Bits Bucket for March 22, 2012
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds 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
-
January 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 31
Photo Submission: hbbphotos@gmail.com
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008
There has been some post, recently, of the U.S. Constitution.
Does the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution creates a social/legal contract? Not to the U.S. courts as per this example for Wikipedia:
“Courts will not interpret the Preamble to give the government powers that are not articulated elsewhere in the Constitution. United States v. Kinnebrew Motor Co.[21] is an example of this. In that case, the defendants were a car manufacturer and dealership indicted for a criminal violation of the National Industrial Recovery Act. The Congress passed the statute in order to cope with the Great Depression, and one of its provisions purported to give to the President authority to fix “the prices at which new cars may be sold.
The case was about whether the transaction in question constituted “interstate commerce” that Congress could regulate pursuant to the Commerce Clause.[23] Although the government argued that the scope of the Commerce Clause included this transaction, it also argued that the Preamble’s statement that the Constitution was created to “promote the general Welfare” should be understood to permit Congress to regulate transactions such as the one in this case, particularly in the face of an obvious national emergency like the Great Depression. The court, however, dismissed this argument as erroneous[24] and insisted that the only relevant issue was whether the transaction that prompted the indictment actually constituted “interstate commerce” under the Supreme Court’s precedents that interpreted the scope of the Commerce Clause.[25]
As far as I know the preamble has no legal significance. It isn’t cited or used to bolster any other arguement. It is a statement of purpose, not of action.
I have a rather interesting book at home called The Sumerian Roots of the American Preamble that argues rather convincingly that the preamble is similar, structurally, to the beginning of ancient near east legal codes in which the king declaring the rules explains with a list of his accomplishments (mostly in battle) why he has the right to tell anyone what they can and cannot do (think “I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.”). Our preamble is about why the rules are a good idea, rather than why the Consitutional Convention had the right to make them up, but since they still had to be adopted by the states to become effective, the other model wouldn’t have been very logical.
Other than separating us as a political entity from Britain, the Declaration of Independence has no legal significance either.
” …it also argued that the Preamble’s statement that the Constitution was created to “promote the general Welfare” should be understood to permit Congress to regulate transactions such as the one in this case,
particularly in the face of an obvious national emergency like …”:
2008’s Hurry! Hurry! Hurry!
… (said the three blind rat$)
Amazing how a large group of quasi-intelligent individuals, elected as “The People’s” Repre$enative$ act/behave/vote when presented with a faux PANIC!
[can you think of any other recent laws passed in this "panic" manner?]
Fear$! Fear$! Fear$! , its a money-maker as well.
I think you are unclear on what a social contract is, VegasDude. It’s a universally understood agreement as to how society will operate, often unwritten and not necessarily codified into law. Exactly like what is outlined in the Preamble.
so·cial con·tract
Noun:
An implicit agreement among the members of a society to cooperate for social benefits.
-Merriam-Webster
Which, except for the period 1941 to around 1962 or so, has never existed in the U.S.
Which, except for the period 1941 to around 1962 or so, has never existed in the U.S.
The Preamble didn’t exist?
But I agree that we came closest to matching its goals during the post-war FDR New Deal period.
And America, like almost all nations, has always had a social contract, although it has evolved over time.
Do you guys not like the idea of a social contract because it has the word ’social’ in it? Or because it implies that the rich should behave with a modicum of decency, and thought for the common good? An idea which seems to equal communism to some.
No, I agree with Bill on this. There was no meaningful social contract in a society where a huge number of people owned slaves. And remember the books/film strips/whatever you had of your earliest history classes. The quote I remember best was, “Why pay a man a dollar when you can pay a child a dime?” What social contract was in evidence during the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire?
If you want a society where the business owners have to play fair with the people who work for them you need one of two things: a severe shortage of workers or effective unions. Take your pick.
Polly, your point is dead on. Of your two choices: there was in fact a severe shortage of workers in this country for a 100 years ending in the 1970’s. Can’t vouch for the unions but suspect they were out of necessity.
No, I agree with Bill on this. There was no meaningful social contract in a society where a huge number of people owned slaves.
That the social contract was not “meaningful” is subjective and is irrelevant to the fact that a social contact existed during slavery. That the social contract became more enforced after the 30’s does not mean a contract did not exist before then.
Because a contract was not perfect does not mean it was not a contract. The founding fathers KNEW the American social contract was not perfect thus the ability to amend the Constitution. The Constitution is part of the American “Social Contact”. And the Preamble is a statement of intent to improve the American social contract.
I think you are going to have to define what you mean by a social contract. I’ve been using a general interpretation of people doing what is right and good for society in general, not what is best for their own self/family/small group. I don’t think we have ever had that. Perhaps very small nearly autonomous units - small communities on the frontier would have had a situation that looked like that, but only because everyone was doing a scratch my back/scratch your back kind of deal. If you needed the whole community to raise a barn and pretty much everyone needed a barn or good business relationships with people who had barns, then you do OK, but it isn’t out of the goodness of anyone’s heart. And it arises out of a shortage of labor.
The book/essay posits a much more formal idea. It has been a while since I read it, but my recollection is that Rousseau was primarily talking about tiny little city-states. He only ever posited that his idea (that people should give up the state of nature - chaos - for a government controlled by all that would be better for all) could really work up to a population of 10,000 living close together.
If you needed the whole community to raise a barn and pretty much everyone needed a barn or good business relationships with people who had barns, then you do OK, but it isn’t out of the goodness of anyone’s heart. And it arises out of a shortage of labor.
This still exists today, in the Amish communities. I don’t know enough about their motivations to speak to them, but it is a social contract that addresses a need of the community, so I’m not sure the motivation really matters much.
I think you are going to have to define what you mean by a social contract.
“Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons’ moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. Socrates uses something quite like a social contract argument to explain to Crito why he must remain in prison and accept the death penalty. However, social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. After Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of this enormously influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories within moral and political theory throughout the history of the modern West.”
http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/
If you want a society where the business owners have to play fair with the people who work for them you need one of two things: a severe shortage of workers or effective unions.
Good point, and in order to have effective unions a nation needs laws to protect union formation. For the past 40 years, the laws of the USA have changed to make union formation much more difficult. This is another example of the breaking of the American social contact in an economic area.
Yeah, I know what the book says. But what do YOU mean by it. Because it doesn’t really mean much, except the basic governing by consent of the governed. Really. That is all. It is a different philosophy of government than might makes right and divine right of kings.
It has no further implications other than most or all people should be able to participate in the governing or at least the selection of those doing the governing. Even with that very limited meaning, we haven’t had that in the US for very long and people consistently try to attack it. Governing by consent of the governed doesn’t even get you to “equality of opportunity.” Not by a long shot. And JJR really only thought about it in terms of small, homogeneous groups living in pre-industrial Switzerland.
There was no meaningful social contract in a society where a huge number of people owned slaves.
Of course there was. The social contract was between white men. It doesn’t have to be ‘fair’ or ‘just’, as we see it today. It’s just an often unspoken and unwritten code that defines how society will operate, and that says that if you do your part to uphold the mores of the society, society will accept you as a member and allow you to benefit from being a part of that society.
That the social contract didn’t fully include women and non-whites at the time just shows that it was still backwards and evolving, not that it didn’t exist. And of course it’s still evolving now, and one day people will look back at us and say something like ‘how could there have been a social contract when some animals ate other animals for pleasure?’, or whatever it is that makes us seem like unimaginable brutes to them.
—–
wikipedia
“The social contract or political contract is an intellectual device intended to explain the appropriate relationship between individuals and their governments. Social contract arguments assert that individuals unite into political societies by a process of mutual consent, agreeing to abide by common rules and accept corresponding duties to protect themselves and one another from violence and other kinds of harm.”
Yeah, I know what the book says. But what do YOU mean by it. Because it doesn’t really mean much
I mean by it what the book says and it means a lot.
I think you are unclear on what a social contract is, VegasDude. It’s a universally understood agreement as to how society will operate, often unwritten and not necessarily codified into law. Exactly like what is outlined in the Preamble.
You hit the nail on the head alpha.
The Preamble having “no force of law” misses the point. The Preamble having no force of law is irrelevant to the fact that the Preamble is stating clearly that the purpose of the following Constitution is to create a political and social contract between Americans and the American government.
“We the People of the United States, IN ORDER TO…”
The Preamble is a statement of intent to form a social contract. The “social contract” is a concept in and of political science, political history, and philosophy. The “Social Contract” is not a notarized piece of paper drawn up by lawyers.
“An implicit agreement among the members of a society to cooperate for social benefits.”
In the 19th and early 20th century, capital exploited labor in every way possible, including illegal ways. The line about paying a child a dime is symbolic of those times. In WWII, with industries sorely needing every worker they could get, the contract worked. But I think the real reason it worked is because the pie was expanding so very fast that no group could take more than a reasonable share. Since the 1960’s we have had a succession of unnecessary wars, ever more prevalent automation, off-shoring, worsening education, the Fed, and the two major political parties all conspiring to screw the greatest possible portion of the populace. I sure don’t see a viable social contract at work there.
I sure don’t see a viable social contract at work there.
Exactly. The rich are no longer obeying the social contract, which I believe was the original point. They are destroying the society that allows them to exist, to be wealthy, and to enjoy that wealth in comfort and safety. They are breaking the social contract which says that we the people will allow you to use our society to earn, protect, and enjoy your wealth, but you must not use that wealth to destroy our society. But they are.
