October 13, 2010

Bits Bucket For October 13, 2010

Post off-topic ideas, links and Craigslist finds here




RSS feed | Trackback URI

341 Comments »

Comment by pressboardbox
2010-10-13 05:22:35

Would our congressmen fit down that mine shaft? Just thinking out loud.

Comment by SouthFL
2010-10-13 07:02:08

Probably best comment ever on HBB!

Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 10:49:44

Watch this video:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1614263296&play=1

The incompetence is just unreal.

Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2010-10-13 14:50:42

And who elected these incompetents?

We did.

Let’s start with the real problem. We the Sheeple.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Mot
2010-10-15 00:09:40

What a complete and utter moron.

How in the world does that woman (Maxine Waters) keep getting re-elected?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by DennisN
2010-10-13 08:14:37

Tell them we are going to send them on a junket - at taxpayer’s expense - to a strange exotic location in Latin America.

 
Comment by Cassandra
2010-10-13 09:03:10

You might need a plunger for that.

Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 10:46:29

Did any of you see the interview with(D) maxine waters from ca this morning on cnbc?You talk about a screwed up politician.she has no clue on housing.All she could say was that homeowners were duped by banks.Give me a break here.

 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-10-13 11:02:15

Throw some money down the hole and you might find out.

Comment by rms
2010-10-13 11:52:07

+1 Exactly, such scumbags!

 
 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-10-13 05:28:33

JP Morgan has killer quarter!

Of course the “profits” were a result of lowering loan reserves, but the coast is now clear so what the hell.

The numbers have got to be bogus. LL reserves on retail financial services lowered to $1.55 billion? Correct me if I am wrong here but wouldn’t just a small number of downtown-sized commercial buildings in default easily exceed this number? Not to mention the other millions of failed ventures/foreclosures the bank was directly involved in. No matter, the bonuses will be fantastic I am sure and so will Jamie’s hair.

Comment by rentor
2010-10-13 06:34:33

My credit card was duplicated and somene charged 400 dollars before bank realised and called me. I am not liabled but bank will take the hit, unless they catch the crooks.

This seems common nowadays and its dishonest shopkeepers who sell personal info to crooks.

Comment by rms
2010-10-13 07:12:57

“I am not liabled but bank will take the hit…”

The merchant will take the hit.

 
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 07:19:28

We have two Chase visa cards (my husband loses them a couple of times per year, which is why we have two.) I pay each of them a week early so there can be no chance of late fees or interest. I don’t want to contribute any more than necessary to Jamie’s bonus.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 07:24:19

My daughter went to Europe with a high school tour group. She used the CC we gave her sparingly, mostly to buy lunches (not included with the tour).

Two months after she gets back HUGE bogus charges appearred on the card, mostly hotel charges in the Carribean. They (Chase) made me sign all kinds of affadivits swearing that it wasn’t me. They did remove the charges.

Comment by dude
2010-10-13 17:34:36

Same thing happened to me in Greece last winter. I know it was Athens because that was the only place I used the card. The bank removed the charges, and they notified me of the fraud, not I them.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Eddie
2010-10-13 06:45:38

Told you so.

Comment by polly
2010-10-13 12:37:58

Across the U.S., Long Recovery Looks Like Recession

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/13/business/economy/13econ.html?src=me&ref=business

“This is not what a recovery is supposed to look like.

In Atlanta, the Bank of America tower, the tallest in the Southeast, is nearly a fifth vacant, and bank officials just wrestled a rent cut from the developer….”

 
 
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 07:15:51

pressboard, you are on a roll today. With such disgusting goings on, your humor helps.

 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-10-13 05:30:24

Sorry - Link…

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/JPMorgan-Chases-profit-jumps-apf-4144540569.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

The second fake recovery is going to be even better than the first. The best fake recovery ever!

Comment by michael
2010-10-13 06:23:29

well…this fake recovery better be at greater 3% per year.

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php/17145-The-American-Output-Gap-Trap-–-Part-I-We-have-three-years-to-escape-or-we’re-dead-meat-Eric-Janszen?p=176721

 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2010-10-13 08:29:19

I’m calling major BS on this fake recovery and stock market scam. The rotting elephant carcass is becoming too stinky to ignore. At some point, the continued job losses will have their way with it all.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 08:57:47

But there’s a one hour wait at Chili’s in suburban Atlanta! The recovery has to be real!

Comment by sold in 05
2010-10-13 11:53:56

the chilis in san luis obispo always has an hour wait…good margaritas !!!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by polly
2010-10-13 12:40:39

From article linked to above but not yet posted because of the link:

“¶Commercial vacancies are soaring, and it could take a decade to absorb the excess in many of the largest cities. The vacancy rate, as of the end of June, stands at 21.4 percent in Phoenix, 19.7 percent in Las Vegas, 18.3 in Dallas/Fort Worth and 17.3 percent in Atlanta, in each case higher than last year, according to the data firm CoStar Group.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2010-10-13 13:02:05

And more from the same article:

Atlanta

Long fast-growing, no-holds-barred Atlanta has burned to the ground before, figuratively and in reality, and each time it was a phoenix rising. But this recession has cut deeper than any since the Great Depression and left Atlanta’s commercial and high-end condo real estate in an economic coma….

Mr. Wexler, a wiry and peripatetic real estate data analyst, describes it all on a drive down Peachtree Road, Atlanta’s posh commercial spine.

He starts in the Buckhead neighborhood, which has more than two million square feet of vacant commercial space. A billboard outside one discounted condo tower promises “New Pricing from the $290s!” There are towers half-empty and towers in receivership. Office buildings that once sold for $85 million now retail for $35 million….

Mike Alexander, research division chief for the Atlanta Regional Commission, posed the question: “When do we start to add premium jobs again?” ….

Small banks are a particular disaster, 43 having gone under in Georgia since 2008. (Federal regulators closed 129 nationally this year, up from 25 last year.)….

Atlanta sounds awsome. 43 bank closures in one state? How can I get a piece of that action?

 
Comment by butters
2010-10-13 13:29:50

January 2008, I was in Buckhead for few days. The cab driver used to point to all those “magnificent condos” that are going for gazillion dollars. Not sure how those Residential condos are doing these days?

 
 
 
Comment by varelse
2010-10-13 09:20:30

That elephant carcass is stuffed with donkey.

Comment by oxide
2010-10-13 14:03:26

Elephant choked on its own success? Not surprised.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-13 12:24:48

Not until Wall St. get its year end bone us’s, grizzly.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 05:31:43

Ex-employee says foreclosure firm forged signatures
October 09, 2010|By Kimberly Miller, Palm Beach Post

A former paralegal for Florida foreclosure giant David J. Stern describes an office where signatures on notarized documents were regularly forged, legal papers were prepared en masse in Guam and the Philippines, and closed-door screaming matches erupted when files weren’t moved fast enough.

The accusations were made in a sworn statement taken Sept. 22 by the Florida Attorney General’s Office for its investigation of the Plantation-based law firm, and appear to support nationwide concerns about behind-the-scenes practices used to take people’s homes.

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 07:35:14

Funny…! It’s hard to imagine here but in the P.I there’s such an emphasis on “proper penmanship” they really can emulate just about anything.

My wife can ( and has ) forged my sig. for years and she’s left handed!

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-13 12:27:10

Seen the latest on the mortgage bond scandal as well?

Can we get popcorn by the trainload?

 
 
Comment by exeter
2010-10-13 05:33:30

Realtors are overpaid scumbags

www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=fdCVHbeH6rM

Comment by Eddie
2010-10-13 06:48:51

So do not use one. Why such hatred for your fellow man Excry? I thought liberals were all about peace love and harmony.

Comment by exeter
2010-10-13 07:11:43

Good Morning EddieTard.

 
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 07:27:54

Watch the video - it is very cute.

 
 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 07:13:41

You’re baiting me and that’s O.K. Realtors are good people providing a necessary service, most people have good relationships with realtors, obviously not you!

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 07:28:12

Necessary? Only because the MLS is a monopoly and you can’t sell your house in a normal (non red hot) market without being listed on the MLS which you can’t do without …. a realtor.

Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 07:38:53

Do you really need the mls to sell a house?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 09:03:03

When the market is red hot you can do a fsbo, when it’s not it will be a lot harder. I have known a few who tried to fsbo in a non-bubble market. They wound up getting a realtor. Other realtors won’t show houses that aren’t on the mls.

Heck, in neighboring Fort Collins the common wisdom that unless you listed with a certain brokerage (”The Group”) that your house would take a lot longer to sell and would sell at a lowe price.

I realize that MLS alternatives are apprearing in other parts of the country (Redfin?”) but in many places the MLS still rules.

 
Comment by Lola
2010-10-13 09:20:35

In Canada, the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) was challenged by the federal Competition Bureau with regards to the CREA anti competitive practices. An agreement was reached whereby home sellers can now choose which services they want to pay for from a realtor. For example, instead of paying a full service realtor up to 5% of the total sale value, a home seller can now pay only a nominal fee for an agent to list the property on MLS.

http://tiny.cc/cjvta

 
 
 
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 07:34:09

No, Georgiagirl, exeter isn’t baiting you. He’s baiting Eddie! You picked the worst blog for a thin-skinned realtor to frequent. I’m a realtor, and am happy to tell you that most people don’t need one, and most of the rest who do use one inevitably pay more than they should for a house.

Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 08:47:20

ReHobbyist-I disagree. “Most” people just don’t understand the process of buying a home and want someone to hold their hand and explain everything to them, as well as showing homes to them. I am also a realtor, and I’m a good honest person, just trying to make a living. Yes, some people can figure it out, but not “most” people. And, a lot of people don’t want to do it all themselves, they want someone else to do it for them. And, if someone out of town is purchasing a home, they definitely need a realtor. Who could go to a strange town and know the neighborhoods, etc.?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 09:05:20

That’s all good and dandy. But why do US realtors charge a 6% commission when in other industrialized countries they charge only 1-2%?

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 09:19:49

“…..just don’t understand….want someone to hold their hand….”

Might I suggest that anyone who “doesn’t understand” and “wants someone to hold their hand” doesn’t need to be buying a house to begin with?

 
Comment by polly
2010-10-13 09:55:34

X-GSfixr…

+100, though I might have gone with “shouldn’t” rather than “doesn’t need to be”

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 10:21:47

Yeah, your right.

Sometimes I lapse into “If everyone thought like me, things would be perfect” mode. :)

 
Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2010-10-13 10:36:35

“And, if someone out of town is purchasing a home, they definitely need a realtor.”

In addition to X-GSfixr’s comments, this one stands out for me. Assuming you mean a soon to be owner occupied home due to a move and not a rental, I’ll never understand the folks who have to buy immediately when they move to a new town. Rent for 6-12 months and figure out where you want to buy. Why would anyone rush the process?

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 10:59:54

When I relocated in 1999, the only thing our “buyer’s agent” did was drive us around an unfamiliar town.

Maybe Garmin should do a tie-in with the MLS. Punch in the parameters of the house you are looking for, in a specific zip code, and let the Garmin direct you to the “For Sale” houses.

Too bad I’m not a software writer/techie. The more I think about it, the more I like this idea.

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 11:38:39

Georgia girl,

I think you are right in that “most” people do need a realtor; it’s just that for most listings, you are grossly overpaid, especially in a market where houses are 500K+. It’s no more work really to sell a 700K house than a 200K one. And no, I’m sorry, but your time is not worth $10,000 to me to fill out a couple of forms any more than a travel agent’s is for something I can do on Expedia. Just admit it, a service like Redfin wouldn’t exist if there weren’t a gaping need for it. Most, but not all, realtors are glorified clerks that should be paid a flat salary plus modest bonuses.

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 12:15:58

“Maybe Garmin should do a tie-in with the MLS”

Redfin + iPhone. Done. (At least in the areas that have Redfin).

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 12:35:36

What’s an iPhone?

Signed,
Technically behind the times old-guy. :)

 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 13:05:01

You can negotiate the commission and this is done all the time. You don’t have to pay 6%, you can shop around and find a relator that will agree to a lower commission. You can also list your home for a flat fee. There are many choices out there if you are savvy enough to find them. And, from showing a home to closing, an agent has to deal with a lot of issues and sometimes serious problems. It’s much more work than just filling out a couple of forms. You don’t really know what agents do, you just have an idea that they fill out a few forms.

If you want to do it all yourself — go ahead. Use Redfin. Go ahead and navigate the whole process yourself! Good luck! As I said, a lot of people want a realtor to help them navigate the whole process, nothing wrong with that. I just finished a short sale that took four months. I was definitely underpaid!

I’m sorry you have allowed yourself to get upset about the 6% commission.

I don’t appreciate your insults. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 13:07:38

To Sleepless, I agree, if I were moving to a new town I would rent for sure until I became familiar with the neighborhoods. But a lot of people buy homes immediately, and they need a realtor.

 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-13 13:33:04

Keep in mind the avg J6P can’t even do a 1040EZ or 1040A income tax return. That kind of person is going to need “someone” to hold his or her hand through the process of buying a house.

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 13:38:43

Georgia girl, once again; hahahahahahaha! I laugh in your general direction.

First of all, I have navigated the whole process, and it ain’t rocket science. Secondly, for those who don’t want to navigate the whole process, there are companies like Redfin, who have apparently decided that they have a viable business model based on discounted commissions. Third, as I said above, I agree that most people do need a realtor; and yes, it is a little more than filling out a couple of forms, but nothing a paralegal couldn’t do at about $20 an hour. Perhaps if realtors charged by the hour (like most professionals, by the way), you wouldn’t be underpaid by the lookie-loos and short sales, and the people that have normal sales wouldn’t be ripped off so badly.

Finally, it is not my intention to insult you, so if you are taking all of this personally, perhaps you should find a business more suited for thin-skinned people.

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 13:41:45

One last thing. In my opinion, it’s the integrity and diligence of the escrow company (or lack thereof), not the realtor, that makes the difference in most real estate transactions.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 14:01:03

“I’m sorry you have allowed yourself to get upset about the 6% commission.”

6% on a 500K house is 30,000 smackers. That’s a lot of dough sweetheart, and you guys and gals aren’t worth it.

To be fair, you guys aren’t the only ones feeding at the real estate trough. Closing costs are another ripoff.

 
 
 
Comment by polly
2010-10-13 07:44:26

I don’t participate much in the realor baiting threads on the blog because, I don’t really care that much, but this particular comment inspires a response.

I have only had significant dealings with two realtors in a professional exchange. I would not genalize to everyone in that job from those experiences, but they were both dreadful beyond all possible comprehension. One was a realtor in Brooklyn who would have been paid by my soon to be employer to help me find an apartment. So, guy with a contract with one of the best law firms in the city, but, to my detriment he knew my starting salary. I gave him my parameters and a price range. He showed me 3 or 4 places at the very, very top of my price range that were complete disasters. One was in a damp basement that got no light at any time of the day and was tiny. One was above a store and had missing floor boards and giant holes in the walls. So, I decided to look on my own and found a perfectly adequate apartment for half the price with a 24 hour doorman and laundry in the building after doing one scan through of the New York Times. It was obvious, he was more interested in upping my price range than finding me a place to live.

The other realtor was allegedly helping me find a place to buy in Jersey City/Hoboken. I was referred to her by USAA so she was supposed to be one of the better people in the area. She was not so much a liar as incompetent and stupid. My one absolute, no compromise requirement was to be close to the PATH train (transportation to New York City). She never showed me one place that was really walkable to the PATH but she did show me places that a) smelled entirely of animal urine and scat, b) had no electricity on at all, c) were in neighborhoods that looked like they had recently been bombed into the stone age, d) had no windows at all except for the ones that were less than 2 feet from the brick wall of the building next door. Oh, and she once commented about how a particular spot in a kitchen would be great for a washer dryer, but she was mistaken. It was the spot for the refrigerator, which evidently wasn’t included.

I find your generalized declaration that realtors are good people who provide a necessary service to be laughable on its face. There may be a few out there. We’ve heard people relate those stories, though precious few of them. I haven’t encountered one yet.

Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 08:53:17

O.K., let me clarify. There are good and bad realtors as in any profession. There are a lot of good realtors who do a very good job. You just had some bad luck. I get tired of people on this blog trashing “all” realtors. And they seem to enjoy it. I’m calling them out because they are wrong!

And I have a lot of realtor friends and co-workers who do a good honest job and treat everyone with consideration.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 09:10:21

And I have a lot of realtor friends and co-workers who do a good honest job and treat everyone with consideration.

I’m sure both Polly and Georgiagirl are making valid observations.

As in any profession, there are bad and good people involved.

It’s the nature of us.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 09:26:40

Yeah, all that “hand holding” is worth 6% of the house.

If realtors are so convinced that their “services” are so valuable, they shouldn’t have a problem opening up the MLS to FSBO.

Realtor = Where all the female college grads with Phys Ed. degrees end up, when they can’t get a job as a personal trainer or junior high gym teacher.

 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 11:04:34

The MLS is now available to everyone. I have a web site and anyone can log in and look at the MLS. You can log into realtor web sites and see the MLS.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 11:16:27

Didn’t know that.

I got “priced out forever” circa 2004, so I haven’t needed a Realtor since then.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 11:41:53

“The MLS is now available to everyone.”

