March 25, 2010

Bits Bucket For March 26, 2010

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




RSS feed | Trackback URI

390 Comments »

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-25 22:23:25

An early good morning to y’all.

This story is awesome: It shows a communist country is way out ahead of Wall Street banks on performance-based pay.

I hope in my heart of hearts that America’s leaders take a hint and ensure that our bankers’ future pay is commensurate with the performance of the loans they make (or securitize).

By staff reporters Feng Zhe and Wen Xiu
03.24.2010 21:58
Bank of China Executive Salaries Halved
New rules released by the government have reduced some banker salaries by nearly 50 percent

[Click for Chinese Version]

(Caixin Oonline) The total salaries of senior management at the Bank of China shrank by nearly 50 percent in 2009 although the bank’s assets and profits expanded last year.

On March 10, China Banking Regulatory Commission released a new pay regulation, which stipulates that bankers are required to return the part of their salary related to bad loans.

Over the past several years, the scale of Chinese banking assets has consistently expanded with impressive results. At the same time, listed banks gradually moved toward market-oriented executive incentive mechanisms, implementing across-the-board salary increases.

Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 05:13:12

…but, but …
Pay based upon performance!?! That’s Communism! We’re Capitalists! We don’t adhere to that philosophy except when it comes to regular working people. The working people - that is the nonfinancial people - get “creative destruction” and unemployment.

Like they should get.

Roidy

Comment by GH
2010-03-26 08:54:47

Actually,
Pay based upon performance is Capitalism. What we have with government bailouts is anything but!

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 10:57:27

Did you somehow miss Roidy’s sarcasm tags?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 11:00:30

Hey, I’m diverse and I appreciate the diversity on this blog… being Sarcasm Challenged is ok.

Roidy

 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 12:49:07

My girlfriend is multi-sarcasmic.

 
Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 20:46:05

Oh wow!

Roidy

 
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 05:19:23

Sounds like they are keeping two sets of books, one for Public Relations and one for Performance Reviews, in the People’s Republic.

Comment by potential buyer
2010-03-26 11:20:48

The grafts they get on the side more than make up for this

 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 05:30:13

Sounds like the Chinese property bubble better not burst or heads will literally roll. But will Wal-Mart be interested in a shipping container full of Chinese banker heads?

 
Comment by exit56
2010-03-26 07:57:30

PB,

I think the interesting thing to watch in the days ahead will be the shareholders’ suits against the banks’ boards of directors, officers, etc.

In theory, corporate governance is democratic. In practice, not so much.

 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:35:07

I guess the Chinese don’t value the “talent” of these corrupt bankers as much as we do here in the US…

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 12:24:06

…and they have bullet trains and maglev trains and will still have an operational manned space program after we retire the space shuttle.

I don’t admire the Chinese that much, but we sure are making ourselves look bad.

Comment by iftheshoefits
2010-03-26 16:53:14

And they’ve got the worst large-scale environmental devastation on the planet. I’m thinking at this point they’ve surpassed the Soviet Union in their heyday.

Well, you’ve got to break some eggs…

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 16:58:50

And we don’t? Ever hear of “superfund?”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by iftheshoefits
2010-03-26 19:29:29

We’ve had our messes, but nothing even close to the devastation wrought in the worker’s paradises. Remember they had to shut down Beijing manufacturing for 3-4 weeks for the Olymipics, just to get the air quality up to “simply foul”? And how about the Yangtze River?

Superfund was all about cleaning up the messes, which has been done in substantial measure, although I’m sure there’s still a backlog.

Ah the good old days, when the environmental movement was about cleaning up actual pollution, before it got hijacked by the warmenists.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-25 22:30:23

This appears to me like just the latest of myriad subtle thefts by Megabank, Inc from the American people.

* MARCH 24, 2010

Tax-Break Battle Flares
J.P. Morgan in Talks for $1.4 Billion; Stimulus Gives $12 Billion to 250 Firms

By SCOTT THURM And DAN FITZPATRICK

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. is nearing a deal that would allow it to benefit from a tax refund of as much as $1.4 billion, becoming the latest company to tap a little-noticed plank in an economic stimulus bill.

That law let companies apply losses from 2008 or ’09 against taxes paid in the previous five years, instead of the previous two years. Failed Seattle thrift Washington Mutual is eligible for about $2.6 billion in tax refunds, thanks to big losses in 2008. Now J.P. Morgan, which took over WaMu’s banking operations in September 2008, is in discussions with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and bondholders about the refund.

According to people familiar with the talks, an agreement under discussion would let J.P. Morgan claim more than half of the total, to be held in an FDIC receivership as part of a larger settlement with bondholders. J.P. Morgan could dip into that pot to satisfy certain claims related to WaMu’s collapse.

Many other companies have benefited from the 2009 tax-refund law already. According to an analysis of securities filings by The Wall Street Journal, more than 250 companies have so far said they expect to get about $12 billion in federal tax refunds under the law.

That remains a partial list. The Joint Committee on Taxation, a congressional committee, estimated the provision would cost $33 billion in its first year.

Some critics have found the corporate-tax-refund technique wanting as a stimulus or job-creation move. Prior to Congress’s passage of the $787 billion stimulus law in early 2009, the Congressional Budget Office looked at six possible stimulus approaches and ranked this one least effective, saying each corporate tax dollar refunded would generate at most 40 cents of boost to gross domestic product. The corporate-tax-refund approach wasn’t included in the big stimulus bill early in the year, but was part of legislation in November that extended jobless benefits.

Douglas Shackelford, a tax professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said using federal tax receipts to shore up corporate balance sheets amounts to “public borrowing to pay off private debt…. It’s not clear to me that’s a good use of money at all.

Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 05:33:04

“public borrowing to pay off private debt…. It’s not clear to me that’s a good use of money at all.”

Was this guy aware of the $700 billion TARP bailout?

 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 06:04:33

I put this one right behind the 100% bailout of AIG and the PPIP program as the worst of the worst of the worst of the programs. Letting people eliminate taxes they already paid because of losses they already incurred has no incentive value at all.

SInce we are already seeing articles that companies are planning to use their money to go on another M&A spree (presumably because they see no value in buying capital equipment, hiring employees or otherwise expanding capacity), I forsee a little more hiring among high end corporate and tax lawyers. Maybe they will hire Joe 6 pack to fix up the house in the Hamptons.

Comment by GrizzlyBear
2010-03-26 06:24:17

Hey, that just made me grouchy.

Comment by polly
2010-03-26 07:35:06

Sorry, Griz. Didn’t mean to depress you. Umm….make Griz feel better…make Griz feel better…what will make you feel better, Griz? Anything I can do?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2010-03-26 10:24:00

Not Polly’s fault for always being so smart and accurate. It was just that whole ‘money flowing into the Hamptons’ thing which always leaves a poor taste in Grizzly’s mouth. I know what Polly can do- post stories of Wall Street bankers and their attorney’s losing their Hampton’s homes!

 
 
 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 06:46:02

Polly, how much farther can they merge and acquire before it turns into outright creation of more too-big-too-fail monopolies? Sure, the Justice Department is trying to assemble cases against monopoly behavior (google and monsanto come to mind), but the wheels of justice turn slowly — slowly enough that these $%*&*@#^s can make hay off of M&A in the meantime.

And the $%*&*@#^s know this full well.

Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:40:09

Ah, but the goal is for everything to be Too Big To Fail.

A nation with only a handful of companies, each heavily influenced by the government, each ruled by the insanely elite, and each with the fewest employees possible.

That’ll get rid of that pesky middle class!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 09:54:43

At this rate, we’ll have three companies: MiniLuv, MiniTru, and MiniPlenty. But still with few employees. Imagine the hordes of Wintons you could replace with a single computer.

 
Comment by measton
2010-03-27 19:41:58

A nation with only a handful of companies, each heavily influenced by the government, each ruled by the insanely elite, and each with the fewest employees possible.

Correction

A nation with only a handful of companies each heavily influencing the gov, each ruled by the elite.

The gov is the lap dog.

 
 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 06:55:23

WaMu = Dead

Now the “heirs” (JP Morgan) get a retroactive tax break. Sorta like collecting Social Security checks after Granny starts pushing up daisies.

Just another back-door means for the government to bail out the Wall Street mob.

Sweet.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:30:23

“Sorta like collecting Social Security checks after Granny starts pushing up daisies.”

Yup. I always enjoy those stories that surface now and again about some guy who kept collecting Social Security for years after he died. Does this news technically make J.P. Morgan a grave robber?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Chris M
2010-03-26 08:49:03

Well, I did appreciate the $50K my metal stamping company got back due to a $280K loss in FY’09. It was a much needed cash infusion, that will keep us above water for a while longer. My 23 employees don’t get much overtime these days, but there haven’t been any pay cuts either. We have no debt, a little cash on hand, and we’re struggling to break even at about 60% of 2005’s sales. Break even is the new profit, I guess. I can’t wait to see our health insurance renewal this year…

Comment by VegasBob
2010-03-26 11:33:45

My guess is that your health insurance premium increase will be 15-30% and will require you to cut employees, cut wages, or require employees to pay a greater share of the total premium.

It’s one of the US government’s small business initiatives - driving small business out of business.

After all, the government needs that money to give it to the Wall Street criminal banksters.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by measton
2010-03-27 19:45:45

No it’s one of big businesses initiatives to drive small business away. They have taken over our gov and they are using it as a tool.

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 12:34:11

You will get a 35% tax break to pay for the insurance.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Chris M
2010-03-26 14:02:10

But that’s a tax break on our corporate taxes, right? What good does that do if we have no profits to pay taxes on? Even in our most profitable years, a 35% tax break might cover one month of health insurance. I still have to make that huge payment to the insurance company the other 11 months of the year. But the banks, which produce nothing but make huge margins, will get a massive benefit, I assume. Thanks Obummer! I get the feeling this president doesn’t even know what he doesn’t know.

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2010-03-26 14:10:02

Even in our most profitable years, a 35% tax break might cover one month of health insurance. I still have to make that huge payment to the insurance company the other 11 months of the year.

And that’s the problem with the tax credits. They do nothing to help you afford the cost of the insurance.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:46:27

No, it’s a 35% tax break specifically of THE COST of your health insurance, and goes up each following year.

What kind of tax break are you getting on your health insurance now?

Ye..ah.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:55:46

There is also the HCTC (see IRS website) for individuals and families.

“The Health Coverage Tax Credit (HCTC) pays 80% of health insurance premiums for qualified individuals and their families.”

 
Comment by Chris M
2010-03-26 16:06:34

OK, so if our health insurance costs us $162K/year (which it does), we’d get a tax credit of $56,700? What if we owe less taxes than that (which we will)? Do we get a refund? That would be a significant help. But I’ll honestly be amazed if it actually works out that way.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 17:02:29

I don’t know Chris, you’d have to check with your tax acct, but I believe, but can’t yet verify, that’s how it’s going to work.

I have been able to verify that it is based on the cost of the health insurance.

 
Comment by Chris M
2010-03-26 20:50:31

Thanks eco. I appreciate the input.

 
 
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:38:18

End goal: 1 giant company with the fewest employees possible.

Think of the savings!

 
 
Comment by measton
2010-03-26 14:11:41

So taxes based on bogus bubble profits have to be returned by the people to the banks, but the profits earned by CEO’s that were fruadulant don’t have to be returned to stock holders or tax payers.

Nice

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-25 22:38:31

Bad sign for Mr Stock Market: The MSM is catching on to the possibility that governmental manipulation is propping it up. Could be really good for T-bonds but not so good for Mr Stock Market if this idea takes hold among the bovine herds (sheeple, bulls, etc).

There was a time on this blog not long ago when posts resembling the following American Public Media Marketplace story would have resulted in the accusation that the poster was wearing a tinfoil hat.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

A new normal for the stock market

The S&P 500’s just a couple percentage points shy of where it was back in July 2006. So is the stock market now back to where it was during more “normal times?” Bob Moon reports.

Kai Ryssdal: For those who’re trying to add to their expected Social Security payouts with some gains in the markets, this has been a pretty good year or so. Today, granted, wasn’t so great. We’ll get to that. But the S&P 500 is just a couple of percentage points shy of where it was back in July of 2006. That was just about the beginning of a yearlong bubble on Wall Street. So if we subtract the S&P’s huge jump during that year before the crash, could you safely say the stock market is now back to where it was in more normal times?

Stock market veteran Michael Panzner writes the blog Financial Armageddon. He argues the market is being propped up by something highly abnormal — the ongoing hand-out from Uncle Sam.

MICHAEL PANZNER: There is some question, particularly in an environment where the government is heavily involved, whether the markets are really reflecting reality in the same way that they once did.

And what might happen when reality bites?

Richard Sparks is chief equities analyst at Schaeffer’s Investment Research. He says lingering worries are keeping trading volumes and investor confidence abnormally low.

RICHARD SPARKS: We don’t know what will happen once we take the patient off life support, so to speak, to see if the economy can grow by itself.

Sparks says the reason stocks are up is that investors are predicting all will be well once that happens.

SPARKS: I think what the market is suggesting is that we’re on the downside of all of those problems, that over time that those problems will be worked through the system, and we’ll be back to a sense of normalcy at some point.

But as S&P’s David Wyss points out, normalcy depends on your perspective.

WYSS: Things are OK only to the extent that we’re not in freefall anymore. Up is better than down, but we’ve got a long way to go before we get back to where you were — certainly my portfolio has a long way to go to get back to where it was.

Unfortunately, a lot of Americans are finding that’s the new normal.

I’m Bob Moon for Marketplace.

Comment by packman
2010-03-26 06:26:03

There was a time on this blog not long ago when posts resembling the following American Public Media Marketplace story would have resulted in the accusation that the poster was wearing a tinfoil hat.

I’m all for naming names. A little Schadenfreude is in order.

(Without having looked at the past posts to see who may have done such scoffing; a prime candidate would be a no-longer-posting troll or two, so perhaps there’s no point.)

 
 
Comment by BubbleButt
2010-03-25 23:05:09

Another milestone day today with Obama announcing principle writedowns being required by banks. I hoped this day would never come.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-25 23:49:53

I guess Uncle Sam is planning to be the monopoly mortgage lender for the foreseeable future, then? After all, what investor wants to provide the principle for mortgage loans if it can be summarily confiscated by intervention in private contracts?

Comment by REhobbyist
2010-03-26 06:10:47

Principal.

Comment by diemos
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:31:58

OK, I don’t think I will misspell “principal” again, even though I am still flummoxed by the lack of English spelling principles.

 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 07:39:27

I was taught that the principal of the school was your “pal” and all the others weren’t. And that metatarsals were ankle bones because if the asphault melted Sally or Sal got tar on them. Was I alone in having all these teachers with the corny learning pneumonics?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:43:59

Polly — Did we go to the same grade school? :-)

I guess if you are a bankster, then the principal on a loan is your “pal,” until the loan goes underwater and the borrower walks away.

 
Comment by Silverback1011
2010-03-26 08:24:51

No Polly, I was going to post the same thing about the Principal being your Pal. Seventh grade, Belleville Junior High. I forget the assistant principal’s name that gave my class this priceless nugget of spelling wisdom. Great memories !

 
Comment by In Montana
2010-03-26 08:41:48

That was not a very good definition for purposes of financial usage.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 10:58:59

“Belleville” IL?

 
Comment by MrBubble
2010-03-26 11:02:15

asphault = asphalt.

I phault your teachers on that one. Ba-dum-Chissss! I’m here all of the week. Try the veal!

BTW — for some rationale behind English spelling, check out The Story of Human Language produced by The Teaching Company. You’ll learn about the Great Vowels Shift of the 15th - 17th centuries and other fun factoids. Yes, you too can be the biggest bore/boor at the party!

 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 16:26:22

I am the worst speller on the planet. I used to misspell “had” in sixth grade (stuck an “e” on the end). In justification, I will only say that the extra “e” might (might) have been a physical tick due to trying to increase my cursive writing speed.

Love The Teaching Company, but haven’t seen that one yet. Time to see if my county has it in the library system….

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:06:09

Thanks. I will go to the grave struggling with English spelling rules (or the lack thereof…).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-25 23:58:53

Sounds like the R-cans forced his hand:

The Financial Times
Obama to announce new housing plan
By James Politi in Washington
Published: March 26 2010 00:29 | Last updated: March 26 2010 00:29

The Obama administration on Thursday night was poised to announce a new plan aimed at tackling the US housing crisis, which was at the root of the financial meltdown of 2008 and continues to hamper the economic recovery.

