October 31, 2010

Bits Bucket For October 31, 2010

Post off-topic ideas, links and Craigslist finds here




RSS feed | Trackback URI

237 Comments »

Comment by aNYCdj
2010-10-31 05:19:18

Happy Hellloween ………maybe Americas will come to its senses on Tuesday….and we can have real change

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 07:26:23

You mean we get to replace Tweedle-Dee with Tweedle-Dum?

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-10-31 07:31:40

We are a long way away from seizing our ownership of our individual rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. But they are ours all along, despite those thugs who label themselves “government.”

So have a bit of coffee, take a walk in the crisp fall morning, and forget about the television (except for sports and music of course).

LA this morning feels cold for some reason. However, looking forward to a good workout of weights followed by a combination of lifecycle, crossramp, and treadmill!

Comment by Rancher
2010-10-31 07:35:39

I’m with you on the coffee, but I’ll take a rain
check on the walk in the rain.

Comment by scdave
2010-10-31 08:18:41

Hey Rancher…From yesterday..Rancho Mirage..

Yep…Its about chase-in some sunshine…I figure by February between the foot recovery and the Or-Rain-Again you will be stir crazy and want to get out of there for awhile :)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Rancher
2010-10-31 09:23:07

Weeeeeee’ll be there!

 
 
 
 
Comment by Man from Long Island
2010-10-31 07:42:11

While I intend to vote largely Republican but even more anti-incumbent this election (in New York the two are nearly the same thing alas), I have my doubts the Repubs will be any better. Already lots of quotes around from Mitch McConnell I believe saying their only goal is to stop Obama from getting reelected. Expect two years of total gridlock. Plus a sense of no spending restraint at all. Remember the prescription drug benefit under Bush?

I don’t like the NY Times anymore editorially, but this is a thoughtful if depressing article by Frank Rich on why things will not get better, repubs are still in big money’s pocket the new tea party:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/opinion/31rich.html?_r=1&hp

Where is real LEADERSHIP? Palin is a joke and frightening to me, and yet she gaining prominence. If she is the Repub stand-bearer in 2012, what kind of real choice will we have? To me, I look to Chris Christie of NJ. I do NOT agree with his social policies (anti-abortion, etc.) as I am socially more liberal — gov’t should not tell me what to do (or maybe more libertarian?). But HE GETS IT. This takedown of the teachers union expresses my feelings better than I easily could. Maybe he needs seasoning on national issues but compared to Palin? What a joke. The man shows he has a brain and is not all platitudes. Yet I doubt he will be socially right wing ENOUGH vs. all the wing-nuts in the Repub party who want to ban teaching of evolution, abortion, stem-cell research, sex ed, etc. Where is a fiscally sane person who will pay attention to the threat of Iran and terrorism without being off the deep end on trying to turn this country into a fundamentalist Christian one? Not Palin. And not a total sleaze (which rules out Gingrich). And not in the thrall of big business (rules out many repubs). And not a suck-up shill for public unions (rules out most dems these days unfortunately. I considered myself a Dem until Pelosi and Reid’s ascendance. Michael Bloomberg (if too sanctimonious by 200%) although he has a tin ear and would have to run as an independent? I’m looking for intelligent centricity, don’t ban stem cells, don’t force creationism idiocy down my kids’ throats at school, pay attention to the danger that is Iran, but don’t expand government 500% and waste my money by throwing $4000 at clunker cars and $8000 at houses in stupidity with 0% interest rates and so-called shovel-ready projects that do NOTHING for the economy. Let alone my truly understanding the bank bail-outs. Am I the only one who feels this way? the two parties are BOTH off the deep end in somewhat opposite directions. But as a check for now I must vote Republican and hold my nose to the party of Trent Lott and Newt Gingrich. As a final note, I kind of admire John McCain overall, and in fact voted for him. Ashame he unleashed Palin on us all.

(I only started listening to FANTASTIC Chris Christie NJ governor vid at 1:53 as per a recommendation, not sure about beginning, but from there on out its great):

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/nj-gov-christie-clashes-with-teacher-at-town-hall/

Comment by Michael Fink
2010-10-31 08:23:34

Your a libertarian (from what you’ve said above). Welcome to the club. :)

 
Comment by Chryslyn
2010-10-31 08:46:58

I’m from NJ. He is doing what needs to be done.

Went to one of his gatherings this summer. It was about 94 degrees and stifling inside the small hall. Hundreds, unable to get in, gathered outside.

Despite the sweltering close quarters, even as he was winding up the talk, none of us wanted to leave, or wanted him to stop sharing his thoughts.
The man is riveting. Teleprompter not required.

As I shook his hand, I said to him that we MUST rid the GOP of the RINOs! His expression was too much.

If you liked the other video, you are sure to like this one:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/20/garden_state_gov_is_gop_rising_star.html

Comment by scdave
2010-10-31 09:08:44

I like his straight talk and pragmatic approach to everything that he does…Its his hard right social positions that would take me out of play and I suppose would leave him short of a national consensus to be elected President…He is probably best suited at being a Governor…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Montana
2010-10-31 10:39:58

Christie has “hard right” social positions?? I thought that’s exactly what he does not have.

Me, I love the Fat Man. Give ‘em hell!

 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:06:01

all the wing-nuts in the Repub party who want to ban teaching of evolution, abortion, stem-cell research, sex ed, etc.

Oh, what a box of tools they have! ;-)

(Keepin’ the real GOP “TrueBeliever’s™ / “TrueDeceiver’s™” soakin’ up even more wealth $$$$$$$$$$ & reclaiming their “I’m the Decider” grip on National Gov’t’s “YOU-WILL-live-like-us!” power distribution disguised as “TrueAmericanPurity™”)

Vote ‘em in, I reminiscence for the “we’re-non-war” results of “Fiscal” Conservatives & “Compassionate” Conservatives.

 
Comment by jane
2010-10-31 12:00:44

MFLI, the thing that is a threat to all of our freedoms is not the candidate, but the infrastructure to which he or she is firmly welded. We have been manipulated to believe that candidates matter. It’s not the candidate. It is the machine whose policies he or she implements via increasingly frenzied legislation. The same machine greases the wheels of both parties, as we have seen.

We sheeple have swallowed the Kool Aid in total by becoming frightened of candidates who do not fit the template promoted by the back room machine. Because it is an edifice comprised of eloquent ideologues educated at the same schools (East Coast Ivies), steeped in the same background, groomed through exercises in the same gilded drawing rooms and boardrooms, it wants candidates of the same ilk. People are uncomfortable when they need to expend energy to incorporate the ‘other’. The East Coast automatons are predictable, and that is what the back room edifice wants. The acid test of having swallowed the manipulation? Be afraid of any candidate whose appearance does not carry the back room seal of approval.

I have said it before, and I will say it again. The only power left to us is to vote out the incumbents, election after election. That is the only way that the octopus arms will yield their grip on the national discourse. It will be unsustainable for the machine to hundreds of millions into EVERY election, EVERY two years, to buy the candidate of choice, only to have that investment yield an ROI of zero when the incumbent front man is voted out in the next two year cycle.

The grip of the machine depends on bought and sold front men with longevity and predictability. Business hates unpredictable circumstances. Let’s bankrupt them.

So. Regardless of who is running, I say, vote out the incumbent before he or she has the opportunity to make hay for the machine. Each year that goes by, the incumbent becomes more and more calcified in a chitin-like cocoon, much like the hapless Specialists entombed in the bowels of the Nostromo, in the Aliens film series, impotent to do anything but serve as the incubator and food source for the spawn of their captor.

Comment by pismoclam
2010-10-31 21:04:18

Good idea JANE. Vote out all incumbants and trust no one who makes a commission !

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Eddie
2010-10-31 12:30:33

Man from LI,

Gridlock is great. Why does govt always have to do something? I’m so sick and tired of people bemoaning gridlock. Reagan and Dems, Clinton and Republicans. Worked great. Bush and Reps, no good. Obama and Dems, downright awful.

Obama and tea party/GOP will ensure absolutely nothing gets passed. And when politicians pass no bills, the country prospers.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:39:58

“Why does govt always have to do something?”

+100

Gridlock is good.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 15:11:25

…until someone you know dies from lack of oversight enforcement from:

Bad toothpaste
Tainted dog food
Tainted baby formula
Shoddy controls on heavy machinery
Poor inspection of critical machinery
Financial fraud

…and that’s just recent event.

Don’t get me wrong, the government often stick it nose it a persons private business or creates impossible situations, but the alternative is far worse.

 
Comment by Eddie
2010-10-31 16:50:57

Oh pleaze. Talk about a strawman. If we don’t cut wasteful govt spending we all die from bad toothpaste. The govt is running a $1 TRILLION deficit every year. You’re telling me reducing that to oh I dunno $200B a year will mean we’re all gonna die from bad toothpaste or dog food? Give me a freaking break man.

This is the MO from liberals. Suggest we cut govt spending and it is interpreted as cut ALL govt spending. Suggest we reduce taxes and it’s interpreted as reduce ALL taxes.

I’m pretty sure a few hundred govt bureaucrats can figure out which toothpaste is good and which is bad without the need for $1T perpetual deficits.

 
Comment by exeter
2010-10-31 17:04:08

Ooooh… EddieTard wheels out the liberal hobgoblin.

Well done WindowLicker. lmao.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 17:45:56

“I’m pretty sure a few hundred govt bureaucrats can figure out which toothpaste is good and which is bad without the need for $1T perpetual deficits.”

They didn’t seem do this NOR police the entire FIRE sector during Bush’s admin where more than just toothpaste was at stake. That was the time period of every one of those incidents. You know, when they were cutting funding to those very agencies responsible for those things.

 
Comment by jane
2010-10-31 19:05:13

Exeter, enough. Think about what you are NOT seeing. Your choice of champion is irrelevant. You could “elect” the CEO of the Teamsters or Chairman Mao into the Presidency, and into any seat of Congress, IF the investment bankers, comprised of Republicans and Democrats agreed to fund his or her campaign, get him or her on the ticket, and buy enough messaging to manipulate the electorate to your effect. This is a back room bloc decision, and it is bipartisan. Regardless of party, EACH candidate is chosen and funded in the same manner by the SAME BLOC OF INTERESTS. Sure, it would be cheaper for them to have only one candidate to fund. You can see they have made great strides towards that end over the past thirty years: Republicans and Democrats present with surface differences, but will vote to please their masters in lock step once in office. E.g., there is no difference between candidates from the standpoint of subsequent votes that serve to consolidate power for the same master.

I belabor the point.

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHO YOU ELECT, OR INTO WHICH OFFICE. Any candidate on the ticket is ALREADY PRE-VETTED AND HAS SIGNED A PRE-NUP WITH THE SAME MACHINE, WHICH FUNDS BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE.

Regardless of what you THINK your candidate of choice will do, he says it only to overcome the election hurdle, a necessary evil. ONCE HE IS IN OFFICE YOU ARE IRRELEVANT and HE WILL DO WHAT HIS FUNDING SOURCE TELLS HIM TO DO.

He will be permitted one or two cosmetic activities with which to placate the people in his district (”I voted to preserve standards in public education” - “I voted for family values” - where there is no cause and effect between what he did vs. the outcome. Most of us are swept away in a feelgood swoon by the sound byte because we are deracinated by public education and cannot reason critically).

However - FOLLOW THE ACTUAL RECORD ON THE MONEY INTERESTS. YOU WILL SEE THAT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND CONGRESSMEN HAVE BEEN BOUGHT BY THE TRICK, LIKE $50 WHORES.

Exeter, I have followed your thinking for years. What has happened? You are jumping blindly into ad hominem, over and over, as a matter of principle!

PS - don’t you dare ad hominem me. I’m old enough to be your mother.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 07:45:30

Ha, “TrueAnger™” + “TrueEvangelicalPurity™” (jib-jab/ping-pong/teeter-totter) or “TrueRestoreSillyness™” :-)

Now who is it that Yells, Screams & Hollers: FEAR! FEAR! FEAR! …cast your votes!

From the LA Times Coverage in D.C.:

(Some signs that made ol’ Hwy smile:)

What would Jake & Elwood Do?: “We’re on a mission from God to restore sanity!”

(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

My comedy channel: MUrDoch’s “TrueProvoker ™” Faux News
My news channel: Comedy Central

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Mothers of Democrats:
Give your children more milk to build stronger backbones

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Do I have a say in the USA?
(I only have $5.00 bucks!)

(Photo by Reuters/Jonathan Ernst)

BWAHAHAHicHAHAHicHAHAHAHAHicHAHAHic* (DennisN™)

(beer with breakfast…)

 
 
Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2010-10-31 08:11:00

We have a one-party system: The Republicrats. The sheeple will once again vote for “change” and yet again will be duped.

Comment by rms
2010-10-31 10:53:18

In California there is an effort being made to address the voting districts, which have been gerrymandered for years.

This LA Times story is interesting since this rich guy, Haim Saban feels that Israel will be at risk if California has its districts drawn by a commission. Maybe all of California must eat crow so Israel can survive? I’m not sure how this linkage has been established. Politics.

Competing propositions take aim at California redistricting
http://tinyurl.com/36nqhn3

“Proposition 20 would double-down on the still-forming citizens’ panel that voters approved two years ago, allowing it to draw maps for Congress too. Proposition 27 would scrap it entirely. The story behind them is an intriguing web.”

