September 27, 2012

Bits Bucket for September 27, 2012

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




RSS feed

317 Comments »

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 01:35:43

Same question as yesterday: So many pundits (including FOMC members) seem to assume a near-term exit by the Fed is necessary.

But why does the Fed ever need to exit anything? Can’t it simply keep the assets it has bought buried on its balance sheet forever?

Sep 6, 2012

THE BEAR’S LAIR
An exit strategy from Bernanke
By Martin Hutchinson

Mitt Romney has now said he would not reappoint Ben Bernanke as chairman of the Fed. What a relief! (Or maybe not; I still reckon Obama has a 50-50 chance of winning in November, and he will now presumably get Bernanke’s help, including a dose of QEIII at either the September or October Fed meetings, whenever Bernanke thinks it will do the most “good”.) Still, even if Romney wins and persuades Bernanke (whose term ends in January 2014) to forego a year of lame-duckery, there’s still the question of how we exit from Bernankeism. Four, six or 17 years of loose money, however you count it, have left a huge number of vulnerabilities in the economy, so exit has the potential to be both painful and destructive.

When you include fiscal policy, there are three separate exits to be considered. There’s the rise in interest rates needed to get short-term and long-term rates safely above the rate of inflation, thus bursting the pervasive global asset and commodity bubbles and restoring positive real returns to savers. There’s the reversal in “quantitative easing” by which the Fed must sell its portfolio of more than US$2 trillion of Treasury bonds and Federal Agency securities, thus removing risk from its balance sheet and ceasing to fund the federal deficit. And there’s the fiscal recovery, eliminating the annual $1 trillion deficits, part of which might conceivably be achieved by faster economic growth, but most of which must be achieved by higher taxes and lower spending.

Then, on top of managing these three processes, the exit has to be integrated with the needs of the global economy, avoiding crashing the market in Japanese government debt, now at a highly unstable level of 220% of GDP, while allowing a reasonable exit for the weaker sisters of the eurozone. The US does not have direct responsibility for these problems, but at least needs to tailor its policy so as to avoid making them intolerably worse.

Various policy reversal strategies would be counterproductive. To take the most extreme example, it would be foolish to attempt to reverse “QE” without doing anything about the deficit. That would double up on the strains to the financial market from financing the deficit, making the annual net cash flow drain on the market perhaps $2 trillion rather than $1 trillion. Almost certainly, this would cause a liquidity crunch, producing an economic lurch downward that would both worsen the deficit and bring even more misery to the American working class.

The British strategy under Prime Minister David Cameron, of making modest back-loaded spending cuts, allowing spending to increase in real terms in the short term, while raising taxes immediately, is also counterproductive. In Britain’s case, the authorities have staved off severe problems by massive doses of quantitative easing, financing a high percentage of the budget deficit through the Bank of England. Needless to say this has resulted in more misery for Britain’s unfortunate savers and a further economic lurch downward, albeit a mild one. It does not offer an attractive path forward.

It thus follows that reversing QE must come late in the Bernanke reversal process; that lowering the deficit must take a top priority and that spending cuts should precede or at least coincide with tax cuts. Passing legislation takes time, so monetary steps should logically precede fiscal ones.

The first step to take is thus to raise interest rates.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 01:40:56

Pull the string, and it will follow wherever you wish. Push it, and it will go nowhere at all.

– Dwight D. Eisenhower

Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - 13:27
Fed’s Plosser: Concerned Might Have Reached Limits Of Monetary Policy
By Brai Odion-Esene

PHILADELPHIA (MNI) - Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank President Charles Plosser Tuesday voiced his fear that in its strong push to support the economic recovery, the central bank’s policies might have passed the point at which they continue to be effective.

Taking questions from the audience after a speech, Plosser argued that over the years, expectations of what monetary policy can do have built up “beyond what we are capable of delivering on.”

He warned that if the Fed is setting itself up for a big fall if it keeps feeding into those expectations.

The central bank needs to display more humility, he said, and make it clear to Americans that there are limits to what monetary policy can do.

“I’m very concerned that we are reaching those limits — if not already there,” he said. “Some humility about acknowledging that actually could benefit the economy over the longer term.”

Plosser said the Fed’s quantitative easing measures have been successful in battling deflation, but subsequent programs have not been as effective in terms of impact on the real economy, with the impact of the asset purchases on employment and output growth not clear.

The results have been “less than spectacular,” so far, he said, adding the efforts being pursued by the central banking will have a “minimal” impact.

On the other hand, Plosser again warned that the risks from the Fed’s aggressive actions to boost the recovery could be quite “substantial,” and voiced his concern.

The Fed’s plan to buy $40 billion in mortgage-backed securities a month, in addition to its maturity extension program or ‘Operation Twist,’ have complicated the exit strategy.

Also the Fed’s goal will be to shrink its balance sheet gradually when the time comes, and the central bank must be aware of the consequences, he said.

Comment by measton
2012-09-27 08:09:55

I ask again

What FED official would undermine the Power of the FED and why?

1. Lining up to be the next FED official
2. Has associates that were massively short yesterday?
3. Is giving his honest opinion?

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 14:58:25

ft dot com

Markets Insight
September 27, 2012 6:19 pm
Watch house prices, stupid, for US election risk
By Gillian Tett

Two decades ago, James Carville, the Democratic strategist, observed that it is “the economy, stupid” that matters in elections. This year that slogan is packing a particularly powerful punch, given the high unemployment rate and wider economic gloom.

But as politicians hurl mud ahead of the November 6 vote, investors might do well to ponder at what “the economy, stupid” actually means; or, more specifically, how it is being experienced by voters on the ground, rather than in boardroom suites or lobbyist bunkers.

In the financial markets, it is generally assumed that “the economy” is something defined by GDP data; the figures that excite analysts are data on inflation, say, or output and unemployment.

However, if a recent survey from Absolute Strategy Research, an economics research group, is correct, it is not necessarily the GDP figures that matter to voters, nor even just the jobless numbers.

Instead, a crucial – but oft-ignored – factor that shapes how voters feel is that slippery issue of house prices. And judging from the ASR survey, a subtle-but-significant distinction has opened up between how people perceive those housing prices – and the wider economy – which reflects whether people define themselves as Democrats, Republicans, or part of that ever-swelling group of “independents”.

Now this ASR survey, like all polls, needs to be handled with some wariness. The pollsters surveyed just over 1,000 people, spread across the country (a sample size which is quite small, albeit relatively typical for polls). Since this survey has only been conducted for three years, there is a limited back-run of data and it only covers working-age people.

Nevertheless, even allowing for those caveats, the findings are striking.

For one thing, they reinforce a point that I discussed a couple of weeks ago: namely that American households are now deeply entrenched in a “deleveraging” mindset.

Only 49 per cent of households told ASR they have a mortgage (10 percentage points lower than two years ago), and 29 per cent of households are debt-free (10 percentage points higher than two years back). Meanwhile, 70 per cent of households say that the financial crisis changed their attitudes to debt, 32 per cent hope to reduce debt over the next year and another 38 per cent simply do not want to borrow at all.

Little wonder, then, that credit card debt is at a decade low, and mortgage debt is falling too.

And that retrenchment reflects a real sense of pain. ASR found that 35 per cent of consumers “worried a lot” about their personal finance, a fifth of households considered their job situation “very insecure” and half of consumers are so fearful that they do not want to take any risk at all with their investments.

But that fear is not just down to jobless issues or generalised economic gloom. Instead, as David Bowers, head of ASR, says: “It is housing which is key.” Notably, households which had seen their home fall in value were much more downbeat about all aspects of the economy. And this is a significant group: a third of households say the value of their home is worth less than they paid for it, and almost as many are underwater on their mortgages.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 01:47:44

The Fed is Trapped, Gold is the Exit
– Posted Wednesday, 26 September 2012

On September 13th, the Fed announced QE3, a policy of open-ended bond purchases which would add $1 trillion annually to the Fed’s balance sheet. The Fed’s decision to provide liquidity ad infinitum, i.e. QE etc, was framed in reasonable and carefully chosen language:

These actions, which together will increase the Committee’s holdings of longer-term securities by about $85 billion each month through the end of the year, should put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative…

The measured wording gave the Fed sufficient cover to mask its increasingly desperate condition, i.e. how to keep its fatally-wounded credit and debt ponzi-scheme functioning while searching for a solution that doesn’t exist.

CAPITALISM’S CONSTANTLY COMPOUNDING DEBT IS THE DEVIL’S WHIP OF GROWTH

In capitalist economies, capital, i.e. money, is introduced by central banks into the economy in the form of loans; and because interest constantly compounds, economies must constantly expand in order to pay down and/or service those loans. This is why economists in capitalist systems are obsessed with growth.

Capitalism is, in actuality, a smoke and mirrors shell game where credit and debt have been substituted for money; and, as long as capitalism expands no one is the wiser because the fraud is so subtle. Capitalism, however, is no longer expanding. It is contracting.

Capitalism reached its peak in 2008 when Greenspan’s historic credit bubble burst. What investors believed was a finely-tuned balancing act between credit and debt orchestrated by Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan turned out instead to be a speculative bubble fed by Easy Al’s easy credit from the Fed’s 24/7 discount window.

While Greenspan presided over the greatest credit expansion in the history of capitalism, Greenspan also presided over two of its largest speculative bubbles—the 1996-2000 dot.com bubble and 2002-2007 US real estate bubble. Greenspan would later refer to evidence of these bubbles as ‘froth’; to those who lost homes and fortunes, it was blood.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 02:04:39

My view of the improbability of a QE exit has some high-level support.

More from Gross: Fed stuck with bad bonds forever
Pimco boss doesn’t foresee full unwinding of obligations from quantitative easing
By Dan Jamieson
September 21, 2012 2:49 pm ET

In wide-ranging comments on Thursday, Pimco founder Bill Gross detailed what the unwinding of quantitative easing might look like.

When asked what the ultimate unwinding of the Fed’s inflation trades might look like, Mr. Gross predicted there would be no exit — that the Fed would be stuck with “dead” bonds.

His full comments:

There are a number of ways it can play out. An exit at the moment is dependent on unspecified but increasingly specific targets. [Federal Reserve] governor [Narayana] Kocherlakota [president of the Minneapolis Fed on Thursday] basically said the Fed’s target is 5.5% unemployment. That seems a little bit of a stretch to me, but clearly at 8.1% or 8.2% [unemployment now], I think they have 6% unemployment targeted. So the exit … won’t occur until we get to 6% or lower unemployment, or as [Mr. Kocherlakota] couched it, inflation at 2.25% or 2.5% and accelerating. So, those are the two conditions. … I’m basically going so far as to say [the Fed is] not going to exit, that all those mortgages, all of those Treasuries on the balance sheet, they’re never coming off. That’s why I tweeted yesterday or the day before, ‘Central banks are where bad bonds go to die.’ Think about it. In euro land, the ECB has been buying Greek bonds, and now they’re buying Italian and Spanish bonds, and we can accurately say those are dead bonds. But in the U.S., a 10-year Treasury at 1.7% and a 30-year Treasury at 2.8%, those are bad bonds, because they’re bubbled and they’re overvalued. And so, a central bank is where bad bonds go to die. So is it like a zombie — do they spring alive again, and come back out of the balance sheet and go home to the private market? It’s possible. And that’s what [Fed chairman Ben] Bernanke speaks to all the time, about the exit strategy. I think basically an investor has to understand there’s no exit. That those bonds are there, they’re going to mature, and that it’s only a question of how long the central bank continues the process of QE3.

When would the central bank stop all this nonsense? When would a central bank realize you can’t cure a debt crisis with more debt? Well, probably only at the point where inflation begins to accelerate as [Mr.] Kocherlakota talked about [Thursday]. And realistically, to 3% and 4% and 5% [inflation], at some point the Fed would say, ‘Hey, we’ve got a dual mandate here and at least we’ve got to stop buying, I may not be able to sell these things, but at least I have to stop buying.’ So the ultimate outcome of all of this is, as I spoke to [earlier], in terms of the reflationary versus the deflationary tilt, if the Fed writes checks over the next 12 months of a trillion dollars, and they probably will, if the ECB writes another trillion dollars of checks, then ultimately it comes out in inflation. It might not come out in real growth. … Ultimately monetary policy ends when inflation begins to accelerate, when the dollar begins to go down and is trashed, and investors like the Chinese and Pimco and others … basically say a 1.7% yield in a 4% inflationary world is not my cup of tea. … So that’s how it ends.

How long is that from now? We’ll just have to see. [Mr.] Bernanke has promised that in addition to QE3, if this doesn’t work, there’s more behind this. And I’m not sure what that might be, because the Fed basically is limited to Treasuries, mortgages, and short-term municipals believe it or not. And to buy foreign bonds which I can’t believe Bernanke would ever do because that’s a political type of thing. So there’s only so many mortgages [and] Treasuries to buy before all of the sudden they become handcuffed in terms of more buying. So maybe that’s an outcome, too. … It’s not an outcome an investor really wants to face unless they’re protected with inflationary-protected types of assets.

Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 07:36:07

Fed basically is limited to Treasuries, mortgages, and short-term municipals believe it or not.

Interesting. So according to Gross, the Fed couldn’t be directly propping up the stock market.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 08:47:50

Since they are not audited, I am wondering why he assumes this?

Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 09:21:10

I wonder if Gross is correct.

While current law restricts the Fed to buying low-risk assets like Treasury bonds, that’s not necessarily set in stone, said Paul Ashworth, U.S. economist with Capital Economics.

In November 2008 for example, the Fed invoked a provision of the Federal Reserve Act that allows it more wiggle room under “unusual and exigent circumstances,” and created the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility as a way to buy student, auto and credit card debt.

“In theory, there’s nothing the Fed can’t buy,” Ashworth said.
CNNMoney

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Carl Morris
2012-09-27 10:24:03

“In theory, there’s nothing the Fed can’t buy,” Ashworth said.

Seems like a recipe for slavery to me. Eventually they own everything, and we work for whatever they feel like paying us.

 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2012-09-27 19:32:49

““In theory, there’s nothing the Fed can’t buy,” Ashworth said.”

Oh, ok. Then this is easy. The Fed IS the economy. The Fed should just buy everything, and all is merry.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2012-09-27 20:29:35

“The Fed IS the economy.”

I hate to say this, but I take the impression that is the way they see it, too.

 
 
 
 
Comment by scdave
2012-09-27 08:15:16

Nice post Pbear….

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 02:09:02

Greek riots, Spanish marches shatter market calm
Published: September 26, 2012 Updated 13 hours ago
By ELENA BECATOROS — Associated Press

ATHENS, Greece — Europe’s fragile financial calm was shattered Wednesday as investors worried that violent anti-austerity protests in Greece and Spain’s debt troubles showed that the continent still cannot contain its financial crisis.

Police fired tear gas Wednesday at rioters hurling gasoline bombs and chunks of marble during Greece’s largest anti-austerity demonstration in six months. The protests were part of a 24-hour general strike, the latest test for Greece’s nearly four-month-old coalition government and the new spending cuts it plans to push through.

The brief but intense clashes by several hundred rioters among the 60,000 people protesting in Athens came a day after anti-austerity protests rocked the Spanish capital.

In Madrid, thousands of angry protesters again swarmed as close as they could get Wednesday night to Parliament, watched by a heavy contingent of riot police. There was no fresh violence, but the demonstrators cut off traffic on one of the city’s major thoroughfares at the height of the evening commute.

The protesters chanted for the release of 34 people detained Tuesday night in clashes that injured 64 others. They also demanded new elections to oust Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy and his conservative government, which has imposed cutbacks and tax hikes, deepening the gloom in a country struggling with recession and unemployment of nearly 25 percent, the highest among the 17 nations using the common euro currency.

Spain’s central bank warned Wednesday the country’s economy continues to shrink “significantly,” sending the Spanish stock index tumbling and its borrowing costs rising.

Across Europe, stock markets fell as well. Germany’s DAX dropped 2 percent while the CAC-40 in France fell 2.4 percent and Britain’s FTSE 100 slid 1.4 percent. The euro was also hit, down a further 0.3 percent at $1.2840.

The turmoil Wednesday ended weeks of relative calm and optimism among investors that Europe and eurozone might have turned a corner. Markets have been breathing easier since the European Central Bank said earlier this month it would buy unlimited amounts of government bonds to help countries with their debts.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:47:59

As I’ve said, most people will not go away and quietly starve to death because their leaders made a mistake.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 02:11:44

Metal prices fall as unrest grips Greece and Spain and uncertainty hangs over world economy
By Associated Press, Published: September 26

NEW YORK — The prices of gold, most other metals and crude oil fell Wednesday, following the stock market down, as unrest grew in Europe and uncertainty lingered about the world economy.

Gold for December delivery fell $12.80 an ounce to finish at $1,753.60 an ounce. Gold has pulled back this week after a summer-long rally took it from about $1,550 an ounce to almost $1,800 an ounce on expectations that stimulus measures would be imposed in Europe and the U.S. to help boost economic growth.

Credit agencies are under greater scrutiny as consumer advocates question the accuracy of the scores.