Apparently America is not the only country trying to encourage foreign real estate investors to buy up its land, parcel-by-parcel.
One third of land in debt-ridden Greece is up for sale
John Kolesidis / Reuters
A man walks next to policemen outside an Eurobank branch in Athens, March 21.
By Alastair Jamieson, msnbc.com
One third of all land in Greece is up for sale as the debt-crippled country tries to raise money from state assets, a state official reportedly said Wednesday – but little of it will help those wanting to snap up a dream home in the sunshine.
Greek authorities are touting billions of euros worth of government-owned land in order to finance international bailout loans totaling $227 billion over the next few years.
However, most of the sites are in industrial zones or tied to facilities such as airports, highways and energy firms, according to a report by Turkey-based news Web site Hurriyet Daily News.
The report said Greece is targeting its immediate neighbor, Turkey, as potentially a large source of investment.
“One third of Greek land is on sale,” the report quoted Panos Protopsaltis, head of the Privatization Program of the Hellenic Republic Asset Development Fund, as saying.
Customers flock to Greek farmers selling cheap spuds
The organization is offering some 50 billion euros worth of assets for sale, and hopes to generate nearly 19 billion euros in cash by as early as 2015, the report added.
A truck assembly plant, sewage works and ports are also up for grabs, along with land on some of the country’s islands popular with tourists.
But tough rules on property transactions in Greece, coupled with an absence of spare land in the most sought-after areas, make it unlikely the country will see a huge influx of private buyers looking to take advantage of the 30 per cent drop in house prices over the past three years.
“Unless you have the cash to buy outright it is very difficult because the Greek banks simply aren’t lending,” UK-based property investment consultant Simon Conn told msnbc.com. “In addition, there are requirements such as having the legal documents translated into your own language. Also, buyers need to be careful. There is a reason a piece of land or building plot is up for sale in the first place; if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.”
…
tough rules on property transactions in Greece
Apparently, as long as you were on the hook borrowing, it didn’t matter how you got there. Residential housing was only one of the many means to the end.
The Germans had land in Greece once before not so long ago, no? Maybe they use different method$ this go around. :-/
Using money is likely to work out better for them than guns did.
Maybe they ought to emulate the $wi$$ & the Dutch.
GO Europe! $ame currency, different tax policie$
Go America! Same currency, different $COTU$ “PersonInc$” / Citizen-peon tax police$
Using money is likely to work out better for them than guns did.
It’s all the same… they tried to conquer Europe twice with their armies and failed. They succeeded 50+ years later by leveraging their economic might.
Now the question is how long will Greece/Spain/Portugal continue to be economically dominated and ruled by Germany. Eventually they will tire of forced austerity and draconian rules from the EU. When the EU fails, it’s back to the two economic powers in Europe vying for power and control. France is always on the losing end of that fight…
If at first you don’t succeed…
The City Was Offering Up to $70,000 at 0% Interest
Elizabeth Salaam, March 21, 2012
On October 12, 2011, my husband and I signed two hours’ worth of paperwork and forked over a $2450 earnest-money deposit on a four-bedroom, four-bath townhome in Chula Vista.
For years, we’d fantasized about escaping the constraints of our 860-square-foot, $1300-a-month condo rental in City Heights. Now, our three-year-old daughter would be able to move out of our closet (yes, our closet) and into her own room, and our cologne-obsessed 13-year-old would have his own lair, two floors down from the other bedrooms. Along with 1850 glorious square feet and extra bathrooms, we’d have canyon views and a two-car garage that led into the house: no more lugging groceries in the rain. And — oh, yeah — mortgage and property tax combined would add up to $1147 (not including HOA fees), $153 less than our rental.
In the parking lot outside the real-estate agent’s office, I sent a text blast to family and friends: “It’s ours. We’re in escrow!”
My husband sighed. “It’s not ours yet, Lizzie. Anything can happen between now and the time we close.”
I dismissed the comment with a wave of my hand. Despite his previously discouraging experiences with sellers (one deal fell apart the day escrow was due to close), my optimism would remain intact. I’d heard about the hassles of purchasing a home through first-time-homebuyer incentive programs, but this place was meant to be ours, and I believed that everything would go swimmingly.
Twenty days later, our listing agent Joe sent us a Notice of Termination.
I panicked, let loose a string of profanities, and went into fight mode.
Our agent later told me that, for a 60-day escrow like ours, 20 days wasn’t too terribly deep into the process. But we’d been at this longer than the length of the escrow, and the future of our down-payment assistance was uncertain. We were relying on it to help with the purchase, and I feared we might not get another chance.
…
This is a really long article full of emo filler. Here are the meaty paragraphs:
==========
“With the $30,000 we’d saved for a down payment, if we came in at around 80 percent of the area-median income, we could probably qualify for a mortgage on a $300,000 home.
“Joe thought we could get them to go a bit lower than $256,000 but we chose to play it safe and accepted.”
“A week later, the same day the seller received all three wire transfers from our lenders, ($175,000 from Northern Trust, at 3.75 percent; $38,000 from Cal-Home, deferred for 30 years at 3 percent; and $32,000 from the City of Chula Vista, forgiven after 15 years), Joe came by with our keys and a $100 gift certificate for a restaurant in our new neighborhood.
“Our monthly payment is $1441 — including HOA fees.
===========
Short version: The Salaams bought a house for $256K relying on others for their down payment cheese.* It looks like they skated away with a good deal, but IMO the ice seems a little thin. For reference, median income in Chula Vista is $65K.** The Salaams probably make 80% of that — ~$55K in order to qualify for the cheese.
$1441 is a manageable mortgage payment for a $55K income. But if anything goes wrong, they are going to be in a world of hurt. Better hope they don’t have to sell. And they better hope their kids are smart enough for scholarships.
Final point: if CA is handing out down payments like this, then prices are NOT going to fall in CA anytime soon, sorry.
————
*Not touching their own “$30K,” which IMO should have disqualified them from ANY of those handout programs.
**http://money DOT cnn DOT com/magazines/moneymag/bplive/2011/snapshots/PL0613392.html
so they are still selling houses for 0 down?
From the buyer… looks like it.
However, the cheese only adds up to $243,000, so they must have lost SOME minor amount of skin buying a house for almost 5x income. If it is more than 3x income; then yes, you will have limited college funds and health catastrophies or costly unexpected, even braces, would push them into a world of financial hurt.
But hey, they asked for it. And yes prices are sticky in some places thanks to things like this. Here in central Oregon, action is hot at the under 300k price range, with less than 3 months inventory of product, multiple bidders, etc. But prices have been allowed to fall 50% or more, making the homes a reasonable price (median income here is 33k, so 3x that means 100k for a home is reasonable in my, and investors, estimation). Rents for these homes hover near $1000/month. With 20% down; a $550 payment is feasible. My parents have been trying to buy a cash-flow rental here, but are giving up due to the amount of competition for homes near 100k.
And having had to listen to realtor double speak, I do not blame them. On a short sale offer they heard, “The bank is going to take your offer, it is just that….. Have patience, it will go through”. Then, “The bank refused your offer, I will let you know when it hits the market again after foreclosure. It will be priced lower than your offer” Which begs the question, why did the bank not accept the offer in the first place?? They want to give money away? We will never know because RAL!
Ahansen says her home is worth less than what it was in 1992. Sounds like full circle and prices there are back to affordable. Not so at the CA coast just yet. I bought my first home in 1995 for $270k near Santa Barbara. After cresting at near 1 million; they have only come down to around 600k, still double what they cost after the last price crash. Nowhere near the descent of value ahansen has experienced away from the salty water and fog.
Mike, the article states that they had offered $245K, but the seller countered with $256K AND pitched in 3.5% for closing costs. So I think that the $2450 is all the buyers ponied up.
If you ask me, countering higher and then pitching in closing just screams “realtor commission.”
Gotcha. Sounds like they put $2450 down. It just cost a friend of mine 3k to move into a rental; so I guess buying has a lower bar of entry still.
What would the buyer care about a higher price if the seller was gonna pitch in the extra funds? I remember selling a condo in 2006 for 350k; and paying the 6k of closing costs for the seller. We bought the thing a year earlier for 208k so we just wanted the deal to go thru.
That 0 skin in the game purchaser never made many payments on his mortgage; as a little over a year later the place was foreclosed on. Never cost the buyer a penny, though, so what did he care? We sold it furnished; so the buyer made off with 20k or so worth of furniture; what a score, it may have been his MO in the first place.
Win win win? We made money on the sale; buyer made money on the furniture. Bank is protected on the non-performing loan; having bet against it they were probably tickled pink! Only the taxpayer, having bailed out F&F, lost.
A significant down payment requirement would have stopped this guy in his tracks.
Or a requirement that the bank assume some risk on the mortgage. and maybe not being allowed to invest in Credit Default Swaps?
They had $30K down and the assistance was coming from the city, no? Chula Vista must be hurtin’ for certain. It’s a TJ border town. Yuk.
Ahansen says her home is worth less than what it was in 1992.
No, she said it ZILLOWED for less than what she paid for it way back then.
It is worth well more than that—she has a unique property, with no data-points due to zero sales history since she has improved it.
Zillow only works even remotely well when it has data-points—either recent sales of the house in question, or of other houses that are fairly similar, such as other tract homes.
oxide
Thank you for that post and your 2C’s.
