September 18, 2009

Bits Bucket For September 18, 2009

Post off-topic ideas, links and Craigslist finds here. Please visit the HBB Forum.




RSS feed | Trackback URI

410 Comments »

Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2009-09-18 02:12:17

1.4 million Americans score $8,000 tax credit
“The IRS reports that taxpayers are cashing in on the tax credit for first-time homebuyers; a push to extend the credit gains steam.”

money DOT cnn DOT com/2009/09/17/real_estate/homebuyer_tax_credit_claims_soaring/index.htm
.
.
“Buyers must close on their homes before Dec.1. But because much of the recent uptick in home sales has been attributed to this tax credit, housing industry advocates worry that the market could quickly turn down again after the credit expires.

“Just like the Cash-for-Clunkers program, there could be a hangover effect,” said Mike Larson, a real estate analyst for Weiss Research.

That’s why housing industry participants are pushing Congress to keep the tax credit in place.

“We’re calling for extending the credit until the end of next year and expanding it to all homebuyers,” said NAR spokesman Walter Molony. “We do think that housing will recover without it but the market will come back faster and stronger with it.”

Oy vey. I love how the title says “taxpayers” are cashing in on the credit. Not this taxpayer. As if that softens the blow for the taxpayers not taking advantage of it.

Yes, let’s subsidize the market back faster to its once and future permanent high plateau.

Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 02:56:55

You really are sleepless!

 
Comment by salinasron
2009-09-18 04:08:58

“1.4 million Americans score $8,000 tax credit”

Gee, do you think that they count a husband and wife purchase as ‘two’ vs ‘one’. If you extend the $8K credit for another year you take away the rush to buy, if you extend the credit to $15K you have just pissed off the previous buyers and some potential buyers will opt to sit things out waiting for a $30K credit. Artificially hold up prices and qualified buyers will sit things out waiting for the crash.

Comment by Julius
2009-09-18 07:23:47

And these things are a problem because….?

Why shouldn’t qualified buyers wait for the crash? Do you think it’s great for a bunch of people to pay way too much for RE now just to keep up the “rush to buy”?

Comment by eastcoaster
2009-09-18 09:23:08

I think the point is that all these ridiculous credits are just prolonging the already prolonged inevitable. And as someone qualified to buy, that’s a problem for me. Enough already.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by CA renter
2009-09-19 02:42:32

Hear, hear!

 
 
 
 
Comment by CarrieAnn
2009-09-18 05:33:18

“Buyers must close on their homes before Dec.1. But because much of the recent uptick in home sales has been attributed to this tax credit, housing industry advocates worry that the market could quickly turn down again after the credit expires.”

Woke up to some pretty significant mark downs on a few remaining area homes today. Some are relatively new to the market (few weeks). Others are jumping down from stubbornly lofty wishing prices after significant DOM. It did appear there might be a whiff of fear in the air.

Comment by Anon In DC
2009-09-18 11:59:34

Hi. I follow the Washington DC market closely. Recently some Capitol Hill rowhouse asking and sold quickly ~ $450K. Chevy Chase (with the district ) single family REO new to the the market for $538K. Both prices are about 2002 - 2003 is my guestimate. I think prices heading much lower :)

 
 
Comment by DebtinNation
2009-09-18 05:45:32

And even the taxpayers that are “benefitting” from it, are they really? Aside from buying prematurely, how quick does the 8,000 subsidy merely get baked into the price in a lot of cases?

Comment by Al
2009-09-18 06:00:28

By taxpayers, they mean realtors, banks and mortgage brokers.

 
Comment by pressboardbox
2009-09-18 06:08:33

I heard some new homebuyers bought new furniture and flat-screen tvs. Free flat-screens are a benefit.

Comment by wolfgirl
2009-09-18 08:59:15

They should hold out for the home 3D tvs that are suppose to be coming out in the next year. Just another item I won’t be buying.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:28:08

Doesn’t the $8K “credit” have to be repaid? Or did they change the rules at some point to turn it into a Rob-Peter-to-Pay-Paul type giveaway?

Comment by eastcoaster
2009-09-18 06:31:33

No repayment. Rules changed. That’s why I’m wondering about the proposed $15K credit. Can they really up it to $15K, make it available to any buyer (not just 1st time) and not have it repaid? That’s ridiculous. And it will keep housing propped up even longer (and tick me off more!).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 06:38:06

Correct, no repayment, and the 1st time buyer refers to anyone that has not ‘owned’ a home in the last three years.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:42:12

Looking on the bright side, there are far fewer qualified buyers at the moment than when the $8K credit went into effect, given the combination of so many fence-sitters who already jumped at the $8K credit coupled with still-rising unemployment.

 
Comment by Kim
2009-09-18 07:02:14

No repayment, but you have to live in the house as your primary residence for three years - or else you DO have to pay it back.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:31:53

“…but you have to live in the house as your primary residence for three years…”

Would lying on the residency declaration form suffice in order for flippers to qualify?

 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-09-18 09:37:32

“No repayment. Rules changed. That’s why I’m wondering about the proposed $15K credit. Can they really up it to $15K, make it available to any buyer (not just 1st time) and not have it repaid? That’s ridiculous. And it will keep housing propped up even longer (and tick me off more!).”

Yes, they can!

I fully expect ever-increasing credits will continue until the dollar is worth less than a piece of bath tissue.

This will produce a “strong economy” with $5+ gallon gas, 15% U3 unemployment, and run-away crime and corruption. But at least everyone will have a Government Supplied crudshack!

 
 
Comment by cereal
2009-09-18 09:08:56

You can have an 8k credit or you can have a 15k credit. But when the market forces pull down prices on the 2.75m Santa Monica house to 1.2, all bets are off.

I rather enjoy watching the government shake their fist at the laws of economics.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by VaBeyatch in Virginia Beach
2009-09-18 07:43:06

Well technically, they are overpaying for their house, so they will overpay on taxes?

 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 07:40:43

money DOT cnn DOT com/2009/09/17/real_estate/homebuyer_tax_credit_claims_soaring/index.htm

Linky

 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 07:43:29

“Just like the Cash-for-Clunkers program, there could be a hangover effect,” said Mike Larson, a real estate analyst for Weiss Research.”

““We do think that housing will recover without it but the market will come back faster and stronger with it.’”

Yes, let’s subsidize the market back faster to its once and future permanent high plateau.

Oy Vey is right. The insanity is spreading like a grass fire.

 
Comment by FP
2009-09-18 08:16:24

Housing will only recover when Private capital is fueling this Industry. All this free money from the government is just keeping housing from going down faster. Once private capital is pumped into housing, that’s when healing begins.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 08:46:33

I agree about private capital being needed to heal the housing industry, but public capital has a healing affect on the general economy to the degree it stimulates economic activity.. and that is their aim.

They fear deflation. They fear the flow of money will slow to the point where it damages production across the board. The housing industry itself is immaterial except for it’s being a convenient vehicle to move money around. Keep the money moving and the economy will continue to heal.

 
 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 08:34:10

imo, it’s much ado about nothing.
Creating $8,000 worth of artificial demand would cancel out $8,000 worth of artificial supply… but there is no artificial supply.

Was any real demand created?
If some person who would never have bought a house was turned into a buyer only because of the credit, then the program has created real demand. I tend to believe such people are virtually non-existent. No new buyers created. No demand added. Price is unaffected.

Comment by polly
2009-09-18 09:09:30

Real demand was created because without the $8000, some people couldn’t come up with the 3.5% downpayment plus closing costs. They had desire before, but not enough savings to actually make the purchase.

Desire does not equal demand. At least not when you are dealing with a purchase that requires a chunk of change before you are allowed to play.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 09:40:43

Those marginally funded buyers who couldn’t afford a home at today’s prices would be able to buy one at tomorrow’s lower prices.
$8,000 is about 8 days worth of price reduction in some places. It might take a month or two in others… perhaps 6 months.
But effectively, as long as prices are falling, the credits do nothing more than steal demand from the future and apply it to today’s market.

I’m not complaining.. i think it’s great. It stimulates the economy, and helps recovery, and in the same stroke takes buyers out of the market, shrinking the qualified buyer pool at the bottom (my competition).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 10:01:33

“$8,000 is about 8 days worth of price reduction in some places.”

Spot on, Joey. That is why anyone who decides to buy in coastal CA based on the $8K credit is an ignoramus.

 
 
Comment by stpn2me
2009-09-18 11:00:20

Desire does not equal demand.

But I thought that’s what “pent-up” demand was…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 13:46:40

Maybe, but, as they say, pent up demand and $2 will get you a ride on the subway. Without the pent up demand? You need 200 cents…

For people who can’t ever seem to save any money at all, the $8000 really does make a difference. It is almost certainly for a house they can’t possibly afford for any length of time - what happens when the roof starts to leak and there is no way to pay other than their credit cards whose limit has just been reduced? - but there have been plenty of interviews with folks who couldn’t scrape together more than $1K or $2K of savings despite wanting to buy for years. Those folks might have been “pent up demand” seven or 8 years from now, but not 12 months.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 17:32:02

The difficulty people might have with saving a big chunk of money when it’s not forced upon them is understandable.

I really struggle with the question of whether or not undisciplined people who do take on a big responsibility, like home ownership, would feel enough pressure to change their saving and spending habits. A quick scan of my memory says I don’t know anyone who did so.

Having little or no skin in the game certainly doesn’t help matters.

Maybe saving and the carefully considered application of one’s money are things that can only be learned when a person is really young… that’s a disturbing thought.

 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2009-09-18 09:50:32

Just like Cash 4 Clunkers, which only served to cannibalize future sales. I can’t wait to see the rest of the monthly auto sales for the year. I expect they will be horrid and “no one expected this”.

One thing I have noticed in my neck of the woods is that the supply of late model used cars has dried up. Small wonder though, why pay $30K for a new car when you could buy a 2 year old one with 20-30K miles on it for 20K. I took my car in for warranty service and noticed they had a big whiteboard in the wating area with a list of desireable trade ins.

Another dealer sent me an email announcing that sales are brisk and that they are looking for sales droids to hire. This struck me as odd. Is this some sort of confidence building hype for potential buyers?

 
Comment by Anon In DC
2009-09-18 12:08:43

Well I think in high cost coastal markets $8K is meaningless. Also there is an income cap for the 8K. Even if expaned to $15K as someone here said try pushing on a string.

 
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2009-09-18 09:31:21

We need to get people back to spending far more than they make! Only with a combination of ever-increasing tax credits, loose lending with taxpayer backing, and runaway unemployment can we achieve the goal of having no jobs and $1,000,000 McMansions for all!

Oh, if you’re a responsible, productive member of society, please leave your wallet and ID info at the door and we’ll relief you of all your money so you don’t have to worry about it anymore.

 
Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-09-18 10:27:34

I bought a house, and I get bupkis from this. We make too much money for the credit, and so I get to pay OTHER PEOPLE TO DRIVE UP HOUSING PRICES. Great. Thanks jerkwads!

I hope there is no extension.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:32:18

1.4 million times $8000 = $11.2 bn worth of free money funneled into the effort to prop up housing prices.

Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2009-09-18 19:37:40

It wasn’t free. Your children and mine will be paying for it.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 03:15:30

Housing Agency’s Cash Reserves Will Drop Below Requirement
Washington Post
September 18, 2009

The Federal Housing Administration has been hit so hard by the mortgage crisis that for the first time, the agency’s cash reserves will drop below the minimum level set by Congress, FHA officials said.

The FHA guaranteed about a quarter of all U.S. home loans made this year, and the reserves are meant as a financial cushion to ensure that the agency can cover unexpected losses.

“It’s very serious,” FHA Commissioner David H. Stevens said in an interview. “There’s nothing more serious that we’re addressing right now, outside the housing crisis in general, than this issue.”

Until now, government officials have warned that the agency could be forced to ask Congress for billions of dollars in emergency aid or charge borrowers more for taking out FHA-insured loans if the reserves fell below the required level, equal to 2 percent of all loans guaranteed by the agency.

Both options are politically unpalatable. Congress and the public are weary of bailouts after the government spent hundreds of billions of dollars rescuing banks; insurance companies; automakers; and the mortgage finance giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Raising premiums for borrowers could increase the cost of buying a home just as a wounded housing market is showing signs of life.

Stevens said that such drastic actions are not needed. He said he is planning to announce Friday several measures that should help the reserves rebound quickly.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:30:13

“…Cash Reserves Will Drop Below Requirement…”

That was fast. Will the FHA go the way of Fannie and Freddie even before the end of the current bust?

One lesson learned from this crisis: ‘Requirement’ is a very flexible concept when it comes to the rules governing housing finance.

Comment by Jim A.
2009-09-18 07:21:13

Well it’s my understanding that the FHA was always a “full faith and credit” agency, unlike the “implied” federal backing of the GSEs.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:27:20

This makes forcing the FHA to make subprime loans, subject to a taxpayer guarantee for the lender who made them, all the more egregious.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:03:05

Recently I heard President Obama say that we need to quit living beyond our means and we need to hold Wall Street accountable. I guess that will happen right after the tax credit for house buying is expanded, the FHA is bailed out and the FDIC taps its credit line from The Treasury.

Responsibility never felt so easy. Or could it be that Mr. Obama, Wall Street and the Congress have no idea what the word “responsibility” means?

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 12:06:19

You want to hold Wall St. responsible? Get out of stocks and bonds. Don’t deal with the big banks. Buy from smaller companies.

Isn’t going to happen is it?

And there you have it. Money and power naturally coalesce into a few hands until they can no longer control events.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

You should read the history of the Medicis. Europe’s first big banking family.

 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 12:21:56

“You should read the history of the Medicis. Europe’s first big banking family.”

Is there a book you recommend? I’m looking for something like The Arms of Krupp by William Manchester that told the story of the Krupp family. I would highly recommend that book to see what corruption power can have on a family.

Thank you in advance. I will drink a Jack Daniels in your honor tonight.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:29:09

“Isn’t going to happen is it?”

Sure — I would be happy to make an attempt at bringing Wall Street to its knees by rejiggering my meager portfolio away from their assets…

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 14:20:14

Sorry NYCBoy, I can’t think of any one in particular. Your local library should have plenty. These guys OWNED Europe at one time.

The Medicis almost single-handedly financed the Renaissance and managed to get one of the their family made Pope. They also had branch banking all across Europe during that era.

PBear, that’s exactly what I’m talking about. Without being able to take away Wall St. resources, (the money flow) they can do pretty much what they damn well please. And where else would you put your money? Unless you invest in physical assets, it all flows through Wall St. eventually.

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2009-09-18 15:39:06

“I would highly recommend that book to see what corruption power can have on a family.”

Any good books on the Kennedys out there?

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 17:36:44

Yes and the Bushes as well.

Again, check your local library.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:59:07

“Both options are politically unpalatable. Congress and the public are weary of bailouts after the government spent hundreds of billions of dollars rescuing banks; insurance companies; automakers; and the mortgage finance giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Raising premiums for borrowers could increase the cost of buying a home just as a wounded housing market is showing signs of life.”

Here is a possible resolution to this politically unpalatable conundrum:

- Shut down the FHA.
- Shut down the GSEs.
- Get the gubmint out of the housing finance business entirely.

Affordable housing would soon miraculously materialize, after so many failed years by government agencies to bring it about.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:06:03

The government gets its hand out of the housing honey pot or NYCityBoy grows a third nut. Which will happen first? You decide.

Comment by wolfgirl
2009-09-18 09:01:38

I vote for the third nut. But why would you want one?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 09:41:45

So he can join The Amazing Mr. Lifto as a sideshow performer? Freak shows are recession-proof, I hear.

 
Comment by wolfgirl
2009-09-18 11:14:49

And you probably get to do a lot of traveling.

 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-09-18 09:11:46

http://bailout.propublica.org/

Interesting find, me thinks.

Sigh,
Leigh

P.S. Hey NYC! We moved to Sullivan, just a tad north of Edgerton. Holler if you’re up this way!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by eastcoaster
2009-09-18 09:35:33

Affordable housing would soon miraculously materialize, after so many failed years by government agencies to bring it about.

I didn’t realize they were trying to bring affordable housing about. Seems to me it’s been quite the opposite.

 
Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 09:44:45

I agree, get the government out of housing, except for the older programs to help first-time buyers get over the initial down-payment hump.

Unlike healthcare, people have the (reasonable) option not to buy housing. It’s called renting.

Comment by sfbubblebuyer
2009-09-18 10:30:45

Why should there be programs to get over the down payment hump? That’s the point of a down payment requirement, to prove you can get over the hump and thus have the ability to save and prioritize making you a decent candidate for borrowing a large sum of money.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:11:02

Friend said his mother rented her entire life.
Really great guy.

Guess it doesn’t Ruin people and babies after all.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Jon
2009-09-18 11:56:03

The purpose of buying a house is to own it before you get old so that you don’t have to come up with the monthly rent nut when you’re 85 and just paid out your life’s savings on those fancy investments that nice fella on the phone talked you into between dementia pills.

 
Comment by wolfgirl
2009-09-18 13:47:43

No, you just have to worry about maintance.

 
Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2009-09-18 19:43:41

Friend said his mother rented her entire life.

Wow. I’ve rented houses but never a life. How does one go about renting one’s life?

 
 
 
 
Comment by Al
2009-09-18 07:38:42

FHA: broke
Fannie & Freddie: broke
FDIC: broke

Thank goodness the recession is over so the government won’t need to bail these organisations out.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:10:10

The United States federal government: broke

Bernanke’s printing press: working overtime

Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 08:37:20

Printing Press will never run out of money

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 10:36:42

Any chance that the costs of printing money will rise faster than the money it prints?

Problem solved.

 
Comment by Sleepr Cell
2009-09-18 12:25:35

That would be called the ‘Zimbabwe Moment’
ZM for short. Remember folks, you heard it here first! ;)

 
Comment by In Colorado
2009-09-18 13:09:12

Won’t work, they can just keep adding zeroes.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:53:47

Great observation: HUD spelled backwards is DUH!

