June 1, 2009

Bits Bucket For June 1, 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

308 Comments »

Comment by Leighsong
2009-06-01 05:26:43

Good Morning HBBers -

Leigh

Comment by Al
2009-06-01 06:16:47

Good morning Leigh.

So over the weekend, I get outside to do a little maintenance. I notice on the lawn there are these green shoots coming up. Strange looking things; much taller than the grass. As I’m heading to get the shovel, I quietly think to myself “thanks Obama” but of course there’s no one around who could enjoy that joke.

Comment by polly
2009-06-01 07:30:14

Wait, are you saying that green shoots are usually weeds?

Comment by Eudemon
2009-06-01 07:47:30

Many weeds have real nutritional value for us humans. It’s knowing what to do with the weeds that do appear that is important.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-06-01 08:29:43

As you imply, the very notion of calling one plant a weed and another beautiful, desirable, or otherwise “good” is very much in the eye of the beholder.

Personally, I find so-called weeds and native plants and hearty little toehold-grabbers are usually much more interesting (unless they’re choking out my herbs and vegetables, but that’s a whole different story).

The last thing I’d ever want is a manicured lawn comprised of a single species of grass that someone else decided should be the standard of beauty — but for some people, creating a perfect lawn is a real joy, and a virtue unto itself. I don’t begrudge them that pleasure unless they’re trying to create their idealized lawn in a place it was never meant to be … like the arid Southwest.

 
Comment by pismoclam
2009-06-01 20:35:22

Just came back from the Sierra at 7500′. Looked for spring Nettles to use in making soup.No luck. Snow on the ground. Trees just budding out. Maybe another week or so.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-06-01 05:29:12

You can sign up today for a new 2012 model Pelosi V2 from Government Motors. Any color, so long as it’s “Green”.

Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 05:46:10

That “green” meme really, really disturbs me due to the lack of understanding of how life works.
We as human beings, even if we had a 0 consumption foot print, would still pollute. We need to have potable water and food. Potable water for us, is generally toxic for a lot of other organisms. Our food requires generally open fields, and a very narrow scope of plantlife. Whatever other plantlife tries to grow where we grow our food, we kill.
That is if we never, ever, had to go do #1 and #2 behind the bushes… That, is probably one of the most difficult to treat, and assimilate pollutants.
Plants on the other hand LOVE the pollutants that come out the pipe of a car with a catalitic converter as it is H2O and C02, with some N2 throw into the mix… Put a plant with that mixture, and sun, and you have a very happy plant!.
Now, with the GM BK, we will all able to enjoy the quality of the soviet era cars, specifically the Yugo type, that required some minor muscle power to move. But look at it on the bright side… We will all be much fitter by pushing the heaps that come out of GM, and at least they will be lighter…
For a quick history lesson in what happens to Gov. O&O car enterprises, check out British Leyland, and the products produced by them….

Comment by skroodle
2009-06-01 06:18:29

Wow, the way you guys talk, we must have lost World War II.

Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 06:30:57

German weaponry was generally superior to ours in WW2. In fact, our tanks had a rough time of it against their Panzers. We would fire at them, and the round would bounce off, while they would traverse, and blow the top off of our tanks. It became so bad, that the US modified its tanks to shoot farther, and moved away from a tank to tank confrontation, and moved towards an airplane to tank confrontation.
Their U boats were very effective, and their torpedoes actually worked. We won WW2 with huge sacrifices both Man and Material, but we had more to give. The Germans had some nasty surprises about to be sprung on us, including intercontinental planes, that would have been able to reach the US east coast, and their missile technology was moving quite nicely along with the V1 and V2 bombs.
We did not win WW2 based on the quality, but the vastness of our production industries. We learned the hard way that a well engineered product is worth 2 or 3 of a crappily engineered product, but when you can produce 10 crappily engineered products for each one of the well engineered one, eventually you will overcome, albeit at a huge cost.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Jim A.
2009-06-01 06:51:49

n.b. Well in the beginning of the war, the Germans too had problems with their torpedoes. This hurt them in operations during the invasion of Norway, but they were fixed more quickly than the torpedo problems that WE started the war with.

 
Comment by Skip
2009-06-01 07:56:32

Amazingly, the United States managed to go from isolationism to defeating both Germany & Japan in less time than it takes GM to move a car from the drawing board to the showroom.

Penicillin and synthetic rubber were probably the best achievements of the Allies.

And that whole Manhattan Project seemed to be a quality project unfortunately.

 
Comment by Muddyfoot
2009-06-01 08:35:55

We really didn’t defeat Germany, Russia did. We helped but they bore the brunt of the effort to defeat Germany. They lost more men taking Berlin than we lost in the fight against Japan and Germany. Also look how badly we were mauled during the Ardennes Offensive in 12/44. I shudder to think what America and Britain would have faced if confronted with an unbroken Wehrmacht.

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-06-01 08:55:02

German weaponry was generally superior to ours in WW2.

The situation at the beginning of the war was quite different than the situation at the end of the war, when the US was churning out much improved armaments and refining existing armaments regularly and effectively.

I don’t disagree that our vast production abilities helped a great deal, but P-51 Mustangs, B-29s, and the later versions of B-25s, for example, held their own against their various Axis counterparts. Our aircraft were quite successfully deployed as tank killers, too, even if the M4 Sherman tanks couldn’t go toe-to-toe with the superior German machines.

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 09:04:40

The real beauty of the Allied strategy was to use the airplane as a tank killer. There was nothing in their arsenal that could deal with that.
What made it even more Ironic, was that it was the Germans who actually developed the concept with the Stuka.
But it had its limitations. During the battle of the bulge, we were nearly wiped out by a coordinated well thought and fought in bad weather offensive. It was our massive numbers, and availability of fuel that actually made a huge difference.
In essence we were very lucky that we had the Russians hitting the Germans on the other side, otherwise there would be but 1 or 2 countries in Europe.

 
Comment by DennisN
2009-06-01 11:15:24

Synthetic “buna” rubber was actually a German invention IIRC. The Germans prepared for war by creating synthetic rubber and gasoline since they knew they were vulnerable to being cutoff from foreign supplies.

 
 
Comment by michael
2009-06-01 09:25:28

i read somewhere that some general was quoted as saying that we were lucky the germans ran out of bullets before we ran out of tanks.

sorry for the vague reference.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by bananarepublic
2009-06-01 12:26:11

“I shudder to think what America and Britain would have faced if confronted with an unbroken Wehrmacht.”

We would have gotten crushed. We never faced the same German army that Europe initially faced. Heck, we barely held them off at the end and they had kids in uniform, and were short on fuel, supplies, etc. What saved our ass was the Atlantic. We were out of reach when the heavy punches were initially thrown.

Now Russia…they were impressive. They took the full force of the German Army, held, and then kicked their asses. Really a great story of courage. I’m not saying our boys didn’t have tremendous courage, because they did. But you cannot seriously compare our military of the day to Germany, or even Russia. We would have had very little chance at even strength against either one. The Germans were begging to surrender to us, because they knew what the Russians were capable of.

Is this even opinion anymore? I think all these arguments have been confirmed conclusively by now. And our current military and science programs were/are based heavily on German tactics and research. The Apollo program is a good example. The tactics we used during the gulf war (and still to this day) are heavily based on German tactics (blitzkrieg).

The only thing we didn’t learn from them was how to build a decent automobile.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by CA renter
2009-06-02 01:19:47

Now Russia…they were impressive. They took the full force of the German Army, held, and then kicked their asses. Really a great story of courage. I’m not saying our boys didn’t have tremendous courage, because they did. But you cannot seriously compare our military of the day to Germany, or even Russia. We would have had very little chance at even strength against either one. The Germans were begging to surrender to us, because they knew what the Russians were capable of.
——————-

It’s good to see the Russians finally getting credit for what they did. My mom lived in Vienna during WWII, and they have always credited the Russians for the defeat of the Nazis. They thought the Americans were cowards because they would just carpet-bomb everything in their paths with their airplanes. The Russians were on the ground doing the real fighting, even when they had run out of food and proper gear (many of them didn’t even have shoes with soles on them anymore).

That’s not to say the Russians would have won by themselves at that point. Just that they were very much a part of our victory.

This isn’t an anti-American remark; it’s just good to see the truth is out there, even in the U.S.

 
 
 
Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 08:04:29

“Plants on the other hand LOVE the pollutants that come out the pipe of a car with a catalitic converter as it is H2O and C02, with some N2 throw into the mix… Put a plant with that mixture, and sun, and you have a very happy plant!.”

Plants love N2? Please, please tell me that you are joking. I don’t think that I could handle it otherwise and living in SF is putting a damper on my sarcasm detector. If you are joking, please forgive the aspersion cast into the wind…

MrBubble

Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 08:22:23

Yup… Plants need Nitrogen… That is why fertilizers generally have Nitrogen… In fact there are bacteria in the soil that attach Nitrogen so that the plants can use it.
Look up the formula for most fertilizers, and you will see Nitrogen, and anyway the composition of our breathing air just happens to be….
78.08% N2….

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 09:15:22

My point is that plain old N2 doesn’t help. N2 is a triple bonded molecule that must be broken, at a huge energy cost, by the nitrogenese enzyme, the Haber-Bosch process or lightning into a form that is accessible to plants (ammonium then fixed to nitrate). My point is that just having the 78% of the atm as N2, doesn’t help, just as having pollutant CO2 doesn’t necessarily help either.

Since it seems as though you are in the looking stuff up mood, check out the net primary productivity of plants with C3 versus C4 photosynthetic pathways and their responses to varying levels of pCO2 (and temperature and PAR, etc. if you are really interested!) Very interesting data for the future of grain crops considering that most of them are C4 plants, which became dominant in the Miocene as [CO2] was dropping…

Gonna go back in time! Sorry. I hate Huey Lewis, but I couldn’t resist!

MrBubble

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 09:40:49

No argument there… But my point seems to have been lost somewhat….
The exhaust coming out of a catalized car, is not as damaging as the “green” people would have us believe. It is noxious due to the CO2 component of it, and that we humans also produce by our normal function a lot of waste that is not environmentaly friendly, and that even if we had no consumption, you would still get a large amount of pollution, as normal human body functions would have an impact. Clean water, food, and waste treatment would have a considerable impact, without taking into consideration our need for shelter, clothing (for cold climates) and our seemingly insatiable need for manufactured trinkets.
We need to acknowledge this, and work around this, but by saying that we need to drive around in a prious, and use only organically recycled bags, is missing the picture IMHO.

 
Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 09:54:33

“The exhaust coming out of a catalized car, is not as damaging as the “green” people would have us believe.”

What you are saying is not getting lost; it’s just wrong. I’m saying that CO2 is damaging and I have given one reason that it could be. I say “could be” because that just so happens to be probability of the issue (plant response to changes in pCO2) that we are discussing. I could give many other reasons that CO2 from fossil fuels IS dangerous and have done so on many occasions here.

Waste that we produce from our bodies is, by definition, green and natural. The problem is that there are too many people to be supported through “natural” means (non-fossil fuels). At some point we will revert to a global carrying capacity of 2 billion-ish people from the 6.4 that we have now. I am open to debate that point and how it will happen (if, in fact, it does).

And no one is saying that we all need to drive a Prius. That’s foolish. (Both doing it and your saying it.) We all need to do much, much better than that.

MrBubble

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 10:03:48

Oh, please do explain how the CO2 emitted by a human, cow, or any CO2 for that matter, is different from CO2 emitted by a car?
I would love to hear this one.

 
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 10:13:44

CO2 is absolutely not a pollutant. That is one of the most onerous lies pushed by the AGW lobby. A pollutant is something either not naturally occurring, or introduced in such quantities that it endangers the livelihood or health of living organisms. CO2 promotes plant growth.

I ran a solar sales and installation business for 8 years. I can give you a half dozen or more reasons why we should be promoting solar energy. Global Warming isn’t on the list.

 
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 10:30:38

CO2 is absolutely not a pollutant. That is one of the most onerous lies pushed by the AGW lobby. A pollutant is something either not naturally occurring, or introduced in such quantities that it endangers the livelihood or health of living organisms. CO2 promotes plant growth.

I ran a solar sales and installation business for 8 years. I can give you a half dozen or more reasons why we should be promoting solar energy. Global Warming isn’t on the list.

Pollution is for the most part unrelated to global warming. The CO2 concern is in regard to the latter. And the problem isn’t the existence of CO2, which as you say is very necessary for plant life, but rather the overabundance of it.

Solar energy, theoretically anyhow, very much does reduce global warming, by replacing other energy sources that release excess CO2 into the atmosphere (coal, oil, gas, etc. burning).

I say “theoretically” since there’s a vast array of tradeoffs - e.g. since solar is much less efficient than fossil fuel burning for electricity generation it requires more work (including energy usage) to create and to trash/recycle solar equipment.

 
Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 10:46:41

Oh god. Why is there such push back on this issue from non-scientists?!

There is no difference between CO2 (other than the isotopic values of each type.) That’s not what I wrote. Please read my post carefully.