Comment by rms
2010-10-31 11:47:57

“Saban may have provided the answer back in 2004. “I’m a one-issue guy and my issue is Israel,” he said in an interview with the New York Times that year. Mundell and other opponents of Proposition 27 have connected his change of heart to his desire to protect the congressional seat of Rep. Howard Berman (D-Valley Village), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and a staunch supporter of Israel.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:38:55

“The Republicrats”

I thought there were two parties: Dumbocrats and Republicants. I now stand corrected.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 15:14:07

The Democrats didn’t vote down a bill to repeal tax breaks for offshoring jobs while simultaneously giving them to local business to hire local.

The repubs did. In September.

Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2010-10-31 15:24:17

Democrats. Republicans. Two hairy ass cheeks around the same stinking bunghole: predatory finance.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by oxide
2010-10-31 15:56:31

No, read the damn post. Democrats tried to slow outsourcing. The Republicans filibustered it. In other words, Republicans WANT to send jobs overseas.

And these guys are on the same side HOW?

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:52:27

I’m not a big fan of the Dems, but the repubs are just plain traitors.

 
Comment by exeter
2010-10-31 16:56:20

The corporate front groups like FreekdomWorks, American Taxpayers Union wants us anti-corporatists to think there is no difference as a means to keep you on the couch on election day.

 
Comment by Mags57
2010-10-31 21:08:54

“The Democrats didn’t vote down a bill to repeal tax breaks for offshoring jobs while simultaneously giving them to local business to hire local.

The repubs did. In September.”

Interesting. And here I thought that the Dems controlled the House, Senate, and White House this past September. Amazing what the repubs ‘did’ with no control or majority of any piece of the process ….

 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:50:55

Here is a tempting suggestion. For the record, our household’s voting record is far more consistent than Meg Whitman’s, but every election I question whether it is worth the headache.

Don’t Vote It Just Encourages the Bastards [Hardcover]
P. J. O’Rourke (Author)
4.3 out of 5 stars See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
6 Reviews
5 star: (4)
4 star: (1)
3 star: (0)
2 star: (1)
1 star: (0)

List Price: $25.00
Price: $14.62
You Save: $10.38 (42%)

 
Comment by exeter
 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2010-10-31 06:11:14

Will UK’s cuts force poor families out of London?

By DAVID STRINGER The Associated Press

LONDON — It’s been at the heart of London’s identity for decades: Bakers and bankers live on the same city streets in patchwork neighborhoods where swank mansions sit in the shadow of grim tower blocks, and residents from all walks of life mingle in shops, schools and subway stations.

Now Britain’s debt-shredding austerity measures will slash housing benefit payments used to subsidize rents for the low-paid, threatening to price tens of thousands of poor families out of their homes and force them toward the fringes of the country’s capital — an exodus that could permanently erode London’s famed ethnic, economic and cultural mix.

Outspoken London Mayor Boris Johnson likens the plan to “Kosovo-style social cleansing.” Some fear London will become more like Paris, where rich elites monopolize the city center and the poor stagnate in decaying housing projects ringing the capital.

But in tough times, others wonder if Britain can still afford to help ordinary workers find homes in a city center that keeps getting pricier, even as the overall economy shows only sluggish growth.

As part of 81 billion pounds ($128 billion) of spending cuts announced last week to help wipe Britain’s crippling debts, limits will be placed on the amount given to the poor to help them pay their rent.

One estimate predicts an exodus of about 200,000 people from central London, with low earning families forced toward down-at-heel outer suburbs and far-flung commuter towns — leaving the capital’s streets reserved for the rich.

Comment by Michael Fink
2010-10-31 06:39:14

“But in tough times, others wonder if Britain can still afford to help ordinary workers find homes in a city center that keeps getting pricier, even as the overall economy shows only sluggish growth.”

I wonder if they ever think that perhaps one thing has led to another.

Perhaps because Britain helps ordinary workers find homes in the city center the prices keep going up?

If you “help” everyone afford a 1M dollar house, what do you think a 1M dollar house will look like?

Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 07:08:01

If a government drops money into a city (such as London) and the money remains in the city then the city will prosper because the money will repeatidly change hands within the city and not leak out to go change hands elsewhere.

But if the money that is dropped into the city changes hands only one or twice before leaking out to go somewhere else then the city will not get an enduring benifit of the money dropped; The city where the money ends up and circulates around and around is the city that gets the enduring benifit.

This is the case in South Central L.A., as has been discussed here before. Money dropped into South Central immmediately goes to buy things at Korean owned stores located in the various neighborhoods of South Central. The Koreans then take this money out of South Central and spend it in Koreatown where it circulates around and around. Koreatown ends up with an enduring benifit of money drops in South Central, while South Central only gets a temporary benifit.

If anyone here gets this concept then they should also broaden this concept a bit and think of what happens to money drops from our government that immediately leak out and end up in places such as China. The government money drops here will give an immediate but limited hit to our economy, but the enduring effect of the money drops will be enjoyed by China.

Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 07:24:06

It is unfortunate for us that Ben Bernanke got his Phd by focusing his attentions on what happened to our economy during the Great Depression. His conclusion to what was needed to fix the Great Depression was to somehow put money into people’s hands so they could use this money to buy products and thus create a reason for these products to be manufactured, which meant people would be hired to make these products and their wages would then go into our economy and circulate about and keep the economy going. This was his conclusion as to how to fix what was happening then and apparantly this is how he intends to fix what is happening now.

However, the products bought THEN were manufactured HERE, in the U.S. The products bought TODAY are manufactured SOMEWHERE ELSE. Not all the products are manufactured somewhere else but a lot of them are - enough of them to heavily dampen the economic benifits of governmental money drops.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 07:38:05

And because much of the money from CONSUMPTION here ends up in China, the place where things are being manufactured, the attraction of money for INVESTMENT also ends up in China for the same reason.

An it is INVESTMENT money that creates wage-paying jobs.

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2010-10-31 07:56:33

You might want to check your understanding of Bernanke’s conclusions about what caused the Great Depression. He has repeatedly said he agrees with Milton Friedman that it was a lack of an easy money policy by the Fed that caused GD1.

You seem to be implying that Bernanke believes Keynes was right, and we need jobs and stimulus for the average guy. Bernanke clearly thinks otherwise:

“In a speech on Milton Friedman’s ninetieth birthday (November 8, 2002), Bernanke said, “Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna [Schwartz, Friedman's coauthor]: Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.”[46] Bernanke has cited Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz in his decision to lower interest rates to zero.” (wikipedia)

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-10-31 07:56:34

That vacuum from the west to the far east has been going on for decades while the corporate taxes of 35% in the US, environmental regulations, and labor costs have driven corporations overseas to desperately hang onto their profits.

On Bloomberg this morning (on my iPad) I saw a feature that Hungary is joining the ranks of the several former iron curtain nations imposing a flat income tax. This one at 16%. It is raising business taxes and laying off 30,000 government employees in austerity measures.

I really don’t care which type of a tax cut occurs: Tax cut on people earning below 100,000? Okay with me. But don’t use smoke and mirrors to raise other taxes. Cut spending instead. A net tax increase is a job destroyer - that’s the bottom line. A net tax cut is a job creater.

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2010-10-31 08:03:41

India, whose economy is expanding rapidly, runs a trade deficit. How is such a thing possible?

I think you’re under the impression that there’s a finite amount of money in the world, and if you run a trade deficit, eventually all your money will wind up elsewhere. That’s not how it works in a fiat currency world.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 08:04:18

was to somehow put money into people’s hands so they could use this money to buy products and thus create a reason for these products to be manufactured, which meant people would be Chinese blue-collar workers would be hired to make these products and their wages would then go into our Chinese oligarchy’s economy and circulate about and keep their slave-wage economy going.

Keep it simple silly… ;-)

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-10-31 08:06:08

combotechie …of course your right and Ben Bernanke doesn’t seem to get it .

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:40:23

You guys sure the helicopter drops are not more about making sure there are enough dollars available to cover a ginormous and growing debt burden than to stimulate U.S. jobs creation?

 
Comment by skroodle
2010-10-31 08:46:42

However, the products bought THEN were manufactured HERE, in the U.S.

According to the history books, the Smoot-Hartley bill was a major cause of the Depression because it raised tariffs on imports.

 
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 08:50:32

“… Ben Bernanke doesn’t seem to get it.”

What he seems to “get” is that it is a good idea to create some inflation in our country so the buying power of the domestically held dollars will diminsh and people will then withdraw dollars from their mattresses and start spending them.

Which means the few dollars that are held by folks lucky (or smart) enough to have them will buy less things tomorrow than they will buy today, which means they will have to have MORE dollars tomorrow than they have to have today.

There is already a scarcity of dollars in circulation. Promising that you will need more of something tomorrow that is already scarce today is not a way of getting people to give up whatever it that is scarce. If anything it will encourage them to hold on tighter than they did before.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 08:53:29

“That vacuum from the west to the far east has been going on for decades while the corporate taxes of 35% in the US, environmental regulations, and labor costs have driven corporations overseas to desperately hang onto their profits.”

Funny how the Germans who with higher taxes, even more onerous environemntal laws, etc, have been able to remain a manufactrung and exporting juggernaut.

I guess it helps when you make quality goods that people actually want to buy. Its a lot easier though to import, rebrand and resell crap from China.

 
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 08:59:01

If it is promised that there will be an upcoming shortage of, say, toliet paper, how many posters here feel that this promise will cause toilet paper to become hoarded?

If it is promised that there will be an upcoming shortage of dollars how many posters here feel that this promise will cause dollars to become hoarded?

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-10-31 09:00:47

The US corporate taxes are second highest to Japan’s. Germany’s corporate tax is under 30%.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 09:12:40

Maybe their corporate Tax is lower, but they are
required to pay other taxes that Corporate America is not: national health comes to mind. Also worker benefits (paid vacations and holidays) are much more generous than here.

Why can’t we make stuff that other countries want, I mean besides weapons? Is it really because of corporate taxes, or is it because of our myopic short term outlook on everything we do?

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:34:45

Germany’s corporate tax is under 30%.

“…but they are required to pay other taxes that Corporate America is not”

Nice try Bill, try again…

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-10-31 09:46:42

PB …I think you might be right about the real reason for the money drops .

 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:47:50

Bill:

Corporations are not being forced to move overseas just to keep their profits. Actually, they have been allowed to move overseas in order to start raking in bigger profits than ever, which in turn has caused an about-face in US wages, which in turn is causing corporations to lose customers, which in turn is biting corporations in the ass.

Tariffs and tax penalties for offshoring always worked in the past, it can work again for us now.

I do not want to become a horrid country such as India, where kids can’t even go to school because they are too busy picking through the garbage trying to find something to eat.

If corporations want to use the tax-supported, capitalistic, democratic/republic US system (public education, homeownership, entrepeneurship, etc) in order to sprout up to begin with, then corporations are just going to have to chip in. Help build the schools, help provide the poor kids with a breakfast and a lunch. Help pay for police, etc.

It is not fair for us to just give them this easy-breezy economic climate, and then allow them to abscond with the jobs we helped to create.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2010-10-31 07:36:45

“The government money drops here will give an immediate but limited hit to our economy, but the enduring effect of the money drops will be enjoyed by China.”

So you are saying the biggest benefit from the disposable income being spent by my neighbors , LLs and acquaintances who have not paid their mortgage in a couple of years and the “bang for the buck” of the $60 billion x $1.79 from food stamps and unemployment insurance spent this year, ends up in China.

Pelosi fires back at Gingrich over food stamps
By: CNN Congressional Producer Evan Glass

At a press conference in her home town of San Francisco, Pelosi explained that the program’s multiplier effect –the amount of money generated in the local economy as the result of the subsidy– far exceeds the nearly $60 billion spent this year by the federal government and is a sure-fire way to stimulate the economy. For every dollar a person receives in food stamps, Pelosi said that $1.79 is put back into the economy. The U.S. Department of Agriculture cites an even higher figure of $1.84.

“It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck,” she said.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 08:02:04

“For every dollar a person receives in food stamps, Pelosi said that $1.79 is put back into the economy.”

That’s it? A dollar and seventy-nine cents?

Subtract the original dollar from the dollar-seventy-nine and you end up with seventy-nine cents.

Spend a dollar THAT WE DON’T HAVE to get a NET BENIFIT of seventy-nine cents?

Has everybody gone crazy?

 
Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2010-10-31 08:21:37

Pelosi, Reid, et al. will go to any lengths to justify and defend their aggressive promotion of parasitic and socially irresponsible behavior, as this in turn justifies the massive bureaucracy and entrenched Democrat voting bloc that sustains Pelosi and her ilk in power.

The Republicans, on the other hand, will do everything in their power to faciliate the corporatists’ unbridled asset-stripping of the productive middle and working classes in this country, and coming up with schemes like “missile defense” to enrich their military-industrial conributors.

 
Comment by skroodle
2010-10-31 08:47:48

They are forgetting that the food purchased is grown in a lot of red states.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 08:55:57

“Has everybody gone crazy?”

There are other benefits. See what Mexico is like when you consider having a foodstamp free nation. It’s gotten to the point where people are afraid to leave their homes for non work activities.

