Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.
Posted By: Ben Jones @ 7:00 am
“Why buy a house at these massively inflated asking prices? Rent for half the monthly carrying costs and buy later, after prices crater for 65% less.”
We’ve waited so long. Who remembers 2006? The homes in my rental area are all being repiped, three floods in my place last year. Oh, when I signed up for rental insurance, my landlord used my name for all three claims, i can’t get any till he removes my name. Anyway, my neighbor’s house backed up with sewer thru the toilets and destroyed her home. I would never buy in fire mt-Oceanside. Back to daydreaming about saving the world and living in a trailer park.
Ann! Where have you been?
Went to a party last night.
First time I got to talk with the host. Very first words:
Me: This is a very nice neighborhood with very nice houses.
Him: Yes. We bought in 2007. We way overpaid.
Me: (Quickly changing the topic) So, I hear your son is a great soccer player…
(Quickly changing the topic)
What?!? Didn’t you want to allow him a chance to elaborate, so you/we could savor the schadenfreude?
Last weekend we got together with five other couples and brought the kids roller skating. One couple said they want to move for a promotion but they “bought a house in 2009 and can’t sell without losing alot of money”.
With a look of indifference, I said “anyone who bought a house from 1998 to current is going to lose alot of money so you’re not alone”. It was great. One of the wives said “really??”…. I said ALOT of money. Then here husband chimed in and said “you’re right”.
I’ve learned to say very little while the wife(s) are within earshot, and the guys open right up. Soon as one of the ladies strolls near the topic becomes subdued; amazing and sad. I suspect there’s a good deal of veiled fear out there.
I suspect there’s a good deal of veiled fear out there. Moreover there is a lot of shame in admitting one is suffering from a problem of one’s own devising.
there is a lot of shame in admitting one is suffering from a problem of one’s own devising.
And there it is. The unvarnished truth and grim reality.
I stumbled across another bubble blog that apparently ran from 2005 to 2008, when the blogger announced, that’s it, everyone - time to buy! I wonder how that worked out.
Yeah… and it was probably run by some liar named Lawler.
Montana, check out the now infamous fall of the Housing Panic blog. The guy running it changed the name to the Soot and Ashes blog 2008-ish, and then in 2010 he lost his effin’ mind, shrieked that it was “TIME TO BUY”, and stopped updating the blog. I never did find out what happened to him, but I predict that he’s now neck deep in mortgage payments on properties that aren’t renting out like he planned. I used to read Housing Panic along with Ben’s blog religiously, and that still happened.
It’s truly sad to see that even a staunch and well documented housing bubble critic can still be revealed to be yet another flipper a$$hole. But it makes sense; there’s a class of flipper that wants a rational or controllable climb in prices that he can capitalize on, and the outrageousness of the bubble destroys that soon enough. They want the bubble to collapse, but only enough to restart flipping again.
“It’s truly sad to see that even a staunch and well documented housing bubble critic can still be revealed to be yet another flipper a$$hole. But it makes sense; there’s a class of flipper that wants a rational or controllable climb in prices that he can capitalize on, and the outrageousness of the bubble destroys that soon enough. They want the bubble to collapse, but only enough to restart flipping again.”
Lacking marketable skills the hucksters prey on the vulnerable.
February 7, 2013, 4:32 p.m. ET
Low Rates, the Federal Reserve and the Slow Economy
The recent release of the Federal Reserve’s minutes from meetings in the fourth quarter of 2007 reveal how little the Bernanke Fed understood before the 2008 financial collapse. Similarly, the Greenspan Fed failed to grasp the risks that led to the earlier stock exchange and housing bubbles bursting. John Taylor makes a similar point (”Fed Policy Is a Drag on the Economy,” op-ed, Jan. 29), arguing that today’s Fed is oblivious to the risks of its prolonged zero-interest-rate policy.
One of his key points—that “extraordinarily low rates support and feed the spending appetites of Congress and the president and, increasing deficits and debt”—should be well understood. In effect, the Fed is now the locus of increasing systemic risk by serving as the handmaiden of a new bubble in U.S. government bonds—the result of trillion-dollar deficits from irresponsible fiscal policy and delayed entitlement reform.
Total U.S. government debt in the form of interest-bearing bonds and IOUs to Social Security and Medicare trust funds grew 53% during the last four years—from $10.7 trillion to $16.4 trillion—and is now 104% of U.S. GDP. Due to the Fed’s massive quantitative easing bond-purchasing programs, today’s blended cost of government borrowing is 1.96%, much less than the historical average market rate of about 5.5%. By staying on the current trajectory of debt monetization and thwarting credit-market price signals, the Fed is setting the stage for this new bubble to burst. It may come from resurgent inflation, the Fed’s sudden need to defend the dollar or the credit-rating agencies’ downgrade of the U.S. As a result, there would be a sharp decline in the standard of living for all Americans, accompanied by regret for having ignored the warning signs when there still had been time.
Scott S. Powell
“As a result, there would be a sharp decline in the standard of living for all Americans, accompanied by regret for having ignored the warning signs when there still had been time.”
That’s then, this is now.
“Having ignored the warning signs when there had been time” means we should select leaders that can think and act beyond the next election. Those who can think and act in such a way may decide to run for public office but because they think and act in such a way they do not get elected.
And so here we are.
Where we learned our present economic policies:
I think these guys sitting in their ivory towers do not feel the financial hardship that the little guy does. So it is all academic to them.
Just my 2Cents
Especially if the “Discovery Institute” was founded by Howard Chapman, a former Reagan official, and is best know for pushing intelligent design.
The giveaway is the phrase “long-delayed entitlement reform.” This should always be translated “Those damn Dems keep getting elected and won’t let us throw grandma in the street.” Always.
By the way, SUguy, I’m sorry if I was pushy yesterday.
As someone pointed out…. you weren’t thinking clearly yesterday.
No not at all. Thank you for the encouragement Oxide. It is always a pleasure to read the perspective of a very intelligent person such as yourself.
“I think these guys sitting in their ivory towers do not feel the financial hardship that the little guy does. So it is all academic to them.”
You just reminded me of some of the bitterly opposed economic arguments I used to have w/an SU economics professor who also at one time was on the Fed payroll. He’s a total print, baby, print guy. He had known tough times in his life while getting his degrees. Had grown up in a country where he totally understood deflation. His parents had been wealthy but I think he was estranged. Was a totally self made guy, actually earning his PhD early. As I understood from our discussions, he had almost a total panic about letting a collapse happen. You could not say anything to steer him from the “avoid at all cost” approaches he embraced.
I wonder is someone else will ever be able to get no doc loans passed off the frannie and freddie?
Don’t fall for GOP’s sequester bluff
Posted by Greg Sargent on February 8, 2013 at 1:12 pm
…we’re back to exactly where we were during the fiscal cliff and debt ceiling fights. Republicans are explicitly and openly using the prospect of serious harm to millions and millions of Americans to force Democrats to agree to a deal that gives Republicans everything that they want, while requiring them to make no concessions whatsoever. Meanwhile, they are accusing Obama and Democrats — whose public position is that we should resolve this mess with a compromise that requires both sides to make concessions — of being unreasonable. On top of this, poll after poll after poll shows that majorities prefer the Democratic solution — that is, a mix of concessions by both sides.