The new plan comes as the White House and the Treasury department have been on the defensive regarding their efforts to aid struggling homeowners, amid criticism that they have only succeeded on the margins to stem the housing downturn.

The centerpiece of the new plan would require lenders to cut mortgage payments for unemployed homeowners. The housing crisis and joblessness fed off each other in a vicious cycle during the recession and are widely seen as the two biggest problems confronting the US economy.

The new plan would also seek to boost government aid for people whose mortgages are worth more than their homes because of a dip in prices and would seek to tackle the problem of second mortgages.

After taking office last year, the Obama administration vowed to be much more aggressive than the Bush administration in its efforts to force lenders to accept loan modifications. It estimated that it could help between 3m and 4m struggling homeowners stay in their homes.

But Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the bail-out fund from which the foreclosure plans are funded, that out of more than $1m trial modifications, only 170,000 or so had become permanent. His report, released this week, described the outcome as “disappointing”. The new Obama plan would also be funded out of Tarp money.

At a congressional hearing on Thursday, lawmakers were scathing: “[The] president’s goals should be met about the time his grandchildren are purchasing their first home,” said Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House oversight and government reform committee.

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 04:19:41

A new shining example of the lofty level of the total economic ignorance of this administration.

Just listened to Mark Zandi speaking to some bald jerk on good morning amerika. He says that the program is unfair to many, and is open to manipulation, but “at the end of the day” it may help the housing market, and keep people in their homes.

Typical blather from media morons, keep it up. The good news is that this new waste of time and money will do nothing but suppress the housing market.

Welcome once again to the land of “unintended” consequences.

Comment by VegasBob
2010-03-26 20:11:10

And Zandi was one of McCain’s economic advisers…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by lavi d
2010-03-26 06:00:25

…out of more than $1m trial modifications, only 170,000 or so had become permanent.

170,000 dollars had become permanent or 170,000 modifications out of 1,000,000?

 
Comment by cobaltblue
2010-03-26 06:19:35

Housing: Obama Still Has Not Grown Up
The misdirection and outright BS simply refuses to stop:

March 25 (Bloomberg) — The Obama administration plans to announce programs to help homeowners avoid foreclosure, including subsidies for borrowers who owe more than their home is worth.

This sounds like homeowners will get some “free money” gifted to the banks so as to make them “not underwater” and thus avoid foreclosure. Well, it is - to a point. (If you were one of the people who put down 20% during the boom and was prudent in your use of debt, are you angry yet? You should be!)

The new plan would increase payments to lenders that modify second mortgages, an official said. Banks’ unwillingness to write down second liens has helped block efforts to prevent foreclosures, said Josh Rosner, managing director at Graham, Fisher & Co. The Washington Post reported earlier on the administration’s plan.

Banks aren’t unwilling, they’re unable. Look, this has been true since this crisis began - the banks - especially the BIG BANKS with lots of these loans - ARE INSOLVENT if they recognize the “value” of this paper.

This plan appears to step up the amounts that can be recovered (on average) to somewhere around 15 cents on the dollar, more or less. That’s a hell of a lot more than zero, but in terms of impact on balance sheets it doesn’t fix the problem.

Key is whether the Administration is actually going to force the banks to take the write-downs. If not, then this does nothing. If so, I hope you’re ready to see either some major handouts to the banks (again) or a few big bank insolvencies, because one, the other or both absolutely will happen if this program is “real”.

“Banks continue to carry second liens on their books at vastly inflated value,” Rosner said. “If the government reduced their ability to overinflate these assets, the banks would be more willing to engage in principal reductions.”
(From K. Denninger)

 
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 06:27:45

The centerpiece of the new plan would require lenders to cut mortgage payments for unemployed homeowners.

Being that the goal is apparently to achieve 100% unemployment - why don’t the PTB just make getting a paycheck illegal, and get it over with?

 
Comment by scdave
2010-03-26 08:24:44

cut mortgage payments for unemployed homeowners ??

Great idea…Tremendous incentive to quit your job that you don’t like…The beat goes on… :(

Comment by eddiamond
2010-03-26 18:40:56

The amazing thing about getting people to quit jobs they don’t like is that they can go on to do something they like do like. I could never before quit my job because of insurance or mortgage noose. Now that I have gotten rid of insurance and mortgage note I have started a small business (the backbone of our economy the corporatists want us to believe), given my job to someone who actually enjoys it and thrown off the shackles of wage slavery. I may not succeed, but it won’t be from lack of effort or desire. In a worst case scenario, I’ll get another job.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by salinasron
2010-03-26 04:03:43

“Obama announcing principle writedowns being required by banks.”

Where are the law suits on this one! If they aren’t forthcoming then who is getting all the money?

 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 05:11:06

The devil is going to be in the details with this one. Principal writedowns for whom? And is it a principal writedown for only the unemployed, a subprime? Who is going to change the contract law on this? The Senate? I thought they tried that already and found out that “the banks own the place.”

Are these writedowns going to be recorded as comps? They better be.
Are the FB’s going to have to declare BK? I hope so. I know we argue about whether it was the banks or the FB’s who were at fault. It was both, and both should take a hit. (But IMO banks should take a bigger hit, because they were experts who deliberately violated good faith).

Moral hazard is bad enough, now they’re cherry-picking moral hazard? This is far more discriminatory than the Community Reinvestment Act* ever was, and I expect class-action lawsuits to eminate from the responsible people, including renters, and I welcome it.

If this does go through, how much do you want to bet that a million workers will beg to be laid off, take a nice vacation and collect government UI for a few months, get the writedown, and then “conveniently” get their jobs back?

Look, Congress isn’t as stupid as people like to think. (Well, the elected official might be dumb, but the staff is generally pretty sharp.) They know about all these scenarios. This is why bills grow to hundreds or even thousands of pages — to account for all these possibilities. As it is, I think Obama is going to hit a wall on this one. I’m just afraid that he’s going to send Bennie and TTTimmy around the end, just as they did with Fannie/Freddie.

———-
* My understanding was that the CRA only required banks to look at applications in red lined areas and judge on individual household alone, not to give away money to the poor. So it was more antidiscriminatory.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:29:38

At any time now, I expect Ben Jones to step in and calmly remind us to ignore the announcement and await the results. Notice how many folks were ‘helped’ by HAMP if you don’t catch my drift…

Comment by Bad Chile
2010-03-26 06:47:34

PB:

Those (including you) around here a long time remember how worked up we used to be over every new announcement. Oh, remember the days when forgiven mortgage debt was made non-taxable? How we all ranted a raved and then someone…I don’t remember who…mentioned: this will only cause the decline to continue. Remember the tax loans? Then it became a twice-extended tax credit? Remember HAMP? Ahh, the good old days.

Anyway, I encouraged that we’re trying something (because the ‘do nothing’ option is not in the playbook of politicians) that will do nothing toward the root cause of the crises (home prices getting too high). Will this new program that totally trashes contract law and encourages unemployement and not thinking ahead when purchasing a house have any effect on Bad Chile & company? Not likely: contract law was pretty well trashed anyway and when was the last time a future FB actually thought about the future other than tomorrow?

The Housing Bubble Blog: How I learned to stop worrying and love the debt bomb.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Montana
2010-03-26 08:46:35

the ‘do nothing’ option is not in the playbook of politicians

That’s true. And when you run for office, all the bright lights (e.g. Frank Luntz) tell you to not run against something, but for something! Propose a plan! Be positive! Don’t be a Don’t-Bee, Be a Do-Bee! Wait, that last was Romper Room

Me, I’m against everything.

 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 07:26:25

True, all the proof one needs to know that things aren’t getting better is that the PTB keeps feeling the need to “act”.

As with the BAC writedowns, none of this would be happening if “they” really believed their lies. (the same lies they expect us to believe.)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 06:35:54

Yes - good points all. This stuff is getting messy, and it seems like the government should just stay out of it - if nothing else just due to the certain huge overhead costs of just administering the plan.

Re: CRA - The CRA essentially outlawed redlining of areas in general I believe. It’s not clear though (from Wikipedia) whether that was an explicit outlawing or just implicit by removing redline-associated practices (as in your statement.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 07:00:16

The flailing around by the drowning economy continues……..

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 07:12:32

The flailing around by the drowning economy continues……..

Good analogy.

Or in computerdom - thrashing.

In computer science, thrashing is a degenerate situation where large amounts of computer resources are used to do a minimal amount of work, with the system in a continual state of resource contention. Once started, thrashing is typically self-sustaining until something occurs to remove the original situation that led to the initial thrashing behavior.

Usually it refers to two or more processes accessing a shared resource repeatedly such that serious system performance degradation occurs because the system is spending a disproportionate amount of time just accessing the shared resource. Resource access time may generally be considered as wasted, since it does not contribute to the advancement of any process.

Silly window syndrome is a type of communications system thrashing.

It’s a state where so much time is spent (wasted) actually managing resources - that very little of the resources actually get used for their intended purpose. It very often ends up in a downward spiral - sometimes requiring a reboot to recover.

(ahem)

 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 07:29:09

flailing - perfect word choice GS. That’s exactly what this is - flailing made to look like synchronized swimming!

 
Comment by scdave
2010-03-26 08:29:04

+ 1 for the edge… Funny :)

 
 
Comment by are they crazy
2010-03-26 08:00:11

But if the government stays out of it, the people scream they’re not doing anything for the little guy, for the homeowner, for the victim of the banks.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by basura
2010-03-26 07:28:41

I don’t know why people are up in arms about this small program?

I mean, many of you supported health care, right? If health care is your “right”, how can you say that “affordable housing” is not your “right”? Government is just trying to help people who lost jobs. That’s a noble goal and should be praised.

Comment by eudemon
2010-03-26 08:07:01

Touche! With an accent on the “e”.

Hypocrisy is thy middle name of many, including several here.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Kirisdad
2010-03-26 09:45:40

Nice try, basura. Affordable housing does not require ownership.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:01:21

+1. Also, you can’t choose to get sick with the cheaper diseases.

 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 17:36:58

is a flatsceen tv a right or a priviledge? I am unclear.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by combotechie
2010-03-26 05:16:19

Anything to keep the FBs from walking.

If the FBs think there is any hope for them on the horizon then they’re likely to suck it up and keep up with making their payments no matter what. If hope is yanked away then they’ll walk.

Words from the Prez instills hope among the masses of FBs. Hope translates into housepayments to the banks. Payments to the banks keeps the banks solvent, and that’s the bottom line.

The bottom line is bank solvency. Whatever needs to be said or done to save the banks will be said or done.

The mortgage reset chart suggests that there is more, MUCH MORE, of this to come.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:48:03

“Anything to keep the FBs from walking.”

Ginormous blood sucking vampire squids gotta eat or else they die.

 
Comment by cereal
2010-03-26 07:00:39

What ComboTechie said. A half million Americans are thinking today “I’m getting my balance reduced by 50,000!” They already have some number in stuck their mind. That will keep them paying another half year.

Comment by polly
2010-03-26 08:10:52

It is a good time to have just moved into an excellent new rental.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:02:32

Indeed it is. *high five*

Although most people wouldn’t consider mine “excellent.”

 
 
 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 05:48:49

Every night I go to sleep and hope for sanity in our nation only to wake the following morning and find none. What does one do on an indiviual basis? I have tried ignoring the problem and it is just not working.

Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2010-03-26 06:50:43

Hey press, what about a meetup? Would that help?

Comment by ann gogh
2010-03-26 07:13:32

yes!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2010-03-26 08:20:15

K, I’m going to try setting up a group on meetup dot com.

 
 
Comment by scdave
2010-03-26 08:31:31

I need a road trip… Where ??

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by are they crazy
2010-03-26 08:03:17

I think you have to get kind of Zen about it. I’ve been struggling with this issue since the election. I finally have gotten to where I can just say it’s going on, it’s not right, it’s going to happen no matter how I respond, I’m going to concentrate on getting my own house in order.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 12:46:20

Simple pbb, keep your job if you can, keep your own house in order if you can, eat healthy (no, really) drink (well it works for me) if you have an SO, stay close and above all else…

… be prepared, if you can.

Because the biggest and most common lament through the ages of history is that the PTB are insane.

 
 
Comment by Captain Credit Crunch
2010-03-26 07:26:22

The initial amount of money for write-downs is $17B out of the $75B available. That ought to be enough for 85,000 homes ($200k a pop), or one city in America. By the time they realize they will need more money 2 years from now, all of the pending resets will have happened and we’ll just be picking up the pieces.

This will not affect prices.

 
Comment by scdave
2010-03-26 08:16:49

Hearing that this morning was very depressing…

 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:41:51

Prophet of Regret (I think): “There are those who said this day would never come - what are they to say now?”

Just kick back and believe in the Prophet of Change. He’ll change everything: up is down, wrong is right, and greed is good.

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2010-03-26 13:12:27

Let’s not forget this is election year folks. They have to look like they’re doing something to get those votes.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-25 23:55:04

Hypothetical questions (not suggesting anything of the sort ever has, could, or will happen):

1) Is the Fed and/or the Treasury legally allowed to deliberately prop up price levels of U.S. asset markets through directly targeted interventions (e.g., support the level of the headline U.S. stock market indexes or U.S. home prices)?

2) Would it be possible for them to contract with private money center banks to execute such interventions?

3) If so, what grants them the legal authority?

4) If not, what would be the consequences if it ever came to light they were engaged in such activities?

Again, these are strictly hypothetical questions; not suggesting such activities ever have, could or will occur.

Comment by XGSfixr
2010-03-26 00:14:38

Wow. Someone who thinks that all this “crony capitalism” should be against the law, if it isn’t already.

How quaint. :)

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 02:03:20

Price controls have been used throughout the history of the world. Famous examples from various cultures, including our own, prove the ultimate result is always the opposite of what was intended.
So, legal or not, attempts to artificially support the high price of RE should be encouraged, imho.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:25:23

Price fixing is illegal according to the Sherman Antitrust Act, though perhaps American law does not matter in this context, given the myriad examples from other cultures throughout the history of the world.

I also realize that price fixing was used during WWII — in fact, John Kenneth Galbraith was referred to as FDR’s “price czar*.” But my understanding is that Galbraith’s role was controlling commodities prices so people could afford to eat, not pumping the U.S. stock or housing market full of liquid froth, then sneering from behind the curtain when MSM news commentators attempted to attribute mysterious counter-fundamentals price movements to “market sentiment.”

But we saw what happened to the Hunt Brothers, who tried to drive up the price of silver around 1980, and to OPEC, who did the same with oil. So your point is taken — this is likely to end badly for those who thought they were snapping up devalued assets at fire-sale prices when they accidentally caught themselves falling knives instead.

*Maybe this explains why many more market oriented economists hate Galbraith so much?

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 06:52:24

I think wartime price controls might be different and deserving of a special case. A population at war is (or should be) willing and even anxious to abide by whatever rules are laid down.

At other times people are more selfish and resistant to controls on their business and livelihoods. They want the opportunity to be paid well and make a profit.

Fix a low price where there is little or no profit and producers eventually stop producing. The low fixed price causes a shortage.
The shortage exasperates things because with lesser supply the upward price pressure increases..
——

But suppose government says a $2 widget cannot be priced less than $10.
There is a built-in $8 in profit in producing a widget, and even higher prices are allowed. Everyone will produce widgets. They will drown in widgets.

Supply will increase far beyond demand.
When supply is great and demand is small, low prices are the natural course. Eventually the price controls will end, and when that happens, what was a fairly priced $2 widget before price control might sell for about 2 cents.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:47:53

“A population at war is (or should be) willing and even anxious to abide by whatever rules are laid down.”

I’m sure the German citizenry under Adolf Hitler would have agreed with you.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 08:24:25

come on now.. America and Britain too..

“…they salvaged tin cans, bottles, rubber, waste paper, nylon and silk, (to make parachutes), scrap metal of any type, fats and cooking oils left over from cooking, with which to make explosives. Clothing was collected to make rags for cleaning machinery, and cleaning the decks of navy ships. Many other classes of material were collected for various ultimate uses, all to help in the war effort.

“Victory Gardens”.. eating leftovers, recycling paper, canning foods, saving gasoline by driving cars slower and less often. The national speed limit was lowered to 35 mph.

Appeals asking women to enlist in the armed forces, to encouraging housewives to conserve all home resources. The government fought price fixing and black marketing with rationing.
All Americans needed to share in the burdens of shortages equally. Not to share in sacrifices for Victory was an unpatriotic act, and often was reported.

” Don’t (you and I) let brave men die because we faltered at home.” Junk helps make guns, tanks, ships for our fighting men … V is for VICTORY!”

