Weekend Topic Suggestions
Please post topic ideas here!
The Housing Bubble
Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
About Me
Name:Ben Jones
Location:Northern Arizona, United States
To donate by mail, or to otherwise contact this blogger, please send emails to: thehousingbubble@gmail.com
PayPal is a secure online payment method which accepts ALL major credit cards.
Links
-
June 2025 M T W T F S S « Sep 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Photo Submission: hbbphotos@gmail.com
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008
I’d like to know what readers here think of government attempts to restrict internet freedom. Not so much about this blog, but what it would mean for financial issues like the housing bubble, or just plain free speech.
If it were not for the internet I would have thought I was the only one paying $9 for mayo and inflation wasn`t a problem just like the government said. In 2004 I would have thought I was the only one who thought house prices were way out of wack because there wasn`t anyone where I lived that didn`t buy into the mania that was supported by the media and the PTB.
It would be a lot easier for the PTB to control people if they had to take the official government numbers as the truth.
Can`t find anything like this on the spoon fed nightly news.
Michael Olenick: Is Shadow Housing Inventory Vastly Larger Than Widely Believed?
Monday, January 2, 2012
All this calls for far more disclosure on the part of the GSE’s, regulators, and courthouses. There is no legitimate reason to keep these figures locked away behind password-protected websites. Everything from the MERS database, to the Fannie/Freddie loan-level information, to the pile of mortgages the Federal Reserve has purchased should be open. This issue rivals a pressing matter of national security: there is no reason to force investors, home buyers, and others to speculate; to search for information.
http://www.shadowstats.com/
For the non-sheep who place no faith in GOSPLAN-like official statistics, here’s a more credible source of metrics on the true state of the economy.
“just plain free speech.”
Well, they controlled George Carlin’s freely expressed x7 lil’ words for many many years…still do actually… lil’ words that fluidly fill the public’s ears on any given day in America iffin’ you just listen to the sounds of people’s frustrations in going about daily life, listening careful like a wandering poet, how do most human animals describe penis & vagina amongst themselves and to themselves, chit-chattin’ and yet descriptive & to the point.
It’s not just Americans spoken words that when they are offensive, they needs to be “lawfully” throttled, for example:
“Audit-the-Pentagon!” … eyes certain does not $ound $o “$weet” to some folks ear$!
another might be say:
“Audit-the FederalRe$erveInc.SCOTU$-”per$on”
The problems always seem to rise when such sounds, words & ideas find a mechanism to be amplified to a greater listening audience.
There are even some “Patriotic” Americans with a similar Australian “pattern” legacy who use such mechanisms to accumulate vast amounts of money and influence, not on distributed “TruthSlaying” facts, but on “Fear-mongering” distortions & yell/scream/hollering vocal repetitions, did eyes mention repetitions?, yes, constant “distorted” repetitions.
Odd kinda, repetition … like in “repeat$” Cu$tomer$!
The assault on basic liberties seems inexorable, aided by the fact that 95% of our population are sheep who might momentarily look up from their grazing, but who fail to place any value on things like freedom of speech or freedom of expression as enshrined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
A couple of things:
‘who might momentarily look up from their grazing’
Notice that the public got worked up by the internet restrictions and the TSA groping, but hardly a whimper about the NDAA. The former directly affects almost everyone and the latter is perceived to only affect Muslim terrorists. Along the same lines, the public would freak out if the draft was re-instituted, but hardly notice another war being ginned up.
On the internet restrictions, it was held out to be about copy-write issues. But IMO that’s the fig leaf for govt control. I don’t think DC stays up at night worrying about somebody copying Lady Gaga music, but controlling the media is key to getting their way.
“…but controlling the media is key to getting their way.”
How does that square with First Amendment rights to freedom of speech? Is the Constitution largely dead in the water at this point in history?