 
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 09:02:35

“There are other benifits.”

Agree. But prosperity is not one of them.

These are TRANSFER PAYMENTS; The economy doesn’t grow due to transfer payments. The economy grows when it produces something.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 09:19:56

“The economy grows when it produces something.”

Agreed, and this is unfortunately no longer an American value.

Slightly off on a tangent, I went to the DMV yesterday to get replacement registration card. I unwittingly went on the last business day of the month and the place was packed with deadbeats who waited until the last day to pay their registration. It was interesting to watch the crowd (there was a 30 minute wait). Most paid with cash and were jabbering on their touchscreen phones. The crowd definitely had a low rent feel to it, different from other times when I went to the same office.

It will be interesting to see how that crowd reacts once their transfer payments cease. Most of them looked unemployable, not that there any jobs for them anyway. I guess when that day comes I’ll call Brinks and get my house wired with an alarm system.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:40:54

They are forgetting that the food purchased is grown in a lot of red states.

Hey is there a connection between Oil & Food production? ;-)

Homes = Wall St. manipulation/extraction scheme (Large $ denominations)

Oil/Energy = Wall St. manipulation/extraction scheme (small $ denominations)

Coming Soon:
Food = Wall St. manipulation/extraction scheme (small $ denominations)

 
Comment by aNYCdj
2010-10-31 09:45:15

Well it is pretty true, she should include Welfare checks too.

Most food people eat are still made in America, but my apple juice was from China (concentrate) and bottled here.

“It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck,” she said.

 
Comment by Carlos4
2010-10-31 11:34:31

I never knowingly buy food of any type from China; the vast bulk of vitamins, spices and food additives are imported from God knows where, which includes China.

 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:53:48

If you spend $1, and get back $1.79, then you have a 79% ROI, dude. The original dollar was returned to the economy, along with the return.

 
Comment by Dave
2010-11-01 13:46:40

I think you all are missing what she said.

For every dollar that somone receiving food stamps gets…the government has to spend 1.79 to get it to them. Half to food, half to the gov’t cubicle workers. 79 cents isn’t just miraculously created out of thin air.

Economy is what you make of it. I wasn’t making enough money at work, so I started my own business. In the black after a year, and poised to generate more than 100K this year, with part time attention.

That’s creating money…but what do I know.

 
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-10-31 07:56:25

combotechie…..I believe your money flow theory is correct .
During the boom huge amounts of money was flowing into
almost every area by loan dollars /debt dollars and this caused incredible stimulus and money flow especially in businesses
related to housing ,but also all the other business was getting
the reward of the wealth affect from the flow from these debt dollars.

This flow of money created a major mis-allocation of funds and
unsustainable growth that stopped when the money dried up .
A lot of those debt dollars ended up in places that had nothing to do with where the money was originally spent .Thats why small
business in a local community tended to keep the dollars
spent in that Community until big monopolies started taking a bigger share of the dollars out .

Communities have to be sustained by a cash flow circulating
constantly into the community by jobs and money spent locally
sustaining the area .

The money has dried up without the debt dollars and loss of
jobs creates less cash flow to staying in areas and sustaining
Communities .

Wall Street and the Corporate machine don’t care where the money flows to because their objective is just making higher profits and they don’t care where the money ends up .The Corporate machine doesn’t care if people are given a live-able wage or anything about the flow of money that sustains communities .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 15:23:31

They help the less well off find houses because if they didn’t, not many people would commute hours each way to work a not very well paid job.

 
 
Comment by Sammy Schadenfreude
2010-10-31 08:15:21

Successive UK governments have massively subsidized and encouraged irresponsibility and parasitism, upon which the Labor voting bloc, much like their DNC counterparts in the US, depends. Now the chickens are coming home to roost. And they can’t deport undesirables to Australia any more.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 08:57:15

“And they can’t deport undesirables to Australia any more.”

They might end up self deporting themselves.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 15:25:18

65% of Brtis say they want to retire in another country.

As for “massively subsidized and encouraged irresponsibility and parasitism” yes they did. The same as we did. The financial sector.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Mags57
2010-10-31 21:17:34

“65% of Brtis say they want to retire in another country.”

Never heard that before - that’s amazing. 65%! I would think the U.S. rate is closer to 6.5%, although we do have a lot more different climates/places w/in the country than the Brits do.

 
 
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-10-31 09:03:34

All you have to do is reverse the analysis to see that combotechie is correct . Let’s say all of a sudden all the world started buying
products that were manufactured in the United States and this was the only source they wanted to buy products from .You would get a boom flow of money coming into areas ,they would have to build new
plants and hire to just keep up with the demand ,money would flow to the local communities and income would rise ,tax receipts would increase and all that jazz .

The thing about the boom was that all we were getting was money for debt dollars that was backed by real estate ,not money to pay for products produced .That’s why the real estate boom was a Ponzi -scheme because real estate was used to create the debt dollars ,Wall Street/Banks made their commissions off that trade .

The point is that investment dollars are suppose to be used for needed items and sustainable risks ,not pumping up a price falsely
so you can take the money and run before it crashes in price or bet against it because of insider knowledge as GS did with the AIG credit default swaps .

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 13:57:47

…money would flow to the local communities and income would rise ,tax receipts would increase and all that jazz .

That’s only true if the companies that produce the products are American companies.

But that’s not what’s happening in our trade with China. Chinese owned companies do NOT produce the vast majority of the products we buy that are marked “Made in China”.

Companies like Hasbro Toys simply rent Chinese factories, and hire Chinese workers.
Other than the very low costs of slave-wages, rent, utilities, etc., in China, all the income from sales of Hasbro toys ends up in American hands.

“Made in China” means only that: Something was MADE there, and making stuff there is CHEAP.
It says nothing about where the bulk of the money ends up.

Granted the money does not go to American manufacturer workers..

But it does go to Hasbro stock holders, to people who work in retail toy stores, American warehouses, and all the other Americans who ship, distribute and sell toys here, along with store/business rent payments, utilities to American utility co.s, taxes to America’s local, state and fed government., and all the various other moneys that are American business operating costs.

Very little money stays in China.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:59:00

If American workers were not hired to manufacture these products, then whose “American Hands”, exactly, has a hold of those dollars today?

Would it be … ummmmmmm … the hands of the few, the wealthy, the priveleged, and the powerful?

That is not a sign of a healthy economy. A healthy economy can be represented by a Bell-curve of wages, with the middle class being represented by the middle third of that curve.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 15:30:26

my last paragraph listed several places the money goes..

A plastic Hasbro toy is manufactured in China:

First of all, China is virtually incapable of making plastic raw material. (They do make tiny quantities) Synthesizing plastic is surprisingly difficult, and high tech, and plastic is one of America’s biggest exports to the world.

So, the cost of the raw material goes to America.

The toy is shipped from China to America. The shipping costs do not necessarily go to China. Shippers might be American.

The toy arrives and is loaded on a train and then trucks. (American companies, American truck driver, etc.)

It arrives at a warehouse. (All Americans.)

It’s shipped to a store. (Again, all shipping/distribution costs go to Americans)

The toy store sells it.
(All the retail store’s business costs go to Americans workers and support companies, from the janitor to secretaries to sales people to store fixtures, maintenance, insurance, etc. Various taxes paid to government entities… and on and on..)
——–

In short, the only money that goes to China is costs of mfg labor, and renting the factory.
What’s it cost to manufacture a $20 (retail) plastic toy in China? Probably about $1. So, China gets $1.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:40:39

“That is not a sign of a healthy economy. A healthy economy can be represented by a Bell-curve of wages, with the middle class being represented by the middle third of that curve.”

Not buying it. Provide a single example of a wage distribution that can be represented by a normal distribution so that we will know you are not pulling our legs.

 
Comment by oxide
2010-10-31 16:02:54

Joey, if so little of the price of the toy is Chinese, then why is it worth the company’s while to manufacture in China? Why not just make the thing here and save on the extra shipping?

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 17:04:37

oxide..

I’ve heard that the costs of manufacturing certain stuff here is very close to making it elsewhere.
If American labor was only slightly less expensive, or if conforming to various govt regulations were just a bit less costly, there’s be no monetary reason to outsource.

However, whenever a company claims that, both labor and politicians argue that the money companies saved would actually go towards larger company profits, cause a reduction tax revenues and govt services, and wage reductions tend to reduce wages across the board in all sectors.. blah blah.. So it never happens.
——-

Sometimes it’s just not worth it to use foreign labor, or becomes so. For instance, customer service might be so unintelligible when using foreigners, people get annoyed.. and it reduces sales and profits. So the co hires locals or subcontracts the service work to American companies.. That’s called insourcing and it happens a lot.

 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 19:00:20

Joey:

All those other people that you just listed, the one’s who “still get paid” when a Chinese product is purchased in the US - They were getting paid before the offshoring to China occured as well. So, my question still stands - Where is all that extra money going? Shareholders in general haven’t made more money from the beginning of the boom through today. The retail sales person makes less, since he/she now has to compete for that same job with someone who might otherwise have worked in the factory, and so on and so forth.

The extra money appears to be going to the wealthiest few in this country, along with the wealthiest few in places like Mexico, India, and China.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 19:50:21

Agreed.. They were getting paid before the offshoring, but who says there’s any extra money after offshoring?

Perhaps a union went on strike for the umpteenth time and hurt production. Stockholders blamed management and threatened to sell if losses weren’t recovered and production stabilized.

One option is to move production elsewhere.

Everyone on the old list still gets paid, plus some new people who handle shipping and distribution from China.
Chinese workers get the wages instead of Americans.

Future labor problems are nil. EPA, OSHA, etc are no longer a concern… lots of other benefits..

The company could be making the same profit as before but with fewer headaches.

 
Comment by measton
2010-10-31 20:11:05

BINGO we have a winner.

As usual I’m going to call BS on Joeys post

“First of all, China is virtually incapable of making plastic raw material. (They do make tiny quantities) Synthesizing plastic is surprisingly difficult, and high tech, and plastic is one of America’s biggest exports to the world”

graphics.thomsonreuters.com/ce/US-CHINA-TRADE-2.pdf

You’ll see the balance of trade with china is a deficit in plastics and rubber products. As it is in the VAST majority of areas.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 21:40:36

well.. plastics AND rubber imports from China.. so your page includes things like car and truck tires.
—-

Things have changed since I last investigated. China is importing less and exporting more plastic raw materials.

But here’s a .gov page that has a chart about half way down and it shows we are still a net exporter.. by a very large margin.

“Chinese Import and Export of plastic raw materials with U.S. (in millions of USD)”

2006

China imports from the USA- 1460.5
China exports to the USA- 126

http://www.buyusa.gov/china/en/plasticmaterials.html

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 22:22:50

Another thing is plastics and rubber “products” are not “raw materials”.

So that imbalance might include everything from A to Z which is made (primarily ?) from plastic and/or rubber. If so, I would be surprised that the trade deficit in those things is as small as it is.

I don’t know what to make of it.. need more study.

 
 
Comment by pismoclam
2010-10-31 21:17:45

Old idea : Only give foreign aid to those countries who buy dollar for dollar Amerikan made products. OK exeter, you can exclude weapons and other war related products.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Real Estate Refugee
2010-10-31 10:33:40

In the spirit of this discussion, let’s consider the Marshall Plan conceived and implemented at the end of WW II.

The theory was that WW II was the result of the draconian and overly harsh peace treaties of WW I. In order to prevent WW III, it was decided that it would be better to rebuild the industrial base of our enemies so that they would have a brighter future and be less tempted to start another war.

At the same time, the US was sitting pretty because it’s factories hadn’t been bombed and were fully functional. Money from all over flowed into the US. The US prospered until the rebuilding of it’s enemies industrial base succeeded to the point where the US now had competition. Since our former enemies were much poorer than we were, they were willing to accept lower wages. And so it goes.

The Marshall Plan - fine example of the rule of unintended consequences.

Comment by DennisN
2010-10-31 12:20:50

Well it wasn’t quite that simple. The Marshall Plan was an example of enlightened self-interest on our part. It had two main goals, neither completely atruistic.

1) Build up western Europe so that their consumers could afford to buy US produced goods - otherwise US producers would experience a painful post-war slump.

2) Make it less likely that people in western Europe would embrace Soviet propaganda, thus providing a bulwark of successful liberal democracies to stand against the USSR and Warsaw Pact.

The most cynical part of the Marshall Plan was that we also offered to include the Warsaw Pact nations as beneficiaries, knowing full well ahead of time that there was no way that Stalin would permit this.

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2010-10-31 18:22:56

But while those countries rose from their ashes- were they running a trade surplus every year? Oh no, they were importing like mad, running trade deficits, on borrowed money, while they rebuilt. And yet after a while, this investment paid off quite well. Surprise, surprise.

The Marshall Plan- fine example that running a trade deficit while investing in your future isn’t impossible after all.

Comment by measton
2010-10-31 20:13:20

Another winner. The key is to spend the money on things that will help your economy and not giant houses.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by awaiting wipeout
2010-10-31 06:17:56

Good Morning. This was funny. Vincent Price, a Yale alumni, is one of my favs. http://www.hulu.com/watch/41410/saturday-night-live-vincent-prices-halloween-special

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-10-31 07:50:01

This is as funny as the one below!

