Bits Bucket for September 28, 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
-
November 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
UK Guardian discusses Rand Paul:
“It’s no secret that the Republican party is short on heroes at the moment. Ted Cruz’s recent audition fell a little flat (his voice and hair are probably more suited to a Pixar villain, anyway). Marco Rubio seems to have gotten his cape stuck in the establishment escalator. Chris Christie is still at the mercy of a vigorous training schedule, and Jeb Bush hasn’t even entered the phone booth to change.
That leaves Rand Paul. Rand-Man! Able to leap tall filibusters (real ones) in a single bound! Lusty defender of the spied-upon and drone-targeted, the casual drug user and reluctant interventionist! For a while, he even had a costumed sidekick: “the Southern Avenger”, a pro-secessionist, anti-Lincoln former talk radio host turned social media consultant known to occasionally don a Lucha Libre-style confederate flag mask.
And that kind of sums up the strengths and weaknesses of Rand Paul for president. He comes with a bright and shiny set of opinions on marquee issues that are just far enough ahead of the curve to seem brave. He also comes with the baggage of a libertarian movement that has, for generations, been a home to passive-aggressive racism and medium-to-high levels of kookiness. He talks a good game on the general principles of civil rights and liberty, but policy specifics (and staffing) are his kryptonite.
A few months ago, Nate Silver slogged through some high-level scenarios that could produce a Rand nomination and pronounced the less-than-ringing endorsement of “better than the 20-to-1 numbers that some bookmakers have placed against him”.
Today, those odds seem to have improved. Rand’s anti-drone filibuster endeared him to many liberals disenchanted with Obama’s surveillance state and his anti-interventionism resonates well with a war-weary and suspicious American public.”
The Guardian has been excellent in their reporting of NSA spying, but sadly they can’t objectively report about Rand Paul with calling him racist.
Son of a congressman? I’ll pass.
they can’t objectively report about Rand Paul with calling him racist.
They didn’t call him a racist. They simply stated facts.
“He also comes with the baggage of a libertarian movement that has, for generations, been a home to passive-aggressive racism and medium-to-high levels of kookiness.”
There is no kookiness or racism in killing innocent brown people with drones. Anyway Rio, what’s the big worry? You Democrats have everything locked up politically, right? Just look at your approval ratings.
There is no kookiness or racism in killing innocent brown people with drones.
Yea. They are being killed because of their color. Right.
You Democrats
I’ve never been a registered Democrat in my entire life. I’ve voted Repub. Just right now, the Repubs have gone off the reservation.
Repubs are led by nuttjobs who are damaging America way more than the Dems.
‘Repubs are led by nuttjobs who are damaging America way more than the Dems’
The Republican party is led by establishment types that are fighting for amnesty for illegals, for bombing Syria, for NSA spying, for the (un) affordable care act. There is a revolt on in the party, but the people in charge are with Obama all the way. This president is just GW Bush without any opposition from the Democrats.
Yea. They are being killed because of their color. Right.
No?
Think about it - white mooslems in Bosnina and Kosovo were not bombed, but brown moosleems everywhere….
I’ve never been a registered Democrat in my entire life. I’ve voted Repub. Just right now, the Repubs have gone off the reservation.
Repubs are led by nuttjobs who are damaging America way more than the Dems.
Same here. If the Repubs would be more “Eisenhowerish” I would return in a flash. But the nutjobs that run the party now scare me to death.
white mooslems in Bosnina and Kosovo were not bombed,
But white Christian Slavs were, so that pretty much destroys your point.
Libertarian Movement? Kookie?
I guess going back to the Founding Principles would scare a lot of special interests.
May I suggest Bastiat’s book, “The Law” as a start, in understanding what Classical Liberalism really is? Might find it’s not what the establishment “Red/Blue” coalition has folks believing. But then, they aren’t called the War Party for nothing.
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Ben, well said, not a dimes worth of difference between the previous administration and the present. Same key players remained in place, from Bernanke to Summers to Geithner and all in between, owned and operated by the same special interests that elected them.
Rayciss? http://www.ranker.com/list/notable-black-libertarians/mrporcupine
This is why I have been trying to say. Statists on the left stole the word “liberal.” its root is the same root as used in “liberty.” it means both civil liberties and economic liberties. No regulations, no taxes, no robbing peter to pay Paul.
The statists on the left have been far more in use of doublespeak than the conservatives on the right.
In actuality, the left statists want to conserve big government. They are really conservatives. They certainly are not progressive. That is another of their doublespeak terms.
Agreed. It is a subtly disguised piece aimed at smearing anything that wants to dismantle drab gray statism. It only encourages me more to find more legal ways to avoid taxes and use them.
Creeps to the left of me…loons to the right. Who to vote for?
don’t be a bag holder this time around.
The dead cat bounce is over. Housing prices have resumed their decline.
Affordable Care Act Questionnaire
NAME AT BIRTH: …
FIRST NAME: …
Age… Height…… Weight… … Today’s date…
Do you take any medication?
Do you own a gun?
Had you ever undergone surgery?
Did you vote for Ron Paul?
Vaccinations up to date?
Does your mother own a gun?
Chest pains during physical efforts?
Do you belong to the Tea Party?
Asthma?
Do you have trouble swallowing the CBS evening news?
Parasites or intestinal worms?
Does your father own a gun?
Persisting or frequent bronchitis?
Did you or anyone in your family vote for Mitt Romney?
Have you ever smoked?
Do you own any high capacity magazines?
Lumbago or sciatica?
Are you a man made global warming denier?
I believe the actual questions are:
Age.
Do you use any tobacco products?
Expected income in 2014 (to determine whether you will qualify for subsidies)?
Which of the insurance plans offered for your area do you want to purchase?
“I believe the actual questions are:”
What was the tip-off?
Parasites or intestinal worms?
“Parasites or intestinal worms?”
That’s [so] illegal immigrant.
The tip off? You mean where did I get the information? Reading newspapers.
“The tip off? You mean where did I get the information? Reading newspapers.”
Then you probably don’t have trouble swallowing the CBS evening news.
Reading newspapers
Written only by what Dianne Feinstein would consider “real journalists”, right?
CBS evening news? First of all, I am rarely home that early. Second of all, reading is a much more efficient way of getting information. And mostly, how OLD are you? Network evening news isn’t even in my mix. I mean I saw it sometimes when I was a little kid and my parents watched it, but I doubt I have watched an entire evening news cast since I started having homework to do in 5th grade.
Actually, I only catch the first 10 minutes of the CBS morning propoganda with Charlie Bilderberg Rose and Oprah’s best friend before I leave the house in the morning.
“And mostly, how OLD are you?”
You forgot…
Do you use any tobacco products?
What’s YOUR age Polly?
Do YOU smoke?
How much money do YOU expect to make in 2014?
Which insurance plans are offered in your area that YOU want to purchase?
Do tell.
By the way, “want to purchase” isn’t an option, is it? What if the answer is none of the above? Great…pay a $95 tax in Year 1, with increased “opt-out” taxes in 2015 and 2016.
Why can’t private companies, such as WalMart, charge Polly an “opt-out” fee? After all, it isn’t important that YOU use a particular company’s product.
I don’t smoke.
The federal government already knows how old I am (passport) and how much money I expect to make in 2014 (similar to what I made in 2013 and 2012 as reported on my tax returns).
As for the insurance that I want to buy? The same plan I have had for the past 8 years through my employer. If I didn’t have that and needed to go to an exchange? Probably a gold or silver plan that includes a lot of doctors in my area in its network, including those with admitting privileges to the closest large hospital. There, how hard was that?
I am delighted to know that a lot of you guys don’t want or think you need health insurance. I hope your excellent health (or assumption that you have excellent health since there are plenty of problems that don’t show up in every day symptoms until you are really sick) continues. But getting access to care isn’t easy without insurance. I made an appointment with a new doctor yesterday. They ran my insurance information (the office is part of a larger practice that I had used before so my info was in their files) before they would even confirm the appointment.
I have no desire to pay for your heart attack and bypass surgery when you show up to the emergency room with chest pains. Or your broken wrist when you trip on a crack in the sidewalk. Take a page from the conservative Heritage Foundation’s plan and pay for insurance for the stuff you likely can’t cover yourself. If you really want to be exempted? Put $1 million in an escrow account so that your expenses can be covered without burdening the rest of us or get a tattoo on your forehead that says you are not to be treated for any illness or injury unless you pay for all the potential costs in advance. Oh, and don’t go on Medicare when you reach 65 because people who haven’t had insurance for a while are much sicker than other people when both groups transition to Medicare.
And just a note on catastrophic plans. I have talked to the people from the hospital associations. Every once in a while a person with one of those plans can pay their bill up to the point where the coverage takes over. Every once in a while. But for financial planning purposes, they consider people with catastrophic only plans to be uninsured. That is how it works in the real world. People with enough money to pay for their own health care up to $10,000 per person? They have health insurance.
I don’t expect others to pay for my healthcare with their livelihoods.
You do.
I don’t expect others to sacrifice their freedoms for my livelihood.
You do.
I believe that ethics and morals trump law.
You don’t.
See a trend here?
I do.
You probably don’t.
Fine. Call me after your have set up that fully funded escrow account or gotten a do not resuscitate/do not provide medical attention without pre-payment tattoo on an easily visible place on your body - preferably your face and at least one back up location in case you get injured over the first location. Because if you collapse on the street, someone will call 911 and you will get treated at my expense.
I’ll be waiting for that call.
Do you know how to read?
I don’t WANT
Polly, it appears you’ve spent much of your life behaving as if the world owes you something.
It owes you your health.
It owes you your paycheck.
It owes you your feebies at local attractions.
It even owes you paperclips.
Is this how your parents raised you? To have your hand out? To have others do for you? To force others to lead the lives you think appropriate for them?
If so, shame on them.
If not, shame on you.
Next time there’s another Boulder or another Joplin, take a month of UNPAID time off and just do it. Do the hard labor yourself– at your financial, physical and emotional expense. No agencies, no tax dollars. Just Polly. All by her lonesome, with a lump in her throat.
Instead of whining about paperclips (seriously?), put some of your own twenties and fifties in the hands of those who need immediate help. Console them in person when they are at their wits end.
Polly, it appears you’ve spent much of your life behaving as if the world owes you something.
What is your IQ? She works. She produces. She has health-insurance. She thinks people should be responsible for their own health care.
You just vomit trite, moronic, AM radio lying points. And you do it badly.
Polly and Rio are hard core nanny statists
Polly and Rio are hard core nanny statists
Yea. I’m a “nanny statist”. I suck off the teat of the US government as you do.
Oh wait. I don’t even live there so how can I suck on the US government as you do? And I’ve lived the independent, business owning, libertarian life that you can only dream of.
You keep talkin’ it. I’ll keep livin’ it.
‘I’ve lived the independent, business owning, libertarian life’
Oh, so now you’re a libertarian?
‘They simply stated facts. “He also comes with the baggage of a libertarian movement that has, for generations, been a home to passive-aggressive racism and medium-to-high levels of kookiness.”
Oh, so now you’re a libertarian?
it’s the new liberal meme. libertarians are now anarchists and racists.
Oh, so now you’re a libertarian?
I’m not a “Libertarian”. Much of that current movement is fake.
I’ve just lived the libertarian life most Libertarians wish they did.
Just like I live in Brazil now but I’m not a Brazilian.
business owning, libertarian life
I thougt the business owners only survuve on government t1ts. Come on dude, pick a side. You are confused as hell although it’s nice to see your ignorance once in a while.
Much of that current movement is fake.
Says the man who thouht Obama is real. LOL
Once a wastrel always a wastrel.
i thought you always voted republican before? Don’t really picture you as the Reagan or Bush 1 type. Now your a libertarian.
I thougt the business owners only survuve on government t1ts.
Your level of written English might be a symptom of why you think such.
You are confused as hell although it’s nice to see your ignorance once in a while.
Your shrink could have a field-day with that beauty.
Says the man who thouht Obama is real.
Obama is real - as real as brains or lack thereof. Obama enacts policies that are real and that differ from the policies that would have been enacted under a Repub. What is not real about Obamacare? It’s not real? How?
If Obama were not real, the Repubs would not have their panties in a bind as they do now.
Here’s something real. Obama was one of only a handful of presidents who won two elections by over 50%. How real is that? You’re going to be looking at him for another three years - eight years total. A big part of your life.
President Obama. Obama dude…….Is that real enough for you?
Your level of written English might be a symptom of why you think such.
ah, the spelling champ steps up. we know you’ve never misspelled a word before. but leaving that aside, you never did answer his question, did you? i’m sure it was just an oversight caused by your alert spelling checking. carry on there champ speller. make sure you avoid the real questions.
Obama was one of only a handful of presidents who won two elections by over 50%. How real is that?
it really proves how dumb the electorate has become. obama is the laughing stock of the world right now. many are finally seeing him as he always was.
ah, the spelling champ steps up.
It’s not just spelling. It’s the totality of his posts - poorly written English and lack of coherence. You know. The same as yours. Your comprehension is lacking.
Here’s an example:
You wrote:
you never did answer his question
But in his post below that I was addressing, there was no question. In fact, there is no question mark. Study English, take some Ginkgo biloba, re-read it and get back to me.
His post:
I thougt the business owners only survuve on government t1ts. Come on dude, pick a side. You are confused as hell although it’s nice to see your ignorance once in a while.
obama is the laughing stock of the world right now.
Really? What “world” do you live in? Your AM radio “world”? I live in the real world and they generally like Obama in the real world I live in - especially compared to the nutjob Repub party.
Global Poll: Obama Overwhelmingly Preferred to Romney BBC
October 22, 2012
A new 21-nation poll for BBC World Service indicates that citizens around the world would strongly prefer to see Barack Obama re-elected as US President rather than his Republican challenger Mitt Romney.
The poll of 21,797 people, conducted by GlobeScan/PIPA between July 3 and September 3, 2012, indicates that Obama is preferred to Romney in 20 of the 21 countries polled. Overall, an average of 50 per cent would prefer to see Obama elected, compared to only 9 per cent who prefer Romney.
It’s the totality of his posts - poorly written English and lack of coherence. You know. The same as yours.
what i know is you keep avoiding what’s brought up.
i can see that’s he’s accusing you of hypocrisy and i think he’s right, but i’m not going to run through a bunch of your old posts just to prove it. the point is that HIS point was obvious but you just went into your grammar or spelling police mode. most of what you do is avoid.
Really? What “world” do you live in?
i live in the real world of sept. 2013 where world leaders are laughing at him and at us for electing him.
i’m not going to run through a bunch of your old posts.
I wouldn’t either if I were you tj. I’d hate to re-read being constantly disproved.