[edited snippets from:]
http://www.intheirwords.org/the_home_front_experience/the_war_effort/scrap_drives
—-

And of course there were War Bonds.. “Over the course of the war 85 million Americans purchased bonds totaling approximately $185.7 billion.” wiki
Adjusted for inflation and it’s… ?

Things must have gotten a lot more serious in Britain, since it was taking direct hits.. Google is your friend.

 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:05:45

Don’t forget the Japanese-Americans. Talk about sacrifice.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 11:01:39

Well, one of the little-discussed problems of all-out global warfare that the “war is good for the economy” people tend to overlook is that it is hard to produce much butter when you are preoccupied with producing guns and playing “kill or be killed.”

 
Comment by MrBubble
2010-03-26 11:23:24

“A population at war is (or should be) willing and even anxious to abide by whatever rules are laid down.”

Luckily, we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

“’Victory Gardens’”.. eating leftovers, recycling paper, canning foods, saving gasoline by driving cars slower and less often.”

Now that part sounds good to me at all times; forget about war time. What the hell is everyone rushing around for in a disposable society with no time for cooking or community? It’s just “hurry up and wait” for your next turn at the wheel to enrich the masters (or for free time to take your Soma, er… American Idol).

MrBubble

 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 17:43:01

but we are at war currently. A war on terror, I think. Where is all of the resourcefulness?

 
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 05:25:54

PB, when are you going to stop beating your wife?

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:42:22

As Michael Vick wished he could have honestly said when his nefarious private life came to light, “I don’t have a dog in this fight.”

 
 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 06:12:24

1) if there isn’t law against the actual actions they took, yes

2) if there isn’t a law against the actual actions they took, yes

3) if there isn’t a law against the actual actions they took, they don’t need specific legal authority to try to accomplish a goal that isn’t illegal

4) if there wasn’t a law against any of their actiosn, nothing would happen legally though there might be political consequences for the Treasury secretary and the people who gave him his orders

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:41:23

(Hypothetical) legal considerations aside, what would (hypothetically) happen if the masses discovered stock prices were at their current levels solely due to top-down manipulation, rather than due to the independent valuations of many private buyers and sellers? I’m guessing stock market volume and participation would shrink to a trickle of what it was a few years ago.

Oops…

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-03-26 07:01:45

“I’m guessing stock market volume and participation would shrink to a trickle of what it was a few years ago.”

I’m guessing you can get a lot of toxic Chuck Fina piggy banks in just one ocean going super-liner cargo container ship!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 07:10:24

Several things could happen.

Dumping out of the stock market is one.

Manning the barricades is another.

Voting the bums out is a third.

I think it would be some sort of combination of all three. The amount of two being essential in determining whether three could happen in an orderly manner.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by scdave
2010-03-26 08:43:14

stock market volume and participation would shrink to a trickle ??

Well, I am not sure of the exact number but some that I have seen say there are roughly 70 mil Baby Boomers…What is the likelihood that other than a small percentage of them are going to go “at risk” with their reserves or 401k ?? That removes a whole bunch of “retail” participants in the market for now and maybe for the next twenty years…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:47:12

If that happens, they’ll just find a way to force participation in the market.

The end goal is always the same: take everything from everyone to rule over a slum of angry poor.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 12:53:06

Didn’t some famous guy try to use SS to play the market?

Jeopardy Answer
This private self managed retirement fund has 3 numbers and is heavily invested in the stock market.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Va Beyatch in Norfolk
2010-03-26 10:09:24

Class action lawsuit against the gov’t from renters and others that are responsible? Would it work? Would it at least make the headlines?

I know, I know, class action lawsuits are garbage because the lawyers walk away with all the money.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 11:57:57

I’m curious about stock market selloff days (like today) on which headline U.S. indexes miraculously land right near the opening bell level. Is the adjustment automatically calved off into the FOREX market?

From Bloomberg:

World Currencies

CURRENCY VALUE CHANGE % CHANGE TIME
EUR-USD 1.3400 0.0127 0.9580% 14:53
GBP-USD 1.4897 0.0084 0.5644% 14:53
USD-CHF 1.0669 -0.0074 -0.6856% 14:54
USD-SEK 7.2624 -0.0242 -0.3328% 14:54
USD-DKK 5.5538 -0.0522 -0.9320% 14:53
USD-NOK 6.0448 -0.0549 -0.8996% 14:53
USD-CZK 19.0020 -0.1116 -0.5836% 14:54
USD-SKK 22.4840 -0.2106 -0.9281% 14:53
USD-PLN 2.9138 -0.0278 -0.9455% 14:53
USD-HUF 198.1550 -1.1700 -0.5870% 14:53
USD-RUB 29.6220 0.0415 0.1404% 13:59
USD-TRY 1.5390 -0.0054 -0.3529% 14:54
USD-ILS 3.7405 -0.0016 -0.0434% 14:39
USD-KES 77.3500 -0.0750 -0.0969% 10:36
USD-ZAR 7.4458 -0.0359 -0.4802% 14:52
USD-MAD 8.3294 -0.0701 -0.8346% 14:53

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 00:01:21

The Financial Times
Fed exit looms over US mortgages
By Nicole Bullock, Michael Mackenzie and Aline van Duyn in New York
Published: March 25 2010 20:23 | Last updated: March 25 2010 20:23

Fortunes on Wall Street have risen and fallen over the years thanks to an esoteric part of the capital markets, which is also one of the world’s biggest: mortgage-backed securities.

The financial crisis of 2008 thrust this market into the spotlight, as trillions of dollars were lost across the globe. It was far from the first time – losses on mortgage-backed debt played a big role in bond market blow-ups resulting from big interest rate shifts in 1994, 1998 and 2003.

Now, less than 18 months after the mortgage markets went into a tailspin, a sense of calm has returned to a key part of the $14,000bn market of outstanding US home loans: the more than $5,000bn of mortgage-backed securities sold by government-backed mortgage corporations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

This so-called “agency MBS” market has been supported for more than a year by the presence of a huge buyer in the form of the Federal Reserve. By the end of this month it will own $1,250bn in bonds, or slightly less than a quarter of the market.

But the Fed’s buying will end next week, on March 31, meaning this vital cog in the US housing system is entering a period of uncertainty.

The purchases – part of the Fed’s “quantitative easing” programme – have played a vital role in stemming the effects of the financial crisis on the US economy.

“Borrowing costs for consumers have fallen, MBS spreads have narrowed and risk assets have rallied – all of which have been, arguably, intended or welcome consequences of the programme,” says Larry Hatheway, an economist at UBS.

The Fed’s buying also tried to stem the collapse of the US housing market by helping home owners refinance their loans at lower rates. But the impact of lower rates has been counterbalanced by other factors such as a glut of unsold homes, record foreclosure rates, tighter credit standards and rising unemployment. These have curbed the scale of the “refi” boom that has often boosted consumer spending in the past.

“For homeowners, [the Fed programme] promoted perhaps the best refinancing opportunity in about 50 years in terms of rates,” says Keith Gumbinger, vice-president at HSH Associates, a mortgage analyst. “But underwriting conditions remain tight. You need to have a fairly deep equity position, good documentation and good credit.”

Comment by Jim A.
2010-03-26 05:53:05

For those of us who secured a sub 5% loan back in 2003 all I can say is, come on, higher rates….

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:02:23

They ain’t gonna let it happen, so don’t hold your breath…

Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 06:03:57

Dang it, PB! Some of us have more at stake than a little schadenfreude. Quit harshin’ my mellow.

:razz:

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:08:26

I would welcome higher rates, as increased housing affordability would be a primary effect. Even the bubble-blind Fed realizes this

 
 
Comment by scdave
2010-03-26 08:46:24

I agree Pbear…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 06:02:31

And for those of use who were fresh out of school and/or sidewaysedly mobile renters 2001-2010 all I can say is, come on, higher rates…and the lower prices that go with…

 
 
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 06:49:00

Some of my personal entertainment is watching this and this, noting that:
- The recent record-low spread between 30-year mortgage rates and treasury yields is obviously due to the Fed MBS purchases - ending next week.
- The past couple of days’ treasury actions have been brutal - causing a nearly-unprecedented jump up in yields.
- Recent reports show new home sales already sinking back down to near-record-lows the past couple of months.
- Of course the $8k tax credit will also be expiring after April.

Things could get veddy intelesting in the next few months in the housing market.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 11:02:53

But not nice.

 
 
Comment by cereal
2010-03-26 07:23:21

They can roll out program after program after program, but gravity will prevail.

Seven figure priced homes continue (beyond the help of government) to sink into the quicksand. Entry level homes continue to stay put or even rise a little.

Under current trajectory, all homes will eventually be priced between 250,000 and 750,000.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:34:23

“Seven figure priced homes continue (beyond the help of government) to sink into the quicksand. Entry level homes continue to stay put or even rise a little.”

All will get smashed into the quicksand. You will not find seven figure priced homes ever priced below entry level homes, unless the first principles of microeconomics are repealed.

Comment by Rental Watch
2010-03-26 08:31:42

I think what he meant was that high end will continue to suffer, and the low end will not fall much further, and perhaps bounce off the bottom.

I tend to agree, but I’m a bit more bullish on the low-end.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:51:40

That would be wonderful with a median national income of only about $45,000 - homes would not be affordable, which is what TPTB want. Lots more need for toxic loans, government “help,” more fees made by selling the same house to sucker after sucker, etc.

 
 
Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 09:13:25

It may be the Fed is just getting tired. I think something is really wrong, and we are not being told what it is. Look, they act like they have been waiting for this. Yearning even. Something’s wrong. It seems all too easy to me, and it doesn’t look like it has been easy! Worse, something is really amiss and it is not understood what it is. Like they don’t have a clue. Of course, the MBS support may not have actually worked. Housing is rolling over again.

I wonder what’s actually up?

Crap, my paranoia is actually beginning to match the events.

If you know me, the you know this is not a good thing.

Roidy
P.S. Just cause you are paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you. (I’m not sure who said that, but it is true.)

Comment by mathguy
2010-03-26 09:40:57

I believe that is a quote from the great Kirk Cobain: Nirvana’s nevermind album.. OlyGal would have giggled for sure.

Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 11:02:04

No, it’s not Cobain. It’s much older than that.

Roidy

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jane
2010-03-26 19:09:32

From Andy Grove, founder and CEO of Intel for many years.

Jeez. what an old fart I am.

 
 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 12:58:38

Something is wrong? How about that $50+ TRILLION in derivatives sitting out there?

Somebody is going to have to eat that. That is the GDP for the entire world for the next 20-30 years.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 00:03:21

Guten Nacht Morgen.

 
Comment by SDGreg
2010-03-26 02:22:05

Distress in San Diego’s Overleveraged Hotels Grows:

http://voiceofsandiego.org/housing/article_498dbe76-388a-11df-af5b-001cc4c002e0.html

“The number of San Diego County hotels in default more than quadrupled last year — from six in January to 29 by December, according to Atlas Hospitality Group, an Irvine-based hotel real estate firm.”

“Groups of owners leveraged and re-leveraged during the boom, taking advantage of some of the loosest years ever for commercial mortgages. Investment firms cobbled together huge collections of hotels, paying extravagant prices. They penciled the deals out counting on the revenues of the heyday to continue.”

“Both the price of rooms and the number of hotel guests dropped significantly last year, thrashing the bottom line for hotel owners. Revenues for San Diego hotels plunged last year, according to PKF Hospitality Research, ending the year down 22 percent, a worse outcome than the stark 17 percent decline nationwide.”

“Even in that case, though, the companies that borrowed too much — at too high a cost — face a huge reckoning, said commercial real estate broker Steve Martini. Though banks have repossessed few hotels in San Diego, he expects that to change.”

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 05:13:00

Only 29 in default? That can’t be right..
I did a quick google map-search for hotels in san diego and got 12,402 hits… and if that number is close, 29 is only about 0.23% of all the hotels.

 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 05:42:04

“Even in that case, though, the companies that borrowed too much — at too high a cost — face a huge reckoning,…”

THERE WILL BE NO RECKONING. (We get it.)

 
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-03-26 06:21:00

One of my professional organizations got a nice hotel rate at the Mancester Hyatt in SD for our 2011 meeting. We never could have afforded their rates in the past. This year we met at the Disneyland hotel for $179/room, a deep discount. Of course, some of our members were embarrassed to be seen there. I kind of enjoyed leaving a meeting room and finding a large Goofy greeting me.

Comment by mathguy
2010-03-26 09:45:47

Being in the business of selling hotel rooms in San Diego, I can confirm that sales are down just about 22% from last year. What everyone forgets is that last year, sales were down about 13-18% from 2008. We are down about 35-40% from 2007. Fortunately when your primary market is just one city, you learn to expand to selling other cities in a down market. And you learn that the cruft gets cut in a down market.

 
Comment by SanFranciscoBayAreaGal
2010-03-26 13:20:58

About five years ago during the Christmas season we were able to get a room at the Disneyland hotel for $89.00 a night. That’s right $89.00. Haven’t seen it at that price since. Darn it.

 
 
 
Comment by salinasron
2010-03-26 04:13:06

They can prop up all the low end mortgages that they want. They don’t have to mark to market and they can try to dribble out foreclosures to control property values, but they can’t stop strategic defaults on quality mortgages. I’ve already talked three people into going for it. Why should people with good jobs no get the freebies too? I think now would be the time to start up seminars on strategic defaults to push things along. As for me I copied the NPR article on them and sent it out to 20 people I know who are underwater.

Comment by combotechie
2010-03-26 05:22:41

Look for some sort of incentive - or punishment - to spring up to keep potential strategic defaulters staying and paying.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:51:51

Wouldn’t this change constitute illegal retroactive contract modification?

Oops — I forgot again that the banksters are above the rule of law.

Comment by cobaltblue
2010-03-26 06:01:35

Good-Bye…

Truth Has Fallen And Taken Liberty With It:

There was a time when the pen was mightier than the sword. That was a time when people believed in truth and regarded truth as an independent power and not as an auxiliary for government, class, race, ideological, personal, or financial interest.

Today, Americans are ruled by propaganda. Americans have little regard for truth, little access to it, and little ability to recognize it.

Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is off limits. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded “anti-American,” “anti-semite” or “conspiracy theorist.”

Truth is an inconvenience for government and for the interest groups whose campaign contributions control government.

Truth is an inconvenience for prosecutors who want convictions, not the discovery of innocence or guilt.

Truth is inconvenient for ideologues.

Today, many whose goal once was the discovery of truth are now paid handsomely to hide it. “Free market economists” are paid to sell offshoring to the American people. High-productivity, high value-added American jobs are denigrated as dirty, old industrial jobs. Relicts from long ago, we are best shed of them. Their place has been taken by “the New Economy,” a mythical economy that allegedly consists of high-tech white collar jobs in which Americans innovate and finance activities that occur offshore. All Americans need in order to participate in this “new economy” are finance degrees from Ivy League universities, and then they will work on Wall Street at million dollar jobs.

Economists who were once respectable took money to contribute to this myth of “the New Economy.”

And not only economists sell their souls for filthy lucre. Recently we have had reports of medical doctors who, for money, have published in peer-reviewed journals concocted “studies” that hype this or that new medicine produced by pharmaceutical companies that paid for the “studies.”

The Council of Europe is investigating the drug companies’ role in hyping a false swine flu pandemic in order to gain billions of dollars in sales of the vaccine.

The media helped the US military hype its recent Marja offensive in Afghanistan, describing Marja as a city of 80,000 under Taliban control. It turns out that Marja is not urban but a collection of village farms.

And there is the global warming scandal, in which NGOs. the UN, and the nuclear industry colluded in concocting a doomsday scenario in order to create profit in pollution.

Wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money.

Wherever money is insufficient to bury the truth, ignorance, propaganda, and short memories finish the job.

I remember when, following CIA director William Colby’s testimony before the Church Committee in the mid-1970s, presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan issued executive orders preventing the CIA and U.S. black-op groups from assassinating foreign leaders. In 2010 the US Congress was told by Dennis Blair, head of national intelligence, that the US now assassinates its own citizens in addition to foreign leaders.

(From Paul Craig Roberts)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:48:34

Some people still think the truth matters. I agree with them. I thank America’s founding fathers for providing us with the Constitutional Freedom of Speech and plan to continue pursuing the truth and writing about it until our First Amendment Rights are finally rescinded.

 
Comment by SV guy
2010-03-26 06:49:54

I have often wondered if the nuclear industry was complicit in the global warming scam.

Think about it. It has made nuclear power, which I support, acceptable to even the Sierra Club.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 07:43:12

“Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding.”