I was watching an online infomercial
for Wells Fargo’s Grant for down payments
(”LIFT”) program yesterday. The take away is why save when
you can get free money. Everybody deserves a home. The saving grace is the areas that qualify, I would not live in.
And then there are those of us doing without
with delayed gratification. My Volvo was bought
new in 1995 (302K on Vixen). Home first, then EV.
DPA, hahaha.
Romney aide Etch A Sketch remark angers women
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Kris Connor / Getty Images
Nancy Keenan, head of NARAL Pro-Choice America, says her group will make sure people know Mitt Romney’s positions on women’s issues.
A Mitt Romney campaign adviser’s comments Wednesday that the front-running Republican candidate for president could reset - “like an Etch A Sketch” - his stands on issues if he becomes the GOP nominee brought a stinging response from the head of the nation’s largest reproductive rights group, who said women voters will not accept flip-flops on issues such as birth control.
“We will make damn sure that women know where Mitt Romney stands” on matters related to women’s health, said Nancy Keenan, head of NARAL Pro-Choice America in an interview with The Chronicle. She addressed more than 1,000 women Wednesday at the group’s annual Power of Choice lunch at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco, shortly after Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom made the comments that became a campaign nightmare.
CNN asked Fehrnstrom whether his candidate could tack more to the political center in the November general election against President Obama, a Democrat.
“Well, I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign,” Fehrnstrom said. “Everything changes. It’s like an Etch A Sketch. You can shake it up and we start all over again.”
…
Not just women’s groups. The Etch-a-Sketch comment made quite a stir on the lib blogs yesterday, and it’s catchy enough to have staying power. It’s probably too late for Santorum to exploit the comment because the delegate math is against him. I’m sure Team Obama will find use for it. They’ve been homing in on Romney since the beginning.
At this point, IMO Santorum’s staying in the race will only frustrate the evangelicals into staying home.
At this point, IMO Santorum’s staying in the race will only frustrate the evangelicals into staying home.
Which will cost Romney the election.
He will get the Ron Paul vote when he makes Rand Paul his choice for VP.
So Rand Paul is going to be willing to promise Romney to back him up in all things at all times throughout the campaign in the fall and for 4 (or
years after that? Really? Because Romney doesn’t strike me as the type of guy who loves his support staff telling him he is wrong on everything. And Rand Paul doesn’t strike me as a fall in line/do what you are told kind of person.
It won’t make up for the loss of the Fundies. In any case, whoever gets the GOP nomination will get the “Ron Paul vote” (like they’re gonna vote for Obama).
But if the Fundies stay home or vote 3rd party, Romney will lose. I was in North Carolina, hanging with my Fundy relatives, last month. The anti Romney vibe in that crowd is strong, very strong. The media won’t talk about it, but it’s there. The Fundy Pastors are telling their flocks to not vote for Romney.
Romney’s pizz-boy is basically telling everyone that someone will get lied to/screwed, in order for Romney to win the election.
After serious consideration, I’ve decided to vote for the candidate that insures that we start a war with Iran, while giving carte-blanche to the banksters and 1%ers economic raping and pillaging.
Maybe after the Republicans, totally unencumbered by Democrats in the White House, Congress or the courts have turned the USA into an economically enslaved, Fundie-Christian run Police State, will the wretched refuse wake up.
If you note, RP never said a bad thing about Romney in the debates. Their wives are good friends.
But most importantly, RP is getting a lot of money from Utah.
The former billionaire partner of Jon Huntsman’s daddy to be exact.
RP crosses party lines. There are a lot of Liberals who stiil want Gitmo closed and are tired of war who are not looking forward to invading Iran.
I don’t know what the Evangelicals are going to do come voting day…. write in Jesus? They think Mormons are cultists so Romney won’t be getting their vote.
I don’t know what the Evangelicals are going to do come voting day…. write in Jesus? They think Mormons are cultists so Romney won’t be getting their vote.
What will they do?
a) Stay home
b) Vote for a 3rd party fundy
c) Vote for Obama, to keep Mormon Romney out of the White House.
Why would Ron Paul say anything bad about Romney? He knew that Romney was about 99% likely to get the nomination from the get go. Why would you piss off the winner? There is no reason for it. Besides, as you note, their wives like each other.
Why would Ron Paul say anything bad about Romney? He knew that Romney was about 99% likely to get the nomination from the get go. Why would you piss off the winner?
Because he’s a Truth Teller, and incapable of selling out?
LOL. Nice, alpha.
oh jesus what a phony issue…but you can bet they were using the etch-a-sketch term during strategy meetings. oops.
I don’t know that it is phoney. It is, however, obvious. People who follow politics at all know that Republicans have to run hard right for the primaries because that is what appeals to their base (the ones who vote in primaries) and then shift to the middle to win the general because the hard right base tops out between 30 and 35% of the people who vote in the general election.
The funny thing is this is possibly a good thing with the independents if they think he would be president more in line with his general campaign, than with his primary campaign. I don’t think you can make that assumption with a first term president, but it is not a solely bad thing if you don’t like President Obama but the hard right rhetoric of the primaries bothers you.
NPR had a story on today that suggested moderate Republicans and Democrats interpreted the Etch-a-sketch remark similarly — i.e. once Romney is no longer competing in primaries for the support of the right wing fringe of the Republican party, he will be able to compete with Obama closer to the centrist middle, which is where Presidential races are won or lost in a two-party system.
It’s also good to bear in mind that Romney successfully governed a liberal state where gay marriage is now legal. He can play centrist politics when the situation calls for it.
Phony as opposed to what? The Kenyan Muslim? The Swiftboat Veterans for Truth?
so people who would never vote for mitt in a million years are not gonna vote for mitt if he pisses them off?
Micheal, the etch-a-sketch meme won’t affect committeds on either side. It WILL affect Mitt-leaning independents and evangelical Santorum voters who are flexible enough to hold their noses and vote for Mitt. That’s not an insigificant number. If Mitt pisses off enough of those people so that they stay home, it has implications for downticket races.
this election is going to be about the economy…period.
not birth control or any other trumped up issue.
mitt will win…from a monetary and economic perspective that will change nothing…but it is just the way it is.
we are all muppets now.
If you think this election is going to be solely about the economy then it makes no sense to declare who is going to win in March. Maybe October, or even mid to late September, but now is way too early.
” If Mitt pisses off enough of those people so that they stay home”
He already has simply by being Mormon. The media continues to pretend that this is not an issue, but for many Fundies and Evangs it’s a show stopper.
I seem to remember a campaign phrase from the distant past, “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Then there was the one, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”
IIRC, they both worked.
And in the end, the masses are addicted to hopeium and will do the switch party in power thing as usual, thinking things will get better. As my former boss would say “They bought it”. (Same PTB origin in reality.) Political Theatre, who cares. Yawn.
Wash Rinse Repeat
yep.
“We will make damn sure that women know where Mitt Romney stands” on matters related to women’s health ??
Did I hear correctly that there is pending legislation in the Arizona house that would require a woman to explain to her employer why she needs contraceptives provided through her health plan ??
I am somewhat surprised at this, as Fundyvangelicals do not have the theological objections to contraception that Catholics do, but they have suddenly jumped on that bandwagon. I’m sure there is a reason, possibly a way to discourage out of wedlock sex (it won’t work) or maybe just a way to stick it to women. Either way, its somewhat puzzling.
“…maybe just a way to stick it to women.”
The party of TruePurity ALWAYS has a target …ALWAYS.
Just add their basic ingreedient: FEAR! Mix in & “Yell/Scream/Holler”, put it in the oven & bake.
There that darn party of small gubermint in action again.
Did I hear correctly that there is pending legislation in the Arizona house that would require a woman to explain to her employer why she needs contraceptives provided through her health plan ??
You heard that right.
And, guess what, the women of Arizona aren’t taking it lying down. Yeah, I know. Bad pun. But this legislation is the proverbial “bridge too far.”
Are they crocheting uteruses to deliver to the members of the state legislature? I’ve heard of that one at the national level.
I don’t know about that, but I do that there is quite a bit of unhappiness in Tucson and around the state.
The far side has crossed over into reality. Who’s got time for all this shenanigans? Budgets to balance, economic woes to deal with, and they have time to ponder this stuff, which is a medical neccessity more so than Viagra.
Speaking as an aging Ex-Repuke Baby Boomer, I think the far right is jealous that their days of yankee doodling are pretty much over. Hump Day means Wednesday to me now.
But I thought you said there was no difference between the parties? How are the dems trying to control your body? Oh, they’re fighting so you have control of your body?
Hmm. That sounds like quite a difference.
Suppose you find yourself arguing with your friend, a conspiracy theorist, who claims that Megabank, Inc engineered the financial “crisis” for private profit. As evidence, your friend notes that every step of the housing boom and bust has turned out very well for Megabank, Inc., as though designed by financial engineers:
Step 1: Collect ginormous fees by playing the middle man between investors and subprime borrowers to facilitate really sh!tty mortgage lending.
Step 2: Get bailed out when the music stops, after accidentally ending up with too many sh!tty mortgage assets on the balance sheet.
Step 3: Use robo-signers to kick those who defaulted on their sh!tty subprime loans to the curb.
Step 4: Use low-interest bailout loans as the proceeds for snapping up foreclosure-to-rental housing at fire sale prices.