But it’s great to know there is a czar on the case…

* The Wall Street Journal
* September 18, 2009, 2:31 PM ET

Lawler: ‘Duh!’ FHA Should’ve Done This Long Ago

By James R. Hagerty

Today brings news of tighter credit standards from the Federal Housing Administration, the arm of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, that insures lenders against losses on home mortgages.

HUD is trying to quell rising anxiety over whether Congress eventually will have to bail out the FHA. “There will be no taxpayer bailout,” David Stevens, FHA commissioner, told reporters today. (As it was a telephone conference call, it wasn’t clear whether Mr. Stevens was crossing his fingers.)

The FHA czar said the planned tighter standards will help ensure that happy outcome.

But Thomas Lawler, a housing economist in Leesburg, Va., argues that the surprise is that the FHA didn’t take many of these precautionary steps long ago.

For instance, the FHA was allowing appraisals to remain valid for as long as 12 months on homes under construction, despite rapid house-price deflation over the past three years. Now the FHA won’t allow appraisals more than four months old.

Under planned new rules, the FHA also said lenders making FHA-insured loans will need to show net worth of at least $1 million, up from $250,000, and further increases may be sought later. As Mr. Lawler put it, even $1 million is a “puny” capital requirement.

For refinances of FHA loans, the agency will make new requirements for verifying income and other quality-control checks. It also will impose a maximum loan value of 125% of the current estimated home value on refinanced loans, in line with government-backed mortgage investors Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. A limit of 125% will strike many as way too high, but it’s better than no limit at all.

And the FHA plans to hire a chief risk officer for the first time.

Here’s Mr. Lawler’s verdict on the overall package: “This is literally HUD spelled backwards-–duh! These are things they should have been doing for a long time.

 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2009-09-18 13:43:58

“The Federal Housing Administration has been hit so hard by the mortgage crisis that for the first time, the agency’s cash reserves will drop below the minimum level set by Congress, FHA officials said.”

Nobody could have seen this coming.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 03:22:51

BlackRock’s Fink Says Obama Loan Rules Threaten Mortgage Market

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — BlackRock Inc. Chairman Laurence Fink said Obama administration programs to help homeowners stave off foreclosure may hinder the recovery of the mortgage market while benefiting banks that own second loans on the properties.

“I am just very worried,” Fink said yesterday in an interview in New York. “How do we get a vibrant securitization market back when we are doing these things in the short run that are good for the banking system and good for the homeowner but not as good as it should be?”

Fink said policies introduced this year to reduce foreclosures are flawed because they don’t require home-equity loans to be wiped out before the mortgage is modified. Instead, in a break with the intentions of contracts, the second loan’s terms may also be revised, spreading the financial loss among lenders, he said.

At stake is the recovery in the market for securities created from individual loans, including the almost $1.7 trillion in residential-mortgage bonds not backed by the U.S., according to Fink. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said in April the securitization market was “until recently” an important source of credit for the U.S. economy.

“This to me is one of the biggest issues facing American capitalism,” Fink said. “There is modification going on protecting our banks, protecting their balance sheets.” With the right types of changes, he added, “the homeowner is better off, America is better off, and you could say the first lien holder is better off.”

Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 03:43:27

Let me add some info from the article:

“Fink said policies introduced this year to reduce foreclosures are flawed because they don’t require home-equity loans to be wiped out before the mortgage is modified. Instead, in a break with the intentions of contracts, the second loan’s terms may also be revised, spreading the financial loss among lenders, he said. ”

Can somebody explain this to me? So what he’s saying is that an FB has to pay back some of his HELOC, as well as some of his mortgages. But what does this have to do with the “first lien holder”? I thought first lien was the 80% mortgages, and second lien was the 20% piggyback. Presumbly the HELOC comes later. And why would this be such a problem for Blackrock?

Unless, of course, Blackrock holds primarily first-lien mortgages, in which case Fink is just blowing propagandic smoke and blaming it on Obama.

And I really hope he means a true HELOC and not a cash-out refi. Technically a refi is a totally new mortgage.

Comment by polly
2009-09-18 09:21:58

The first lien holder expects to be FIRST. They get all their money before anyone else in line gets a penny. They rate their securities that way. If they only have the top 80% of the deal, they expect the bonds made out of that pool shouldn’t have to lose a penny until the value is down over 20%. If someone forces another deal on them (they get covered 90% - 72 out of 80 - while the rest of the lien holders get 40% - 8 out of 20 - then they are angry and won’t be able to guuarantee which bits of the securitized bonds are triple A so they will take their investment bankers and go home.

He has a point under contract law - a very good one. But the second lien holders can hold up the deal by refusing to sign off on the refi unless they are given something to buy them off. They really don’t have anything to lose.

Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 09:54:04

Oh, I got it, thanks. So the first lien-holder essentially rated their securities higher than they should have.

I think it’s pretty funny that they based all their risk calculations and bond ratings on 20%, that original 20% down payment, while the original down payment vanished.

And, there are piggyback mortgages on the re-fi too? I guess there would have to be, since so many people re-fi’d if they had less the 20% equity (the down payment) when they refied.

The more I learn about this, the more my internal alarms go off, and the more I resolve not to buy a damn thing until I have 20% to put down, and avoid all this malarkey. Simpler is usually safer.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 14:02:15

Just to remind you, Blackrock is mostly a hedge fund/private equity place, so they may not have put together the securitization pools. I just don’t know if they are in that business or not. But the point that first lien holders expect to be paid first stands. Blackrock may own securities, or may have bought up a pool of mortgages on the cheap when they could no longer be sold for making bonds. In any event, sounds like they have some interest in the first lien holders not having to share with the rest of the children on the playground.

 
Comment by Lenderoflastresort
2009-09-18 16:27:51

Actually, the local municipality is really the first lien holder. If the taxes are not paid, they get first dibs.

 
 
 
 
Comment by palmetto
2009-09-18 04:54:13

“How do we get a vibrant securitization market back”

Bwahahahaha! Is this guy on crack or what? Securitization is over. Who’s gonna buy? China? Finland? Oh, wait, maybe he can get Congress to pass a law that everyone has to buy the putrid sausage, or pay a fine to the IRS.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-09-18 05:55:04

I think he forgot a word in there:

How do we get the Fraudulent securitization market back!

—————————————————–
“How do we get a vibrant securitization market back”

 
Comment by pressboardbox
2009-09-18 06:11:20

I think the FED is supposed to buy the crap along with all of the other worthless $hit they are purchasing hand over fist.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:19:11

As long as their printing press is functioning well, I guess they can snap up anything they see fit to purchase?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:14:15

Wouldn’t you love to have a table at a flea market and see that little troll Bernanke walk up to it? You know you’d be able to sell him that stack of old Readers Digests for something like $96,000,000. That would be sweet. Laughter really is the best medicine or maybe the best medicine is a moronic academic that is playing chicken with the world’s financial system.

 
Comment by Lenderoflastresort
2009-09-18 15:25:05

No, but really, the bears are being trounced by the bulls as of late. If any of us had put money into mutual funds in April, we would be seeing 50 % returns by now. Man, am I pissed! I always listen to the bear yahoos. Hence, my financial decline. Sorry, I just got to call it as I sees it. In fact, I’m disturbed that this point has not been brought up here. Yes, there will be a correction, but I could have ridden this bear market rally out until now. As it is, I feel like jumping in, which I know is a signal that the markets are due for a correction, so I feel I can’t win! Go figure!

 
Comment by Watching the Carnage
2009-09-18 16:49:00

Lenderoflastresort,

Should’a…Could’a….Would’a

You can’t run your finances looking in the rear-view mirror. I feel your pain as I’ve been nearly all cash since Oct. 2007 and did envision a run up, but not nearly to this level.

So - still ahead. I’m one of those bear yahoos, so disregard my advice but I think the market is more likely to move to you rather than further away from you.

Patience is a virtue.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:31:20

“How do we get a vibrant securitization market back when we are doing these things in the short run that are good for the banking system and good for the homeowner but not as good as it should be?”

What is this guy smoking?

Comment by Housing Wizard
2009-09-18 08:20:33

These clowns think that they can get confidence back by a PR campaign ,rather than true reform and addressing fraud and corruption and all that was fake about the system that crashed that
enriched the investment elite and Wall Street and the lenders and big business, who were selling people crap they couldn’t afford by debt,that falsely raised the asset values.

Can someone please tell these people that unemployment ,no wage increases ,unpaid debt , trade imbalances ,global cheap labor competition , bankers and borrowers stealing from the coffers,no true reform on regulations , keeping interest rate low , is not the formula for confidence .

These clowns aren’t addressing the fact that not controlling the money supply to begin with was part of the problem .

Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 10:03:30

I just want to repeat something Le Prof said a few weeks ago — these jokers still haven’t realized that the consumer is FUNDAMENTALLY broke. They think we have all this “wealth” (read: access to ever-more credit) lying around gathering dust. If only they could convince us to “give it up,” — in every sense of that phrase — then they can go back to the business of leveraging that little bit of debt up to a lot of debt. Yachts for everybody!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 10:08:09

‘They think we have all this “wealth” (read: access to ever-more credit) lying around gathering dust.’

So long as the Fed has a working printing press, it seems we have a virtually unlimited supply of money — i.e., there is no macroeconomic budget constraint. Where is the problem?

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 12:11:24

Exactly. They are STILL mistaking the map for the terrain.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Lucy
2009-09-18 03:28:22

Wow Ben, you must be getting up these days before you go to sleep.

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 03:41:05

Now who would have thought protectionism would rear it’s lovely head.

Protectionism rising despite G-20 vows on trade
Improving economies may ease pressure on world leaders to work together, fight protectionism

WASHINGTON (AP) — Leaders of the world’s 20 top economies vowed to resist protectionism last November and again in April as they charted a joint strategy for confronting the worst global downturn in generations. As they meet again, they’ll get this progress report: Most of their economies are on the mend — and trade tensions and protectionism are on the rise.

A U.S.-China spat over Chinese tires and American chicken exports is just the latest example of how hard it has been to live up to those lofty fair-trade pledges. Nearly all 20 nations whose leaders meet next week in Pittsburgh have violated the no-protectionism pledges made earlier in Washington and London, according to reports from international monitoring groups.

As economies escape the grips of recession, the pressure to work together appears to be lessening.

National self-interest is reasserting itself. That includes a desire to protect battered home industries from overseas competition as governments look toward the day when they can dial back stimulus measures such as extra government spending and low interest rates.

Also, participants are arguing over issues such as proposed limits on bankers’ compensation, how far to go with international financial regulation and alarming recession-fueled budget deficits, especially in the U.S.

Comment by salinasron
2009-09-18 06:39:41

“As economies escape the grips of recession, the pressure to work together appears to be lessening.”

More like as ‘economies grapple with the fear of sliding into depression, the pressure to work together is evolving into protectionism’.

Comment by measton
2009-09-18 07:27:53

More like as ‘economies grapple with the fear of sliding into depression, the pressure to work together is evolving into protectionism’.

More like political leaders grapple with the fear of large mobs of angry unemployed people the pressure to work together fades.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:18:51

There’s never been a better time to buy stock in the manufacturers of industrial strength rope and lampposts.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Cassandra
2009-09-18 12:16:21

Better yet, buy a box of bullets, break it up and sell them individually.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 07:17:06

Trade is already down 30-40% depending on what source you read.

All those empty ships in Singapore will be empty for quite a while.

 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:16:06

“Leaders of the world’s 20 top economies vowed to resist protectionism last November and again in April as they charted a joint strategy for confronting the worst global downturn in generations.”

Wasn’t there an old expression about honor and thieves? I think there is. How did that go again?

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 04:15:40

Multinationalmonitor Sept 15 (Excerpt)

The Financial Crisis One Year Later: The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same
One year ago, Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy, bringing to a head the growing chaos on Wall Street.

Some things have changed dramatically — notably in the real economy — but Wall Street’s political power remains intact. No new rules are in place to prevent a recurrence of the crisis. Major questions remain about whether any such rules commensurate with the scale of the crisis — with the important exception of a new consumer financial protection agency — will be seriously considered.

The poverty rate has worsened dramatically, just based on the available data for 2008 alone. The official poverty rate in 2008 was 13.2 percent, up from 12.5 percent in 2007. There were 39.8 million people in poverty in 2008, 2.5 million people more than the previous year. The 2008 poverty rate — and things have surely gotten worse — was the highest since 1997.

The mortgage crisis continues to worsen. More than 1.5 million foreclosures were filed through the first seven months of this year. By mid-2009, roughly a third of outstanding mortgage borrowers were underwater — meaning they owed more than the value of their home — and the number is growing. Mortgage modifications — almost none of which touch principal — do not come close to keeping pace. Goldman Sachs projects there will be 13 million foreclosures between the end of 2008 and 2014.

The causes of the financial crash continue unabated and in some cases have worsened.

Out-of-control compensation packages, linked to short-term profit performance, drove top Wall Street and big bank executives and traders to take reckless risks. For them, it was a game of heads we win, tails you lose: If their firms registered short-term profits, they received outrageous bonus packages; if there was a longer-term fallout, that would hurt shareholders, but they would have already pocketed their bonuses. Wall Street bonuses are already on track to match or exceed the glutinous pace of 2007.

Perhaps one of the most telling statistics is the number of stand-alone pieces of financial reform legislation passed, one year after the collapse of Lehman Brothers: zero.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:49:13

Help is on the way!

* THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
* MANAGEMENT
* SEPTEMBER 18, 2009

Bankers Face Sweeping Curbs on Pay
Fed Plans to Limit How Lenders Can Structure Compensation for Executives, Traders, Loan Officers; 5,000 Firms Affected

By DAMIAN PALETTA and JON HILSENRATH

Policies that set the pay for tens of thousands of bank employees nationwide would require approval from the Federal Reserve as part of a far-reaching proposal to rein in risk-taking at financial institutions.

The Fed’s plan would, for the first time, inject government regulators deep into compensation decisions traditionally reserved for the banks’ corporate boards and executives.

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 06:59:57

“Policies that set the pay for tens of thousands of bank employees nationwide would require approval from the Federal Reserve as part of a far-reaching proposal to rein in risk-taking at financial institutions”.

“The Fed’s plan would, for the first time, inject government regulators deep into compensation decisions traditionally reserved for the banks’ corporate boards and executives”.

I think it’s so special that the FED is going to be given broader powers!

We also need to “inject a deep” and through books wide open audit of the FED. (Won’t happen)

Even Dick Durban hit it right when he said they (being the FED) own us (meaning congress)

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:20:25

That’s right. The Fed owns Congress, and they own the power to override the Constitution at will.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by alpha-sloth
2009-09-18 07:34:58

Said it before and I’ll say it again– Campaign finance/lobbying reform is the only real long term solution. Otherwise big money will always ‘outvote’ us.

 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:23:27

That’s funny. We are talking about campaign/finance reform right as The Supreme Court is on the brink of allowing corporations to have limitless ability to finance campaigns (in other words steal elections).

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 10:19:53

Campaign finance regs are unconstitutional and ineffective. As long as Congress has the general police power, with no popular referendums to check its power, money will continue to govern politics.

 
Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:13:30

Said it before and I’ll say it again– Campaign finance/lobbying reform is the only real long term solution. Otherwise big money will always ‘outvote’ us.

Lets say it again. Obviously no one is paying attention.

 
Comment by Jon
2009-09-18 11:43:26

LehighValleyGuy:

“Campaign finance regs are unconstitutional and ineffective.”

While currently true, both of these can be changed.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 12:19:51

Actually, there is nothing in the Constitution about campaign funding.

What there IS, is a built in mechanism for creating Amendments.

But let’s face it, money and politics are the same thing and there are far more idiots voting for other idiots than informed people voting for rational people.

 
Comment by rms
2009-09-18 12:29:52

“Said it before and I’ll say it again– Campaign finance/lobbying reform is the only real long term solution. Otherwise big money will always ‘outvote’ us.”

Looking beyond taxpayer funded abortions or environmental issues, campaign finance/congressional lobbying is the only thing keeping Israel alive. The rest of the world is aligned against Israel as well as many Americans, so absolute control of Congress is critical. Don’t count on any effective lobbying reforms within your lifetime.

 
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 14:34:14

I thought it was the Israeli nukes that were keeping Israel alive…

Having the rest of the world “against you” is not much of a problem for Israel. They seem to have enough trade partners. And if they lost the US foreign aid, they would just expand their own arms industry and sell to people the US would prefer not have such easy access to high tech weapons. That is the real reason for the foreign aid. That and the fundamentalist Christians wanting to protect Israel so Jesus can come back. Anyone who tells you anything else is deluded.

 
 
 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:21:32

Bankers Face Sweeping Curbs on Pay

Please refer back to my prior post about a third nut. The day they tell Jamie Dimon, Lloyd Blankfein or Vikram Pandit how much money they can really make is the day that I replace my entire wardrobe of boxer shorts.

Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 10:51:43

They’ll tell them how much they can make. As much as they want!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 10:58:54

The Fed’s plan would, for the first time, inject government regulators deep into compensation decisions traditionally reserved for the banks’ corporate boards and executives

Isn’t this the same FED that threatened to fire Ken Lewis and the board at BAC if they didn’t lie to his share holders. This should give them just a little more leverage.

 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 07:57:53

Wall Street bonuses are already on track to match or exceed the glutinous pace of 2007.

Glutinous bonuses?

Wouldn’t that absolve the traders and execs if the bonuses stuck to them and were impossible to remove?

