June 6, 2009

Bits Bucket For June 6, 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

293 Comments »

Comment by Leighsong
2009-06-06 02:13:07

Good Morning HBBers!

Happy Saturday!

Leigh ;)

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 06:54:34

And it is always a good morning when I can listen to Scott Simon make fun of Miley Cyrus on NPR….

 
Comment by Rancher
2009-06-06 06:58:34

Ahhh yes! And a good morning to you Leigh.

On my second cup of good brew sitting at my desk and watching the deer trying to get at the new
shoots on my new orchard. Chicken wire is such
a marvelous product when you have two lazy dogs.

Comment by Carl Morris
2009-06-06 07:13:21

So…you’re saying nature can be hell on green shoots?

Comment by Rancher
2009-06-06 07:49:20

Yes, but the government is worse. At least mine are green, not brown.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 02:25:45

Good morning everyone!!!!

I am saving money left and right. Does anyone have an opinion on gold or platinum? I am thinking of buying some pure coins or some of that bullion from Monex. Anyone know of a good dealer? I think the economy will get a little worse and platinum will rise. It used to be $2000 an ounce and it is now $1200. Plus, the coins look soooo neat! Any opinions? Plus, I am putting as much money under my matteress as will fit! Passbook savings from USAA is the way to go!

Comment by Bad Chile
2009-06-06 03:09:06

I used apmex to satisfy my physical gold craving back in the days of alad, worked out quite well with the wire transfer from USAA, fast shipping.

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 03:32:16

What Bad Chile said, I have been using APMEX for years, no problems, ever.

Consider a few Krugerrands.

Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-06-06 06:38:13

I’ve also had pleasant transactions with APMEX and wouldn’t hesitate to use them again.

 
 
Comment by Cassanda
2009-06-06 04:46:26

I am a frequent flier at www dot bulliondirect dot com.
No problems, low spreads. But be forewarned: service can be a bit slow, which can be really scary to a newbie.

Comment by bobby c
2009-06-06 06:18:34

I too use APMEX but you can find a list of dealers here with reviews http://goldsilverchat.com/BBchat/viewforum.php?f=40

BTW, buy gold or silver. Platinum and Palladium are industrial metals, even though I believe you should be fine because they’ll be needed over time, gold and silver have been real money for the past 5000 years.

 
 
Comment by combotechie
2009-06-06 06:50:46

“I think the economy will get a little worse and platinum will rise.”

I suggest you carefully think about what you just wrote.

 
Comment by mikey
2009-06-06 07:34:56

Sheesh Stpn2me,

I remember humping 50 lbs plus of equipment and an old 23.5 lb “Prick Twenty-Five radio”(PRC-25), that could bearly transmit to the next ridge 200 yards away on a good day and here you’re on the internet wheeling and dealing in Savings Bonds, gold and precious metals and USAA savings accounts many thousands of miles away.

I LOVE it!

War is Hell but ain’t technology…. wonderful :)

Comment by Olympiagal
2009-06-06 17:42:10

Yar, I’m rather fascinated by this situation myself.

 
 
Comment by CorpsmanUSN
2009-06-06 09:02:15

Stpn2me,
I am a USAA member as well…what is passbook?

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 09:57:55

USAA website shows three types of savings account: regular, Performance First and Youth. Rates max out at 0.9%. Bleh.

 
 
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 02:28:09

I’m also started saving EE and I bonds. I know they arent the best investment, but since I am 40 now, when I get 60, they will start maturing one a month. At least I wont go broke!

Comment by Cassanda
2009-06-06 04:51:53

I bought I’s and EE’s a while back. The I’s were a really good choice, as interest rates were falling. I’m still wondering about the EEs. Seemed to me at the time that the EEs, pathetic interest rate that they were, might pan out in a deflationary environment.

Comments please?

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 12:39:03

I haven’t bought EE’s for several years. I was upset when they lengthened the time to get the guaranteed face value. I think it went from 17 years to 20 years.

Note some of your I bonds you bought the last few years may be earning 0 interest these six months. The guaranteed fixed rate does not seem to be what the U.S. government promised. They did mention you will never get less than 0%. So the CPI-U can be “deemed” negative, and the government will add it (the variable rate) to the fixed rate. If the sum is negative you will get 0%.

We have been saying the CPI-U calculation is bogus. So it’s always good to have other inflation protected assets such as stocks and precious metals.

However the compounding tax deferral advantage of I bonds and EE bonds is a much better deal than what you’d get out of other treasuries. So I would not boycot savings bonds altogether. I will buy I bonds again when the fixed rate is not zero!

 
Comment by robin
2009-06-07 00:41:38

Schwab Bank Variable Savings currently at 1.75%/Yawn!

 
 
Comment by combotechie
2009-06-06 06:54:50

Savings bonds are exempt from state taxes which makes especially good if you live in a state, such as California, where the state taxes are high.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 09:48:05

Hey Stpn2me, EE and I bonds are great. However for this 6 month period I bonds are paying 0 interest. So they are serving as merely a hedge against deflation and certainly are better than a depreciating value on a house!

They are wonderful as a balance against your platinum and gold and silver.

Doug Casey had a book a decade or two back and presented a risk neutral portfolio that would be a warm fuzzy feeling to have in days like these. Some of that was in government securities and some in precious metals.

I think you have a good idea, but you also need some of your assets in a low cost stock index fund such as Vanguard’s total market.

I bought several hundred silver maple leafs from Monex several years ago. No problem from them. That was back when silver was somewhere between $5 and $7 per ounce. Still have the boxes of silver.

Ah, it’s a sunny day in L.A.! Carpe Diem!

 
Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 12:02:39

Stepn,

I want to mention a fixed-income strategy that assumes neither party will allow another Lehman-type failure. Consider Morgan Stanley bonds, which for five years yield more than 6%. They won’t do well in a high-inflation environment, but if deflation continues, there might even be a quick-profit trade available.
And, MS doesn’t have quite the “toxic asset” problem that Citi and BofA are dealing with.

 
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 03:12:18

You have a webpage? Will they let you buy one ounce at a time and mail it to you? I am very interested in this….

Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 03:15:41

Nix that, I found it, thanks!!!

Comment by Bad Chile
2009-06-06 03:27:17

No worries - sorry - still didn’t have my moring coffee yet!
www (dot) apmex (dot) com

It works out better if you wait until you get a few ounces - shipping is a flat rate after a thousand, and add in whatever USAA charges for the wire transfer. They update prices real time which can be nerve wracking when purchasing!

PS: Thanks for your time in Afghanistan - Looks like a beautiful country based on the photos I’ve seen - I’ve done some design work for facilities at Bagram and Kandahar.

Comment by cereal
2009-06-06 07:10:50

My take is to hold onto your cash IF buying a house is the prize. Your loot is gaining value at the approximate rate of the Case/Schiller chart - moving inversely of course.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by measton
2009-06-06 11:15:43

BINGO

Inflation will kill housing until it translates into higher income, and even then it may kill housing as lending will go into the crapper and needs will cost a lot more.

Deflation will kill everything

Hold onto cash if you plan on buying a house, you can’t loose.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 03:48:47

Chile,

Kandahar stinks to high heaven as you know. That poop pond is an awful man-made creation! I never believed something could smell so bad!

The country is beautiful only in the morning before the 130+ heat and dust storms…..

And of course before the taliban want to play :)

Otherwise, it’s a paradise…LOL

Comment by Bad Chile
2009-06-06 04:16:08

Sorry - I’m a fan of high desert landscapes…I imagine it is deep in the suck othertimes.

One of the things I was involved in was the design of…get this…some of the sewage lagoons. Kid you not. Nice low-tech waste disposal mechanisms.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 04:03:49

Krugman Says No Signs of ‘V-Shaped’ Economic Recovery (Update1)
By Dara Doyle and Louisa Nesbitt

June 5 (Bloomberg) — Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman said the world’s economy is showing “not a hint” of a “V-shaped” recovery marked by a swift decline and revival.

The economy is “stabilizing, not recovering,” Krugman, an economics professor at Princeton University in New Jersey, said today at a conference in Dublin. “Things are getting worse more slowly.”

Data this month showed that the contraction in Europe’s manufacturing and service industries is easing and confidence in the economic outlook is rising. The U.S. lost fewer jobs in May than forecast, a report today showed. The International Monetary Fund says its forecast for global growth of 1.9 percent next year is based on the premise of a healthy financial system.

“We have made the transition from sheer panic to chronic anxiety,” Krugman said, adding he’s has a “hard time” seeing what might drive a “full” economic recovery.

U.S. payrolls fell by 345,000 in May, the smallest decrease in eight months, after a revised 504,000 loss in April, the Labor Department said today in Washington.

The U.S. policy response to the economic crisis has been “extraordinarily aggressive,” Krugman said. “Unfortunately, it hasn’t been enough.” The country will need “some form of new taxes” to bring down its deficit, he added.

Service industries in the U.S. shrank at a slower pace in May while job losses mounted, indicating that any economic recovery will be slow to develop.

“The euro zone, like the United States, I fear, could be facing kind of a lost decade,” Krugman said.

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 06:40:24

“We have made the transition from sheer panic to chronic anxiety,” Krugman said…

Ah, Krugman, bless his sceptical heart. Unfortunately, I don’t see a lot of chronic anxiety. I see people positive that redemption is around the corner since the stock market is going up and everyone knows that once the stock market goes up the recession is automatically over 6 months later. I know that it is hard for people - well, at least Americans - to be gloomy for extended periods, especially during barbeque season. We don’t seem to have it in us to keep being scared when things are still bad but not quite as bad as they were 4 months ago.

Why?

Is it just getting used to it?

Is it persistant innumeracy?

MSM just deciding that they need a new “product” to tout?

Is the stimulous spending actually hitting the streets yet? I’m pretty sceptical about this one….

I’m just not sure

Talked to a friend last night. She got laid off. NYC transactional attorney and fantastically good at what she does plus fluent in enough languages to be more valuable than most. Said there just wasn’t enough work. She has had an interview for another job that she would be perfect for, but she isn’t the only candidate so no guarantees. We were out of work together after the last recession. Freaks me out. Very glad to be where I am.

Comment by Zombie Banks
2009-06-06 07:07:20

“Unfortunately, it hasn’t been enough.” The country will need “some form of new taxes” to bring down its deficit, he added.

Stop ruining my mornings. These new taxes will only go to the czars.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2009-06-06 07:59:43

“The country will need “some form of new taxes “to bring down its deficit,he added.”

Funny how you don’t hear the experts saying that we need some form of new jobs to replace the ones created by housing and commercial construction and debt ,or jobs lost to out-sourcing and slave labor in the last 15 years . Guess we can all get the 20k
Wal-Mart jobs they are offering and buy 500k houses with jobs like that and new taxes can be raised based on that Wal-Mart low wage job base.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 08:19:17

Umm… the biggest point of the stimulous package is to create/save jobs. The infrastructure building, to the extent that it is actually accomplished, is the method, but the idea is to create jobs.

That is also the whole point of the bailouts of GM and Chrysler.

I don’t see a lack in calls for spending to create jobs.

 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 08:56:36

new taxes can be raised based on that Wal-Mart low wage job base ??

Nope….IMO, new taxes will come in two forms;

#1…Elimination or severe reductions in tax deductible benefits…(See Mortgage Interest deduction)…

#2…Get ready for a VAT….Its coming folks…It will be progressive and hit EVERYTHING including the service sector…

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2009-06-06 09:13:16

The degree of job creating is the question ,it needs to be massive . Saving jobs that aren’t needed by government spending isn’t the answer either and its just as bad as trying to keep real estate prices high . A total re-look at the system that has failed is necessary .

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 12:19:48

Oh, I make no claims that is what is already in place will be enough to work, but it is there for jobs.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 13:05:53

Also it’s time to get rid of the tax deduction for having dependents. That and getting rid of the mortgage interest rate deduction will do far more to slow down environmental destruction than anything Al Sore proposed. It will take a generation to show the effects.

My sisters are single renters and two of those sisters do not have chodren. For years, they have not been enjoying the social engineer tax breaks that encouraged baby making and house buying. They have little savings. The money they used to subsidize the baby factories and stucco boxes could be used for financial security for my sisters.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 13:07:23

chodren - meant to be “children.”

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 13:20:25

tax deduction for having dependents

Deduction? Hah…they get a tax CREDIT these days, doncha know.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 14:43:26

Okay, credit. The $ amount is the same whether you call it deduction or credit. So don’t get all tight-pantied about terminology, okay?

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 16:13:40

So don’t get all tight-pantied about terminology, okay?

I’ll get tight-pantied and you’ll like it, BiLA :) And it’s not the same….claiming a dependent is one thing. Claiming the child tax credit is another.

Deduction only benefits you if you have income. Credit is paid out, regardless (that’s my understanding)

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 19:53:08

I’m sorry Drumminj, I did not mean to be mean…

If the parent of dependents pays lower taxes because he has dependents, it’s an unfair advantage. It’s not neutral, and you want some neutrality or fairness. Taxes should not encourage or discourage anything.. Right?

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 22:30:08

Bill in LA, we agree….and I didn’t think you were being mean.

You and I agree on this issue. I was just pointing out that deducting dependents is one thing. But having an actual tax credit is a considerably greater advantage (ie a 5000 deduction vs a 5000 credit. One is 5000 in your pocket, the other is 5000*your tax rate in your pocket).

As a single taxpayer (and previous homeowner), it frustrates me to subsidize other’s sprog to such a degree.

 
Comment by desertdweller
2009-06-06 22:33:13

I want to stop paying taxes for education because so far I am getting a bad product for my monies.

Since all those idiot children of idiot parents are getting schooling because of you and I paying taxes on their being breeders, well, that just aint fair.

 
 
 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 08:47:59

NYC transactional attorney and fantastically good at what she does plus fluent in enough languages ?

Well…There is the problem….She actually had the audacity to get a advanced degree…Should have just gone to work for the government or better yet AIG or GM…

Sarcasm off…Seriously, its sad to see someone this talented struggle for a job…

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 09:18:36

It pains me too. I expect she will land on her feet as she usually does, but it may take some time. I am under the impresion her husband’s business is still doing well which is great, but I don’t think there is much chance they can support their mortgage on his income alone. I bet they have enough saved to last quite a while, but even substantial savings are not infinite.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 09:52:00

Polly:

Finally maybe they will live below their means. Work as dried up all over America.

We are all searching for what is next. Sure “infrastructure” is great but how many people like your lawyer friend can stand outside in heat snow and bad weather making $20hr to hold a stop sign at a construction site?