“CO2 promotes plant growth.” Not always and often the plants that we prefer as crops underperform other types in high CO2. Again, please look up C3 vs. C4 photosynthetic pathways and compare the Zachos et al 2001 Science paper for an understanding of the levels of CO2 and rates of increase during the Cenozoic. Or just argue your “facts”? Whatever.

Perhaps we are merely in a semantic argument about what constitutes a “pollutant”. However, I (and the scientific community as a whole as well as the international community) aver that the rate of excess, fossil-fuel derived CO2 being put into the atmosphere will have deleterious effects on humanity. You can call it a pollutant or you can call it “Fred”. I don’t much care. It’s just not good for humanity. That’s all. If I called it a CO2 bubble, would it make more sense?

I’m not gonna touch your life-cycle energy of solar PV comment, packman, since I haven’t run (or seen) the LCA numbers. But what about solar hot water? Fill a black bag with water and let it sit in the sun seems like a good way to go about gathering heat. Also, check out the DGE building on Stanford’s campus. It has tons of “old tech” ways to reduce energy.

MrBubble

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 10:56:41

Hmmm…
Now that you have led me down that path…
From Wiki, and I know far from the Truth, but..
“Further information: Evolutionary history of plants#Advances in metabolism
C4 plants have a competitive advantage over plants possessing the more common C3 carbon fixation pathway under conditions of drought, high temperatures and nitrogen or carbon dioxide limitation. 97% of the water taken up by C3 plants is lost through transpiration,[2] compared to a much lower[quantify] proportion in C4 plants, demonstrating their advantage in a dry environment.

C4 carbon fixation has evolved on up to 40 independent occasions in different groups of plants, making it an example of convergent evolution.[3] C4 plants arose around 25 to 32 million years ago[3] during the Oligocene (precisely when is difficult to determine) and did not become ecologically significant until around 6 to 7 million years ago, in the Miocene Period.[3] C4 metabolism originated in open habitats, where the high sunlight gave it an advantage over the C3 pathway.[4] Drought was not necessary for its innovation - rather, the increased resistance to water stress was a by-product of the pathway and allowed C4 plants to more readily colonise arid environments.[4]

Today, C4 plants represent about 5% of Earth’s plant biomass and 1% of its known plant species.[5] Despite this scarcity, they account for around 30% of terrestrial carbon fixation.[3] Present-day C4 plants are concentrated in the tropics (below latitudes of 45°) where the high air temperature contributes to higher possible levels of oxygenase activity by RuBisCO, which increases rates of photorespiration in C3 plants.”
Seems to me that C4 plants have a better Carbon fixation that C3 plants, and from a very simple extrapolation, would imply that they would take more carbon out of the environment and bond it to itself.
Btw, I am NOT a botanist, and I never studied botany, so this comes from fairly neutral ground.
If 5% of the plants are C4, and they bonded 30% of the carbon… what does that lead to?

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 11:01:21

Mr bubble.. your words, not mine..
“Waste that we produce from our bodies is, by definition, green and natural. ”
One of the “wastes” produced by our bodies is….
CO2.

 
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 11:15:51

Cut the non-scientist canard. I’ve got 20+ years in temperature measurement and compensation as a degreed engineer, in addition to my 8 years in solar. A lot of my temperature measurement involves atmospheric/weather station data logging. I’ve chased lab temperature signals down to +/- .005 degrees C, .05 traceable. One learns quite a bit about temperature measurement artifact when getting down to those levels. The extrapolated claims that are made about global temperature trends from a handful of land based point sources are, let’s just say rather dubious.

My credetnials don’t ultimately mean anything in the overall debate other than to debunk one of the other onerous lies, that any opposition to AGW is obviously “non-scientific”.

Atmospheric CO2 may be proven to be an issue at some point. I’ll start paying serious attention when they stop playing non-auditable games with the existing temperature databases, and when their models start showing some actual predictive capacity.

 
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 11:36:06

I’m not gonna touch your life-cycle energy of solar PV comment, packman, since I haven’t run (or seen) the LCA numbers. But what about solar hot water? Fill a black bag with water and let it sit in the sun seems like a good way to go about gathering heat. Also, check out the DGE building on Stanford’s campus. It has tons of “old tech” ways to reduce energy.

Absolutely. We had a solar hot water system growing up - it’s a great low-tech and efficient way to save energy, and something that quite frankly I’m amazed isn’t promoted more. Of course it has its limitations (e.g. doesn’t work at night to heat the water you’d use for showering in the morning) but nonetheless can be very cost-effective if used properly - e.g. do laundry and dishes in the afternoons and that kind of thing, and/or is combined with good insulation in the water system.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-06-01 16:05:59

Remember, just because a certain amount of something is good, does NOT mean more is better. :wink:

 
 
 
 
Comment by peter a
2009-06-01 06:18:25

I will never buy a GM or Chrysler truck while the government has there hands in them. Toyota maybe because they are made in the U.S.A. and not Mexico, but I will never support the government auto makers, and I believe there’s alot of people like me out there. GM and Chrysler will be a name in the history books.

Comment by exeter
2009-06-01 06:41:39

“I will never buy a GM or Chrysler truck while the government has there hands in them.”

But you’ll be crying the blues and kicking yourself 5 years from now when you could have bought GM at 0.75/share(likely less) and didn’t.

Comment by Jim A.
2009-06-01 06:54:45

Doubt it. In bankruptcy the existing shares generally go to ZERO. Certainly by most accounts that the plan here. Now there will presumably be NEW shars in NEW GM, but those will be the property of the U.S. and Canadian Governments, the Unions, and the bondholders.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blano
2009-06-01 07:03:12

The current shares will go to zero because they’ll either be cancelled out, or kept on along with the 60 BILLION additional shares that are going to be issued, mainly to the guvmint.

 
 
Comment by Al
2009-06-01 06:58:16

Do you mean the current shares that have halted trading and are likely worth 0, or the new shares?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by exeter
2009-06-01 07:02:04

After credits are paid at cents on a dollar, there will be investment opportunity in GM. The question is will the fed.gov share that opportunity.

 
Comment by Jim A.
2009-06-01 07:31:04

Well my limited understanding is that unsecured creditors will get (newshares) for 10% of the value of the company. Certainly some of them will be willing to sell at market. I predict that the government will wait an election cycle or two to sell off it’s shares for pennys on the dollar.

 
 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 07:04:42

Not to worry, as you as a tax payer are a de-facto stockholder in GM… Albeit with no say and no vote.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 07:11:51

GM workers taking in bankruptcy, its effectsJune 1, 2009 9:53 AM ET

All Associated Press newsDETROIT (AP) - General Motors Corp. workers and others across the nation were beginning to deal with the automaker’s historic bankruptcy filing Monday and the effect on their plants and lives.

Markis Coleman, 30, a GM employee at a plant in Orion Township, Mich., north of Detroit, said shortly before the bankruptcy was announced that there is little he can do even as much needs to be done.

“I’m going with the flow,” the 10-year company veteran said Monday morning. “It’s all in their hands. I’m going to let them do it. But they need to change things, though. They have to change.”

The once-mighty corporate giant whose brands were household names and plants the lifeblood of many U.S. communities filed its Chapter 11 petition in New York Monday. It marks the fourth-largest bankruptcy in U.S. history and the largest for an industrial company.

The deal will give taxpayers a 60 percent ownership stake and expand the government’s reach into big business.

GM’s reorganization plan will rely on up to $30 billion of additional financial assistance from the Treasury Department. That’s on top of the $19.4 billion in taxpayer money GM already has received as low-interest loans.

 
Comment by Muddyfoot
2009-06-01 08:42:29

Will this mean that retired GM workers will have to pay for their Viagra now?

 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-06-01 08:21:36

“And you’ll be crying the blues and kicking yourself if you don’t buy now”

You sound like a copy writer for the National Association of Realtors.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 08:32:13

Ouch.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 08:52:11

“And you’ll be crying the blues and kicking yourself if you don’t buy now”

What did we just buy?

“The deal will give taxpayers a 60 percent ownership stake and expand the government’s reach into big business”

 
Comment by exeter
2009-06-01 09:12:35

“You sound like a copy writer for the National Association of Realtors.”

And it didn’t take PlentyPlaint#1 to deny the truth.

 
 
 
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 07:04:14

Will you still be saying that years from now when a comparable GM vehicle is 20% cheaper than a Ford vehicle?

That is the choice we will have to make, as cars that are the product of massive government subsidies start competing with cars from companies with no such subsidies (or less subsidies).

Look at Boeing vs. Airbus now. They’re on a relatively level playing field, and in fact Airbus is mostly winning - but mostly because of larger government subsidies.

Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 07:11:40

I think that GM will start producing whatever the regime wants them to produce. Right now it is idiotic small cars with hybrid engines. Next year it could be escalades.
The problem with a government controlled enterprise is that it will produce what the government deems it should produce to be politically viable, and not what the market wants.
There are so many examples of this throughout history, that I am amazed that we are allowing these 2 to live out a couple years more.
These 2, chrysler and GM are going to die. Make no mistake about it. If MB with all of its engineering, and marketing know how almost bit the bullet with Chrysler, and gave it away, Fiat with its mediocre (at best) product, and lazy management style is not going to fare any better.
GM will go the way of British Leyland after the take over, and pieces of it will survive, to be bought out by somebody else… I think that their truck division might make it, as well as the corvette division… that is, if it is not killed off by the scary bride and her government management.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Leighsong
2009-06-01 17:17:06

Pinch - not a specific reply to your post.

Something triggered my brain into thinking military application?

Yes, it is a question.

For the life of me, I believe there may be another angle?

Best,
Leigh

 
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-06-02 09:10:09

In New Future, all will be subsidized by the government as we spend our way to glory!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 07:07:24

“I will never buy a GM”

Is it better for the US if you buy domestic or foreign? Is this more true now than before, or less?

Comment by Al
2009-06-01 10:00:56

When you ask about buying domestic or foreign, are you talking head office or where the car is built?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 10:54:18

Or where the parts are manufactured? Or where the raw materials come from?

 
 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-06-01 07:12:50

I just can’t square how an adminstration that beats the “green” drum goes to such lengths to ensure that more crappy cars are made. There’s a huge contradiction here - the $100 BB going to these derelict companies should be going intermodal transport initiatives.

All that’s going to come out of this is that lousy Cap-n-Trade nonsense. Cap-n-Trade and ethanol - proof that those that look to nanny state for solutions are warped.

Comment by michael
2009-06-01 09:39:31

“I just can’t square how an adminstration that beats the “green” drum goes to such lengths to ensure that more crappy cars are made.”

beating green drum = more votes.

giving companies to labor unions = more votes.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 07:19:34

Here’s how I think they will do it.

Have GM start building tons of tiny tin cans that get 50-60 mpg, while the other auto manufacturers raise their mpg somewhat, but still concentrate on building cars that consumers want to buy. Then, the government creates a 60-70% tax credit for people who buy cars getting over 50 mpg. That way, they don’t explicitly have to subsize the government car companies. Sound plausible?

If that doesn’t work, they’ll commission Michael Moore (remember Roger & Me?) to do a documentary showing how all is well at GM now that it’s owned by the people. But that might be seen as a desperation move, so they’ll hold off a while on that one.

Comment by kirisdad
2009-06-01 08:57:45

$1.25 federal tax on a gal of gas should do the trick. The new gov’t gets more money for pet projects and the gov’t motors corp will be making all the small cars everyone will want. I’m not saying I want this to happen, but the handwriting is on the wall.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 09:16:44

I hear you, but I don’t think that will do it by itself. With a simple hike in the price of gas, more buyers will still choose the “higher” mileage, well-designed and built models over the government sponsored “highest mileage” tin cans.

They’ll have to explicitly find a way to subsidize the purchase of the tin cans in order to maintain any semblance of viability.

 
 
Comment by Jon
2009-06-01 10:49:52

I know tons of folks who would love to buy a car doing 50-60 mph. Myself included. Mr. Market won’t make one for me though.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 10:56:38

50-60mpg? Check out the VW Diesels. They get around that, I believe. Quiet for a diesel too.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:39:34

The problem with the diesels is that they are a lot more expensive initially. In a truck, it’s a minimum $6k premium. Thus, there’s no savings even when you factor in the better mileage. Also, while it has been cheaper lately, diesel can run a lot more per gallon than regular unleaded. You have to put the pencil to the paper in order to find out if it’s cost effective (and don’t forget to factor in increased maintenance costs for diesels). It’s usually only those who log LOTS of miles who would actually save money over the life of the vehicle.

 
 
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 16:19:12

OK, I was way off on the timing of the Michael Moore part. It’s already started!

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=248

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-06-02 09:13:46

The future will include some sort of horrid gas tax to make sure people stay poor and dependent upon the government. Once you can no longer afford fuel to drive or heat your house, all the various government programs that will control your life in exchange for energy suddenly start looking like good ideas. Poor people are easier to control, so expect for them to find way to create more poor people.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-01 08:33:50

I was that way about Chrysler for years after the $1 billion bailout a few decades ago. Then I rented Chryslers from Thrifty.