Step 5: Rent out foreclosure-to-rental housing to former members of the Ownership Society who got foreclosed.
Since you are level-headed and don’t buy into conspiracy theories, how would you refute your friend’s claim?
Ben said there was no housing bubble and home prices were in line with robust economic growth.
Mega-Bankers “dis-owning” the real e$tate Indu$try in favor$ of Rental-Corporation$Inc.
Think man, think!
Them Mega-Banker$ have a looooooonnnnnnggggggg human history of Dignitie$ / Integritie$ / Honorarium$ & Trustworthine$$. + [They collectively effu$e Ethical Behavior$]
Hit the books/google-it dude, exam their hi$tory, there’s pattern$ that will emerge before your very own eyes, and as they say: Beauty is in the eye$ of the beholder!
There are a lot easier ways for megabank to conspire to get rich, with less chance of backlash. Why not just crank up your bonuses without creating a bubble? I’m more inclined to believe a bunch of short sighted ‘leaders’ chose to believe it was a legitimate boom while naysayers were pushed to the margins (after all the bubble did build over a loooong time.) When things collapsed the ‘leaders’ did what was to be expected; they used their connections to their advantage.
I’m just not inclined to believe that these guys have the intelligence to plan something like this, but they do lack the ethics and integrity to take advantage of it.
“…but they do lack the ethics and integrity to take advantage of it.”
I think you meant to say something like, “…but they do have the requisite lack of ethics and integrity to take advantage of it”?
What you wrote suggests their lack of ethics or integrity somehow prevented them from taking advantage of it.
I miss angelo mozillo and his nice tan.
+1
And you have to remember that they would have made a lot more money if the whole thing had continued for a lot longer. Even at the height of the bubble what percent of households owned a house? 70%? There was no reason for them to think that 70% was the point at which the whole thing had to collapse. Why not 80%? Why not 90%?
And what percent of the population “owned” multiple homes? With cheap, low bar credit the potential was limitless until it wasn’t.
It didn’t and doesn’t have to be timed perfectly.
Think “disposable”. You don’t need to know when your disposable lighter is about to run out to get real use from it.
If they had designed the whole thing, they would have found a way to make it last longer. Just because you know that a lighter is disposable, doesn’t mean you design it to only work 5 or 6 times.
How do you know it didn’t last as long as they needed?
You can’t push/run ANY system full tilt for very long.
As long as they needed? For what? They do what they do to make money. The longer it ran, the more money they made in that phase. You don’t shut down a money maker while you are still making it hand over fist.
I just don’t buy the whole designed from the beginning to work out exactly this way in the end. Making/selling/repackaging loans with huge fees makes huge amounts of money at almost no risk. Why would you ever want to stop it?
For what?
Is this a trick question?
“I just don’t buy the whole designed from the beginning to work out exactly this way in the end.”
You’ve never sold used cars have you?
(I’ll explain. You don’t really make the big money on the sell of the used cars, you make the REAL money from repossessing it and reselling it… as many times as possible)
Just how many examples of corporations premeditating scams and fraud do you need? Google can give you THOUSANDS of examples from the last 10 years ALONE.
I was AT Enron. They got away with their scam for almost 10 years.
Also, you should look up the history of HUD and the FHA. They’ve been deep into corruption and scams since the almost right after they were created.
The S&L disaster was started the day the ink was dry on the Tax Modernization Act.
And let’s not forget that Congress can freely inside trade.
And do you think it was coincidence that the Bankruptcy Reform Act was written and heavily lobbied by (M-something), the largest private credit card issuer in the world?
I’ve seen the computing power and long term analysis used by large corporations. They know EXACTLY what they are doing, let alone the reams of books written on the subject.
And would Enron have said after 3 years that they had had enough? No more money needed?
And the used car dealer makes that money over and over again from selling the same car, because the business is easy. Their only risk is not being able to reposses it. And they are pretty much unregulated.
The banks do have some rules they are required to follow. And the hedge funds/private equity people are slightly different people than the investment banks. I just don’t see why the investment banks would have given up their lovely, almost riskless chunk of the pie as early as they did to benefit the other parts of the FIRE sector. They really are focussed on the next bonus. Why would they give up such easy money hoping to make another killing in a decade? They already had a killing right in front of them.
“If they had designed the whole thing, they would have found a way to make it last longer.”
It’s not over yet, despite the serial bottom callers’ customary chanting to kick off the red-hot spring sales season.
I wouldn’t believe it either except for one thing: it’s almost exactly like the Savings & Loan disaster.
Which was engineered as well.
I would point to
Hank Paulson
and Anthony Mozillo
and say those at the top knew what was going to happen, we did as well. What gives them the advantage is they also knew when it was going to happen and how it was going to be handled. Seriously Hank Paulson was in charge of saving AIG.
During the summer of 2007 the squad was tracking insider trades of Countrywide stock (from SEC filings reported on MarketWatch), the Orange One was literally cashing in hundreds of thousands of dollars worth every few days. This was later reported as being the result of restructuring his retirement plan…
Matt Tabbi has also documented the bank and inventiveness houses massive insider sell off just before the market collapse of 2007.
Polly, the evidence is unequivocal. It WAS engineered.
Long term plans with large sums of money are not unusual in human history.
The Medici spent several generation trying to get a family member elected Pope. Have you heard of the Medici?
Having a spot where you can see the cracks in walls before anyone else doesn’t mean you were the one who designed the house to break. It just means you could see it early. It is still horrible. It just isn’t quite as planned as you guys seem to make out.
Unless you are really positing a lot less “planned out” than I think you are. If you really think that the build up, the collapse, the delay in the collapse because of robosigning, and the ultimate “lets all be landlords” endgame was planned starting in 2000 or even 2004, then I say you are way overreaching.
I’m saying it was planned WAY before even that and the evidence is abundant.
Ah, found the name I was trying to remember:
Former Assistant Secretary of Housing under George H.W. Bush, Catherine Austin Fitts.
Start here. She dishes the dirt.
Turkey, it depends on what you mean by “beginning.” I believe the engineering began in mid-2003. Whether or not that’s the beginning is semantics.
2001: With Greenspan’s low interest rates, heavily screened safe borrowers, and big chunks of flowing electronic liquidity, housing was a good way to borrow, pay back, and collect up-front fees and returns on a lot of cheap money fast and make a fast return, in as few transactions as possible. This is NOT engineering; it’s invisible hand and flight to quality.
Mid 2003: They ran out of quality buyers, THEN they began to engineer. Lower standards, exotic morts etc, to keep the party going. They were able to engineer up until the Aug 2007 Alt-A discount window crisis. We know the rest.
Before housing bubble, the tech/dot com bubble was engineered as well in my opinion. We got out soon enough and made a few bucks, but didn’t get rich. The money came in handy during our financial tsunami.
When I think of the beginning of an engineered FIRE sector, I always default to the tech/dot com bubble.
We owned during the S&L fiasco. It took years to get a fair amt of equity again. We never used our “extra equity”, so we were in better shape than our neighborhood (debt & stuff idiots).
“Matt Tabbi has also documented the bank and inventiveness houses massive insider sell off just before the market collapse of 2007.”
If true, is there still at least some prospect of uncovering what went down and sending perps to serve hard time? Or has the clock run out by now on the statute of limitations?
A lot of people planned to make a killing, that’s for sure.
Read “Gods of Money”. They can and have done a lot worse.
Since you are level-headed and don’t buy into conspiracy theories, how would you refute your friend’s claim?
Occam’s razor.
Of course, the greed of Wall St. and the political power wielded by the wealthy create a perfect storm where Megabank can continue to profit from bubbles and collapses. No, I don’t think it was a “conspiracy” from the beginning. Yes, I think Moral Hazard played a very big role in Megabank deciding to make it’s levered bets.
I would pick a different razor.
“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
Hanlon’s/Heinlein’s Razor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon’s_razor
This stuff is not adequately explained by stupidity, unless you are referring to the policians who got rid of Gl/St. I just think we are dealing with very clever people who take advantage of every opportunity as it comes up. They are fantasitic at that and it hurts the country as a whole. They just didn’t plan back in the 90s for hedge funds to be able to buy up a lot of SFHs in the 2010s to rent out to people with ruined credit. To believe otherwise is to fall too far into Foundation trilogy territory.
To believe otherwise is to fall too far into Foundation trilogy territory.
+1000
I’ve always wondered how long it would take for us to come up with accurate predictive models and the computing power to run them emulating Asimov’s ideas…
BTW, supposedly Sony bought the rights to the Foundation movie.
You forgot the step where they invested in credit default swaps and profited from that, too.
Since you are level-headed and don’t buy into conspiracy theories, how would you refute your friend’s claim?
I can’t. That’s why I’m here.
Gollum to muppets: Buy stocks now, or get priced out forever!
March 21, 2012, 2:25 p.m. ET
UPDATE: Goldman Sachs Says Stocks Returns To Beat Bonds
–Goldman Sachs says equities to outperform bonds in next few years
–Risks from investing trends, demographics said to be overstated
–Debate has picked up over stocks’ worth amid rally this year
(Adds context and forecasts from other firms starting in sixth paragraph.)
…
DJIA = 13K or bust!
Silver lining: There is no reason the PPT can’t turn a bearish start into a benign finish.
Dark cloud: Green shoots of improved U.S. jobless claims numbers make QE3 a harder sell for the Fed.