To look at, yes.

To list a property on: no.

You need to go through a Realtor/Broker to list your house on the MLS. It’s a monopoly, and until recently it was a really good one (for Realtors).

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 11:47:18

Georgia girl,

Hahahahahahaha! I know a lot of realtors as well; most of them are nice people, but I don’t pay someone to be nice. Most of those same realtors don’t know jack about economics either; they think everything revolves around a comp. Well, it’s no secret that macro-economics have driven almost everything real estate-related in the past 10 years, and yet most of your peeps are still drinking the kool-aid. When a realtor knows more than me about real estate (I’m a graphic designer, but got my RE sales license years ago), then I’ll consider paying them.

I also know a handful of absolute professionals in RE who are great, and also embarrassed by their fraud, greed, and incompetence-ridden industry.

So if you want to be a cheerleader for the RE industry on this blog, go right ahead, but don’t expect a sympathetic ear from many people.

 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-13 13:11:40

I’m not trying to be a cheerleader. I said the same thing as you, some are good, some not good. Just don’t trash all realtors as a group. People on this blog love to trash all realtors and I’m saying they’re not all bad. That’s all.

 
Comment by kmfdm rules
2010-10-13 15:08:15

6% is the standard fee - however remember that it has to be split between the “buyer agent” and the “seller agent” - on some transactions it is the same person but really each side should have their own representation… Then out of the 3% each typically gets often the broker takes some of it. Then there is self employment taxes, etc…

I think the biggest issue is back when houses were realistic values - i.e. 80 to 100k in most parts of the country what the realtor ends up netting isn’t really much more than most jobs make unless they are a top seller and can get the primo listings. (Which is true in most sales professions - only the super stars make bank, for most it is just a living)

The bubble years created a situation where any moron could stick a sign in the ground and list a house for some inflated value and collect a huge commission for doing very little work.

Now with the collapse the work is harder (have to know how to deal with short sale, foreclosure, trashed properties, uncooperative banks, lower selling prices and long waits where deals fall through and you don’t get paid even though you may have spent many hours on the deal, etc…

 
 
Comment by GeorgeSalt
2010-10-13 09:38:23

I’ve also had bad luck with realtors referred by USAA. It’s a great insurance company and their credit card rates are great, but stay away from their real estate services as well as their mutual funds and other investment funds.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2010-10-13 09:48:41

When USAA called to ask how my experience had gone with the realtor, I told them the unvarnished truth. The person on the other end of the phone was stunned to silence at the facts I presented. I thought it might have been because they didn’t have very good contacts in the area (there not being that many military personnel close in to Manhattan), but it sounds like it is more pervasive problem.

Thanks for the heads up. I’ll keep it in mind if I ever find myself doing business with a realtor again. Eww…must go rinse out mouth. Bad taste.

 
Comment by The_Overdog
2010-10-13 12:28:40

I also had a bad realtor! The only houses he would show us were listings owned by his company. We would look up places on the MLS for him to show us and he just ignored them to show us his POS listings and say we needed to raise our max to purchase something decent. He was always late and ignored the city we wanted because his listings were elsewhere.

We ditched that guy, and the new one we found showed us exactly what we wanted and got out of the way. I’m not sure she was worth 6%, but was a lot better than the first failure of a person we had.

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 15:47:45

Overdog,

That is truly awful, glad you saw right thru it. Pray for those that didn’t.

 
 
Comment by michael
2010-10-13 10:26:43

the realtor my wife chose (we no longer speak to her) actually lives in the neighborhood we want to live. needless to say…she was only interested in showing us houses that were way overpriced pieces of….

talk about conflict of interest. not one short sale or forclosure property.

we continue to rent.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by mikeinbend
2010-10-13 11:10:48

But how bout them lawyers, what do realtors or others typically say about them?
both good and bad as well, I suppose.
I have a friend, who had to quit his job at a firm where he had a slave-driving boss. He is not a quitter, but he did what he had to to remain sane due to not wanting to take abuse.
Sorta like firing your realtor.

 
 
Comment by cactus
2010-10-13 12:03:36

I find your generalized declaration that realtors are good people who provide a necessary service to be laughable on its face.”

I agree I only knew one good realtor and she verified most of her co-realtors were crooks and Liars along with their favorite mortgage brokers. I won’t even rent from a realtor its a sure thing you won’t get your deposit back no matter how clean you leave the home.

The whole thing is a big mess and I now beleive it will never get straightened out in my life time.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by EdSTS2000
2010-10-13 14:33:08

+1 on the not renting from a realtor! That happened to me, and they tried to sic some scumbag collection agency (which has a BBB rating of F) on me when they realized that I had only put a 1/2 month deposit on the townhouse I was renting. A sharply worded letter sent to them (pointing out all the inconsistencies the renting realtor had committed, and written with a lawyer’s assistance) sent them back into their hole.

And I will name names. Stay away from:

Sun Cove Realty, in Tampa FL. Better Business Bureau rating: F.

 
Comment by exeter
2010-10-13 16:02:03

Simply put…. realtwhores get into the business as a last choice alternative to other work they wanted more but could not get, in just the same way most house appraisers and “inspectors”enter their respective industries that do not require college training and a degree. They’re incapable of productive work. As a result, all of these businesses are dumbed down for the masses so real quality performance is rare. It’s a sorry state, but that is the truth, and is the reason all these”professions” are so lacking in talent, expertise and dedication and is the main reason many buyers pay a heavy price for those deficiencies “at work”.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 05:37:46

Foreclosure Fraud: It’s Worse Than You Think
Published: Tuesday, 12 Oct 2010 | 1:14 PM ET
By: Diana Olick
CNBC Real Estate Reporter

There has been plenty of pontificating over the ramifications of foreclosure freezes on troubled borrowers, foreclosure buyers and the larger housing market, not to mention lawsuits, investor losses and bank write downs. There has been precious little talk of what the real legal issues are behind the robosigning scandal. Yes, you can’t/shouldn’t sign documents you never read, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. The real issue is ownership of these loans and who has the right to foreclose. By the way, despite various comments from the Obama administration, foreclosures are governed by state law. There is no real federal jurisdiction.

A source of mine pointed me to a recent conference call Citigroup had with investors/clients. It featured Adam Levitin, a Georgetown University Law professor who specializes in, among many other financial regulatory issues, mortgage finance. Levitin says the documentation problems involved in the mortgage mess have the potential “to cloud title on not just foreclosed mortgages but on performing mortgages.

Comment by polly
2010-10-13 06:49:23

Well, I pointed out that the whole “signing off on stuff you didn’t read” thing is fairly common even in high quality financial transactions over the weekend. If your firm has a process set up for a number of people to check the items that need to be checked and then the supervisor of the process does the signing, that is not a big deal. It is a bigger deal if there is a legal requirement for the signer to have read it (possible) and a bigger deal if there is no process in place for the items to get checked by other people, but it is not the main problem.

But, I will object to the idea that anyone should care who has the title for mortgages that are not going into foreclosure. If the mortgage is performing, and the system is set up so that eveyone knows who is supposed to have the right to receive the payments and they all behave as if those people have the right to receive the payments, then it doesn’t matter that much if the legal technicalities have been followed. Everyone is performing the way the deal was intended to happen. Everyone should be happy.

UNLESS (and it is a big unless) the person who actually owns the mortgage (who thought they sold it down the road and received a cash payment for it) decides that they also want to get the stream of payments because, they didn’t really sell it - they got the payment but kept the mortgage. Then you have an issue. Of course, then they will get the behind sued off, so maybe they won’t do that. They will just be satisfied with the fact that three years ago they sold a mortgage for $100K and it is most certainly worth less than $50K now.

Oh, and once the mortgage does stop performing, it is an issue because only the real owner has the right to bring a foreclosure action, but we already knew that.

Comment by Jim A.
2010-10-13 07:41:25

But of course the problem is that the mortgage system was predicated on the idea that nobody would ever have to look at the paperwork. Since everybody was simply going to refinance every two years, nobody was really concerned with making sure all the paperwork was on hand and properly executed. But like all the complicated ropes, chocks, carabiners etc that rock climbers use, you don’t need it until you need it, and then you need it REAL BAD.

Frankly, the checks and balances are so out of whack, I’m surprised we haven’t seen cases of fraudsters foreclosing on property that they had no interest in whatsoever in an attempt to sell it, as opposed to banks just not PROVING their legitimate interest in the property.

Comment by Cassandra
2010-10-13 09:47:12

Speaking of climbing…

I once prussiced (is that a word? to climb with a prussic hitch) out of a mine shaft. Perhaps not as dramatic as of what we’ve seen on TV of late. Still, seems a fitting metaphor for where we are at.

It’s going to be a long, tedious and difficult climb. There doesn’t seem to be an easy out.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Jim A.
2010-10-13 09:49:30

In case I wasn’t clear, what we’ve seen so far isn’t really foreclosure FRAUD per se. After all, except for a few careless mistakes, what we’ve seen has been the designated representatives or agents of those who are owed money to seize the pledged collateral on delinquent loans. These disputes aren’t about whether the loan is current, or whether the property was pledged as collateral for those delinquent loans. Rather the question so far has been whether the lenders (or their agents) have properly gone through the legal formalities intended to protect property owners from fraudulent seizure of their property by those with NO legitimate security interest in it. And make no mistake, until this sloppiness came to light, it appears that there was relatively little to prevent fraudsters from seizing property on their own say so and selling it before the owner even knew what happened.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by GeorgeSalt
2010-10-13 09:43:57

In states that require judicial review of foreclosures, isn’t submitting fraudulent paperwork to a court of law a big no-no? Isn’t that the sort of thing that could result in prison time? I think that is what has the banks spooked.

And if some state AG or federal prosecutor can establish collusion among the many entities involved, I can see one hell of a RICO case.

Then again, I’m not a lawyer.

Comment by polly
2010-10-13 10:03:29

Yes, it is. But until the loan stops performing and the foreclosure proceedsing start, all you have are payments going to people who are supposed to own the loan, but no one quite got around to perfecting the trasfer. There is someone who technically could get the payments who isn’t getting them, but only because they didn’t officially tranfer ownership of the note when they sold it. As long as the payments go to the people who think they bought it, it isn’t really a big deal.

Big deals come when you have forclosures proceedings brought by someone who has no legal right to do so, whether there is a court involved or not.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 12:28:51

I once saw a sign that said, “Nobody thinks my job around here is important, unless I stop doing it.” Sounds similar to this situation.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 05:39:01

Idaho to join other states in foreclosure fraud investigation
Posted: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 1:49 pm | Updated: 2:38 pm, Tue Oct 12, 2010.

BOISE – Idaho will join about 40 other state attorneys general in a joint investigation into banks’ use of flawed foreclosure paperwork.

Idaho Deputy Attorney General Brett DeLange confirmed today Idaho’s involvement in the investigation.

“We currently know about this at the national level and we have received complaints, some recent, of specific defects under Idaho law,” DeLange said.

The joint investigation by 40 states could further escalate pressure on banks to widen their suspensions of foreclosures. On Friday, Bank of America became the first bank to halt foreclosures in all 50 states.

DeLange said he did not know the number of complaints of foreclosure problems received by Idaho’s Attorney General Office. He said one area of fraud could be a mortgage lender submitting improper documents in foreclosure proceedings.

“I don’t want to label it, but we want to find out,” DeLange said. He said his office wanted to make sure Idaho’s various foreclosure procedure laws were followed.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 05:40:46

Americans want more money spent to create jobs. Americans want to work. To get this money, most Americans want to raise taxes on the rich.

The American People Want More Government Spending
The public isn’t nearly as worried about the debt as the bipartisan elites in Washington are

http://www.newamerica.net/node/33998

The new conventional wisdom in Washington is that more spending to promote job creation is out of the question, because the public has changed its priorities and its obsessed with the danger of federal deficits.

Really? What public? The Paraguayan public? The Moroccan public?

The actual views of the American people are at odds with the corporate media’s portrayal of a nation of deficit hawks. According to a June 11-13 USA Today/Gallup Poll, 60 percent of Americans favor “additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy.” Only 38 percent of the respondents opposed the proposal, while 2 percent had no opinion.

On the basis of that poll and similar ones, many have concluded that in order to reduce the defection of independents to the Republicans in the fall, the Democrats must at least make a show of being deficit hawks. But other polls suggest a different strategy. In the June USA Today/Gallup Poll, majorities of Democrats (83 percent) and independents (52 percent) supported more stimulus spending. Only the Republicans opposed it, by 61 to 38 percent. How can it be argued that Democrats need to appeal to independent swing voters in the fall by denouncing deficits, when a majority of those independents side with Democrats against Republicans on the need for more spending to spur job creation?

Further evidence that Americans are more concerned with job creation and shoring up social insurance comes from the AmericaSpeaks “town hall” forums sponsored by deficit-hawk billionaire Pete Peterson. As numerous commentators have pointed out, Peterson must be disappointed if he expected these forums, coming shortly after his associate David Walker’s deficit-fear-mongering “IOUSA” movie and discussion tour, to demonstrate public support for the case he has made since the 1990s, in good times and bad, for major cuts in Social Security and Medicare.

Here we have a clue to the oligarchic nature of the contemporary American political system. As observers pointed out during the campaign-year debate about lifting the cap on payroll taxation, only the top 5 or 6 percent of American wage earners would be affected. But that tiny minority includes the overwhelming majority of politicians of both parties, as well as think tank experts, elite journalists and other opinion makers

Even though they were probably less liberal than the public as a whole, the AmericaSpeaks town hall participants delivered a devastating setback to the Peterson-Walker agenda. By 51 percent to 38 percent, AmericaSpeaks participants favored more stimulus spending. To reduce budget deficits, the participants favored cutting defense spending and raising taxes on the rich.

Comment by rentor
2010-10-13 06:40:57

By 51 percent to 38 percent, AmericaSpeaks participants favored more stimulus spending. To reduce budget deficits, the participants favored cutting defense spending and raising taxes on the rich.

That makes sense, Bush tax cuts for the rich only resulted in China, India & Brazil benefitting.

Comment by exeter
2010-10-13 06:53:56

Deficits don’t matter. -Vice President Richard Cheney

 
Comment by varelse
2010-10-13 09:29:49

Except that Bush’s tax cuts weren’t just for the rich, they were for every working American.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-13 10:23:23

Yep,

Thus Cheney-Shrub eCONomic calculus:
“Here’s $600.00 now go be happy for the next 8 years, while we figure how to maximise our $35,000++++++ in tax breaks…” ;-)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 10:31:14

Bush’s tax cuts weren’t just for the rich, they were for every working American.

That is an old, dull saw. Besides, Obama’s plan would keep the tax “cuts” for the middle class.

And yea, you got 45 bucks in tax cuts and billionaires got millions in tax cuts. Wow, we did good…

The study was by the nonpartisan CBO.

Tax Cuts Offer Most for Very Rich, Study Says

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html?_r=1

Families earning more than $1 million a year saw their federal tax rates drop more sharply than any group in the country as a result of President Bush’s tax cuts, according to a new Congressional study.

The study, by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, also shows that tax rates for middle-income earners edged up in 2004, the most recent year for which data was available, while rates for people at the very top continued to decline.

Based on an exhaustive analysis of tax records and census data, the study reinforced the sense that while Mr. Bush’s tax cuts reduced rates for people at every income level, they offered the biggest benefits by far to people at the very top — especially the top 1 percent of income earners.

Put another way: rich families were the undisputed winners from President Bush’s tax cuts…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by dude
2010-10-13 17:36:09

Rio, take a look at my reply yesterday to your last Bawney Fwank comment, it might give you a chuckle.

 
Comment by dude
2010-10-14 14:00:06

Wow, we must have been vewy naughty, Ben deleted the whole thread.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Mike in Miami
2010-10-13 06:51:46

Deficts, some questions to be asked:
1. Who do we owe the money too? As to my understanding we own the most money to banks, including the FED. The next largest group are foreign governments followed by various funds and private investors. Does anybody have exact numbers?
2. Given demographics, globalization & jobs and dwindling natural resources (peak everything) there’s is no way we can ever pay the debt back. Not only the federal debt, but the debt at every level of society, private, commercial, local and federal government. Somthing like 330% of GDP.
3. At some time in the future there will be some type of large scale default event as we can’t have infinite exponential growth in a finite world. 95% of money was loaned into existence. To service that debt plus interest the amount of money (= debt) has to keep expanding exponetially at about 3% per year.
4. Since we’ve already past the point of no return as far as total debt is concerned, why worry now? Charge up that credit card as fast as you can before further credit is denied. See Greece as they are a few year ahead of us.
5. We default and have some currency reform. Preferably with a currency not based on debt as this concpet is not sustainable on the long run. Of course, in the long run we’re all dead anyway.

Any better ideas?

Comment by BlueStar
2010-10-13 07:49:23

How about a military coup? It has happened almost every time a empire falls. Surly the most trusted element of our society, the military, could take over and do a better job than these civilians. Before this is over, the public will be begging them to take control.

Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 08:49:42

Yeah ’cause they did such a great job running things in Iraq.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by BlueStar
2010-10-13 09:48:44

You mean Paul Bremer? The guy who single handed started the insurgency by disbanding the Iraq army? The guy who “privatized” the Iraq economy?

