distribution costs. As such, once the costs of invention have been spent and are no longer borne by the producer, the prices go down dramatically; witness for instance how a computer that costs $500 today would have easily cost $4000 for the equivalent just a couple of years ago. The reason why electronics get so much cheaper is that the invention efficiencies are much faster than the government inefficiencies.

The same principle applies to everything - even food, because even for food the costs of production of a given item are reduced over time due to gains in production efficiency, due to inventions. However in the case of food a much higher percentage of the cost is in materials - hypothetically let’s say 20% invention and 80% materials, production, and distribution. Eventually food costs should decrease by 20% after the invention costs are borne, but they don’t because the 20% is more than offset by increased cost of government interference - regulations, taxes, etc.

Of course the percentages aren’t really static like that - they change every time new inventions bring new efficiencies. The principle is there though. The key is that invention efficiencies are *cumulative* - you can’t “uninvent” something. You could invent something new that actually reduces efficiency - but in that case that something would just be discarded and become meaningless. Therefore the only reason for production efficiencies to decrease, and therefore costs to increase, is government intervention.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 14:03:13

theoretical hindrance of progress is fuel, due to exhaustion of fossil fuels
The price of diesel has already tripled compared to a few years ago. Triple it again and it will not be “theoretical”. You have trotted out the “exhaustion of fossil fuels” strawman. I am talking about expensive vs. cheap fuels.
————
Therefore the only reason for production efficiencies to decrease, and therefore costs to increase, is government intervention. Bull.

 
 
 
 
Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 07:52:25

Mike,

Gas inventories are at a 20 year high. Every month of May for 24 of the last 25 years saw a rally in retail gasoline only to fall back to pre-spring levels in late summer.

Just some WBBR trivia as it was a topic yesterday morning.

Comment by Mikey(2)
2009-05-14 11:35:59

That’s interesting, Ex. I was at the gas pump and the guy pumping next to me was complaining about the price and asked me what I thought it would be up to by the summer -$3, $3.50? I said, “I don’t know, it depends on how they fell like manipulating the price. Could be back to $1.80 for all we know.”

 
 
 
Comment by lainvestorgirl
2009-05-14 07:03:43

Karl Denninger is reporting today that Obama FORCED the banks to accept TARP money — with all the concomitant regulations that went with it — without any finding of insolvency, resulting in an unconstitutional taking…

“Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it forced the Obama administration to release documents about the October 13, 2008, Treasury Department meeting that coerced major banks to allow the government to take $250 billion equity stakes. Among the other news, the documents confirm former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson told the CEOs of nine major banks that they had no choice but to allow the government to take equity stakes in their institutions.”

President Obama’s Treasury Department attempted to prevent the disclosure of these documents, refusing to respond to an FOIA request. Judicial watch sued.

On February 4th The Obama Administration claimed it had no documents related to the meeting, but was forced to recant and release them.

In other words, THE PRESIDENT LIED AND ATTEMPTED TO COVER UP THE FACTS.

These documents show that the banks in question were literally forced to accept the interference of the government in the form of equity investment under the direct threat that their primary regulator (the OTS or OCC, as the case may be) would force them to do so if they refused. Both OTS and OCC are run by Treasury.

The outrage here is not just that these CEOs were forced (literally) to take the money. It is also that they were forced to, at the same time, accept whatever FUTURE restrictions on activity, including compensation, Treasury or Congress desired to impose.

In short the banks were forcibly nationalized without a prior finding of insolvency; this is blatantly unconstitutional as a “taking” without compensation.

A recent Ticker commented on the nascent bill to provide a “backstop” to state and local municipal bond issuance. I believe it is quite safe to say that the precise same sort of thuggery used with the banks will be employed with the States, if we do not stop it. After all, there is zero evidence that this changed with the Obama Administration; they in fact tried to prevent the release of the FOIA’d documents from Treasury, redacted an awful lot of the material, refused to provide Geithner’s notes on the matter and further, have failed to act to restructure that odious “trust” document mentioned above.

We are no longer a nation of laws; this is a bigger scandal, by far, than Watergate and it is 100% bipartisan.

If we the people allow any of this to stand we can consider our nation’s founding document to be nothing more than toilet paper.

We need a special prosecutor, we need indictments and impeachments, and we need them now.”

Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 07:55:16

WRONG.

WBBR reported this morning that there is a Treasury Dept. memo signed by Hank Paulson that essentially forced banks to take TARP money.

Comment by lainvestorgirl
2009-05-14 10:04:57

You’re right, the cover up was the story, not the force feeding of TARP funds; the former was Obama’s action, the latter was Bush’s. The point being, they are both crooked.

 
 
Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 08:59:25

Uh, sweetie, I think Hank Paulson was Treasury Sec’y under the FORMER Occupant.

Comment by Central Valley Guy
2009-05-14 09:26:04

Nor was Obama even the president-elect when this meeting took place IN OCTOBER.

Comment by Skip
2009-05-14 09:52:47

And I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a lot of paper work missing from the past couple of years that can’t be found now.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by lainvestorgirl
2009-05-14 10:01:01

I posted this article to show the kind of wreckless abuse of the Constitution that has been going on over the past year or so, starting with Bush’s presidency and continuing now under Obama, I honestly dislike both men. If Denninger was incorrect and the force-feeding of TARP money started under Bush, so be it. Bush should be indicted, along with Hank Paulson.

However, the program continues under Obama and if he is hiding documents to prove this scandal, that is wrong.

It is also wrong that Obama is abrogating the property rights of Chrysler’s bondholders in favor of his political contributors, the unions.

We should all be alarmed at the descent toward tyranny, by both political parties.

As for Obama’s actions with respect to TARP, this is a pretty good summation:

“I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn’t much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street’s black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell ‘em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration’s thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash — which was often forced on them in the first place — the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That’s what’s happening right now.