Index Futures:
S&P 500 1,389.50 -8.00 -0.57%
DOW 13,005 -61.00 -0.47%
NASDAQ 2,723 -12.50 -0.46%
Street’s set for bearish start
Stock futures point broadly lower, tracking overseas markets and falling commodity prices precipitated by poor China data overnight. Further improvement in U.S. jobless claims fail to dampen bearish mood.
cramer is bullish things must be ok.
goldilocks is back bro. these folks will say anything to suck the retail investors in. I don’t think it is working this time. Mom and pop have finally wised up to the shysters who inflate, deflate. Too bad the people who control the money supply are on the wrong side.
While I was back east, I read an article, ISTR it was in the WSJ, about the fear of small investors. Seems that the little guys and gals were feeling a bit hesitant about getting back into stocks. The article was trying to tease out the reasons why.
My guess: Perhaps they don’t want to lose their life savings a second time.
I don’t think that was mentioned in the article.
yeah really.
Calling all muppets!
Goldman Sachs on muppet alert
March 22, 2012 - 1:08PM
Goldman Sachs has begun scanning internal emails for the term “muppet” and other evidence that employees referred to clients in derogatory ways, chief executive Lloyd Blankfein told partners in a conference call this week, according to people familiar with the call.
The company-wide email review comes after an executive director named Greg Smith resigned last week in a scathing op-ed column in the New York Times in which he said he saw five Goldman managing directors refer to clients as “muppets,” at times over internal email.
On the conference call with partners this week, Mr Blankfein said the company was taking Mr Smith’s claims seriously and was conducting a review of his assertions, including the email scan, according to these people.
…
The Enron by the Hudson
fire up the shredders.
Brian Cruver’s book, Anatomy of Greed: The Unshredded Truth from an Enron Insider, made frequent references to the paper shredders near his work area. In short, they were very busy before Cruver was laid off from the company.
Why didn’t Greg Smith himself save the emails, especially if he intended to spew to the NYT? If Smith wanted to embarrass GS, he could have named who wrote the muppet emails. If Smith wanted to damage GS, he could have named who the muppet clients were, thus encouraging those clients to “move their money.”
He may have signed a client confidentiality statement.
“Mr. $mith goes to Washington II”
Tom Hank$
Goldman mine for ‘muppet’
After an employee quits with a highly public critique of its culture, Goldman is left scouring emails and other internal communications for evidence of workers using derogatory comments about clients.
Outperform bonds? That’s a pretty low bar these days…
basically GS is betting against the dollar?
GS is trying to get those who have flocked to bonds to come out of their hole and buy GS stocks so that GS can then put their money in bonds.
In similiar news, here’s another contrarian indicator :
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-20/biggs-boosts-bullish-bets-on-stocks-to-90-percent-net-long
Common retail idiots - time to jump in, we need bagholders!!!
It really seems flagrant, doesn’t it? Why would anyone think it was a good time to buy equities when the Dow is nearing its all time high? Isn’t rule #1 in the stock market “buy low, sell high”? These guys must really think people are retards. Oh, that’s right…
How do current bond yields compare to those circa Fall 2008, and what does that portend for future stock price dynamics?
I know it’s different this time and all…
March 22, 2012, 1:12 p.m. EDT
Treasury sells TIPS at negative yield; bonds up
By Deborah Levine
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — The Treasury Department sold $13 billion in 10-year Treasury Inflation Protected Securities on Thursday at a yield of -0.89% - the second time 10-year TIPS have sold with a negative yield.
…
Do you mind explaining your sarcasm?
I have some TIPS in my portfolio, I want to make sure that I understand your snark.
Thank you, sir.
Bond yields similarly hit the deck in Fall 2008 just before the U.S. headline stock market indexes dipped by 50% or so, roughly Sept 2008-March 2009. Quantitative easing, starting in Spring 2009, made it all good again.
But it is different this time…
Right -
I didn’t realize that bond yields had dipped then.
Thanks for the info.
Right - I remember now. That’s when many money markets ‘broke the buck’, right?
Here is a good graph to get an idea of what “pushing on a string” means. The Fed has been doing it since the Fall 2008 Wall Street financial collapse, pretending all the while that it holds a royal flush.
I’m thinking these negative yields in the 10-year inflation indexed Treasurys are signalling something about future inflation. Roughly speaking, no-arbitrage considerations require the expected level of inflation over the next ten years has to be sufficiently high to match the current spread between the yield on non-inflation-indexed 10-year Treasurys and on inflation-indexed 10-year Treasurys:
Current 10-year Treasury yields
Non-inflation-indexed yield 2012-03-20: 2.38
Inflation-indexed yield 2012-03-21 -0.89 (see MW post above)
Based on a no-arbitrage condition, the approximate 10-year inflation expectation is 2.38 + 0.89 = 3.27%.
Try not to get caught when the music stops, holding long-term bets against rising inflation.
Q. How do you know if a Goldman analyst is lying to muppets about which assets will do well going forward?
A. Check whether his lips are moving.
Oh bugger…
Bulletin » Euro-zone purchasing-managers index at 3-month low, underlining recession concerns
Europe feeling China’s pain
China manufacturing activity falls, weighing on the Continent’s bourses, particularly on miners.
• Chinese factories suffer Asia markets weak
How many months of slow-motion stock market bloodletting will be necessary to price in twin recessions in China and the Eurozone?
Global Dow Realtime USD
DJI: GDOW 1,994.33
Change -5.41 -0.27%
Volume 431.96m
Mar 22, 2012, 11:34 p.m.
Previous close 1,999.74
Day low 1,993.16
Day high 1,999.74
Open: 1,999.74
52 week low 1,664.60
52 week high 2,270.47
$800k for a second home w/cabin motif near the crumbling Sylvan Beach community? Yeah, good luck w/that, waterfront or not.
http://www.cnyhomes.com/Listing/Search/info.cgi?mlnum=S268698
Lot size: 0.18 acres. No way, that property is far larger than that. That said, it’s a very nice lot, perfect for a 900 sq ft cottage.
I wonder how many chemicals they had to put on that lawn?
The “Green Lawn” guys swing buy every spring and leave an unrequested quote on our front door. Their services are NOT cheap. This year’s quote was something like $700. I can get the lawn aerated for $30. $670 buys a LOT of fertilizer.
<The Atlantic makes The Bernank out to be a hero, while insinuating that Andrew Jackson was only riding a populist wave that threw the country into recession when he rid the nation of its second central bank. I’m really tiring of the propoganda that the system is “saved” when in reality our central bankers and our government have only bought time.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/04/the-villain/8901/
“The U.S. Federal Reserve was founded 99 years ago, as a bulwark to the banking system and an antidote to its frequent runs and panics. Strictly speaking, it was America’s third attempt at a central bank. The first, organized by Congress in 1791, was allowed to expire after 20 years, leaving the young republic with only a patchwork system of weaker state banks. During the War of 1812, Congress realized its error (in the absence of a central bank, inflation had run rampant), and in 1816, it chartered a second bank, again for 20 years. The Second Bank of the United States was, in the main, a success. Its notes were circulated as currency, and it astutely managed their supply so as to keep the economy humming. Alas, President Andrew Jackson, a fierce opponent of both paper money and national banks, campaigned in 1832 against renewal of the charter, and indirectly against the bank’s brilliant but impetuous head, Nicholas Biddle. Resentment against financiers was running high, and the election became a referendum on the genteel Philadelphia banker versus the rough-hewn war hero—and a referendum on the bank itself. Jackson won, and the Second Bank was, per his promise, destroyed. The U.S. economy promptly plunged into a severe depression. Biddle died not long after, in semi-disgrace, but the battle between bankers and populists never went away.
None of the invective heaped, of late, on Ben Bernanke would have come as a surprise to Biddle, and one doubts whether the Fed would fare much better with the electorate today than the Second Bank did in the 19th century. Bernanke himself certainly would not win a popularity contest. In 2010, four years after his appointment by President George W. Bush as Fed chief, he was approved for a second term by a Senate vote of 70 to 30—the slimmest margin for a Fed chief ever. (In 2000, Alan Greenspan won a fourth term by a vote of 89 to 4.) Bernanke’s troubles with politicians were a direct result of his sagging poll numbers, and since his reappointment these numbers have only gotten worse. In a Bloomberg poll last September, only 29 percent of respondents expressed a favorable opinion of Bernanke; 35 percent had an unfavorable view. In October, just 40 percent of those surveyed by Gallup said they had confidence in Bernanke’s ideas for creating jobs; even congressional leaders inspired greater faith.”
I’m really tiring of the propoganda that the system is “saved” when in reality our central bankers and our government have only bought time.
To quote a favorite novel/movie/website of mine:
“On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.”
How much time do you need?
“In the long run, we’re ALL dead.”
Well let me float this idea: if we’re dead before this thing hits bottom than I’ve lost a lot of time sitting on a computer that might have been better spent doing something else. If you want to talk how long before my body starts to reverse my ability to care for the land I’d like to own: 20 tops. They’ve already taken 6 years from me.
You only have one chance at life… do what makes you happy and don’t look back.
“…do what makes you happy”
I’ve tried that. I went broke.
And yes CarrieAnn, this being my 6th recession, I feel the same way… x6.
CarrieAnn & Turkey
I can relate. I have less time in front of me, than behind me. That realization is a wake-up call that time is ticking away.