But I see what you mean. I had one GM product a few years ago but had two Toyotas and one Ford.

 
Comment by michael
2009-06-01 09:36:34

hmmm….i agree with you. Government Motors will have to sale their cars for a huge discount (below cost even)…all backed and subsidized by the u.s. taxpayer.

gotta spread that wealth you know.

Comment by VaBeyatch in Virginia Beach
2009-06-01 10:38:27

Ooo. Wonder if they will have any good deals on BMW M5s…. oh wait.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by rms
2009-06-01 07:00:24

The automobile has been priced beyond the family budget for the past twenty five years; loans with a huge back-end balloon payment have kept the party going with low monthly payments. Banks dropped out of the automobile financing many years ago because the asset backing the loans, the automobile, were worth less than the loan balance. Hello GMAC, FMC, CC, etc., all a huge government approved scam.

Comment by Jim A.
2009-06-01 07:33:42

Well from an economic standpoint, the car is the premium that they give away with a usurious loan.

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-01 08:07:20

Banks dropped out of financing cars because of competition from the financing arms of the car companies that securitized the loans and sold them. These entities did not have reserve requirements like the banks and they had absolutely no intention of holding the loans long term, so they did not need to carefully look at the finances of the borrower. And the borrowers loved it. Who the heck would want to go to make a separate appointment to go to a local bank loan officer (kids on same little league team with your kids) and have to show proof of income, savings, other debts etc. when the guy at the car dealership would just approve you and send you on your way surrounded by new car smell?

I had a loan from a local bank for my first car. The bank manager knew my mother so he already knew that I had graduated from college with a useful major, had a job and was gpoing to be living at home to keep expenses low while paying off my student loans. I still had to show up for the meeting with my paperwork in order and a 25% downpayment.

Securitizing loans makes credit looser. It doesn’t have to be evil. There is no reason to think that only regulated banks should be allowed to finance consumer purchases. But it has to be transparent and the purchasers of the bonds have to know what they are really getting. People assumed this stuff was always going to be paid back at the historical rates even though they had abandoned the historical lending standards. Bad statistician, bad, bad.

Comment by Temporal
2009-06-01 09:25:41

Speaking from an in-industry standpoint RMS, baloney! There is no balloon payment financing going on, they simply supported higher prices by making finance terms longer (years ago the average financing term was not 5 or 6 years, it was 2 or 3). Stretch out the loans, reduce the rates to the rediculous, and you have the same kind of payments people were making on cars back in the later 80’s and 90’s.

Banks have always been around willing to finance auto-loans, they never “dropped out” (well, I should qualify that, a TON of subprime lenders “dropped out”, but they did so because they wen’t completely bankrupt, these lenders arent loaning money because they no longer EXIST). The remaining banks are -still- completely willing to finance customer’s on automobiles at their new and used-car sale prices. Alot of business goes to captive lenders (like GMAC thanks to 0% deals that the banks wont touch), but this isn’t the case everywhere. Most store’s run 70%+ captive lending on new and 30-40% captive on used. If there is no crazy subsidised rate on a new car (which happens on the more in-demand models) you can most often achieve a better rate going with a bank or credit union (I know lately BofA has been offering some stupid-low auto rates, as an example).

The amount’s any of the banks are willing to finance -have- reduced (during the peak of this rediculous boom we were financing people at 140-160% of wholesale book on a SUBPRIME customer, or full sticker price on a GMC tahoe with a 6000$ rebate). Now we might only get 120% on a good credit buyer (from the actual selling price after rebates, not the sticker price) and 80-90% of book on a bad credit buyer. A customer with some negative equity might actually require some cash down, which is a good thing. A bad-credit buyer who hasnt shown a propensity to pay will need to be in an equity situation to purchase (again, this is a good thing).

How they ever thought it was smart to vastly overfinance people who never paid -anyone- in their life is absolutely beyond me. It was obvious to every single person in the business that these customer’s would end up 10,000$+ upside down 3 years into their 6 (or even 7!) year loan. We knew these cars would end up repossessed, there was no question that these people would eventually stop paying and walk away. Many of them were “saved” when they were able to use a home equity line of credit to “pay off” their car. Oops.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by rms
2009-06-01 11:32:35

I used to do no-contact field repo’s for a living, and the paperwork always included the the financing details. Almost every loan carried a balloon payment so that the monthly payments would fit into the budget of the “how much a month?” consumer. Sometimes we even got the exact same automobile repo account after it was resold through a used car lot. A friend’s wife stopped by a showroom one day the check out a minivan, and someone there got here to sign a committal to make a purchase agreement; Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? The automobile business is a total scam industry, IMHO.

 
 
 
Comment by whyoung
2009-06-01 15:08:00

I think peoples attitudes changed back in the 80’s (or late 70s?) when they started promoting leasing cars… The “how much a month” mentality became so much a part of it, and you could just turn in the old one for a bright shiny new one and stay a step ahead of the Joneses down the block and appear prosperous.

(If i recall correctly the lease payments were cheaper in those inflationary times…)

“Owing” a car was no longer a part of it for a lot of people.

Not so hard a leap to the other big ticket purchase in life - the house.

 
 
Comment by James
2009-06-01 08:44:25

Oh boy,

I here the government is interested in protecting the union jobs. They are planning another massive round of layoffs in the white collar workers.

In other words the management, engineers, designers, marketing are all getting sh*t canned.

I do not see how this is going to be a good thing going forward.

I also don’t see how the government is going to make sensible financial decisions in dealing with the union. This seems like bankruptcy mark 1 and will continue till we have a regime change then hopefully it gets jettisoned and we have bankruptcy 2.

 
Comment by yogurt
2009-06-01 10:59:18

You can sign up today for a new 2012 model Pelosi V2 from Government Motors.

Funny how people don’t call Lockheed Martin “Government Airplanes” or the likes of Blackwater “Government Mercenaries”, but I guess it’s less noticeable when the government subsidizes a corporation as a customer rather than as an investor.

Comment by polly
2009-06-01 12:10:50

+10

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 12:34:15

The way I see it, Defense related companies are providing “unique” services. Lockheed provides products that are unique to the DoD, and you would not want to sell in an open market.
GM/Chrysler sell very mundane products that are being reproduced even in India. Their products are not very good, and have been losing market value ofr quite some time. If this deal had not been made to save the UAW’s ass, these companies would be much better off in the future if a regular BK and reorganization had been ordered, and if they died, other companies would come in to compete with better products, or cheaper products.
GM has been a company that has treated their customers like poo for a long, long time. Even ardent GM supporters have become disilussioned as of late with the companies offerings, and their QC. Some cars are great, and will last a lifetime, while some others were designed in Senegal, by goat herders… There no longer is any consistency left.
The last thing is that unlike the EU, we here have some really absurd mandates that make producing “niche” cars extremely complicated and expensive.

 
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 12:45:09

Um… surely you see the fundamental difference between a non-customer subsidizing a supplier vs. a customer buying from a supplier, no?

 
Comment by waiting_in_la
2009-06-01 22:16:25

daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn. nice.

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-06-01 16:17:32

This has been 55 years in the making, when the Big 3 rejected William Edwards Deming “Total Quality” system of building better anythings and Japan embraced it.

You’ve just witnessed history in the making and the long term effects of certain actions. The worst kind. The Big 3 (and most other American corporate behemoths) still haven’t learned a thing.

Stick a fork in ‘em. They’re done.

Comment by neuromance
2009-06-01 18:26:29

The current CEO (Fritz Henderson) appeared on Meet the Press or some such Sunday morning talk show. He said that Rick Wagoner was his friend and mentor, and he defended Wagoner.

I thought, this is not going to end well.

Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-06-02 09:21:26

Of course not.

The new crop of idiots will be very much like the old crop of idiots, and GM and Chrysler will bumble along for years while producing garbage subsidized by us. But since plenty of crooks will get rich from all this, it must be a good deal.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Lucy
2009-06-01 05:33:22

As the US$ has been falling recently, i’d like to go over the hyper-inflation scenario. It is often stated that you cant have hyper-inflation without a similar increase in people’s income. But i don’t think this is correct. Wiki lists about 40 or 50 countries which have experienced hyper-inflation in the last 80 years or so. In most cases i dont believe there was any huge rise in salaries, but perhaps someone more knowledgeable can comment.

Comment by rusty
2009-06-01 05:39:34

Time to get a wheelbarrow with a good wheel, to lug all the cash around to the stores. I would suggest comfy handle grips as well, to avoid chafing of the hands.

Comment by dennisd
2009-06-01 05:53:04

Thus began the great wheelbarrow bubble of 2009.

 
Comment by Pinch-a-penny
2009-06-01 05:57:43

Problem is where is the cash coming from? UI?
We are the consumers of last resort. We stopped consuming. There are no other consumers like us out there. Where is china going to sell its wares? Africa? Asia? Europe? South America? Too much production of anything leads to prices dropping like rocks. We are witnessing the worlds largest over capacity, and there is nowhere to drain it.
It seems to me, that all these problems are due to a lack of inflation, as everybody gambled that the house/stock/MBS, etc would “appreciate” and that their counterparty would be stuck with a rapidly depreciating debt. It seems to me that it worked the other way around, where the houses lost value, the stock market lost value, and the MBS’s that where so highly leveraged to buy also lost value, so where is this inflation thingy?
Gasoline even at 2.50 per gallon, is not much changed in almost 10 years, barring the 4.50 of 2 years ago… That is still about 40% under peak.
Food is a bit more expensive, but not 2 or 3 times as much. I can still cook a decent meal for under 10 dollars for 4.
Houses are dropping like a rock.
Imported things are getting more expensive, but there are choices there. We can still buy locally produced stuff.
The dollar is losing ground because people are
a: most likely needing cash to cover their infestments at home.
b: think that the dollar will tank, and they think that their local economy will survive. They are wrong. The whole world was selling their wares to US, or to somebody who depends heavily on us. That is stopping.

They are still playing the BUY IT NOW OR BE LEFT OUT game. It did not work last time, why would it work this time?

Comment by WT Economist
2009-06-01 06:31:20

“We are the consumers of last resort.”

I remember that quote from the late 1990s. It was a complaint that the whole world was underconsuming and depending on exporting to us.

“We stopped consuming.”

You’ve helped to bankrupt the United States. Congratulations?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by VirginiaTechDan
2009-06-01 10:47:53

Please cut it with this “consumer of last resort” B.S. Consumers ARE NOT NECESSARY, there is no purpose to production unless to support the actual ability to consume. I could consume everything by fire and it would not help the producers. People produce one thing in order to acquire another. If all we have to offer are worthless dollars made on a printing press, then we will not be able to trade for valuable products produced in a factory.
The factory will be able to produce valuable products to trade for other valuable products made at other factories.

Thus, real wealth/capital is the *ability to produce* and our country has been moving that over seas for decades.

You get hyperinflation when trust breaks down (due to default, theft, etc). All trade is barter of “value” for “value”. Unless you are able to produce something of value, you will have nothing to trade with others. As a country we have relied our our ability to print the world’s reserve currency. People are starting to realize that we will be FORCED to printing unending supplies of money to cover the interest on an exponentially growing national debt. The end of the dollar is certain.

When the world wide demand for the dollar falls off of a cliff (because they don’t really need it) you can expect prices to go through the roof as people attempt to exchange what ever dollars they do have for something that has *real* value.

Hyperinflation is almost always driven by a self-reinforcing fall in demand for a currency without regard to supply or wages.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by robin
2009-06-02 01:22:31

Cornish Game Hens at $99 cents a pound!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Lucy
2009-06-01 05:40:28

This is the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation

33 examples of hyper-inflation, a surprising number of them within the last 20 years.

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-01 06:13:38

JUNE 1, 2009

Black Swan Fund Makes a Big Bet on Inflation

A hedge fund firm that reaped huge rewards betting against the market last year is about to open a fund premised on another wager: that the massive stimulus efforts of global governments will lead to hyperinflation.

The firm, Universa Investments L.P., is known for its ties to gloomy investor Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of the 2007 bestseller “The Black Swan,” which describes the impact of extreme events on the world and financial markets.

Funds run by Universa, which is managed and owned by Mr. Taleb’s long-time collaborator Mark Spitznagel, last year gained more than 100% thanks to its bearish bets.

 
Comment by skroodle
2009-06-01 06:27:59

I think its how the government spends the money. So far, all of the government money has gone to banks, car companies, insurance companies, etc. They are not passing that money on to anyone.

There hasn’t been any double digit increases in Social Security, Federal Pensions, etc. Decreases in spending by the DOD.

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 06:41:06

Well, let’s think over hyperinflation for housing. If a loaf of bread will cost $50, then I will buy a house, cash, for $250.

Either way, houses get cheaper.

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 10:14:04

“then I will buy a house, cash, for $250.”

You can already do that, as long as you are willing to move to Detroit…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by David
2009-06-01 07:29:20

The government IS giving piles of money to the people. What do you think FNMA FRE and FHA loans are? Government money going to the people with very little oversight, in huge quantities.
The beauty of government guaranteed loans is that they are off balance sheet, and everyone can pretend like they will be paid back.