Here’s a true story…Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He’s been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with “adverse” consequences if its chairman persists. That’s politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can’t a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can’t special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit — until now.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Anonymous Coward
2009-05-14 11:13:56

So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future.

The real answer: The banks can’t really afford to give the money back yet, and everyone but the bankers seems to know that.

Keep in mind the context. Fractional reserve banking is a con game in the most classic sense of the phrase: It requires confidence in the system or it all comes crashing down. In October, all of the banks were facing the very real prospect of massive bank runs. Money markets froze up. No one would lend to them. Could the system take another Lehman? The Treasury didn’t want to find out. It’s fine to disagree with what they did and what they’re doing now. But it wasn’t as if it was a blatant power play that came out of nowhere. And I say this as no big fan of Hank Paulson or Bush. They were scared, and their actions were better than Paulson’s first and favorite choice: the SuperSiv that would have seen us buy toxic SIV holdings with only the slightest of discounts to get the junk off of bank balance sheets. Instead, they went the equity infusion route. A bad option among even worse options.

 
Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:44:27

But it wasn’t as if it was a blatant power play that came out of nowhere. I do recall news stories of that time mentioning that same type of Paulson coercion that is now causing this uproar. It was in the news, and there was no uproar. Virtually everyone was buffaloed into following the herd, accepting/approving the way the TARP money was handed out, because the situation was “urgent.”
And our Congress is still out to lunch.

 
Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:53:50

why can’t special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? By the way, it’s already happened with the Chrysler bankruptcy.

 
 
 
Comment by lainvestorgirl
2009-05-14 10:16:28

Okay yeah I totally botched the description of what Denninger’s piece said (sorry, Denninger) but he makes some good points and shows Bush and Obama are both creeps so everybody read it and ignore what I said, here it is from the source, like half way down the page:

http://market-ticker.org/

Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 12:20:57

Then you should have been squealing about it in October BEFORE the election.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 09:49:20

Sweetie … are you over 18?

Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 10:06:26

Sweetie…. lmao…. thats better than my old standby “cupcake”.

Comment by phillygal
2009-05-14 10:29:00

Ding ding ding

We have two (2) winners in the Condescendion and Patronizing Event!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 10:35:35

Drats!

Foiled AGAIN!

I was going for the Lascivious and Bacchus award.

 
Comment by Elanor
2009-05-14 12:40:21

Dang, I was going for sarcasm.

 
Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 12:50:56

:-( :-)

 
Comment by flint 'burbs
2009-05-14 18:03:29

Yeah, I was wondering why all the incumbants that cast their votes FOR this bailout got reelected - after their votes enraged “the American electorate”. All noise but no change?
And I see the unions losing as the spending habits retract - all of business related employment shrinks, except the funeral homes and repo men.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by rms
2009-05-14 07:17:54

Bankruptcy helps the undeserving—and that’s the way it should be.
by Megan McArdle

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200906/bankrupcy

Comment by Jimbo
2009-05-14 08:25:51

That was an excellent read. Good find…

 
 
Comment by Observer
2009-05-14 07:21:23

Jobless claims over expectations and the market is up. What happened to the green shoot of declining jobless claims? Is it a green shoot now even when jobless claims rise? (What’s more the previous week’s were revised up.)

This week’s was blamed on the auto industry and the market is treating it like a one-time event, an outliner. These people aren’t going back to work anytime soon, what’s more, their layoffs will affect other workers down the supplier chain. What is the market seeing with future jobless claims that I’m not?

Comment by exeter
2009-05-14 07:53:45

Wall Street is happy when hourly workers are put on the street.

 
Comment by Captain Credit Crunch
2009-05-14 08:22:12

The fourteenth derivative of jobs to time was greater / less than expected.

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 08:53:01

Did we skip the tenth derivative of Fed BS and sham-wow sales converging toward a blurry but ever finer line? What about the realationship between Barney Frank and cartoon-voice spin-offs? That change is the twelfth derivative if I am not mistaken.

 
 
Comment by CincyDad
2009-05-14 09:52:18

Apparently Illinois had the greatest increase in jobless claims. They are blaming it on a drop in construction and manufacturing jobs, NOT on auto industry jobs.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 07:54:08

Mumbai authorities tear down ‘Slumdog’ star’s home May 14, 2009 10:42 AM ET

All Associated Press news MUMBAI, India (AP) - City workers bulldozed the home of a “Slumdog Millionaire” child star Thursday as part of the demolition of dozens of shanties in a Mumbai slum.

Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail was asleep when a police officer woke him up and told him to leave his family’s home, he said. Shortly after that, the shack and about 30 more were destroyed.

“A police officer took a bamboo stick to hit me, and I was frightened,” said 10-year-old Azhar.

Authorities say his family will be given a new home elsewhere.

Eight Oscars and $326 million in box office receipts have so far done little to improve the lives of the film’s two impoverished child stars, Azhar and Rubina Ali — who were plucked from the slum to star in the blockbuster.

Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 08:34:22

Mr Quereshi said that Mr Boyle — who made Slumdog Millionaire for only $15 million and has since seen the film take more than ten times that sum at the box office — recently promised to buy his family a better home after the Oscars were over. The money his daughter earned for her part in the film had seemed a large sum before Slumdog’s release, he added. “But having seen its success, now I’m not sure.”

Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 09:24:34

Not to get all libertarian on this guy but before the movie, she had NO future at all. Her future came via the gamble that the capitalists who made the bet on the movie and in the process, her.

As Munger and Buffett once told the newspaper employees in Buffalo, “To the risk-taking capitalist investors go the spoils. Consider yourself just lucky to be employed.”

Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 11:56:11

Tsk Tsk.. Fasty you are heartless.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 14:24:10

I’ll just note that you didn’t provide any form of rational disagreement with me.