‘Is the Constitution largely dead in the water’
IMO, it is and it isn’t. The politicians and the giant machine they run have constructed legal routes to do basically anything they want. But at the same time their only claim to power is through the constitution. So they have to hold up the illusion that this is the basis for the rule of law while at the same time exempting themselves from large parts of it. The bill of rights has become almost meaningless since Sept 11, 2001.
So quite the feat, trashing the rule of law that keeps one in power. How’s that done? Money, force and control of the populace. That latter is largely done through the media, hence the desire to hold a kill switch on any website they please. You may know that the DHS has shut down some web domains.
But now even social media constructions are expanding, and here comes the law. Remember when the London riots involved mass texting and such? Police considered shutting down those networks and you can bet they hold the switch now.
But IMO, the majority of media control isn’t actually shutting down media. But rather drowning out independent thought with a barrage of mind control. To the point that people will plead to give up their rights and condemn anyone who questions authority.
“But rather drowning out independent thought with a barrage of mind control.”
That is both more effective and politically viable…
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=200832
As usual, they tried to sneak this one past with a barrage of lies and misinformation.
A Bigger and bigger government demands conformity.
It is the nature of the beast.
“A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.”
Tommy Jefferson/Gerald Ford
Too-big-to-fail thrives on limited scrutiny.
Really excellent comment.
1) My simple conjecture is that limiting information about the real economic situation can serve to cover up and accelerate incipient economic collapse.
Exhibit A: The defunct Soviet Union was famous for gross official overstatement of its economic successes, to the point where citizens and non-citizens alike realized the end was at hand.
Exhibit B: Enron’s stock price stayed reasonably high right up until the point of collapse, during a period of massive control fraud.
Exhibits A and B both are examples of how using deception to cover up economic malfeasance can lead to sudden and “unexpected” collapse. Restricting free speech on the internet would act in the direction of increasing the number of sudden collapses of “too-big-to-fail” economic entities operated under conditions of control fraud, of which I assume Enron and the former Soviet Union are primary examples. (Ironically, both failed, and the world kept on spinning.)
2) The internet has been a great driver of free speech and information exchange. Those who are against freedom of speech and who profit from limiting others’ freedoms will not hesitate to take away American’s Constitutional free speech rights if doing so best serves their avaricious interests.
Backdown on internet censorship
Washington 1:40AM Saturday Jan 21, 2012
People gather on Third Avenue in New York to protest the proposed PIPA bill. Photo: AFP
JUST days before a critical vote, US senators are abandoning an anti-piracy bill after an outpouring of online opposition to tinkering with internet freedoms.
Senate Democratic Party leaders still plan to vote on Tuesday on taking up the Protect International Property Act and supporters are scrambling to make changes before then to answer some of the critics, but it is questionable whether they have the 60 votes needed. Half-a-dozen of the 40 original co-sponsors of what is known as the PIPA bill withdrew their support after a one-day protest blackout by Wikipedia and protests by other web giants and a flood of emails to US politicians.
More than 7 million signed a petition on Google saying the Senate bill and its counterpart in the House would censor the web and impose burdensome regulations on US businesses.
…
I’d like to know what readers here think of government attempts to restrict internet freedom.
One concern around my house that I haven’t heard voiced much by anybody else is that they were trying to use SOPA to prevent Americans from buying medication in legitimate Canadian pharmacies. There is a small minority for whom this is a critical issue. Not only are the medications from Canada affordable, in some cases generics exist that are not sold in the USA.
Economist Dean Baker thinks that free trade provisions should apply to such things as pharmaceutical prices. Which would remove restrictions on importing drugs from Canada.
We should also worry about hidden money flows from outside the U.S. which might perversely be used to shut down our Constitutional rights under the guise of SCOTUS-defined “freedom of speech.”
I had enough of 1950’s-type censorship in the 1950’s. We anti-war activists got a little taste of it during the run-up to IW2 when you were “either with us or with the terrorists.” And anyone who ever lit up a doob recalls that feeling of paranoia that comes with the “first time.”
