March 23, 2012

Bits Bucket for March 23, 2012

Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.




RSS feed

244 Comments »

Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:24:22

Seems like the time is about ripe for bears to come out of hibernation.

March 23, 2012, 12:01 a.m. EDT
Secular bear market set to grip Wall Street
Commentary: Big financial firms will get a taste of own medicine
By Howard Gold

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — Stocks are hitting post-crisis highs, unemployment is falling and even housing sales are putting up their best numbers in years.

On Wall Street, however, it’s still the winter of their discontent. The giant firms that were instrumental in causing the financial crisis (they had plenty of help, of course) were saved from themselves by taxpayers’ money and zero interest rates, courtesy of Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke.

They had spectacular years in 2009 and 2010 and paid out huge bonuses to their undeserving minions, just as if nothing had happened. The public, suffering through the worst recession since the 1930s, was understandably outraged.

But, oh ye of little faith, justice and retribution are at hand. Market forces and a regulatory tidal wave are bearing down on these Masters of the Universe. The big firms are slashing bonuses, laying off workers and getting out of markets they had no business being in in the first place.

In coming years, these firms will earn less and shareholders may put more pressure on managements to improve profitability — the same kind of heat Wall Street puts on everyone else.

It all points to a secular bear market for Wall Street, no matter how the rest of the economy does. In financial speak, secular means caused by structural forces rather than the normal ebbs and flows of the market cycle.

Last week’s public resignation by Goldman Sachs Group (GS -0.99%) vice president Greg Smith in the New York Times was more than just a take-this-job-and-shove-it message. It was a symptom. These things happen in bear markets, when rats jump off sinking ships. In this case, the rat ratted out his employer.

The former Goldman employee called the environment at the firm “toxic and destructive” and wrote, “It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off.”

Comment by Martin
2012-03-23 04:28:49

I thought DOW is going to 16K.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 05:37:42

I’m certain it is.

The question is of how long it will take (days, months, years, decades, etc…) and how much inflation will be involved.

Comment by Jim A
2012-03-23 05:46:08

Yep. “The price will go up (sometime)” ≠ “Is a good investment.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by azdude
2012-03-23 06:41:59

what is the best and cheapest way to short aapl and pcln ?

 
Comment by rms
2012-03-23 07:16:09

what is the best and cheapest way to short aapl and pcln ?

Easy, don’t buy their products.

 
Comment by azdude
2012-03-23 07:39:32

pcln is in a major bubble. there is a money making opportunity here big time:

http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/pcln

 
Comment by The_Overdog
2012-03-23 09:15:49

The easiest and safest way to short stocks is to buy put options. You can see prices and expiration timelines at Yahoo finance.

I wouldn’t recommend it though unless you really know what you are doing. Options are zero sum. If you are incorrect and they have not passed the price you guessed they would fall to by their expiration date, then you lose your money.

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:07:23

I had a 250% gain on my 8,000 shares of company stock, sold a little over 25% (including the costliest batch, which was a fifty percent gain) early this week. Lo and behold, two days later my company announced its purchase of a slightly larger one. My a$$ is black and blue. At least I had most of my remaining shares, my stock price went up more than 20% to more than a six year high. I will at least get over 1600 shares at next Fridays closing price for about 1/3 the price.

When a company stock goes up gangbusters on announcing a huge acquisition, that is good news for more gains ahead.

So much for stocks as a poor investment. I cashed out over $30,000 to pay extra taxes this year. Have another $70,000 cash and my stock buy interests are Ross, Whole Foods Markets, Master Card, and…Apple.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 06:27:31

“…going to 16K.”

Roughly.

Dow, 30,000 by 2008″ Why It’s Different This Time - Second Printing [Paperback]
Robert Zuccaro CFA (Author)
1.8 out of 5 stars See all reviews (20 customer reviews) | Like (0)

Available from these sellers.

1 new from $97.97
7 used from $49.94

Comment by azdude
2012-03-23 06:56:29

when people lose their @ss again they will call themselves long term investors.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 08:39:47

What about long-term investors who know they’ll “lose their @ss” by “investing” in government products such as Medicare?

What options do those investors have?

At least stock investors have the option of voluntarily losing their @asses.

 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-03-23 07:47:06

As I read it, it’s the Wall Street firms that are undergoing the secular bear market. The real economy and the stock market may continue to improve, though it happens in fits and starts.

 
 
Comment by combotechie
2012-03-23 05:50:57

Woe to the managers of Other People’s Money. It used to be easy (the ever-expanding credit based economy made it easy) for eight-percent-plus returns to be gotten.

Yesterday: Round up a few investors, rake in eight-percent-plus return on their money that they willingly hand over to you, scrape off the top one or two percent for yourself, then hit the golf course.

Today: Struggle to get even three percent. It’s hard to scrape off one or two percent for yourself when all you get is three percent. And this is not about to change anytime soon because (in case nobody has noticed) the secular credit expansion that has been the driving force behind all this easy money for years - decades even - has morphed into a secular credit contraction.

Now these Masters of the Universe will have to go out and get some real jobs - except there aren’t all that many to be gotten because of that ol’ nasty secular credit expansion thingy.

Karma.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 06:08:49

Now these Masters of the Universe will have to go out and get some real jobs - except there aren’t all that many to be gotten because of that ol’ nasty secular credit expansion thingy.

And offshoring! Don’t forget offshoring! And if they aren’t going to India they’re going to Utah (at about 30% or less of the old east coast wage!). Get ready to compete with BYU grads!

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 06:30:51

Does Afghanistan have any investment banks looking for top managers?

Karzai Says Foreigners Are Responsible for Corruption
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Published: December 11, 2011

KABUL, Afghanistan — President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan blamed foreigners on Sunday for the corruption of Afghan officials and demanded that the United States extradite the former chief of the Afghan Central Bank in connection with the collapse of Kabul Bank, the country’s largest financial institution.

President Hamid Karzai demanded Sunday that the United States extradite the former chief of the Afghan Central Bank.

The former governor of the Central Bank, Qadir Fitrat, is living in Virginia. He fled Afghanistan, saying he feared for his life after he was involved in making public the massive fraud at Kabul Bank and removing its senior management.

Neither of the top bank officers nor any of the major shareholders, who include a brother of Mr. Karzai’s and a brother of the first vice president, Marshal Fahim, have been prosecuted, although all of them are still in Afghanistan.

Referring to Mr. Fitrat, Mr. Karzai said, “The government of the United States should cooperate and hand him over to us.”

“Bring Fitrat and hand him over to Afghanistan to make clear who is to blame,” he said. “But our hand can’t reach to America.”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by rms
2012-03-23 07:18:55

“But our hand can’t reach to America.”

Certainly made it as far as the U.S. Treasury.

 
 
Comment by ProperBostonian
2012-03-23 06:50:27

“Don’t forget offshoring!”

Ugh!! The last employee background check I went through was offshored to Estonia. You wouldn’t believe how incompetent they were. And the employees based in California headquarters were all ESL.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 08:57:56

When I worked at HP, all of the HR backoffice work was done in Mexico or Costa Rica. Everytime I had to talk with someone in HR I would get someone south of the border. Of course, most of the HR support was done via self service web pages. And there wasn’t as single HR person onsite at the campus where I used to work. Not a single one. They were all laid off. Poetic justice, I suppose.

 
 
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 06:44:08

+ a lot

Secular credit expansion

Secular credit contraction

This is a clear and concise description of what actually happened and is happening. Nice phraseology.

 
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 06:39:21

Don’t fret, Bear. Your coveted bear market will come. Sure as the sun rises.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 06:44:44

Keep dreaming, Howard.

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:28:03

March 23, 2012, 2:00 a.m. EDT
Asia stocks fall, with Japan, China down sharply
By Virginia Harrison, MarketWatch

SYDNEY (MarketWatch) — Most Asia markets fell Friday amid renewed concerns about global growth, with losses for banks and property firms pushing Hong Kong into the red, while a stronger yen weighed on Japanese exporters.

Japan’s Nikkei Stock Average (JP:100000018 -1.14%) and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index (HK:HSI -1.16%) each dropped 1%, while the Shanghai Composite (CN:000001 -1.10%) lost 0.7%.

Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 index (AU:XJO -0.08%) edged down a more modest 0.1%, while South Korea’s Kospi (KR:0100 +0.04%) shrugged off early weakness to inch 0.1% higher.

For the week, Hong Kong was trading down 3%, and Japan was 1.1% lower, while South Korea was 0.4% weaker, and Australia was off by 0.1%.

Linus Yip, strategist at First Shanghai Securities in Hong Kong, said concerns about weak data were to blame for much of the losses.

“The market has turned its focus back to fundamentals. Taken together, yesterday’s China data and the euro-zone manufacturing index [suggest] the global economy is slowing down,” Yip said, referring to weak manufacturing surveys Thursday from Europe and China.

“Markets had good moves in January and February, but having shot up to relatively high levels, and given the economy is slowing down, the market is under correction pressure,” Yip said.

The manufacturing data helped push U.S. stocks lower overnight. Read more on the U.S. session.

“Global markets switched to a risk-off stance this week, led by disappointing global manufacturing numbers. The euro area [data] suggests the economy is still in the woods, as France and Germany look vulnerable to slowdowns,” strategists at Barclays Capital said.

“But we do not think this signals the end of the risk-asset rally [and] do not expect a sustained correction,” the strategists said.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:30:03

March 22, 2012, 8:19 p.m. EDT
Japan stocks fall on yen, land-price data
By Michael Kitchen

LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) — Japanese stocks opened sharply lower Friday, with the Nikkei Stock Average (JP:100000018 -1.14%) testing the 10,000 level, as an overnight rise for the yen hit exporters and new data dragged on property firms. The Nikkei Average was down 1.1% at 10,018.40 in the early minutes, while the broader Topix gave up 1%. With the U.S. dollar (USDJPY +0.2309%) dropping almost one full yen overnight to ¥82.51, and with losses on Wall Street due to global growth fears, the blue-chip exporters retreated.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:33:44

The Associated Press March 22, 2012, 03:59AM ET
Unhappy public not sure who to blame for high gas
By JOHN ROGERS
More from BusinessWeek
LOS ANGELES

Some families are canceling vacations while others are buying their gas a gallon at a time.

From all corners of the country, Americans of all kinds are irritated these days by record-high fuel prices. Fill-ups have soared above $4 a gallon in some states and could top $5 by summer.

The cost is becoming a political issue just as the presidential campaign kicks into high gear.

A Gallup poll this month found 85 percent of U.S. adults believe the president and Congress should take immediate actions to try to control the rising price of gas.

Meanwhile, fishermen from Maine to Louisiana say they are watching their profits burn up along with their boats’ gasoline.

Building contractors, tour boat operators and others say they are passing the cost on to consumers.

Comment by goon squad
2012-03-23 04:59:15

But food and energy prices are “volatile” and therefore excluded from calculation of “core” inflation. Let them eat ipads!

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-03-23 06:33:16

“president and Congress should take immediate actions”

They are responsible for us being in such a mess to begin with.

It’s going to be a bumpy ride, the Fed pumping money into zombie banks making the price of gas and fish go up, making more of us lose our funny bubble jobs, making the Fed pump…..

It is possible to stay ahead of this, only if you did not start chained to it by debt.

Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:05:04

“It is possible to stay ahead of this, only if you did not start chained to it by debt.”

What if you’re a recent unemployed college grad saddled with $40K of debt? What do you tell them? That they’re screwed the rest of their life? Sounds like a great way to have your kids hate you for the rest of your life.

Ethics, schmethics. Pftttft. As long as I have mine, right? 50 years of two-generational self-absorption…oh, well. What’s that line again about parents’ sins being borne on the children?

Comment by Blue Skye
2012-03-23 07:22:37

and the grandchildren.

Go ahead and lie to the unemployed college grad with a load of debt. The truth is they are in a tight spot, and there’s no preventing that after the fact. What’s your “ethical” solution, call in the fairy god mother to make it all go away?

The Big Lie was earlier, when the kid was told it would pay out to go into debt for school.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:51:42

Agreed, and that’s why I said “two-generational”.

 
Comment by Jim A
2012-03-23 12:44:08

The problem is that it still might be worthwhile. Not because the kid is likely to get a good salary of the kind that a college degree used to imply, but because the alternatives are ever more meager. I mean, there are fewer non-college jobs like slinging a hammer in the building trades, or working on a factor floor that will pay a reasonable wage.

 
 
 
 
Comment by michael
2012-03-23 06:39:20

“Building contractors, tour boat operators and others say they are passing the cost on to consumers.”

i didn’t think it trickled down?

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 06:50:32

Costs? Of course it does!

Prosperity? Keep dreaming. :lol:

 
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 06:49:11

No, it’s the Associated Press that is unhappy…they don’t have a scapecoat to hang it all on. Are they supposed to blame Obama?

I remember quite well that for much of 2008, the high gas prices were all Bush’s fault, according to the AP. Apparently, presidents were culpable in 2008. Not so in 2012. How odd.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:36:21

Considering Bush CAME from the oil industry, and Obama doesn’t, yeah I guess some might see that as odd that Obama shouldn’t be blamed, yet Bush was. :roll:

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-03-23 07:50:47

If Bush had been a democrat, his oil industry roots would have been ignored. If Obama were a republican he’d be getting much more blame from the likes of AP.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 08:01:00

Not true at all.

You do know that ALL of MSM is owned by just 6 corporations right? You do know this?

With the largest being Rupert Murdoch’s, News Corp. Last I heard, ol Rupert wasn’t very liberal. In fact he seems, no wait, he’s now PROVEN, to be quite the guy willing to break laws to fabricate controversy.

All that side, it still doesn’t change the fact that Bush comes from the oil industry and Obama doesn’t and your “what-if” is moot.

 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 08:47:44

You mean in the same why the NBC fabricated exploding pick-up trucks during the late 1980s. You mean, like that?

I suppose those exploding gas-guzzler pick-ups were another one of Bush’s machinations.

 
Comment by wittbelle
2012-03-23 21:47:53

Don’t think for an instant that news organizations don’t adopt certain slants in order to increase viewership. They are part of the machine. The majority of the country is divided as evidenced by the comments on this blog. Very few people have adopted the position that the members of both Democratic and Republican parties are corrupt and that neither party is in the service of their constituents, but of their corporate contributors. Most people hold the party line that their parents did without question. They enjoy watching a news program that reinforces their belief that the opposing party’s agenda is bad for the country, not the truth.

 
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:55:18

Funny…I don’t see the housing mess being blamed on Obama, though he was clearly a complicit participant.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by goon squad
2012-03-23 08:49:28

It’s *still* Bush’s fault. And it will still be Bush’s fault for the entire duration of O’s second term :)

 
Comment by wittbelle
2012-03-23 21:58:59

Stupid people are to blame. If consumers were not so greedy and eager to go into debt, this would never have happened. People should take the time to educate themselves to avoid making bad financial decisions, but they don’t. Unfortunately, the government is attempting, (or at making the appearance of same), to spare everyone the consequences of their bad investments. This is where Obama/Bush (pick an idiot) can and should be blamed. All parties in this debacle should be held accountable and pay the price for their fiscal irresponsibility but they won’t… so they keep doing it, over and over and over again.

 
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 08:21:02

Obama is involved in healthcare, isn’t he? In fact, he increasingly is DICTATING healthcare, isn’t he? Yet, health care costs keep increasing. Why?

Funny…while the MSM reports that the masses are trying to affix blame to gasoline, everyone has suddenly forgotten all about spiraling health care costs. Why? Where’s the MSM reporting on health care costs? Where has that entire discussion gone?

The CBO believes Obamacare will cost double what was projected (so in other words, in reality, about 20x what is projected). Where’s turkey lurkey’s comments about this? Why aren’t you complaining about Obama’s handling of it? It is his baby, afterall.

I guess the absence of commentary is justified. Since the government will provide healthcare, your Lucky Duckies won’t have to pay for it through fewer jobs, lower wages, higher taxes and an ever-crappier standard of living. As long as the actual bill the Lucky Duckies see coming through the mail is lower nominally, no harm done. The government pays for it so the Lucky Duckies don’t have to. Right? Right.

January 2013, here we come! Fewer government services, fewer government jobs, increasing federal income taxes, increasing SS taxes, fewer tax deductions, increasing estate taxes, no change to ATM.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 09:36:43

He’s dictating nothing.

The requirement to buy health care was written in by Republicans.

You’re premise, like your memory, is flawed from the beginning.

Have you EVEN heard of Google?

 
Comment by 2banana
2012-03-23 15:24:50

The requirement to buy health care was written in by Republicans.

NOT one republican in the house voted for obamacare…

In the senate - yeah, you got Arlen Specter…

Hardly the “bipartisan” law you are somehow trying to imagine.

The dems own obamacare.

 
 
 
 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 06:49:33

Regular is now ~$3.80 here. Mid and premium over $4.

Have I mentioned the supply and demand system? They supply it and demand an artificially high price for it.

I’m still wondering why people are driving their 14mpg urban assault vehicles. They can’t all be 1%s.

Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:09:29

I’m still wondering why some people on this board cannot fathom that it might be cheaper to hang onto a gas guzzler than buy a more gas-friendly car at $20K+.

While some people are dumb enough to drop $20-$60K on a gas-friendly vehicle, others aren’t. They still drive their old, used vehicles they purchased for much less than $20K.

Comment by measton
2012-03-23 07:22:33

I still don’t understand how some people on this board don’t understand that they could have purchased a used small car for less than a gas guzzler?

Gas guzzler around town 15 mpg. Small car 30mpg.
15,000 miles a year at 4 dollars a gallon
SUV = 4000 dollars
small car = 2000 dollars
Over 5 years blindly assuming gas prices don’t continue to rise.
SUV spends 10,000 dollars more than small car driver. They also spend more on insurance, tires, oil changes, etc.

See you at 6 bucks a gallon.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by azdude
2012-03-23 07:37:18

bingo I get about 30mpg+ in my tin can.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:44:57

Exactly.

A used high mpg car is the bargain.

As for gas prices going down, the long term trend is up and has been for 30 years. This is not going to change within our lifetime.

Urban assault vehicles need to go back to their original purpose: work trucks. You need one? Fine. I’ve worked in heavy industries and played sports and outdoors. Nothing else will do when you need one. As a family car? Insanity.

 
Comment by drumminj
2012-03-23 08:47:35

Gas guzzler around town 15 mpg. Small car 30mpg.
15,000 miles a year at 4 dollars a gallon

Okay, now let’s look at your assumptions.

1) How many folks drive 15k miles a year?
2) How many folks currently drive an auto that gets 15mpg around town (ie a large SUV or truck)
3) How many of those, if they bought a newer car, would get something that gets 30mpg?

I used to drive a car that gets about 16mpg around town. I bought a new car (smaller, lighter), that gets about 18-20mpg around town - it does much better on highway (28). I drive about 10k miles a year.

Guess what - there’s not much of a gain for me there. A couple hundred dollars a year? Not to mention the increased cost of insurance (not reflected in your numbers), the increased cost of the registration (most places do it based on age/value of car).

 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 09:03:58

Sorry, Measton, your math is off.

It would take 10 years for a buyer today to make up the difference, not 5 years.

10x$2000 is $20,000. 5x$2000 is $10,000.

And that’s if the car costs $20K. Most newer, gas efficient cars cost considerably more than that.

Now, if cas hits $6 a gallon, you have a point. But, should gas hit $6 a gallon, we’ll be Europe and 1/4 of the population will no longer need transportation because they won’t have a job.

The problem gets fixed rapidly for all if we’d actually use the resources we have rather than ban the production (and, essentially, the use) of them.

Measton, what you should be pushing for is construction of natural gas filling stations and nuclear facilities. Want infrastructure spending? That’s where it should be spent. Not on banks, lobbyists and union leaders. The U.S. is awash in energy options.

Alas, Obama isn’t the slightest bit interested in energy independence (he’d rather cow tow to his minions). But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 09:38:20

“Most newer, gas efficient cars cost considerably more than that.”

No, they don’t.

Google, Poser. Google.

 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 10:20:03

Stupid is as stupid does.

“Sorry, Measton, your math is off.
It would take 10 years for a buyer today to make up the difference, not 5 years.
10x$2000 is $20,000. 5x$2000 is $10,000.”

1. Why is the choice a NEW car vs an OLD SUV? Even with your assumption of needing a new car you forget the trade in. Curious.

“Now, if cas hits $6 a gallon, you have a point.”

2. Not if when

” But, should gas hit $6 a gallon, we’ll be Europe and 1/4 of the population will no longer need transportation because they won’t have a job.”

3. 1/4 of the population already has no job. We’ll just all live in the city and use mass transit or bikes. If your vision of 6 dollars of gas is armagedon then why wouldn’t you choose to conserve.

“The problem gets fixed rapidly for all if we’d actually use the resources we have rather than ban the production (and, essentially, the use) of them.”Measton, what you should be pushing for is construction of natural gas filling stations and nuclear facilities. Want infrastructure spending? That’s where it should be spent. Not on banks, lobbyists and union leaders. The U.S. is awash in energy options.

4. I mostly agree, but the people in Japan maybe not so much. Has anyone seen how long our natural gas reserves would last if we converted all of our cars to nat gas. My guess is not long.

“Alas, Obama isn’t the slightest bit interested in energy independence (he’d rather cow tow to his minions). ”

“So you are interested in energy independence but refuse to drive a more efficient car. While Obama isn’t the slightest bit interested in energy independence because he promotes alternative energy. Never mind that Obama has recently added 38million acres of the gulf to oil drilling and we are producing more oil now than at anytime in the last 8 years and we are importing the lowest percentage of our oil in the last 16 years mostly due to conservation and cars getting better mpg. US consumption is down 10%. Keep telling yourself you’re right.

 
Comment by sfrenter
2012-03-23 12:21:33

Nothing else will do when you need one. As a family car? Insanity.

Part of the problem is that station wagons got phased out and SUVs were their replacement.

We ended up with a RAV 4 after not being able to find a decent station wagon, and then replaced it with a Honda CRV because the RAV couldn’t fit 3 carseats/boosters in the back seat.

Did I mention that I HATE mini-vans?