 
 
Comment by awaiting wipeout
2010-10-31 06:33:35

Here’s the one from last night. Vincent Price invites Judy Garland and her “m&m’s” in her pharma container.
http://www.hulu.com/collections/520/189401

Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-10-31 07:19:37

OMG how funny …….

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-10-31 07:41:40

Worth sending out on e-mail distribution! Thanks!

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 08:19:20

Tanhxs! :-)

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 15:41:54

:lol:

 
 
Comment by Meow
2010-10-31 07:33:30

I decided to do a little sleuthing on the St Paul house in the Star Tribune article posted by P-Bear yesterday and thought I would share the numbers.

2175 Princeton 55105
Sold in foreclosure: 9/17/2010 for $157,500
Zestimate 10/30/2010 $323,500
Last sold according to Zillow 9/1993
Last sold according to Ramsey Co 4/1/1992 for $95,000
2010/2011 tax market value $284,800

Hmmm, foreclosure after 18 years of payments.

Nothing to really say about it–Highland Park is one of the ‘nice’ St Paul neighborhoods and the location is just 3 blocks from the Mississippi and the river trail system. A steal based on recent pricing, gives me hope for the future. Still a lot of players that need to agree on valuation.

http://www.startribune.com/business/106354858.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:27:25

“Sold in foreclosure: 9/17/2010 for $157,500
Zestimate 10/30/2010 $323,500

Did some remarkable transformation add $166,000 in value to the home between 9/17/2010 and 10/30/2010, or is this simply an instance where Zilldo™ hasn’t a clue?

Comment by rms
2010-10-31 13:40:31

Most of this price volatility would go away without federal government underwriting.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:37:17

Unaffordability would also go away without federal government ‘affordable housing’ programs.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2010-10-31 08:41:19

Sold in 1992 for $92,000. Sold in 2010, in foreclosure, at $157,500. That’s about 3% a year increase- isn’t that the historic average? Theoretically that price would be about right. I wonder if banks are looking at the historic average to set their foreclosure prices.

Do you know the square footage and age of the house?

Comment by Meow
2010-10-31 08:53:33

According to the county info the house was built in 1916 and is 1470 square feet.

And I really should stress that this is one of the stickiest zips in St Paul and that you are flanked by some really nice properties. 3 blocks away on the River Parkway it is all historic mansions and ~5 blocks away is Summit Ave.–Garrison Keillor and the Governor live here–another long section of historic mansions. Also, not urban blighted mansions but nice, mostly still single family or a few condo conversions.

Warms my heart.

Comment by DennisN
2010-10-31 09:09:46

Garrison Keillor lives in a mansion in a tony part of town? You mean that “poor country boy” act is just an act? I always thought he lived in a double-wide at Lake Woebegon.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 10:55:36

Hah!

BTW, we went to a performance at Copley Symphony Hall Thursday which I am quite sure you would have enjoyed: The Dresden Staatskapelle played Beethoven and Schumann, w/ Rudolph Buchbinder as soloist on the Schumann piano concerto. It ranks with the best symphony concerts I have ever witnessed — the audience gave a five minute standing ovation after the finale of Beethoven’s 7th Symphony.

A good European orchestra plays together as a unified whole in a manner which is seldom matched in American orchestras, which are relatively more top-heavy on individual egos.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2010-10-31 13:02:50

Beethoven’s 7th has been my favorite since I first heard it in the late 1970s.

 
 
 
Comment by SD Renter
2010-10-31 08:56:50

I don’t think the banks give 2 poops about the historic average. They are so understaffed when it comes to their REOs.

In SoCal, banks are pricing their properties “below market” for the neighborhood. Once investors see it’s below market, they are getting sometimes 10-20 offers. Many times they will only accept cash offers.

After all of the offers are submitted, they go back to all the realtors who have submitted their client’s bids and say, “now give me your best and final bid.”

All of the investors should give one large and collective Efff U to best and final crap…but they don’t. They get scared that they won’t get the property so a certain % of them raise their offer. They may have bid the highest in the first place but the fools are still raising their offers.

On another note, I have many investors come to me for a hard money loan because they SAY they have an “in” at the bank with the person handling the REO’s and want 100% financing. I laugh and say people haven’t done 100% financing for 6 years.(VA loans excluding)

Most are full of BS and the ones who might really have an “in”, don’t realize that is called FRAUD.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:46:47

After all of the offers are submitted, they go back to all the realtors who have submitted their client’s bids and say, “now give me your best and final bid.”

All of the investors should give one large and collective Efff U to best and final crap…but they don’t. They get scared that they won’t get the property so a certain % of them raise their offer. They may have bid the highest in the first place but the fools are still raising their offers.

This sounds like a fraudulent sales mechanism, designed to give market power to the seller. Is it legal?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Housing Wizard
2010-10-31 11:53:15

They got the seller reserve price at a auction in which they don’t have to accept the highest bid if it doesn’t meet the reserve price ,so the seller can try to get the bid up . On a regular sale in which you have a list price ,I suppose even if the asking price was reached the seller could refuse all offers ,but they would
have to pay a commission to the listing/selling agents if they brought a buyer who met the terms of the listing contract . Hell ,some people in the annuals of real estate cases have actually sued for specific performance on a real estate listing that was not honored .
But lying about bids to get the price up is a form of fraud .
But if the offer doesn’t meet the listing price or more than the seller doesn’t have to take the offers and the agents can go back trying to get the offer up . It’s really about protecting the real estate people that spend money on a listing and bring what the seller advertised they wanted ,they put a punch of money into marketing the deal and the seller refuses the deal anyway .
They played a lot of games during the boom in which they
put forth a low price listing to get a bidding war going and drive the price higher than it would get on regular action .

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 12:23:38

“They played a lot of games during the boom in which they
put forth a low price listing to get a bidding war going and drive the price higher than it would get on regular action.”

True confession time: I played that game. There is no way to tell whether it worked — maybe our offer would have still come in at $10K above the most recent comp if we had listed it for more than $20K below the most recent comp.

 
 
 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 15:02:56

Banks are hiring people (realtoRs) to give them a “value” for the each house. There’s totally no consistency to it.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:35:23

We’re running out of new homes in San Diego — less than 1,000 available for a county with on the order of 3 million residents. I wonder whether $212 is a good price or still too high; it gets confusing against the backdrop of a sliding dollar…

Another interesting statistic: If there are fewer than 1000 new homes spread over 116 new-housing projects, that adds up to fewer than 10 new homes per project. How can these guys even stay in business at that rate, not to mention with a continuation of 2006 pricing (”From the $700’s”)?

New housing inventory heading below-1,000 mark

Only 116 new-housing projects in the county at end of third quarter
By Roger Showley
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 6 a.m.

As the housing market nears its annual holiday hibernation, the new-housing sector has approached the sub-1,000 mark, according to MarketPointe Realty Advisors.

In its third quarter report, the local consulting firm found only 1,002 unsold homes on the market, two-thirds of which are attached. Two years ago, there were 2,622 units and last year at this time, there were 2,000.

“The fourth quarter stands to be an important one for trending,” the company says. “All of the ingredients are present for a strong quarter: historically low mortgage rates, lower inventory levels with no new product being built, and steady pricing.”

At the end of the third quarter, there were 116 new-home projects, one more than in the second quarter, but 20 less than a year earlier and down from 241 in the third quarter of 2008.

The sales rate was .32 unit per week, down from .55 in the second quarter as buyers were hoping to take advantage of tax credits. The sales was .43 in the third quarter of 2009 and .17 in the third quarter of 2008, when the subprime mortgage meltdown and other economic issues were roiling the market.

Pricing in the third quarter averaged $564,229 or $388 per square feet for attached homes, but MarketPointe said that figure was inflated by the large number of high-priced condos that sold downtown, where the average of $662,756 or $500 per square foot. Outside downtown, the attached average was $472,419 or $300 per square foot.

For detached housing, the average price was $603,744 or $212 per square foot.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 09:22:40

“For detached housing, the average price was $603,744 or $212 per square foot.”

And the average SD household earns how much?

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:43:50

Officially it’s $60K, though I personally dispute that figure, as I believe it only includes currently employed households in the average. Factor in 10% or so unemployment, and the figure would drop considerably (albeit this is a rough calculation, but gives the idea):

10% * $0 + 90% * $60,000 = $54,000

The housing demand picture in San Diego is also heavily influenced by retirees, independently wealthy individuals and outside investors who think San Diego prices have bottomed out.

Household income falls in county
By Morgan Lee, Karen Kucher and Danielle Cervantes

Originally published September 28, 2010 at 10:49 a.m., updated September 28, 2010 at 11:06 a.m.

A steep decline in household income for San Diego County in 2009 wiped away any benefits from the boom years of the past decade, according to census data released Tuesday that showed the far-reaching repercussions of the U.S. recession and its aftermath.

Median household income for the region between 2008 and 2009 fell by $2,508, or 4 percent, outpacing state and national declines, according to an analysis of census data by The San Diego Union-Tribune. The new county median, $60,231, was a 5.9 percent decline from the start of the recession in 2007 and comparable to what households were bringing in a decade ago.

The decrease in income is not just the middle class shrinking but across the board,” said Murtaza Baxamusa, a demographer and deputy director of the Center on Policy Initiatives in San Diego. “We are still struggling. We will continue to struggle over the period of this year.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:49:05

:-)

 
 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 15:08:49

So, these 116 new housing projects are in addition to all the in situ houses, right? Sounds like a glut.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:41:48

Massive, top-heavy glut, especially when you start to look at the distribution of asking prices compared to the distribution of potential offers!

 
Comment by LA Wallflower
2010-10-31 23:23:19

And with prices 10x or more the local median income, it’s still completely insane. Shouldn’t these houses be more like $170,000-$200,000?

Seems like things aren’t even close to as ugly as they’re gonna get in SD… could turn into another Vegas.

 
 
Comment by pismoclam
2010-10-31 21:22:29

San Luis Obispo Co. prices down to 2002 prices.

 
 
Comment by skroodle
2010-10-31 08:37:55

Ex-builder branches out to a new business:

In Quest for ‘Legal High,’ Chemists Outfox Law

By JEANNE WHALEN

ANTWERP, Belgium—When the housing market crashed in 2008, David Llewellyn’s construction business went with it. Casting around for a new gig, he decided to commercialize something he’d long done as a hobby: making drugs.

But the 49-year-old Scotsman didn’t go into the illegal drug trade. Instead, he entered the so-called “legal high” business—a burgeoning industry producing new psychoactive powders and pills that are marketed as “not for human consumption.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704763904575550200845267526.html

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:29:58

But with their resources stretched, police say the new drugs aren’t as high a priority as fighting “class A” drugs, such as heroin and cocaine.

As he scurries to stay ahead of the law, authorities have put speed bumps, not roadblocks, in his path. Mr. Llewellyn says Belgian customs officials recently raided one of his storehouses and seized his chemicals, threatening to use environmental laws to shut him down. And he says he may have to move one of his production labs from the Netherlands because authorities there are planning to outlaw the use of certain lab equipment without a professional license.

“TrueAnger™” PeeParty tea toadlers have a “fix-all” epoxy solution for Europe:

“Smaller Gov’t” :-)

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:38:21

Does someone in the REIC pay Zilldo™ to lie about home prices?

New Zillow chief cites San Diego price trends as signs of hope in the market
Comments trail contradictory findings that prices are falling
By Roger Showley

Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 8:26 a.m.

Spencer Rascoff, recently elevated to CEO of Zillow, talks about his company and the housing market with Rismedia’s Maria Patterson in an online story released Wednesday. In the final exchange, he mentions San Diego’s recent price trends as signs that the real estate picture is improving.

However, there is contrary evidence of prices stagnating or falling, as shown in the August price index from Standard & Poor’s released Tuesday, and from MDA DataQuick for September median prices.

Comment by DennisN
2010-10-31 09:18:27

I’d really like to see Zillow’s proprietary scheme for estimates explained. In states like CA it’s bad enough, even though they have access to actual sales prices. It’s mandatory to disclose the sales price in CA and it becomes a matter of public record. The situation in states like ID is even worse. Disclosing the sale price of a real estate transaction in Idaho is purely voluntary and most sellers/buyers don’t. How the heck then does Zillow come up with an estimate here? Anecdotal evidence is that the estimates in CA trend high whereas in ID trend low.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 12:19:53

“I’d really like to see Zillow’s proprietary scheme for estimates explained.”

Isn’t it enough to see a 100% error between the sales price and the Zestimate on a regular basis? No matter what scheme they use, it produces unreliable estimates…

 
 
Comment by DennisN
2010-10-31 09:39:56

Here’s an example of Zillow in flyover country.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2443-Country-Club-Loop-Westminster-CO-80234/12964030_zpid/

This is a very nice place about to be formerly owned by a friend going into BK. Why is it sitting on the market at $450K when Zillow says it’s worth $569K? One would think it might sell when priced $130K under what it’s “worth”.

Odd how most of his neighbors’ houses Zillow out around $450K.

Comment by edgar
2010-10-31 14:24:21

I’ve seen houses zillow at $189k, go for sale and sell at $150k, then right back to being on zillow for $190k. It makes no sense. Zillow is always 20% above true prices here.