I would like the draft brought back, it would force our Illiterate hip hop kids into the service and stop a lot the garbage.

We should also declare:

the Era of Dumb and Dumber is OVER!

—————————————————
but I don’t think there is much chance they can support their mortgage on his income alone

Krugman said, adding he’s has a “hard time” seeing what might drive a “full” economic recovery.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 10:14:27

He owns a successful business which won’t support their mortgage? What kind of mortgage are we talking about?!

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 11:02:14

Big. I don’t know what she was making, but since first year associates make $160K in NYC she must have been pulling down well north of $200K. There aren’t too many couples who could ignore that sort of income when buying a house. They had a substantial downpayment (over 25% I think) and the loan itself was reasonable on just her income, but I don’t know if it is reaonable on just his. And not really my business, either.

 
Comment by oc-ed
2009-06-07 00:38:13

I imagine she got a severance package and can coast for bit if needed. But in NYC her unenjoyment will not even come close to her monthly housing costs. I am in a similar spot here in CA. I have less than three weeks left and then I am unemployed after 7 years with this company and 22 years in the profession. I have a Masters, worked at NASA/JSC in Robotics and then in Cellular. I have numerous technology achievements including author and developer of the wireless amber alert prototype for the http://www.wirelessamberalert.org system in place today.

I have a handful of decent leads, but no firm offers. I rent and have savings and got a package coming. I have already simplified the budget and have no debt. Since things are so bad I plan to spend my summer cleaning and organizing and also take what may be my last affordable road trip with my 11 year old. Of course in each major city we drive through I will arrange an interview somehow to offset the costs next April.

At summers end after my son starts school I will downsize to a rental that costs less than what I will get from unenjoyment to reduce the burn rate. I look at it this way, I can get all bent out of shape about how bad the job market is, or I can keep putting myself out there, but focus on using the time off productively until something comes around. I have a good network and am optimistic overall. My Grand Father used to say that a job hunt was a long string of no’s punctuated with a yes.

Heck, I may finally have the time to work on some inventions I have on the shelves and even throw the HBBQ party I want to throw for y’all down here in SoCal.

 
 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2009-06-06 09:51:35

“NYC transactional attorney and fantastically good at what she does plus fluent in enough languages to be more valuable than most. ”

Sounds like there is a future for her in helping foreign investors in bankrputcy workouts. Gonna be a lot of that.

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 11:07:47

Not a bad idea. This most recent place had her advising their real estate department on the implications of corporate law on all the securitized real estate deals they were taking apart. At least, that is what I think it was.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 10:12:32

I think it depends upon the circles you run in, Polly. I happen to know a fair share of tradesmen, and people who’s jobs were tied to housing. Many of these people and their spouses have been let go or, in the case of a few, are contractors who are not working because they are bidding on very few jobs and not getting them. They don’t seem optimistic, but rather filled with anxiety and even fear. I actually try to maintain somewhat of a positive attitude (which I do not hold) regarding the economy when I talk with them about things, because they’re really hurting.

I’m very worried for a long time friend in northern CA who stands to lose everything because of the meltdown. He’s a commercial contractor, and there’s just no work anymore. He had contracts to build gas stations, and those were canceled, and his loan was called for the house he was building for his family. Last time I saw him, he looked like he could cry. He’s trying to land a job for another company, but it’s slim pickings.

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 14:15:43

There is too much luck involved in this economy. Entirely too much.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-06 11:20:49

“Freaks me out. Very glad to be where I am.”

polly, you are making Krugman’s point! Even you, with a stable job, are feeling the anxiety. Now imagine what those with less stables jobs are feeling. Chronic anxiety is not a bad description, IMHO.

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 11:28:34

You are right, of course. It is just the Beltway buzz that makes me think that no one else is upset. I live outside, but work inside and there are a lot of people around here who just don’t see the problem, or at least act like they don’t.

Green shoots, Dow up, houses moving, blah, blah, blah…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by 20910
2009-06-06 16:54:49

I agree with the Beltway Buzz point.

On the one hand, two co-workers of my SO just sold their homes — one a house in DC and one a cookie cutter townhome in NOVA (and they went on to buy another house). They see no, hear no, speak no recession.

OTOH - SO’s firm announced across the board 10% pay cuts, a good friend of ours was just laid off (MBA type working for DC environmental thingamajiggy bizness) close friends who are reporters are being fired, taking pay cuts, working longer & harder since there are fewer warm bodies.

So I think it does matter if you have been personally affected, but also the main thing is what you are predisposed to believe. i.e. if you want to believe in fairy tales, you will only believe the positive news. These people remind me of the “Secret” — you say enough positive things — it will come true, say Beezlebub three times and the devil will appear!

 
 
 
Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 12:09:28

Polly, I shouldn’t razz you, because I usually like your comments, but

“Is it the persisant innumeracy?”…

Nope, it’s the persistEnt misspelling of “stimulus.”

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 12:22:00

:) or is that ;)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 04:24:37

CLEARWATER — Clerk of Court Ken Burke gave 39 employees pink slips Friday as spending cuts begin to pare the ranks of Pinellas County workers.

Another 40 employes lost their jobs in layoffs at Pinellas Business Technology Services this week. They were forced to immediately leave the county agency for security reasons.

On Monday, more than 200 additional employees will learn that they will lose their jobs by the fall in notices sent by County Administrator Bob LaSala.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/workinglife/article1007835.ece

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2009-06-06 06:58:59

This is really good news. I had planned to leave Tampa and move closer to work in Pinellas County in 2002 when the “boom” started………multiple builds, “shortage of housing”, “economic fundamentals”, “rich” baby boomers wanting 2nd and 3rd homes, etc, etc, etc. NAR lies and misinformation to no end.
I decided, at the time, that housing was already 20% overpriced and would wait a year or 2. Next year it went up 20% more, the following year 30% again. Then 2006 came and the STALL hit. Then 2007 saw the first declines, but of course, it was just 6 months from “recovery”, ……………for the last 2 years.

Now, prices are dropping, and another 280 government workers are unemployed.
They may not be making payments for much longer, either.
I am holding on to a job where 80% of our workforce has been laid off. That’s right..80%.

If i can outlast those government workers, i may be able to finally move nearer to the job.
Hopefully, i too, will still have one. But i will be buying for cash from savings. So, i won’t be worried about making a payment i can’t afford.

Comment by Zombie Banks
2009-06-06 07:11:23

Cash from savings could become the next well for weath tax

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 09:12:29

You mean just making everybody cough up 2% of whatever they have in the bank as of December 31st each year?

No chance. None at all. They can’t risk people taking out cash and keeping it in the modern equivalent of a mattress. Enforcement would be next to impossible. There is a reason the only wealth taxes we have are real property based (can’t hide it) or occur at moments of wealth transfers (large gifts and large estates).

National sales tax much more likely.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by krazy bill
2009-06-06 09:30:18

And yet…
If the purpose of the state is to protect lives and property, doesn’t it make sense that wealth be taxed regularly?
And if my total wealth is 10X, shouldn’t my annual tax be 10 times that of some poor schlub whose wealth is only X?

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 09:36:58

shouldn’t my annual tax be 10 times that of some poor schlub whose wealth is only X?

In terms of $ amount, sure. as far as tax rate? no.

I agree with your statement. Same reason I’m not a fan of “progressive” taxation. Someone who earns more already pays more in taxes assuming a fixed tax rate. How can you justify taxing them at a *higher* rate as well? (yes, I’m sure there are plenty of retorts. We probably don’t need to go down this path again :)

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 09:53:01

Zombie banks,

You are a scare monger. Don’t be paranoid! You don’t notice, but millions of Americans are at the tipping point to revolution against taxes and big government. We will throw the rascals out in 2010.

Besides, your scenario requires a totalitarian system in which jackbooted thugs invade our homes to get the cash under out mattresses.

Yes, there are sickos in America who want this to happen, but they are too few to make their wishes come true.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 10:18:36

“We will throw the rascals out in 2010.”

Methinks you’re too optimistic. The sheeple will, again, vote for ol’ mushmouth Barney Frank since he headed off the closing of that GM factory for his constituents. Other Senators and Congresscritters will claim victories based on pork barrel spending or other shenanigans. Same as it ever was…

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 10:20:38

“If the purpose of the state is to protect lives and property, doesn’t it make sense that wealth be taxed regularly?
And if my total wealth is 10X, shouldn’t my annual tax be 10 times that of some poor schlub whose wealth is only X?”

No. The only tax that makes sense is the “equal” tax, whereby every voting age citizen pays the same DOLLAR amount per annum. Everyone is entitled to an equal service from the gov’t, so everyone should pay the same. If the rich want additional protection for their assets, they can happily pay private security services to provide that.

Furthermore, the amount of the equal tax should be determined by popular referendums, not by actions of the legislature.

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 11:35:02

There is a GM factory in Massachusetts? In Barney Frank’s district? Really? I grew up in Frank’s district (well, it was Margaret Heckler’s district at the time) and I had no idea there was a GM factory there. Maybe in Stoughton? Anyway, area is mostly bedroom communities where people commute to Boston or 128 or 495 loops. Not very industrial.

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 11:44:05

Wow, Polly, you’re quite charged today. I misspoke as I should have said GM parts center instead of GM factory. My apologies, though it changes nothing about my point.

 
Comment by measton
2009-06-06 11:48:03

1. We already have a tax on money in the bank, it’s called inflation, the tax just isn’t working right now but it will in the future.

“I’m not a fan of “progressive” taxation. Someone who earns more already pays more in taxes assuming a fixed tax rate. How can you justify taxing them at a *higher* rate as well?

2. “assuming a fixed tax rate” BIG assumption there and absolutely not true in the US. As pointed out by many here the effective tax rate for the elite is less than the upper middle and in some cases middle class.

The only tax that makes sense is the “equal” tax, whereby every voting age citizen pays the same DOLLAR amount per annum. Everyone is entitled to an equal service from the gov’t, so everyone should pay the same

3. “Everyone is entitled to equal service” Don’t make me laugh
Military contractors, actually any one who contracts with the gov gets much more than average citizens. What about Wallstreet’s bailout.

Do people really think that someone who earns minimum wage should pay the same rate as Anthony Mozilo, Ken Lay or any of the other wealth strippers in this country? How about Bill Gates or others with wealth gained via monopoly/oligopoly. How about Buffett? with wealth gained via Moody’s, or mandated insurance now getting bailed out.

We should tax investments like income especially for CEO’s and Hedge Fund Managers ect. We should add a few more tax brackets for those making over 1 million and those over 10million.

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 12:50:17

“Everyone is entitled to equal service”

I’m saying that’s how things SHOULD be. If you don’t like bailouts, wasteful gov’t contracts, etc., then work to eliminate them. Don’t compound the problem by taxing people unequally.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 13:04:01

Do people really think that someone who earns minimum wage should pay the same rate as Anthony Mozilo, Ken Lay or any of the other wealth strippers in this country?

Sure, why not? Why should someone who makes more pay a higher rate? I can buy paying more overall, but you base your argument on the idea it’s a given that those who earn more not only should pay MORE in absolute terms, but also in % terms. I’d like to understand the basis of this assumption, as I think the correct “default” is to treat everyone equally.

“assuming a fixed tax rate” BIG assumption there and absolutely not true in the US. As pointed out by many here the effective tax rate for the elite is less than the upper middle and in some cases middle class.

You’re introducing a second issue here. Progressive tax rate is one issue. Tax loopholes is another. We can discuss both, but if we try to do it at the same time we’ll get nowhere. Can we first cover progressive taxation of wage income?

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 13:21:26

If we should be taxed, the only good tax to have is the fair tax, which is the sales tax. There will be an exemption indexed to inflation for low income people so that it won’t be regressive. It will not punish income generation, but encourage it. It’s a tax on consumption.

I also like that it does not put one class against another class. It will remove most deductions, including mortgage interest deductions and deductions for having dependents. So it won’t be unfair to single renters. It won’t encourage a population explosion, nor will it encourage overbuilding houses.

Moreover it will mean no capital gain taxes and no taxes on dividends. It will encourage saving and discourage consumption. In fact, we are getting used to an economy of greatly reduced consumption anyway. So we will be prepared for creating an economy based on producing.

After this four year or eight year stint with socialism we will reverse a lot of the socialist policies and get rid of the income tax and replace it with the fair tax and legalize victimless crimes.

Get ready for morning in America, not “mourning” in America.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 13:28:50

There will be an exemption indexed to inflation for low income people so that it won’t be regressive.

I know I brought this up several weeks ago. I still can’t get my head around this…

why can it only be “progressive” or “regressive”. Is there no such thing as “neutral”? Wouldn’t a flat/fair tax be neutral? If those who earn more pay a higher % is progressive, than those who earn less paying a higher % should be regressive, no? So if everyone’s paying the same %, that’d fall inbetween and be…neutral, no?

Whenever this conversation comes up it’s apparent there’s a clear bias that those who make less money should pay less in taxes, both in terms of $$$ amount and also tax rate, by default. I just don’t buy that - I’d like to see an argument made on moral grounds.

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 13:54:36

The tax policy argument for progressive rates is that the first $20K you earn is much more necessary to your survival and your ability to take care of yourself than, say, the 5th or 13th or 500th $20K you earn. That first $20K is barely enough to live in a dry warm place and eat moderately healthy food in most of the country. The 5th is awfully useful in many places but not required to keep dry and fed anywhere I can think of. By the time you get to the 13th or especially the 500th, you don’t need it and since the tax money has to come from somewhere, people who have that much money can certainly afford it. Similar to the arguments in favor of the estate tax. The moment of your death is certainly the moment you need the money the least, especially as you can leave all of your estate to your spouse with no estate tax at all - for tax purposes, spouses are considered a single economic unit.

This philosophy, of course, would require tax indexing to cost of living in different areas which we don’t have and which would be nearly impossible to administer, but that is the idea behind it.

 
Comment by cashedin05
2009-06-06 17:40:54

“Furthermore, the amount of the equal tax should be determined by popular referendums, not by actions of the legislature.”

Mob rule. No thanks.

 
Comment by cashedin05
2009-06-06 17:58:51

We already tax cigarettes to the point where they are $8 per pack. Let’s see what else our “friendly” referendum voters and elected officials can demonize and tax out of existence. Perhaps it will be something you like.