Try again.

 
Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 11:13:58

I was thinking of Rumsfeld, but Bremer was an employee of the DOD for many years.

 
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 20:29:01

4. Since we’ve already past the point of no return as far as total debt is concerned, why worry now? …
5. We default and have some currency reform. Preferably with a currency not based on debt as this concpet is not sustainable on the long run. Of course, in the long run we’re all dead anyway.

Mike,
I think your post illustrates our choices well, and it realistically discusses the path (for good or bad) that I think we have available considering that we are a Republic.

As far as a military coup as another mentioned, we and they don’t want it. It’s needlessly messy with our lives and history.

Rather, our people will rise up and demand more from our representatives.

 
 
Comment by Eddie
2010-10-13 06:52:54

Dude where do you find these “studies”? I posted yesterday the findings of a Gallup poll where 70% said govt is too big and doing too much. And in 2 weeks and 6 days you will see exactly how disgusted people are with tax and spend Democrat policy.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 07:16:21

Dude where do you find these “studies”?

Dude it’s easy! Really. Here’s another one that says the same thing. But it’s from the Bloomberg Communista website. As far as the election. Who cares? The best thing for the Democrats chances in 2012 is for the Republicans to gain some legislative power and responsibility for what’s coming down. Not that it matters.


Americans Want Government to Spend for Jobs, Send Bill to Rich

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=awkrRPMONDW8

Americans want their government to create jobs through spending on public works, investments in alternative energy or skills training for the jobless.

They also want the deficit to come down. And most are ready to hand the bill to the wealthy.

A Bloomberg National Poll conducted Dec. 3-7 shows two- thirds of Americans favor taxing the rich to reduce the deficit.

The wealthy would be better able to bear the burden of more taxes, she says. “I don’t think it would be a big issue for them.”

Across Party Lines

The appeal of taxes on the wealthy crosses party lines. About half of Republicans back the idea and it is more popular among Democrats and independents.

Comment by polly
2010-10-13 07:47:23

December 3-7?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 07:59:16

Dec 3-7 2010. Bloomberg is just a head of the competition.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 08:39:34

December 3-7?

December 3-7, 2009, Dates which will live in infamy for the brainwashing mouthpieces of the supply-side traitors. :)

Newer? July 2010:
The American People Want More Government Spending
The public isn’t nearly as worried about the debt as the bipartisan elites in Washington are

http://www.newamerica.net/node/33998

The actual views of the American people are at odds with the corporate media’s portrayal of a nation of deficit hawks. According to a June 11-13 USA Today/Gallup Poll, 60 percent of Americans favor “additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy.”

And newer? Here’s a brand new one from Oct. 2010.

Beyond the tea party: What Americans really think of government

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/09/AR2010100903308.html

A new study by The Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University shows that most Americans who say they want more limited government also call Social Security and Medicare “very important.” They want Washington to be involved in schools and to help reduce poverty. Nearly half want the government to maintain a role in regulating health care…

Nearly six in 10 say they want their congressional representatives to fight for additional government spending in their districts to spur job creation; fewer (39 percent) want their member of Congress to cut spending, even if that means not as many local jobs. This is a turnabout from September 1994, when 53 percent said they wanted their representative to battle against spending and 42 percent were on the other side.

Despite evident public dissatisfaction with the growth of the federal deficit, 50 percent of those polled say they would prefer more government spending to try to boost the economy. Forty-six percent say avoiding an increase in the deficit should take precedence…

Despite the common view that the 2009 stimulus package has largely been a waste of money, Obama fares far better than President George W. Bush did in terms of public perceptions of how they managed the economy. Nearly two-thirds of Americans say the Bush administration’s actions made the economy worse. Assessments tilt more on the work the Obama administration has done to deal with the country’s economic challenges: Forty percent say those efforts have made things better and 30 percent say they are worse, with the rest undecided.

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2010-10-13 09:28:51

Tell you what, Rio. You’re obviously rich since you live abroad and have lots of time on your hands. Why don’t you send some money to the gov’t, and enclose a note saying, “Please spend this. And please also use some of this to pay down the public debt.”. And could you also get all your buddies who responded yes to that poll to do the same thing. Then I’m sure we could get the economy back on track in no time. Thanks.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 10:42:35

Why don’t you send some money to the gov’t, and enclose a note saying, “Please spend this.

Fine. We’ll discuss public policy structural changes to get America back in line with our historical, progressive, deficit friendly tax burden ratios and you can talk about dumb stuff.

 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2010-10-13 11:58:40

Talk is cheap, and so are 500 word blog posts. Putting your money where your mouth is, shows integrity. I’m waiting.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 12:22:32

Talk is cheap,

Then come up with some good stuff sometimes. I’m waiting. lol
(that was funny)

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 12:24:47

“so are 500 word blog posts”

If only, try 5,000 ( min. ) “There is no dispute” X 67 ‘alone’.

Yeah, reminds me of someone’s wishful thinking “These.Are.The.FACTS” posts. Having conviction in your beliefs is one thing, palming ‘em off as facts is another. Sorry.

 
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 12:54:24

Y’know, I’m sure at least 4 out of 5 Americans would also like a jacuzzi installed in their backyard, and granite countertops, courtesy of the government, but I’m not sure what your point is.

Seems we have a dilemma — on the one hand, I’d venture to say that even most liberals would agree that the gubmint is not a very efficient or judicious arbiter of “fairness”, esp. when it comes to jobs, which don’t contribute anything to our GDP. On the other hand, am I saying that billionaires shouldn’t pay more taxes? Heck no, either.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 13:16:34

on the one hand, I’d venture to say that even most liberals would agree that the gubmint is not a very efficient or judicious arbiter of “fairness”,

That depends on what we are talking about.

When it comes to healthcare, most other western governments do a much better job at fairness than America’s private healthcare system.

Other governments do a better job at protecting their country’s jobs too.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 15:10:04

If only, try 5,000 ( min. )….Having conviction in your beliefs is one thing, palming ‘em off as facts is another. Sorry.

Man, I hope you never try it. It’s hard to decode your 20 word ones.

But I like you.

 
 
 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2010-10-13 07:56:32

” tax and spend Democrat policy.”

As opposed to borrow and spend republican policy, or “I don’t understand arithmetic” teabagger policy?

Comment by Doghouse Riley
2010-10-13 13:14:25

I would be in favor of putting the liberals in charge of taxation, and the conservatives in charge of spending.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by varelse
2010-10-13 09:35:56

Both sides almost always have studies to point to that were designed to produce the results that are best for their immediate political needs. All to often it is an unholy marraige between the “science” of poll taking and the religion of ideology, with predictable results.

Did you know there is now such a thing as THIRD hand smoke? Turns out second hand smoke could only justify so many anti-smoking laws…the powers that be wanted more laws- presto….out comes a study that shows how harmful THIRD hand smoke is.

My point is, most of these studies show the results that the people funding the study are looking for. Except for this time, of course! ;)

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 11:02:02

My point is, most of these studies show the results that the people funding the study are looking for.

Yea, whatever. You just don’t like some of the conclusions so you quibble. And you make a minor point. But…

Within the realm of sanity and using logic, objectivity, observation and considering common sense, history and overall opinion of the majority:

There is no dispute in the math that Bush’s tax cuts benefited the rich way more than anyone.

There is no dispute that the majority of Americans want to keep their Medicare and SSec as they are.

There is no dispute that the majority of Americans feel we are getting a raw deal and the rich benefit most from public policies.

There is no dispute that a hand full of giant corporations package our news to their benefit.

There is no dispute that the majority of Americans wanted the public option.

There is no dispute that Americans want to work hard and get paid fairly for it.

There is no dispute that Americans have lost millions of jobs so the rich can make more profit from outsourcing.

There is no dispute the Corporations control our government more than anytime in our lifetimes.

There is no dispute that Union workers earn higher pay.

There is no dispute that our taxpayer money bailed out CORPORATE FAILURE AND CRIMINALITY while main street was SHAFTED.

There is no dispute that the social contract between business, government and its people has been BROKEN.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-13 13:44:09

“There is no dispute that the social contract between business, government and its people has been BROKEN.”

Agreed. Fortunately we have a solution, courtesy of T. Jefferson in his magnum opus.

“…That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

Coming soon.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 15:32:32

Agreed. Fortunately we have a solution, courtesy of T. Jefferson in his magnum opus.

Coming soon.

But your side would lose most likely. I’d put it at 60/40. When push comes to shove, Americans want and deserve a basic safety-net. We had one. They took it. Americans don’t like nutballs, ignorance, racists and haters. You and most here are none of those, however these are the lines being drawn. Choose wisely.

And even if nutballs “won”, they would lose.

Look at my “no dispute” list above. What do you got? My list’s math and facts would trump yours in a heartbeat. Yea, let rich Aholes and banks ream us and become socialized on OUR dime, while the citizens of the greatest country of the world are disrespected, marginalized, made unemployed, scared to get sick, sick and then get sicker and left to die because they cant make their deductible or are too broke to make their insurance payment. Fight for this. Fight hard and be proud. Of what? Freedom? LOL Yea, we’re really free.

While you are tilting at your bugaboo windmills we all are getting shafted.

Yea man, the people the Tea-Party are fighting for are really on your side.

 
Comment by evildoc
2010-10-14 15:27:23

I do wonder…

if it is *bad* that the Bush tax cuts benefited “the rich” disproportionately (high), is it also *bad* that the rich *pay* taxes disproportionately (high) to begin with?

I am after all *rich*. I make $300k/year as an evil doc. Lose half my income to taxes while unemployment gives folks 2 years off work, not looking, because it is not worth it to them to humble themselves pumping gas or what have you, while taking the largess that comes from my working crazily.

 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 11:04:05

Third hand smoke = re-breathing smoke exhaled by second-hand smokers?

Yeah, thanks for painting that vision in my head………

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Al
2010-10-13 11:05:09

2 survey questions designed to get different answers.

Q1: Is it okay to pray while smoking? (sure it is, maybe God will forgive you for smoking)

Q2: Is is okay to smoke while praying? (no! We can’t sully our prayers by smoking)

Determine the answer you want, then tailor the question.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 11:29:44

2 survey questions designed to get different answers….Determine the answer you want, then tailor the question.

I know that Al. And obviously you know that Al.

If we know that don’t you think Gallup, Harvard, and USA today know that? Professional pollsters are paid big bucks to do their job objectively.

Yes, some polls are done badly but most pollsters know what you know and make an effort to ask questions in a manner to elicit honest answers.

It is important to see who is funding the polls though.

 
Comment by AL
2010-10-13 13:17:36

“Professional pollsters are paid big bucks to do their job objectively.”

Which polling firm would you use, the one that will get the answer you want, or the one that might get the answer you want? Makes me cautious about polls, and certainly explains why different results can be obtained by different pollsters. Definitely agree on seeing who is paying the bill. Given the lack of integrity we see in almost all aspects of business/government, I don’t give the pollsters the benefit of the doubt.

 
 
 
Comment by CrackerJim
2010-10-13 11:52:25

I think the reference used in this thread starter was AmericaSpeaks. The information on what Americans want used here was from participants at America Speaks Town Hall type meeting; not any type of formal scientific poll.

 
 
Comment by LehighValleyGuy
2010-10-13 06:55:50

Polls show that the majority of Russians revere Stalin as a great leader. So obviously they should bring back Stalinism. Hey, it worked great for seven decades, right?

Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 08:01:45

As Louis Farakan said - “if I have a great pain in my leg, it does not mean it is a good one”.

Comment by DennisN
2010-10-13 08:45:07

I don’t think Louis Farrakhan is a pain in the leg - I have a somewhat higher opinion of him.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DebtinNation
2010-10-13 12:57:36

:-)

 
Comment by Marko
2010-10-13 19:39:33

Yes, Louis Farrakhan also has a “there is no dispute” list that is as hairbrained as Rio’s above.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 20:00:10

Yes, Louis Farrakhan also has a “there is no dispute” list that is as hairbrained as Rio’s above.

Marko,
Really? So far, your dog does not hunt. It just barks.

Please point out and explain what on my “no dispute” list is “hair brained”. And why.

Please think hard, gather your thoughts and take your time writing.

 
 
 
 
Comment by measton
2010-10-13 07:17:00

But other polls suggest a different strategy. In the June USA Today/Gallup Poll, majorities of Democrats (83 percent) and independents (52 percent) supported more stimulus spending. Only the Republicans opposed it, by 61 to 38 percent. How can it be argued that Democrats need to appeal to independent swing voters in the fall by denouncing deficits

Rio maybe this will help.
Do you remember seeing signs at Tea Party rallies that read
“Keep gov hands off my Medicare”

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 07:30:33

Funny, true, but no less delusional than the legions of public employees that think the only reason the private sector even ‘exists’ is to serve them?

Comment by SDGreg
2010-10-13 10:47:15

More interesting are the ‘bagger public sector employees that assume they would never be impacted by the spending cuts they want.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 11:09:02

SDGreg,

I’m running into that more than you’d suspect these days. They all seem to think that the ‘cuts’, if they absolutely must be! ( should come from ‘elsewhere’? )

Yeah I’m not defending either side, public OR private but my point was that benefits are benefits! If you can’t afford them, is one or two dufus signs really gonna’ make a difference?

 
Comment by SDGreg
2010-10-13 11:30:24

DinOR,

I’m not surprised about what you’re hearing or seeing at all. More often if pressed for what should be cut, nothing specific is offered or items offered would result in savings so small as to be almost irrelevant.

There are possibilities, both on the revenue and spending sides, for reducing the deficit. Much of the public appears so ill-informed that most would be worse off with the solutions they might propose than with some of the other possibilities that are out there. That’s said with the knowledge that there really aren’t any painless solutions at this point, but some with a lot more pain than others.

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 12:16:11

SDGreg,

A very real world example:

My neighbor across the hall does IT svcs. for the State. They are getting cut off at the knees. When the contract expires, the State simply does not renew the svc.

So… they don’t have a budget to DO what they are charged to DO ( but the paychecks keep coming in, for ‘them’ ) It’s so typical.

 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 07:33:24

“Do you remember seeing signs at Tea Party rallies that read
“Keep gov hands off my Medicare””

LOL! I want to see their faces when the millionaire GOP boyz n girlz they supported and elected start bloviating about ending Social Security and Medicare.

Comment by exeter
2010-10-13 08:04:14

I died laughing when I saw the dope holding that sign… just goes to show you the level of ignorance of the teaparty.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by In Montana
2010-10-13 09:11:44

No. I went to two of them and didn’t see that.

Even if…maybe people don’t want govt to jack with the programs more than they have already. Ie, use social security to support younger deadbeats who pull off a good mental disability act or eat themselves into morbid obesity so that they can’t even stand up much less work.

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 10:04:56

In Montana,

However poorly worded. Right, and most of us don’t think of “the government” when we pull out of our driveway onto a public road to go to work each morning?

Now they want to move the road that’s been in front of your house for… 50 years. I know, I know… Nice Try! But it’s perfectly acceptable for pub. employees to picket for benefits they’ve been promised for years? And… what do their signs usually say?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 07:31:11

“The public isn’t nearly as worried about the debt as the bipartisan elites in Washington are”

Well, hasn’t the public been indoctrinated into believing that “debt==wealth”?

Comment by WT Economist
2010-10-13 07:44:27

I think it’s pretty much the other way around — people are more worried about the debts than the politicians.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 09:13:35

I suppose they are now that their houses are depreciating and they realize that all the debts they took on have to be repaid. Not so much when it was party time though.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Jim A.
2010-10-13 09:53:04

When you lend to spendthrifts, it is remarkable how quickly they go from grateful for the money you gave them, to indignant about having to repay the money.

 
 
 
 
Comment by GeorgeSalt
2010-10-13 10:36:47

I’m not a fan of The New Republic or Jonathan Chait, but he nails this one:

In 1993, conservatives unanimously predicted that Bill Clinton’s tax increase on incomes over $200,000 would slow growth, reduce tax revenues, and likely cause a recession. Instead, of course, the economy boomed and revenue skyrocketed. Then George W. Bush cut upper-bracket tax rates, and conservatives predicted that this would cause the economy to grow even faster. Instead, the economy experienced the first business cycle where income was lower at the peak of the business cycle than it had been at the peak of the previous business cycle. It is rare that events so utterly repudiate an economic theory.

None of this evidence has penetrated the conservative mind to the slightest degree. Reading the right-wing press, it is exactly as true today as it was 18 years ago that reducing Clinton-era upper-bracket tax rates holds the key to economic growth. (The latest Weekly Standard editorial: The best place to combine fiscal rectitude and pro-growth economics is the tax code. “After repealing Obama-care, the second agenda item for the new GOP Congress is extending current tax rates.”)

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 11:13:09

George,

Not necessarily apples to apples. After the ‘87 Crash and recession that followed we really had nowhere to go but up. I speak from experience as I’d just gotten out of the ( post-cold war mil. at the time )

By ‘96 Greenspan was already talking IE.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 20:15:45

I’m not a fan of The New Republic or Jonathan Chait, but he nails this one:

Wow, I think he did too.

 
 
Comment by cactus
2010-10-13 12:06:01

Democracies vote themselves broke I guess

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 05:41:18

Ask George Bailey
Do we need a foreclosure moratorium? And other dilemmas.