Comment by hip in zilker
2009-09-18 08:05:58

It would make them stand out in a crowd, which might not be a good thing for them…

Comment by In Montana
2009-09-18 13:12:28

but, but, butt…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by salinasron
2009-09-18 04:25:30

“By Stephanie Armour, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is engaged in high-level talks about providing financial assistance to homeowners who’ve lost their jobs and can’t afford their mortgage payments.
The Treasury Department held meetings on the subject as recently as Thursday with key stakeholders, according to Laura Armstrong, a spokeswoman for Hope Now, an alliance of non-profits and mortgage servicers, and more discussions are planned.

Proposals include getting servicers to let jobless homeowners skip some monthly payments, according to Faith Schwartz, executive director of Hope Now.

Another possibility that has been discussed includes grants or loans to temporarily cover part of the mortgage costs for homeowners who become unemployed, says Paul Willen, a Federal Reserve Bank of Boston economist.

“Treasury has now brought us all together,” says Jack Shackett, Bank of America’s head of credit-loss prevention, who is involved in the discussions.”

This is really getting ugly now. Just bail out any ole a$$hole for a vote down the road. It’s time to throw the whole lot out into the real world and see how they survive. I’ll be headed to the gym soon to work out my anger.

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-09-18 06:38:32

The proposals are directed at bailing out Megabank, not the jobless homeowner. The govt already has plans in place to help a homeless, jobless person. The whole pupose of all of the new “mortgage assistance” programs is to keep the payments coming to the bank. That way the bank does not need another back-door bailout and the public outrage that goes with it. Every government action these days is to help Megabank. Megabank owns our government. Megabank owns you (therefore). We really need to do something about it other than just whine on this blog.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:03:18

“The proposals are directed at bailing out Megabank, not the jobless homeowner.”

Exactly. Have Uncle Sam keep the payments going on loans which should lead to the bankruptcy of the lenders who own them.

Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 07:19:22

I’m not sure its necessarily the lenders, but the owners of the mortgages that would benefit directly.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:26:01

Thanks for the clarification. I concur.

 
Comment by Jon
2009-09-18 12:03:39

Yeah, the way I see it is the government is making payments on the MBS tranches so that “private” capital will start snapping up new MBS issues, which is the only way to get the housing market & banks “back on track”.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:05:24

Calling it “financial assistance to homeowners” is a nice way to hide yet another bailout of Megabank, Inc provided by Uncle Sam.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:29:31

The Obama administration is engaged in high-level talks about providing financial assistance to homeowners who’ve lost their jobs and can’t afford their mortgage payments.

But I thought Obama just said that he was going to hold Wall Street accountable? Maybe I should just watch what his administration does and not listen to what they say. What do you think?

Where do the renters line up for their bailouts? That’s right. They won’t be getting any of the free cheese. Discrimination is the name of the game. Those that preach against discrimination sure seem to do a lot of it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 10:47:39

Notice that they are talking “loans and grants”…….which infers that the government expects to be repaid.

Unlike TARP…….

Wall Street and government at all levels (by policy and taxation) killed the golden-egg-laying goose. All the action now is the equivalent of doing CPR and charging up the AEDs.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:23:52

“But I thought Obama just said that he was going to hold Wall Street accountable?”

Read his lips. I think the plan is to put the Fed in charge of the regulatory effort, given that they have done such a stellar job thus far of regulating the financial sector.

 
 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 08:00:37

The whole pupose of all of the new “mortgage assistance” programs is to keep the payments coming to the bank.

Bingo!

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:39:34

“The Obama administration is engaged in high-level talks about providing financial assistance to homeowners who’ve lost their jobs and can’t afford their mortgage payments.”

Time for struggling renters to buy houses, then get themselves fired from their jobs.

 
Comment by Carlos4
2009-09-18 07:00:14

Ah, the Law Of Unintended Consequences rears its ugly head. I wonder how many of you complaining about home ownership related bailouts, modifications and outright grants voted last November? Anyone the least internet competent could have dug up the Obama wink-wink to the FB’s and the urban underclass. To those of you who couldnt, renew your USA subscription. To those of you who can and did and still voted for him, you have no justification to vent here. Suck it up and wait for the next bubble to pop or, jump in and buy now if you think the sheeple are getting such a great deal. Falling knife holder or catcher, you’ll all be in the same boat.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 10:50:18

Sorry to ruin your Obama rant, but this is an Equal Opportunity “Charlie-Foxtrot”

Comment by polly
2009-09-18 15:11:36

Isn’t the primary sponsor of the legislation to raise the subsidy to $15K and take all the restrictions away a republican?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 11:03:56

Does the Keating Savings and Loan case make you feel more confident about McCain.

The bottom line is these guys all work for the banks and big money.

 
Comment by Jon
2009-09-18 12:07:00

I voted for Ralph Nader. I’m allowed to rant against all of you sheeples.

 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-09-18 07:08:43

Their actions are betraying their words.

If the economy and housing market have bottomed, then why all these simultaneous and new efforts to help it recover? Despite the rosy headlines they sure ain’t acting like recovery is imminent.

Comment by Shizo
2009-09-18 07:42:50

+1

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 08:44:43

Do you think anyone in the press has put those two together? Bueler, Bueler, Bueler?

Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:16:01

crickets… chirp chirp chirp….echooooooooooooooooo
echoooooooooooooooooo

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 10:01:44

To be very fair, while they say that the recession is over, they generally admit that unemployment is going to be high for a long time. Now, while I agree that this is mostly a way to save the banks from having to take losses, if you couch it as a way to help the unemployed, it is not inconsistent with their public statements.

Comment by GrizzlyBear
2009-09-18 14:45:41

Problem is, I haven’t see any definitive proof that this is doing anything to help the unemployed. It appears to me, at least on the surface, that the stimulus has gone right into the pockets of big business, be it banks or otherwise, in order to shore up cash reserves, rather than lead to an increase in hiring or decrease in firing.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 15:08:05

I didn’t say it was a real way to help the unemployed. I said that saying that wasn’t inconsistent with what is being said about the recovery starting. Big difference.

It might be a way to help the unemployed if people were generally only out of work for a month or two, but we know that is not the case.

 
 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2009-09-18 14:49:25

Moreover, I would argue that the stimulus has been nothing more than free gambling money for insiders looking to upgrade their yachts, and better their positions amongst their peers, all at the expense of the hard working people and the unemployed, or soon to be.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by salinasron
2009-09-18 04:28:29

Gee, renters of the country unite. If you lose your job the government owes it to you to give you a grant to stay in your rental or maybe they can force the landlord to allow you to miss a few payments now and then at their expense.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:45:19

Renter’s Revenge

1. Buy the biggest house you can afford.
2. Quit your job.
3. Stop paying your mortgage.

Comment by measton
2009-09-18 07:32:20

Renter’s Revenge

1. Buy the biggest house you can afford.
2. Quit your job.
3. Stop paying your mortgage.

Then rent out your house to others and pocket the money.

Comment by Shizo
2009-09-18 07:44:38

1. Buy the biggest house you CAN’T afford.
(I fixed it for you)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by mtnbikegirl
2009-09-18 21:39:47

And right before they foreclose, gut the place and make it unsellable.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 05:15:01

The Wall Street Journal SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
Uncle Sam Bets the House on Mortgages!

More than half of U.S. residential mortgages are being made by just three large banks.

It is a stunning change, but is it good for the housing market, and to what extent will it boost profits over the long term for this elite trio: Wells Fargo, Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase?

Right now, housing remains on government life support. Treasury-backed entities are guaranteeing about 85% of new mortgages, while the Fed buys 80% of the securities into which these taxpayer-backed mortgages are packaged.

The optimistic take is that this support, though large, will shrink when market forces regain confidence. But there is a darker possible outcome: The emergency assistance is entrenching a system in which the taxpayer takes the default risk on most mortgages, while a small number of large banks get a larger share of the fee revenue from originating and servicing mortgages.

That is what is happening now. While big banks are originating lots of mortgages, they are selling nearly all of them to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Indeed, combined single-family mortgages held on the balance sheets at J.P. Morgan, BofA and Wells actually fell 3.5% in the first half. Before the bust, these banks sold large amounts of loans to Fannie or Freddie, but they also held on to products like jumbo mortgages. The volumes for those large loans now have tumbled.

And even as their mortgage holdings fall, these banks are posting big jumps in fee revenue from mortgage banking. Combined, it was $14 billion in the first half, up more than threefold from $4.1 billion in the year-earlier period.

Granted, some of this increase came from marking up mortgage-servicing assets, but fees from writing huge amounts of new loans, fueled by refinancing, caused revenue to soar at BofA and Wells.

And these blowout revenues are partly down to increased market share following big mergers, like BofA’s acquisition of Countrywide.

The three originated 52% of mortgages in the first half, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, just over double these banks’ market share in 2005. In servicing, their share is 49%, compared with 22% in 2005.

Regulators signed off on the mergers that caused this dominance. Even without the urgency for saving weak banks created by the crisis, regulators have never focused primarily on mortgage share. That suggests they won’t worry about increased concentration. What’s more, they may like it that most mortgages go through three banks that they intend to regulate heavily.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:34:03

“More than half of U.S. residential mortgages are being made by just three large banks.

It is a stunning change, but is it good for the housing market, and to what extent will it boost profits over the long term for this elite trio: Wells Fargo, Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase?”

Friends of the Fed

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 06:47:46

“Friends of the Fed”

Imagine that…Comes a real surprise doesn’t it. They are flat out in your face.

 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:32:20

Friends of the Fed

What do you mean, Bear? They are The Fed. Jamie Dimon runs the show on Maiden Lane. The only surprise is that he is letting Wells and BofA in on the action.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:22:01

“…letting Wells and BofA in on the action.”

It would look bad if JP Morgan were the only member of the Megabank, Inc cartel, wouldn’t it?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 12:26:33

He needs patsies/fall guys/scapegoats doesn’t he?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by mrktMaven
2009-09-18 07:05:33

Not only are they issuing new debt and refinancing troubled debts and stuffing them under the governments rug, primary dealers with Fed backing are buying down interest rates keeping savers in the dark. Heads they win. Tails you lose. There are more sides to this bailout than most realize.

There is only one party — the inner party. Politics is for Lemmings.

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 12:30:43

Believe it or not, there are plenty of rich and powerful people who hate each other’s guts.

 
 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 08:48:34

Just think two of these banks started from California. One is still here. We’ve come a long way baby. Oh yeah that’ll show you.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 05:18:24

America’s Two Trillion Dollar Meltdown
Heesun Wee in Investing,

Prolific author, lawyer and former banker Charles Morris presciently laid out a likely course of write-downs and defaults on assets — a year ago — well before Lehman collapsed in September 2008, followed by the global credit meltdown. But given this year’s stock market bull run, all is OK, no?

Hardly, says Morris. “We may have reached a trough” in the economy, he says, but we’ll likely “bottom bounce” for some time.

Morris notes the subprime crisis and credit meltdown still are unraveling, and American consumers won’t be able to spend their way out of the mess this time. For years, consumer spending has driven about 70 percent of GDP, or U.S. economic activity. “We have to get a different model,” says Morris, author of “The Two Trillion Dollar Meltdown.”

With unemployment approaching 10 percent and many Americans still trying to wean themselves off years of profligate spending, Morris sees a “painful, hard” transition ahead for U.S. workers.

In hindsight, Morris, who wasn’t a fan of the bailout, says government intervention has worked out better than he initially thought. But don’t confuse stop-gap measures with long-term, sustainable growth for America’s economy.

And beware of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, a student of the Great Depression and an academic now empowered to prove his theories correct, Morris says.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:35:22

“…now empowered to prove his theories correct…”

Science and policy don’t mix.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 05:44:45

‘Ol Slobbering Barney never gives up his race based proposals…

COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT, PART II
Neal Boortz September 18, 2009

We all know of the disaster that occurred, thanks in large part to the Community Reinvestment Act of the 1970s. This is the brilliant idea that government would require financial institutions to lend to unqualified borrowers. Long story very short … eventually this policy led to the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to the economic difficulties we’re facing today.

So what is the logic emanating from Washington today? Let’s EXPAND the scope and power of the Community Reinvestment Act.

Yesterday, Barney Frank held a hearing on the “Community Reinvestment Modernization Act of 2009.” The bill’s purpose is “to close the wealth gap in the United States” by increasing “home ownership and small business ownership for low- and moderate-income borrowers and persons of color.” And, according to this column by Byron York, “It would also make CRA more explicitly race-based by requiring CRA standards to be applied to minorities, regardless of income, going beyond earlier requirements that applied solely to low- and moderate-income areas.”

Here we have the man largely responsible for the disasters we’re facing today proposing even more power for his pet agency. Yeah .. that’s going to work out real well for all of us. I wonder if Barney still has some boyfriends working out there who might get a career boost from this proposal.

Comment by palmetto
2009-09-18 05:50:23

Take heart. ACORN is going down in a BIG way.

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 06:09:18

Just seeing that their fed funding is getting cut is a step in the right direction. Hope there’s plenty of follow through, ACORN is one of many totally corrupt leaches.

None of that would have happened if it weren’t for the recent exposures.

Comment by palmetto
2009-09-18 07:12:59

The gubmint is way bloated. So many useless organizations get federal funding. Really, the federal gubmint is WAY out of control.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 08:24:37

Just seeing that their fed funding is getting cut is a step in the right direction. Hope there’s plenty of follow through, ACORN is one of many totally corrupt leaches.

To paraphrase the late Dick Nixon, “You won’t have ACORN to kick around anymore.”

I hope this won’t stop cobalt blue from finding ACORN’s dirty hands in every sector of the political and financial world …

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:19:03

“I hope this won’t stop cobalt”

BwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaHAaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 
 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:36:14

Just seeing that their fed funding is getting cut is a step in the right direction. Hope there’s plenty of follow through, ACORN is one of many totally corrupt leaches.

They will just morph into another form and be back with a vengeance.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2009-09-18 19:58:14

Yep. The Democrats will still need to mobilize the parasite vote, and there are no shortage of “former” criminals turned “community activists” who will be happy to step up and deliver votes-for-graft. Of course, ACORN is small potatoes compared to the pulpit prostitutes of the so-called Christian Right delivering the bloc votes of their scooped-out-brain evangelical adherents to the GOP.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:15:54

Tax advice for prostitutes:

The Audacity of Hos

Comment by alpha-sloth
2009-09-18 07:55:26

Frikkin hilarious. How does performance art differ from prostitution? And as for burying the money in a tin can in the backyard–Hey! I think we’ve got a hbb fan in ACORN! Surprised she didn’t tell them to buy gold. (I actually admired the ‘can-do’ attitude of the ACORN workers. And I’m sure it would be just as appalling to hear the banksters conniving with their lawyers.)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:20:25

Yes, why is this ‘advice’ so different from the crooks from THE banks and congress?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:31:10

“How does performance art differ from prostitution?”

I think the point was that prostitution qualifies as a form of performance artistry. Hard to argue with that…

 
 
 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 09:31:13

Oh give me a break, yes let’s go after another bogey man. Never mind what is really happening over in the other corner.

The distracting benefits of ACORN hysteria:
Snip
“ACORN has received a grand total of $53 million in federal funds over the last 15 years — an average of $3.5 million per year. Meanwhile, not millions, not billions, but trillions of dollars of public funds have been, in the last year alone, transferred to or otherwise used for the benefit of Wall Street. Billions of dollars in American taxpayer money vanished into thin air, eaten by private contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, led by Halliburton subsidiary KBR. All of those corporate interests employ armies of lobbyists and bottomless donor activities that ensure they dominate our legislative and regulatory processes, and to be extra certain, the revolving door between industry and government is more prolific than ever, with key corporate officials constantly ending up occupying the government positions with the most influence over those industries.”… link here: http://tinyurl.com/new8gz

Oh yes let’s go after the poor, and save the corporations and the rich (those poor, poor people)

Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:22:35

What she said.

X bazillion.

As has been pointed out previously, there are lots of congress crooks and others out there, but lets go after the entire Nut because it helps low income people.

By the way, how about those new private jets being purchased by the WS crowd.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:50:09

“ACORN has received a grand total of $53 million in federal funds over the last 15 years — an average of $3.5 million per year.”

Dough-4-Dalliances

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 09:40:05

In defense of ACORN
The right-wing crusade against ACORN is a far bigger fraud than any misdeeds a few employees might have committed

“For many years the combined forces of the far right and the Republican Party have sought to ruin ACORN, the largest organization of poor and working families in America. Owing to the idiocy of a few ACORN employees, notoriously caught in a videotape “sting” sponsored by a conservative Web site and publicized by Fox News, that campaign has scored significant victories on Capitol Hill and in the media.”….

snip

“If only the Republicans who have worked up a frenzy over ACORN’s alleged crimes were so indignant about real and damaging voter fraud — such as the amazing case of Young Political Majors, the firm that ran GOP registration efforts in California, Massachusetts, Florida, Arizona and elsewhere before the authorities in Orange County, Calif., busted its president, Mark Anthony Jacoby, and sent him to jail last year. He had built a lucrative partisan career by teaching his minions to deceive thousands of voters into registering as Republicans rather than Democrats, among other scams. Of course, the only on-air mention of the Young Political Majors scandal on Fox News was made by blogger Brad Friedman — and the national media, mainstream and conservative, generally ignored it. They were too busy generating “controversy” over ACORN.”

Here’s the rest of the story: http://tinyurl.com/kj69n2

Comment by DD
2009-09-18 11:26:24

Thank you for broadening the horizon to Include the right wing and their lies and corruption.

Gee, we wouldn’t want that to get out now would we, wmbz,stpn,etc.?
Do you guys just believe in - do as I say, not as I do- politics?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 12:36:23

Holy cow, even I didn’t hear about that one!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-19 05:48:26

“Defense of Acorn”

REpublitards svck, and they did such-and-such to so-and-so. Compared to that cr@p, ACORN smells like a rose.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2009-09-18 06:06:48

The question you have to ask yourself is: In what kind of country could a man like Barney Frank acheive the power he currently has? Kind of makes me want to find another planet somewhere.