You tried to pull emotion on me, and I eat folks like you for an appetizer before breakfast. ;-)

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-05-14 16:12:36

“To the risk-taking capitalist investors go the spoils.”

I wish. What kinds of risks did Paulson, Blankfein, and all those other turkeys take?

 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 16:17:02

Oh, don’t get me wrong. I know how the system works.

But it’s not an either-or. You take what it is and work within it.

 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 16:19:38

My point, in case it wasn’t clear, is the man is fully within his rights to make a b*tchfest to the press to appeal to their liberal instincts - he’s exploiting the system and I wish him all the very best.

I also wish the people on the other side who have completed their contract the very best.

I know on which side my money would bet though.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 15:27:46

I know nothing about this movie, these kids or Mr. Boyle. And I certainly don`t want to be an appetizer. But if he made a movie for 15 million that did 326 million at the box office and won eight Oscars, I would think someone who profited could have done something to improve their situation. Where are the Oscars held, Hollywood?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 15:49:12

They did - the money was put in escrow for their education or some such nonsense. This is the father’s feeble attempt to milk more.

One trick ponies like this resort to manipulation of the emotions via the press. His only achievement in life seems to have been fathering a toddler that got an Oscar. He’s trying to get a second golden egg from the goose.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 16:01:08

Like I said I don`t know anything about any of them. If the money is in escrow for the kid that is a good thing. And thanks for not making me an appetizer, I kept picturing that old Tom Petty video.

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-05-15 09:47:51

At least one of the two kids in the movie has a father who sounded like a major alcoholic. I read another reporter’s piece where he was heading out at something like 10am; when the reporter asked where he was going, he replied “to drink”.

It is a GOOD thing that the money set aside for their future educational expenses is not available to the family to spend, or it would just cause them to be penniless _orphans_ when they cannot afford a liver transplant down the road.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 08:02:34

When will WalMart start taking toxic debt as cash? Just think how much more crap they could sell if they accepted unpaid utility bills, mortgage notes, late car payment notices, cell-phone bills, bounced checks, etc for goods. I sense a new Obama plan here if he reads this. Hope is is too busy reading his prompter today…

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-05-15 09:50:49

Hey, pressboardbox, that’s a FANTASTIC plan! What a boost to the economy that would be.

It reminds me a lot of the Fed’s similar plan, where they take toxic assets and swap them for Treasuries…

Garbage in, gold out—who says alchemy is not possible?!?

 
 
Comment by 41Cadillac
2009-05-14 08:04:57

Bill From L.A. You got it right. Today the masses do not see the once in a century change coming. Social Securty will be saved. The great industrial might of America will return in some fashion. Government will back off. Don’t know how but it will happen.

Who would have thought the 13 little insignifecant colonies on the New Continent would buck the kings of Europe. They Did. That was a world shaking event.

We are about to have another one.
So. Be. It.

Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:47:01

The great industrial might of America will return in some fashion. Government will back off. You left out the miracle that has to occur first.

 
 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 09:21:51

It’s another story in the City of London, where office rents in the U.K.’s main financial district are falling to 1991 levels as job losses and a mistimed building boom depress prices.

The City already has enough empty offices to hold two- thirds of Canary Wharf, the docklands area developed 1 1/2-miles east in the 1980s to lure investment bankers. About 9 million square feet (855,000 square meters) are available in the City and that may climb to 12 million by the end of 2009, according to CB Richard Ellis Group Inc., the biggest commercial property broker. Almost 19 percent of all City offices may be vacant next year, analysts at CB Richard Ellis estimate.

The building has no tenants. “Supply way exceeds demand,” he said.

Rents will drop to 40 pounds per square foot by the end of this year, the same as 1991 when Canary Wharf got its first tenants, analysts at London-based King Sturge International LLP estimate. Prices declined to 46.50 pounds per square foot in the City during the first quarter from a high of 65 pounds in mid- 2007. Rents fell to as low as 30 pounds two years after Canary Wharf opened.

BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 09:44:21

I stopped out on FAZ and SRS…

Rumors of another Friday bank failure on my fav tin foil site. SKF is so sexxy. I even like saying, “Skiff.” FAZ sounded too much like fizz. NIA

Comment by realestateskeptic
2009-05-14 10:34:21

That’s ok, I’ll assume you had some fun and can take your wife to dinner and by the baby something nice, all on their $$$.

Comment by kirisdad
2009-05-14 12:01:01

Don’t spend it all Muggy, next april, 28% of the profits goes to the IRS.

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 16:33:50

I have a lot of experience with freelance/1099s… I set aside half of everything, no matter what. (But thank you for looking out!).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by whino
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 10:11:07

Yeah?!?

Read the posting I made above on CRE.

Comment by whino
2009-05-14 11:20:49

It looks like they caught our Green Shoots virus. :-D

Comment by whino
2009-05-14 11:26:30

Symptoms are a very high fever causing delusions.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 11:19:43

Dollar down versus krona currencies:

USD-SEK 7.8495 -0.0650 -0.8219% 14:08
USD-DKK 5.4646 -0.0119 -0.2173% 14:08
USD-NOK 6.4798 -0.0402 -0.6173% 14:08
USD-CZK 19.7090 -0.1260 -0.6352% 14:09
USD-SKK 22.1060 -0.0486 -0.2194% 14:09

Does this suggest krona is king?

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-05-14 11:59:41

“You Can’t Drink Yourself Sober”:

Financial Crisis Far from Over, Ritholtz Says
Posted May 14, 2009 12:34pm EDT by Aaron Task in Investing, Banking
Related: C, BAC, XLF, MS, WFC, KEY, PNC
The financial sector continues to bask in the afterglow of last week’s stress test results and subsequent capital raises by numerous banks, with PNC and KeyCorp. joining the parade.

The fact bank stocks have rallied and many have been able to raise private capital is a positive, but it’s folly to believe the crisis is over, says Barry Ritholtz, CEO of Fusion IQ and author of the forthcoming Bailout Nation. “You can’t drink yourself sober and you can’t leverage your way out of excess leverage.”

