Bits Bucket for May 18, 2013
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.
The Housing Bubble
Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
About Me
Name:Ben Jones
Location:Northern Arizona, United States
To donate by mail, or to otherwise contact this blogger, please send emails to: thehousingbubble@gmail.com
PayPal is a secure online payment method which accepts ALL major credit cards.
Links
-
April 2024 M T W T F S S « Sep 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Photo Submission: hbbphotos@gmail.com
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008
Timing the housing market is difficult because it is based on fraud and delusion. It is impossible to predict when reality will present itself.
we time it correctly when we renew our lease every six months.
bull markets are for selling.
with stocks watch revenue because earnings can be manipulated bigtime.
If the economy is so strong why is walmart missing on revenues?
It is a bifurcated economy. The poor get poorer and spend less and the well off are no longer feeling like they have to shop at Wal Mart since they are feeling wealthier. Wal Mart may also be losing its competitive advantage as inflation in China reduces the price advantages.
If the economy is so strong why is walmart missing on revenues ??
The customers of Wal-Mart provide your answer…Those customers have not been invited to the party…
Exactly, scdave.
You mean Walmart customers aren’t benefiting from Bernanke’s explosive DOW? You don’t say!
If only they learned to dollar-cost-average the last ten dollars of their bi-weekly paycheck into the stock market, they could all be rich by now!
I did a search of Olli Rehn from the article below and found Portraits of Bilderberg Meetings Participants. He is easy to find, he’s the white guy. Say hello to your masters.
Portraits of Bilderberg Meetings Participants - Scribd
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32723303/Portraits-of-Bilderberg-Meetings-Participants - 190k -
Top officials call to overhaul euro institutions
Posted: 3:05 a.m. Saturday, May 18, 2013
By JUERGEN BAETZ
The Associated Press
BERLIN —
Engineering a financial bailout for Cyprus in March was such a chaotic process that top European officials say it is time to rethink how the region manages its crisis — and who should be involved.
Officials say the International Monetary Fund, which has contributed financial expertise and billions in emergency loans, may no longer be needed as a key decision-making partner. And they say that the eurozone would be able to make decisions and take action more quickly if it wasn’t bound by the need for unanimous agreement among its 17 member countries.
These concerns have been raised before by analysts and government officials outside of Europe, but now two of the region’s leading financial decision-makers have said publicly that something needs to be done. Olli Rehn, the top economic official at the European Commission — the European Union’s executive arm — and Joerg Asmussen, who sits on the European Central Bank’s six-member executive board, said at a hearing last week that the easing of the financial crisis presents an opportunity to fix what is broken.
Portraits of Bilderberg Meetings Participants - Scribd
http://www.scribd.com/doc/32723303/Portraits-of-Bilderberg-Meetings-Participants - 190k - Cached - Similar pages
I appreciate your Bilderberg posts; the more people aware the better.
It’s the white people comment. Maybe I’ll come across as nitpicky, but I could live without that. I’m a lower middle class white person. We have been conditioned to hate ourselves, especially the young. The media, etc. has done a very good job at that. I’ve never been unkind to someone simply because of their race, and I’m sure I’m representative of the majority of white people.
If my husband happens to make an un-PC remark about another race, I always remind him that to the PTB we’re all scum and that we have far more in common with black and Spanish speaking people than these evil bastards.
It worries me when my 21 YO daughter says “white people” in a disparaging tone. I always respond “Honey, we are white people.” (And life is not a bowl of cherries for all of us, either.)
It’s all about keeping the poor fighting each other.
True.
“It’s the white people comment. Maybe I’ll come across as nitpicky,”
I put that in there not as a shot at white people in general, but at the elites who use the race card “tea billy” etc. to their advantage in order to advance their agenda. When you get to the top of the ladder where it comes from, the funny thing is it’s a bunch mega rich white elites doing it.
I have no problem with white people as long as they are decent people, hell I am white person myself. However I have no problem with brown, black or any other kind of people either, as long as they are decent people.
“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
King Jr. Martin Luther
PS
I am a “I’m a lower middle class white person.” too! And damn proud of it, just as I would be if I was a lower middle class black or brown person who had busted his @ss to take care of his family in good times and bad, done the best they could for neighbors, friends, my community and people in need.
“It worries me when my 21 YO daughter says “white people” in a disparaging tone.”
Mission accomplished.
David Rockefeller’s 1991 Bilderberg
Quote…Ten Years Later
Quote:
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”
I’m afraid so.
New masters? They’ve been running the show for decades.
I thought you all might enjoy this: Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.
“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.”
But if you use a gun to rob a man, don’t shove him in a closet where he keeps “his” guns.
Robbers Shove Homeowner In Closet, Where He Kept His Guns
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
May 17, 2013
In yet another pro-Second Amendment story that the national media dare not touch, a homeowner in Sharpstown, Houston was assaulted by three robbers who broke into his house and shut him in a closet – unaware that the closet was where he kept his guns.
With the homeowner thinking the three men had left, he exited the closet armed and proceeded to walk downstairs, before confronting one of the burglars and exchanging shots.
The homeowner was unharmed but the wounded robber stumbled outside and collapsed onto the floor, where he was watched by Neighbor Craig Gaddis who had heard the gunfire. The other two men fled the scene.
Neighbors said that the area had been plagued by a spate of recent robberies. The wounded suspect was hospitalized and the homeowner faces no charges for defending his property.
“Guess what? The owner had a gun,” Gaddis told local ABC 13 news. “He did exactly what he was supposed to do — with the gun, that’s what they’re made for — protect his home.”
http://www.infowars.com/robbers-shove-homeowner-in-closet-where-he-kept-his-guns/ - 134k -
I got the Explanation of Benefits from my insurance company for a pretty dull set of ordinary blood tests from my physical. The Lab charges $659. When I went to the lab, I had to provide a credit card and sign a form promising that I would pay $659 up to that amount, though it was clear that that amount would only be charged if the lab didn’t have an agreement with my insurance (they did) and if the insurance paid nothing. $659 is what a person without insurance would have to pay. And if they didn’t agree to it and provide a card that amount could be charged to, the samples wouldn’t even be taken.
The insurance company has a negotiated rate with the lab. The lab is more than willing to take this amount for taking the samples and running the tests. Presumably, they pay for their costs and can make some profit at this rate. What is it? $52.72. Yup. 8% of the amount they charge to the uninsured. 92% discount.
It is enough to make you sick. Or, at least leave you sick and ignorant of your illness. If you don’t have insurance and can’t afford the tests.
Our health system is broken.
A few years ago I had a dermatologist look at some spots on my hands and ear. I had told him up front that I didn’t have health insurance. He suggested that the spots might be pre-cancer and that he’d freeze them. He did 11 of them, charged me for one; $150. It would have been $1,650 if I had insurance. The time I spent with him was about 30 minutes. Treating the spots took around 5 minutes.
healthcare is one big scam that is about to get bigger.
anytime you have insurance that price of that service usually doubles.
autobody repair is another raquet.
have u seen those people at gas stations trying to fix windshield cracks or replace windshields?
First thing they ask, do you have insurance?
A doctor working for himself has the discretion to do that (treat 11 spots for the price of one). Whatever agreement he has with the insurance policies he accepts, is dependent on that $150 being what he “really” charges uninsured patients. He assumed you weren’t going to call the insurance companies and rat out the fact that he gave you 10 spots for free, making the real charge per spot around $15. Oh, and if you had had insurance, he would have charged for all 11 spots, but not at $150 each. A lot less. Probably between $10 and $20 each.
The employees at a giant corporation that processes lab samples don’t have the discretion to make those decisions the way a doc in private practice can.
‘if you had had insurance, he would have charged for all 11 spots, but not at $150 each…Probably between $10 and $20 each’
So there is no problem then. I don’t have insurance, it cost $150. If I’d had insurance, it would have cost $110. Even though he said it was $150 per treatment initially.
Because what you needed was treatment from a doc in private practice and you managed to find a nice guy. What if you had needed to be in a hospital (and you didn’t qualify for its charity care policy). What if you had needed lab work? What if you had ended up in the office of a large corporate practice where an executive makes discount decisions and you didn’t qualify? What if the doc had been a bit more of a jerk and decided to see if he could get more out of you despite you not having insurance? What if the doc hadn’t been a jerk but was a recent graduate with $250 K of student loans and needed to get every penny possible to pay them off? What if the doc had suspected you might be undercover from an insurance company whose policy he accepted and was trying to find out if his “regular charge” is what he really charged uninsured patients?
You got lucky with your spots and the dermatologist. Not every one is lucky all the time.
‘You got lucky’
Thinking about it more (it was many years ago) I should add more detail.
I was only worried about two places on my skin. I told him I didn’t have insurance and asked about the price, and he said $150 each. When he looked me over, he said you’ve really got 11 that need treatment. I said I don’t want to spend that much, just do the two that look bad. He went ahead, did them all and when I went to the counter the bill was $150, which I paid in cash.
The main point I’m trying to make is, what he did wasn’t worth $1,000. It took him 5 minutes with a little spray can; it took me a lot longer to make that $150.
Cash also pays. My partner had a procedure done and he negotiated a cash discount off the list price.
My healthcare story is that my wife, when pregnant with our first child had a rapid heartbeat measured (by human). The second test was low-tech, little GE listening device to measure the fetus’s heartbeat for a half hour. No expensive machine, no expensive test, no rapid heartbeat detected…approximately 4,000 heartbeats measured by low-tech machine…0 measured as rapid.
Now things get bad.
The doctor suggested a neonatal EKG, but said it was expensive. A couple of thousand dollars. He left the room and came back…GOOD NEWS!, our insurance covered it!
If he said that we needed to pay, we would have asked our primary care doc if we needed the test. After asking our primary care doc after the test, she said given the facts, it was way overkill…
Payment per procedure when the patient sees no cost is a recipe for overspending.