I’d hate to re-read being constantly disproved.
you should be used to it by now avoider.
Run Liar Run!
I’m on Medicare with a very good supplemental
policy. My wife has a $2,500 deductible with
full hospitalization and even with minor things,
our insurance company usually picks up most
of the costs. Go figure.
so how is her insurance ‘our’ insurance? are you using hers as a secondary policy?
I’m on Medicare
See? Even the rugged conservative individualists get on the government teat.
What’s the moral difference between Medicare and Obamacare?
You left out the final question.
Aren’t you happy Obama is going to give you something for nothing?
I work with many Millennials.
It’s beginning to dawn on many of them that they’ve been hoodwinked re: ObamaCare.
I thank them for being willing to support old people medical coverage with their livelihoods.
They get upset when I say such things.
It gets worse when I tell them they soon will have no choice whatsoever once ObamaCare fails, and will pay much higher taxes for that lack of choice.
At which time, I gently remind them that they can always resort to living in their parents 3,000 sq.-ft. + homes until they’re 40 years old.
See? (I say). It’s a win-win!
Millennials get to extend their social and financial dependency for yet another decade. Elders get to continue to helicopter over their increasingly dependent progeny.
If you play your cards right, elderly, you’ll have a trusted son or daughter available to wipe your loose behinds as they wait for you to die off so as to take possession of your house at age 50.
Brought to you by Big Government near you.
If you play your cards right, elderly, you’ll have a trusted son or daughter available to wipe your loose behinds as they wait for you to die off so as to take possession of your house at age 50.
Is the tax code that friendly to the offspring inheriting the house? Gobmint didn’t wipe the wipe the loose behinds but will still take a large cut.
They get upset when I say such things.
A lot of people get upset listening to ignorance.
A lot of people get upset listening to ignorance.
you have a lot of experience in that area.
A lot of people get upset listening to ignorance.
you have a lot of experience in that area.
I do have a lot of experience listening to ignorance. Especially when tj posts.
I do have a lot of experience listening to ignorance. Especially when tj posts.
it’s good you’re paying attention to my posts.. maybe someday you won’t be so ignorant.
it’s good you’re paying attention to my posts..
Only slightly at the beginning. They quickly devolve (if that’s even possible) into endless tit-for-tat, trite talking point banalities. (With a sprinkling of weird economic non-thoughts thrown in for color)
Only slightly at the beginning
now, now, don’t be modest, you’ve proved you’re always paying attention to my posts.
They quickly devolve (if that’s even possible)
you’re correct! (for once).. it isn’t possible!
you’re correct! (for once).. it isn’t possible!
Study English and read it again.
Study English and read it again.
aw rio, are you devolving into nastiness?
aw rio, are you devolving into nastiness?
I’m not sorry if the truth hurts.
I’m not sorry if the truth hurts.
it always seems to be hurting you.
You’re making too much noise TJ. His skull is vibrating.
His skull is vibrating.
if you held a stethoscope to his ear you could probably hear the ocean..
LMAO
His skull is vibrating………LMAO
Dumb and Dumber giving each other the “high-five” really hurts.
Oooh…. yes…. the liar is getting nasty.
getting nasty.
No. My worst “nastiness” is not even half as nasty as your daily poison of hate and name calling “Housing Analyst”.
You’re the most consistently hateful poster on this blog.
The truth is hurting you again.
The only interesting thing about tj is that he apparently cannot tell the difference between his beliefs and facts. He states his incorrect beliefs as facts, and then says the internet is wrong when shown multiple sources that refute him.
speaking of the difference between facts and belief, do you still believe dueling is legal in the USA?
speaking of the difference between facts and belief, do you still believe dueling is legal in the USA?
Dueling itself is specifically outlawed in some states, not in others. Of course, murder and assault are illegal everywhere, so duelists can be charged with those or similar crimes in every state.
My point was that if two people want to walk into the woods and duel, there’s not much stopping them.
My point was that if two people want to walk into the woods and duel, there’s not much stopping them.
no, that wasn’t your point. you said you couldn’t find a law against dueling. now you can. you did your own research.
and yes, there’s plenty stopping two people from going into the woods to shoot guns at each other.. in any state.
And my other point was that, as usual, you were wrong. Dueling was not outlawed in the US after Hamilton was killed in a duel. It may have been outlawed in some states at that time, but I doubt it. It certainly wasn’t specifically outlawed throughout the nation, because it still isn’t.
And I’m sure you won’t provide a link that proves your point, because all your “facts” are made up. All of them.
you said you couldn’t find a law against dueling. now you can.
Oh really? Well,here’s your big chance to prove your “facts” are actually facts, and not just made up, as I say they are.
Produce the quote where I say such a thing.
keep believing dueling is legal in some states. it will fit right in with the rest of your fantasies.
try to set up a duel in any state. see how far you get.
Produce the quote where I say such a thing.
Or is this yet another made up “fact”, tj?
Produce the quote where I say such a thing.
no.
produce all the quotes a few days ago saying you didn’t say such a thing.
don’t forget any. produce them all.
produce all the quotes a few days ago saying you didn’t say such a thing.
lol
Isn’t it bedtime, pj? You’ve got Sunday school in the morning, and your cub scout pack meeting after that.
Slob…. you’re still here?
Set up a duel? Don’t you just slap somebody in the face with a glove to set up a duel? Does the government really monitor that?
Affordable Care Act Questionnaire
Are you paranoid?
Are you a kook?
‘I do have a lot of experience listening to ignorance…Are you paranoid? Are you a kook?… It’s loony tunes out there’
I bet you win over people in political discussions all the time.
I bet you win over people in political discussions all the time.
I win over people in the undecided middle by unabashedly pointing out the current lunacy and irrationality of the far-right loons - and how they have been propagandized to harm their own people.
I’ll never win over those I am pointing out, but that’s not the point.
‘pointing out the current lunacy and irrationality of the far-right loons’
I realized left and right were false dualism’s when Reagan picked Bush to be his VP. But within that falsehood, I suspect you are the one that’s far right.
I realized left and right were false dualism’s
Yes, in one way it is all a big corporate, hide-the-pea game.
Nevertheless, I can’t understand how you can maintain that left and right are false dualism’s when each side enacts opposite policies that affect people differently.
Here’s a yahoo finance headline:
‘How This Government Shutdown Would Be Different From the Last One’
We’ve really turned into a broke-a@@, mickey mouse operation.
And I bet it’s a reprint from years ago, Just a change in headline.
Shutdown? I am still waiting for the “sequester” to take effect?
LOL….what an effn’ joke!
they are borrowing about 50 cents out of every dollar they spend.
They have kept govt employees and unions happy over the past 5 years by essentially going into more debt so they can keep their jobs.
I saw something on the news yesterday about state workers in CA getting another raise. Its going to be detroit X 100 here.
And speaking of Detroit, wasn’t there a story yesterday about the Feds announcing that they are going to pour tons of fed dollars down that rathole?
latest Mike Whitney piece:
“After five years of Obama’s economic recovery, the American people are as gloomy as ever. According to a Bloomberg National Poll that was released this week, fewer people “are optimistic about the job market” or “the housing market” or “anticipate improvement in the economy’s strength over the next year.” Also, only 38 percent think that President Obama is doing enough “to make people feel more economically secure.” Worst of all, Bloomberg pollsters found that 68 percent of interviewees thought the country was “headed in the wrong direction”.
Obama has done everything he could to make the lives of working people as wretched as possible. Do you remember the Card Check sellout or the Wisconsin “flyover” when Governor Scott Walker was eviscerating collective bargaining rights for public sector unions and Obama blew kisses from Airforce One on his way to a campaign speech in Minnesota? Nice touch, Barry. Or what about the “Job’s Czar” fiasco, when Obama appointed GE’s outsourcing mandarin Jeffrey Immelt to the new position just in time for GE to lay off another 950 workers at their locomotive plant in Pennsylvania. That’s tells you what Obama really thinks about labor.
What Obama cares about is trimming the deficits and keeping Wall Street happy. That’s it. But the people who elected him don’t want him to cut the deficits, because cutting the deficits prolongs the slump and costs jobs. What they want is more stimulus, so people can find work, feed their families, and have some basic security. That’s what they want, but they’re not going to get it from Obama because he doesn’t work for them. He works for the stuffed shirts who flank him on the golf course at Martha’s Vineyard or the big shots who chow down with him at his $100,000-per-plate campaign jamborees. That’s his real constituency. Everyone else can take a flying fu** for all he cares.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/27/american-workers-hanging-on-by-the-skin-of-their-teeth/
Oh, but he arranged it so that I have to buy health insurance I can’t afford! This is great social advancement. I will now be forced to hand money over to insurance companies even though I never go to the doctor. Hurrah!
Plus, he has a kill list. And he uses it too, boy howdy.
If they make you buy something, isn’t it for them to provide the means to buy it, too?
Yes. My health care costs are DOUBLING as a result of ObamaCare.
Thanks, El Presidente!
(And, yes, we’re all well aware that the real goal is to destroy healthcare so as to nationalize it. Because I have the right to one-size-fits-all healthcare.
Wonder what will happen to housing once tens of millions are charged thousands more annually for something they didn’t want in the first place.
I give it five years max before illegal legislation enables Washington to begin seizure of retirement accounts via increased taxes (oh, say 3-4 percent every year for 20 years). Too many guns in this country to achieve the immediacy of Poland and Hungary.
‘what will happen to housing once tens of millions are charged thousands more annually’
I’ve been thinking about this, not so much for housing but the economy in general. If I have to spend X on something new, that’s just X that I won’t be spending somewhere else. Remember when the government thought that sending out $600 checks would help the economy?
“If I have to spend X on something new, that’s just X that I won’t be spending somewhere else.”
Right. That’s why at least some folks question the Fed’s wisdom in providing massive subsidies to housing. Doesn’t that automatically reallocate spending away from something else that might be of greater benefit to American households than owning a 3000 square foot home priced ‘From the $1 millions’?
If tens of millions are charged thousands more, so much for the permanent democratic supermajority. Maybe that’s what it will take to get over to working people that big government = bad.
so much for the permanent democratic supermajority.
Yep. So if it’s a catastrophe, we’ll vote out its supporters and get it repealed.
The secret fear of the GOP, of course, is that it will work, and prove quite popular, too. That’s why they want to halt its inception.
Does anybody’s health care cost decrease, with no decline in the quality of service, under ObamaCare?
Probably so, Whac. Someone here mentioned that a few days ago, and I believe their statement.
People in high costs states (such as New York and California) might see SOME benefit as those in low cost states get screwed BIG TIME.
It’s funny how people in high cost states such as NY, MA, NJ and CA assume that everyone everywhere has been paying the same outrageous rates they do. It simply hasn’t been true. I’ve been paying $145 monthly for coverage (80%, 2,500 deductible). People in CA, NY, MA and NJ would call me a liar. People near me ask why I pay so much.
Under ObamaCare, the cheapest plan near me (which covers less at higher deductible) is $340 monthly.
I can either pay $95 penalty (2014 only) and thus support full, nationalized healthcare and massively wasteful bureaucracy as ObamaCare fails miserably, OR I can pay an extra $2400 dollars a year for lesser coverage.
Those are my two choices. Either way, my standard of living drops.
People here need to remember such things as their sons and daughters remain unemployed or working barista jobs.
MacBeth- it’s not $95, this excerpt from thehill dot com:
“For the first year, the charge for not obtaining health insurance is $95 or 1 percent of household income. The penalty will increase, though, to $695 per person or 2.5 percent of household income in 2016 and then according to a cost-of-living formula for following years”
Does anybody’s health care cost decrease, with no decline in the quality of service, under ObamaCare?
Yes. Obamacare addresses 57 million people without health insurance. The health care cost to the public treating the uninsured decreases.
Also many are looking at it wrong. Is there not a price to be paid for enabling 57 million to have access to health-care? It should be free?
We all act like America joining every other advanced countries’ universal health-care should not have a cost.
Why would not some sacrifice and costs be incurred for becoming more civilized?
The Repub’s b!tch and moan about responsibility. Well here it is.
The health care cost to the public treating the uninsured decreases.
Can’t be. I have heard over and over again that people are not getting any health care without insurance.
I have heard over and over again that people are not getting any health care without insurance.
Do you think much?
Do you think much?
do you avoid much? if you’re too smart for everybody here, then why do you post here? you should be off advising dictators and despots. i’m sure they’d relish a chance to get input from your giant intellect.
if you’re too smart for everybody here, then why do you post here?
Because there are a lot of smart people here. You should learn something from them as I do.
dictators and despots.
Those words are common AM radio blather. You could try to be more original than a parrot.
Because I have the right to one-size-fits-all healthcare.
Yawn. Even countries with single-payer have many private options.
Do you get out much?
Isn’t all insurance just a scam? Cars insurance, fire insurance, credit default insurance are all just clever ways to force people to pay for a few people who are just stupid or unlucky. Smart people save enough money in advance so they are self insured. Maybe we should repeal the laws from the Reagan era that force doctors and hospitals to treat sick people who can’t pay for treatment which should lower the cost for cash customers like you and me.
The first thing I did when I paid off my house and car was cancel the mandatory insurance premiums. I bought 2 large fire extinguishers, several smoke detectors and drive defensively and have saved well over $15k in ten years. What we need is a plan that would just remove stupid and unlucky people from the population. Got any ideas on how to do that?
I hear you dude but most people just think it will never happen to them. when it does they have no money.
I can see car insurance because you have the potential to hurt someone else.
But with medical insurance how can u inflict bodily harm on someone else if you don’t have insurance?
what people will argue is that if you get sick and dont have the money to pay you will cause financial harm on the hospital.
Is there a difference between financial harm and bodily harm?
The goal is tort reform to an extent that the entire enterprise represents a net financial loss to lawyers.
Until that happens, insurance (auto, home, health/ObamaCare) will remain the racket it is.
Remember: Government always operates at a net loss to society. It order to grow, it MUST siphon wealth from the private sector. Always.
Government in increasingly involved with insurance of all types. Not hard to figure out why.
Insurance represents a simple way to siphon wealth…and better yet, the public thinks they come out ahead.
Remember: Government always operates at a net loss to society.
Are you out of your mind? It is proper government that makes society and countries thrive.
USA became what it was because of the structure of its government.
How can people on the right fawn over and cite the Constitution over and over and then bash the reason for and the product of its existence (the government)?
I’m tellin’ ya. It’s loony tunes out there.
It is proper government that makes society and countries thrive.
no, proper government (protection of personal and property rights and defense from enemies) ‘allows’ society and countries to thrive. government is needed. but when it steps beyond the bounds i stated above, it becomes detrimental to society and the economy. eventually it becomes tyrannical as it is becoming now.