Benchmark crude fell below $90 as protests raged in Greece and Spain over spending cuts and tax increases designed to resolve a debt crisis. Oil finished the day at $89.98 per barrel, down $1.39.

Police fired tear gas at rioters hurling gasoline bombs and chunks of marble during Greece’s largest anti-austerity demonstration in six months. At least 38 people were arrested and 64 injured in protests in Spain.

The protests in Europe shattered a relative calm and raised investor fears that the region still does not have control of its three-year-old debt crisis, despite a bold plan by the European Central Bank to buy bonds of indebted countries.

The unrest in Europe led traders to abandon risky assets, said Sterling Smith, a futures specialist with Citi in Chicago.

With U.S. economic figures “mixed at best,” he said, global economic concerns are also taking a toll, and what he called the “half-life” of the Federal Reserve’s latest efforts to help the economy is getting shorter.

Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 06:49:52

“Metal prices fall as unrest grips Greece and spain and uncertainty hangs over world economy.”

“The unrest in Europe led traders to abandon risky assets …”

Gold and other PMs are “risky assets”? The mantra used to be that these “risky assets” were the only “true money”.

Lol. Churn ‘em and burn ‘em. Shear ‘em and skin ‘em.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 09:21:17

Gold’s up $20 right now. 1% on the day 6.5% on the month 7.5% on the year, almost 300% in 5 years and almost 500% in a decade.

And it’s shiny.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 02:15:19

RPT-UPDATE 3-Japan auto makers to slow output in China amid darkened outlook
Wed Sep 26, 2012 1:57am EDT

* Nissan to extend China holiday production halt

* Toyota says to suspend production at 2 factories from Wednesday

* Suzuki says cuts one of two shifts in China

* Output adjustments come on top of cuts linked to slower China econ

By Norihiko Shirouzu

BEIJING, Sept 26 (Reuters) - Japanese automakers including Toyota Motor Corp and Nissan Motor Co. are cutting back production in China in the wake of anti-Japan protests that shuttered dealerships and darkened their sales outlook in the world’s biggest car market.

Production slowdowns are a normal feature of the auto industry in mature markets like the United States and Japan, where they are used to keep inventories from ballooning and avoid pressure for automakers to offer deep discounts that erode profitability.

But the steps by the Japanese automakers to cut output in China are an anomaly in a market that has driven the industry’s global growth over the past decade and where most automakers had been adding capacity until China’s economic slowdown in recent months. That caused production to outpace sales, resulting in larger-than-normal inventory levels at many car dealers.

For the time being I think you’re going to see Japanese automakers’ sales in China down by 20 to 30 percent,” said Koji Endo, auto analyst at Advanced Research Japan.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:51:36

Or is it because of the islands dispute and Japanese brands are taboo at this time?

I’m betting on that.

Comment by measton
2012-09-27 08:27:00

If I had factories in China and they were being damaged by rioting Chinese I’d be looking to move my production somewhere else pronto.

Comment by Happy2bHeard
2012-09-27 10:09:05

I wonder if any American companies are worried about this. Or are they just too complacent to think it could happen to them.

If I were an executive at a large manufacturing company, I would be thinking about spreading out production.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 08:33:37

Japanese brands are taboo

I wonder how many Buicks they’re selling.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 02:18:32

Mortgages & Real Estate
Housing market cool down widespread across Canada
Julian Beltrame, Canadian Press | Sep 24, 2012 11:36 AM ET | Last Updated: Sep 24, 2012 4:56 PM ET

Toronto new home sales fall to record low for August

In yet another sign the housing sector in Canada is slowing down, Toronto new home sales in August were the worst ever for that particular month.
Read more.

OTTAWA — Canada’s housing market appears to be cooling across the board in the face of tighter mortgage rules that affect many first-time buyers of modest means, a new analysis from the Conference Board shows.

The think-tank’s snapshot of resales for August shows a widespread decline in sales of existing homes, with 21 of 28 metropolitan markets registering a drop from July, and 16 of the markets showing a falloff of five per cent or more.

As well, listings fell in 17 of the 28 markets, an indication that owners were reluctant to place their homes for sale due to soft conditions.

Senior economist Robin Wiebe of the Conference Board said there was evidence of cooling in some markets — particularly Vancouver and Victoria — before the new rules went into effect July 9. But the new data shows the slowdown has spread to most markets and from coast to coast.

When you see sales down in three-quarters of the market, that means it’s pretty widespread,” he said. “It’s knocked down previously high-flying markets like Regina and Saskatoon down a peg. Vancouver had been showing signs of cooling, now it’s spread out into the Fraser Valley.”

 
Comment by Hard Rain
2012-09-27 03:58:43

Bet they do.

National Australia Bank Ltd (NAB) has defended itself and the broader banking industry against accusations that bank profits are too high, saying that investors would flee the banking sector if it was unable to consistently deliver strong returns, according to The Australian

“If we’re not making $6 billion, they’re going to want to take their money out,” Mr Joiner said, according to The Australian. “We don’t sit on a pile of gold coins and yell, ‘Yipee!’”.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Bank-profits-dont-deserve-sharp-criticism-NAB-pd20120926-YHQ9X?opendocument&src=rss

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:53:13

“Investors”

Translation: my preferred board of directors stock needs to stay high.

 
 
Comment by Hard Rain
2012-09-27 04:07:50

Are buyers to blame for housing bubbles?

It’s easy to blame bankers and real estate agents for the housing mess, But maybe it’s also time to take a good hard look in the mirror.

Karl Case and Robert Shiller recently collaborated on new research that looks at the power of belief in driving up home prices.

The dynamic duo, founders of the vaunted Case-Shiller housing index, laid out their case last Friday before a Newport hotel hall packed with mortgage bankers.(OK, blaming the buyers also probably went over well given the audience, but I will leave that for another post.)

Here’s an observation from Case - as reported by Banker & Tradesman - that gets right to the point.

“It’s the people who have the highest willingness to pay that drive the price,” Case said.

Think about the implications of that - it’s pretty frightening. It’s not the savvy buyers sticking with a budget who are driving this train.

http://www.boston.com/realestate/news/blogs/renow/2012/09/are_buyers_to_b.html?comments=all#comments

Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 07:10:55

I used to pity morons. Now I see how dangerous and numerous they are, and I fear them.

Comment by Salinasron
2012-09-27 08:27:55

Damn I just spilled coffee on me and now I have to clean it up. A great morning pick-me-upper!

 
 
Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 07:20:47

“It’s the people who have the highest willingness to pay that drives the price.”

Yeah? Well that’s true for every market.

All someone with the willingness needs is the money, which means all the price needs is someone with the willingness and the money.

Take away the willingness OR the money and the price will fall.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:29:45

“Take away the willingness OR the money and the price will fall.”

Willingness + money = market demand

 
Comment by Dale
2012-09-27 08:56:34

Let the fools and their money part and see what it does to the market.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:28:18

“Karl Case and Robert Shiller recently collaborated on new research that looks at the power of belief in driving up home prices.”

Where does this ‘belief’ (some might say ‘irrational exuberance’) originate?

Sales of New U.S. Homes Hover Near a Two-Year High
By Michelle Jamrisko - Sep 26, 2012 7:11 AM PT

Purchases of new U.S. homes hovered in August near a two-year high, adding to signs that the housing market is on the way to recovery.

Sales fell 0.3 percent to a 373,000 annual pace following a revised 374,000 rate in July that was higher than previously estimated and the strongest since April 2010, figures from the Commerce Department showed today in Washington. The median estimate of 71 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for a rise to 380,000.

Record-low borrowing costs continue to attract buyers, lifting demand for homebuilders, while a drop in the supply of foreclosed homes is easing downward pressure on prices. Federal Reserve policy makers have targeted the housing market with further accommodation measures in order to spur growth and reduce unemployment.

 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-09-27 07:46:14

‘ “It’s the people who have the highest willingness to pay that drive the price,” Case said.’

I hope this guy doesn’t think he’s discovered some new economic principle.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:49:52

How does “willingness to pay” relate to “ability to pay”? Is there a household budget constraint in the macroeconomic universe, especially when the federal government is handing out low-downpayment, low-interest, federally-guaranteed loans like candy to specially-favored individuals?

Comment by Spook
2012-09-27 08:56:56

through debt?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 11:22:25

As mentioned on this board a few weeks ago, psychology of buyers has a big impact on the market.

Comment by Carl Morris
2012-09-27 11:48:13

Yes…but that can be manipulated easily enough if they have access to credit.

Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 12:17:49

Yes it can.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Iwog
2012-09-27 12:14:10

As we’ve so often observed, the lies and misrepresentations about housing has a big impact on the market.

Do not buy housing at current prices.

 
 
 
Comment by Iwog
2012-09-27 04:27:15

The NAR is nothing but a terrorist organization and spends millions each year on political lobbying efforts to push their agenda.

 
Comment by Hard Rain
2012-09-27 04:37:56

goon squad employer?

A $23 million mansion avoids auction: Rodney P. Hunt built a 20,000-plus-square-foot mansion on the Potomac River in McLean as a monument to what he’d achieved as co-founder of RS Information Systems, a government contracting firm. The house, with its indoor basketball court, two-lane bowling alley and 15-car garage, was facing a foreclosure auction this week. The entrepreneur owed more than $9.4 million to Bank of America, public records show, for money borrowed against the house, which was once featured on MTV’s “Teen Cribs.” On Wednesday, Hunt was able to convince the bank that he can make payments on the loan, and the auction was cancelled.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/foreclosure-auction-is-off-for-23-million-mclean-mansion/2012/09/26/9154aaec-081e-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_story.html?wprss=rss_local

Comment by rms
2012-09-27 07:07:01

Wow, $23-million for that fugly setting. I’d rather have a 3/2 rancher in a coastal California community.

Comment by scdave
2012-09-27 08:31:08

I’d rather have a 3/2 rancher in a coastal California community

Like Pismo Beach ??

 
Comment by polly
2012-09-27 11:02:19

Looks like the picture was taken in February (mostly bare trees with perhaps a few just starting to show green which happened pretty early this year). I’m sure it is more attractive at other times of the year.

Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 19:15:04

You probably can’t see the house when the leaves are in. But I agree with rms, it’s not the most beautiful location. Damn sure not for $23 million.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Jingle Male
2012-09-27 16:01:57

Typical Romney 47%er …living off the government dole, not paying his bills, waiting for a handout…..

 
 
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:07:13

Without going into too much detail, the bid on our contract was awarded with the primary consideration of cost. There may be layoffs within the incumbent contractor’s management at our field office, and for some of the more senior analysts because they get paid too much.

We work in a corner of the military industrial complex that no elected official would dare to vote against funding. Sequestration is a non issue here :)

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-09-27 07:53:21

“…and for some of the more senior analysts because they get paid too much.”

During my career I left a company to take a more desirable job. About a year later I got a call from one of my former co-workers who, along with a lot of others, had just been laid off. He lamented to me that, “they got rid of all their good talent.” I responded by saying, “I bet they were all the higher paid people.” He paused for a moment and then said “goddammit, you’re right.”

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:57:14

“…they got rid of all their good talent.” I responded by saying, “I bet they were all the higher paid people.”

Lesson learned: If you are talented, try not to do so well that you price yourself out of a job.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 08:11:53

Yeah, but they can all just go back to school (at age 55) to retrain for the Jobs Of The Future.

Or start their own Candle Store or Pirate Shop, LOLZ.

 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 08:12:29

I’ve witnessed this happen myself.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
2012-09-27 10:56:45

So your working on eliminating toilet paper in the world? Imagine clean moving poop, no more skid marks…no need for bidets…a freakin miracle I’ll tell ya!

We work in a corner of the military industrial complex that no elected official would dare to vote against funding. Sequestration is a non issue here

 
 
Comment by Jingle Male
2012-09-27 16:00:39

Typical Romney 47%er …living off the government dole, not paying his bills, waiting for a handout…..

 
 
Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 04:52:52

Why the Q-poll is a Qrock, Counting too many Democrats, NY Post

In the Q-polls released yesterday, the spread between Democrats and Republicans each exceeded Obama’s 2008 advantage.

In Florida, the 2008 actual result was D +3; yesterday’s Q-poll had it at D +9.

In Ohio, it was D +8 in 2008, D +9 in the Q-poll.

And Quinnipiac gave us D +11 in Pennsylvania, versus a 2008 result of D +7.

Mind you, each of these states has seen dramatic changes in party preferences since 2008 — electing Republican governors, flipping the state legislatures to GOP control, etc.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/why_the_poll_is_qrock_56LUGAzegy7yn9zE8PsymK

In other words, these polls are being used as a political tool to push support to Obama, or to suppress Romney support. FYI, voting results are going to be much more slanted towards Romney as the conservative vote is motivated, widely dispersed and totally committed toward getting our government back from the Prez.

Will Romney win? I think so, but time will tell.

Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 06:46:35

Media Ignore Independents’ Swing Toward Romney

In both Ohio and Florida, Barack Obama’s “clear leads” all come from heavy over-sampling of Democrats, not from winning the crucial Indie vote. In fact, most of the polls that show Obama with big leads also show Romney handily winning Independent voters. Yet, somehow, Obama manages to increase his performance from 2008 despite Independents now opposing him.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/27/Romney-Winning-Swing-State-Independents-Media-Ignores

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:35:01

Seniors don’t seem to trust the Republicans with Medicare.

Medicare working to boost Obama in swing states, poll finds
By Jon Cohen and Peyton M. Craighill, Thursday, September 27, 6:23 AM

Voters in three critical swing states broadly oppose the sweeping changes to Medicare proposed by Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan and, by big margins, favor President Obama over Mitt Romney on the issue, according to new state polls by The Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Among seniors, the issue rivals the economy as a top voting issue, undercutting Romney’s appeal in Florida, Ohio and Virginia. Generally, the more voters focus on Medicare, the more likely they are to support the president’s bid for reelection.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 09:28:49

Rasmussen has Romney leading in Idaho.

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 06:58:01

And we are being told; a vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Obama.

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:13:02

The Colorado race is a dead heat between O and R. Would be some major LOLZ if we get a Florida 2000 type outcome here because of Gary Johnson, who is polling around 3% here. There is a statewide ballot measure to decriminalize marijuana, which Johnson supports.

Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-09-27 07:55:19

Oh, wow.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 07:14:59

Don’t you see what is at stake here? The world will come crashing to an end if Rmoney isn’t elected!

Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 07:27:15

Not exactly, but having a plan to repair this mess might help the current Prez as raising taxes on the 1% just doesn’t add up as a credible solution.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:36:20

“…raising taxes on the 1% just doesn’t add up as a credible solution…”

But wouldn’t that at least be a start towards reversing the greatest wealth gap in the U.S. since the Great Depression?

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:39:41

Americans Underestimate U.S. Wealth Inequality
Morning Edition
October 7, 2010

The term wealth inequality refers to the unequal distribution of financial assets among a group of people. In the U.S., the top 20 percent of people have 85 percent of the wealth. Harvard professor Michael Norton, co-author of a forthcoming paper on misconceptions about wealth equality, talks to Steve Inskeep about what Americans think they know about wealth inequality.

STEVE INSKEEP, host:

And while youre clicking there or doing whatever else youre doing this morning, give a listen to Michael Norton. He’s an associate professor at Harvard Business School and he’s been looking at the way that Americans perceive wealth in a forthcoming paper.

Professor MICHAEL NORTON (Harvard Business School): Wealth inequality is an interesting thing to ask about because it encompasses a lot of other issues. So for example, if we ask about income, people have a sense of how much income they make, and they have a sense of the minimum wage, and they can kind of think pretty clearly about, you know, income distributions and things like that.

Wealth is something that is much more complicated because it involves all kinds of calculations. So it involves your, the value of your mortgage. It involves the things you have in savings. It involves your debts. It involves your accumulated wealth over generations, and it turns out that wealth inequality is very static across generations. So this…

INSKEEP: Let’s define that term that you give there, wealth inequality. You’re basically talking about what slice of all the national wealth belongs to the richest one percent or the lowest 10 percent, that sort of thing.

Mr. NORTON: Exactly, and if you look at most statistics, the bottom 40 percent of people in the United States basically have zero wealth.

INSKEEP: They’re not all unemployed but you’re basically saying they either don’t own a house or the house that they own is worth less than what they owe on it. If you looked at their net worth, it’s nothing.

Mr. NORTON: That’s exactly right. And many of them, of course, have negative net wealth. But the latest estimates for the top 20 percent of Americans is that they have something like 85 percent of the wealth in the United States.

INSKEEP: So you were beginning with those facts but then you went on to survey people because you were asking not what is your situation now but what kind of country do you want? And what did you find?

Mr. NORTON: The first thing we wanted to do was ask people do they know what the distribution of wealth is right now, and then as you just mentioned, we also wanted to ask people what sort of society would you like to live in if you got to choose from scratch. And what we find is really two things. One is that people really underestimate what the actual level of wealth inequality is in the United States right now. And then in addition to that, when we asked them how unequal would you like it to be, they want things to be even more equal than they think they are, which is really more equal than they actually are.