Comment by Skip
2009-06-01 08:47:25

I think when you get money from FNMA/FRE/FHA you have to use it to buy a house.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by David
2009-06-01 09:50:07

Its money going into the system.
A lot of the money is going to refis, so people have lower payments and more money to spend.
If they buy an existing house, the seller could be cashing out.
If its a new house, everyone involved with construction gets paid.
Its possible to have a family member buy your own foreclosed house.
There’s lots of money going from the agencies into housing, and from there its flowing indirectly into the economy.\
Philosophically, how did our nation decide that home finance was such a critical function, that it needed to be nationalized and subsidized by the federal government. In affect what is happening is the US is giving up our enviable advantage of having the world’s reserve currency in exchange for buying everyone a mcMansion. Thank you real estate industry, way to go!

 
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 09:56:11

What David said.

The money doesn’t just disappear after the house is bought.

That’s what’s been so insidious about this bubble all along. One of the enablers was the fact that home prices are not counted in CPI. If they were (in proper scale - i.e. way more weight than food and gas) - then everyone would have seen the massive inflation that was happening during the front side of the bubble, and the bubble would have gotten a lot more attention as the negative thing it was, and wouldn’t have been as bad as it was.

 
Comment by Jon
2009-06-01 11:02:24

Fannie & Freddie aren’t going to cause hyper-inflation. They aren’t lending near what the market was lending a few years ago. We didn’t have hyper-inflation in the overall market then, so fannie & freddie won’t kick it off now.

 
Comment by yogurt
2009-06-01 11:09:21

One of the enablers was the fact that home prices are not counted in CPI.

House prices aren’t counted in CPI for the same reason as stock prices aren’t - buying one is a capital transaction, not consumption. Nobody has to buy a house, and changes in house prices don’t affect anyone’s cost of living, whether you own a house or you don’t, except for changes in property taxes, which I think are included in CPI.

House prices don’t belong in CPI any more than farmland prices do.

 
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 11:48:03

House prices aren’t counted in CPI for the same reason as stock prices aren’t - buying one is a capital transaction, not consumption. Nobody has to buy a house, and changes in house prices don’t affect anyone’s cost of living, whether you own a house or you don’t, except for changes in property taxes, which I think are included in CPI.

Wow - where to start with that.

A. House prices very much are consumption. Houses are created and destroyed constantly - i.e. consumed.

B. Housing actually is counted in CPI - as the single largest component by far; however the problem is only rent equivalent is counted; thus the huge price rise we had during the bubble didn’t show up.

C. “Nobody has to buy a house” - sure. Nobody has to go to college either, but that’s counted towards CPI. As is other discretionary spending like entertainment. CPI isn’t just composed of food and clothes. Look it up.

D. “changes in house prices don’t affect anyone’s cost of living” - excuse me what? Do you think houses are free?

 
 
 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-01 07:12:11

“It is often stated that you cant have hyper-inflation without a similar increase in people’s income. But i don’t think this is correct.”

I’m pretty sure that NYChk told us that there was hyperinflation along with stagnant wages/high unemployment in Russia in the 1990’s.

Comment by Jon
2009-06-01 11:04:01

Russia didn’t have hyper-inflation. They had one quick round of wealth destruction. Hyper-inflation assumes a long term escalation in prices.

Comment by yogurt
2009-06-01 11:11:49

No it doesn’t, and at any rate the hyperinflation in post-Soviet Russia lasted just as long as in Weimar Germany, although the magnitude was smaller.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-06-01 08:14:31

If there isn’t a rise in salaries then there has to be savings that get depleted or someone lending them the money. Think about it if gas prices go up and people are broke they will spend less on other things.

Comment by VirginiaTechDan
2009-06-01 10:54:46

You assume fixed demand for dollars, demand for dollars is destroyed on the international market making it impossible to trade freshly printed dollars for real goods.

You ignore the international market for goods. A local producer would rather ship overseas and get foreign goods in exchange as it would be far more profitable than selling locally.

3rd world countries experience this problem all of the time. Their people starve while the nation exports food to 1st world countries than can pay a higher price than locals.

 
 
 
Comment by SUGuy
2009-06-01 05:36:13

What stumbles next apple pie?

After Many Stumbles, Fall of an American Giant

It is a company that helped lift hundreds of thousands of American workers into the middle class. It transformed Detroit into the Silicon Valley of its day, a symbol of America’s talent for innovation. It built celebrated cars, like Cadillacs, that became synonymous with luxury.

.
And now it is filing for bankruptcy, something that would have been unfathomable even a few years ago, much less decades ago, when it was a dominant force in the American economy.
Rarely has a company fallen so far and so fast as General Motors. And while its bankruptcy appeared increasingly likely in recent weeks, the arrival of the moment is still a staggering blow, particularly for anyone with ties to the company.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/business/01downfall.html?ref=todayspaper

Comment by Al
2009-06-01 06:07:46

I find it interesting that the BK of GM is such a surprise. They’ve had issues for a long time, especially excessive debt load. This just strikes me as yet another “no one could have seen me coming” article, when in truth it was reasonably obvious.

Comment by ylekiot1
2009-06-01 06:30:31

All I need to remember are items like the Pontiac Aztek, Chevy Uplander, Cadillac Cimmeron to know why GM is in the position they are in. Don’t get me started on the bottom plastic cladding on the “trucks” over the past few years and the Cavalier that kept being made after that model design should have died three times over.

Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 06:46:39

to know why GM is in the position they are in.

Let us not forget the illustrious Chevy Vega.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Cassandra
2009-06-01 13:56:29

I must disagree. I try to forget the Vega in the same way I try to forget a root canal.

 
Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 14:06:08

Ever hear of the Cosworth?

(Hope life’s treating you well, Cassie :)

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2009-06-01 15:01:39

IMO Cosworth Vegas are similar to 1st gen Taurus SHOs. As in, cool idea at the time but not worth dealing with once something better came along in the same category.

 
 
 
Comment by rainmayun
2009-06-01 07:17:22

I think the BK is a surprise because people thought GM was “too big to fail”. Everyone knew there were structural problems, but everybody thought the government or someone else would magically fix them.

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 10:22:18

BK and “too big to fail” are not incompatible. BK does not mean they do not exist anymore.

It just means they have restructured their capital structure: shedding previous equity interests and converting previous creditors into equity holders.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 10:47:52

After purchasing a new GMC truck in 2005, I am not surprised in the least that they went BK. They produce a substandard, overpriced product. It would have been better to buy a $500 pickup truck, and put a completely new drivetrain in it.

 
 
Comment by Eudemon
2009-06-01 06:39:35

40 years is “so far so fast”? How clearly delusional.

Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 07:24:12

My thoughts exactly. The Chevrolet Vega was about 1972 or 73 as I remember, the descent had clearly started by then.

 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-06-01 07:19:43

What’s funny on so many message boards is when people spout that GM and the “Arsenal for Democracy” meme. Citing GM’s role in WW II production as a reason for keeping that zombie alive today.

So bascially, we should use tomorrow’s labor to save one of yesterday’s largest war profiteers? Great, living in the past - American style.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 08:00:28

Look on the bright side: The stock market is up on the news!

 
Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 08:31:49

The net/net is that I will pay to keep GM going. I will fund the pensions and luxury post-retirement health care plans of thousands of GM employees forever. Like most of us, I struggle to pay my bloated health care premiums and look to a retirement with no pension and likely limited SS and Medicare.

Not sure how I feel about this new favoritism (Socialism) for certain sectors. Like the rest of the world trying to divest from US dollars, I know of no where else to go, so here I sit.

Comment by ecofeco
2009-06-01 16:33:18

It’s not socialism, it’s Corporate Communist Capitalism©®™.

Just to clear up any misinterpretation, this means the corporations own and run everything and your choices are between corporation A or corporation B and you really don’t get a vote/say/influence on who runs those corporations or the lap dog regulatory agencies.

Do you? No, you don’t.

Soviet style, baby!

(FYI, the corporations have been running this country since the railroad empire days circa 1880s. See “San Mateo Country vs. Southern Pacific” and “San Clara Country vs. Southern Pacific”)

 
 
Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2009-06-01 11:40:19

‘Rarely has a company fallen so far and so fast as General Motors. And while its bankruptcy appeared increasingly likely in recent weeks, the arrival of the moment is still a staggering blow, particularly for anyone with ties to the company.’

Joe: “I know you. You’re Norma Desmond! You used to be in silent pictures. You used to be big!”
Norma: “I am big! It’s the pictures that got small!”

Norma: “We didn’t need dialogue. We had faces!”

Norma (to newsreel cameras): “And I promise you I’ll never desert you again because after ‘Salome’ we’ll make another picture and another picture. You see, this is my life! It always will be! Nothing else! Just us, the cameras, and those wonderful people out there in the dark!… All right, Mr. DeMille, I’m ready for my close-up.”

 
 
Comment by SUGuy
2009-06-01 05:37:47

Quotation of the Day

“I never ever could have believed that one day this thing would go that way.”
JIM WANGERS, a retired G.M. executive and the author of “Glory Days: When Horsepower and Passion Ruled Detroit,” on the company’s downfall

Dude you should know better. You ran this “shit show” into the ground. Congratulations Rick. Way to go

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 09:12:49

At today’s safe investment interest rates, the average GM pension equates to 3M in assets for each worker, and that is not even counting the free health care. All these benefits now compliments of me, for the rest of my life.

Comment by packman
2009-06-01 09:58:02

the average GM pension equates to 3M in assets for each worker,

Can you say from where that number comes?

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 10:47:29

Mr. Numbers :)

Average longer term Treasury bill/note is 3%.

.03 x 3M= 90K annually. Living in CA, taxes on 90K are 35K So net 65K on 3M of assets.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 05:41:36

It`s not my fault, THEY DID IT!!!

Ginn, affiliates inflated prices of homes, buyers say in lawsuit
By Eve Samples

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Sunday, May 31, 2009

A group of buyers in communities built by The Ginn Co. - including grandiose Tesoro in Port St. Lucie - is claiming the developer and its affiliates fraudulently inflated real estate prices.

A class-action lawsuit filed in late May in U.S. District Court in Jacksonville targets Celebration-based Ginn, its sister companies, financing partner Lubert-Adler and banks that worked with Ginn, including SunTrust, Fifth Third Bancorp and Wachovia Bank.

The suit alleges Ginn led a scheme to bloat prices at every step of the process - from lavish sales launches to manipulated appraisals. Among the claims: Ginn staffers posed as competing buyers to pressure people to sign a sale contract.

The misdeeds happened in more than a dozen Ginn developments, starting as early as the late 1990s, according to the suit.

Some properties are now worth as little as 10 percent of their appraised value, “a phenomenon that absolutely cannot be explained by mere market downturn,” the suit states.

Buyers from as far as England and as near as Boca Raton are parties. They are seeking class certification.

“We will vigorously defend against this litigation and any other false allegation brought against our company,” Ginn spokesman Ryan Julison said.

Comment by yogurt
2009-06-01 11:16:35

What a bunch of nonsense.

Since nobody ever has to buy a house, inflated house prices are always - ALWAYS - the fault of the buyers.

 
 
Comment by InMontana
2009-06-01 05:52:08

Montana’s for sale! We had to drive to a lake resort area an hour away yesterday for a small-town HS graduation. The C-store and gas station at the halfway point has been shuttered all year. A campground is still open but for sale. Lots of expensive 2nd home properties for sale. A cabinet maker’s spread for sale on Hwy 200. He apparently moved out already. The lumber mill at the lake is still hanging on but rumors are circulating that it may shut down like most the others. Both our relatives at the lake work there.

I was surprised, though, out of 20 grads only one going into the military (our g-son) whereas three years ago it seemed like half were going in.

Comment by palmetto
2009-06-01 05:57:07

“out of 20 grads only one going into the military (our g-son) whereas three years ago it seemed like half were going in.”

Who wants to risk their lives so a bunch of fat cat corporate trash and politicians can live off war profits?

Comment by Eudemon
2009-06-01 06:43:18

I agree. Why serve the country so that General Motors and the UAW can screw them over once they return from serving overseas?

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 11:09:54

Screw them over??? Nah, I’m sure we’ll be giving free cars to returning GIs within a few years in an attempt to stimulate demand!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by In Montana
2009-06-01 08:29:24

I have no opinion one way or the other, but the contrast with the last two graduations I went to was startling. The job situation is worse than ever, but kids are vulnerable to hype sod I guess the War on Terror is over.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 10:08:48

Spot on, Palmy.

 
 
Comment by REhobbyist
2009-06-01 06:18:28

Just a minute there. I distinctly remember that Montana is different!

Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 07:26:26

That’s what I’d heard as well. Didn’t they have a thriving dental floss industry or something?

Comment by Groundhogday
2009-06-01 07:50:16

Perhaps you CAN eat the scenery after all… in a pinch?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 10:09:52

Montana is sooooooo screwed.