Too bad they don’t make convertible station wagons…

 
Comment by Jim A
2012-03-23 12:47:45

I recall a story on NPR this morning that the big SUVs are actually becomming less popular. Gasoline consumption has gone down over the last few years because many people are switching to car based “crossover” vehicles.

 
Comment by Pete
2012-03-23 19:03:54

“It would take 10 years for a buyer today to make up the difference, not 5 years.”

I work in the liberal bastion of Davis, California, and a good chunk of folks spend the extra money to make a statement. OK, maybe for some, that statement is “look at me”. But for most others, they are simply willing to spend their (plentiful) money just do what they feel is right. I regularly drive a guy to the airport who just spent $10,000 on solar panels. He’s over 60 years old, and doesn’t expect payback before he dies. Kind of like the people who go out of their way to “buy American”. Not acting in their short-term self interest, but still making a logical, defensible choice.

 
Comment by rms
2012-03-23 20:14:19

Part of the problem is that station wagons got phased out and SUVs were their replacement.

Subaru AWD Wagon?

 
 
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 07:28:15

Correct posers.

The last time diesel went to $5/gal in 2008, I calculated it would take 8 years to get a return on buying a fuel sipper. A few months later, fuel prices fell to $2/gal.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by michael
2012-03-23 09:42:46

Just a funny car buying anecdote:

My little brother and one of his co-workers bought the same make and model car.

Her: “does yours have heated seats?”

Him: “no.”

Her: “does yours have a sun roof?”

Him: “no.”

Her: “does yours have the sound system upgrade?”

Him: “no.” [long pause] “is yours paid for?”

Her: “no.”

 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 10:21:06

Let’s see your calculations.

You know what they say about assumptions.

 
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 13:28:04

Cmon measton are you serious? IF I can double mileage from 20 to 40(which I can’t), my $2400/yr fuel bill goes to $1200. $1200/yr offsets the price of a going out and replacing a perfectly good existing vehicle in how many decades?

 
Comment by D'uh
2012-03-24 11:01:33

It’s about buying smart the first time. You’re also not factoring in trade -n costs, any existing payments etc. if you have a paid-off guzzler it makes more sense now to keep it, even if it was the foolish choice up front.

 
 
Comment by SaladSD
2012-03-23 10:20:12

That may be true. But still seeing a lot of dealership stickers on hulking new SUVs being used to commute. Why are people dumb enough to drop 40-50K on a gas hog?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by rms
2012-03-23 07:22:01

…and premium over $4.

If you can’t afford premium you can’t afford to drive.

 
 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 07:16:48

Maybe the unhappy public should look in their mirror. They could use the giant SUV side view.

Comment by goon squad
2012-03-23 07:40:47

Do you honestly expect the 1/3 of this country that is obese to all shoehorn themselves into a Ford Focus? They need the big azz SUV with 20 cupholders to contain their Brawndo and value meal fries and to schlep their fat kidz 2 blocks to get to school. There will be no exception to American exceptionalism!

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 08:24:20

I just used a BMI calculator on pretty conservative numbers (I think I overestimated height and underestimated weight) for my Father. Definitely came out obese with a BMI of 31.1. He drives a 5 or 6 year old Honda Civic and has no problem at all fitting in it. You can’t assume that 1/3 of the population obese means 1/3 the population tall and so heavy they can barely walk.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by CarrieAnn
2012-03-23 09:15:27

Right before my triathlon for which I trained 10hr/week, I did an online BMI index. It said I was borderline obese when, in fact, people were telling me I was losing too much weight. I was in the best shape of my life and seeing as I was always a gym rat, that was saying something. You’ve gotta do the pinch test and it’s gotta be done w/calipers by a person who knows what they’re doing to get any chance of taking the results seriously.

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 11:45:16

I am no runner (longterm injury to start with) but every freakin morning I tread 45 minutes. My aging body seems to have a few aches and pains, but I can imagine if I ignored my health, I would feel worse. I am 5 ft and 93 lbs. I do the clothing fit test.

Being a land whale isn’t ladylike nor healthy.

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 12:16:35

CarrieAnn
I am so very proud of you. The determination and stamina you have is impressive.

I had a serious fall down stairs in 1998 , still have a lingering injury. I am grateful I can walk.

 
Comment by sfrenter
2012-03-23 12:26:11

My aging body seems to have a few aches and pains, but I can imagine if I ignored my health, I would feel worse.

The research on aging and exercise is astounding.

I started doing triathlons in my early 40’s (yeah, midlife crisis, but cheaper than a red Porsche) and it has changed my perception of aging entirely.

For starters, everyone has their age written on their calf. Nothing like a 73-year old man passing you on the bike portion of a half iron man to inspire you to train harder for the next race.

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 18:15:45

sfrenter
Good for you. I am glad to hear you’re being pro-active as well.

My husband went for the black Vette in his midlife crisis, and as he has gotten older, he hates that damn car. (Getting in and out is hell and he hates the 6 speeds now.) You made the right choice.

I didn’t realize the research was the impressive on aging and exercise, but that’s good to hear. My injury feels better when I tread. Miss one day, and I can tell. Amazing.

I like your spunk sfrenter.

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 18:17:49

the s/b that

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:17:11

I am happy to say I have the flattest belly at age 52 than I ever did in my younger days. Very close to the “six pack.” part of it is medication I have to take which does a bunch of things including speeding up metabolism, but I am on card machines every other morning until I reach 650 calories and on alternate mornings I swim 4,000 yards. I was a flabby kid until age 17.

 
 
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 09:49:50

Here in the east, we got Fat Tony and Hairy Marie and their two extra beefy slob children who can’t resist pulling their lumbering SLOBurban through fastfood drive thru’s at every opportunity.

Super mega sized everything. We are the Pig People Culture.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sfrenter
2012-03-23 12:28:36

Super mega sized everything. We are the Pig People Culture

San Francisco used to be one of those places where you didn’t see that many overweight people (except at Giant’s games). But in the last 4-5 years this has been changing. It just took longer for some places to get fatter.

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 18:33:27

I love the bay area, so I am sad to hear the land whale population is growing up there as well. In So Ca, even in Thousand Oaks (think Walnut Creek), tramp stamps on oversized bodies are the rage. It’s just fugly and trashy. Period.

“SLOBurban” lol

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 18:40:01

RAL “SLOBurban” (post below) lol

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:23:32

Lots of skinny people here in my corner of Los Angeles. Parki g is a problem in my neighborhood. So I have to walk a lot. Fortunately I can walk to two grocery stores, a pharmacy, a shopping mall (Macy’s, et al), movie theaters, Barnes &Noble, several big name restaurants, my doctor, Starbucks, banking, and so forth.

I love my studio apartment and I have quiet neighbors. I am not on the busy street. Of all the places I consulted, I clued g the east coast, I love L.A. But I am pressured to work over 49 without pay.

 
 
Comment by Rancher
2012-03-23 10:38:51

Forget obese! What do you drive when you’re
6′7″ and 240+ lbs with zip fat? For a certain
% of the population, there will always be a need for a full sized car.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 11:17:29

I don’t know. What did they do before SLOBurbans? Walk?

 
Comment by cactus
2012-03-23 12:17:12

Forget obese! What do you drive when you’re
6′7″ and 240+ lbs with zip fat? For a certain
% of the population, there will always be a need for a full sized car.”

A Subaru Forester without sunroof

 
 
Comment by howiewowie
2012-03-23 15:03:25

Just considered buying a Focus. It is fairly small. My wife vetoed it because of the backseat room. She commented that my 5-year-old son would literally be able to strangle me from the back without moving much because the driver seat was so close to him.

The Kia Soul, which has much more inside room, is now the front runner and still gets great mileage.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:26:29

I have long legs and shorter than average torso. A focus suits me fine. My Matrix is okay except I cannot push the seat back far enough to allow my legs a needed stretch. Part of why I do not take my Toyota to the east coast when I work over there.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:36:04

March 22, 2012, 9:33 AM

Fed’s Bullard Sees Inflationary Risks This Year
By Chester Yung and Jeffrey Ng

St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President James Bullard said Thursday he sees further inflationary risks for the U.S. and the rest of the world this year, as key central banks in developed countries continue to pursue looser monetary policies.

Bullard noted that the U.S. and Europe have been running very loose monetary policies for some time, while Japan has embraced quantitative easing. “So that sounds like a very easy global monetary policy to me, and that’s why I think there’s a bit of upward inflation risk,” he told Dow Jones Newswires in an interview.

Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 05:41:48

MoneyChanger #8 says blah blah blah blah. Tomorrow, Temple MoneyChanger #11 will state blah blah blah blah.

Evil men, evil deeds, evil lies. Thieves and Liars. All of them.

 
Comment by cactus
2012-03-23 12:18:45

that’s why I think there’s a bit of upward inflation risk,”

probably same reason Goldman says sell bonds

inflation risk

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 00:44:20

Now that the economic recovery is underway, what is stopping the PTB from breaking up systemically risky Megabanks, before they collapse again and rape middle America’s financial security in the process?

Steve Schaefer, Forbes Staff
If you can put the word market after it, I cover it.
3/22/2012 @ 2:00PM
Only Bank Breakups, Not Bailouts, Will End ‘Too Big To Fail’

The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas is out with its 2011 annual report Thursday, and it should come as little surprise that the district overseen by inflation hawk Richard Fisher is making something of a splash.

“If you are running one of the “too-big-to-fail” (TBTF) banks—alternatively known as “systemically important financial institutions,” or SIFIs—I doubt you are going to like what you read in this annual report essay written by Harvey Rosenblum,” Fisher writes in his letter prefacing the report.

That is because the essay from Rosenblum, head of research at the Dallas Fed, a 40-year central bank veteran and former president of the National Association for Business Economics, takes aim squarely at the “too big to fail” (TBTF) firms, and why the ultimate solution, albeit a difficult one, is to break up America’s largest financial firms.

The TBTF term “disguised the fact that commercial banks holding roughly one-third of the assets in the banking system did essentially fail, surviving only with extraordinary government assistance.” That assistance included: shotgun weddings of failing or failed firms like Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Washington Mutual, and Wachovia to the likes of JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo; massive capital infusions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program; and the bailout of AIG that allowed the insurer to pay out obligations to counterparties.

While the rescue effort, no small feat by the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve, kept most of the country’s major financial institutions in business, it saved them from failure on a technicality. “[M]ake no mistake about it,” Rosenblum writes, “A bailout is a failure, just with a different label.”

The financial regulatory reform under Dodd-Frank has been positioned by proponents as the solution, but it does not meet Rosenblum’s standard. “Words on paper only go so far,” he writes. “What matters more is whether bankers and their creditors actually believe Dodd-Frank puts the government out of the financial bailout business.”

Comment by measton
2012-03-23 07:33:31

Perfect for the masters of the univers.
They profit on the way up.
Get bailed out when they can’t extract all their wealth.
Then allow collapse, break up banks and they use their wealth and 0% financing to buy up the choice pieces.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 00:48:22

Etch-a-sketch time?

Why isn’t Romney for breaking up the big banks?