Many big banks remain technically insolvent and “are only being held together by spit, bailing wire and tape,” says Ritholtz.

Banks like Citigroup and Bank of America are being “propped up by the grace of Uncle Sam,” which can’t afford to let go because bad loans continue to rise and demand for credit is falling, says the money manager and Big Picture blogger.

The banking system needs more time, at least three to five years, to deleverage before it can be left to its own devices, Ritholtz says, suggesting only time can heal the sector’s wounds.

That said, because the government is propping up “zombie” banks, you can’t rule out the Japan scenario of a decade (or more) of economic malaise, he says.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 14:02:47

“You can’t drink yourself sober and you can’t leverage your way out of excess leverage.”

I guess he does not advocate hair-of-the-dog hangover cures, for either drinking or credit binges?

 
 
Comment by Northeastener
2009-05-14 12:00:29

Not sure if anyone else has posted this, but I thought many here would appreciate it… from the Wall Street Journal.

WSJ Headline:
SEC Poised to Charge Mozilo With Fraud

The Securities and Exchange Commission staff is readying civil fraud charges against Countrywide Financial Corp. co-founder Angelo Mozilo, in what would be the highest-profile government legal action against a chief executive connected to the financial crisis.

The SEC staff sent a so-called Wells notice to Mr. Mozilo several weeks ago alerting him to the potential charges, people familiar with the matter said. Mr. Mozilo’s lawyers could still persuade the SEC’s commissioners that there isn’t sufficient evidence to bring a case.

David Siegel, a lawyer for the 70-year-old Mr. Mozilo, declined to comment on the investigation and said there is no “fair basis” for any allegations against the former Countrywide chief executive.

The charges the SEC is considering include alleged violations of insider-trading laws and alleged failure to disclose material information to shareholders, according to people familiar with the matter.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 06:06:10

My understanding from skimming the article is that a key piece of “evidence” against Godzillo is that he sold lots of stock just before the crash. I am not clear that is illegal, but if it is, won’t they have to go after lots of homebuilder CEOs for similar reasons?

 
 
Comment by Muir
2009-05-14 12:18:40

Here’s why shorting this market is a fools play.

I was wondering why the market was going up on a day where in the morning everything was pointing down.
Then I read this.
The title is misleading.

___

Fed May Revise Limits on Use of Credit Ratings, Bernanke Says

“The U.S. Federal Reserve may revise rules that currently favor Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings, Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said …

“That review encompasses the ratings of securities of all types accepted as collateral at all our recently established credit facilities as well as collateral accepted to secure regular discount window loans,” Bernanke wrote. David Skidmore, a Fed spokesman, didn’t return calls seeking additional comment.

The Fed currently only accepts collateral ranked by the “major” nationally recognized statistical ratings organizations, or NRSROs, Bernanke said. Because “the number of NRSROs is expanding” the Fed is conducting its review, he said.”

____

The money quotes:

1. “That review encompasses the ratings of securities of all types accepted as collateral at all our recently established credit facilities as well as collateral accepted to secure regular discount window loans”

2. “The Fed currently only accepts collateral ranked by the “major” nationally recognized statistical ratings organizations, or NRSROs, Bernanke said. Because “the number of NRSROs is expanding” the Fed is conducting its review.”

__

Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 12:51:30

The Fed currently only accepts collateral ranked by the “major” nationally recognized statistical ratings organizations, or NRSRO
You have to go into a light trance just to comprehend that sentence. “nationally recognized” — by whom? by what standard? Notice how the loosely regulated Fed created an absolute necessity for securities to be rated before they could be accepted, and then outsourced the job to unregulated private parties.

 
 
Comment by whino
2009-05-14 12:18:59

Has anyone here heard about the large overnight bank transaction loan that failed last night? This rumor is spreading on the internet today. They say its anywhere from $10 to $30 billion dollars.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 06:12:02

Here is an account I scrounged up on the http://WWW. It reads like a sales pitch from a Nigerian gold dealer.

If Ron Paul’s Fed audit proposal goes through, I guess we will get a complete accounting of how much bad collateral they have on their books?

13 Hours Ago

extremely large overnight bank transaction loan failed last night

While there are zillion reasons to buy gold at the moment, another critical one may have surfaced overnight … one hidden from the public (what else is new). Jim Willie sent out the following this morning…
urgent notice on overnight bank loan failure
just got word from a reliable source with an excellent track record
he calls me every several weeks when he has something very critical to share
he wants me to put the word out and to see what comes back to confirm or add to the story
an extremely large overnight bank transaction loan failed last night, gathering major attention
it started in US west coast, went to Hong Kong, then Singapore, then London
it failed in London, by that is meant no return was given on the overnight loan
he guessed the size was something like $10 to $30 billion
he suspected (without much direct evidence) that it was Citigroup
he believes the failing bank is a London subsidiary for a giant US-based bank
he likened it to a plumbing blockage with extreme backup consequences
he expects a ripple effect to cause shock waves, or a flood of sewage
we wondered if it could have Commercial Paper consequences, since often used in overnights
he has five expert friends watching for specific market reactions, like LIBOR
this source said that in May June timeframe, foreign creditors will put the screws to the US bankers, who are recognized as totally corrupt … foreigner big bankers want to remove some power levers from US control
QUOTE ME IF YOU WISH
my source remains anonymous
jim

I responded with…
This is what I am hearing from my very good source:
It sounds like the Fed Bucket Brigade at work if it did occur … meaning the loan was passed from the subsidiary of a large major bank to another. Then the collateral turned out to be bad, causing a failure. Thus, it ended up with the Fed supplying the money and taking the bad collateral, so as not to set off a bank run.
The other thing the source said was he thought the description of the problem sounded more like State Street, rather than Citi.
IF this occurred (NO CONFIRMATION thus far), it should show up tomorrow afternoon on FRB form H.4.1.
Time Will Tell.