USA became what it was because of the structure of its government.
because the constitution was followed.
How can people on the right fawn over and cite the Constitution over and over and then bash the reason for and the product of its existence (the government)?
we are fawning over the constitution because loons like you in government are ignoring it.
proper government (protection of personal and property rights and defense from enemies) ‘allows’ society and countries to thrive
Look up the word thrive. People to not thrive without proper health care.
Obamacare allows 57 million Americans to thrive whereas they did not before.
Obama has utilized the proper role of government by codifying a Republican concept of “universal” healthcare. Deal with it.
health care doesn’t seem to be connected to the word ‘thrive’.
yes people do thrive without proper health care. some people never get sick enough to go to a hospital. they get sick and recover. some people think they recover more quickly without doctor’s pills.
Obamacare allows 57 million Americans to thrive whereas they did not before.
what a sick joke. your precious obamacare is costing thousands of jobs. premiums in most states are going much higher. yeah, obamacare is a real boon. more like boondoggle.
Obama has utilized the proper role of government by codifying a Republican concept of “universal” healthcare.
the proper role of government?? the proper role of government is to force citizens to buy what they don’t want? the proper role of government is to exempt certain elites and ‘friends of obama’ from what they’ve forced on everyone else? the proper role of government is to pass unconstitutional laws? (may roberts burn in hell).
like most communists, you don’t have any idea what the proper role of government is.
health care doesn’t seem to be connected to the word ‘thrive’.
LOL. There it is folks. SNAP!
That is one of the dumbest things you’ve ever written tj and that’s amazing because of your bizzare content.
If anyone takes you seriously, they are not serious enough to affect anything anyway.
“Obamacare allows 57 million Americans to thrive whereas they did not before.”
Serious question:
How many of the 57 million are young people who never wanted health care before and are unlikely to get sick anyway? Is the coverage going to people who need/will use it or have we just enrolled/forced a bunch of people (young people) to contribute against their wishes?
How many of the 57 million are young people who never wanted health care before
Serious question:
How many young people who need health-care don’t want health-care?
serious questions to the avoider:
for starters, let quit confusing health care with health insurance, because that’s what you really mean, right? when you say ‘health care’ you mean ‘health insurance’.
how many young people do you think need health insurance?
should young people get to decide if they want health insurance?
don’t you think it’s tyrannical for a government to force people to pay for something they don’t want or need?
let quit confusing health care with health insurance
Why? In the USA, most need health insurance for access to proper healthcare. Where is the confusion?
how many young people do you think need health insurance?
All of them. In the USA, most need health insurance for access to proper healthcare. Is this a trick question?
should young people get to decide if they want health insurance?
They can decide. They can decide and pay the tax penalty if they opt out. The tax was voted as Constitutional.
don’t you think it’s tyrannical for a government to force people to pay for something they don’t want or need?
They can opt out and pay the penalty or “tax” which is not a tyrannical concept. Taxes are not a tyrannical concept in and of themselves.
Facts: Healthcare reform was wanted and needed by Americans and Obama was elected twice largely running on healthcare reform. Obamacare was a Republican concept voted into law by Congress, signed by the President and confirmed by The SCOTUS. The law and “tax” are not tyrannical at all.
Facts: Healthcare reform was wanted and needed by Americans and Obama was elected twice largely running on healthcare reform. Obamacare was a Republican concept voted into law by Congress, signed by the President and confirmed by The SCOTUS. The law and “tax” are not tyrannical at all.
IMO, the only reason Republicans “oppose” O’care is because they’re pizzed they didn’t get there first…to be the ones to hand the insurance industry 50 million new customers.
In the USA, most need health insurance for access to proper healthcare.
that’s because insurance has driven up the cost of health care.
health care can be had without insurance. but it would be much cheaper if there were no insurance.
All of them.
all young people need health insurance? hardly any of them need it. but leave it up to little tyrants like you to force them into it.
In the USA, most need health insurance for access to proper healthcare.
let the one who need it buy it of their own volition. they don’t need tyrants like you to force them to.
Is this a trick question?
for the dimwitted it might be..
They can decide and pay the tax penalty if they opt out.
yes, for the dimwitted there’s a real choice there. pay this way or pay that way. no way not to pay. no way to be free.
btw, many will opt for the penalty until they make the penalty more expensive. so that penalty will be money out of their pockets for nothing. less money the have, less they can spend. seems like the keynesian nightmare to me.
The tax was voted as Constitutional.
by nimrods that don’t care about the constitution. just like you, traitor.
They can opt out and pay the penalty or “tax” which is not a tyrannical concept.
who are you to say what’s easy for people to pay? for many it will be a chunk out of their budget. others that can’t afford it will have to be subsidized. more money taken from others pockets. and yes, BEING FORCED TO PAY FOR ANY PRODUCT ONE DOESN’T WANT, BY THE GOVERNMENT IS TYRANNICAL.
Taxes are not a tyrannical concept in and of themselves.
correct. taxes for defense and protection property and personal rights are needed and aren’t tyrannical. taxes for those things can and should be low. taxes that are to provide things for people are tyrannical by nature. everything other than the named above can be provided by the private sector.
The law [obamacare] and “tax” are not tyrannical at all.
it’s the bedrock of tyranny. never before has the government been able to force everyone to buy a product. now they can literally force us to buy anything. i can’t possibly impart the disgust i have for you and your ilk.
‘Healthcare reform was wanted and needed by Americans’
I’m confused. Are you a libertarian, or a neocon, or what? Because you are all over the place today.
nimrods that don’t care about the constitution
They’ve only dedicated their lives to its study. As opposed to original-thought challenged AM radio listening parrots.
taxes that are to provide things for people are tyrannical by nature.
That is hilarious. You be funny.
i can’t possibly impart the disgust i have for you
That is even more hilarious.
You should dwell on it.
I’m confused. Are you a libertarian, or a neocon, or what? Because you are all over the place today.
What’s confusing about a guy who’s lived a life of individual liberty, who’s independent and productive but wants to see his country join the rest of the modern world on health-care and not be hi-jacked by right-wing loonies?
‘join the rest of the modern world on health-care’
Oh please. You mean like that socialist utopia Brazil, where everybody is so pissed at the government? Or like Canada or the UK, where they still have the Queen on their money?
never before has the government been able to force everyone to buy a product.
Yes they have. It’s called taxation and the “product” is government services. And Constitutional mandates have been around since the Constitution.
If Health Insurance Mandates Are Unconstitutional, Why Did the Founding Fathers Back Them?
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102620/individual-mandate-history-affordable-care-act
…….The founding fathers, it turns out, passed several mandates of their own. In 1790, the very first Congress—which incidentally included 20 framers—passed a law that included a mandate: namely, a requirement that ship owners buy medical insurance for their seamen. This law was then signed by another framer: President George Washington. That’s right, the father of our country had no difficulty imposing a health insurance mandate.
That’s not all. In 1792, a Congress with 17 framers passed another statute that required all able-bodied men to buy firearms. Yes, we used to have not only a right to bear arms, but a federal duty to buy them. Four framers voted against this bill, but the others did not, and it was also signed by Washington. Some tried to repeal this gun purchase mandate on the grounds it was too onerous, but only one framer voted to repeal it.
Six years later, in 1798, Congress addressed the problem that the employer mandate to buy medical insurance for seamen covered drugs and physician services but not hospital stays. And you know what this Congress, with five framers serving in it, did? It enacted a federal law requiring the seamen to buy hospital insurance for themselves. That’s right, Congress enacted an individual mandate requiring the purchase of health insurance. And this act was signed by another founder, President John Adams.
Not only did most framers support these federal mandates to buy firearms and health insurance, but there is no evidence that any of the few framers who voted against these mandates ever objected on constitutional grounds. Presumably one would have done so if there was some unstated original understanding that such federal mandates were unconstitutional. Moreover, no one thought these past purchase mandates were problematic enough to challenge legally.
You mean like that socialist utopia Brazil, where everybody is so pissed at the government?
Partially because Brazilians want better public health-care investment? Yea. Like there.
Or like Canada or the UK, where they still have the Queen on their money?
Yes. Like there too. And like France.
now they can literally force us to buy anything.
No they can’t. That’s another AM radio myth. The power under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause was not the basis of the law’s constitutionality.
The mandate is constitutional: In Plain English
http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/the-mandate-is-constitutional-in-plain-english/
…….If the Court were to interpret the Commerce Clause the way that the government does, (Chief Justice Roberts) contended, it would allow Congress to regulate all kinds of new things – including forcing people to buy vegetables (with no specific reference to broccoli, however). “That is not the country” the Founding Fathers envisioned, he proclaimed.
Although the Chief Justice rejected the government’s Commerce Clause argument, he agreed with one of the government’s alternative arguments: the mandate imposes a tax on people who do not buy health insurance, and that tax is something that Congress can impose using its constitutional taxing power. He acknowledged that the mandate (and its accompanying penalty) is primarily intended to get people to buy insurance, rather than to raise money, but it is, he explained, still a tax. If someone who does not want to buy health insurance is willing to pay the tax, that’s the end of the matter; the government cannot do anything else.
They’ve only dedicated their lives to its study.
they’ve dedicated their lives to its destruction, regardless if they’ve studied it.
That is hilarious.
to little tin horn tyrants like you. it’s not so hilarious to people that don’t want to live under the government’s thumb.
That is even more hilarious.
i have to admit that i laugh my butt off when you get irritated too.
===
What’s confusing about a guy who’s lived a life of individual liberty, who’s independent and productive but wants to see his country join the rest of the modern world on health-care
ya, a life dedicated to deprive others of liberty. you really are full of yourself.
a life dedicated to deprive others of liberty
“Obama the Liberator“ Isn’t it cool? Liberty and Justice for all. Obamacare grants liberty.
The liberty to start a business without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty to move without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of piece of mind without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of telling your boss to FO without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of getting what you pay for without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of parents to provide healthcare for their children - to take care of their family.
The liberty to take personal responsibility for one’s healthcare.
“Obama the great liberator”
Man, these socialists are really angry that the public is turning against this thing. How do you make a socialist unpopular? Give them what they want.
Man, these socialists are really angry that the public is turning against this thing.
It’s already in the bag.
It’s called taxation and the “product” is government services.
’services’ aren’t supposed to be part of the government’s job.
seamen
i didn’t know that seamen were ‘everyone’.
That’s not all. In 1792, a Congress with 17 framers passed another statute that required all able-bodied men to buy firearms.
i didn’t know that able-bodied men were ‘everyone’. but i do like the idea that at least able-bodied men had to buy a firearm. would have been nice if they would have included women over 21 too. more people being able to protect themselves is always a good thing.
should the medical insurance thing have been done? no, but it wasn’t forced on everyone (except the elite and friends of obama). there are no outs for people now. everyone has to pay. one way or another.. proud of yourself little tyrant?
No they can’t.
yes they can. forget that feel-good drivel from traitor roberts. all congress has to do is pass another law mandating you buy broccoli or you get fined.
’services’ aren’t supposed to be part of the government’s job.
LOL You are on a roll today!
The liberty to start a business without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty to move without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of piece of mind without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of telling your boss to FO without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of getting what you pay for without fear of losing healthcare.
The liberty of parents to provide healthcare for their children - to take care of their family.
The liberty to take personal responsibility for one’s healthcare.
none of those things are liberties. you despots always forget that your rights end where another’s begin. obama is a despot like you are. a brainless empty suit that the world is slowly growing to despise. most liberals are good people that do some evil things because they don’t understand the evil in those things. but i think obama knows the evil he does. that makes him evil, not just some of the things he does. and i think you are like him.
You are on a roll today!
i forgot, you socialists believe that government should provide services. sorta like gettin’ them trains to run on time! daycare anyone?
but i think obama knows the evil he does. that makes him evil
They have good medication nowadays tj. Obamacare will give you access.
“Isn’t all insurance just a scam?”
1. Tell clients the premiums are going into an insurance fund to pay future claims.
2. Use money from the fund to pay for actuaries, whose job it is to justify high premium payments, and attorneys whose job is to deny claims payments.
Does that about sum it up, or am I missing something?
Does that about sum it up, or am I missing something?
that’s about it. if you missed anything, it was damn little.
Bluestar is correct. fundamentally, all insurance is a scam.
we all pay for the scam with higher prices of the things insured. health care would be dirt cheap if there were no insurance companies.
From Monty Python Moror Insurance sketch:
Vicar:’ It’s about this letter you sent me regarding my insurance claim.
Devious: Oh, yeah, yeah - well, you see, it’s just that we’re not, as yet, totaly satisfied with the grounds of your claim.
Vicar: But it says something about filling my mouth in with cement.
Devious: Oh well, that’s just insurance jargon, you know.
Vicar: But my car was hit by a lorry while standing in the garage and you refuse to pay my claim.
Devious: Reverend Morrison, in your policy it states quite clearly that no claim you make will be paid.
Vicar: Oh dear.
Devious: You see, you unfortunately plumped for our ‘Neverpay’ policy, which, you know, if you never claim is very worthwhile, but you had to claim, and, well, there it is.
Oh, but he arranged it so that I have to buy health insurance I can’t afford!
If you can’t afford it there are subsidies which make health insurance affordable. If you really can’t afford it you can be on Medicaid unless you have a Repub governor who is a nuttjob and refused (out of hatred and spite) to get with the program.
‘If you can’t afford it there are subsidies’
There are lots of us that can’t afford it but don’t qualify for subsidies. It’s called the middle class.
‘unless you have a Repub governor who is a nuttjob and refused (out of hatred and spite) to get with the program’
I think Arizona’s governor is going along with it. See, she’s part of the establishment, like John McCain, who is really pissed (when is he not?) that anyone dare block the ACA.
If you can’t afford it there are subsidies
who is paying for the subsidies rio? (it ain’t pennies from heaven)
who is paying for the subsidies rio?
Society dude. You’re part of it. You want something for nothing? Where? What makes you so entitled?
Freedom is not free.
Freedom is not free.
Are we going for another war? Used to hear that alot after 911.
Society dude.
what makes up a society dude? individuals. individuals that are forced to pay for what others want, with socialism that you love.
You want something for nothing?
no, it’s people like you that want something for nothing. but it’s always more expensive than you’ve ever dreamed.
What makes you so entitled?
i want all subsidies and bailouts ended. i don’t want to pay for your evil dreams. i don’t want anyone to pay for your desires, no matter how noble you think they are.
you’re the one that’s proven you’re for entitlements many times here. unless you’ve had a change of heart, which is highly unlikely.
so rio, do you want to end all subsidies and bailouts of all kinds?
i don’t want to pay for your evil dreams.