INSKEEP: What do people want? If people could just dictate the kind of country they had, what would it be?

Mr. NORTON: If you think again in percentage terms, so the top 20 percent, as I said, have 85 percent of the wealth, most Americans want them to have roughly 35 percent of the wealth. You’re talking about 50 percent of all the wealth in the United States, which as you can imagine is a very, very large number. People would like that to be more evenly distributed across people with less income.

INSKEEP: That’s a colossal change.

 
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:45:22

reversing the greatest wealth gap

By taxing the Job Creators? Nonsense. They are the Creators, the Masters Of The Universe, doing “God’s work”…

And those Occupiers need to occupy a shower and get a job! LOLZ

 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 07:49:57

So it makes more sense to raise taxes on the people that are supposed to b consuming?

The 1% has all the free money they want from the fed. They’re not investing it because of lack of demand.

We’ve had trickle down economics for 30 years. It doesn’t work that way.

 
Comment by 2banana
2012-09-27 07:55:01

There is no problem in the world that can not be solved if you just raise taxes

just ask any democrat

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 08:11:25

I think this proves that the 1% aren’t interested in “growing the pie”, they want to hog all of the existing pie for themselves.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 09:41:30

raising taxes on the 1% just doesn’t add up as a credible solution.

It is an entirely credible part of the solution. CBO and other estimates put the BushTaxCutsForTheRich as responsible for about 23-25% of our deficits.

Just because there’s a bipartisan consensus on an idea, such as tax cuts, doesn’t mean it makes sense. Today’s tax cutters have set us up for tomorrow’s fiscal crisis and real damage to U.S. national security.”[24]

A Washington Post article takes a different view, claiming that data showed that the biggest contributor to the disappearance of projected surpluses was increased spending, which accounted for 36.5 percent of the decline in the nation’s fiscal position, followed by incorrect CBO estimates, which accounted for 28 percent. The Bush tax cuts (along with some Obama tax cuts) were responsible for just 24 percent.[25]

A New York Times article claims the full Bush-era tax cuts were the single biggest contributor to the deficit over the past decade, reducing revenues by about $1.8 trillion between 2002 and 2009.[26]

CBO estimated in June 2012 that the Bush tax cuts (EGTRRA and JGTRRA) added about $1.6 trillion to the debt wiki

 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 09:59:02

When the budget is balanced, and the debt paid off, we can think about tax cuts.

I want to see spending cuts BEFORE tax cuts. Always.

 
Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 13:28:38

AR,

The spending cuts have hardly ever happened, but they will in the future, either by choice or by necessity.

 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 16:18:54

How? The fed will keep buying infinite bonds, until the government and it’s corporate owners are the only entities with anything to spend.

At this point I wonder why they even bother with taxes. It’s not like they need them.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Bluestar
2012-09-27 07:25:27

You don’t trust anything do you? Polls are rigged, AGW is a Hoax, is water wet? You want to know what I think, ‘He who counts the vote determines who wins’ and Bush v Gore settled that question. It could be true that a statistical majority of Americans don’t like Mitt Romney because he is filthy rich, he flip-flops daily, and he’s a Mormon cult leader. On the other hand he’s the perfect candidate for a plutocracy. That said, I still think it’s a toss up. Obama will loose 2 out of 3 debates (according to the instant analysis by big media for each debate) and you will see a bunch of polls swing back to Romney. What will you say then Lip?

Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 16:03:46

Bluestar,

What will I say? Probably not much.

I think that Romney is already ahead when you consider that most of the undecideds will go for the new candidate. This is a historical fact.

So when I see the articles in Real Clear Politics saying stuff like,

“Mitt Romney: This Year’s Michael Dukakis” or
“The Poetic Justice of Romney’s Self-Immolation”

I just think it’s my duty to inform you guys (and gals) that there is another side of the story that you’re not hearing.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:32:30

The Iowa Electronic Markets folks need to rescale their graph, as the Obama 2012 US Presidential Election Winner Takes All Market price is off the top of their chart.

 
Comment by polly
2012-09-27 08:53:02

Why do you assume that the media telling people that candidate X is ahead is good for candidate X’s campaign? Telling people that candidate X is ahead could just as easily motivate candidate Y’s supporters to give money, go to vote, help with GOTV efforts, etc.

Comment by Michael Viking
2012-09-27 13:34:16

Yeah, this was my thinking also, along with “I don’t need to go out and vote…my candidate has it all under control”.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:33:56

Euro near two-week lows, market awaits Spain budget
Analysis & Opinion
Counterparties: The never-ending story of the Euro crisis
Euro bank recap battle line limits solidarity

Euro notes are pictured at a bank in this photo illustration taken in Seoul June 18, 2012. REUTERS/Lee Jae-Won

By Nia Williams

LONDON | Thu Sep 27, 2012 8:11am EDT

(Reuters) - The euro traded close to a two-week low against the dollar on Thursday as investors awaited a draft budget from Spain that could pave the way for the country to request an international bailout.

Uncertainty about when Spain will request a rescue program has weighed on the euro in recent sessions, with the single currency coming under pressure as Spanish 10-year bond yields hovered near 6 percent.

Spain is expected to present its 2013 budget draft later on Thursday. A credible budget along with comprehensive structural reforms could build the foundation for meeting conditions for a Spanish aid package and intervention by the European Central Bank in the bond market, analysts said.

The euro was close to flat at $1.2862, just above a two-week low of $1.2835 set the previous day. The euro has support at the 200-day moving average near $1.2826 and around $1.2740, the 38.2 percent retracement of the July to September rally.

“All eyes have been on Spain for the last week or so. We have had a big shift in euro positioning recently so going into the budget investors are probably positioned fairly neutral,” said Michel Sneyd, FX strategist at BNP Paribas.

Adding to concerns over Spain, the indebted Castilla La Mancha region may seek 800 million euros ($1 billion) in emergency funding from the central government, regional and party sources said on Thursday.

Most strategists said the euro was likely to appreciate if and when Spain requests a bailout to trigger ECB bond-buying, although gains would be curbed by concerns about Greece.

“The reaction to the Spanish budget and whether Spain is going for a bailout or not in the near term along with the clear and present danger that Greece presents will be factors that will keep gains limited,” said Simon Derrick, head of currency research at Bank of New York Mellon.

Demonstrators clashed with police in Athens and Madrid this week in protest over new austerity measures.

Greece’s international lenders are at loggerheads over how to respond to its debt crisis, threatening more trouble for the euro in the coming weeks.

A Moody’s review of Spain’s ratings is also expected this week. A cut could take the country below investment grade and put further pressure on policymakers.

CHINA EASING TALK

Talk that Chinese authorities might take steps to prop up the country’s stock markets had earlier bolstered riskier currencies like the Australian dollar and lent some support to the euro against the safe-haven dollar and Japanese yen.

Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 07:00:24

“CHINA EASING TALK”

Has it ever occured to anyone here just how cheap talk is and what a great return this cheap talk can generate?

Say a few words and prices will go up. Say a few more words and prices will go down. All one needs to perform this feat is to obtain some credibility, a quality that can easily be annointed instead of earned.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:58:51

It’s a club and you’re not and never will be, a part of it.

- George Carlin

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:36:55

Updated September 19, 2012, 7:08 a.m. ET

MONEY TALKS
Undeclared Currency Wars
By ALEN MATTICH

What ever other arguments central bankers make for quantitative easing, the one they don’t readily admit to is an effort to beggar their neighbors.

The result is seemingly endless rounds of QE.

The latest started with the Bank of England’s decision to restart bond purchases in July. Not to be outdone, the European Central Bank followed suit with a promise to make unlimited purchases of short-dated sovereign debt so long as the relevant sovereign agreed to fiscal conditions. Then the Federal Reserve launched its third QE program to buy fixed monthly quantities of mortgage-backed securities, with no pre-set end. And now the Bank of Japanhas launched yet another round of its own brand of QE.

Although central banks argue primarily that QE is there to circumvent the broken financial sector as a means of getting money to households and companies that need credit, there’s the less readily admitted boost to domestic industry through currency weakening.

The Bank of England has probably been clearest in seeking to rebalance the U.K. economy towards manufacturing and exports and away from domestic consumption through the mechanism of a falling pound.

If, as many central bankers believe, the world is demand constrained, then they are hoping to use currency weakness to stimulate demand and are effectively taking some more of that fixed pool of demand for themselves. In other words, beggar thy neighbor.

But if everyone’s doing it, surely QE won’t work. Right?

Comment by salinasron
2012-09-27 07:27:12

“What ever other arguments central bankers make for quantitative easing, the one they don’t readily admit to is an effort to beggar their neighbors.”

I think there is a spelling error here: bugger not beggar!

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:42:34

There is actually some history behind the term “beggar thy neighbor.”

Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 09:25:27

Quite a pro-globalist slant to that history. But then I saw it came from a financial dictionary. I guess writing the dictionary is even better than writing the history books.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 08:00:02

*snerk* :lol:

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:38:28

Japan launches QE8 as 20-year slump drags on
Japan has launched an eighth round of quantitative easing to weaken the yen and cushion a slide back into recession.
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
7:29PM BST 19 Sep 2012

The Bank of Japan (BoJ) is to buy a further 10 trillion yen (£79bn) of bonds, bringing the total accumulated so far in its battle against deflation to 80 trillion yen, or 20pc of Japanese GDP.

Jun Azumi, Japan’s finance minister, praised the bank’s “bold” efforts to hold down the yen, lending credence to suspicions that the real motive is to counter “beggar-thy-neighbour” currency devaluations by other powers and prevent the strong yen choking Japan’s export industry.

Yunosuke Ikeda, from Nomura, said the Bank of Japan had yielded to “immense political pressure” after months of criticism. Governor Masaaki Shirakawa is a champion of orthodoxy, a soulmate of Germany’s Jens Weidmann.

Mr Shirakawa stated on Wednesday – almost with regret – that Japan now has the “easiest monetary conditions” in the rich world. “I do not think that you could argue that the BoJ is less bold than the Fed,” he said.

Comment by Montana
2012-09-27 12:38:40

It’s different here.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:43:00

Opinion: Ben Bernanke declares war on the Canadian economy
Monetary policy will raise the value of the loonie, but we can compete by making high-quality products that sell
By Bruce Stewart, Special to the Sun September 25, 2012

Did you smile or cheer when U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke announced Quantitative Easing III (and the markets went up)?

He just declared war on your job, and the whole Canadian economy.

Of course, so did the European Central Bank, the Central Bank of the People’s Republic of China and others.

All of them are engaged in the same practice. They’re printing money. Gobs of it, in programs that have no end point.

Some are doing it to apply stimulus to revive their economies. Some are doing it to play extend-and-pretend games to hold their banks together.

For a country like Canada, with an economy in reasonably good shape, a government that’s not out of control, banks that are healthy and dependent on exports, it’s a declaration of war.

The game everyone else is playing is “beggar thy neighbour.” All this excess cash, whatever its stated purpose, is designed to bring their currencies down.

Like a see-saw, as they push their currency down the honest Canadian currency goes up. That’s why the Canadian dollar is worth so much more lately relative to the U.S. dollar and the other world currencies. It’s a measure of their weakness more than it’s a measure of our strength, but it doesn’t matter. It kills our exports just the same.

Worse, the weaknesses in other countries’ economies affects our resource exports just as much as it does our manufactured goods and our services sold overseas.

Well, we could play the game: Mark Carney could drop our interest rates to zero, and print money like it’s going out of style. The government could launch a larger Economic Action Plan II and rack up the deficits. Both would lower the Canadian dollar.

It would also send the price of a litre of gasoline and a week’s groceries through the roof — food and fuel have gone up 35 to 40 per cent in the countries that are playing the “print and hope” game — and anyone living on a fixed income, or anyone planning to collect their pension, would be in deep trouble. It’s hard to live on zero interest.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 09:47:01

And it’s not just a “war” on Canada.

Developed Country Monetary Policy Fuelling “Currency War,” Brazil Says

http://ictsd.org/i/news/bridgesweekly/146150/

Warnings that the global economy is embroiled in a “currency war” were again raised by Brazilian Finance Minister Guido Mantega last week, following the US Federal Reserve’s announcement earlier this month that it would be undertaking another round of monetary stimulus. Brasilia’s plan to temporarily raise import tariffs on various goods has also ramped up tensions between the trading partners, as Brazilian officials - including the country’s president - argue that the measures are both WTO-consistent and necessary to counter the currency effects of developed country policy, amid Washington’s claims that the tariffs are protectionist.

US Federal Reserve’s move sparks unease in Brasilia

The 13 September announcement that the US Federal Reserve would be launching a third round of “quantitative easing”- in other words, buying up assets, in this case mortgage-backed securities, to prop up the economy - has prompted harsh criticism from Mantega on various occasions over the past week, with the finance minister lambasting the Fed’s decision as a “protectionist” one that would help the US little.

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 05:47:31

from the bottom of yesterday’s bits bucket:

“How does the Fed’s new easing benefit equity REITs?

The Federal Reserve’s latest round of money stimulus and extended low interest rates should bolster real estate valuations and provide a tailwind for equity REITs amid gradually improving fundamentals. The fundamentals — gradual recovery in jobs and housing — indicate a poised pattern of slow economic growth.”

I’d like to understand more about the QEternity program. In the meantime my imagination is active.

No one will much question the Fed for bailing out the GSEs in the name of “JOBS!”. If the government gave 50 billion to the GSEs it would bring on a public scandal, like Solyndra x 100 every month.

The GSEs will sell the stinkiest mortgages to the Fed first? 250,000 dodgey mortgages a month just vanish, with money stolen from us.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:44:52

“The GSEs will sell the stinkiest mortgages to the Fed first? 250,000 dodgey mortgages a month just vanish,…”

Does this sound familiar? It should, as the policy will have the same effect as withholding inventory from the housing market had on housing prices: Prices of the MBS that remain in circulation will be artificially inflated.

Comment by cactus
2012-09-27 08:56:30

Prices of the MBS that remain in circulation will be artificially inflated.”

and cause a demand for more mortgages so banks will start lending again so home prices will rise again construction picks up unemployment goes down

Then what ?

Comment by GrizzlyBear
2012-09-27 20:19:57

Not happening. House prices are now dictated by wages, not the willingness to take on liar loans.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by polly
2012-09-27 09:07:39

US taxpayers are already on the hook for GSE debt. Selling it to the Fed spreads the risk around to other people who hold US dollars like the government of China.

Seems like a slightly better deal to me. Of course, holding down mortgage interest rates extends housing being overpriced, etc. But it isn’t like this is a direct transfer from private holders to taxpayers. Indirect since the banks can sell new mortgages they originate to the GSEs, but they were doing that anyway.

Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 09:41:37

Dumping losses on the Fed spreads the risk to savers and those who are going to have to live off their savings. Less palatable to me.

This should spell death for all the work outs for FBs. This should end the prolonged foreclosures that were masking losses. Make the banks whole and kick the bums out. If more housing inventory doesn’t result rather quickly I’ll be amazed.

Comment by polly
2012-09-27 11:57:53

Savers are taxpayers. Largely the same group, except for foreign holders of US debt and older people who have savings but very low income because they aren’t working anymore.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 13:29:36

I still contend that pilfering savings through inflation is wrong. Of course it’s a tax, but it’s a tax by the central bank.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 11:33:57

I talked about this yesterday in our office. If QEternity results in lower yields chasing non-Fed capital out of the mortgage market, it will result in those chased out looking for yield elsewhere. The next logical place for them to go is CMBS. This will reduce the cost of capital for Equity REITs.

The big question is whether there will ultimately be an increase in demand sufficient to absorb the vacant space to drive rents higher (since with the weaker dollar, the commodities necessary to build more space is more expensive in dollar terms).

What I’ve been seeing is a gradual reduction in vacancy rates, not yet to a point where there is lots of new construction or higher rents. However, I’ve also been seeing the REITs lower their cost of borrowing, and converting floating rate debt to fixed.

The increase in Equity REITs in the near term is based on an assumption that low fixed rates and inflation will ultimately benefit them…but the cash flows enjoyed by the REITs have not yet been substantially increased.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:51:35

Jeepers! Just at the point when the U.S. housing market is finally back on its feet, we get this terrible news from the market for other durable goods (besides housing).

What gives? Could it be that people who bought overpriced housing have no money left over in their meager budgets to buy other big-ticket items?

Sept. 27, 2012, 8:30 a.m. EDT
U.S. orders for durable goods sink 13.2% in August
By Jeffry Bartash

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Orders for durable goods sank 13.2% in August, the biggest one-month decline in more than three years, as bookings for autos and aircraft fell sharply, the Commerce Department reported Thursday. Economists polled by MarketWatch had expected a decline of 5.3%. Excluding the volatile transportation sector, whose bookings can swing sharply from month to month, orders fell a much smaller 1.6%. And orders for core capital goods, which exclude defense and aircraft, actually rose 1.1% after a 5.2% decline in July. Shipments of durable goods fell 3.0% in August, while inventories rose 0.6%. Orders for July were revised down to a 3.3% increase from an initial report of a 4.1% gain. Shipments of core capital goods, a number used to help calculate gross domestic product, fell 0.9% in August to mark the second straight decline.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:53:48

At least the U.S. stock market is rallying on the gloomy durable goods orders number.