By James Pethokoukis
March 5, 2012, 10:46 am

It’s the issue that won’t go away. Even though Washington has created a new financial regulatory regime, there are still calls to shrink or break up America’s biggest financial institutions:

The biggest five banks in the United States are too powerful and should be broken up, Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher said on Wednesday. The financial crisis has left the five biggest banks even more powerful than before, he told an event in Mexico City. ”After the crisis, the five largest banks had a higher concentration of deposits than they did before the crisis,” he said. “I am of the belief personally that the power of the five largest banks is too concentrated. The purpose of Dodd-Frank was to reduce the concentration of power and we have a term called ‘too big to fail’ … perversely, these banks are now even bigger, they are too ‘bigger’ to fail than before.”

And in a research note today, superstar banking analyst Jaret Seiberg of Guggenheim Washington Research Group said the issue may actually be gaining momentum:

Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas president Richard Fisher garnered headlines last week when he called for breaking up the biggest banks. Were he the only voice calling for splitting up the banks, then this would be a nonevent. … This is not a threat that should be ignored. The far left and far right are united in calling for breaking up the biggest banks. That is why the increasing polarization of Congress is a negative for the mega banks as it is only the political center that tolerates the status quo.

Mitt Romney has taken several populist policy positions that conservatives hate but work to counterbalance the plutocrat, Gordon Gekko caricature his opponents—both Republican and Democrat—try to promote. He is for cutting capital gains taxes—but only for middle incomers. He is for indexing the minimum wage to inflation. He is for labeling China a currency manipulator and slapping a tariff on its goods.

Message: This is one multimillionaire, corporate turnaround artist who cares about the average American.

But if Romney is looking for a big idea with populist oomph—one that might actually make some economic sense—he should call for breaking up America’s biggest banks. It seems like a perfect “Nixon goes to China” sort of play for the former banker … I mean, private equity investor … I mean, venture capitalist … I mean, conservative businessman. It’s actually kind of surprising Romney hasn’t already made busting up the mega-banks the 60th idea of his 59-point economic plan.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:00:26

Romney? MR. Bain Capital, Clear Channel, corporate raider? Not break up the Wall St. masters?

Was this a trick question? :lol:

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:52:08

March 22, 2012, 2:01 p.m. EDT
Beware of Housing Prices
By Thomas H. Kee Jr.

The recent frenzy in the housing market is very interesting, although somewhat counterintuitive, and deserves consideration. In my neck of the woods, and I am sure in others, certain people are getting caught up in the sudden change in interest rates, but those same people are missing a very important relationship in the “home value” equation that I hope to reveal here.

Of course, the most important aspect in buying a home is location, but right next to that is affordability, and when interest rates begin to increase, affordability ratios decline. Everyone knows when interest rates increase the monthly mortgage payment increases, so if prices are held the same and interest rates rise, then the affordability ratio declines.

However, the comparison above included an important assumption; it assumed that prices remain constant, and we all know that prices do not remain constant. In fact, the fluctuation in prices is a very important and dynamic variable in this same equation. I have argued many times that housing prices are a direct reflection of the amount people are able to pay, and nothing else. If that is true, the inverse relationship between price and interest rates that we all learned in economics 101 comes into play as well.

In school, we learned when interest rates increase, prices go down, but when interest rates decline, prices go up as well. This should be an eye-opening relationship given the direction of interest rates and prices over the past few years. Arguably, real estate prices would have declined much more than they have already if the level of interest rates was not declining alongside it.

There is not enough room in this article to include the findings, but the bubble was so exaggerated that even the steep decline in interest rates that we have seen since the bubble burst could not stop housing prices from falling.

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 08:30:17

I can’t count the number of times I have pointed out that with my fairly large downpayment saved up, I would be nuts to buy with interest rates so low since when interest rates rise, I will be able to leverage the savings into a better deal (downpayment means a lot more when it saves you 8% interest in your monthly payment than when it saves you 4% interest in your monthly payment). Every time I am told that it can’t happen. That prices are as low as they can possibly go. That when rates go up it means the economy is doing better and prices will go up right along with them. I should just give up.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:30:42

Buy a luxury sport car instead. Many of my renter neighbors have BMWs, Audis, and SUVs. But after thinking about it I don’t think they are stupid at all. One bedroom rent: $1450. Neighbor houses for sale, although three bedrooms: $600,000

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 00:53:33

March 23, 2012, 12:32 a.m. EDT
U.S. probing high-frequency stock trading: WSJ
By Michael Kitchen

LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) — The Securities & Exchange Commission has launched an investigation into communications between some stock exchanges and high-frequency trading firms, looking for any collusion to limit competition or manipulate markets, The Wall Street Journal reported late Thursday, citing an unnamed person familiar with the matter. The probe focuses on computer-driven trading platforms of certain exchanges, including BATS Global Markets Inc. BATS 0.00% , the report cited several unnamed sources as saying. The action is still in its early stages and has yet to turn up any suggestion of wrongdoing by trading firms or exchanges, the report said.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:04:42

Thank god high frequency, high speed trading itself isn’t considered anti-competitive. :roll:

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 01:52:13

Not clear whether Ryan’s proposal would decrease or increase future bailout risk.

Paul Ryan wants to repeal rules meant to stop Too Big to Fail

Posted by Suzy Khimm at 11:42 AM ET, 03/20/2012

On financial regulation, Paul Ryan’s 2013 budget basically cuts-and-pastes its recommendations from last year: it wants to repeal parts of Dodd-Frank that give new power to federal regulators to break up big banks, arguing that the regulations actually make bailouts more likely, not less so. Ryan isn’t proposing an alternative, however, so his plan to repeal the government’s new “resolution authority” would bring us back to the pre-Dodd Frank era — which was also, of course, the era in which bank bailouts proved necessary.

Under Wall Street reform, financial institutions that are deemed “systemically significant” are subject to a host of new regulations, including a new rule that requires them to submit “living wills” that explain what would happen if the firm went belly up. They’re required to submit such plans to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which has new authority to help liquidate troubled firms so as to avoid systemic catastrophe and prompt taxpayer bailouts.

The Ryan budget, however, would actually repeal the FDIC’s new resolution authority, arguing that it would have the opposite effect of what’s intended by allowing bank regulators “to access taxpayer dollars in order to bail out the creditors of large, ‘systemically significant’ financial institutions.” By doing so, Ryan says he would “end the regime now enshrined into law that paves the way for future bailouts.”

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 01:54:20

Serial bottom callers will never give up until a bottom is finally visible through the rear view mirror, at which point they will collectively proclaim, “We called it!”

Housing prices will finally increase in … 2013? 2014?

Posted by Suzy Khimm at 12:02 PM ET, 03/22/2012

There’s a growing consensus that housing prices are more or less hitting bottom this year. But it’s still unclear when they’ll go from flat to rising: Calculated Risk predicts that year-over-year housing prices will start to increase in early 2013, while Merrill Lynch is more pessimistic, expecting “roughly flat home prices this year and next with modest growth in 2014,” according to a new research note. “We continue to believe the recovery will not begin in earnest until 2014,” the firm concludes.

Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 05:46:50

McBride is a NAR proxy.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 01:56:16

How The House Republican Budget Protects Too-Big-To-Fail Banks
By Pat Garofalo on Mar 21, 2012 at 10:40 am

The House Republican budget that was released yesterday, in addition to blowing up the deficit and the national debt and shredding the social safety net, would repeal a key provision in the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. In response to the 2008 financial crisis and the ad-hoc bailouts to which the government was forced to resort, Dodd-Frank gives the government the ability to unwind failing financial firms. But the House Republican budget would take this important power away:

While the authors of the Dodd-­‐Frank Act went to great lengths to denounce bailouts, this law only sustains them. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) now has the authority to draw on taxpayer dollars to bail out the creditors of large, “systemically significant” financial institutions. CBO’s expected cost for this new authority is $33 billion, although the office recognizes that “the cost of the program will depend on future economic and financial events that are inherently unpredictable.” In other words, another large-­‐scale financial crisis in which creditors are guaranteed to get government bailouts would cost taxpayers much, much more…This budget would end the bailout regime enshrined into law by the Dodd-­‐Frank Act.

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) has done this before, dressing up his opposition to the power known as “resolution authority” in the Dodd-Frank law as a principled stand against bailouts. But make no mistake: repealing the power would return the nation’s regulatory framework to where it was in 2008, leaving the government with little choice when large interconnected financial firms fail other than bailing them out or risking the implosion of the financial system.

Comment by oxide
2012-03-23 05:56:11

Who is pulling Ryan’s puppet strings?

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 06:31:51

I don’t suppose it would be that hard to figure out which Wall Street banks dump money into his campaign coffers?

 
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 06:34:55

The hedge funds. He is the biggest supporter of the carried interest exception in Congress.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:06:12

Oh ho!

Good to know. Thanks polly.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 08:39:55

His wife (Janna Little Ryan) is (or at least was) a lobbiest. Is anyone willing to go look up her info? Who is she working for?

 
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 09:17:39

Lobbyist. And I don’t even drink coffee.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 09:51:38

All I can find right now is she works for PirceWaterhouseCooper and has some land investments in Texas that are leased to mining and oil.

…and I know who and what PWC do and are.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 01:58:05

US to tell markets: too big to fail is over
Friday 16th March 2012, 3:26am
BANKING
JULIET SAMUEL

US REGULATORS believe they have done enough to end the “too big to fail” problem and stop taxpayers from ever having to bail out banks, but they have yet to convince markets.

The head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp has said that he is planning a major roadshow to persuade investors that the government now has the power to wind up a failing bank rather than bail it out.

“I don’t know that we’re going to persuade everybody, but if we can even move the center of gravity a little bit in terms of persuading people that we are really quite serious about this… If we can do that, we really will have accomplished a lot,” Martin Gruenberg (pictured), acting chief of the FDIC, told Reuters.

“I think now we are really at the point where we have to go outside the regulatory community and speak more publicly to interested parties.”

The Dodd-Frank Act has given US regulators powers to take over failing banks and impose losses on their private bondholders rather than resorting to taxpayers cash. But it is not clear if investors really believe that the authorities would do it in a crisis, meaning they still believe banks are effectively subsidised, thus lowering their cost of funding.

Comment by measton
2012-03-23 10:24:47

My reading suggests that the big banks now control a much higher percentage of the banking pie. Too big to fail has gotten bigger.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 02:01:16

If they pull this off, Sheila Bair’s legacy is sealed.

But what all Americans who care should ask themselves is whether, in the throes of crisis, bank regulators would have a better alternative than bailing out systemically risky institutions.

FDIC shoots to kill on “too big to fail”

By Dave Clarke
NASHVILLE, Tennessee | Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:26pm EDT

(Reuters) - Bank regulators are launching a campaign to sell the markets on the idea that “too big to fail” is dead.

Martin Gruenberg, the acting chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, said the agency will soon be meeting with financial institutions, investor groups, public interest groups and academics.

The goal, he says, is to shoot down the idea that the government does not yet have the smarts or the guts to smoothly dismantle failing financial firms that are so large and complex that their collapse would threaten markets.

“Too big to fail” was a buzzword in the 2007-2009 financial crisis when the FDIC only had the power to unwind traditional banks, not firms such as Lehman Brothers or insurer AIG.

The result was massive taxpayer-backed bailouts or in the case of Lehman, a failure that nearly brought global markets to their knees.

The post-crisis Dodd-Frank financial oversight law gave the FDIC broad “resolution” power over non-bank financial firms. But markets are not yet convinced that government officials will pull the trigger on that power, or if the FDIC can pull off a major dismantling.