 
 
Comment by Xenos
2009-06-01 06:01:02

I hate to sound like a doofus, but I have not been keeping up lately and I have a question — are we near anything like a bottom in medium-to-high end sfhs in Florida? A friend who has cashed out on a divorce wants to take a lump sum to Daytona (new job) and put a few hundred thou down on a house or a nice condo and live mortgage free. I like the general idea, but it sounds early to me. Any one with any sense of what is going on at ground level with the market there?

Comment by palmetto
2009-06-01 06:09:13

“it sounds early to me.”

Me, too. I’d wait. More pain to come.

I don’t know if the guy is new to Daytona, but a really good policy when relocating for a new job is rent, wait and see. If the job is working out, and you’ve had time to get to know the area and where and where not to live, and the price is right, then buy.

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 06:11:18

Hi Xenos, I was in Daytona a few weeks back, and buying a condo sounds like a very bad idea. I saw two huge, empty, dark, ghost towers on the intracoastal right by the main causeway there…

Why not take the windfall and rent?

Comment by Xenos
2009-06-01 06:15:18

I think there is some bankruptcy pre-planning going on. Maybe he should just get a really big chunk of unimproved land and put a yurt on it.

 
 
Comment by Les Pendens
2009-06-01 06:16:59

A friend who has cashed out on a divorce wants to take a lump sum to Daytona (new job) and put a few hundred thou down on a house or a nice condo and live mortgage free.

Well, here in Central Florida it seems that prices have stabilized somewhat…at least I hope so since I just picked up a 2001 block home for $137,700 @ 4.85% here in Polk County.

“A few hundred thou” will not be necessary to get a home at this point. Beautiful, sapcious homes can now be had in the $125,000 to $200,000 price range….but the property taxes and insurance can/will be a BEAR. Especially insurance on anything east of I-95 or west of I-75.

Beware of bubble construction. There’s a whole lot of frame/slab and stucco junk that was built out there from 2004-2008. Some of these homes won’t last 20 years and already show signs of significant deterioration.

That being said, it seems like the market is holding up some for well-built, clean and modest pre-bubble homes in decent areas. We’ll see if it drops further, but I hope not.

The mortgage rates are starting to skyrocket, however, and this might serve to drive prices even somewhat lower.

..

Comment by DinOR
2009-06-01 07:44:12

“Beware of bubble construction”

Right, with or without Chinese made drywall you’ve got problems. I usually take it a step further by adding not only homes -built- between 2000 and current, but it’s best to steer clear of anything that was SOLD or even re-fi’d in that era as well.

Any Pre-Bubble Era home that wasn’t equity-stripped to the tune of 100k+ and you get particle board cabinets and koi pond in exchange would be preferable. Yes.

 
 
Comment by REhobbyist
2009-06-01 06:21:14

“a few hundred thou down on a house or a nice condo”

I think that answers your question. How the hell can a condo cost three hundred thou? A hundred thou is more like it. Especially in Daytona.

 
Comment by Jon
2009-06-01 11:14:32

The low to mid-range have collapsed. Prices are down to 2002 levels in my area and still falling. The high end is holding up somewhat on the pricing but sales have stopped because of that. They will collapse though. Wait a year.

High priced condos on the water are nice, but the condo fees are killer. We have some nice condos on the water where I live & I had been considering looking into them. Condo fees are $475/mo. though. I just have better things to do with the $475. Every month.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-06-01 16:38:57

Condos are for morons.

New to town? Rent.

Bottom? Nowhere close.

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 06:09:42

G’mornin’ HBB, I have several things:

1. Geo ducks are disgusting — need the barf emoticon, Ben.

2. Combo, I’m not making this up: my dog ate the post-it that had those two books written on it. Please re-post.

3. Palmy, yes my rental house was built in 1956. I too love the old Florida CBS homes. My crib stays very cool…

Comment by combotechie
2009-06-01 06:28:12

“The Intelligent Investor”, by Benjamin Graham

“The Market Wizards”, by Jack D. Schwager (focus on the interview with Ed Seykota).

Ed Seykota says (in part): “Everyone gets what they want out of the market”, meaning winners want to win and losers want to lose, and the market will provide ways for each party to fulfill their wants.

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 07:08:36

Thank you, Combo.

 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 06:52:17

1. Geo ducks are disgusting — need the barf emoticon, Ben.

My inappropriate crush on Oly ended the moment I clicked on a picture of a geo-duck in Wikipedia.

(It’s probbably for the best)

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 08:52:07

I don’t know, I have this image of the warrior maiden in the surf, hair flowing and gossamer cape in the wind, crown of flowers, in pitched battle for mastery over a giant phallus. Or is it mistressey?

Keep in mind that it is impossible to be a long time bachelor without becoming a total perv.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 09:00:35

Keep in mind that it is impossible to be a long time bachelor without becoming a total perv.

Do you know how long it takes for this crossover to happen? I’m wondering if I should be concerned….

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by phillygal
2009-06-01 09:07:08

My SO is a longtime bachelor and he’s only about 20% perv.

 
Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 09:42:37

Philly —

Perhaps that’s because he hasn’t told you everything? :smile:

MrBubble, bachelor, 58% perv (to be revised upward next month).

 
Comment by Jon
2009-06-01 11:17:27

A friend once told me that if women really knew what men were thinking they’d shoot us on sight.

 
 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 11:13:41

“I don’t know, I have this image of the warrior maiden in the surf, hair flowing and gossamer cape in the wind, crown of flowers, in pitched battle for mastery over a giant phallus. Or is it mistressey?”

+1… I _loved_ that image! :-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Cassandra
2009-06-01 09:38:55

One would think that evolution might have provided a strategy where a creature could be too disgusting to eat. This is apparently, not true.

Comment by Al
2009-06-01 10:07:51

I think I saw one of them geoducks attack the Enterprise.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Rancher
2009-06-01 06:14:45

Morning all! What a great day, second cup of java and we get to watch as GM dies. Remember that
little ditty that said “As GM goes, so does the rest
of the country”? Well, how long do we have?

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 06:20:51

Its gonna take time
A whole lot of precious time
Its gonna take patience and time, ummm
To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it,
To do it right child

But its gonna take money
A whole lotta spending money
Its gonna take plenty of money
To do it right child

Its gonna take time
A whole lot of precious time
Its gonna take patience and time, ummm
To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it,
To do it right child

Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 06:27:20

George Harrison?

Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 08:05:56

“George Harrison?”

If we are going with my favorite Beatle, why not go with “All Things Must Pass?”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 12:32:55

“If we are going with my favorite Beatle”

I didn`t have a favorite Beatle, but I did have a favorite Bangel.

 
 
Comment by Cowtown
2009-06-02 07:48:15

Rudy Clark, actually. Harrison covered it on his 1987 album “Cloud Nine”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:53:02

Very underwhelming lyrics.

 
 
Comment by Zombie Banks
2009-06-01 07:49:22

GM….Mark of Excellence!

 
Comment by Cassandra
2009-06-01 09:43:24

I was visiting a friend the other day. She worries much about GM, and she has much family that either works there, or is retired from GM. She hopes and prays every day for GM’s successful revival.

I of course, tried, perhaps unsuccessfully to be polite, sharing the views of most here on the blog about GM.

The best part was we were having this conversation in her newly acquired Audi TT.

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 11:15:04

“The best part was we were having this conversation in her newly acquired Audi TT.”

Priceless! :-)

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 12:15:52

Maybe your friend could call Alcee in his Lexus and voice her concern.

About Alcee Hastings’ $24,730 Lexus lease….
by George Bennett | June 1st, 2009
As noted over the weekend, U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Miramar, was the first example cited by The Wall Street Journal in an article about legal but “eye-catching” expenses that members of Congress have passed on to taxpayers.

Taxpayers shelled out $24,730 last year for Hastings to lease a luxury 2008 Lexus hybrid sedan.

Hastings’ office responded today…..

Here’s a statement from Hastings Chief of Staff Lale Mamaux:

“The lease of the vehicle in question has been approved by the U.S House of Representatives. It is an energy efficient vehicle that the Congressman feels safe driving throughout his district, which as you know encompasses Palm Beach, Broward, Hendry, Martin and St. Lucie counties. He believes that the overall cost of the vehicle will decrease as he plans to keep it over the next 6 years for official business.”

 
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 06:31:02

So I drove by a house that was in foreclosure a year or so ago. It’s a house in a ‘hood where I regularly bike ride / walk. It was listed for about $250k right before it went into foreclosure. Well, it has been rehabbed and is now on the market for $420k! So the flippers are still out there.

I’ve adjusted my plan a little: I may actually buy down here if prices plummet enough. That was never my intention.

Anyway, I think we maybe should have a thread where we can all update our bubble positions. You know, were you all in cash, and now stuffing your pants with ingots? Did you buy? Do you move into a van down by the river?

Comment by Kim
2009-06-01 07:23:23

“I think we maybe should have a thread where we can all update our bubble positions.”

Still mostly in cash here. Nothing about this market temps me on the long side. I put most of DD’s 2009 Coverdell contribution into oil, expecting it to be a very long term play. I have a trailing stop on it now because the short term gains have been better than expected. If oil hits $75 or so, I may attempt a small short position in my trading account.

Still holding a little SRS from a lot higher than what its at now. I’ve been fighting the tape on that for a while - it can go to zero and as long as the fundamentals in RE still don’t make sense, I’ll be hanging on. FAZ under $4 intrigues me (for a trade).

 
Comment by Groundhogday
2009-06-01 07:55:36

Still living in our 2-bedroom apt. $715/mo, all utilities included. 5 minute walk to work. We are maxing out on retirement contributions plus saving $3-4k/mo in non-retirement funds. The only significant downside is that there is no garage for storage, place to keep bikes, etc…

Money, half cash (CD’s, 10 year treasuries) and half TIPS. Hedging my bets. Just made a family decision to only consider buying houses that we can purchase with cash (about $200k max at this point).

 
Comment by Xenos
2009-06-01 08:27:48

Hunkering down in the rented Casa Xenos. Cheap rental in a rural town with good school district. Saving money, probably won’t buy a house until it is time to retire in 25 years or so. Medium term plans include relocating out of the country to allow for good colleges at affordable rates.

 
 
Comment by Ben Jones
2009-06-01 06:45:10

ylekiot1

If you post a PDF file, please include a warning. Yours froze up my PC.

Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 06:50:53

ylekiot1

If you post a PDF file, please include a warning.

Also, if you have a handle that takes me more than three tries to figure out, please put the alternate spelling in parentheses.

Comment by ylekiot1
2009-06-01 07:27:38

Lavi D,

It means Wyle E Coyote

That coyote that chases the roadrunner.

Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 08:21:14

It means Wyle E Coyote

And a warning for me… Make jokes more obvious.

:)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Al
2009-06-01 11:46:09

I’m with you lavi, did not get that one. I thought ylekiot1
was something in Latvian. Wiley, why the 1?

 
 
 
 
Comment by ylekiot1
2009-06-01 07:26:19

Sorry about that, Ben. I will remember next time.

 
Comment by VaBeyatch in Virginia Beach
2009-06-01 11:23:25

Hey guys if your computers are locking up viewing PDFs and your on Windows systems, consider uninstalling Adobe Acrobat reader and using an alternative PDF viewer like the free “Foxit Reader.” This is good if you just simply look at PDFs and don’t fill out interactive forms on them.

 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2009-06-01 06:56:46

Here’s a little look-ahead worth thinking about. I always said the way the irresponsibility of many Americans will be transferred to to the rest is through the public sector — slashed services and benefits and higher taxes.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=ayC51TwbH6_8&refer=home

“Imagine, for example, that California returns to credit markets in the coming months simply to roll over some of its expiring debt. Maybe the state borrowed money from China for two years back in 2007 and now has to borrow again to give the Chinese their money back. What happens if, seeing the catastrophic budget situation, lenders decide to shun California altogether?”

“If that happens, California would have to default on its obligation to give the Chinese their money back. It might do so by extending the terms of the existing debt, but that would be, nonetheless, a default, and a run on California debt surely could ensue.”

“Once a panic occurs, similar assets tend to be swept up in the wave. Bad news spreads. Witness the run that occurred during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s.”

You know, without debts or pensions we could have much lower taxes and better services and benefits.

Comment by scdave
2009-06-01 07:49:07

without debts or pensions we could have much lower taxes and better services and benefits ??

Public sector unions are a big part of the problem…

Comment by james
2009-06-01 09:50:51

Yeah, but we agreed to pay pensions and if your not talking about some of the fat cats, a lot of the pensions are reasonable.

A good number of the firefighter/police pensions are gaming the systems and that should stop as well.

However, I think a broad based default to all of our civil servants is an attrocity.

Comment by Jon
2009-06-01 11:29:09

The Florida Retirement System pays out 42% of the highest 5 years pay to members after 30 years of employment. The average State worker makes $39,000/year. $39k x .42 = $16,380. Woohoo.

I’m in the FRS. Unfortunately a lot of folks take some cases from union firefighters in San Fran making $250K/year & assume all government workers are the same. They’re not.