Weak orders point to sharp slowdown in U.S. manufacturing

Worker Derrick Williams loads material into a cutting machine at a Wrap-Tite manufacturing facility in Solon, Ohio July 13, 2012. REUTERS/Aaron Josefczyk

By Lucia Mutikani

WASHINGTON | Thu Sep 27, 2012 10:36am EDT

(Reuters) - Orders for long-lasting U.S. manufactured goods fell sharply in August, suggesting the main engine of economic growth was stalling and offsetting the hopeful sign provided by a drop in new claims for jobless benefits.

The Commerce Department said on Thursday durable goods orders dived 13.2 percent, the largest drop since January 2009, when the economy was in the throes of a recession
. The decline primarily reflected weak demand for aircraft and automobiles, although orders were down for a wide range of goods.

Excluding transportation, orders were off 1.6 percent.

“It just shows the manufacturing side of the economy continues to labor here, and in fact, contract,” said Tim Ghriskey, chief investment officer at Solaris Group in Bedford Hills, New York.

Economists polled by Reuters had expected orders for durable goods — items from toasters to aircraft that are meant to last at least three years — to fall 5 percent, with non-transportation orders rising marginally.

Comment by cactus
2012-09-27 08:37:06

companies can’t compete with old machines they will be forced to buy new machines

Because after 10 years you can’t find anyone to maintain what was a once new state of the art piece of equipment.

Comment by Carl Morris
2012-09-27 10:28:38

Because after 10 years you can’t find anyone to cheaply maintain what was a once new state of the art piece of equipment.

You can almost always find someone if you’re willing to pay.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-09-27 07:58:41

No, it’s the size of their 4G mobile phone bill that’s limiting their purchases of other big-ticket items. :-)

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 08:20:45

Great piece in yesterday’s WSJ about smartphone “family plans” costing $400/month.

Comment by aNYCdj
2012-09-27 11:23:48

Thats nuts….$400 a month for what…playing games downloading music videos??

I’d be standing in line for hours getting an Iphone 5 and paying 4g rates even $400 a month if I could generate 10x that a month in cash gigs…otherwise a cheap phone and a cigarette lighter charger, is really all i need on the road right now.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 08:04:15

Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-26 08:36:06

Low-wage work force grows 30% as the number of jobs shrinks

(this)

Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 08:09:22

Absolutely. And the even lower paid workers in the sweatshop countries won’t be picking up the slack.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:55:31

September 15th, 2012 02:19 PM ET
11 days ago

Ryan calls Federal Reserve actions ‘insidious’
Posted by CNN Political Reporter Peter Hamby

Oldsmar, Florida (CNN) - Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan called the Federal Reserve’s latest effort to stimulate the economy “insidious” during a speech to Floridians on Saturday.

The Federal Reserve this week announced a new round of quantitative easing, the central bank’s program to increase the money supply by buying up billions of dollars worth of debt held in mortgage-backed securities.

The week’s move by the Fed, known as “QE3,” has become a campaign talking point for Republicans, including GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Critics say the central bank’s effort is inflationary, and argue it’s yet another sign that President Obama has failed to turn around the limp economy.

“One of the most insidious things a government can do to its people is to debase its currency,” Ryan said at an outdoor rally in Oldsmar, Florida. “We want honest money; that means we want honest government. It’s one and the same. Now the secret to prosperity is not more money printing.”

Ryan said QE3 might help banks on Wall Street but will do little to help middle-class families.

“We don’t need sugar high economics; we don’t need synthetic money creation,” he said. “We need economic growth. We want wealth creation. We don’t want to print money. We want opportunity and growth. And when they do this to our money, it undermines the credibility of our money.”

Comment by Bluestar
2012-09-27 07:42:27

It doesn’t hurt to have 5000+ nuclear warheads to backup your dollar. Everyone seems to forget that spending trillions on our military plays a big part of why the dollar doesn’t crash when we do QE.

 
Comment by Neuromance
2012-09-27 08:21:09

It’s really remarkable the Republicans are botching this election so badly, with such a vulnerable president. Obama talks a good game but his actions are that of fat-cat insider. The polls are widening in battleground states. The reason I think is because there’s a financier at the head of the ticket, someone who made his money in private equity, field-stripping companies, shipping jobs overseas, then admitting his disdain (”I can’t force these people to take responsibility for their lives”) for Lucky Ducky. On top of that, Romney’s a Mormon, which won’t enthuse the evangelicals.

If they had picked someone credible at the top of the ticket, Ryan would have been a good veep choice. As it stands, he could be well positioned for a 2016 run.

Comment by Bluestar
2012-09-27 08:48:37

I see it a different way. Romney was rich enough to crush everyone in the primaries. Do you seriously think Romney would be the nominee if his net worth was 3-4 million? He’s the very definition of a Plutocrat but in ‘Free Market’ politics he is the CEO of the GOP. If Rick Santorun had 300-500 million things would have been different.

If O wins we ‘might’ see him make overturning Citizens United a priority. If R wins we could see a move to limit voting to property owners.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 09:50:35

If R wins we could see a move to limit voting to property owners.

Fine. (As long as it’s only the white ones.)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 19:48:30

But we get to count our renters as 3/5ths of a person, right?

 
 
Comment by Happy2bHeard
2012-09-27 10:35:49

“If R wins we could see a move to limit voting to property owners.”

To goose the housing market? Would we see a new breed of REITs designed to give ownership to anyone? I see opportunity!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Hi-Z
2012-09-27 16:14:18

“If O wins we ‘might’ see him make overturning Citizens United a priority.”

This has appeared before here on HBB. Exactly how is Obama to proceed in overturning a Supreme Court decision? Maybe increase the SCOTUS to eleven by decree and then appoint his people to the open slot? Didn’t FDR try that?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by MiddleCoaster
2012-09-27 09:49:37

2016 is earmarked for Jeb Bush! Just ask Karl Rove!

 
Comment by oxide
2012-09-27 11:17:55

No fat-cat insider would have signed Dodd-Frank.
No fat-cat insider would have appointed Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
No fat-cat insider would have signed the credit card bill into law.*
No fat-cat insider would have inserted the student loan provision into the health care law.
No fat-cat insider would have initiated S.3816, which would have cut tax breaks for offshorers (if the R’s in the Senate hadn’t filibustered it).
No fat-cat insider would have kept the Consumer Protection Bureau alive, or recess appointed Cordray. (I speculate that it was Obama’s idea to promote Elizabeth Warren to run for Senate.)

————
*yes DJ I know the CC companies used the delay to jack rates on grandfathered debt, but they can’t do it with new debt. Without that law, CC’s would still be pulling hijinks..

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 05:57:08

September 14, 2012 3:05 PM

THE RACE: Fed move lifts its political profile

The Federal Reserve under Chairman Ben Bernanke is trying to help the economy by doing something President Barack Obama and Congress can’t and which Mitt Romney opposes: electronically creating money, mostly out of thin air.

The Fed says it will “buy” $40 billion a month in mortgage bonds until stubbornly high unemployment eases substantially. The Fed’s new move is on top of its $85 billion-a-month purchases of Treasury securities under an existing program.

It hopes to hold down long-term interest rates long enough to stimulate more private-sector borrowing and hiring.

Democrats generally welcomed the step, although Obama’s camp won’t comment on Fed actions. Republicans called it further confirmation that Obama’s policies are failing.

“The president’s saying the economy’s making progress, coming back. Bernanke’s saying, ‘No, it’s not. I’ve got to print more money,’” Romney told ABC.

If elected, the Republican says he won’t reappoint Bernanke when his chairman’s term expires in January 2014.

The Fed has kept a key short-term rate — on loans between banks — near zero for over three years and pumped hundreds of billions of dollars into the financial system.

Comment by cactus
2012-09-27 08:25:36

The Fed says it will “buy” $40 billion a month in mortgage bonds until stubbornly high unemployment eases substantially.”

what happened last time there was a big demand for mortgages ?

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 19:53:50

and which Mitt Romney opposes

Unless he wins. Then it’ll be ‘good for business’.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 06:00:39

FOSTER: What Fed policy says about Obama economy
By J.D. Foster - Special to The Washington Times
Tuesday, September 25, 2012

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Has Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke gone all political on us? Very unlikely, though it may look that way. But he does seem deeply worried about the sliding U.S. economy under President Obama’s policies.

The Fed’s recent announcement of the third round of bond-buying stimulus known as Quantitative Easing 3 (“QE3”) was criticized by some as appearing to be intended to boost Mr. Obama’s re-election prospects. Nothing like a little Fed-driven stock market boomlet just before an election. Now that’s Chicago-style politics big time! Money pumping beats dead people voting every time.

The opposite is far more likely. Mr. Bernanke almost surely launched QE 3 despite grave reservations about the timing coinciding with the hyper political season. The Fed, and likely anyone who’s ever thought about monetary policy and monetary history, know that politicizing a central bank is a major no-no. Central bank independence of political pressures is essential to its credibility as an inflation fighter.

The Fed’s counterpart in Europe, the European Central Bank, knows this all too well. It regularly succumbs to the “Desperate Housewives” version of European policymaking in defense of a failed monetary union. Mr. Bernanke wouldn’t risk the appearance of playing politics if he thought he could prudently avoid it.

So if they are so deeply reticent to inject the Fed into a political environment, why did Mr. Bernanke & Co. launch QE3 now? The answer is plain enough: Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues are so worried about the sliding, stumbling, suffering U.S. economy they felt they couldn’t wait just two short months to get past the election.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 06:03:59

Posted: Sept. 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM
Alex Tokarev
Ben’s big bluff: The political implications

Last week I listed some of the possible economic perils of unleashing a new round of “quantitative easing.” The events have, as usual, a political aspect that needs attention. With just a few weeks left until the 2012 elections, the Fed’s mid-September monetary intervention makes short-term speculation more profitable. Rewarding such market behavior through record low interest rates could boost the Wall Street numbers long enough to create the illusion of a robust economic recovery. The White House relies on just such developments to persuade undecided voters from the so-called “battleground states” to favor the current administration.

QE3 may get Barack Obama reelected despite a pathetic economic record, making him the first incumbent in more than seven decades to win another term by prolonging a depression. It may help Ben Bernanke to be reappointed to the most powerful office in the world, Fed chairman. It may also earn a few CEOs obscenely large bonuses. What QE3 cannot do is create incentives for governments to live within their means and for households to save for their future. Neither can it inspire confidence in our entrepreneurs to invest the mountains of idle cash in productive activities that create conditions for long-term expansion.

The new phase of monetary easing (and note how the Fed avoids using the term “stimulus,” which has become a dirty word thanks to President Obama’s policies of the last four years) increases volatility in the housing and energy sectors with predictable economic and political repercussions. It creates additional traps and roadblocks for our economy in the years to come. It fuels the progressivist propaganda machine that portrays capitalism as an unstable system. It makes it much easier for future generations to swallow the “noble lie” that government interventions in the market are indispensable.

Comment by measton
2012-09-27 09:03:34

QE3 may get Barack Obama reelected despite a pathetic economic record, making him the first incumbent in more than seven decades to win another term by prolonging a depression.

Is he saying QE3 is prolonging the depression? You can make an arguement that it’s bad long term but not short term.

” What QE3 cannot do is create incentives for governments to live within their means and for households to save for their future. Neither can it inspire confidence in our entrepreneurs to invest the mountains of idle cash in productive activities”

This type of statement tells me everything about this writer. The reason entrepreneurs are not investing their cash is because they don’t have customers if they could make money they would invest it. If the gov lives within it’s means particularly in the short run there will be a lot fewer customers.

 
 
Comment by goon squad
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 06:08:03

Union-busting Wis. governor calls for return of NFL’s union refs after call seals Packers loss

(Mike Roemer/ Associated Press ) - Green Bay Packers fan Mike LePak holds a sign in front of Lambeau Field on Lombardi Avenue, Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2012, in Green Bay, Wis., in protest of a controversial call in the Packers 14-12 loss to the Seattle Seahawks, Monday night in Seattle. Just when it seemed that NFL coaches, players and fans couldn’t get any angrier, along came a fiasco that trumped any of the complaints from the weekend.

By Associated Press, Published: September 25

MADISON, Wis. — Nothing brings political enemies together in Wisconsin like the Green Bay Packers.

Following a controversial game-ending call by replacement referees that cost Green Bay a win over the Seattle Seahawks on Monday Night Football, Wisconsin officials from across the political divide united behind the Packers.

Even Gov. Scott Walker and a Democratic state senator who were bitter opponents in the 2011 battle over Wisconsin public workers’ collective bargaining rights found themselves on the same side Tuesday.

Walker, whose union-busting efforts have made him the darling of fiscal conservatives, posted a message on Twitter calling for the return of the NFL’s locked-out unionized officials.

“After catching a few hours of sleep, the (hash)Packers game is still just as painful. (hash)Returntherealrefs,” Walker tweeted early Tuesday.

Comment by Just Shoot Me
2012-09-27 07:45:55

It’s time to stick a few “THE PACKERS REALLY SUCK” bumper stickers on my car and then drive it to Green Bay.

 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2012-09-27 08:00:52

Walker’s target is/was PUBLIC unions, which even FDR was against.

Comment by Happy2bHeard
2012-09-27 10:39:15

Except police and fire unions. Those are the good guys, not the blood sucking bureaucrats and teachers. /snark off

Comment by aNYCdj
2012-09-27 11:47:27

I think there needs to be some collective bargaining in regards to employment and especially firing. It was always the indiscriminate abuses that led to unions….

Make it clear the days of lifetime employment is over, that firing will take 90 days not years and 19 hearings and appeals like in NYC.

That pension spiking is eliminated and disability claims will be very carefully monitored.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 10:00:49

Bears-Packers replay game, Nov. 5th, 1989

Don Majkowski’s 4th down, 4th quarter TD pass to Sterling Sharpe, originally penalized for the QB being over the line of scrimmage, is reviewed and reversed, giving the Packers a 14-13 win over the Bears.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HscrMo8Tk6Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Freaking Packer fans. They thought this blast “referee mistake” was just fine. Go Bears!

 
 
Comment by goon squad
Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 06:51:43

“Last week, the Obama Administration argued in front of the First Circuit Court of Appeals that there is no official evidence we are waging drone warfare in northern Pakistan.”

Prez, it’s time to stop “lying” and bring them all home. Seal the borders with the troops that we bring home.

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:16:05

Nothing less than the Hope And Change you’d expect from the Nobel Peace Prize President :)

 
Comment by Ross Peroxide
2012-09-27 07:19:27

no official evidence

What about the unofficial evidence?

 
Comment by rms
2012-09-27 07:22:15

“Prez, it’s time to stop “lying” and bring them all home. Seal the borders with the troops that we bring home.”

And what about Jesus’ return, and the safety of God’s children?

 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 07:30:26

Why put quotes around lying? Seems pretty clear it’s plain old lying.

Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 08:04:09

Cuz the title starts out

Living (and Dying) - - - Lying under the Drones

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 06:12:30

It seems like nobody in the MSM is capable of connecting the dots between the Fed’s indefinite QE and the pension crisis. If nearly every state is facing problems with their pension, doesn’t it seem plausible something bigger is in play than local budget issues? The situation brings to mind the days when there was no housing bubble, as “All Real Estate is Local.”

Wake up, people!

ECONOMY
September 21, 2012, 8:02 p.m. ET

Pension Crisis Looms Despite Cuts
Almost Every State Trims Public-Employee Benefits but $900 Billion Retirement Funding Gap Remains
By MICHAEL CORKERY

Almost every state in the U.S. has made cuts to its public-employee pensions, seeking to dig out from the economic downturn, but so far the measures have fallen well short of bridging a nearly $1 trillion funding gap.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 06:33:34

Hmmm…

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:25:41

Commie talk! Even if you didn’t say it we can tell you’re thinking it.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:34:41

:lol:

Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 10:36:19

Maybe turker is pondering that “long hot summer” that never materialized?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 12:39:46

I didn’t say THIS year did I? :lol:

But within the next 10 years? Very likely. (Americans are kind of slow)

 
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 12:42:43

I was really hoping for it. Admittedly wrong on that prediction but the squad stands behind its other prediction that within a few decades less than 25% of USA population will enjoy what was once considered a middle class (or better) lifestyle, 75% of this country will be working poor.

The future belongs to Lucky Ducky!

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Brett
2012-09-27 06:59:36

Colorado said the following about my housing choices and wanting to stay in downtown Austin, but I didn’t have time to respond.

——–
“2012-09-26 10:01:37
You see, he wants to live downtown and be cool. An apartment in the burbs is the epitome of uncool.

I see this same nonsense in downtown Denver. You pay a huge premium to be there.”
——–

There’s always somewhere cheaper to live than your current place. Why not move to Detroit? Houses are cheap!!!

Some of us are active and social people, yet intelligent. Being downtown provides convenient access to many features that fit MY lifestyle. I hate being home doing nothing; I hate watching tv, playing video games, cleaning or reading a book. I like to be out doing something whether is kayaking, working out, having a drink or just walking around.