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 09:10:15

cobaltblue……Truth is the protector of Freedom and Liberty .
How can anyone suggest that we have freedom when cover-ups, bail-outs ,myths and market hype that is the current glue that holds faulty systems from exposure and correction .

When government in conjunction with Special Interest attempts to control the winners and losers ,by any form of oppressive tax, or unjust redistribution of the wealth or unjust penalty or lack of penalty for acts ,than Government becomes a tool to maintain the
oppression of Freedom and Liberty and Justice for the Majority .

Really ,damage control isn’t even a acceptable excuse for the Power Brokers because in those decisions they are unjustly choosing the winners and losers and maintaining the faulty systems .

Currently the bottom line is that there is a attempt to rig the confidence in the market by unjust means including
after the fact changing the consequences of the laws ,including contract laws .

Most criminal cases of financial fraud involve mis-pricing assets in order to gain a ill-gotten gain that won’t be detected . The very methods that the FBI and Justice Departments have busted as the biggest shams and Ponzi -schemes ended up being employed in the bail-outs . The tax-payer paying face value for assets a fraction of the mark to market value and the benefited entities take the ill-gotten gains .

The new reform proposals are a trick and do not meet the goals of removing the risks and corruptions of the systems that brought the Globe to this big financial hole of loss . The efforts are toward maintaining the faulty systems ,not corrections of what came about .

The inertia of the faulty systems and regulations and Global
market interplay would not allow the necessary correction ,at least not by the current power brokers in government and
BIg Business . The pity is that the ship that is maintained is the ship of death to Liberty and Freedom and Justice .

 
Comment by roger
2010-03-26 11:13:14

A length of rope, a lighthouse ,and thee

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:06:00

The truth doesn’t sell.

Think positive! Remember “The Secret”! Think happy thoughts! Wish real, real hard and it WILL come true!

The truth doesn’t sell.

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 21:45:04

ecofeco…I always enjoy your posts .In that I believe that only the truth sets you free to regroup and become productive again
on a rational level ,all attempts to maintain these stacked deck systems just isn’t productive .

We are now living in a County of the bogus efficiency concerning systems .
If the systems are rigged to favor the inefficient or the corrupt ,such as bankers reaping a unfair share for ill-gotten production or gains or rewards(whatever you want to call it )than it’s non-productive.

The distribution of the wealth to a greater portion of the population ,such as it use to be with the middle class in America, was favorable for overall incentives and efficiency .

The Bankers and Wall Street creating Ponzi schemes that directed wealth going to those ends mis-allocated funds
to their pockets . Monopolies always mis-direct funds
to the unearned and un-productive . Look at the excessive profits the Health care industry has been enjoying at the expense of balance to a economy in the sense that more money isn’t directed elsewhere .The balance has been broken. Slave labor does not produce efficiency in that the savings is put in elite fat cats hands (or corrupt government hands )thereby not creating efficiency ,but undue profits and windfalls used for absurd
hoarding of wealth ,than used for buying 20 cars ,10 Mansions ,5 boasts and all kinds of excesses . Also the accumulation of money that than creates more power by money accumulation creates power to influence system ,as in these industries having more money than ever to be effective lobbyist . Bribe money becomes a part of the price paid for the advantage to keep unearned profits and windfalls because of favorable laws for the Power Brokers .
Government should not be a tool for those ends to create a
unfair playing field ,but this has occurred to the discrimination of the Majority of Citizens .

 
 
 
Comment by Jim A.
2010-03-26 05:56:35

Arguably, there IS some disincentive for those of us who live in a full recourse state. When walkaways become more common, it seems to me that we’re likely to see some separation between the RATES charged on recourse ve non-recourse loans.

 
Comment by combotechie
2010-03-26 06:04:57

FBs will be offered the carrot and the stick. They’ll get to choose which one they want.

If they choose to stay and pay then they’ll get to nibble on a jucy carrot. If they choose to walk instead then they’ll get beaten with the stick.

What forms the carrot and stick will take is yet to be determined. Stay tuned.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:10:22

Retroactive government modification of private contracts is a bitch.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 07:34:29

Exactly, more than anything they need people to do one of two things:

1. Those in debt need to keep servicing that debt

2. Those who can afford more debt need to take on more

Most HBBers are probably in group 2 and so this is something they may want to keep in mind when making future “choices”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by are they crazy
2010-03-26 08:12:25

Help me understand. If they keep the people in debt, then they don’t spend. If the economy is dependent 70% on consumer spending, how is that going to work? Are you saying that “they” have all gotten together and cooked up some scheme to destroy the economy? What do they get out of that?

 
Comment by Silverback1011
2010-03-26 08:39:39

Yes, that’s a very succinct summation of what our future spending choices should be. Although we are underwater on our mortgage like everyone else, it costs us $ 274.50 per week to live there (mortgage), so it is reasonable enough to rent out should we move. I decided to have it taken out of our checking account weekly to ensure a more even cashflow for us since my husband no longer works and his benefit check comes once a month. (Thank goodness he has it ). We have enabled the economy to enjoy a healthier cashflow by taking 2 weeklong vacations (one for my father’s 85th birthday - he gave us a boatride in his cruiser which he is still sailing ! ), selling our Disney timeshare, paying for all of the needed renovations for our office which we now have for sale, paying off legal bills from our formidable attorneys, paying on my husband’s student loans, and periodically going out to dinner or the movies. I seriously doubt that we’re going to take on more debt. Tough bananas to anyone who wants that, especially TPTB. We’re doing enough.

 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 08:59:22

Crazy, therein lies the rub! The demand for real wealth (as represented by cash) has never been greater. Taking on debt and servicing debt helps the bankers - the PTB thinks the bankers in turn will fund new start up industries and businesses (like the “internets”) and that will trickle down to the consumers in the form of new jobs - which in theory will provide consumers with the money to do both - take on more debt and consume.

That’s theory - and there’s holes big enough to drive a truck through in it.

 
Comment by Silverback1011
2010-03-26 11:15:50

The smarter ones are hanging onto their cash, or putting it into tangibles of some sort, so there won’t be too many jobs created by buying out J.C. Penney’s weekend sales and their local auto dealers’ showrooms. I’m not holding my breath on jobs creation whatsoever. I mean, yippee if we see a surge in new hiring, and I hope it all happens, but I don’t think it will come to pass. A few unemployed people that I know have scored some temp jobs, but that’s about it.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:29:13

What do they get out of it?

Ever hear of “feudalism?” It’s the basic form, with many variations, of social structure through most of the history of the human race.

“It’s GOOD to be the King!”

 
 
 
Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 09:55:12

Yep: the poor and middle class have obligations to pay their debts. The rich, not so much - more Bailouts!!

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:50:43

“As for me I copied the NPR article on them and sent it out to 20 people I know who are underwater.”

Link

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:00:26

I am heartened they chose a person of color as the poster child for walkaways; otherwise, folks might get the mistaken impression that it is only rich white males who are doing it.

Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 07:45:38

All the money is green.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 08:19:36

Yep - and the blood of all those that die in wars because of it is red.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 10:20:05

Amen

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 08:30:58

“The mortgage broker she worked with told her she qualified for the loan based on her credit score alone”.

“He was like, ‘Go get whatever house you want. It doesn’t matter.’ And that’s pretty much what I did, unfortunately,” Baker says.

And “she was like” income vs. outgo doesn’t really matter, houses only go up.

Shouldn’t she stay put? Team Barry is going to make all those inconvenient mortgage balances go away. Everyone deserves a house.

Comment by GH
2010-03-26 09:00:13

Credit scoring models are a lot like forecasting yesterdays weather. Much more difficult to forecast tomorrows weather, but if the models took (verifiable) income into account they would be about 90% more accurate.

But… Many are out of work today or will be out of work tomorrow, due to economic and off-shoring pressures, so really credit scoring models need to account for the likelihood your line of work will hold up over time…

Bottom line, once you have lost the income which is defined by your power earning band, if you hold debt, you WILL default!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 09:25:11

This is what happens when Megabank gets farther and farther removed from their actual customers - relying on models, scores, etc. instead of actual individual customer interaction and research.

This is the result of an ever-increasing amount of government regulation, BTW. Bankers aren’t allowed to use judgment anymore to determine if a person gets a loan or not, because that judgment may not meet the government-defined rules - even though those rules are defined U.S.-wide and thus don’t account for regional or community variants.

A great example is the jumbo-loan criteria. It was set at the stupidly-high level of $417,000 for years, in order to account for higher-priced areas like CA. That was finally changed recently, but only after the bubble had burst - too late.

 
Comment by Happy2bHeard
2010-03-26 12:44:31

” credit scoring models need to account for the likelihood your line of work will hold up over time…”

Interesting idea. What is the likelihood that any of our lines of work will hold up over time? President of the USA is a short term gig. Supreme Court Justice is a really long term one.

What about adding some kind of health projection to the scoring model (smoker, age, weight, genetic history, risky hobbies …)? Before you know it, nobody would be considered a good credit risk and the banks could charge everyone sky-high interest rates and fees.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 04:22:18

Half of U.S. Home Loan Modifications Default Again

(Bloomberg) — More than half of U.S. borrowers who received loan modifications on delinquent mortgages defaulted again after nine months, according to a federal report.

The re-default rate of loans modified in the first quarter of 2009 was 51.5 percent by the end of the year, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision said in a joint report today. The figure, which measures payments at least 30 days late, climbed to 57.9 percent for changes made in the prior 12 months.

U.S. homeowners are struggling to make payments as depressed housing prices leave them owing more than their properties are worth. About 24 percent of properties with a mortgage were underwater in the fourth quarter, First American CoreLogic said last month. The median price of a U.S. home was $165,100 in February, down 28 percent from its peak in July 2006, according to the National Association of Realtors.

Modifications are “clearly not working well and it’s not a surprise,” said Sam Khater, a senior economist at First American CoreLogic in Tysons Corner, Virginia. “It’s pointless to rewrite these loans because they’re underwater.”

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 04:56:37

“It’s pointless to rewrite these loans because they’re underwater.”..

That would be true if the value of the property does not rise for the remainder of the loan’s term.

But if the value rises by any amount, the loss on that loan if it defaults or if the property is sold, would be less.

The dollar not lost buys just as much as the dollar gained.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-03-26 05:19:42

Despite more and more efforts to turn America into Cuba, I know the unintended consequences will kick in and turn the planned economic policies into disasters. We will see reversals of this drab gray Sovietism in this generation.

 
Comment by combotechie
2010-03-26 05:26:51

Ooops, that didn’t work. Let’s try something else …

 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 05:38:45

Let’s try principal writedowns. If that doesn’t work, just have the government pay off all of the loans directly. As long as the banks get their money everything should be fine. Nothing to worry about.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:39:05

“It’s pointless to rewrite these loans because they’re underwater.”

The point is not to enact an effective policy, but to show that ’something is being done’ to save households from the logical consequences of their own poor financial decisions, in order to increase the chances that said-households will choose to vote again for The One who tried to save them.

So long as the rescue attempt is announced loudly and often enough through Big Brother’s bully MSM megaphone, hopefully the target of the rescue attempt won’t notice too much whether the or not the rescue actually ‘worked.’

And in case the rescues turn wildly successful at some point, hopefully those who were forced to chip in to pay for someone else’s bailout won’t mind sacrificing a little bit of their own hard-earned savings to enable another household to continue living large in a home for which they borrowed and spent more money than they could ever possibly hope to repay.

Comment by Bad Chile
2010-03-26 06:50:13

Well said.

 
 
Comment by Jim A.
2010-03-26 05:59:05

U.S. homeowners are struggling to make payments as depressed housing prices the fact that they overpaid leave them owing more than their properties are worth.

There I fixed it for you.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-03-26 06:35:47

“…the fact that they overpaid”

Tankxs Jim, I award to you: ‘The ROOT CAUSE / First Domino” trophy of the week! :-)

 
Comment by exeter
2010-03-26 06:50:48

Precisely.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:36:35

While I often stick up J6P, you are entirely correct in that they overpaid. WAY overpaid. For that I have no sympathy.

Illness, job loss, I understand. And there are many in that boat. But not doing even the basic due diligence? Uh, no.

I remember buying my first house. It was daunting to say the least. But what saved me was doing full historical research of the area I buying into.

That and the Internet.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 17:03:51

“…stick up for…”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 07:01:56

U.S. homeowners are struggling to make payments as depressed housing prices leave them owing more than their properties are worth.

Is it okay if I shout?

This statement is blatently false!!! People are struggling because they don’t have the income, NOT because they are “underwater!!!” If you have the income it doesn’t matter a flip WHAT your house is worth!!

And if you’re not underwater, you can still struggle with the payments…all it means is that if you struggle too much and have to sell, you only break even. (and then you have to rent)

Good god, will NO ONE correct the press on this?

Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 07:51:45

The sublty Oxide is that mortgaging a big expensive has been a way to generate cash flow, HELOCing your way as the price rose year after year. Now, not only discouraged but shishkabobed.

 
Comment by vicever
2010-03-26 11:49:23

It is not entirely false. If there house is selling more than their debt, they can always sell instead of struggling to pay the debt which in many cases was never affordable.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:39:44

Oxide, you are correct as well. But truly, many folks way, way overpaid.

 
Comment by Spokaneman
2010-03-26 13:59:42

That doesn’t translate too well into a 15 second soundbite. Take too much explaination for the masses to understand.

 
 
 
Comment by I can't do fifty five
2010-03-26 05:24:41

Who wants to make $10,0000?
Media failed us again?

Andrew Breitbart Offers $10,000 Prize for Anyone Who Can Document Tea Party Protesters Yelling N-Word at the Congressional Black Caucus Saturday.

Considering that some of the staffers within proximity of the alleged slurs were reportedly pointing cameras toward the crowd, this would seem like easy money if the story is true. As Michael Moynihan pointed out earlier this week, the anecdote has been presented as fact all over the journalism world.

Comment by palmetto
2010-03-26 06:46:55

Thank you, fifty-five. When alpha-sloth posted about the alleged “slurs” on the CBC shakedown, I asked for the proof. Where’s the (undoctored) video, audio? OTOH, we do have documented proof of former CBC congresscrimer Jefferson with the 90 grand packed in his freezer.

That was a set up, just like Tawanda Brawley, the Duke stripper and the freak in Sandyago who planted white sheets and then screamed racism. I’m really sick of this sh*t.

 
Comment by basura
2010-03-26 07:11:49

What a big surprise?

A group of people who have consistently used victimhood as a strategy to advanced their agenda has chosen to be victims again. Who cares even if it is a fabricated one?

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2010-03-26 07:18:55

Hell, just make it up. It already worked.

October 17, 2008

Secret Service says “Kill him” allegation unfounded
By Andrew M. Seder aseder@timesleader.com
Times Leader Staff Writer

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.

 
Comment by cereal
2010-03-26 07:27:50

You can just as easily plant somebody to stir it up at a rally. The only way to get the truth is to

waterboard that individual.

Comment by jeff saturday
2010-03-26 07:33:32

Nah
Send him to a resort.

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 09:54:51

Club Gitmo

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 08:00:06

We have become a nation of “sensitive” kandy ass enabler pansies.

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 08:48:08

Yes, and it’s getting worse by the day… The big nanny gubmint loves it!

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 05:34:55

Millions of Americans driving around with those wonderful ‘black’ boxes unbeknown-st to them. I’ll stick with my old ‘87 Mercedes 300-SDL turbo Diesel. Not one thing can go wrong with it that I can’t fix!

Recalls Triple as Electronics Run Cars, Swamp U.S. Regulators

March 26 (Bloomberg) — U.S. vehicle recalls related to electronic systems have tripled and investigations quadrupled in the past 30 years following a surge in the use of computers to control functions such as acceleration.

Lawmakers and safety advocates probing Toyota Motor Corp.’s handling of sudden-acceleration complaints say the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has failed to keep pace with the technology. At least 27 individual lawsuits assert that electronics systems are responsible for deaths or injuries in crashes of Toyota vehicles.

“The proliferation of features in cars has really passed NHTSA by and caught them somewhat unprepared,” said David Champion, director of testing at Consumer Reports magazine. “I don’t think anyone thought too deeply before the Toyota issue came along about how to turn off the electronic ignition for a car, for example.”

Comment by pressboardbox
2010-03-26 05:44:48

The ‘87 SDL is an awesome car. Do not sell it!

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:22:23

I have had it for 15 years and will never sell it, the OM-603 inline six diesel is a great engine, and very easy to work on. We have 5 old Mercedes diesels in my family.

My 81 year old mother drives a 1987 300-TD wagon. I rebuilt it’s engine 10 years ago with 315,000 miles on it, due to a coolant leak and head damage.