I won’t stay in public service much longer. I jumped in out of short term necessity. Stayed in because the system is so bad I thought I could fix it & found out that it is designed to be that way. It’s a feature, not a bug.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by sfrenter
2009-06-01 13:50:28

You guys act like pensions are handing out free money.

As a school teacher - making well below the median income -I pay over $500 month into CALSTRS (state teachers retirement plan).

Yeah, maybe if and when CA goes belly up I’ll be screwed, but no more screwed than everyone who had their retirement money in 401Ks.

Do we really want to live in a world where a good portion of elderly folks don’t have enough money to retire? To eat?

I hear some of you going on about how we should get rid of social security and public pensions…

…but it doesn’t look like privately investing one’s retirement money in the stock market has worked out to anyone’s interest, except the folks on high.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ecofeco
2009-06-01 19:02:08

Exactly sfrenter.

I so love the attitude of disposable citizens. “Retirement age? Please die.”

Yes, there is plenty of “gaming” going on, but the vast majority of retirees with a pension are getting very modest incomes and most of them are struggling.

 
Comment by CA renter
2009-06-02 03:22:47

Great posts, sfrenter and ecofeco. Agree 100%.

It’s like the rats are turing on each other. Instead of tearing down unions, ALL workers should be using them as leverage with their own employers — to build themselves UP!

 
 
 
 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 11:38:18

Don’t worry, the FDIC will start guaranteeing state bond-issues next…

(joking, I hope)

 
 
Comment by awaiting wipeout
2009-06-01 07:02:19

I am thinking of trying to access the ghost inventory and see if I can nail a cash deal. Any advice?
*Should I try to network with a real estate attorney that belongs to reomac in my area?
*Is this a better strategy than doing a redfin reo deal with the rebate? (I’m have a license - they always try and use it against me, and cut out my commission- I don’t do UHS for a living)
I would assume the right approach would net me a fair primary residence deal.

 
Comment by cougar91
2009-06-01 07:05:10

Shorts are officially toast. All hail the Great Recover of 2009. Credit Crisis gone and forgotten. No such thing as housing bubble. Fed completely reflates world economy. Everything back to normal.

That about sums it up for the market action.

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-06-01 07:26:09

Several here opined we’d hit 9k DJIA, 1k S&P - looks like that will happen. This is just riveting - like standing next to a boiler with a broken pressure gauge.

Comment by hd74man
2009-06-01 17:07:22

RE: This is just riveting - like standing next to a boiler with a broken pressure gauge.

+1!

 
Comment by Watching the Carnage
2009-06-01 17:59:05

HA - Too funny in a not so funny way. That’s a great analogy as I’m watching my shorts flounder. Kind of the same feeling when my gas grill caught on fire over the weekend and I had to either step back and let it burn…or step into the inferno and shut off the gas feeding it.

I opted to step in and shut off the gas as the other option would have resulted in burning down the house.

I’m kind of liking the eyebrow-less and eyelash-less look - tho my wife and son seem not to as they have now nicknamed me Fire Mutant.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 08:14:37

“Shorts are officially toast. All hail the Great Recover of 2009.”

All they have done is calmed the waters on a dark night so the look outs can not see the waves breaking on the iceberg ahead. CC debt, shadow inventory, prime forclosures and inflation. I talked about a trend line on the S&P from the ealy 80`s through the early 90`s that had been broken below months ago and I started putting money in a mutual fund, I thought it would take years not months to break back above that trend line but as I said I bet the dog house not the farm. If the Dow hits 9500 I will move it to a money market in the fund family and wait for the iceberg.

Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:44:15

“All they have done is calmed the waters on a dark night so the look outs can not see the waves breaking on the iceberg ahead. CC debt, shadow inventory, prime forclosures and inflation.”

Nah. All the potential negatives have been “priced in” already. The stock market only goes up.

 
 
 
Comment by darthrealtor
2009-06-01 07:06:20

Fourth largest bankruptcy in US history (1st largest industrial) and markets up almost 2%.

The disconnect is like the scent of white puffy clouds to this perma-bear.

Comment by Blano
2009-06-01 07:12:15

That’s why I’m probably gonna have to bail out of faz. Having it right now just seems to be fighting the trend.

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 07:36:16

FAZ is scary. I lost a good portion of my SKF/SRS gains on FAZ. Lesson learned.

 
Comment by Watching the Carnage
2009-06-01 18:10:07

Yes Faz - still money to be made there. The question is where to cut the FAS lifeline.

I say this with the great confidence based on Muggy’s counsel here on the board; )

 
 
Comment by Lesser Fool
2009-06-01 07:23:41

You don’t understand. The worse things get, the closer to the bottom we must be, so go up the markets must. Remember that markets are forward looking, in this case perhaps by a few years or a decade. The mentality that everything has to be obtained well in advance of when it logically should, is alive and well in the good old USA. That was behind every bubble in the past, and is the foundation for this credit-driven society. People have short memories, and the govt is enabling it all.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 10:21:55

“Fourth largest bankruptcy in US history (1st largest industrial) and markets up almost 2%.”

I just looked at the DOW for the first time all day a few moments ago, and it’s up over 220 points. Pure fantasy. It’s laughable. Apparently the markets WERE oversold, as money is just flowing in with no regard to value. P/E ratios of 120 on the S & P when 20 used to be a sell, and the money just flows on in…

 
 
Comment by cougar91
2009-06-01 07:38:20

To me this is quite an amazing number, assuming the revision won’t be too much. Income up by 0.5% in a single month is quite impressive given the unemployment situation. Can’t say I expect this at all.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -

Personal income rose 0.5%, the biggest increase since May last year, after falling by a revised 0.2% in March, which had been reported as a 0.3% decline in March. Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast income to fall 0.2% in April.

Comment by Groundhogday
2009-06-01 08:00:15

I’m guessing this is just noise.

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 08:12:25

noise to be revised.

 
 
Comment by measton
2009-06-01 08:51:09

They include unemployment

Personal income rose 0.5 percent, the biggest increase since May last year, after falling by a revised 0.2 percent in March. Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast income to fall 0.2 percent in April.

Disposable income surged 1.1 percent in April, boosted by tax cuts and increased social benefit payments under the government’s record $787 billion stimulus package, the Commerce Department said. Excluding the stimulus package, disposable income increased 0.7 percent in April.

“The income data was skewed by the stimulus, where unemployment insurance was accelerated and extended. If you take that out it doesn’t look as good as it seems,” said Peter Boockvar, equity strategist at Miller Tabak & Co in New York.

Still I don’t see how income can be rising in a world of rising unemployment, loss of overtime, and underemployment. I just don’t believe any of the numbers.

Comment by In Colorado
2009-06-01 09:14:03

Agreed. Who believes the ministry of propaganda anymore?

Comment by Temporal
2009-06-01 09:42:18

Sad thing is, sooner or later someone’s going to say “But we’ve always been at war with Iraq…” and be telling the truth.

:)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-06-01 10:45:14

I guess another area where we could see an increase given the 30% increase in the market is in Wall Street Bonus money. That would tend to increase incomes, but it’s a lot of wealth in a tiny number of hands.

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-01 12:04:24

If people who used up all of their unemployment benefits were added back in because of an extension, that could account for some of it. Seasonal hiring for summer activities (pools, amusement parks, etc.) might be some of it too. And some offices will use more temps during the summer when regular employees are taking vacations.

Just a few ideas, though the last two should be taken care of if the stats are seasonally adjusted.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 13:33:12

Don’t forget the $25/week boost as part of the federal stimulus. For me that was a 6.5% “raise”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Northeastener
2009-06-01 13:21:02

Personal income rose 0.5%, the biggest increase since May last year

The Bloomberg article had more detail… suffice it to say the increase is from an increase in unemployment benefits, extensions, and such. Basically, incomes aren’t actually increasing at all, rather the government is supporting more people financially who would otherwise have no income.

 
 
Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 07:47:35

FDIC’s processes for taking over a failed bank was lead story on 60 minutes last night. To see what hopelessness and job burnout looks like, view Sheila Blair in this. Somebody really needs to help her transition out.

Other stand-out was reporter Scott Pelley’s glossing over the massive taxpayer funds given to the bank that ultimately purchases the FDIC-seized bank. US Gov compensates purchasing bank 80% of all loans that go bad. Pelley called it a sweet deal, but left it at that.

Viewable at cbs dot com

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 07:49:28

Posted this late yesterday, but thought I’d post again.

I put together a user guide for my Firefox extension. You can access it here.

The main page for the extension is http://home.avvanta.com/~drumminj/joshuatree.html

It’s just a quick pass, so let me know if anything remains unclear. Also, I’d be interested to know how many people are using it, so if you’ve installed it, drop me an email and let me know what you think, eh?

Thanks.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 08:01:47

D’oh, that’s what I get for copying and pasting.

The user guide is here: working link.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 08:29:03

Forgot to include the proper link above. Posted a reply with the proper link in it, but it’s in purgatory at the moment.

 
Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 10:56:33

Just like a real IT guy you got angry because people kept asking you the same stupid questions over and over again a few blogs ago. I thought that was so funny. Just like at my real job, I got scared and ran away.

My question: Does FF and IE live together happily?

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 11:18:38

I’m confused…I got angry? When?

Yes, FF and IE live together happily. Personally I’d ditch IE altogether, but that’s me :) No reason you can’t run multiple browsers, though.

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 12:34:16

Yes, I’ve heard nothing but good things about FF and have good incentive to make the switch with your extension.

Comment was May 29th b&b regarding the last time you would post the link. After a re-read, you were actually only being apologetic for repeating - so I am officially take away your “angry IT Guy” title.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:48:42

Firefox used to be great- until the latest version. It’s now garbage. It shuts down unexpectedly, freezes up, and just plain goes haywire. These are similar to the problems which plagued IE and prompted me to switch to FF in the first place. Why they would release such a POS upgrade is beyond me…

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 13:35:26

By this you mean version 3.0.x? I’ve not had any problems like that.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 14:20:30

Go check the forums then. It seems you’re one of the few.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 15:41:44

Go check the forums then. It seems you’re one of the few.

Interesting. Looks like most of the people are running Windows…I’m a mac guy. No problems with 3.0.10 for me. I guess one can hope 3.1 or 3.5 will fix it…

 
 
 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 13:59:34

drummin

Awesome work, drumminj - the reply function dropped the “j” from your handle, is that supposed to happen?

I have often wondered what thing I could possibly write that would increase my enjoyment of the web and also wondered why Ben ended up with such a clumsy interface, but I never had the two thoughts simultaneously.

Kudos!

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 15:35:33

the reply function dropped the “j” from your handle, is that supposed to happen?

I’m guessing the ‘j’ wasn’t selected…I’ve not seen issues of it dropping the last character. User error is a powerful thing ;)

Glad it’s of use. I would think there’s money to be made in making a plugin for wordpress blogs that would clean things up (Ben already uses one for the comment structure, as far as I can tell), but I have no clue how to do that.

It’s cool that a mechanism exists such that the end-user can modify (hopefully improve) their experience without the help or permission of the web site operator. Of course, it’s a shame it’s necessary in the first place :)

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 08:07:00

Does the Fed prop up the stock market on days like today, or doesn’t it? It is a bit hard to guess exactly what they do do from my cursory reading of a St. Louis FRB Review article by William Poole which I posted last night. It is towards the end of the bits bucket if it made it through (caution: .pdf). Here is a snippet:

‘From time to time, to be sure, Fed action to
stabilize the economy—to cushion recession or
deal with a systemic financial crisis—will have
the effect of pushing up stock prices. That effect
is part of the transmission mechanism through
which monetary policy affects the economy.
However, it is a fundamental misreading of monetary
policy to believe that the stock market per
se
is an objective of policy. It is also a mistake to
believe that a policy action that is desirable to
help stabilize the economy should not be taken
because it will also tend to increase stock prices.
It makes no sense to let the economy suffer from
continuing declines in stock prices for the purpose
of “teaching stock market speculators a lesson.”
“Teaching a lesson” is eerily reminiscent of
Mellon’s liquidationist view. Nor should the central
bank attempt to protect investors from their
unwise decisions. Doing so would only divert
policy from its central responsibility to maintain
price stability and high employment.’

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 09:32:29

My reading of Poole’s paper thus far is that he pretty much admits that a predictable consequence of Fed intervention to prop up the economy is a rising stock market. Naturally this gives a huge advantage to the mavens of Megabank, Inc, who still have lots of nine-figure bonus money in their pockets to invest in a rising stock market buoyed by the Fed’s liquidity flood.

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 11:25:30

So Poole is saying that as long as Gov supports are as aggressive as they are, big opportunities in stocks should continue.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 12:10:46

I still am confused why it matters whether the stock market is going up due to a direct or an indirect effect of Fed intervention. At the end of the day, the stock market always goes up, so it seems the two cases are observationally equivalent.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 08:11:10

The MSM interprets all upticks in l-t T-bond yields as signs of increasing confidence in economic recovery. Luckily for the Fed, nobody is worried whatever about the prospect of higher inflation…

Jun 1, 2009, 10:43 a.m. EST
Treasurys decline as investors resume taking risk
By Deborah Levine, MarketWatch

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — Treasury prices declined Monday, pushing yields higher, as U.S. stocks opened to the upside amid increasing investor confidence that the worst of the financial and economic crisis is over.