By Timothy NoahPosted Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2010, at 7:53 PM ET

The Bank of America has halted foreclosures nationwide, and three other banks—GMAC Mortgage (a unit of Ally Financial), JPMorgan Chase, and PNC Financial Services—have halted foreclosures in certain states. The reason is that the banks were using faulty paperwork to process foreclosures, leaving them open to legal challenge and creating at least the theoretical risk that the wrong borrowers were getting thrown out of their houses. President Obama pocket-vetoed a seemingly unrelated bill that would have loosened notarization procedures across state lines. But he’s resisting pressure to declare a national moratorium on foreclosures for fear it will wreck the fragile recovery.

If you’re having trouble understanding all this, join the club. For answers, Slate turns to George Bailey Jr., chairman of a building and loan founded by his father that has lent money to many families of lesser means in the little town of Bedford Falls so they might purchase their own homes and secure a little piece of the American dream. When the subprime market took off, Mr. Bailey’s bank stayed prudently on the sidelines. (His rival, Mr. Potter, on the other hand, went long on subprime mortgage securities and eventually received a $10 billion bailout under the Troubled Assets Recovery Program.)

Comment by rentor
2010-10-13 07:21:36

Moratorium by banks to effect political change. Thats why Obamam administration KEEPS SAYING they aren’t in favor of stopping all foreclosures.

 
 
Comment by lavi d
2010-10-13 05:41:19

Good Morning HBB!

I just finished the oatmeal and I’m about to suit up to ride to work and do battle for the forces of good.

Wish me luck.

Comment by Red Beach
2010-10-13 05:52:20

“ride to work and do battle for the forces of good.”

I didn’t realize you worked for Goldman Sachs!

 
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-13 05:57:07

“…I’m about to suit up to ride to work and do battle for the forces of good.”

You’d better arm yourself well, you’re in for a hell of a fight.

 
Comment by oxide
2010-10-13 05:58:40

Blackberry smoothie this morning! I had too many carbs this weekend and I feel as if I’ve had too much Halloween candy. Blech.

MSM still can’t figure out whether Obama pocket vetoed or officially vetoed the “foreclosure bill.” It wasn’t only a foreclosure bill, folks! The bill was a blanket allowance of out-of-state notary signatures to enable more interstate commerce. I guess you could use it to ge an out-of-state divorce or sign an apartment lease remotely. The bill wasn’t controversial, which is why it passed by voice vote.

As to the type of “veto,” here is the man himself:

———–
“Presidential Memorandum–H.R. 3808

It is necessary to have further deliberations about the possible unintended impact of H.R. 3808, the “Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010,” on consumer protections, including those for mortgages, before the bill can be finalized. Accordingly, I am withholding my approval of this bill. (The Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655 (1929)).

The authors of this bill no doubt had the best intentions in mind when trying to remove impediments to interstate commerce. My Administration will work with them and other leaders in Congress to explore the best ways to achieve this goal going forward.

To leave no doubt that the bill is being vetoed, in addition to withholding my signature, I am returning H.R. 3808 to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, along with this Memorandum of Disapproval.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
October 8, 2010.”
———–

whitehouse DOT gov/the-press-office/2010/10/08/presidential-memorandum-hr-3808

“Witholding signature” [for ten days, until the Congress is out of session] is the pocket veto. Returning the bill to the Clerk is the legal official veto. So I guess it’s BOTH a regular veto and a pocket veto.

Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 08:00:17

But oxide, if the notary bill was so non-controversial, why did it languish for four years after its introduction in 2006, then suddenly get rushed through both houses of Congress on voice votes? Probably because banking lobbyists saw it as a potential solution to their current problem and pushed it through. That is why Obama vetoed it.

Wall Street contributed heavily to Obama in 2008 because they saw a winner. Now he’s talking tough about them (but his bark is much worse than his financial regulatory bite.) They own Democrats and Republicans, but this year they think the Repubs will do more to help them.

The mindsets have changed. One year ago the banks and the Democrats were of one mind: help the houseowner with government cheese. Now that government cheese is running out, the Democrats and the banks are opposed.

This brings up a blog-related issue. Our beloved liberals, exeter, oxide, Rio, alpha, etc stand in opposition to their own party on the issue of FBs. The Democratic party line is that we should do anything to keep them in their houses and keep prices up. Nobody on this blog agrees with that idea, be they liberal, moderate, conservative, or libertarian.

HBB rules!

 
Comment by DennisN
2010-10-13 08:41:32

I asked this question the other day: why is this legislation even necessary?

Apparently robosigning is legal in certain states. If this is true, then robosigned legal documents originating in such states should be given “full faith and credit” by the other states, in accordance with the Constitution Art. IV sec. 1

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Comment by In Montana
2010-10-13 09:31:54

Dennis I don’t know about you but I still don’t understand the exact nature of the “technical mistakes” the media wants to gloss over. Was robosigning really the problem? Or was it MERS’ shortcuts in not requiring assignments? Or ???

Been reading and reading but it seems like no one wants to “bore” us with the details so as a lawyer I’m not satisfied I really know what happened here.

If ya got any good links, clue me in.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by DennisN
2010-10-13 10:07:41

Journalists would much prefer to interview and photograph a weepy-eyed “victim” than to delve into boring legal details. Sadly the MSM is more into “entertainment” than news and analysis.

 
Comment by Cassandra
2010-10-13 10:08:55

Technical mistakes? I’m not a lawyer, and don’t even play one on TV. But wouldn’t a notary stamp dated before a signature constitute a technical error?

 
Comment by In Montana
2010-10-13 12:28:22

Is that what happened, or one of the things that happened? I’m reading all sorts of different vagie stories. I’m not disputing it, I’m just trying to get some clarity.

But already today, out of curiosity I called the county clerk to see if my lender ever recorded a Satisfaction on my paid note and …nope. So I got after it and the CU promised to record one (8 years late) and CC me.

Sheesh.

 
Comment by In Montana
2010-10-13 12:29:46

“vagie” …I meant vague..lol

 
Comment by In Montana
2010-10-13 15:22:25

Ah, made some progress….there is a link to a law review article in this Salon piece.

http://tinyurl.com/388n2hc

Clarity! At least in part.

 
Comment by DennisN
2010-10-14 01:43:38

Ugh. That paper is 51 pages long.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Rancher
2010-10-13 06:06:41

Oh, this is going to be a great thread…think I’ll
refill my cup for this one.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:14:42

Just wait until my foreclosure fraud posts (with linked articles) start showing up. You just might need another pot of coffee. :-)

Comment by Rancher
2010-10-13 06:55:14

Sometimes you just have to stop reading, a
form of sensory overload with to much information that just needs more time for
processing.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-13 06:12:13

China sure does have its problems…

“Cash floods into China, raising pressure on Yuan.”

“China’s stockpile of currency reserves, already the world’s biggest, increased by $194 billion from July to September, the most ever in a three-month period, to reach $2.65 triliion.”

Oh, I feel their pain!

Comment by combotechie
2010-10-13 06:25:46

I’m going to suit up and ride to work so I can earn a lot of dollars to send to China to help put pressure on the Yuan.

Comment by combotechie
2010-10-13 06:30:33

The only way we can win against China is to flood them with all our wealth.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 07:37:06

Hey, I do my best to not buy their crap. It can be challenging though. I know a guy who runs a body repair shop. He says he constantly buys parts where the box says “Made in USA” but the part is stamped with “Made in China”. He always sends them back to the supplier when that happens.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 08:08:36

This blog has made me think about that. My son needed a couple of bowls, so I went to Marshall’s to get some. I had to peel off some tags to make sure they weren’t made in China. There were also some made in Indonesia. The ones I bought were made in Portugal. I don’t want him eating food from some lead-containing bowls for the next 20 years.

 
Comment by DennisN
2010-10-13 08:26:45

Yes, but the box itself probably was made in the US. No attempt to defraud there….

 
Comment by whyoung
2010-10-13 09:06:51

Check out book called “A Year Without “Made in China”. It’s a couple of years old, but an interesting account of a personal experiment.

 
Comment by Kim
2010-10-13 10:58:56

“My son needed a couple of bowls … I had to peel off some tags to make sure they weren’t made in China. There were also some made in Indonesia. The ones I bought were made in Portugal.”

Did the same with a mattress pad I just purchased… passed over the Chinese-made one in favor of a Vietnamese-made one. Too bad there weren’t any choices manufactured in North America.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Insurance Guy
2010-10-13 06:15:39

Last week I asked the manager of the local branch office of NBSC if there was a list of properties that were for sale by the bank due to foreclosure. She called me back very quickly and said that there were some lots in the Cliff’s development in the mountains just northwest of me but they were listed for $100,000. She volunteered that was alot of money for some dirt.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-13 07:17:48

Aha, another South Carolina poster.

The Cliffs concept was questionable even during the recent Second Gilded Age(TM). Now it’s dead.

Each development was anchored by a big name designer golf course and a very upscale clubhouse and separate fitness center. Buy a lot in one development, and join that club, and you had full privileges in all the Cliffs developments.

Most of these communities never achieved critical mass with respect to full-time residents. The streets and utilities are there, along with the golf course and other amenities, but just a smattering of large, mostly attractive homes. And many if not most of them were only part-time residences.

The developer apparently has been cut off by his banks so he resorted to mortgaging a significant part of his remaining real assets to a group of property owners, paying 11% annual interest. If (when) he defaults, the property owners will at least own those assets.

http://www.cliffscommunities.com/real-estate/

Comment by Insurance Guy
2010-10-13 08:17:43

I wonder what he was thinking when he mortgaged his personal assets to build more golf courses and empty lots. Things won’t come back for some time. When the foreclosure comes, then I will see what a lot costs.

 
Comment by JackRussell
2010-10-13 19:37:50

I think I will stick to the Cliff’s Notes..

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:17:01

Does the “slow drip release” plan involve collusion between banks? I thought price fixing was illegal, though I guess no evidence has come to light on this just yet.

Most Foreclosures Not On The Market; Pain To Last Years

By MARILYN ALVA, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 10/06/2010 07:18 PM ET

The flood of new foreclosures might ebb for a while as major lenders GMAC, Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase suspend filings in 23 states due to sloppy procedures.

But like a finger in the hole of a broken dam, these actions — and any possible political reactions — are unlikely to stop the pressure foreclosures are putting on the housing recovery .

The mortgage and housing markets already are awash in repossessed and delinquent homes. And banks are only putting a fraction of their inventory up for sale. That slow-drip release helps prevent another big price drop, but it also means home values will be under pressure for years to come.

And it’s even more unlikely that foreclosures will filter out of the system anytime soon in light of the growing controversy over mishandled documents. The three big lenders have suspended foreclosures in 23 states where courts han dle filings. The Justice Department said Wednesday it would look into the issue after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats urged Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate.

Comment by SDGreg
2010-10-13 11:57:49

“But like a finger in the hole of a broken dam, these actions — and any possible political reactions — are unlikely to stop the pressure foreclosures are putting on the housing recovery .”

What a surprise. You mean getting a haircut and a new suit doesn’t do anything to stop the cancer ravaging the body?

But foreclosures aren’t putting pressure on a housing recovery, they are an essential and necessary part of any legitimate recovery.

“The Justice Department said Wednesday it would look into the issue after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats urged Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate.”

The Justice Department under Holder has arguably been the biggest disappointment of the Obama administration. Maybe there’s more going on in the background that we haven’t seen so far, but the Holder Justice Department has seemingly done little compared to what it might have done.

There were so many big crimes committed in the past decade that there should have been two main decisions for Holder: Which crimes do we go after first, and what do we need to do so we can go after a lot more of the big crimes.

 
Comment by neuromance
2010-10-13 17:00:10

Does the “slow drip release” plan involve collusion between banks? I thought price fixing was illegal, though I guess no evidence has come to light on this just yet.

Geither himself has stated that propping up home prices is one of his and the government’s goals. Politicians love it when property values are high as this leads to more revenue. Money is the politician’s lifeblood as it allows him to dispense favors and keep himself in power.

I do find it odd that propping up values of an asset class is a stated government goal. But it is done to improve the balance sheet of banks.

It is an absurd situation. The banking sector well and truly has managed to convince the society that it is holding them hostage. “If you don’t help us, we’ll blow up the economy.” That’s the paradigm being advertised.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:18:10

Missing link:

Most Foreclosures Not On The Market; Pain To Last Years

By MARILYN ALVA, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 10/06/2010 07:18 PM ET

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:22:05

* OCTOBER 8, 2010, 3:29 P.M. ET

Foreclosure Reviews Could Cost Banks In More Than One Way

By Matthias Rieker
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–The longer that U.S. banks place a moratorium on home foreclosures, the higher the risk they might suffer financial costs in addition to the political pain they already feel.

Bank of America Corp. (BAC) said Friday it would review its foreclosure documents in “all fifty states” and “stop foreclosure sales until our assessment has been satisfactorily completed.” Brian Moynihan, the chief executive of Bank of America, the nation’s biggest bank by assets and deposits, told the National Press Club Friday the Charlotte bank hasn’t found problems in its foreclosure process, but wanted to “clear the air” with its halt to foreclosure sales.

Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM), and Ally Financial Inc. last week postponed foreclosures in 23 states because of foreclosure documents signed by staff who did not review those documents. PNC Financial Services Group Inc. (PNC) said it “is reviewing its mortgage servicing procedures to ensure these comply with applicable law,” a spokesman said Friday.

Eventually the banks will foreclose on nearly all the properties. In many cases owners have already left their home or been evicted. But there are legal and administrative costs related to delayed foreclosures.

The delays probably won’t hurt banks’ mortgage originations, which are driven mainly by interest rates rather than service levels.

But for banks that have to publicly defend their foreclosure procedures, the issue is a political hot potato. To the public, already inflamed by government bailouts and a debate over bank fees, it’s one more instance of banks treating their customers badly.

For some banks, the bad publicity, said David Trone, an analyst with JPM Securities LLC., might hurt “deposits and ongoing relationships with customers.”

There may also be a broader economic impact from the slowdown in foreclosure sales: “It adds a level of uncertainty that prevents” the banks involved “from making new loans” until the banks hold the capital they hope to recover from foreclosure sales, Trone said.

Comment by JackRussell
2010-10-13 06:37:12

But this mess slows things down for another reason. If the property had been previously foreclosed upon, then the title insurance companies will want to know that the foreclosure was done properly. If there are doubts, then no insurance, and with no insurance, there is no sale.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:47:58

Bloomberg
Title Insurers in Talks With Lenders on Warranties
October 11, 2010, 4:49 PM EDT

By Danielle Kucera

(Updates with Bank of America accord in third paragraph.)

Oct. 11 (Bloomberg) — Title insurers are in talks with banks and regulators to obtain warranties from lenders assuring they followed proper procedures before selling foreclosed homes, said Kurt Pfotenhauer, head of the insurers’ trade group.

Everyone sort of sees the same risks, and that’s the good part,” Pfotenhauer, chief executive officer of the American Land Title Association, said today in a telephone interview. “You just have to craft a solution that’s acceptable to all the parties, and we’re making progress.

Bank of America Corp.
, the biggest U.S. lender, on Oct. 8 extended a freeze on foreclosures to all 50 states amid concern by federal and state officials that homes are being seized based on faulty information. The Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank agreed that day to issue warranties for Fidelity National Financial Inc., the largest title insurer, said Peter Sadowski, executive vice president and chief legal officer for Fidelity.

“It’s a representation that there are no issues going forward and an indemnity if someone makes a mistake,” he said.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Ally Financial Inc.’s GMAC Mortgage unit have also stopped repossession cases in 23 states where courts supervise home seizures, amid allegations that employees submitted documents with unverified or false data to speed the process.

Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 07:01:34

this reminds me of a game of hot potato.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 06:56:59

In a private transaction do you really need title insurance?

If I sell my property to you, cant you go research the title yourself?If you are confident I am the owner and there are no liens than whats the problem?The title comapny cannot see any issues that are not recorded.

When a bank is involved then you have two policies.The seller will issue the buyer title insurance.Then the lender wants title insurance too.They will not loan money without it.

But what if there is no bank loan involved?

I’m just making the point that in some transactions title insurance is not needed.the industry makes you think it is a must but it’s not.A lot of them also wont give title insurance unless you also do an escrow with them.

I have sold property to someone and he did not want to pay for title insurance.We had the deed notarized and recorded it in the county where the property was.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-13 07:20:29

If you’re paying cash then yes, you can assume the title risk. But mortgage lenders are going to insist on a policy that at least covers the mortgage amount.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 07:40:49

What about seller financing?

 
Comment by Cassandra
2010-10-13 10:15:04

What about seller financing?

Take a huge down payment.

 
 
Comment by REhobbyist
2010-10-13 08:18:44

If I was buying property from a trusted and well-off relative or friend I wouldn’t likely ask them to buy title insurance. But that’s all. Most transactions are between strangers. And given the current economic conditions I want title insurance. The policies are relatively cheap relative to some of the liens you could have to pay (IRS, property tax).