Carpe diem. The weather here went from mild winter to mild summer basically overnight. Temps have been hitting the low 80s every day. Dogwoods and azaleas are out, flowering fruit trees have finished blooming and are leafing out. So are the fast growing trees like poplars. Pollen’s coming out the wazoo but fortunately it doesn’t bother me.
So, I’m taking advantage of it. Tennis each of the last three days, golf tomorrow and Sunday (we attend Our Lady of the Fairways). Will have to do some cleaning on Saturday. C’mon rain; I need a down day!
BTW, I am very well aware that this phase of my retirement won’t last. Don’t forget George Carlin’s line: “Life’s journey is not to
arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting
‘..holy sh*t ….what a ride!’ “
CarrieAnn–
The day I hit forty I realized that if I didn’t jump now, I would never have the physical energy left to set up what I wanted to do–so I did it that year. (You can improve as you go along– incrementally, if you start with good bones and a good basic property.)
If I had to do it now, twenty years later, I might be in a better money situation (might…) but I don’t know that my body would be as willing to go through all that again.
China’s Recession Begins
Posted: March 22, 2012 at 6:39 am
The recession in China has begun. Normally a recession would be marked by two quarters of GDP contraction. The Chinese economy needs a momentum of much more than that to retain growth of its middle class, essential to internal consumption, and the progress of its state-owned companies, which substantially control the economy. China has attempted to reverse its slide with monetary and bank policy. That has not worked. The government expects GDP expansion of about 8% this year. That will not happen.
…
What would we expect in a recession in China? Job losses? Mass foreclosures on those 28xincome high-rise condos? Does China have a safety net? Unemployment/food stamps etc?
Does China have a safety net?
No, they opted for the much-cheaper suicide nets.
That’s why the Peter Schiffs of the world so admire them. Not being a democracy allows them to think more strategically.
These guys are all okay with political and economic repression, as long as they are the ones doing the repressing.
And profitting from it.
“And profiting from it.”
Like $mith Barney of yore:
“We make moneie$ the old fa$hioned way, … we EARN$ it!”
I don’t think China has bankruptcy laws….
The real question is whether children inherit their parent’s debt. In the US, death discharges all your debts, but that doesn’t mean that is the case everywhere in the world.
There’s no debt in China. From what I read, most of the buying is all cash.
Who in China is buying cash condos as 28 x income? The low-paid wage slaves who made most of what they sell at Wal-mart?
Death discharges debts? Not if the decedent has an estate.
Of course not if you have an estate (though there are a few types that carry an embedded insurance policy so they pay off without impacting your estate). If you have an estate that is larger than your debts, you aren’t in net debt.
What would we expect in a recession in China?
Commodities prices cut in half?
What would we expect in a recession in China?
Massive social unrest.
I assume they’ll hand out surplus cheese in Tiannemen Square?
March 22, 2012, 8:22 a.m. EDT
Weak PMIs underline euro-zone recession fears
By William L. Watts, MarketWatch
FRANKFURT (MarketWatch)—Weaker-than-expected purchasing managers’ index readings from France and Germany on Thursday pointed to an accelerated contraction in private-sector activity across the euro zone, highlighting fears the region slipped into and remains in a recession.
The Markit composite purchasing managers’ index, or PMI, fell to a three-month low of 48.7 from 49.3 in February. The services index edged down to 48.7 from 48.78 in February, while manufacturing PMI fell to 47.7 from 49.0. A reading of less than 50 indicates a contraction in activity.
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had forecast a composite PMI reading of 49.6.
“The euro-zone economy contracted at a faster rate in March, suggesting that the region has fallen back into recession, with output now having fallen in both the final quarter of last year and the first quarter of 2012,” said Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit.
…
What are we to think of the announcement yesterday that Strum Ruger has stopped taking order for new guns because their backlog is over 1 million guns? How does this relate to the really low Republican turnout in the primaries? Is the Tea Party worried about Obama winning another 4 years or are they more worried that if they take over the White House in 2012 then mobs of angry Democrats will invade the suburbs to rob them of their bibles and force them to have gay sex?
Check out the stock prices of RGR and SWHC this morning…
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sturm-ruger-soars-on-brisk-demand-for-new-guns-2012-03-22?link=MW_latest_news
What about that they wisely decided not to borrow money to vastly expand production (possibly impacting quality) in the face of what might be a temporary increase of demand? Also, assuming they have a computerized order system, it might only have 6 digits so that going over 999,999 would mean that they have to keep track of anything over that just on paper.
Maybe so but the FBI confirms really high levels of applications so the demand is really there. I also remember reading that most new gun sales are to existing owners which I assume are mostly right of center and a bit older & whiter and can afford to drop $400-$900 on a new weapon. To me this smells like fear, but of what?
According to yesterday’s bits comments, liberal bigot here. Also the owner of some “toys” that Eric Holder allegedly wants to confiscate.
The teabaggers need all those gunz for when they go John Galt and secede to create their own libertarian paradise just like unregulated free market utopia Somalia.
I also remember reading that most new gun sales are to existing owners
Most gun “enthusiasts” that I know have enough guns to arm a platoon.
Not what I would call an ethusiast so I only have enough to outfit a squad.
In anecdotal housing “news”, my brother is buying another mortgage after having learned nothing from his short sale in 2007. I am still processing this information.
Just because the demand is there, doesn’t mean it is permanent. New factory capacity is expensive.
I don’t disagree with you, and it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if gun demand fell dramatically come 2013. If a Repub wins, demand will drop. If Obama wins and doesn’t push another assault weapons ban, demand will drop. If Obama does get another ban passed, demand will drop. If the world doesn’t end on Dec 21, 2012, demand will drop…
Having said that, gun demand has been on a record pace since 2008:
Boom times continue for US gun business
“To me this smells like fear, but of what?”
A $pinning Wobbling planet & lil’ Opie + Amtrak Joe … again.
Mercy, Mercy!
My b/f just recently bought several guns. He bought them because there have been a string of home invasion robberies in town. None have been too close to us, but he decided that it would be a good idea to have some protection since we are in the boonies and he travels a lot.
We have them strategically hidden around the house. (No kids, so that is not a worry.) We also have coyotes, mountain lions and bears around, and with the fire burning a lot of the mountains, they are ranging a bit further out. We also find “illegal supply/pickup stations” close to our property from time to time, although fortunately I have never seen any illegals, or had any come to our house. Our next door neighbor is border patrol, so we always let him know when we find the supply stations.
We also go to the range about once a month to keep in practice. Neither of us are gun nuts and I sincerely hope that I never have to use a gun against anyone, but I like knowing that I have the option to protect myself.
Neither of us are gun nuts and I sincerely hope that I never have to use a gun against anyone, but I like knowing that I have the option to protect myself.
Yeah, I know some gun people in AZ who say that they would like to confront an intruder in their houses, so that they could legally blow someone away.
Yeah, I know some gun people in AZ who say that they would like to confront an intruder in their houses, so that they could legally blow someone away.
I do too. When they say such things, I make a mental note to avoid them in the future.
Well I have never heard anyone actually say that, but I suspect I know a few who feel that way. Unfortunately, one of them is a neighbor. But I just avoid him and act neighborly when I can’t.
I’ve read that most gun sales are to those who already own them. Which indicates that the collectors are the buyers.
Not to mention the rate of gun ownership in this country — it’s been falling since the 1970s. Used to be slightly more than 50% of American households. It’s down to about 33%.
According to my brother who sells guns - there are rumors that when Obama is re-elected he will ban lots of gun types.
These are the same rumors from 4 years ago.
“there are rumors that when Obama is re-elected he will ban lots of gun types.”
With what Congress?
Indeed, gotta love the gun nut hysterics. The scary black man is gonna take their guns away if we re-elect him.
Here is what gun owners are afraid of: BS anti-gun scare tactics ,aimed at ignorant liberals, spouted by equally ignorant liberals with an agenda, bent on creating a UK-like environment where no-one but the the Government is allowed to have guns…
Trayvon-martin shooting shows perils of lax us gun laws
The editorial board of Bloomberg News is why I contribute to the NRA annually and exercise my constitutionally protected 2nd amendment rights on a regular basis. The article above is part of the “scare tactics” of the anti-gun liberal media, and clearly shows it’s agenda in every anti-gun agenda…
Why is it I never hear from the liberal media about disarming Police, after an innocent victim is shot and killed by them? Do the popo really need assault rifles in every patrol car? Armored Vehicles on city streets? .50cal Sniper rifles (don’t even get me started on the problem of over-penetration in an urban environment with a round like the .50, talk about inappropriate).
Were the “gun industry” behind that rumor?
I wouldn’t be surprised.
So the gun owners think Mitt and his super pacs can’t defeat a Muslim socialist president? Even if Obama wins he will still loose the Senate and I bet the House stays in Republican hands. Just look at the level of voter suppression in the last few years and the deck is tilted ‘R’. I will concede that making Texas or Mississippi even redder than they already are doesn’t change the electoral collage math.
And back in 1991, when Clinton was elected.
I imagine that they were whining back in 1932, when Roosevelt outlawed private ownership of machine guns.
“When 105mm howitzers are outlawed, only outlaws will have 105mm howitzers….”
“When 105mm howitzers are outlawed, only outlaws will have 105mm howitzers….”
I think the citizens of Homs, Syria would take issue with your tongue-in-cheek example.
Yeah, and they would still be outgunned by the government.