Wine - Alchoholics are bad
Beer - Same as wine
Fast Food - High fat and sugar/low nutrition
Beef - Greenhouse gas/have to kill the cow
Pork/Lamb etc. - Same as beef
Poultry - Also has a face
Casinos - Gamblers are bad
Carbohydrates (all) - diabetes/weight gain
Ipods - Ear Damage
Cell Phones - Cancer
Real Grass - Allergies
Caffeine - diuretic/stimulant

Until one day we are all stuck in the house holding our Johnsons wondering what the hell happened.

 
Comment by desertdweller
2009-06-06 22:44:46

WOrks for me !

 
 
Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-06 09:49:25

Ummm… we already have such a thing. It’s been government policy our entire lives, because it’s the easiest tax of all to collect. It’s called inflation.

I understand that there are solid (purely economic) arguments on both sides of the coin on why a little inflation or deflation might be preferable. From a political/government point of view, though, deflation is absolute suicide, no matter who’s in charge.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by skroodle
2009-06-06 08:27:04

If there’s a hurricane, you might not get that chance:

Foreclosed Florida homes considered for hurricane housing
A Florida emergency management chief wants to use the state’s foreclosed homes to house hurricane refugees.
BY MARC CAPUTO AND SHANNON COLAVECCHIO
Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau

TALLAHASSEE — The state’s top disaster-management official has a use for all those foreclosed homes in Florida: temporary hurricane housing.

”This option didn’t exist two or three years ago before the real-estate market crashed,” said Ruben Almaguer, interim director of Florida’s emergency management division.

”We can’t not look at something staring us directly in the face. It’s a solution to a potential problem.” Almaguer asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency to consider the proposal this week during a mock-disaster drill that spotted vulnerabilities in the state’s emergency response plans.

The drill’s scenario: a Category 4 storm nearly bankrupts the state, displaces one million residents, destroys homes and schools, and even frees zoo monkeys that terrorize Floridians.

During the weeklong exercise, Almaguer said, it didn’t take long for the 250 state, federal and local officials to figure out that neither Florida nor FEMA has enough shelter space to house the newly homeless.

Florida has about 250,000 homes in the process of foreclosure and up to 300,000 unsold homes on the market

Comment by Kim
2009-06-06 11:01:47

If banks could collect a token amount of rent (from the state, the “refugees”, or the insurance companies) on those foreclosures, that might be as close to a win-win as the plan would get.

The problem is a lot of foreclosures are not in livable or move-in condition. With the lack of maintenace and preparation (i.e. boarded or taped up windows), they’re are less likely to survive a hurricane than their occupied and cared-for counterparts.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-06-06 19:19:14

frees zoo monkeys that terrorize Floridians

I think we have M. Night. Shamalamadingdong’s next movie!

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

Muggy, you infected my brain. Your posts of wanting to trade inspired me to dive into the charts looking for a pure technical play.

I found one in the form of FEED of which I went long a hundred shares yesterday. Lol.

I’m going to move some more bucks in my more-or-less inactive trading account ’cause I found a few more interesting plays.

Comment by FB wants a do over
2009-06-06 09:02:00

DYY just came off a bottom.

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 10:33:15

“I’m going to move some more bucks in my more-or-less inactive trading account.”

I suggest you go for a long walk and think that over. :grin:

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 14:54:34

What, no FAZ!?

Wussy!

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 14:58:47

O.k., all kidding aside Combo, I have thought about getting into some normal trades, as opposed to playing 2x/3x inverse ETFs.

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 16:24:39

Holy schnit, Combo! You bought stock in a Chinese pig company!Swine Flu (buy when there’s masks on faces?)… And I’m nuts for playing with SKF?

Maybe we all are crazy.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 16:32:05

Hmm, I see, if Sotomayor makes it the stock will skyrocket because pig intestines will be hotter than a Times Square Rolex PNW geo duck.

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 16:41:08

One more thing: I would be derelict of duty if I didn’t tell you to

1. Take a long walk and think this over

and/or

2. Go lie down for a while.

Lol

 
Comment by combotechie
2009-06-06 18:18:55

Lol. You forgot to remind me that Wall Street can be a very expensive place to find out who I am.

 
 
 
 
Comment by crash1
2009-06-06 07:27:38

Wyoming, one of only three states with a balanced budget, announced a hiring freeze for all state employees with a ten percent across the board cut for the coming year. The University of Wyoming immediately cut 45 jobs and eliminated several programs to make up for their 18 million dollars. Cities are bracing for reductions in payments from the state. Meanwhile, my city continues to spend like drunken sailors (no offense to drunken sailors), on unused bike paths, decorative lighting, landscaping, and all manners of fluff. Next year should be real interesting. Many local businesses are cutting jobs or reducing hours.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 09:29:43

Cities are bracing for reductions in payments from the state.

Anyone know when this structure started? The whole “collect taxes at the highest level and re-distribute to smaller entities” thing? It really undermines local government, and it just seems to get worse and worse.

Why should a town get tax money given to it from the state? Or a state the fedgov?

Comment by DennisN
2009-06-06 09:48:36

Wyoming has almost no population and the state has huge cash flow from oil/nat. gas extraction fees. It’s almost like Alaska where there’s a negative income tax - everyone gets a free check from the government.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by crash1
2009-06-06 10:13:10

Pretty close to true. The extraction taxes are collected by the state and distributed to local communities via grants and other means, unlike Alaska where everybody gets a check directly. Every ten cent change in natural gas prices is a $23 million change in revenue to the state.

 
Comment by JimboAC
2009-06-06 10:32:30

You should see it in New Jersey. I started two explanations about the roots of NJ’s problems with “equalization aid” to municipalities, but I got bogged down myself and doubtlessly would have turned off HBBers. The bottom line is that the progressive thinkers who run this state believe that every city should spend the same statewide amount for each student’s education but also realize that not all cities have the tax base to support these expenditures. Thus, the state has an incredibly complicated, constantly challenged and shifting system for equalizing pupil spending that is supposed to take into account genuine market value of taxable real properties, bogus and out-of-date assessments, collection efforts, levy rates, and on and on. It’s a mess. Which cities get how much from the state every year depends much less on the results of any objective formula than on the power of their representatives in the statehouse.

 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 10:29:56

“Why should a town get tax money given to it from the state? Or a state the fedgov?”

Damn good question. It seems like creeping totalitarianism to me. Each entity should stand or fall on its own.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 12:54:55

Each entity should stand or fall on its own.

I’m not sure I agree with that (not sure I disagree either). It just gives the larger gov’t entity power over the smaller one. Even if the constitution limits the fedgov’s power, they can exert it via withholding tax dollars - ie highway funds when it comes to the drinking age in a state.

I really don’t understand how the average citizen doesn’t seen an issue with this. Is it really that they want to project their ideas across the whole country, rather than be able to make the best decisions on a local level?

I suppose funding/being able to stand on one’s own is also a factor. It bothers me more due to the influence it gives the larger gov’t entity.

 
 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 12:32:09

I believe it has its origins in law suits that the state was discriminating against children in poorer communities because those locations could not spend as much per pupil on education since their property tax base was much smaller even when measured on per pupil basis.

The lawsuits prevailed and states were required to provide aid to poorer communities to equalize spending. I believe things have crept upward significantly since then so that in some states a large portion of education funding comes from state tax receipts.

Please note that I am by no measure a constitutional scholar, so I can’t be sure. This is a rather vague recollection.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 13:05:30

I believe it has its origins in law suits that the state was discriminating against children in poorer communities because those locations could not spend as much per pupil on education since their property tax base was much smaller even when measured on per pupil basis.

Thanks, Polly. That makes sense regarding educational funding, I suppose. But clearly at this stage the re-distributed funds cover far more than education.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 04:38:13

“Unfortunately, it hasn’t been enough.” The country will need “some form of new taxes” to bring down its deficit

Why is it liberals think the only way to raise money is to TAX everything? Why not make money the old fashioned way? By making more EXPORTS. I.E. selling something??? Oh yea, the U.S doesnt make anything anymore….my bad…

Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 04:53:30

“Why is it liberals think the only way to raise money is to TAX everything”?

Unfortunately it’s not just the libs, it’s damn near everyone in political power. They have the dumb masses believing ‘they’ are just taxing the evil ‘rich’ folks.

As to production, stick a fork in that, with cap and trade, and increased taxation, what few products we do produce will just move elsewhere as they have been.

Taxes will increase across the board no way around it, at some point our system will collapse, no way around that either.

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2009-06-06 07:05:01

OH! OHH@! wait!! i have an idea.
Let’s buy houses and sell them at a profit.
FLIP them! Push the prices up with CHEAP MONEY. The FED will always accommodate that.
Since we are already at zero interest rates, let’s charge people with savings a penalty for saving money!! Then they will be forced to SPEND it. This will cause an uptick in SALES which will create new demand.
There will be housing shortages, causing prices to rise. This will put a “bottom” on pricing.
When the prices go up, we can increase property taxes. Then we can have more money for the government to “invest” in various programs.
That’s the ticket!!!
Buy houses! FLIP them at a profit. Raise the tax base! Problem solved.

Comment by exeter
2009-06-06 07:21:38

Perfect narrative Diogenes. Some things really are so simple that the general public misses it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 07:57:25

Hun?…What?…Did I miss something?…or is that exactly what happened? :-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 10:20:14

I absolutely HATE the term “flipping houses”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 09:07:10

I agree wmbz….

 
 
Comment by LongIslandLost
2009-06-06 04:55:40

Um, well, if the government wants money, it taxes things. When a company wants money, it sells things.

While there are exceptions, the government should not sell things to raise money. If the government sold things on a large scale, it would become a company. And the last thing I want is the equivalent of GE with a standing army and the power to regulate competitors out of existence.

Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 04:59:00

Point well taken…

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-06 05:47:55

“And the last thing I want is the equivalent of GE with a standing army and the power to regulate competitors out of existence.”

Looks like you are going to get the last thing you want.

Comment by LongIslandLost
2009-06-06 16:16:46

LongIsl

I think I already got it. When I first wrote my post, I typed GM and then realized that it is too late. I can imagine the future … the GM dealer has an armed force recruiting station. The Hyundai dealer across the street is used for target practice ;-(.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 06:11:25

Agreed. I have no idea what it is the government is supposed to export to make more money. Is he suggesting that the feds seize goods from companies and sell them? Makes no sense at all. The government can get addtional funds from exports but that money comes from taxes - on profits from the companies if they don’t have good enough tax lawyers to hide it and on the salaries of the people who make the goods.

The government does sell some things. I am all in favor of charging market rates for grazing rights on federal land. I wonder if an auction would work or if the collusion would mess it up?

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 07:14:19

“…I have no idea what it is the government is supposed to export to make more money.”

I can see some folks haven’t had their coffee this morning… :-)

Let’s make a list, I”ll start it off, you all can add to it:

1. Saudi Arabia
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

“…The Shrub administration is preparing to ask Congress to approve an arms sale package for Saudi Arabia and its neighbors that is expected to eventually total $20 billion …(July 27, 2007)

“The proposed package of advanced weaponry for Saudi Arabia, which includes advanced satellite-guided bombs, upgrades to its fighters and new naval vessels, has made Israel and some of its supporters in Congress nervous. Senior officials who described the package on Friday said they believed that the administration had resolved those concerns, in part by promising Israel $30.4 billion in military aid over the next decade, a significant increase over what Israel has received in the past 10 years.”

O.K., any others? :-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 08:00:42

Um…are you suggesting that those sales are made directly from our own arsenal? I suppose it is possible but I don’t really think so. I was always lead to believe the arrangements are to give permission for our military contractors - which are private companies - to make those sales, since a lot of those systems were made to military specifications and sales to others are restricted. If the government weren’t involved, the deals wouldn’t happen, but I don’t think the government is actually acting as a middle man and taking a cut of those sales. Please post links if you think otherwise.

The government does get to tax profits of the company if they are not otherwise sheltered, dividends when declared, salaries of the employees of those companies, etc.

Oh, and aid to Israel is generally required to be spent on items purchased from US military contractors as well. I suppose they are willing to give up some growth in their own military industrial complex to get to buy the US stuff out of aid money. If the US aid hadn’t been there, they almost certainly would have created a huge export arms industry - probably in conjunction with South Africa - during the past few decades.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 08:52:11

“…does get to tax profits of the company… salaries of the employees of those companies…

Polly,
I understand the specific’s of your point…grazing does bring in some actual monies $$$$ …but so does oil lease’s & other such activities. Thus, war expenditures = $O.00 Gov’t created revenue, I understand.

Now all this money being spent (mentioned below)… adds absolutely $0.00 dollars to the US Gov’t coffers?…say an engineer working at Northrup building a military stealth Bomber making a $120,000 US dollars…decides to use some of his salary to (unthinkable) to buy a house in Lancaster, CA…goes to Home Depot for paint supplies (sale tax) , hires a roofer to replace his roof (employment tax)…ect., ect.,

“Right now, the White House is asking Congress for $70 billion in supplemental war funding. Judging by past spending, that $70 billion will last about four months. Add up all projected defense-related spending for fiscal 2009 and $515 billion balloons to $750 billion — almost a third of all U.S. federal spending today. To put it another way, if the Pentagon were an independent country, it would be the 10th richest in the world.”

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 10:45:48

So after accusing me of being so stupid I must need coffee you are agreeing with me?

The government gets money comes from taxing the salaries of the workers who remain employed because the government give military contractors permission to sell weapons systems to other countries. That is exactly what I said above.

You contradicted me when I said that the government wasn’t doing the exporting and gave Saudi Arabia as the example. Unless you have an example of the US military selling directly to SA your original point was 100% wrong.

Btw, that is hardly the only example of give aways to military contractors. My agency was recently required to switch to a system made by one of those contractors to book our official travel. They get a fee for every transaction even when it is done entirely electronically. They get a fee (around $12) every time someone who has to go work offsite submits a voucher for a 10 mile round trip for about $5 of mileage reimbursement. Yup. $5 cost just got turned into $17. Our travel money is tight. I guarantee you the senior executives would NEVER have approved a system like that unless they were forced. They make plenty of bone headed decisions about software around here, but that would not have been one of them.

And I don’t drink coffee.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 11:29:27

Dearest Polly, please don’t imply an insult was given (”accusing me of being so stupid”), when in fact there was none…relax, please look carefully at the quote I responded too…you know sometimes things get “lost in translation” …no need to get you feathers up…geez,…

Now, help me out here…please explain the monetary value of this statement:

“…because the government give military contractors permission to sell weapons systems”

in relation to this quote:

“…I have no idea what it is the government is supposed to export to make more money.”