 
 
Comment by whino
2009-05-14 12:43:03

Stocks still face deflationary collapse: Prechter

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE54D4IL20090514

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 00:02:19

Such a pessimist! If they really were going to collapse, why wouldn’t Mr Market have already figured that out and collapsed ‘em?

 
 
Comment by X-GSfixer
2009-05-14 13:14:14

Re: Buffalo NTSB report

Missed the comments in the “Bits” yesterday. Just some info to further the education of the HBB………since you guys have helped further my financial education, I thought I might reciprocate, with apologies to those who already know this stuff.

-”Stick shaker” and “Stick pusher” are two different devices.

Lots of airplanes give no “natural” stall warning before the wing quits flying. The stick shaker is a system that shakes the control column of an airplane when the system senses an impending stall. Since the stall speed changes depending on flap and/or slat position, the system computer compensates accordingly.

The “Stick pusher” (basically) is an actuator device that physically pushes the control column forward/aircraft nose down, when an impending stall is sensed. The pusher is a newer device, and is mostly installed on Transport Category airplanes certified in the past 10-15 years or so, because it was decided by the PTB that the stick shaker wasn’t adequate.

According to the report, this crew didn’t monitor airspeed, lost 50 knots airspeed in about 20 seconds, stick shaker went off and stick pusher pushed the column forward. Pilot evidently physically overrode all the devices by pulling back on the column, stalled the airplane, and spun in. The NTSB detirmined that the ice accumulation on the airplane was insignificant.

While this was going on, copilot retracted the flaps…..if flaps were full down, and she retracted them to 15 degrees from 35, this may have helped (although this may have aggravated the stick shaker issue…..you get a pitch change ususally with a change in flap position)…..if retracted from 15 to zero, (IMO) this would have been a mistake. I frankly would have retracted the landing gear first.

Of course, one of the the NTSB’s solutions to this will be to put ANOTHER idiot light/EICAS message/aural warning on the airplane.

From what I get from the report, the co-pilot had approx 600 hours or so Total Time when she was hired. Our company requires an ATP rating (minimum of 1500 hours), and a minimum of 200 hours in type before hiring. IMO, unless you have an ATP, you have no business flying Part 121 or 135.

All the issues concerning low pay (forcing the crews to fly long commutes from home to duty station) and crew rest have been flogged to death for years, and nothing has changed……all I can say is that “the flying public gets what they will pay for”

(Example……..at my former employer, they were having a hard time retaining A&P mechanics, so they formed a “TQM” team to study the problem……they did exit interview, shop questionaires, etc.

SURPRISE!…..the study concluded that they weren’t paying enough for one……..the second was all of the forced overtime 700-800 hours a year, three out of four weekends/month, plus O/T during the week, holidays, etc. (My own personal “best” was almost 1100 hours). Most of the forced overtime was due to shortages in staffing, because they didn’t pay enough, then they ran everyone else into the ground until they quit.

Of course, this required the company to spend some money to address …….can’t do that. Report disappeared, never to be seen or mentioned again.

Comment by tresho
2009-05-14 14:05:35

Of course, this required the company to spend some money to address …….can’t do that. Report disappeared, never to be seen or mentioned again.
That reads like something out of Dilbert.

Comment by In Colorado
2009-05-14 14:15:07

The idiocy of Corporate America seems to know no bounds these days.

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2009-05-14 14:30:20

Thanks for the report. I can’t believe that the ice was insignificant, based on first hand experience of the conditions that evening. If it was insignificant, what caused the unexpected loss of airspeed???

How do they determine how much ice there was after the crash???

 
Comment by AZtoORtoCOtoOR
2009-05-14 21:47:54

600 hours - My dream may still be alive!! Maybe my 1,000 hours TT and 100 hours of multi-engine obtained from 1987-1994 can get me a flying job. I also have a BS degree, so at least when I buy the farm, they can write “even the 4 year college degree couldn’t save him from the stupid pilot error that cost him his life and left the wife and kid’s homeless since he never made any money pursuing his dream of flying”

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-05-14 13:29:55

From TDR… B.Bonner

Without the financial sector puffing up assets, prices will tend to go down, not up. And without the financial sector adding debt…and giving American consumers the wherewithal to dig themselves deeper holes…the whole world economy needs to be restructured. Manufacturers in China can’t depend on the consumers of first and last resort in America anymore. People in the US are no longer buying what they don’t need with money they don’t have. Because no one will lend them money. And so, global commerce slumps. Ships wait at loading docks; where are the containers? Factories wait for orders and stores wait for customers; but where are the customers? The customers aren’t going to show up. Because if there is one thing Americans have learned from this crisis it’s that they must stop spending so much money. They’re facing what the Washington Post calls the “Baby Boomers’ Retirement Bummer.” They have no choice; they have to pay off debt, not add more of it.

We’re hearing that China is recovering. We don’t believe it. Who’s buying?

They say the US economy is close to a bottom, too. We don’t believe that either.

Wait…let’s ask Alan Greenspan. Here’s the Bloomberg report:

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said on Tuesday that “the seeds of a bottoming” in plunging U.S. home markets were becoming visible.

Speaking to a National Association of Realtors summit, Greenspan said there were reasons to believe that bulging inventories of unsold homes were dwindling and that should bring some stability to prices.

“It looks to me, judging from the balancing of household formation on one hand, conversions, mergers, demolitions…that we’re at the edge of a major liquidation in that excess of inventories which I suspect and I hope will be of such a pace that it will stabilize prices,” the former Fed chief said.

“So as I look at the housing market…we are finally beginning to see the seeds of a bottoming,” he added.
We can imagine seeds of a recovery. We can imagine signs of a bottoming. But we don’t know what the hell “seeds of a bottoming” is supposed to mean.