If the seller refuses to buy title insurance or the title company refuses to provide it, that’s a red flag.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by GeorgeSalt
2010-10-13 10:01:51

Without title insurance, the buyer is assuming the risk that there are parties with claim to the property who haven’t stepped forward at the time you did the title search. For example, a former spouse could show up years after the fact and claim that her husband at the time did not get her consent for the sale. It’s my understanding that title insurance protects you in cases like that.

Title insurance is not mandatory for a cash sale, but I’d get it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 10:44:07

That could be challenged in court I’m sure.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:25:32

Foreclosure logjam threatens Fannie, Freddie

By Zachary A. Goldfarb, Dina ElBoghdady and Ariana Eunjung Cha
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 11, 2010; 9:57 PM

A breakdown in the nation’s foreclosure process threatens to create billions of dollars in losses for federally controlled mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, highlighting how improper actions by banks could impose new costs on taxpayers, said government officials and industry sources.

To protect themselves from those losses, Fannie and Freddie have threatened to penalize thousands of lenders if they fail to rapidly fix the way they seize the homes of borrowers who missed their payments, according to letters sent by the firms to lenders.

Comment by pressboardbox
2010-10-13 06:50:34

“To protect themselves from those losses, Fannie and Freddie…”

I thought Fannie and Freddie had unlimited support from the Treasury to protect them from losses? What do they really care about more losses? Losses mean success for those guys.

Comment by polly
2010-10-13 10:46:34

Despite their formerly implicit (now more explicit) guarantees, Fannie and Freddie are private companies and, as such, give mondo salaries and bonuses to their executives. And those executives get bigger bonuses when the companies make money. My recollection was that they got up into the millions, but you should check to be sure.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 16:15:14

“And those executives get bigger bonuses when the companies make money.”

With apologies to Carl Sagan, how does their compensation work when the companies lose billions and billions of dollars?

Chilling effect
Foreclosure freeze means more bank pain: groups
By MARK DeCAMBRE
Last Updated: 1:27 AM, October 12, 2010
Posted: 12:21 AM, October 12, 2010

Scott Talbott, senior vice president for government affairs at the Financial Roundtable in Washington, echoed Ryan’s sentiments, telling The Post that a foreclosure halt could wind up whacking taxpayers in the wallet over the long term.

That’s because giant mortgage entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guarantee nearly 90 percent of all mortgages originated in the US, and a foreclosure freeze could put taxpayers at further risk of investment losses in the government-sponsored enterprises.

The Federal Housing Financial Agency, which regulates Fannie and Freddie, estimated last month that the mortgage giants could wrack up losses of as much as $400 billion due to souring loans. Fannie and Freddie have already lost roughly $150 billion since they were rescued two years ago by taxpayers.

“This [proposed foreclosure freeze] puts taxpayer dollars at risk,” Talbott said. “We have grave concerns that a government-imposed national moratorium would have negative consequences for the economy in general.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by neuromance
2010-10-13 17:03:31

With apologies to Carl Sagan, how does their compensation work when the companies lose billions and billions of dollars?

The system is set up in a “Heads I win, Tails you lose” model.

The heads of Wall Street companies are the highest paid government employees in the world.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:28:15

Government had been warned for months about troubles in mortgage servicer industry
By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 10, 2010; 12:45 AM

Consumer advocates and lawyers warned federal officials in recent years that the U.S. foreclosure system was designed to seize people’s homes as fast as possible, often without regard to the rights of homeowners.

In recent days, amid reports that major lenders have used improper procedures and fraudulent paperwork to seize properties, some Obama administration officials have acknowledged they had been aware of flaws in how the mortgage industry pursues foreclosures.

But the officials said they could take only limited action to address the danger. In part, this was because they wanted lenders’ help carrying out federal programs to modify mortgages that had fallen into default or were poised to do so.

Comment by Kim
2010-10-13 11:11:28

“In part, this was because they wanted lenders’ help carrying out federal programs to modify mortgages that had fallen into default or were poised to do so.”

Refinancing and/or modifying a loan kind of solves the problem of “who owns the note” and whether it was properly recorded throughout the securitization process, no? After all, refi and mods provide the lender with a brand new set of paperwork and (by now) they are somewhat aware of the possible consequences for mishandling it.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:31:00

It would be far more convincing to see white collar criminals in jump suits than to hear this populist rant against the entire Wall Street establishment.

Obama rails against Wall Street during campaign stops
Tuesday, October 12, 2010; 9:57 AM

Oct. 12 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama is returning to the rhetorical roots of Democratic politics in the final weeks of this election: setting up a battle of the classes.

Presenting Democrats as the party that will fight for the “middle class,” and Republicans as the party that will look out for “millionaires and billionaires,” Obama in campaign speeches and at fundraisers has sought to make his point using a populist lexicon that aligns Republicans with big businesses as the forces behind the worst recession since the Great Depression.

His cast of villains makes repeated appearances, including in Obama’s remarks at an Oct. 10 rally in Philadelphia: “special interests,” “Wall Street banks,” “corporations,” the “oil industry,” the “insurance industry” and “credit-card companies.” Specific corporations aren’t spared, as when the president said the Republican governing agenda was “written by a former lobbyist for AIG and Exxon Mobil.”

If the other side wins, they’ll try their hardest to give rein back to the insurance companies and the credit-card companies and the Wall Street banks that we’re finally holding accountable,” Obama told a crowd of supporters in Philadelphia.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-13 07:23:23

Gosh, you’d think the Dems would be running on their considerable accomplishments of the past 18 months.

Oh that’s right. Biden says the accomplishments are too complicated for most people to understand.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 07:46:19

Oh that’s right. Biden says the accomplishments are too complicated for most people to understand.

Did you not just prove him correct? :)

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-13 13:55:36

Biden knows how unpopular the WS bailouts, GM ownership, Obamacare, and Cap and Tax (which fortunately only passed in the House) are. So of course he has to say they’re “too complicated.”

“Consent of the governed” was totally ignored.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2010-10-13 17:13:37

Not too complicated to understand. Too complicated to explain.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2010-10-13 07:46:34

Well, they ought to be running on health care reform, not away from it.

It appears that Republicans are dishonest, while Democrats are gutless cowards — perhaps because most of them doubt their ability to get another job.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 08:44:50

It appears that Republicans are dishonest, while Democrats are gutless cowards —

You just hit the nails on their heads. Hard.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by measton
2010-10-13 10:16:44

I suspect it’s more that the Republicans and the Democrats are dishonest and gutless cowards.

Follow the money
Insurance company money went to democrats last election cycle, despite the talk of a public option.

Low and behold the final plan that leaves congress has no public option but mandates that people buy health insurance. Essentially a tax on the healthy low end middle class. Then to get the high end middle class they propose a tax on health care plans. The elite of course do well. A huge gift to insurance companies to say the least. They sprinkle in a few populist features such as not excluding kids who have a prior health care problem.

Next up Republicans. Previously recipients of drug company money that got the Medicare prescription drug plan through congress, which mandated coverage and prevented Medicare from bargaining for cheaper drugs. They are now the primary recipient of insurance money. We will surely see a roll back of the few features costing the insurance companies money, but some how they won’t be able to overturn the mandated coverage or the tax on good health care plans.

No price restraints or limiting of profits for insurance companies.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 11:06:49

I suspect it’s more that the Republicans and the Democrats are dishonest and gutless cowards.

Maybe so but where have Republicans been gutless cowards lately?

 
 
 
 
Comment by mrktMaven FL
2010-10-13 07:44:39

ROTFLMAO!!!

After saving fat cat banker bonuses and the economic elite from huge losses, he rails against them. Dude, should do stand up comedy.

 
Comment by michael
2010-10-13 07:57:20

talk is cheap.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 06:32:25

Thousands of foreclosures are put on hold

During the housing boom, millions of homeowners got easy access to mortgages. Now, some mortgage lenders and government officials are taking action after discovering that many mortgage documents were mishandled.

Comment by arizonadude
2010-10-13 06:59:34

Those poor homeowners.

 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-10-13 06:45:18

So the big news around the world today is they are desperately trying to rescue a bunch of people from a deep, hopeless, dark, claustrophobia-inducing, depressing abyss. Oh, and some trapped miners were brought home too.

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 07:23:16

LOL, “and upon their return to the surface of the earth the miners decided to go back into the abyss”

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 07:39:39

“Stop the world, I want to get off!”

 
Comment by Kim
2010-10-13 15:08:41

Some of them may wish they could go back down there!

“At least five wives have found themselves dealing with mistresses at the rescue site, The Daily Telegraph said. This isn’t just a cause for embarrassment: Some women are fighting over the compensation on offer to the miners.”

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 15:35:45

“At least five wives have found themselves dealing with mistresses at the rescue site,

This is very common in Latin America. Most will get over it. A lot of the women understand it. The men sure do.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Rancher
2010-10-13 07:24:05

What ever coffee blend you’re drinking, I want some
of it. You’re on a great roll.

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 07:42:53

Rancher,

I don’t know about a ‘roll’ but lately I’ve come to the realization that we ‘all’ really need to think long and hard about playing a ret. ’split hand’?

One involves round the world trips and stays at luxury hotels ( and the other involves shovels, picks and adequate ventilation? )

 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 08:13:25

Mexican Senate approves of “food stamps” program.

http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/editoriales/50233.html

Sorry, it’s in Spanish.

I never expected to see this, I’m guessing that the Mexican PTBs realize that they can’t count on the USA as an escape valve anymore, or at least not to the level they are accustomed to enjoying.

I suppose that they understand that this is the universal “Revolution Prevention” program. Keep them fed and they won’t revolt.

I heard an interesting story from my brother the other day. He graduated from one of Mexico’s more “elite” universities: the Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM). Years ago it was common knowledge that “exatecs” (as ITESM grads are called) could always find a decent job because of the school’s reputation.

Fast forward to 2010. My brother was catching up with an ITESM classmate who told him about a mugging he experienced. After he handed his watch and money over to the perp, the mugger gave him a funny look.

Turns out they were classmates at ITESM 20 years before. The mugger returnd his stuff and apologized.

That’s how bad things are In Mexico now.

Comment by measton
2010-10-13 08:37:14

That’s how bad things are In Mexico now.

If you want to see where the US will be without a middle class in 10 years just look south. Mexico is run by a small number of very rich people and criminals. The masses get a state with a corrupt out gunned police force that can’t protect itself or elected officials let alone the people.

Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 08:57:16

Some of the criminals are very rich as well. ;-)

Once they reach the point where the can no longer export oil, things will really get bad.

Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 09:10:42

It’s the Remittances that keep the corrupt in power there. Millions of illegals paying 20 bucks to send a 100 home and they get a cut of each and every transaction.

Hell, it works ‘perfectly’ where they’re concerned?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 09:23:22

The problem is that millions of unemployed illegals (I read in the Mexican media that its as many as 3 million) are coming home with their faimiles. There are no jobs waiting for them, the public schools have no room for their kids (many Mexican public schools run two shifts).

So they have hungry, teeming masses with nowhere to go. So there will be bread (foodstamps, not as generous as ours of course) and circuses (futbol) to keep them “happy”.

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 10:13:05

In Colorado,

Certainly they have other problems and this isn’t making things any better. A few mos. ago the paper in K’ Falls ran a story on this and the migrants were finding that they weren’t exactly being ‘welcomed’ back w/ open arms?

The personal accounts made for a gut-wrenching story. I guess as long as there were job ‘opportunities’ here in the States, they really didn’t have to confront their own problems. Still, Remittances = Power. So we’ll see.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 10:39:52

“A few mos. ago the paper in K’ Falls ran a story on this and the migrants were finding that they weren’t exactly being ‘welcomed’ back w/ open arms?”

That’s pretty much the case. They show up at home with a “troka” (pickup truck) full of their US acquired possessions and some dollars in their pockets. The locals get envious and of course they are shunned.

Also, their American born kids will be discriminated against as well and I’m sure Mexican authorities will make them jump through hoops to claim their Mexican citizenship.

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 11:22:41

In Colorado,

What the paper found was that these were people that were being slowly bled to death on ‘both’ ends. Their families back home still had their demands and needs and yet at the same time, the work was tapering off to a tickle here in the States.

Some even just turned themselves in to authorities for deportation, not knowing where they’d end up when they got there. Of course when you’ve got regulators that can’t see AIG was a house o’ cards how can we possibly expect them to see human consequences this far down the chain?

 
 
 
Comment by whyoung
2010-10-13 09:13:43

I know a woman whose brother-in-law worked at the embassy in Mexico City in the 1980’s… at that time her sister’s family felt unsafe on any public transportation and lived in a house surrounded by a wall topped with broken glass and barbed wire…

Think some of this has been simmering for a long time but not noticed so much but the “outside world” as long as the tourist areas were kept safe.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 10:42:33

” and lived in a house surrounded by a wall topped with broken glass and barbed wire…”

You just described all upper middle class houses in Mexico. They resemble fortresses. It’s been that way for decades. The street I used to live on now has gates on both ends with guards, even though it’s technically a public street.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 08:49:49

After he handed his watch and money over to the perp, the mugger gave him a funny look….Turns out they were classmates at ITESM 20 years before. The mugger returnd his stuff and apologized.

College students take heed and network, network, network.

 
 
Comment by Accroyer
2010-10-13 08:43:34

I have been off this blog for about three years now…I see a lot of new faces and some old ones.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-13 10:38:33

Ha, the Colorado River has been a flowing for what 2 million years+,…still after all that time,…no clarity!

“Diz, ALL the gubmints fault!”
“Diz ALL the Wall Street’s fault!”
“Diz ALL the liberal’s fault!”
“Diz All Daffy’s fault!”

Sunlight & “TruePurity” diz is all that’s needed… ;-)

 
Comment by ann gogh
2010-10-13 16:27:28

I read but rarely comment.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 09:14:31

McDonald’s Happy Meal resists decomposition for six months

Vladimir Lenin, King Tut and the McDonald’s Happy Meal: What do they all have in common? A shocking resistance to Mother Nature’s cycle of decomposition and biodegradability, apparently.

That’s the disturbing point brought home by the latest project of New York City-based artist and photographer Sally Davies, who bought a McDonald’s Happy Meal back in April and left it out in her kitchen to see how well it would hold up over time.

The results? “The only change that I can see is that it has become hard as a rock,” Davies told the U.K. Daily Mail.

She proceeded to photograph the Happy Meal each week and posted the pictures to Flickr to record the results of her experiment. Now, just over six months later, the Happy Meal has yet to even grow mold. She told the Daily Mail that “the food is plastic to the touch and has an acrylic sheen to it.”

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 11:14:38

Story I heard from a pilot for one of the big chicken growers/processors (he was joking, I think……)

Says the proceesing facility starts with the whole chicken, which is then disassembled in factory like way. At the end of the process, you get beaks, feet, gonads, etc………the stuff that NOBODY in the world will eat. this is freeze dried, ground up, and turned into chicken feed.

The stage just before the chicken feed stage, is where they get the Chicken McNuggets. :)

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 11:53:12

probably just dried out. Bacteria can’t live on stuff that gets drier and drier… which, btw, is why wooden cutting boards are better than plastic. Knife cuts in plastic hold moisture.

“..artist and photographer Sally Davies” had a great idea.. use stop-motion photos and watch a happy meal rot. No luck.
Otoh, she got her name in the paper.

 
Comment by SaladSD
2010-10-13 21:56:13

Years ago Spy Magazine did a similar photo experiment with a Twinkie left on a rooftop for months without decomposing. Even the pigeons wouldn’t touch it…

 
 
Comment by sold in 05
2010-10-13 09:24:40

The Gulf Coast Disaster made me sick to my stomach,but another dirty secret of the gulf coast was that most of the economy was under the table. People were paid in cash,with very poor record keeping…fisherman sold their catch for cash,paid there workers in cash.Income tax was not reported,and the men and women of the gulf coast collected welfare,food stamps and all forms of govt assistance,because they had no reported income BP cant pay their claims for lost wages,because none of these people have ever reported income…i hate what happened in the gulf,but have to laugh at the irony of this situation…working men and women all on welfare and food stamps……bp is an evil company,and wont pay if there is no documentation,how can they…..

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 10:18:19

Old USA motto: “In God we Trust”

New US motto: “Rules are made to be broken”

 
Comment by michael
2010-10-13 10:43:26

it’s not a “dirty secret of the gulf” it’s a dirty well known fact of life.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 11:22:22

“…..well known fact of life.”

Nationwide.

Which is why any small business owner who complains about taxes doesn’t get a lot of sympathy from me. Those guys have about a bazillion ways to avoid paying them (legal and illegal) that the typical W-2 wage earner only dreams about.

Comment by CrackerJim
2010-10-13 12:10:09

I am a small business owner (26 years and counting) and you have no idea what you are talking about.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 12:30:27

I don’t? Funny, as a newly minted involuntary “independent contractor”, all kinds of crap is deductible now, that wasn’t when I was a wage serf.

And why is it that every small business I know give a discount for cash? Can’t be that it’s harder for the government to check the books when there is no record of the transaction?

 
Comment by baabaabooie
2010-10-13 12:54:30

What about all the family dinners wrote off as “Business” entertainment?

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 13:01:54

The number of ways there are to cheat is only limited by one’s imagination and creativity, and has nothing to do with owning a business.

 
Comment by CrackerJim
2010-10-13 13:22:28

I stand by my comment.