 
Comment by polly
2009-06-06 13:33:21

When you say that the government is exporting something, you are saying that the government owns something directly and then sells it. The income to the government is the same as it is for any business - sale price less cost of goods sold. The amount of money that comes in from this line of business is very predictable.

Allowing certain transactions to happen and then getting to tax the income of the people who are employed to make the goods that are included in the transaction is very indirect. If the people who make the item all make very low salaries, they may have enough deductions and exemptions to pay almost no income tax. They may be extremely wealthy and have accountants who can put together tax shelters that protect large portions of their income. They may receive a huge amount of their compensation in various income deferral programs that mean the income is not taxed now or any time soon though it may come into income some day in the future when the employees are in a lower bracket. It may be paid to employees who buy a house this year so that they get an $8000 tax credit and most of their tax liability is wiped out.

If you can’t see the difference between income derived from direct sale of goods and taxing the income from the economic activity generated by allowing a private company to engage in the sale then I can’t help you. One has a guaranteed return. The other is a hopeful shot in the dark.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 14:51:51

Then it’s just as I expected: ‘There’s no economic value in war” ;-)

“The income to the government is the same as it is for any business - sale price less cost of goods sold. The amount of money that comes in from this line of business is very predictable.”

 
 
Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2009-06-06 07:19:38

There is no need for the FEDs to seize goods from companies. They are currently seizing the companies. It’s a government -business relationship called fascism.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 10:40:33

“When a company wants money, it sells things. ”

You’re talking pure theory here. In reality, when a company wants money (which is all the time, of course), it sends jobs overseas, lobbies the gov’t for bailouts, and litigates to stop competitors from offering better goods/services at a lower price.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 11:33:13

+1

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by neuromance
2009-06-06 14:36:01

Or sells that virtual product, “stock”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by desertdweller
2009-06-06 22:50:40

For quite some time now, corps to raise money, just fire people and suddenly Voila! The “bottom line” is flush. So they didnt’ sell a damn thing.

 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 05:18:50

Governor David Paterson announced a deal Friday that is said to save the state hundreds of millions of dollars and avoid the laying off of nearly 9,000 public employees.

The agreement also creates a reduced pension tier for new hires, which would raise the retirement age for new employees and increase the minimum years of service required to draw a pension.

“The same public employees that I criticized for not coming to the table, they came to the table and therefore we reached the goal that we wanted to established in this year’s budget,” said Paterson. “We will not lose a dime as a result of this deal.”

The deal also includes a one-time retirement offer of $20,000 for about 4,500 employees.

Comment by skroodle
2009-06-06 08:37:03

Hey NYdj - the article I read said that police, firemen, and teachers are not included in that deal. Who does it cover?

 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 09:15:17

Does not sound to me that they gave up anything…Reduced benefits and wages for new hires…Oh the pain of it all…

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 10:10:27

:-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2009-06-06 09:55:49

So, the bastards who were passing pension enhancement after pension enhancement up until a few minutes ago have no agreed to pay younger generations of employees less?

FYI we’ve had four rounds of this in NY.

Generation Greed bastards. Not one cent from the seniors, for whom by the way, pension income is free of state and local income taxes.

Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 10:25:00

Yep. And this will all end badly, as it means less tax revenue, a lower standard of living, and continued economic decline due to decreased consumer spending.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by ibbots
2009-06-06 06:17:30

fyi - the US is still the largest mfg in the world.

fyi also - the reason pols are talking about raising taxes is because we have a large national debt brought to you by the admin and congress of the last eight years.

Comment by jbunniii
2009-06-06 08:49:26

Unfortunately, Obama looks set to increase the national debt more this year than Bush did during his entire eight years. We seem to have traded one administration’s disastrous policies for another’s.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 09:34:57

Please, people. Congress passes the budget, no? Not the president. Why do you all insist on attaching a president’s name to expenditures when it’s Congress that’s doing so?

Yes, the pres can veto, but it’s Congress who is drawing up the legislation, not the POTUS.

Both O and W deserve to be criticized. But be honest about it if you’re going to do it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by measton
2009-06-06 12:10:29

Unfortunately, Obama looks set to increase the national debt more this year than Bush did during his entire eight years

The difference is Bush cut taxes on the elite when times were good and we were at war driving up the deficit. Obama has arrived in office to find a flaming bag of crap. At this point without gov intervention the US economy and gov would collapse. I disagree with what they are spending money on, but if they didn’t spend at all we would have a total collapse in the economy and thus tax income. Our deficit would likely increase rapidly even if they didn’t increase spending a dime, plus we would have social unrest, riots and crime.

I would have crushed the big banks but lent money to the smaller banks that were prudent so they could purchase the remains of the big banks and lend. I’d have pumped much more money into job creation. I would have pushed for a tax law at treats all financial rewards for CEO’s Hedge Fund managers ect as income. Increased the gas tax to pay for all things related to driving and cut the payroll tax.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 13:19:18

The difference is Bush cut taxes on the elite when times were good

If I recall correctly, CONGRESS gave everyone a tax break, no? I know my tax rate went down, and I’m certainly not elite at all.

Can you make your point without cherrypicking “facts” to support it?

It sounds like you’re arguing that the ends justify the means - they HAD to spend money or else XXX. But who says they had the right to spend that money? To take money from me directly and spend it on propping up AIG/the banks, or to devalue the currency I and likely a billion others hold so that the 19 biggest banks can survive?

Just because there’s a good cause doesn’t mean one is free to pursue/support it via any means.

 
Comment by measton
2009-06-06 16:39:59

Bush: “We cut the taxes on everybody who pays taxes.”

In fact, all taxes were not cut and 35.6 million individuals w low income did not get a cut because their incomes were too low.

The President also bobbled the numbers when describing the average size of the cut.

Bush: The tax relief we passed, 11 million* taxpayers this year will save $1,086* off their taxes. . . .

(* 111 million taxpayers will save, on average, $1,586 off their taxes.)

The $1,586 figure is indeed an accurate statement of the average cut received by those who are getting a cut, according to the Treasury Department. However, it is far from typical.The figure does not take into account the 25% of all individuals and families who are receiving zero tax cut. When those who get nothing are added in the average cut drops to $1,217, according to the Tax Policy Center.

But most importantly, the average is inflated by the fact that most of the money is going to a relatively few taxpayers at the top of the income scale, as seen from the following table distilled from a more extensive analysis by the Tax Policy Center:

Taxpayers making more than $1 million a year get an average cut of nearly $113,000 this year. Those making 75-100 got 2543 Those making 20-30 got 600

A more meaningful number is the median — or mid-point. The Tax Policy Center calculates the median cut received for income earned in 2003 is $470.

That means half of all individuals and families get less than that, and half get more.

Even the median figure doesn’t give a full picture of how the benefits are spread around, however. Taxpayers make out very differently depending on whether they are married or single, and how many children they have under age 17.

That’s because much of the tax relief for 2003 comes in the form of a tax break for married couples — reduction of the so-called “marriage penalty” — and a doubling of the tax credit granted for each child under 17, to $1,000 per child. Those do nothing to benefit single taxpayers — including unmarried workers and millions of elderly widows and widowers, for example. In fact, the Tax Policy Center calculates that nearly 13 million of those over age 65 will get no tax cut.

Now factor in AMT and that tax cuts during a time of war which drove up the debt were ultimately inflationary and you will find that the vast majority did not benefit from his tax cuts. I had two physcian friends who bragged about how much they were going to save when we crunched the numbers and they found out how much they lost to AMT they were shocked. The % of income paid in taxes because of AMT rises rapidly from 60-70 k through 200 k then plateaus for higher income earners. Suddenly they realized that this was tax cut for the top 1%. It was timed for the elites to cash out before the coming subprime collapse, just like the bankruptcy reform laws were passed in 2005 or so to prepare for the coming rise in bankruptcy.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 17:26:33

measton - Thanks for bringing those facts to the table. Honestly, I’m not here to argue that tax cuts were good, or bad. All I want to do is make sure we are talking in terms of facts…as your most recent post demonstrates, it was not only the “elite” who received a tax cut, as you claimed in your earlier post.

Also, it should be able to go without saying (though apparently not), that certainly those who pay zero taxes can’t possibly get a tax cut. And those who pay a larger amount of taxes (by number) are likely to get a larger cut (by number), as our tax system is based on a percentage of your income. Obviously, (X * Y) < (X * 10Y). That shouldn’t surprise anyone, nor be considered “unfair” just because one number is bigger than the other in terms of # of dollars.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 09:04:26

fyi also - “the reason pols are talking about raising taxes is because we have a large national debt brought to you by the admin and congress of the last eight years”.

8 years???? It amazes me that so many think all of this mess occurred in that short period of time. Not even close, add a few decades to tha number and you are getting closer!

Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 15:20:31

There’s a good point. We can blame O for proposing a lot more deficit spending than any of his predecessors. We can blame W for running a war on credit. We can blame WJC for promoting the housing bubble by increasing the cap gain exclusion and presiding over a huge expansion of consumer credit. I never think of THE housing bubble as what began in 1997; that was just a continuation of a housing bubble that had begun much earlier and was briefly interrupted under GeorgeHWB.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by desertdweller
2009-06-06 22:53:42

Starts with the 80s Reagan.

 
 
 
Comment by ButImNotDeadYet
2009-06-06 12:56:23

I have to agree with your observation, about the U.S. maufacturing base.

Every day, I review items that my company is exporting to its overseas affiliates. These are mostly spare machine parts, going to affiliates in S America, Asia, Europe, even China . We’re required by U.S. customs to declare the “country of origin” of these items before we can ship them. We purchase them all from our suppliers, ship them to a central distribution point in the U.S., then redistribute them to our affiliates.

I would say about 80% of the items I see come through are U.S. made. European countries (primarily Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy and Sweden) are a significant percentage. As are Canada. China and India, and Mexico are small, as is Vietnam. Last week I saw a part come through made in Liechtenstein (first time for that one) and a few weeks prior I saw one from Malta. I had to look that one up on a map (it’s an island in the Mediterranean).

The stuff coming from China, Mexico, India and Vietnam are all commodity items: low-value nuts, bolts, and fasteners that have relatively little intellectual property content. Also knives (blades), which are fairly simple to manufacture. All the high-dollar stuff is made either here in the U.S., or in Europe.

Those of you who are ready to declare the death of U.S. manufacturing, need to think again. Yes, for cheap garbage that doesn’t need to last, I would agree. But for stuff that needs to be reliable and keep the machines running, I definitely disagree.

 
 
Comment by Blano
2009-06-06 06:39:38

LOL you’re asking for it now with that L word!!!! :)

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 07:36:25

Here we go…just say it: Democrapts are Anti-American…that’s a good start, …geez, Thanksgiving dinner with the “True Believer” siblings is coming rather swiftly… :-)

Lucy: “Hwy…you’re such a BLOCKHEAD!” ;-)

Comment by Blano
2009-06-06 07:42:48

You just proved my point……..thank you.

Ok, I’ll play along……yep….some Democrats, at the national level, ARE anti-American. Don’t mind saying it at all.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 08:15:03

Hey would you like to join the family Thanksgiving feast? You can start things off with the “True Believer’s” on the “Right” side of the table with something like this:

“The 7 million jobs lost to the US Economy are directly related to the first 139 days of the Opie ™ Obama… it’s a plain as day” :-)

 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 09:21:06

directly related to the first 139 days of the Opie ™ Obama… ??

Don’t forget its Clinton’s fault also…

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 10:26:24

Don’t forget its Clinton’s fault also… :-)

I’ve not forgotten scdave…Clinton should have resigned.

Repubican’s 1 (Nixon)
Democrapts 1 (Clinton)

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 09:28:57

One thing Hoffer was right about, to be sure, was affirmative action. He called it a RACKET and it is and always was. The likes of the king of the race pimps J.Jackson would have never made a dime other wise. Blackmail works great for him and his type, does nothing to help those they claim they are though!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by exeter
2009-06-06 11:13:00

“Blackmail works great for him and his type, does nothing to help those they claim they are though!”

Kind of like God, Gays, Guns and Turrrrrrrrrists.

Imagine that.

 
 
 
 
Comment by exeter
2009-06-06 07:31:26

Liberals, muslims, socialists, turrrrrrrists….. everyone needs an imagined hobgoblin to live out there victimhood roles.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 08:01:27

Politics & Religious education…follows not long after mastering dodge ball in the schoolyard. ;-)

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 10:44:03

“everyone needs an imagined hobgoblin ”

And then there are the real hobgoblins, like the Fed.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 07:36:42

Why is it that conservatives can’t seem to figure out that the only way taxes were avoided on AG’s watch was through a massive stealth tax of monetary expansion, which enabled our country to spend beyond its means for years on end, and for which we are currently paying the piper?

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 07:45:11

“stealth”

Good word choice Mr. Bear…can you find use of “Shadow” ? ;-)

 
Comment by exeter
2009-06-06 08:26:01

Because you are asking adherents of the supply side failure to admit to……. failure. The only thing their simpleton minds can muster is “we need rich people”…… even at their own economic peril.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 09:54:48

It actually never realized until it just occurred to me that “supply side” might actually refer to “money supply”…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 09:56:34

P.S. And to the extent “supply side” refers to real supply of goods and services, I suggest any remaining Reagan Republicans behold the 19m+ vacant houses dotting the landscape as evidence of the long-term effects of supply side stimulus.

 
Comment by cashedin05
2009-06-06 20:05:41

“supply side stimulus”

The alternative? 10T in new spending? Government Healthcare? Cap and Trade?

I would like reduced spending and lower taxes, I want Big Brother out of my face. How about you?

 
 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 09:55:07

“Why is it liberals think the only way to raise money is to TAX everything?”

I’m a liberal and I certainly to not want to tax everything. In fact I want taxes cut way back and to get rid of the income tax.

 
Comment by Carlos Cisco
2009-06-06 10:33:52

We make lots of lawyers, social workers, rehabilitators, tax collectors, importers, outsourcers, workout artists, personal trainers, politicians, financial analysts, along with a myriad of others that you can come up with who depend on a system devised and refined in the 1940’s. It worked in the ’50’s, ’60’s, got wobbly in the ’70’s, was given away to “globalism” in the ’80’s and 90’s. Propped up in the early 2000’s, collapsed in the late 2000’s; attempted to be repurchased with a few dozen trillion, will the zombie rise from its grave? Alad didnt think so. Neither do a few billion foreigners. My vote is still not in.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 10:59:58

“…Neither do a few billion foreigners”

Well, like I’ve said my times…I’ll take USA resources…”stupid” people & “worthless” land & “horrible” Gov’t …over anything else offered up around the globe, and that includes North Korea & Iran :-)

 
 
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 05:37:10

I might just wait until platinum opens on the exchange today. It was falling yesterday…

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 06:06:02

Stpn2me,

If you want to make additional comments on a particular topic, please, please, please go back to that thread and hit Reply to this comment. Tons and tons of mini threads about the same topic (like buying metals) in the bits bucket makes it almost unreadable to the rest of us.