The whole thing is every bit as absurd as the fiscal cliff and debt ceiling strategies were. Yet in this case, Republicans are telegraphing to the press that they are more inclined to let the worst happen. Obama and Dems need to treat this like a bluff, and proceed from the assumption that Republicans will cave in this fight, too. Get out there and hit harder on what Republicans are really threatening here.
Call Obama’s sequester bluff
By Charles Krauthammer, Published: February 7
For the first time since Election Day, President Obama is on the defensive. That’s because on March 1, automatic spending cuts (“sequestration”) go into effect — $1.2 trillion over 10 years, half from domestic (discretionary) programs, half from defense.
The idea had been proposed and promoted by the White House during the July 2011 debt-ceiling negotiations. The political calculation was that such draconian defense cuts would drive the GOP to offer concessions.
It backfired. The Republicans have offered no concessions. Obama’s bluff is being called and he’s the desperate party. He abhors the domestic cuts. And as commander in chief he must worry about indiscriminate Pentagon cuts that his own defense secretary calls catastrophic.
He’s playing for history now. Seems like a good time to deepen the recession and see if he gets the blame. If things do worsen significantly for any good part of this 2nd term I think he would.
As a bonus, budget mess fighting could distract and delay immigration reform?
Obama better get all bad bills he can get this yr. Next year, he will be a lame-duck.
What, $120 billion a year?
OMG! It is a catastrophe!
How will we be able to afford the new F-35? That program will cost $1 trillion!
I guess we will need to cut Social Security then.
Seems like there is a hell of a lot of sequester bluff calling going on inside the beltway these days!
Doesn’t actual bluff calling usually result in something happening? I don’t see anything happening yet.
It will predictably turn into another one of those 11th hour 59th minute agreement processes — just like the New Year’s Eve fiscal cliff deal.
Meanwhile, hedge your bets wisely.
May the odds be ever in your favor.
– Katniss Everdeen, The Hunger Games
May the odds be ever in your favor.
– Katniss Everdeen, The Hunger Games
Some compromise will be reached at the eleventh hour as you say and many of wishing to really have debt down and sequester happen will be fooled once again.
Katness did not say that. That was Effy Trinkets line.
Skroodle — you are right (and IMDb is wrong)…
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
February 08, 2013
Fact Sheet: Examples of How the Sequester Would Impact Middle Class Families, Jobs and Economic Security
Unless Congress acts by March 1st, a series of automatic cuts—called a sequester—that threaten thousands of jobs and the economic security of the middle class will take effect. There is no question that we need to cut the deficit, but the President believes it should be done in a balanced way that protects investments that the middle class relies on. Already, the President has worked with Congress to reduce the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion, but there’s more to do. The President believes we can not only avoid the harmful effects of a sequester but also reduce the deficit by $4 trillion total by cutting even more wasteful spending and eliminating tax loopholes for the wealthy.
Unfortunately, many Republicans in Congress refuse to ask the wealthy to pay a little more by closing tax loopholes so that we can protect investments that are helping grow our economy and keep our country safe. Our economy is poised to take off but we cannot afford a self-inflicted wound from Washington. We cannot simply cut our way to prosperity, and if Republicans continue to insist on an unreasonable cuts-only approach, the middle class risks paying the price. The most damaging effects of a sequester on the middle class are:
• Cuts to education: Our ability to teach our kids the skills they’ll need for the jobs of the future would be put at risk. 70,000 young children would be kicked off Head Start, 10,000 teacher jobs would be put at risk, and funding for up to 7,200 special education teachers, aides, and staff could be cut.
• Cuts to small business: Small businesses create two-thirds of all new jobs in America and instead of helping small businesses expand and hire, the automatic cuts triggered by a sequester would reduce loan guarantees to small businesses by up to $902 million.
• Cuts to food safety: Outbreaks of foodborne illness are a serious threat to families and public health. If a sequester takes effect, up to 2,100 fewer food inspections could occur, putting families at risk and costing billions in lost food production.
• Cuts to research and innovation: In order to compete for the jobs of the future and to ensure that the next breakthroughs to find cures for critical diseases are developed right here in America, we need to continue to lead the world in research and innovation. Most Americans with chronic diseases don’t have a day to lose, but under a sequester progress towards cures would be delayed and several thousand researchers could lose their jobs. Up to 12,000 scientists and students would also be impacted.
• Cuts to mental health: If a sequester takes effect, up to 373,000 seriously mentally ill adults and seriously emotionally disturbed children could go untreated. This would likely lead to increased hospitalizations, involvement in the criminal justice system, and homelessness for these individuals.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) now calculates that sequestration will require an annual reduction of roughly 5 percent for nondefense programs and roughly 8 percent for defense programs. However, given that these cuts must be achieved over only seven months instead of 12, the effective percentage reductions will be approximately 9 percent for nondefense programs and 13 percent for defense programs. These large and arbitrary cuts will have severe impacts across the government.
We have an economy that is being held together with smoke and mirrors, there is nothing we can do that will not hurt. The automatic cuts are the best we are going to get the budget under control. Had Simpson Bowles been passed at the beginning of Obama’s presidency we would have been far better off but it wasn’t so now we are broke just like Zimbabwe. Similar policies and similar results.
“Had Simpson Bowles been passed at the beginning of Obama’s presidency we would have been far better off”
How would Obama have won re-election with Simpson Bowles been passed. It is the free money that makes the case for re-appointment.
Like we said:
“we would have been far better off”
When you borrow 45 cents of every dollar you spend - eventually something has to give.
The real trick is understand that a little pain now MIGHT avoid us become like Greece in the not to distant future- where ALL government programs like these are eliminated.
You like Head Start? When we default the ENTIRE program will be eliminated.
So stop squealing like a spoiled teenage girl who had her iphone taken away.
Per the CBO, the deficit will be about 845B this year (which is pretty bad, but at least its shrinking). The 2013 budget is 3.8B
.845/3.8 = 22%
22% is still a huge number, but it’s half of the out of date 45% number you love to quote.
Per the CBO, the deficit will be about 845B this year
Is that projection based on the assumption that the sequester occurs, and remains for the full budget year?
Nobody could have seen it coming. We were all taken by surprise that the estimates proved wrong in hindsight.
Even if the deficit stays around a trillion, we aren’t borrowing 45%. And some of that decrease in borrowing is already funded by the tax increases.
Our economy is poised to take off [...]
LOL!! That’s _rich_!
Did they really manage to write that with a straight face??
I think we are finally getting somewhere.
Sayonara, Timmy Boy.
Time to break up the big banks
By George F. Will, Published: February 8
With his chronically gravelly voice and relentlessly liberal agenda, Sherrod Brown seems to have stepped out of “Les Miserables,” hoarse from singing revolutionary anthems at the barricades. Today, Ohio’s senior senator has a project worthy of Victor Hugo — and of conservatives’ support. He wants to break up the biggest banks.
He would advocate this even if he thought such banks would never have a crisis sufficient to threaten the financial system. He believes they are unhealthy for the financial system even when they are healthy. This is because there is a silent subsidy — an unfair competitive advantage relative to community banks — inherent in being deemed by the government, implicitly but clearly, too big to fail.