“The main point I’m trying to make is, what he did wasn’t worth $1,000. It took him 5 minutes with a little spray can; it took me a lot longer to make that $150.”
So why didn’t you do it yourself?
So why didn’t you do it yourself?
You cannot be this dense? The main obstacles to reduce healthcare costs in this country are the doctors, hospitals and the whole MedicalIC.
‘So why didn’t you do it yourself?’
I do now, in a way. I was told that if any of these blemishes came back, I should have a dermatologist look at it. A couple of years later one did and I had moved so I went to a different doctor. It was a really small spot, and the lady told me she wanted to take a biopsy and then remove it. I resisted because I don’t like having anything cut into me. After asking a few times if there wasn’t another way, she said there was a creme I could apply for three weeks and it might work. So I bought this creme for $125, it worked, and I went back for a followup. She then told me I could use it on any other blemish that I thought was unusual. I still have that tube, haven’t used 10% of it, and have successfully gotten rid of anything since.
IMO some of this is being a consumer of healthcare instead of blindly following what I’m told to do. And because it’s my money, I push for less costly, less intrusive treatment.
i’ve used two creams for this. aldara and efudex. they both worked, but aldara seemed to work the best. aldara comes in sachets and efudex comes in a tube. that might be what you used..
‘So why didn’t you do it yourself?’
I’m fair skinned and frequently battle the consequences of trying to tan as a youngster. What was I thinking? Anyway my hands are the biggest problem and in additon to the cream Ben mentions, I’ll use the OTC freeze treatment wart remover. You get about 5-6 shots per can for around 15 dollars. I save the derm visits for the spots I can’t see or reach.
Health care = 18% of USA GDP.
Single payer = better results at half the cost.
But to quote a HBB post from months ago, “I’d rather live 60 years under freedom than 80 years under tyranny”.
How very rugged individualist of you. The for-profit, private-sector, invisible hand of free market, insurance company death panels will make sure to bleed you dry of your last pennies at the end of those 60 years
USA! USA! USA!
Yes - only bigger and bigger can save us.
And higher and higher taxes.
Just like in housing.
Just like in higher education.
Just like in health care.
The funny thing - health care NOT covered by ANY insurance and NOT mandated by government (cosmetic procedures) have actually gone down in price in the last 10 years.
Yes - only bigger and bigger can save us.
Where is your “bigger and bigger” logic?
USA healthcare = 18% of GDP
Single payer healthcare averages about 11% of GDP in countries that have it.
So what are you talking about?
‘Single payer = better results at half the cost’
We’re about to find out how the government can run this thing, like it or not. It doesn’t seem so complicated to me. Why should this stuff cost so much? It’s just a rip off.
“We’re about to find out how the government can run this thing”
IRS official who oversaw unit targeting Tea Party now heads ObamaCare office
Published May 17, 2013
FoxNews.com
WASHINGTON – The IRS official who led the tax-exempt organizations unit when Tea Party groups were targeted is now in charge of the IRS office responsible for ObamaCare, two Capitol Hill sources told Fox News.
The acknowledgement comes after the administration announced that the official’s successor Joseph Grant — who had only been on the job a few days — would be retiring. And it fueled criticism of the agency, as the outgoing IRS commissioner prepared to face lawmakers’ questions at a hearing Friday morning.
“Stunning. Just stunning,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in reaction to the latest development.
President Obama, meanwhile, maintained Thursday that he didn’t know about the investigation into the IRS program until it was made public.
But White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has said no one in the White House knew about the practice.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/17/second-irs-official-to-leave-amid-tea-party-scandal/ - -
IRS Scandal: You Are Going to Love Obamacare!
Published Friday, May 17, 2013 A.D. |
By Donald R. McClarey
This is almost getting farcial. The IRS bureaucrat in charge of the tax exempt division of the IRS during the persecution of conservative groups is now the head of ObamaCare enforcement for the IRS.
For her “good” work, Sarah the Enforcer got over 100k in bonuses during the four years of the Obama administration on top of her 170k salary:
Ingram received a $7,000 bonus in 2009, according to data obtained by The Washington Examiner from the IRS, then a $34,440 bonus in 2010, $35,400 in 2011 and $26,550 last year for a total of $103,390. Her annual salary went from $172,500 to $177,000 during the same period.
http://the-american-catholic.com/2013/05/17/irs-scandal-you-are-going-to-love-obamacare/ - - Cached -
July 19, 2012, 7:20 p.m. ET
Strassel: Obama’s Enemies List—Part II
First an Obama campaign website called out Romney donor Frank Vandersloot. Next the IRS moved to audit him—and so did the Labor Department.
This column has already told the story of Frank VanderSloot, an Idaho businessman who last year contributed to a group supporting Mitt Romney. An Obama campaign website in April sent a message to those who’d donate to the president’s opponent. It called out Mr. VanderSloot and seven other private donors by name and occupation and slurred them as having “less-than-reputable” records.
Mr. VanderSloot has since been learning what it means to be on a presidential enemies list. Just 12 days after the attack, the Idahoan found an investigator digging to unearth his divorce records. This bloodhound—a recent employee of Senate Democrats—worked for a for-hire opposition research firm.
Now Mr. VanderSloot has been targeted by the federal government. In a letter dated June 21, he was informed that his tax records had been “selected for examination” by the Internal Revenue Service. The audit also encompasses Mr. VanderSloot’s wife, and not one, but two years of past filings (2008 and 2009).
Mr. VanderSloot, who is 63 and has been working since his teens, says neither he nor his accountants recall his being subject to a federal tax audit before. He was once required to send documents on a line item inquiry into his charitable donations, which resulted in no changes to his taxes. But nothing more—that is until now, shortly after he wrote a big check to a Romney-supporting Super PAC.
Two weeks after receiving the IRS letter, Mr. VanderSloot received another—this one from the Department of Labor. He was informed it would be doing an audit of workers he employs on his Idaho-based cattle ranch under the federal visa program for temporary agriculture workers.
Mr. VanderSloot says he “expected the public beatings” from the left after the naming, but he “also wondered whether government agencies, anxious to please their boss, would take notice of the target he had apparently placed on me. Now that I’m being singled out for audits, I can’t help but wonder whether there is a connection.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444464304577537233908744496.html - 175k - Cached - Similar pages
they did nothing to address the cost of healthcare. Seems like everyones premiums are going up. I’ve heard of people payn a 1000.00 / month for insurance.
And why do you have to have insurance now? How are you going to hurt someone by not having it?
I can see mandated auto insurance cause you could hurt someone operating a car.
I’ve heard of people payn a 1000.00 / month for insurance ??
We were paying $2500. per month until I bumped my deductible way, way up…
wow what a ripoff.
I wonder if some company will sell insurance with a real high deductible for cheap to satisfy the new requirement to have healthcare?
The Ba$turds won’t do “anything” for cheap…
People want something for nothing. You get sick, you want the best doctor, the latest drugs, the latest diagnostic equipment. But they scream if they have to pay for any of it. WHAAAA? $1000 for lab work that can save my life? That’s outrageous the scream (right after returning from Best Buy with $1000 worth of new toys they didn’t think twice about buying).
‘WHAAAA? $1000 for lab work that can save my life? ‘
Here we go. The fireman down the street can save your life; he want’s more money. You don’t want to pay more? WHAAAA? And the policeman and the guy who fixes stop lights and the air traffic controller. Come to think of it, our lives are dangling by a string every second!
The issue is, why do these things cost so much more, year after year.
why do you have to have insurance now? How are you going to hurt someone by not having it?
By raising their insurance costs to cover you when you get sick.
WHAAAA? $1000 for lab work that can save my life?
That costs $100 in Brazil.
‘By raising their insurance costs to cover you when you get sick’
WHAAAA? I thought it was a tax!
I’m glad someone here is taking the credit for Obamacare. We’ll need a doorstep to put it on when it turns into a disaster.
“That costs $100 in Brazil.”
___________
As a % of median income in Brazil, that’s the same as $1000 in the US. Or close to it.
“That costs $100 in Brazil.”
___________
As a % of median income in Brazil, that’s the same as $1000 in the US. Or close to it.
No it is not because blood tests can be “free” in Brazil if one does not want to use the private system.
I’m glad someone here is taking the credit for Obamacare.
Obamacare will be a great success even if it is a failure. Why? Because it changed the debate from “should we have universal coverage?” to how are we going to do it.
“Why should this stuff cost so much? It’s just a rip off.”
Matt Taibbi asserts in his book Griftopia that it has something to do with political favors for the health care insurance industry which translate into reciprocal Democratic party campaign contributions. You will have to read the book for details; I had to put it down when I got to the chapter on health care reform, as I found it too depressing to continue reading. (I find Les Miserables to be a far more uplifting read.)
are you going to any open houses today in carmel valley or scripps ranch? We need on the ground reporting of the feeding frenzy occuring when a listing hits the market. Bring a video camera and give us live updates . they arent making anymore land in s cal!!!!!!!!!
The market is dead as a doornail in my area of RB, as there are no “For Sale” signs to be found.
By contrast, I was recently driving out along the coast between Solano Beach and La Jolla, where there were numerous “For Sale” signs to be seen. My drive started in the back country of Rancho Santa Fe, where I also saw lots more homes with “For Sale” signs out front than can be found around our area.
My hunch is that investors have snapped up all the homes on the market in “modestly priced” areas like ours (SFRs on the $500K-$1m price range) while there is relatively more inventory in relatively desirable areas, like the strip between Solano Beach and La Jolla.
A quick search on Redfin suggests my hunches are reflected in the distribution of San Diego County homes for sale. For instance, for five near-coast locales in North County (Solano Beach, Del Mar, Carmel Valley, Rancho Santa Fe and La Jolla), Redfin shows 634 currently listed townhouses, condos and single-family homes, of which 78.4% are priced north of $1 million.