Thanks.

Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 06:07:25

Sorry Polly,

Still getting the hang of this….I apologize….

 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 07:25:35

“…I might just wait until platinum opens on the exchange today. It was falling yesterday…”

Stpn2me, please do not take this personally, you & every soldier fighting on behalf of America & our allies have my deepest gratitude & I want all of you to have a safe return home to our beloved soil & your families…please keep this in mind.

Making commodities trades in Afghanistan?

(Hwy walks away…to dwell on the state of things)

Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 07:32:58

Making commodities trades in Afghanistan?

Naw,

Just going to buy some platinum eagles. I like the coins. Plus, a bullion or two for the long term future. Plus, I guess I have too much time on my hands :).

You know combat is 98% boredom and 2% (OH CRAP)….

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 07:40:51

(Hwy thinks the world suddenly is much different then he imagined …too much information…)

Time to listen to Neil Young’s “Living with War” again…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 06:16:28

Lots of Flooding in super luxury South beach……hope they have flood insurance great vid:

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-267514

Comment by palmetto
2009-06-06 06:54:31

This is the fate of many low-lying areas of Florida. South Tampa floods if a dog so much as tinkles in the street. Shore Acres in St. Pete is real laugh-a-minute after even a moderate rain. What I want to know is, how long will local govs keep beating a dead horse, making temporary fixes, etc.? Sooner or later, after all the money spent on drainage projects that don’t work, people will just have to give up and re-locate, as the inevitable sea level rise or changing topography forces their hand.

Dale Mabry Highway through Tampa is swiss cheese underneath, seems like every time I check the local news, another new sinkhole has opened up.

Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 09:39:41

South Tampa floods if a dog so much as tinkles in the street.

Thanks for the laugh, palmy. They’d be in trouble if I brought my dog down there - man does he have a big bladder!

 
 
 
Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-06-06 06:19:29

Ten Cities With Rising Home Values http://realestate.yahoo.com/promo/ten-cities-with-rising-home-values.html

Think that no real estate market is safe? Believe it or not, there are cities where home values have held their own. Their economies are well diversified, and their population growth has been slow, keeping unemployment low and speculative building to a minimum.

Check out these ten cities that have seen an increase in median home value. Change in median home price is from the fourth quarter 2007 to the fourth quarter of 2008, which is the most recent data from Fiserv Lending Solutions, a home-price research company.

—-
Unintentionally funny.

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 06:50:16

Four of the ten are big university towns and two more are cited as locations of one or more major hospitals?

Interesting.

I’m not sure exactly what was funny, though. Care to explain? I don’t know enough about the areas listed to figure out the humor. Could use a laugh, though….

Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-06-06 07:20:07

I guess it was that the “top ten” recovery cities were middling to small cities whith 7.5% unemployment and one was almost a quarter of a million people, yet “The United Independent School District, Laredo Independent School District and the city government are the three biggest job sources in the city.”

Like the reasons you quoted, it just seemed like a list of “out-liers” - (from wikipedia) “In statistics, an outlier is an observation that is numerically distant from the rest of the data. They can occur by chance in any distribution, but they are often indicative either of measurement error or that the population has a heavy-tailed distribution.”

This was the best they could find? (Even in areas where the amenities kept “speculative building to a minimum”.)

I recall one year in the boom where my similarly sized home town of Spokane, WA (A good place to be from, I always say. :) ), values supposedly went up over 40%. Now we find #1 at +10%, with #2 a “close” +6.6%. The End is Nigh! Party up!

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 08:58:34

OK, that is what I was hoping you would say, as it was my best guess. They certainly are not what I would call the big city. Not by a long shot. I’ve heard of a few. Even spent a weekend in College Park, PA once (math team meet).

And the unifed schools district is a little odd. Is this what you have when there aren’t enough kids in the surrounding towns to support a high school in each one, so they bus everyone to a single high school?

Do you know what is going on in Dallas? A former colleague moved there because she was completely sure that the big increase in housing prices was permanent and had heard that Dallas hadn’t gone up much yet and was sure that was going to be the next place to explode upward. I hate to admit it, but I look forward to a time when I can be sure she is upside down and likely to stay there. She was so smug about buying in a neighborhood where almost everyone else was doing tear downs and was so sure her place would be a good investment…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Little Al
2009-06-06 06:56:44

I noticed that education seems to be the bulwark of their employment in several of these towns. We educators in Los Angeles are shaking in our boots to see the degradation of the schools next year when only a skeleton crew tries to provide the same service as in the past. With big government cuts, education cannot provide growth in the jobs market next year.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 07:19:17

AL:

Find another job Fast. Education is Next on the chopping block

We have way too many colleges and need to close 1/3 of them…Why?

The new economy doesn’t care about your Expensive piece of paper, all an employer will care about is can you walk in and do the job with minimal supervision and training because you got it somewhere else.

Only unions and companies that use the degree to discriminate or to charge higher prices will care.

EG: A law firm with 50 graduates from Yale vs a podunk U can charge a much higher fee, even if the Podunk U guys are Ten times better street fighters in court then the wussie yalies.

Comment by iftheshoefits
2009-06-06 08:08:36

I think that the thing to note in these towns is that

1. There’s just enough economy that they’re not dying
2. The housing prices are very affordable.

Boomer retirees are still looking for places they can afford, they are few and far between. Those of us that have work that allows us to choose wherever we want to live will look for low tax, low cost of living areas to settle. I don’t see any surprises here.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by skroodle
2009-06-06 08:41:08

My company cares a lot about that piece of paper and the managers in my dept only like to hire employees that graduated from the same Universities that they did.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 10:02:41

EXACTLY skroodle:

Discrimination against people who didn’t live with mom and dad or those willing to go into hock for the paper.

Your company will be in the minority, and may not survive…. As others with Critical thinking skills, and street smarts will WUP your companies azz.

 
 
 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 09:41:07

to see the degradation of the schools ??

Its all about priorities…Good friend of mine reads my water meter…He easily makes more money than my school teacher daughter does…

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 10:36:47

Yes dave but your meter reader has to be in very good psychical shape…how many Fat meter readers have you seen vs teachers?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Carlos Cisco
2009-06-06 10:41:59

Education should not provide growth in employment; it is tax based. An expanding economy should provide for any growth in jobs, otherwise, spiraling deficits …..sound familiar??

Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 11:08:49

The idea that people need more education to get better jobs never made sense to me. That’s a zero-sum game. If the number of job openings is constant, and people’s educational qualifications are increasing, you’re just going to wind up arbitrarily elevating the education requirements for each position. You’re not increasing overall employment, just forcing people to waste time studying things they don’t need for their jobs.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 15:30:15

Certainly more degrees, more pieces of paper are not useful. In terms of substance, though, higher standards might make it more possible for American workers to compete with those in south Asia and east Asia. Some US companies say that their reasons for outsourcing include the lackadaisical, imprecise approach of American HS and BA grads, and I can believe that (even if those same companies are more interested in just saving money).

 
 
 
 
Comment by scdave
2009-06-06 09:32:53

1/2 are in Texas…Think Shrub delivered the bacon for his state ??

Comment by skroodle
2009-06-06 14:22:36

Shrub did not deliver any bacon to Texas. The state did not benefit at all.

A few companies made bank(Halliburton, etc), but none of that money stayed in the state.

 
 
 
Comment by dimedropped
2009-06-06 06:56:00

After reading that list I can see why there was no bubble there.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 07:48:44

Now Comes the Real Crash
By John Rosevear
June 4, 2009
The Motley Fool

Here’s the good news: The worst of the subprime mortgage carnage is behind us.

Here’s the bad news: That was just the tip of the iceberg. There’s probably much worse ahead.

Fool retirement guru Robert Brokamp recently sat down with noted value investor (and former Fool writer) Whitney Tilson to talk about his thoughts on the continuing mortgage crisis. In the interview — which appears in the new issue of the Fool’s Rule Your Retirement newsletter, available online at 4 p.m. EDT today — Tilson talks about where we currently stand in the mortgage crisis.

What, you thought things were stabilizing?

Tilson recently argued that the appearance of stabilization in the housing market is a “head fake,” caused by the usual spring surge in homebuying and a temporary reduction in the inventory of foreclosed homes sitting on the market. The crisis, Tilson says, is actually getting worse.

As Tilson sees it, although the worst of the losses suffered by speculators and subprime borrowers are over, problems with prime loans are just now starting to pick up steam. Many conforming prime loans are owned by Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac. But other mortgages will likely also prove problematic, including home equity lines and prime “jumbo” mortgages, as well as the scarier Alt-A and Option ARM loans.

Eeeek?

Why scarier? According to Tilson, nearly half of Alt-As and over 70% of Option ARMs are underwater. Alt-A resets are just starting to take off — they won’t peak until 2012 or 2013. And Option ARMs don’t just reset, they recast — borrowers go from making just interest payments, in many cases, to making full proper 30-year-amortized mortgage payments. Some could see their monthly payments increase by 60% or more.

And after that, commercial real estate could be the next problem area. That won’t just hit the property owners — REITs like mall giant Simon Property Group (NYSE: SPG) and New York-based heavyweight Vornado Realty (NYSE: VNO) — but will also impact regional banks such as Fifth Third (Nasdaq: FITB) and Regions Financial (NYSE: RF) that have heavy exposure to commercial real estate loans.

Comment by combotechie
2009-06-06 08:12:50

Sounds a wee bit deflationary, no?

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 12:52:39

Sounds like a really scary roller coaster ride to me, and I like roller coaster.

 
 
Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 15:38:25

http: slash slash effectivedemand dot blogspot dot com
slash 2009 slash 01 slash
updated-credit-suisse-mortgage-reset.html

 
 
Comment by Simiwatch
2009-06-06 08:08:24

News from San Diego: Mission Bay.

I just returned from San Diego Shelter Island. A friend of mine wants to park his boat in a marina in Mission Bay. Every marina we visited has “openings” and every marina employee said “in this economy we have many open moorings”. Also, some marina employees said many new boats, 45-55 foot long have been reposed by the banks. A few years ago the marinas had no openings. One marina employee said he has never had this many openings since he has work there, about 8 years.

Also, the long distance charter boat business is very bad. Many captains said they cancel trips due to lack of bookings.

Good day to all!

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 08:26:15

“…said many new boats, 45-55 foot long have been reposed by the banks.”

Well, I plan on helping out the American economy, yes sir by golly, I will spend some savings that are earning 1.0012% interest… for something foolish but fun, I is going to take someone’s “loss” of a 37′ Hunter Passage and go visit aladinsane in New Zealand, take him out to lunch, maybe have a green salad with sliced Kiwi’s, show him some recent pictures of the Sequoia’s, bring him an HBB t-shirt, …that is… if I make it across the Pacific with no problems… ;-)

Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 10:07:31

Hunter 37′ ? Okay for some old slow duffer I guess. Why not live a little, go for a Farr 40 or bigger. Better yet grab a crew position on a Volvo 70 and get it on!

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 10:19:24

I like to go slow…I’ve sailed quite a few boats…That one single handed the best for myself…just like my Gibson guitar, my fingers & ear said, yep this is… the one… :-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Simiwatch
2009-06-06 13:24:20

Funny you said that: One old guy at Pier 32 Marina (a new marina, full due to prices half off of other marinas in Mission Bay) told us he sailed to Australia on a 43 foot single mast sail. 24 days to Marianas (Sp?). Said some drunken Assize hit the back of his boat while he was there. Good guy salt of the earth type, said to avoid National City (very close to down town San Diego) for local shopping (bad crime).

 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 09:51:48

“Many captains said they cancel trips due to lack of bookings.”

The charter boat industry is a canary in the coal mine for the San Diego economy.

Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 12:37:38

“The charter boat industry is a canary in the coal mine for the San Diego economy.”

The canary is decomposing.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-06-06 09:14:03

What’s this? “When groups seek to undermine the U.S. currency system, the government is compelled to act,” said acting U.S. Attorney Edward Ryan of the Western District of North Carolina. The government crackdown on the so-called “Liberty Dollars” may backfire. The courts have historically avoided cases in which the legality of the debauched U.S. money system comes into judicial question, but this action in Asheville, NC might get out of hand. “Fraudulent Money?”

Ponder this: The Treasury Department contends that the value of four 1964 U.S. quarter-dollar coins is identical to four 1965 quarter-dollars. Should you present rolls of these coins from ‘64 and ‘65 for deposit at a bank they will be accepted at face value. Likewise, if you offer coins from each of these years as local, state, or federal taxes they will be accepted at face value.

Now comes the catch. The Treasury Department cannot make a distinction between its older silver coins and the later copper/nickel versions of the same denomination because it would blow the present fiat currency system to smithereens. Hence, the question never gets far in a court of law.

Answer this question: If the government will accept U.S. silver coins only at face value for payment of taxes, should you not be able to receive legal U.S. silver coins at face value? NO! The Treasury Department says if you receive, say, a $1.00 silver eagle coin in a transaction you must pay taxes on the metallic value, not the face value. Got it? A silver eagle is worth only a dollar if you pay taxes with it, but must be counted as worth more than $15.00 for tax purposes if you receive one as compensation. Why? Let’s hope the “Liberty Dollar” case finally pushes the question into court.

Comment by krazy bill
2009-06-06 09:46:46

http://www.lvrj.com/news/9893062.html
a jury found Robert Kahre et alia not guilty

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 10:36:48

So, if Rupert Murdoch puts 15 million $$$$ (Face value) of US gold coins in his safety deposit box…according to the IRS… he only has to state this holding only amounts to 15 million dollars in his yearly tax filing, right? My millionaire (”tax professional”) brother surely knows the answer to this question…myself, just genetics & philosophy…I ain’t got a clue… :-)

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 13:20:10

You don’t declare gold coins in a safe deposit box on your taxes. You declare income or loss when you sell them. US taxes income which requires a recognition of income event like a sale.