 
 
Comment by palmetto
2010-03-26 06:02:06

I’m with you, wmbz. I want my vehicle as simple as possible, starting with crank windows.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-03-26 06:13:00

We have a Mini Cooper and even the power windows are hooked up to a computer. We’ve had to take it back to the dealer twice for firmware upgrades as the windows wouldn’t stay closed. The 2nd time apparently fixed it.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 07:16:44

Cars are becoming throwaway devices. Have a minor accident and pop the airbags, and you can total a four year old car.

1996 was the approximate cutoff, when OBD-II compliance was mandated.

Have a 70’s/early 80s pickup truck in decent shape? Keep it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:15:18

“starting with crank windows”.

Funny you mention crank windows, a neighbor of mine bought a new Honda Civic a couple of years ago. He is extremely frugal, and asked for crank windows. The salesman said that they were an option and would cost an additional $285.00 dollars.

He went with the standard electric windows.

Comment by In Montana
2010-03-26 06:37:39

hubby has a ‘98 Ranger with crank windows. He was embarrassed but I think they’re fabulous.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2010-03-26 09:16:04

I had a 2002 Prizm (Corolla) with crank windows. I actually saw it the other day. Whoever the new owner is, they trashed it.

 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-03-26 06:49:48

i had a car with a crank window. Once as i rolled it up the window cracked. So much for them.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-03-26 08:01:39

Bet you never had a vehicle with a “fly window”.

LOL.

 
Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 09:17:34

fly window: Redneck Airconditioning.

Roidy

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 11:24:24

I have a crank. But it has nothing to do with windows.

 
 
 
Comment by Va Beyatch in Norfolk
2010-03-26 11:43:20

Cars are still pretty reliable these days. You don’t see many people stranded, unless they ran out of gas.

Once you understand the computer stuff, it’s not that bad. The worst part is the manufacturers keeping things proprietary and secret, but people figure it out.

 
 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 06:11:18

Toyota: Moving forward.. much faster than you want it to.

This public service message brought to you by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and by General Motors, producers of the finest cars available anywhere in the world.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:13:46

I’m awfully tempted to snap up a new Toyota this year; any thoughts on when the public relations smear campaign’s effect will max out?

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 07:30:11

I hear they will offer the new and improved version of GM as an IPO sometime this year. Investors might be ready to soak it up.

Once the govt has thus divested itself of it’s interest in the company, the anti-Toyota campaign should end.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 11:30:20

I don’t think the smear campaign is to help General Motors. It has more to do with the fact that Toyota is solvent (and can pay off lawsuits and government fines), and the Big 3 are not.

I think the MSM is belatedly coming to the conclusion that bashing all our major manufacturers may not be ultimately beneficial to the health of the country.

Honda is as much an American company as it is a Japanese company. Look for Hyundai to receive some government scrutiny.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:49:17

I’m no fan of big business and they need to be called out when they are screwing up, but yes. sometimes it’s just manufactured controversy.

 
 
Comment by Kim
2010-03-26 14:02:49

“I’m awfully tempted to snap up a new Toyota this year; any thoughts on when the public relations smear campaign’s effect will max out?”

Immediately prior to card check passing Congress.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 07:18:50

Now *that* is funny. I wish it weren’t, but it really is.

 
 
Comment by Lane from s.c.
2010-03-26 06:33:08

wmbz…you have one of the few cars, once started you can remove the battery and it will keep running. I know the old older one`s were that way. One thing I like about the new stuff it seems its never breaks. I have a 530i bmw its all fly by wire….the cruise is solid as a rock. I was down in your area this…charleston…rode down to folly beach….about every 4th house for sale. I love folly though…sort of key west.

Lane

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:45:50

wmbz…you have one of the few cars, once started you can remove the battery and it will keep running.

Yep, mechanical fuel injection pump, once it’s running it’s doesn’t matter if the alternator ain’t nate’n. Of course everything that is electric won’t function but you can get home.

Nothing against drive by wire we have a ‘98 E-320 wagon, and I work on it, but I have access to OBDII computers at a friends shop. The old ‘87 requires no computer probing.

Comment by SV guy
2010-03-26 06:57:15

I’ve got a ‘96 Cummins that’s one of the last “hard” diesels made. I have zero intention of getting rid of it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 07:34:38

“….features….”

Since when is a throttle/gas pedal considered a feature?

All this electronic control is required to comply with government pollution mandates. And now they are caught short once again, because they failed to hire software engineers, to shoot holes/check failure modes in the codes.

Comment by ACH
2010-03-26 09:15:41

Hmm, that was outsourced. Embedded SW Engineers are no longer needed in this country.

Roidy

 
 
Comment by Spokaneman
2010-03-26 14:04:38

Whenever the MSM get recall blood in the water people should remember the mid 80’s Audi fiasco. They dang near put Audi out of business and there wasn’t jack wrong with the cars. And before that it was the Corvair.

The “high speed” Prius chase was all the headlines, the fact that the whole thing was a farce was not.

Anyone that faults electronics in vehicles should have to drive a mid 70’s Chrysler vehicle in sub zero temps.

Comment by Cowtown
2010-03-26 15:03:37

I love my 1965 Corvair Monza. The closest thing to a computer in it is the AM radio (no pushbuttons).

 
 
Comment by roger
2010-03-26 15:05:58

I own a 1986 w124 300e five speed stick gas. Experienced sudden exceleration syndrom. Disconnected cruise control amp under dashboard 20 minute job. I’m in control now, I hope of my wallet. Some manufactures don’t seem too be in control of their bribes

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 05:39:37

Overview 2009: Income, Population, Jobs and Home Prices by State
WSJ ~ 3-26-10

Things were bad all over the U.S. in 2009, but some areas got hit harder than others.

Overall U.S. per capita income dropped 2.6% to about $31,000. Connecticut, home to many of the titans of finance, continued to be the state with the highest per capita income in the nation at $54,000, but it was in the top 10 in terms of declines from 2008 with a 3.3% drop. Wyoming had the largest personal income drop in the country at 5.9%. Only four states posted gains in per capita personal income with West Virginia coming out on top with a 1.8% increase, though it has seventh lowest level in the nation.

Every state experienced a decline in employment last year. Unsurprisingly, California, the most populous state, lost the most jobs, but its average unemployment rate of 11.4%, fourth highest in the nation, showed that the decline was disproportionate compared to other states. North Dakota, the nation’s third least populous state, had the smallest drop in jobs, but it also had the lowest average unemployment rate.

Home prices, as measured by Federal Housing Finance Agency which only tracks mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, posted large declines in bubble areas such as Nevada, Arizona and Florida. But 18 states posted year-to-year gains, according to FHFA whose index may understate declines since it doesn’t track jumbo or subprime loans.

Comment by combotechie
2010-03-26 06:48:25

“Overall U.S per capita income dropped 2.6% to about $31,000.”

So much for the runaway hyperinflation scenerio.

Comment by palmetto
2010-03-26 06:51:24

“So much for the runaway hyperinflation scenerio.”

I’m tellin’ ya. I don’t think TPTB want to go there. Angry mobs would be more likely under hyperinflation than deflation, IMHO. It’s that pesky little thing called jobs. Can’t hyperinflate if there’s no jobs.

Comment by Pondering the Mess
2010-03-26 10:01:23

Sure you can!

It’s called “make everyone poor.”

So long as the mobs are going after each other and not the crooks who created the problem, everything is fine.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:19:02

You don’t use the inflated dollars to create jobs, you use them to pay endless unemployment benefits.

 
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 11:06:38

You don’t use the inflated dollars to create jobs, you use them to pay endless unemployment benefits.

Among other mounting government debts.

 
 
Comment by packman
2010-03-26 11:04:03

Can’t hyperinflate if there’s no jobs.

Sure you can - see Argentina in 2002 - 25% unemployment rate combined with hyperinflation.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-03-26 06:51:32

Then 0 interest rates the next 6 years! Yahoo! Great for stock market! Great for gold. Because it’s what’s ahead that matters.

Comment by basura
2010-03-26 09:19:14

I have been collecting a coin here and there. Now I am wondering about how to store them safely. Don’t really trust the Safety Deposit at Maga bank although I have one and have used it when I was out of town for a while.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 05:50:13

Florida locales dominate FHA default list
March 26, 2010
What the hell happened to the FHA’s loans in Florida?

The state dominates the list of troubled metro areas for Federal Housing Administration-insured mortgages. In fact, 16 of the top 25 locales with the highest default rates are in Florida, as of December, with tiny Punta Gorda on the Gulf Coast leading at 22.7%.

The poor performance of Florida’s FHA loans has helped drag the agency down to its lowest point in decades, raising concerns that taxpayers will have to bail it out. The agency is in the midst of overhauling its operations to shore up reserves, which have fallen well below the level required by Congress.

Much of the blame lies in Florida’s famous condo market, which collapsed during the housing bust. The controversial practice of seller-assisted downpayments is also contributing, as is the scarcity of jobs and the severe decline in home values.

Florida homebuyers have long gravitated to FHA loans, which are aimed at first-time and low- to moderate-income purchasers. The state’s relatively cheap home prices fueled the market for these government-backed mortgages.

“The FHA got sucked into Florida because they loan in the price range where a lot of the vulnerability was,” said Wayne Archer, executive director of the Kelley A. Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies at the University of Florida.

Condo crash

FHA loans have been particularly popular among Florida’s condo buyers. The agency has backed more of these mortgages in the Sunshine State than anywhere else in the country, insuring more than 11,000 loans valued at nearly $1.7 billion over the past five years.

“Florida is ground zero for condos and for losses for condos,” said Guy Cecela, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, a trade publication. “South Florida condos are the worst of the worst.”

Comment by palmetto
2010-03-26 06:48:41

Back in the day when I used to look at Florida’s FHA, VA loan defaults and re-sales, Jacksonville was the star performer city. Always a ton of FHA, VA repos there, long before the bubble.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 05:58:37

Sounds like the FHA will funnel your tax dollars towards foreclosure relief. For those with no insurance background, the suggestion you can insure against something that has already happened (e.g. mortgage default) is patently absurd.

* MARCH 25, 2010

New Plan to Cut Some Mortgage Balances

By NICK TIMIRAOS and JAMES R. HAGERTY

The White House will announce Friday an expansion of its foreclosure-prevention efforts to include reducing mortgage loan balances for some borrowers, a controversial step that policy makers have long resisted, people familiar with the plans said.

The revisions, which will also include temporary help for unemployed borrowers, serve as a recognition that the administration ’s foreclosure rescue plan hasn’t kept pace with the rising number of souring loans.

Under the plan, the Federal Housing Administration will take on a much bigger role in government efforts to avert foreclosures by allowing some homeowners who owe more than their homes are worth to refinance into government-backed loans, according to people familiar with the plans. The FHA, which doesn’t make loans but insures lenders against losses, already faces rising losses on loans it has backed.

Comment by Steamed Bean
2010-03-26 07:26:23

The Office of Thrift Supersivision just released Q4 2009 update on mortgage performance. FHA loans continue to deteriorate, only 82.7% were performing and current at the end of 2009. That’s about $150-200 billion in delinquent FHA loans. Assuming loss severity of 60% results in $90-120 billion in losses to the current delinquent pool. FHA’s capital reserves as of 9/30/2009, $3.6 billion. FHA will do whatever it can to extend the problem so it doesn’t have to take all those losses at once. However, extending will only make the problem worse over time as redefault rates will be high and deferred maintenance on these properties will pile up. Also, the moral hazard inherent in the policy probably creates more defaults.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:00:24

Another group of booger picking, window lickers looking for uncle sugar to bail their sorry asses out…

Unions want Washington’s help with pension funds.
Washington Times 3-25-10

Nonunion workers and private companies could be forced into absorbing the financial liabilities of underfunded union pension plans, thanks to pending health care mandates and an executive order that could be finalized this year, policy analysts and trade group representatives have concluded.

Even as unions continue to market themselves to new members on the basis of generous pension programs, government figures show these plans are performing poorly in comparison with retirement packages that operate beyond the orbit of organized labor.

In addition, unions are pushing the Obama administration on project labor agreements (PLAs), which, among other things, will give their pension plans new sources of outside funding - nonunion workers on government contracts worth more than $25 million.

The average union pension has resources to cover only 62 percent of what is owed to participants, according to the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. Pensions with less than 80 percent of the assets needed to cover present and projected liabilities are considered “endangered,” while those that fall below a 65 percent threshold are classified as “critical” under the Pension Protection Act of 2006.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:54:52

Not just unions. Google “failed pensions” and see all the large corporations who drooped their pension system into the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

They far outnumber the unions.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:00:34

Didn’t the T-secretary tell Congress a couple of days ago there would be no changes to the mortgage mod plan for at least a year?

Obama Team To Unveil New Foreclosure-Fight Plan
11:04 pm

March 25, 2010

By Frank James

The White House is expected on Friday to unveil a new effort to help homeowners facing foreclosure because of unemployment or whose homes have dropped so much in value that they owe more than their homes are worth.

According to reports, the administration will lay out a plan meant to encourage banks to reduce the principal on mortgage loans. Before now, the administration focused on interest-rate deductions.

It’s an attempt by the Obama Administration to take another whack at dealing with a problem it has so far been little able to budge with its Home Affordable Modification Program which has helped relatively few homeowners.

Comment by combotechie
2010-03-26 06:33:14

“It’s an attempt by the Obama Administration to take another whack at dealing with a problem it has so far been little able to budge with its Home Affordable Modification Program which has helped relatively few homeowners.”

Government by Trial and Error and Seat of the Pants.

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 07:42:53

Keep pounding that point, Combo. These guys are REACTING, not leading. Throwing sh*t on the wall and hoping some of it sticks.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 11:17:18

Actually, there is a “Master Plan”.

Future direct bank bailouts are impossible. Too many people have their torches and pitchforks locked and loaded. So now we have stealth bailouts, because the government realizes that the banks will go down the crap tube, if everyone walks, and the banks have to take these properties onto their books, and write down the value of these houses.

Repeating: It’s all about saving Wall Street and Washington . Keep the mushrooms in the dark, and feed them BS. Pray for a “good” Black Swan, and keep people focused on their basic survival. Keep throwing out “rescue plans” with great fanfare, that don’t rescue anybody. Main Street is tapped out, so dump their crap on the government……they went to the same Ivy League schools as you did, so they will drink the kool aid.

Saving FBers, and Main Street would be a nice byproduct, but is not essential to the Master Plan. They are a bunch of easily replacable nobodies anyway. Our alliegance is to the green.

“The peasants are revolting!!”

“Yeah, they stink on ice…….”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:55:58

It’s GOOD to be the Banksta!

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by sean
2010-03-26 06:06:40

I have a 30 year mortgage and pay it, and do I ask for help. No!!. I goto work everyday so my family can have the simple stuff in life, but do I ask for help. No!! I have family member willing to help each other out when other family members need it. Do we ask for government help. No!! I am getting tired of people skating on loans, but people who does research and play by the rules gets screwed without even a kiss. Just once I would like the ball bounces our way!!

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:57:06

Dude — I can feel your pain. As I mentioned yesterday, my position was eliminated during the early 1990s downturn at a point when the job market was about as healthy as it is currently and when we carried a 30-year fixed rate mortgage. My wife and I hustled like crazy to scrounge up work and dipped into our savings to continue making payments. It helped that we had not bought a home that we couldn’t afford…

Comment by arizonadude
2010-03-26 07:15:45

I’m beginning to think that repsonsibility does not pay.Look at all the people who overbought and took out helocs.They are getting bailed out on the basis of the common good.I call bullsh@t on this deal.Just wait till everyone quits paying on their mortgages and looks for a bailout.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:38:19

It doesn’t pay. I am surprised responsible home owners who are deeply underwater and not ‘helped’ by HAMP or any other unfairly selective government mortgage subsidy program don’t just walk away in droves.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 13:59:41

“Responsibility doesn’t pay” was pioneered by Wall St. “corporate raiders” during the 1980’s “slash and burn” mergers, offshoring and “rightsizing.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2010-03-26 07:41:37

Lots of our friends bought coops/condos in the late 1980s/early 1990s. They became trapped there when prices collapsed.

They ended up living in one-bedroom apartments with two kids, sacrificing and saving just to come up with enough money to bring to closing and make the bank whole. And then start over.

The difference: back then they required downpayments and a reasonable relationship between documented income and price.

 
 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-03-26 07:03:32

Sean, it will feel good when you stop beating your head against that wall. Stop supporting Uncle Sam. You need to go with the flow and let Uncle Sam support you.