By contrast, a block of five North County communities which lies roughly due east of the five coastal locales mentioned above (Rancho Bernardo, Poway, Rancho Penasquitos, Sabre Springs and Scripps Ranch) shows a relative dearth of current listings (272) with a paltry 25.7% of them priced north of $1 million.
I haven’t dug up the statistics on the numbers of housing units for these ten communities, but if I had to throw out a guess, then my hunch is that there are between 2 and 3 times as many housing units in the lower priced five communities, making the inland listing drought even more extreme.
For San Diego County overall, 4570 homes are listed, of which 1395 (30.5%) are priced at $1 m or more. Unfortunately for would-be sellers of homes priced north of one million, the percentage of San Diego County residents who can afford to buy a home in that price range is far under 30%. Hopefully an influx of all-cash Chinese and Canadian plus hedge fund investors will enable these sales to eventually happen.
cool
I have a buddy in scripps ranch and he says it feels like 2004 again. A house across the street with like 1500 sq ft sold for 510,000.00. He wants to cash out and head for the hills in arizona. He likes pine trees and fresh air.
flagstaff might be to far. he was going to check out prescott and payson.
have you been to lemon grove lately?
I haven’t been to Lemon Grove for at least five years, but it is not an area I would consider living in, due to perceived crime risk. I haven’t looked up any crime stats for the area, but my street sense, honed from having lived in some dicey neighborhoods during my younger, poorer single (childless) days, suggests that it is less safe than the North County corridor where we live.
Regarding the SD County inventory below 5000 homes, right smack in the middle of the red hot spring sales season, I have to wonder: How does a Realtor™ in a city of 3 million citizens and (roughly) 1 million housing units make a living when only 5000 (0.5%) of the housing stock is on the market?
Turns out I was right. More than 1 out of 200 Lemon Groves people were victims of violent crime in 2011.
Steep Declines Seen in Lemon Grove Crime Rate, Says New SANDAG Study
But violent crime rate in city is third-highest in areas listed in countywide annual report.
Posted by Ken Stone, April 25, 2012 at 04:32 pm
Lemon Grove saw a steep drop in serious crime over the last year and a greater decline in the latest 5-year period, according to a report released Wednesday by the San Diego Association of Governments.
Between 2007 and 2011, the city’s rate for FBI Index crimes fell 28 percent, SANDAG said in the report. Index crimes are homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny and motor vehicle theft.
But Lemon Grove had one of the highest violent crime rates in the county in 2011—5.24 per 1,000 people. The region’s rate for homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault was 3.41 per 1,000.
…
I think the area has really went downhill.
I guess north county is the most desirable area in SD county.
As you head east from mission valley you seem to come up to a ridge before you drop into elcajon. I always liked la mesa. Grossmont center is still cruisn along.
does elcajon have a good reputation? Seems like some rough areas over there.
Why should this stuff cost so much? It’s just a rip off ??
Well sure it is because it is allowed to happen…Insurance companies & the medical industry are in bed with D.C….
I have read much about “medical tourism”…Have you seen what a “competent” surgery cost in a state of the art facility in malaysia costs compared to here ?? 25 cents on the dollar…Maybe even less…
I read one article on a guy without insurance getting a estimate for a knee replacement for something around $100,000…He went overseas and as I recall had it done for about $18,000…Something that he could afford to pay for…
Not sure what the answer is to help solve this train wreck but I would start with Tort reform…
Insurance rates are subsidized by what the insurance companies can earn on the float. Now that the float earns next to nothing the rates have been jumped up to close the gap.
Tort reform?
“Tort reform” is bullcrap. In fact, no cap would solve the problem by forcing better quality control on the medical industry.
Tort reform has been shown time and time again to have no effect on lowering costs to patients. It only benefits the medical industry and insurance companies.
It only benefits the medical industry and insurance companies ??
Well trues if you allow them to take advantage of the savings…My Tort reform suggestion was in the context of one of the things that could be addressed…If you look at my post you will see most of my comments were regarding the much lower cost of medical care in other countries vs. us…
“Tort reform has been shown time and time again to have no effect on lowering costs to patients. It only benefits the medical industry and insurance companies.”
Just like high corporate taxes are never passed along to consumers, right?
What corporate taxes?
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1249465620080812
We’re about to find out how the government can run this thing, like it or not.
Actually, we already know how well government runs health care. Medicare is much more efficient than private insurance companies. It’s also one of the most popular institutions in American life. The Veterans Administration health care system, which could reasonably be called government-run health care, is eve more efficient than that.
‘Medicare is much more efficient than private insurance companies’
I don’t know if it is or isn’t but it’s bankrupting the country.
‘The Veterans Administration health care system…is eve more efficient than that’
From what I’ve read it’s a disaster.
Anyway, we’re not too far from the Obamacare start, so let’s just wait and see. I’m kinda expecting it will sink like an SUV in quicksand.
Take a look at this.
The Best Care Anywhere
Ten years ago, veterans hospitals were dangerous, dirty, and scandal-ridden. Today, they’re producing the highest quality care in the country. Their turnaround points the way toward solving America’s health-care crisis
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0501.longman.html
The Veterans Administration health care system, which could reasonably be called government-run health care, is eve more efficient than that.
Based on how they worked on my grandfather, I’d say their efficiency was in how quickly they could kill him. He had the money to go somewhere else but by gawd they owed him that care and he was gonna get it.
When did that happen? The article describes how the VA was a mess before some serious changes were made in the mid-1990s.
Health care used to be cheap until the govt decided to step in and help via Medicare, Medicaid and thousands of regulations on providers. Then like everything else the govt touches, costs grew exponentially. But it’s the free market’s fault, of course.
Health care used to be cheap until the govt decided to step in and help via Medicare ??
Medicare was established in 1965…So your saying medical care was “cheap” like in the 50’s & 40″s ??
What was the average life expectancy at that time…What were the age demographics of our country at that time ??
Wrong as usual.
HMOs destroyed and distorted the market.
The doctors and hospitals wanted the insurers. Insurers just added their cuts and gamed the system with the help of who else…
???
I can remember all my MD father’s friends and colleagues screaming bloody murder when the insurance camel poked its nose into the medical tent back in the late 1950’s. “Where did they go to medical school?” was his disgusted editorial.
And the hospitals then were adamantly opposed to corporate intrusion into their privately-held medical groups and foundations. In fact, up until the 1970’s at least, it was illegal for a doctor (incorporated or not) to own part of any laboratory or hospital department to which they referred.
Bingo! We have winner! Create massive new demand with subsidies and handouts to create 30 million new customers without any corresponding increase in supply.
Don’t know that’s it’s broken. I judge it by the outcome. I think the quality of care now available is pretty good.
But I do think it will decline because of Obamacare. The government will subsidize the 30 million or so who don’t have insurance so that demand will increase a lot without any increase in supply.
Access to medical care is clearly going to become a huge problem over the next few decades, for reasons that are too obvious to discuss.
The rest of the civilized world has the same quality yet cost to patients are 1/3.
Yes, you can google it.
Yep…
I doubt the rest of the civilized world sees a doctor even a specialist when they want to without any (or very little) delay as I do now. But that will end as soon as the rationing starts which it will have to when you add 30 or it 40 more million people in the mix.
We are not a civilized world. Just accept the fact and life will be much easier.
Same quality….well if you don’t mind a 6 month wait for that hip replacement operation that here you can have tomorrow. Or if you don’t mind seeing a nurse for a check-up instead of a doctor, what’s a fancy title anyway? A nurse is just as good. All those years spent in medical school don’t really teach you anything 2 years in nurse school doesn’t teach.
But it’s all FREE so it’s worth it. Well it’s free but gas is $5 a gallon and sales tax is 15% and
And so what if the govt has bankrupted SS, Medicare, Medicaid, the Postal System and Amtrak? I’m sure they’ll run the health care system just fine and with utmost efficiency.
Government run healthcare brought to you by the community organizer who won’t even trust government to teach reading & writing to his kids. They go to private school.
American myth. I talk to people from all around the world all the time and your post is nothing but FUD.
Oh, and they STILL have access to any private treatment they want. And it’s STILL cheaper.
“Don’t know that’s it’s broken. I judge it by the outcome. I think the quality of care now available is pretty good.”
The problem is the patients; they don’t take their health seriously.
It’s sort of like the school system trying to work with students whose parents are too busy following the Kardashians, and really don’t give a chit about their children’s future. Many are simply waiting for their eighteenth birthday so they can toss ‘em out on the street.
That’s BOHICA.
The vast majority of medical blood tests are automated. Highly automated and very fast and accurate.
Costs per test have been dropping for years, will cost to patients have been rising.
Broken? It’s WAY beyond broken.
And the sad thing is that hospitals are struggling (plenty go BK).
The way the math works is something like:
80% insured*52.82+20% uninsured*659*40% actually collectible=about $95 actually collected by the hospital per blood test.
If I were king of the world and could only pass a single law for healthcare it would be the following:
It is illegal to charge different parties different prices for the same procedure.
Done.
The uninsured would get far less screwed, large insurance companies would have no pricing power with hospitals, so small insurance companies could actually compete (which would drive down the profit margins for insurance companies).
The problem is that Medicare would need to play by the same rules, and I’m guessing their reimbursement for that same blood test was less than $52.82.
It is illegal to charge different parties different prices for the same procedure.
*****
Such a simple concept was missed in whole Obamacare discussion. Anyway the intention was never to make it easier and cheaper anyway.
Another fun anecdote…I just got a letter from my primary care doc. I saw him perhaps 2-3 times per year. He is leaving the practice, since he isn’t able to spend as much time with each patient…too many patients, too little time, too little pay. He’s going to a concierge method of practicing medicine.