No way. LOL. There it is folks. The classic tj post as described above:
“(tj’s posts) quickly devolve (if that’s even possible) into endless tit-for-tat, trite talking point banalities. (With a sprinkling of weird economic non-thoughts thrown in for color)”
Life is funnier (or sadder) than fiction.
There it is folks.
your constant pandering is comical. need a little support?
need a little support?
Obviously not when dealing with you. Why would I need support when I described your posts and an hour later you post exactly as I described? You’re fun and I just wanted people to see how much fun you are.
“(tj’s posts) quickly devolve (if that’s even possible) into endless tit-for-tat, trite talking point banalities. (With a sprinkling of weird economic non-thoughts thrown in for color)”
I just wanted people to see
yes, i know. you’re always pandering for support.
The one thing that they SHOULD do is level the playing field for insurance companies…make it illegal for healthcare providers to charge different prices to different entities. Joe 6-Pack pays the same as Blue Cross.
At a minimum, it would open up competition in the insurance market, which is currently lacking.
Meanwhile, Corporate America has been enjoying fat profits and is utterly unwilling to share some of the wealth with its hardworking employees, for whom frozen wages have become a way of life.
utterly unwilling to share some of the wealth with its hardworking employees
That would be THEFT from the producers, the job creators.
Now shut up and get back to work, serf!
“hardworking employees” = “REPLACEABLE hardworking employees”
The word “replaceable” make all the difference.
First the universities churn ‘em out and then the corporations burn ‘em out.
A seemingly never-ending supply of hungry graduates that have huge ever-growing debt alligators to feed.
An employer’s dream.
Meanwhile, Government has been enjoying fat profit from Corporations enjoying fat profits.
Why can’t the government share some of its wealth with its hardworking serfs, for whom frozen wages and domestic imperialism have become a way of life?
What is the name of the wealthiest metropolitan area of the United States. Where are wages increasing most rapidly.
Send in that $95 dollars, Ben. The IRS needs your money to defray printing and mailing costs of ObamaCare paperwork. Anything left over can be used to purchase paperclips.
Meanwhile, Government has been enjoying fat profit from Corporations enjoying fat profits.
You mean like GE and the rest of Corporate America that pays little or in many cases NO INCOME TAX on their record profits?
So what, they line up the politicians’ pockets.
What, are you saying politicians are not part of the government?
You should choose your words more carefully. What you meant to say was that politicians get fat off of political contributions and kickbacks. No one here will argue with that.
But legislators are not “the government”. At best they are but a small part of it.
I always laugh when I see that “is this country headed in the wrong direction” question. Theoretically, Polly, alpha-sloth, and I could all answer yes to that. Even though we have very different views.
Count me in, and I am no nanny statist.
I am no nanny statist (except when I cash my government teat paycheck, drive on a road, invest in stocks protected by the government, call the cops or soon use my Medicare.)
Other than that, I’m a rugged individualist “Libertarian”.
What a crock.
‘I am no nanny statist except when…’
OK, I think I’m beginning to understand. Like how the “right” says that Reagan was for smaller government, when he borrowed and spent like crazy, and took the war on drugs to new levels. Or how people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Ted Turner make a bunch of money, then turn to the government to deliver up their globalist “free market”. This is why left and right are meaningless. Anybody can say they are “conservative”. Look at Romney; an eastern “liberal” who enacted the boiler plate for Obama care and restricted gun rights. And he lost the previous nomination to an even more statist McCain! Oh, and did you notice that Karl Rove thinks challenging Obama care is a bad idea? Surprise, surprise! The Republican establishment are not right or conservative. They are globalist, war loving, police state worshiping, tax and spend statists.
Broken record Rio keeps banging the same communist drum. Fact is my work is purely commercial.
We live in plutocratic oligarchy. I’m starting to think it has never been otherwise.
Fact is my work is purely commercial
That’s what she said.
“is this country headed in the wrong direction”
When the country is headed in the wrong direction they put up big signs like this one….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfmKwgrQzdE - 146k -
Check this one out:
‘A new residential neighborhood in south Phoenix is offering an unusual way to help first-time homebuyers purchase a home.’
‘Tierra Vista, a Bellago Homes subdivision near Roeser Road and Montezuma Street, offers a sweat-equity program in which homeowners can paint the interior of their house in exchange for money toward their down payment.’
‘Rebecca Hidalgo, Integrity All Star Realty designated broker, said this program is a Federal Housing Administration loan that allows homeowners to paint the inside and outside of the house and landscape.’
Anything but actually have to come up with the money, huh? Why not have them wash your car for the down payment Rebecca? Or pick up some trash:
‘Tierra Vista has five floor plans ranging from three to five bedrooms and cost between $134,800 and $159,700. Hidalgo believes building in this area will increase the values of the surrounding homes, reduce graffiti and stop people from dumping on the vacant lots.’
“Us coming in here has been a blessing to all the neighbors,” she said. “Every week, we have to clean up something new. But once the community is all finished, that stuff isn’t going to happen anymore. We are hoping to bring up the community and not the other way around.”
now that is hilarious. can u imagine some people showing up and trying to paint? I imagine you will get some half @ss paint jobs out of that.
To Ben’s point….They are trying to get the marginal buyers in the loop AGAIN !!
Lets try some common sense….Whats the labor cost for a interior paint job in Southern Phoenix ?? Man hours can’t be more than three man days…Thats 24 man hours…Can’t imagine a painter in this area makes more than $20. per hour if that….
So, $160. per day X 3 days….Grand total of $480. bucks…You telling me that you are going to make a 6 digit loan to someone that can’t scrounge up $480. ??
My goodness….
yes sir I got the point thank you sir.
I’m also saying can you imagine the logistics of having people paint their own homes?
Can you also imagine the piss poor work that will be performed?
Most of the work in painting is really prep work. taping the stuff off you dont want to get paint on. This is where the shortcuts often take place because people are lazy. I’ve seen painted over electrical covers, crooked as hell lines where the wall meets the ceiling, uneven painting from different coats, paint all over the carpet. there is a reason painters earn their money.
‘people are lazy’
True story; I worked on a foreclosure in Williams that the FB’s had painted inside. There was a big spot on the living room wall where they had painted around the couch.
Maybe they ran out of dyed water…. you know… that $hit Home depot calls paint…..
Holy sufferin’ chit…. this sounds like a day-hab program for the mentally and physically challenged.
So let me get this right. I’m going to offer a net credit to the contract of say $4000(typical paint package in a SFR) and have the owner paint?
What’s in it for me the contractor?
‘What’s in it for me the contractor?’
It’s an FHA loan. Basically zero down. So you sell them the house and don’t have to even paint the inside.
And when do I get to have these yahoos on site? Do I get to cover their workers comp and resulting claims? And when this $hit work shows up on the punchlist… I get to fix that too?
I have a better idea. Send these jackwipes in after I get to my substantial completion. They can dump paint and overspray all the flooring after I’m gone.
Here’s a bulletin… This FHA painting fairy tale is akin to paying laborers to dig a hole and fill it in again.
‘Send these jackwipes in after I get to my substantial completion’
That’s probably how it works.
Ben…. sequence of construction. They’re going paint after the GC is gone and flooring is installed, cabs hung, with wall openings and penetrations trimmed out? It’s stupid right from the start.
I get though. Strip the paint package from the contract so guys like me don’t try to offer a net credit equal to nickels on the dollar… it’s gov at its’ best. Increase the cost for a substandard product.
I’d bet there will be some foreclosures in the future with bare walls that were never painted.
I’ll double down on that bet and say the materials were bought and paid for.
Bare gypboard walls + tens of thousands of dollars in missing materials=Gov at it’s best.
sweat equity?
Roeser and Montezuma? Before they show up to paint they may want to consider some kind of protection against random gunfire.
Ladies love the recoveryless recovery:
“Unemployment data appear to show big advances for women. The jobless rate in August for females 20 years and older was 6.3 percent, the lowest since December 2008, compared with 7.1 percent for men. As recently as January, the rate was 7.3 percent for both genders, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The downside is that the gains for women have been largely in low-paying jobs such as waitressing, in-home health care, food preparation and housekeeping. About 60 percent of the increase in women’s employment from 2009 to 2012 was in jobs that pay less than $10.10 an hour, versus 20 percent for men, according to a study by the National Women’s Law Center.
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Job-gains-for-women-largely-in-low-paying-sectors-4847226.php
Thank god for the National Women’s Law Center. What would we do without their unbiased studies. What could be causing this dramatic divergence?
There must be some other gender that has an unemployment rate greater than 7.3% to make the numbers above work. Wonder if there is an upper limit on the age “20 years and above”
Lengthy piece discussing the criminal cartel Federal Reserve
Asia Times Online - The Fed goes too far:
“The Federal Reserve shocked the markets Wednesday with its decision to furlough QE “tapering”. The Ben Bernanke Fed, having for years prioritized a clear communications strategy, threw unsettled global markets for a loop.
Much has been written the past few days addressing the Fed’s change of heart. I’ll provide my own take, noting first and foremost my belief that Wednesday’s decision likely marks a critical inflection point. A marketplace that had been willing to ignore shortcomings and give the Federal Reserve the benefit of the doubt must now reevaluate. After all the fun and games, the markets will have to come to terms with a divided and confused Fed that has lost its bearings. As much as the Bernanke Fed was committed to the notion of market-pleasing transparency, it had kind of come to the end of the rope and was forced to just throw up its hands.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/GECON-01-230913.html
Breaking news:
“After all the fun and games, the markets will have to come to terms with a divided and confused Fed that has lost its bearings.”
This could have been written ten years ago.
Lol.
I’m missing the confusion. There was a Greenspan put ten years ago and there is a Bernanke put today; what else has changed?
that printing money to sustain the economy has become pretty obvious to everyone now?
there is an urban legend floating around that the FED hands over the interest it collects on the treasuries it buys back over to the US treasury. This makes no sense at all. anyone care to set this straight?
Comment by MightyMike
2013-09-27 13:16:58
For example, a hundred years ago women didn’t have the right to vote. A political movement was formed and eventually they got that right. This happened within the two-party system
———————————————————————————
You cannot define mens ability to vote as a right if the state can draft them into the army at any time for any reason?
Men had to EARN their “right” to vote by accepting the unwritten contract that in exchange for certain “rights” not given to others; when SHTF, your ass goes to the front of the line immediately to deal with any and all threats.
No ifs ands or buts.
Women never EARNED the right to vote; this may be a good reason why they should not have it?
Let me know when you want to hear that Wendy joke. I told it to a Jamaican dude on a job last week and he laughed until he cried.
Tell us the joke.
Ok, but I will have to word it so it slips past the goalie.
A 22 year old white dude falls head over heels in love with a girl named Wendy. 2 weeks into their relationship he goes to a tatoo parlor to have her name put on his soldier. The tatoo artist informs the 22 year old that he will have to have his soldier standing at attention to have Wendy’s name written on it. So the 22 year old white dude does what he has to so he can have Wendy’s name placed where it will prove his eternal love for her.
The only problem is when his soldier is not standing at attention the only thing that can be seen is Wy. None the less 3 weeks later the 22 year old white dude takes Wendy for a vacation to Jamaica. Upon arrival at the airport he excuses himself and goes to the restroom where he ends up using a urinal right next to a big strapping Jamaican dude. He glances over and notices that he too has a Wy on his soldier.
Astonished, the 22 year old white dude asks….. Hey! Are you in love with a girl named Wendy too?
The Jamaican dude responds… What that? No Mon, that says…. Welcome to Jamaica have a nice day.
LOLZ
Mine has written on it the Preamble to the U.S Constitution, which also starts out with “We …”
(We, the people of the United States of
America, in order to form a perfect union …)
Bring it on, phony…I leave for work in 20-minutes.
Wendy gonna tell the joke?
Not telling us the joke IS the joke.
How about a session of telling just the punch lines. Something like:
“Whatever you do, don’t sell that cow.”
or …
“Rectum! Hell, it killed ‘em!”
It’s a p3nis joke.
Bernanke or Obama?
Both?
Written above a urinal: don’t look here, the joke is in your hand
“Federal Housing Administration needs $1.7-billion bailout
“
http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-federal-housing-administration-fha-bailout-20130927,0,6044953.story
This corrupt cash cow for congressmen and realtors is the conduit for 90% of all mortgage paper….. and bribes.
its ok the FED can print some more money and buy more treasuries so they can be paid in full. they will get their money.
“FHA needs $1.7B to cover reverse mortgage losses”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/27/fha-reverse-mortgage-losses-bailout/2884621/
A different twist on the latest fraud that is FHA.
So inflated appraisals aren’t such a good idea are they? Appraisal fraud is skyrocketing again.
“… reverse mortgage losses” translates to “No FB dollar shall be allowed to escape”.
Not one.
Seymour Hersh on Obama, NSA and the ‘pathetic’ American media
Pulitzer Prize winner explains how to fix journalism, saying press should ‘fire 90% of editors and promote ones you can’t control’
By Lisa O’Carroll
Friday 27 September 2013
Seymour Hersh has got some extreme ideas on how to fix journalism – close down the news bureaus of NBC and ABC, sack 90% of editors in publishing and get back to the fundamental job of journalists which, he says, is to be an outsider.
It doesn’t take much to fire up Hersh, the investigative journalist who has been the nemesis of US presidents since the 1960s and who was once described by the Republican party as “the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist”.
He is angry about the timidity of journalists in America, their failure to challenge the White House and be an unpopular messenger of truth.
Don’t even get him started on the New York Times which, he says, spends “so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would” – or the death of Osama bin Laden. “Nothing’s been done about that story, it’s one big lie, not one word of it is true,” he says of the dramatic US Navy Seals raid in 2011.
Hersh is writing a book about national security and has devoted a chapter to the bin Laden killing. He says a recent report put out by an “independent” Pakistani commission about life in the Abottabad compound in which Bin Laden was holed up would not stand up to scrutiny. “The Pakistanis put out a report, don’t get me going on it. Let’s put it this way, it was done with considerable American input. It’s a bullshit report,” he says hinting of revelations to come in his book.
The Obama administration lies systematically, he claims, yet none of the leviathans of American media, the TV networks or big print titles, challenge him.
“It’s pathetic, they are more than obsequious, they are afraid to pick on this guy [Obama],” he declares in an interview with the Guardian.
“It used to be when you were in a situation when something very dramatic happened, the president and the minions around the president had control of the narrative, you would pretty much know they would do the best they could to tell the story straight. Now that doesn’t happen any more. Now they take advantage of something like that and they work out how to re-elect the president.
He isn’t even sure if the recent revelations about the depth and breadth of surveillance by the National Security Agency will have a lasting effect.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2013/sep/27/seymour-hersh-obama-nsa-american-media - 128k
close down the news bureaus of NBC and ABC, sack 90% of editors in publishing and get back to the fundamental job of journalists which, he says, is to be an outsider.