Comment by palmetto
2009-09-18 07:08:40

I hear ya, press. I was watching him on C-Span spewing spittle during the whole TARP fiasco and when he rose from his chair, one of his lower shirt buttons had popped or come undone or whatever, giving us a peek at a bunch of flaccid, hairy stomach. I really cringed, thinking of the international audience getting a gander of that.

Comment by VaBeyatch in Virginia Beach
2009-09-18 08:04:23

Maybe he’s trying to pick up bears (subculture of gay people who look like Billy Mays or Ben Bernanke).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 11:02:18

Palmy, fantasizing of the effect that seeing some of Barney Frank’s body hair will have on international relations is way too much focus on Barney Frank’s body hair.

While I am generally socially liberal in inclination, ACORN deserves what it gets in this case. Yes, the folks who have been after them are mostly after them because they organize poor people to vote and that sort of thing. But when you are taking government money (both in grants and by being tax exempt) you have a responsibility to make sure your employees are following the law scrupulously. You do it by training. You do it by sending the occasional undercover person through yourself. You do it by good management.

Without any federal money, ACORN will die. The people who run it can start new organizations to do the same sorts. Hopefully they will be smaller, more focussed on a paticular function so they can actually do it right, and much better run. But it will take a while.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by hip in zilker
2009-09-18 11:14:44

+1000, polly

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 13:25:19

The federal grants ACORN has received is peanuts considering the money given to the banks, defense industry etc. They employed thousands of people. Oh well, they have to pay for their transgressions. Heck, according to your standard the banks, and other corrupt entities should also have their money taken away. Have you seen that happen yet?

Once again we get blinded by what is actually going on.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:52:02

“The federal grants ACORN has received is peanuts considering the money given to the banks, defense industry etc.”

Which is more important — the world’s oldest profession (prostitution) or the second oldest (arms trade)?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:53:23

‘…the world’s oldest profession (prostitution) or the second oldest (arms trade)?’

Not sure how this dichotomy applies to banks, as one could argue they fit into both categories…

 
Comment by polly
2009-09-18 14:58:19

SFBAGal,

Yup. It is peanuts compared to the bank bailouts. The AIG one particularly gets my goat. The idea that Goldman Sachs didn’t understand the implications of counter party risk in credit default swaps is so laughable that it just about makes me cry.

But, it doesn’t matter. Two wrongs don’t make a right. There were good people at ACORN, like the ones who reviewed the voter registration forms they collected and tagged the ones that were fraudulent before even sending them on to voting officials so those officials could avoid processing the fraudulent ones. Yes, they really did that. But they didn’t do enough and they got caught. End of story.

And if the amendment forbidding ACORN from getting federal money is enough to get the student loan bill passed with a bipartisan vote, it will even be worth it. Other organizations can give tax advice to poor people. Other organizations can help with the census. But stopping that massive transfer of cash to banks so they can screw over 18 year olds while bribing the financial aid counselors is important too.

 
 
 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 07:29:52

The question you have to ask yourself is: In what kind of country could a man like Barney Frank acheive the power he currently has? Kind of makes me want to find another planet somewhere.

Feel free …

 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 08:11:15

The question you have to ask yourself is: In what kind of country could a man like Barney Frank acheive the power he currently has? Kind of makes me want to find another planet somewhere.

Yes! The same question and reaction I had after just two years of Bush.

There is enough sleaze, greed and stupidity to go around for both parties.

If Reid and Pelosi were Republicans, and Bush was a Democrat, there’d be war crimes trials right about now.

What do we get? I cringe every time Reid opens his mouth.

The Republicans are vicious hypocrites and the Democrats are bumbling frauds.

Feh.

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 08:51:30

What are you waiting for. Please go. No one is holding you back.

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-09-18 10:49:21

So we can put you down as a Barney fan then? Stay the hell away from my planet!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 13:09:41

Oh I’m here for the long haul. Hell I’ve lasted through 8 years of the previous administration. Let me see Barney over you, Barney over you, well yes I guess I would pick Barney over you.

 
Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 14:01:39

Look on the bright side. At least Barney isn’t reproducing.

 
Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2009-09-18 20:18:47

What bothers me is the attitude that fraud and corruption “on our side” isn’t that big a deal. ACORN got “only” $3.5 million a year in tax money, so their fraud is inconsequential compared to the far more massive fraud perpetrated by defense contractors in Iraq. True enough, but Fraud is fraud and corruption is corruption no matter how you slice it. I wish we lived in a society where there was zero tolerance of corruption and fraud regardless of your political stripe.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Yensoy
2009-09-18 06:14:09

Sorry but however flawed it may be the CRA didn’t lead to the financial meltdown. Bad or malintentioned banking decisions can’t be blamed on this act.

Comment by palmetto
2009-09-18 07:05:33

I agree with you. Blaming it for the mortgage meltdown is a talking points tactic by the looney-con fringe right.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:22:40

Let’s discuss substance here and lay off the political demonization.

What exactly leads you guys to suggest the CRA had nothing to do with the financial meltdown? Didn’t it provide the rationale for making shoddy loans to low-income households, in order to make housing “affordable”?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by yensoy
2009-09-18 07:46:46

CRA provinding “rationale” for making shoddy loans
=
Second amendment providing “means” for every shooting

Tell me:
1. CRA was a nationwide plan. Why did only some banks fail? Why have many credit unions continued to do well?

2. What took 30 long years for the CRA to end up crashing the financial system?

Anyway, the burden of proof is on you. I thought I would humour you with some counter arguments while you worked on your defence.

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 07:55:11

Let’s discuss substance here and lay off the political demonization.

What exactly leads you guys to suggest the CRA had nothing to do with the financial meltdown?

Speaking of substance and demonization, why are poor (brown) people and a relatively narrow piece of legislation the scapegoats for a failure in the marketplace?

As I recall, you’ve been demonizing CRA for some time now, and have failed to connect the dots between some well-intentioned but flawed federal statutes and an international housing bubble of epic proportions.

Perhaps you can begin by telling us why legislation enacted in 1977 took so long to unbalance the US housing market. What happened in those intervening 20+ years? Is CRA a Manchurian Candidate-style sleeper agent planted by the Russkies before the fall of communism? Those Red Devils!

 
Comment by yensoy
2009-09-18 07:56:37

I seem to have hit the mother lode on Wikipedia
The law, however, emphasizes that an institution’s CRA activities should be undertaken in a safe and sound manner, and does not require institutions to make high-risk loans that may bring losses to the institution.
unfortunately the above is attributed to Ben Bernanke and the White House, immediately making it suspect.

Oh well, let me try again:
3. Have the poor minorities been the only folks to foreclose?

 
Comment by exeter
2009-09-18 08:05:28

Riddle me this Batman;

Why is it that those geographical areas subject to CRA compliance have a LOWER foreclosure rate than area not subject to CRA?????

The CRA hobgoblin doesn’t work and never did.

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2009-09-18 08:35:28

Those evil geniuses at ACORN took control of the ratings agencies on Wall Street too. And they own trillions in shaky derivatives. They’re the ‘dark’ force behind the whole crash, I tell you!

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 08:42:09

Those evil geniuses at ACORN took control of the ratings agencies on Wall Street too.

Aha!

I knew I smelled ACORN’s acrid scent on Wall Street.

There’s no one those fiendish bastards can’t pervert, I tell you.

 
Comment by Al
2009-09-18 08:56:04

CRA provided a plausible explanation when the crisis was supposedly subprime. But as we know, the subprime mortgage issue was just one part of a much bigger problem.

Maybe without CRA, the mortgage crisis could have been ‘contained’ amongst ‘rich’ people.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 11:05:31

As much as I think CRA was BS from the get-go, in the housing climate we had from 2000-2006, those loans would have been made anyway.

All it did was give all the lenders a scapegoat.

“They FORCED us to make that crappy loan, those ba$-tard$!!!!”

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:01:00

“Speaking of substance and demonization, why are poor (brown) people and a relatively narrow piece of legislation the scapegoats for a failure in the marketplace?”

They aren’t. But racially discriminatory laws certainly are fair game. (Those would be the laws that provide a market advantage for one racial group over another.)

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:04:19

“Why is it that those geographical areas subject to CRA compliance have a LOWER foreclosure rate than area not subject to CRA?????”

I haven’t seen the evidence on this, but even if this supposed statistical regularity happens to be accurate, there could be many possible reasons other than whatever reason you believe to be self evident. For instance, suppose more foreclosure relief assistance was funneled into geographic areas subject to CRA than other areas?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:06:29

“poor (brown) people”

Is this intended to be some kind of racist suggestion that all brown people are poor?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:29:16

“Perhaps you can begin by telling us why legislation enacted in 1977 took so long to unbalance the US housing market.”

Given the tendency of the PTB to regularly layer one housing subsidy on top of another one, there is no reason imbalances cannot build over a period of decades before they implode. My hunch is that the market became continually more unbalanced from 1977 until the bubble popped circa 2005. Only now is rebalancing underway.

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 13:45:55

Is this intended to be some kind of racist suggestion that all brown people are poor?

It is a suggestion that those who demonize CRA may have a bias against both poor people and brown people, and especially poor brown people.

You know very well that CRA is aimed at discriminatory lending practices — perhaps you’re familiar with the social history of redlining as well?

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 13:51:12

Given the tendency of the PTB to regularly layer one housing subsidy on top of another one, there is no reason imbalances cannot build over a period of decades before they implode.

Is this a new application for Chaos Theory?

Call Sean Hannity and explain this concept; you may be able to make his head implode. For added effect, pepper your explanation liberally with “ACORN.”

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 15:57:55

“Is this a new application for Chaos Theory?”

Kaboom Theory

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 15:59:27

“It is a suggestion that those who demonize CRA may have a bias against both poor people and brown people, and especially poor brown people.”

Right. Similarly, anyone who ever dares to question a single thing The Messiah™ says must belong to a secretive organization that wears white hoods.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 16:00:28

“You know very well that CRA is aimed at discriminatory lending practices — perhaps you’re familiar with the social history of redlining as well?”

Racist policies make a poor remedy for racist policies.

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 16:19:32

Now that we’re past all your righteous harrumphing and your Colbert-like post-racial magnanimity, maybe you can give us a lick of evidence to support your original claim, instead of hunches.

Or is all that harrumphing just a ploy to divert our attention?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 20:41:57

ColbertObama-like post-racial magnanimity

Just sounds better, doesn’t it?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 21:14:25

* THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
* SEPTEMBER 16, 2009, 10:07 A.M. ET

US Advocates Push To Expand Community Reinvestment Act

By Jessica Holzer

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)–The Community Reinvestment Act should be modernized and extended to apply to credit unions and other financial institutions beyond banks, witnesses will argue in a U.S. House hearing Wednesday.

Massachusetts top bank regulator Steven L. Antonakes will discuss his state’s efforts to extend CRA or similar standards to credit unions and non-bank mortgage companies in prepared remarks before the panel. In addition, he will argue for the need to force affiliates of CRA-covered institutions to adhere to CRA standards.

“Because of the way CRA regulations are written, a bank can structure its lending, investments, and services so that activities that enhance its CRA performance are either done directly by the bank or through an affiliate at its choosing,” Antonakes, Massachussets’ commissioner of banks, will say.

CRA, enacted in 1977, requires covered institutions to lend to poorer borrowers in the communities they serve. Democrats are seeking to expand the law, an effort that will be controversial with the banking industry.

There you have it: Coercing lenders to make loans to the group of individuals least likely to be able to pay it back. I would conjecture that coercion increases the risk that loans will not be repaid, as it takes away a lender’s ability to independently decide how much to lend to which customer, based on an objective assessment of said customer’s ability to repay the loan.

Depending on how the coercion is implemented, lenders could find their arms twisted into making loans they don’t believe are like to be repaid to people who are unlikely to repay them at interest rates that are not sufficiently high to cover the risk of default. And I suppose this is where Uncle Sam feels obligated to step in with a loan guarantee to make sure if the loan is not repaid by the borrow, other nonparties to the loan transaction are forced to make the lender whole.

Without having any direct evidence to rely on, I cannot help but wonder whether one of the key rationales behind so many subprime loans made to low-income communities was in part to satisfy CRA requirements to make loans which might have seemed imprudent without the force of government mandate to change lenders’ minds.

Nobody seemed to have considered whether flooding money through crazy loans of hundreds of thousands of dollars to low income households might not result in pushing home prices in low-income areas to absurd heights, which might not be sustainable. And nobody seems to have worried what might happen to these loans or the households which borrowed the money if real estate ever stopped going up. But as they say, hindsight is 20-20.

That’s my preliminary take on the CRA policy of coercing lenders to make loans they otherwise would not chose to make. Whatcha think, ET?

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 23:56:33

That’s my preliminary take on the CRA policy of coercing lenders to make loans they otherwise would not chose to make. Whatcha think, ET?

It’s far too late to write a lengthy response, but my short answer is this: there’s a helluva lot more bad paper out there than could possibly be explained by 30 years under CRA, even in the scenario you depict in your last several paragraphs.

Lacking any direct evidence, ascribing blame to the CRA is a canard in a tragedy driven by private, for-profit entities in the marketplace. That’s what I think.

PS: I’ll leave you with an interesting tidbit from Wikipedia, perhaps food for thought all-’round:
In October 1997, First Union Capital Markets and Bear, Stearns & Co launched the first publicly available securitization of Community Reinvestment Act loans, issuing $384.6 million of such securities. The securities were guaranteed by Freddie Mac and had an implied “AAA” rating.[48][89] The public offering was several times oversubscribed, predominantly by money managers and insurance companies who were not buying them for CRA credit.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 07:22:16

eventually this policy led to the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to the economic difficulties we’re facing today.

Do you have anything to support this?

I think HGTV is more culpable than a program initiated in the 70’s.

 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 07:51:13

Revision

CRA did not mandate that banks lower lending standards. It mandated that they stop redlining. Ie not loaning to people just because they live in a certain neighborhood. They had to lend in all neighborhoods where they took deposits.

In the February 2008 House hearing, law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton,[64][109] stated that a Federal Reserve survey showed that affected institutions considered CRA loans profitable and not overly risky. He noted that approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made “perhaps one in four” sub-prime loans, and that “the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight”.[110] According to Janet L. Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, independent mortgage companies made risky “high-priced loans” at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts; most CRA loans were responsibly made, and were not the higher-priced loans that have contributed to the current crisis.[111] A 2008 study by Traiger & Hinckley LLP, a law firm that counsels financial institutions on CRA compliance, found that CRA regulated institutions were less likely to make subprime loans, and when they did the interest rates were lower. CRA banks were also half as likely to resell the loans.[112] Emre Ergungor of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland found that there was no statistical difference in foreclosure rates between regulated and less-regulated banks, although a local bank presence resulted in fewer foreclosures.[113]

Finally, keep in mind that the Bush administration was weakening CRA enforcement and the law’s reach since the day it took office. The CRA was at its strongest in the 1990s,a period when subprime loans performed quite well. It was only after the Bush administration cut back on CRA enforcement that problems arose, a timing issue which should stop those blaming the law dead in their tracks. The Federal Reserve, too, did nothing but encourage the wild west of lending in recent years. It wasn’t until the middle of 2007 that the Fed decided it was time to crack down on abusive pratices in the subprime lending market. Oops.

Better targets for blame in government circles might be the 2000 law which ensured that credit default swaps would remain unregulated, the SEC’s puzzling 2004 decision to allow the largest brokerage firms to borrow upwards of 30 times their capital and that same agency’s failure to oversee those brokerage firms in subsequent years as many gorged on subprime debt. (Barry Ritholtz had an excellent and more comprehensive survey of how Washington contributed to the crisis in this week’s Barron’s.)

The problem
#1 securitization
#2 rating companies
#3 leverage
#4 Massive profits for reckless gambling with other peoples money.

Comment by Jon
2009-09-18 13:51:36

Leave it to Measton to muddle the issue with facts.

 
 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:34:41

“to close the wealth gap in the United States”

I agree that this is their goal. When everybody is in poverty then the Barney Franks of the world will hang up their “Mission Accomplished” banner. It’s a race to the bottom and Barney is making sure that we have the wind at our backs.

Comment by pressboardbox
2009-09-18 10:53:50

Notice how you never see a Barney Frank-type offering to use his OWN money to give to the poor. Barney will make sure that HE never lives in poverty - just everyone else.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:01:54

Did you both not just read the above?

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 13:11:41

You and pressboardbox don’t have a secret crush on Barney now do you?

 
 
Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 10:21:45

Geez, if they just let the damn banks fail, house prices would fall on their own and poorer people of all colors could afford more housing.

This Rube Goldberg machine has far too many moving parts.

 
 
Comment by dimedropped
2009-09-18 06:08:25

The acorn does not fall far from the tree!

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 06:10:18

OKLAHOMA CITY — Only one in four Oklahoma public high school students can name the first President of the United States, according to a survey released today.

The survey was commissioned by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs in observance of Constitution Day.
< So, 75 percent of Oklahoma high schoolers can’t name the first president of the United States?

Is that as bad as 99 percent of the U.S. Congress not knowing what the statutory definition of a “dollar” is? Not many bank officials can define it, either.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-09-18 06:16:47

But But But 99% know who lady gaga is…doesnt that count for current events Wmbz????

——————–
So, 75 percent of Oklahoma high schoolers can’t name the first president of the United States?

Comment by eastcoaster
2009-09-18 06:34:41

True confession - I actually like Lady Gaga (well, her music anyway).

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-09-18 06:45:13

Eastcoaster:

Yes she actually is a smart girl, but to me she went to very commercial route…maybe she will actually use her skills and create worthwhile long lasting music someday…

—————————————————————
At the age of seventeen, she gained early admission to the New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts. There, she studied music and improved her songwriting skills by composing essays and analytical papers focusing on topics such as art, religion, and socio-political order.[7][8] Gaga later withdrew from the school to focus on her musical career

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by scdave
2009-09-18 08:00:17

Lady Gaga ??