Comment by DennisN
2010-10-31 17:30:20

Where is “here”?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:45:01

Brown’s lead shrinks, Whitman’s internals show dead heat
By Alexis Levinson- The Daily Caller | Published: 5:01 PM 10/29/2010

Alexis Levinson is a reporter for The Daily Caller. She left behind the eternal spring weather of Santa Monica, CA to attend Princeton University, where she studied comparative literature and worked as associate opinion editor for The Daily Princetonian.

A new public poll Friday indicates that Meg Whitman is closing the gap in the California gubernatorial race, and the Republican’s camp said internals are showing that the contest is a dead heat.

Democrat Jerry Brown is still ahead, according to the new Rasmussen survey, but his lead has shrunk to four points.

The Whitman campaign points to internal polls and says the race is even tighter. One of them shows the two candidates tied at 43 percent and the other has the Republican ahead by one point.

Comment by In Colorado
2010-10-31 09:05:58

I still can’t believe that these two are the best California could come up with.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:37:11

Maybe they are the best who were willing to take on what, by all appearances, will prove a thankless and hopeless occupation?

Comment by skroodle
2010-10-31 10:02:45

I think they accurately reflect the voters of California.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 10:47:30

Right, and as an independent voter, I am still wrestling with the choice. I think I will vote for Whitman; even though I hate the thought of having a governor with close ties to Wall Street interests, I still think there is a better chance she will do something to fix California than someone who has been around forever.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 11:17:09

I hate the thought of having a governor with close ties to Wall Street interests whose “TrueHypocrite™” + “TrueDeception™” is to become a Billionaire Repubican female US President, ASAP! ;-)

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 11:26:54

Thanks, Hwy — Brown gets my vote…

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:10:13

“even though I hate the thought of having a governor with close ties to Wall Street interests, I still think there is a better chance she will do something to fix California than someone who has been around forever.”

I love ya man, but this makes no sense.

You’re going to vote for someone who is part of the club of the very people that created this mess?

Seriously?

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:53:35

Ah, I see your posts below.

Never mind.

 
Comment by B. Durbin
2010-10-31 20:41:43

I’m voting third party. I seriously cannot stomach pulling the lever for either one.

(Same in the Senate race. Seriously, Carly Fiorina? The CEO who was so bad that the (remaining) employees of HP applauded when her resignation was announced? The one who held a mandatory company-wide party to welcome the new Indian employees… from the people they were replacing? Icky…)

 
 
 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:23:04

The Whitman campaign points to internal polls ;-)

Snoopy: “BWAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!” (fpss™)

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2010-10-31 08:48:44

“Brown’s lead shrinks”

Was he in the pool?

Comment by exeter
2010-10-31 09:24:22

Meg’s PotatoHead would make even the most desperate man shrink.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:53:07

Ohio’s Cordray Asks for Affidavits by ‘Robo-Signer’
By Michael Riley - Oct 29, 2010 1:20 PM PT

Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray asked judges in his state for copies of foreclosure affidavits filed in their courts that are signed by a woman he identified as a “robo-signer” for Wells Fargo Bank NA.

Cordray sent a letter to 133 judges asking for information on any cases that involved Xee Moua, a Wells Fargo vice president of loan documentation. Cordray sent a separate letter to Wells Fargo & Co. asking the bank to vacate any foreclosure judgment in Ohio involving incorrect affidavits.

Moua gave a deposition in a Florida case in March in which she testified that “statements made by her in sworn affidavits were false,” Cordray said in the letter. Moua said she wasn’t familiar with the books and records related to the transactions an affidavit covered, according to Cordray.

“These are crucial misstatements that are an affront to our legal system,” he wrote. “If you become aware of affidavits Ms. Moua signed in any foreclosure cases filed in your court, I would appreciate receiving copies of such affidavits.”

Tom Goyda, a spokesman for Wells Fargo, said the company’s policy is “to comply with all applicable state and federal laws and to follow required court procedures” and that executives “intend to cooperate” with Cordray’s inquiries.

Wells Fargo, the biggest U.S. home lender, said Oct. 27 that it will file supplemental foreclosure affidavits to courts in about 55,000 proceedings after finding some statements “did not strictly adhere to the required procedures.” The bank has said it chose to resubmit the documents out of “an abundance of caution” and that none of “these instances led to foreclosures which should not have otherwise occurred.”

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 08:55:26

Wells Fargo’s foreclosures are jeered, cheered
Bloomberg October 31, 2010 04:00 AM

Wells Fargo has become both a target of foreclosure critics and an example of how the housing mess might be cleaned up. Ohio’s attorney general on Thursday chastised the San Francisco bank’s plan to submit supplemental affidavits to courts in about 55,000 foreclosure proceedings where some statements didn’t “strictly adhere to the required procedures.” (The bank said none of the paperwork problems led to foreclosures that shouldn’t have occurred.) In New York, Wells Fargo’s effort to foreclose on Tandala Mims’ two-family home was rejected by a bankruptcy judge, who said the paperwork was “questionable.” In the same week, Arizona’s top state lawyer held up Wells Fargo’s agreement on loan-modification procedures as a model remedy for a 50-state foreclosure probe, which will soon begin meetings with lenders. Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and other banks have suspended some foreclosure sales and evictions in the wake of concerns that documents weren’t filed properly.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:12:57

IIRC, Arizona’s “top state lawyer” is a nutcase and has often contradicted and run contrary to all branches of state government.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:00:53

Lenders skirt foreclosure rules
Local homes going on sheriff’s auction block despite problems

Sunday, October 31, 2010 03:01 AM
By Jill Riepenhoff
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Jeff Barron, who did not want to give his affiliation, sits in the Franklin County Hall of Justice and checks a list of about 190 homes that were auctioned last week. Sales are continuing despite the discovery of problems with some foreclosures.

At least 55 Franklin County homeowners will lose their houses at an auction Friday despite the fact that their foreclosure cases appear to contain mistakes, omissions of critical evidence or questionable affidavits, The Dispatch found in a review of court documents.

The newspaper examined the files of more than 130 homeowners whose houses are slated for auction Friday. Half of the cases had issues that consumer advocates call troubling and should have raised red flags before a judge ordered the homes sold.

In 13 of the 50 questionable cases, the lenders failed to produce the promissory note, as required by law. The note is the legal agreement that spells out how much is owed, how the loan will be repaid and to whom it is owed.

The default judgments in 19 other cases were built upon sworn affidavits by people who appear to be “robo-signers,” lending-industry employees who aren’t verifying the amounts owed or the ownership of the mortgage and note, as required by law.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 09:15:45

“…as required by law” :-)

“Financial Innovation” meets “Legal StallintheNation”

This case deals with,…blah,blah, the party of the 1st party claims that…blah,blah, blah,…the party of the 3rd party says that…oh finally, here it is, the case:

Sally: “I’ll take it to the Supreme Court!”

Judge Lucy: “The Beagle is a Lawyer?”

Snoopy: “BWAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!” (fpss™)

Clerk Marci reads out loud legal description addendum:

Marci: “Deception…
Deception is the act of convincing another to believe information that is not true.

Deception involves concepts like propaganda, distraction and concealment. Fiction, while sometimes manipulative, is not a deception unless it is portrayed as the whole truth; not to be confused with half-truths.In many cases it is difficult to distinguish deception from providing unintentionally wrong information. One of the reasons for this is that a person or an entire organization may be self-deceived.”

Charlie Brown: “Good Grief,…”

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:34:57

I just love a good old fashioned food fight between states attorneys generals and Megabank, Inc! The more these guys fight tooth and nail over the scraps of the housing bust, the less likely it seems that nonparties to the transactions will be left holding the bag on Megabank, Inc’s bad housing market gambling debt.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:14:27

Don’t forget that MegaBank is also drawing legal fire from shareholders, bondholders and other investment organizations.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:05:02

Foreclosure defense: Court rules bank must prove ownership
Published: October 31, 2010

Following foreclosure moratoriums by PNC Bank, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, and Ally Financial, the settlement of deceptive marketing charges by Wells Fargo Bank, and the Attorney General’s investigation into faulty foreclosure practices at the Florida Default Law Group, the Law Offices of Marshall C. Watson, P.A.; the Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A.; and Shapiro & Fishman, LLP., a Florida court ruled that banks must provide evidence of ownership when attempting to foreclose on a property.

On Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach overturned an earlier summary judgment by Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Thomas Barkdull, allowing repossession of a Boca Raton couple’s home by US Bank National Association. The foreclosure went through even though the lender did not provide an original note or other acceptable proof of ownership.

In the case of Guiseppe Servedio, the court ruled that banks must provide evidence they actually own and hold the mortgage when seeking to foreclose on a property.Some judges have been lax about the rules of evidence,” stated Peter Snyder, his attorney. “I think that what this case says is you better have the original note.

The decision comes following an earlier ruling against Deutsche Bank where the court stated that “[a] summary judgment should not be granted where there are issues of fact raised by [the] affirmative defense[s] which have not been effectively factually challenged and refuted.” In this matter, a homeowner asserted several defenses that were ignored by Deutsche Bank and the lower court.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:10:06

I don’t get how withholding supply from the market in order to make sure foreclosure paperwork is in order could depress home prices. Can someone please help me out on this apparent violation of the laws of supply and demand?

Treasury Links Foreclosure Ills to Lower Housing Prices
By SEWELL CHAN
Published: October 27, 2010

WASHINGTON — The uncertainty over the legal status of foreclosed homes in the nation could further depress home prices and delay the recovery of the housing market, the Obama administration said on Wednesday.

Phyllis Caldwell of the Treasury said Wednesday that the government believed the overall risks to the financial system were slim.

The warning came at the first Congressional hearing since the magnitude of the problem gained wide attention. Distressed properties make up one quarter of all home sales.

Revelations about paperwork shortcuts and so-called robo-signed affidavits, as well as the likelihood of protracted legal battles by homeowners and inquiries by state and federal officials, will hinder foreclosure proceedings and discourage prospective buyers, a Treasury Department official said.

“Together, these two factors may exert downward pressure on overall housing prices both in the short and long run,” said the official, Phyllis R. Caldwell, chief of the homeownership preservation office at the Treasury.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 14:24:44

Assume supply and demand are fixed.
The add some additional measure of risk to the product. The product has become less desirable, and sells for less.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:16:09

“The add some additional measure of risk to the product.”

You are only considering the demand (consumer) side of the equilibrium. If banks slow the flow of foreclosures to the market, then supply is also reduced, making the price effect indeterminate.

The only thing for sure is that the volume of transactions is sure to slow — as if it weren’t already near a stand-still. This is why I am expecting to see transactions volume bottom out over the next twelve months. Not sure about prices, though…

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 16:02:42

I’m not saying prices will fall..
I’m only proposing that there are reasons beyond supply/demand that could make them fall (or rise).

Suppose a high court decides that since FBs suffered no monetary damages, no injury, no losses of any kind, robo-signing lawsuits lack status and can’t be prosecuted.
Prices would tend to rise on that alone.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 15:21:05

Joey,

Firstly, supply and demand are not fixed. You can see that, right? Secondly, no risk has been added. Once you buy a house and the title is transferred, then there is no court in this country who will make you give back that house (in the absence of fraud on your part). Besides, even if they did, then you would be covered by title insurance.

PB is correct.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 15:40:12

I deliberately fixed supply and demand to illustrate the point.

Even if supply is static and sales (demand) remain the same, price can change. There’s more to determining prices than just supply and demand.
—–

When the validity of ownership of a home is being questioned by the courts, how can you say risk wasn’t added to buying that home?

You might be buying something that can’t legally be sold. You might be forced to give it back after the sale. If that happens, it can cost you time and some money.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by mrktMaven FL
2010-10-31 09:11:40

Imagine having to pay a fee to a developer, over and over again, every time property changes hand. That’s a clever scheme. How do I get in on that one?

If you’re in the market for a newly built home, be on the lookout for a controversial cost called a private transfer fee. It has gotten the attention of Congress and could change how homeowners value their homes.

A private transfer fee, which is also known as a home-resale, capital-recovery or flip fee, is typically 1% of the sales price that a developer or a homeowners association collects at the time of a sale. It generally is directed toward capital improvements in a subdivision or condominium complex and is paid to a homeowners association.

But a growing number of developers are starting to charge a type of private transfer fee to cover the upfront costs of building streets and infrastructure in large residential developments. The fee, devised by Freehold Capital Partners, a New York-based real-estate consulting firm, kicks in every time a property sells, generally over a 99-year period.

WSJ: New-Home Buyers: Be Aware of Transfer Fee

Comment by Kim
2010-10-31 13:34:44

This is already illegal in many states.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:31:41

“It has gotten the attention of Congress and could change how homeowners value their homes.”

Sounds like a great way to either reduce the sticker price of new homes, the number of new home buyers or both…but I suspect there is an intent to deceive built into this practice, as most folks don’t know how to convert the value of this scam fee in perpetuity into a present value which should be applied as a discount to what the buyer might otherwise be willing to pay for the privilege of new home ownership.

REIC = “Scams-is-Us”

 
Comment by pismoclam
2010-10-31 21:44:09

Mello Roos bonds anyone ?