Ten-year note yields (UST10Y 3.64, +0.18, +5.23%, UST30Y 4.50, +0.16, +3.78%) rose 17 basis points to 4.51%, the biggest increase since May 7.

The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (SPX 943.30, +24.16, +2.63%) gained 2.4% in early trading.

“Rising equities are likely causing asset allocation out of Treasuries,” said T.J. Marta, founder and chief strategist at Marta on the Markets.

Comment by bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-01 08:42:49

Yeah, for me, gold is not much of a buy right now, just a hold. LT bonds are looking better for contrarians. I like the idea of buying 10 year notes when the yield goes above 5%. Then increase the amount of purchases when the yield goes above 6%, and so on.

I like to buy when everyone else is bailing. I don’t anticipate a case for bailing out of gold for the next three years though.

Comment by In Colorado
2009-06-01 09:16:50

Yeah, for me, gold is not much of a buy right now, just a hold.

But the Mogambo Guru always closes his column with something like “Whee! Investing is easy”, usually right after he says that anyone who doesn’t buy gold is crazy.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 09:34:12

Isn’t Mogambo pretty much a gold dealer? I used to have a stock broker friend who always thought it was a good time to buy stocks, and many a UHS can still be heard to say that now is a great time to buy. It is pretty typical for sales folks to always have a reason to buy their special asset class.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 08:42:22

My wife just emailed me a listing for a 5 br. house in Rochester ‘burbs for $150k!! She wants to have 4 kids.

Hmm… I don’t think I’d mind a tribe if houses are cheap enough.

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 08:55:37

You are scared of the wrong thing Buddy. The house is dirt cheap compared to what the rug rats cost. I raised four. Sure I’ve blown through a million at least on that little adventure.

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 09:00:02

O.k. Blue, weird question (because I’m sure you love all four), but do you wish you only had two?

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 09:18:14

No Muggy, I wouldn’t send any of them back for a refund.

I wouldn’t know what to do with the money anyway. I have everything.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by CA renter
2009-06-02 04:05:04

Muggy,

We have three, not four. Here are my observations:

The world is designed for a family of four.

-Once you get over that number, you have to wait while restaurant servers prepare a “special” table for you.

-Amusement park rides often have only two seats per car/ride, so if you have more than two kids, you have to drag Grandma along to tend to the third kid. Another kid will require a fourth adult, etc.

-It’s difficult to get together with other larger families. We have friends with four kids, and whenever we get together for a “casual” playdate, we have seven kids, plus parents. A lot to feed, if they are staying for snacks/lunch/dinner!

-More bikes, skates, skis, sleeping bags, etc., etc… For us, $$everything$$ is multiplied by five (including adults), and this really puts a crimp in what you can do. Think airplane tickets, amusement park tickets, show tickets, etc. We need to stay in two (adjoining) hotel rooms when we vacation now, because most rooms are only made for four people, at most.

Other than that, we would never think about “returning” any of our kid. Each one is unique and wonderful in her own way. We feel tremendously blessed to have them, and have no regrets, whatsoever.

Whatever you do, I’m sure you’ll enjoy every minute of it. It sounds like you are a very proud, happy daddy! :)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 08:57:39

FPSS refers to those things as sprogs, yes?

Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-06-01 09:32:15

I do (on occasion.)

A friend’s sprog recently nearly pulled down my bookcase packed to the gills with books (400 lbs or so) on top on himself by rocking back and forth.

I told the parents that I had “umbrella coverage” so I didn’t particularly care but that they might care about the sprog.

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 17:12:59

lol. No doubt the parents thought the whole ordeal was cute and wished they had a camera.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-01 09:38:38

Yes she does…

 
 
 
Comment by bananarepublic
2009-06-01 09:17:42

Why do people on the far right feel justified killing people they don’t agree with? This is another reason why I cannot associate myself with the right. The far left may have illegal aliens and welfare queens, but the far right has murdering lunatics.

There really is a difference.

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 09:34:07

Evil flies any banner it pleases. The more deceptive the better.

I am extremely conservative in my own doings, and very liberal (in the classic sense) in my dealings with others. I’ve only considered murder once.

Comment by combotechie
2009-06-01 17:10:52

“I’ve only considered murder once.”

You need to get out more often.

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 17:15:03

:)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by bananarepublic
2009-06-01 19:39:21

Now the anti-abortion crowd is worried they will all be branded psychos over this killing. Too late. These people are frickin nutcases. And the thought that somehow this was a “bad apple” among so many level headed members is laughable. Are we to forget the violent protests, blocking clinics, harassing workers, bombing clinics, etc. that these psychos have done over the years?

Everything that is wrong with this country can be found on the far right. Stupid, homophobic, religious freaks is just about all you get from the far right.

The left has issues, but the far right is downright repulsive. They make perfect Nazis. And before you people freak out, I am not talking about regular conservatives. I’m talking about the far right. You know, the Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly side of your party.

The nutcases.

 
 
Comment by MrBubble
2009-06-01 09:34:11

Which of our RW2Ns will take the bait on this one?

Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-06-01 09:36:39

It’s so boringly troll-esque that it’s too much work to respond on a nice languid summer’s day.

BORING. NEXT.

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 10:02:15

+1.

It’s one thing when political actions taken in response to the housing bubble lead to politicized discussions here… But let’s at least make the token effort of STARTING with the bubble as subject matter before we take off on wild political tangents.

BORING.

NEXT.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by bananarepublic
2009-06-01 12:12:08

It’s an off-topic post in a thread designated “off-topic”.

Next?

 
Comment by Faster Pussycat, Sell Sell
2009-06-01 13:59:05

Wow, this is the lamest attempt at trollness so far.

It almost makes you nostalgic when realtors used to march in fearlessly, caution thrown to the wind, and talk about “bitter renters”.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 19:57:16

“Wow, this is the lamest attempt at trollness so far.”

That is funny. I wish I had a smiley face to put here.

 
 
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 10:24:47

+1E6.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by packman
2009-06-01 10:32:46

+1E6

Soon to be +1E7 after inflation.

(Just to bridge a couple of fun subjects on the HBB) :)

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 12:11:54

“Soon to be +1E7 after inflation.”

LOL! :-) Nice one, packman!

 
 
 
Comment by Al
2009-06-01 11:33:38

Just out of curiosity, RW2Ns means?

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 11:56:43

What ever it means, I guess I was the sucker!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 09:49:32

Immigration puts hold on illegal in fatal bus crash
Suspect in accident that killed 4 kids identified as 24-year-old from Guatemala

——————————————————————————–
Posted: February 25, 2008
10:42 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Van driver who identified herself as Alainiss Morales, now identified by authorities as Olga Franco

Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement authorities have placed a hold on a woman who was driving a van that allegedly barreled through a stop sign and hit a school bus, killing four Minnesota school children.

The announcement came as Minnesota authorities confirmed the woman was identified as Olga Marina Franco, 24, from Guatemala. She first had given the name Alianiss Nunez Morales, and provided her age as 23, her home country Mexico.

The Lyon County attorney, Richard Maes, has charged the woman with four counts of criminal vehicular homicide, driving without a license and running a stop sign. But if and when those counts are resolved, she still faces custody, because of the paperwork filed by ICE to keep her behind bars, according to a report from Associated Press.

Federal officials confirm they have developed probable cause to believe she is an illegal alien, a status confirmed earlier by state officials.

Comment by Skip
2009-06-01 13:28:57

I guess vehicular homicide is not on the list of allowable infractions for illegal aliens.

Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 14:26:27

“I guess vehicular homicide is not on the list of allowable infractions for illegal aliens.”

I guess it is.

Josie Bluhm, 4, Killed By Illegal Alien Eleazar Rangel-Ochoa [Video]
By Digger

Josie Bluhm, a 4-year-old from Omaha, Nebraska, was killed when Eleazar Rangel-Ochoa ran through a red light in his Ford truck and smashed into the side of the Bluhm family mini-van. Little Josie was ejected from the vehicle and trapped under the bumper of the min-van. She later died from her injuries.
I am really at a loss for words after watching the video below. This happens every single day in this country and the legal system and politicians are doing nothing. They continue to give ilegal aliens driver’s licenses. They continue to allow illegal aliens to remain in our country after being convicted - Rangel-Ochoa had 3 previous drunk driving convictions from 2002. They continue to deport people and then don’t secure our borders so they just come right back in under different names. They continue to come up with excuses.

This may seem harsh, but I can only hope that one day the politicians and judges who allowed this animal to remain in our country - to kill this innocent child from a hard working and loving family - have their own children brutally killed at the hands of an illegal alien drunk driver, robber, burglar or thug. The gloves are off on nice speech. Anger needs to be expressed that this is being allowed to continue. There is no room for forgiveness when things are being done deliberately to put you - and those you love - knowingly in harm’s way.

Next it could be you or your child or family member.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 16:03:51

“The far left may have illegal aliens and welfare queens,”

It`s not just the far left, but the far left to the far right and everything in between that has done nothing about illegal aliens. As far as welfare queens Iam not really sure, is that like Peggy Joseph or an ACORN guy dressed up like a woman marching in a parade in San Francisco?

 
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 14:30:32

She’ll just get deported and then show back up a week later. These illegals don’t assimilate, they annihilate. It’s time we made the companies and individuals who are responsible for these people being here in the first place pay for their sins. Shut them down and fine them until they are penniless, or imprison them. These companies and individuals are destroying our country. If you’re using illegal labor to clean your house, mow your lawn, or tend to your garden, you’re the problem.

Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-01 17:02:12

I cut my lawn or the LL`s lawn, my wife and kids clean the house and we have no garden. I went through the Palm Beach County Police blotter wich has the bookings from the past few days. I counted 14 driving W.O. licence charges to what appear to be illegal aliens.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ahansen
2009-06-01 22:31:45

As opposed to this LEGAL citizen?

http://www.jimbyrd.com/welfare-aint-what-it-used-to-be

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-02 04:49:39

“The far left may have illegal aliens and welfare queens,”

Oh, that`s a welfare queen.

Polotics off. ahansen I hope you are feeling OK.
you are a pretty special person.

 
 
 
 
Comment by bananarepublic
2009-06-01 13:31:33

Surprise surprise. Bill O’Reilly has been going after Dr. Tiller since 2005, calling him a murderer, executioner, etc. This means Bill has more blood on his hands, and it is almost guaranteed that a Fox News viewer did this.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/05/31/tiller/

Comment by cobaltblue
2009-06-01 15:49:29

I’m sure a viewer from “The View” did it, which means Whoopi Goldberg has more blood on her hands, feet, and face.

Maybe Obama should personally arrest and convict her, ya think???

 
Comment by bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-02 08:00:24

Grr! I cannot stand Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity! Their Dark Ages social conservatism makes my blood boil! They stir up a lot of hatred from lawmakers too.

 
 
 
Comment by bananarepublic
2009-06-01 09:49:23

So…you want to blame someone for this mess?

Reagan did it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-01 09:58:41

Tried to post this late last week in response to Observer making an analogy of the economy as an out-of-control airplane; I liked it enough to repost when it didn’t make it through… :-)

———————-

“The market these days is day trader’s dream, wild up and down swings in the same day. It’s like a plane that is out of control and violently gyrating up and down while the pilot tries to regain control. You don’t know if the pilot will regain control and safely land the plane or will lose control and have it spiral into the ground.”

Here’s a better analogy: it’s like a plane that is on the edge of a stall, the stick-shaker is going like crazy, and the stick-pusher is pushing the stick forward to break the stall, but the pilot (Fed) is fighting it violently by pulling BACK on the stick—e.g. trying not to let the nose drop (RE prices) so that the plane can recover naturally.

If they would just relax their grip on the stick (e.g. stop manipulating interest rates, the MBS market, the treasuries market, and possibly other markets), the nose would drop all on its own, and then the plane would pick up speed naturally and be flying again.

The longer they fight it, the longer the stall. Will they stall it all the way to the ground?

 
Comment by darthrealtor
2009-06-01 11:08:10

GM up almost 10% now. Talk amongst yourselves! ;-)

Any holders of GM CDS’s out there? Something tells me that AIG (through the US taxpayer) is gonna paying out the nose for this one!

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 15:51:39

Muggy’s hot stove speculation on GM stock must be driving up the share price :-)

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 16:17:23

Stocktwit comment: mikeblair Jun. 01 at 6:53 PM # Proof of just how worthless your USDollars are: a share of $GM, a known bankrupt company, is still worth 3/4 of one.

 
Comment by Blano
2009-06-01 17:41:30

Whoever bought at 27 cents sure made out nicely.