If they lose the case, the most likely change in law is this: You can pay $15 worth of taxes with a coin worth $15 even if its face value is $1. However, you will have to recognize income on the coin equal to the difference of your basis in the coin and the value you are receiving (in this case $15 because you are paying off $15 worth of debt). Since it is essentially impossible to prove that any particular coin has a basis over its face value, you will be taxed on the $14.00 difference between the two and that tax will be deducted from the $15.00. In other words, you will get the exact same treatment you would have gotten had you sold the coin on the open market and declared the sale as part of your taxable income - except they will take a fee to cover their cost in selling the coin on the open market.

So, you turn in the $15 silver coin to pay taxes. If you are in the 28% bracket you will instantly be assessed $3.92 of tax. You will get credit for $11.08 toward your tax bill less a large fee (10%? 20%) to cover administrative costs.

And the IRS hires an additional 10,000 people to handle the paperwork.

This is a purely administrative issue. The face value rule may have origins in some interesting bit of obscure financial law, but the real reason for it is administrative. You have to sell stuff and get the money (and pay any tax on capital gains) before you can use it to pay taxes. Same rule applies to all the other assets in the world. These coins are more “stuff” than money when most people look at them, but there is no reason to force banks or governments to become coin dealers. We have coin dealers for that.

And they won’t lose the case.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 14:38:59

Wow, Polly that’s awesome! There’s never been a rumor floating around that you had a twin brother at birth in your family has there? Because I swear you sound exactly like my millionaire “tax professional” brother…do you wear eyeglasses?

O.K., so here what happens next: I’m at the Belmont horse races & Mr. Murdoch turns to me and says “I’ll wager you 15 million $$$$ in gold coins I have in a safety deposit box in California, that “mine-that-bird” wins this race today, if he loses you win, if he wins you have to go on fox news and promise to agree with everything Rash Limbaugh’s says for the next x2 years…agreed?” (I agree, and he puts the wager in writing, in the form of an I.O.U. listing said gold coins) Now “Mine-that-bird” finishs last place. Just after the race I get a call from an “acquaintance” in Nigeria, I tell him about my good luck…the Nigerian says “Hwy, I’ll take that I.O.U from you for twice that amount of 15 million $$$”, I agree, so I FedEx the I.O.U. to Nigeria…months later,…The gold coins are gone…the Nigerian is gone…the bank with the safety Deposit box is seized by the FDIC, Rupert has renounced his American citizenship, and being the honest fellow that I am I report all this to the IRS…now my question:

What do I report to the IRS on my personal income taxes? :-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Bub Diddley
2009-06-06 09:48:32

Ah, I’m so sorry I’m missing out on the joys of home ownership. I was already getting pretty depressed over not having a lawn to mow in 95 degree heat. Now, I’m missing out on the fun of going in to protest the increase in property taxes on my piece of the American Dream. Boo hoo.

http://www.statesman.com/business/content/business/stories/other/06/06/0606appraisals.html

One of the comments says

“The “Great American Dream” of owning your home has become “a nightmare” for many Americans.”

You don’t say? Ya know, I bet that’s not something that “experienced real estate agent” Vickie Goodwin ever mentions to her clients…

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 09:50:07

Suggested solution: Let the banks that threw money away into the deep blue sea go out of business, and start some new, more competitive banks that don’t throw away money. Bailing out fools is not a solution.

Commercial Real Estate — the Economy’s Anvil
By Stephen Gandel Friday, May. 29, 2009
store closing
James W. Porter / Corbis

Commercial real estate may soon bulldoze the green shoots.

A coming wave of defaults on loans to developers of condominiums, office buildings and malls could do significant damage to the already deflating economy. That was the overwhelming concern expressed at a public hearing of the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP) on Thursday that focused on corporate and commercial real estate lending.

The COP was set up last fall as part of legislation that gave the Treasury Department permission to spend $700 billion to rescue the nation’s ailing financial system. The panel, which is headed by Harvard Law professor Elizabeth Warren, has no legislative or official regulatory powers. It is supposed to monitor the Treasury’s spending and report back to Congress as to whether it is being effective in boosting lending and shoring up the financial sector.

Thursday’s hearing was one of a number of public forums the COP is hosting on different segments of the lending market. Warren is often criticized for being too critical of banks and their lending practices. But at the hearing on commercial real estate, Warren focused on how big a problem future loan defaults will be and what should be done about them.

She got an earful. Richard Parkus, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, said he thought two-thirds of all commercial real estate loans due in the next few years — hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth — could go bust. Jeffrey DeBoer, president of trade group the Real Estate Roundtable, fretted that problems in the lending business could cost the nation thousands more construction and real estate jobs. Next up, Congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York expressed worry that the country was headed for a lost decade of economic stagnation.

There were not many solutions offered. Nadler said he thought the government should create new banks, which, unencumbered by souring loans, would boost lending. Nadler said he thought private investors would be interested in helping fund the new banks. A number of the panelists thought the government’s TALF and PPIP programs meant to boost lending were helpful but not the answer. Parkus said he thought extending the terms of commercial loans set to default would only delay the problem and make it worse. As more and more bad loans pile up, he predicted, it will become progressively harder for any of them to get refinanced.

Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 19:55:00

“Start some new, more competitive banks that don’t throw away money.”

I’m thinking about this. Banks that don’t throw away money just can’t function competitively in this system, because the mandate is, finance everyone who doesn’t already have a house. That is to say, PLEASE throw money away. I can’t compete directly with FNMA and Freddie in their sphere (SFH stick-built), must stay mostly with MH’s which they won’t finance. That’s the only way I can charge an interest rate that makes the risk worthwhile.

 
Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-06-06 20:30:26

You aren’t bailing out the fools, but the fools who invested in them, and paid taxes to them.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 10:07:25

They aren’t making prime California properties any more, which makes the sale price of prime properties different. I am wondering if the writer meant to say “billiion” as $24 million would not amount to more than a small dent in a $20 bn+ budget deficit (roughly 0.1%, in fact).

Digital Journal
Arnold Schwarzenegger Selling Famous Landmarks to Erase Deficit
By Leo Reyes.
Published 3 hours ago by ■ Leo Reyes

The governor of California is planning to sell government buildings and famous landmarks to raise funds in order to erase the swelling budget deficit of the state of California.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing to sell popular California landmarks to erase some $24 million in budget deficit this year.

Some of the famous landmarks that are being targeted to raise funds include San Quentin State Prison, The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum and the California State Fairgrounds, among others.

The Governor is also proposing to sell some other properties outright, sell office buildings and lease them back from the new landlords and lease some state lands to developers.

California taxpayers are opposing these proposals by the Governor saying that the timing is bad.’ How can California taxpayers get a good deal in this slumping real estate market?’ they asked.

Bur Fred Aguiar, the governor’s secretary of consumer services defended his boss saying that the properties mentioned cannot be compared to other commercial space because they are unique and sits on prime land. He said people will be surprised at the kind of prices that they will fetch.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 10:41:58

If the state is getting out of the real estate business, then what is up with that $10,000 taxpayer-funded giveaway to home buyers?

LA Times
Top of the Ticket
Gov. Arnold to state Legislature: Our wallet is empty, credit dried up

California Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger meets with local officials recently on the budget crisis

Following is the complete text of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s budget speech to the Legislature this week, which his office also released as weekly remarks. An obvious attempt to save money:

Thank you. Thank you very much, Speaker Bass, Senate Leader Steinberg, Assemblyman Blakeslee, Sen. Hollingsworth, my fellow constitutional officers and my fellow servants of the people.

First of all, I want to thank you for the gracious invitation to address you here today and to address the people of California.

Today I want to talk about financial crisis. Three months ago the members of this body came together to set aside their ideological differences and did what they believed was best for California. We solved $36 billion of a $42-billion deficit.

But as you know, part of our budget agreement required us, by law, to go back to the people for approval, right at a time when the people wanted to send Sacramento a powerful message. And that message was clear: Do your job. Don’t come to us with those complex issues. Live within your means. Get rid of the waste and inefficiencies and don’t raise taxes.

Now, as I stand here today, we are in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. In the past 18 months one-third of the world’s wealth has vanished. And because of that and because of California’s outdated and volatile tax system, our revenues have dropped 27% from last year. And you can see this right here on the charts next to me; it’s very clear.

We are now back to the same level of revenues we had in 2003, and when you adjust for inflation and population, we are back to the level of the late ’90s.

Today, just three months after our February budget, we once again face a $24-billion deficit. California’s day of reckoning is here. In order to deal with our….

…limited amount of money, I have proposed some dramatic changes in our May revision.

Those spending cuts represent much more than the hard decisions necessary to balance our budget. They represent the transformation of what services Sacramento can provide and how those services are delivered.

The immediate task before us is to cut spending to the money that is available to us. We have no time to waste. The controller has told us that we have 14 days to act or California is at risk of running out of cash. I’ve already used my executive authority to reduce the state payroll and I’ve proposed the necessary cuts to the three largest areas of our budget, which is education, healthcare and prisons.

I know the consequences of those cuts are not just dollars. I see the faces behind those dollars. I see the children whose teachers will be laid off. I see the Alzheimer’s patients losing some of their in-home support services. I see the firefighters and the police officers who will lose their jobs.

People come up to me all the time, pleading, “Governor, please don’t cut my program.” They tell me about how those cuts affect them and their loved ones. I see the pain in their eyes and I hear the fear in their voices and I hear the demonstrations outside of our Capitol. It’s an awful feeling, but we have no choice.

Our wallet is empty, our bank is closed and our credit is dried up. I know for many of you these will be the hardest votes that you will ever make. But the people sent us here to lead not only in times of prosperity but also in times of crisis.

We must make these cuts and live within in our means, because what is the alternative? If we don’t act, the state will simply run out of money and go insolvent. You see, we are not Washington. We cannot print our own money, we cannot run trillion-dollar deficits, and we can only spend the money that we have. That is the harsh but simple reality.

I’m also proposing to sell off state property, because Sacramento should not be in the real estate business, especially when we are in a fiscal crisis like this. Now, I know that the money that we receive from this property won’t go directly to the general fund; it will pay off debt. But that lowers our debt payment, which then does help the general fund.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 11:53:47

“That is the harsh but simple reality.” :-)

The National average income in America: $56,545.00

# of vacant homes = 19.1 million

x2 wars

10%+ unemployment

Starmucks coffee: 7.99 / 12 oz (on sale)

x1 q-tip at your local hospital: $13.41

 
Comment by palmetto
2009-06-06 15:03:02

Mexico’s takeover of Collyforkneeuh is all but complete. Stick a fork in it, it’s done.

Comment by palmetto
2009-06-06 15:22:11

If I’m Gray Davis, my schadenfreude is off the charts. LMAO!
BTW, think there’s a snowball’s chance in hades of changing the naturalization law so Arnie can run for Prexy of the US now? LOL!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-06-07 07:15:26

So: Why again did CA spending per capita go up 27% since the 1990s?

 
 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-06 10:14:41

Lower property values mean higher taxes

By JENNIFER SORENTRUE

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Saturday, June 06, 2009

WEST PALM BEACH — If you think plummeting home values are going to save you money on your property tax bill this year, you might be in for a big surprise.

More than two years after Gov. Charlie Crist promised that property taxes would “drop like a rock,” many homeowners could actually see their tax bills increase.

That’s because local governments across the state are proposing tax-rate increases to recoup the revenue lost as a result of the housing market meltdown.

Long-time property owners who have been shielded from years of soaring taxes by 1992’s Save Our Homes amendment would be the hardest hit.

Although Palm Beach County property values fell by 13.5 percent last year, most homesteaded owners will not get any break on their appraisals. Under state rules, if a homesteaded property’s market value remains higher than the assessed value, then Property Appraiser Gary Nikolits is required to increase the assessed value. This year that increase will be 0.1 percent.

That slight increase, coupled with higher tax rates, would erase the savings many homeowners have seen over the last two years as a result of state-mandated and voter-approved property tax cuts.

“There are going to be a lot of very unhappy people this year,” Nikolits said. “They are going to scratch their heads and wonder how that is possible.”

But not everyone will see an increase.

Owners of commercial property and homesteaded owners whose market value has fallen below the assessed value could see their tax bills fall under the county’s budget proposal, depending on how much their property values declined.

Based on the preliminary property values that Nikolits released last month, County Administrator Bob Weisman is recommending that the countywide tax rate rise from about $3.78 to $4.37 for each $1,000 of taxable value - a 15.6 percent increase that would generate about the same tax revenue that the county collected last year.

Under the proposal, the owner of a $250,000 home with a $50,000 homestead exemption would pay about $875 in county taxes next year, up about $119 from this year’s bill.

That figure does not include what property owners pay to the school board, city governments and other taxing authorities.

But many of the county’s 38 municipalities, some of which have seen their tax bases erode by more than 20 percent, will have no choice but to consider similar rate hikes, Nikolits said.

“They either have to cut their budgets or they have to increase their tax rates,” Nikolits said.

Weisman stresses that the rate increase is not an overall tax hike, since it will only enable the county to collect about what it did last year.

“Some people’s taxes are dropping,” Weisman said. “Those are the people whose taxes went up the most the past five years. Even people who are homesteaded will still be paying less taxes than they did two or three years ago.”

Even with the tax rate increase, County officials are still facing a budget shortfall of about $60 million.

County commissioners will discuss Weisman’s budget proposal at 9:30 a.m. Monday at the county’s headquarters, 301 N. Olive Ave., West Palm Beach.

The only glimmer of good news this year, Weisman said, is that the tax inequity that many argue the Save Our Homes amendment created is starting to vanish.

When property values were soaring, the state’s Save Our Homes amendment cap limited increases in assessed values of homesteaded homes to no more than 3 percent a year. That limited the tax increases of such properties. while those without homestead protection faced big increases in their assessments and taxes and the county saw double-digit increases in its tax base.

Now, with property values declining, the gap between the market values and assessed values of homesteaded properties is closing. And as that happens, the disparity in taxes between owners of commercial and rental properties and those who have homestead exemptions will lessen, Weisman said.

“The positive thing for the tax system about this circumstance it that it is eliminating the imbalance between the long-term homesteaded and the non-homesteaded property,” Weisman said. “While it is painful right now, in the future years that will be a good thing.”

 
Comment by BanteringBear
2009-06-06 10:26:26

(throws down laptop) ALRIGHT, SPAM FILTER- LET’S TAKE THIS OUTSIDE!!!