The Senate has unanimously passed a bill offered by Brown and Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, directing the Government Accountability Office to study whether banks with more than $500 billion in assets acquire an “economic benefit” because of their dangerous scale. Is their debt priced favorably because, being TBTF, they are considered especially creditworthy? Brown believes the 20 largest banks pay less when borrowing — 50 to 80 basis points less — than community banks must pay.
In a sense, TBTF began under Ronald Reagan with the 1984 rescue of Continental Illinois, then the seventh-largest bank. In 2011, the four biggest U.S. banks (JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo) had 40 percent of all federally insured deposits. Today, the 5,500 community banks have 12 percent of the banking industry’s assets. The 12 banks with $250 billion to $2.3 trillion in assets total 69 percent. The 20 largest banks’ assets total 84.5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product.
Such banks have become bigger, relative to the economy, since the financial crisis began, and they are not the only economic entities to do so. Last year, the Economist reported that in the past 15 years the combined assets of the 50 largest U.S. companies had risen from around 70 percent of GDP to around 130 percent. And banks are not the only entities designated TBTF because they are “systemically important.” General Motors supposedly required a bailout because a chain of parts suppliers might have failed with it.
But this just means that the pernicious practice of socializing losses while keeping profits private is not quarantined in the financial sector.
To see why TBTF also can mean TBTM — too big to manage — read “What’s Inside America’s Banks?” in the January/February issue of the Atlantic. Frank Partnoy and Jesse Eisinger argue that banks are not only bigger but also “more opaque than ever.” And regulations partake of the opacity: The landmark Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, separating commercial banking from investment banking, was 37 pages long; the 848 pages of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law may eventually be supplemented by 30 times that many pages of rules. The “Volcker rule” banning banks from speculating with federally insured deposits is 298 pages long.
“the 848 pages of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law may eventually be supplemented by 30 times that many pages of rules.”
And we can add TSTS (Too Small To Succeed) to TBTF.
And the Too Big will get even bigger.
Good point. A heavy regulatory burden, like that envisioned by banking industry whores Dodd and Frank, would tend to favor Megabank, Inc, which could devote a whole department to filling out government forms if necessary.
Yet another point that Romney made during the Republican debates…that no one should worry about the big banks–they have plenty of money to pay for all sorts of accountants and attorneys to deal with overregulation.
What we need to be concerned with is smaller financial institutions being unable to afford the regulatory burden and getting gobbled up by bigger banks.
But everyone just LOVES Dodd Frank…which is an ongoing disaster…
My main suggestion regarding the banking industry is STOP PROTECTING BANKS FROM FAILURE.
It would work out best for Main Street American households if the banking industry became as mean and lean as the restaurant industry around U.C. Berkeley, where one gets delicious food at affordable prices, in large part because the restaurants are in Darwinian competition for survival.
Protecting banks from failure results in the ongoing screwing of the little guy, and the FOMC should be held accountable for this choice.
If It’s Too Big to Fail, Is It Too Big to Exist?
Daniel Acker/Bloomberg News
By ERIC DASH
Published: June 20, 2009
Nearly a century ago, the jurist Louis Brandeis railed against what he called the “curse of bigness.” He warned that banks, railroads and steel companies had grown so huge that they were lording it over the nation’s economic and political life.
“Size, we are told, is not a crime,” Brandeis wrote. “But size may, at least, become noxious by reason of the means through which it is attained or the uses to which it is put.”
Today, amid the wreckage of the gravest financial crisis since the Great Depression, bigness is one of our biggest problems. Major banks, the Detroit automakers, the financial basket case that is the American International Group — the only reason these giant, sclerotic companies are still standing is that they have been deemed “too big to fail.”
Or, more precisely, too big to be allowed to fail. Policy makers fear companies like these are so enormous and so intertwined in the fabric of the economy that their collapse would be catastrophic. Hence, all those multibillion-dollar, taxpayer-financed bailouts.
In its overhaul of financial regulation last week, the Obama administration proposed several measures to try to contain the biggest of America’s big banks. But it stopped far short of calling for the dismantling of those institutions.
A few Jeremiahs within the administration wanted more. They contended that the biggest banks must be streamlined, and that, in the future, banks should not be allowed to grow to the point where they pose a threat to the financial system. But they are losing a battle to other officials and banking executives who argue that such radical steps would be impracticable and deal yet another blow to the nation’s damaged financial industry. Washington, the argument goes, let banks grow into behemoths in the first place. Now, all of us must live with the consequences.
“FOMC should be held accountable for this choice.”???
Sorry, the FOMC had nothing to do with Dodd Frank. Our elected officials are choosing to allow TBTF to continue.
“He would advocate this even if he thought such banks would never have a crisis sufficient to threaten the financial system. He believes they are unhealthy for the financial system even when they are healthy.”
They are also unhealthy given our venal political system.
The housing crime syndicate operators and proxies are desperately flailing away attempting to salvage what’s left of their big lie.
If you can make the telephony or the airline industry more competitive by busting up 800 lb corporate behemoths, why not try it in the banking sector?
Main Street America deserves better banking services than the Fed-funded parasitic vampire squid offerings of Wall Street’s Megabank, Inc cartel has to offer.
You don’t go far enough.
Several hundred bank executives need to go to jail and the last five years of bonuses need to be clawed back
Then they need to understand that NO future bad decisions will be bailed out - no matter how much money they donate to the current administration.
And the government will no longer guaranteed ANY type of bank loans.
My post was not meant to prescribe limits on the scope of measures needed to restore trust in our financial system.
For once I actually agree with one of your posts, brother, except for the politics, which I find completely irrelevant.
… - no matter how much money they donate to the current administration.
Had Mitt Romney been elected president, we would have more of the same, and perhaps a lot more.
I meant any administration.
Interesting how you linked it to obama with the only defense is that the other guy would have done it too.
The logic used by 5 year olds and criminals who get caught.
“Interesting how you linked it to obama with the only defense is that the other guy would have done it too.”
Funny, isn’t it, how your stopped-clock barrage of post-election Republican propaganda elicited that interpretation?
How would they go to jail when they are in bed together scratch each other’s back.
“…scratch kiss each other’s back balz.”
I discussed Fisher’s bull with a colleague at work, who is in line to inherit his dad’s Texas ranch. He opined that it really is possible for a breeding bull to be “too big.”
Too Big to Fail Too Hard to Fix Amid Calls to Curb Banks
By Craig Torres & Cheyenne Hopkins - Feb 4, 2013 12:07 PM PT
Three of the four largest U.S. banks — JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) — are bigger today than they were in 2007, heightening the risk of economic damage if one gets into trouble. JPMorgan’s 2012 trading loss of more than $6.2 billion from a bet on credit derivatives raised questions anew about whether the largest institutions have grown too complex for oversight.
That loss is among events that “have proven ‘too big to fail’ banks are also too big to manage and too big to regulate,” Brown, an Ohio Democrat, said in a Jan. 22 e-mail. “The question is no longer about whether these megabanks should be restructured, but how we should do it.”
Brown and fellow Banking Committee member David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, are considering legislation that would impose capital levels on the largest banks higher than those agreed to by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Financial Stability Board, which set global standards. Brown also plans to reintroduce a bill he failed to get included in Dodd-Frank or passed in the last Congress that would cap bank size and limit non-deposit liabilities.