The Right to Own an AR-15/Barrett doesn’t mean a damn thing, if you can’t afford to make the purchase.
Private ownership of machine guns is not outlawed except in CA, DE, DC, HI, NY, and WA.
Yeah, and they would still be outgunned by the government.
Considering the Taliban of Afghanistan have managed to fight the US war machine to a standstill after 10 years of war, I would tend to disagree.
Amazing what a few hand-me-down AK’s, some RPG’s, and a few IED’s can do to a “modern” army when you have people with the will to use them. It’s almost like the Taliban studied history: they took a page out of George Washington’s playbook during the Revolutionary War. Or was it Hồ Chí Minh during the Vietnam War? Or was it Aslan Maskhadov in the Chechen conflict…
The only reason they have fought our war machine to a standstill, is that some idiots decided we needed to get involved in nation building, instead of making the Taliban’s support of Al Queda an object lesson.
Then trying to do it on the (manpower) cheap…….if defeating al Queda and the Taliban was important enough for us to occupy the country for ten years, it was important enough to reinstate the draft (preferably with no college deferments, and including women), so you had enough guys to do the job, and wouldn’t have to send guys overseas for 6-7-8 tours.
We spend billions on weapons intended to MINIMIZE death/injury to out OPPONENTS. Carpet-bombing is underrated. And a hell of a lot cheaper than wasting a $200K Hellfire missile on some Habib with a rusty AK.
If you aren’t willing to do everything that is necessary to win, then maybe you shouldn’t be starting the war at all.
“War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it.”…..W.T. Sherman
Bin Ladin was our allie, how were the Taliban to know any different?
“…there are rumors that when Obama is re-elected he will ban lots of gun types.”
Again?! Dear god! He signed a bill ALLOWING guns into Nationals Parks for the first time since their creation!
We are a nation of goddamn morons! With GUNS!!
But he’s a scary black man, he has to take the guns away!
“These are the same rumors from 4 years ago.”
Now Steve. Let’s call a “Spade” a “Spade” shall we?
“These are the same … Fears! … from 4 years ago.”
They’re already having gay sex but keeping it on the downlow
What are we to think of the announcement yesterday that Strum Ruger has stopped taking order for new guns because their backlog is over 1 million guns?
Doesn’t surprise me in the least. Here are a number of personal anecdotes that reinforce the view demand for all types of guns and ammunition is way up:
1. Of the three dedicated gun stores I frequent, they are always busy, whether it be a weekend or weekday. I usually end up waiting 30+ minutes for service. Women make up a large percentage of the shoppers I see. Almost all of them are purchasing concealable hand guns (i.e. compacts). The men seem equally enamored with AR15’s and large-frame handguns.
2. The .308 match ammo I usually run through my bolt action couldn’t be found at Walmart, Dick’s, or the gun shops I frequent over the last two months. This is $25/box of 20 ammo, so you would think demand for expensive ammo would be down. My last two trips to Four Seasons, in Woburn, they were out of M855 5.56 bulk ammo cans (420 rounds per can). These are $170/box… FS is the highest volume gun store in MA. At a local Walmart superstore, the associate told me that they sell out of ammo within a couple of days of getting it in…
3. Gun shops can’t keep AR15’s or AK47’s in stock. Even parts kits are hard to come by. I’ve been looking for over a month for a castle nut and end plate (replacement parts)for my M&P15T. These are $5 parts that I should be able to order online or pick up from any store that has parts kits. Everyone is sold out. Every available part is being used to build guns because of order backlog.
4. Accessories for AR’s like Magpul or Troy hardware are very hard to come by. I had to search four different websites to find the stock and rail guards for my AR. Everyone was sold out, with 1+ month waits. I was quite surprised a high volume site like USCAV was out of everything I needed.
5. When I bought my S&W M&P40, it was the last new one in the shop. They had already sold out of M&P 9mm, which is what I was originally looking for. These are staple guns for gun shops and $500-700 purchases.
Yup. The local Wally Mart sells out of 7.62×39 within days of shipment…
That’s commie talk!
But my “toy” was manufactured in Yugoslavia, not in Russia or China, so is it technically commie then?
It’s all good. I was trying “unsuccessfully” to make a joke… “Commie” talk, 7.62×39 Soviet caliber… never mind.
I’m actually in the market for an Arsenal AK myself. A quote from Clint Eastwood in Heartbreak Ridge comes to mind:
“This is the AK-47 assault rifle, the preferred weapon of your enemy; and it makes a distinctive sound when fired.”
The local Wal Mart is selling Bushmaster M-4s, and the Sig Sauer M400s, and they always seem to be in stock.
A sign to me that the AR-15 has reached market saturation, or that the local $12/hour schlubs can’t afford the $800-900+ price tag.
A sign to me that the AR-15 has reached market saturation, or that the local $12/hour schlubs can’t afford the $800-900+ price tag.
Makes sense… you’ll know your local market better than me. In MA, quality AR manufacturers like Armalite, Stag, DPMS, Bravo Company, and Smith & Wesson are in very high demand, price be damned. Walmart doesn’t sell guns in MA, just ammo.
Bushmaster isn’t known for it’s quality, among AR enthusiasts btw. Should have seen the uproar among enthusiasts when Magpul announced it was selling rights to the Masada to Bushmaster/Remington… and when the Masada/ACR finally came to market = Bushmaster Fail.
I’m seeing a lot of the black rifles that were selling so well in 2008 now in pawn shops.
Americans love guns. It really is that simple. Want one? Go buy one, or two. They’re relatively inexpensive and don’t take up much space. If I loved guns, I would own a stack. Have you seen all the guncentric shows on TV?
Americans love guns.
I am always perplexed by how supposedly “Christian America” is so entralled by weapons.
Matthew 26:53 (NIV)
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
In other translations it sometimes says “He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword. Jesus tells this to Simon-Peter when he draws a sword to defend Jesus from those who have come to arrest him in Gesthsemane.
I am always perplexed by how supposedly “Christian America” is so entralled by weapons.
Luke 22:35-38
“He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
“That’s enough!” he replied.”
A few other choice quotes:
“Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”
“God made man, but Samuel Colt made them equal.”
“Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”
They tend to practice that bassackwards in thee South. :-/
And yet, when they used one of those swords later in Gethsemane, they were rebuked by Jesus, who is well known for telling his followers to “turn the other cheek”.
And yet, when they used one of those swords later in Gethsemane, they were rebuked by Jesus, who is well known for telling his followers to “turn the other cheek”.
Indeed. Almost as if Jesus wanted to martyr himself…
If you read the Old Testament, there are plenty of examples of taking up swords and conquering your neighbors with the full support, and indeed, help, of God.
History has many examples: thousands of Christian Crusaders left their homes in Europe to travel to the “Holy Land” and wage war against the Muslims; fully sanctioned by the Church. The Templars were a Christian military organization… Christian by belief, military by organization, training, and actions. Reminds me of Balackwater/Xe/Academi…
So, who’s right? Old-testament God: the one who sent his angel of death to destroy entire cities? Jesus: the one who martyred himself to inspire millions, preceding an eventual takeover of Roman religious society? The Pope: those who sanctioned the Crusades of the middle-ages and the latest one who hasn’t protested about the most current Crusade in Iraq/Syria/Iran/Afghanistan/Yemen/Libya?
I’d stick with The Prince of Peace.
I’d stick with The Prince of Peace.
Personal choice, and I respect that.
Here are a number of quotes from famous people that might sway your opinion.
“When a strong man, fully armed, guards his palace, his possessions are safe.”
Jesus Christ, Luke 11:21
“Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready.”
Theodore Roosevelt
“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”
Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, 1941
“Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA — ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the state.”
Heinrich Himmler
“That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer’s cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”
George Orwell, author
“The unarmed man is not just defenseless — he is also contemptible.”
Machiavelli
Peace on you.
“Sons of Guns”
Discovery Channel.
Mystery solved.
File this under “green shoots”, from the WSJ: Student Loan Debt Tops $1 Trillion
“Rohit Chopra, student loan ombudsman for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said student debt could ultimately slow the recovery of the housing market. “First time home buyers are a substantial part of the housing market,” Mr. Chopra said in a speech at the banking conference in Austin. “Instead of saving for a down payment, these borrowers are sending big payments every month.”
Thanks Captain Obvious! This clown deserves a Nobel Prize in economics, or better yet, a columnist gig on SmartMoney.
Here in Tucson, there are more than a few people attending the University of Arizona and Pima Community College because of the crummy job market.
Meaning that it’s better to be “going back to school” than trying to find a job right now. Call it higher education, call it a hiding place from reality, call it what you will.
Less opportunity cost than when the economy was good.
Money printing depreciates the Constitution.
What if it promotes the general welfare?
Then you get a Welfare Bubble.
“Then you get a Welfare Bubble.”
Incomplete sentence:
“Then you get a Welfare Bubble known as Wall $t.”
On financial innovation:
“A financial product is about as conceptual as you can get,” says Wilson Ervin, a senior adviser at Credit Suisse. “You just need paper and ink.”
http://www.economist.com/node/21547989
A remarkable thing really. Create logical constructs which people might value. The only catch is people need to pay actual cash for them in order for them to have value for the seller. And the customer needs to get cash or some sense of value from the construct somehow.
snake oil for a modern age
Got that right.
“You just need paper and ink.”
A good attorney can’t hurt.