Doesn’t he understand that outsiders aren’t real journalists and don’t deserve first amendment protection?
I did a search of Seymour Hersh and came across an interesting read, a summary of his book “The Dark Side of Camelot”.
http://bztv.typepad.com/Winter/DarkSideSummary.pdf
Here’s some excerpts from another one of Seymour Hersh’s books, “The Price of Power”:
http://www.thridworldtraveler.com/Kissinger/Price_Of_Power.html
Interesting stuff, IMO.
Ooooops, make that:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Kissinger/Price_Of_Power.html
Mark Twain - “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re mis-informed.”
The number of Americans giving up their citizenship has rocketed this year - partly, it’s thought, because of a new tax law that is frustrating many expats.
Goodbye, US passport.
That’s not a concept that Americans contemplate lightly. But it’s one that many of them seem to be considering - and acting on.
The number of expatriates renouncing their US citizenship surged in the second quarter of 2013, compared with the same period the year before - 1,131 cases to 189 in 2012. It’s still a small proportion of the estimated six million Americans abroad, but it’s a significant rise.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24135021
Roughly 0.0185%.
So 1131 Americans out of 300,000,000 million plus are resigning their citizenship. Big whoop. Of course they know that even if they resign that taxpayer funded US military will continue to protect their economic interests around the globe, using the offspring of the Lucky Ducky class as cannon fodder. It’s a sweet deal.
You know, while it is true America has more a socialist economy and higher taxes than 13% flat ax Russia, probably more regulations than China, and the politicians still chant we are the freest nation, I prefer to stay in America. I gave myself a huge tax cut, partly by having a huge pay cut and partly by not realizing much gains. I will keep looking for ways to cut my taxes further. I don’t need to crusade to other voters to vote libertarian. No guarantee that they will stay libertarian. Or if I was a nanny stater like Alpha slob I would have no guarantee of being sure those I persuade to become nanny staters will stay that way. I was born here in the USA. I did not sign up for the statist society we have. I signed no contract. My tax avoidance Is basically efforts to not have my property stolen by thugs who call themselves government. They are thugs no matter what. My goal is to just operate and not sanction them.
I prefer to stay in America.
Because you’re a hypocrite. An extreme hypocrite.
Which also explains why you work for the military industrial complex.
No I do not a$$whole.
Yes you do, my friend.
Slob… you’re a proven LIAR.
Now that the government shutdown looks inevitable, would this be a good time to buy the dip in stock prices?
House Plans Funding Bill, With Conditions
* House Republicans attach a one-year delay of the Affordable Care Act to legislation that would keep the government operating past midnight Monday. A vote is expected later Saturday.
* The Republican package would repeal a tax on medical devices that helps pay for the health care act.
* Separately, the House will vote to ensure military forces continue to be paid in the event of a government shutdown, an admission that the outcome of the fiscal showdown is all but sealed.
House Plans Funding Bill, With Conditions
House Republicans attach a one-year delay of the Affordable Care Act to legislation that would keep the government operating past midnight Monday. A vote is expected later Saturday.
The Republican package would repeal a tax on medical devices that helps pay for the health care act.
Separately, the House will vote to ensure military forces continue to be paid in the event of a government shutdown, an admission that the outcome of the fiscal showdown is all but sealed.
A Government Shutdown, by the Numbers: A look at the costs, closures and other ramifications of a government shutdown.
By JONATHAN WEISMAN and JEREMY W. PETERS
Published: September 28, 2013
WASHINGTON — Facing the prospect of the first shutdown of the federal government in 17 years, House Republicans chose a hard line on Saturday with a proposal to delay President Obama’s health care law for one year and permanently repeal a tax on medical devices that helps pay for the law.
House Speaker John A. Boehner arrived at the Capitol for a meeting on Saturday with Republicans over the budget negotiations.
The House is expected to vote late Saturday on the legislation, which would keep the government operating past 12:01 a.m. on Tuesday. But the Senate, controlled by Democrats, has said it will not accept changes to the health care law as a condition for keeping the government open, all but ensuring that much of the government will shut down unless lawmakers can agree on a short-term spending bill while negotiations continue.
Indeed, the House Republican package would also ensure that military personnel continue to be paid in the event of a government shutdown, an acknowledgement that a shutdown was likely.
“The American people don’t want a government shutdown, and they don’t want Obamacare,” House Republican leaders said in a joint statement. “We will do our job and send this bill over, and then it’s up to the Senate to pass it and stop a government shutdown.”
Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California, showed a flare of temper when asked what would happen when the Senate rejected the House’s offer.
“How dare you presume a failure?” he asked. “We continue to believe there’s an opportunity for sensible compromise, and I will not accept from anybody the assumption of failure.”
Even so, House Republicans on Saturday appeared ready to let the government shut down, at least for “a very brief” time, said Representative Doug Lambron, Republican of Colorado.
Representative Virginia Foxx, Republican of North Carolina, shrugged off the drama. “The federal government has shut down 17 times before, sometimes when the Democrats were in control, sometimes with divided government,” she said. “What are we doing on our side of the aisle? We’re fighting for the American people.”
…
I frankly don’t get why Wall Street cares one iota about looming govt shutdown prospects. Haven’t they learned by now that there are no lasting negative consequences for share prices in the event of a shutdown?
I would think the Fed’s signal of their plans to not taper QE3 any time soon would more than offset the effect of debt wrangling on share prices.
ft dot com
Global Market Overview
Last updated: September 27, 2013 9:09 pm
Stocks slip as US budget woes cast pall
By Dave Shellock
Friday 21:05 BST. Global equities remained on the back foot at the end of a week in which the market focus shifted from US monetary policy to the fiscal stand-off in Washington between Republicans and Democrats.
Politics also played a starring role in the eurozone this week as Angela Merkel began negotiations to form a new government following her victory in Germany’s election, while the fragility of Italy’s governing coalition was exposed, driving up borrowing costs in Rome.
The S&P 500 equity index fell 0.4 per cent on Friday, leaving it with a loss of 1.1 per cent over the week – its first weekly drop this month – and down more than 2 per cent from the record intraday high struck in the wake of the Federal Reserve’s decision not to begin winding down its stimulus measures.
Across the Atlantic, the FTSE Eurofirst 300 index fell 0.2 per cent, for a five-day decline of 0.6 per cent, while the Nikkei 225 dropped 0.3 per cent – although it managed to inch up 0.1 per cent over its shortened week – for its fourth successive weekly gain.
The lack of progress in the US budget and debt ceiling negotiations was the key driver of the weaker tone to global stocks, as worries mounted that a partial government shutdown could be on the cards next week – with the possibility of Washington technically defaulting on its debts also keeping investors on edge.
“Even if Congress can reach an agreement to renew the federal government’s spending authority before it expires this Monday – which is looking increasingly unlikely – there is a much more serious battle brewing over the push to raise the debt ceiling before the Treasury runs out of money sometime shortly after October 17,” said Paul Ashworth at Capital Economics. “We have no idea exactly how this stand-off will be resolved and even less of an idea exactly when any agreement might be reached. But, at this stage, we would be lying if we said we were confident of a positive outcome.”
Indeed, the US five-year credit default swap spread – which gauges the cost of insuring against Washington failing to meet its debt obligations – widened to 32 basis points on Friday, from 22bp a week earlier.
However, analysts noted that this was much less than levels seen in mid-2001, when the US came close to default.
…
The Trader | SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2013
Washington Wrangling Knocks Stocks
By VITO J. RACANELLI
All the talk about budget deadlines and debt ceilings unnerves investors. And that doesn’t even cover worries about Fed policy.
Stock prices fell about 1% last week, ostensibly on the lack of a political accord ahead of looming deadlines for the federal government budget and for raising the debt ceiling. With some kind of deal needed by Oct. 1, political wrangling and brinkmanship caused investors to cash in gains from the all-time highs registered Sept. 18.
The more important issue, however—and here we’re going to assume the politicians eventually act like adults and reach a deal—is lurking beneath the budget turmoil. The question is: How and when will the Federal Reserve eventually taper the quantitative easing (QE) policy that has kept interest rates artificially low and stock prices high.
The Fed surprised investors on Sept. 18 by not tapering. But after a strong, albeit brief, rally, uncertainty has ensued. Since then several members of the central bank have made speeches that have given contradictory signals about the timing of the promised tapering of the bank’s $85 billion monthly bond buying.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average gave up 193 points, or 1.3%, to 15,258.24, while the S&P 500 index lost 1%, or 18 points, to 1691.75. Both indexes managed only one up session, Thursday. Bucking the trend, however, was the Nasdaq Composite ndex, which finished the week fractionally to the upside, closing at 3781.59.
The question for investors ahead of the Oct. 1 budget deadline is, “How big a showdown is this going to be?” says Giri Cherukuri, head trader at Oakbrook Investments. Assuming a deal is struck, investor focus can return to the economy and earnings, and the market can work higher, he says, adding, “It’s going to be wait and see for the next couple of days.”
However, if there’s no deal by the deadline Tuesday, shares will likely continue to drop for as long as the politicians in Washington, D.C., bicker.
…
Suck ‘em in, shake ‘em out. Rinse, repeat.
Apparently this is a great time to own long-term Treasurys!
Treasuries in Longest Win Stretch Since April on Budget Turmoil
By Cordell Eddings & Susanne Walker - Sep 27, 2013 9:00 PM PT
Treasuries rose for a third week, the longest winning streak since April, as demand for the safest assets increased amid speculation political deadlock over the U.S. budget may lead to a government shutdown.
Benchmark 10-year note yields touched a six-week low as the Senate approved a stopgap spending bill yesterday, three days before funding for the government runs out. The measure needs House approval, and Congress still must vote on raising the federal debt ceiling. Treasuries’ gains in September amid political turmoil and the Federal Reserve’s decision to refrain from reducing bond purchases have pared a loss for the quarter.
“We have the non-trivial risk of a government shutdown looming and the greater risk of coming to a reasonable negotiation on the debt ceiling that ultimately threatens growth and is supporting Treasuries,” said Christopher Sullivan, who oversees $2.1 billion as chief investment officer at United Nations Federal Credit Union in New York. “The risks to economic growth may keep the Fed not tapering into 2014.”
Ten-year (USGG10YR) note yields dropped 11 basis points, or 0.11 percentage point, to 2.62 percent this week in New York, according to Bloomberg Bond Trader prices. They touched 2.60 percent, the lowest level since Aug. 12. The price of the 2.5 percent note maturing in August 2023 rose 30/32, or $9.38 per $1,000 face amount, to 98 29/32.
The benchmark yields climbed to a two-year high of 3.01 percent Sept. 6 amid bets the Fed would trim its bond-buying program. They fell after policy makers on Sept. 18 unexpectedly maintained their $85 billion in monthly bond-buying, saying they need more evidence of lasting improvement in the economy.
Bond Index
The Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Bond Index (BUSY) dropped 2.5 percent this year as of Sept. 26. It has returned 0.8 percent this month, leaving the quarter’s performance little changed. The Bloomberg Global Developed Sovereign (BGSV) Bond Index has gained 1.4 percent this month while losing 3.9 percent in 2013.
Treasury yields fell yesterday as the Senate voted 54-44 to finance the government through Nov. 15, putting pressure on the House to avoid a federal shutdown starting Oct. 1. The chamber stripped language to de-fund President Barack Obama’s signature health-care law. House Republicans insist the bill include limits on the law, a demand Democrats say they won’t accept.
“Until we get a resolution from Congress, we will see the safe-haven bid continue,” Guy LeBas, chief fixed-income strategist at Janney Montgomery Scott LLC in Philadelphia, said yesterday.
…
Captains Ahab — LOLOLOLOLZ!
Op-Ed Columnist
The Captain Ahabs of the House
By CHARLES M. BLOW
Published: September 27, 2013
How many more rounds of this must America take?
How many more times must the economic neck of the nation have a knife pressed against it by Republicans demanding a ransom?
It seems the answer is at least once more — or twice.
Washington is still wrangling over a way to avoid a government shutdown next week, while Republicans are already gearing up to refuse to raise the debt limit — something that no Congress under any other president has ever refused to do.
But those presidents were not Barack Obama, the bane of the far right’s existence, and those Congresses were not as infested with members who saw disruption as part of their duty.
As long as Obama is president, these folks will be flush with fever. Opposition to Obama is their raison d’être. America’s national interests are subordinate to their selfish ones.
The far right needs Obama to fail in order to fulfill their most preposterous prophecies. President Obama must deal with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives that wants nothing more than his demise. There is nothing between the House and the president but a table of cease-fire and surrender at which no one will sit.
The House Republican caucus is full of Captain Ahabs, and Obama is their Moby Dick.
…
‘Hersh returns to US president Barack Obama. He has said before that the confidence of the US press to challenge the US government collapsed post 9/11, but he is adamant that Obama is worse than Bush.’
“Do you think Obama’s been judged by any rational standards? Has Guantanamo closed? Is a war over? Is anyone paying any attention to Iraq? Is he seriously talking about going into Syria? We are not doing so well in the 80 wars we are in right now, what the hell does he want to go into another one for. What’s going on [with journalists]?” he asks.’
‘Don’t even get him started on the New York Times which, he says, spends “so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would”
http://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2013/sep/27/seymour-hersh-obama-nsa-american-media
‘Don’t even get him started on the New York Times which, he says, spends “so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would”
Isn’t the New York Times viewed as the premier liberal MSM daily U.S. newspaper (among those that survive)?
NBCNews dot com — 1 hour ago
Shutdown odds spike as GOP unveils new funding bill
House Speaker John Boehner arrives for a closed-door meeting of the House Republican caucus Saturday.
By Michael O’Brien, Political Reporter, NBC News
The odds of a government shutdown spiked on Saturday after the House GOP said it would again vote to force concessions on “Obamacare” as a condition of funding government.
House Republicans doubled down on their strategy of seeking to undo Obamacare as part of the battle over funding the government past Monday, scheduling a vote on a stopgap measure that would delay the health care law for a year.
Though President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats have already said they would reject any measure to fund government that touches on the Affordable Care Act, Republicans barreled ahead with a new proposal to fund the government through mid-December, but also delay Obamacare for a year and repeal a politically-unpopular tax on medical devices contained within the law.
“The American people don’t want a government shut down and they don’t want Obamacare,” Boehner and his deputies said in a joint statement. “That’s why later today, the House will vote on two amendments to the Senate-passed continuing resolution that will keep the government open and stop as much of the president’s health care law as possible.”
The Republican leaders added: “We will do our job and send this bill over, and then it’s up to the Senate to pass it and stop a government shutdown.”
…
There appears to be little wiggle room in the budget battle negotiating stances of Democrats and Republicans.