The two senators have asked the Government Accountability Office to look into the economic benefits including lower borrowing costs that banks with more than $500 billion in assets receive as a result of federal deposit insurance, access to the Fed’s discount window and investor perceptions that they’ll be rescued in times of trouble.
Momentum for revisiting Dodd-Frank, whose Democratic authors Senator Christopher Dodd and Representative Barney Frank are no longer in Congress, is driven by both parties. Still, lawmakers are nowhere near consensus on what approach to take — whether raising capital standards, limiting the size of institutions or curbing subsidies.
The push by regulators may encourage Congress to take another look at the law, said Camden Fine, chief executive officer of Independent Community Bankers of America, which represents about 5,000 small lenders.
“I think there’s going to be a synergy here between the regulators and Congress,” said Fine. “If regulators call for new authority, Congress will look for that. I would say that between now and probably the end of 2015 or 2016 you’re going to see some significant step by both Congress and regulatory agencies to rein in the big banks.”
The Dallas Fed’s Fisher, who keeps a breeding bull named “Too Big to Fail” on his Texas ranch, proposed in a Jan. 16 speech that regulators be explicit about what kinds of banking the government will backstop. Deposit insurance and discount- window loans would be available only to a firm’s commercial and consumer-banking operations. Fisher’s proposal would push other risk-taking businesses, such as investment banking, away from government support, raising their cost of funding.
Fisher said reaction to his speech and bipartisan interest in limiting the safety net for banks make him think Congress may act on the issue.
“I believe deep in my heart, in the way that speech has been received” that lawmakers “will move on this front,” he said in an interview with Kathleen Hays on Bloomberg Radio’s “The Hays Advantage.”
While Senators Brown and Vitter want to limit bank size, “I’m a little uncomfortable about that,” Fisher said. “But it may be necessary from a transition standpoint.”
Anyone on line from the Northeast or upper Mid-Atlantic? If so, what are conditions like on the ground, really? Is it snowmageddon, or just a bad blizzard such as we’ve had in the past?
BTW, these weather events can be so over-hyped. You’d think this stuff is something out of the ordinary, but when I wuz a pup, we had bad storms and blizzards. And I don’t recall such massive power outages.
The real culprit, IMO, is “growth”. As in cancer. Somebody farts, and everyone gets all hysterical “Oh, what will this do to the eeeeeeCONomeeeeeeee.?”
‘The real culprit, IMO, is “growth”.’
Don’t forget about global warming.
Easiest way to mitigate global warming, is put on a condom.
Not my quote, BTW.
Growth of the cancer kind can bring about all sorts of unwanted environmental conditions, as we’re seeing.
Drought, famine, flooding, degradation of water supply, etc.
So this what, the 5th storm in 5 years to knock out power on the east coast??
I bet most people still don’t have generators or emergency water/food supplies.
I’d rather have a wood-stove than a generator—very simple, and unlikely to break. The last thing you want during an outage is to depend on something that may not be reliable.
How many people with generators actually perform proper maintenance on them?
Meanwhile, we’re having a snow free winter here on the Colorado Front Range
Meanwhile, we’re having another snow free winter here on the Colorado Front Range
“Meanwhile, we’re having a snow free winter here on the Colorado Front Range”
Not good news for Lake Powell nor Lake Mead.
Indeed. It is snowing in the Rockies, but not enough. Things are going to get interesting in US south west next summer.
‘ Is it snowmageddon, or just a bad blizzard such as we’ve had in the past?’
It’s snow-a-gettin’ me cabin fever. Very windy out. All powder snow with three foot high drifts in the parking lot. Everything is closed. Post offices, stores, you name it. No reason to go out except I did the same yesterday and need to get to the gym ( which is supposed to be open , haaa!) or else I am going to succumb to eating those cookies in the freezer………
Where are you located?
Soon they will pass a law that forbids cars to be parked on the street in a storm!
They have a few cant park during snowstorm streets here…but even churches here have very small parking lots 25-30 cars tops we have no big supermarket lots or garages to move the cars to.
In Madison, WI, they used to have “alternate-side parking”—in other words, when the plows needed access, you could only park on one side of the street one day, and only on the other side the next day.
Net result: they could plow the street in its entirety over the course of two days. That always struck me as a pretty smart solution.
But they suspend that here for holidays and snowstorms
Here you can’t park on the street from November till April because of snow.
Am thinking of heading up maybe Monday. Chains in town?
at the moment, mostly yes, by Monday could change
Charlie but you have a weird thing called driveways…
Hello from suburban Boston. About 2 feet but snow is tapering off. Very windy. It’s a typical Northeaster. But guess places to west and south got more snow. All in all a bit hyped. Got to keep viewers glued to the TV.
when I wuz a pup, we had bad storms and blizzards. And I don’t recall such massive power outages.
Almost exactly 35 years ago northern Ohio had its Winter Hurricane. 50 died, many in cars that were marooned & stuck on public roads. Power in rural areas was out for over a week & people with health problems had to be evacuated by National Guard helicopters. One woman I knew had a baby at the beginning of the storm in a farm house. Baby did fine. Mother developed a uterine infection, surely related to stress of no heat & lights, had to be flown out & had an emergency hysterectomy to save her life. A semi truck driver named James Truly got stuck on a state highway near Mansfield after making a steel delivery to an auto plant. He got disoriented in white out conditions and had to park his truck. He had a CB and called for help, but the corrupt local sheriff’s department ignored him. He was buried alive for 124 hours until a National Guard team instigated by his brother, who drove down from Cleveland, found his truck by probing drifted snow along the road side. They had to dig down about 6 feet to get Truly out. His truck was buried so deep it was completely invisible to detection by air.
For a couple of days Akron & other cities banned all non-emergency private vehicular traffic so that the fire, EMS & bus systems could continue to operate. US 30 in the western part of the state was deliberately blocked by snow removal equipment to keep people from driving into a no-go zone where conditions were impossible.
I would call this “massive” by any definition. How soon we forget. News from the NE indicates similar conditions, although I do think they will improve more rapidly than Ohio did in 1978.
Despite all this, the morning after the storm I walked from my house to the bus stop, caught a bus, and was only 5 minutes late for work at a local hospital. Most all the staff did the same, and the hospital did business as usual. The wise decision of local authorities to outlaw non-emergency, non-public transportation saved the day, otherwise the streets and highways would have been clogged by hundreds of ninnies getting stuck.
7 February 2013 Last updated at 02:26 ET
India cuts economic growth forecast to 5%
India has lowered its growth forecast for the second time in two weeks, underlining the challenges it faces in reviving its sluggish economy.
The statistical office has forecast growth of 5% for the year to 31 March 2013, based on advanced estimates.
Last week, India’s central bank had cut its forecast to 5.5% from 5.8%.
India’s growth has slowed in recent months because of several factors, not least the sharp slowdown in its manufacturing and services sectors.
Rupa Rege Nitsure, chief economist at the Bank of Baroda, said that the revised figure of 5% growth was “more in tune with reality”.
“The industrial sector downturn has extended beyond anyone’s expectation. Exports have been continuously declining, non-food credit growth is slowing while agricultural sector performance has also been sub-optimal,” she added.