Who ??

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:04:14

Exactly. Who? (and who cares?)

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 06:45:56

Damn, had to look that one up! Never heard of her or her music, interesting dresser to say the very least.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 11:09:03

Actually, they probably DON’T know who “Lady Ga-Ga” is………never heard of her myself, until I saw her on that award show.

Toby Keith is different.

 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-09-18 07:13:08

They don’t need to know who the first president was, they only need to know who the current president is, that’s good enough for ‘em.

Comment by Al
2009-09-18 09:04:45

…they only need to know who the current president is…

That would be Arnold Schwarzenegger right?

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:05:27

You mean it’s not Rush Limbaugh? :shock:

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2009-09-18 07:36:11

It’s better for the corporatist state if Americans know little about our history and the American Revolution including our first president Abraham Lincoln. :-)

If everyone knew how and why our country was founded and the beliefs of our founders including Adams, Jefferson and Washington, more people would realize why things are so messed up. And if people knew why, they might have ideas on how to fix things.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-09-18 07:58:36

And Boy are Teachers Unions are doing an EXCELLENT job of training our kids to be stupid…

Lets not forget the lack of English skills, the swearing and using the N word…great strides have been made in the Amerikan edukatsunal sistim.

—————————
It’s better for the corporatist state if Americans know little about our history

Comment by oxide
2009-09-18 10:25:11

When I lived in Washington, I used to see school kids walking to the Metro using the nastiest language imaginable and half-undoing their uniforms to moment they left the school campus. Yep, they went to a private school.

You can’t blame this on the “socialist” public school system.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2009-09-18 11:20:32

Let’s face facts. We are already socialist in a perverted way. We socialize the losses of the too-big-to-fail corporations but if you’re poor and sick, too bad sucker, because now we have to watch our budget because the money’s been spent on the GSE’s, GS, BofA, Citi and AIG.

The left vs. right BS is mostly noise because both parties are in the corporate pocket. The real leader will emerge who can convince moderates on the right and the left that we have bigger problems than those proposed by the right and the left.

We have been encouraged to be divided when in fact; we are first and foremost Americans.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 11:28:17

The name of the game in D.C. and Wall Street is to keep the B.S. sideshows going, to keep the mob distracted/entertained, until they complete their jobs, and fly off to their Carribean tax haven.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:08:06

Bamboozling is Job One!

 
 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 10:47:09

It’s better for the corporatist state if Americans know little about our history and the American Revolution including our first president Abraham Lincoln

Yep, especially this quote from Lincoln:

As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:14:42

1886, corporations were declared persons by the Supreme Court and thus given access to the same rights as human beings.

Google “Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 09:24:58

.. there is much moral hazard in the teaching industry. Kids being woefully ignorant begs for smaller class sizes, and more funding.. and more teachers.

Apply the same standards to teachers as some here would apply to the bankers. Pay them in accordance to their performance. Ya hear me, PB?

Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 09:46:11

Who would set those standards joey? You, me, bureaucrats, the state, the government, the political wind at the moment?

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 10:23:24

Setting standards is easy. Anyone can do it. One standard will do.
Tomorrow’s students must to be equally educated or better educated than today’s students.

Teachers who cannot accomplish that simple task are either inept or are, more likely, gaming the system and they should suffer pay reductions or be terminated… as teachers, that is.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Cassandra
2009-09-18 12:31:12

Agreed. Any standard will do. We can tweak the standard as we go. But a standard, any standard, implies accountability. Good luck with that. Schools and indeed most government institutions hate accountability. They just wont do it.

Case in point. Local university runs short of money. What do they do? They cut classes because they “can’t afford them”. I ask, “How much do they cost?”. No answer. My next remark, “If you don’t know how much they cost, how do you know you can’t afford them?”

/rant off

I can’t do this. I gives me ulcers. I’ve been in ed all my life. The whole mess is totally insane.

 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 10:25:32

How about the customers– the students and their parents?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 11:11:19

There is no need for standards, aside from standard metrics to objectively compare educational performance. Hand all households with children education vouchers and let the customers vote with their feet.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 12:45:29

The number of good schools and available desks is no match for the number of little feet that would walk..

..and what about the feet that are for some reason forced to keep padding around in the crappy schools? Why should those schools change their ways?
Are you admitting that less money is an incentive to do a better job and that crappy schools are capable of doing better if they simply desire to do better?

If so, there’s no need for vouchers. Just threaten to cut their pay and then follow through..

 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 13:45:31

There is no need for standards, aside from standard metrics to objectively compare educational performance. Hand all households with children education vouchers and let the customers vote with their feet.

The only problem with this is that then we severely damage the melting pot. Little jimmy goest to a christian school and Mohammed goes to a muslim one, and Missy goes to a Jewish one, or all black all white ect. They never meet anyone different and will likely fear those that are different and be more susceptible to fanatics.

Public school provides more than an education.

 
 
 
 
Comment by jfp
2009-09-18 11:58:22

It was Kanye West, right?

 
 
Comment by Skeptical Onlooker
2009-09-18 06:12:50

Ex, Not sure if you saw it, but the Pres. is coming to visit the chip-fab plant area to “tout” the Community college and plant as part of successful economic develop. Not bad for a plant that was never really going to be built. Wonder if he’ll comment on the big yellow turd?

ww.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=843288

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:22:05

Is that newspaper too cheap to at least provide a picture of said facilities?

Seriously. This is another reason why newspapers are having a hard time. A photo costs nothing these days but really helps to grab and hold reader interest and provide a connection to the story. Yet there are less and less pictures every year.

But they sure have no problem hitting you with web tracking. 5 different trackers. 5! Morons.

 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2009-09-18 06:35:15

I’m fine with making the first time homebuyers tax credit permanent. As long as this is 100% financed by limiting or eliminating the mortgage interest deduction, and an upfront savings requirement is put in place for the buyer.

Putting this special deal for the better off on the credit card? How much more of this are we going to do?

Comment by scdave
2009-09-18 08:08:41

limiting or eliminating the mortgage interest deduction ??

And what happens to the 125 mil people who have mortgages ?? Effectively +/- a 30% increase in their monthly carry…What would be the ramifications ?? Why stop there…Eliminate the tax benefits, interest deduction & depreciation on all real estate…

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:37:45

Every gloomy economic situation has a silver lining.

* WALL STREET JOURNAL
* SEPTEMBER 18, 2009

Beyond the Bubble
As Riches Fade, So Does Finance’s Allure

By LISA BANNON

Gordon Jones, who spent 26 years on Wall Street selling stocks and convertible securities, updated an education degree and now teaches math at Greenwich High School in Connecticut. ‘I’ve been completely energized,’ the 54-year-old says. ‘I’m having the time of my life with these kids.’

Like nearly 30% of Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduates in recent years, Ted Fernandez set his sights on finance. Though he majored in materials science and engineering, he was wowed by tales of excitement from friends who went to Wall Street.

But when he stopped by an investment bank’s booth at a job fair a year ago, it was eerily empty. The booth belonged to Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and the date was Sept. 18, three days after the 158-year-old bank filed for bankruptcy. Now Mr. Fernandez, 22 years old, is getting a master’s in engineering at M.I.T. and aiming for a career in solar-power technology.

“Undoubtedly, I would have gone into finance if the financial meltdown hadn’t occurred,” he says. “Now I won’t make as much money, but I can go home at night and feel good about what I do. That’s worth more than any amount of money.”

Comment by Bad Chile
2009-09-18 07:06:41

I went to a fairly well known private university for grad school (had an assistantship) in engineering back in the 90s after attending a no-name state school for undergraduate. None of the undergrad students in any of my classes I was the TA for expressed any interest in remaining in engineering. All the undergrads wanted to go into business or law school and saw an engineering degree as an easy way in.

When I was finishing my master’s I went to the career center to try and get on-campus interviews. Only one company was there to interview engineers for engineering positions, the remainder wanted engineers for business/finance purposes.

I remember my interview with Anderson Consulting (of Enron fame - this was a few years before the blow up). The interviewer was a fresh-faced kid with a year of experience after his bachelors. I went to the interview…well; I forget why I showed up.

Bad Chile: So how do you employ structural engineers?
Anderson: As consultants.
Bad Chile: What kind of consultant? Why do you need a structural engineer on staff?
Anderson: I don’t know. But you’ll be a consultant. You know, doing consulting. You’ll tell business how to run their business.
Bad Chile: What do I know about running a business? I’m a structural engineer. I design buildings and bridges.

I figure the guy was making about twice what I eventually made in my first job as an engineer. I didn’t even get a rejection letter, which while it didn’t upset me then, the street cred I’d have by having a rejection letter from Anderson consulting would be priceless now.

Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 07:31:49

Remember that most of the finance/business majors that they hire are the ones passed out in the halls on Friday mornings you had to step over on the way to class(finance/business majors always started the weekend on Thursday nights at my school).

They are always looking for very smart people.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:26:29

I see a LOT of this in most large corps. Young adults with degrees and NO experience in positions of authority and total entitlement mentalities.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 06:53:25

A similar story briefly appeared on MarketWatch’s home page last night, then mysteriously vanished from view.

Experts warn bubble brewing in HK property market
By Channel NewsAsia’s Hong Kong Correspondent Leslie Tang
17 September 2009 1909 hrs

Private residential homes in Hong Kong

HONG KONG : Hong Kong’s residential property prices have rebounded this year by up to 30 per cent, despite continued economic uncertainty.

Consultants said the property market is disconnected from the wider economic reality, while economists warned that a property bubble has formed.

Developers attribute the rise to record-low mortgage costs, near-zero interest rates and tightened supply.

Consultants predict property transactions will be around 20 per cent higher in 2009, compared to the previous year.

But they believe there is a disconnection between what’s happening in the property sector and the real economy.

Some expect prices to plateau towards the end of 2009, and continue into 2010.

“At best, a plateau for 2010, perhaps even a dip. Nothing dramatic, but just an adjustment or correction as reality prevails, if you like… as people realise that the potential could be more job losses, and people feel vulnerable in terms of their employment. These sort of things could affect sentiment in the market,” said Nicholas Brooke, chairman of Professional Property Services Ltd.

 
Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 07:06:12

The recession is over:

“The Aspen city government laid off 12 employees Thursday and eliminated four other positions, shaving $1.36 million off its operating budget.

Sales tax collections continue to be weaker than projected at the beginning of 2009, and city officials don’t anticipate the winter season to bounce back.

Year-to-date city sales tax collections were down 18 percent from last year through July, while lodging taxes were down 27 percent. Building and planning fees were down 46 percent year-to-date through August from last year.”

www dot postindependent dot com

Aspen lodging down 27 percent. Wow. As Aspen goes, so goes the entire Roaring Fork Valley, where a number of small towns serve as bedroom communities to Aspen. Lots of illegal workers, too, not just Mexico, some from E. Europe and Africa.

This area has reveled in the Aspen mystique for years and will crash hard. BTW, Charles Hugh Smith has a good article today on the propaganda and thinkspeak coming from our government, compares it to WWII propaganda (oftwominds dot com).

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2009-09-18 07:30:34

That’s quite an article by Smith, I admire his certainty and resolve on the matter. Even I show the weakness of thinking the PTB might be able to pull it off.

 
Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 07:34:25

So much for the trickle down theory…

Comment by Shizo
2009-09-18 08:00:31

I wonder if the Aspen Po-Po are still cruizin’ in Hummers? When I was in Vail they were skipping around in Saabs…

Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 13:23:16

I heard the Red Onion closed as well (after 100+ years). That bar had stayed in business through several depressions and panics.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by scdave
2009-09-18 08:16:39

aid off 12 employees Thursday and eliminated four other positions, shaving $1.36 million off its operating budget ??

Lets see….$1.36 mil divided by 12 = roughly $110,300 per person average…

Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 09:23:06

Don’t forget to subtract roughly 28% for benefits, etc., so not quite that high. And don’t forget to factor in the extreme cost of living, the city requires their employees to live in the city, last I heard (may have changed).

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:34:41

Okay, that’ still +/- $80K in pay! WTF?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 14:45:57

Hey, you have to pay them well to live in such a place. Otherwise they’d bolt down valley to Silt.

 
 
 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 08:32:52

www dot postindependent dot com

Linkee

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 09:49:47

Lostie gal, good to see you posting today. How the heck are you doing? My mom was asking about you.

Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 11:43:14

Thanks! I can’t believe I’m still in Montana, but winter will eventually force me south, though they’re having record heat here. Have been enjoying watching the wheat harvest. Yup, I’m easily entertained, for sure. Me and the dogs take a picnic lunch and a book and hang out by an irrigation ditch near some wheat fields.

Bears in town (Bozeman) to watch when I get bored with the wheat. But I pulled a muscle making it hard to drive, will head back to Utah soon, I hope.

I know, I know, I’m a slacker, came up here to go to grad school and actually made it to one class. I then spent a half hour asking the prof to justify why I needed a class in obtuse theory to be able to make nature films. He never could answer my question, but it was a good conversation. Nice guy, though. The shortest of my endeavors so far…

One of my new friends here told me I was anachronistic. I don’t know if it was a compliment or not, cause I don’t have a dictionary. Don’t want one neither, I prefer ignorance.

So, back to my own devices, such as they are. :)

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:42:22

Hey lostie, here’s a little treasure trove of short films for ya.

Enjoy. (all absolutely G rated!)

http://www.avgeeks.com/our-films-online/

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 14:52:15

Jeez Louise, eco, I was all set to spend the afternoon cleaning out my pocket protector until I saw that. I’ll be lost for days watching all that awesome stuff.

Pretty cool, thanks!

I think… :)

 
 
 
 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2009-09-18 14:19:48

“Aspen lodging down 27 percent. Wow. As Aspen goes, so goes the entire Roaring Fork Valley, where a number of small towns serve as bedroom communities to Aspen. Lots of illegal workers, too, not just Mexico, some from E. Europe and Africa.”

This model of importing cheap labor so rich pukes can live like kings at the expense of society as a whole is BS. Ski resorts pay such appalling wages that no legal citizens can afford to work there given the cost of living. Without the work-housing provided to these foreign workers, these resorts would have no employee base and would be forced to raise wages. We need to get rid of these foreign work visas and make these b@stards pay up.

Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 14:43:42

Hey Griz, all it would take is if you’d go on a rampage around town for a few days, everyone would flee and you and I could have the place to ourselves.

But as for work-housing, there really isn’t that much of that in the valley, those guys just live 20 to an apartment. Lots of legals do work there, but some even commute from Grand Junction, almost 200 miles away. I know a woman who commuted from Delta, across McClure Pass, a long drive. Same with Telluride, they come from as far as Cortez.

I grew up in Western Colorado. I still remember the first time I ever went to Aspen, I think I was about 20. Couldn’t wait to leave, and I grew up skiing, learned to ski at Tellyride and Steamboat, so I was used to the ski culture. Still couldn’t wait to get out of Aspen, it made me feel ill.

I later moved to Glenwood Springs, down the road 45 miles, and learned to appreciate the nice Thai restaurant in Aspen, even had friends in Aspen (OK, see, I’ll admit to it now, but it took years to work up to this somewhat depressing admission, one was even a director of TV commercials, ohmygotoheck, I actually admitted this…wow), but to this day it feels totally pretentious and shallow to me. I even taught at the college there for awhile.

I’d rather hang out and watch the wheat harvest in Montana or about anywhere than do anything in Aspen.

Comment by GrizzlyBear
2009-09-18 16:59:35

Geez, after that report I’m going to throw away the John Denver CD.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by mrktMaven
2009-09-18 07:13:34

From WSJ/By JESSICA HOLZER

WASHINGTON — Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair said her agency is considering borrowing from the U.S. Treasury to replenish its deposit insurance fund.

“We are carefully considering all options” including borrowing from the Treasury, Ms. Bair said Friday after a speech in Washington.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2009-09-18 08:27:41

My left pocket needs some cash so I’ll borrow it from my right pocket.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 11:09:37

Don’t you wish you had a money printing press so you could create wealth out of thin air and loan it to your friends at whatever interest rate you chose?

 
 
 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 07:16:45

My Friendly Neighborhood Realtor has a lot to say about governmental policies this month. The upshot? It’s a great time to buy!:

Perfect Timing! Tax Credit Deadline & New FHA Guidelines

Beginning October 1st, 2009 FHA Guidelines will change dramatically, creating a bevy of unique opportunities for Home Buyers. Over the last two years, condo financing has become increasingly difficult due to tightening guidelines, restrictive mortgage insurance policies and loan level price adjustments. Thanks to the new FHA standards and the First Time Home Buyer Tax Credit, purchasers are able to take full advantage of todays Real Estate Market.

While conventional loans usually require a 10% down payment, FHA loans offer buyers competitive rates, some as low as a 3.5% down payment. The trouble with FHA loans in the past were their pre-approval restrictions, making it difficult to receive FHA approval on a number of desirable condominiums. With the new and improved guidelines going into effect on October 1st, home buyers will gain increased access to some of our city’s most desirable properties.

For those with unique financial situations, FHA loans can also serve as an alternative to conventional loans, thanks to smaller down payments, manual underwriting abilities and expert advice from direct endorsement lenders involved in FHA financing. Pair this with the $8000 First Time Home Buyer Tax Credit, and you are looking at a once in a lifetime opportunity.

Comment by mrktMaven
2009-09-18 07:42:37

He neglected to mention mortgage insurance, gargantuan cumulative interest payments, buying costs, hoa fees, cdd fees, property insurance, taxes, maintenance costs, and falling home prices.

 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 08:44:05

Home Buyers. … Real Estate Market.

I like how he/she capitalizes Things.

Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 12:20:14

Yeah, it makes things sound Really Important.