Do the seeds grow downward? And turn into a bottom? Then what happens?

But that confirms it for us. If the former Fed chief thinks he sees the “seeds of a bottoming,” a bottom must be nowhere in sight. And how could it be? You can’t hope to erase the errors of a 50-year debt build up in a single year.

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-05-14 17:49:03

I guess you get the green shoots first, then the seeds ???

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 14:01:44

Opinion
California’s fiscal crisis is about to hit home

If the budget propositions fail, Sacramento may force local governments to hand over property tax revenue used for everything from keeping us safe to cleaning our streets.

By D.J. Waldie
May 14, 2009

Cynicism and contempt. Isn’t there anything new from the state’s budget mismanagers?

Not judging by what local government leaders heard from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday. He told them to brace themselves for more. He said that he plans to release two summaries of his budget today. One optimistically assumes that the budget propositions on Tuesday’s ballot will pass (something that is increasingly unlikely). The other — based on defeat at the polls — will contain, among other nasty surprises, a forced loan from cities and counties to the state for 8% of their property tax revenues.

According to the League of California Cities, L.A. would be forced to loan the state $67.7 million. The county would be particularly hard hit, giving up as much as $250 million. The overall impact on local government — and your neighborhood — is estimated at just over $2 billion.

Taking 8% of the property taxes now used to fund local governments would force deep cuts in the services and programs delivered by your city and county. Worse, a property tax shift fixes nothing. The state is obligated to repay the local governments — with interest — in three years. That just kicks the state’s deficit down the road. This might make cynical sense for termed-out legislators and Schwarzenegger. But the state will have dug itself a deeper hole from which it’s less likely to recover.

Forced lending is a provision of a proposition voters approved in 2004, which was supposed to stop the state’s dipping into the funds for city and county services. Between 1991 and 2003, the state budget had shifted more than $40 billion from cities, counties and redevelopment agencies to pay for state programs. Voters who overwhelmingly supported curbs on extractions from local governments probably thought they had put a firewall between their neighborhood and the cynical and contemptuous authors of the state budget. It turns out that the wall of separation is dangerously porous.

Taking from local governments comes at a time when they are struggling to cope with the lower property and sales tax revenues that have come with declining property values and curtailed spending.

My city has budgeted carefully, put reserves aside for rainy days and taken care to keep programs and services in line with revenues. We thought we might be lucky, that fiscal good sense would get us through these tough times. Our reward is the state’s indifference.

 
Comment by whino
Comment by whino
2009-05-14 16:12:37

From the article:

“Chase had sent us blank checks that we could use to either pay bills or give ourselves cash advances.”

I havent received these blank cash advance checks in quite a long time, months, has anyone else noticed this happening?

Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 16:26:54

Now that you mention it - yes, I haven’t used my shredder in a few months!

Comment by whino
2009-05-14 17:17:24

Yeah, I had forgotten all about those too. Its funny how the banks quit sending those checks, do they not trust us anymore? Ha!:-D

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 17:28:42

I bought a shredder at the top of the bubble!!!

LOL

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-05-14 19:10:18

LOL!

 
 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-05-14 19:23:07

I am still getting them, but only from Bank of America. Funny thing is I told them to stop sending them months ago.

 
Comment by ChrisInBirmingham
2009-05-16 05:58:32

I just received a pack of checks from Chase yesterday. I get them about every other 3 or 4 months. We have a card with them with zero balance, never use, and almost $30k of available credit. I keep waiting for them to just reduce the credit or close the account for no use. Not that I’d really care.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 16:20:30

Wow! We moved in 2004. Fortunately my wife thinks like me when it comes to too-big-to-repay loans, and not like this journalist.

Please forgive my taking editorial liberties with a passage from the article:

‘The only problem was money. Having separated from my wife of 21 years, who had physical custody of our sons, I was handing over $4,000 a month in alimony and child-support payments. That left me with take-home pay of $2,777, barely enough to make ends meet in a one-bedroom rental apartment. Patty had yet to even look for a job. At any other time in history, t The idea of someone like me borrowing more than $400,000 w should have seemed insane.

But this was unlike any other time in history. My real estate agent gave me the number of Bob Andrews, a loan officer at American Home Mortgage Corporation. Bob wasn’t related to me, and I had never heard of his company. “Bob can be very helpful,” my agent explained. “He specializes in unusual situations.”

Bob returned my call right away. “How big a mortgage do you think you’ll need?” he asked.

“My situation is a little complicated,” I warned. I told him about my child support and alimony payments and said I was banking on Patty to earn enough money to keep us afloat. Bob cut me off. “I specialize in challenges,” he said confidently.’

 
Comment by Frank Hague
2009-05-14 17:29:43

The best part of the article is saved for the last paragraph:

“I’m sorry, but our analysts have been backed up,” yet another Chase rep told me, even more politely than the previous one. She said each analyst had about 500 distressed borrowers to deal with, and it had been taking about five weeks for customers to get a direct response. The delays seemed to be getting longer.

“I was actually beginning to feel sorry for Chase. It seemed to be so flooded with defaulting borrowers that it didn’t have time to foreclose on my house. Eight months after my last payment to the bank, I am still waiting for the ax to fall.”

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 00:00:46

“Eight months after my last payment to the bank, I am still waiting for the ax to fall.”

Are there any estimates about of how many loan owners are living rent-free / payment-free these days? I am starting to feel like we are missing out.

 
 
 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 14:42:02

If there was anybody who should have avoided the mortgage catastrophe, it was I. As an economics reporter for The New York Times, I have been the paper’s chief eyes and ears on the Federal Reserve for the past six years. I watched Alan Greenspan and his successor, Ben S. Bernanke, at close range. I wrote several early-warning articles in 2004 about the spike in go-go mortgages. Before that, I had a hand in covering the Asian financial crisis of 1997, the Russia meltdown in 1998 and the dot-com collapse in 2000. I know a lot about the curveballs that the economy can throw at us.