I’m thinking that the expiration of the US Payroll Tax holiday is being felt around the world, as Americans are buying fewer toys and goodies, which are mostly imported these days.
My, my, such responsibility that comes from being the world’s consumer of last resort.
Poor India and China, they’re only going to have 5% growth. We should offshore even more jobs to their countries and buy more stuff from them (on credit, of course, since we’re broke) as they definitely deserve 10% annual growth.
India is being priced out by cheaper countries like China and the Philippines.
India is riding a major RE bubble. The problem is that the central banks all over the world have pledged to print and increase the M0 supply to infinity. Probably this is the new normal. But how long can it go on till the RE bubbles burst all across the world. With everyone printing, net effect in currency depreciation is almost zero.
I hope this nonsense end sooner than later and RE comes to sanity all around the world. India should really be in recession as it is just a service based economy and massive Keysianism going on there. RE values have climed more than 500% since 2005.
Someone with a Georgetown degree should know how to handle their finances better…
It is too bad the article does not say what the Atlanta house sold for at auction. I am thinking around $1.5 million.
That is quite a haircut from the $4.5 million original cost.
Allen Iverson Foreclosure: See the $2.8 Million Atlanta Home Ex-NBA Star Lost
By AOL Real Estate Editors - 2/7/2013
Former NBA star Allen Iverson isn’t having a good week. First, a judge skewered him Tuesday for bad parenting skills, and now he’s lost his giant Atlanta mansion to foreclosure. Iverson’s nearly 10,000-square-foot home on Atlanta’s exclusive West Paces Ferry Road had been on the market for $2.5 million, but it was sold at auction Tuesday back to Georgia Primary Bank, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. Iverson built the home for $4.5 million in 2009 and lived there with his wife and five kids, but he and his wife recently divorced. A current listing on the house shows the asking price at $2.8 million.
Allen Iverson Don’t think this is the first time Iverson has lost a home to foreclosure. Back in 2011, when he was shooting for the Denver Nuggets, Iverson also lost his posh $3.875 million Cherry Hills, Colo., mansion to foreclosure after defaulting on the mortgage, according to the Denver Post. Luckily, a buyer had entered into contract to buy the home before Iverson defaulted, the Post said.
Iverson’s Atlanta home is quite the luxury estate, one you wouldn’t expect to see on the auction block. The listing calls it “one of, if not the finest, private gated estates ever to become available in Atlanta.” Iverson had sunk $4.5 million into building it with a custom bar, gourmet kitchen, master suite with “spa-like” bath and luxury accents such as copper gutters. Click through the gallery below to see the amazing home Iverson has lost.
Simply breathtaking how these pro athletes piss money away.
A few seasons ago the Broncos lost most of their running backs to injury midseason and had to scramble to find replacements pronto. They recalled a guy they cut from the previous season. This was a guy who had played for them for a few seasons and no doubt had earned the equivalent of a lottery jackpot over that period and should have been able to retire in comfort. It turns out he was working in a cell phone kiosk in a mall when he was recalled to the team. In an interview he admitted that he was flat broke.
No matter how much revenue comes in - they will piss away all of it and even go greatly in debt.
Sometimes I get confused if we we talking pro-athletes or government…
The main difference is that aren’t pissing away someone else’s money. And unlike pro athletes, governments tend to have steady sources of income into the long term
I don’t think they’re any dumber than the average person. It’s just like watching a bunch of J6Ps get handed a few million.
It’s just like watching a bunch of J6Ps get handed a few million.
Yup. A great many people in the USA are capable of wasting money far faster than anyone can give it to them. Some of us have relatives like that.
Never underestimate the number of people that follow pro athletes around with their hands out.
20 Reasons America Is Becoming An Increasingly Nonfunctional Society
Townhall.com | February 9, 2013 | John Hawkins
2) Many people are becoming so childlike in their dependence on the government that they can’t save for their own retirement, escape from an oncoming hurricane, or even purchase their own birth control without the government handling it for them.
3) Our legal system encourages frivolous lawsuits, is punitively expensive and because of the political inclinations of the judges, can often be almost random.
4) Leeching off more productive people has become much more acceptable. To many people, taking welfare, food stamps, free lunches and anything else they can get the government to force someone else to pay for isn’t shameful; it’s deserved, presumably because they’re doing everyone else in the country such a wonderful favor just by existing.
5) The mainstream media has become so partisan for the Democratic Party that it’s not significantly different from a state-run media. Every news story and scandal is reported differently based solely on which party is involved. “Scandals” that would destroy the careers of Republicans are largely ignored and treated as irrelevant when Democrats are involved.
6) Americans have lost confidence in our institutions. Most Americans don’t trust our politicians, our criminal justice system, big business, our schools, our media or our churches.
7) As choices have proliferated because of the Internet, TV, and our affluent culture, Americans have become more alien to each other and share less and less cultural experiences. Today, two Americans may live in the same small community without ever talking, watching the same TV shows, listening to the same radio programs, or getting news from the same sources.
9) We have stopped breaking up monopolies in this country and that has allowed mega-corporations to have an outsized and unhealthy level of influence on our political process. That’s how corporations that make more money every sixty seconds than the average person does in a lifetime can rake in hundreds of millions each year in subsidies and be given access to billions of dollars’ worth of your money when they make dumb decisions that put their companies’ futures at risk.
14) Over the past few decades both parties, but particularly the Democrats, have given up on the idea that the government should have any sort of limits on what it spends, should be required to afford new spending, or should even try to pay back the money it already owes.
17) Our federal government has grown so far beyond the boundaries that were originally intended for it by the Founding Fathers that it intrudes and interferes into almost every facet of American life. Since the government is always slower, stupider, and less efficient than the private sector it feeds off to grow, this leads to an inevitable decline.
19) As the standard of living in America has increased and globalism has made having manual labor done in foreign countries more economical, highly paid, low skill level jobs have mostly either been replaced by technology or have moved offshore to nations with cheaper labor. This means that a large number of men who could have once held “good” jobs that could have provided a living for them and a family now are barely able to take care of themselves and they also have poor future prospects in an economy that now favors highly educated, heavily skilled workers.
Not a word on the MIC….
#1 We tend to make too many long lists.
This means that a large number of men who could have once held “good” jobs that could have provided a living for them and a family now are barely able to take care of themselves and they also have poor future prospects
Gee, ya think maybe this is why the “have a childlike dependence on government?” Instead of spending the taxpayer money trying to repeal Obamacare 30 TIMES, why not try to bring some jobs back, and then maybe we’d have fewer people “leaching off the more productive.”
That’s commie talk
Reason 21: Too much extremist political propaganda, not enough rational discussion of what’s best for America’s future.
What do you make of this? $450K last sold in Dec 2012 for $600K? Typo on the tax record? Someone bought hoping to tear down and build bigger but could not get zoning? Other?
This record also shows it being sold for $1 April 12, 2012, a little over 6 months prior to the $599k sale.
Definitely something fishy going on…
The Truth Behind Our Entitlement Culture
By Steve Tobak - Critical Thinking - February 07, 2013
Entitlements are two-thirds of the federal budget. Entitlement spending has grown 100-fold over the past 50 years. Half of all American households now rely on government handouts.