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 15:58:32

Well Key….rhist people. Everything in moderation? Don’t go ‘claiming’ you spent money on this that or the other thing for yo’ bidness when clearly revenues don’t support it!?

I once knew a guy that claimed his take home was less than his mortgage! Gee, like the IRS won’t ’see’ thru that? C’mon ppl, they have pretty derned good idea of what it takes to run a biz. The DOL has Occupation Codes etc. and they just match ‘em up against other peers in your region.

Not rocket sci-unce. ( Hope I didn’t lose RioBrasilia66 there? )

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 16:11:37

( Hope I didn’t lose RioBrasilia66 there? )

You did. What’s with the question mark?

Does it mean:

You don’t know if you hope you did lose me?

You know you hoped you wouldn’t lose me?

or maybe:

Is Rio there? Or lost here?

or you didn’t lose me there? (as in where)?

You really didn’t not want to lose me here?

Or you did?

 
 
 
Comment by ann gogh
2010-10-13 16:30:39

I never heard that.

 
Comment by technovelist
2010-10-14 05:24:07

Yes, it’s definitely a shame when our wonderful government doesn’t get every dime they say they have coming to them. Look at the great works they can do with the pittance they already get!

 
 
Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 11:29:37

It sucks when tax cheats end up cheating themselves out of money.

I bet tax revenues increase a lot next year now that everyone has learned this impotent lesson.

 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 09:33:01

Boomers’ Shrunken 401(k)s Spark Interest in Reverse Mortgages

Demand for reverse mortgages is expected to rise, especially among younger retirees preparing for a drop in retirement income.

Comment by JackRussell
2010-10-13 19:05:22

They actually have equity?

 
 
Comment by Doug in Boone, NC
2010-10-13 09:38:42

Should I rush out now and buy crap I don’t need, before the price of that crap is artificially inflated as the second part of QE2?

Comment by WT Economist
2010-10-13 09:44:56

I said a couple of years ago that my goal was to buy everything I expect to need in the next 15 years during this recession. I’ve replaced the frig, dishwasher, and microwave, and installed solar panels. We finally got digital TV when the cost of the flat panel fell. The washer and dryer are going next. I might even get a new bicycle.

I had an electrician over to my house yesterday. I plan on getting my house re-wired before the dollar collapses and the Chinese buy up all the copper.

The 14 year-old car? When it dies, we probably won’t replace it.

Comment by Doug in Boone, NC
2010-10-13 09:57:57

My 1991 Chevy Cavalier finally died, so I had to replace it with a 2000 Buick (ONLY 10 years old, but the newest car I ever owned!)

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 11:12:40

2000 Buick

Used Buicks rock. As good as or better than a Toyota and 30% cheaper.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Doug in Boone, NC
2010-10-13 12:01:52

Mine is a LaSabre Limited. It is in almost new condition, and a 1 owner who bought it new in 2000 for30K (I paid 2K for it). So far, I am very pleased with it.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 20:12:38

Mine is a LaSabre Limited.

In the past 14 years, I’ve owned Buicks, Hondas, Toyotas and Fords.

The Buicks and Fords were just as good or better than the fine Japanese nameplates. (But the US cars were cheaper to fix, maintain and insure)

 
 
 
Comment by michael
2010-10-13 10:21:37

didn’t see a “home” on your list.

Comment by WT Economist
2010-10-13 12:19:52

Got one of those in 1994, and I don’t need a new one.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by josemanolo
2010-10-13 13:21:42

dude, big mistake. all those stuff will be cheaper tomorrow and newer too.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 09:39:29

Benson’s Economic & Market Trends
Obesity and Taxes

If what I read recently is correct, the cost of medical care linked to obesity in America is approaching $150 billion a year. (At least we’re not alone; worldwide, an estimated 1.6 billion adults are now overweight, and 400 million of them are classified as obese.) We have gone from “living off the fat of the land” to being “the land of the fat”. Worse yet, for all those baby boomers heading to retirement, there is no question we will get stuck with the bill for a broken medical system fueled by fast food.

As tens of millions of Americans remain addicted to the fat, sugar, salt and refined flour found in fast food and high-calorie drinks and treats, obesity has become the number one health issue afflicting not only adults, but teenagers and children. When I did some further digging into statistical databases on my own, my interest was spiked even further when I noticed a segment on the news about Section 8 Housing. (Section 8 Housing, or the Housing Choice Voucher Program, is a Federal program created to provide housing assistance to low income renters and homeowners.) In the news story, a crowd of over 30,000 people were in a parking lot in suburban Atlanta swarming HUD officials to get applications for Section 8 Housing. The size of the crowd was astounding, but, then again, we’re coming out of a recession so who wouldn’t want a government hand out? But what really caught my eye was not only the sheer number of people waiting in line, but the size of their bodies; most were simply obese, while others were supersized.

This really got my attention and made me wonder what’s happening here. Since President Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty kicked off, our country has spent a few trillion dollars for minorities (who, by the way, are fast becoming the new majority). My initial thought was that minorities should be in pretty good shape with that kind of money allocated to help them, but then I pulled out my statistical atlas and found that minorities are huge in number: The African American population is currently in excess of 35 million and the Hispanic population is over 50 million (not counting the 12 - 20 million or so who are here permanently but illegally.) The US has been keeping tabs on its citizens by race or national origin for a long time and their figures show that in 2009, 72 percent of African American babies, and 51 percent of Hispanic, were born out-of-wedlock. When I was growing up, starting a family before having a job and being able to support yourself was ostracized, while today it’s apparently heavily subsidized. Today, having children out-of-wedlock is a free ticket for food, housing, and financial independence and it’s had horrible consequences for our society.

http://www.321gold.com/editorials/benson/benson101310.html

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-13 10:42:20

“…and it’s had horrible consequences for our society”

“What’s so horrible about $7.25 per hour?,… asks the man driving out of the golf course parking lot in Hummer.

 
Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 11:32:46

Corn subsidies and sugar quotas are a huge cause.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 12:25:32

You can’t bitch at me for being overweight. My plan is to keel over from a massive heart attack/stroke sometime before I turn 65. Wouldn’t want to burden society.

Last time I heard, all those exercise fanatics will need hip/joint replacements eventually. And 30 years of Social Security, if they live to 85. Those aren’t cheap either.

Having fought a (mostly losing) lifetime battle against being overweight, I all can say is that our society sure likes to punish overweight people, but actually help them out with the problem? Nope, when it comes to putting money where their mouths are, weight loss is considered “cosmetic”, like boob jobs and Lasik.

I went to a local doctor, who is well known regionally for his weight loss program. Starvation diet, supplemented by pills, and anti-depressants for the times when you get tired of eating soy. Out of pocket, of course. The cost worked out to $50/pound.

Comment by butters
2010-10-13 13:17:06

Last time I heard, all those exercise fanatics will need hip/joint replacements eventually.

And much more. More and more data is coming out against the gym-rats and the long distance runners. To live healthy, you will have to ditch the trend that started in last 100 yrs or so. Give up on your long distance running, heavy Gym workout and processed foods. Instead do what cavemen did; lots of movement all day, may be a few sprints once in a while; lift heavy stuff here and there, eat natural foods mostly vegetables and fruits and some meats.

Comment by peter a
2010-10-13 13:31:12

Not many overweight Amish folk.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by neuromance
2010-10-13 17:06:32

How long did the average caveman live?

Not long, I’d wager.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by josemanolo
2010-10-13 13:24:13

dude, the more you exercise your joints and hips, the stronger they get and the longer they will last.

 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 16:03:34

X-GS,

A BIG part of the reason I signed back up for the Guard! Now I ‘have’ to do it. Sucks, big time but I’ve cut way… back on beer and you’re right, eating right ain’t cheap.

I went back to our specialist and said “My shopping cart is almost as empty when I ‘leave’ the store as when I walked IN!” He said, Good ( save your money! ) I’m still right at 200 but feel much better.

 
 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 09:43:46

So, judging from what is featured on cable TV, the following jobs are now the “glamour” jobs (in no particular order):

-Exterminator
-Truck Driver
-Gator Hunter
-Guys who aren’t afraid to drive on ice and snow
-Bounty hunter
-Repo Man
-Lame-Azz custom “Chopper” builder
-Logger
-Oil Well Roughneck
-CSI tech

Behold the growth industries of the USA!!!

Comment by butters
2010-10-13 10:10:06

Crab fishers
Pawn shop workers

I am sure the elites and their family won’t be dead caught 100 miles near these “jobs”, but they would gladly produce and distribute for the masses.

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 10:15:05

Youngest daughter was in Las Vegas last week. Went to the “Pawn stars” pawn shop while she was there. Says that most of the “pawn shop” is occupied by a gift store selling “Pawn Stars” T-shirts, etc.

Comment by butters
2010-10-13 10:26:31

Ah, the t-shirts.

A decade ago, just out of college, for some reason I started collecting t-shirts from the places I have visited. In a matter of 2/3 yrs I had 50 or so t-shirts in my closet. I never wore them because I usually do not like logos and images in my clothings. What a waste of money, ended up donating to Goodwill…….

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by michael
2010-10-13 10:37:45

you should have collected christmas ornaments…i think christmas ornaments are neato.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 10:51:05

The way I look at it, I wear a logo T-shirt, if they GIVE me the shirt.

My old, Mobil Jet II stained “Garrett TFE731″ hat is one of my prized possesions.

That, and the old school, brand new in the box, Pratt and Whitney “Eagle” medallion. Both were freebies. And not just anyone can get them.

 
Comment by Steve J
2010-10-13 11:36:15

I proudly wear the 4/$10 tshirts from Walgreens.

 
Comment by Mot
2010-10-15 12:17:18

I have a collection of t-shirts from failed dot coms.

They used to give out that swag everywhere in the bay area of California during the early aughts.

 
 
Comment by DinOR
2010-10-13 11:27:28

X-GS,

AFAIK, the Pawn Stars guys are the only ones not jacked up on steroids? I think that’s mandatory.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by edgewaterjohn
2010-10-13 10:40:02

Isn’t a gator hunter a type of exterminator?

Comment by X-GSfixr
2010-10-13 10:45:16

Exterminators typically don’t eat what they are exterminating. :)

Guess now we know the difference between a hunter, and an exterminator.

 
 
Comment by pressboardbox
2010-10-13 16:57:13

You forgot “crab catcher”. My take on the popularity of these stupid “watching real men work” type shows is simply that the average lazy American couch-jockey is such a real-life candy-ass that he must fantasize about working like a man as he visualizes himself doing such manly things. Take the average football or professional wrestling or Nascar fan: Those guys could no more run, throw a ball, throw somebody, or drive a racecar than they could put down the remote. Yet they all love to be experts on those subject based on religiously watching some docu-series of which they are a fan. When a whole coutry has “fans” for guys just doing their jobs, is when you have a country that is ripe for all of the mistakes and poor leadership we are now experiencing. “MegaBank Monsters” would be a good show if it showcased behind the scenes lives of bank CEOs. I would probably watch that one.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2010-10-13 19:34:12

My take on the popularity of these stupid “watching real men work” type shows is simply that the average lazy American couch-jockey is such a real-life candy-ass that he must fantasize about working like a man as he visualizes himself doing such manly things.

Partly maybe. But a lot of manly jobs were outsourced, mechanized, perverted by a stupid housing boom and taken over by illegal workers.

Men are not lazy, men work hard. Men got the rawest deal lately.

 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-13 10:48:36

From “The OC” :-)

Double dipper? Orange mayor says she’ll drop double benefit
October 13th, 2010, by Tony Saavedra, OC Register investigative reporter

“All of us need to look at the benefits we’re getting and make a decision whether they’re appropriate or not appropriate,” Cavecche said.

So Cavecche collected a total of more than $204,000 in benefits from both agencies since 2004 — all legal.

Something about the deal made Orange mayor Carolyn Cavecche — also a board member for the Orange County Transportation Authority – a tad uncomfortable.

As an Orange City Council member, she was entitled to a total of $105,201 in health and other benefits since 2004. She could also take the cash, or decline the program altogether. She took the cash and some non-medical benefits, not unlike her council colleagues.

And since she didn’t have health insurance, she also qualified for $98,862 in health benefits from the transportation authority since 2004 — which she took. She paid about $3,000 a year in premiums, documents show.

OCTA’s policy is written in such a way that it doesn’t matter that she got more than $100,000 from her city. As long as she didn’t use the city money to pay for health insurance, she was in the clear

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-13 11:40:52

Amtrak says more people riding the rails: :-)

By GARY A. WARNER / OC Register Travel Editor

Amtrak reported a healthy jump in ridership over the past year, with a new record of 28.7 million passengers and $1.74 billion in ticket revenue.

Officials with the government operated passenger railroad credited the uptick because an improved economy compared to the previous year and some passengers desire to travel in a more environmentally-friendly mode than cars or airplanes.

Long distance train travel was up 6.6 percent, while the financially important Northeast Corridor ridership was up 4.3. percent. Short-distance trains were up 6.5 percent.

Amtrak says it now has a 65 percent share of the air-rail market between Washington and New York and a 52 percent share of the air-rail market between New York and Boston. It noted the improved service of its Acela high-speed train and the addition of wifi on some service.

Amtrak said it was working to implement a Congressionally-mandated review of service on its long-haul trains. The first trains under scrutiny are the Sunset Limited, Texas Eagle, California Zephyr, Cardinal and Capitol Limited.

Comment by Red Beach
2010-10-13 18:02:32

“riding the rails”

Ha! Still plenty of Wall Streeters doing this…

 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-13 12:23:00

It just gets better and better. What was I saying about looking closer at some of those NINJA loans? Yeah, that’s exactly what the banks want. :lol:

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/10/13/the-enormous-mortgage-bond-scandal/

Oct 13, 2010 11:21 EDT
banking | housing
You thought the foreclosure mess was bad? You’re right about that. But it gets so much worse once you start adding in a whole bunch of parallel messes in the world of mortgage bonds. For instance, as Tracy Alloway says, mortgage-bond documentation generally says that if more than a minuscule proportion of notes in a mortgage pool weren’t properly transferred, then the trustee for the bondholders can force the investment bank who put the deal together to repurchase the mortgages. And it’s looking very much as though none of the notes were properly transferred.

But that’s not even the biggest potential problem facing the investment banks who put these deals together. It also turns out that there’s a pretty strong case that they lied to the investors in many if not most of these deals.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 12:31:51

F&F Don’t be worry’n bout no losses, da gubmint got dey back.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Face Huge Losses in Foreclosure Moratorium

Government-sponsored mortgage enterprises Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae could face billions of dollars in losses if the current foreclosure moratorium turns into a prolonged delay.

Industry sources told the Washington Post that an extended suspension of foreclosures “could cause financial harm to Fannie and Freddie” if prices of homes continue to slide.

A professor at George Mason University, Anthony B. Sanders, also told the Post that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would face losses that will run into billions of dollars in the event the foreclosure moratorium extends over a long period of time. Sanders said a longer freeze would prevent companies from selling off foreclosed homes.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 12:34:06

“The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government.”

~Franklin Roosevelt.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 12:43:41

I find it hard to believe Roosevelt didn’t realize that government only protects itself..

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-13 13:49:28

“and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government”

Sounds to me like he was fully aware.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 14:06:49

That second part was pure pandering.

Once it grows too large and strong, people cannot defend themselves from govt. regardless of how strong and informed they might be.

Anyway, the proof of the pudding is in the eating…
Was Roosevelt responsible for huge increases in govt size and power? Certainly.
Did he balance that by empowering the people? How?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 13:05:08

21st century updated version:

“…interests of the people bankers, and a people banks strong enough and well enough informed protected to maintain its sovereign control over the government.”

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 13:02:38

What do central bankers have against affordable housing? Would it hurt their protected industry’s profits if home prices decreased to levels set by the free market instead of by government intervention?

Given that lower home prices would presumably stimulate home sales, you can call me skeptical about untested claims that lower home prices would some how damage the broader economy. But I do see how Megabank, Inc’s balance sheet might suffer; I suppose what is good for Megabank, Inc is good for America?

Foreclosure Crisis
Legal Heat On Robo-Signing Stokes Foreclosure Fiasco
Agustino Fontevecchia, 10.13.10, 03:17 PM EDT

Attorneys General of all 50 states have initiated a joint investigation into foreclosure procedures.

GMAC holds $2.2 billion in one to four family loans in foreclosures, or 10% of its total one to four family loan portfolio and it services about $13.2 billion home loans in foreclosure for other firms. That compares to $19.5 billion or 7.5% of its one to four family home loan portfolio for J.P. Morgan and $54.5 billion serviced for other fees. Bank of America holds $18.8 billion foreclosed home loans, or 4.4% of its portfolio, with $87.9 billion being serviced for third parties, while Well’s Fargo holds $17.6 billion or 4.7% of its portfolio as it services $36.5 billion foreclosed home loans for others.

The numbers, taken from a report by SNL Financial, demonstrate how important the problem is for the American economy. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner weighed in on the matter on a TV show on Wednesday, claiming that a national moratorium on foreclosure seizures could push house prices further down, harming homeowners and the general economy.

Comment by neuromance
2010-10-13 17:22:40

What do central bankers have against affordable housing? Would it hurt their protected industry’s profits if home prices decreased to levels set by the free market instead of by government intervention?