(The Realtor is a he — the bastard culled my e-mail from a mutual friend’s birthday party invite a few years ago. It made me mad at first, but the high schadenfreude factor makes up for his lowdown dirty maneuver. Now I kind of look forward to his desperate missives each month.)

Comment by hip in zilker
2009-09-18 18:17:18

look forward to his desperate missives

simple pleasures are the best, aren’t they?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by FB wants a do over
2009-09-18 07:17:39

Here’s an interesting chart listing the average square footage wishing price in the San Diego area versus what the square footage is actually selling for. There’s also a graph for the number of price reductions in relation the length of time the property was on the market.

From the chart it appears San Diego is on the cusp of starting the next leg down.

http://www.redfin.com/city/16904/CA/San-Diego

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:39:36

Coolest thing about that chart:

The gaping hole that developed between listed price per square foot and sold price per square foot from early 2008 (when they were essentially one and the same) to the present (list ppsf around $305, sold ppsf around $240).

Based on this info, your “typical” 2000 sf San Diego home has recently been listed at $610,000 (2000*$305) and sold for $480,000 (2000*$240) — a $130,000 “discount” off the seller’s wishing price.

Comment by Shizo
2009-09-18 08:02:56

I love the smell of divergence in the morning!

 
 
Comment by cereal
2009-09-18 09:15:03

Sweeeeeet

SD is on my shortlist of places I could live

 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-09-18 07:29:20

‘Cash for Clunkers’ a Great Success! GM, Chrysler Primed for Profits, MI Congressman Says.

Posted Sep 18, 2009 09:00am EDT by Aaron Task

U.S. car sales are a “disaster” in September, according to Fiat-Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne. But that doesn’t mean the “cash for clunkers” program was a failure — quite the contrary, according to Michigan Congressman Gary Peters.
The program was “very important for Michigan - it was great economic stimulus” and provided “immediate jobs” as automakers ramped up production, says Rep. Peters, a Democrat. “The whole idea of ‘cash for clunkers’ was to act as priming the pump and get people back into showrooms. It was very successful at that.”

Reminds me of a little story from Russia some years ago.

During one of their many famines a Russian university professor was assigned the experiment of determining the minimum amount of feed a horse could get and still function as a farm animal. The professor was shipped out to Siberia and ordered to send his experimental results back each month via telegraph. He understood the political importance of good results and that failure would mean permanent exile in Siberia.

Month one - He wired back -”Good success, comrades! We have substituted sawdust for food one day per week, and the horses don’t mind!”

Month two - “Even better success, comrades! We have substituted sawdust for food two days per week, and the horses don’t mind!”

Month three - “Fantastic success, comrades! We have substituted sawdust for food six days per week, and the horses don’t mind! Please send more horses, the ones we had were defective.”

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:42:08

In other countries, bankers actually some times serve jail time for wrongdoing. Here they just get slightly-smaller bonuses.

Sept. 18, 2009, 7:45 a.m. EDT

Ex-Morgan Stanley banker sentenced to jail in Hong Kong

By MarketWatch

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) — A Hong Kong court handed down its stiffest-ever term for a case involving insider dealing Friday, sentencing 40-year-old former Morgan Stanley banker Du Jun to seven years in prison and a fine of HK$23.3 million ($3 million).

The sentence, the maximum that can be imposed under Hong Kong’s District Court, was handed down Friday following Du’s conviction on nine counts of insider dealing last week.

“I can’t think of another reason other than being driven by sheer greed for his action,” Judge Andrew Chan reportedly said during court Friday.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:43:50

As long as Megabank, Inc stands ready to provide plunge protection services as needed, I expect the builder stocks will do very well going forward.

The Ratings Game

Sept. 18, 2009, 10:14 a.m. EDT
J.P. Morgan turns positive on home-builder sector
Toll, KB Home lifted to overweight; M.D.C. Holdings downgraded

By John Spence, MarketWatch

BOSTON (MarketWatch) — J.P. Morgan analyst Michael Rehaut on Friday lifted his view on the home-builder sector to positive from negative, saying the housing market has made it through the worst of the correction.

“While fundamentals will likely not demonstrate an uninterrupted solid rate of improvement over the next six to 12 months, we believe that not only is housing solidly past its trough, but over the next 24 months will continue to recover and drive further upside to the current rally in the home-builder stocks,” he wrote in a research note.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 07:45:55

I take this as a sign that more and larger housing subsidies are in the works. If the market were left on its own without government sponsored life support, I expect the big Wall Street favored home builders would be declaring bankruptcy some time soon, as their McMansion tract home development-based business model has clearly failed.

Comment by exeter
2009-09-18 08:07:13

“I take this as a sign that more and larger housing subsidies are in the works.”

Whatever it takes to keep the mortgage interest scam going, they’ll do it.

 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 08:53:15

I take this as a sign that more and larger housing subsidies are in the works

That’s depressing and annoying.

 
Comment by Al
2009-09-18 09:11:49

I take this as a sign that J.P. Morgan has some stock in the home-building sector they want to sell.

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:46:10

Exactly. :lol:

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-09-18 07:54:36

Wonder if these guys are hiring?

USA Tent City
We serve people in the United States who reside in tent cities across America. Additionally we act as a clearing house for those with resources who wish to serve the homeless in our country. We also have information for people who are in danger of becoming homeless.

We do NOT accept monies, fees etc. and we have NONE to distribute! See “State by State Discussions and Resources” for available third party programs and services.

http://usatentcity.us

 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-09-18 07:59:01

A Plunge Protection Team for Junk Bonds Needed, Stat!

NEW YORK (Reuters) - About 40 percent of all U.S. junk bonds outstanding in late 2008 will likely default by 2013 as government aid measures end and a wall of corporate debt comes due, Bank of America Merrill Lynch said on Thursday.
By contrast, the cumulative five-year default rate was about 30 percent in the last two default cycles, Bank of America said in a report.

The worst recession since the 1930s has already pushed defaults to double-digit rates. According to Standard & Poor’s, the default rate rose to 10.4 percent in August from less than 1 percent in 2007 as the recession and credit crunch left companies unable to pay off debt.

Deleveraging by consumers and financial institutions and fiscal problems at federal and state governments will slow the economic recovery, keeping defaults high, Bank of America said. Failure of the “shadow banking system” to reinvent itself will also contribute to high defaults, it said, referring to hedge funds and other non-bank institutions that fueled the last credit boom.

Defaults will also be triggered by hundreds of billions of dollars of debt coming due, especially in 2013 and 2014, Bank of America said. About $361 billion of high-yield loans come due in those two years alone, or 72 percent of the total outstanding, the bank estimated in an earlier report.

Comment by WT Economist
2009-09-18 08:11:46

Default or soaring inflation, bonds look really band, and not just junk bonds.

The only reason to buy them is that you are actually interested in stock — ie. the new stock after the restructuring and the debt for equity swap.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 09:03:23

“Defaults will also be triggered by hundreds of billions of dollars of debt coming due, especially in 2013 and 2014, Bank of America said.”

I see nothing here the Fed’s printing press cannot make whole, do you?

Comment by Al
2009-09-18 09:17:34

“I see nothing here the Fed’s printing press cannot make whole, do you?”

Once the printing press has fixed all this, will those companies be able to survive when everything imported costs 1350%* what it does now?

* After careful analysis of a ball of lint found in my winter jacket that has been in storage since last spring, I came up with that figure. I can make economics as good as the pros.

 
 
 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 08:08:02

The United States federal government: broke

Bernanke’s printing press: working overtime

Comment by mrktMaven
2009-09-18 08:41:07

Asset prices are increasing again, however. That should please the masses. Pass me the JD. Statically double plus good times ahead.

 
 
Comment by mrktMaven
2009-09-18 08:23:40

If you threw 500K into the stock market today, would you turn your back on it and hope for the best or would you monitor it daily?

If you’re going to speculate, get real time data. A lot of housing speculators didn’t have access to timely market moving information. As a result, they didn’t sell when the market turned. Big Sis had access to real time MLS data but ignored it.

If you are going to speculate using borrowed money in any market, you have to make sure the thing you are speculating in is increasing in price beyond your costs, particularly interest payment costs. The delusional speculators of yesteryear, however, were funding interest expenses with equity lines and so on, without the knowledge prices were crashing. Wash, rinse, and repeat a million times.

One of the problems during the housing bubble was a lot of speculators were using unsupervised borrowed money. As a result, no one called them on their failing bets. Until recently, for example, my BIL was still talking, spending, and acting like a RE mogul. This is after the market had tanked 30 pct here in FL. Ignorance is bliss.

If you are going to speculate, pay attention. Don’t assign critical responsibilities like monitoring price movements and profit & loss statements to someone else and later absolve yourself when things go wrong. It’s your responsibility to monitor your bets.

Lastly, don’t delude yourselves with labels like investor and long-term buy and holder. When you buy something with the hope and intention of selling it later at a higher price, you are speculating.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 10:06:35

..When you buy something with the hope and intention of selling it later at a higher price, you are speculating..

I would argue with that except for the fact it includes gold bugs.. so I won’t.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 08:55:57

Hedge Funds’ ATM Moves From Tokyo to Washington: William Pesek

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — China is getting all worked up about the wrong thing when it comes to the U.S.

Forget these nascent trade wars over tires, cars and chickens. China’s real problem is how quickly the dollars they hold in great quantity are getting all the respect of pesos these days. Sound like hyperbole? Not when you consider what may be the hottest investment of 2010: the dollar-carry trade.

Move over Japan. Investors spent a decade borrowing in zero-interest-rate yen and putting the funds in higher-yielding assets overseas. It’s the U.S.’s turn to flood the world with cheap funding and the risks of this going wrong are huge.

The carry trade has never been a proud part of Japan’s post-bubble years. Officials in Tokyo rarely talk about the yen’s role in funding risky or highly leveraged bets on markets from Zimbabwe to New Zealand. Japan never set out to become a giant automated teller machine for speculators. It was a side effect of policies aimed at ending deflation.

The perils of the carry trade were seen in October 1998. Russia’s debt default and the implosion of Long-Term Capital Management LP devastated global markets. It was a decidedly panicky and messy period culminating in the yen, which had been weakening for years, surging 20 percent in less than two months.

Now imagine what might happen if the world’s reserve currency became its most shorted. Carry trades are, after all, bets that the funding currency will weaken further or stay down for an extended period of time. It’s also a wager that a central bank is trapped into keeping borrowing costs low indefinitely.

Cheapest Currency

“The dollar is the cheapest funding currency bar none and only challenged by the U.K. in terms of the risks from money printing and escalating deficits,” says Simon Grose-Hodge, a strategist at LGT Group in Singapore.

Three-month London interbank offered rates, or Libor, for dollar loans are at a record low and fell below those for the yen on Aug. 24 for the first time in 16 years.

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 08:58:39

The Treasury, responding to the growing pain in the commercial real-estate industry, released new tax rules that make it easier for distressed property owners to restructure loans that were packaged by Wall Street firms and sold as securities.

Most in the real-estate industry, which lobbied intensely for the move, applauded the action. But some warned it has opened a Pandora’s box, especially for servicers of the securities who will likely come under new pressure from borrowers and competing classes of investors.

The move is the first round of “additional guidance” the Treasury is weighing to stave off what many fear will be a commercial real-estate crisis, according to people familiar with the matter.

But some investors holding CMBS bonds are watching nervously because loan modifications, known as “mods,” mightn’t always be in their best interest. CMBS have junior and senior pieces, and the senior holders may be in a better position, when a borrower defaults, to foreclose and liquidate the property rather than modify the loan. Junior holders, on the other hand, might benefit from a mod because they mightn’t get their money back in a forced sale.

“The biggest concern is that the guidance could open the floodgate for everyone to try to get some sort of loan modifications,” said Aaron Bryson, a CMBS analyst at Barclays Capital. “There is a tremendous burden on the servicers to uphold their end of the bargain.”

The move by the Treasury reflects the deep concern in government and industry circles over the problems looming in the $6.5 trillion market for commercial real estate. Just as the U.S. economy is struggling to regain its footing, defaults are mounting because of credit-market turmoil, along with declining property cash flows and plunging property values.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 09:02:07

Is it desirable for the labor market to be stabilizing at a record-high level of unemployment?

California, Nevada Reach Record Unemployment Levels (Update2)

By Timothy R. Homan

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — Unemployment rose in 27 U.S. states in August, with California and Nevada reaching record levels of joblessness.

Rhode Island rounded out the list of states with the highest level of unemployment since data began in 1976, the Labor Department reported today in Washington. California’s unemployment rate reached 12.2 percent and Nevada’s climbed to 13.2 percent.

The job market is showing signs of stabilizing as reports indicate economic growth is resuming this quarter. Economists surveyed by Bloomberg News this month said the unemployment rate nationally will reach 10 percent this year, a reminder that consumers are unlikely to lead the recovery.

“There’s still a fair amount of weakness in some of the larger states,” said Steven Cochrane, director of regional economics at Moody’s Economy dot com in West Chester, Pennsylvania. “State finances are probably going to be among the last of all the various components of the broad economy to turn around.”

Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 11:23:11

If you are an employer, it’s the cat’s a$$..

Five applicants for every open position, cram-downs on your current staff, and much lower turnover.

If you have to work for a living, not so much. But we don’t count in the bigger scheme of things anyway.

At least the service in the fast food restaurants is getting better, with all those engineering grads flipping burgers now…………

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 13:50:19

If by “stabilizing” they mean UE is running out for thousands, then yeah, of course it is.

 
 
Comment by OCBear
2009-09-18 09:07:00

Derivatives update:

At the (previous) height of the CDO, CDS, MBS, Financial Weaapons of Mass Dextruction environment, the Derivatives Market was estimated at 600 Trillion Dollars. After the crash it shrunk down to somewhere around 400 Trillion Dollars.

This time instead of Mortgages we have Derivatives leverage in Corporate Bonds. The yields are way down on Corporate Bonds, the face values are waaaaay up, in the midst of the Great Recession no less.

Looks like useing Corporate Bonds to create CDS is the new rage. Wall Street Bonus’s should be good for Christmas.

The Derivatives market is now estimated at ONE THOUSAND TRILLION DOLLARS.

Hate to be a Negative Nattering Neigh Bob BUT, what if Corporations go broke, say because the resession does not end and the Green Shoots turn Brown.

Joshua Tree’s the size of Redwoods.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 09:34:31

ONE THOUSAND TRILLION DOLLARS = $1 quadrillion. Better get used to the term quadrillion, folks, as from here on out you will be seeing it with increasing frequency.

Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 10:11:28

Better get used to the term quadrillion, folks, as from here on out you will be seeing it with increasing frequency.

“To the moon, Alice!”

 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-09-18 10:28:57

“Better get used to the term quadrillion, folks”

Hey now, PB, some of us are still getting used to the term Quadrophenia:

You were under the impression
That when you were walking forward
You’d end up further onward
But things ain’t quite that simple.

You got altered information
You were told to not take chances
You missed out on new dances
Now you’re losing all your dimples.

My jacket’s gonna be cut and slim and checked,
Maybe a touch of seersucker, with an open neck.
I ride a G S scooter with my hair cut neat,
Wear my wartime coat in the wind and sleet.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:18:12

I personally am suffering from quadraphobia (fear of the day when $1 quadrillion dollars seems like small change)…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2009-09-18 18:53:30

A quadrillion here, a quadrillion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 09:36:35

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

Four more companies were downgraded to junk territory in the past month, pushing the total for 2009 to 66, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said Wednesday.
Those entities have $223.06 billion in debt, just shy of the debt held by the 55 companies that were junked last year.
The latest round of downgrades helped pushed the number of potential fallen angels - entities at the lowest investment-grade level with a negative outlook or on watch for downgrade - down one to 75. But new additions to the list include printer maker Lexmark International Inc. (LXK) and Deutsche Lufthansa AG (DLAKY).
Financial companies continue to constitute the biggest number of companies which became fallen angels this year with 12, followed by banks at nine and utilities at eight. Banks lead the way for potential fallen angels with 15, followed by consumer products at nine.
Commercial lender CIT Group Inc. (CIT), with $38.19 billion in rated debt, remains the largest fallen angel this year and Hungary remains the largest potential fallen angel this month, with $58.27 billion in rated debt.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2009-09-18 09:41:32


$1 quadrillion. Better get used to the term

becuz things are gettin better right?

Comment by Shizo
2009-09-18 14:24:57

Time to fire up the salad shooter!

 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-09-18 09:51:36

Now, you realize the Russians know a broken economic system when they see one:

SOCHI, Russia (AP) — Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Friday said other currencies besides the dollar should be used as global reserves to reduce the risks posed by swelling U.S. debt.

Putin, who spoke at an international investment forum in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, chided the United States for “an uncontrolled issue of dollars” and said the American currency’s dominance had been “one of the triggers” of the global crisis.

Putin renewed Russia’s call on the U.S. administration and global community to give the green light to alternative reserve currencies: “If there are several reserve currencies, this will not harm the U.S. economy in any way.”

President Dmitry Medvedev’s economic advisor, Arkady Dvorkovich, said Thursday that Russia would at next week’s G-20 summit in Pittsburgh press for more follow-through on measures to confront the global downturn and to change Western-dominated international financial institutions.

Russia and China have pushed for alternative reserve currencies, but being the world’s largest holders of U.S. dollar assets — such as Treasuries — they are unlikely to abandon it. Dvorkovich stressed on Thursday that Russia is not out to replace the dollar, but only diversify.

Putin, meanwhile, also promised to encourage foreign investment in Russia by removing bureaucratic hurdles.

Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 13:30:22

LOL - Russians couldn’t see a broken economic system if they looked in the mirror!

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2009-09-18 18:57:59

They need our permission to use other currencies as a reserve? Have at it. Why don’t they hold their wealth in rubles?