Don’t be the last sucker.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 07:23:49

Dude, this “working hard” stuff is so 20th Century. Sorta like that “justice” thing. It must happen in the afterlife, cause I ain’t seen none of it lately.

What the government wants, it subsidizes.

You can only beat your head against that rock for so long……get with the program. :)

 
Comment by eastcoaster
2010-03-26 08:01:02

But you have something they don’t - personal pride. To me, that means a lot. I agree that I feel like I do everything right and get nowhere, but I wouldn’t be comfortable doing it wrong.

You’re in very good company here at the HBB.

 
Comment by BP
2010-03-26 08:57:43

We own a small biz and work about 60-70 hours a week keeping it going. I am sick to death of all these government programs rewarding failure (including the banks). Anyway I would like to take off this summer courtesy of Uncle Obama’s new bail out for the unemployed. Does anyone know if I simply shut down the biz for the summer what kind of docs they would need to prove I am unemployed? I guess show up at the state unemployment offices? I am tired of supporting everyone else, it’s time to jump on the gravy train and ride.

Comment by Spokaneman
2010-03-26 14:10:55

As a “very general” rule, shareholders in the business are not eligible for UE benefits. Often officers in the company are not eligible either.

Comment by rearden
2010-03-26 15:33:05

You can’t take advantage of it if you need it, but of course you still have to pay SUI and FUTA on yourself.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:34:58

Barry’s new ‘plan’ will come up short also, but that won’t stop the fiscal moron from trying…

Foreclosure relief plan still coming up short
Treasury making more changes to speed mortgage modifications
MSNBC ~ 3-25-10

The government’s foreclosure relief program just isn’t working.

That was the assessment Thursday of two reports from government watchdogs and a panel of witnesses at a congressional hearing trying to find out why the Obama administration is falling far short of its goal of preventing millions of Americans from losing their homes.

Treasury officials at the hearing acknowledged problems in the year-old mortgage-modification program and announced changes designed to address issues that have limited its effectiveness. Only 170,000 homeowners have completed the process to get their monthly payments reduced out of 1.1 million who began it over the past year.

A failure of the government’s latest effort to stem the tide of foreclosures would threaten more than the roughly 8 million homeowners at risk of losing their homes in the next two years, according to John Taylor, president of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition.

“If we have another 8 million homes to go into foreclosure it will have a devastating effect on our economy, and job losses will continue to rise,” Taylor told the House Committee of Government Oversight and Reform.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:39:25

Washington to run student loans ~ March 26, 2010

WASHINGTON (CNNMoney.com) — Congress passed a bill Thursday to make Washington the one-stop shop for cheap student loans and to boost need-based scholarships.

Starting July 1 nearly all federally backed student loans, like Stafford loans, will come directly from the federal government. The measure prevents private student lenders, including Sallie Mae (SLM, Fortune 500) and Nelnet (NNI), from making federally backed loans, although both have federal contracts to service government loans to students.

The bill passed 56-43 in the Senate and 220-207 in the House. It was a part of a budgetary “reconciliation” package that also included changes to the health care overhaul bill President Obama signed into law on Tuesday.

The student loan legislation has been a major priority for President Obama, especially since loans backed by the federal government are the single most common way students finance higher education.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 07:09:54

I vaguely remember parts of Hillary’s health care plan. She wanted to place med students into particular fields according to society’s needs. It wouldn’t be efficient to have too many surgeons running around and not enough anesthesiologists or general practitioners..

If the feds are the only place to get a student loan, might they apply a bit of pressure on applicants so that.. aww.. forget it. My mind is wandering… the idea is not even worthy of being called a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory.

Comment by WHYoung
2010-03-26 15:54:28

Had an acquaintance that went through med school funded by the govt. and then had to do several years of service. Worked at an indian reservation, prison, under served rural area.
Seemed like a reasonable exchange to me.

Comment by Arizona Slim
2010-03-26 16:29:22

When I lived in Pittsburgh, I went to a dentist who was serving out her obligation to the U.S. Public Health Service. Darn good dentist too.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 23:31:37

That’s not at all what I was saying..

Would you like live in a country where the government chooses our careers for us?

“Well, I’m not interested in the medical field, so I really don’t care what happens to people who are.
They will never get around to forcing me to do something I don’t want to do. I have special abilities, and anyway, the government would never have any reason to take control of my industry.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:23:40

The key phrase here is GOVERNMENT BACKED.

No one is stopping a bank from offering a loan on their own terms — and backing it up with their own cash.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 06:54:19

The good news: San Diego’s USD Index of Leading Economic indicators was up in February for the 11th straight month.

The not-so-good news: Recent gains have been declining.

The dismal news: The only two out of six categories to see gains were building permits issued and the employment situation — that against the obvious fact that reflation of the construction boom will not get San Diego out of its economic morass, plus the recent “unexpectedly-large” spike in San Diego unemployment from 10.3 pct to 11 pct.

County’s economy sees smaller gains
2 of 6 factors tracked were down in February

By Thomas Kupper, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

Thursday, March 25, 2010 at 6:13 p.m.

An index of leading economic indicators for San Diego County rose in February for the 11th straight month, though the gains have gotten smaller recently.

The University of San Diego reported Thursday that the index was up just 0.1 percent from January, driven largely by improvements in building permits issued and the employment situation. But two of the six index components showed declines — consumer confidence and local stock prices.

“The outlook remains for positive but slow growth for the local economy for the year ahead,” said USD professor Alan Gin, who compiles the index. “The growth may be uneven, with occasional setbacks.”

Comment by In Colorado
2010-03-26 08:11:58

I have a friend who is a comptroller in San Diego and who recently switched jobs. I congratulated her on finding a new job and her reply was “what’s the big deal? there’s plenty of jobs!”

I was quite taken aback by her attitude. I guess it just goes to show that those at the top of the ladder don’t have a clue regarding what the masses are suffering,

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 14:03:40

None. What. So. Ever.

NONE.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 06:58:40

Marlin to close North Haven plant; 265 jobs going
Thursday, March 25, 2010 ~ Metro Editor

NORTH HAVEN — Longtime gun manufacturer Marlin Firearms Co. will shut its doors in June 2011, leaving 265 people without jobs.

A phase-out of operations will begin in May, First Selectman Michael J. Freda said tonight.

“The situation appears to be compounded by the fact that Connecticut is a difficult state for any manufacturer to sustain its business model,” Freda said.

He added that wage differentials, the cost of doing business and other higher costs seem to be several of the driving factors connected to the closing.

Marlin officials couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

The company started in New Haven in 1880 and was purchased by Frank Kenna and later moved to 100 Kenna Drive in North Haven.

Comment by Va Beyatch in Norfolk
2010-03-26 12:48:39

They should resort to making bullets. There is a bullet bubble.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 07:10:34

“As an economist, I am astonished that the American economics profession has no awareness whatsoever that the U.S. economy has been destroyed by the offshoring of U.S. GDP to overseas countries. U.S. corporations, in pursuit of absolute advantage or lowest labor costs and maximum CEO “performance bonuses,” have moved the production of goods and services marketed to Americans to China, India, and elsewhere abroad. When I read economists describe offshoring as free trade based on comparative advantage, I realize that there is no intelligence or integrity in the American economics profession”.

~ Paul Craig Roberts

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:39:46

“When I read economists describe offshoring as free trade based on comparative advantage, I realize that there is no intelligence or integrity in the American economics profession.”

Stupid is as stupid says.

 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2010-03-26 10:41:55

One of my favorite quotes of all time on this blog. This off-shoring, coupled with the importation of cheap, illegal immigrant labor by American mega corps is the main reason we find ourselves where we are in terms of unemployment, and lower wages. We have not heard so much as a peep from the PTB regarding this fact.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 11:39:09

What they could outsource got outsourced. The industries that couldn’t be outsourced were overrun by illegals.

If the illegal crowd was doctors, lawyers and MBAs, we’d have had Abrams tanks parked track-to-track all the way from Brownsville to San Diego.

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 14:14:50

As I’ve said, one day the vector of falling wages has to cross the rising vector of prices. When that day comes, it’s game over. That day may be now.

Our current situation is just a taste of how bad it can get and perhaps the last warning. This is by far the worst recession I’ve seen in 30 years. If we don’t fix the income problem and the rigged system, the next one will make this look like a picnic.

For those of you old enough, remember the riots of the 60s.

 
 
Comment by polly
2010-03-26 07:27:58

From the money chat in the Washington Post yesterday. Read it. You will love it:

Arlington, Va.: Thank you for taking my question.

My husband and I are looking for our first house. We have no debt (no credit cards, no car payments, no student loans), earn about $160,000 a year in government jobs, and have $200,000 in savings. No kids yet. We’re thinking that our housing budget is about $550-$575K, putting 20% down. Our current rent is $1,950, we contribute a lot to retirement, and save about $2,000 a month on top of that. Does that housing budget sound reasonable? The main thing I’m wondering about is child care once we have kids. Thanks so much!

Elisabeth Leamy: Congrats on being in such great shape! One way to figure out the price house you can TRULY afford is to make your monthly mortgage equal to your monthly rent. (You KNOW you can afford your rent, right? In this case $1,950.) I created a neat calculator on my website, http://www.elisabethleamy.com, that shows you how much house your current rent will buy you. I ran it for you and it says you can afford a house that costs $353,130. If you put 20% down, ($70,626), you’d be taking out a mortgage of $282,504. I believe in buying below your means. And I don’t believe in letting the mortgage or real estate industry tell you what you can afford because they have skin in the game! The more expensive house you buy, the more money they make! Plus they base their calculations of what you can afford on vague, theoretical formulas that may not apply to you. Good luck!

Comment by eastcoaster
2010-03-26 08:06:47

Did you run the calculator? Essentially, it just spits out a mortgage amount that equals your current rent payment (including an estimated taxes/insurance figure). So if I’m renting a 1BR apt. dirt cheap at, say, $600/month - even if I tell the calculator I have, say, $100,000 saved for a house, it calculates based on the rent only.

Comment by polly
2010-03-26 09:38:25

Which makes a lot of sense if you are dealing with people who don’t know how to budget and therefore don’t even know how much they can afford per month, never mind what is a good price historically. All they know is they can basically make things work with what they are already spending on rent.

I think it is most interesting to use it to compare costs of buying vs. costs of renting than for actually figuring out what you can afford to spend.

 
 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:31:19

You don’t need no stinkin’ calculator; just multiply by 2.5 income, like they’ve been doing for 80 years.

Did Elizabeth Leamy tell this bright young couple what they can actually find in the DC area for their $353,130? I’ll tell you what they can buy — an 1970’s townhome in the middle burbs, not even an SFH. IMO a townhome is a dwelling suited to the middle of middle class, if that. But even in DC, $160K is upper middle class. On their pay, this couple should be able to afford, honestly, a pergraniteel McTyvek.

The median home price is still far above 2.5x the median income.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 14:18:02

How do people who that much money NOT know how to handle their money?

Seriously?

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 14:47:45

“…who make…” :roll:

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 07:31:52

The old botox moonbat hit’s 70 today…

News media have not said much about it, but today is Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 70th birthday!

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 07:41:14

I hope I am still running as strongly as she is when I hit the big 7-0.

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 07:46:05

I just think of all the truly stand up people who never got to see 70.

 
Comment by Spokaneman
2010-03-26 14:15:30

She always has had a Platinum Health Plan.

 
 
Comment by eastcoaster
2010-03-26 08:07:55

Like her or not, she looks mighty good for 70. I won’t mind hitting that milestone if I can still look that good.

Comment by exeter
2010-03-26 08:13:54

Happy Birthday Madame Speaker.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 08:41:30

First I look at the purse.

hmm.. she’s worth about 12.5 million? That will do.

 
Comment by basura
2010-03-26 08:53:59

Ya but she’s dumber than that Palin chick…

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 09:12:20

True, but it has been proven by many through the decades that you don’t have to be smart the serve in the cesspool, screw the public and line your pockets.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 09:30:21

I got to admit that I thought she was in her late 50’s .
I’m beginning to wonder about Politicians that are over 60. Really is enough air getting to their brains ? How many of those people are taking medications that might contribute to their behavior ?

JFK was the youngest President elected at the time at 42 years
old ,which was refreshing at the time . I like young energy and creativity I guess . The young really are the future .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:14:12

“I got to admit that I thought she was in her late 50’s” .

Well, I didn’t think she was 70 until I saw her bug-eyed mug on a 52″ hi-def TV. Yikes!

She needs to apply more Spackle prior to any close ups. Spooky looking!

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-03-26 11:41:34

LOL…….not just her. Take an HDTV look at Kathy Griffin sometime.

 
Comment by Spokaneman
2010-03-26 14:19:40

Kennedy’s inexperience dang near got us in a nuclear war. Frotunately Nikita K. was experienced enough to send a guy through the back channel to defuse the situration.

It started with Kennedy’s handling of the Bay of Pigs. Age and experience counts for something. Obama has much the same problem, he ain’t smart enough to know what he doesn’t know.

 
Comment by rms
2010-03-26 22:35:07

Kennedy was also taking self prescribed medications.

Joseph P., his father, was upset that his son was pi$$ing away $50k/month on incidentals; this was back in the mid-fifties.

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 23:04:57

True what you say Spokaneman ,so somewhere between 50 and 65 would be the height of effectiveness in terms of experience with still having energy and creativity .Maybe Kennedy was a bad example as you have pointed out . It’s just some of these
old farts are just into maintaining systems ,or the status quo,where more creative solutions are required .

 
 
Comment by oxide
2010-03-26 10:35:52

Make that comment again when Palin manages to herd 400+ cats in Congress to pass an “Armegeddon” bill.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2010-03-26 14:50:46

LMAO, eastcoaster! I’m glad I kept reading after seeing “I wouldn’t mind hitting that” and thinking your post was going in an entirely different direction!

 
 
 
Comment by AZgolfer
2010-03-26 08:24:59

Hi from Phoenix

This is just too good not to share. I posted a couple of years ago about visiting one of the model homes at the Chateaux on Central. The one I looked at was 3,400 sq ft and was for sale for around 3 million as I recall. The entire project just sold for 7 million or less than 350K per unit. Wow!

Luxury Phoenix homes “Chateaux on Central” sell for bargain price
Phoenix’s cluster of brick mini-mansions called Chateaux on Central has a new owner. Wisconsin-based MSI West Investments paid $7 million for the 21 homes with elevators and rooftop terraces.
The high-profile project was started during the housing boom. Then plans called for the homes, some with turrets and wine cellars, to sell for $2.8 million and higher. The current deal breaks down to less than $350,000 a home.
Chateaux on Central, at Central Avenue and Palm Lane, has been tied up in Mortgages Ltd.’s financial problems for the past few years. When the original lender Desert Hills Bank filed to foreclose in 2007, Mortgages Ltd. took over with a $65 million financing deal. But then Mortgages Ltd. was forced into bankruptcy by its creditors and investors in June 2008, and Chateaux on Central has been stalled since then.

Comment by Rental Watch
2010-03-26 08:38:15

How much work still needs to be done on the homes? Are they all complete?

If so, wow, seems like it could be a great deal for the investor.

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 09:17:28

Goes to show you how high they pumped up home prices that weren’t supported by anything but hype at the time .

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 08:34:44

Good Lord, the media just needs to stop printing this crap. Anyone an IQ greater than their shoe size knows the benefits will be extended to eternity…

Jobless Aid Could Halt after Congress Fails to Act
26 Mar 2010 ~ Reuters

Hundreds of thousands of jobless Americans could once again face a disruption in their unemployment benefits after Congress failed to extend them on Thursday.

Unemployment
Amid the deepest recession in 70 years, Congress prepared to adjourn for a two-week break without extending jobless programs that are due to expire in coming days.

That could lead to bureaucratic disarray and further hardship for those who depend on the payments to help cover their bills while they look for work.

Up to 750,000 people could lose their benefits by the end of April if Congress does not act, Democratic Senator Jack Reed said.

Democrats had hoped to extend the program for a month, but Republican Senator Tom Coburn argued that the $9.2 billion cost should be covered by redirecting money from last year’s economic stimulus package rather than adding to the record budget deficit.

“We are now like the person who gets in trouble on their credit card,” said Coburn, who prevented the Senate from voting on either approach.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-03-26 09:12:07

““We are now like the person who gets in trouble on their credit card,” said Coburn, who prevented the Senate from voting on either approach.”

Tht train left the station a long time ago.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 14:58:31

Decades.

 
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 09:14:17

Notice how they never mind giving new money to Bankers by any form
possible but when its comes to people with hardship than oh we got to
cut spending .