Central bankers are as political a creature as any other politician or high level bureacrat. One cannot rise to the top of a bureacratic structure in government without having sound political instincts.

The current housing and economic situation has some contradictory elements:

1) Banksters want high home prices as this leads to high debt and more profit.

2) Politicians want high home prices as this leads to higher property taxes and it satisfies their big contributors in the FIRE sector.

3) Due to the worldwide crisis caused by bad mortgage debt, people are having a harder time raising cash.

4) Thus the US government has stepped in to buy 90+ percent of mortgage backed securities in 2010 (I heard on PBS’s Nightly Business Report some time ago that it was 96% in 2010).

5) This forces government to borrow more to help pay for the support of the real estate market.

6) Government can carry a certain amount of debt, but they will keep borrowing until they can no longer borrow. “The system is fine all the way up to the time that it becomes not fine.”

7) With higher prices and a borrower with unserviceable debt, there are fewer real estate transactions. Somewhat lower prices plus significantly lower volume puts the squeeze on a big sector and contributor, the NAR.

8) NAR wants both high prices and high volume, but the top players know they currently can’t have both. They want some volume to keep their members solvent and contributing to the organization.

Don’t know how it’s going to all shake out. I do know politicians will keep doing the politically expedient thing. Which is continuing to have the government borrow and support the FIRE sector. That’s the one given.

I guess the way to continue the game is to assure the populace that this must continue or else the economy will implode.

This will continue till it cannot. I am so very curious to see how this election season turns out.

The election though is an amazing thing. It seems to be turning into a question of voting for corrupt tools of the system, or voting for kooks and incompetents.

I am starting to get a suspicion that things will have to get a lot worse before they get better.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 22:39:30

Great post!

“The election though is an amazing thing. It seems to be turning into a question of voting for corrupt tools of the system, or voting for kooks and incompetents.”

And for that reason, I sincerely hope our journalists do their part to fan the flames of outrage over the Great American Foreclosure Fiasco between now and Election Day.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 13:11:43

I cherish the idea of states attorneys generals holding hands with managers of Megabank, Inc and singing Kumbaya, in an idyllic picture of peaceful coexistence.

Bloomberg
Attorneys General in 50 States Open Foreclosure Investigation
October 13, 2010, 2:45 PM EDT
By Margaret Cronin Fisk

Oct. 13 (Bloomberg) — Top legal officers of all 50 states opened a joint investigation into home foreclosures, saying they will seek an immediate halt to any improper practices at banks and mortgage companies.

The states will conduct a coordinated inquiry into whether banks and loan servicers used false documents and signatures to justify hundreds of thousands of foreclosures. The group intends to establish independent monitoring, Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, who is leading the group, said today in a statement.

“The financial institutions would be well served by working with us to get it cleaned up,” Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray told Bloomberg Television’s “InBusiness with Margaret Brennan.” “And they’d also be well served to think about reaching negotiated resolutions with borrowers in cases where they’ve created exposure for themselves by committing fraud upon the courts.”

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 13:45:51

While the bailouts have yet to cost taxpayers a dime, why no outrage about the real costs of this little episode?

that’s what happens when one lacks a moral compass..

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 14:08:38

“…about the real costs of this little episode…”

Could you please elaborate, assuming you know what these ‘real costs’ are? I am sincerely curious.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 14:20:54

Top legal officers of all 50 states..

For starters, you ever consider who pays those people? Lets tie this up in court for a year or so..

As long as it makes banks look bad, it’s worth the cost (or so says Rio and company).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2010-10-13 17:57:16

I can predict the result of the investigation. They’ll find out that the idiots foreclosing are the same as the idiots making lots of the loans, and the documents are just as fraudulent.

 
 
Comment by butters
2010-10-13 13:33:11

Dow 11096
Gold 1370

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 14:07:12

Clearly the stock market and gold always go up.

Comment by wmbz
2010-10-14 03:12:08

No that’s only real estate.

 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 14:02:28

It’s all about the money,money,money……MONEY! “Some people gots to have it, some people really need it”…

Bachmann Rakes in $5.4 million in 3rd Quarter
ABC News

Tea Party-backed Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-MN, raised an extraordinary $5.4 million in the third quarter, possibly smashing a congressional fundraising record for a three-month period while pushing her total fundraising haul for this election cycle to almost $10 million.

Although Federal Election Commission financial disclosure reports are not due until October 15, Bachmann press secretary Sergio Gor confirmed to ABC News late Tuesday evening that Bachmann raked in the incredible loot in the months of July, August and September. Gor said he expected Bachmann to report that she has about $3.4 million cash-on-hand in her campaign war chest.

 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-13 14:04:13

Michelle Obama: It Means The World That “There Are Prayer Circles Out There”

“It means all the world to us to know that there are prayer circles out there and people who are keeping the spirits clean around us,” First Lady Michelle Obama said on the “Tom Joyner Morning Show” today.

Obama: “I Really Need You To Get Out On November 2nd”

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 14:08:34

comeon.. she didn’t really say that.. youze pulling our collective leg..

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 14:35:58

3 Reasons Why the White House Flip-Flopped on Foreclosures
Oct 12 2010, 12:30 PM ET 6

The Obama administration has taken aggressive efforts to attempt to prevent foreclosures. There are numerous programs out there to try to help struggling Americans stay in their homes, the most notable of which is the $75 billion Making Home Affordable Program (HAMP). So you might think the White House would cheer when banks began announcing that they were halting foreclosures due to documentation problems. After all, this could provide more time or reason for homeowners to qualify for modifications. Yet, administration officials are not among the chorus of lawmakers calling for a national foreclosure moratorium.

Comment by neuromance
2010-10-13 17:26:59

Halting foreclosures makes the assets of the FIRE sector less liquid. So they oppose it.

But, a voting bloc of FBs would love it.

Politicians need to figure out how to resolve this contradiction.

And the answer will have nothing to do with what is just, or good for the economy long term. The answer will be what is politically expedient.

I’m guessing they’ll talk up support for a foreclosure moratorium, but not do anything to move it forward.

A blue ribbon commission is going to be one part of the political theater we’ll see.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 14:39:26

Secretary Geithner’s Listening Tour on Housing Market Reform Comes to Washington
Published on October 12, 2010 by Ronald Utt, Ph.D. Backgrounder #2475

Abstract: Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner recently held a meeting to discuss what the future housing finance system should do and look like. However, he discouraged discussion of what caused the crisis in the housing market. Regrettably, the consensus view from the panel called for continued and likely expanded federal involvement in the market, even though the entire market is already almost completely federalized. Unless the Obama Administration changes course on the housing financial market, it will simply repeat the mistakes of the past, leaving the taxpayers to pay for the cleanup.

We worked through Spring and Winter, through Summer and through Fall

But the mortgage worked the hardest and the steadiest of us all

It worked on nights and Sundays, it worked each holiday

Settled down among us and it never went away

—Ry Cooder

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 15:50:48

“Settled down among us and it never went away”

Brings to mind bedbug infestations

Don’t Let The Bed Bugs Bite
By Megan Burke, Maureen Cavanaugh
October 12, 2010

We’ll discuss why there’s been a plague of bedbugs across the U.S. Some San Diego neighborhoods, hotels and fire stations are fighting the persistant pests. Why is San Diego playing reluctant host to this outdated bug and what can we do about it?

Bed Bug Registry

The Bed Bug Registry is a free, public database of user-submitted bed bug reports from across the United States and Canada. Founded in 2006, the site has collected about 20,000 reports covering 12,000 locations.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 14:43:25

Always remember, “A closely-watched pot never boils over.

Daniel Indiviglio is a staff editor at TheAtlantic dot com, where he writes about credit markets, regulation, monetary & fiscal policy, taxes, banking, trade, emerging markets and technology. Prior to joining The Atlantic, he wrote for Forbes. He also worked as an investment banker and a consultant.

Foreclosure-Gate’s Doomsday Scenario
Oct 13 2010, 5:06 PM ET

The documentation problems surrounding mortgages originated during the housing boom just get uglier and uglier. One of the most recently surfaced worries is also one of the most serious. Bank analyst Josh Rosner envisions a doomsday scenario where banks would have to stand behind most private label mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that they had believed they had no exposure to. This would be disastrous.

Rosner imagines this leading to a Lehman-type weekend, where the financial industry again nears collapse. That might be a little melodramatic, but it isn’t impossible. If these investors have the legal standing that Rosner thinks, they would be sort of crazy not to force banks to take back these bad deals. After all, it’s better for the investors that they force these losses back to the banks who wrote the mortgages.

If this problem turns out to be real, and the worst-case scenario that Rosner imagines come to be, then it’s hard to see how the government could fix it simply without tramping over contract law. Instead, more aggressive approached would be required.

For example, it could recapitalize the banks through a sort of TARP II so they could afford to repurchases these bonds. Another possibility might be to get Fannie and Freddie involved and having them buy the MBS from these investors instead, which would cause the GSEs to incur more big losses. Finally, the Fed could get involved, perhaps by purchasing those MBS as part of a new quantitative easing effort — a sort of two-birds with one stone approach. Of course, losses would again likely result — this time for the Fed. In all scenarios, taxpayers would ultimately suffer.

Comment by neuromance
2010-10-13 17:32:32

If this problem turns out to be real, and the worst-case scenario that Rosner imagines come to be, then it’s hard to see how the government could fix it simply without tramping over contract law.

It seems to me that the politicians (people who write the laws) and their biggest contributors see a problem coming, and see a solution, that they will happily create a system which allows them to bypass the problem. If that situation means trampling contract law, then trampling contract law will be a fait accompli.

Of course, there are unintended longer term consequences to trampling over contract law. But this whole exercise we are seeing is a giant exercise in kicking the can down the road.

 
 
Comment by Eddie
2010-10-13 14:55:36

Prof. Bear,

Yesterday you were saying something about stocks falling off a cliff and October isn’t even over yet?

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 15:47:49

Yes I was. I wouldn’t judge where stocks are headed by today’s action alone. Right now, irrational exuberance is running amok, thanks to the Fed’s QE2 jawboning exercise. If they don’t follow through on the announcement, look out below; if they do follow through on the announcement, don’t expect much upside movement, as it is already priced in.

It’s a long way from here to DJIA = 12K, but I will admit that it is too early to tell whether your prediction will come to pass (at least for me).

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 16:17:17

…don’t expect much upside movement…
——-

…Consider the average recommended equity exposure among a subset of short-term stock market timers tracked by the Hulbert Financial Digest (as measured by the Hulbert Stock Newsletter Sentiment Index, or HSNSI). It now stands at 25.9%.

To put the current HSNSI level in context, consider that it stood at 65.5% on April 26, the day of the market’s closing high prior to the May-June correction. In other words, the average stock market timer today is less than half as bullish as he was in late April.

Since the usual pattern is for advisers to become more bullish as the market rises, and more bearish as it declines, the current low level is quite surprising — and bullish.

Furthermore, the current HSNSI means that the typical short-term timer still has three-quarters of his stock portfolio in cash. That represents a lot of sideline cash that could propel the market higher, should these timers decide to once again turn bullish.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/contrarian-analysis-is-bullish-on-stocks-2010-10-13

Traders are being very cautious, and there may be more upside movement than one might imagine.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 17:10:44

I must confess my great skepticism regarding Hulbert’s “contrarian analysis” as a predictive tool. For one thing, please correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe he takes into consideration the possible role of government intervention to distort the picture given by investor sentiment. This is what econometricians refer to as a “missing variables” problem, and to make matters worse, the missing variable in this case is endogenous, as the Fed may base its decision whether to intervene on its judgment of market sentiment. Both missing variables and endogeneity are known sources of bias in econometric models, and I seriously doubt Hulbert has thought this through (but please offer evidence if you know otherwise).

Does Hulbert have a track record to show how well his analysis does in predicting future asset price movements? If not, I would take his “predictions” with a grain of salt — on second thought, make it a large block of salt.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 17:30:17

I have no idea about any track record, but it must exist. I’ll search it out later.
——

There are no predictive tools… and I didn’t mean to imply this index was such a thing.

From what I gather, the index only estimates how much cash some group of traders prefers to keep in reserves. When they feel bullish, a portion of that cash is invested, and the index rises.

This group remains bearish (keeping 75% in cash), despite all the rumors of Fed intervention.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 22:54:10

“When they feel bullish, a portion of that cash is invested, and the index rises.

This group remains bearish (keeping 75% in cash), despite all the rumors of Fed intervention.”

It kinda sorta makes sense, but again — MISSING VARIABLES. For example, some times there is a very good reason for bearish sentiment, such as when there is an unresolved real world banking crisis playing out as the backdrop to a steady stream of misleadingly upbeat propaganda. Another one is the homebuilders’ sentiment index (NAHB HMI) — it’s been in the toilet for months on end, and provides a nearly-perfect mirror of the real-world state of the home construction industry.

How does Hulbert’s contrarian analysis distinguish between situations where pessimism is unfounded and others where it is completely on target? I don’t think it does.

All that said, I generally agree with what I think your point is and, though I am loathe to admit it, with Eddie as well.

Buy when everyone else is selling; sell when everyone else is buying.

– J P Morgan –

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 16:45:06

Out of common decency, shouldn’t FBs with a personal interest in the outcome recuse themselves from discussing the policy options for dealing with the foreclosure document fiasco?

California Congresswoman Waters Calls for Suspension of Foreclosures
by Moe Bedard on October 13, 2010
in Government News

LOS ANGELES (LoanSafe dot org) – In a national TV interview today, Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA), who chairs the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, reiterated her call for a suspension of foreclosures in all 50 states and also discussed legislation she has proposed to help solve the nationwide foreclosure problem.

During the interview on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” program, Congresswoman Waters said that a foreclosure moratorium, along with an investigation into reported fraud at the hands of the major mortgage servicers, is necessary to “hit the pause button” and stop unwarranted foreclosures and other systemic problems in the mortgage servicing industry.

While strongly supporting a nationwide moratorium, Congresswoman Waters emphasized this is a necessary step but not enough to solve the foreclosure problem.

 
Comment by HottyToddy
2010-10-13 17:36:28

File under the truth hurts and does not make friends and relatives happy:

A relative was over yesterday evening and was complaining about his situation. In 2004, he and his wife bought a new build condo - more like a glorified suburban apartment. You know the type, clusters of three story buildings with units on each floor, small pool and clubhouse strategically shoehorned in next to the dumpster clusters and tennis courts built in twenty minutes that aren’t level and hold water. What they call luxury condos. An hour from the city and any reasonable employment opportunities.
They paid around $150,000 for the 2 bed/2 bath unit and lived there until 2008. At that point the construction on the half finished development stopped.
They had good jobs, mortgage was easy for them, then they decided to move out of state. Didn’t sell before looking to move or taking jobs and got stuck with the condo. Lucked out and had good tenant that at least paid P&I, they only were stuck with taxes, insurance and condo fees since then.
Six months ago, the bank and builder decided to finish the project and quickly built out the project. Big problem - comparable new units now asking/wish price $100,000 and the tenant is moving out and 15 other condos in complex are for rent. Relative says life isn’t fair, they are getting hosed. If they had stayed in their old jobs - which do still exist, btw their replacements are still there and they are good companies - they would be in much better shape.
The value of the condo wouldn’t matter because they would be in it and enjoying its use (I for one could care less what the “market value” of my house is - I’ve been in it since the late 80’s, have added on and remodeled and can afford it). They of course now need to sell it and would take a beating, writing a big check to get out, even with their original 20% down payment. They don’t have the cash flow to cover the mortgage without a tenant.
They knew the risk when leaving without selling first, took the gamble and lost. They think someone should bail them out. I feel bad for their hit, but we all take risks in financial transactions, this one was bad for them. I am the bad guy for pointing out their starring role in the fiasco and for not being angry at the bankers, government or the developers. The family thinks I should apologize for pointing out the facts. Next time I hear a story like that, maybe I’ll just nod and mumble.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-13 18:19:56

it’s much easier to forgive a person for being wrong than for being right, and an apology will do nothing to save the situation.

i had a similar encounter but kept my cool.. and kept my mouth shut.

nod.. mumble.. good advice.

 
 
Comment by clark
2010-10-13 20:49:06

nod.. mumble.. good advice.

HAHAHAHA, no f-ing doubt.

Doing otherwise gets you nowhere fast, much as I dislike not informing, advancing and overcoming, it can’t be done with a pile of Gober’s.

Someone i know did the same thing yesterday, five states away from where they work.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 22:13:48

* The Wall Street Journal
* BUSINESS
* OCTOBER 14, 2010

Document Mess Hits Fannie, Freddie
By NICK TIMIRAOS and CARRICK MOLLENKAMP

Raising questions for the first time about the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the unfolding mortgage-foreclosure crisis, the two government-owned giants are reviewing the work of a Florida law firm they recommended to process foreclosures.

Until now, Fannie and Freddie have been largely bystanders in the widening foreclosure scandal, because they don’t directly service loans, or handle day-to-day management of mortgages. But their use of so-called foreclosure mills, law firms that specialize in quickly processing thousands of foreclosures on behalf of lenders, is dragging the companies into the latest crisis.