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:13:51

Federal bailout oversight panel raises alarms over foreclosure crisis
By Brady Dennis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 27, 2010; 8:41 PM

Members of a congressional panel charged with monitoring the government’s bailout programs expressed alarm and frustration over the potential repercussions of the unfolding home foreclosure crisis during a hearing Wednesday on Capitol Hill.

The hearing called by the bipartisan Congressional Oversight Panel was intended to examine the Treasury Department’s foreclosure prevention programs, but panelists focused much of their attention on revelations that some of the nation’s largest mortgage servicers routinely submitted faulty and even fraudulent paperwork as they undertook hundreds of thousands of foreclosures.

The panel’s chairman, outgoing Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-Del.), said in opening remarks that the problems “are already undermining investor and homeowner confidence in the mortgage market, and they threaten to undermine Americans’ fundamental faith in due process.

The revelations last month forced lenders such as Bank of America, Ally Financial and J.P. Morgan Chase to halt foreclosures temporarily while they examined the problems. The uproar also has triggered numerous state and federal investigations, led more homeowners to challenge the legitimacy of their foreclosures and prompted large investors to threaten lawsuits and demand that big banks buy back failing loans.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:32:20

Just what the country needs: A Wall Street insider as president.

Government of the sheeple, by the plutocrats, for the plutocrats shall not perish from this earth!

Markets
Don’t Count Bloomberg Out for 2012 Just Yet
By Charlie Gasparino
Published October 20, 2010 | FOXBusiness

Mike Bloomberg for president?

Several top Wall Street executives think he would make a good choice, and in several private conversations with banking executives, Bloomberg himself isn’t ruling out the possibility, FOX Business Network has learned.

The possibility of the three-term New York City mayor running in the 2012 presidential election is still largely a Wall Street fixation. Several banking executives have privately prodded Bloomberg to make the run, possibly as an independent, while publicly Bloomberg has said he isn’t in the race, explaining that winning as an independent is still a next-to-impossible feat to pull off.

Wall Street executives say it is doubtful that Bloomberg, who has also been rumored as a possible replacement to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner who may step down sometime after the midterms, would challenge President Obama in a Democratic primary for the 2012 presidential contest. And given his socially liberal positions on abortion, gun control, not to mention his support for the building of a Mosque near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan, he knows winning a Republican primary might be just as difficult as winning the presidency as an independent.

That said, prodded by Wall Street bankers who are sick of class warfare coming from both policies and believe Bloomberg has done a good job managing New York City finances during difficult times, Bloomberg is keeping their hopes alive.

He won’t rule it out, which is why Wall Street is still buzzing, and praying that he will run,” said another executive.

Comment by whyoung
2010-10-31 13:47:54

But are they sure he’d run as a Democrat? He was a Republican when first elected mayor and now an independent.
NY loves its R.H.I.N.O.’s.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 09:52:19

There is nothing better than a well-functioning market with a healthy rate of arms-length transactions to promote credible appraisals. When supply is withheld from the market by a few collusive players with overwhelming market power, appraisals tend to get artificially inflated.

Federal Reserve’s proposed home appraisal rules may not prevent inaccurate valuations

The rules would replace those imposed last year by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Critics say they won’t lessen the system’s tilt toward cut-rate fees and short turnaround times.

By Kenneth R. Harney

October 31, 2010
Reporting from Washington —

You may have missed it, but the Federal Reserve proposed far-reaching new rules Oct. 18 that could affect home real estate appraisals — and millions of owners’ equity holdings — nationwide.

Comment by Kim
2010-10-31 13:33:22

“some of whom will pay only $300 for the appraisal but later charge consumers $450 at closing”

“Independent appraisers say some management companies already are looking for ways to bypass the Fed, such as requiring them to sign statements in advance of their work that the fee they receive is “customary and reasonable” — even though it’s bare-bones and far below what experienced appraisers would be paid.”

It would have been nice if the law had addressed those kinds of things!

 
 
Comment by cobaltblue
2010-10-31 10:02:55

Just look at how the outsourced jobs from America have improved the standard of living for foriegners:

MUMBAI, India (AP) — The Mumbai slum of Rafiq Nagar has no clean water for its shacks made of ripped tarp and bamboo. No garbage pickup along the rocky, pocked earth that serves as a road. No power except from haphazard cables strung overhead illegally.

And not a single toilet or latrine for its 10,000 people.

Yet nearly every destitute family in the slum has a cell phone. Some have three.

When President Barack Obama visits India Nov. 6, he will find a country of startlingly uneven development and perplexing disparities, where more people have cell phones than access to a toilet, according to the United Nations.

It is a country buoyed by a vibrant business world of call centers and software developers, but hamstrung by a bloated, corrupt government that has failed to deliver the barest of services.

Since there are no water pipes or wells here, residents are forced to rely on the water mafia for water for cooking, washing clothes, bathing and drinking. The neighborhood is rife with skin infections, tuberculosis and other ailments.

A large blue barrel outside a home is filled with murky brown water, tiny white worms and an aluminum drinking cup. To fill up two jerry cans costs between 40 ($.90) and 50 ($1.10) rupees a day, about one-third of the average family’s earnings here.

“If the government would give us water, we would pay that money to the government,” said Suresh Pache, 41, a motorized rickshaw driver.

Instead, it has issued demolition notices throughout the slum, which sits illegally on government land. Pache, whose home was razed 10 times, jokes that the destruction is the only government service he can count on.

Guess the residents there need a dose of Hope and Change. They should vote in all Democrats. Don’t they realize that???

Comment by alpha-sloth
2010-10-31 10:56:19

Sounds like the people are getting their water from the free market- and hating it, and begging for the government to provide it instead. So much for the free market providing everything better if the gov would just get out of the way.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2010-10-31 11:12:39

residents are forced to rely on the water mafia for water for cooking, washing clothes, bathing and drinking. The neighborhood is rife with skin infections, tuberculosis and other ailments. ;-)

So much for the free market providing everything better if the gov would just get out of the way.

Yep, “Diz ALL the Gov’t’s fault,… de-regulation = salvation!”

Comment by butters
2010-10-31 12:18:24

You guys are one sick puppy.

Here’s an example where government has truly failed to provide water for its people and people have relied on other ways of getting it. And you still think people would be better off with government. It’s India so there are diseases everywhere even in places with government provided water.

An average Indian thinks like you guys. He expects the government to provide all things. I don’t blame him, I would have done the same thing if I have been brain-washed by over 60 yrs of Soviet style central planning and bureaucracy that comes with it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Danny Harbison
2010-10-31 12:46:11

Now NutterButter… Read the article. There is no water infrastructure there, hence there was never any government involvement in providing water supplies. The fact that such large projects require the marshalling of state resources completely eludes you.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:23:48

“The fact that such large projects require the marshalling of state resources completely eludes you.”

As it eludes all libertarian and neocon “free market” fanatics.

“Free market” is nothing but code for “free to eff you up the A.”

 
Comment by oxide
2010-10-31 16:51:07

Here’s an example where government has truly failed to provide water for its people

Aren’t you the one for “limited government” and “private enterprise?” And part of the crowd that just last week argued that “nothing the government does can’t be done more efficiently by the private sector?”

And now you’re screaming that the government is required to “provide” water? ARE YOU TRULY THIS DENSE?

 
Comment by oxide
2010-10-31 16:53:54

Oh wait. I had to re-read your post. You’re saying that “look how bad the government is doing, better to get rid of government” — and presumably let the free market take over. Well duh, in the case, YOU GOT YOUR WISH. In the case of water, there IS no government, and the free market HAS taken over. And the people are still in horrible shape. So which one are you gonna pick?

 
Comment by LA Wallflower
2010-10-31 23:37:38

Water is different, because if you don’t have water, you’ll die within a few days. This means that rather than providing water at a reasonable fee, something that people can afford easily so they can use more of their income to better their lives, those with water can charge whatever they want to.

Imagine what your life would be like if you had to spend 1/3 of your income - what most Americans are supposed/advised to spend on their housing - on just barely enough water to keep you from dropping dead, say a liter, maybe 2 liters per day.

Some things should not be left to the “free market.”

 
 
 
 
Comment by combotechie
2010-10-31 11:23:46

“Instead, it has issued demolition notices throughout the slum, which sits illegally on government land. Panche, whose home was razed 10 times, jokes that the destruction is the only government service he can count on.”

Same description fits what can be found under a L.A. freeway overpass.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 10:44:49

Two good articles by Dean Calbreath on the robo-signer scandal appear in today’s dead-tree edition of the SD Union-Tribune. I will post later in the week if they show up on the website. Here is a passage:

Foreclosure Procedure in Review
Investors in mortgage-backed securities press lenders for buybacks

…after investigations discovered that some lenders were submitting faulty documents to support the foreclosures–including documents with falsified signatures, backdated notary stamps and misleading affidavits — judges throughout the country are taking a second look at foreclosures. New York, for instance, issued a regulation saying that lawyers must certify to the validity of the documents that they are filing.

The latest challenge comes from the investors in mortgage-backed securities, including some of the nation’s leading hedge funds, pension funds and mutual funds. The investors say that the lenders and their affiliates never should have sold them the securities in the first place, since they were much riskier than advertised. And the recent revelations, the investors say, show that the lenders have failed to service the loans properly.

BofA CEO Brian Moynihan made light of the investors’ concerns in a conference call. “If you think about people who come back and say, ‘I bought a Chevy Vega, but I want it to be a Mercedes with a 12-cylinder,’ we’re not putting up with that. .. We will diligently fight this,” Moynihan said.

But critics of the banks say that the recent revelations of how poorly the banks have managed the foreclosure process show that the investors could have just cause to complain.

It’s very likely that the lenders will prevail, especially if they prove there were mistakes on the documentation that the banks were using,‘ said international real estate attorney Edward Mermelstein.

Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:28:20

I don’t get what the investors are saying. Just because the foreclosure documents were rubber-stamped, doesn’t mean the loans weren’t legitimately sold to the investors. I am really confused by this.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:11:49

“Just because the foreclosure documents were rubber-stamped,…”

I guess it depends on whether the rubber-stamping activity reduces the prospect the investors will get their money back. Nobody could have seen the foreclosure tsunami coming so rapid and deep, so nobody foresaw how an unmanageable foreclosure processing workload might throw a wrench into the collateral reclamation business. Perhaps the investors wrongly assumed the banks would process documents according to legally mandatory guidelines?

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:07:10

‘I bought a Chevy Vega, but I want it to be a Mercedes with a 12-cylinder,’

Did them Megabank of America Vegas come with AAA ratings?

 
 
Comment by Real Estate Refugee
2010-10-31 10:49:05

During my mornining walk, I had a revelation.

Sarah Palin is the Tammy Faye Baker of politics.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 11:29:11

Dumb Prediction of the Day: Some second-rate candidate will soon win the WH just because of her gender. I give it two decades, max, for this to happen.

Comment by In Montana
2010-10-31 16:50:18

Well, we did it for race. Another first, coming up!

 
 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-31 13:10:50

Not true! She smart, successful and has a lot of governing experience. You can’t put her down, she’s a woman of substance and intelligence and the liberals are scared of her. Why can’t liberals have an intelligent discussion of issues instead of name calling?

Comment by Georgiaboy
2010-10-31 14:04:15

Fixt it for you sister.

So true! She’s obviously not well read(she doesn’t read), a quitter with little governing experience. There’s no need to put her down as she’s a woman with a mind of little substance and intelligence and the TeaPartyRepublicans are proud of her lack of intellectual fortitude. Why do TeaPartyRepulbicans shift into victim talk when we honestly critique of her lack of intelligence?

Comment by exeter
2010-10-31 15:25:15

So long as Sarah keeps her mouth open, the crazy just keeps falling out of it.

Keep talkin’ Sarah.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-31 16:49:36

Lack of intelligence? What??? How do you become an authority on intelligence? Can’t see it in your post. What kind of intelligence does Obama have, he has to have a teleprompter for even the smallest event, and as far as being a president, he is completely lost. He’s all over the place, can’t figure out what to do about anything.

She’s been a mayor and a governer, fought the oil guys and won! How about that? She is an accomplished and successful woman. You liberals just can’t stand it, makes me laugh.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Georgiaboy
2010-10-31 17:00:33

You liberals make me laugh.

 
Comment by Ben Jones
2010-10-31 17:06:47

‘She’s been a mayor and a governer, fought the oil guys and won! How about that? She is an accomplished and successful woman.’

Well, she’s a Neocon:

‘Palin was discovered by Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol in 2007 while he and a group of National Review stalwarts were on an Alaska cruise. Kristol assiduously pushed the right buttons to get her on the Republican ticket with John McCain. Palin returned the favor, describing how she had an Israeli flag on display in her governor’s office and describing her love for Israel during the debate with Joe Biden…Palin continues to be in contact with Kristol and has benefited from a recent hagiography The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star by Matthew Continetti, who bears the title of “opinion editor” at the Kristol’s Weekly Standard’

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2010/10/27/the-tea-party-disconnect/

 
 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-10-31 16:51:39

I notice that about you too.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Georgiaboy
2010-10-31 17:06:20

We know alot of things about each other Sis. wink wink.