And you know what? There’s nothing wrong with that. You are no better than someone hair because you live in a small town, suburb and $ave money.

At the end of the day, I don’t live to work; I work to live… And being downtown close to my friends and the activities I enjoy makes me HAPPY! And I stay well within my budget; zillow says I should be able to afford up to 380k with my salary, but I’m smarter than that.

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:35:08

That’s great how it’s all worked out so well for you and your Shiny Happy People neighbors paying $1700+ for one bedroom apartments in downtown Austin.

You mentioned “musicians” as one of Austin’ assets. The squad spent some time in Austin in 1997, with some actual musicians that don’t have trust funds, that could afford rentals for living and practice space on non-IT sector wages. Where do these “musicians” live now?

Comment by Brett
2012-09-27 07:55:23

The music scene is a great asset to the city because it brings a lot of tourism. Most of them are starving musicians and DO NOT live downtown. So, I don’t get your point.

Most people who live downtown work for high-tech companies , business owners or retirees , at least I’m my building.

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 08:31:42

I don’t get your point

When musicians can no longer afford to live in Austin how will they be an asset to the city? Will they just fly them in for SXSW? Or will they all be trust fund baby musicians like the Strokes?

Nashville still has a music “scene” because musicians who play music for a living can afford to live there.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-09-27 09:26:33

Nashville still has a music “scene” because musicians who play music for a living can afford to live there.

Same thing here in Tucson.

But, locally, I know very few full-time musicians. The old adage about not quitting your day job is very true.

 
Comment by Bub Diddley
2012-09-27 12:09:09

“When musicians can no longer afford to live in Austin how will they be an asset to the city? Will they just fly them in for SXSW? Or will they all be trust fund baby musicians like the Strokes?”

This has already pretty much happened. The reason Austin became a music mecca was because a.) there was a supportive scene with lots of clubs, lots of other bands, and people that actually went out to shows, and b.) cheap rent.

That is gone now. If you are a musician who didn’t already move here 20 years ago and buy a house, you are screwed. Even if you did, you probably can’t afford your property taxes anymore.

Austin’s music scene is coasting on fumes at this point. Hell, even Dallas and Houston have some cheap neighborhoods where a musician could afford to make rent. Austin doesn’t anymore.

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-09-27 14:07:15

Austin’s music scene is coasting on fumes at this point. Hell, even Dallas and Houston have some cheap neighborhoods where a musician could afford to make rent. Austin doesn’t anymore.

I’ve heard similar stories. And, once the musicians get priced out of one town, they move on.

BTW, my take on the Tucson music scene goes like this: Lively and diverse. But, truth be told, a lot of our leading locals would be lucky to be session musicians in places like LA or NYC. Or, for that matter, Nashville.

 
Comment by Freak80
2012-09-27 14:08:15

“Austin’s music scene is coasting on fumes at this point.”

Given the desperado style posts Brett is posting, It seems Austin itself is coasting on fumes.

If I had any stake in Austin, I’d be exiting in a big hurry.

Spread the word.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2012-09-27 15:17:37

But, truth be told, a lot of our leading locals would be lucky to be session musicians in places like LA or NYC. Or, for that matter, Nashville.

I think the session musicians are usually better than the bands/stars. They’re just not as purty.

 
 
 
 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 08:28:34

What’s the old saying? “Don’t ask the question if you might not like the answer.”

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 08:51:37

“zillow says I should be able to afford up to 380k…”

Yes, empowerment.

The question isn’t whether you should live the way to do, where you do. The question is whether you should have a couple hundred grand in debt to live where you do, or not. Tough choice.

Mortgage is like marriage, it’s hard to describe the actual impact to someone who hasn’t already been there.

Why anyone would buy an apartment has always been beyond me.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:11:17

“Why anyone would buy an apartment has always been beyond me.”

Same here.

 
Comment by Brett
2012-09-27 09:40:52

Why would anyone want to waste time maintaining at home? It’s beyond me
Why would anyone want to be in the middle of nowhere and have to drive to get to places? It’s beyond me

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 10:18:45

If it is the downtown Austin lifestyle package that you desire, you are free to pay for it. And pay and pay and pay.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Brett
2012-09-27 10:42:48

And I have for 6 years, and I’m happy.
I am willing to pay the premium, and the renting vs buying dilemma is always present.

 
Comment by Pete
2012-09-27 13:26:33

“I am willing to pay the premium, and the renting vs buying dilemma is always present.”

I started a response yesterday but didn’t post it. And my opinion has changed, so here goes. Speaking as a recent buyer, based on the 1900/mo PITI vs. your 1700 rent, I was going to say “don’t!” Especially since it’s a condo, as I recall. For me, the 400/mo cusion I get (our PITI 400 less than rent) is what allows for maintenance costs within my comfort zone. You’ll have no such luxury. No matter. If you’re ‘willing’ to pay the premium, really need to be downtown and really want the hedge against rising rent, go for it. Just keep in mind that property tax and HOA can rise, just like rent. I don’t know Texas’ property tax scheme.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 14:48:02

I don’t know Texas’ property tax scheme.

Property tax is high in the Lone Star state. I’ll bet those 300K condos in downtown Austin pay 6K per year.

 
Comment by oxide
2012-09-27 18:53:30

I agree with Pete. The rent vs. buy equation for you favors renting, but not by that much. If you keep your job, if the house values don’t fall very much, and if your neighbors don’t go bankrupt and make you pay repairs, then you’re probably ok.

Is it a 2-bed condo? If you, I suppose you could always rent out the room and/or find a willing lady.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by rms
2012-09-27 07:09:36

“The New Price of American Politics” The Atlantic

Not since the Gilded Age has our politics been opened so wide to corporate contributions and donations from secret sources. And the new era of big money has just begun. Jim Bopp, its intellectual architect, believes this is a good thing—the more money, the better, he says. Reformers (and most voters) disagree. Their battle is over the most-basic ideas of our democracy; at stake—according to both sides—is either the revitalization of politics, or its final capture by the powerful.

By James Bennet

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/10/the/309086/

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:43:43

There are so many parallels and attempts to take us back to the 19th century these days that it’s pretty scary.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 07:47:56

The Republicans want to take this country back — to the Gilded Age.

Comment by 2banana
2012-09-27 07:59:16

The top 11/15 of ALL TIME CONTRIBUTORS are UNIONS.

Facts? Data? Who needs that when you have your “emotions” to guide you.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 08:31:00

Comment by Housing Wizard
2012-09-27 07:13:13

From Natural News ,Sept 27,staff writer Ellen A. Hutt .

“Nearly Every Major Drug Company Convicted Of Criminal Behavior In Three Years ,11 Billion sweep .

(posted below)

 
Comment by Neuromance
2012-09-27 08:32:54

I’m less wrapped around the axle about Citizens United because of this factoid. Unions are organizations representing large groups of people. Their political contributions are made by a small group of people in the leadership. The same applies to corporations.

I don’t see how we can stop people from buying advertising time on the airwaves or in print without undermining the first amendment.

HOWEVER - we have got to break the connection between politicians and contributors. If there is so much of a hint that a politician is, in any form, receiving money from a contributor - either to a PAC that he controls, or is run by the national party apparatus, or via some other shenanigan, there should be instant and ferocious criminal sanctions.

We do currently have the government of the highest bidder, by the highest bidder, for the highest bidder. And that’s because politicians directly get so much money. It’s de facto legalized bribery. If people want to run ads for or against politicians, that should not be stopped. But politicians getting money from contributors - that must come to an end. That’s an extremely corrosive influence on our political system.

Politicians should be responsive to voters. Politicians are opportunistic and narcissistic for the most part. They’re to be trusted as much as a bank robber is to be trusted. Politicians can be influenced with the threat of running ads for or against politicians, but not giving them money. And there cannot be a revolving door between DC and the people that are regulated.

Dick Durbin put it best - when he gets back to the hotel after a long day and there are a hundred voice mails, he’s going to respond to the biggest contributors first.

That’s gotta stop.

 
Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 10:58:26

Here’s another view of the whole Citizen’s United Sooper Dooper PAC debacle:

At some point (like maybe this coming month) the Great American Public is going to be SO FREAKING SICK of Presidential ad campaigns, they will tune them out entirely, withdraw from the process, and refuse to even vote. And afterwards, campaign managers will take a look at the $150,000/voter it’s costing them NOT to get out the vote and decide that media ad campaigns are not a cost effective way to push their candidate anymore.

Then big Super Secret Pac donors will look at the figures vis-a-vis the national ennui and come to the same conclusion; it’s just not a good use of their money. Better to bribe our elected representatives directly after the elections are over.

In the meantime, political marketing is a huge seasonal business directly employing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. Why, it’s almost as big as Christmas! Let us all look at it as job creation — and be merry.

 
Comment by rms
2012-09-27 11:35:54

“HOWEVER - we have got to break the connection between politicians and contributors. If there is so much of a hint that a politician is, in any form, receiving money from a contributor - either to a PAC that he controls, or is run by the national party apparatus, or via some other shenanigan, there should be instant and ferocious criminal sanctions.”

The lobbying could be eliminated completely, and the corporations would adapt since being in business is all about adapting. They would survive the loss of direct influence and thrive.

Israel on the other hand depends entirely on lobbying for their survival; they don’t have the means to adapt to a world without the economic, military and political backing of the United States. You think they want an end to lobbying? AIPAC is both an admired and feared lobbying machine.

Thus solving the lobbying problem means first solving the Palestinian problem, IMHO.

 
 
Comment by Lucifer
2012-09-27 08:07:54

People willingly follow me because I lead them where they want to go.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Lip
2012-09-27 08:41:17

Ex, is that you?

 
Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 09:06:39

People willingly follow me because I lead them where they want to go.

The willingly follow you because they are weak in character and morals. But there are those who are willing to stand up and be counted against you. There can be no evil without the existence of good…

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:13:56

Poverty and hunger can and will change your mind about almost anything.

Starving beats morals every time.

 
Comment by Lucifer
2012-09-27 09:14:44

“But there are those who are willing to stand up and be counted against you.”

Yeah? Then where are they?

Bring them on. Both of them.

 
Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 13:51:42

And I shall offer them high office and watch them cave….

 
Comment by exeter
2012-09-27 14:17:35

“Ex, is that you?”

Nope.

But isn’t it strange that you would conflate me.

Pimping political parties and candidates is different than pimping depreciating assets at grossly inflated prices in what way?

I pimp neither. You on the other hand….

 
 
Comment by michael
2012-09-27 08:12:12

where do the democrats want to take the country?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 09:05:46

Not relevant, Alibaba and his band of thieves will take you where they find you.

 
Comment by Housing Is Cratering
2012-09-27 18:43:29

Where? Directly to hell. Right where the other party will take us.

Had enough?

 
 
 
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 07:48:37

We loved reading Charles Dickens so much we can’t wait to live it :)

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:16:19

Thank you suh. May I have anutha?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by michael
2012-09-27 11:22:05

“a shilling for a lump of shit please”

 
Comment by polly
2012-09-27 14:50:13

At least David Copperfield could find a job that covered rent and food.

“Labels on bottles….”

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 17:43:36

and love.

 
 
 
Comment by MiddleCoaster
2012-09-27 09:52:55

19th century? More like the 14th, IMO.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 12:42:17

…at the rate we’re going…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 12:49:02

The 14th century wasn’t all bad. After the bubonic plague killed 1/3 of Europe there was actual wage inflation for Ye Olde Lucky Duckies.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2012-09-27 07:13:13

From Natural News ,Sept 27,staff writer Ellen A. Hutt .

“Nearly Every Major Drug Company Convicted Of Criminal Behavior In
Three Years ,11 Billion sweep .

From the article ;

“…Two new papers published in New England Journel of Medicine (NEJM)suggest that drug industry corruption is so pervasive nowadays
that even the most rigorously conducted studies and trials are not taken seriously by many doctors . ”

” Over the past three years ,nearly every major drug company on the planet has been convicted of some kind of criminal behavor ,whether
it is fudging drug safety data; or conducting fraudulent clinical trials.
Collectively ,these companies have been forced to pay roughly 11 billion in fines for theses and other crimes, which have apparently become a normal part of their corporate operating procedure .”

Big Pharmas culture of corruption reminds me of the real estate lending fraud that caused such World wide financial destruction .
Because over 4 billion prescriptions are written yearly and this makes up a large part of the medical system these days ,this is a major issue
regarding the absurd cost of medical care that would have this much corruption . Big Pharma Companies have been found to be bribing doctors to write more and more prescriptions ,including off label use
which isn’t even approved by the FDA .

Because you have 3 major monopolies tied into the medical system,
being the AMA ,the Insurance Industry and the Pharma Industry ,one has to wonder how much of this is really good or needed medical care . The stats keep rising on preventable or premature medical deaths per year ,whereby some stats are at 700 thousand a year .making medical care a major cause of death .

And the people are set up to pay the increasing costs of this system
that has become questionable in that corrupted and criminal Big Corporations are cashing in by the trillions on this Big Pharma medical approach . Not only are the costs becoming a National burden , this form of Corporation greed profit motive can kill you .

This is one of the areas that needs a major overhaul because in spite of being fined ,no CEO of big Pharma has gone to jail ,and the fines are peanuts compared to the profit margins from deadly and damaging drugs ,even if they have to take them off the market eventually .

It is my contention that the rise of Big Monopoly Corporations and their increasing power over” close their eyes” Regulatory agencies and Politicians ,coupled with de-regulation, has created a culture of
corruption that is spaning to many areas ,including food production .
Corruption everywhere ,at the expense of the people .

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 07:45:34

Poetic justice: everyone who thinks corporations are over-regulated becomes their victim.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 08:06:56

But I thought savvy consumers would weed out the crooks. At least that’s what they told me would happen at Biz School.

Comment by Ross Peroxide
2012-09-27 08:17:37

But I thought savvy consumers would weed out the crooks

Doctors are the crooks.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 13:56:01

Doctors also brought these lawsuits against Big Pharma, RP.

No one is forcing you to buy or take these medications are they?

 
 
Comment by Lucifer
2012-09-27 08:18:08

Savvy consumers will boycott the crooks so it up to the crooks to fool the less-than-savvy, which is a talent they have perfected.

It’s not as if there are a shortage of the less-than-savvy.

“If God did not want them to be sheered then He would not have made them sheep.” - Calderas

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 09:09:22

How could corporations be over-regulated when they get to write the regulations and hire the regulators?

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:18:41

Ah! Same with other industries as well.

How, indeed.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by redrum
2012-09-27 12:38:08

Seems that (over) regulation of an industry is most often used to raise the barriers to entry - incredibly hard to start up a new business in said industry. It add costs (to, of course, be passed along to customers) for the entrenched incumbents, but that’s a small price to pay for their share of the monopoly thus established.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2012-09-27 08:01:57

So when you get sick - don’t take any drugs newer than 1985.

Problem solved.

It is ironic that nearly 80% of ALL new drugs are developed in America.

Why is that?

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 08:33:52

Because we allow questionable drugs with serious side effects to BE made, sold through price rigging and collusion to manipulate the market, that’s why.

God I love a good straight line!

Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 09:10:50

Drugs have side effects. If you don’t like the side-effects, don’t take the drugs. Why do you think it’s the government’s responsibility to keep you healthy? Why do you think it is the government’s responsibility to decide what medicines you can or can’t take to address your ailments?

Socialists are weak because they willingly give up responsibility for their own welfare to the all-powerful government. Where’s the personal responsibility?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:23:44

Why is it my personal responsibility to be a chemistry drug expert, when I’m too busy being an engineering/lawyer/doctor/insurance/automobile/computer/resume writing/programmer/clothing/stock market/RE/labor law/political/criminal/civic fees/credit card/loan/genetically modified food/marketing/advertising… expert?

Where is THEIR personal responsibility? Life is not a damn one way street for corporations to do as they damn well please.

 
Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 10:10:53

Life is not a damn one way street for corporations to do as they damn well please.

I don’t disagree with that statement. It’s all in the execution. Of course, it would help if more corporations and executives actually followed a moral code…

 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 09:21:02

Not to mention food mutations!

Comment by Housing Wizard
2012-09-27 16:32:36

Corporations aren’t going to follow a moral code ,and they have become increasingly more skilled at taking advantage
of the piss poor regulatory agencies we have that expect them to regulate themselves.

With the Banks we kept finding out that they resorted to more and more “foul play” ,with no moral code . The fact that they are to big to fail apparently makes them immune to Justice ,and just pass the bail outs for their greed to the people .

Now think about one of the biggest industries in the World ,and that is medcial care ,and don’t be shocked and dismayed that the profit motive might of exceeded the “DO NO HARM ” motto . This is especially true when you think about how much was paid by Medicare /Medical ,a major cash cow .

I have researched a lot of the side effects of major drugs ,but i don’t expect that the average person is going to have the time or desire to do that ,and people would like to just trust
the system ,especially when they are sick .