Last Friday, Freddie told mortgage servicers to stop sending cases to the Law Offices of David J. Stern, of Plantation, Fla. Fannie followed suit on Monday. The law firm has been at the center of recent allegations by the Florida attorney general’s office, which released a deposition of a former law-firm employee. In the deposition, the employee alleged the firm routinely forged notarized documents amid closed-door screaming matches that broke out because files weren’t moved fast enough.

The employee, Tammie Lou Kapusta, didn’t return calls for comment. Jeffrey Tew, a lawyer for the Stern firm, declined to comment about the review by Fannie and Freddie. But he said Ms. Kapusta was fired by the firm. “The firm thinks her allegations are incorrect and not true,” he said.

Fannie and Freddie have hired separate firms to review the foreclosures handled by Stern’s offices. Fannie also began conducting audits of all nine Florida law firms in its retained attorney network earlier this year, said people familiar with the matter.

“Obviously, a lot of issues have been raised about this firm,” said Brian Faith, a Fannie spokesman. “We thought it was appropriate and responsible to suspend new referrals to the firm while we undertake our review.”

The Florida firm processed more than 70,000 foreclosures last year, and Mr. Stern was named “attorney of the year” by Fannie in 1998 and 1999, according to his biography.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 22:33:27

Will the Great American Foreclosure Fiasco serve to finally wrench America out of the denial phase and into the anger phase of the housing bubble stages of grief? Lately I’ve been reading with my thirteen year old son about Shays’ Rebellion; is it time to purchase a pitch fork?

P.S. Thank Gawd this story broke within weeks of the election. Hopefully the MSM will do an outstanding job between now and Election Day fanning flames of fury among the electorate, in order to spice up what is otherwise doomed to be the usual dreary choice between Republicrats and Democons.

The great American mortgage crisis deepens

Foreclosure abuse has sparked anger at the banks, as fears over its impact on the fragile housing market grows. Stephen Foley investigates

Wednesday, 13 October 2010

Which word to choose? Chaos. Debacle. Scandal. Perhaps even, crisis. Just when you thought the US housing market, epicentre of the earthquake that collapsed the world’s financial system two years ago, had stopped causing us all problems, it is time to pay attention again. Because after the Subprime Mortgage Mess, now we have the American Foreclosure Fiasco.

Around 7 million Americans are now either not paying their mortgages at all, or are seriously behind in their monthly payments – about one in seven of all residential mortgage borrowers – but that is not the surprising issue. This remains largely in line with the predictions that were made at the onset of the credit crisis, when it became clear lenders had been foisting unsuitable loans on indigent borrowers for years.

The surprising issue is this: the lenders and their agents have messed up the paperwork in truly heroic fashion. What ought to be a simple process – taking back the home used as collateral for a loan that is no longer being paid – has in fact turned into a legal quagmire, as each day brings forth revelations of fraud, cutting corners and shoddy treatment of homeowners. The ultimate outcome of the furore is difficult to predict.

Today, attorneys general from some 40 50 states will band together to launch a formal investigation of the mortgage servicing industry, which processes foreclosures. Bank of America, one of the top four lenders in the US, has halted all repossessions while it tries to work through the mess, and numerous other players have also stopped the foreclosure process in some or all of the country’s 50 states. The White House yesterday rejected the idea of imposing a national moratorium on foreclosures – partly because the mortgage market is regulated at the state, rather than federal level, partly because the unintended consequences are scary – but that hasn’t stopped a slew of other politicians demanding such a halt. Once again, public anger is stirred against the banks.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:04:57

We could sure use a latter-day Ferdinand Pecora about now. Any takers?

P.S. I love how the writer notes that Pecora’s education in banking and finance was gleaned “from prosecuting low-level frauds.”

* BOOKSHELF
* OCTOBER 14, 2010

Out for Blood
A portrait of the prosecutor charged with investigating the causes of the 1929 crash.

By JAMES GRANT

As night follows day, so inquests follow crashes. What followed the 1929 crash were the sensational stock-market hearings of 1933 and 1934. Michael Perino’s “The Hellhound of Wall Street” is the story of the chief inquisitor.

Contrary to the book’s overpromising subtitle, the Senate Banking and Currency Committee investigation did not, in fact, “forever change American finance.” Dramatic it was, and shocking, too. But if Ferdinand Pecora, the committee’s chief counsel, were gazing down on Wall Street today, he might be struck not by how much has changed but how little. Regulations we have in profusion, and regulators, too. Yet fallible human beings persist in buying high and selling low, rather than the other way around.

Mr. Perino roots hard for his protagonist, who had spunk enough for three. Ferdinand Pecora was born in Sicily in 1882 and brought to New York City at age 4. He grew up in a cold-water basement flat that was part residence, part shoe-repair shop. When his father, Luigi, the cobbler, was incapacitated in an industrial accident, 14- year - old Ferdinand became the family’s principal bread winner.

The striving young immigrant had energy left over to attend law school at night. He passed the bar exam and cast his political lot with the city’s Democratic Party machine. In 1918, now 35, he became a deputy assistant district attorney. A decade later he made a run for the DA’s office. Defeated, he left the city payroll for private practice on Dec. 31, 1929. The stock market had already crashed, of course, but the Depression was just beginning.

The inquisition that would make Pecora a household name in Depression-era America was set in motion by President Hoover in 1932. Led by Sen. Peter Norbeck of South Dakota, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking and Currency Committee, the panel was charged with unmasking the short sellers who, according to urban legend, were undermining share prices. Hoover wasn’t out to regulate American finance, Mr. Perino relates, but rather to finger the scoundrels he suspected of wrecking the market and ruining his presidency.

Norbeck’s investigation went nowhere. The villains he hoped to expose—notably, Richard Whitney, the imperious head of the New York Stock Exchange—walked all over a succession of ineffectual chief counsels. With Franklin Roosevelt’s election, Norbeck would soon lose his committee chairmanship. How to reinvigorate his moribund investigation? The Republican senator hired the eager, obscure, Democratic ex-assistant DA.

What little Pecora knew about banking and finance he had gleaned from prosecuting low-level frauds. He was, however, a master cross-examiner, a quick study and a tireless worker. He wanted blood, too. In a dinner speech to the Elks Club of New York, he assailed the “men of might” on Wall Street who had taken “millions and millions of the hard-earned pennies of the people.” As for what his investigation might achieve, Pecora ventured: “When the nation again comes to days of plenty and prosperity, let us seek to make it impossible for water and hot air to be sold to men and women for gold taken from their life savings.”

The Hellhound of Wall Street
By Michael Perino
(Penguin Press, 341 pages, $27.95)

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:08:49

This issue could not have arisen at a better time for incumbent politicians, who have doubtless been looking for a convenient excuse for why the economic recovery is turning out “worse than expected.”

Foreclosure anger is now hitting election campaign
By LAURA WIDES-MUNOZ and TOM RAUM (AP) – 6 hours ago

MIAMI — Three weeks before the election, anger over tainted home foreclosure documents is bursting into the battle for control of Congress, especially in hard-hit states such as Nevada and Florida. Democrats in tight races in the worst housing markets are pressing for a national moratorium, putting a reluctant White House on the spot.

Leading the call for a nationwide time-out on kicking people out of their homes is Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is locked in a neck-and-neck re-election contest with tea party-endorsed Sharron Angle in Nevada, which has the highest foreclose rate in the country. Reid is decrying “reports of shoddy and defective affidavit preparation.”

On Wednesday, attorneys general and bank regulators in all 50 states announced a joint investigation into questionable foreclosure practices, including forged documents, apparently bogus signatures and questionable notarizations. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said the Justice Department also is looking into the allegations — but he stopped short of opening a formal investigation.

While the allegations have suddenly become part of the political dialogue in a volatile election season, politicians are all over the map on the issue, some fearing that direct government action could snuff out a fragile recovery. Some candidates appear to be ducking the issue entirely, leery or unsure how to address it.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:14:00

We certainly have yet to see home prices “cut in half” in our ‘hood!

Foreclosure anger is now hitting election campaign

By LAURA WIDES-MUNOZ and TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writers,
Wednesday, October 13, 2010 at 12:44 p.m.

MIAMI — Three weeks before the election, anger over tainted home foreclosure documents is bursting into the battle for control of Congress, especially in hard-hit states such as Nevada and Florida . Democrats in tight races in the worst housing markets are pressing for a national moratorium, putting a reluctant White House on the spot.

Since 2007, both California and Florida have seen average home prices cut roughly in half. But in California, whose economy is more diverse than Florida’s, conditions are slowly improving. In Florida, foreclosures are still on the rise.

The state’s court system is so swamped with foreclosure cases that judges are being called out of retirement to handle the workload. The average foreclosure in Florida takes nearly 600 days, among the longest in the nation. Florida is one of 23 states where foreclosures must be approved by a judge.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics and a specialist on housing and foreclosures, calls Florida the “poster child” for a bogged-down system. “And the Florida economy is still very troubled,” Zandi said.

But Zandi says a moratorium “at this point would be an economic mistake.”

“The sooner we work through these problem loans, the sooner the economy will take off,” he said. “If we prolong the process, it will simply prolong our economic problems.”

A moratorium would give homeowners facing foreclosure more breathing room. But it could backfire, stifling the fledgling recovery and keeping downward pressure on home prices, Zandi and other economists warn.

People trying to buy foreclosed houses could see the sales suddenly suspended. And those considering buying such a property might have second thoughts. Banks that followed sound foreclosure practices would be penalized along with ones that didn’t.

Economists and industry defenders say a freeze could also penalize pension funds, insurance companies and investors who hold mortgage-backed securities. It could make new loans more expensive. And it could further weigh on mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac., putting taxpayers at greater risk of losses.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:22:43

A one-month level of 338,863 foreclosure filings occurs at an annualized level of 4,066,356 homes. That represents a tsunami wave of new shadow inventory soon to hit the market!

US housing market faces new threat from foreclosure row

The US housing market faces a new threat from an escalating row over how banks have been repossessing homes.
By Richard Blackden
Published: 9:45PM BST 11 Oct 2010

Bank of America last week halted foreclosures across the country amid allegations that homes are being seized based on data that has not been properly checked and moved too quickly through the process. JPMorgan Chase and Ally Financial have suspended foreclosures in 23 states to address similar allegations.

The suspensions have prompted calls from politicians for a national suspension until the foreclosure process has been fully investigated. That demand has prompted anger from those in the housing market, where sales of foreclosed homes currently account for about a quarter of all sales, according to RealtyTrac. The company, which tracks the housing market, said that banks seized 95,364 homes in August and issued foreclosure filings to 338,863 homeowners.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:25:24

News Analysis
A Foreclosure Tightrope for Democrats
By BINYAMIN APPELBAUM
Published: October 11, 2010

WASHINGTON — The swelling outcry over fast-and-loose foreclosures has thrust the Obama administration back into the uncomfortable position of sheltering the banking industry from the demands of an angry public.

While senior Congressional Democrats join the calls for a national moratorium on foreclosures, the White House once again is arguing against punishing the industry, just as it did in 2009 amid the outcry over the unbreakable habit of paying large bonuses.

“Irresponsible banks need to be held accountable, but if we have not found a problem with a bank’s process we do not believe that we should impose a moratorium where that can hurt the market and hurt individual buyers,” said Shaun Donovan, secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

The administration’s basic logic has not changed since it took office in the depths of the financial crisis: Hitting the financial industry, officials argue in private and in public, hurts the broader economy. A moratorium on foreclosures may provide short-term political satisfaction in an overheated election climate, but the administration fears it will only delay the inevitable and necessary process of forcing many Americans out of homes they cannot afford.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:27:51

WSJ Blogs
Developments
Real estate news and analysis from The Wall Street Journal

* October 11, 2010, 12:04 PM ET

Foreclosure Suspensions Raise Anti-Bank Anger
By Emily Peck

The foreclosure market is stalling and confusion is rising in the wake of the recent suspensions of foreclosures by four major mortgage servicers.

On Friday, Bank of America announced it would suspend foreclosure sales in all 50 states. That follows the bank’s earlier suspension of tens of thousands of foreclosures in the states that handle foreclosures through the court system, a move also taken by GMAC Home Mortgage, Inc., a unit of Ally Financial Inc., and J.P. Mortgage Chase & Co.’s home-loan unit.

Meanwhile, several state attorneys general, as well as members of Congress, are calling for an across-the-board foreclosure moratorium to sort out alleged irregularities in foreclosure documents submitted by the banks. (More: Courts Add to Foreclosure Delay)

It’s unclear how long the foreclosure market will be stalled–but economists are warning that the delays are bad for housing. The uncertainty in the market will likely scare buyers away from foreclosed homes, which represent a big chunk of current sales.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:30:46

“We evicted those FB’s fair and square!”

JPMorgan chief defends home foreclosures

Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, has robustly defended how the bank evicts homeowners, as the row over repossessions in America escalates in the run-up to key elections.

By Richard Blackden, US Business Editor
Published: 6:27PM BST 13 Oct 2010

The country’s second-biggest bank has suspended repossessions in 23 states amid allegations that homes have been taken back without the necessary paperwork being properly checked. JPMorgan is examining 115,000 cases at the moment and is confident its procedures were correct. Bank of America has halted repossessions throughout the US.

I don’t think there are cases where people have been evicted out of their homes when they shouldn’t have been,” Mr Dimon said on Wednesday, as the bank delivered third-quarter profits ahead of Wall Street’s expectations.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:36:12

How can this story possibly get any better?

Wells adds to crisis over home seizures
By Suzanne Kapner in New York
Published: October 14 2010 00:01 | Last updated: October 14 2010 00:01

The US mortgage foreclosure crisis deepened as it emerged that Wells Fargo may have used practices that prompted rivals to halt home repossessions, and JPMorgan Chase said banks might be fined over the issue.

Bank of America, JPMorgan and GMAC have halted foreclosures after learning that “robo signers” had rubber-stamped thousands of mortgage documents without checking their accuracy. Attorneys-general in 50 states have launched a joint investigation into the matter.

Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan chief executive, on Wednesday became the first top banking executive to say some attorneys-general may levy penalties on banks for their foreclosure practices.

Legal documents obtained by the Financial Times suggest that Wells Fargo, the second-largest US mortgage servicer, also used a “robo signer”.

Unlike its rivals, Wells Fargo has not halted foreclosures. The San Francisco-based bank said on Tuesday it was reviewing some pending cases, but it has maintained that it has checks and balances designed to prevent serious procedural lapses.

In a sworn deposition on March 9 seen by the FT, Xee Moua, identified in court documents as a vice-president of loan documentation for Wells, said she signed as many as 500 foreclosure-related papers a day on behalf of the bank.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:40:05

The best bet to curb too big to fail
By John Gapper
Published: October 13 2010 20:23 | Last updated: October 13 2010 20:23

Two years after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, regulators are working on ways to prevent it happening again. That means finding a way to wind down a complex, global financial institution safely, while making its shareholders and bondholders suffer enough to discourage reckless behaviour.

Don’t hold your breath.

On the face of it, this week marked some progress, with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the US publishing its plans to be able to liquidate large financial institutions in the same way that it deals with small bank failures – swiftly, ruthlessly and effectively.

Meanwhile, European regulators are mulling the idea of “bail-ins” – an alternative to US-style forced liquidation that would involve converting bonds to equity when a bank gets into trouble. They hope that giving themselves “resolution authority” to alter banks’ capital structure would be sufficient to avoid chaotic bankruptcies.

Governments and central banks will definitely have more authority to act by the time the next Lehman or American International Group threatens to fall and take other institutions with it. But will they have the resolve?

In practice, while domestic banks that get into trouble will be seized instantly, the threat to a big international, interconnected one is much less credible. Despite all the work of the past two years, there is little sign of moral hazard being abolished, or even reduced.

Politicians talk of consigning “too big to fail” to history, but investors and rating agencies regard it as alive and kicking. They do not believe that any government would have the nerve or power to close a Citigroup or a Deutsche Bank and transfer its assets to another bank. There is plenty of room for doubt.

In fact, the incentive for the Goldman Sachs’s of the world to get even bigger and more complex, believing it will shelter them from the risks of enforced closure and shareholder losses, is still strong. That is a logical way to exploit the gap between regulators’ aspirations and their powers.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-13 23:47:12

Oct. 14, 2010, 12:01 a.m. EDT
Don’t get used to the new Fed
Commentary: Quantitative easing will work for only a short time

By Jon Markman

SEATTLE (MarketWatch) — For decades, the Federal Reserve has been a brooding, dark, menacing presence at the edge of Wall Street, feared for its propensity to spit acid rain on markets whenever mortals dared to crack a smile.

At one time, news that Americans might be enjoying a little happiness was enough to provoke saturnine Fed chairmen to jack up interest rates, thin the money supply and generally just bum us out.

So you can understand that investors have been slow to understand the new Fed, which appears to be populated by unicorns and leprechauns who spend their days paging through how-to manuals to find new ways to shower the markets with cheap money. The Fed may have been on traders’ side for around 20 months now, but the relationship is so awkward that few can quite believe it.

Sadly, there might not be too much more time to enjoy it. About 12 weeks, in fact. Here’s why.

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post

  • The Housing Bubble Blog
  • The Housing Bubble Blog