September 28, 2013 9:31 PM
White House, Democrats vow to reject GOP’s latest conditions to fund government
By Jeff Pegues
(CBS News) WASHINGTON - The two sides are not getting any closer in the budget battle on Capitol Hill with the possibility of a government shutdown midnight Monday.
Republicans in the House were working on a series of amendments Saturday night that the White House and Senate Democrats have already vowed to reject.
On Saturday, House Republicans introduced another emergency funding bill - again with conditions attached. This one funds the government through mid-December but also seeks to delay the implementation of the president’s health-care act. That’s something that Democrats say is a non-starter.
With a possible government shutdown looming, there were signs of strain on Capitol Hill.
“How dare you, how dare you, how dare you presume a failure,” House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa of California told a reporter.
…
Sept. 27, 2013, 6:30 a.m. EDT
Will Obamacare hurt job creation and marriage?
Commentary: Families and employers pay the price
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth
Getty Images
Job seekers wait in line to enter a job fair at a new San Francisco Target store in August. Hundreds of people applied.
At one time, getting a job was not that much of a problem. Neither was getting married. But the Affordable Care Act appears to create substantial disincentives both to hiring and marriage, potentially changing the fabric of American society in serious ways.
Let’s first look at hiring.
The Affordable Care Act is partly responsible for the slow jobs recovery. If employers with 50 or more employees do not offer the right kind of health insurance, and at least one employee gets subsidized coverage on the exchange, they are faced with penalties of $2,000 per employee per year. Since the first 30 workers are exempt from the penalty, moving from 49 to 50 workers can cost an employer $40,000 a year.
No wonder that many small businesses are opting to stay at 49 workers. If they decide to expand, they can use temporary workers or contract employees.
Bob Funk, president and founder of Express Employment Services, the fifth-largest employment agency in America, told The Wall Street Journal in an interview published last week, “Obamacare has been an absolute boon for my business…We’re up 8% this year. But it’s just terrible for the country.”
Funk continued, “Firms are just very reluctant to hire full-time workers. So they are taking on more temporary help, which is what we do.”
Companies can get around the penalty by hiring part-time workers, because they do not owe the $2,000 penalty on those who work fewer than 30 hours a week. Many companies such as SeaWorld, Wal-Mart, and Lands’ End, are substituting part-time for full-time workers.
As well as effects on hiring, the subsidies in the Affordable Care Act, could increase the incentive to divorce and discourage marriage.
Under the Act, if workers have affordable single-family coverage from an employer — coverage that by law workers are obligated to accept — their family members will not be eligible for premium subsidies on the exchanges. This can make the cost of insurance for some low- or middle-income families unaffordable. But if they divorce, they get the subsidy.
…
So many folks are worrying about bubbles these days. At what point will the prospect of another crash appear more worrisome?
Friday’s trio of Silicon Valley IPOs eases fears of new tech bubbleBy Peter Delevett and Jeremy C. Owens
09/27/2013 03:37:14 PM PDT | Updated: about 19 hours ago
RingCentral CEO Vlad Shmunis rings the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange to celebrate the company’s IPO on September 27, 2013 in New York City. ((Photo by Ben Hider/NYSE Euronext))
Three more Silicon Valley IPOs Friday demonstrated that while Wall Street remains hungry for tech stocks, its appetite is mostly centered on a few key sectors.
Redwood City’s RingCentral, which delivers corporate telecommunications services over the cloud, saw its initial public offering soar, much like two other valley software companies that went public last week.
But San Francisco cleantech company Pattern Energy enjoyed only a modest uptick in its stock price. And shares of Mountain View-based Violin Memory, a maker of enterprise storage technology, plunged in value when trading began.
It was a far cry from the dot-com era, when investors pounced on seemingly every tech company that came to market.
“I don’t think we’re in a bubble. A bubble means there’s a lot of euphoria and a lot of companies going out,” said Manuel Henriquez, who runs a Palo Alto tech investment firm called Hercules Technology Growth Capital.
However, he added, “I think there are certainly valuation bubbles in certain sectors.”
…
i guess the creator of the candy game is filing for an ipo. Sell the garbage to the sheep while risk is on?
“…aimed at freeing up mortgage lending, if there are signs it is creating a housing bubble.”
If ‘freer mortgage lending’ is the BoE’s proposed remedy for a housing bubble, they have serious issues across the pond!
Europe: Economy
UK acts to reduce housing bubble fears
Published: Friday, 27 Sep 2013 | 4:04 AM ET
By: Arjun Kharpal, special to CNBC.com
The Bank of England could get new advisory powers to intervene in Britain’s Help to Buy scheme, aimed at freeing up mortgage lending, if there are signs it is creating a housing bubble.
Critics fear the scheme is stoking an unsustainable housing boom, and the move by U.K. finance minister George Minister is seen as an acknowledgement that Help to Buy might have to be pared back if prices rise rapidly in London and the south-east of England.
Under the proposals the BoE’s Financial Policy Committee (FPC) will conduct an annual review of the housing sector every September starting next year, after Osborne had originally said the Bank would look at the scheme at the end of its lifespan in January 2017.
The central bank would also be able to recommend a cap on properties eligible for the mortgage plan, currently set at £600,000 ($966,600), to reduce its availability in London where house prices are 8 percent above their 2007 peak.
(Read more: Carney warns of UK ‘false dawn’, overheating housing market)
…
Positive feedback loops do tend to lead to run-away situations.
Does the main point made in this article remain valid?
OPINION
March 11, 2009
The Fed Didn’t Cause the Housing Bubble
Any new regulations should help direct savings toward productive investments.
By ALAN GREENSPAN
We are in the midst of a global crisis that will unquestionably rank as the most virulent since the 1930s. It will eventually subside and pass into history. But how the interacting and reinforcing causes and effects of this severe contraction are interpreted will shape the reconfiguration of our currently disabled global financial system.
There are at least two broad and competing explanations of the origins of this crisis. The first is that the “easy money” policies of the Federal Reserve produced the U.S. housing bubble that is at the core of today’s financial mess.
The second, and far more credible, explanation agrees that it was indeed lower interest rates that spawned the speculative euphoria. However, the interest rate that mattered was not the federal-funds rate, but the rate on long-term, fixed-rate mortgages. Between 2002 and 2005, home mortgage rates led U.S. home price change by 11 months. This correlation between home prices and mortgage rates was highly significant, and a far better indicator of rising home prices than the fed-funds rate.
This should not come as a surprise. After all, the prices of long-lived assets have always been determined by discounting the flow of income (or imputed services) by interest rates of the same maturities as the life of the asset. No one, to my knowledge, employs overnight interest rates — such as the fed-funds rate — to determine the capitalization rate of real estate, whether it be an office building or a single-family residence.
The Federal Reserve became acutely aware of the disconnect between monetary policy and mortgage rates when the latter failed to respond as expected to the Fed tightening in mid-2004. Moreover, the data show that home mortgage rates had become gradually decoupled from monetary policy even earlier — in the wake of the emergence, beginning around the turn of this century, of a well arbitraged global market for long-term debt instruments.
U.S. mortgage rates’ linkage to short-term U.S. rates had been close for decades. Between 1971 and 2002, the fed-funds rate and the mortgage rate moved in lockstep. The correlation between them was a tight 0.85. Between 2002 and 2005, however, the correlation diminished to insignificance.
As I noted on this page in December 2007, the presumptive cause of the world-wide decline in long-term rates was the tectonic shift in the early 1990s by much of the developing world from heavy emphasis on central planning to increasingly dynamic, export-led market competition. The result was a surge in growth in China and a large number of other emerging market economies that led to an excess of global intended savings relative to intended capital investment. That ex ante excess of savings propelled global long-term interest rates progressively lower between early 2000 and 2005.
That decline in long-term interest rates across a wide spectrum of countries statistically explains, and is the most likely major cause of, real-estate capitalization rates that declined and converged across the globe, resulting in the global housing price bubble. (The U.S. price bubble was at, or below, the median according to the International Monetary Fund.) By 2006, long-term interest rates and the home mortgage rates driven by them, for all developed and the main developing economies, had declined to single digits — I believe for the first time ever. I would have thought that the weight of such evidence would lead to wide support for this as a global explanation of the current crisis.
However, starting in mid-2007, history began to be rewritten, in large part by my good friend and former colleague, Stanford University Professor John Taylor, with whom I have rarely disagreed. Yet writing in these pages last month, Mr. Taylor unequivocally claimed that had the Federal Reserve from 2003-2005 kept short-term interest rates at the levels implied by his “Taylor Rule,” “it would have prevented this housing boom and bust. “This notion has been cited and repeated so often that it has taken on the aura of conventional wisdom.
…
Can anyone recall the days half a decade ago when the U.S. federal government tried its best to dispel the notion that a housing bubble was even a remote possibility?
Today the term “Housing Bubble” is a defined term at Investopedia dot com.
Definition of ‘Housing Bubble’
A run-up in housing prices fueled by demand, speculation and the belief that recent history is an infallible forecast of the future. Housing bubbles usually start with an increase in demand (a shift to the right in the demand curve), in the face of limited supply which takes a relatively long period of time to replenish and increase. Speculators enter the market, believing that profits can be made through short-term buying and selling. This further drives demand. At some point, demand decreases (a shift to the left in the demand curve), or stagnates at the same time supply increases, resulting in a sharp drop in prices - and the bubble bursts.
Investopedia explains ‘Housing Bubble’
Traditionally, housing markets are not as prone to bubbles as other
financial markets due to large transaction and carrying costs associated with owning a house. However, a combination of very low interest rates and a loosening of credit underwriting standards can bring borrowers into the market, fueling demand. A rise in interest rates and a tightening of credit standards can lessen demand, causing a housing bubble to burst. Other general economic and demographic trends can also fuel and burst a housing bubble.
Merriam-Webster enhances the definition of the word ‘Underwater’
Proof that the U.S. housing crisis has permanently infiltrated the collective psyche of an entire country is the recent announcement from Merriam-Webster, the word “underwater” now has an additional meaning.
7. underwater adj. (1672): having, relating to, or being a mortgage loan for which more is owed than the property securing the loan is worth.
Really took off when the housing bubble burst. There was an earlier sense referring to assets in general that was in use in the early 1990s, but we all became familiar with this term in 2006 and 2007 when homeowners were suddenly shackled to properties that were worth far less than the outstanding mortgage on them. A very visual play on the idea of “staying afloat” and “sinking” financially.
It would seem that other finance and mortgage-centric words like “shadow inventory” and “ZIRP”, which have become staples in the common vernacular, would make for interesting additions as well.
…
It seems the Housing Bubble is making its mark on the standard English lexicon. Check out the example served up from Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary (and note how “realist” was omitted from the list of synonyms, even though the so-called “doomsayers” nailed it with the 2007-08 housing market crash, and are destined to nail it again when the echo bubble eventually collapses):
doomsayer
noun
one given to forebodings and predictions of impending calamity <doomsayers had been saying for some time that the housing bubble was going to burst>
Synonyms Cassandra, Chicken Little, doomsdayer, doomster
Related Words defeatist, fatalist; naysayer, negativist, pessimist; handwringer, worrier, worrywart
Antonyms optimist, Pollyanna
Footnote: Though Merriam-Webster uses “housing bubble” in its example under the term “doomsayer,” it fails to define “housing bubble.”
“doomsayers had been saying for some time that the housing bubble was going to burst”
I resemble that strawman. Those who correctly predicted the housing bubble was going to burst are now characterized by even the likes of the Merriam-Webster lexicographers as ‘doomsayers.’ I guess we just got lucky with our predictions for an epic housing market crash?
Meanwhile, those who completely missed the call on the bubble are working frantically behind the scenes to revise history.
Got friends on Facebook?
N.S.A. Gathers Data on Social Connections of U.S. Citizens
By JAMES RISEN and LAURA POITRAS
Published: September 28, 2013
WASHINGTON — Since 2010, the National Security Agency has been exploiting its huge collections of data to create sophisticated graphs of some Americans’ social connections that can identify their associates, their locations at certain times, their traveling companions and other personal information, according to newly disclosed documents and interviews with officials.
The spy agency began allowing the analysis of phone call and e-mail logs in November 2010 to examine Americans’ networks of associations for foreign intelligence purposes after N.S.A. officials lifted restrictions on the practice, according to documents provided by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor.
The policy shift was intended to help the agency “discover and track” connections between intelligence targets overseas and people in the United States, according to an N.S.A. memorandum from January 2011. The agency was authorized to conduct “large-scale graph analysis on very large sets of communications metadata without having to check foreignness” of every e-mail address, phone number or other identifier, the document said. Because of concerns about infringing on the privacy of American citizens, the computer analysis of such data had previously been permitted only for foreigners.
The agency can augment the communications data with material from public, commercial and other sources, including bank codes, insurance information, Facebook profiles, passenger manifests, voter registration rolls and GPS location information, as well as property records and unspecified tax data, according to the documents. They do not indicate any restrictions on the use of such “enrichment” data, and several former senior Obama administration officials said the agency drew on it for both Americans and foreigners.
N.S.A. officials declined to say how many Americans have been caught up in the effort, including people involved in no wrongdoing. The documents do not describe what has resulted from the scrutiny, which links phone numbers and e-mails in a “contact chain” tied directly or indirectly to a person or organization overseas that is of foreign intelligence interest.
…
Senators Push to Preserve N.S.A. Phone Surveillance (September 27, 2013)
Today at 11:46 AM
The NSA Can Track Who Our Friends Are, and Much More
By Adam Martin
Fort Meade, UNITED STATES: A computer workstation bears the National Security Agency (NSA) logo inside the Threat Operations Center inside the Washington suburb of Fort Meade, Maryland, intelligence gathering operation 25 January 2006 after US President George W. Bush delivered a speech behind closed doors and met with employees in advance of Senate hearings on the much-criticized domestic surveillance.
(Photo credit should read PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images)
In the latest revelation from Edward Snowden’s not-so-secret-anymore NSA files, the New York Times on Saturday reported new details on how the agency uses the metadata we already knew it collected to map out people’s social circles and activities, whether they’re American or not. While the agency isn’t supposed to listen in on the phone calls nor read the e-mails of Americans, it can analyze the information about the locations, time, and participants in calls and e-mails. And analyze it does! A 2011 memo outlined the policy shift that allowed the agency to track data connections that included U.S. citizens, who had previously been off-limits. “The agency was authorized to conduct ‘large-scale graph analysis on very large sets of communications metadata without having to check foreignness’ of every e-mail address, phone number or other identifier, the document said.”
…
In fairness to the Fed leadership, they have often openly opined that bubbles are only visible to them through the rear view mirror.