 
 
Comment by exeter
2009-09-18 09:56:03

It’s Happening……

Many times on this blog I’ve discussed how equity bandits(putting it nicely) from NYC/NJ/CT/PA have bought/built architectural abominations in VT/upstate NY border counties during the 1980’s only to dump them at a loss in the 1990’s to go back where they came from for various reasons. I insisted it would occur again but only on a scale to match the magnitude of the 2000-2007 bubble.

My 80something parents befriended a retired NJ couple who paid $500k for a newly constructed dump back in early 2003 in essex county, ny. Mom just called and said they put their shack on the market in August because “she” didn’t want to die alone in the north pole(her words), they want to *return to NJ.*

Now I’ve stated over the years on the blog that one primary reason these equity bandits leave is a desire to return home, wherever that may be. Tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands thought it was a good idea at the time(2000-2007) to venture to a place entirely foreign to them and convince themselves to stay…… until they face reality and concede that it was a bad plan…..

By the way…. the asking price on the $550k shack??

$350k….. with no interested buyers.

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 10:57:02

“Mom just called and said they put their shack on the market in August because “she” didn’t want to die alone in the north pole(her words), they want to *return to NJ.*

Is it that much warmer in NJ in the winter time?

I know, the weather had nothing to do with the move. Sounds like she is paying a super premium for her stay in NY. Didn’t go according to plan, imagine that.

Comment by exeter
2009-09-18 11:47:39

“Is it that much warmer in NJ in the winter time?”

NJ is warmer without a doubt and coastal NJ significantly so….. and far less snow. Understand that Essex Co is less than an hour to Quebec and the canadian wind blows down the champlain valley 24 hours a day. BurlingtonVT is a half hour to the border.

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 13:06:46

Didn’t look at the map, and they don’t let me north of the Mason-Dixon line very often.

My wife just got back from Sodus Bay NY sailing and said they were chilly on lake Champlain.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 13:32:38

Never have understood why people retire and move away from their family and friends to a place they have never lived.

 
 
Comment by Skeptical Onlooker
2009-09-18 10:57:22

At 2 - 2.5 times the average sales price and a countywide sales volume of about 25 sales a month (and headed into Winter) its going to be a while…

Comment by exeter
2009-09-19 08:33:11

hello skeptic ;)

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 10:00:17

African Condom Shortage Said to Worsen Climate Impact

Sept. 17 (Bloomberg) — Unwanted pregnancies in poor countries have led to higher demand for land and water, resources already taxed by climate change, according to research to be published by the World Health Organization.

Runaway population growth in countries such as Ethiopia and Rwanda where contraceptives are in short supply is exacerbating drought and straining fresh water supplies, said Leo Bryant, lead author of the study. Of 40 nations reviewed, 37 said rapid population growth worsened environmental damage.

Climate change has been blamed by scientists for increasing droughts, pushing up sea levels and causing floods from heavy rainfall in countries across the globe. The impact can be worse in developing nations where food and water already are in short supply and there is little funding to help communities adapt.

“It’s time to start looking at the environmental relevance of family planning,” Bryant, an advocacy manager for the London-based reproductive health-care provider Marie Stopes International, said yesterday in a telephone interview. “Reproductive health services ought to be integrated into the climate adaptation strategy.”

Bryant analyzed national plans to adapt to climate change submitted to the United Nations by 40 poorer countries. Most said demographic trends were “interacting” with climate change to speed the degradation of natural resources and raise the risk of extreme weather events. He said the findings are set to be published in November by the Geneva-based World Health Organization, which coordinates UN health policy.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 10:05:39

“African Condom Shortage Said to Worsen Climate Impact”

Doesn’t condom manufacturing and transport create greenhouse gases?

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 10:13:03

Anyone who can’t see that the goal of the enviro-wacko elite is the control and manipulation of every facet of people’s lives, from cradle to grave the world over, just isn’t paying attention.

Comment by exeter
2009-09-18 10:26:35

“control and manipulation of every facet of people’s lives, from cradle to grave the world over, just isn’t paying attention.”

Sounds like the social conservative thugs. Always impinging on your personal life, sexual sexual proclivities, religious preferences, etc.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 10:50:24

Always impinging on your personal life, sexual sexual proclivities

We know what’s on your mind. You have double the proclivities of others. There are a lot of farm animals in Upstate New York. Aren’t there?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by exeter
2009-09-18 11:40:05

Did you hear the news release this afternoon? The AP reported that the 9/11 WTC collapse was orchestrated and executed by ACORN….. serious NYCB.. Be skeeerd…..

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:56:31

exeter — Please provide a link to that story when you have it. I cannot find it. But here is another good one. It sounds like ACORN has a systemic problem with advising pimps and hookers on how to skirt the law.

San Diego ACORN officials fire worker over video
(AP) – 16 hours ago

NATIONAL CITY, Calif. — ACORN officials in San Diego have fired an employee caught on video providing advice about human smuggling to a couple posing as a pimp and a prostitute.

David Lagstein, the group’s head organizer in San Diego, initially said Thursday that he believed Juan Carlos Vera did his best to deal with a challenging situation and would not be disciplined. But three hours later, Lagstein reversed that decision.

He said he reevaluated the videos posted online in which Vera was secretly filmed answering questions about smuggling people into the U.S. through Tijuana. Lagstein said after further discussion with supervisors and state ACORN officials he decided Vera’s conduct was “unacceptable.”

Earlier Thursday the House followed the Senate’s lead in denying all federal funding for the scandal-tainted community organizing group.

Information from: The San Diego Union-Tribune

 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 12:56:47

What? I was just having fun with the fact you typed “sexual” twice. That was pretty funny. I wasn’t trying to get political. I thought a good farm animal joke would liven things up.

 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2009-09-18 11:39:20

Guilty as charged. I’m all for impinging on the personal life and sexual proclivities of the Maury Povich “Who’s the Daddy” crowd.

Why is it government’s job to subsidize the kids of some idjit high school dropout, who has eight different kids with five different women?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 13:34:28

Because abortion is bad.

 
Comment by San Diego RE Bear
2009-09-18 14:27:23

“Why is it government’s job to subsidize the kids of some idjit high school dropout, who has eight different kids with five different women?”

Pffft, that’s so 1990’s. Today’s woman can have 8 different kids in one go with no daddy in sight! Isn’t technology wonderful?

 
 
 
Comment by lavi d
2009-09-18 10:29:41

… the goal of the enviro-wacko elite is the control and manipulation of every facet of people’s lives, from cradle to grave the world over…

Perhaps, but they’ll have to wait in line behind the financial-corporate elite.

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 10:32:27

You might want to add religion to that also joey.

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 10:38:48

Well, I am doing my part to save the worlds environment. On the bumper of my 1987 Mercedes 300-SDL turbo diesel I have installed a section of a pine tree branch just above the tailpipe as my carbon offset.

I had thought about using old panty hose over the exhaust to act as a particulate filter.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 10:59:08

trees and plants absolutely love carbon dioxide… actually they feed on it.

Any degree of “success” at reducing atmospheric CO2 content has a direct negative effect on the amount of plant life nature can support. Birds, animals, various creeping critters and slimy little bugs won’t have anywhere to live.. the survival of their species put at risk by our pompous ignorance.

Don’t fool with Mother Nature.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 11:50:13

My comments were tongue in cheek…

I am reasonably tuned in to what makes our planet tick. I actually took and passed science in school, but thanks anyway.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 12:24:24

tongue in cheek? You don’t really have a tree branch mounted on your tail pipe??

i wish people would provide some sort of clue when they’re just kidding around.. we’re not all mind readers.

 
Comment by Sleepr Cell
2009-09-18 13:21:25

And I’m certain that the birds and bugs and plants and everything else was perfectly happy back in the Cretaceaous era which was about the last time atmnospheric concentrations of CO2 were this high. Unfortunatly sea levles were a tad higher as well which might pose a bit of a problem with earths dominant critter of the moment.

Are you in LA Joey? if so, take a long hard look at the profile of the Palos Verdes peninusula. See those “steps” or bench like flat areas as various heights? Know what those are?

Former sea levels. Think about that for a moment before you spout off any more ignorant BS.

 
Comment by Sleepr Cell
2009-09-18 13:31:46

Back in the Cretaceous era I’m sure all the bugs and birds and plants and everything else were quite happy. That was the most recent time where atmospheric concentrations of CO2 were as high as the levels we are fast approaching.

Unfortunately the other thing that was rather elevated was the sea level and that might pose a bit of a problem for earths current dominant critter.

Are you in Los Angeles Joey? If so, on a smog free day, take a good long look at the profile of the Palos Verdes peninsula. See those giant steps? Bench like flat areas that march up the hill? Do you know what those are?

Former beaches.

Ponder that for a moment before you spout off any more ignorant BS.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 13:43:21

..pose a bit of a problem with earths dominant critter of the moment.

referring to mankind..

You want to sustain or improve an environment that favors mankind over one which would support more plant and animal life??

Environmentalism is not about helping endangered species, preserving pristine rain forests and all that stuff?

It has selfish motives from the point of view of humans beings? We are more important? We and our destructive habits and cultures are not the enemy?
—-

I wish you guys would get your story straight.

 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 15:21:13

I wish you guys would get your story straight.

More importantly, what’s your story, Joey?

Is there a coherent ecological philosophy winging around in there somewhere beyond “Drill, baby, drill”? Do you say things like “Don’t fool with Mother Nature” to be intentionally hilarious, or do those pearls just slip out of your enviro-wacko dislikin’ mouth?

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 17:04:37

.. an ecological philosophy?

I need to look that word up. Lets see..

Philosophy- A comprehensive system of belief.

Belief- Religious faith.

Nope.. There is no environmental philosophy in me.

 
 
Comment by ET-Chicago
2009-09-18 12:42:51

Well, I am doing my part to save the worlds environment. On the bumper of my 1987 Mercedes 300-SDL turbo diesel I have installed a section of a pine tree branch just above the tailpipe as my carbon offset.

For what it’s worth, that made me laugh.

Don’t fool with Mother Nature.

That made me laugh, too.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Olympiagal
2009-09-18 18:05:10

That made me laugh, too.

I was going to laugh, too. But instead, for maybe the first time ever on this blog, I just got bored and didn’t even bother to respond, instead.
I mean, jeeze, did the subject of poisoned rivers not just get covered YESTERDAY? At length? How much documentation does anyone NEED? Yakadee yakadee…
YYYyawwwwwnnnn….

 
 
 
Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 10:38:58

The religious fanatics of the Middle Ages just finding different things to be fanatical about in our “modern age”.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 11:14:23

I am wholeheartedly in favor of religious freedom. If the envirowackos were categorized as and admitted to being a religion, which they obviously are, I’d be in favor of their freedom to spout their inane beliefs as well.

Unfortunately for us they can currently create and pass laws that force us to worship and make sacrifices to their gods.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 11:28:10

Hey Joey

Go visit China and come back and report on what it looks like when there are few envinronmental regulations. I’d like to build a nuclear waste dump up the hill from you. Those gov regulation keep getting in the way.

Terry Shiavo and her husband might disagree, as would the doctors gunned down by your right wing wack jobs.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 12:27:39

How am I supposed to visit China?

Take some huge jet plane and radically increase my carbon footprint?? Ya think I’m algore and deserve special consideration?

^*#@$* hypocrites..

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 12:56:11

Go visit China and come back and report on what it looks like when there are few envinronmental regulations.

Pretty much everything is state-run in China. That’s about as regulated as it gets.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 13:58:36

“That’s about as regulated as it gets.”

Really ???? You think that China has regulations that require miners and manufacturers to dump toxins into the rivers??? It’s either no effective regulation or no regulation.

HONG KONG – One needs to look no further then the river that runs through Shangba to understand the extent of the heavy metals pollution that experts say has turned the hamlets in this region of southern China into cancer villages.

The river’s flow ranges from murky white to a bright shade of orange and the waters are so viscous that they barely ripple in the breeze. In Shangba, the river brings death, not sustenance.

“All the fish died, even chickens and ducks that drank from the river died. If you put your leg in the water, you’ll get rashes and a terrible itch,” said He Shuncai, a 34-year-old rice farmer who has lived in Shangba all his life.

“Last year alone, six people in our village died from cancer and they were in their 30s and 40s.”

Cancer casts a shadow over the villages in this region of China in southern Guangdong province, nestled among farmland contaminated by heavy metals used to make batteries, computer parts and other electronics devices.

Every year, an estimated 460,000 people die prematurely in China due to exposure to air and water pollution, according to a 2007 World Bank study.

Yun Yaoshun’s two granddaughters died at the ages of 12 and 18, succumbing to kidney and stomach cancer even though these types of cancers rarely affect children. The World Health Organization has suggested that the high rate of such digestive cancers are due to the ingestion of polluted water.

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 15:37:01

You think that China has regulations that require miners and manufacturers to dump toxins into the rivers???

Yes, I do. What fate do you think would await a Chinese miner, working for a government-owned enterprise, who decided to stand on principle and refuse to dump toxins in the rivers?

 
 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 14:06:20

China. That’s about as regulated as it gets. Really your going to argue that the toxic waste in China is the result of effective environmental regulation. ???? It’s because of ineffective or corporate regulation. The same thing we are going to get here.

HONG KONG – One needs to look no further then the river that runs through Shangba to understand the extent of the heavy metals pollution that experts say has turned the hamlets in this region of southern China into cancer villages.

The river’s flow ranges from murky white to a bright shade of orange and the waters are so viscous that they barely ripple in the breeze. In Shangba, the river brings death, not sustenance.

“All the fish died, even chickens and ducks that drank from the river died. If you put your leg in the water, you’ll get rashes and a terrible itch,” said He Shuncai, a 34-year-old rice farmer who has lived in Shangba all his life.

“Last year alone, six people in our village died from cancer and they were in their 30s and 40s.”

Cancer casts a shadow over the villages in this region of China in southern Guangdong province, nestled among farmland contaminated by heavy metals used to make batteries, computer parts and other electronics devices.

Every year, an estimated 460,000 people die prematurely in China due to exposure to air and water pollution, according to a 2007 World Bank study.

Yun Yaoshun’s two granddaughters died at the ages of 12 and 18, succumbing to kidney and stomach cancer even though these types of cancers rarely affect children. The World Health Organization has suggested that the high rate of such digestive cancers are due to the ingestion of polluted water

China has many ‘cancer villages’ and it is very likely that these increased cases of cancer are due to water pollution,” said Edward Chan, an official with Greenpeace in southern China.

But it’s not just water, the carcinogenic heavy metals are also entering the food chain.

Mounds of tailings from mineral mining are discarded alongside paddy fields throughout the region

Hey Joey, if you won’t visit China maybe you could order some bottled water and rice.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2009-09-18 15:45:14

Really your going to argue that the toxic waste in China is the result of effective environmental regulation. ???? It’s because of ineffective or corporate regulation.

It’s the result of draconian state control over all aspects of manufacturing, with little regard for private property, common law, or free enterprise. The central government demands a certain quantity of output under threat of severe penalties for the workers if the demands aren’t met, and no one has an incentive to be concerned about the environmental side effects.

 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 11:01:47

A friend of mine has a Dr. uncle that travels around the world with doctors without boarders. They have been trying for years to reduce pregnancy . In many cultures the males will NOT wear a condom, I don’t care how many education programs you try.

Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 13:41:47

It is forbidden by many religions.

 
Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 14:06:00

Drs. w/o boarders…

Is this some new group of docs formed to differentiate themselves from the docs who are FBs and have to take on boarders to keep their houses?

(Sorry, just funnin’ with you, wmbz, I know you meant borders…)

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 17:51:02

well, i love a turn of phrase when combined with some sideways thinking.. and to make it topical on top of that was a stroke of, if not genius, borderline genius , utarr..

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 22:14:44

Yup, everyone who doesn’t know me thinks I’m smart.

Luv ya, Joey. :)

 
 
 
 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 11:29:53

war famine and disease = population control for those that don’t support birth control.

 
Comment by WT Economist
2009-09-18 12:52:35

What an honest person would take away from this:

For nearly 40 years people in rich countries have been pressuring those in poor countries to have fewer children to protect the global environment.

But when those elsewhere, worried about their future, ask that those in rich countries suffer any inconvenience to limit global environmental damage? I’m not gonna change my lifestyle or pay a dime!

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 10:16:50

New Government Policy Imposes Strict Standards on Garage Sales Nationwide.

Americans who slap $1 pricetags on their used possessions at garage sales or bazaar events risk being slapped with fines of up to $15 million, thanks to a new government campaign.

The “Resale Round-up,” launched by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, enforces new limits on lead in children’s products and makes it illegal to sell any items that don’t meet those limits or have been recalled for any other reason.

The strict standards were set in the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act after a series of high-profile recalls of Chinese-made toys.

The standards were originally interpreted to apply only to new products, but now the CPSC says they apply to used items as well.

“Those who resell recalled children’s products are not only breaking the law, they are putting children’s lives at risk,” said CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum. “Resale stores should make safety their business and check for recalled products and hazards to children.”

In order to comply, stores, flea markets, charities and individuals selling used goods — in person or online — are expected to consult the commission’s 24-page Handbook for Resale Stores and Product Resellers (pdf) and its Web site for a breakdown of what they can’t sell.

Violators caught selling anything on the enormous list face fines of up to $100,000 per infraction and up to $15 million for a related series of infractions.

Though the CPSC says it won’t be sending enforcers to garage sales or yard sales, FOX News Legal Analyst Bob Massi says the law makes no distinction for families and small resellers.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 10:40:04

a country can never protect it’s children enough, nor have enough unenforceable laws..

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 11:02:46

Yea, but they will waste a ton of money fighting a losing battle.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 11:07:01

A country can never saddle its children with enough future debt payments.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 11:30:03

Citigroup CEO says $100 million annual pay is too much

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Citigroup (C.N) Chief Executive Vikram Pandit said on Thursday that $100 million is too much for an employee to earn given the bank’s circumstances.