Army still not sure how this whole Internet thingy works:
Army Tried to Delete Bales From Web After Arrest
WASHINGTON — Besides waiting nearly a week before identifying the Army staff sergeant accused of killing 16 Afghan villagers, the U.S. military scrubbed its websites of references to his combat service.
Gone were photographs of the suspect, Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, as well as a recounting in his base’s newspaper of a 2007 battle in Iraq involving his unit, a report that quoted him extensively.
http://m.military.com/news/article/army-tried-to-delete-bales-from-web-after-arrest.html?comp=700001075741&rank=2
Army Tried to Delete Bales From Web After Arrest
The army doesn’t want pesky questions like “How could an otherwise reliable and accomplished soldier, who has survived combat on numerous occasions, in different theaters of operation, perform this heinous crime?”
Given the hospital at joint base Lewis Mcchord, where he was stationed at, was declining 100’s of soldiers PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) diagnoses, ostensibly to save the army money. Given this particular soldier had received a TBI (traumatic brain injury) in Iraq. Given the statistically significant number of alcohol-related/drug-related incidents, suicides, and violent crimes at joint base Lewis Mcchord, perpetrated by formerly deployed soldiers, as compared to other bases. I would say the army doesn’t want people thinking there is a systemic problem, and would rather everyone think this was a rouge incident by a uniquely troubled soldier.
Eggs-zactly. Like I said yesterday, a bad apple can played as an unfortunate but isolated case.
One “AWSHIT” = 100 “Attaboys”
Given the statistically significant number of alcohol-related/drug-related incidents, suicides, and violent crimes at joint base Lewis Mcchord, perpetrated by formerly deployed soldiers, as compared to other bases. I would say the army doesn’t want people thinking there is a systemic problem, and would rather everyone think this was a rouge incident by a uniquely troubled soldier.
Shades of My Lai. And the cover-up afterward.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
On (self)regulation:
Greenspan said:
“But on Thursday, almost three years after stepping down as chairman of the Federal Reserve, a humbled Mr. Greenspan admitted that he had put too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage lending.
“Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html?_r=1
I don’t expect any serious reform from the current Bought Congress as the current system has rewarded them handsomely. If November 2012 brings changes, I would look for some real reform next year.
“I’m shocked, SHOCKED, to find that gambling is going on in here!….”
“Your winnings, sir.”
Realtors Are Liars®
Apple is the New Brawndo.
ROFLMAO
Oh hell yeah!
It’s what yuppies crave!
Does this mean everyone gets to play with the funbags?
In NoVA, buy now or be priced out forever. From the Northern Virginia Housing Bubble Fallout blog:
“Northern Virginia’s February 2012 housing sales were up 3% YoY, and median prices were up 2.6% to $384,500. The average days on the market decreased 2.6% to 75 days.
“(The above statistics include Alexandria City, Arlington County, Fairfax City, Fairfax County, Falls Church City, Fauquier County, Loudoun County, Manassas City, Manassas Park City, and Prince William County).”
Is the possible collapse of the euro anything U.S. householders need to worry about? If so, why? (Yawn…)
P.S. I expect the stampeding Wall Street bovine brigade to also ignore this article.
March 22, 2012, 12:01 a.m. EDT
Ben and the Muppets’ European adventure
Commentary: Few warnings get taken seriously in a bull market
By David Callaway, MarketWatch
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — Notorious Goldman Sachs traitor Greg Smith and Fed chief Ben Bernanke have one thing in common: Nobody will listen to them.
A week after Smith’s New York Times resignation set off an ethics bomb in the heart of Wall Street, two main camps of reaction have coalesced: Those who think Smith wasn’t important enough to make his voice heard; and those who think he’s stupid for not recognizing that the financial industry runs on greed.
Both camps ignore the obvious extension of their arguments, which is the same. Smith is right. Wall Street is corrupt. It’s such an acceptable view that nobody wants to hear it anymore, which is a disgrace. When will they listen? When a large Goldman client publicly bolts. Watch for it.
Bernanke seemingly would not have any of these issues. He’s the head of the Federal Reserve Board, the most powerful central bank in the world. When he talks, markets move.
Yet his warnings on Wednesday that Europe’s crisis isn’t over went largely unheeded in the markets, almost to the point of being ignored. It can’t be that investors doubt his pedigree, like Smith. So it must be that the collapse of the euro is so widely expected that Bernanke’s comments are blindingly obvious.
…
…or maybe it’s the 800lb gorilla that everyone seems to be missing: the Eurozone is THE largest market in the world, surpassing the US by a very large margin.
“…the Eurozone is THE largest market in the world, surpassing the US by a very large margin.”
That detail certainly seems lacking from most current discussions of the near-term global economic outlook…
Paging Combo (and X-Gs)!
My new neighbors from Ohio just moved down because the FAA shut down the helicopter repair company he worked for (I didn’t get the details on that).
BUT, they left an inherited house.
So there it is. Even a free house is too expensive is the cash does not flow.
I used to say that “…I’m so poor that even if someone gave me an “X” for free, I couldn’t afford to keep it.”
Seriously, I know that kind of poor all too well.
Maybe they can give it to GS.
They can turn it into wall street rental gold.
Any chance they mortgaged that free house somewhere along the line?
NOOOOOOO … say it ain’t so…
Cleveland?
YES! We’re renewing through June 30th, 2013 at our current rental.
This is great news. Holy frick, I can’t believe the weight that was just lifted off my shoulders. Either way my son will have a seat at a great elementary, be it a zone or application school.
Congrats! Such a great feeling.
I want house prices to crash so low that every small-to-midsize city in America can have a band like this:
http://youtu.be/4rz4I69mQMo
Whoa!
Rhymes with bass? Or did you mean bass?
The fish, not the guitar.
According to FPSS, you can ignore Fisher, because he is talking to the MSM. Here’s to hoping FPSS is wrong on this opinion.
WRAPUP 1-Fed officials clash on view of economy
Analysis & Opinion
Fed’s Fisher sees no need for more monetary easing
Too big to fail banks? Break ‘em up, Fisher says
Thu Mar 22, 2012 6:41pm EDT
By Ann Saphir
CHICAGO, March 22 (Reuters) - The gap between the Federal Reserve’s dovish core and its hawkish wing was on display on Thursday as a top Fed official said the economy is in better shape even as Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke focused on a source of weakness.
While growing “slower than we would like,” the U.S. economy is expanding fast enough that it does not need further help from the central bank, Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher told Fox Business Network.
“We will not support further quantitative easing under these circumstances because there’s a lot of money lying on the sidelines, lying fallow,” he said, according to a transcript provided by the network. “We don’t need any more monetary morphine.”
Bernanke, by contrast, sounded more cautious, saying U.S. consumer spending is still too weak to ensure a healthy pace of economic growth.
“Right now, in terms of debt and consumption, we’re still way low relative to the pattern before the crisis,” Bernanke told students in the second of two lectures at The George Washington University. “We lack a source of demand to keep the economy growing.”
Fisher is in the minority at the Fed, which last week reiterated its expectation that it will need to keep short-term interest rates near zero through late 2014 to help a lackluster recovery.
But his vocal opposition to further easing points to the challenges Bernanke faces as he seeks consensus on future policy in the face of subpar growth and high unemployment. While Fisher does not have a policy vote this year, he participates in the Fed’s regular policy-setting meetings.
In response to the deepest recession in generations, the Fed, under Bernanke’s leadership, slashed short-term borrowing costs to zero and promised to leave them there until at least late 2014. The central bank has also sharply expanded its balance sheet through the purchase of some $2.3 trillion in Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed debt.
…
In response to the deepest recession in generations,…
The national debt has doubled is just a few years, the financial, insurance and automotive industries have bailed-out and are on life support, state and local governments are struggling to stay alive on federal grants and shovel ready funding, disability, welfare and food stamp programs are busting at the seams, etc., but they still call this crisis a recession. Down the road a decade or two it will be re-written as a second depression once they “study” the data, IMHO.
Is there any chance Mitt Romney might appoint someone like Fisher to the Fed chairman position after Bernanke goes back to Princeton?
Too big to fail banks? Break ‘em up, Fisher says
By Ann Saphir
March 21, 2012
Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher wants the biggest U.S. banks broken up, calling them a danger to financial system stability and their perpetuation a drag on the economy. It’s an argument he’s made before – in full-length speeches, asides to reporters, parries to audience questions. (For the latest iteration, see Dallas Fed bank’s annual report published Wednesday.)
Indeed, Fisher is among the most consistent of Fed policymakers. He’s against further quantitative easing – has been ever since QE2, back in 2010. (By contrast, Minneapolis Fed President Narayana Kocherlakota supported QE2, before reversing course and opposing new rounds of monetary easing in 2011 and 2012). He’s against big banks, of course. He says repeatedly that uncertainty over taxes and regulation, not too-high borrowing costs, is what is holding back businesses from investing and hiring.
He’s even consistent with his jokes: several times last year Fisher lampooned the Fed’s increasing emphasis on transparency, quipping that no one wants to see a “full frontal” view of a 100-year-old institution. That particular joke dates back to at least 2006, according to a transcript of a Fed policy-setting meeting from October of that year. “Uncertainty is the enemy of decisionmaking,” Fisher said then, lambasting market participants eager for the Fed to provide more clarity on its views. “Of course they want more frequent forecasts. Governor Kohn and I talked about this before. They want a full frontal view. I find a full frontal view most unbecoming.”
…