The truth is that America’s growing entitlement culture is far more pervasive than people realize. It’s also far more top-down than people realize. Indeed, the entitlement mindset that’s infecting America starts with our leadership, and not just in Washington, either.
The truth is that nobody wants to give up their stuff. Not our congressional leaders with their pork projects and no term limits, not our corrupt and power-hungry regulators, not our ridiculously overcompensated big-company CEOs, not our public union workers, not our overhyped and overpaid celebrities.
And certainly not everyone else. Why? Because, folks have this perception that everyone is getting rich but them. When they see leaders who aren’t held accountable making big bucks they don’t deserve, what do you think happens? That’s right. They become resentful, jealous, angry, and selfish. They want their piece of American Pie. And why shouldn’t they?
So, you want to know what’s fueling our entitlement state? You really want to know? Okay. Here’s the truth:
Out of control executive compensation. In a 1984 essay, Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, argued that executive pay was out of control and lucrative severance packages destroyed accountability. “This is morally and socially unforgivable,” he said, “and we will pay a heavy price for it.” It’s gotten far, far worse since then. And there’s no end in sight.
Politicians getting rich on perks, trading stocks, speaking engagements, consulting, endorsements, investments, book deals, and who knows how else. No, Al Gore isn’t the only politician to make a fortune off his political clout, but he is, in my opinion, the poster child for hypocritical greed and gluttony. Don’t you find it at all odd how much more money politicians have than they make doing their “jobs?”
All the corruption in the entitlement system. When people see others on the take, they get the sense that it’s okay for them to do the same thing. There are people here in California living in million dollar homes and getting government handouts. No kidding.
Crony capitalism. When the banks, the regulators, the lobbyists, the Treasury, the Fed, the credit rating agencies, and who knows who else, all get caught with their pants down and American taxpayers have to bail them out, they get sort of fed up. Can you blame them?
Public employee union benefits. Employee contracts, great pay, generous pensions, free healthcare, no wonder all the states and municipalities are going broke. I never thought I’d see the day when it would pay off to be a government bureaucrat. Something’s very, very wrong here.
Out of control government spending. What kind of example does that set for American families? When our government is sitting on a mound of record debt and there’s no accountability, why should Americans be fiscally responsible?
Never let a good crisis go to waste. Whether the Dems are really buying voters by giving them stuff, or the GOP has a bad case of sour grapes it calls “the changing demographics of America,” it doesn’t matter. Neither side misses an opportunity to demagogue the other. And that leaves everyone feeling like they’re being used. It’s demotivating, to say the least.
High corporate tax rates pushing corporations to park profits offshore. I don’t fault our corporations for seeking tax havens in other countries. Our high corporate tax rates and loopholes are to blame. But when companies skirt taxes, what message does that send to the people?
Burden of illegal aliens on society and infrastructure. One of most demoralizing issues for those who jump through all the hoops to immigrate to this country legally is that people who break the law somehow end up with all sorts of handouts anyway.
Athletes and entertainers making ungodly amounts of money. That, and the excesses of all the celebrities, reality TV stars, pop culture icons, and society people like the Kardashians and Lindsay Lohan. That just adds to the jealousy factor and the “where’s my piece of the pie?” mentality. The saddest thing about it is how many of them still end up blowing it and going bankrupt.
It’s in our schools and in our speech. There are no winners or losers anymore. Everyone gets a gold star. Everyone gets an award. There are no individuals, no standouts. We wouldn’t want to offend anyone. Everything has to be inclusive, especially in our politically correct speech. That takes all the power out of the concept of individual responsibility and exceptionalism.
And eventually, one way or another, America will collapse under its weight.
It’s in our schools and in our speech. There are no winners or losers anymore. Everyone gets a gold star.
Yeah, right. That’s why my kids graduated from High School with honors, 4.0 GPAs and got scholarships for college, while the overwhelming majority of their peers did not come close. Gold stars for everyone? I don’t think so.
Nope, not our location either. The district is sharply competitive. There are kids w/their entire schedule AP courses. We have national level superlatives in all sorts of activities. Music virtuosos leave the more mainstream band or orchestra members, although talented in their own right, out of the spotlight on their special nights. (My 7th grader really struggles when these kids are trotted out and the audience goes wild barely noticing the band has worked especially hard on a difficult piece.) There are 4 different levels of many of the subject matters available depending on how much material you can process in the time frame. Kids in the remedial levels may be treated w/respect if they are showing up w/a good attitude but they will never be getting star treatment.
How can you include retired military and social security recipients in with the “government handouts” crowd?
Get off my lawn!
I was with Steve Tobak until the final paragraphs — where he certainly isn’t demonstrating much “critical thinking”.
First he tells us:
“Athletes and entertainers making ungodly amounts of money…all the celebrities, reality TV stars, pop culture icons, and society people like the Kardashians and Lindsay Lohan.”
And in the very next paragraph:
“There are no winners or losers anymore. Everyone gets a gold star. Everyone gets an award. There are no individuals, no standouts….”
In America, there are plenty of “standouts”– just as there are plenty of immigration cheats, but there are also plenty of “quiet” standouts as well quiet cheats, and it is these oiligarchic cronies and corporate boards who have skewed the social system so far in their favor as to threaten America’s cohesion — not the increasingly disgruntled people who work (or used to work) for them.
Incentive has to come from within, but if there isn’t a framework from which to employ it, people will survive any way they can. All too frequently, that leads to violence.
Last night I watched John Ford’s iconic film of Steinbeck’s “Grapes of Wrath” again, and for the first time in many such viewings found it resonant rather than quaint. Of particular interest to me was the strong message of communism presented by one of the most notoriously individualistic directors (and producers, D.F. Zanuck) in the business at the time. Taken in the context of the times, there is a sobering lesson to be considered.
Today broken-down vans and campers again line the Edison Highway, and the faces of the furtive camping out in the fields and orchards are just as gaunt, but the real story of desperation and loss has transferred to the suburbs where there is an overflow of people searching for jobs, any jobs, to keep them and their family from massive social upheaval. And they’re not finding them.
It’s one thing to lump whole classes of human beings into “parasites” or “producers”, but Tobak seems to miss the broader point, namely that we all inhabit the same system. And like it or not, the numbers aren’t on his side. America’s “weight” is tipped to one extreme end, and it’s in desperate need of rebalancing if our nation is to survive.
This isn’t an ideological issue, it’s a practical one. The real question is how to manage it without resorting to either totalitarianism or anarchy — either of which is likely to lead to bloodshed.
I never thought I’d see the day when it would pay off to be a government bureaucrat. Something’s very, very wrong here.
That “something very very wrong” is the Bottomless Stockholder Maw and its overbonused CEO’s. Pension and retirement plans, at least at the federal level, for government workers hasn’t really changed; in fact it’s not as good as it used to be. It simply looks better because in comparison private sector has decimated its benefits and retirement for full time employees, turned a lot of full-timers into part-timers to eliminate benefits altogether, or offshored the job altogether.
I get the most people mad and angry with me over this…Diversity of opinion includes ME
Everything has to be inclusive
How does the paranoid home arsenal owners club feel about the revelation that Obama can target your house with a drone strike if he chooses?
Big Brother is watching you — from a drone’s eye view.