Having to live, work, write, with that sort of mentality leads to both creative deadlock and a strong desire to circumvent the law— neither of which bodes well for a vibrant, functional society.
Practical considerations aside, living in fear that your words/posts may land you in prison, on unspecified charges, indefinitely, makes for an authoritarian (and unaccountable,) ruling class, and ultimately revolution.
Frankly, I don’t understand the issue well enough to comment on it.
Basically, unless people are willing to pay for content, there will be less and less of it. The piracy issue is real, and not just overseas.
On the other hand, I understand the bill over-reaches, in some way that is hazy. That’s what I get from a brief debate I saw on TV.
The issue is “fair use,” I suppose — quoting something with attribution rather than simply republishing it without attribution.
I understand the bill over-reaches, in some way that is hazy
I would characterize it as over-reaching in ways that are not “hazy” at all—but rather downright unconstitutional IMHO. There is no right to due process before your site is taken offline, and you get to argue about getting it back online.
Of course, our current crop of SCOTUS PTB would likely not find it unconstitutional, unfortunately.
Occupy SCOTUS!
Basically, unless people are willing to pay for content, there will be less and less of it.
Case in point from one of my photography mentors. And, yes, I subscribed.
Congress puts brakes on anti-piracy bills
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid speaks during his news conference on the payroll tax cut extension on Capitol Hill in Washington December 23, 2011. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas
By Jasmin Melvin
WASHINGTON | Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:30pm EST
(Reuters) - Lawmakers stopped anti-piracy legislation in its tracks on Friday, delivering a stunning win for Internet companies that staged an unprecedented online protest this week to kill the previously fast-moving bills.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he would postpone a critical vote that had been scheduled for January 24 “in light of recent events.”
Lamar Smith, the Republican chairman of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, followed suit, saying his panel would delay action on similar legislation until there is wider agreement on the issue.
“I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy. It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products,” Smith said in a statement.
…
I think it is clear that the legislation was targeted at sites that specialize in the distribution of copyrighted movies, music, tv shows, entire books, etc.
The problem is the difficulty is in drafting legislation that allows them to shut down sites clearly created to assist in the pirating of copyrighted materials, and a site intended as a discussion forum where the owner of the site can not prevent people from posting copyrighted materials.
I think internet freedom relates to our guaranteed freedom of privacy in our papers. The federal government has no right to monitor what we write. No right to read it, shut it down, take it away or censor it.
“…our guaranteed freedom…”
They’re just so many words unless you’re willing to fight to defend those freedoms.
“What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?”
- Patrick Henry
Back in the day rock stars would sing about how much money they made.
That what I think about it.
Regulating the internet is a slippery slope. Which would surely vary widely by the reigning administration.
Don’t do dat. Do’t go dere.
The Thought Police are watching. The have firm control in China and our Thought Police are jealous of them. How else will the Secret War with China be won without firm control of the population by the Thought Police?
IMO, it not the “Thought Police” they are jealous of.
They don’t care about what we think. They like the fact that the Chinese Army will use tanks to force the serfs back into their cubicles, if they get too uppity. Protesting serfs hurt productivity. Most business owners would turn back the labor laws to circa 1895, if they could wave a magic wand.
The laws preventing the US military from taking up arms against citizens have turned from black and white, into gray areas. The test will be when some Homeland Security puke tells the local National guard to “detain” people because of “terroristic threats” (like hanging banksters from lampposts, or giving a few politicians their own “Marie Antoinette” moment.
1895…
Gold Standard
Tiny American Army
Small and limited government
No income tax
No property taxes
No foreign wars
Huge and positive balance of trade
Huge depression, signaled by a financial panic in 1893, blamed on deflation dating back to the Civil War, the gold standard and monetary policy, underconsumption and government extravagance.
Next….
“We’re Trying To Save Life On This Planet As We Know It”