Comment by CarrieAnn
2012-03-23 05:24:11

I’m going to predict that they can talk all they want but until they actually take one down, no one’s going to believe them. The double speak is now on the public’s radar. The “actions speak louder than words” idiom will continue to haunt them.

*********
“Martin Gruenberg, the acting chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, said the agency will soon be meeting with financial institutions, investor groups, public interest groups and academics.

The goal, he says, is to shoot down the idea that the government does not yet have the smarts or the guts to smoothly dismantle failing financial firms that are so large and complex that their collapse would threaten markets.”

Comment by oxide
2012-03-23 06:02:06

Why is the government was bothering with “convincing” investors of this? Just warn them once and let buyer beware. When a bank finally unwinds, just say “I told you so” and that’s it.

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 06:37:37

The idea is that if you convince them that you will do it if they screw up (rather than bailing them out), they will be less likely to screw up. They don’t mind being bailed out, but they don’t want to be taken down.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:09:17

Smoke screen.

And even if they do take one or two down, all that will result will be the reorganization in names only, shaded in legal fiction, just like any corporate subsidiary restructuring.

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 09:23:27

It isn’t a reog in name only. Yes, you sell off the bits that are still functioning and profitable. But you use the money from those bits to pay off the debts of the bad parts - which is the way it ought to have worked the last time - AIG had plenty of good businesses when it was about to collapse over the CDSs - but there was no way to force the company to do it because of corporate structure and limited liability. This avoids that. When some of your units would need a government bailout to avoid collapsing business transaction that would cause the system to hiccup, the regulators jump in and use the TBTF bank’s own assets to cover it instead. Sell off the good stuff to cover the bad stuff instead of the government taking care of the bad stuff and waving its finger at the bank saying, “Naughty, naughty. Don’t do that again.

I rather like it.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 09:53:29

I sincerely hope it works that way.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 02:03:22

Sheryl Nance-Nash, Contributor
ForbesWoman

3/22/2012 @ 10:41PM
Student Loan Debt: $1 Trillion and Counting

Whatever happened to the American dream of going to college, landing a great job and living happily ever after? College is supposed to be about getting off to a great start, but it’s a financial noose that threatens to kill our young and everybody else too. The U.S. has the dubious distinction of now having more than $1 trillion in outstanding student loan debt.

The crisis has the full attention of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which in a recent blog , presented its sobering findings. “Unlike other consumer credit products, student debt keeps growing at a steady clip. Students borrowed $117 billion in just federal student loans last year. And students continue to borrow private student loans, which lack the income-based repayment and deferment options of federal student loans. If current trends continue, there will be consequences not just for young people, but for all of us,” wrote CFPB’s student loan ombudsman Rohit Chophra.

Worse still, he writes, according to data from the Department of Education, federal student loan debt isn’t growing just with new originations — with so many borrowers unable to keep up with interest payments, debt is growing even for many who have left school. Too much debt means too much risk for a generation of young people, many of whom are struggling in today’s economy.

Comment by goon squad
2012-03-23 04:54:59

No “household formation” for many of these Lucky Ducklings, sorry REIC!

Comment by azdude
2012-03-23 06:46:08

I have been told that student loan debt is not allowed to be written off in bankruptcy. Is this true? So basically debt slave forever?

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:12:42

Yes, it is true.

Cool, huh?

Modern corporate serfdom. Or bonded servitude. something this country was founded on. It’s what made “freedom” and “rights” such a successful recruitment tool during the American Revolution.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Hi-Z
2012-03-23 07:21:26

No one is forced to take out a student loan.

 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:25:58

Why is this corporate surfdom? I didn’t know students obtained college loans from corporations.

Though, that’s an interesting proposition.

Remove government and banks (which I consider quasi-government entities since they sleep together) from the stuent loan equation. Maybe corporations (real ones) ought to fund student educations on an individual student level.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 07:36:17

Try getting a job in the cube farm without a degree these days.

I recall years ago when I worked with “software engineers” that didn’t have any kind of college degree. Back then it was no big deal. Fast forward to the present. Just about every cube farm job description requires a 4 year degree now, even if it’s irrelevant to the task.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:54:13

“I didn’t know students obtained college loans from corporations.”

Every day.

The rise of student loans by private lenders was made possible by the government guaranteeing those loans made by the private lenders. This is why there is so much current interest in the effect of student loans and the bubble talk thereof.

It was also made possible by colleges making money from the loans, outside of direct tuition charges, as well.

News article are reporting that, “…students at for-profit colleges are responsible for about 45 percent of all student loan defaults.”

But default doesn’t mean they are free. Student loans CANNOT be discharged in bankruptcy.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 08:00:13

But default doesn’t mean they are free. Student loans CANNOT be discharged in bankruptcy.

It also means that they can kiss pretty much every tax refund they would have otherwise received buh-bye.

 
Comment by Kirisdad
2012-03-23 12:05:06

” I didn’t know students obtained college loans from corporations”
Where did you think the money comes from? Gov’t subsidized loans top out at $5,000/yr. The thieving banks are the ones that tack on the incredible interest and penalties. Do you bother to read the full stories or just the headlines? You and Hi-Z should investigate student loans, like I did. It turned me from a Republican to Democrat and I’m never going back.

 
 
Comment by vicever
2012-03-23 10:34:21

One thing I am considering is this, If I paid college tuition for my kids, I will be very reluctant to accept any son/daughter-in-laws whose tuition was not paid by their parents. Maybe it is too far down the road, but I will need to find a solution to this.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 11:36:32

You think you get to decide who your child chooses to marry? Are you living in the US?

 
Comment by aNYCdj
2012-03-23 19:54:25

Consider encouraging them to just shack up….don’t you even DARE to ask them when they will marry…..

You want them shacking up as long as possible so the debts are paid before they get married and if they break up in the mean time….what’s wrong with that?

 
 
 
 
Comment by rms
2012-03-23 11:54:52

That photo of the student with $25k+ doesn’t draw any sympathy from me because I had $22k of student loan debt when I popped out the other end with a civil engineering ticket. I had to move 1,000-miles from my desired local, and I paid it back while supporting a one-income family too.

Comment by Kirisdad
2012-03-23 12:53:26

Maybe the 25k was 1/5 of his entire tuition. Maybe he worked and earned scholarships for the rest. What percentage was the 22k? can everyone become an engineer or a financial wizard or a doctor? Do we want to live in a society where there are no art historians or musicians or archaeologists? The problem is tuitions are too high and the bankers are effing GREEDY! P.S. I paid my older daughter’s entire tuition and will pay 3/4 of my youngest’s tuition.

Comment by rms
2012-03-23 20:53:51

What percentage was the 22k?

That was roughly 60% of the total costs, and I honestly began losing sleep when the debt exceeded $12k; yeah, chicken little here. I was a returning student, no grants, no rainbow favors, bareback all the way.

I agree, tuitions are too high. I will be doing my best to get my two through the pipe, debt free.

Do we want to live in a society where there are no art historians or musicians or archaeologists?

I married a lean athletic blond, and I enjoy challenging productive work; civil engineering satisfies both pursuits.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 02:06:07

The Real Meaning of $1 Trillion in Student Loans
By Jordan Weissmann
Mar 22 2012, 4:15 PM ET 7

We’re burying our country’s future under a mountain of debt.

If the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is right, the total outstanding student loan debt in the United States now stands at above $1 trillion dollars. In economic terms, that changes very little about what we already knew regarding college borrowing. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York had previously pegged the figure at $870 billion by the end of 2011. Either number would be larger than America’s collective credit card balance.

But psychologically, it’s a sad threshold. A trillion dollars — it brings home just how enormous the burden is quickly becoming.

There is only one silver lining to the news. It’s a sign, partly, that more students are going to college. It doesn’t mean more are graduating, or that those who finish are finding gainful employment. It only means that an increasing number of Americans understand that they need an education to survive in the modern economy. Although earnings for colleges graduates are stagnating, they’re not shrinking at the same breathtaking pace as wages for workers who only have a high school diploma. Getting a degree is the only reasonably safe route into the middle class, these days. It seems people are absorbing that lesson.

Otherwise, there’s really nothing good to say. Student debt is skyrocketing alongside tuition prices, which have been fueled by a horrible confluence of state budget cuts and rising institutional costs. We still do not have a clear consensus on how to tame those forces. The White House has offered a few smart ideas, such as withholding a small amount of student aid from campuses that don’t restrain tuition. But they’re mostly half steps. As of now, they’re also only theoretical.

And so we’ve reached a point where two-thirds of college seniors now graduate in debt, where a total of 37 million Americans now owe money on their education. Sixty-seven percent are between the ages of 18 and 39, but recent research suggests the fastest growing group of borrowers may be in middle age — people who have been laid off from jobs or are afraid their professional skills aren’t fresh enough to keep up with a changing economy. Among all borrowers, the median balance is $12,800. Thanks to a select group of students who are deeply in debt, the average is skewed higher, at $28,000. For young graduates — or dropouts, for that matter — the debt will drag on their finances well into adulthood. For the adults, it’s an investment they may not have a time to recoup.

Many are already being overwhelmed by what they owe. The NY Federal Reserve believes that more than a quarter of all borrowers with due loans are now delinquent on some of their payments.

Comment by goon squad
2012-03-23 04:57:28

One quarter now delinquent? Can’t wait to see how this movie ends :)

Comment by CarrieAnn
2012-03-23 05:32:06

I don’t mean to change the direction of this thread but yesterday I was thinking of the investors buying up the rentals and it occured to me we are entering the stage where the big boyz will be forced to eat each other. The student loan situation is just another symptom of this.

They may think they are positioning themselves to force us to cough up more but you can’t get blood from a stone. Force up the costs of housing beyond the confines of what the market can bear, investments in other areas will suffer. Force up commodities’ pricing, renters/mortgage holders start making late payments. Put seniors in a positon where a majority retire broke? How many industries will that starve?

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 05:40:19

Seems like that “one quarter” number comes a lot these days in financial discussions (e.g. “one quarter” = 11 million out of 44 million U.S. mortgages “are underwater”…).

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 05:41:19

“comes up a lot” (pre-coffee, post-Hunger Games = bad grammar…)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 11:37:59

Well, since the debts aren’t dischargeable, there is no “end.” Just decades of people spending a lot less than previous generations. You can’t foreclose on a brain.

Comment by aNYCdj
2012-03-23 19:43:09

Actually you could Polly

Trade in your degree or license and poof on the student debt.

How any lawyers who give up their jd in exchange for no debt? heck lots of them here work as paralegals.

The license /college degree gets cancelled…and you would have to state that on a resume…

I did get my BA but couldn’t afford to the payments, so like cash for clunkers I traded my clunker college degree for freedom!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 20:36:04

Never work. If you can state and get it confirmed that you actually earned the degree without paying for it, it would create an entire underclass of people with evaporated degrees who get paid a lot less. Then the people who kept them, would never be able to get a job.

Lawyers would only be able to work under supervision. Docs would be limited to PA status. Computer programmers wouldn’t have any restrictions. I could go on and on.

And exactly WHY would the government agree to such a deal. The student gets the education and gets to reneg on the student loan if they have to say they don’t have a degree when everyone knows they do leaving the government to pay off the whole thing?