 
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:09:16

Oil is up $2 a barrel. On what FANTASY are these people trading? Because, it sure has NOTHING to do with fundamentals, or demand. Just last week they were talking about touching $70 per barrel by the end of the year. End of the year? How about end of this week! This is EXACTLY the same thing that happened last year. Rampant speculation and market manipulation by deep pocketed Wall St. firms, turning oil into a vehicle of quick money, and at the expense of everyday people, and the economy as a whole. These are the same leeches who were on life support until they were shored up by taxpayer dollars. Sad, sad, sad times for this once great country.

Comment by Al
2009-06-01 11:36:12

The smart money is flailing around, trying to find some way of validating its existence. Mini-bubbles everywhere seems to be the new trick.

Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-01 15:21:16

Agreed. With nowhere to get any type of safe return, the only hope is to chase the latest trend up or down, or both, if you’re really savvy.

My bet is that those who predict “oil to $100″ and also those that predict “oil to $20″ are both right, because the bottom line is, virtually anything tradeable is now going to gyrate wildly in price. For the foreseeable future. Same could be said about most other commodities. Real Estate may even gyrate upward at some point for a while, but for now the trend remains clearly down.

The geniuses that gave us ZIRP no doubt have this all figured out, right?

Comment by CA renter
2009-06-02 04:19:31

This is exactly what the Fed wants, IMHO.

Keep rates artificially low for so long that all the savers/investors start reaching for yield again, going further out on the risk curve.

I’m hearing about lots of hard-money lending, and that this might be where all of these “all cash” buyers are coming from, in addition to the investment pools.

Even I’ve considered HM lending, as my liquid funds are back to earning sub-1%…again. (sigh) :(

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:12:57

It’s time to fire all of the politicians.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-01 11:20:43

I keep trying, but everyone else keeps re-electing them.

I think we need to fire the voters before we have a chance of firing the politicians.

 
 
Comment by DennisN
2009-06-01 11:31:27

I’m not sure what the DOW being up so much today really means.

GM has been swapped out for Cisco. (No surprise there.)

Citigroup has been swapped out for Travelers. I wonder why they needed to do this today?

I’m guessing a DOW component has never before been kicked out due to a bankruptcy.

Comment by DennisN
2009-06-01 11:41:32

Apparently the change is effective 8 June, so Dow Jones is making it up as they go along in regards the valuation of GM.

http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2009/06/01/gm-will-stay-in-djia-for-a-week-where-will-the-share-price-come-from/

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 11:57:41

“I’m not sure what the DOW being up so much today really means.”

I think it means there’s still WAY too much money sloshing around the system.

 
Comment by llcarlos
2009-06-01 14:26:21

CNBC reports that DeVry replaces GM in the DOW. That is a good choice as with so many unemployed the retraining industry will boom.

Comment by DennisN
2009-06-01 16:40:03

Carlos,
Straight from the horses . . . er, mouth. Cisco and Travelers.

http://www.dowjones.com/Pressroom/PressReleases/Other/US/2009/0601_US_DowJonesIndexes_9122.htm

I wonder how CNBC got it wrong.

 
 
 
Comment by VaBeyatch in Virginia Beach
2009-06-01 13:06:38

I went to pick up some 8″ Xenix floppies a guy was giving away. His neighborhood in Va Beach was really nice. For the heck of it, I pulled the general area up on Zillow. Little red houses cover the screen. Most are high 700’s+. The sheer amount of inventory when visualized like that is staggering. I guess everyone is waiting for a fool, or their speculation didn’t pan out. I make good money for the area (high than average household) and there is nothing that even comes close to tempting me.

 
Comment by mrktMaven
2009-06-01 13:55:28

Sell everything.
Oh, the humanity!
2002 200 day Mvng Avrg study.

Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-01 15:04:18

It seems the suckers are really pouring into the market right now.

Comment by Don't Know Nothin About Buyin No House
2009-06-01 18:44:41

Get into equities now or be priced out forever.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-01 14:21:57

Northwestern Mutual Makes First Gold Buy in 152 Years (Update2)
By Andrew Frye

June 1 (Bloomberg) — Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co., the third-largest U.S. life insurer by 2008 sales, has bought gold for the first time the company’s 152-year history to hedge against further asset declines.

“Gold just seems to make sense; it’s a store of value,” Chief Executive Officer Edward Zore said in an interview following his comments at a conference hosted by Standard & Poor’s in Brooklyn. “In the Depression, gold did very, very well.”

Northwestern Mutual has accumulated about $400 million in gold, and Zore said the price could double or even rise fivefold if the economy continues to weaken. Gold gained 10 percent last month, the most since November. The commodity has more than tripled since 2000, rising for eight straight years. Gold futures for August delivery slipped $4.80 to $975.50 at 4:03 p.m. in New York.

“The downside risk is limited, but the upside is large,” Zore said. “We have stocks in our portfolio that lost 95 percent.” Gold “is not going down to $90.”

Policyholder-owned Northwestern Mutual, based in Milwaukee, ranks third by 2008 life insurance premiums according to data from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. The data excludes annuities.

Comment by Blue Skye
2009-06-01 15:53:48

By his logic, $1000 will never go to $90 either.

One would hope their insurance comapny was not speculating in the metals markets. Policies are written in dollars, the policy holder takes the currency risk.

 
Comment by Blano
2009-06-01 17:39:40

“The downside risk is limited”

Heads up dude!!!!

 
 
Comment by llcarlos
2009-06-01 14:29:14

The bank just informed me that the interest rate on my unsecured line of credit is increasing by 1 percent. They are under pressure because there are too many deadbeats.

Comment by combotechie
2009-06-01 16:55:43

Another case for …

Oh, never mind.

 
 
Comment by whino
2009-06-01 14:51:01

Global Crisis ‘Inevitable’ Unless U.S. Starts Saving, Yu Says

June 1 (Bloomberg) — Another global financial crisis triggered by a loss of confidence in the dollar may be inevitable unless the U.S. saves more, said Yu Yongding, a former Chinese central bank adviser.

It’s “very natural” for the world to be concerned about the U.S. government’s spending and planned record fiscal deficit, Yu said in e-mailed comments yesterday relating to a visit to Beijing by U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

The Obama administration aims to reduce the fiscal deficit to “roughly” 3 percent of gross domestic product from a projected 12.9 percent this year, Geithner reaffirmed today. The treasury secretary added that China’s investments in U.S. financial assets are very safe, and that the Obama administration is committed to a strong dollar.

It may be helpful if “Geithner can show us some arithmetic,” said Yu. “We need to know how the U.S. government can achieve this objective.”

He questioned whether there would be enough demand to meet U.S. debt issuance this year.

Referring to the Federal Reserve “as the world’s biggest junk investor,” and to Chairman Ben S. Bernanke as “helicopter Ben,” Yu said the Fed has dropped “tons of money from the sky since the subprime crisis.”

“The balance sheet of the Federal Reserve not only has expanded like mad but is also ridden with ‘rubbish’ assets,” he said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aCV0pFcAFyZw&refer=asia

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 15:50:26

Yu speaks like a HBB reader…

Comment by whino
2009-06-01 17:37:59

His audience also responded like HBB readers. Although, mine would include some rotten veggies too. :-D

Geithner tells China its dollar assets are safe

BEIJING (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Monday reassured the Chinese government that its huge holdings of dollar assets are safe and reaffirmed his faith in a strong U.S. currency.

“Chinese assets are very safe,” Geithner said in response to a question after a speech at Peking University, where he studied Chinese as a student in the 1980s.

His answer drew loud laughter from his student audience, reflecting skepticism in China about the wisdom of a developing country accumulating a vast stockpile of foreign reserves instead of spending the money to raise living standards at home.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE54U0W320090601?sp=true

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-01 22:58:37

I had to check that Bloomberg link, to make sure it did not some how secretly connect back to The Onion…

Great to read about a Chinese central bank adviser with a senses of humor.

 
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-06-01 14:58:10

Yahoo finance
why are bankers given more of a hearing? They have more money to spend on Congress, as the article points out:

‘Through political action committees and their own employees, securities and investment firms gave $152 million in political contributions from 2007 to 2008, according to the most recent Federal Election Commission data. The top five companies — Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS - News), Citigroup (NYSE: C - News), JP Morgan Chase (NYSE: JPM - News), Bank of America (NYSE: BAC - News) and Credit Suisse (NYSE: CS - News) — gave $22.7 million and spent more than $25 million combined on lobbying activities in that period, according to election data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.’

The bankers argue that too much regulation will slow down financial innovation. That very well may be true, but how many recent financial innovations have really helped the economy or investors? The only one I can really think of off-hand are ETFs. Most of the others have just been ways to make financial transactions more complex and opaque. Just how in the long run has the economy been strengthened by innovations like CDO’s, CDO’s squared or cubed, CDS’s, CMBS’s? They mostly serve to lure people into investments they do not truly understand (but which they get into because they are ’sophisticated’). They also make it possible for Wall Street to rake in huge fees.

We desperately need more transparency, not less. Putting derivatives like CDS’s on an exchange with a central clearing house is a good idea, but the Geithner proposal would exempt customized swaps. If that happens, it is almost a guarantee that with in five years 90% of all derivatives will be specifically ‘customized’ so they can avoid being regulated and can be hidden from regulators and investors.

Even after we have subsidized the banks to the tune of hundreds of billions to help clean up the mess they made, they are pushing hard for the right to make more and even bigger messes in the future. They have the money to buy the ear of Congress and the Administration (of either party). Bank regulation is the sort of down-in-the-weeds boring — but extremely important — issue that most people quickly lose interest in. It is exactly the sort of issue where the special interests can have the greatest sway and do the most damage to the common good.

Citizens who believe these measures will further put at risk the country and the futures of our children and grandchildren have the option to get in touch with their senators and representatives and let them know that what the banks want is bad for the country. Perhaps Congress will listen to demands that we have more oversight and transparency in the markets.

Wow what an optomist.

Comment by lavi d
2009-06-01 15:15:07

Wow what an optomist.

Every time I see “optimist” misspelled as “optomist” I immediately think of “octomom”

How about “octomist” - someone who has eight reasons to be happy?

“Reasons to be Cheerful, Part Three”

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-01 16:18:57

I spent 4 hours today at a doctors office sorting through an unpaid claim related to my wife’s pregnancy two years ago. Our health car system is horrifying.

Comment by desertdweller
2009-06-01 21:42:31

Muggy, did your wife have that cute baby in the car?

‘health car system’?

Yes, I am also having serious issues with our lovely deducted health ins system. BS. Crapola.

 
 
Comment by desertdweller
2009-06-01 21:41:13

Did anyone decide that ‘we’ will be having a HBB Meetup in the SD area on June 3rd?

email me at ellisisland1AThotmailDOTcom..

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-02 07:34:43

Palm Beach County foreclosure filing fees shoot from $301 to as much as $1,906
June 1st, 2009 by Jeff Ostrowski
Filing foreclosure in Palm Beach County just got a lot more expensive.

On Friday, filing a foreclosure in Palm Beach County Circuit Court cost $301. Today, the prices are way up:

A foreclosure filing for a loan of $50,000 or less now costs $401.
For loans of $50,000 to $250,000, the fee is $906.
And for claims of more than $250,000, the fee is $1,906.
“The increases are part of legislation initiated by Florida judges and sponsored by Rep. Ellyn Bogdanoff and Sen. Ken Pruitt,” the Palm Beach County Clerk’s office said in a statement. “The state, not the Clerk & Comptroller’s office, will receive the additional revenue the fee increases are expected to generate.”

UPDATE: Lenders pay the higher fees, but RealtyTrac’s Rick Sharga says lenders likely will pass the fees on to borrowers (if the foreclosure doesn’t go through) or investors (if the bank takes back the property.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-02 20:33:34

aa

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-04 13:28:07

Alabama County Seeks SEC Help in Crisis as Suit Looms (Update1)
By William Selway

June 4 (Bloomberg) — Jefferson County, Alabama, asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to help it escape bond deals that have left the county struggling to avoid bankruptcy for more than a year.

The appeal follows the disclosure by JPMorgan Chase & Co. that it may be sued by the SEC for its work on bond and interest-rate swap sales for Jefferson County’s sewer system in 2002 and 2003. The financings converted $3 billion of the debt to floating-rate bonds, a bid to drive down its borrowing costs that backfired because of the financial crisis on Wall Street.

Jefferson County, home to Birmingham, has been unable to win backing from creditors or state lawmakers for plans to restructure the debts. In a letter to SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro yesterday, County Commission President Bettye Fine Collins asked that creditors be pressed to accept a deal if they committed wrongdoing.

“In light of the enormous harm and damage to Jefferson County and its citizens from any violation of the securities laws determined by the SEC, a simple monetary settlement is not likely to fix the underlying problem,” Collins wrote.

Jefferson County’s bond deals unraveled after insurers that guaranteed the bonds against default lost their top credit ratings because of losses on securities linked to subprime mortgage loans. When investors dumped the county’s floating-rate bonds, interest rates surged as high as 10 percent. Most of the debt is now held by New York-based JPMorgan, Bank of America Corp. of Charlotte, North Carolina, and others who agreed to act as buyers of last resort.

 
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