But in 2004, I joined millions of otherwise-sane Americans in what we now know was a catastrophic binge on overpriced real estate and reckless mortgages. Nobody duped or hypnotized me. Like so many others — borrowers, lenders and the Wall Street dealmakers behind them — I just thought I could beat the odds.

(From the New York Times.)

What in f***’s name is this man griping about? Somebody loaned him close to a million dollars without him having to pay back anything. And he doesn’t have a skill in his bone.

If I ever saw this man homeless, I would make sure I p*ssed all over him after consuming a bottle of Chateau Margaux 1982!

This is possibly more than any of y’all are willing to express in decent society but I want my pound of schadenfreude.

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-05-14 15:03:48

You won’t have to piss allover him, the woman will have left him soaked in it and a stiletto heel depression in the center of his forehead.

If a guy has a brain, it shuts down when he’s offered a nice pair of breasts. The pheromone hangover is a real nut cracker.

HAHAHAHAHA!

Comment by Muggy
2009-05-14 16:36:39

Apparently the HHB has reached the urination stage of Kübler-Ross.

Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-05-14 16:40:08

I just want to get to the an@l JT-thrusting blood-and-guts leaking phase.

As promised for a long time, I’m bringing my opera glasses.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 15:19:20

Has the Fed’s War on Savers ended in defeat? And how will the cloudy outlook change if GM joins their Chrysler brethren in declaring BK?

Wall Street Journal

* ECONOMIC FORECASTING
* MAY 14, 2009

Economists See Long Road to Recovery

By PHIL IZZO

Economists in the latest Wall Street Journal survey see an end to the recession by autumn, but say it will take years for the economy to fully recover.

On average, the 52 economists who participated in the survey project that the recession will end in August. They expect gross domestic product to contract 1.4% at a seasonally adjusted annualized pace in the current quarter, compared with the 6.1% drop recorded in the first quarter. Slow growth is expected to return by the third quarter, with the economy expanding more than 2% in the first half of 2010.
video

The survey was conducted before the Commerce Department’s report this week that retail sales fell 0.4% in April from the previous month, which left some economists questioning whether consumer spending is ready to rebound. Initial unemployment claims released Thursday brought more gloomy news: Seasonally adjusted claims in the week ended May 9 increased 32,000 to 637,000 from a revised 605,000 in the preceding week. Most of the losses can be chalked up to Chrysler LLC’s 27,000 layoffs following its April 30 bankruptcy filing.

Separately, the April producer price index, which gauges prices at the wholesale level, rose 0.3%, driven by growth in food prices. The core price index, which excludes food and energy, was up 0.1%.
About the Survey

The Wall Street Journal surveys a group of 54 economists throughout the year. Broad surveys on more than 10 major economic indicators are conducted every month. Once a year, economists are ranked on how well their forecasts have fared. For prior installments of the surveys, see: WSJ.com/Economist .

Even before the new data were released, economists were expecting a major pullback in consumption. Nearly three-quarters of survey respondents said the recent increase in the U.S. saving rate is the beginning of a major behavioral shift.

Savings rates will remain above pre-bubble levels,” said Scott Anderson of Wells Fargo & Co.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 16:24:06

Let me state simply and plainly why I expect the data to continue turning out “worse than expected” compared to the mass of economist’s forecasts for the foreseeable future: They are using forecasting methods calibrated from post-WWII recessions to measure the magnitude and duration of a 1930’s-sized economic downturn. It won’t work.

 
 
Comment by Ria Rhodes
2009-05-14 15:50:02

Excerpt from story in today’s New York Times:

“When I first called Chase in October, a representative named Sarah said I didn’t qualify for a loan modification because I wasn’t yet 90 days past due. The only “loan modification” she could offer me was a “repayment plan” under which I paid $400 more per month for six months until I was current again.

“It sounds as if I would be better off waiting to fall 90 days behind,” I said. “I think I’ll wait for that.”

It took a while, but Patty and I found we could get past blaming each other. We had seen each other’s worst sides, but we were still together, and that helped us to get closer. We started listening to each other. Patty began to find her way in the work world, and I was learning that I didn’t have all the answers. And we saw how our children were thriving. My three sons transferred to schools in our neighborhood and made scores of friends. Emily, Patty’s daughter, was a sparkling 10-year-old who loved her home and her school as well as all her brothers. Even if we lost the house, we had gained in other ways.

I called Chase back in January, when I was 90 days past due. Another representative told me that I would automatically be evaluated for a loan modification.

“You should just wait until you hear from one of our negotiators,” he told me politely.

Another two months passed without anyone calling, so I tried again in late March.

“I’m sorry, but our analysts have been backed up,” yet another Chase rep told me, even more politely than the previous one. She said each analyst had about 500 distressed borrowers to deal with, and it had been taking about five weeks for customers to get a direct response. The delays seemed to be getting longer.

I was actually beginning to feel sorry for Chase. It seemed to be so flooded with defaulting borrowers that it didn’t have time to foreclose on my house. Eight months after my last payment to the bank, I am still waiting for the ax to fall.”

Eight months of not paying a mortgage and playing the waiting game. I guess those of us who’ve made good on our mortgage obligations/debts are the real suckers in this something for nothing environment.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-14 15:54:19

I don’t know about selling the Del Mar fairgrounds, but shutting down and selling San Quentin is a long-overdue idea. There is no logical reason to perpetually devalue one of the most scenic pieces of real estate on the planet with an ugly hell hole, when there are plenty of desolate pieces of land across the great state of California which could be used for the same purpose. As I heard it explained years ago, a key reason San Quentin continues to exist at its present site is due to its proximity to a group of death row attorneys over in San Francisco who serve its inmates. I see no reason attorneys cannot relocate their businesses, but it is not possible to relocate waterfront property in Marin County.