Don’t you ever think about the consequenses or implementation of anything?

 
Comment by aNYCdj
2012-03-24 12:28:19

Thats why I bonce this off of you Polly …yes it would create an “underclass” but it would be an alternative to being a debt slave, and never getting any tax refunds if you default, or applying for certain jobs.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Muggy
2012-03-23 03:02:56

“About 470 Florida homeowners have avoided foreclosure and taken cash payouts from Bank of America after agreeing to short sales of their homes.”

http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/bank-of-america-customers-take-payouts-for-short-sales/1221289

 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 05:02:28

Thanks Muggy. It was interesting to read a Florida SS took 2 months to close, when we are seeing in excessive of 8 months on some SS’s in So Ca.
I think the payouts are way too generous, and just wrong.

Legal question:
Why can’t they just do a Deed In Lieu Of Foreclosure? Is it the MBS?

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 20:37:40

A house loses additional value the instant it becomes RE owned.

 
 
Comment by ProperBostonian
2012-03-23 05:15:46

Bank of America Tests Rental Program as Alternative to Foreclosure

Bank of America said Thursday that it would offer a small number of customers facing foreclosure the option to remain in their homes and rent the property instead. The program highlights how investors are increasingly interested in becoming landlords on troubled properties.

Under the terms of the pilot program, which will be offered initially to about 1,000 consumers only in New York, Nevada and Arizona, homeowners will give up the title to their property in exchange for bank forgiveness of their mortgage debt. They would then be able to rent the property for up to three years. The rent payments would be less than the monthly mortgage payment and be set at or below market rates, according to bank officials. (NYTimes)

Comment by palmetto
2012-03-23 05:58:55

Desperation?

Comment by ProperBostonian
2012-03-23 06:46:50

I wonder how the dialogue will change when a large portion of former owners become renters? Will I no longer have to hear about the moral superiority of homeowners? Will I no longer have to hear about what a great investment homeownership is? I hope so.

I met a real estate agent this week who….rents. And she said she knows an amazing deal when she sees one.

 
 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 10:27:25

My guess is they will use a front company. How many people would drill holes in the floor and strip the house if they knew their land lord was BOA?

Comment by wittbelle
2012-03-23 22:57:01

BofA is so good at handling paperwork anyway… geez.

 
 
 
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 05:37:25

Realtors Are Liars®

Comment by goon squad
2012-03-23 07:31:05

The squad will be camping and mountain climbing with facebook Realtor® this weekend, need to call him out on his REIC propaganda. This one supposedly has an economics degree from CU Boulder yet is blissfully ignorant of the quantity of shadow inventory or how median prices in Denver should be supported at 4.5x median incomes. The blanket response to these questions cater to the slack-jawed, Brawndo drinking, howmuchamonth crowd.

Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 09:39:13

Ask a simple question.

Why are you realtors advising the public to buy housing when prices are falling?

Report back to us his response. Of course his reply will imply or allude to prices going back up “eventually”. This is easily shot down too.

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 14:49:48

Why do you even care about this question?

The answer is that realtors are salepeople, not financial advisors. It isn’t their job to tell you when it is a financially beneficial time to buy. It is their job to help a person who wants to sell now to do so. And they don’t get paid until they manage to do it. That is why they encourage people to buy at any given moment. It is their job.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 17:42:57

Why does this question get under your skin?

The question isn’t your burden.

 
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 20:45:28

The question doesn’t get under my skin. Asking questions with obvious answers bothers me a little, especially since I know that you are more than intelligent enough to know the answer on your own.

 
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-24 09:14:39

It’s a rhetorical question for realtors to answer. We know the answer.

 
 
 
Comment by AnonyRuss
2012-03-23 17:59:14

But Brawndo has electrolytes.

 
 
 
Comment by combotechie
2012-03-23 06:16:57

The Catbird Seat.

Herds of talented and experienced technical folks I work with are flooding out the door and easing into retirement. Herds of them.
This leaves a shortage of talented experienced folks need to do the work.

Now, all of a sudden, the bosses have become extra nice to me, and I have no clue as to why.

/sarc

Comment by ProperBostonian
2012-03-23 06:44:11

Dream on.

Last night I was talking to a software developer who just gave his notice. He said the final straw was when management found out he was organizing a company softball team, they got upset and asked who would be available to work overtime (this is, of course, unpaid OT). One of his colleagues averages 3 hours of sleep a night. She works until midnight and then starts again at 3 a.m.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 06:47:38

Anecdotes aside, I suspect we are nearing the point in the labor market recovery when there is a looming shortage of skilled workers, as Combo’s post suggests. Oxygen will be a welcome change for them…

Comment by ProperBostonian
2012-03-23 06:59:55

This is not anecdotal for what I see, but structural and I suspect it will continue for quite some time. But very happy to be proven wrong. :)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:22:02

There’s no shortgage of skilled labor in IT if there’s so many imbeciles willing to work such long hours.

Lots of incessant whining by those in IT. Non-stop, it seems.

I strongly suspect that many in IT operate as lawyers do…they extend the problems (and thus their lucrative contracts) as long as humanly possible.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by combotechie
2012-03-23 06:50:11

The Catbird Seat: If one has the capability of solving a problem but not the responsibility of solving the problem then he finds himself in the Catbird Seat: He gets to call the shots.

Unless, as you posted: “(this is, of course, unpaid OT)”

Therein lies a big difference between hourly and salaried.

Comment by combotechie
2012-03-23 07:02:39

The irony of a lot of this is the control of the company has been seized by bean counters and the mentality of bean counters is all numbers are on equal value - i.e. an employee is an employee and all employees with the same job titles are equal.

Not true, of course, and the impelmentation of the policies driven by such bean-counting drives the most competent employees from the job (because they have somewhere else to go?) and leaves the less-than-competent employees behind (because they have nowhere else to go?).

I have seen the future and it looks as if it is going to be interesting, profitable and fun.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:16:40

Yep. NEVER let an accountant run your company.

 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 07:43:26

You do if your a CEO and your goal is to profit as much as possible in the next 4 years and then get out with a golden parachute.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 08:04:18

True.

 
Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2012-03-23 12:55:34

See also: Carly Fiorina

 
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-03-23 07:17:40

“a looming shortage of skilled workers…”

Oh. That would be the end of 99 weeks of UI. That would be when this credit expansion gets a full head of steam again. That would be when we roll out that next new great world changing technology and the US becomes the engine of world economic growth. That would be when demand for credit pushes interest rates to new upper bounds.

90% of the skills required for 90% of the jobs take less than a few months to learn. 90% of the jobs require less than average intelligence and education to accomplish passably. Most people end up with jobs that have little to do with their education major, and they get up to speed in just a few months.

We are still in the ebb of a bunch of pretend technology jobs that were supposed to extend the credit expansion. How many “highly skilled” solar panel installer jobs do we need? How long did it take to train these people? Why do they drive a nicer truck than me?

 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 07:35:18

Well, then the IT industry has a problem, doesn’t it?

How to convince today’s youngsters to take out $50K in student loans so that they can enter the field, then spend an additional $10K every 3-4 years so that they can stay “current” is becoming quite difficult, apparently.

It is cost-prohibitive for the dumb and “unskilled” to become “skilled” in the seemingly innumerable way that IT credentialists demand. Ditto for those who are “skilled” but skilled in the wrong fields.

The “unskilled” don’t have the cash, combo.

IT is reaping what it has sown. Prohibitive entry barriers leads to lots of unpaid OT for those remaining.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 08:45:30

“IT is reaping what it has sown. Prohibitive entry barriers leads to lots of unpaid OT for those remaining.”

Is this the IT empoyees fault? Or is it the employers who demand tons of unpaid overtime and who refuse to pay for ongoing training?

I think that employers love it this way. Another trend is to push tasks that used to be performed by IT onto end users. A common example was setting up PCs and Workstations. Once upon a time IT would set these up for non technical staff. Nowadays the new machine arrives in boxes in your cubicle and you have to set the whole thing up, including configuring the custom IT environment for your system.

I had to do this once at HP. I received a pile of custom CDs and the instruction list was about 20 pages long. It took almost a whole day to “reimage” the stupid machine. The instructions were ambiguous in many places and I can only imaging the horror non technical staff must have felt in having to perform such a task.

Anyway, I can’t remember the last time I saw an “IT guy” in a cubicle farm environment. It’s all self serve now.

Comment by cactus
2012-03-23 12:54:31

IT won’t set up any of my CAD programs

They are good for getting passwords from to get around the intranet

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by drumminj
2012-03-23 08:55:30

then spend an additional $10K every 3-4 years so that they can stay “current” is becoming quite difficult

What do you consider “IT”? Who the heck needs to pay money to learn new skills?

I have a BS in Computer Science. I didn’t even learn marketable “skills” there, so much as how to think and problem solve. I’ve learned everything else on the job, or on side projects. No annual subscription required!

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 09:43:38

Just in case you are interested (not a suggestion, just calling your attention to a unique opportunity):

Unlocking Knowledge, Empowering Minds.

“OCW opens up knowledge across the world and allows universities to benchmark teaching.”

François Viruly
Educator
South Africa

Free lecture notes, exams, and videos from MIT.
No registration required.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 10:19:52

A lot of IT jobs require Microsoft “certification” these days.

As for learning “marketable skills” in your undergrad work, all those UNIX tools you learn to use are considered “marketable” skills. But todays undergrads are different. In many programs they don’t learn things like data structures or compiler theory anymore. Assembly language? That is rarely taught anymore. Today’s employers expect CS grads to hit the ground running, and expect undergrad programs to teach them how to use the current tools. They aren’t engineers anymore, they are “technologists”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 11:41:30

So that seminar in search tree structures isn’t the top of anyone’s list now?

 
 
 
 
Comment by cactus
2012-03-23 12:36:27

This leaves a shortage of talented experienced folks need to do the work.”

yes this is happening now I’m 51 so expect frantic managment to try and work me at 2x to keep productivity up as older experienced workers bail out.

should be interesting

 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:45:11

Okay this thread hits home. I am working four hours of overtime per week on the weeks when I get out of L.A. And 50 to 55 hour weeks otherwise. Most of my colleagues are doing 50 to 60.

We braves talk to each other and agree that there will be a return to a labor shortage (see, the GP is aware of cycles in everything unlike the HBB regulars). Good to see Combo and PB are aware. There will be a labor shortage ahead.

And when that comes, we turn the tables on management. Competitors will be paying OT for hireds as well as contractors. In my field I say at most two years from now. The current client’s management will have to return to treat it’s employees like royalty instead of like dogs.

I love L.A. But I will be here no more than ten kore months and I am eyeing Tampa again where I can get $110 per hour, or San Antonio, Austin, or Washington D.C. I am willing to I clued Northern suburbs of Boston for my upcoming consulting gigs.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 20:46:23

And no, I don’t get paid OT.

 
 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2012-03-23 06:59:22

Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime

(js: Why not? Hell hath no fury like a, ah forget it.)

By Richard Weir
Saturday, February 25, 2012 - Updated 4 weeks ago

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

But Carolyn Euell, 38, mother of two of the defendants, Erika Stroud, 21, of Dorchester and Felicia Stroud, 18, West Roxbury, told reporters the alleged attack “can’t be hateful” because both her daughters are lesbians.