We have too few doctors…it’s going to get fun if this trend continues. The rich will use concierge doctors (who will be seeing fewer patients than other docs), and everyone else will be fighting over the doctors who stay in the system.
We will see A LOT more nurse practitioners in the coming years, and that may not be a bad thing.
Gotta understand this as well: Doctoring is a dirty, difficult, stressful business. And as a society, we want the best of society to do it, so that when we have a health issue, we have the best shot of keeping our health.
Doctoring is part of the “real” or “productive” economy - delivering actual goods and services people want. Like plumbing, truck driving, farming, butchering, trash collection, etc. But a lot of people with the nerve and intelligence of doctors wind up going into the more lucrative “non-productive” economy. When I say non-productive, I mean not in the business of delivering actual goods and services people want or the society needs. Elements of the financial sector (not all), government (not all), government support (not all) fit that bill.
So, in order to keep attracting some of the best talents to medicine, the pay needs to be in line with the non-productive economy.
I don’t begrudge doctors their pay. But, there is a large host of middlemen between the doctor and patient, for a lot of reasons, and they too, want to make money. And the way our government is set up, well-funded special interests call the shots to a large degree.
The other problem is that the political system itself is not designed to present good candidates to the voters. Whenever I go to the polls, it always is a question of choosing the least bad option. I wonder what’s up with that.
The problem with the political system is that the pay is too little, and process too brutal on families.
Ever ask a highly successful businessperson if they’ll run for office?
The answer generally ranges from “why should I do that?” to “hell damn no.”
The wealthy that I know “get involved” indirectly through supporting candidates and charitable giving, not running for office themselves.
With the public demonizing of success with Meg Whitman and Mitt, you can see why.
My last blood test was $589 (without insurance) through possibly the same company LabCorp since I had to do the same thing. I guess there is a 10% COL difference between where you live and I live.
If your policy was like most, Polly, you’d be responsible for the entire $659 until you’d paid your out-of-pocket deductible minus whatever the insurance company deemed “reasonable and customary” for those lab tests.
I.E.; $659.00-$52.72 leaves you responsible for $601.28. And that $52.72 is all that’s applied to your $2500 deductible. Which resets each year.
Next year the exchanges will be able to post their competitive premium prices. Remember what happened to markups when Amazon came on the scene? Stealth Obamacare is free-market capitalism in action — which is why the insurance cartels are screaming bloody murder in spite of the ten-year head start they’ve been given on their divestment.
Obamacare is the end of insurance. When an insurance company has to accept everyone, regardless of risk, they are no longer selling insurance. To say that this is stealth free market is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read. Free market insurance doesn’t dictate that everyone can buy insurance regardless of risk.
Everything people predicted about Obamacare is either already true or is slowly becoming true. People said it would cost more than originally estimated. It’s now doubled in price per CBO. People said employers would cut hours to avoid it, it;s happening. People said doctors would leave, it’s happening. People said insurance rates would go up, they’re up 20-50% since Obamacare was signed into law.
And next year is when the s**t truly hits the fan. It will be a huge wake up call to the people out there who though it would mean free health insurance. And they will be angry. And the whole thing will collapse on itself.
Can’t come soon enough. I really think it will be repealed.
End of insurance? You make this sound like a problem.
As for the rest of your post, just more FUD. Just like all of your posts.
It’s not “insurance”, Smithers. That’s the point. It’s a government-subsidized monopoly (like the military or the treasury) overrun by an industry that has no business butting into public health policy.
Fee-for-service “concierge” practice will always be available for elective medical care, but the massive taxpayer subsidies to endless levels of medical industry middlemen has bankrupted the practical delivery of basic public health needs. (And no, bariatric surgery for cupcake addicts and liver transplants for elderly indigents are not public health needs).
Obamacare is in reality a stealth means of introducing interstate competition (we call that “free market competition”) into what has been (since the late 1970’s) the corporate takeover of public medicine. Once the consumer realizes the true cost of seeing a doctor, (or prosecuting a war, for that matter,) perhaps they’ll utilize it with more circumspection and not consider it an automatic right.
In any case, the health insurance industry as we know it is kaput.
And the whole thing will collapse on itself.
Good. What will not collapse is the “new” American concept of universal coverage being a new American right.
you’d be responsible for the entire $659 until you’d paid your out-of-pocket deductible minus whatever the insurance company deemed “reasonable and customary” for those lab tests.
In 2002 I got a CBC, chem profile & urinalysis done on me when I had no insurance. One hospital quoted me a price of $700 for the list of tests. A second hospital refused to give me a quote, saying I simply had to sign & affirm I would pay whatever they decided to charge after the fact- the bill they sent me would be my ‘estimate’. I got my tests done at a place called “Direct Laboratory Services”. They had a contract with the second hospital, and that’s where my specimens were drawn/dropped off. My bill for everything was just $176.
Which is why, like your auto insurance, it’s sometimes better to just bypass your policy altogether and pay for it out-of-pocket. Physicians who accept ANY form of insurance are currently contractually obligated to charge you the insurance-set fee. No discounts, no fudging. If they get caught, they can lose their hospital and admitting privileges.
But not for much longer.
David Rockefeller’s 1991 Bilderberg
Quote…Ten Years Later
Quote:
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”
He went on to explain:
“It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.”
– David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle
http://rense.com/general17/quote.htm - 3k -
Why would anyone think it was in American interests to forge one world government? It seems rather absurd to even suggest it.
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
- David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405
“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
- David Rockefeller
“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it’s profits or so dependent on it’s favors, that there will be no opposition from that class.” - Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws.”
- Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
- Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, Time Magazine, July 20th, l992
Didn’t the Nazis try their best to create One World Order? And the Soviets?
How’d that work out for them?
“Didn’t the Nazis try their best to create One World Order? And the Soviets?”
“How’d that work out for them?”
How’d that work out for who?
“Stalin had announced his intention to “liquidate” prosperous peasants (“kulaks”) as a class so that the state could control agriculture and use capital extracted from the countryside to build industry.”
Hitler vs. Stalin: Who Killed More?
March 10, 2011
Timothy Snyder
Today, after two decades of access to Eastern European archives, and thanks to the work of German, Russian, Israeli, and other scholars, we can resolve the question of numbers. The total number of noncombatants killed by the Germans—about 11 million—is roughly what we had thought. The total number of civilians killed by the Soviets, however, is considerably less than we had believed. We know now that the Germans killed more people than the Soviets did. That said, the issue of quality is more complex than was once thought. Mass murder in the Soviet Union sometimes involved motivations, especially national and ethnic ones, that can be disconcertingly close to Nazi motivations.
It turns out that, with the exception of the war years, a very large majority of people who entered the Gulag left alive. Judging from the Soviet records we now have, the number of people who died in the Gulag between 1933 and 1945, while both Stalin and Hitler were in power, was on the order of a million, perhaps a bit more. The total figure for the entire Stalinist period is likely between two million and three million. The Great Terror and other shooting actions killed no more than a million people, probably a bit fewer. The largest human catastrophe of Stalinism was the famine of 1930–1933, in which more than five million people died.
Of those who starved, the 3.3 million or so inhabitants of Soviet Ukraine who died in 1932 and 1933 were victims of a deliberate killing policy related to nationality. In early 1930, Stalin had announced his intention to “liquidate” prosperous peasants (“kulaks”) as a class so that the state could control agriculture and use capital extracted from the countryside to build industry. Tens of thousands of people were shot by Soviet state police and hundreds of thousands deported. Those who remained lost their land and often went hungry as the state requisitioned food for export. The first victims of starvation were the nomads of Soviet Kazakhstan, where about 1.3 million people died. The famine spread to Soviet Russia and peaked in Soviet Ukraine. Stalin requisitioned grain in Soviet Ukraine knowing that such a policy would kill millions. Blaming Ukrainians for the failure of his own policy, he ordered a series of measures—such as sealing the borders of that Soviet republic—that ensured mass death.
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM - 18k -
“intellectual elite…”
These naturally are self declared superiors, the sort of which I usually find lacking in cognitive power.
Gold has had quite a run as of late…straight down hill. So have bonds.
Meanwhile, the Fed’s anointed asset classes (stocks and housing) are in parabolic bubble blowout mode.
For how long can this great divergence continue to accelerate until it reaches a breaking point?
Today the SF Fed’s Williams is a “hawk.” Yesterday he was a “dove.”
You never know what the MSM is going to come up with next.
PRECIOUS-Gold hits 1-month low as Fed pressured to end stimulus
Related News
Dollar soars, stocks set new highs on Fed stimulus exit talk
Fri, May 17 2013
PRECIOUS-Gold slides to 4-week low as investors sidestep bullion
Thu, May 16 2013
PRECIOUS-Gold slips below $1,400, down 2 pct on eco. optimism
Wed, May 15 2013
PRECIOUS-Gold down 1 pct on fund outflows, economic hopes
Mon, May 13 2013
Amplats scales back South African mining job cuts plan
Fri, May 10 2013
Fri May 17, 2013 3:02pm EDT
* US gold futures down 1.6 pct, down 5 pct on week
* Traders see more losses, could take market to 2010 level
* Fed officials pressure for stimulus end, driving dollar up
* Strong US consumer data, stock market weigh on gold
* Palladium, platinum outperform (Updates to close of U.S. trading session; adds fresh trader comments, NEW YORK to dateline, new byline)
By Barani Krishnan and Jan Harvey
NEW YORK/LONDON, May 17 (Reuters) - Gold fell for a seventh straight session on Friday, its longest losing streak in four years, as the dollar rose to the highest since 2008 after some Federal Reserve officials said the central bank should end its stimulus for the U.S. economy.
Investors also rejected gold’s safe-haven lure after a May reading for U.S. consumer sentiment hit a near six-year high, showing Americans are feeling better about their financial and economic prospects.