Bullard Sees No Asset Bubble… Because All Previous Bubbles Were “No Secret”
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/20/2013 13:52 -0400
In what is unbelievable hypocrisy and re-writing of history based on 20/20 hindsight, Bullard, in responding to a question on asset bubbles, explained that while all Fed members are “concerned about asset bubbles,” they do not see one now. His reasoning is so cognitively dissonant as to be almost comedic:
*BULLARD SAYS TECH BUBBLE, HOUSING BUBBLE WERE BOTH `NO SECRET’
“Bubbles Of The Past Were Gigantic And Obvious… Not Now”
So there it is - because the St. Louis Monday-Morning-Quarterbacker can now so clearly see the previous epic bubbles (which the Fed did not see and merely pumped even higher) were obvious and one is not obvious now (unless you actually take a minute or two to consider forward earnings growth and margin expectations in light of lower deficits, unemployment, and global growth; high-yield credit spreads; primary issuance levels; and the fact that corporate leverage is at record highs).
I’m confused, I don’t know who used to be who or what they were when they used to be trapped in who’s ever body they were trapped in. But as long as everybody is happy and there were no donkeys involved it’s all good.
Husband, Wife Share Story Of Coming Out Together, 20 Years Into Their Marriage
September 27, 2013 12:31 AM
A California man says he realized he was gay more than 20 years into his marriage, then he realized he was a she.
It’s the kind of thing many think would tear a husband and wife apart, but not David and Cat Kaufman. But the end of the Kaufmans’ love story has an unusual ending. More than 20 years later, David Kaufman became Dani Kaufman.
“We were each other’s best friend,” Cat said
It’s a love story with a normal beginning.
“We were a good match for each other,” said Dani Kaufman.
They fell in love, got married and had a kid.
“We just got along really well,” Cat said.
But the end of the Kaufman’s love story has an unusual ending. More than 20 years later, David Kaufman became Dani Kaufman.
When Cat looks at Dani, “Inside she’s the same person that I married, and just the outside has changed.”
Cat says she didn’t see any signs at all that David could be gay.
And if you’re wondering if Cat was really OK with her husband’s confession, she had a secret of her own.
That secret began a few years ago.
But Dani’s goes back for as long as she can remember, she says she’s always struggled with being born a boy.
“When I was 5 years old I just wanted to be a girl so badly,” Dani said.
In between attempts to end his life that began at 13, Dani ignored that haunting, nagging feeling, and did what everyone around him expected.
“I got married twice,” Dani said.
He got married and had two kids. After his divorce, he met Cat.
“It never occurred to me that it would be anything but forever,” Cat said.
The couple moved from Michigan to California, where David worked as a radiologist.
More than two decades after living a happy life together, things changed.
“I realized it was going to be the end of what we had,” Cat said.
Four years ago, Dani says he finally fully realized his attraction to men. While David, a husband and father, struggled with the idea of what to do next, he had no idea his wife had a secret of her own.
“I just said, ‘You know, I need to tell you something,” Cat said.
“I could tell she was really nervous,” Dani said.
“I need to tell you that I’ve been thinking that I would like to date women,” Cat said.
Yes, Cat told her husband she’d recently realized she was a lesbian.
“And I remember saying, “Oh my god, get out of town! I just figured out I’m gay!” Dani said.
“It was pretty shocking for both of us,” Cat said.
So after more than 20 years of marriage, husband and wife sat across from each other, knowing it was the beginning of their end, but a new beginning for each of them.
“It was excitement and relief,” Cat said.
Then last year, Dani realized she wasn’t gay, she was just born in the wrong body.
“No, I don’t just want to be female. I really am female,” Dani recalled.
She says she felt like a woman trapped in a man’s body.
When asked how she’d respond to people who might not understand this, Dani said, “I’m sorry if you don’t understand it but this is who I am.”
Dani began the transformation more than a year ago, and she says she’s finally able to be herself after more than 50 years of pretending to be someone she wasn’t.
“It felt so good to be me. It felt so good to be a woman, to be Danielle. This is incredibly cool,” she said.
The couple now lives separately just a few minutes from each other.
Dani wrote a book about his struggles called Untying The Knot: A Husband And Wife’s Story Of Coming Out Together.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/09/27/husband-wife-share-story-of-coming-out-together-20-years-into-their-marriage/ - 103k -
Sounds like something out of a Robert A. heinlein novel.
My dad had a friend who had some life threatening issue and had to become a woman.
Odd for those who have no life or death issue to change.
It is not in most of our culture. Not my culture. But it is their culture. I leave them be. One of my favorite supervisors is gay. And I worked with several gays and lesbians. The gays know better thn to pick up on us straights. Everything is about professionalism. This is part of working in America 2013. 60 years ago all this was hidden. I am an atheist. I would be reported to the HUAC if this was the early 50s. In this regard, I am too, a minority. My atheism is more than choice. It is a chain of reasoning and refusal to accept contradictions.
My dad had a friend who had some life threatening issue and had to become a woman.
Oh, was that his story?
Why should I tell an A$$ who keeps lying about my job. Hey a$$ what is my street address in OC Since you claim to know who my customer is? If you do not reply with my street address you are a proven LIAR.
So if you got your schnooker cut off in, say, a food processor accident, you’d start wearing a dress and sleeping with men?
proven LIAR
I think I heard this story from my wife a while back (or perhaps a different couple), where the man concluded that he was a lesbian woman trapped in a man’s body…so, he (excuse me, she) liked women, but only AS a woman.
What makes me think it’s the same is that in my wife’s story, the couple also had a child together…but at that time (or that story), I think they lived in the same building…
Chinese Cities Hooked on Land Revenue Fuel Housing Costs
By Bloomberg News - Sep 24, 2013 8:42 PM PT
Chinese cities, addicted to the money they raise by selling land to developers, are undermining the government’s multiyear campaign to contain housing costs.
Municipal residential land deals, measured by area, rose 26 percent in the first eight months of the year from the same period in 2012, according to China Investment Securities Co. The average price per square meter jumped 43 percent, pushing proceeds up 80 percent to 816.5 billion yuan ($133 billion).
Local officials rely on revenue from the sales to repay debt, especially as economic growth slows. Developers bid up prices because demand from homebuyers remains strong. The cycle is driving property costs higher, complicating Premier Li Keqiang’s task of preventing social unrest over the lack of affordable housing amid a massive urbanization program.
“If the momentum in the land market can’t be cooled down rather quickly, it’s actually a fairly dangerous signal,” Bei Fu, Standard & Poor’s Hong Kong-based property credit analyst, said in a phone interview. “Should it keep heating up, we’re worried there might be further policy tightening, and there could be consequences for the entire market that are unpredictable at this point.”
The government has been trying to cool the housing market since April 2010, following a 14 percent jump in new home prices the previous year. The most-recent curbs, introduced in March by Li’s predecessor, Wen Jiabao, included higher down-payment requirements and interest rates for second-home mortgages in cities with “excessively fast” price gains. Thirty-five provincial cities set price-control targets, mostly capping increases at the growth rate of local disposable incomes.
…
Kenneth Rapoza, Contributor
I cover Brazil, Russia, India & China.
Investing
9/24/2013 @ 5:27PM
What Investors Really Think About China’s ‘Ghost Cities’
The Chinese housing bubble. It’s on every investors mind. We’ve all heard of the new developments in China, entire cities built to look like mini-Paris downtowns in some cases, complete with Eiffel Tower replica with one stark difference: they’re mostly empty.
What do investors think about these cities? More importantly, will the bursting of China’s housing bubble be as big, and as economically devastating, as America’s?
“I think they certainly have their issues in the property sector,” says Marc Tommasi, head of international equity strategy at Manning & Napier in Rochester, NY. ” It’s more an issue of oversupply in some cities, but not all. I’m not worried so much about debts related to the property sector because, quite simply, unlike here there is not a ton of debt driving property pricing.”
Most investors I have interviewed over the last year about this tell me China’s housing bubble is a problem, but it’s a different sort of problem than the American and European one. There’s no mortgage backed security crisis in the works threatening investment banks. There’s no army of subprime buyers biting off more than they can chew.
“ The strong hands purchasing housing in China are mostly cash buyers, and they have put a floor on price drops on developed properties,” thinks Joel Smolen, a hedge fund manager at Axion Capital outside of San Francisco.
To say leverage in China housing is a non-issue would be to sweep a pulled hand grenade under the rug. Just because you can’t see it, doesn’t make it isn’t explosive. Leverage exists primarily in the municipal banking sector. But investors have an answer for that too. They say that those banks are really a branch of the government and if there ever was a popping of the bubble, the government has the resources to clean up the mess.
…
How is the India housing bubble holding up these days?
Business Standard
Sunday, September 29, 2013 | 03:52 AM IST
Malini Bhupta & Vishal Chhabria | Mumbai
September 16, 2013 Last Updated at 00:58 IST
I don’t think there’s any real estate bubble: Keki Mistry
Interview with Vice-chairman & CEO of HDFC
Economic growth has fallen off the cliff, currency has depreciated by 15 per cent and foreign institutional investors are jittery. A lot has happened over the last few months with the Reserve Bank of India battling a new crisis each month. In a bid to defend the currency, the central bank tightened liquidity, pushed up short-term interest rates and put capital controls in place. Most of these have boomeranged. Keki Mistry, Vice Chairman & CEO of HDFC Limited, spoke to Malini Bhupta and Vishal Chhabria at length on what bothers foreign investors, efficacy of measures rolled out to defend the currency and the real estate sector. Edited excerpts from the interview:
…
What about news of real estate prices coming down by about 30 to 35%. Is a crash imminent?
I don’t know where the information is coming from. If you look at the NHB residex, you don’t see that much change in prices. We don’t see a major price correction. I don’t think there is any real estate bubble happening. Supply of real estate has always been restricted in Mumbai due to slower approvals. Now a lot of projects have come in and supply has increased of late at a time demand is slower. But this is typical of some pockets, but it’s not a secular trend. If prices stabilise it’s a good thing. Prices are not coming down by 30-40 per cent anywhere. When you compare prices even in one particular pocket, you need to look at the projects and the amenities they offer.
…
The Economic Times
ET Home›Markets›Real Estate›News
Slowdown in real estate forces builders to cut prices and dole out freebies
By Ravi Teja Sharma, ET Bureau | 2 Sep, 2013, 06.45AM IST
NEW DELHI: There are no takers for close to 6 lakh homes in the country, forcing builders to cut prices and dole out freebies, which many hope will herald the much-awaited correction in the home market ahead of the festival season.
With the economy in a mess, the rupee caught in a whirlwind and the job scene deteriorating by the day, buyers are shying away from the market, leaving builders to grapple with an inventory of over 700 million sq ft. By end of June 2013, cumulative nationwide unsold inventory was 670 million sq ft, up 54 million sq ft in just one quarter, says property research firm Liases Foras.
According to the National Housing Bank’s (NHB) residential housing index, Residex, 22 of the 26 cities it tracks have seen a decline in home prices in the April to June quarter. Prices are expected to fall further, says NHB Chairman RV Verma. “Developers are now willing to take a haircut on their margins,” he says.
There are signs the bubble will finally burst. A 1,100 sq ft apartment in Noida Extension that cost around Rs 42 lakh a few months ago can today be bought for around Rs 37 lakh, as the builder is agreeing to a 10% discount.
…
A Housing Slump in India
Atul Loke for The New York Times
A construction site at a standstill in Mumbai, India, where the real estate market is crumbling as the economy slows.
By KEITH BRADSHER and NEHA THIRANI BAGRI
Published: September 10, 2013
MUMBAI, India — The Orbit Grand, a block-size complex designed to have at least 26 floors of elegant apartments, an extensive array of ground-floor stores and abundant parking for the chauffeured cars of residents and shoppers, was supposed to be a diadem of India’s real estate market.
Now it is turning into a symbol of the slumping fortunes of property developers and owners in a once-promising emerging economy. Construction of the Orbit Grand has almost completely stalled at the 10th floor, the tower crane at the site seldom moves and the builder has defaulted on its loan.
“There’s no real work going on right now. There’s just a minimum number of workers coming in to do small things,” said Alam Sheikh, an electrician who is one of just 14 builders left at the site.
The real estate market in cities across India is crumbling as the Indian economy slows. The rupee has dropped nearly 20 percent against the dollar since early May, scaring away foreign investors.
The Reserve Bank of India, the country’s central bank, raised a key short-term interest rate for commercial banks’ borrowing by two full percentage points in mid-July, to 10.25 percent, mainly to prevent further declines in the rupee. To put a brake on the flow of money leaving the country, the central bank followed up last month with a regulation banning Indians from transferring money overseas for real estate purchases.
Rising financing costs are all the more painful because India’s real estate developments take a long time to build because of a vast and often corrupt regulatory apparatus. Publicly traded real estate investment groups in India are heavily in debt, so they struggle to make interest payments and are not in a position to bankroll further projects.
That combination has produced almost unanimous bearishness about the short-term prospects for residential, commercial and industrial real estate prices in India. Sanjay Dutt, the executive managing director for South Asia at Cushman & Wakefield, the world’s largest privately held commercial real estate company, predicted that prices would fall 10 percent in big Indian cities and 15 percent on the outskirts of large cities, where many speculative projects have been built. He said, “Given the universal sentiment of the market, there could be a sharp correction between now and Gudi Padwa,” an annual festival next March that has long been considered in India an auspicious time to buy real estate.
What has sustained prices so far, and what might prevent more serious losses than those predicted by Mr. Dutt, has been the willingness of developers to hold growing inventories of unsold apartments, shops and offices without offering price discounts. The volume of real estate transactions has slumped in India as developers have refused to offer discounts for fear of starting a market rout.
“If they drop prices, investors will panic and it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy,” causing further declines in prices, said Siddharth Yog, a co-founder and managing partner of the Xander Group, a large international real estate investment firm started in 2005. That was the year India began allowing foreign institutional investors into its real estate market.
…
THE HINDU Business Line
Realty bubble waiting to burst
VENKATESH PANCHAPAGESAN
The real estate market is fast approaching the eye of a perfect storm. Demand has slowed down considerably and inventories have been building up. New regulation and market conditions, both global and domestic, will soon make access to land and capital more difficult. To weather this storm, builders need to let house prices fall. And the government needs to eliminate bureaucratic hurdles to make development a viable business at lower prices.
Indian real estate saw a gold rush-like craze in recent times because its vested interests had carefully planted the idea that property prices “never go down”.
To validate this notion, prices and price information were kept high and opaque high through implicit collusion. Media sound bytes were more often either from developers or financiers, who had everything to gain from sounding positive and optimistic.
Just the other day, the chairman of a large housing finance company went on record saying that he doesn’t feel there is a bubble in real estate prices. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure that something is wrong when a similar-sized apartment is more expensive in Mumbai than in Manhattan.