Prosecutor Lindsey Weinstein said the two sisters and one of their domestic partners, Lydia Sanford, also a defendant, viciously beat the man Sunday, repeatedly punching and kicking him after he bumped them with his backpack on a stairwell.

She said the victim, who suffered a broken nose, told cops he believed the attack was “motivated as a crime because of his sexual orientation” since the three women “called him insulting homophobic slurs.”

http://bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20220225lawyer_lesbians_assault_on_gay_man_cant_be_hate_crime

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:18:37

The whole “hate crime” concept is itself, discriminatory.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-03-23 08:08:09

Uh-oh, I think someone has stolen turkey lurkey’s online ID, at least on this blog. If it’s the real turkey lurkey who posted above I must warn you that your comment definitely puts you off the reservation. The concept of a hate crime, and giving some groups more protection than others, is a proud invention of the left.

Comment by Blue Skye
2012-03-23 08:32:21

The Left has no monopoly on delusion or illogic.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 09:55:11

Exactly.

 
 
Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 08:35:42

No, it doesn’t, Bill. Not if you’re a straight, white liberal.

Bill, a recent event in Kansas City illustrates this straight, white dilemma quite well. A little while back (maybe a month), it so happens that three black teenagers beat up a white teenager quite severely.

The judge declated in NOT to be a hate crime, because it was a black-on-white and not a white-on-black crime.

See the difference? This is why, among straight, white liberals, the “hate crime” legislation is discriminatory. They know can get beat up by other liberals, who because of their race or orientation, can get away with it.

If they could sue in the same manner, then it wouldn’t be discriminatory. See?

Note that among liberals, OLD, WHITE MALES are still a problem, no matter where they reside in society. Old, white male liberals even believe this, much less women, gays and liberals of various races.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 08:37:01

Maybe you should stop with the pidgeon holing, Bill. Just what is a “Liberal” anyway? A moderate Republican from 30 years ago would be considered a “Liberal” today, at least in some circles.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by drumminj
2012-03-23 08:59:08

Maybe you should stop with the pidgeon holing, Bill

Maybe everyone on this board should stop doing that. How many generalizations are made about “Republicans” day in and day out???? Liberals also.

It’s lazy and the easy way out. Seems to be par for the course in the discourse on this blog lately.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 09:38:29

Maybe everyone on this board should stop doing that. How many generalizations are made about “Republicans” day in and day out

Agreed. FWIW, I used to be a Republican, until one day I decided that the inmates had taken over the asylum and that’s when I got off the bus.

That said, wanting my neighbors to have good jobs, not having to worry about healthcare for the elderly, not wanting an imperialistic foreign policy doesn’t make one a “Liberal”.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 10:05:37

Same here.

I had nothing against Republicans until they became the bullies 30 years ago using religion, phobias and offshoring to repeal as many rights and opportunities for the average person as they could.

Their latest example is nothing short of treason against J6P.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/28/us-usa-democrats-offshore-idUSTRE68R40I20100928

I’m not real fond of Democrats either (see the Keating 5), but the Republicans have raised the bar of tyranny to record heights and continue to be the world champeens of “f-u, I got mine” hypocrties.

 
Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2012-03-23 12:49:18

While I recognize this thread is more about calling others Repubs, Dems, Libtards, or Conservatards, frankly I’m confused when I hear someone describe THEMSELVES as Repubs or Dems. It’s a construct that simply doesn’t compute for me.

 
Comment by butters
2012-03-23 12:52:22

I used to be a Republican

It amazes me how people automatically assume that just because they changed positions, they must be right now. It’s very possible that you were wrong then and still wrong now.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 13:57:39

I did say, For What its Worth (FWIW). I never clained moral superiority or even being “right”. All I said was that the GOP was taken over by madmen, so I left.

Is that clear, Butter Boy?

 
Comment by butters
2012-03-23 14:17:24

Is that clear, Butter Boy?

It’s Mr Butters. :)

 
Comment by rms
2012-03-23 21:58:33

It’s Mr Butters.

Hint: Crystal.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 07:08:30

NEW YORK (AP) — Undercover NYPD officers attended meetings of liberal political organizations and kept intelligence files on activists who planned protests around the country, according to interviews and documents that show how police have used counterterrorism tactics to monitor even lawful activities.

The infiltration echoes the tactics the NYPD used in the run-up to New York’s 2004 Republican National Convention, when police monitored church groups, anti-war organizations and environmental advocates nationwide. That effort was revealed by The New York Times in 2007 and in an ongoing federal civil rights lawsuit over how the NYPD treated convention protesters

The document provides the latest example of how, in the name of fighting terrorism, law enforcement agencies around the country have scrutinized groups that legally oppose government policies. The FBI, for instance, has collected information on anti-war demonstrators. The Maryland state police infiltrated meetings of anti-death penalty groups. Missouri counterterrorism analysts suggested that support for Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, might indicate support for violent militias

I guess Morgan Stanely and others got what they paid for when they dontated to the NY police.

news.yahoo.com/documents-show-nypd-infiltrated-liberal-groups-081951121.html

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 07:23:05

The Supreme Court ruled many years ago that police can gather intelligence, but it can only be of a limited nature and relevant to an ongoing case.*

Damn SC interfering with states rights to violate your constitutional rights!

*this may be overturned in light the new neocon composition of the SC and various “soft” martial law bills passed over the last 10 years.

Comment by Posers
2012-03-23 08:26:53

I see that Obama has has no problem doing the same to an enlisted who dared give him a piece of his mind.

Don’t see you complaining about THAT, turkey lurkey.

As I recall, the enlisted swear to uphold The Constitution, not the Commander-in-Chief. The former supercedes the latter.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 09:39:54

I think that more than a few “Liberals” on this blog howled bloody murder when Obama signed NDAA into law.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 10:13:17

Poser has a VERY selective memory.

And let me remind you who signed BOTH “Patriot” Acts into law. It wasn’t Obama.

…and who blocked decommissioning Gitmo. Again, it wasn’t Obama.

…and who STOPPED the effort to end offshoring and bring jobs back to America. Yet once again, it wasn’t Obama.

…and who signed TARP.

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2012-03-23 12:12:55

and who…

and who…

and who…

“it wasn’t Obama.”

I`ll tell the 2 guys who have been with me for 15 years that when I hand them their last paychecks today. We cut everything, gave up our health insurance last year and I burned through about $100k keeping them paid in a losing effort for the last 2 years but they`re gonna have to file for unemployment. We were too small to bail. I know, I know it`s Bush`s fault, all is well cary on.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by michael
2012-03-23 07:20:00

nothing housing, economic, or political…just wanted to say that i watched the new muppet movie last night and it was absolutely wonderful…Jason Segel and Kermit really hit it out of the park.

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 09:03:22

Are you man or a muppet?

A very manly muppet…a muppet of a man….

Loved it. Practically my whole family all went to see it the evening of Thanksgiving. Most of the adults included.

Comment by michael
2012-03-23 09:36:49

that scene/number “muppet of a man” was great. last time i was moved that much by a musical number was when john c. reilly sang “mr. cellophane” in chicago.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2012-03-23 09:09:27

Muppets Are Liars.

 
 
Comment by jeff saturday
2012-03-23 07:25:54

By Kimberly Miller Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Posted: 3:17 p.m. Wednesday, March 21, 2012

“The great suppression in household formation during the past four years was unsustainable, and a pent-up demand could burst forth from the improving economy,” said Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the National Association of Realtors.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/money/foreclosures/palm-beach-county-home-sales-advanced-in-february-2252244.html - 82k -

Comment by measton
2012-03-23 07:47:07

Mr. Yun should visit a home full of fruit pickers to see how far the collapse of house hold formation can go. 3 bedroom house, one 6 person family to a room. We haven’t even rented out the garage yet.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 08:33:58

Lucky Duckies don’t count in household formation.

I am reminded of a scene in Dreamwork’s ‘Prince of Egypt’, where Pharaoh tells Prince Moses to not be troubled by the deaths of all the Hebrew Children, because: “They were only slaves”

 
 
Comment by DudgeonBludgeon
2012-03-23 08:46:56

How do lowered expectations drive pent up demand? I don’t think there will be much demand let alone pent up demand from the next generation of house buyers.

Comment by polly
2012-03-23 09:09:12

More to the point, how do corporate profits or the stock market increase demand? You have to have local hiring in jobs that allow for saving up a downpayment (theoretically) and then allow for making payments. Unemployment number measure how many people actually looking for jobs (less than before) have some sort of job, however part time and however poorly paid. If you did even one hour of paid work (or work of a type that is commonly paid for, even though you didn’t get paid), and you get called for the survey, you don’t count as unemployed. Watching the neighbor’s kid for an hour means you aren’t unemployed.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 10:16:50

Why, the answer lies in the 2006 Citigroup Plutonomy Report!

Our 75% retail driven economy no longer needs customers!

Marie Antoinette would still be around if she had only been this smart!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Awaiting
2012-03-23 07:57:47

Los Angeles Downtown ChinaTown District NO WAL-MART

Wal-Mart wants to come into the area, and take up a ground level 33,000 retail space in a senior apartment building at the Dragon Gateway Entrance to ChinaTown. I am against it myself. It will just destroy the mom and pop shopping experience of the quant little enclave of small retailers. I go down there 4-6 times a year and love the price flexibility down there. The food is always delicious as well. The restaurants and retailers appreciate the business.

WM wants a lot of it to be food, but all I see is vacant restaurants and stores if they win approval. I’m bummed. Deep pockets always win.

The L A City Council is voting on it today.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 08:16:39

Say hello to Wal Mart. I would be very surprised if they pass up this deal.

Comment by b-hamster
2012-03-23 08:47:32

Yeah, now that the US market in rural and suburban areas are saturated with Mao Marts, the cities are what left for them to penetrate. There were rumors about one coming into dowtown Cincinnati years ago.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 10:19:38

I can guarantee you that’s no rumor.

This is the plan already in progress in most major cities.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sfrenter
2012-03-23 12:44:54

This is the plan already in progress in most major cities.

Manhattan is one big mall now. Sad.

I thought it was an awesome place to live (in the 1980’s).

 
Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2012-03-23 23:52:55

Target claimed a stake in downtown Portland recently.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Neuromance
2012-03-23 08:16:22

So, how does one put an offer on a house before the inspection?

Nowadays, in Baltimore-DC metro, a lot of houses are being sold “as-is.” I have no idea what the legal standing of that statement is, but I’m not prepared to litigate. The realtors want you to submit a bid, tough noogies what the inspection reveals, because no-way no-how is the seller going to change his price or pay for repairs. As-is. Just bid.

It seems that an inspection BEFORE making a bid makes sense. A lot of sales fall through because of games on both sides. But, if one is serious, wouldn’t an inspection before making a bid make sense? I realize it costs 250-500 bucks, but that shows some seriousness too in the bid.

On the other hand, the seller may reject the price outright. But armed with an inspection, you’ll have a better idea of what you can pay, including the cost to repair the deficiencies.

Thoughts?

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-03-23 08:18:26

NEVER make an offer without an inspection. That’s just stupid.

Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2012-03-23 11:50:23

And a title search.