Major U.S. stock indexes were on track to close up for a fourth straight week as the dollar rocketed to a 4-1/2-year high against the yen.
At 2:30 p.m. EDT (1810 GMT), bullion’s spot price was down 1.6 percent, hovering at a four-week low below $1,364 an ounce.
U.S. gold futures for June delivery settled down 1.6 percent at $1,364.70. For the week, it fell more than 5 percent.
Some traders expected the sell-off to not let up until gold lost between $200 or $300 more per ounce, pushing it back to levels last seen in the first quarter of 2010.
“With a few more hard losing sessions, we could be down to between $1,050 and $1,100. It could happen over two weeks or it could happen in a couple of days if the market plunges $100 a dip,” said Frank McGhee, head precious metals trader at Integrated Brokerage Services in Chicago.
“There’s heavy rotation of money from gold into the stock market as the U.S. economy keeps getting better and the need for Fed stimulus gets weaker by the day,” McGhee added.
A trio of hawkish regional Federal Reserve officials have called on the central bank to stop buying mortgage-backed bonds, citing the recent improvement in the U.S. housing market.
San Francisco Fed chief John Williams, one of the three, said he expected U.S. stimulus action to ease from this summer. Richard Fisher, head of the Dallas Fed, meanwhile, said “the efficacy of continued (bond) purchases is questionable.”
…
the FED is testing the market with hawkish comments to see if the market can support itself without QE?
It seems that QE3 was the best thing that ever happened to gold. And those who thought that gold would always go up predicated their belief on the assumption the Fed would never exit.
In short, if the Fed ends QE3, gold will be only slightly more valuable than toast. And you can’t eat gold.
COMMODITIES
Updated May 17, 2013, 3:15 p.m. ET
Gold’s Selloff Deepens as U.S. Picture Improves
By TATYANA SHUMSKY
Gold fell for the seventh straight trading day Friday, notching its longest losing streak since the financial crisis as the metal approached a fresh low.
Fueling the latest leg of gold’s selloff—which has sent prices of the precious metal down 7.4%, or more than $100—were U.S. indicators that pointed to an improving economy.
The price of gold has been falling in recent months. Francesca Freeman and Michael Weir debate whether the trend is set to continue or whether the bulls could be about to take charge.
Investors increasingly are lured by rising stocks and other assets that usually get a lift from growth. Bulls who swore by the metal amid the turmoil of the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent euro-zone debt crisis are now beating a retreat.
Gold for May delivery, the front-month futures contract, slid $22.20, or 1.6%, to 1,364.90 a troy ounce on the Comex division of the New York Mercantile Exchange. That closing price is just shy of the $1,360.60 an ounce hit on April 15, the second day of a record two-day rout that shaved $200 off gold prices.
The most actively traded gold contract, for June delivery, ended at $1,364.70, also declining by $22.20.
Gold skidded lower Friday as recent U.S. consumer-confidence readings bolstered expectations among some investors that the Federal Reserve will taper off its easy-money policies this year. Stocks rallied on the data and many low- or zero-yielding investments, such as Treasurys and gold, fell.
…
“unexpected 1.4 percent drop in sales at Walmart U.S. stores open at least a year. ”
japans printing experiment has been going on over 20 years.
From what ive gathered everytime wall streets casino bets go south the FED is right there to print more money. Its odd that the markets crash so hard before the FED shows up.
It all leads to inflation over time. more and more people cannot keep up and dropping into poverty.
I wonder how much leverage they have now?
“From what ive gathered everytime wall streets casino bets go south the FED is right there to print more money.”
Yep. Which is why investing in stocks in the long term is virtually risk free.
‘investing in stocks in the long term is virtually risk free’
That’s what some of the people on TV tell me. But there’s something that doesn’t sound right about “risk free” money making. Think about it; if this were true, why would there be any poverty on the planet?
we are in another pump and dump cycle. The pumping is getting noisier every week. people are day trading again.The FED is basically telling everyone that they will pick up the pieces everytime with a printing press. It is encouraging a gambling atmosphere.
we are in a cycle of bubbles based on printing money.
‘But there’s something that doesn’t sound right about “risk free” money making. Think about it; if this were true, why would there be any poverty on the planet?’
If only everyone understood this risk-free money making potential and bought stocks to exploit it, we could all be wealthy.
That’s why I don’t understand why the government doesn’t require Social Security tax proceeds to be invested directly into the stock market.
“That’s what some of the people on TV tell me. But there’s something that doesn’t sound right about “risk free” money making. Think about it; if this were true, why would there be any poverty on the planet?”
Find me a 10 year period in the past 75 years where the S&P500 has had a negative return when including dividends. You can’t.
“That’s why I don’t understand why the government doesn’t require Social Security tax proceeds to be invested directly into the stock market.”
What I don’t understand is why the govt forces me - with the threat of jail if I don’t - to invest in SS. You’d think if it was such a wonderful program that benefits people, everyone would voluntarily sign up.
‘Find me a 10 year period in the past 75 years where the S&P500 has had a negative return when including dividends’
I usually don’t have a negative return when I go to work either.
I would hope that when people put billions of dollars into 500 ongoing corporations, they could at least make a little money. But what’s all this risk free business? Nothing of any consequence is risk free. If that were true, the central banks could print up several trillions of Bernanke Bucks, put it in the stock markets forever and nobody would have to work or pay taxes, ever again. We’d be so rich we could have robots build more robots to cook, clean, fly our planes so we could all travel around the world doing good for the environment.
It’s interesting how far we really are from such a utopia.
“What I don’t understand is why the govt forces me - with the threat of jail if I don’t - to invest in SS.”
I’m guessing your (and my) F.I.C.A. contributions are paying for somebody else’s benefits. But this is just a guess, albeit an educated one.
My mom’s dad didn’t much care for the F.I.C.A. when it went into effect (1935) — he foresaw it as destroying incentives for American households to save.
Find me a 10 year period in the past 75 years where the S&P500 has had a negative return when including dividends. You can’t.
Don’t the companies that form the S&P 500 change over time? There’s a reason for that. I’m guessing with research effort it would be possible to find years that lost money if the companies always stayed the same. Imagine how good my returns would look if my index were always composed of the top 10 companies of the month.
“Find me a 10 year period in the past 75 years where the S&P500 has had a negative return when including dividends.”
Doesn’t the mix and weighting of “the S&P 500″ change every day?
Just like with the DJIA - How are Kodak and International Paper doing?
“…more and more people cannot keep up and dropping into poverty.”
Doesn’t people dropping into poverty in a 70% consumption economy lead to deflation over time?
Bloomberg News
Gold Bears Revived as Rout Resumes After Coin Rush
By Nicholas Larkin
May 17, 2013
Gold bears are dominant again after prices resumed their slump and billionaire George Soros joined investors selling holdings in exchange-traded products that have retreated to a two-year low.
Seventeen analysts surveyed by Bloomberg expect prices to fall next week, with eight bullish and three neutral, the highest proportion of bears in two weeks. The analysts were divided a week ago after gold rebounded as much as 13 percent from the two-year low of $1,321.95 an ounce on April 16. ETP holdings slid 16 percent to 2,207.1 metric tons this year, the lowest since July 2011, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
Prices that rallied as much as sevenfold in the past 12 years entered a bear market last month after some investors lost faith in gold as a store of value and equities rallied on mounting confidence the U.S. economy is improving. The slump spurred a surge in demand around the world, with coin purchases from the U.S. Mint rising to a three-year high in April. This month’s sales are on course to be 65 percent lower and global ETP holdings increased on just one day in the past six weeks.
“The momentum has slowed significantly,” said Jeremy Baker, a senior commodities strategist who oversees about $800 million of assets at Harcourt Investment Consulting AG in Zurich and who forecasts prices may drop as low as $1,200 in six months. “The safe haven has definitely lost its gleam. We are in a declining phase here.”
…
My questions are 1) If gold is not a currency, why are central banks still buying gold? 2) Why the high demand for physical metal and the big selloff in ETFs? 3) The 400 ton sale of gold in April - who was behind it? 4) George Soros who is bearish on gold. Did he sell ETFs only? He still has a big stake in gold. 5) Why are the Chinese and Indians snapping up gold still? 6) Muslim countries may be rich in oil, but why do they like buying and selling gold?f
My conclusion is that world governments, and not PB/Whac/Get Stucco, consider gold as valuable and a currency. They (not you Whac) are trying to scare physical owners to sell off and get stuck into stocks and then pull the rug out from under the stock market.
Physical gold is movable and hidable. The actions against Bitcoin yesterday is the warning to physical owners of gold that government goons will most likely come for your gold. They will make it a felony to own gold, buy at perhaps $1000 per ounce, then raise the price to $1500.
“My conclusion is that world governments, and not PB/Whac/Get Stucco, consider gold as valuable and a currency.”
My conclusion is that you fail to understand the definition of a currency. Gold is an asset class, not a currency.
Definition of ‘Currency’
A generally accepted form of money, including coins and paper notes, which is issued by a government and circulated within an economy. Used as a medium of exchange for goods and services, currency is the basis for trade.
Investopedia explains ‘Currency’
Generally speaking, each country has its own currency. For example, Switzerland’s official currency is the Swiss franc, and Japan’s official currency is the yen. An exception would be the euro, which is used as the currency for several European countries.
Investors often trade currency on the foreign exchange market, which is one of the most heavily traded markets in the world.
“They will make it a felony to own gold, buy at perhaps $1000 per ounce, then raise the price to $1500.”