As long as you have Corporations that think that their fines
will be less than their excessive profit margins for any damage they do if they get busted ,than they will continue to do what they do .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2012-09-27 17:20:21

Apparently Russia is banning the GMO foods ( based on recent tests ) ,yet the big Monopoly food and seed companies don’t
want to lable it in the USA .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 09:15:51

What they do now is run studies in foreign countries or multiple countries to make enforcement more difficult. Many countries don’t have laws about bribery or MD’s are more deperate for cash and have lower standards.

The other thing you find is that the companies and not the doctors are desigining the trials in wasy that increase the chances that their drug looks good.

Again is capitalism with a few large giants controlling everything the best system?

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:26:08

Of course it is you damn socialist commie!

This country was founded for corporations! Says so right in the Constitution!

 
Comment by polly
2012-09-27 14:54:23

The companies run many trials and only publish the ones that reflect the results they like. It doesn’t even need to be actual falsification of results. Make the trials small enough and you will find a few where the results look OK no matter how ineffective the product it.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2012-09-27 15:46:39

Because we all pay for health insurance ,and everyone complains about the high cost ,I would think that people would want a crack down on anything that is corrupt ,or not really effective ,or worse ,can kill you . It’s not a simple issue of just not taking drugs if you don’t like them ,your paying for a health system that other people taking drugs that might be bad cost you in higher costs for the total system .

We all know that the USA cost 50% more than other western medicine systems and this drug corruption might be part of the problem . The Pharma business is one of the biggest in the World .Medicare pays for a lot of these drugs and people
are bitching and moaning about the health care costs .

For a good portion of my life people didn’t go on this number of drugs . There is something very wrong with younger and younger people going on long term drugs also . I think its a major issue regarding health care costs and if all this drug pushing is more of a profit motive ,than the people end up being the victims of one more monopoly that could care less about doing no harm . Recent discovery of the fraud from
Pharma Companies is not acceptable ,it just isn’t .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 07:44:17

Home prices may not return to peak until 2023

By Les Christie | CNNMoney.com – Wed, Sep 26, 2012 6:28 AM EDT..

Home prices are showing signs of life, but have a long way to go to make up for losses from the housing bust.

U.S. home prices dropped by a third from the start of 2007 to the start of 2012, according to Fiserv, an analytics firm.

Fiserv forecasts prices will bounce back an average of 3.7% a year for the next five years — a rate that would still leave prices 20% below the peak. At that forecasted growth rate, the national average high of $238,000 would not be hit again until 2023.

It could take even longer in some areas. “In some hard-hit markets, prices could take decades to recover,” said Fiserv economist David Stiff.

Among those facing a long haul: Arizona, California, Florida and Nevada, the states most caught up in the speculative feeding frenzy of the mid-2000s.

In California, for example, home prices should grow a little faster than the national average. Fiserv projects 4.4% gains during the next five years. But the hole is also deeper, with prices having fallen nearly 46% from early 2007 to early 2012. Break even won’t come until after 2026.

Homeowners in Nevada may have to wait the longest to make up lost ground. Home prices in the state plunged nearly 60%, and Fiserv projects annual gains of just 2.3%. It would take some 40 years at that pace to get back to 2007 levels.

Real estate, of course, is local, and there are many housing markets that never bubbled during the boom. In those places, buyers who bought in 2007 are much more likely to be in the money today. In South Dakota, Texas and West Virginia, prices are already slightly higher than they were five years ago.

In North Dakota, a housing shortage driven by the oil boom has sent prices soaring 17.7% over the past five years.

Iowa, Oklahoma and Nebraska, are nearly back to peak, as are Kentucky, Vermont and Alaska. These were all housing markets that recorded only mild price increases during the boom.

View this article on CNNMoney

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/home-prices-may-not-return-102600405.html -

“Break even won’t come until after 2026.”

In The Year 2525 lyrics

In the year 2525
If HARP is still alive
If Deadbeats can survive
They may find

In the year 3535
Ain’t gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies
Everything you think, do, and say
Is in a workout plan you just got today

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FgSmdfRUus - 158k -

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 08:35:10

In other news, wages will still have not kept up with inflation.

 
 
Comment by cactus
2012-09-27 08:11:16

The Fed and ECB have managed to restore calm to financial markets and lower borrowing costs for governments across the G7 and European periphery. The boss of Bond giant Pimco told CNBC on Wednesday that he is hoovering up the very same debt the Fed and ECB plan to buy as part of their respective unconventional programs and expects to make a healthy return.

“We continue to anticipate what the Fed is buying,” said Bill Gross on CNBC’s Street Signs “They’ve told us they will buy $40 billion to $70 billion of agency mortgages every month until the cows come home. It pays to own these mortgages even though they’re overvalued.”

Pimco is also looking to get ahead of any ECB move to buy Spanish and Italian debt. “They told us they are going to buy Spanish and Italian 1- to 3-year debt should those countries apply for a rescue,” Gross said.

 
Comment by 2banana
2012-09-27 08:12:17

Hope and Change!

Four more years!

FORWARD!

and we can always blame bush…

————————-

More Proof The U.S. Economy Is Falling Apart
Forbes | 9/27/2012 | Abram Brown

A series of new economic figures this morning cast fresh gloom on the health of the U.S. economy.

The economy grew much less than expected in the second quarter, new Labor Department estimates show. Second quarter GDP was revised lower to 1.3% from an earlier 1.7%. (Economists believed that GDP would be revised lower to 1.6%.) Declining consumer spending and business investment combined to weigh mightily on economic activity.

More troubling still is what this suggests about the third quarter. Little has surfaced to point to a pick-up, meaning that it’s unlikely the economy will grow much more than before. In short, today’s data sends “a notable red flag for U.S. growth,” says Action Economics‘ Michael Englund.

U.S. economic growth turned even more anemic after the first quarter, when GDP grew by 2%. Manufacturing, a key driver of the economy earlier in the recession, has cooled, the result of an uncertain U.S. political outlook and slowed global demand.

What’s more, durable goods orders, a measure of factory activity, plunged last month in the largest drop in more than three years, data released by the Commerce Department this morning shows. Orders fell 13.9%. The last time that factories slowed this much: January 2009, when the economy was in the depths of the recession.

This data point also stymied economists, who predicted that orders would fall 5%.

Comment by Ross Peroxide
2012-09-27 08:22:51

Stocks are up.

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 08:48:15

The wait time at Atlanta area Applebee’s are up.

 
 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 08:25:18

Romer admits stimulus failed

By Abby Wisse Schachter
Posted: 10:03 AM, September 2, 2010

Dr. Christina Romer is leaving the Obama administration, and in her final speech she admits that the stimulus did not work to revivie the economy as she had hoped and as President Obama promised. “The United States still faces a substantial shortfall in aggregate demand… this shortfall in demand, rather than structural changes in the composition of our output… is the fundamental cause of our continued high unemployment,” Romer told the crowd at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

‘Course she argues that the only thing to be done is another round of stimulus to fix the problem, really. Happily, she’s outta there and as she pointed out later in her remarks, the political “will” to spend more may just not exist right now. Well, thank God for small favors.

http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/capitol/romer_admits_stimulus_failed_QdyUlKNVSvHO1PI7dULZIO - 69k -

Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 09:27:15

“the political “will” to spend more may just not exist right now…”

Obviously then we are stimulating the wrong crowd. We ought to stimulate the legislators. Imagine what would happen to our GDP if they lose the “will”.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 10:09:46

Romer admits stimulus failed

That headline is a flat-out lie. Romer never “admitted” any such thing in that speech. If anything she’s saying the stimulus was not large enough.

Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 10:18:21

Headlines often do not match content. It made you look though.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 16:52:51

“That headline is a flat-out lie. Romer never “admitted” any such thing in that speech.”

She should have. Sooooooolyndra :)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2012-09-27 21:04:12

That headline is a flat-out lie.

Well, it is the NY Post. About half a step above the Washington Times. Anyone who links to or reads either has already shown questionable judgement.

Although I’m sure Jethro got it from Drudge.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 08:28:43

“Stocks are up.”

Suck ‘em in, shake ‘em out.

Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 08:44:59

Sucking them in or shaking them out - there is a commission to be had in either direction. Oh, and then there’s the spread between bid and ask.

The only thing this easy-money-machine needs are players, something the MSM is able to entice millions of sheeple to become.

The MSM supplies the “news”, then feeds this news to the sheeple, and the sheeple then perform.

Pavlov.

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 08:34:00

19 PERCENT OF FAMILIES IN DEBT FOR COLLEGE
Enrollment, tuition increases drive up student loan borrowing
By HOPE YEN • ASSOCIATED PRESS
12:01 a.m., Sept. 27, 2012
Updated 4:01 p.m. , Sept. 26, 2012

With college enrollment growing, student debt has stretched to a record number of U.S. households — nearly 1 in 5 — with the biggest burdens falling on the young and poor.

The analysis by the Pew Research Center found that 22.4 million households, or 19 percent, had college debt in 2010. That is double the share in 1989, and up from 15 percent in 2007, just before the recession — representing the biggest three-year increase in student debt in more than two decades.

The increase was driven by higher tuition costs as well as rising college enrollment during the economic downturn. The biggest jumps occurred in households at the two extremes of the income distribution. More well-off families are digging deeper into their pockets to pay for costly private colleges, while lower-income people in search of higher-wage jobs are enrolling in community colleges, public universities and other schools as a way to boost their résumés.

Because of the sluggish economy, fewer college students than before are able to settle into full-time careers immediately upon graduation, contributing to a jump in debt among lower-income households as the young adults take on part-time jobs or attend graduate school, according to Pew.

As a share of household income, the debt burden was the greatest for the poorest 20 percent of households, or those making less than $21,044. In all, 40 percent of U.S. households headed by someone younger than age 35 owed college debt, the highest share of any age group.

“Comparing the debt to their economic resources, the lowest-income fifth of households are the ones experiencing the greatest stresses,” said Richard Fry, a senior economist at Pew who analyzed the numbers.

Noting that college enrollment has continued to climb since 2010, Fry added: “Until college enrollment peaks, I would not expect the amount of outstanding student debt to level off.”

Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 08:50:53

Maybe Rick Santorum was right about one thing.

And the coastal elitist bedwetter libtard media hated him for saying that.

 
Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 09:01:52

“Comparing the debt to their economic resources, the lowest-income fifth of households are the ones experiencing the greatest stresses.”

Not a big surprise. Take a look at the number of “higher-education” ads on daytime TV and pay close attention to what they are saying.

The shearing and the skinning, it just goes on and on.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 09:58:17

What percentage of college students attend the diploma mills they advertise on daytime TV?

There are a few in Neighboring Fort Collins, but they are dwarfed in size by the local CC and CSU.

Comment by Combotechie
2012-09-27 10:21:21

Pay attention:

“… while lower income people in search of higher-paying jobs are enrolling in community colleges, public universities and other schools as a way to boost their resumes.”

“other schools” = diploma mills. Visit daytime TV and you will be exposed to dozens of diploma-mill ads.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 11:28:30

There are diploma mills for high school and medical school, too. And they’re officially referred to as “private schools” now. Thanks to deregulation, credentials mean nothing anymore.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2012-09-27 11:46:57

I don’t think that diploma mills should be eligible for Federal Financial Aid

 
Comment by I blame progressives
2012-09-27 14:37:45

“And they’re officially referred to as “private schools” now. Thanks to deregulation, credentials mean nothing anymore.”

Yeah, we can’t have one mind escape the indoctrination machine.

 
Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 19:41:02

When your blustering leads to your first infarct, nicky, I’m sure you’ll do just fine with that “get-your-degree-in-your-spare-time” cardiologist.

Higher education doesn’t teach one what to think; it teaches one HOW to think. You out yourself with every post.

 
Comment by I blame progressives
2012-09-27 21:54:56

Haha, very colorful…judging by the bile in your response, I would imagine you will get there before I do.

The only outing being done by my posts is of progressives and their ilk.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Neuromance
2012-09-27 08:36:00

(Data links below) So, if I’m reading this correctly, new house sales were 31,000 in August 2012. It last reached that level around March-August 2009. Before that, those numbers were seen back in March-July 1982.

NAR provides the numbers for the Commerce department. And NAR is constantly playing with the numbers, as some research on their site indicates. I don’t know why Commerce does this as NAR is a sales organization first and foremost. They’re not going to say or do anything that’s going to hinder their agenda. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, it’s just a description of reality.

Anyway, NAR says annual existing house sales are at 4.8 million, the level last seen in 2002 and 2007 (both sides of the bubble plateau). Can it be true that existing house sales are back into bubble territory, yet new house sales are at levels which existed in a recession 30 years ago? NAR says house prices are back in bubble territory as well.

So - the bubble was driven by bad lending (driven by lenders not retaining repayment risk) resulting in toxic mortgages. Now, the government and The Bernank are putting the full firepower of the Fed behind trying to get prices and volumes up to those toxic-mortgage-driven bubble levels.

Your tax dollars at work. Actually, more like you children’s, grandchildren’s and great grandchildren’s tax dollar at work.

Data sources:

Existing house sales up to 2010, from commerce.gov/census.gov (data provided by NAR):
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0977.pdf

New house sales, 1963 - August 2012, from census.gov:
http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/pdf/soldreg.pdf

Existing house sales, 2009 to 2012, from NAR:
http://www.realtor.org/news-releases/2012/09/august-existing-home-sales-and-prices-rise

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 08:36:29

432,000 MAY COLLECT IN MORTGAGE SETTLEMENT
Relief process to start for Californians who lost homes to foreclosure
Written by
Lily Leung12:01 a.m., Sept. 27, 2012
Updated 6:10 p.m. , Sept. 26, 2012

More than 432,000 Californians who lost their homes to foreclosure may get money through a historic mortgage settlement between 49 states and major banks, according to the state Attorney General’s Office.

Eligible borrowers may receive at least $840, but the exact amount depends on how many people submit claims, Nick Pacilio, a spokesman for the AG’s office, said Tuesday. The higher the number, the smaller the claim amount will be.

Consumers who receive letters from the Attorney General’s Office were chosen because their homes were foreclosed upon between Jan. 1, 2008, and Dec. 31, 2011, and because they had home loans serviced by the banks named in the $25 billion mortgage settlement. They are Ally/GMAC, Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo.

The deal, approved in court five months ago, required those lenders to provide relief to homeowners in the form of principal reductions, loan refinances, restitution and short sales. The relief was the answer to allegations that mortgage servicers approved loan documents without proper review, abuse also known as robo-signing.

Borrowers should expect to receive packets by mail starting this week and through Oct. 12. Packets include a claim form that should be filled out and details about the settlement.

The Attorney General’s Office has urged borrowers to fill out the claim form and return it by Jan. 18, either by mail or at nationalmortgagesettlement.com.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 08:39:21

Dot com mania 2.0, we barely knew thee!

SMALL BUSINESS
Updated September 27, 2012, 11:34 a.m. ET

Internet Funding Boom Ends as Fast as It Began
By PUI-WING TAM And AMIR EFRATI

The falling stock prices of Facebook Inc., Zynga Inc. and Groupon Inc. are causing some investors to pull back from Web start-ups.

Jeff Tangney recently experienced the change firsthand. Mr. Tangney, chief executive of Doximity Inc., a social network for doctors, said venture capitalists clamored to invest in his San Mateo, Calif., start-up earlier this year. At the time, the investors “encouraged focus on user engagement, not revenue,” he said.

But when Mr. Tangney hit the fundraising trail last month with the goal of amassing $20 million, he got a different reception from investors. By then, Facebook had held its botched initial public offering and its share price—along with those of Zynga’s and Groupon’s—was quickly dropping.

In the aftermath, investor questions turned “a complete 180 degrees” and they wanted to know how Doximity would make money, said the entrepreneur.

This month, Mr. Tangney disclosed Doximity’s new financing. But instead of snagging $20 million, he got $17 million and his company was valued 30% lower than what he anticipated. Only half the number of venture firms that had made verbal offers to Doximity earlier in the year ended up making formal offers last month, he added.

“I underestimated how tough this round would be,” said Mr. Tangney. “In hindsight, I should have raised earlier in the year because that’s when the market was hot.”

Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 09:14:04

Lol. The CEO of a medical social media site is complaining because he received $17 million instead of $20 million, and at 30% worse terms than he had expected? Cry me a river… the boom for startups that have a solid revenue model and can execute is still there.

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-09-27 09:28:15

There’s a reason why it’s called social media and not business media.

Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 10:11:55

Exactly. The fact he still completed another round of funding shows the bubble still exists.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-09-27 08:46:50

Is Megabank, Inc legally permitted to redline areas which had the biggest housing bust?

BUSINESS
Updated September 26, 2012, 7:16 p.m. ET

Need a Loan? Where Do You Live?

Banks Boost Consumer Lending in Smaller Cities That Skirted Mortgage Crisis, but Big Cities Trail
By DAN FITZPATRICK

The long-awaited recovery in bank lending to consumers is well under way in some smaller U.S. cities but remains depressed in large metropolitan areas on the East and West coasts, according to an analysis of data by The Wall Street Journal.