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 10:30:34

The claims about low CA inventory are a sham, given the large shadow inventory of bank-owned homes. With the humongous shadow inventory of bank-owned homes not yet on the market, unemployment over 10 percent and a formidable gauntlet of option ARM resets and recasts scheduled through 2012, I am wondering how these bottom callers can so confidently predict that California housing prices are at the bottom?

As the median list price on the MLS in our zip code is still north of $1m, which is more than 10X median income for our zip code, my impression is that sellers are still in denial. Given that many have not even left the denial stage of the housing bubble stages of grief, I would guess this bubble has years worth of unraveling to come.

Big mystery: Given the state’s dire budget situation, how can if find $10,000 to giveaway to anyone wealthy enough to currently be in the market for a home? At any rate, I fail to see the urgency to buy, as prices are still falling despite these taxpayer-funded giveaways to new buyers, and either the incentives will stay in place, or home prices will drop to reflect their eventual removal.

And regarding what inning we are in, I note that in the early-1990s recession, California was in maybe the second inning towards the end of the recession (March 1991), and job losses are still increasing. I further note that serial bottom callers kept predicting a bottom one-year out throughout the duration of the early-1990s bust.

Real Estate News
May 28, 2009, 12:21PM EST
Is California Real Estate Near a Bottom?

Tighter inventory and two consecutive months of home-price gains suggest it might be, but unemployment fears remain a factor

By Prashant Gopal

California was one of the first states to enter the housing downtown. Could it be one of the first to recover?

First-time home buyers and investors are jumping to take advantage of state and federal tax incentives, low interest rates, and prices that are more affordable than they have been in many years. California’s median home price climbed in April on a monthly basis for the second straight month. That hasn’t happened since August 2007, the California Association of Realtors reported on May 28. Home sales in April rose 49% compared with April 2008.

The most promising sign of stabilization is the strikingly low inventory of unsold homes—well below the historical average. It would now take 4.6 months to deplete the state’s supply of unsold houses at the current sales pace. Supply was as high as 16.6 months in January 2008, and the long-term average for the state is about seven months.

The median price for a single-family home in California was $256,700 in April, down 36.5% from a year earlier but 1.4% higher than the previous month, according to the California Association of Realtors. Other states aren’t faring as well. Inventory levels in Arizona and Nevada remain high. And Florida’s supply of unsold homes is two or three times normal levels, according to John Burns Real Estate Consulting in Irvine, Calif.
tens of thousands of foreclosures expected

Despite the positive signs, California faces a bumpy road to recovery. Unemployment is still rising, foreclosures are expected to accelerate in coming months, and the luxury market is weak not only because jumbo loans are expensive and difficult to get approved but also because few buyers are willing or able to take a risk on pricey properties. Even the California Association of Realtors&mda—which is saying prices are likely close to the bottom—expects some additional pressure on prices as tens of thousands of foreclosed properties enter the market later this year.

But home prices, which have fallen more than 50% from their peak in some areas of the state, probably won’t fall as far or as fast, said Delores Conway, director of the University of Southern California Casden Real Estate Economics Forecast. “There are a lot of headwinds, but we have tailwinds as well,” Conway said. “If we were in a normal economy, we’d be fine. The problem is, this is still not a normal economy, and there’s still a lot of uncertainty out there.”

Mark Goldman, a mortgage broker and lecturer in real estate at San Diego State University, says the bottoming of the California market might feel a bit like a rough airplane landing. “Imagine the runway as the theoretical bottom of the market,” he says. “I’m confident we’re near a bottom,” Goldman adds. “But nobody knows we’ve hit a bottom until we’ve passed it.”

San Diego, which was one of the first bubble markets to burst, now is one of the tightest markets in the state. It had only a three-month supply of unsold homes in April, according to the California Association of Realtors, which ranked California counties for BusinessWeek.com, based on the tightest inventory levels. Other tight markets include Sacramento County and Riverside/San Bernardino counties (in Southern California’s Inland Empire), which also have less than four months of inventory.

California’s $10,000 tax credit for new buyers

Peter Toner, a Realtor at Prudential California Realty in San Diego, says luxury homes are lingering on the market, but properties listed for less than $400,000 are selling quickly. In many cases, these are also homes that are selling at a steep discount.

“You’ve got people making multiple offers on multiple properties because they’re eager to acquire something,” Toner says. “Anything that can be bought right away—like a foreclosure or a seller who has a home that is properly presented and isn’t underwater—they’re hot to trot.”

California has some advantages over other states that were also ravaged by the housing slump. Construction in the state’s coastal areas was fairly limited during the boom and—unlike Florida and Nevada—builders focused on single-family homes rather than condos, resulting in fewer new housing units. And California, despite its economic problems, has a diverse job market, natural beauty, top schools, cultural depth, and great weather.

Moreover, in March the state also began offering a $10,000 tax credit for buyers of new homes. That’s in addition to the federal government’s $8,000 credit for first-time buyers. Buyers now feel a sense of urgency to take advantage of the programs before they end, says Lisa Marquis Jackson, a vice-president at John Burns Real Estate Consulting.

“I don’t think there’s a fear [among buyers] of home prices falling a whole bunch more,” Jackson says. “Now the fear is if you’re going to have a job or not.” John Burns, president of the firm, says he expects San Diego to lead the way in recovery. But California’s not out of the woods. “We’re probably in the seventh inning of the downturn,” Burns says. “Sales volumes are increasing, and supply is coming down, but until job growth returns, we probably don’t see prices stabilizing.”

Comment by robiscrazy
2009-06-06 13:31:14

So does this mean houses that qualify for the fed + ca home purchase tax credit are now priced $18,000 higher?

If yes, then this is a subsidy for the REIC and not people.

Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 15:56:42

They were already priced $18K too high, but nobody was buying them. Anyway, we’ll have another round of downdraft even if Delores Conway is right in predicting that prices “won’t fall as far or as fast” in the future. They will still fall !

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 23:08:15

“They were already priced $18K too high, but nobody was buying them.”

Exactly! I look at it as primarily a transfer into the pocket of sellers who would otherwise not be able to find a buyer, and secondarily as an income stream to UHS who suddenly can put together deals. Either the $18K credit stays in place forever, or the temporary $18K home price premium will go away with the credit.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by banana republic
2009-06-06 10:39:28

To show exactly how crazy the anti-abortion crowd is, they even protested Dr. Tiller’s funeral. Think about that. The guy is murdered by one of their supporters, and to show how sorry they are, they protest the guys own funeral.

These people are scum.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 11:33:44

Of course The RIGHT thing to do is PAY the doctor $250K a year not to do abortions. the Anti abortions don’t have the guts to pay up or shut up for that idea.

Like what we should have done with the Iraiq’s Pay them not to fight each other or US, and turn in their weapons…

How many lives and money could we have saved?

Comment by oxide
2009-06-06 18:10:03

Actually, I thought that we DID begin to pay off the Iraqi’s to stop fighting, especially after the 2006 election, when Rumsfeld was tossed and Gates got in. Gosh, Muqtada Al-Sadr been awfully quiet lately…

 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-06-06 12:11:24

They are certainly no different than Al Quaeda, and I’m not joking.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:35:30

“These people are scum.”

At least these murderers have the moral high ground.

 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 13:24:45

Hrm..this relates to housing..or the economy how, exactly?

Oh, that’s right, it doesn’t. Please, take this crap elsewhere!

 
 
Comment by kerk93
2009-06-06 10:40:15

test

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 10:45:07

Hey Mr. Bear, what if they got the impact location slightly wrong…like say a error of about -40 miles North? :–)

China has lately discovered a small error in their x1 child policy due to earthquakes…perhaps “The O.C.” might have a similar error in having all their housing valued at $650,000+ ;-)

New video shows theoretical quake slamming O.C.:

http://sciencedude.freedomblogging.com/2008/11/12/new-video-shows-theoretical-quake-slamming-oc/7464/

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 10:45:11

I guess if so many reporters say housing is undervalued now, then it must be true? And if it is undervalued now, just imagine how very, very undervalued it will get when interest rates revert to historic norms. I am expecting the current wave of investor-knifecatchers to get flushed down the toilet at about that point.

SPECIAL REPORT Road to Rescue
Most over- and under-valued housing markets
Low prices bring investors back into many markets.
By Les Christie (CNNMoney.com)
Last Updated: June 4, 2009: 12:58 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Home price declines have sent affordability soaring. Prices have fallen so far that the average U.S. home is now undervalued by 12.2%, according to a new report from IHS Global Insight.

“The good news is that the declines are happening as consumer confidence is rising and housing sales and [building] starts seem to be bottoming out,” said Jeannine Cataldi, senior economist for IHS in a statement accompanying the study.

“The bad news is that job losses continue at high rates, housing inventories are still elevated and consumers, while becoming somewhat more confident, are still wary in the face of economic uncertainty.”

Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 19:58:20

I love the idea that “building starts are bottoming out” is “good news” when “housing inventories are still elevated.” WTF?!

Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-06-07 07:16:57

Well, they are bottoming out ABOVE ZERO. You take good news where you can in that industry ;)

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 10:49:59

High unemployment and surging l-t interest rates are a potent force against a housing recovery.

LA Times
Money & Company
Tracking the Market and Economic Trends that Shape Your Finances

Interest rates soar on jobs data, putting housing at risk
11:38 AM, June 5, 2009

The Treasury bond market is in cardiac arrest today over the May employment report: Yields are soaring, dealing another blow to investors who’ve been hiding out in government bonds — and threatening another big jump in mortgage rates.

If rising home loan rates price more buyers out of the market, sellers will have to respond by cutting asking prices. Anyone have a better idea?

The 10-year T-note yield has surged to 3.84% from 3.71% on Thursday. The 2-year T-note has rocketed to 1.25% from 0.96%. Yields now are the highest since mid-November.

Comment by Groundhogday
2009-06-06 19:06:44

OH MY GOD!!!! 6.5% interest on conventional mortgages!!! HOW WILL BE POSSIBLY SURVIVE!!!!

What is the long term norm for mortgage interest rate by the way…?

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 23:11:11

More important than the long-term norm for interest rates is the long-term trend, which was increasing from roughly 1950-1980, decreasing from roughly 1980-2009, and now is at generational lows awaiting the onset of another 3-decade long uptrend.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 10:55:01

More evidence on the debate over whether the Fed is part of government or is rather a private bank posing as a government agency for politically expedient reasons: They hire lobbyists. What other government agency hires lobbyists to lobby THE GOVERNMENT???

It seems somehow appropriate that they found someone who used to work for Enron…

The Wall Street Journal
* JUNE 6, 2009

Fed to Hire Lobbyist as Overhaul Push Looms

By DAMIAN PALETTA

WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve is close to appointing a veteran Washington lobbyist to a senior role as the Obama administration prepares to ask Congress to redraw the central bank’s powers.

Linda Robertson, a former top aide at the Treasury Department during the Clinton administration, is expected to start at the Fed in July. She has been a lobbyist at Johns Hopkins University since 2002, where she was most recently a vice president for government affairs. At the Fed, she would lead the congressional-affairs team.

Ms. Robertson had a brief stint on the lobbying team at Enron Corp., but spent eight years in the Clinton administration where she worked closely with then-Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers as well as his predecessors, Lloyd Bentsen and Robert Rubin.

Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-06-06 12:41:09

Well unfortunately, gov’t agencies do lobby for greater funding and powers all the time… But this kind of thing reinforces my conviction that there is no essential difference between a medium-to-large size “private” corporation (or a small company with large corporate clients) and a government agency.

Comment by polly
2009-06-06 15:09:50

Umm…you are aware that the Federal Reserve isn’t really a government agency, right?

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 23:13:32

Yes. Just trying to reinforce the point for those who are confused by their propaganda tactics (e.g., using web site names like www dot federalreserve dot gov).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 11:00:20

Just wait until rising l-t interest rates and falling prices serve to wrest the shadow inventory of 500,000+ homes out of the banks’ clutches and onto the market. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

New Business June 4, 2009, 5:00PM EST
Foreclosure: Now an Upscale Blight

Rising job losses and falling home prices are dragging down people who never dreamed they would get in trouble

By Peter Coy
BW Magazine

With the U.S. economy and financial markets showing signs of life, optimistic analysts are looking for a recovery in the all-important housing sector. They got some ammunition on June 2 from the National Association of Realtors, which said that its Pending Home Sales Index jumped in April by the most in more than seven years.

But housing can’t revive as long as the market is being flooded with homes that are falling into foreclosure. And far from going away, the problem is broadening. It’s not just about subprime anymore. Now, people with excellent credit who never dreamed of getting in financial trouble are being dragged down by a dangerous cycle of rising unemployment and falling home prices. That is going to prolong the foreclosure crisis and, inevitably, inhibit the recovery of the rest of the economy.

Any illusion that prime loans would emerge unscathed was shattered by a May 28 report from the Mortgage Bankers Assn. “For the first time since the rapid growth of subprime lending, prime fixed-rate loans now represent the largest share of new foreclosures,” the bankers said. The grime in prime was responsible for the worst performance on record for the U.S. mortgage sector in the first quarter: Nearly 13% of loans were delinquent or in foreclosure, the most since the bankers started keeping tabs in 1972. The problems were worst in the bubble states of California, Florida, Arizona, and Nevada.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 11:51:15

“Are we sick yet of stories about housing? The answer is no…”

The money quote in this interview: “The NAHB chief economist told me he could see the foreclosure rate continuing to rise for another two years.”

And another beauty:

“Peter, I really wish that at some point we could stop writing and talking about housing, but it doesn’t look like that’s going to be any time soon.”

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:51:01

Now to turn my sights to our own tony zip code (Rancho Bernardo West — 92127):

MLS SFR Inventory = 171 homes
Median list price = $1,299,000 (a very popular price point, with ten homes on the $5000 range from $1,295,000 to $1,300,000)

ForeclosureTown Inventory = 258 homes
Median list price = $545,490

It looks like foreclosure is definitely the way to go if you want to buy a home in 92127! And I am still having a hard time seeing those inventory shortage trees, given that my view is blocked by a forest of foreclosure homes…

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 14:14:22

“Now to turn my sights to our own tony zip code (Rancho Bernardo West — 92127)” hahahahahahahhahahahahahaha lol ;-)

Go ahead Mr. Bear, wear your HBB t-shirt in public at a local “Tony” restaurant..go ahead…I dare ya…I double-dare ya :-)

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 17:57:50

I would wear it tonight, but the restaurant we are planning to visit would most likely not serve patrons wearing HBB tee-shirts :-(

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by az_lender
2009-06-06 20:04:55

“optimistic analysts are looking for a recovery in the all-important housing sector”

They never seem to Get It that the “all-importance” of the housing sector is the root of the problem!