To do this correctly, the State would need to first make clear that relocating San Quentin’s inmate population far from Marin County is part of the plan. The value of the land would skyrocket if this were done correctly.

Schwarzenegger Seeks $6 Billion Loan, Orders Cuts (Update1)
By Michael B. Marois and William Selway

May 14 (Bloomberg) — California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed the state seek a $6 billion loan from Wall Street and called for deep cuts in education and welfare program to help erase a resurgent $15 billion deficit.

Schwarzenegger, a 61-year-old Republican, said the state should sell $6 billion of revenue anticipation warrants, a type of cash-flow loan that can be repaid over two years. He also proposed cutting an equal amount in spending, mostly from schools and colleges. The proposals are part of his annual May revision to the state’s budget plan.

The worsening economy is forcing Schwarzenegger to open a new fight over the budget just three months after he slashed spending and raised taxes by $12 billion in a failed bid to erase what was then a record shortfall. Schwarzenegger said there’s no will in the Legislature for another battle over tax increases, forcing him to find other fixes.

Sacramento is not Washington, we cannot print our own money,” Schwarzenegger said today. “To look for new revenues is out of the question.”

Among his proposals are moves to sell some of California’s landmark buildings, including San Quentin State Prison, where California’s condemned inmate executions are conducted. The 157- year-old prison occupies prime waterfront property on San Francisco Bay.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 00:08:22

Wall Street Journal

* MAY 15, 2009, 2:54 A.M. ET

German GDP Posts Sharpest-Ever Fall

By MARCUS WALKER and NINA KOEPPEN

German gross domestic product in the first quarter posted its sharpest fall since records began in 1970, as economic activity was much weaker than expected, data from the Federal Statistics Office showed Friday.

First-quarter real GDP shrank 3.8% from the fourth quarter of 2008, below economists’ forecasts of a 3.2% fall. The quarterly data are adjusted for seasonal and calendar effects.
[A German store advertises a sale] Getty Images

That was the fourth straight quarterly decline in GDP, underpinning the view that Europe’s largest economy will contract by as much as 6% this year.

“The recession has returned the German economy to its size of late-2005, and the last three years of economic growth have gone up in smoke,” said Carsten Brzeski, an economist at ING Bank.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 00:18:27

As California budget mess deepens, Schwarzenegger proposes huge new cuts

By Mike Zapler

Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
Posted: 05/14/2009 03:02:40 PM PDT
Updated: 05/14/2009 09:47:34 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO — Thousands of low-level criminals would get out of prison early. Funding for public schools would drop by billions of dollars. Strapped local governments would see their coffers raided once again. And programs that aid the poor, aged and disabled would be slashed.

Those drastic proposals are among the ideas Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger offered in his revised budget plan Thursday, as the state faces yet another enormous shortfall that could top $20 billion this summer.

“Every single thing we’re doing here is very tough,” the governor said. But there is little choice, he added: “We have no money.”

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 06:20:01

Keep your eye on those rising l-t T-bond yields. Since they are 99 pct correlated with mortgage lending rates, when coupled with a still-weakening labor market and an ever-growing black cloud of foreclosure inventory behind the mountain, they portend a “longer and deeper than expected” period of U.S. housing price declines.

Indications
May 15, 2009, 8:42 a.m. EST
U.S. stock futures drift lower to wrap up down week
By Steve Goldstein, MarketWatch

LONDON (MarketWatch) — U.S. stock futures drifted lower Friday to wrap up a week of consolidation, as gains for insurers on approval to get government money weren’t matched elsewhere.

Continuing a week that’s featured three losses in four sessions, S&P 500 futures fell 3.3 points to 886.20 and Nasdaq 100 futures fell 6.75 points to 1,347.00. Dow industrial futures slipped 38 points.

Futures were still in the negative camp after data showing U.S. consumer prices were flat on a monthly basis and down 0.7% on an annual basis, the biggest drop in 54 years.

Core prices excluding food and energy have climbed 1.9% over the last year.

A separate release showed manufacturing activity in the New York area contracted at the slowest pace since last August.

Still to come is March investment flow data, April industrial production and the preliminary University of Michigan consumer sentiment gauge for May.

GDP data was released across the globe, including figures showing Germany’s worst quarterly performance since 1970.

The German economic data hit the euro, which dropped 0.6%, and the dollar fell to two-month lows vs. the Japanese yen.

Yields on 10-year Treasury bonds rose to 3.105% after the data. Yields move in the opposite direction to prices. Oil futures fell 77 cents a barrel.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-15 06:48:54

Tinfoil hat moment:

Is some financial entity with massive fire power plunge-protecting San Diego home prices? I will present the evidence here once, then drop the subject. Before I do so, I acknowledge that, like most other tinfoil hat theories, this one can not be proved by only looking at the indirect evidence, and there may be other explanations consistent with the data (i.e., “green shoots”, “housing market has reached bottom”, etc).

On the transaction date of 24-Sep-08, Radar Logic’s 1-day-average price index for San Diego dipped below $200/sq ft for the first time this cycle, to a level of $198.81. By the next “transaction day” shown in this data (26-Sep-08) it bounced up by $17.34 to $216.15/ sq ft.

Subsequent to this first dip below $200/sq ft, the daily index crossed back and forth over the $200/sq ft threshold a total of 20 times through 13-Mar-09, with an average move of $17.34 to return to a level above $200/sq ft. By contrast, the average daily change (”mean absolute deviation”) in the daily index level over the period has been $10.24.

Tentative tinfoil hat conclusion: Some financial entity with massive fire power is plunge-protecting San Diego home prices at a level at or near $200/sq ft. Too bad this will create a massive financial train wreck when coupled with rising foreclosures, a huge shadow inventory glut and rising unemployment.

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post