I don’t see this happening in the current episode. It is far more practical to use gold price dynamics as part of a pump-and-dump operation. For instance, a central bank could enter the up-phase of the short-term market cycle as a major buyer — a veritable 800 lb gorilla driving the price up very quickly and sucking in lots of momentum traders from the sidelines — then pull the plug, take the profits, crash the price, and start the cycle over again with another injection of printing press money to drive up the price. This seems to me like a far more politically viable way for governments to participate in the gold market than to confiscate it from households and further rile up the Tea Party types.
And when QE3 ends, watch out below.
Sorry, but I still regard gold as a currency (legal or “not recognized”). It’s an alternative currency to fiat money. It is a legal currency in Utah and was almost legal in Arizona until Jan Brewer vetoed the bill a couple weeks ago.
Any day of the week I can take gold to a coin shop and come out with dollars. Or take dollars to that coin shop and come back with gold. It’s an exchange. Certainly it’s not an immediate transaction. It’s not as fast as an ATM or internet. But it’s an exchange.
If it’s not a currency why to central banks insist on owning gold as opposed to Nike Jordan shoes?
‘Sorry, but I still regard gold as a currency (legal or “not recognized”).’
And I consider tomatoes and avocados to be vegetables. To each his own.
“‘If it’s not a currency why to central banks insist on owning gold as opposed to Nike Jordan shoes?”
Shoes are consumption goods, not assets like gold and Treasury bonds.
Though I am no fan of Glen Hubbard’s, especially after his ignominious interview in the Inside Job movie, I have always appreciated his Money and Banking textbook which used for a course I took a couple of decades ago. On money and currency, he says the following:
So according to generally agreed definitions, gold is money, but not a currency. The latter includes bills and coins but not gold, unless the gold happens to be in the form of a coin. But even in coin form, gold is different, as the value typically far exceeds the face value of the coinage, making it more of a speculative asset than a medium of exchange.
Of course, it is your prerogative to use whatever definitions you choose of commonly-understood terms. Don’t let the other humans stand in your way.
Currencies are logical constructs. Slips of paper to which people ascribe value. Gold is similar - you can’t eat it, drink it, wear it (as clothing), shelter under it, use it to cure ailments or bind wounds. Yet (most) people value it.
Some say gold has an inherent value because people like to wear it. Shiny, pretty metal. However, a) do people wear it as jewelry because it is valued? or b) people value it because it is wearable as jewelry?
I submit the former. Cubic zirconia is more durable than diamonds. Diamonds burn. Cubic zirconia does not. Yet it is diamond that is valued.
“If your house burns down with the family jewels inside, you can collect the pools of melted gold, but the diamonds will be gone in a puff of CO2. Cheaper, more attractive stones, such as cubic zirconia and synthetic ruby and sapphire, are made of refractory metal oxides that easily withstand the same heat. So it’s actually mall trinkets, not diamonds, that are forever.” — Popular Mechanics
There are unreliable, uncomfortable, totally impractical cars that have an allure because they are fantastically expensive. They are purchased and used for the same reason some wear gold and diamonds - to demonstrate wealth, which they perceive can then demonstrate a host of other positive qualities.
However, currency is a durable logical construct, primarily because it makes people’s lives easier and improves their standard of living. It is the core logical construct at the base of the economic universe.
Currency, stocks, bonds, derivatives are logical constructs which people value. Houses, art, gold, beanie babies, firearms, rare automobiles are physical objects which people value.
The most basic measure of value in terms of the currency. All of these items are measured - valued - in terms of currency.
Why then are these things valued, and what determines their value? Items not necessary to take care of the body are often valued in terms of what others will pay for them. Fine art is a prime example. There are those who will pay 120 million dollars for a painting. Why? Ultimately, they believe others value it similarly. Beanie babies are another example. Firearms, exotic cars, houses-to-be-flipped, etc are yet other examples.
There are unreliable, uncomfortable, totally impractical cars that have an allure because they are fantastically expensive.
Usually they do at least one thing really really well compared to most cars. And gold conducts heat and electricity very well and doesn’t oxidize. The latter is a particularly rare property.
They are reportedly an unsurpassed aphrodisiac.
Sometimes that’s one of the things.
Gold loses value. Gold mining stocks plunge.
Gold loses 1.6 percent in the spot and futures markets, hovering near lows set in April. But the GDX, the ETF for gold miners, loses 4 percent and now stands at lowest point since December 2008.
By Bruno J. Navarro, CNBC Online Producer / May 17, 2013
The gold miners exchange-traded fund GDX has plummeted to its lowest point since December 2008 as the precious metal has lost ground, putting it in a new light, Strategic Financial Group CIO Lincoln Ellis said Friday.
“The bloom is definitely off the rose in the gold market, and the gold miners are feeling it, too,” he said, adding that the pain trade in gold “has been twice the pain” for miners.
The Market Vectors Gold Miners ETF, as the GDX is called, closed down 4 percent at $26.38.
…
Jim Rogers on Gold: Continues to Have a Long Overdue Correction
By Lauren Lyster | Daily Ticker – 23 hours ago
It’s been a rough week for gold. Prices fell for a seventh day in a row Friday morning, marking the worst slump since March 2009, according to Bloomberg Businessweek. By mid-morning gold futures were trading at $1,362 an ounce, down almost 2% from the previous close and 28% from the September 2011 high of $1,920.
Explanations for the latest dive range from the strengthening U.S. dollar to the shrinking holdings of gold exchange-traded funds, which are not offset by increased demand from India and China.
The latest drop extend’s gold’s plummet in mid-April to just below $1,400 an ounce, which put the yellow metal technically in bear territory.
Meanwhile, commodities guru Jim Rogers, in an interview with The Daily Ticker, maintains that gold’s move down was not unexpected.
“Whenever things go down, people look for reasons,” says the famed investor and Streets Smart author. “But the main reason is…gold was up 12 years in a row without a down year–that’s extremely unusual.”
Rogers says gold is having a “long-overdue correction,” which he warned about long before the precious metal’s plunge last month. He says he would start to be concerned that this was more than just a correction if gold drops to $800 or $600 an ounce. But, as he’s said before, he would buy more gold at $1300 and $1200 an ounce.
…
Gold Prices ‘Still Very Inflated’: Talking Numbers’ Brian Sullivan
By Bernice Napach | Daily Ticker – Tue, May 14, 2013 8:47 AM EDT
Neither industrial metal nor an official currency, the gold commodity is an asset investors have come to either love or hate.
The yellow metal is trading near $1,430 an ounce, down 25% from a record high of $1,920 in September 2011.
More hedge funds are selling short the yellow metal while other investors are getting out of their long positions. Holdings in exchange-traded funds backed by gold bullion are at their lowest level since July 2011, according to Bloomberg.
But Blackrock, the world’s largest money manager, is still buying gold, according to its president Robert Kapito and billionaire John Paulson continues to stick with gold despite a 27% loss in his gold fund in April. His company is the biggest investor in the SPDR Gold Trust (GLD). And gold demand in China and India is still strong.
Brian Sullivan, host of Talking Numbers, a joint production from Yahoo! Finance and CNBC, tells The Daily Ticker that gold is having a hard time because it has no industrial use and traditionally weakens when the dollar strengthens, which is the case now.
“Gold as an asset class that doesn’t give you anything,” Sullivan says. “Try selling it…Gold is not a liquid asset except for the ETF…and that’s too easy to sell when people feel they’ve made their money.”
Moreover, says Sullivan, gold, like other assets, tends to fall much faster in price than it rises. Sullivan says his special guest on Talking Numbers Dennis Gartman has “a very negative call on gold.”
…
12 (Misguided) Commandments of Gold Bugs: Barry Ritholtz
By Stacy Curtin | Daily Ticker – Fri, Apr 19, 2013 8:35 AM EDT
Gold prices have finally stabilized after falling roughly 11% over the last week.
The yellow metal closed Thursday up 1.84% to $1,417 an ounce.
The reason for the recent drop in gold prices is unclear but some cite Cyprus selling its gold to cover the cost of its bailout as a factor or central bank manipulation.
Barry Ritholtz of Fusion IQ made a prescient call last December when he sold all his gold. He has recently been writing on his The Big Picture blog about the “New Great Rotation” from commodities into bonds (versus the “old rotation” from stocks to bonds).
In a recent blog post entitled “The Rules of Goldbuggery”, Ritholtz noted the “cognitive dissonance” of gold bugs around the recent gold crash. He writes:
…
“Wiener Philharmoniker gold coins are pictured at the Ginza Tanaka store in Tokyo February 23, 2011″
If the gold price ever again returns to reasonable levels, I intend to purchase some of those Wiener Philharmoniker gold coins.
Hedge funds selling gold after propping market a month ago
Wiener Philharmoniker gold coins are pictured at the Ginza Tanaka store in Tokyo February 23, 2011. REUTERS/Yuriko Nakao
By Barani Krishnan
NEW YORK | Fri May 17, 2013 6:55pm EDT
(Reuters) - Hedge funds and other big speculators in commodities have started selling gold in a big way, trade data showed on Friday, just a month after they had supported the precious metal amid a record tumble in its price.
Money managers, including hedge funds, pulled $1.4 billion from the U.S. gold futures market for the week ended May 14 by trimming their net long positions in the metal, according to Reuters calculations of data released by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
Just a month ago, CFTC data showed hedge funds had added to their net long positions in U.S. gold futures despite a record loss in bullion prices at that time due to a broad commodities selloff triggered by global economic worries.
The spot price of gold fell to below $1,340 an ounce in mid-April, losing over 8 percent or more than $125 in a single day. The selloff was mitigated by buying support later in the week from consumers attracted to the drop in prices for gold bars, coins, nuggets and jewelry. Gold futures then shot back up, to above $1,400.
Since then, they’ve fallen again, closing on Friday at below $1,365 an ounce.
“I think hedge funds have begun accepting the fact that deflation is a bigger threat to the U.S. economy now than inflation. So, the argument of owning gold as an inflation hedge no longer holds water,” said Adam Sarhan, chief executive at New York-based investment advisory Sarhan Capital.