Comment by In Colorado
2010-03-26 11:00:49

We all know that the proles don’t matter.

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:01:08

The economy is not going to recover for J6P until the end of the year, if then.

If historical trends are the same, it will be yet another jobless recovery or job creation will be so low as be the practical equivalent.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 08:37:47

School groups: Education layoffs may top 20,000
March 26, 2010

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) - A coalition of Illinois education groups says more than 20,000 teachers and staff could be laid off in the next school year.

Schools must tell employees now whether their jobs will be cut next year.

The coalition says it has heard from three-quarters of Illinois school districts and they plan 17,000 layoffs.

The coalition says it expects the total to reach 20,000 when complete information is available.

Those layoffs could be canceled if schools get additional money. Education advocates want state officials to raise taxes.

The groups include the Association of School Administrators, the Illinois Federation of Teachers, the Illinois Education Association and more.

Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-03-26 09:05:10

Basically in IL right now we have all these groups clamoring for the passage of a state income tax increase. It’s funny actually to watch the public employees beg for a tax increase because their jobs and bennies depend on it. Their logic is clear: an income reduced by increased taxes is preferable to no income at all.

Now, what the workers in the private sector think of it…that’s a whole ‘nother story.

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 09:18:18

Our local city council here in S.C. which is 3 quarters occupied by true morons, just paid a firm $150,000.00 dollars to check the cities fiscal efficiency.

Bottom line… City is way over staffed, recommendation… Cut jobs!

Council’s response… Don’t want to see more people jobless. Will look for ways to increase revenue! Wonder how they will do that?

Comment by Arizona Slim
2010-03-26 12:05:50

Council’s response… Don’t want to see more people jobless. Will look for ways to increase revenue! Wonder how they will do that?

Sounds like the Tucson City Council has an SC clone.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-03-26 12:52:06

“Basically in IL right now we have all these groups clamoring for the passage of a state income tax increase.”

Hey, it worked in Oregon. My school teacher offspring, who strongly supported the bill to raise taxes, wants to believe that the turnips still have a lot of blood left in them. I’m discouraged, but then I remember how I must have discouraged my Marxist parents.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:09:05

This is happening all over the country.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 08:42:54

Unemployment Line Stays Long: Up to 26.4 Million Seek Full-Time Jobs
(Washington)

The unemployment line is likely to remain long for the next few years as 26.4 million workers seek full-time jobs.
If you’re looking for a full-time job, the good news is you’re not alone. That’s also the bad news. The 9.7% unemployment rate isn’t likely to fall anytime soon, economists say, and the actual number of workers seeking full-time jobs could be poised to grow. In the worst-case scenario, more than 26 million people could be battling each other for a few available jobs.

As it is, more than 40% of the nation’s 14.9 million unemployed workers have been out of a job for 27 weeks or more, according to the latest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics employment report. The average member of this group has been unemployed for 29.7 weeks — nearly seven months, with no end in sight. And with each passing week, finding a new job has become harder and harder.

Unemployment is expected to remain above 9% for at least the next two years, according to Christopher Woock, research associate for The Conference Board, and other economists. That’s because many of the estimated 4 million jobs lost in the construction and manufacturing industries during the recession may never come back.

Comment by rudekarl
2010-03-26 11:17:08

“If you’re looking for a full-time job, the good news is you’re not alone.”

Yeah, that’s GREAT news!!! It won’t surprise me if this journalist gets mowed down by someone looking for a job.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-03-26 12:53:50

Would this reporter have written, “If you’re dying from cancer, the good news is you’re not alone?”

Comment by Carl Morris
2010-03-26 19:36:10

Worse than that, you’re not competing with the other patients for the cure.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Happy2bHeard
2010-03-26 22:22:11

Good news for employers.

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:10:59

9% for the next 2 years?! That means the U6 wills stay over 15%.

oh crap oh crap oh crap

I’ve never seen it this bad.

Comment by WHYoung
2010-03-26 15:59:14

few living people have.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 08:56:38

Spring Outlook: Housing Sales Are Looking as Bleak as Ever
CNBC ~ March 26, 2010

It’s going to be another bad spring for the US housing market-unless you’re a buyer.

With prices still falling and more distressed homes hitting the market, many experts are expecting the market to get even worse before it gets better.

“There’s been some increase in inventory lately, mostly from distressed sales,” says Walter Malony, spokesman for the National Association of Realtors. “Buyer’s are pretty much in the driver’s seat.”

Even the Obama administration’s new plan to help troubled homeowners, while praised by some economists, won’t help the market much right away.

The $14 billion program, announced Friday, will try to stem a rising tide of home foreclosures by giving lenders incentives to erase some mortgage debt and slash mortgage payments for the unemployed. But it will take months before there is any impact, experts say.

“This change by the Obama administration is good news,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moodys. “It will help homeowners in a meaningful way. We should see the impact of this by the fall with fewer foreclosures. Housing needs this.”

In the meantime, home values are continuing to drop and the amount of distressed property on the market is growing.

“There are still a lot of foreclosures in the pipe line,” says Greg McBride, chief economist at Bankrate.com. “They’re backed up because of paper work at the banks or moratoriums at the state level. But they are the elephant in room. And who knows what will happen when that inventory hits the market. It will more than likely hurt housing prices even more.”

Comment by AZtoORtoCOtoOR
2010-03-26 10:28:04

I love the smell of springtime!!

The past couple of months I was getting a bit discouraged as a renter, but stories like this (whether true or not is to be seen) keeps the hope alive!! Rock on Barry!!

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-03-26 12:56:12

Here’s a question. Why doesn’t The One just create and fund a second Resolution Trust Corporation?

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:12:49

The real question is why doesn’t Wall St. want this to happen?

Rhetorical question: because it would expose the true value of their Level 3 assets.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by OcBystander
2010-03-26 18:56:56

wmbz’s post …
The $14 billion program, announced Friday, will try to stem a rising tide of home foreclosures …

meet PB’s post …

Now, less than 18 months after the mortgage markets went into a tailspin, a sense of calm has returned to a key part of the $14,000bn market of outstanding US home loans: the more than $5,000bn of mortgage-backed securities sold by government-backed mortgage corporations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Lol. $14B. That’s all? Obama, I laugh at your $14B program. So, it might help out 1000 borrowers, max? Ha.

Comment by OcBystander
2010-03-26 19:31:41

err “…1 out of a 1000 borrowers…”

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 09:03:18

Gotta get those fed bucks…

Struggling Georgia school firing entire staff
03.26.10~ Associated Press

ATLANTA — A failing Savannah high school is firing its entire staff in an effort to avoid further sanctions from the state and to make the school eligible for up to $6 million in federal money, officials said Thursday.

The 200 employees at Beach High School - including the principal - will work there through the end of the year but will not be rehired for that school, said Karla Redditte, spokeswoman for the Savannah-Chatham County school district.

The teachers can reapply for their jobs but only half can be rehired under federal education law, she said. Staff can also apply for other jobs in the school district.

“It is a sad day for us,” Redditte said by phone as she stood outside the 950-student school in south Georgia.

Comment by rosie
2010-03-26 09:14:28

Hence the problem. 200 staff to service the needs of 950 students. The ratios in education are totally out of whack. I know, I’ve been doing the ed racket for goin’ on 30 years. The number of people actually in front of a room full of kids compared to the number overall is nuts.

 
Comment by Muggy
2010-03-26 10:04:18

This would be the type of school where I would be sent in. This is not a particularly special event. If the district wants the fed cash, they have to play by the fed rules. They could opt out of the fed money altogether if they wanted.

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:09:11

“They could opt out of the fed money altogether if they wanted”.

That is true, but getting off the fed crack is something few towns,cities, states are willing to do. “Free” money that ain’t free and comes with plenty of strings attached.

Comment by Muggy
2010-03-26 10:16:32

“Getting off the fed crack is something few towns,cities, states are willing to do.”

I agree, but these people, instead of realizing that they’ve been subsidized, actually think they’re losing something they’ve earned.

Hmm, where have I seen this before? :grin:

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:22:06

“I agree, but these people, instead of realizing that they’ve been subsidized, actually think they’re losing something they’ve earned”.

Gotta say, sad but true, it’s ingrained.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:14:50

Hey! Good for the goose (Wall St., big business) good for he gander (the rest of us).

 
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2010-03-26 10:14:03

BTW, in Florida this would not happen overnight — the entire staff would have been supported for 1 to 3+ years and given a chance to improve before “cleaning house.”

It’s not a sad day. It’s a tool that also lets admin. get rid of deadbeat teachers. It’s a very reasonable system, IMHO.

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2010-03-26 10:20:38

From another outlet:

“Beach High School has been classified by the state as needing improvement for the past five years.”

Uh, that had plenty of time.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:06:28

The little potbellied kook, Kim Jong Mentally-ill may have fired off a torpedo. Must be bored and looking for attention…

South Korean Navy Reportedly Shoots at Unidentified Ships Near North Korea ~ FOXNews.com 3-26-10

The South Korean navy has reportedly fired shots at unidentified ships in the direction of North Korea as it investigates whether a sinking vessel in its fleet was struck by a torpedo Friday.

Military officials said the 1,200-ton ship Cheonan was patrolling in waters south of the maritime border with North Korea when an explosion occurred at the stern of the ship, which carries a crew of 104 sailors, KBS World Radio reported.

Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 11:03:20

Nope… The South Koreans blew up their own ship! Little Kim is off the hook for now.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-03-26 10:23:02

If now is the time to sell Treasurys, why is Gross trumpeting it? Wouldn’t that work against PimpCo’s ability to profit from movements in bond prices?

* March 26, 2010, 9:29 AM EDT

Short-Treasury ETFs and Bill Gross

Everyone is talking about how investors pouring money into bond funds could get burned when interest rates rise.

Couple things caught my eye this week on this story.

Big swings in leveraged ETFs designed to short Treasury bonds are not uncommon. But the recent rally in ProShares UltraShort Treasury 20+ Year Treasury (TBT) and Direxion Daily 30-Year Treasury Bear 3x Shares (TMV) has unfolded during some lackluster Treasury auctions this week. TMV has jumped about 10% over the past three days.

Separately, whenever Pimco’s Bill Gross is out with bearish comments on bonds, investors want to listen up. Gross told Bloomberg that bonds have seen their best days, and that investors may want to cut back with the prospect of a strengthening U.S. economy and higher interest rates.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-03-26 20:53:50

Stay away from bonds and any note over 2 years maturity. 0 interest rates for a few years but then they will go up to double digit after that. Short term treasuries are king.

Balance that out with IPS and precious metals to cover for inflation.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:29:33

Not that anyone in D.C. gives a sh!t…

CBO report: Debt will rise to 90% of GDP
March 26, 2010

President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation’s economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.

In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president’s budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade.

“An additional $1.2 trillion in debt dumped on [GDP] to our children makes a huge difference,” said Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “That represents an additional debt of $10,000 per household above and beyond the federal debt they are already carrying.”

The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it’s headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO’s deficit estimates.

Comment by packman
2010-03-26 11:09:35

Well…. darn.

(Now let’s see - what’s on American Idol tonight?)

 
Comment by Steamed Bean
2010-03-26 13:00:38

$170k per household, but how many households have the ability to pay their fair share, 10% maybe. So those 10% will have to pay a much larger amount. Then add in the unfunded social security and medicare liabilities of $40-100 trillion, depending on the assumptions used, and one finally gets to realize the enormity of the ponzi scheme that is being run.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:33:39

Whispering Harry has a brain fart…

Washington (CNN) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid mistakenly called out “no” Thursday when asked for his vote on the health care reconciliation bill, setting the chamber howling with laughter.

Reid voted the wrong way when the clerk called for his vote, realized his error and quickly changed his vote to “yes.”

“He did it again,” someone said amid laughter.

Reid, who spent months persuading fellow senators to vote “yes” on President Obama’s top domestic priority, made the same mistake December 24 when voting on the original health care bill.

His office said Reid made the gaffe because he was so focused on getting health care passed.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 10:49:51

Well, the DOW won’t hit the 11,000 target this week it appears. Gonna have to reload the coffers at the PPT for next week.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 11:34:18

Futile Attempts To Reflate The Housing Bubble & The Deadly Cost
Daniel R. Amerman, CFA, DanielAmerman.com

When a financial bubble bursts – can it be reflated? And what are the risks for all of us the reflation attempt fails?

http://danielamerman.com/articles/Reflatep.htm

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 11:43:03

Greenspan Calls Treasury Yields ‘Canary in the Mine’ (Update2)

March 26 (Bloomberg) — Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said the recent rise in Treasury yields represents a “canary in the mine” that may signal further gains in interest rates.

Higher yields reflect investor concerns over “this huge overhang of federal debt which we have never seen before,” Greenspan said in an interview today on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital With Al Hunt.”

“I’m very much concerned about the fiscal situation,” said Greenspan, 84, who headed the central bank from 1987 to 2006. An increase in long-term interest rates “will make the housing recovery very difficult to implement and put a dampening on capital investment as well.”

The yield on 10-year Treasury notes was 3.86 percent at 12:19 p.m. in New York, little changed from late yesterday and up from 3.69 percent at the end of last week.

Comment by packman
2010-03-26 13:09:04

This coal mine threatens to make the housing market look like Centralia.

 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-03-26 13:09:05

Greenie, just shut up and get yourself up on the changing table. You’ve soiled your diaper again.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 11:44:32

Ambac Regulator Takes Over to Avoid Asset ‘Scramble’ (Update1)

March 26 (Bloomberg) — Ambac Financial Group Inc.’s regulator said he seized $35 billion in risky mortgage insurance to keep the company afloat and forestall an “uncontrollable scramble for assets” among policyholders and counterparties.

“You’re not triggering any defaults,” Wisconsin Insurance Commissioner Sean Dilweg said yesterday in an interview. “All this is, from our perspective, is a timeout so we can create a more orderly runoff.”

Dilweg is taking over policies on residential mortgage- backed securities and halting some payments to protect municipal bondholders who count on the company’s guarantees. Claims paid now to mortgage investors are threatening to deplete Ambac’s reserves and leave a thinner cushion for municipal-bond clients whose coverage extends decades into the future, Dilweg said.

Ambac, created in 1971 to insure debt sold by states and municipalities, lost its top credit ratings and 99 percent of its stock-market value after expanding from its main business into guaranteeing bonds backed by riskier assets. The company guarantees $256 billion of the $1.4 trillion in insured municipal issuance, according to Bloomberg data. The muni market totals $2.8 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve.

Comment by Steamed Bean
2010-03-26 13:55:35

Bet the investors who bought those bonds never thought they wouldn’t have a claim to all of Ambac’s assets. I’m sure they believed they had the same claim as a municipal bond investor. What happens when certain munis default? Do they get removed from the “insured” pool too? Typical insurance company tactic, you have insurance and can pay your premiums until you need the insurance, then the ins co disallows your claim. How about refunding the premiums paid while you’re at it.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 11:45:56

New York Helicopter Commute for $200 a Day Signals Revival

March 26 (Bloomberg) — Liberty Helicopters Inc. is offering to fly weary commuters from New Jersey to Manhattan for about $200 a day, saving them 14 hours in traffic a week and signaling that Wall Street may have seen the worst of the recession.

As many as six people at a time will travel above the Statue of Liberty, Governors Island and the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge during the trip of about 20 miles (32 kilometers) from Port Monmouth, New Jersey, to landing pads at West 30th Street and Pier 6 near Wall Street. Weekend service starts tonight and weekday runs begin next month.

Liberty has already been approached by 150 potential clients after about a month of advertising, Patrick Day, a pilot and vice president of charter marketing, said in an interview in the cabin of a twin-engine Dauphin at the carrier’s base in Linden, New Jersey. The interest may reflect how far Wall Street has bounced back, said Robert Grotell, an independent transportation consultant in Port Jefferson, New York.

Comment by packman
2010-03-26 13:10:59

Yeah - 150 rich bankers signals a “revival” - that’s it.

They’re not even buying the service yet - they’re just “potential customers”.

Comment by Kim
2010-03-26 13:54:43

Stop peeing on the green shoots, Packman! ;)

 
Comment by WHYoung
2010-03-26 16:05:04

I’ll bet they’ll find some way to put it on an expense account.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 12:21:23

Says Walter Malony, spokesman for the National Association of Realtors, “Buyer’s are pretty much in the driver’s seat.”

Had the government stood aside and let the real estate crash occur without interference, prices would have fallen much lower much more quickly thereby allowing prudent buyers to acquire properties at realistic costs.