 
Comment by Georgiagirl
2010-11-01 06:14:02

I’m learning things about some of you and it’s not good. I’m happy that I don’t have to attack a person’s character and intelligence in order to disagree with them. I have the capability to disagree with someone on the issues and not attack them personally. Some people don’t know the difference.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by wmbz
2010-10-31 10:50:25

“The Obama government shows no interest in jettisoning any of the accumulated ballast of the last half a century of boondoggles, bailouts and bunkum. Instead, with new health care and regulatory programs, it is adding to them. The current budget deficit is close to 10% of GDP, with no plausible plans to reduce it significantly. Instead, the political elite dream that they will ‘grow their way out’ of their financial problems. They count on stimulus to rev up their economy. But what do they have to ’stimulate’ with?’ ”

~ Paper Money Decline

Bill Bonner flits among his offices in France, England, the U.S. and elsewhere gets first-hand glimpses of what’s going on. He sees the French behaving like spoiled brats because the government must raise the age for state-paid pensions. He notices the English beginning to take matters seriously and tightening their belts. And the U.S.?

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:43:57

The only spoiled brats I see are on Wall St. and Fleet St.

They screw up but we have to tighten our belts?

Marie Antoinette had the same attitude.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 11:25:44

1000 signatures over eight hours exceeds two files per minute rate of robo-signing!

DEPOSITIONS SHED LIGHT ON ‘ROBO-SIGNERS’
Lenders’ workers had little financial acumen or grasp of papers they signed on foreclosures
DEAN CALBREATH * U-T

The following is an abridged version of the deposition of Kelly Scott, legal assistant at a foreclosure mill in Florida. The deposition gives a glimpse of how quickly foreclosures are being processed.

“The paralegals in the firm were all notaries. They’d get all the pleadings and documents and once they were printed out, the senior paralegal would notarize the file and sign it. Then they would take them and lay them out on a long table. Then they would get stacked among each other, side by side, and Cheryl (office manager of the foreclosure department) would come twice a day, in the morning and midafternoon, and she would sign every single one of them.

“She doesn’t review them. She just looks. Cheryl would give certain paralegals rights to sign her name, because most of the time she was very tired, exhausted from signing her name numerous times per day. You have to understand that it was more than 500 files that she’s signing in the morning and another 500 in the afternoon.

“One borrower said they were notified that they were going to be evicted in 24 hours. And this borrower had just got out of the hospital and just had a baby. So I put her on hold and I went to see Cheryl to advise her of the situation because this lady had nowhere to go. And Cheryl instructed me that was not her problem or her issue and to transfer her to the reinstatement supervisor. I have no idea (how the reinstatement supervisor handled it. They will sometimes request payoff figures to reinstate the loan.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the clients that came most to the office. (After one visit, the staff was tole) they need to pump out as much as they can for the month so they can meet the quota. What was the quota? I really wouldn’t know. But (were were told that ) the clients weren’t happy and we needed to pick up the speed.”

For the record, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac deny they have quotas and attorney David Stern, who runs the firm, has challenged Scott’s veracity.

 
Comment by Eddie
2010-10-31 12:39:48

Yesterday I took my daughter trick or treating downtown. It was one of those setups where the Main St shops hand out candy for a couple of hours. Huge turnout. Lots of fun, even with the crappy weather.

A few kid-less friends joined us just to tag along. After, we all went out to dinner. At least tried. Every restaurant downtown was a zoo so we trecked out a few miles and went to a local California Piiza Kitchen type. Wait time? 2.5 hours for a table. I thought the hostess was joking, nope, that was the wait. No thanks. There was a Texas Roadhouse across the street. There the wait was better, but still 45 mins. 45 min wait with a 2 year old….not so good either.

We all ended coming to my house and ordered a couple of pizzas from Dominos. Which itself took about an hour to deliver since they were so busy. But at least at home my daughter has things to keep her occupied during the wait.

So here we are yet again in a tale of two worlds. The real world where I literally could not eat out due to the crowds. And the HBB world where it’s 1934 all over again.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:45:52

There’s a big difference between Friday and Saturday night and the rest of the week.

Other than that, glad you and your daughter had fun.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2010-10-31 17:41:28

Compared to 2008 and the first half of 2009, the restaurants we frequent are definitely busier now.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 17:51:35

I’m seeing mixed results. But the “bleeding” does seemed to have stopped.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Kim
2010-10-31 13:59:24

Happy Halloween!

Anyone else passing out candy right about now?

BTW, my parent’s town limited trick or treating to two hours. Our is five hours long, so I am kind of envious.

Last year I had about 45 kids total. This year I am already up to 32 and we’re only one hour into it.

Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:17:03

Really, your town actually decreed when people could trick or treat? That is crazy, man.

Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:47:11

Many places do this now. I really don’t want trick or treaters coming to my door at 11pm.

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2010-10-31 23:41:17

Easy solution: turn the porch light off when you don’t want them coming to your door any more. Works like a charm.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by dustartist
2010-11-01 00:29:36

Kids aren’t out trick-or-treating at 11pm on a school night. Relax, man…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:12:10

What happens to a ghost when he gets lost in the fog?

 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 14:15:04

He is mist.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:26:46

Nice one! We mist your posts as of late…

 
Comment by ecofeco
2010-10-31 16:48:57

:lol: +1

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 14:59:24

Does it make any sense for California to elect a billionaire governor with close ties to big money Wall Street interests at a time when many of its citizens cannot afford a pot to p!ss in? Note that it was the flood of easy mortgage loans from Megabank, Inc that put us into this pickle; why trust them now?

Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown locked in battle for broken state of California

Who will inherit Arnold Schwarzenegger’s poison chalice?

* Paul Harris in California
* The Observer, Sunday 17 October 2010

Meg Whitman Meg Whitman has put more than $100m of her own money into the California governorship race – and is still slightly trailing Jerry Brown.

The candidates fighting to become governor of California were faced with an unusual sight when they met last week for their final pre-election debate.

Moderating between the Democrat Jerry Brown, a liberal dubbed “Governor Moonbeam” when he held the position in the 1970s, and the Republican Meg Whitman, a former Silicon Valley chief executive, was an injured debate host, Tom Brokaw.

Brokaw, one of America’s most famous TV newsmen, had broken his ankle and he hobbled on stage on crutches. He could not resist comparing his condition with that of California. “We’re both broken at the moment,” he said. “The difference is that I hope to be repaired before the beginning of the year.

The punchline lies in the cruel reality of the crisis facing California as it prepares to wave goodbye to Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former movie star who became its governor. He departs with catastrophic approval ratings but also a sense that the state’s problems were too big even for a “Governator”.

California, which once embodied a sun-soaked version of the American Dream, now has an unemployment rate of 12.4%, far above the national average. Its public education system is ranked bottom in the country. Its budget deficit is $19bn, and its government regularly has to issue IOUs. Some of its cities, such as Vallejo, have declared themselves bankrupt. A few people believe that a major metropolis, perhaps Los Angeles, could follow suit. With its sprawling suburbs and ample land, this state was at the centre of the property boom, and figures released late last week showed that it leads America in at least one thing: the rate of foreclosures.

Political commentators do not pull their punches when discussing the challenge that faces the next governor. “It is absolutely awful,” said Barbara O’Connor, a professor at the University of California at Sacramento. “Many voters’ fears here are basic. How will I keep my house? How will I feed my family? How will I keep my job?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:02:09

Why big-time CEOs make terrible politicians

Government and business are antithetical. That’s not a flaw in the system — government exists to take on precisely those tasks the private sector can’t or won’t.

By Michael Hiltzik
October 31, 2010

California is poised once again to compete for the crown as the nation’s leading graveyard for business superstars trying to make the jump into politics.

With election day yet 48 hours away, it’s still possible that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina will prevail in their campaigns for governor and U.S. senator. But the betting and the opinion polls are pointing the other way. So as we face the likely, if not certain, wreckage of these two lavishly financed campaigns, it’s proper to ponder anew the following question: Why do big-time CEOs make such terrible politicians?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:24:18

If Megabank, Inc has to pay what it really costs to comply with legal requirements in foreclosure processing, how will they be able to afford those ginormous bonus payments to their managers?

Op-Ed Contributor
How the Banks Put the Economy Underwater
By YVES SMITH
Published: October 30, 2010

IN Congressional hearings last week, Obama administration officials acknowledged that uncertainty over foreclosures could delay the recovery of the housing market. The implications for the economy are serious. For instance, the International Monetary Fund found that the persistently high unemployment in the United States is largely the result of foreclosures and underwater mortgages, rather than widely cited causes like mismatches between job requirements and worker skills.

This chapter of the financial crisis is a self-inflicted wound. The major banks and their agents have for years taken shortcuts with their mortgage securitization documents — and not due to a momentary lack of attention, but as part of a systematic approach to save money and increase profits. The result can be seen in the stream of reports of colossal foreclosure mistakes: multiple banks foreclosing on the same borrower; banks trying to seize the homes of people who never had a mortgage or who had already entered into a refinancing program.

Banks are claiming that these are just accidents. But suppose that while absent-mindedly paying a bill, you wrote a check from a bank account that you had already closed. No one would have much sympathy with excuses that you were in a hurry and didn’t mean to do it, and it really was just a technicality.

The most visible symptoms of cutting corners have come up in the foreclosure process, but the roots lie much deeper. As has been widely documented in recent weeks, to speed up foreclosures, some banks hired low-level workers, including hair stylists and teenagers, to sign or simply stamp documents like affidavits — a job known as being a “robo-signer.”

Comment by In Montana
2010-10-31 17:15:59

“The major banks and their agents have for years taken shortcuts with their mortgage securitization documents — ”

I was looking at someone’s property records and saw one of those Lost Note Affidavits, signed by a “vice president” of some lender. I guess they needed it to record the payoff (no foreclosure). The affidavit was filed in 1996 for a 1993 loan on a building lot..it wasn’t even that old and they “lost” the note.

Methinks this particular shortcut has been in use awhile.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:27:12

Boot camp for foreclosure lawyers
By Prashant Gopal
Bloomberg News
Posted: 10/31/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT

Consumer lawyers have been traveling to a remote 160-acre farm in the mountains of western North Carolina since 2006 to network, drink Scotch and prepare for legal combat in foreclosure and bankruptcy cases.

They arrive in groups of a dozen or so for a four-day boot camp where they learn how to protect their clients’ assets by exploiting the mistakes of creditors. Attendees these days are especially keen on strategies to fend off mortgage lenders and servicers seeking to seize their clients’ homes.

Their instructor is O. Max Gardner III, a 65-year-old bankruptcy litigator and grandson of a North Carolina governor, who was using flaws in mortgage servicing to stave off lenders years before cases involving shoddy paperwork spurred this month’s investigation of the industry by the attorneys general of all 50 states. He charges $7,775 for the program, which covers 3,000 pages of materials, lodging, food and unlimited wine, beer and single-malt Scotch.

My time with Max changed the trajectory of my legal career,” said Nick Wooten, 40, an Alabama attorney who changed his focus from personal injury to bankruptcy and foreclosure after attending the boot camp in 2007. “Knowledge is power, and one thing he is able to give in his boot camp is a tremendous amount of knowledge about how the other side operates.

Participants, who are admitted only after a background check confirms that they don’t work for creditors, gain access to a private e-mail distribution list where they share legal strategies, documents and advice. Linda Tir elli, a consumer-bankruptcy attorney in New York and Connecticut and one of the 599 people who have gone through the program, said she feels like she’s now part of a big law firm.

It’s a fraternity,” Tirelli said. “We don’t see each other as competition. We want more attorneys to join because the more we have the better.”

Comment by DennisN
2010-10-31 17:10:38

Max claims the Scotch must be “old enough to vote” before he will stock it. :lol:

http://www.maxbankruptcybootcamp.com/training-for-attorneys/boot-camp

Can I Get CLE Credit?

The North Carolina State Board of Continuing Legal Education, through its accreditation committee, has approved Max’s live Bankruptcy Bootcamp for 28 hours of general CLE credit. Other states have approved credit at the request of individual participants, so be sure to check. There are no CLE hours available for the online training.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:31:09

Federal program designed to help homeowners leaves many in foreclosure

The Freemans prepare to light the wood furnace at Friendly Haven Rise.
Photo by Zachary Kaufman

By Cami Joner
Columbian Staff Reporter
Sunday, October 31, 2010
By Zachary Kaufman
The Columbian

Joseph and Jacqueline Freeman at their Battle Ground-area farm, Friendly Haven Rise. The 10-acre farm and home have been on the brink of foreclosure since 2008, when the Freemans lost income from the farm business. The Freemans operate the farm like a school, where people pay to learn about raising crops and livestock and using tools.

Jacqueline and Joseph Freeman thought they were doing everything possible to keep from losing their Battle Ground house and farm when they obtained a temporary mortgage modification through a federal program in 2009.

But despite not missing a single month’s payment during 12 months at a “trial” reduced mortgage rate, the Freemans are worse off now than in late 2008, when their income fell dramatically due to canceled bookings at their farm-school business, Friendly Haven Rise.

Last month, the Freemans received a foreclosure notice from their lender, Wells Fargo, which said the couple’s mortgage is $23,000 in arrears. They feel betrayed by the federal program that was set up to help, Jacqueline Freeman said.

We had no clue we were headed toward foreclosure,” she said. “We thought we were taking part in a national program that was helping people.