The geographic divergence in new credit highlights the uneven recovery in different parts of the U.S. In some smaller population centers across the Great Plains and Midwest that rely on energy, food processing and manufacturing industries, banks are taking as much risk as they did precrisis.

But new lending still is trailing in larger coastal areas that were dominated by construction and finance.

In Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the 177th-largest metropolitan area in the U.S., banks made 11% more new consumer loans in 2011 than they did at the peak of the U.S. housing boom in 2006, data from Equifax Inc. and Moody’s Analytics show. The amount of new loans in the fourth quarter alone was 52% higher than the same period in 2006.

The jump in Cedar Rapids was the largest among roughly 200 U.S. metropolitan areas cataloged by Equifax and Moody’s, a population mass that comprises more than 80% of all U.S. borrowers.

The largest drops were in cities scattered across California and Florida, the states hardest hit by the U.S. housing bust. New lending in Merced, Calif., which experienced one of the worst housing collapses in the U.S., ended last year 81% below the peak in 2006. The three largest U.S. cities—New York, Chicago and Los Angeles—experienced decreases of 38%, 44% and 55%, respectively.

All told, U.S. consumer-loan originations were down 40% in 2011 compared with 2006, the data show.

“A lot of these places that were not hit hard that tend to be concentrated in the Midwest are recovering more quickly,” said Mike Shires, an associate professor at Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy who specializes in economic development and local finance. “The urban areas will have to follow for us to feel like it’s a true economic recovery.”

U.S. banks took flak during the financial crisis for clamping down on lending to conserve capital as a cushion against mounting loan losses. Loan demand also fell as companies shelved expansion plans and consumers trimmed spending. That combination made it harder for the U.S. economy to rebound.

Now, loan portfolios at U.S. banks are growing and loan demand is returning, but it is largely in the form of new lending to small and midsize businesses. Such loans were up 17% in the second quarter of 2012 compared with the same year-ago period, according to banks surveyed by Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. Consumer loans, on the other hand, were down 0.9% in the second quarter compared with the same period last year, according to KBW.

The cities in the middle section of the U.S. that experienced the largest increases in consumer lending share several characteristics. They all have low jobless rates, stable employers and real-estate markets that avoided speculative bubbles—leaving them with stronger household credit conditions. These include the college towns and state capitals of Madison, Wis., and Lincoln, Neb., as well as the agricultural centers of Davenport, Iowa, and Omaha, Neb.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 09:28:07

Why not? They’ve proven they can do anything else they damn well please.

Except in commie Europe.

 
 
 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 10:10:28

In January 1999, a trust set up by Mitt Romney for his children and grandchildren reaped a 1,000 percent return on the sale of shares in Internet advertising firm DoubleClick Inc.

If Romney had given the cash directly, he could have owed a gift tax at a rate as high as 55 percent. He avoided gift and estate taxes by using a type of generation-skipping trust known to tax planners by the nickname: “I Dig It.”

The sale of DoubleClick shares received before the company went public, detailed in previously unreported securities filings reviewed by Bloomberg News, sheds new light on Romney’s estate planning — the art of leaving assets for heirs while avoiding taxes.

So his effective tax rate is 13%
But he has over 100,000,000 million in a trust that he uses to dodge taxes so that get’s him down to around 10 cents on every dollar
But he has 100,000,000 in an IRA which he doesn’t pay income tax on so that get’s him down to around 7 cents on every dollar.
But then he has had or continues to have off shore accounts that don’t report income or he hides assets at BAIN that does this for him.
So that get’s him down to an effective tax rate of around 5 cents on every dollar.

The poor in my state pay more than this in sales taxes.

How anyone can stomache this is beyond me.

 
Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 10:15:11

How anyone can stomache this is beyond me.

You blame the man for taking advantage of legal ways to minimize taxes? Try blaming the politicians that pass these inane tax laws…

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 10:28:25

You blame the man for taking advantage of legal ways to minimize taxes?

How do we know they were all legal ways? We don’t. He’s only shown 2 returns. Many think he won’t show more because he did some things illegally and then took advantage of the tax amnesty window for tax crooks and general slime-balls.

I was just thinking that Brazilians pronounce things funnily. They don’t end names in consonants so they add a vowel whether you want one or not. They also add syllables that aren’t there and pronounce T’s as chee’s and R’s as H’s. rock ‘n’ roll = hock ‘n’ hole
and Mitt Romney = Mi-chee Hom-a-nee

Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 12:13:02

You know who has Romney’s tax returns?

The friggin’ IRS.

It’s not like his returns are in some black box at the bottom of the ocean.

Don’t you think that if there was something illegal about his returns the IRS under the current administration would be auditing?

Wow. Talk about a witch-hunt.

The reason for wanting them released is not to make sure they were done legally, it is to try to score political points/dig up dirt.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 12:45:15

How do we know if they are or aren’t?

IRS actions and personal information are very confidential.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 13:15:46

Audits are all confidential, however:

Tax Liens (if the person is found to have owed money) are public record, as are suits brought in tax court by the IRS.

So we know that if Romney has been audited, he was either a) found to have been clean, or b) fixed the problem quietly.

 
 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 13:33:44

“Mitt Romney = Mi-chee Hom-a-nee”

How would you say….Harry Reid is a big fuqin liar and nobody seems to care?

How can this guy say Mitt Romney “didn’t pay any taxes for 10 years” and I have a credible person who told me this but I can`t tell you who that is. Have it dominate the news cycle for days. Romney releases tax returns

“2011 tax return revealed Romney and his wife Ann paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes on $13.7 million in income”

“2010 tax return which showed the couple paid $3 million in taxes on $21.7 million in income — at a tax rate of just 14%.”

And nobody bothers to ask Harry Reid WTF he was talking about and who TF he was talkin to? It doesn`t matter followed by harp strings.

Harry Reid Romney Tax Tipster ‘Is A Credible Person,’ New Source Tells CNN (VIDEO)

A second source, said to be “close to Senator [Harry] Reid,” has told CNN’s Dana Bash that Reid’s original source for the claim that Mitt Romney “didn’t pay any taxes for 10 years” exists, is a “Bain investor” and a “credible person.” Dana Bash reported on this source, and the person’s willingness to corroborate the allegation to which the Senate majority leader repeated on Thursday’s airing of CNN’s AC360.

As Bash told the show’s host, Anderson Cooper:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/02/harry-reid-romney-tax-source-_n_1735729.html - 428k

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 14:41:17

Harry Reid = Haih-he Hee-jee in Brazilian Portuguese.

But Haih-he Hee-jee is not running for POTUS. = Poe -chus

 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 16:34:44

So that makes it OK for a Senate Majority Leader to slander the dude who is running against his guy with a lie and the networks to cover it for days as if it was gospel without a peep from them when he is proven wrong?

As long as we got that straight.

I guess if you have 1.3 percent growth, unemployment over 8% and trillion dollar deficits what else have you got?

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 18:35:33

So that makes it OK for a Senate Majority Leader to slander the dude who is running against his guy…..

Strawman 101.

I guess if you have 1.3 percent growth, unemployment over 8% and trillion dollar deficits what else have you got?

A second term?

 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 19:22:47

Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio -

 
 
 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 10:56:37

Yes because BAIN lobbied politicians for tax loopholes that allow them to dodge taxes.

Yes because he blasts the 47% below him most of whom work or have worked who pay 0% income taxes without considering that many likely pay a higher total effective (local, state payroll tax) than he

Comment by measton
2012-09-27 10:57:39

Try blaming the politicians that pass these inane tax laws…

So if I higher a hit man and he kills someone am I to blame??

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 10:59:00

Tell me how he legally put 100,000,000 million into an IRA account that limits contributions to 6k a year and get back to me.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 11:23:02

A company can set up a retirement account for execs that has a yearly limit of something like $30K. If you run a vulture capital business, probably you know how to self direct that investment account.

Higher tax rate on withdrawal than the 15% capital gains tax to take it as personal income now. Of course you avoid the tithe….

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 12:15:29

“Tell me how he legally put 100,000,000 million into an IRA account that limits contributions to 6k a year and get back to me.”

You don’t put $100MM into an IRA.

You put a small amount into an IRA and self-direct it into an investment where you get a big payoff as an owner of the private equity firm if the investment works.

 
Comment by polly
2012-09-27 12:16:06

Measton, I speculated about this a while ago.

You create a shell company and contribute the stock (worth a few hundred bucks) to the IRA. That company borrows money from one of your other companies for working capital at very,very, very favorable rates and terms and buys all sorts of stuff that you know will go up in value. Once the stuff that was purchased goes up enough in value or gets fees paid to it or whatever, it may or may not bother to pay off the original loan. Keep running your very profitable business out of the company whose stock is owned by the IRA account.

Oh and you have to do all this through a foreign subsidiary in a tax haven which is the “blocker corporation” because otherwise the IRA has to pay something called unrelated business income tax on the business income but the blocker corporation fixes that even if you want to pay out the income.

It isn’t that hard.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 12:24:02

Why did it involve off shore entities?

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 12:30:04

What is likely is that they put the money in offshore company A and then in his private account he invests in offshore company B.

Then company A and B both go all in on say the price of oil.

One bets it will go up the other down.

But if the retirement account loses then quick accounting switches the bets. That way you can take a large loss in your private account (offsetting gains elsewhere) and funnel money into your retirement account where you pay no taxes.

PS retirement accounts set up for execs are not IRA’s.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 13:05:32

measton:

http://www.spencerlawfirm.com/Publications/Mitt-Romneys-IRA.shtml

My understanding with the offshore entities have to do with creating a blocking structure for UBIT (Unrelated Business Income Tax), which are apparently also used commonly for pension funds, etc. who wish to invest in similar activities.

I spent an hour this morning with my CPA. After that hour, I feel even more strongly that tax code needs to be reformed. Most of the time was spent on positions that I could be taking. When I asked what the proper (i.e. legal) position was, he shrugged his shoulders, saying that the law was unclear, and the IRS has not made efforts to make the law clear.

What this means to me is that there are gaping loopholes that can be exploited from people choosing to take positions that are allowed under the currently law.

This is the same with Romney’s IRA/UBIT blocker, etc. The law allows this structure to occur.

It also allows Warren Buffett to pay 15% on his capital gain, and give away all his wealth to avoid the 50% estate tax.

It also allows the famed 47% to pay no INCOME tax (recognizing there are other taxes they pay).

It also allows for carried interest, when coming from capital gain generating events, to be taxed as capital gain.

It also allows for corporations to write off the remaining basis in US manufacturing facilities if they close them down and move the activity overseas.

It also allows complex structures by even very left leaning corporations to set up foreign subsidiaries to minimize US tax (http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/10/21/130727655/google-s-tax-tricks-double-irish-and-dutch-sandwich).

All the political demonizing of people and entities who are following the laws (written by the politicians) does nothing for me but emphasize how ineffective our leadership in Washington DC has been in making the tax code fair and reasonable.

It’s a friggin’ mess.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 13:22:47

“PS retirement accounts set up for execs are not IRA’s”

Let the IRS know, OK?

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 14:42:14

To add to Polly’s point: “It isn’t that hard.”

It also isn’t that uncommon.

 
Comment by Neuromance
2012-09-27 15:46:53

Try blaming the politicians that pass these inane tax laws…

It is the politicians’ fault. They write the laws.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 16:02:24

Again if I hire a hitman and he kills someone am I to blame??

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 17:35:00

Who are you considering?

 
 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 13:17:09

“BAIN lobbied politicians for tax loopholes that allow them to dodge taxes.”

What loopholes did Bain lobby for and get (by getting politicians to pass them into law)?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 13:48:21

2007, as it turns out, was something of a watershed for private equity lobbying: In that year, lobbying expenditures for the industry practically tripled. The spike was the result of an industry-wide effort to preserve a number of tax giveaways for the finance industry and its CEOs—including the carried interest rule, a tax loophole that allows Romney and other private equity mavens to reduce their taxes by millions of dollars. Carried interest refers to the commission that private equity and hedge fund executives receive for managing investors’ money. Although commissions may seem like ordinary income to the rest of us, the carried interest loophole allows some money managers to claim this income as long-term capital gains, which are taxed at a rate much lower (15 percent) than the top tax rate for normal income (35 percent).

Bain was doing its part to make Romney’s vision a reality. The firm spent $300,000 between August of 2007 and April of 2008 lobbying the House and Senate on bills that threatened the carried interest loophole. Along with other private equity titans like Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Apollo Management, Bain and its ilk paid lobbying shops, public relations firms, and trade groups like Ogilvy and the Private Equity Growth Capital Council an estimated $15 million between January 2009 and April 2010 to convince lawmakers to keep the loophole alive. The force of those combined lobbying efforts kept the carried interest loophole wedged open, denying the federal government some $10 billion in revenues in the process

Google

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 14:23:58

So, Bain lobbied to preserve the status quo of partnership tax law that has been in existence since what, the 1970’s? And you call that “BAIN lobbied politicians for tax loopholes that allow them to dodge taxes.”

Let’s remind people what carried interest is:

It is a part of partnership taxation that allows the sharing of profit among partners (in a partnership or LLC) on an agreed upon basis between themselves WITHOUT changing the tax character of that income.

So, if one guy invests his own money and that investment earns $100 in capital gain, he pays $15 in federal tax.

With investment partnerships, that one guy decides that he wants a manager to invest the money for him (for whatever reason), and the economic deal struck is that he keeps 80% of the profit, and the manager gets 20% of the profit. If that arrangement earns $100 in capital gain, under the current law, the owners of that partnership pay $15 in tax. (80% of it from one party, 20% from the other party)

The government gets the same tax receipts either way, regardless of how the money is invested.

Also note that it typically takes YEARS to realize a carried interest in these arrangements. So, Bain was right to try to preserve the status quo for all their partners that made economic arrangements with their investors YEARS before based on the current tax law. This is not a Bain for Romney thing, this is a Bain for its partners thing.

My problem with changing the carried interest law as the politicians want to is that it discourages the use of experts in deploying capital.

How about the following change from the same example:

1. Investor keeps $100 of capital gain, and pays $20 in compensation to Manager.
2. Investor gets to deduct $20 as wages paid, as a business would deduct payroll expenses.
3. Manager gets $20 of ordinary income.

This would be tax neutral to the US Government and be OK with me. Otherwise, you are talking about trying to increase tax revenue by making certain ways to invest more expensive (from a tax standpoint)…this is bad policy.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 15:44:40

BS

The manager went to work and earned a bonus no different than a working stiff who sold a lot of widgets. The manager did not risk capital it is not a capital gain.

The difference the manager paid 15% on his earnings while the working stiff paid 20%.

My MIL worked at Merrill Lynch as a stock broker, doing the exact same job that these Hedge Funds do. Yet her tax rate is much higher. Where does it end. I mean if I give advice to a private company and that company makes more money because of my advice should I get paid in carried interest??

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 15:53:33

This is not BS. This is partnership tax law.

When your MIL worked for ML, did she get paid $0 if the investments she made were not successful? If a successful transaction occurred, did the investor give up some of their capital gain?

If the private company is willing to give up some of their capital gain to you for part of your compensation, if it is revenue neutral to the US government, why shouldn’t they be able to?

The point is this:

1. Investment activities generate either capital gain or ordinary income;
2. Current partnership tax law allows the investor to share that gain or income however they wish with another person. The sharing of that income does not change it’s tax character.
3. This is revenue neutral to the US government as compared to a situation where the investor makes the investment without making the arrangement with the other person.

BTW, Hedge Funds don’t care about the carried interest legislation…you know why? Trading frequently generates ordinary income. Partnership tax law does not magically turn this into capital gain.

The carried interest legislation hits longer-term investment partnerships, like Venture Capital and other forms of Private Equity.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 15:53:56

If you manage money for a mutual fund or a public company, you pay regular income taxes; do it for a private fund, and you pay capital gains. Similarly, when a corporate executive gets stock or stock options as a bonus for a job well done, it’s generally subject to income taxes; carried interest, which is also performance-related, isn’t. Like the rest of us, fund managers are being paid for their labor, but, unlike the rest of us, they get to pay taxes as if they were capital

Carried interest is a quintessential example of this: when the law governing partnerships was passed, back in 1954, the goal was to make it easier for people to run what one law professor has termed “simple ventures.” No one imagined that the law would end up covering an industry that manages trillions of dollars in assets, and would cost the government billions in tax revenue. You can see the same problem at work in the case of farm subsidies, which have morphed from a way to keep small farmers afloat during the Great Depression into a multibillion-dollar handout to huge agribusiness companies

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/03/15/100315ta_talk_surowiecki#ixzz27iIUDMkO

Your right though these loopholes probably just fell from the sky without any lobbying.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 15:56:42

“Otherwise, you are talking about trying to increase tax revenue by making certain ways to invest more expensive (from a tax standpoint)…this is bad policy.”