These government interventions only postpone the inevitable correction. The endless fixes by the federal government in the 1930s prolonged the Great Depression, and damned if they’re not going to do it with this one!

Comment by Kim
2010-03-26 13:53:16

Actually, with all we’ve read on the HBB on how long banks are taking to approve short sales and how they’re holding back their shadow inventory, it still doesn’t feel like buyers are in the drivers seat.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:20:13

Yep. Anybody can sit in the drivers seat, but it doesn’t mean you’re going anywhere. :lol:

 
 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 20:36:13

..thereby allowing prudent buyers to acquire properties at realistic costs…

With a systemic banking / lending failure and with just about every investment category smashed to smithereens… where did these prudent buyers store the money they would buy that property with?

Under their mattresses? Buried in the yard?

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-03-26 20:48:49

Meanwhile apartment rents get lower by the year. Throw the savings into T-bills to save for your own unemployment. Safest bank in town is the US Treasury. If that one goes insolvent you’d see gold above $10,000 per ounce.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 12:26:39

Bank of America, Wells Fargo probably won’t pay income tax for 2009
Annual reports suggest BofA and Wells Fargo won’t have to pay federal income taxes for 2009. charlotteobserver.com ~ Mar. 26, 2010

This tax season will be kind to Bank of America and Wells Fargo: It appears that neither bank will have to pay federal income taxes for 2009.

Bank of America probably won’t pay federal taxes because it lost money in the U.S. for the year. Wells Fargo was profitable, but can write down its tax bill because of losses at Wachovia, which it rescued from a near collapse.

The idea of the country’s No. 1 and No. 4 banks not paying federal income taxes may be anathema to millions of Americans who are grumbling as they fill out their own tax forms this month. But tax experts say the banks’ situation is hardly unique.

“Oh, yeah, this happens all the time,” said Robert Willens, an expert on tax accounting who runs a New York firm with the same name. “Especially now, with companies suffering such severe losses.”

Bob McIntyre, at Citizens for Tax Justice, said he opposes the government giving corporations such a break.

“If you go out and try to make money and you don’t do it, why should the government pay you for your losses?” McIntyre said. “It’s as simple as that.”

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 20:22:29

..“If you go out and try to make money and you don’t do it, why should the government pay you for your losses?”

wtf .. if you try to make money and fail, and your effort should be taxed?
“why should the government pay…” ?!? The government pays??

Some guy at Citizens for Tax Justice is promoting the idea that anybody anywhere should pay more taxes?
——–

That didn’t make any sense so i had to look and see what this “Citizens for Tax Justice” is about.

Wikipedia .. well whadayaknow.. there’s a wiki page.
Citizens for Tax Justice is a liberal..
Ahh.. I’ve seen enough.. [click!]

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 12:33:02

LOL!!!

Possible fraud, lies, cheats, bribes… I just can’t believe it! I thought these professionals were managing all that dough fair and square.

Report: Criminal investigators probe CalPERS
Sacramento Business Journal - 3-26-10

Sacramento-based CalPERS is the nation’s largest public pension fund with about $200 billion in assets.

The investigations into allegations of wrongdoing in public pension funds might be setting its sights on the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

The investigation of using placement agents has been going on for months, but the new twist is that criminal investigators are now involved, the paper reported.

Citing anonymous sources, the Journal reported federal investigators in Los Angeles are probing payments that might have been used to influence the fund’s investment decisions.

“We are not aware of an investigation,” said Brad Pacheco, spokesman with CalPERS in Sacramento.

The pension fund is in the midst of its own investigation of investment activities, he said. The system hired an outside attorney to investigate its investment activities, its use of placement agents and its fee structures.

These West Coast actions evolved after a pay-to-play scandal came to light in New York pension funds, which led to six persons pleading guilty to schemes to influence investment decisions.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-03-26 12:37:58

The long slow bleed… Get’n while the get’n is good, the tax man cometh…

BP Solar laying off 320 from Frederick facility

BP Solar announced Friday it is laying off 320 manufacturing workers at its Frederick facility. There are approximately 430 total workers at the facility.

BP Solar, a subsidiary of British energy giant BP, is discontinuing its silicon casting, wafering and cell manufacturing at the Frederick plant, company officials said in a statement. Workers in the technology, sales and marketing, human resources and other departments will not be affected, said spokesman Peter Resler.

“This was a difficult decision and we deeply regret the impact it will have on our employees and the community,” CEO Reyad Fezzani said in the statement.

BP Solar also has plants in China and India. The company laid off 140 assembly line workers at the Frederick facility last year.

Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2010-03-26 14:35:48

Meanwhile, every other state leader is touting green jobs as their state’s savior….

Comment by Arizona Slim
2010-03-26 15:05:49

Just like biotech was supposed to be the savior a few years ago.

 
 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2010-03-26 13:05:19

Consequences Of Health Care: Valuations

Yeah, I know, Obama has said that there would be no “material” impact to finances until 2014.

Liar.

Truth: Caterpillar and John Deere already announced non-cash charges of $100 and $150 million, respectively, for this year based upon the impact of this bill on forward retiree health care costs.

The law says you must account for such changes when you become aware of them, and that would be now.

But today a 100-kiloton device landed on AT&T’s (NYSE: T) balance sheet - they announced a one billion dollar non-cash charge:

On March 23, 2010, the President signed into law comprehensive health care reform legislation under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (HR 3590). Included among the major provisions of the law is a change in the tax treatment of the Medicare Part D subsidy. AT&T Inc. (”AT&T”) intends to take a non-cash charge of approximately $1 billion in the first quarter of 2010 to reflect the impact of this change. As a result of this legislation, including the additional tax burden, AT&T will be evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health care benefits offered by the company.

Oh, there won’t be any material impacts until 2014 eh?

I told you that was BS, and now you’re seeing it. If you’re wondering how this stacks up, AT&T had revenue of $123 billion and a reported profit margin of 10.19%, for a net profit of $12.54 billion.

This represents about 8% - for this quarter.

Caterpillar (NYSE: CAT) reported $32.4 billion in revenue and a 2.76% profit margin, with a net income attributed to common of $895 million. Their $100 million charge amounts to 11% of that income.

John Deere (NYSE: DE) reported $22.8 billion in revenue, a 4% profit margin and $912.80 million in net profit; their $150 million charge amounts to 16% of net income.

Still think this is no big deal eh?

I will note that “EPS”, or Earnings Per Share, is how we value stocks. These valuation “hits”, if they are somewhat representative, imply that stocks instantly became overvalued by somewhere between 10-15% when President Obama’s pen hit the paper.

(From K. Denninger)

Comment by warlock
2010-03-26 13:52:34

So… rather than redistribute the profits to upper management and stock holders, they have to spend 10% of it on the health of their workforce.

The same workforce that earns all that money and profits for the company in the first place.

Why that’s terrible. Just terrible.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-03-26 13:56:50

We should just reinstate slavery in the US! Imagine what that would do for corporate America’s bottom line!

Comment by WHYoung
2010-03-26 16:07:52

No, slaves have to be fed, even in the bad times as they are an asset. Sheeple can just be shorn and tossed.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-03-26 14:53:36

:-)

10% spent to maintain a healthy work pool, but I’m sure there is a Corporate pencil head that has convinced Corporate Management that they can actually save money with a high turn-over rate of their labor force. Plan B is to somehow find a lower cost labor force…elsewhere.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 22:26:22

But that was the new system ,anything that increased the value of the stock so that the stock market was the happening place instead of American Citizens having livable wages and benefits and all that . Increase the value of the stock and than sell out ,just like increasing the value of real estate and selling out .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:43:15

To blame that on the new health care system is a lie. Their pension systems have been in trouble for years… because they did fund it as MANDATED BY LAW.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-03-26 15:51:43

“…DID NOT FUND IT…”

 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-03-26 18:39:10

Hwy is sendin’ yet another postcard to God:

“Dear MSG Mame”: “If you can please find someway… anyway, to have the GOP win in 2012″ (MSG = Most Significant God)

Hwy’s on record: For America to be SAVED…we need the GOPOFC&CC (“The Grand Old Pimp of Fiscal Conservatives & Compassionate Conservatives”) to have control of every Gov’t entity in 2012. I’m serious, a 4 year inoculation should provide about 120 years of protection! PEACE BABEEEEEEEEEEEEE! :-)

Catholics & the Deaf…Palin & Peace…man, what a long strange trip it’s gonna be… ;-)

By BRET HOVELL and TEDDY DAVIS March 26, 2010 ABC News:

Sarah Palin appeared today with Sen. John McCain to urge Arizona voters to re-elect McCain and help lead a peaceful political revolution in the United States.
Sarah Palin joins John McCain on the trail for first public reunion since ‘08.

“There’s something going on out there, my friends, there’s something going on, and it’s a revolution,” said McCain. “It’s a peaceful revolution, but we’re going to take on this Obama Care. “

 
Comment by neuromance
2010-03-26 20:17:33

What kind of insanity incites lenders to make loans to people with a high risk of not paying them back?

It is a system which separates lenders from repayment risk. Basically, securitization and the ability to sell off loans to others.

Any financial reform, if it hopes to return long-term sanity to lending, must inextricably bind lenders to repayment risk.

Comment by rms
2010-03-26 20:55:32

You’d never make it on Wall street.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 21:54:54

neuromance …Wall Street/Lenders/Insurance Companies are fighting not to have their ability to increase profits by risk and leverage ,while at the same time they want build in bail=outs set up in the new systems and reforms This is how bad it’s gotten . Power Brokers/Lobbyist want to maintain these unfair and corrupted systems . You can judge by the loss of wealth these systems created, not to mention the lack of efficiency ,that they are no good on top of being bogus in terms of false creation of value .

I’m just sick about this attempt to maintain the systems that are
so counter-production to the welfare of the Majority .

 
 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 21:07:08

When a bank originates loans, offers them for sale as securities and you buy them, you become the lender and you take on the risk.

The loan’s risks don’t suddenly disappear. Risk and gain are inexorably tied together.
Risk gets passed along to whoever buys the security, along with the potential income and gains, as it should. The bank makes it’s fee and is out of the picture.

If you (an investor) are unaware of the loan risk, don’t buy the security. If the risk is deemed too high, don’t buy the security.

The bank will then be stuck with crappy loans it can’t sell, and will be more careful about the loans it originates.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 22:18:57

No reason why we should of bailed out investors ,but of course they would of sued lenders and investment firms . Why doesn’t anyone ask the question ,”If banks passed on their risk to a spread out investor based ,than why did the Lenders/Investment firms/Insurance Companies need to be rescued?” In theory these entities were just middlemen for the process . And in this answer you will see where the cover-ups and robbery and obstruction of justice takes place .

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-03-26 23:03:46

..why did the Lenders/Investment firms/Insurance Companies need to be rescued?”

Hardly middlemen..
The simple answer is that lenders, insurance companies and investment banks worldwide were themselves huge securities investors. Add hedge funds and pension funds and wall street to that list.. add everyone else who had some money to invest.

They all drank deep of the Kool-aid. They believed property prices would never fall and the RE market was not only safe and extremely profitable, it was a gimme.. guaranteed..

Among other things, they owned tons of MBS as well as being invested in derivatives including Collateralized Debt Obligations, while backing up immense amounts of Credit Default Swaps.

People gotta understand that everyone from today’s lowly FB to the biggest financial institutions were infected by the mania and were out of their minds. Ignore that and whatever measures we might take to prevent more bubbles or to limit the damage done by this one, will not be effective.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by neuromance
2010-03-26 22:41:42

The problem is that this kind of a system sets up a perverse incentive structure at the point of origination. That perverse incentive is to generate as many loans as possible in order to collect fees, without regard to the ability of the loans to be paid back. As you noted, “The bank makes its fee and is out of the picture.”

We just watched this very system melt down because it created perverse incentives I mentioned. And because of a variety of factors, the people generating the loans became very wealthy, and the US government - the US taxpayer - was left holding the bag.

In theory, if information is perfect, the system could have worked. In reality, the farther from the point of origination one gets, the murkier the information about the loan becomes.

In theory, lots of things work. Communism, libertarianism to name a couple. But human nature has got to be taken into account. We just watched this theory in play among real humans, around the world and it was a disaster.

At every point of sale for the loan, fees are collected. So, again, the destructive incentive here is to gloss over the quality of the loan. One can say, “Caveat Emptor”, buyer beware, and if the damage were contained between only between buyers and sellers, I wouldn’t give a hoot about their games. But, inevitably, the taxpayer will get dragged into this game.

Civilized man has always known about the dangers of runaway lending. We just learned the lesson again. And we, our children and grandchildren will be paying for the massive costs incurred.

 
 
 
Comment by neuromance
2010-03-26 20:33:01

I had a pretty good laugh this evening. I heard on news radio that many people on talk radio today were decrying the unfairness of the government subsidizing principal reductions, since others have dutifully been paying their mortgages.

I blurted a “HAH!”, and thought, you want unfairness? How about the government manipulating the real estate market to continue the bubble and prevent people like me from buying a house, people who do not accept that house prices increasing by 200-300% over a 5 year period is normal? How about the government using my own tax money to do it?

Unfairness? Mortgage holders are a significant percentage of the population and they have welcomed the manipulations to keep home prices at bubble levels. But now, they too will get to feel the sting as they watch neighbors get principal reduced.

I’m quite looking forward to seeing this program get implemented. The blowback from the outrage of current mortgage holders, and those who try to game the system to get principal reductions should make for an interesting show.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-03-26 22:07:12

In past economic cycles lenders couldn’t save the unemployed from losing a house ,and this was the biggest risk factor for lenders ,including divorce and medical BK .
In the future your going to get things like people being insured against unemployment thereby creating a new world of premiums for Insurance Companies as long as the lenders aren’t employing the normal means by which to reduce risks in lending.

I can’ just see in the future lenders requiring private unemployment insurance
in order to lend and things like that . The normal lender risks will have to be addressed when the private market replaces the government as the money for lending entity .

All the Money Changers did was set the stage for the real cost of money to be much more expensive in the future ,but never at their expense ,just added costs for borrowers in one way or another .

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-03-26 22:11:38

“…people who do not accept that house prices increasing by 200-300% over a 5 year period is normal?” ;-)

Hey, so there’s no confusion for ChartBoy™ …the “TrueNonDeceiver™” …could you please provide a “time frame” for this assertion of a 200-300% increase…

Comment by neuromance
2010-03-26 22:52:43

I’m providing my observations for a zip code in central Maryland. I saw ranchers that originally sold for around 120K in the late 90s go for nearly 400K around the 2005-2006 time period. Rowhomes in Baltimore (!) that may have gone for 60-80K were going for nearly 300K (with a continuing loss of population in Baltimore). At a minimum, home prices in the areas I am familiar with at least doubled - increased by 100%.

I can’t cite peer-reviewed articles in prestigious journals for this data point, but it is my (an anonymous poster on an internet blog) observation. Take it for what’s it worth.

 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-03-26 22:59:38

Mr. Bear, it’s your choice, being the custom of yore, choose thy weapon Sir!: ;-)

O.C. housing beyond bottom, homebuilders say
March 26th, 2010, by Jeff Collins

A number of speakers told a home-builder’s conference in Costa Mesa that the Orange County housing market has hit bottom and is in the midst of recovery. However, they differed over how long the recovery will take.

Here’s a sampling of comments from today’s O.C. Building Industry Association Development Trends conference:

Kerry Vandell, director of the UC Irvine Center for Real Estate: “The national recovery is real. There’s too many consistent signs to say it’s not real.” When it comes to rising home prices, he added: “I truly think this is not a dead-cat bounce. … We’ll continue to see (them) rise.” He predicted that the U.S. economy will continue to stabilize over the next 18 months, but “California’s recovery will be slower and will lag,” he said.

Emile Haddad, president and CEO of Five Point Communities, manager for Lennar Corp.’s Great Park-El Toro development: “We have definitely hit the bottom on the primary markets such as Orange County. I think it’s a real bottom.” Secondary markets — places that are further from the urban core like eastern Riverside County — will lag two to three years, and “some markets will not even recover this cycle.”

Roger C. Hobbs, president of R.C. Hobbs Company in Orange: “Banking will return. Construction loans will return, but not for 24 months.” The market for buying raw land and preparing it for development is “24 to 36 months out.”

Steve Magee, senior vice president of land management for iStar Financial in Dallas: “We’ve hit the bottom. We’ve started to turn the corner and are heading back up.” Magee added that while more foreclosures are coming, prices have already completed their fall. In fact, “in Southern California, we feel like (prices) over corrected a little bit. It’ll come back. We feel the fundamentals for home building are strong.”

 
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