In an interview before an audience in New York, when asked if $100 million was too much money for a Citigroup employee to earn given the government support the bank has received, Pandit said, “Yes.”

Andrew Hall, a trader at a Citigroup unit, is contractually entitled to a 2009 pay package that could be worth $100 million. Prior Citigroup management signed the agreement that compels the bank to pay Hall so much, Pandit said.

Hall’s massive pay package is a serious challenge for Kenneth Feinberg, the man U.S. President Barack Obama appointed to review executive pay at banks that accepted government bailouts. If the “pay czar” is seen as soft on Hall’s pay, the public outcry could be strong. Hall’s potential $100 million payday is equal to about 2,000 times median household income in the United States in 2008.

But it is not clear if Feinberg has authority to limit Hall’s pay, given that the trader’s contract was put in place well before February 11, 2009, the cut-off date for the pay czar’s authority over compensation agreements.

Hall works at Citigroup energy trading unit Phibro, a business that Pandit said he is working to turn into an asset manager that invests money from outside investors, instead of a unit that trades Citigroup’s money.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 12:15:58

How about if they knock that pay cap back to $99,999,999.99 if $100m is too much?

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 12:57:27

Yep, that may straighten out the dilemma, however Andrew would have to agree to the concession.

 
 
 
Comment by MovedToAugusta
2009-09-18 12:59:09

Bank Closure day! Another hour so until they start getting announced. I predict 5 today.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2009-09-18 13:30:05

It was stated that the FDIC was setting up a satellite office in South Florida. I read this several months ago. I don’t have the link. They were supposed to be fully operational by September. I’m sure they could have a field day closing down South Florida banks. Once that gets rolling the state of Georgia may not feel so bad.

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 13:34:34

What? Is you nuts, our system is on the mend, our banks have the full faith and backing of central control. Why BB just said were all clear, now get out there and spend.

P.S. I’ll call 3

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 13:41:57

First up…

Irwin Union Bank FSB is in serious jeopardy of being shut down by federal regulators.

The community bank’s parent, Irwin Financial Corp., entered a “cease and desist” agreement with the Federal Reserve System and the Indiana Department of Financial Institutions on Wednesday.

Under the order, Irwin Financial must achieve and maintain certain capital levels by Sept. 30 to remain in business. The company also must submit a plan to reduce the bank’s reliance on wholesale deposits.

In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Irwin Union officials said they believe “there is no realistic prospect of achieving the required capital levels by the date required in the order.” They added that they likely would not be able to reduce the bank’s reliance on wholesale deposits by Sept. 30.

Columbus, Ind.-based Irwin Union, which operates two Arizona branches — one in Mesa and one in Phoenix — has struggled under a heavy portfolio of soured real estate loans. The Phoenix Business Journal has tracked the bank’s demise for more than year as it has struggled to rid itself of hundreds of problem loans and build its dwindling capital base.

Bank officials in Arizona did not immediately return a call for comment.

 
Comment by bink
2009-09-18 15:44:45
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 13:08:58

Silicon Valley warning: Detroit still doesn’t get it.

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - From Detroit’s union halls to its boardrooms, the consensus belief is that billions of dollars in federal investment and loans kept the American auto industry from collapse.

But drive up Silicon Valley, and you hear a sharply different — and far darker view — from some of the world’s most prominent venture investors.

The U.S. auto industry, they warn, remains too wedded to a dying business model and too out of touch with the sources of innovation to become competitive again.

Instead, they look for a new group of upstart companies to shoot to prominence and profitability, eclipsing the automakers once known as the “Big Three” just as Google Inc came from nowhere a decade ago to eclipse established technology companies.

“I do not believe that the U.S. auto business can be competitive,” said Ray Lane, Managing Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. “I don’t see any of these new car companies based in Detroit.”

Lane, who is backing plug-in hybrid carmaker Fisker Automotive that is planning to launch a $39,000 model, said Detroit has lost its entrepreneurial spirit.

“For years they have been led by accountants and lawyers, not engineers and entrepreneurs,” Lane said. “That’s OK if the industry isn’t changing.”

So, what do the three U.S. automakers need to do to get back their once-dominant position in the marketplace?

Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 14:09:06

It was over when they rejected Deming in the 50s.

20 years later the Japanese were contenders. 20 more years later they kicked our butts.

You can blame the unions all you want, but the unions had no say in the design of the products.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 16:00:19

Labor costs play no part in the design of a product? I disagree.

If anything, a product saddled with higher labor costs, when pitted against less expensive products forces a cheaper and less competitive product to be produced, all other things being equal.

But i wouldn’t only blame union labor’s disregard for the competitiveness of car manufacturers for the troubles they’ve had.

The government (our demand for stringent pollution control, tighter regulations, and all the other restraints placed on large manufacturers, some stemming from nothing more than the public’s popular disdain for Big-fill-in-the-blank) is also responsible.
—-

Someday we may realize there’s a connection between business and our jobs, and support business for our own benefit.

Go ahead.. call me a dreamer.

Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 16:32:42

So management is not to be blamed in any of this?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 17:07:37

sfgal.. like my daddy used to say, “It takes two”.

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 17:49:30

Joey I grew up when cars were gas guzzling, dangerous and built like crap.

How’d you like 8 mpg with today’s prices? How about 4 wheel drum brakes? (you ain’t lived until you’ve driven one) Or no brakes lights? (You’ll just have to guess if I’m slowing down) And then there was the tune up every 4 months and major parts that wouldn’t last the first year. And passenger safety? What’s that? Don’t hit anybody and you don’t have to worry about it. Power steering, power brakes, automatic transmission, A/C, passenger side mirror and AM radios were considered luxury items and they scammed you accordingly.

You should read about Williams Deming. Because you have no idea what you’re talking about.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 18:19:01

i’m shopping for a motor home and that 8mpg and drum brakes sorta go with the territory.. and i don’t like it.

I learned on fairly new car.. a column 3 speed and clutch. AM radio. No intermittant wipers. No radial tires. No pollution control. No seat belts.
I doubt you’re that much older than me, presuming you are at all, so don’t throw your age and experience at me like it’s gonna be meaningful.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 13:29:12

Team Barry, need to have their azz kicked for even thinking about giving the fed more power and control. This is one huge mistake, the fed is a huge mistake! It’s all about power and control though, so grab’um and bend over.

Volcker Criticizes Obama Plan to Make Fed Systemic Regulator

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — Paul Volcker, a former Federal Reserve chairman and now an economic adviser to President Barack Obama, criticized his boss’s plan to give the Fed authority to supervise “systemically important” financial firms.

“I don’t know what systemically important institutions are,” Volcker said. “But I’m sure that if you picked them out, people will assume they’re going to be saved, that they’re too big to fail.”

Volcker’s remarks appeared in the form of a “conversation” with Gary Stern, the recently retired president of the Fed Bank of Minneapolis, and published in “The Region,” the bank’s quarterly publication. Volcker, 81, is chairman of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board, a body created by Obama in February to recommend responses to the crisis.

Obama’s plan to give the Fed powers to monitor risks to the financial system is aimed at avoiding a repeat of the financial meltdown that led to $1.6 trillion of bank losses and writedowns and triggered a global recession. The Obama plan would label banks including Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc. as “systemically important” and subject them to capital and liquidity requirements and stricter oversight.

The plan has drawn criticism from lawmakers including Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, who has said the central bank failed to use its existing supervisory powers to curb some of the lending practices that contributed to the crisis. Congressional leaders are leaning toward vesting authority over capital, liquidity and risk-management practices of big banks in a council of regulators.

The administration also wants the power to seize financial institutions if they run into trouble. And Obama’s regulatory framework would make it mandatory for large hedge funds, private-equity firms and venture-capital funds to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Comment by Skip
2009-09-18 13:37:21

I think you might be mistaken, I am sure it actually means less control.

What Wall Street company do you think the new supervisors will come from?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 13:54:42

‘Volcker Criticizes Obama Plan to Make Fed Systemic Regulator

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — Paul Volcker, a former Federal Reserve chairman and now an economic adviser to President Barack Obama, criticized his boss’s plan to give the Fed authority to supervise “systemically important” financial firms.

“I don’t know what systemically important institutions are,” Volcker said. “But I’m sure that if you picked them out, people will assume they’re going to be saved, that they’re too big to fail.”’

What a great man Volcker is.

 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 14:10:47

The very idea of having the FED control things is nauseating. No open books to see what favors they give to their friends. I hope this get’s shot to he##.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2009-09-18 14:11:22

Well at least we’re not like China where the state regulates everything.

Oh wait…

Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 16:34:30

Too funny eco

 
 
 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2009-09-18 13:32:00

42 US states lose jobs in August, up from July

WASHINGTON – Forty-two states lost jobs last month, up from 29 in July, with the biggest net payroll cuts coming in Texas, Michigan, Georgia and Ohio.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090918/ap_on_bi_ge/us_state_unemployment

 
Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 13:37:29

UPDATE 1-Thelen law firm files Chapter 7 after Citi cutoff.

* Firm once had more than 600 lawyers

* Says Citigroup will no longer advance funds (Recasts third paragraph, adds Citigroup declining comment)

NEW YORK, Sept 18 (Reuters) - Thelen LLP, a U.S. law firm that once had more than 600 lawyers, said it filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation after Citigroup Inc (C.N), a large creditor, cut off needed funding.

The 85-year-old firm said Citigroup “is no longer willing to advance funds for the cost of collection and (to) wind down operations,” or to fund the costs of a Chapter 11 proceeding, according to a filing on Thursday with the U.S. bankruptcy court in Manhattan.”

Thelen also said its estimated assets “will be insufficient to result in any meaningful payment” to unsecured creditors, in light of Citigroup’s $7.2 million secured loan.

A Citigroup spokeswoman declined to comment.

According to its bankruptcy petition, also filed on Thursday, Thelen has between $10 million and $50 million of assets, and between $50 million and $100 million of liabilities.

Thelen shut down in late 2008 after the recession hurt revenue, many partners departed, and efforts to merge with another firm fell apart.

The San Francisco-based firm had reached its maximum size following a 2006 merger with New York’s Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner LLP. Thelen said its largest remaining creditors are in New York.

 
Comment by measton
2009-09-18 14:12:50

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The International Monetary Fund said its executive board approved Friday the sale of 403.3 tonnes of gold, mainly aimed at boosting the institution’s capacity to lend to poor countries.

The IMF said in a statement the sales would be “in a volume strictly limited to 403.3 metric tonnes, with these sales to be conducted under modalities that safeguard against disruption of the gold market.”

The IMF said the decision was a central element of a new income model for the institution that had been approved by the executive board in April 2008.

The sale of gold “will also increase the fund’s resources for lending to low-income countries,” a strategy that won board backing in July.

Comment by wmbz
2009-09-18 15:49:32

The sale of gold “will also increase the fund’s resources for lending to low-income countries,” a strategy that won board backing in July.

LOL! Sweeet Nothing to do with helping “poor” countries, they never get re-paid. Who pays into the IMF more, much more than any other country? I forget.

Good way to try and suppress prices though.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 16:31:08

About 13 million troy ounces, and 13 billion dollars worth.. ’tis but a flesh wound. No cause for alarm. The bugs can sleep tight over the weekend.

I would’a sworn they’d wait for $1,100 or so. The market can support that, theoretically. I guess they needed the money.

 
Comment by technovelist
2009-09-19 20:13:03

I can assure you not one ounce of that gold will ever see the open market. It will go to one or more of the central banks that have figured out that paper money is not the best reserve asset.

By the way, that came out before the close on Friday and had essentially no effect on the gold price. Of course, there undoubtedly will be several corrections in the generational gold bull market along the way to MUCH higher prices. These will turn out to be buying opportunities for those underinvested in gold (approximately 100% of the public).

 
 
Comment by salinasron
2009-09-18 15:00:15

“The sale of gold “will also increase the fund’s resources for lending to low-income countries,” a strategy that won board backing in July”

Ok, now China, it’s your turn. Step up to the plate and buy gold with your spare US dollars so that they can be loaned to some third world country and the game can continue to buy us time til the US consumer starts consuming once anew. Oh, they’re unemployed? Don’t worry, we got plan B. What’s plan B? It’s a banking secret, we can’t tell you yet!

 
Comment by Lost in Utah
2009-09-18 15:05:53

Question:

Since I’ve been rigorously and religiously attending Slacker University and haven’t made enough money to pay taxes for a number of years, just wondering how the 8k tax credit would apply to someone who doesn’t have a job or pay taxes. Assuming one paid cash for the house, of course, cause you’d never get a loan.

Also, what if you got the house using the credit and then lost your job and didn’t pay taxes that following year?

And what if the house cost 8k? How would that work?

Just wondering how the credit thing works, I guess, in case I get a job and lose my mind and buy a house… none very likely, except maybe the mind part…

Comment by polly
2009-09-18 22:05:47

Not sure if it is a “refundable credit” which is where you can get the money even if you didn’t pay that much in taxes.

But there is a maximum based on the price of the house - 10%. So if you bought an $8000 house, the max credit would be $800. Better than nothing, but not enough to write home about.

 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2009-09-18 15:13:31

In other news, expect a chilly winter in Wallace Pond, Vermont if you’re not yet thinking about taking down the screens and putting up the storm windows. On average, the coolest month is January. The lowest recorded temperature was minus 42°F in 1962.

Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2009-09-18 16:39:44

Well right now we started our Summer. Temperatures expected to climb into the 100s. Yuuuck. Just not a hot weather person.

 
 
Comment by Mike in Bend
2009-09-18 15:35:27

Funny postcard from a UHS today, outlining how she was a shortsale specialist, and her polar bear stamp and a picture of her kisssing a baby made her message a little funnier. She is a short sale specialist, BTW. I do not endorse her for those who think I too am morally corrupt, but she may be:
FALSE HOPE: Loan Mod
less than 20% qualify
wait 3…6 months to find out
Temporary short term fix
Stay upside down and stuck in your house 5….10 years or longer
Missed payments, late fees and back interest is often added to your balance
Get rejected and your short selling window may have closed

(other side of card promoting her SS biz)VS A WAY OUT
Sell for less than you owe
Escape your $$ burden
The bank EATS the difference
Lender covers closing costs
Your credit can start repairing immediately
Potentially buy again in 2 years

(But the other side said you could be stuck upside down for 5 or 10 or more years, why promote the ability to buy in 2 years??)
SO STICK IT TO that EVIL BANK, cuz they are immoral, I guess.
I almost bought into this reasoning a bit ago. Until I remembered what mom told me. Two wrongs don’t make a right!

This postcard message brought to you from the “Real-a-tor with the banking background”!!

Comment by joeyinCalif
2009-09-18 18:09:35

I have no soft spot for used house sellers, but i did serve a couple years in the RE Core, and i understand there are times when all that matters is making a sale or even just getting a listing.

As a newbie sales person, I once wrote a letter that was worse than that… hehe.. it was too freakin embarassing to give the details here. I’d never live it down. It was one brutal piece of hard sell. Anyway, i mailed copies to everyone on my contact list.

Word got back to my broker.. fast. Had I not been one of the few producers in the office despite my youth and inexperience, he would’a canned me in a heartbeat.

funny.. haven’t thought about that since it happened, long ago…

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 20:45:35

The New York Times
The Bill Comes Due, Vexing Housing and Banking Agencies
By DAVID STREITFELD
Published: September 18, 2009

A year ago, as the financial system was threatening to collapse, federal regulators offered all sorts of assistance to ward off catastrophe. The strategy worked, at least so far, but the bill is starting to come due.

The Federal Housing Administration, which is supporting the housing market by insuring loans for millions of struggling buyers, said Friday that its cash reserves had fallen below 2 percent for the first time. Raising its insurance premiums would replenish the reserves, but could also hamper the housing recovery. Another unpleasant option: asking for a federal bailout.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, meanwhile, is running out of money to pay back the depositors of failed banks. Its chairwoman said Friday the agency might for the first time decide to borrow from the Treasury.

Taken together, the two developments indicate “the limits of the government’s ability to make all the bad stuff go away,” said the investment strategist Ed Yardeni.

During the housing boom, borrowers spurned the F.H.A. because it required them to fill out a few forms and come up with a down payment of 3 percent. Subprime lenders, by contrast, asked for neither money nor documentation. The F.H.A. became a wallflower, its share of the market dwindling nearly to nothing.

Now the subprime lenders are gone, and traditional banks are so reluctant to issue mortgages they demand large down payments. But the F.H.A., which works with thousands of lenders to guarantee repayment of mortgages loans, only requires a down payment of 3.5 percent.

The reason banks are so reluctant to loan is that they correctly perceive that housing is still generally overvalued, and they don’t want to catch falling knife collateral. Apparently govt lenders with taxpayer guarantees don’t think housing is overvalued? Either that, or they don’t mind putting other peoples’ money at risk…

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-09-18 21:22:36

Sheila Bair is standing up in favor of rational economic policy.

The Financial Times
FDIC considers tapping Treasury credit line
By Joanna Chung in New York

Published: September 18 2009 19:31 | Last updated: September 18 2009 19:31

Ms Bair … warned that the financial system would be more fragile following the crisis unless there was a “credible method” for closing down too-big-to-fail companies that ran into trouble, saying that the financial markets were even more interconnected than before the crisis.

Unfortunately, measures taken during the past year, while necessary, have only reinforced the idea that some financial firms are simply too big to fail,” she said. “Unless we adopt needed reforms, our system will be more, not less, fragile after this crisis.”

Ms Bair has long been a proponent of a system for resolving such troubled companies. The FDIC has a system for seizing deposit-taking institutions for a short time, before winding them down or selling them, to protect depositors.

But the biggest banks are organised into holding companies, which stand outside the current powers.

This too-big-to-fail doctrine creates a vicious cycle that needs to be broken,” she said. “We need a credible method for closing large financial companies without inflicting collateral damage on the economy.”

 
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