A Map Of Where Drones Are Allowed In The U.S.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation releases the Federal Aviation Administration’s drone authorization list. See who’s allowed to fly drones in your neighborhood!
By Colin Lecher Posted 02.08.2013 at 2:15 pm
If you want to fly more than a hobbyist’s drone in the United States, you have to get permission from the Federal Aviation Administration. We’ve know for a while about some drones–the ones keeping an eye on the U.S.-Mexico border, for example–but this list of applications through October 2012, obtained and mapped by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, is the most up-to-date look at domestic-drone permissions we’ve got.
The list is broken down by “entities,” places like colleges or local sheriff’s offices that have applied to the FAA for a license to use drones. The 81 entities on the list, 20 more than on the first list we saw from the EFF, are mixed: a lot of drones are going to government agencies like police departments, a lot to universities and colleges, others to drone manufacturers, and one to an Indian tribal agency. For some reason, Ohio seems to have been granted a lot of permits in this round.
On this interactive map, you can find out what type of drones many applicants were authorized to use: We know the Nellis Air Force base in Nevada has a license to use an MQ-1 Predator drone, and the University of Colorado, Boulder, has a license to use a NexSTAR miniature UAS drone to do experiments into weather and wireless networks. But we don’t know what everyone’s allowed to use. The U.S. Army, for instance, has, permission to fly drones in the “general location” of the Pentagon. Type of drone? “Unknown.”
What this list also doesn’t tell us is how many drones are flying around or how many drones each entity is flying. Like, does the U.S. Army have some gigantic fleet of drones at the Pentagon? This doesn’t say.
All the better to live in a crowded area such as apartment building or high rise. I don’t think the thugernment is at the point of not worrying about collateral damage from drone strikes. However LAPD is happy to shoot to kill people in vehicles that resemble suspects they are looking for. The two women in Torrance were lucky not to be killed. But the cops did not seem to care either way. This happened about two miles of where I rent in L.A. I was out that morning at the times of the shootings of those innocent women by LAPD. I was on foot, headed to my car parked streetside and several emergency vehicles were blaring sirens, one headed southward toward a nearby hospital.
“However LAPD is happy to shoot to kill people in vehicles that resemble suspects they are looking for.”
It’s frightening — and yet another reason I am glad to not live in LA.
Liberals and progressive are funny.
They NEVER think the new insane powers they bestow on the liberals/progressives in power will ever be used against them.
Or against the policies they hold dear.
I guess they figure republicans will not play by the same rules.
Is your world trichotomized into blue-blooded Republicans, liberals, progressives?
Because your tiresome posts sure do read that way.
I was the target of a drone (?) intimidation attempt about six or seven years ago when I (repeatedly) called the public affairs officer at Edwards Air Force Base to complain about low-flying test pilots violating my airspace (FCC no-no) and intentionally stampeding my stock.
In subsequent weeks my house was periodically circled at low altitude by sleek red and white aircraft (I’m out in the middle of nowhere and the only structure around) for five-to-ten minutes at a time. Very disconcerting the first time it happened. Then it came back. Twice.
Rather than track it through the telescopic site on my deer rifle (FBI bait for certain) I went out on my balcony with my digi-cam and stood there in plain sight, filming it buzzing me.
Then I posted it to Youtube, and called the public affairs officer to tell him to tell his gameboys to knock it off or I’d go to high def and blow the cover on their proprietary design.
Youtube banned me, but the buzzing stopped. They may have my coordinates, but I’ve got their number– for now….
Good Lord, woman — the reality of your posts scares me some times!
How do you think I-iiii feel?
The Ruby Ridge and Waco fiascos were some of the first transgressions. Many conservative Republicans were fine with how the government acted. The handling of Elian by Jackboot Janet was another sign. The mishandling of the war on terror and the needless invasion of Iraq, the “Patriot Act,” the refusal to use racial profiling, in favor of undoing diapers of old cancer patients at TSA checkpoints, the executive orders to assassinate any American, the use of drones spying on Americans, as noted by the above post, the threat to take away our guns, which are our only way to defend against tyranny. One by one, more former conservatives drop out of support for the same things they supported in the past. One by one they question the use of force. One by one they recognize the war on drugs is an excuse to take more of our money and take away more of our civil liberties. It is no wonder conservatives are becoming libertarians and former libertarians are now calling themselves voluntaryists. If we reject voting, what are left are 1) disobedience and 2) self defense on our own properties. One of our bill of rights allows us to be secure in our own homes.
jeeez….. you got some brass for a lady.
Here is a question that is bound to be forming in every patriotic traditional Goldwater conservative’s head, as well as eve Reagan conservative, which is far less interventionist than the endless warfare GWB conservative:
At what point will I be considered a traitor, no longer a patriot, if I not only say this government is way beyond the constitution, but I participate in civil disobedience? Will it be when the government infringes on the second amendment? Will it be when government orders Citizen’s to send in their gold?
And those conservatives who work in the DOD are bound to start asking these: am I a traitor if I proclaim that the “Patriot Act” and NDAA are bad laws and intrusive and overstepping g the constitution? Will I be denied a clearance by not reporting what guns I have? By refusing to turn in my AR15? Will I be denied a clearance for opposing the Patriot Act and the presidents ability to order the assassination of any American based on the constitution?
I am quite sure these very questions are in everyone’s heads and most likely why, to date, it’s been virtually all quiet on the western front.
“…if I not only say this government is way beyond the constitution, but I participate in civil disobedience?”
Didn’t the Occupy Wall Street movement peops already test that?
OWS was not against government, but against wall street, without which you and I would not profit on our stock index funds. They disobeyed minor laws of vagrancy I suppose, but I doubt they would oppose taxes and gun control.
“How does the paranoid home arsenal owners club feel about the revelation that Obama can target your house with a drone strike if he chooses?”
Oh I don`t know, the FEMA camps look nice. I really like the way they are right by train tracks.
Jesse Ventura FEMA Camps 1 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-RoWFUQ63k - 146k - Cached - Similar pages
Dec 12, 2012 … TruTV never re-aired Jesse Ventura’s FEMA Camp show because of constant government harassment and pressure. It has already been …
Napolitano stands by controversial report
By Eli Lake and Audrey Hudson
The Washington Times
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S.
But the top House Democrat with oversight of the Department of Homeland Security said in a letter to Ms. Napolitano that he was “dumbfounded” that such a report would be issued.
“Rightwing extremism,” the report said in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to “those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.”
“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” said the report, which also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks.”
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/#ixzz2KRNEaStV
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
My personal favorite is….
Jesse Ventura FEMA Camps 3 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJy0zjRTYwg - 132k -
I have my city of Phoenix sample ballot and publicity booklet, as it’s called, in front of me. The system from local to federal is rigged. I know in 2010 I vowed not to vote, but went ahead and voted for Gary Johnson in 2012 and libertarians in other contests. But I no longer care about voting, particularly with the job the RNC did against the Ron Paul campaign.
The revolution will hopefully be peaceful through civil disobedience. How many more transgressions and usurpations will we allow before we follow the advice of Thomas Jefferson? I hope we can succeed with combining Ghandi’s and Jefferson’s advice to restore our liberties. But we should keep our guns ready if needed to guard our lives and those of our loved ones and our property from tyrannical occupies of Washington and their agents. New Yorkers are going to disobey commie Cuomo’s infringement edicts on 2A.