…
Fundamentals are utterly irrelevant now. The ONLY thing that matters for asset prices is QE3, especially when the Fed decides to end it.
Was the Fed’s plan to become the sole determinant of asset prices? And where is it in their mandate that they are supposed to do this, or even legally permitted?
CREDIT MARKETS
Updated May 17, 2013, 5:06 p.m. ET
Treasurys Fall Ahead of Bernanke Testimony
By MIN ZENG
Treasury bonds sold off Friday, pushing up the benchmark 10-year note’s yield toward 2%, as anxiety mounted that the Federal Reserve would reduce its bond-buying spree in coming months.
The price weakness capped a third straight weekly loss for the bond market ahead of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s testimony before lawmakers next Wednesday.
Mr. Bernanke could spark further selloff or stem the bleeding in the bond market depending on how he casts his stance on the monetary stimulus outlook, traders said.
The benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell by 25/32 in price, pushing up its yield to 1.951%. The yield rose about 0.05 percentage point for the week. Bond prices move inversely to their yields.
The central bank’s steady purchases—$45 billion a month in Treasury bonds since the start of the year—have been a major factor holding bond yields near historic lows. The Fed has $1.86 trillion in Treasury bonds, the world’s biggest holding of U.S. government debt.
Investors are worried that bond yields could jump if a major buyer retreats at a time when riskier assets have provided much higher returns. U.S. stocks have hit record highs this month.
Debate about when the Fed will start removing its punch bowl has grown for months. But the angst intensified over the past week following a story in The Wall Street Journal that the central bank has mapped out an exit strategy for its unconventional monetary stimulus
…
“The Fed has $1.86 trillion in Treasury bonds, the world’s biggest holding of U.S. government debt.”
are there any limits to how far this balance sheet can expand?
Why cant they just keep buying treasuries and allow the economy to grow? They keep sayn there is no inflation.
“…are there any limits to how far this balance sheet can expand?”
I can’t think of any, can you? It’s not like the Fed has to ever sell the Treasurys it buys in order to generate income.
I wish there was a way to see how long it will take to flush the old $100 bills out of the economy? The change over starts Oct. 8th.. I’m sure it would provide some insight into how much cash is really in the float. Actually there would be a gold mine of data just knowing what part of our population is cash based? It might shed some light on the size of the underground economy.
May 18, 2013, 7:02 a.m. EDT
Don’t fixate on gold in your portfolio
By Robert Powell, MarketWatch
Those living in retirement are often told to strike a balance between investing for safety and investing for growth. And when it comes to investing for growth, some pundits are fond of telling investors to put their money in commodities, including gold. Doing so, the experts say, is one surefire way to keep pace with inflation.
It’s also one surefire way to lose money as some retirees and would-be retirees are finding out: Gold has declined sharply and now, some say, might be a good time for retirees to revisit their decision to put their money at risk in commodities and gold. On Friday, gold futures ended the week at $1,364.70 per ounce, the seventh consecutive session of losses.
…
So I should fixate on increasing my T-bills which yield 0.10%?
Which currency has outlasted gold?
Why are central banks still buying gold?
Why is the physical demand for gold still very high?
Why is loose money still a strategy?
With wage still stationary like they were ten years ago, do you really believe the Fed will increase interest rates?
How about long-term Treasurys? When they sell off, their yield goes up in lockstep.
By contrast, what do you get more of by purchasing gold after its price tanks?
More gold per $. If Friday’s closing price holds the next two weeks I get to buy six of the quarter ounce American Eagles for less than $2400 rather than five for just above $2,000…
“More gold per $.”
That’s fine so long as gold remains in its current holding pattern.
Once QE3 ends, it won’t be fine any longer.
when QE ends who will buy the treasuries to finance the current budget deficit? Are there enough other buyers of US debt to finance the deficit?
If the govt has to cut its spending then the economy goes down the tubes right? Govt spending has been propping up the economy.
Are there enough other buyers to gobble up a trillion per year in treasuries?
If the birth dearth in the developed nations slows down growth, I still would wonder why toilet paper with images of Lincoln, Washington, Adams, etc would be worth something to hold onto (at least it would be useful hanging from the bar next to the toilet).
In deflationary times such as the GD, my great grandfather and his household which included my dad, never lived a depression lifestyle. They had plenty of food from great grandfather’s farm anyway.
But tell me more why I should disrespect gold relative to the dollar which lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913? You need to post far more articles in many more days to convince me.
“If the birth dearth in the developed nations slows down growth, I still would wonder why toilet paper with images of Lincoln, Washington, Adams, etc would be worth something to hold onto (at least it would be useful hanging from the bar next to the toilet).”
It seems no more puzzling to me than why generations of humans would put their faith in shiny, heavy yellow metal.
Upon a bit of reflection, humans are strange creatures.
“Are there enough other buyers to gobble up a trillion per year in treasuries?”
At what price (yield) and anticipated inflation rate?
For example, I would be happy to buy 30-year Treasuries yielding 4% if I knew that current inflation rates were going to hold for the next thirty years.
P.S. Throw in mild (e.g. 1%) deflation for the next three decades, and I would happily buy 30-year Treasurys at the current yield slightly north of 3%.
You are fighting several thousand years of gold. You have a tough battle ahead of you PB! A variation of Occam’s razor applies to the question of which asset or currency will last generations: your country’s fiat currency or gold…
Don’t kill the messenger; I don’t invest in gold, and frankly don’t care much if the price goes through the roof or to the floor from its current level. It’s the behavioral aspect of asset bubbles and their aftermath which fascinates me.
You put your faith in gold over dollars; I put my faith in neither. So far as asset classes go, I am a pure atheist.
To each his own!
“If the govt has to cut its spending then the economy goes down the tubes right? Govt spending has been propping up the economy.”
This argument is an old strawman that never dies, even four decades after Ravi Bhatra declared the U.S. economy was doomed because the Asians were going to stop buying U.S. Treasurys.
The reality is that there is a tradeoff between the level of Fed purchases of Treasurys and yields. If they buy less, yields will go up, and vice versa. It’s not an either-or / black-and-white situation as your post suggests.
London Fixed spot price of gold in November 1979 was below $400 per ounce. January 1 1980 just around $580 per ounce. January 21 1980 close to $860 per ounce. January 31 1980 $620 per ounce. December 31 1980 $580 per ounce.
If you bought gold monthly in that time frame, there were no tears to be shed. it’s insurance and should not be over 20% of your assets. Stocks should be most of your assets.
Gold has become too unstable. Looking at a chart of gold prices over the last few years tells me it’s highly susceptible to being manipulated.
Gold has several things going for it:
1) On demand universal exchange for fiat money.
2) Portable.
3) Durable.
4) Transactions not traceable in some cases.
But it has a down side too:
1) Can’t use it to buy things directly. Banks or stores won’t deal with it and you can’t pay taxes in gold.
2) No small denominations available like 1 gram coins.
3) Can not earn interest unless you want to ‘loan’ your gold to somebody that pays interest in gold.
4) Price has become very volatile and is clearly being manipulated.
5) If you have a lot of gold you may have trouble safely storing it and you home insurance probably won’t cover it’s loss or theft.
Best advise - it’s not an investment so think of it as a special kind of insurance.
“Gold has become too unstable.”
In reference to what time frame?
In reference to what investment?
100 years?
US Dollar: $20 would buy you a good quality men’s suit in 1913. $20 for a one ounce coin.
$20 is 1.4% of $1360, Friday’s spot price. The dollar lost 97% of purchasing power since 1913.
Is the US Dollar stable? In what time frame? Long term, all fiat currencies fail.
Graphically the 2013 gold chart looks like 1976. If this is the same deal, we are in a bear trap in the “institutional investor” phase and the physical buyers, the public, will cause gold to go up above $1600 in the Fall.
However “Cahtah” was elected in 1976. The “Cahtah” malaise was very strong and quite a shock as he flew around the world saying how bad America is.
Two paths to go on: If unemployment comes down and wages go up, interest rates will go up. My staffing company stock should do well and precious metals will do rotten. If we get another budget impasse and taxes go up, unemployment will go up, the stock market will have no place else to go but down and interest rates will stay near zero. Bernanke will greatly increase the MBS buyback and gold will go up.
“1) Can’t use it to buy things directly. Banks or stores won’t deal with it and you can’t pay taxes in gold.
2) No small denominations available like 1 gram coins.”
I.e. NOT A CURRENCY!
In parts of the developing world, where corruption and incompetence are (more) rampant, gold serves as a protection against inflation. People in those locales cannot trust their governments and central banks to do the right or smart thing (like we can here - hah).
Why is gold highly valued there? Gold has a relatively fixed supply. Gold can’t be wildly printed by those “clever” enough to discover that people value currency, and more currency will (briefly) make people feel wealthier. And gold has a very long history as a store of value.
It is still a logical construct - any “store of value” is. But it has proven to be a durable one.
If the Fed were ever able to drop its dual mandate, which provides it cover for all kinds of shenanigans, and its sole mandate became price stability, the gold price would probably drop. But, then there would still be the developing world’s appetite with which to contend.
If anything, commentaries like this one can only serve to open up a buying opportunity for true believers.
Gold bears going grizzly, Credit Suisse sees $1,100 in a year
May 17, 2013, 11:41 AM
Brace perhaps for another wave of slash-and-burn gold forecasts, with Credit Suisse leading the charge this time and gold GCM3 -2.05% looking at a weekly loss of over 5%.