 
 
Comment by Lisa
2009-06-06 11:47:56

“Nearly 13% of loans were delinquent or in foreclosure, the most since the bankers started keeping tabs in 1972. The problems were worst in the bubble states of California, Florida, Arizona, and Nevada.”

Good thing these are all small population states -); California is BK, and I believe all states combined account for 12% of GDP. Consumers are what, about 70%? I am noticing there is less crap about “green shoots” in the MSM, though. Can’t wait to hear the spin when the Q3/Q4 “recovery” fails to materialize…

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:21:25

What does CA being bankrupt have to do with anything? Nothing, apparently, as the green shoots visionaries never, ever mention anything about it when describing the world they see through their green-tinted glasses.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:05:35

Is anyone in the market for a high-end foreclosure home? ForeclosureTown dot com lists 196 of them for Rancho Santa Fe (92067), on the range from $475,000 to $14,000,000, with a median list price of $2,990,000. In case you like that median price point, there is plenty of selection, with three homes listed at exactly that price, and another nine listings at $2,995,000 ($5000 more = a few pennies to a rich buyer).

If buying off ForeclosureTown is beneath your dignity, there are 302 single family homes on the MLS for 92067, marketed at list prices between $950,000 and $35,000,000, with a median list price of $3,399,000. Assuming the sellers have listed their homes at fair market value (Hah!), the total value of these homes currently on the market is upwards of 302*$3,399,000 ~= $1 bn. And since they are selling at a rate of maybe 10 homes per month, there is roughly a 40 month (400/10) supply, not counting shadow inventory that we don’t yet see.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 12:12:43

Ha, some “aliens” are going to show up in that exact location Mr. Bear…and then there will be even more “vacant” homes! ;-)

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:16:46

May they enjoy journeys to other worlds in their “containers” :-)

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 14:03:35

Oh, Good-ody…Mission Accomplished! Wasn’t that also in San Diego Mr. Bear? ;-)

The members of the group added “-ody” to the first names they adopted in lieu of their original given names, which defines “children of the Next Level.” This is mentioned in Applewhite’s final video, “Do’s Final Exit,” that was filmed on March 19, 1997, just days prior to the suicides.

“In the months prior to their deaths, Thurston-ody, Sylvie-ody, and Elaine-ody worked for Advanced Development Group (ADG), Inc. producing computer-based instruction for the U.S. Army. Upon resigning from ADG, the three informed their supervisor that they had completed their mission.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 17:56:17

“Wasn’t that also in San Diego Mr. Bear? ”

More to the point, it was in Rancho Santa Fe :-)

 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:13:07

92130 (Carmel Valley) is another San Diego zip code rife with foreclosure listings. There are upwards of 280 shown on ForeclosureTown dot com, and the median list price shown for the 280 homes with prices given is $688,888. That is a pretty penny to pay for a 4 br/3 ba home in foreclosure, but I suppose it might look like a steal for some real estate investor trying to get into San Diego housing now that it has bottomed out.

In case you don’t care for buying foreclosures, the MLS shows 213 single family homes on the market for 92130, at a median list price of $1,150,000.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:34:10

Doing a bit more ground truthing of local San Diego housing market data against the “low inventory” reports from REIC boosters. Let’s turn our sights to La Jolla (92037) for a moment.

MLS Inventory (single family, only) = 275
Median list price = $1,995,000

ForeclosureTown inventory (SFRs+Condos, I think…) = 422 (Oh my!)
Price range = $1700 to $33,000,000
(w/ 4 foreclosure homes at $32m!!!)

Median list price (for prices shown) = $1,295,000 (a very popular price point, I might add, with 4 homes for sale at exactly this price).

All told, I am having a very hard time identifying that inventory shortage the San Diego real estate shills are claiming.

Comment by Wickedheart
2009-06-06 16:06:40

There is a shortage, it just isn’t the better areas of San Diego. There is an abundance of properties over a half mil.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 17:49:01

“There is a shortage,…”

Just temporarily, IMO due to the taxpayer-funded giveaways of tax credit incentives to buy houses now. The likely result is that the natural flow of demand will be interrupted, with a spike now representing whoever is close to a decision to buy getting off the fence, followed by a trough of demand in the form of a post-stimulus hangover. This will get much uglier if the current crop of investors realize they caught falling knives, which could result in many drawing the reasonable conclusion that ‘real estate is the worst investment.’

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 17:55:15

When you say there is a ’shortage’, are you factoring in the houses banks are hoarding on the presumption that the green shoots theory will prove true and home prices will soon be inflating again?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 18:11:59

Del Mar (92014) is another tony San Diego suburb with a fair amount of foreclosure inventory. Though only 160 show up in ForeclosureTown listings, they range in price as high as $26,000,000. The median is $1,595,000, and there are three foreclosure homes listed at this price. Doesn’t foreclosure mean that people had mortgages? I am quite shocked at how many $1m+ homes were bought with mortgages, as I thought anyone who could afford a home in that price range bought with cash, or at least had a deep enough cash cushion to avoid having to sell at fire sale prices.

Comment by SaladSD
2009-06-06 19:09:38

The full time residential population of Del Mar is ridiculously small, something like 10 or 15,000. Lots of 2nd homes and race track rentals. A 58 year old Del Martian woman just thew herself in front of the train a few days ago. Wonder what her story is, we typically think of folks living in Del Mar as living pretty well. Del Mar doesn’t have the pomposity of La Jolla, and has some very charming nooks and crannies, including some modest sized vintage bungalows. (as with all San Diego coastal communities, east of I-5 doesn’t count..)

 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 12:08:49

Hey Ben, Mr Bear is scaring everyone again! Is it “sweeps week” for the coveted Golden Bear “Eeyore Award” or what? :-)

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 12:14:37

Since when does mundane reporting of actual data instead of sprouting nonsense about green shoots qualify as “scaring people”?

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 14:08:19

Well, when you receive a call from Vatican City…remember the the code name: Galileo …and you didn’t hear it from me.

(Poor Mr. Bear, he must have temporarily forgotten how much “real estate” churches own in America) ;-)

 
 
 
Comment by milkcrate
2009-06-06 12:59:25

His new 2009 release (not the archives project) is dedicated, seemingly, to….. cars. Might be a Dodge anthem in there somewhere.

Comment by milkcrate
2009-06-06 13:00:29

Prev. was for hwy who was living with war…

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2009-06-06 13:58:05

Thanks for the nudge to look see… :-)

http://www.neilyoung.com/forkintheroad/getaroundpreview.html

The prolong is rather interesting considering GM/Jeep… :-(

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 15:09:39

This is the coolest article I’ve read in a while:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/06/lear_jet_repo_man/index.html

Comment by lavi d
2009-06-06 17:19:05

This is the coolest article I’ve read in a while:

Holy smokes!

I was just joking when I posted this.

 
Comment by X-GSfixer
2009-06-06 18:47:28

These jackholes work the other way, too. Stole a midsize jet right off the ramp of the OEM (right wing was damaged, aircraft parked for two years; pi$$ing contest between the owner and the insurance company).

Never steal an airplane from an OEM; you will be found sooner or later.
Tracked this airplane down in less than a week, because they needed parts to fix it.

This guy can’t be too smart…….trying to repo an airplane sitting in Haiti.

Eventually, one of these guys is going to try to repo an unairworthy airplane, auger in and kill a bunch of people, and the families of the survivors are going to OWN the repo guy’s estate, and whoever hired them.

 
Comment by SaladSD
2009-06-06 19:20:13

Wow, I used to watch Family Bonds on HBO, and their operation was small potatoes compared to this guy. I’d love to see a dramatization of a day in the life of this repo man.

 
Comment by rms
2009-06-07 00:18:35

The ocean capable boating biz was interesting. The deadbeat buys a fancy boat, and sails away to a port in another country. Very dangerous repo contracts with poor rewards. The third world is loaded with stolen property from rich countries.

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

I have a question for you guys. I know a couple trying to sell their house FSBO in Saratoga, CA. It’s in the cheaper part of Saratoga bordering Campbell. Zillow says it’s worth $866,000. They are asking $1,188,000 and haven’t come down a penny in 364 days on the market. The house is sitting empty since they moved out into a rental a year ago. The husband, unemployed since 1999, appears unwilling to face the present reality.

How should I approach giving them some helpful advice?

Comment by LongIslandLost
2009-06-06 16:22:20

Offer to review his resume. Seriously, this couple’s most serious problem is the unemployment. I have been unemployed and it sucks a lot worse than renting. Also, if he is unemployed, he may have trouble getting a rental. If you really want to help, help him find a job.

Do not offer advice on the house sale. Let a 6%’er deal with that.

Comment by DennisN
2009-06-06 16:27:49

He’s living off his wife’s income. She’s a partner in a law firm.

 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 16:36:53

F%$k it, tell him to HELOC as much as possible, open a trade account, and let it ride. :grin:

 
Comment by DennisN
2009-06-06 18:36:59

Actually I’m trolling for Olygal’s comments on the lazy husband. ;)

 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 17:05:13

The husband, unemployed since 1999

so what he’s been off the books for years….Nobody is unemployed that long…I made lots of money just dj parties when i was a full time dj…all cashola….yet i was “Unemployed” during the week for years.

Comment by DennisN
2009-06-06 18:44:18

No he goofed off and didn’t graduate from college until he was 28. He then got a computer job, but quit it 3 years later after he got married to “discover himself”. He hasn’t worked since.

Comment by SaladSD
2009-06-06 19:12:37

I so love hearing these stories where the man is the Gold Digger.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2009-06-08 07:52:41

aNYCdj, do you feel at all bad about your cashola-based working of the system? You alluded to the tax advantages a long time back on the board, and now you mention being “unemployed” during the week while making lots of money working weekends.

Both sound like stealing to me—and incidentally, stealing _from_ me, since I pay my taxes due under the law.

 
 
 
Comment by wawawa
2009-06-06 16:02:00

You can read WSJ subscriber articles for free and it is legal.

I tried it and it works 

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-read-the-wsj-for-free-online-2009-6

Thanks to Tyler Durden of ZeroHedge.

Comment by tresho
2009-06-06 19:15:13

Dang. I stumbled across these “free” articles many times in the past, but never suspected there was a system to it. Thanks for posting.

 
 
Comment by Olympiagal
2009-06-06 17:59:31

Howdy, droogies, how you being this Saturday eve?
It seems like a fitful and chancy and unrestful night to me, but maybe that’s because a storm seems to be setting up to blow in off of Totten Inlet, so that the tops of the tall trees are starting to churn and bend. That always makes me a bit levitatey and twitchy.

Plus I fell out of a new tree I tried to climb and I about busted my right arm this afternoon. I swear, I felt the little bone in the front bend a bit; is that the radius thingie or the ulna thingie? The one that moves the thumb. I never can remember, but I bet I will be paying lots of attention when I try to drive myself to the hospital while all my arm bones clash together.

That stupid tree! I’m gonna kick its barky butt! NO tree’s gonna resist THIS lemur evolutionary off-shoot and my long digits! I’m gonna climb to the top* and sit there swaying back and forth, singing triumphant songs and everything!

Oh, yeah….in an effort to make this germane and relevant to the HBB, I will tell you all that today when I drove down Steamboat Island Road I saw a bunch of new ‘for sale’ signs pointing off onto various roads. These were new ones, set enticingly next to the ones that have been there for months, that are now leaning over in a tired fashion and getting a bit mossy loooking.
Maybe we had a new REtard seminar/clean-up party! After all, a new fresh sign will lure in the eager bidders, right? Right?
Yeah…that’ll work. Just think positively. That’s alllll you need….
BWAHAHAHAAH!

*As soon as I have the use of 5 limbs back.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 23:20:27

“…a bit levitatey and twitchy.”

No storms in sight here in SD, but the wife is a bit agitated due to tidal issues (perhaps the right description involves dropping the opening ‘t’ from the last word in your description, or possibly going so far as to replace the ‘w’ with a ‘b’…).

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 18:06:19

Must… not… drink… and post…

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 18:13:23

Awe, come’on, muggy — drinking and posting is fun, it’s challenging, and it’s not even against the law!

Comment by Muggy
2009-06-06 18:16:10

I’m bombed. I cut waaayy back after becoming a stay-at-home dad. My wife’s off for the summer, so I get to sleep in tomorrow. First bottle off Pinot in a long time, and I knocked it off in one episode of Cops.

I will sleep better than my baby tonight.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-06-06 19:27:37

moogy……

ware iz yor nu drinkin pardner NYCboy 2 nite?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Stpn2me
2009-06-06 22:29:54

God, I miss cops…

I think the wife is going to try to put them on a thumb drive and email them too me. We have digital cable, and I think the box can support it. I have been watching cops for years. If I wasnt in the military, I would be a cop….

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by drumminj
2009-06-06 22:39:17

Watching cops and drinking wine? Is that like pairing something bitter and sweet together? I consider wine somewhat sophisticated…..cops?? not so much ;)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-06-06 23:30:19

I find it bizarre that the FDIC chief is playing politics with respect to which banking CEOs survive and which do not. Too bad we cannot have a well-regulated banking system, including a rule of law with transparency and proper regulatory enforcement, so that Mr Market can do a proper job of picking which CEOs to dump and which to keep around. Leave communism for the communist countries.

Financial Times
Regulator expects bank chiefs to lose jobs
By Francesco Guerrera and Nicole Bullock in New York
Published: May 16 2009 00:10 | Last updated: May 16 2009 00:10

A US regulator on Friday predicted that chief executives and directors of some of the banks that underwent the stress tests could lose their jobs, in another sign of the government’s desire to have a say in the running of bailed-out companies.

Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, said the authorities could replace management and boards at some of the 10 banks that were ordered to add fresh capital after the tests.

“Management needs to be evaluated,” she told Bloomberg television. “Is this the right skill set? Have they been doing a good job? Are there people who can do a better job?”

Asked whether some chief executives and directors would be replaced when banks present their capital-raising plans in the next few weeks, she said: “Yeah, I think there will be an evaluation process. We’re requesting it as part of the capital plan.”

Comment by LongIslandLost
2009-06-07 05:00:44

Maybe we’ll get lucky. Maybe the government will respond so randomly, stupidly, and aggressively that generations of bankers will avoid needing government “help.”

I can’t wait until Congress starts reviewing compensation packages.

 
 
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

  • The Housing Bubble Blog