Unfortunately, both the government and the academia have remained largely silent, letting vested interests rule the public debate on this issue. As a result, price speculation has been left to grow for too long, despite signs that it is no longer sustainable to do so.
…
(The author is Associate Professor of Finance and Coordinator of the IIMB-Century Real Estate Research Initiative, IIM-B.)
(This article was published on September 22, 2013)
Keywords: Real estate, fast approaching, perfect storm, new regulation, house prices
THE HINDU Business Line
Spectre of bubble-burst looms over housing sector
Rashmi Pratap
Mumbai, Sept. 16: The year was 2007. The real estate market, like the Indian economy, was on a roll. And Manish Khanna was busy house-hunting in Mumbai. His weekends were spent looking for an affordable deal in a good locality.
But every weekend, when Khanna sought to finalise a deal, the prices would have risen by Rs 200 to Rs 300 a square foot over the previous week.
When he finally bought a flat in Navi Mumbai’s Nerul locality, Khanna paid Rs 5,200 a sq. ft. for a property that had cost Rs 4,200 a sq. ft. when he first checked it a month earlier.
Those were the heydays of real estate. Incomes were growing and so was the demand for real estate, while property supplies were limited.
Cut to 2013: builders are sitting on piles of unsold inventory and debt, demand has slowed down in metros and big cities, projects are stalled, private equity firms are exiting the sector and new projects are selling at discounted rates.
The long real estate party finally seems to have come to an end.
…
Try not to get trapped in a housing market collapse!
Real Estate
India’s top housing market headed for correction?
Published: Thursday, 26 Sep 2013 | 10:25 PM ET
By: Ansuya Harjani | Writer, CNBC Asia
Mumbai saw its most expensive apartment sale on record last month, with a sea-facing duplex located in the highly sought after Malabar Hill area fetching a staggering $9.1 million, according to local media reports.
This record-breaking sale stands in stark contrast to growing pessimism over the broader outlook for Mumbai’s subdued residential property market, which faces a subdued job market, lower household incomes and higher interest rates.
The combination is increasing the risk of a home-price correction in India’s financial center over the coming months, analysts say, noting housing prices in Mumbai have risen nearly 70 percent over the past four years.
(Read more: Five-story building collapses in Mumbai; dozens trapped)
“With sentiment low, only buyers that are from double-income households or [are] financially well-off are committing to real estate; the majority remain cautious. Investors also aren’t active in the market, they are waiting on the fence,” Sanjay Dutt, executive managing director for South Asia at Cushman & Wakefield told CNBC.
Inventory levels in the city have risen to around 48 months, double the 20-24 month level regarded as healthy, according to Jones Lang La Salle. Meanwhile, sales volumes have slowed considerably from around 17,000 units in the fourth quarter of 2011 to 11,800 units in the second quarter of 2013, according to data from Knight Frank.
“The pile up of inventory is alarming. Adding to this, developers’ financial conditions are stressed. Their revenue streams have dried up due to falling sales,” said Samantak Das, director, research and advisory service at Knight Frank India.
(Read more: India’s central bank follows Fed with market surprise)
…
India’s economy faces alot of headwinds these daze…ALOT!
Check out the cargo cult mindset of the following article, which presumes that gold demand from rural India will somehow drive the recovery from a 90 percent year-on-year drop in imports fueled by a currency collapse. Good luck with that lame-brained prediction working out!
As I pointed out right here a couple of days ago, when chimeric Keynesian animal spirits crash into the brick wall of a budget constraint, the brick wall wins every time.
COMMODITIES
September 27, 2013, 10:55 a.m. ET
India’s Gold Imports Set to Pick Up
Gold Demand From Rural India Expected to Be Strong
By DEBIPRASAD NAYAK
MUMBAI—India’s gold imports are expected to pick up in October after a three-month slump as festival-season sales kick in, and because of a government push to clear shipments that were stuck because of confusion over new import rules.
Volumes have already started rising with government officials clearing this week imports which were stuck since August.
India in July said importers such as banks and trading agencies must ensure that 20% of the quantity they imported is shipped abroad as jewelry. Customs authorities stopped clearing imports without importers indicating how they would meet the rule, while importers stopped fresh purchases, leading to a more than 90% year-over-year fall in August gold imports to three metric tons.
…
“…but hopes remain”
You can wish in one hand and sh!t in the other, and see which one fills up the fastest.
Deccan Herald
News updated at 2:20 AM IST
Rupee collapse confounding, but hopes remain
Suresh Nandi , Sep 1, 2013
Economy: Speculation overseas is seen as a factor in the sharp fall of rupee, which nosedived to 68.85 on August 28.
Let’s face it. The battered Indian rupee is still in an overshot territory. Till now, it has fallen so ‘fast and furious’ that even chartists - as technical analysts in the forex markets are also known - could not figure out which way the local currency’s future is headed, for sure.
For the record, rupee has dipped consistently below all reasonable technical targets since breaking its then record low of 57.32 to the dollar on June 10. Percentage-wise, rupee has tumbled nearly 20 per cent this year, amid interventions by Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the government, to close at 65.70 against dollar on Friday last.
…
After casually perusing a few articles, I take the impression that India’s economy is in a full blown panic rivaling the one the U.S. found itself in starting in August 2007.
Is that overstating the situation? I sure wish FPSS were around to weigh in on this one…
Key questions of interest:
Will there be blowback from the India economic panic into the U.S. economy?
Or is it safe to assume the U.S. economy is decoupled from the BRICs, as Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill long ago observed?
ft dot com
February 5, 2013 6:59 pm
Brics builder O’Neill leaves Goldman Sachs
By Dan McCrum and Tracy Alloway in New York
Jim O’Neill, chairman of Goldman Sachs’ struggling asset management arm, is to retire from the investment bank where he became famous for forecasting the growing power of emerging market economies.
In 2001 Mr O’Neill coined the acronym Brics to represent the potential of Brazil, Russia, India and China while head of economic research for the bank, and his own rise mirrored that of the countries he championed.
However, people familiar with Mr O’Neill’s decision said that his departure may have been motivated in part by frustrations over the status of Goldman Sachs Asset Management within the bank.
A member of Goldman’s influential European management committee from 2006, the post of GSAM chairman was created specifically for Mr O’Neill in September 2010.
He was charged with expanding the business and rebuilding its flagging reputation on Wall Street, and had “strong ideas” about what should be done to revive the business, according to a person familiar with the group.
Those ideas included expanding the unit’s equities offering and introducing a new incentive structure which Mr O’Neill believed would have better aligned GSAM advisers’ pay with the interests of their clients, the person said. Neither initiative came to fruition.
“For a firm of Goldman’s culture to do that is quite hard,” the person said.
The bank’s asset management arm reported a larger contribution to overall revenues of $5.2bn last year against $4.93bn from the investment banking arm which has been long regarded as central to the culture of the bank.
Yet GSAM has struggled since the financial crisis, with assets under management in its high-margin alternatives business declining for five years in a row, and overall assets of $821bn still well below their 2007 peak of $868bn.
During Mr O’Neill’s time as chairman, the level of assets under management at GSAM have remained largely static even as markets have rallied. The bank is not expected to appoint a replacement for his role, and Tim O’Neil and Eric Lane will remain co-heads of the asset management arm.
Mr O’Neill, 55, submitted his notice last month but Goldman delayed the public announcement of his departure until after the bank’s annual partners meeting, which took place last week in New York. Mr O’Neill has been a partner for 18 years.
The announcement arrived on Tuesday shortly after the bank published his weekly investment viewpoint: “Are things that good?”.
…
I sure wish FPSS were around to weigh in on this one…
Maybe he’s busy trying to sell his Calcutta condos?
I never took the impression from any of his posts that he is careless enough to get crushed by the steamroller in front of which he was picking up nickels, but who knows?
What a difference four years can make!
And given that China’s and India’s business cycles have converged, according to The Economist writers, is it safe to assume the Chinese economy is destined to be the next BRIC to crumble?
BRICs, emerging markets and the world economy
Not just straw men
The biggest emerging economies are rebounding, even without recovery in the West
Jun 18th 2009
THE inaugural summit of the BRICs—Brazil, Russia, India, China—came and went in Yekaterinburg this week with more rhetoric than substance. Although Russia’s president, Dmitry Medvedev, called it “the epicentre of world politics”, this disparate quartet signally failed to rival the Group of Eight industrial countries as a forum for economic discussion.
But that should be no surprise: to realise how disparate they are, consider that Russia and Brazil are big commodity exporters, whereas China is a big commodity importer; China is a proponent of the Doha trade round, India a sceptic; India and China vie for influence in the Indian Ocean, Russia and China compete in Central Asia.
Instead, the really striking thing is that four countries first lumped together as a group by the chief economist of Goldman Sachs chose to convene at all, and in such a high-profile way. And that when they met, they discussed topics such as reforming the IMF; their demand for more say in global policy-making; and, in the case of China, Brazil and Russia, a plan to switch some of their foreign-currency reserves out of dollars and into IMF bonds.
All this reflects growing self-confidence. The largest emerging markets are recovering fast and starting to think the recession may mark another milestone in a worldwide shift of economic power away from the West. Estimates for their national incomes in the first quarter were better than expected. In the year to the end of March GDP rose by around 6% in China and India. The two accounted for no less than half the world’s increase in wireless-technology subscriptions in that period. In Brazil gdp fell slightly in the first quarter but it is growing faster than the Latin American average and most economists think growth will return to its pre-crisis level as early as next year. In contrast, output in most large industrial economies is still falling. The exception in the BRICs is the host: dragged down by plunging oil prices last year, Russia’s economy shrank by 9.5% in the first quarter, the worst performance in the G20 after Japan.
The fortunes of the others mark a sharp rebound since the turn of the year. Then, it seemed, the largest emerging markets faced being overwhelmed along with everyone else. Chinese exports in January were 18% lower than they had been a year earlier. Industrial growth fell by two-thirds in November and December. And around 20m migrant workers were wending their way back to their villages, jobless after the collapse of construction and export booms in coastal cities. The notion of “decoupling”—that emerging markets were no longer mere moons revolving around planet West—suffered a severe setback.
So what should one make of the turnaround? Might there be something to decoupling after all? Why are the BRICs recovering? And what are the implications for the rest of the world?
Decoupling means not simply that emerging markets tend to grow faster than rich industrial ones, although that is certainly true; it also implies that to some extent the two groups dance to different tunes, with emerging markets growing or shrinking autonomously, not just under the influence of rich ones. A study last year by Ayhan Kose of the IMF, Christopher Otrok of the University of Virginia and Eswar Prasad of Cornell University gave some support to this idea.
You would expect less decoupling as a result of globalisation. The cycles of output, consumption and investment should become more closely aligned in countries engaged in world trade. Yet when the authors looked at these indicators, they found something different. The cycles of output, consumption and investment did indeed become more closely aligned in rich countries. And the same thing happened in emerging markets. But when the authors compared the two groups, they found they were diverging. The business cycles of America and Europe converged. The business cycles of India and China converged. The business cycles of rich and emerging markets had decoupled.
When this study came out in mid-2008 the worldwide crash seemed to render it instantly obsolete.
…
At the risk of seeming a gloomster, what if the entire recovery was a facade, hiding behind countless ginormous bubbles that have inflated in the wake of quantitative easing?
Jesse Colombo, Contributor
I’m an economic analyst who is warning of dangerous post-2009 bubbles
9/27/2013 @ 4:14PM
Bubblecovery: Why Our Economic Recovery Is Actually An Illusion
As global stock and housing prices continue to climb, an increasing number of people are becoming “true believers” in the economic recovery. But what if the recovery is really a “Bubblecovery”?
Bubblecovery is a term that I coined to describe a bubble-driven economic recovery. According to my research, growing post-2009 economic bubbles are helping to foster an illusion of economic healing by creating temporary economic growth, new jobs, and rising asset prices.
I also consider the 2003-2007 economic recovery from the early 2000s recession to be a “Bubblecovery”, as the growing U.S. housing and credit bubble led to renewed, albeit temporary, economic growth and job creation in sectors like construction, mortgage lending and other areas of finance.
As with the 2003-2007 Bubblecovery, I expect the current Bubblecovery to cause a devastating economic crisis when the post-2009 bubbles collectively pop. Unfortunately, the next bubble-induced crisis is likely to be even more severe than the last one because the global economy is in a much weaker state than it was in before the last crisis started.
This is an overview of the primary economic bubbles that I am warning about. I will be writing about each of these bubbles in much greater detail in coming posts.
China: In recent years, China has become notorious for building countless empty “ghost cities” and other wildly ambitious infrastructure projects for the sake of boosting economic growth. China’s frantic building activity is fueled by a multi-trillion dollar debt bubble that will cause the country to replicate Japan’s experience after its bubble popped
Emerging Markets: As a side-effect of global central banks’ stimulative monetary policies, $4 trillion has flowed into emerging market assets since 2009, inflating credit and property bubbles (see charts) from Brazil to India to Turkey. Despite this past summer’s EM rout, these property bubbles have not popped yet.
Canada: Canada is currently experiencing a household debt and housing bubble that is even worse than the U.S.’ in 2006:
…
Australia: Similar to Canada, Australia is experiencing a household debt and housing bubble that is worse than the U.S.’ bubble (see chart). In addition, Australia’s mining sector has benefited from the unsustainable China-driven commodities boom.
…
Northern and Western European housing: Record low European mortgages rates have fueled growing property and household debt bubbles across Northern and Western Europe, especially in the Nordic countries.
Bonds: Investor risk aversion and central bank bond-buying and zero interest rate policies in the wake of the Great Recession have sent trillions of dollars worth of capital on a global “hunt for yield”, inflating prices for all types of bonds – including risky junk bonds.
…
You’re welcome, Carl.
It’s funny that some people your hardly know (but just adore), become part of your life experience.
I posted this late last night:
Was thinking about Olygal tonight and wanted to celebrate her life here. Died 10/28/2009-time flies!
http://www.funeralalternatives.org/keepsake.asp?GBObitKey=1642&ObitKey=1642
Thanks inch. Nice that Oly gets remembered here.
Thank you for posting that. It brought a smile to my face and a moment of warmth to my ordinarily cold heart.
I only regret that I never had the chance to meet Gayle in person. She was so much fun to interact with on the HBB.
Whoops…that was supposed to go with inchbyinch’s Olygal obit post above…
Real Estate
Is It the End for the 30-Year Mortgage?
The real housing debate boils down to this: Should all Americans continue to have relatively easy access to the pre-payable, 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage? Nick Timiraos reports. Photo: AP.
9/23/2013 9:46:46 AM3:23