Ric Deverell, head of commodities research at Credit Suisse Group, told reporters in London on Thursday that gold will trade at $1,100 an ounce in a year and $1,000 in five years. And then for emphasis he added this:
In the next couple of weeks, Deverell said he sees gold slipping to $1,350 an ounce, saying it’s still too pricey compared to other “real assets,” using base metals as an example. As of May 15, Credit Suisse was forecasting gold would drop to below $1,400 in a year. Big banks rushed to cut gold forecasts as the metal fell out of bed in April, and perhaps a new slew of downgrades is yet to come, with Credit Suisse leading the pack.
Deverell has no faith in central-bank buying either.
Nor does he care that China and India are keenly buying up gold jewelery and bars (see Soros splits with Chinese housewives on gold). The World Gold Council came out swinging in defence of gold the other day, saying that ETF gold holdings – up 2% in the quarter — mean less to gold’s price than the physical buying.
Deverell made mince meat out of the physical-buying side.
…
After reading this I almost feel bad for the POTUS. You get busted on all this sh#t in one week and then you show up at a school after praising the teachers all this time, you ask a kid what 2 minus 1 is and you end up having to say ..”subtraction is tougher than addition.”
Poor dude probably walked out mumblin’ …. How am I gonna find good paying jobs for people who don’t know what the answer to 2 minus 1 is?
By By NEDRA PICKLER | Associated Press – 22 hours ago
The White House said the trip would focus on three areas of needed investment to grow the middle class — jobs, skills and opportunity.
The focus on Obama’s economic agenda comes at the end of a week that found the president consumed by a trio of political controversies. They include the targeting of conservative political groups by the Internal Revenue Service, the administration’s response to last year’s deadly attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, and the seizure of Associated Press phone records by the Justice Department as part of a leak investigation.
At the elementary school, Obama watched as a group of youngsters learned to write about their favorite zoo animals. He asked what else they are learning and proceeded to quiz them on simple arithmetic. When a student couldn’t come up with the answer to “2 minus 1,” Obama said in a sympathetic tone that “subtraction is tougher than addition.”
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/obama-focuses-job-creation-baltimore-visit-173909349.html -
‘When a student couldn’t come up with the answer to “2 minus 1,” Obama said in a sympathetic tone that “subtraction is tougher than addition.”’
He should have tried the sure-fire grade school arithmetic question: ‘What does one plus one make?’
He should have tried my favorite question: “What state is Columbus Ohio the capital of?”
Here’s two good questions to ask adults:
1. Who’s on the one hundred dollar bill?
and after they answer, ask:
2. When was he president?
Surprisingly few, after the tee-up question, can come up with “never”.
That was the president who discovered lightning was electricity.
“Which U.S. president is buried in Grant’s Tomb?”
The scandals must be really bad that he’s changing the subject and talking about economy now.
One longs for the good old days when a scandal was actually a scandal. As for the kid, Obama should have whacked her with a ruler until she came up with the right answer, seeing as how she was on the spot in front of all those strange suits and uniforms and vans and cameras and microphones and aids running around her school and classroom for probably the first time in her life. Dumb little brat….
“Dumb little brat….”
I did a job in a Chater School in WPB about 9 years ago. I worked there 2 days. There were about 20 middle-high school aged black kids in one class room and that was it, besides the offices that was the school. The one teacher was a (pretty mean) black lady and the dude who owned the school (who drove a brand new BMW) was a fairly personable black guy.
We were working in an area where we could hear the class going on at about the same time both days we were there. At the same time both days they were going around the room with each kid reading from their books. Now I couldn’t tell you what the subject was because not a one of those kids could read. I had seen and talked to them before they were in class, they were not stupid kids they had just never learned how to read.
What was actually more disturbing was at the same time both days they put there books away and changed subjects to what ever you would call racism. The mean black teacher would ask them questions like…. Where do you go if you run into racism? or… Who do report it to if you are turned down for something because of your race? Me and the dude I was working with were like WTF, these kids can’t read and they are spending 45 minutes a day on this?
Now I am sure those kids could answer… what is 2 minus 1 but there is no way in hell they could have told me what 6 x 6 was without a calculator and it wasn’t because they were “Dumb”.
NON….. This is the only difference between a good school and a failing one is… the good school demands you speak English when you walk through the doors…
Now we also need to force all Public assistance people to sit in class 25 hrs a week and learn English and Math for their EBT card
And Make prisoners read the NYTimes before a parole board if they even want a chance for early release…..
At least Moochelle was right http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/DA6B75SG0
ahansen
I don’t know if you saw this or not.
High School Student, Jeff Bliss gives a lesson to his teacher at …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bYv2AKPZOk - 270k
I did, and I loved it. (Though perhaps he would have been better served by showing a bit less arrogance. And we didn’t get to see the back story.)
Scandal?
Here’s the real scandal.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/jason-chaffetz-embassy_n_1954912.html
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.
“Here’s the real scandal.”
“three Pinocchios”
Posted: 05/16/2013 2:24 pm EDT
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) argued earlier this week that Republican budget cuts hampered security at the Benghazi consulate.
“It takes funding to protect an embassy,” Boxer said during remarks on the Senate floor. “Who cut the funds from embassy security? The Republicans in the House, that is who — hundreds of millions of dollars … They ought to ask: Mirror, mirror, who cut the funding for diplomatic security across this world for America? The answer: Republicans.”
But the Washington Post gave Boxer “three Pinocchios” for her claims and pointed to the fact that State Department officials “repeatedly told Congress that a lack of funds was not an issue.” Instead, the Post states, Benghazi security was hampered because of bureaucratic obstacles and management failures.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/obama-embassy-security_n_3287266.html - 408k - Cached - Similar pages
So Obama’s DOE secretary will be Dr. Ernest Moniz. For a Senate that can’t agree if water is wet this guy gets a 97-0 vote. How come everybody suddenly does a group hug and puts this guy in charge of our energy policy?
Well turns out this guy Moniz is the DOE version of Timothy Geithner (in the pocket of Wall St.).
“Oil, gas, nuclear money influence Dr. Moniz
Dr. Moniz has been accused of poor academic ethics, and Former American Association of University Professors President Cary Nelson told the Boston Globe in March 2013 that Dr. Moniz did not display a proper preference for independent research while heading the institute.
The MIT Energy Institute is heavily funded by the oil and gas industry, and Dr. Moniz has received funding from the nuclear industry as well. Specifically, Dr. Moniz and others at the MIT Energy Institute failed to disclose their financial ties to the oil and gas industry in a 2011 study of natural gas which was presented as independent.
-and-
Dr. Moniz expressed in a 2003 study that renewable energy sources will only be able to serve as a niche technology over the next 50 years.
-and-
Dateline 5/18/2013
The DOE opened the door to a new era of U.S. energy exports on Friday, approving the first natural gas project since the start of a heated debate over how best to benefit from the shale energy boom. Natural Gas jumped 12 cents on Friday.
Nice. Not only will this jack up our Natural Gas prices and speed up the depletion of our native supply of NG they also completely disregard all trade restrictions so the LNG can be sold to anybody.
http://www.solarserver.com/solar-magazine/solar-news/current/2013/kw20/dr-moniz-becomes-us-secretary-of-energy-epa-nominee-gina-mccarthy-to-move-to-full-senate-vote.html
2000:
Median house price: $169,000 (census data)
Median HH income: $41,994 (census data)
30 year fixed rate ranged from 7.6% to 8.5%, average out to 8% for the year
So a $169,000 mortgage at 8% = $1240/month
As a % of gross median income that’s 35.4%
2013:
Median house price: $174,000
Median HH income: $50,500
30 year fixed: 3.5% average
$174,000 mortgage at 3.5% = $781/month
As a % of gross median income that’s 18.5%
So explain to me how real estate is overpriced in 2013 compared to 2000 again…..It costs 1/2 as much relative to median income to own a median priced house than it did in 2000. And yet people pine for the “good old days” when housing was cheap. Today is the good old days of cheap housing.
I like the math. How long was that mortgage for and what can I rent that house out for?
Rent - (mortgage + insurance + maintenance) + depreciation and interest deduction + price appreciation = cash flow & profit?
Slithers…
Show us the link to the 2013 price data.
Ya know… forget that Mr. Slithers… I’ll help you out once again.
And why do you flat out lie repeatedly? Even after being caught again and again, you seem to have no shame. Strange indeed.
For the Reading Public:
Beware of con-artists like Mr. Slithers who want you to believe housing prices have bottom. They haven’t and as you can see from the data, are still at the massively inflated prices of 2004.
http://www.census.gov/const/uspriceann.pdf
“And why do you flat out lie repeatedly? Even after being caught again and again, you seem to have no shame.”
So are you giving Mr. Smithers three or four Pinocchios?
Slithers deserves a four pinocchio stamp for this flat out lie.
Too bad there aren’t pinocchio emoticons.
How about…?
()—-
Mr. Smithers are you allergic to bee stings? Not that there is anything wrong with that. I`m a big supporter of people who are allergic to bee stings. Just ask alpha.
Waylon Smithers, Jr. - Simpsons Wiki
http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Waylon_Smithers,_Jr. - 256k - Cached
Yo by the way… brotha Nick is back.
Yep. Noticed that.
Further declines in gold ahead
http://www.kitco.com/ind/Radomski/2013-05-17-Further-Declines-in-Gold.html
But I’m on autopilot of course, buying gold monthly. The columnist thinks gold is no longer overbought. IMO, summers are historically the best months to buy gold as the prices go down. In the Fall months gold usually recovers sharply.
Gold may get as low as $1200 this summer, just my gut feeling.
I’m thinking long-term bonds will continue to decline this summer as well, and note that both gold and bonds are money-losers in the “Great Rotation” scenario where investors increasingly pile into risk assets on anticipation of real economic recovery.
My best guess is that this current period, characterized by Green Shoots of euphoria, will end in a crash which leads the Fed to double down on QE3. Both gold and bonds will benefit from the flight-to-quality move.
What is the most per ounce you have paid ? (Not adjusted for DCA) -