The Freemans are not alone. They are among millions of American home owners who are frustrated with the Obama administration’s Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, a $75 billion federal program that was supposed to be their salvation. Instead, the program appears to be failing droves of homeowners who, like the Freemans, have been drawn into trial modifications that leave them with more principal outstanding on their loans, less home equity and worse credit scores.

Clark County homes in foreclosure
Third quarter (July-September)
2010: 1,451
2009 : 1,174
2008 : 751
2007: 374
2006: 180

Source: RealtyTrac, California

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 16:20:14

What happened in between not missing a payment for 12 months, and being 23 large in arrears?

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 18:17:39

The Freemans thought they were benefiting from the trial modification that reduced their monthly payment from $2,150 per month to a more manageable $1,390. Now Jacqueline Freeman would like to know what happened to the total $16,680 they shelled out over the course of 12 months.

“How could the bank say we are $23,000 behind? That part doesn’t make sense to us,” she said.
—–

$16,680 equals 14 payments ($1,390 x 14)

She says they didn’t “miss a payment” in 12 months. Did they make 14 payments in 12 months? If so, why?

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:33:43

Home sales in county tumble 48 percent in July
Realtors cite end of federal tax credit
Clark County home sales dropped 48 percent in July, according to a housing report released Thursday.
By Cami Joner
Columbian Staff Reporter

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Clark County home sales plummeted in July, sparked by the end of a federal tax credit that ended in June, according to a housing report released Thursday.

Realtors say the 48 percent drop in sales from June to July has ushered in a new standoff between buyers and sellers, which are often banks holding defaulted mortgage loans. To minimize losses, the banks want the homes to fetch the highest price possible. But potential buyers — battered by falling investment portfolios, wage freezes and high unemployment — are still holding out for rock-bottom prices.

The face-off intensified just after the June 30 cutoff date for 2010 home buyers’ tax credits of up to $8,000, said Tracie DeMars, a Vancouver-based Realtor with Re/Max Equity Group Inc.

People (potential buyers) are saying they are just going to wait now,” she said.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:35:57

* BUSINESS
* OCTOBER 31, 2010, 6:20 P.M. ET

Bank of America Tries to Straighten Out Mortgage Files
By RUTH SIMON And DAN FITZPATRICK

At five offices around the U.S., hundreds of Bank of America Corp. employees are slogging through 102,000 foreclosure files, trying to fix any problems.

The grunt work is slow. Just a “handful” of new affidavits were submitted to courts last week, a company spokesman says. Documents on “more than a handful” of restarted foreclosure actions will be handed over this week.

Cleaning up the mess is a huge challenge for the Charlotte, N.C., bank, a modest player in the mortgage-servicing industry before the 2008 acquisition of Countrywide Financial Corp. The takeover, encouraged by the Treasury Department, ballooned the size of the combined company’s servicing unit to 14 million loans from four million.

More than 85% of the bank’s 1.3 million mortgage customers now at least 60 days behind on their payments got their loans through Countrywide.
The $4 billion deal also saddled Bank of America with technology problems, paperwork glitches and cultural tension. The servicing unit now has its fourth leader in roughly two years.

The acquisition “prevented a potentially dramatic negative impact on the U.S. economy,” says James Mahoney, Bank of America’s head of public policy. But the housing downturn “was far more severe than anybody had projected,” and the “sheer volume of delinquent loans required a massive buildup of systems and staff to deal with them.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 17:20:08

Many of us foresaw the problems BofA was inheriting when they bought Countrywide. I am positive BofA had no illusions about it, knew even more about the potential losses, and priced it all in.

People forget that BofA had no retail mortgage capability, and acquiring Countrywide at a huge discount instantly gave it to them, coast to coast.
It wouldn’t surprise me if analysts declare it the smartest move ever made… in about 5 years or so.

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 18:38:42

“It wouldn’t surprise me if analysts declare it the smartest move ever made… in about 5 years or so.”

By that time, we may have seen the biggest mortgage lenders carved up into a bunch of non-systemically risky little mortgage lenders. Clearly the Countrywide mortgage lending business model was an abject failure, and Megabank of America may have made a foolish move by assuming they would be able to turn Countrywide’s rotten lemons into lemonade.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 20:24:45

Countrywide’s stock has been described as the “23,000% stock” by Fortune magazine. Between 1982 and 2003, Countrywide delivered investors a 23,000.0% return, exceeding the returns of Washington Mutual, Wal-Mart, and Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway.[11]

I wouldn’t categorize that as abject failure..
——

While there’s a lot of vocal criticism from all quarters, are any of the PTB advocating or making moves towards chopping big finance into parts?
They seem to be re-re-regulating the industry into one that’s less of a threat.
But it could happen..

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 20:48:48

“…are any of the PTB advocating or making moves towards chopping big finance into parts?”

Sanders hits Wall Street over executive pay

Burlington, Vermont - October 13, 2010

Sen. Bernie Sanders is fed up with Wall Street executives and their pay increases. So he is once again pushing legislation that would mean if you’re too big to fail, you’re too big to exist.

The legislation would require the Treasury Department to break up grown commercial and investment banks along with hedge funds and insurance companies– if their failure would mean an economic catastrophe.

They have unbelievable economic power, unbelievable political power and the only solution that I know for our economy is to break these people up– they’re just too powerful. These financial institutions just have enormous sway over what goes on in the economy,” said Sanders, I-Vermont.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 21:08:47

Like i said.. vocal criticism.

His (similar) bill failed just last year. What has changed that makes it’s passage any more likely?

On top of that.. He is the first person elected to the U.S. Senate to identify as a socialist.[3]
[snip]
Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist,[1][2]
.. and is technically an Independent.

I dunno how much support he’s likely to garner due to “politics”.. and all that.

 
 
 
Comment by measton
2010-10-31 20:26:10

Yes they will call it the smartest move because they will get the gov to take all of the bad loans off it’s hands.

I’d look like a genious if I could buy a debt ridden company and then over a few years have the gov take away all the debt.

I’d be in Vegas every day if the gov took all the loosing hands I was delt.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 20:58:58

..if I could buy a debt ridden company..

“Buy” may not be the right word. You traded some of your company stock for it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:38:06

Published: Sunday, Oct. 31, 2010 / Updated: Saturday, Oct. 30, 2010 10:43 PM
Paperwork woes plague many S.C. foreclosures
By Andrew Shain

COLUMBIA —

Across courts in South Carolina, judges say they are halting more foreclosures - as many as one in four -because lawyers for banks have incomplete documents or missing paperwork.

They also are starting to see the challenges to the authenticity of signatures on foreclosure documents that have made headlines in recent weeks.

Everything happening in the paper is happening across the state,” said James Spence, the Lexington County master-in-equity, the judge who oversees foreclosure cases in that county.

 
Comment by Big V
2010-10-31 15:41:30

For all of you who worry about a Palin Presidency:

I would make a better prez than she would. Vote for meeeeeee!

Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:44:57

If you run for high office, you have my vote. ;-)

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:48:56

Mightier than the ‘tea party’: The American non-voter

The real majority in the midterm elections will be those who just skip it. Non-voters are younger, poorer, less educated and more liberal than likely voters.

By Michael Muskal
October 31, 2010|3:12 p.m.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 15:50:46

* THE JOURNAL EDITORIAL REPORT
* NOVEMBER 1, 2010

A Tsunami, or Just a Wave?
A transcript of the weekend’s program on FOX News channel.

Paul Gigot: This week on “The Journal Editorial Report,” as candidates make their final campaign push, a look at the most important races and why they matter, and some sleepers to watch for. Plus, lessons from the campaign–our panel’s take on what’s really driving voter anger, and their picks for the best, and of course the worst, moments of the election season.

 
Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-10-31 17:40:44

I had the TV next to me tuned to a soccer game on a Telemundo channel.

An anti-Whitman ad came on and of course it’s all in Spanish, voice and text. But at the end, the required disclaimer at the bottom… which says who sponsored the ad.. was in English.

 
Comment by Yankee Bear
2010-10-31 18:36:54

what happened to this blog? did Ben take a hiatus?

question for anyone knowledgeable about mortgages.

Am considering buying a second home in VT. IT needs major renovation, but I may be able to purchase for 70-90k, which is far less than the ~$200k it would appraise for if renovated.

Is it possible to borrow an amount in excess of the purchase price, up to 80% of the appraisal? (obviously I am assuming that the appraisal is still higher than the purchase $, renovation need not withstanding).

Or am I better off just paying cash and taking a mortgage once renovation is complete?

Comment by rms
2010-10-31 19:51:11

“what happened to this blog?”

You’re in the Bits Bucket. No holds barred.

 
Comment by Real Estate Refugee
2010-10-31 19:57:04

Just say no.

Are you kidding? (okay - I’ve had a couple of glasses of wine)

A second home in Vermont? Why don’t you just go ahead and buy a boat instead? It’d be cheaper.

If you’re into just throwing money away, hey - I’ll give you my address - just send it to me and I’ll go to Napa and buy some lovely overpriced wine and send you some - you’ll enjoy it a lot more.

 
 
Comment by Little Al
2010-10-31 19:48:53

Do you think realtors have something to be truly scared about this Halloween?

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 20:39:50

Megabank, Inc = Gulliver; state AG’s = Lilliputians

* BUSINESS
* NOVEMBER 1, 2010

One Probe, 50 States, High Stakes
By VANESSA O’CONNELL

DES MOINES, Iowa—From his office overlooking the gold-gilded Iowa State Capitol, Tom Miller is confronting the reality of how hard it is to get all 50 state attorneys general to agree on anything.

The 66-year-old Mr. Miller, up for re-election Tuesday to his eighth four-year term as Iowa’s top law-enforcement official, leads the nationwide investigation into the foreclosure mess that erupted in September. The attorneys general are scrutinizing whether home-loan servicers violated state laws against deceptive practices by submitting affidavits and foreclosure documents without confirming the paperwork’s accuracy.

The investigation could lead to civil charges and inescapable pressure on financial institutions to rewrite a mountain of mortgages. Already, there are signs that state officials are working together closely to gain more leverage over companies such as Bank of America Corp., Wells Fargo & Co. and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

Yet there also was a squabble over what to call the investigation, with some state officials preferring “inquiry” and others the word “effort.”

“I’m pleased when people are floating options and trying to look at alternatives,” Mr. Miller says with a smile and a shrug. “As long as they aren’t saying: This is the way it’s got to be.” In an interview last week, he pounded on a wood conference table in a show of mock aggressiveness.

While federal officials also are examining the use of “robo-signers” and other mortgage-servicing procedures, the legal quagmire that is slowing foreclosure sales and snarling courtrooms likely won’t end until the 50-state investigation is resolved.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 20:43:56

Poll shows ‘hurricane winds’ for Democrats
NBC/WSJ pollster: Results show ‘rebuke’ of last two years
By Mark Murray Deputy political director
updated 41 minutes ago 2010-11-01T03:00:10

Republicans remain on course to make substantial midterm gains across the country and to win control of at least one chamber of Congress, according to the final NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll before Tuesday’s elections.

Nearly 50 percent of likely voters prefer a GOP-controlled Congress, which is virtually unchanged from the poll taken two weeks ago; a plurality of all registered voters say it would be a “good thing” if Republicans were in charge of both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate; and almost two-thirds — including about half of Democrats — want to see a significant amount of change in the way President Barack Obama has been leading the country.

This is a devastating set of data for the incumbent party,” says GOP pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted the survey with Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart. “It is a rebuke to the last two years.

On Election Day, Hart adds, “The Democrats are about to feel the force of hurricane winds.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2010-10-31 23:10:02

This is surreal.

* October 30, 2010, 5:00 AM ET

Number of the Week: 107 Months to Clear Banks’ Housing Backlog

By Mark Whitehouse

Number of the Week 107

107: How many months it would take to sell banks’ current and shadow inventory of foreclosed homes.

Banks’ vast pile of foreclosed homes doesn’t appear to be diminishing. That’s a troubling sign for the future of the housing market.

Back in April, this column tallied up all the foreclosed homes sitting in banks’ inventory, as well as the “shadow” inventory of homes in the foreclosure process or on which owners had missed at least two mortgage payments. At the time, we reported that at the current rate of sales, it would take 103 months to unload it all.

Over the past six months, that number has actually risen. Banks managed to pare down the shadow inventory, but largely by taking possession of foreclosed homes. As of September, they owned nearly 994,000 foreclosed homes, up 21% from a year earlier. The shadow inventory stood at 5.2 million homes, down 7% from a year earlier. Grand total: 107 months of inventory.

The numbers aren’t exactly comparable to the April analysis, as the providers of data have changed. The inventory data now come from RealtyTrac, the shadow inventory data from LPS Applied Analytics, and the sales data from Core Logic. But no matter how you slice it, the housing market faces almost nine years of foreclosure hangover.

Comment by joeyinCalif
2010-11-01 05:07:49

..at the current rate of sales..

well.. 9 years of inventory at the “current rate” of sales is an unreal concept.

The rate of sales WILL change.. by a hell of a lot.. several times.. between now and 2020. So, we don’t really have 9 years worth of inventory.

I guess there’s no other way to estimate how many “months of inventory” exists. But how much value can it have?
Does anyone use ‘months of inventory’ to accomplish anything practical?

 
 
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