 
Comment by sfrenter
2012-03-23 12:46:05

NEVER make an offer without an inspection

That’s what contingencies are for.

 
 
Comment by polly
2012-03-23 09:14:44

If they are selling the house as-is, you need an inspection more than any other house you will ever bid on. If I were you, I’d pay extra for the best inspector in the county. If they refuse, walk away.

As-is bidding is for people who have extremely deep pockets and can negotiate VERY aggressively on price because they are willing to take on thousands of units - they are taking a risk that the law of large numbers means that the average cost of repairs will be within their estimate/assumptions.

As a buyer of a single home that you want to live in, you can’t afford that risk.

 
Comment by Neuromance
 
 
Comment by mattsmith
2012-03-23 09:17:27

I mentioned the other day that my wife and I bought a house last year. We’ve only done cosmetic things (refinished the wood floors, painted) so far, but were considering making some energy-efficiency upgrades. I sat down with a SolarCity rep and with a couple different window/door guys to get estimates. I’ve turned them all down after doing my own research on how much we’d really save over time, etc. I’m wondering if I did the right thing.

Re: solar, the 20 year lease from SolarCity would probably save a lot of money, but I expect solar panel technology to come down in price and become more effective at generating electricity. After I drilled down into SolarCity’s written proposal, even covering my south-facing roof with 24 panels, it was only going to cut my electricity costs by about $1000 a year. The upfront 20-yr lease would run me about $10k up-front. The other problem with solar panels, from my perspective, is that our heat and hot water are from natural gas. Both our water heater and furnace are 1 year old (replaced prior to us buying as part of passing inspection). Anyway, I told SolarCity to keep in touch but if I’m filling my roof with solar panels and paying cash up front, I need the system to provide me with at least twice as much electricity as the current systems. Because I will be leasing the system for 20 yrs, I don’t want to be stuck with a less effective system when in 5 yrs, there will probably be systems that can take me off the grid entirely (except for natural gas, which is probably going to be fairly cheap for a long time).

So now I’m considering alternatives that focus on conservation–low-E film for the windows, using the programmable thermostat we already have, insulating our 2nd floor rooms/roof, switching to LED lights where sensible, and considering a tankless natural gas water heater for our daily-use bathroom.

I’m pretty sure we aren’t going to replace our windows any time soon. We have 22 windows and the best price quote we got was $6100. But between the conservation measures and doing some caulking, we can probably get a majority of the effect of better windows for a tiny fraction of the cost. And since we both work, our heat/AC only runs in the evenings and weekends. Except on the coldest days, the temp in the house rarely drops below 64 or 65 all day, even after being at work all day.

Short version: Replacing windows or adding solar panels would be a mistake for us, right?

Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 10:02:05

If the temp stays at 65F without any supplement heat, what are you trying to do? And why? Do you have a long AC season?

Comment by mattsmith
2012-03-23 11:18:44

RAL, I am in mid-Atlantic (Balt) so it’s not the heat as much as the humidity in the summer. Yes, the AC runs more than the heat and our utility, BGE, was just part of a sale to a huge energy conglomerate. Total cost of our electricty right now, with delivery charges and use feels, is 14.2 cents/kwh. Double what it was a decade ago. Let’s say it doubles in the next decade…. that would be my concern.

The house temps dropped to 60 or 62 in late December-early February. But in Oct, Nov, and so far in March, it stays in the mid 60s. I bump it up to 68 or 70 when I get home. But yes, I think you see my point… I’m not losing all that much heat, am I? If I leave the house at 8am and the heat falls from 70 down to 64-65, it’

AC runs more because my wife is a teacher. She is home a lot during the day in the summer. She works at a theater camp for 2 weeks but is completely off 9 or 10 weeks. I’m honestly thinking of giving her a pool membership to the one down the street from us for her birthday… so she’ll go there and not run AC in the afternoons… haha.

What do people think about solar? It is going to improve by leaps and bounds in the coming years, right? I would hate to fill my roof with panels now, fulfilling only half my electric needs, and then have better panels available at same price in a few yrs…

Comment by mattsmith
2012-03-23 11:22:24

user fees*

(What I’m getting at is the electricity “costs” 8.8 cents/kwh, but with fees and taxes it is 14.2 cents/kwh)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 12:53:55

Those rates are steep. I pay less for service in NY.

Running any rotating equipment (a/c compressors included) on pv panels seems like a fools game to me. They impose huge loads and have high inrush current which I don’t think you could do with solar efficiently.

 
Comment by mattsmith
2012-03-23 13:04:06

RAL, what solar city does is put the energy you produce from your solar panels back out onto the grid, causing your power meter to slowdown or reverse. They don’t use the panels to directly power your AC is anything else. I’m not 100% sure how it works technically speaking, but I do understand that they aren’t exactly using the solar power panels to directly power your house.

The other thing they do is guarantee you x amount of production, depending on number of panels, position of your roof, etc. So I’m pretty sure they are using a very conservative estimate, one that they will beat. The problem is, it is very low, like I said, I would still need to buy electricity. Hence my inclination to wait for better panels before I consider it again.

 
 
Comment by cactus
2012-03-23 13:04:36

What do people think about solar? It is going to improve by leaps and bounds in the coming years, right? ”

Gallium arsenide (GaAs) technology looks promising RFMD is experimenting with it using their GaAs foundry

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by The_Overdog
2012-03-23 11:36:38

If I got a quote to replace 22 windows with relatively efficient ones for $6100, I think I’d take it. In my kneck of the woods, I’d say the average window replacement is closer to $400 per window for the base model.

Comment by mattsmith
2012-03-23 12:59:36

That was the best price I got… prices ranged from 6k to 12k.

The real question isn’t whether 6k is a good price compared to other prices, the question is whether or not it’s worth it to do at all. Even at a 6k price range, I would probably only save about $600/yr, if even that.

I think there are much lower-cost ways to get a big chunk of those savings. But I could be wrong, thus I posed the question.

Comment by The_Overdog
2012-03-23 13:33:14

Yeah, I get that, but there’s lots of factors you don’t really mention for us to answer that for you. Do you like the way the old windows look? Do they open/close properly? Do you ever open them if they do? Do you have your windows uncovered all the time, or blocked by drapes? Do you sit near the window, or is your bed near the window, where the cold drafts or 100F+ weather is physically uncomfortable? Do you mind running your heater or A/C to compensate for drafty windows (a lot of people don’t like forced air)? I would put all those factors above energy cost.

Is your attic insulated above what you area says it should be? If not and money were a factor, i’d spend it there first.

I changed out a few crappy single pane windows from the 1970s in my living room, and it made all the difference in the world. But the ones I changed didn’t open, weren’t attractive, and were generally trash. I’m going to replace all eventually, but am in no hurry. I can’t really speak to the electricity costs since the year i did it was historically warm, so my energy bills were higher than normal due to that.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-03-23 14:44:35

“the average window replacement is closer to $400 per window”

For the DIYer it is about $150 per.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 09:38:28

Beware of geeks bearing grifts.

Behind B. of A. olive branch

Bank launches lease option for delinquent borrowers

Mortgage-to-lease program may offer an escape hatch for homeowners facing foreclosure, but the primary beneficiary — perhaps unsurprisingly — looks to be Bank of America itself (First Take).

 
Comment by measton
2012-03-23 10:44:26

If Pat Robertson’s vision of theological payback comes true, Peyton Manning will be injured this season as retribution for the Denver Broncos getting rid of Tim Tebow.

sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/pat-robertson-believes-peyton-manning-hurt-142935112.html

Yes what would Jesus do??

Amazing

Comment by Realtors Are Liars®
2012-03-23 11:12:43

“When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get.”- Jesus Christ, matthew 6:5

Tebow is a hypocritical fundie like no different than the islamic fundies.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2012-03-23 21:02:05

+1

 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-03-23 13:53:32

Manning has a tough job. Every one in Denver is now expecting him to lead the Bongos to a Souper Bowl victory. Anything less than that will be considered a failure.

Then again, with the Powerball jackpot sized contract he’s getting, he probably doesn’t care.

Comment by butters
2012-03-23 14:15:24

Tebow curse will be reminiscent of famous curse of past.

Don’t agree about Retribution like Pat Roberston suggests, but I am a big believer of Karma. Manning will not win a superbowl in Denver period.

There’s a karma, Kramer!

 
 
 
Comment by stewie
2012-03-23 12:19:37

Something may be going down in the land of the dragon.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-china-coup-rumors-20120323,0,6191555.story

I love the phrase “ideological retraining”. WTF does that even mean?! Imagine DHS, the FBI, or NSA rounding up a few dozen rabble rousing congresscritters and shipping them off to an undisclosed location to “teach” them how to be American again. Unbelievable.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2012-03-23 14:41:39

The Hunger Games = Republican primary season

Words That Shaped the Week: Etch A Sketch, Muppet, The Hunger Games
By Juli Weiner
4:56 PM, March 23 2012

For your edification, a look back at the phrases, nouns, and neologisms that have, for better or for worse, shaped the week’s national discourse.

Etch A Sketch [etch uh sketch], noun: A children’s toy, the protean qualities of which are similar to Mitt Romney’s dynamic policy positions.

Flour attack [flou-er- uh-tak], noun: A substance thrown on Kim Kardashian that should soak up of the last bit of slime left behind by Kris Humphries.

Mad Men [mad men], noun: America’s favorite, most historically accurate reason to drink copious amounts of hard liquor on Sunday nights, beginning anew in just two days!

Muppet [muh-pet], noun: In Goldman Sachs–speak, a pejorative term for unsophisticated investors.

The Hunger Games [thuh hung-er gaymz], noun: This weekend’s new soon-to-be-blockbuster movie, starring Jennifer Lawrence, Liam Hemsworth, and Josh Hutcherson.

Mexico [mex-ih-ko], noun: The secret, scandalous place of Mitt Romney’s birth, maybe! (No, not maybe.)

Aspirin [az-prin], noun: The cure for cancer, though sadly not hypochondria.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 23:38:12

The Hunger Games = Republican primary season

+1000 now that I have actually seen the movie…

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-03-23 23:40:52

What the ‘The Hunger Games’ really means
Where some see support for the Occupy Wall Street Movement, others see a warning about Big Government. Or a religious message, or …
By Steven Zeitchik, Los Angeles Times
March 24, 2012

“The Hunger Games,” the teen action-adventure film that is opening to big numbers this weekend, is, without question, a parable of the Occupy Wall Street movement. It’s also a cautionary tale about Big Government. And undeniably a Christian allegory about the importance of finding Jesus. Or maybe a call for campaign-finance reform?

Like the Suzanne Collins bestseller on which it is based, the movie about a teenage girl fighting for her life in a televised death match in a dystopian post-apocalyptic country that has replaced America has a whiff of political content. But that has been enough to make a lot of people sniff out their own messages. “The Hunger Games” has become the rare piece of Hollywood entertainment: a canvas onto which disparate and even opposing ideologies are enthusiastically projected.

“It’s the 1% [who are killing the kids],” “Gossip Girl” star Penn Badgley told the website Vulture recently, referring to the story’s elites who force young people from different economic backgrounds to hunt one another for the amusement of society’s elites. “I think you’d have to be blind to not see that.”

 
 
 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post