Again a mutual fund manager pays income taxes on his performance bonus, as does a stock broker. The only one getting preferential treatment are the large Hedge Fund managers. So by your own logic it’s bad policy.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 16:00:55

Carried interest is a quintessential example of this: when the law governing partnerships was passed, back in 1954, the goal was to make it easier for people to run what one law professor has termed “simple ventures.” No one imagined that the law would end up covering an industry that manages trillions of dollars in assets, and would cost the government billions in tax revenue. You can see the same problem at work in the case of farm subsidies, which have morphed from a way to keep small farmers afloat during the Great Depression into a multibillion-dollar handout to huge agribusiness companies

http://www.newyorker.com

You are right though the politicians just do this stuff in a vacume, lobbying and payments probably had nothing to do with it???

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 17:50:28

“If you manage money for a mutual fund or a public company, you pay regular income taxes; do it for a private fund, and you pay capital gains. Similarly, when a corporate executive gets stock or stock options as a bonus for a job well done, it’s generally subject to income taxes; carried interest, which is also performance-related, isn’t. Like the rest of us, fund managers are being paid for their labor, but, unlike the rest of us, they get to pay taxes as if they were capital”

This is not correct.

If you invest for a private fund, and have guaranteed fees (ie. the 2%), carried interest rules don’t apply. This is ordinary income. If in part of your agreement with your investors, you get to share in the investment returns, the character of the income doesn’t change when you are allocated that income. If the income is ordinary in nature, then as manager, that carried interest is taxed at ordinary rates.

ONLY if the character of the income generated from the taxable event is capital, AND the fund has made enough money as a whole to be sharing in profits does the carried interest get taxed as capital gain.

Mutual funds by and large have a fixed and guaranteed fee from the investors. How the mutual fund company compensates their employees is up to them, but if the mutual fund itself doesn’t make any money that year, their employees don’t go home empty-handed, they get paid from the guaranteed fees from the mutual fund.

I think the difference in the way we are thinking of this is as follows:

1. You are thinking of this as an employer/employee relationship–one entity pays a salary and bonus (and gets to offset their income by the additional expense), the other receives the salary and pays ordinary income tax.

2. I am thinking of this as a partnership. If an activity that generates a certain amount and certain type of income, and by agreement, the income is split a certain way–and the character of that income doesn’t change.

The proposed changes to carried interest laws do not change #2 to #1. I would be fine with it if this were the case.

They want to make it so that investments that generate a capital gain are taxed at 15% in aggregate in some circumstances, and taxed more in aggregate in other circumstances. This distorts how investments are made and managed.

I don’t think people really understand the ramifications of what these changes would mean:

Today:

If you and your brother decide to buy rental properties, and he puts in the money, and you put in the labor to fix up the home. You decide that what would be fair would be to split any profits 50/50. There is no guaranteed salary. Let’s say when you sell the home, you make $25k as a capital gain (you held it more than a year). That capital gain would be split 50% to you and 50% to your brother. Each of you pay 15% on the gain. Your “sweat equity” is carried interest.

Changing carried interest law would convert half of that $25k capital gain from selling the house to ordinary income.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 10:22:27

If your grampa left you something in a legal tax dodge, would it make you just as sick?

Comment by measton
2012-09-27 11:34:36

Nice job missing the point, and throwing up a straw man.

The question is do you think it’s right that the elite are paying effective tax rates that are less than the poor pay in sales tax alone,

Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 11:57:14

The question is do you think it’s right that the elite are paying effective tax rates that are less than the poor pay in sales tax alone

No. I think the wealthy should have an effective tax rate higher than those less well off than themselves. But to me, the question isn’t about “raising taxes on the rich”, as that doesn’t solve anything but inequality in the tax code. To me, the real issue is what the government does with the tax money it collects.

I despise liberals because invariably they want to take money out of others pockets to redistribute and social engineer their version of society. Even though I’m not wealthy, I still get hit with their various tax/redistribution schemes because I’m in the top 10% of earners.

Bottom line, I support less government, not more. Do I think the wealthy should pay a higher share of taxes? Yes. Do I think that money should then be used to grow government programs to redistribute to the less well off? No. As I said before: Life isn’t fair. There will always be a lower class. In a meritocracy, those with the ability, skills, and knowledge succeed and those without do not. That is the model I choose to follow.

From each according to one’s ability, to each according to one’s needs is Marxist. Socialism, Communism, etc, all of the same mold. That is the antithesis of Capitalism, of any meritocracy really, and the ideology this country spent years fighting.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by X-GSfixr
2012-09-27 12:25:14

“…….invariably want to take money out of other people’s pockets……to social engineer their version of society……”

Compared to Republicans/Tea Parters, who want to manipulate the law to avoid taking money out of their pockets, and take it out of the pockets of the wretched refuse, to social engineer their version of society.

Classic 1%er example: Always cheering for “privatization” of government services.

Until it’s a service they have to use (like air traffic control for their bizjets, like NAV Canada and all of Europe). Then they complain about getting ATC bills, and blather on about how free ATC promotes commerce.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2012-09-27 12:41:15

And in support of your views, I know people in the 1% (or even 0.5%). They are willing to pay more in taxes.

However, they are not willing to do so if that increase in taxes is not in conjunction with a larger plan to put the fiscal health of the US on a long-term path to stability.

 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 13:03:36

An approx. $1 TRILLION a year defense industry says that will never happen.

 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 13:42:07

” despise liberals because invariably they want to take money out of others pockets to redistribute and social engineer their version of society.”

As opposed to unregulated market manipulation and theft by the deregulation crowd.

As opposed to no bid contracts and medicare advantage plan that costs 15% more than medicare (goes for high priced management)

As opposed to Taxing middle and upper midde class people at 2-4x the rate of the elite. I pay 24% income tax alone.

As oppossed to trade law that enriches the elite at everyone elses expense.

As opposed to military interventions that protect or enrich the elite at everyone elses expense.

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-09-27 13:43:47

“do you think it’s right that the elite are paying effective tax rates that are less than the poor pay in sales tax alone…”

On the face of it of course not. There would be exceptions, such as tax incentives for people with money to invest in things that are in the national interest. All of us modify our behavior to take advantage of incentives.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 13:58:03

What loopholes did they lobby for

2007, as it turns out, was something of a watershed for private equity lobbying: In that year, lobbying expenditures for the industry practically tripled. The spike was the result of an industry-wide effort to preserve a number of tax giveaways for the finance industry and its CEOs—including the carried interest rule, a tax loophole that allows Romney and other private equity mavens to reduce their taxes by millions of dollars. Carried interest refers to the commission that private equity and hedge fund executives receive for managing investors’ money. Although commissions may seem like ordinary income to the rest of us, the carried interest loophole allows some money managers to claim this income as long-term capital gains, which are taxed at a rate much lower (15 percent) than the top tax rate for normal income (35 percent).

Bain was doing its part to make Romney’s vision a reality. The firm spent $300,000 between August of 2007 and April of 2008 lobbying the House and Senate on bills that threatened the carried interest loophole. Along with other private equity titans like Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Apollo Management, Bain and its ilk paid lobbying shops, public relations firms, and trade groups like Ogilvy and the Private Equity Growth Capital Council an estimated $15 million between January 2009 and April 2010 to convince lawmakers to keep the loophole alive. The force of those combined lobbying efforts kept the carried interest loophole wedged open, denying the federal government some $10 billion in revenues in the process

So you believe that they did not lobby for lower tax rates on carried interest??

 
 
Comment by goon squad
2012-09-27 10:26:23

Yeah, but he’s a PRODUCER.

It’s the f*ing parasites with SNAP cards and Earned Income Tax Credits that are really responsible for bankrupting this country. Especially the black and brown ones!

 
Comment by Anon In DC
2012-09-27 18:00:08

Assume Romeny makes $10M a year @ 5% that $500K. The poor in your state must be pretty rich and big spenders to be paying more than $500K in sales tax.

P.S. Never enough taxes for tax and spend liberals*

*Recently rebranded as “progressives” but still liberal. Especially with other people’s money.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 18:38:48

P.S. Never enough taxes for tax and spend liberals*

Nope. We need to tax the rich much more. Right now their taxes are historically low and their wealth/income is historically high.

The BushTaxCutsForTheRich are responsible for about a quarter of our deficit since they were passed. Some estimates put it at 35%.

Tax the rich.

Comment by I blame progressives
2012-09-27 19:02:51

Mr. Potato head…we need growth to increase revenues enough to reduce deficits. I am neither for nor against any particular tax plan involving the rich, but the point remains that you can go as far as confiscating all the rich’s wealth and that would only pay for 1/2 of a one year Obama deficit.

Then what? Mass killings and starvation? I guess your communist mentors left that out or reminded you not to talk about the ugly side of your ideology.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by measton
2012-09-27 19:43:43

The top 1% own 50% of the stock market.

The stock market is worth around 16 trillion

So excluding bonds real estate and other forms of wealth if we confiscated all of the stocks from the top 1% we’d not only be able to pay off Obama’s debt but about half of all of the national debt.

What a maroon!

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 20:18:55

we need growth to increase revenues enough to reduce deficits.

And we need higher taxes on the rich. Higher taxes on the rich do not hinder growth.

Lowering the rich’s taxes did not create jobs or more growth.

Since passed, lowering taxes on the rich contributed about a quarter of our deficit.

 
Comment by I blame progressives
2012-09-27 21:08:12

“What a maroon!”

Another communist shows his/her face, hence the name calling.

“The stock market is worth around 16 trillion”

I was talking about the combined assets of the 1% in this country, your figures mean absolutely nothing. Back in your hole commie.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Neuromance
2012-09-27 11:43:06

Denninger posted a nice essay.

The Speech That Wins The Election

My fellow Americans:

Almost exactly four years ago the stock market began a sickening plunge that would shake the world. Declining from just over DOW 11,000 to under 7,500 in two short months, only to fall another 1,000 points in the next three, this period marked an unprecedented time of government intervention that you were told was for all of our good, and the good of our nation.

You were lied to.

The intentional expansion of debt unbacked by anything was the cause of the market crash. This intentional fraud perpetrated upon all of you went back to the Tech Crash in 2000, and goaded Americans into taking out loans that could not be repaid to cover up the malfeasance of those who had systematically looted Americans’ retirement accounts and offshored their jobs during the 1990s.

Nobody makes bad loans on purpose under ordinary circumstances, because doing so guarantees a loss. So these Wall Street and Banking swindlers did something very creative — they sold that debt, which they knew was bad when it was originally issued to Americans all over the world to various pension funds, insurance companies and other investors. They lied about the credit quality of the borrowers, they lied about what they had put into the securities and they skimmed off billions in fees and bonuses. By doing so they shifted the loss onto others — your pension, your state, your personal investment account.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=211989

Comment by Carl Morris
2012-09-27 11:59:30

I can’t think of a better way to NOT get elected. Or assassinated if by some miracle elected anyway and not willing to be bought off.

Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-09-27 12:07:26

To me, it reads like something that Bullworth, the movie character, would have said. And we know what happened to him.

 
 
Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 13:05:19

…shifted the loss onto others …and your house.

 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2012-09-27 17:06:19

I really liked this speech ,but we hear the BS instead .

 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2012-09-27 12:29:23

Re: Romney’s roll-down windows in airliners, from the other day.

Some ideas are just too stupid to refute.

Next time I fly the airlines, I’m going to sneak a window crank on the airplane, and Super Glue it on the wall, below the window.

Comment by turkey lurkey
2012-09-27 13:06:22

Have “Romney” engraved on the stem.

 
Comment by frankie
2012-09-27 13:15:13

You’ll get arrested; still at least you won’t have to worry about your retirement.

 
Comment by ahansen
2012-09-27 14:16:49

But the other day Dia told us that we were all poopie pants for making fun of his junk science and that

“…You could design the system … so that the “window” would only “crack open 1/16 of an inch at high speed and open gradually to another vent level as speeds declined, to FULLY open on the Tarmac….”

So which is it, Gulfie? Do we get those casement windows on the spacecraft?

 
 
Comment by frankie
2012-09-27 12:35:33

A day for agreeing cuts

Greek political leaders have broadly agreed on a nearly €12 billion austerity package despite reservations over wage and pension cuts to bring Athens closer to a final deal on the contentious plan.

After weeks of haggling over the budget cuts, Prime Minister Antonis Samaras’s allies have struck a deal on the composition of the package and are ironing out final details of how salary and pension cuts will be spread, officials said.

Nearly 70,000 Greeks marched to parliament yesterday in one of the biggest demonstrations yet against cuts that threaten a new round of wage and pension cuts for tens of thousands of the population. That is putting pressure on coalition politicians but the government is pressing ahead with steps to secure the next batch of bailout funds - vital to keeping the state solvent.

“There is a basic agreement, we’re moving forward to the final negotiations,” Finance Minister Yannis Stournaras said after a meeting of the three leaders in Mr Samaras’s conservative-led government.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0927/breaking42.html

The Spanish government has unveiled another round of tax increases and budget cuts as it tries to avoid a full-blown bailout.

Spanish 10-year bond yields fell as the 2013 budget was announced by deputy Prime Minister Soraya Saenz de Santamaria, who insisted the axe would be accompanied by 43 new laws to restructure the economy to help ensure growth and competiveness.

http://news.sky.com/story/990254/spain-budget-imposes-more-cuts-and-tax-hikes

The University of Georgia intends to move forward with budget cuts that would eliminate about 130 positions, President Michael Adams said Thursday.

Many of the positions are vacant or filled temporarily by rehired retirees, according to plans submitted to the state. The plans also show dozens of jobs currently filled by full-time staff would be eliminated.

College presidents typically contend budget cuts will have minimal impact on students, but Adams didn’t say that.

“Everything you do ultimately impacts students,” Adams said during a briefing with reporters. “To say there is no impact on students, I simply can’t do that.”

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/uga-ready-to-implement-budget-cuts/nSNTx/

MORROW, Ga. — The Georgia Archives, which holds both historical curiosities and virtually every important state government document ever created, is about to become nearly impossible to visit.

In November, a round of government budget cuts will reduce the staff to three, one of them the maintenance man. Thousands of documents that pour in every month are likely to languish because no one will be available to sort through them, archives officials said. People who view accurate and open government records as the bedrock of democracy are outraged.

The move will make Georgia the only state without an archives open to the public on a regular basis. But this closing is simply the most severe symptom of a greater crisis facing permanent government collections in nearly every state, professional archivists say.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/us/budget-cuts-to-limit-public-access-to-georgia-archives.html?_r=0

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2012-09-27 12:44:17

On the road with the -fixr……..two months on the road in Cornhusker land, baby-sitting the “C” Check.

Priority #1……GTHOOD on home game Saturdays.

Local fishrap did a story on how the local pharmacutical company is substituting Cornhuskers for lab rats in their trials. Seems that, unlike the lab rats, the lab techs don’t get emotionally attached to the Cornhuskers.

 
 
Comment by frankie
2012-09-27 13:56:47

The spat over the Diaoyu or Senkaku islands has escalated dramatically in the past month with violent protests across China.

But with a national election approaching in Japan, and a change of leadership in China, politicians on both sides have refused to step back from the brink, afraid that they will appear weak.

“There is a danger of China and Japan having a military conflict,” said Yan Xuetong, one of China’s most influential foreign policy strategists, and a noted hawk.

“One country must make a concession. But I do not see Japan making concessions. I do not see either side making concessions. Both sides want to solve the situation peacefully, but neither side can provide the right approach,” he added.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/9571032/Military-conflict-looms-between-China-and-Japan.html

Hope this is just sabre rattling.

Comment by Northeastener
2012-09-27 15:15:02

Black Swan alert… with attention on Syria, Iran, Egypt, and Israel regarding tension and the prospect of a broader war in the MENA, who would expect a centuries old territorial conflict between two of the largest economies in the world to turn into a hot war in Asia?

May you live in interesting times?

Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 16:47:06

I don`t believe in any of this but I don`t think I am doing any Christmas shopping until Dec. 22 this year. :)

Dec. 21, 2012, when the Maya’s “Long Count” calendar marks the end of a 5,126-year era.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2012-09-27 18:40:18

Dec. 21, 2012, when the Maya’s “Long Count” calendar marks the end of a 5,126-year era.

I’m scared because I just noticed my calender ends on Dec 31.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Happy2bHeard
2012-09-27 20:10:18

Interesting times, indeed. Might the end result of a hot or cold war between China and Japan mean more growth in the US? Would manufacturers decide to move back here?

I would be surprised if this tiff blows up in the next 6 weeks.

 
 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2012-09-27 18:39:34

Actually, I’d like to see a war we weren’t involved in.

Comment by frankie
2012-09-28 00:22:45

Wouldn’t be this one

U.S. and Japan Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement
March 8, 1954

http://www.learner.org/workshops/primarysources/coldwar/docs/usjapan.html

 
 
 
Comment by Housing Is Cratering
 
Comment by Muggy
2012-09-27 16:48:41

Realtors snort coke. A LOT.

Property developer James Brown’s habit was so bad his nose collapsed after nine years of daily cocaine use.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208318/Millionaire-cocaine-habit-jailed-police-drugs-stash-folding-roof-Bentley.html?

 
Comment by UNKNOWN TENANT
2012-09-27 16:57:24

Move over Peggy!

Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio -

Comment by aNYCdj
2012-09-27 18:42:45

Make her sit in class 25 hours week and learn English for her ebt card and phone…..I give her a week then poof!

 
 
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