Gun owners potential risks? 2.7 million background checks in December and 2.4 million in January for new gun purchases. The amount was so huge it brought down the computers for a bit. We people who are actively enjoying our second amendment are on the $hit list? Boggles my mind.
I take CCW class in a few days.
Also opposition to abortion and immigration? While I am pro choice, I certainly would not consider the opposite side a threat to national security.
In reality, there are centuries of precedents where American presidents exceeded Constitutional limits on their power, going back almost as far as the birth of the Constitution. So I am a bit confused why so many folks have their undies in a bunch over the present instance.
Death By Drone, And The Sliding Scale Of Presidential Power
by Frank James
February 08, 2013 1:18 PM
An unmanned drone armed with Hellfire missiles is shown over southern Afghanistan. A Hellfire missile fired from a drone was used in 2011 to kill an American in Yemen who the Obama administration says was an al-Qaida leader. Another American died in that attack, and a 16-year-old American was killed in a separate drone strike. Enlarge image
An unmanned drone armed with Hellfire missiles is shown over southern Afghanistan. A Hellfire missile fired from a drone was used in 2011 to kill an American in Yemen who the Obama administration says was an al-Qaida leader. Another American died in that attack, and a 16-year-old American was killed in a separate drone strike.
The controversy over President Obama’s targeted-killings-by-drone policy is a reminder that the default position of presidents in times of crisis is generally to side with national security over civil liberties.
Whether it has been Great Emancipator Abraham Lincoln sidestepping Congress and suspending habeas corpus to enable the arrests of scores of Confederate sympathizers, or that great liberal Franklin D. Roosevelt placing his imprimatur on the internment in camps of hundreds of thousands of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor, presidents have often used their power as military commander-in-chief in ways profoundly at odds with constitutional protections of the individual.
If truth is the first casualty of war, civil liberties often come second.
A 2008 collection of essays titled Security v. Liberty, published by the Russell Sage Foundation, examines this tension throughout the nation’s history. It found no shortage of times when national security concerns — as defined by a president who was sometimes abetted by Congress and the courts — infringed on civil liberties.
A Legacy Of Power Grabs
And the examples go all the way back to the start of the republic.
Daniel Farber, the University of California, Berkeley law professor who edited the book, said he came away from the project with the sense that it’s more the rule than the exception that civil liberties are early casualties of a president’s response to national emergencies.
In an interview, Farber said:
My feeling, after looking at all that history in the book, is that that just goes with the office. It’s part of what happens when you’re sitting in the Oval Office.
Presidents, regardless of political party, or liberal versus conservative, they just don’t seem to have a lot of qualms about doing what they think is necessary for national security. So it doesn’t surprise me [that Obama has allowed Americans to be targeted in drone strikes overseas]. There have been very few exceptions.
My feeling, after looking at all that history in the book, is that that just goes with the office. It’s part of what happens when you’re sitting in the Oval Office.
Presidents, regardless of political party, or liberal versus conservative, they just don’t seem to have a lot of qualms about doing what they think is necessary for national security. So it doesn’t surprise me [that Obama has allowed Americans to be targeted in drone strikes overseas]. There have been very few exceptions.
The nation had barely begun when Congress in 1798 passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, during a time when the Federalist-led government worried both about an actual French invasion and the French Revolution introducing destabilizing ideas into the new American Republic.
Among other things, the acts made it a crime for anyone to criticize the government. This was seven years after the states ratified the First Amendment, which protected the rights of U.S. citizens to make such criticisms.
Thanks for your post. The real question is why do we have this permanent war in the middle east? If war emergencies are when we can forgive government for violating our individual rights, what mechanism do we have for keeping said emergencies as brief as possible?
The congressional power to lay and collect taxes was considered for emergencies only, which is why the only income tax in the U.S. prior to 1913 was during the Civil War and abolished in 1871. Emergency over.
So we had a 100 year national emergency, is that why we should forgive government for stealing our income and profits?
What eventually happens when you borrow and borrow and have insane amounts of debt.
But hey, let’s kick the can down the road and call anyone who wants to cut even $1 of government spending racists and wanting to starve kids and have grandma sleep in the street.
and yes - soon to come to America.
Days After Freezing Prices, Argentina Bans All Advertising
Tyler Durden - 02/09/2013 - zerohedge
A week after Argentina resorted to every failing authoritarian government’s last ditch measure to (briefly) control inflation before runaway prices flood the nation and result in political and social upheaval, namely freezing retail prices - a decision which never has a happy ending, the country is pressing on through the rabbit hole and in the latest stunner of a government decree (which like Venezuela yesterday is merely a harbinger of what is coming everywhere else), has banned advertising in the Argentina’s newspapers in an attempt to weaken what’s left of a private, independent media, and to punish those who don’t comply with the government’s propaganda.
At the end of the day, this like every other idiotic measure taken by a government in its last throes is just to preserve power one more month, or week, or day:
Gabriel Gómez, an economist at the research firm Consultora Ledesma, said the government is imposing short-term price controls and advertising limits ahead of a key mid-term election in October.
Or, as is the case everywhere: when the government’s self preservation is the bottom line, screw the people. Alas, that is the case now in every “developed world” nation, whose status quo is clinging on to dear life as the legacy socioeconomic and financial system implodes.
Keep an eye on just how far Kirchner will go to keep her place in power - that will be a useful indicator of what is coming to every banana republic next, and quite soon.
All the more reason why we need to stop the offshoring juggernaut. Remember that the next time you buy something imported because its cheaper.
I just bought some T-Shirts from an American manufacturer…plenty expensive, but I know for a fact they’ll last longer than the cheaper, imported variety.
Disability insurance programs vulnerable to fraud, abuse
David Lee Miller reports from New York
Date Feb 4, 2013
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2141985493001/disability-insurance-programs-vulnerable-to-fraud-abuse-/ - 27k -
Just checked the return since I parked some savings in the Vanguard REIT fund late last September. It’s up 15.5 percent annualized — pretty sweet returns for making a foolish real estate investment.
Good choice! I was going to buy that fund but got completely out of dividends as my personal rule until axes come down. Probably won’t see taxes comIng down in my lifetime.
I bought $18,000 worth of stock in VMW, AAPL, HES and DLTR a few weeks ago. VMW after its 20% haircut. All are low or no yielding. Good to sit on for five years perhaps. Wanted to diversify out of my company stock without realizing aims this year.
IPad predictive text trips me up again, by now you know the context though.
good choice I have that same fund in a IRA
I also own shares in the wellington fund and a corporate bond fund
and a money market in case I want to buy somthing
Right here is the perfect webpage for everyone who wishes
to find out about this topic. You understand a whole lot its almost hard to argue with you (not that I
really would want to…HaHa). You certainly put a new spin on a subject which has been
discussed for decades. Wonderful stuff, just excellent!
Feel free to visit my blog; Ninja Morning Trade Review
Name:Ben Jones Location:Northern Arizona, United StatesTo donate by mail, or to otherwise contact this blogger, please send emails to: email@example.com
PayPal is a secure online payment method which accepts ALL major credit cards.
Subscribe to comments
Photo Submission: firstname.lastname@example.org
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008